The polls looks grim, and it appears that some in the Republican Party are losing their marbles as they pull out all the stops in a desperate attempt to win this election. With this story, they may have reached a new low.
With Rove and Bush the Republicans have been peddling fear for years, and McCain and Palin have been more than happy to use the same tactics. It shouldn’t be surprising when some nuts in their party escalate the attacks to even more offensive extremes.
11/4 will be a great day for this country. I cannot wait until the moral and ethical right gets it handed to them. They should know by now that “what goes around, comes around”. Funny how the party that is always screaming about “life” have left so many things “dead” after 8 years.
Good riddance.
The rats are jumping off the sinking ship.
John-what do your friends like Pelosi and Reid have to offer?
after 8 disasterous years of George bush, America wants the opposite of everything he stands for. That’s why the demos will dominate the house and senate after the election. People also believe Obama will be able to reign in the congress to the center but he will have to earn peoples trust still and that won’t be easy given the clean up job bush has left.
The bottom line is that America is living a Seinfeld episode. The majority want “the opposite”.
I was reading an article that said McCain was in Cleveland today where he was very critical of Bush and talked up a series of economic points that actually are aligned with some semblance of traditional conservative values.
My god, he only waited until 8 days before election to get on message. If he had done that 2 months ago and if he had chosen someone else as his running mate, he might be in a tight race now.
Down 11 points in the polls and with Palin out of control and openly defying him, it’s too little too late for the impotent McCain campaign.
That said, at least today was the first good day he has had in at least 6 weeks.
Anyway you can post this on the front page of your blog?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck
No– not Socialism or Marxism -no, doesn’t scare the s*it out of me, no, he won’t horribly change this country…
His redistribution of wealth tag is not a side show, it’s him, the guy is a nut.
I just got out of a client meeting. This is a long time client of our firm and he is highly succesful in many ways and he has always voted Republican. Anyway, he just told me how disgusted he is with Bush and the rest of his hit gang and that he is going to vote for BO and the dem ticket for the first time in his life.
It was music to my ears.
Boy, oh, boy, eight days out and you’re going off the deep end.
The U.S. (along with most other Western economies) already has a progressive tax system, that by definition is redistribution of wealth. He isn’t talking about any drastic increases in the top tax brackets. He’s taking them back to the levels they were under Clinton. And when Bush initially suggested his tax cuts, the current GOP nominee said that they were “irresponsible” in a time of war and voted against them twice.
We can argue until we’re blue in the face about whether it’s better to cut taxes for the upper class or for the middle class, or argue about whether a flat tax is feasible, but just because a guy talks about “redistrubtion of wealth” it doesn’t make him a traditional socialist. There are many different definitions of the word “socialism” from the extreme (“communists,” who believe in collective ownership of all wealth) to the moderate (“social democrats,” who believe in national control of key industries within the framework of a capitalistic economy.) Obama (as well as any Republicans who believe in Social Security or Medicare, or voted for the financial bailout) fall into the latter category.
I often find that the hardcore flat taxers don’t understand that their tax bracket is not the same as their marginal tax rate. They think that since they are in the 28% tax bracket, they are being taxed at 28%. Not true. The link below does a good job of showing how our tax system works.
Throw in all the tax write-offs that the upper class has (that many in the middle class do not) and you have effective tax rates that are much closer to each other than most upper class taxpayers realize.
http://www.ncnblog.com/2007/11/16/a-bit-about-taxes-understanding-e
ffective-tax-rates-for-2007-planning-for-2008/
The bottom line is that the “redistribution of wealth” so-called “bombshell” isn’t going to play very well with a middle class that is really struggling. In fact, unless the right is successfully able to paint it as communist (which it’s not), it’s probably going to sound pretty good to most independent voters. It’s just another case of the GOP not understanding the current financial situation of most Americans.
It’s amazing how far downhill we’ve come as a country when a politician can actually use the words “redistribution of wealth” and people don’t run for their guns and run him out of town, they actually think he’s on to something-wow-that is incredible.
We have cultivated a society of people that want everything for nothing, and a society of dumber and dumber people – we are now the richest, fattest, dumbest, and laziest country and there is no end in site.
It’s really amazing how effective the radical left is–it’s taken them over 50 years, but they are close to their goal of changing this from a self reliant society to one that depends on the government and keeps giving the government more and more power.
Welcome to Europe, west— I wonder if there is any hope for us.
I still HOPE Barrack cannot be elected.
Nick: have you seen the girls over here in western Europe? Maybe our communist systems in France Spain Italy etc… are not so bad. In any case look at tax rates in the USA when Nixon was president. Nobody ever said to Nixon we were communist
I’m not so sure we’re the richest country any longer.
You should research Obama’s position on self-reliance.
“I’m not so sure we’re the richest country any longer.” I’ll take that as a confirmation you agree with the rest of that line
. And if we’re not the richest any longer because of everything I’ve been ranting about!
it was a joke, and I don’t think we’re anywhere near the dumbest or the laziest. fattest? probably.
Nick – I’m curious. Is it your opinion that all poor people are lazy? Or that all poor people simply aren’t working hard enough?
If not, (and some poor people are indeed working hard) then do they deserve access to affordable health care? Or should they receive assistance (in the form of low interest loans or tax credits) in sending their kids to college?
Do you believe that the strength of an economy depends more on the strength of its upper class than its middle class?
Please just answer the questions that were posed and don’t go off on a long rant about a tangential topic. Thank you.
Nick –
The last nail in the coffin = Ted Stevens. Good riddance to him and the rest of your party for a long, long time. A fitting end to a disgraceful bunch indeed.
Keep talking about the lazy poor people. This will be democracy at its finest next week.
Tall,
By now you have to know where I stand on all the issues, and it’s too simplistic to just answer you questions without explanation.
Things like housing, health care, transportation, food, the health spa, vacations, bottled water, heat in the winter, cell phones, electricity, etc are COMMODITIES, not inalienable rights.
With all that said, in conservatism there is plenty of room for compassion for those in need- we just do not want to be FORCED into your idea of wealth redistribution.
You asked about the strength of our economy. The strength of our country lies in the framework that was set up from the beginning– if you work hard, if you follow the rules, if you do what you are suppose to do, you can become successful– millions and millions of people have done it. Once you start tinkering with the ingredients that have made this country a fantastic success with socialism (which, by the way has never worked in any country it was tried in) that’s the end of America as we know it.
I’m not making a judgment on your beliefs even thought that is not where I want this country to go, just admit that’s what you want and that’s what it is.
John–
You have to be kidding, right? For every example of a Republican who gets in trouble, I can name 5 Democrats- How about William Jefferson (D-La) with $100 k in his freezer??? Please. Republicans do not hold a monopoly on corruption on our government.
One thing I do not understand is how anyone who was even remotely a Republican in the past can possibly support the clown that is Obama.
The redistribution tag is starting to stick, the 401k stories are being told on the news now, a FANTASTIC day on the market, gallup is tightening up on all parameters– especially traditional likely voters.
2 more days of a market like this (as the poll continue to tighten the market will continue to go up), and it’s lights out for BO…..
Just my prognostication for whoever is interested
.
This election has been fascinating to me personally, having never been this engaged in any sort of political process. It’s also been disturbing.
McCain’s primary objective for the better part of his campaign has not been to sell himself as the best candidate in this race, but to simply tear down Obama and make naive and/or uninformed voters suspicious or downright afraid of him. I understand that’s pretty standard practice, especially for the guy who’s losing, but it proves McCain doesn’t have many good ideas that are resonating with most Americans. Is that the guy we want in office? The one who’s so devoid of ideas that he can only win by pointing out all of the perceived negatives of his opponent?
Now Obama is Robin Hood, a guy who wants to steal from the rich and give to the poor. Bullshit. He wants to instill some fairness in the tax code so the people who have been hardest hit by rising costs for health care, education, gas, food and everything else will actually see some relief. And that makes him a socialist?
I read a great column today. Here’s an excerpt:
Full column here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-ostroy/wasnt-it-emspreading-the_
b_136133.html
Yes, it’s from the Huffington Post, so I’m sure Nick will discredit it out of hand. Here’s what I know, though.
If I made $250,000, I’d be okay with having my taxes raised to help the family making $60,000 a year get by. Would I be thrilled about it? Of course not. But I’d also understand that I’m contributing to the greater good. Nick, you keep saying that Obama wants to help (if I have this right) lazy, pot-smoking, porch-dwelling, beer-swilling people who have no interest in helping themselves. What about all of the hard-working middle class people who DIDN’T enter into a mortgage they couldn’t afford, who work just as hard (or harder) than you or me or anyone else, who only want to provide for their kids and sack some money away for retirement, but have still been buried under the crumbling economy?
Is it really such a bad thing for the government to help people who are trying to help themselves, but can’t? Is it really so unfair for people who make money off the hard work of their employees, and who receive other tax benefits that their employees will never see, to have their federal taxes raised?
Jamey,
Please help me understand how this:
“In a higher phase of communist society… only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be fully left behind and society inscribe on its banners: from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. “
Is different from this:
“What about all of the hard-working middle class people who DIDN’T enter into a mortgage they couldn’t afford, who work just as hard (or harder) than you or me or anyone else, who only want to provide for their kids and sack some money away for retirement, but have still been buried under the crumbling economy?
Is it really such a bad thing for the government to help people who are trying to help themselves, but can’t? Is it really so unfair for people who make money off the hard work of their employees, and who receive other tax benefits that their employees will never see, to have their federal taxes raised?”
The previous being a quote from Karl Marx.
Here are more if you’d like to see them:
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/k/karl_marx.html
Philosophically there is nothing wrong with what you propose but that IS a socialist/Marxist society– that is NOT what we are– and it’s failed everywhere it’s been tried.
Those people that “make money off the hard work of their employees” were the ones that took enormous risks in starting their business, and probably failed once or twice before they were a success, THEY deserve whatever they’ve earned.
Capitalism has its flaws! Isn’t that more evident than ever? What we’ve been doing isn’t working, so some adjustments need to be made. Nobody’s talking about becoming Sweden, but what was wrong with the Clinton economy? Were we socialists then?
It’s lazy to start tossing around names and labels whenever you don’t agree with someone’s ideas, but is it really so black and white? (And no, that’s not me interjecting race!) Is it EITHER capitalism OR socialism? Isn’t there a way to protect our capitalistic values and still help people secure a quality education and affordable freaking health care? You call health care a commodity, but I wonder if you’d feel the same way if you lost your job through no fault of your own and therefore lost your health care, and while you were trying to find a job in this shitty economy, you got really sick. Or if you needed some kind of serious treatment and your provider claimed it was a preexisting condition so they stuck you with the bill.
I’m all for self reliance (and, surprise, so is Barack Obama). But it seems to me that greed has helped turn self reliance into self involvement, with everyone running around a million miles an hour trying to grab every last dime they can. And a lot of them don’t care who gets run over in the process.
Nick – you’ve got to be kidding. Any attempt to help ordinary people is NOT Marxism.
Unless you are prepared to argue that Social Security and Medicare should be abolished, then by your definition you are also a Marxist. Then, if you do propose this, you couldn’t be elected to any position in America. I guess we’re a nation of Marxists.
None of your arguments will make any sense of you keep using words like socialism and Marxism.
mccain is having a good week and the polls are tightening but not nearly enough for McCain
I am curious about the impact of last nights Obama vision. He has run a brilliant campaign but my gut says he would have been better off to avoid that kind of display even if I am sure the content must have been useful to most Americans
“if you work hard, if you follow the rules, if you do what you are suppose to do, you can become successful– millions and millions of people have done it. Once you start tinkering with the ingredients that have made this country a fantastic success with socialism (which, by the way has never worked in any country it was tried in) that’s the end of America as we know it.”
So your theory is that if you work hard you CAN become successful or that you WILL become successful? If it’s the former, then there are hard-working people who, for whatever reason, can’t make ends meet or can’t get ahead. If it’s the latter, then you believe that all poor people just aren’t working hard enough.
I agree with your statement about commodities, though health care is NOT on that list. Emergency rooms do not turn people away, so we, as a society, have decided that health care is a right. No conservatives that I know say that ERs should turn away a sick man who doesn’t have any insurance, so I don’t see how basic preventative care would be any different.
You love to throw around labels like “socialism,” “commmunism,” “Marxism,” etc, but what Obama is talking about is the same thing we’ve been doing here for the last 80 years, and it has worked just fine. You seem to want to take things to their absolute extremes, but the comparisons are ridiculous. The US economy will always be based on capitalism, but a pure free market simply does not work.
Tall man: Your post has me thinking about an issue that is near to my heart when you talk about the pure free market.
One thing that surprises me about America, and this is my personal opinion, is that the almight dollar is viewed by so many as the only legitimate source of power. if you have money, or you generate money, you are viewed as having a legitimate source of power. So if Donald Trump uses the leverage he has from having a fat bank account to get the best deal possible for himself, he is celebrated as a hero.
On the other hand, any other collection of interests to form a power center, is often viewed as illegitimate. For example, if 27,000 middle class workers at Boeing form a union of interests to negotiate collectively with Boeing and then they decide to leverage that power by striking, they are somehow illegitimate, unrealistic, destroying America, etc… etc.. etc…
America is really quite unique is this lack of respect for anything except the dollar sign and I think this is both naive and disrespectful to our own humanity. Further, there is nothing “undemocratic” about the existance of interests outside the pure economic.
I am torn around the idea of universal health care. I’ve said many times here I don’t like to think that people in the US are suffering because they cannot afford care. But I DON’T want the government dictating fees, MD salaries, drug prices, or any other interference. And I think there MUST be some sort of responsibility on the patient as far as compliance and personal health choices- for example– if you smoke- you don’t get coverages, if you ride a motorcycle without a helmet you coverage is limited, etc.
There ABSOLUTELY should be some type of safety net in our country– any one of us on this blog can lose their source of income tomorrow. But, Gerardo- cradle to grave entitlements are NOT a help to people they are a disaster.
And Tall, what I’m talking about as far as following the rules and doing what you’re suppose to do, I mean come to work on time, don’t call in sick, don’t have a baby if you cannot afford a baby, for God’s sake don’t have baby if you’re not married, if you can’t afford something DON’T buy it… that’s what I’m talking about. I can tell you thousands of anecdotal stories of idiots that get themselves in situations that make life difficult for themselves– I don’t want to subsidizes those idiots with my tax dollars, I don’t want to help them send their kids to college and I don’t want to fund their retirement accounts.
And, finally, JP– your beloved unions have destroyed car manufacturing in this country- GM and Ford are about to fold because we were paying people $60 k a year to screw a bolt in a fender, with full benefits– that’s insane. You’re unions have also destroyed the airline industry and education and probably every other manufacturing shop they were involved in . I don’t understand how you can get a group of employees at a company that has hired them– they form an extortion group with ridiculous demands and that somehow is good for business and our economy.
I’m up against an onslaught of liberal nuttiness here
. I need some reinforcements!
Polls are tightening even further– people are wising up– that nauseating last night by nobama I think will backfire– he will not get elected in 6 days.
McCain/Palin 08
I was kidding about the liberal nuttiness– don’t be offended!
Nick: You made my point for me.
- When a business in the USA uses it’s economic leverage and moves hundreds of jobs to Communist China, and fires hundreds of American workers that they committed to and hired, they are viewed as heroic and allowed to take these steps practically unfettered by any obligations. I compare this to a father who abandons a newborn child, same thing really. Companys hire people who make a life around the job they have.
- What exactly is wrong when a union organises and leverages itself to get a good deal as long as they negotiate in good faith, it’s not extortion
Fact is that if workers in China were able to organise themselves, the USA wouldn’t be in nearly the same fix they are now. Those chinese children working in the shoe factories are slaves.
By the way, when Obama wins, are you gonna come on this blog and take your medicine, or will you go on “strike” for a few days til the pain wears off??
Businesses in the USA used its economic leverage to move jobs overseas because it is retarded to pay unskilled workers huge salaries that drives up the cost of those products so others cannot afford them. You should be paid what the market dictates you are worth. To pay a toll worker 50 k a year to make change (as is happening in Pennsylvania- and they refuse to take pennies because they don’t want to count them) is obscene – but thank your union and my tax dollars. And you ask what’s wrong with that– I just cited the potential closing of Ford and GM- that’s what’s wrong with it.
Let me ask this. What do employers “owe” their workers in your opinion? I’ve had shit jobs all my life and all I’ve ever expected was a paycheck- if I didn’t think the business was fair, I moved on-AND all those shit jobs motivated me to be were I am today.
If Nobama wins I will not weep like all the libs I know did when Gore and Kerry lost. It’ll suck, and I’ll hate it- but I’ll be here posting the next day.
Now, when McCain wins, and I come here are you going to be all pissy, or will you congratulate the repbulicans on a hard fought win?
“I can tell you thousands of anecdotal stories of idiots that get themselves in situations that make life difficult for themselves…”
Wow, it’s awful easy for you to pass judgment on people who have made mistakes in life. It’s also awful easy for you to assume that people in tough situations right now are there because they screwed up somehow.
“that nauseating last night by nobama I think will backfire…”
Think again. Conservatives say it was over-the-top but I think he spoke to a whole lot of undecided voters last night. Besides, how much of it did you actually watch, if you even tuned in at all?
“…will you congratulate the repbulicans on a hard fought win…”
A “hard fought win”? Is that what you would call it if McCain somehow wound up winning Tuesday? As I mentioned before, the guy is nearly devoid of any good ideas that resonate with voters so he’s resorted to slamming his opponent and trying to paint him as some socialist monster who’s going to steal everyone’s money and lead us to ruin. That’s all he has left — there’s absolutely no substance with McCain anymore, and if he somehow ends up on top, it’ll be because he deployed every dirty trick in the book to make a black guy with an Arab-sounding name look like the Boogeyman, and NOT because he was the better candidate.
Fortunately, I don’t think that’s going to happen.
By the way, Nick, you didn’t answer my question: were we socialists under Clinton? Because that’s what Obama is proposing — moving back to the tax structure we had under Clinton.
So again, how is it socialism to tax the wealthiest Americans at the rate that Clinton used during his term, but it wasn’t socialism when Bush lowered the tax rate for the wealthiest Americans? Bush did it to spread the wealth to the rich, Clinton and Obama were and are more concerned about the middle class.
When you take from someone who has and GIVE to someone who has not, that is socialism whether you want to admit it or not, and when the whole theme of your campaign is to “move the wealth around,” that’s absolutely socialism.
I’d be willing to bet huge money, that the people that were struggling during the Clinton years were no better off under Clinton, they were no better off under Bush, they were no better off under Reagan, and (God forbid) if Obama gets elected they STILL won’t be better off- except they get a $1500 federal tax “rebate” even though they will pay NO federal tax–no, that’s not socialism-come on, Jamey.
You’ve been so blinded by your liberal ideology that you can’t even see if you get a tax break all that means is you get to keep more of YOUR OWN MONEY— That’s YOUR money that goes away in taxes to be wasted on crap that doesn’t work. So how can you call it “redistribution up” when the simple fact is that break “on the wealthy” is on money that should have never been taken away?
So, under Clinton more money was TAKEN AWAY from people in taxes, and under Bush, more people were allowed to keep THEIR OWN MONEY. How is keeping your own money socialism? Sounds like smart capitalism to me.
“I’d be willing to bet huge money, that the people that were struggling during the Clinton years were no better off under Clinton, they were no better off under Bush, they were no better off under Reagan,”
You are in another world if you don’t think the middle and lower classes weren’t better off under Clinton than they are now. By every standard (average salary, consumer buying power, unemployment, job creation) the middle class was better off eight years ago than they are today. If you bet “huge” money, you would lose “huge” money.
Re: socialism, there isn’t a pure capitalistic/flat tax economy in the world because it doesn’t work. Corporations have proved that they can’t regulate themselves and a flat tax is akin to a regressive tax when you consider all he other taxes people pay regardless of income. Every Western economy has some form of so-called “socialist” program within it. You say it is a bad thing but the rest of the world and most of our country (anyone who supports Medicare or Social Security) says that it is a society’s responsibility to take care of those that cannot take care of themselves. There is a big difference between Obama’s health plan and a government run health care system that everyone HAS to belong to. He’s talking about introducing a baseline program that would compete with private enterprise in the same way that the post office competes with FedEx and UPS.
Also, regarding progressive tax, you should look at total wealth, not just income. The top 1% owns 39% of the country’s wealth.
“The top 1 percent of tax returns paid about the same amount of federal individual income taxes as the bottom 95 percent of tax”
http://www.taxfoundation.org/press/show/22652.html
Don’t tell me they aren’t paying their fair share
It depends on your definition of “fair share.” The top 1% owns about 40% of all wealth and earned approximately 21% of all income. I don’t remember the upper class complaining during the Clinton years.
A strong middle class makes for a strong economy.
Obama’s plan will cut more taxes for the poor and middle class. McCain’s will cut more taxes for the wealthiest Americans. Since the vast majority of Americans are in those poor-to-middle-class brackets, that means that Obama’s plan would actually allow more people to keep more of their money. That should be music to your ears, Nick.
By the way, one of your heroes greatly expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit in 1986, a refundable federal income tax credit for low-income working individuals and families. So was Ronald Reagan a socialist?
Nick: we all enjoy debating with you and I want to express that I think you are proof positive that not all fascists are bad.
Thanks, JP- I think???? But I also think you need to lay off the gelato– it’s screwing with your blood sugars and messing up your logical thought.
Please tell me how low taxes, a small government, freedom and personal responsibility are fascist? Fascism opposes conservatism, I’m getting worried about you, buddy.
And Jamey, if you think your taxes are not going up with Obama, you’re living in liberal la la land. Clinton said exactly the same thing and everyone’s taxes went up.
Damn, Nick — why didn’t you tell us you could predict the future?! That’s got to be a pretty useful little trick. Do you hang out with Miss Cleo?
So tell us, who wins on Tuesday? Actually, it doesn’t look like we’ll need your gift to predict that outcome. Instead, just let me know when the Indians or Browns will actually win a title.
Nick: the Webster definition of fascist is one on the extreme right. The way you toss around the word Marxist and socialist I can only conclude you are in fact fascist. Hitler was beloved by the right when he rose to power, your Sarah Palin has some interesting parallels to hitler. He also rose to prominence using highly inflamatory rhetoric.
Jamey–
Predicting a democrat will riase your taxes is like predicting Saturday will come after Friday– It’s no trick, by liberal brother.
And the browns/indians– that’s easy too- never!
JP, me thinks there is much flaw in your “logic”.
“And the browns/indians– that’s easy too- never!”
Now you’re just being mean.
Nick: Go ahead and read some of Hitler’s early works, he rails on communists and substitute Muslim for Jew and you could almost hear Sarah Palin talking.
I am telling you, both you and Sarah are fascists my friend. Not that there’s anything wrong with that !
John-
The Jews were not a threat to Germany in any way. There are no Palin supporters fainting at any of their rallies, and there is no fervent, cult-like following of McCain or Palin.
Now contrast that to the Obama supporters. You don’t find it odd that he has no real political achievements, he’s at least associated with anti American nutclowns, his wife practically stated America is a horrible place and his only management experience is “community organizing” (the term has become a punch line- and, certainly, old Adolf was a community organizer in his early days)-
Couple his early days with his cult like status and he’s more like Hitler than Hitler was, but I don’t expect you to see that because you are part of the cult– Let me give you a bit of advice-DON’T DRINK THE KOOLADE at any democratic functions.
You guys are being hoodwinked….
Obama will not win
“no real political achievements”
-nuclear non-proliferation w/Luger
-Senate ethics reform
“only management experience”
-senate offices
-US Presidental campaign for the last two years
Tall-
Is that a Friday night comedy skit or something? You cannot be serious with that- that makes me qualified to be ruler of the world!
That was funny– I’ll give you that!
On Drudge–
ZOGBY SATURDAY: McCain outpolled Obama 48% to 47% in Friday poll. He is beginning to cut into Obama’s lead among independents, is now leading among blue collar voters, has strengthened his lead among investors and among men, and is walloping Obama among NASCAR voters. Joe the Plumber may get his license after all…
Interesting if anything…
The election all comes down to 7 states
Colorado
New Mexico
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Viginia
North Carolina
Florida
should be interesting
Comrades,
Good news from the Zoby front:
http://www.zogby.com/main.htm
The majority of those states will go McCain, JP!
Don’t let those corporate bastards keep us down!
I give you two examples of real political accomplishments (when you said he had none) and you just laugh it off? Conversely, I find it hilarious that a 72 year-old man who seems to get confused/mixed up a lot would select as his running mate a first-term governor that answers legitimate questions with nonsensical answers and then complains about the “filter of the mainstream media.”
That’s why I wrote a while back about how the Palin choice as VP was great for Obama. It completely undercut the experience argument, which was McCain’s best chance.
That Zogby poll was a one-day set of interviews. It’s funny how Drudge picks the one outlier and touts it as if it’s the only poll in the field. And then Nick turns around and touts it here. Laughable.
Nick – you seem certain that McCain will win. How about putting your money where your mouth is? I’ll bet you $50 straight up that McCain is not our next President. (I’d bet more but I know how good the GOP is at caging voters and suppressing the vote.)
I can see NC, Florida, NM and Colorado flipping back to McCain.
I cannot see Ohio, PA and Virginia.
The polls say the other 43 states are more or less solid for one or the other so in my opinion, whoever wins Ohio, PA and Virginia wins the election.
I think it’s gonna be close in any case. McCain has been coming back from the dead, sometimes literally, his whole life. I think he will fall just short this time but he is going to make this close.
He has had a good last week, no doubt about it.
Tall, the comedy of your post is two-fold– the items that you mention have in no way been a success- we have nuclear weapons, and ethics in congress- do I even have to say anything? and number 2 your bozo the clown candidate has only campaigned- that it– THAT IS NOT ENOUGH TO BE PRESIDENT, my liberal, misguided friend.
HE’S DONE NOTHING. NADA. NOTHING. NOTHING. Got is?
Where he’s “organized” in the past is still a disgrace– poverty and crime reign.
The clown speaks of “being his brothers keeper” implying I’m responsible to help the poor (which I don’t mind VOLUNTEERING for) and yet his REAL bother lives on less than 15 dollars a YEAR. And you’re going to tell me that’s not f#$@ed up? Yea, he want’s to help the poor– with other peoples money– great guy.
I’ll never understand the devotion of the left to this cult leader.
JP-
I live in PA– I have a strong feeling the “gun hugging, religious, red-neck racists” in the center of the state will go McCain.
We’ll see.
and Murtha is set to go down in flames because he’s a brain dead idiot.
“I’ll never understand the devotion of the left to this cult leader.”
In which case, you may as well just insult, ridicule and debase him, since you don’t understand him. That’s clearly the course of action for any conservative these days: if you don’t get it, destroy it. Fortunately, there are millions of people who do “get it,” and they’re going to elect the best candidate come Tuesday.
I also find it very interesting that the vast majority of the world (including our so-called allies who aren’t very impressed with us these days) overwhelmingly supports Obama over McCain. As a conservative, I know you’ll dismiss that out of hand as being insignificant and, quite possibly, another reason to in fact not like Obama. But to me, it speaks to the fact that other countries aren’t caught up in our ideologies and instead are judging these two candidates on their character, what they stand for, whose view of the world they most align with, etc. Which tells me that, when you strip away ideologies (and I mean on both sides), Obama is the heavy global favorite.
As for your dismissal of his campaign as being irrelevant and/or insignificant, what a joke. He’s been campaigning for nearly two years, and he’s done the impossible — knocking out the other democratic candidates, including the very formidable Hillary Clinton during a brutal primary season, and now he’s got a popular decorated war hero against the ropes with the election just days away. He’s run a brilliant campaign, he’s withstood the absolute worst your party could throw at him, he’s stayed “above the fray” for the most part while McCain has tried repeatedly to drag him down into the muck, he’s answered questions many voters had about his judgment, readiness and ability to lead, but you somehow don’t think that’s relevant.
The bottom line is, Obama is the far superior candidate in this race, the proverbial “right guy at the right time,” and he’s run a far superior campaign too. I know that eats you up inside, but it’s the truth.