Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Updated Fix Electoral Map Picks: An Obama Landslide?

Barack Obama stands on the cusp of an electoral vote blowout over John McCain with just eight days left in the 2008 general election.

On our latest Fix electoral map, we have Obama at 349 electoral votes -- his highest total since we began picking the playing field earlier this fall -- while McCain stands at 189 electoral votes.

And, it's uniquely possible that Obama could crest 350 electoral votes before all is said and done next Tuesday. The hardest three states for us to pick -- Missouri, Indiana and Nevada -- were all carried by President George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004. (In the case of Indiana, the Republican presidential nominee has carried the state in every election but one -- 1964 -- since 1936.)

While we have McCain to Indiana, it's uniquely possible that the Hoosier State could flip from red to blue as Real Clear Politics shows Obama leading by a half percent in an average of polling conducted in the state. (The RCP average and other helpful indicators for nine battleground states can be found in our new Battleground Cheat Sheet.)

Similarly, North Carolina, which we are giving to McCain, could go for Obama, according to aggregated polling.

If those two states were to flip, Obama's electoral vote count would stand at a whopping 375. For comparison purposes, President Bill Clinton won 379 electoral votes in his 1996 re-election race against Kansas Sen. Bob Dole while then Vice President George H.W. Bush claimed 426 electoral votes in his win over Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis in 1988.

Much can change in eight days -- especially when so many people are paying so much attention. But, since late September Obama has consolidated his electoral gains and looked hungry for more. There is little indication in any polling we've seen that any major change agent is on the horizon that would disrupt that pattern.

<p><strong>><a href='http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008/pick-your-president/'>2008 Election Contest: Pick Your President</a></strong> - Predict the winner of the 2008 presidential election.</p>

By Chris Cillizza  |  October 27, 2008; 6:00 AM ET
Categories:  Battlegrounds , Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Wag the Blog Redux: Palin's Shopping Spree
Next: Obama: The Final Frame

Comments

hungry4it.. maybe we should focus on using the correct terms so the republicons can't distort the picture. Western European countries are social democracies; not socialist states perse. A social democracy has socialized certain aspects that pertain to the public good (fire,health,welfare,education,police,etc) but are capitalist in every other way. The government doesn't dictate how corporations use their money/make money etc. A socialist society the government has a huge role in business and most business are government owned/controlled/etc.

In the same respect, Obama has no intention on socializing corporations or businesses or have the government plan production/etc. He just wants to make sure people have health care, and easy/cheap access to education, re-education, and a social net in case the capitalist system and greed get out of hand and cause an economical collapse where the average person who does not make millions of dollars a year has a chance to pull himself out of the hole he was placed into due to the inherent greed in human nature.


Social Democracy vs Socialist is a big difference and to fight the crud the republicons are spreading it might be useful to point to the discrepancy in the terms and language they use vs what that language really means/implies.

Posted by: PaulD2 | October 30, 2008 5:41 PM | Report abuse

* * * * * * * * * *
====> Let me tell you it felt astoundingly great to be on the winning side of Ronald Reagan's landslide victory. I am voting for Sen. Obama this time around...and to think I could once again be on the winning side of a landslide is exciting beyond belief. I'll do my part with my vote for Sen. Obama...please do your part if we are to help make this 2008 landslide reality.
* * * * * * * * * *

Posted by: hungry4it | October 30, 2008 2:05 AM | Report abuse

* * * * * * * * * *
====> Let me tell you it felt astoundingly great to be on the winning side of Ronald Reagan's landslide victory. I am voting for Sen. Obama this time around...and to think I could once again be on the winning side of a landslide is exciting beyond belief. I'll do my part with my vote for Sen. Obama...please do you part if we are to help make this 2008 landslide reality.
* * * * * * * * * *

Posted by: hungry4it | October 30, 2008 1:53 AM | Report abuse

I see that 37th&OStreet is becoming even more hysterical with each passing day!

e.g.: "What is worse is that Obama exposed his children to the HATE OF BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY FOR YEARS"

Oh, the poor children! Get a grip.

First, what kind of idiot (or bigot) thinks that "Black liberation theology" advocates hate? Do they imagine that freedom is some kind of limited commodity, such that if black people are free, white people are not? Or that liberation of black people threatens the liberty of white people in some way? Since most of the "children" who were thus exposed to the terrible and heretical idea that black people ought to be free were black children, then 37th&OStreet's complaint makes NO sense, even for a bigot... unless 37th is afraid that such lessons will make them too uppity.

Posted by: Iconoblaster | October 28, 2008 5:03 PM | Report abuse

To all of you screaming "socialism" at the prospect of Obama being POTUS, may I remind you that most, if not all, of the European countries are mostly socialist, and the last I looked, before the economic "meltdown (brought on by the US)," they were kicking our donkeys! Also, to Texan2007; Geez! don't have a heart attack! You'll live through it just as we liberals have had to live through the last eight years.

Posted by: nwsjnky1 | October 28, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

.

.

.


.


Old Tape of Obama Revealing His Real Thinking:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck


.

.


.


Let's all review how this year, not decades ago. OBAMA REFUSED TO DISAVOW Rev. Wright and his BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY TEACHINGS.


What is worse is that Obama exposed his children to the HATE OF BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY FOR YEARS.


EXPOSED HIS CHILDREN TO THAT RACIST HATE UNTIL IT BECAME POLITICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR OBAMA TO CONTINUE TO BRING HIS CHILDREN TO THE RACIST CHURCH !


IF A WHITE candidate had a similar church, the Washignton Post would be railing against that candidate.


The bias is great, the racism is unbelievable. The media has given Obama so many passes.


Then they have to go and get some FALSE CHARGES FROM DECADES AGO.


Investigate Obama and his democratic friends in Chicago.


Investigate his friend REZKO who has been indicted and whose story much of America does not know.


Investigate all the connections between Michele Obama and Farrakhan.


BE SERIOUS MEDIA.


YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING DRINKING THE KOOL-AID OF THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN TALKING POINTS AS IF IT WERE TRUTH.


.


.

Posted by: 37thandOSt | October 28, 2008 11:41 AM | Report abuse

Was the 39% tax rate "socialism" throughout the 90s when virtually everyone in the country prospered? Our entire government has "socialistic" qualities: Out current tax system, social security, medicade, corporate subsidies, etc... Real socialism is when the government takes over the means of production in a country - the closest we've come to that is the government bank bail out proposed by the Bush Administration and approved by both McCain and Obama. Can you say "red herring"?

Posted by: NMModerate1 | October 28, 2008 11:25 AM | Report abuse

Why do ALASKANS get to be MARXISTS and WE dont?

Transfer Wealth from Rich Oil Companies and send to ALASKANS?

And is Sarah going to stop BEING THE BIGGEST SOCIALIST REDISTRIBUTOR of Oil Company Wealth?

Posted by: capinfusion | October 28, 2008 10:47 AM | Report abuse

officermancuso -

I didn't predict that my remark would boost McCain. It was, however, as you pointed out, a technical point. A point meant to go over the heads of ignorant, naive voters, a BO core group.

Posted by: leapin | October 28, 2008 10:02 AM | Report abuse

brazilianRio -

Please read what is actually written. I didn't say I was against compassion. I was saying what blind tolerance and compassion will lead. Get your Brazilian thong out of your crack.

Posted by: leapin | October 28, 2008 9:51 AM | Report abuse

peter 1231 wrote:

According to the Marxist “ labor theory of value”, the "value" of a good or service is proportional to the amount of labor required to produce it (including the labor required to produce the raw materials and machinery used in production).
Karl Marx writes: "A useful article, therefore, has value only because human labour in the abstract has been embodied or materialized in it. How, then, is the magnitude of value to be measured? Plainly, by the quantity of the value-creating substance, the labour, contained in the article." (Das Kapital, volume 1, part 1, chapter 1)
Obama says, on Sat Oct 18th, 2008, at a speech in Missouri, in hitherto capitalist America:
"It comes down to values in America. Do we simply value wealth, or do we value the work that creates it?"
How is it that Obama should so felicitously paraphrase Karl Marx?
Simply, he was influenced by Marxism in his youth (hawaii, columbia university, etc.)
what makes Obama so unique is that he is willing to be radical, while purporting to behave like a mainstream politician.
Mainstream politicians, like Biden, have never gone that far. Radicals have never deined to behave like mainstream politicians.
Obama has decided that any household with a gross income over 250K does not have a right to those earnings.

For Obama, the factory workers should own the factory. The investor merely steals the fruit of the workers’ labor.

marx, engels, lenin, obama!

-----------------------------------

Adam Smith, and all the other classical political economists, also ascribed to a labour theory of value. The divergence between them and Marx, who was very much in that tradition, arises over the question of why commodities don't necessarily exchange on the basis of the amount of 'living' and 'dead' labour that went into the production of the commodity.
As it happens the author of your republic's constitution (I'm a Brit and unfortunately we are all still subjects), Jefferson, would have been more likely to agree with Marx than he would McCain or yourself.

Posted by: gazmac1 | October 28, 2008 9:07 AM | Report abuse

Chris is really a hot looking guy!

Posted by: marksquarepants | October 28, 2008 1:16 AM | Report abuse

thecannula-

Thanks for the opportunity to discuss our differing positions.

Rooster54-
Sorry, I was at work.
You have a problem with Jack Welch. I see him as a money magnet: wherever he goes, money follows. He pulled GE out of Rhode Island and thousands of middle class workers lost their jobs and are still suffering. So, the officials of Rhode Island are reconsidering their 9% state corporate tax rate- what do you think they should do? Isn't it the same thing WE should do on Nov 4th? Let's cut US corporate tax rates so Jack's successors running multinational corporations don't see the US the way Jack saw Rhode Island...But Rooster, It's Not Personal- It's Just Business...

Obama is now on tape from 2001 confirming that he wants to redistribute wealth and change the supreme court to assist in this task-

John Mccain wants to keep business in America by cutting corporate taxes-

Socialism (Redistributive economy) has failed EVERYWHERE it's been tried- according to the World Health Org., countries with the highest rate of suicide are all socialist- take away incentive and employment goes down, suicide goes up- is that the country for which you will vote?


(Zogby Rasmusson and Gallup (traditional)
all down to 5, IBD- 4....America is waking up to Obama's Redistributive Socialism- national polls first, the states will follow)

Posted by: thecannula | October 27, 2008 10:20 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl, I am surprised that you would have anything to say about "black people's hopes and fears" - as you have spent a lot of time on these boards previously making all sorts of demeaning comments about blacks. What gives? Evil twin died?

Posted by: LABC

Why do the diehard Obama trolls think that criticism of Barack Obama, were generalized racist attacks on all black people. One more time: criticizing or vetting Barack Obama isn't racist, just because he's a black candidate.

Posted by: AsperGirl | October 27, 2008 9:39 PM | Report abuse

According to the Marxist “ labor theory of value”, the "value" of a good or service is proportional to the amount of labor required to produce it (including the labor required to produce the raw materials and machinery used in production).
Karl Marx writes: "A useful article, therefore, has value only because human labour in the abstract has been embodied or materialized in it. How, then, is the magnitude of value to be measured? Plainly, by the quantity of the value-creating substance, the labour, contained in the article." (Das Kapital, volume 1, part 1, chapter 1)
Obama says, on Sat Oct 18th, 2008, at a speech in Missouri, in hitherto capitalist America:
"It comes down to values in America. Do we simply value wealth, or do we value the work that creates it?"
How is it that Obama should so felicitously paraphrase Karl Marx?
Simply, he was influenced by Marxism in his youth (hawaii, columbia university, etc.)
what makes Obama so unique is that he is willing to be radical, while purporting to behave like a mainstream politician.
Mainstream politicians, like Biden, have never gone that far. Radicals have never deined to behave like mainstream politicians.
Obama has decided that any household with a gross income over 250K does not have a right to those earnings.

For Obama, the factory workers should own the factory. The investor merely steals the fruit of the workers’ labor.

marx, engels, lenin, obama!

Posted by: peter1231 | October 27, 2008 9:25 PM | Report abuse

I hope that Obama wins AND Missouri goes for McCain. The less "you have to win this state" comments, the better.

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | October 27, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

Risible. Bush - the President least capable of carrying out the demands of his great office, since at least as far back as the Teapot Dome Scandal.
The Repo Party (yes with them everyone is broke)fanboys want people to vote for McCain whose campaign makes even GWB look capable...

Posted by: ppjmckeown | October 27, 2008 7:49 PM | Report abuse

HUM!!!

Posted by: fu_buki | October 27, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

leapin wrote, "McCain voted 90% of the time with Bush...oops...I didn't know the President has a vote I thought only the Congress and Senate vote."

leapin, you can't seriously think that that argument is going to convince anyone who is not already in the Republican bunker, can you?

:::Breaking news:::::

McCain leapfrogs Obama in polls after leapin makes technical semantic point that president doesn't vote in congress.

Cheney destroys files, fearing that leapin's argument may lead investigors to realize that he is actually an employee of George W. Bush and not of the U.S. Senate

::::now back to reality:::::::

Posted by: officermancuso | October 27, 2008 7:20 PM | Report abuse

Texan2007, were you asleep when a Republican president proposed taking $3,000 from every American man, woman, and child, and "infusing it" into Wall Street? Asleep when John McCain suspended his campaign to fly back to DC and do his patriotic duty to bail out those bankers and hedge fund managers who might have to downsize from McMains to 2 million dollar a year brownstones?

Redistribution of wealth is happening rapidly before the very eyes of anyone not asleep at the wheel this very minute - and it sure wasn't brought about by Democrats.

Posted by: officermancuso | October 27, 2008 7:10 PM | Report abuse

What is an ELECTORAL map?
We need a SOCIALIST map.

VOTE FOR CZAR OBAMA!

VOTE NO TO DEMOCRACY.

VOTE FOR CZAR OBAMA.

Posted by: Texan2007 | October 27, 2008 6:53 PM | Report abuse

LEAPIN LEAPIN!!!


NETHERLANDS ANTILLES

Posted by: fu_buki | October 27, 2008 6:50 PM | Report abuse

What about Omaha's electoral vote? You gave it to Obama last time. Should be 350-188.

Posted by: JonSM99 | October 27, 2008 6:40 PM | Report abuse

LEAPIN LEAPIN

Posted by: fu_buki | October 27, 2008 6:35 PM | Report abuse

Oh LEAPIN, LEAPIN: dont' tell us you are against tolerance and compassion. Come to the good side - be passionate.
Peace to you!

Posted by: brazilianRio | October 27, 2008 6:30 PM | Report abuse

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Posted by: fu_buki | October 27, 2008 6:17 PM | Report abuse

“Welfare countries as Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland have the highest ranks on Human Development in the world.”

The also have some of the highest taxes in the world which stifles business and innovation and crushes the human spirit, however, they should enjoy their “progress" because they will be under Sharia law in the not too distant future because of their tolerance and compassion.

Posted by: leapin | October 27, 2008 5:29 PM | Report abuse

FACT ERROR! FACT ERROR!
Roosevelt (Dem) carried Indiana in 1936. Landon (REP) only carried Maine and Vermont. In 1940, the Indiana GOP streak began with Wendell Willkie carrying the state over FDR. Willkie was orginally from Elmwood, Indiana.

Posted by: HistorybuffinKC | October 27, 2008 5:24 PM | Report abuse

McCain voted 90% of the time with Bush...oops...I didn't know the President has a vote I thought only the Congress and Senate vote.

Posted by: leapin | October 27, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Hey Leapin:
Welfare countries as Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland have the highest ranks on Human Development in the world.
Why don't you take your passport to know it?

Posted by: brazilianRio | October 27, 2008 5:12 PM | Report abuse

37th and 0 street - don't you have that sad sack blog to run? You know, the one where you claimed was a "hot spot" of blogging?

AsperGirl, I am surprised that you would have anything to say about "black people's hopes and fears" - as you have spent a lot of time on these boards previously making all sorts of demeaning comments about blacks. What gives? Evil twin died?

Posted by: LABC | October 27, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

Hey OLANDUG:
Condemned (today) Sen. Ted Stevens is Sarah Palin's pal - what about Mrs. Palin?

Posted by: brazilianRio | October 27, 2008 4:57 PM | Report abuse

The only failure of capitalism is that it has been so successful that it could afford to fund generations of welfare. Now the welfare generation thinks you can replace capitalism with socialism. Can socialism fund generations of welfare without capitalists?

Posted by: leapin | October 27, 2008 4:55 PM | Report abuse

REPUBLICANS:
You must call up mr. Jeb Bush and Mrs. Katherine Harris from Florida as soon as possible. Only them can now save the Party!

Posted by: brazilianRio | October 27, 2008 4:47 PM | Report abuse

Donjasper: You're right of course.

Did you vote yet?

:-)

Posted by: toritto | October 27, 2008 4:46 PM | Report abuse

--toritto said:
--
--"This nation is on the verge of something
--historic - the election of a black man as
--President of the United States. "

-At least that' how I view the historic aspect of
-Obama's potential presidency.
-
-Posted by: VMR1 | October 27, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Dudes, first settle down. If Obama heard you talking like that he'd point out New Hampshire. It ain't over until it's over.

Second. History has already been made. He's changed the way elections are funded in this country. Lobbiest's, PAC's, 526's and all those third-party money raisers are now out of business.

One of the benefits of knowing how to Internet I guess. Maybe McCain should've taken the trouble to learn. Old versus New.

I heard a warehouse manager quoted as saying: "If McCain wins, then it's more of the same. If Obama wins, then it's the end of politics as we know it."

Posted by: DonJasper | October 27, 2008 4:38 PM | Report abuse

.


.


Old Tape of Obama Revealing His Real Thinking:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

.


.

Posted by: 37thandOSt | October 27, 2008 4:31 PM | Report abuse

...and I never said the possible election of Obama was "meaningful to black people"....I said it was historic ...

:-)

Posted by: toritto | October 27, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

I believe in the New American Santa Claus.

Hope and Change And Goodies !

Posted by: leapin | October 27, 2008 4:20 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl said: "Well, but it is meaningful to black people and those who share their pain and dreams."

--What makes you think you know what black folks' "pain" and "dreams" are? ...

Posted by: VMR1 | October 27, 2008 4:11 PM

Nowhere in my statement did I claim to be one of "...those who share their pain and dreams".

Posted by: AsperGirl | October 27, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

VMR1: Well as far as the dreams and hopes of black people, I can't speak to that.

But I sure as hell can count their votes - which I assume might be a reasonable indication of how they feel about the possibility of a black President.

P. S. I wonder how Condi will vote in the privacy of her voting booth??

:-)

Posted by: toritto | October 27, 2008 4:18 PM | Report abuse

Obama seems to have a Teflon quality because the American public is hesitant to criticize an African American. If Obama were white, he would have been crucified a long time ago. This need to vote for someone because of their race is an insidious and destructive form of discrimination.

All Obama says in his speech is empty hyperbole. And like a Gumby without integrity, he bends his words to fit what the public wants to hear, prostituting his words for a vote.

But what the populous fails to consider is Obama’s past actions and associations which clearly demonstrate a hatred for this country and horrendous bad judgment. And Instead of addressing the accusations of associating with terrorist and mob members, Obama reacts like a terrorist by threatening all who dare to criticize or challenge him.

I have never given credence to the idea of an Anti-Christ, until now.

Posted by: olandug | October 27, 2008 4:15 PM | Report abuse

37thandOSt:

Oh, get lost already!

Posted by: VMR1 | October 27, 2008 4:13 PM | Report abuse

AsperGirl said:
"Well, but it is meaningful to black people and those who share their pain and dreams."

What makes you think you know what black folks' "pain" and "dreams" are? J.C.Watts, Joseph Perkins, Condoleezza Rice, et al obviously don't share the dreams of the Obama presidency with other black people.

Can't you tell that by "knowing" "their pain and dreams" and by saying "their pain and dreams" you engage in a kind of sub-conscious racism, even if it comes from a good place in your heart? "They" are all as different as "Us", ok?.

Also, as a Jew, I well recall the enthusism of some Jews about the prospect of Joe Lieberman becoming the first ever Jewish VP back in 2000, as well as displeasure and fear by other Jews about the very same thing because "if he does or says something wrong, it'll be because he's a Jew and we'll all be blamed".

How do you know that thinking along the same lines doesn't go on in the AA communinty?

Posted by: VMR1 | October 27, 2008 4:11 PM | Report abuse

.


.


Let's all review how this year, not decades ago. OBAMA REFUSED TO DISAVOW Rev. Wright and his BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY TEACHINGS.


What is worse is that Obama exposed his children to the HATE OF BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY FOR YEARS.


EXPOSED HIS CHILDREN TO THAT RACIST HATE UNTIL IT BECAME POLITICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR OBAMA TO CONTINUE TO BRING HIS CHILDREN TO THE RACIST CHURCH !


IF A WHITE candidate had a similar church, the Washignton Post would be railing against that candidate.


The bias is great, the racism is unbelievable. The media has given Obama so many passes.


Then they have to go and get some FALSE CHARGES FROM DECADES AGO.


Investigate Obama and his democratic friends in Chicago.


Investigate his friend REZKO who has been indicted and whose story much of America does not know.


Investigate all the connections between Michele Obama and Farrakhan.


BE SERIOUS MEDIA.


YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING DRINKING THE KOOL-AID OF THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN TALKING POINTS AS IF IT WERE TRUTH.


.


.

Posted by: 37thandOSt | October 27, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Ted Stevens guilty on all counts.

:-)

Posted by: toritto | October 27, 2008 4:07 PM | Report abuse

nsabetus said:

"Mccain we will be safe for another 4 years and he IS NOT GWB"

As a New Yorker, I take offense at your suggestion that GWB is not safe!

Millions of cars and trucks pass through it daily, many of them Republican-owned, but there's no current evidence of its structural deficiency or worse, attempts at sabotage by either Republicans (who hate it because it's a socialist structure) or Muslim terrorists (who hate anything big and American).

Posted by: VMR1 | October 27, 2008 3:51 PM | Report abuse

Obama's blackness is a very artificial reason to proclaim this election historic...

Posted by: VMR1 | October 27, 2008 1:00 PM

Well, but it is meaningful to black people and those who share their pain and dreams. Just as Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin's candidacies have been meaningful to me. When you see someone from your home team hit a record-winning home run or make that superbowl-winning touchdown, that is the same kind of feeling. it does mean a lot.

Also, Obama's candidacy is an achievement not of just one black man. Obama's campaign is a group project in the sense that a lot of his supporters worked unbelievably hard and sacrificed a lot to make his lead right now possible. I mean, watching the enormous effort and passion, it's hard to not respect it.

We can fight with Obama or in Congress over raising taxes, but when it comes to things like whether Obama's black supporters think his candidacy is historic on account of his race, we should not argue with them. And we should all celebrate an historic presidency if he gets elected.

I think John McCain made a beautiful mini-speech in the middle of his jokes at that Catholic fundraiser in NY this month. John McCain interrupted his jokes to talk about Obama's historic presidency and the prospect he might win the White House:

"I've come out on both sides of elections, and I've never lost my confidence in the judgment of the American people. In the military they work pretty hard to impress "the chain on command" on your thinking. One way or another, on the fourth of November, word will come down from the top of the chain and Senator Obama and I will receive our orders. I don't want it getting out of this room, but my opponent is an impressive fellow in many ways. Political opponents can have a little trouble seeing the best in each other, but I've had a few glimpses of this man at his best, and I admire his great skill, energy and determination. It's not for nothing that he has inspired so many folks in his own party and beyond. Senator Obama talks about making history, and he's made quite a bit of it already. There was a time when the mere invitation of an African American citizen to dine at the White House was taken as an outrage and insult in many quarters. Today is a world away from the cruel and prideful bigotry of that time, and good riddance. I cannot wish my opponent luck, but I wish him well."

http://www.youtube.com/v/pq4zrOoHXeg
(McCain starts this little speech about minute 15:40)

John McCain gave that little speech at a charity dinner, away from the campaign trail and attacks. I think McCain's words reflect his true feelings, and that he will also appreciate and support Obama's presidency as historic, if Obama wins.

Posted by: AsperGirl | October 27, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

torrito said:

"We stand at a moment in history where progress is palpable."

Sorry to douse you with cold water but don't get your hopes up yet, old man. America ain't yet ready for "palpable progress". It will be when it collapses completely. To collapse completely it needs a McCAin, or better yet a Palin presidency.

At this point, Americans are dumb enough to switch their votes to McCAin, now that the price of gas is falling and home sales are up.
Things are looking up, so maybe it's kind of unnecessary to elect a Negro socialist. C'mon, you've been around and ought to know how dumb our people are.

As for me, I fully expect McCAin to win, as improbalbe as it may sound today. Because I think it's America's destiny. US has to fully gag on its own B.S. before progress becomes palpable. From what I see around me, the fear and loathing of the self have not yet fully materialized.

Posted by: VMR1 | October 27, 2008 3:39 PM | Report abuse

Actually, although LBJ legally ended segregation and President Obama will put the final nail in the coffin of Jim Crow segregation, politically Obama resembles no one more than Tony Blair, the former British Prime Minister. Tall, same bearing, same easy manner in front of a camera or crowd, picked by the party of the left wing, but once in office, continuously makes realistic choices that confound the expectations of the old left...

Bluewash nevertheless and a worthy successor to LBJ.

Posted by: ppjmckeown | October 27, 2008 3:38 PM | Report abuse

Bluewash Coast to Coast!

Obama 2008/LBJ 1964!

John McCain = Barry Goldwater.
and Sarah Palin....
... the Wicked Witch from the fairy tale that gave you nightmares as a 5 year old.

Posted by: ppjmckeown | October 27, 2008 3:16 PM | Report abuse

How do King of Zouk, 37th and O, Scrivenor et al do it? I've gotten a dozen or so attempts to post, (all original and all different) over several of these columns, gotten my greyed submit button, and never gotten in?

And now to the real mis nomer: Taxation as "Redistribution of Wealth". Taxation is at most redistribution of income. Redistribution of WEALTH would consist of taxing personal property, including investments, based on their current value, at a rate that drained the wealthy of their accumulated loot, and not simply relieving them of some of their current bag of swag.

The worst action the Republicans ever took was to convince Congress that, since only a few Americans qualified for the 95% tax bracket, that we could afford to do away with every tax bracket higher than 40%.

Those > 50% tax brackets did provide negative incentives, because even Micheal Millken wouldn't have played his games for half a billion a year had he known that all he would have realized for his efforts would have been a measly $2.5 million.

Well, now to hit the submit button and see another submission disappear into the ether.

Posted by: ceflynline | October 27, 2008 2:48 PM | Report abuse

I will tell my daughter. No, honey I didn’t vote for the socialist dictator. No, there is nothing we can do about it now because we are totally dependent on the government for everything. They punitively taxed us and confiscated our 401K’s. We can no longer protest. We are totally dependent. But remember honey I wasn’t one who voted for him.

Posted by: leapin | October 27, 2008 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Glad to see the comments concerning my post. I got to Obama because of the war. I support Obama because of the economy.

But it was the shredding of the Constitution before my eyes that made me open my wallet.

...as for the several comments about the historical significance of electing a black man - in my life time the military was desegregated; then schools; then Jim Crow throughout the South. The Civil Rights Act was passed only 40 years ago along with the Voting Rights Act.

The face of American is changing and so are the attitudes of the young. Slavery and racism are the original sin of this nation. We stand at a moment in history where progress is palpable. As the boomers used to say "The whole world is watching"

One more week...

:-)

Make sure you VOTE!!

Posted by: toritto | October 27, 2008 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Nevada will turn blue come next Tuesday. We have one of the highest forclosure rates, people are losing their jobs, our health care system here is a mess people want change. Nevandans would rather have an intelligent poker playing president than a crap shooting president who hopes the dice will roll in his favor. Besides, all those who bet on college sports remember when McCain tried to ban betting on college games.

Obama has a massive grassroots army that is helping to get the vote out.

Posted by: Nevadaandy | October 27, 2008 2:10 PM | Report abuse

VMRI - this bears repeating:
"What everyone should be happy about is that a truly intelligent man has a chance to become President and lead us out of the dark ages of the past 8 years."
HEAR HEAR!!!

But Obama supporters, it isn't over til it's over. You've got that message and you know we cannot take anything for granted. Keep working! AND VOTE VOTE VOTE!
Obama/Biden '08!

Posted by: sheridan1 | October 27, 2008 2:01 PM | Report abuse

Torrito makes a very good point. It now is the economy that drives our wagons but for a good many of us it was the war that first turned us "off" George Bush. Than came McCain and he was a big supporter for this stupid war. By the time this economy went into the basement my mind, and I suppose the mind of others was made up long ago. I am as much voting AGAINST McCain as I am voting FOR Obama. This war has to end. The Iraqis do not want us there any longer but Bush still pursues an "agreement" they do not want to sign. McCain would like to lock us in there for "100 years" if he could. Enough already. Bring the boys and girls home NOW. Don't even wait the 18 months that now seems to be the accepted policy. That's more American lives lost and 18 more months of 10 billion dollars down the drain. Let's start pushing Obama to bring them home NOW.

Posted by: Opa2 | October 27, 2008 1:55 PM | Report abuse

You repubs are a riot!

Allinthegame repeats his loony "facts" as if he actually believes them!

"and the Congress has been controlled by the Democrats." Um, no, wrong again. Two years ago they gained majority status, but not enough to shut down GOP filibusters, therefore haven't been able to move much significant legislation. Bush, on the other hand had a compliant repub majority for six long years, and Clinton was stuck with a GOP majority during his second term, that's 12 years of GOP controlled congress. Keep trying to blame the dems, old chum, nobody's buying it this year.

Why can't you guys make a point without including such whoppers?

Posted by: fnlorrain | October 27, 2008 1:41 PM | Report abuse

"See:
http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/542179.html

Her approval ratings are an envious 68% but they were in the 80%s before she was picked for the VP slot. The drop seems to be the more local issue of her abuse of power. She will have to face that music when she returns, no longer the republican rock star and having shot herself in the foot so many times while campaigning that she sunk the ticket (or at least that's how I expect republicans will be looking at her). It will be telling to see how Alaska votes Nov. 4."

Thanks for the link.

Wow, 12 points over one month. (the article was published October 1st)

I don't know if even Bush had a month THAT bad.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 27, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Torrito:

I'm too a middle-aged white guy but one who grew up in another country, listening to Ella Fitzgerald, Oscar Peterson, John Coltrane, and Jimi Hendrix, and having read Harriett Beecher Stowe, Mark Twain, James Baldwin, Harper Lee, Tennessee Williams, J.D. Salinger, et al
So this American race thing is both, quite familiar and quite alien to me.

Posted by: VMR1 | October 27, 2008 1:33 PM | Report abuse

VOTE MCCAIN/PALIN
Wake up America, Hussien Obama is a fraud. Don't put our country in jeopardy. Bush has made many enemies for us, with Mccain we will be safe for another 4 years and he IS NOT GWB, he will repair the domages done by this ad. Read this and decide...
The World That Awaits
http://www.newsweek.com/id/165648/output/print

Posted by: nsabetus | October 27, 2008 1:30 PM | Report abuse

As usual, poor Allinthegame has it backwards.

"You will be lucky if there is not a class action suit brought by the voters."

Wouldn't that suit be more likely directed at the Republican party, and their pals on Wall st., for taking this country to the cleaners while enriching themselves for the last eight years?

Posted by: fnlorrain | October 27, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD wrote: "Is there any evidence of her declining popularity as a governor? (I can imagine people liking her as a governor, but not as the VP)"

See:
http://www.adn.com/sarah-palin/story/542179.html

Her approval ratings are an envious 68% but they were in the 80%s before she was picked for the VP slot. The drop seems to be the more local issue of her abuse of power. She will have to face that music when she returns, no longer the republican rock star and having shot herself in the foot so many times while campaigning that she sunk the ticket (or at least that's how I expect republicans will be looking at her). It will be telling to see how Alaska votes Nov. 4.

Posted by: bevjims1 | October 27, 2008 1:12 PM | Report abuse

Starting from this map, I also thing Obama will take the Nebraska 2nd, North Carolina and North Dakota.

Obama 368
McCain 170

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008/pick-your-president/13260/

Posted by: Peter_Zenger | October 27, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

VMR1: We came to the same point on many different paths but as an old white guy born during FDR I never thought I would live to see the day.

:-)

Be sure to VOTE!

Posted by: toritto | October 27, 2008 1:03 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: toritto | October 27, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

toritto said:

"This nation is on the verge of something historic - the election of a black man as President of the United States. "

Obama's blackness is a very artificial reason to proclaim this election historic. The symbolism is nice but quite secondary to the IMPORTANT things this country must do.

What everyone should be happy about is that a truly intelligent man has a chance to become President and lead us out of the dark ages of
the past 8 years.

At least that' how I view the historic aspect of Obama's potential presidency.

Posted by: VMR1 | October 27, 2008 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Matt Drudge must get a huge testosterone rush when he reads the responses here. Looking at all of the references, innuendo and stuff, it's obvious that folks spend most of their time reading the Drudge report.

I think we call it SOS. Actually, if you watch the evening cable news, you see the "Drudge Effect". My wife gets upset when I blurt out the story line when just hearing the 'teaser'!

I read it at lunch and then wash it down with something sane like Wonkette.

Two extremes.

Posted by: poorrichard | October 27, 2008 12:58 PM | Report abuse

rgab1 – You’re absolutely right. I misspoke. I meant to say that McCain was one of the few candidates running for president who is from the incumbant party but is not the sitting president (or vice president). Gore, George HW Bush, and Humphrey were sitting VPs running for president. And Nixon ran against the incumbent party, succeeding LBJ. But, even so, you’re right, there still are a couple of examples over the past 100 years…but, that was the point I was trying to make – it is fairly rare.

Posted by: Bassomatic76 | October 27, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

I HOPE scriverner50 is worried about nothing (then, he probably hopes that, too). I wish I were sure.

All the squealing on the Right about ACORN and fake registrations is a big cloud of smoke. There MIGHT be thousands of fake registrations (turned in by people who got paid for them), but this will have ZERO effect on the election, since nobody will be turning up at the polls to vote as "Mickey Mouse". Even real ballot-stuffing, by that method (fake voters), is labor intensive and penny ante.

On the other hand, voter suppression tactics (allotment of insufficient resources to opposition-leaning areas, restrictive ID requirements) and worse, monkeying with electronic voting machines by people who both own and operate them, and have an interest in the outcome of the elections, all involve risk of widespread, large scale manipulation of the election. In the last election, for example, 18,000 votes from one Democratic-leaning voting district in Florida simply vanished in an electronic poof (leaving the Republican candidate to "win" by 369 votes).

These hazards are NOT equal. American voters best pay CLOSE attention to what is happening THEMSELVES, and better not rely on assumptions that someone ELSE is watching the chickens, if we don't want to lose the power of our vote entirely.

Republicans for Obama!

Posted by: Iconoblaster | October 27, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD:

Thanks for your sanity and logic

Posted by: VMR1 | October 27, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

FORGET REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH

It already exists in the form of taxes. We’re all heading for higher taxes. How about redistributing better education more effectively?

http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/10/education-not-redistribution-of-wealth.html

Posted by: JamesRaider | October 27, 2008 12:52 PM | Report abuse

This nation is on the verge of something historic - the election of a black man as President of the United States. It is fair to say the entire world is watching. It is also fair to say the vast majority is rooting for a Republican defeat. If you don’t believe me you clearly don’t read anything.

How did we get to this place and time? How did a freshman Senator inspire millions of voters to finance his unlikely campaign? Why is he leading in the polls? How did this happen?

Well, I’ll tell you how it happened for me.

I was one of those who had doubts about the Iraq war. I did not believe that Iraq was an imminent threat to the United States. Not that Saddam was a good guy ( he wasn’t) however there are lots of bad guys in the world who are not an imminent threat to us whom we don’t attack. We were already flying over his country everyday. There was a tight embargo. Unless he had nuclear weapons how big a threat could he be?

The Administration then lied to us about Saddam and his weaponry.. Further, it sent out a duped Colin Powell to convince us. Bush knew we would believe Colin. So the United States of America, beacon of liberty, attacked a third world country, destroyed its hapless military, made rubble of its infrastructure and occupied it.

Later the lies came out. There were no dangerous weapons. Just fudged intelligence.

The Dems swept into control of Congress in 2006. Bush’s veto could override a 51-49 majority in the Senate so the war went on. Notwithstanding every indication that the majority of Americans didn’t want this war to continue, it went on anyway with no end date. I watched the war go on. I watched as we tortured prisoners, suspended Habeas Corpus and shredded the Constitution. I watched as Bush politicized the Justice Department and placed incompetent political hacks in high office.


So here we are. Tens of millions of us have made this journey starting a different places for different reasons; a journey which began with a distaste and disgust with Bush to a point where we may take our country back. Tens of millions have worked hard, made whatever donations we could afford and are already voting in many states.

The whole world is rooting for us to succeed. The whole world needs an America they can look up to again.

MAKE SURE YOU VOTE!

:-)

Posted by: toritto | October 27, 2008 12:50 PM | Report abuse

.....,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Posted by: fu_buki | October 27, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

allinthegame said:

"If you had money, would you put it in a Socialist system?"

Absolutely! I grew up in a socialist system.
As far as I'm concerned, with all its pluses and minuses it stands at about the same level on the desirability scale as the anglo-saxon brand of capitalism.

One thing I miss is telling my boss to go f**** him/herself. Because in the US, it is said, every piece of dreck can make it rich, you basically encounter mostly dreck in top management or ownership, wherever you work.

So, when your and your family's welfare depends on today's mood of some piece of dreck, that doesn't make for a very happy or secure existence in the USA, does it?

At least in Europe you can tell them to go hang themselves without fear of losing your job or at least your relative economic security.

Democracy is not an objective concept then, it all depends on who the puppet masters are.

Posted by: VMR1 | October 27, 2008 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Wasn't it recently that so many of the pundits were asking, "Why can't Obama close the deal?" He seems to be closing just fine. For Obama to have an opportunity to implement his priorities, a 60-vote Senate seems more important than a presidential electoral "landslide."

Posted by: Byron5 | October 27, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

"It will be short lived. She is still under investigation in AK. She is a lot less popular now than before."

Is there any evidence of her declining popularity as a governor? (I can imagine people liking her as a governor, but not as the VP)

Posted by: DDAWD | October 27, 2008 12:40 PM | Report abuse

"The above is not to say that each of us is not PRIMARILY responsible for our own welfare. But if you live in an organized society, your own welfare necessarily and often significantly depends on the welfare of others."

Purist theory is stupid. Republicans have noted that people who overeat get heart attacks and diabetes. Their solution is to stop eating altogether.

You have to do things in moderation. You need some government investment in infrastructure. That's why the Clinton economy was successful. He listened to smart economists and made sound policies based on the advice. Obama will do the same.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 27, 2008 12:36 PM | Report abuse

VOTE VOTE VOTE OBAMA BIDEN 08.......

Posted by: fu_buki | October 27, 2008 12:31 PM | Report abuse

vote vote vote

OBAMA BIDEN 08...!!!


NETHERLANDS ANTILLES

Posted by: fu_buki | October 27, 2008 12:25 PM | Report abuse

If governments are necessary to protect and promote the welfare of their citizenry, why shouldn't it be a government's prerogative to spend money on the same? If the population grows then the spending should increase in rough proportion. Why should there be an opposition to government spending on philosophical grounds, as there is among the
Republican spectrum?

The above is not to say that each of us is not PRIMARILY responsible for our own welfare. But if you live in an organized society, your own welfare necessarily and often significantly depends on the welfare of others.

If a single mother can't afford daycare, which she needs so she can work and provide income and health care benefits for herself and her child, it affects you whether you want it or not.

You've gotta chose not WHETHER but HOW it's gonna affect you: either you pay a dollar more in taxes now for the kid's daycare, or you're gonna pay a dollar later for the mother's food stamps, her and the kid's health insurance, or possibly even for the kid's incarceration further down the road, because of the dysfunctional milieu he grew up in.

Now you might ask, why should I have to pay for somebody else's irresponsible behavior, as right wingers like to do often? To this, Jesus Christ gave an excellent answer: let he who is without sin cast the first stone, or something to that effect.

For example, why should I, a driver of a Honda Civic, have to pay more for gas (and more frequent than necessary road repair) because the demand and prices are upped by all those irresponsible people driving Denalis, Suburbans, Explorers, Escalades and Hummers?

Or, why should I, a conscientious environmentalist, suffer the consequences and pay the price of someone deciding that the best way to deliver products to customers is by huge and dangerous diesel trucks driven by sleepy drivers, clogging up the city streets and highways endangering other drivers, damaging the roads, polluting the air and god knows what else?

Seems like there's a dimension missing in the thinking process of the right wing types, esp. GOP's staunchest supporters.

Posted by: VMR1 | October 27, 2008 12:25 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD -- A little research would have given you an answer. The search into JtP's background was done on State of Ohio computers (Remember Joe is from Dayton which for you daily WP readers is in the State of Ohio and is about a 10 hour drive west od DC).

Ohio's recently elected Democrat administration has already had the Attorney General resign over sex and ethics issues and the Secretary of State has been and is now under investigation for irregularities in the electoral process.

While this background may not be proof positive of the snoopers political affiliation, it certainly appears to be more than an coincidence.

Posted by: prarieplow | October 27, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

KoZ hates both candidates. Zouk in 2012! Step out of the shadows and run for president. Let's see how well you would run. Let's see how far you can get.

Posted by: dognabbit | October 27, 2008 12:18 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960 wrote "So Palin has gone rogue? That cannot be good news."

It will be short lived. She is still under investigation in AK. She is a lot less popular now than before. I expect talk to impeachment to happen as more comes out about troopergate and other abuses.

Palin is setting herself up to run in 2012, but she just cannot see how after this election is lost in a landslide republicans will start looking at her as being the reason for the loss. Her political history is over at the national level and may even be over in AK.

Taking this nomination is the perfect example of the Peter Principle at work. The principle states that "In a Hierarchy Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence." Palin has showed America just how incompetent she is for a VP job. She does not even know what the job entails as evidenced by her answer to a question by a 3rd grader, nor does it seem she wants to know. Dan Quayle must be smiling now that Palin's name, and not his, will be invoked when someone talks about inability for office.
Posted by: bevjims1 | October 27, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse
----------------

The story is too long and I don't feel like typing it regarding her house. She has problems that are like jail level stuff. If found to be true, what she has done makes that guy Steven's trial look like nothing.
You can google Palin and her house and probably find the story. It is currently under investigation. If the contractor rolls over on her she will take a fall that will be Shakespearian

Posted by: popasmoke | October 27, 2008 12:14 PM | Report abuse

As an Obama supporter (from the beginning) you are always pleased to see your candidate ahead in the polling, but the only polling that matters is that done post-voting on Nov. 4th!

GET OUT AND VOTE! DO IT EARLY AND TAKE SOME FRIENDS!

OBAMA/BIDEN IN 2008!

Posted by: AJ2008 | October 27, 2008 12:14 PM | Report abuse

"We're talking bureaucrats here, right? Like the guys who have been put into place by Bush?"

No, we're talking about people who pass the civil-service exam and work a couple levels of bureaucracy below the people put into place by Bush (or a governor, in the case of looking up info on JtP).

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 27, 2008 12:12 PM | Report abuse

koolkat_1960 wrote "So Palin has gone rogue? That cannot be good news."

It will be short lived. She is still under investigation in AK. She is a lot less popular now than before. I expect talk to impeachment to happen as more comes out about troopergate and other abuses.

Palin is setting herself up to run in 2012, but she just cannot see how after this election is lost in a landslide republicans will start looking at her as being the reason for the loss. Her political history is over at the national level and may even be over in AK.

Taking this nomination is the perfect example of the Peter Principle at work. The principle states that "In a Hierarchy Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence." Palin has showed America just how incompetent she is for a VP job. She does not even know what the job entails as evidenced by her answer to a question by a 3rd grader, nor does it seem she wants to know. Dan Quayle must be smiling now that Palin's name, and not his, will be invoked when someone talks about inability for office.

Posted by: bevjims1 | October 27, 2008 12:08 PM | Report abuse

""If a democrats raises taxes to pay for the debt created by republican wasteful spending its "stealing". ""


It seems bevjims has been imbibing early today. In his world Democrats are frugal, they like to lower taxes, they believe in a strong defense, they abhor corruption and prosecute even their own if caught. Obama has vast experience and a strong record of accomplishment and going against those in his party. his fundraising has no evidence of foregn illegal money and his past associates mean nothing about his character.

Tee hee, silly Libs. do you know how out of touch you sound????

Posted by: king_of_zouk | October 27, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

"While you are correct about certain info, zouk is also correct that people have apparently misused gov't resouces to research JtP. Where he oversteps is in presuming that all such folks are liberals. There is no proof, so far as I've seen, of such folks' political affiliations. Its possibly comparable to the kerfuffle earlier this year where it was reported that state dept computers were used to look up info on not only the political candidates, but celebrities as well. What can you say? Gov't workers are slackers. A coworker occasionally gets emails from an old high school friend who looks up people from their class in the DMV database (source is a cop). They have a good laugh over who's gotten fat or gone bald. If I were zouk, I could determine political affiliation with this info."

We're talking bureaucrats here, right? Like the guys who have been put into place by Bush?

Posted by: DDAWD | October 27, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

IN A PERFECT WORLD, MAYBE...

Chris:

Your analysis hinges upon two predicates that may or may not hold:

1) The electoral process, with more than a third of the votes being cast electronically, yielding only a limited "paper trail," will result an accurate vote tally

2) A game-changing "October Surprise" won't happen this week

So better keep your fingers crossed, because if the past is prologue, something unexpected may be about to happen on the world or national scene...

...or, in the alternative, Election Day will be another long day's journey into vote tabulation Hell in the calculated tradition of the year 2000.

The Democratic Congress failed to address the electronic voting/paper trail issue, perhaps to the detriment of their candidates in this contentious election cycle.

And yet party "wise men" like Schumer and Emanuel are predicting a Democratic tidal wave and already are mapping out the priorities of their assumed reign.

Once again, their naivete is breathtaking, especially in light of their self-defeating inaction on electoral process issues.

Have they failed to recognize that the infrastructure of entrenched power may be working against them?

WHAT IF McCAIN-PALIN'S STRATEGY IS AIMED NOT JUST AT VOTERS, BUT AT THE APPARACHIK?

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/mccain-palins-fellow-traveler-insinuations-what-if-u-s-security-forces-agree

OR members.nowpublic.com/scrivener


Posted by: scrivener50 | October 27, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

"On the contrary, we have about the worst two candidates available."

I sense a write-in for Giuliani.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 27, 2008 12:03 PM | Report abuse

I agree with Aspergirl's positive comment to the effect that the next president will be an improvement no matter which one we elect. KOZ, surely you believe that these two are better than GWB-Kerry?

And I am embarrassed that I cast an aspersion [pun] on Aspergirl's failure to moderate her tone in her consistently well written posts, after reading hers at 11:31A.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | October 27, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

popasmoke writes
"Are you kidding. I can look up and see if you have paid your taxes with little more then your address and tax liens are public information. You also do know he is wanted in another state and will have to deal with that."

While you are correct about certain info, zouk is also correct that people have apparently misused gov't resouces to research JtP. Where he oversteps is in presuming that all such folks are liberals. There is no proof, so far as I've seen, of such folks' political affiliations. Its possibly comparable to the kerfuffle earlier this year where it was reported that state dept computers were used to look up info on not only the political candidates, but celebrities as well. What can you say? Gov't workers are slackers. A coworker occasionally gets emails from an old high school friend who looks up people from their class in the DMV database (source is a cop). They have a good laugh over who's gotten fat or gone bald. If I were zouk, I could determine political affiliation with this info.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 27, 2008 12:01 PM | Report abuse

The market is fluctuating exactly because it is afraid of an Obama presidency. This whole financial crisis will be exposed to be a largely Democratic problem. "Blame Bush" is old and stupid-"It's the Economy Stupid," and the Congress has been controlled by the Democrats. Bush warned about this. If you had money, would you put it in a Socialist system? We desperately need the people with money, but Obama is threatening them.

Posted by: allinthegame
*********************************
Where do you get this load of crap from - faux news?

First, he has no experience to walk his way out of a paper bag and now he is responsible for the fluctuating market? The poor state of the McCain - Palin campaign is reflected by the simpleminded paranoia filled worldview of their "supporters", who see stalinist bogeyman everywhere taking over the U.S. - (Or is it just better than saying that I will not vote for the black guy?) Because whenever these posters write, it is quite clear that they do not know what socialism is, have a shaky handle on economics as a whole and have embraced the McCain's false assertions about "spreading the wealth around." What a sad close to McCain's campaign - no ability to offer a compelling economic message, a pitifully bad choice as VP, and reduced to snarling grumpy talking points in front of dwindling crowds of idiots.

Posted by: LABC | October 27, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

The whole thing may have been a set up in the first place.

Posted by: popasmoke


those repubs are so clever thay can dictate where Obama goes door-to-door. amazing. and they can find the one question in the whole world that has not been asked of Obama.

tin foil hat loose today bongbrain???

Of course, Libs prefer to pretend that Obama CAN answer questions and that biden actually has a functioning brain. Dream on moonbat.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | October 27, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Obama Seeks Delay In Voter Fraud Investigation Obama's campaign is pressuring the Department of Justice to put off a probe of voter registration fraud allegations leveled against the now infamous liberal group ACORN One News Now

anyone surprised. Chicago, corrupt politics coming to DC.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | October 27, 2008 11:35 AM | Report abuse
------------

1, there is a big difference between voted fraud and registration fraud. Maybe like the difference between Armed robbery and J-walking.
2, Who cares and why would Obama care. It was ACORN who brought the voter registration problem to light. It is meaningless.


Posted by: popasmoke | October 27, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

obamaNation,
has a twist to it'
tempered with Russian
tanks in the Ukraine,
and Iran provoking
isreal,
and a 'safty net'
for those who dont work.
the perfect obamanation
of a 'global socialism'
lets hope the russians
and chinese stop their
new weapons programs too.
I hate to think of our grandchildren
fighting enemies,
who were 'almost' vanquished.

Posted by: USA3 | October 27, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

"What will you all do with all the free time you will have on Nov 5th?"

Get started on my New Years resolutions.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 27, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

"Could be an early night next election day.

The polls in Virginia close a 7 PM. The election usually won't be called until the polls close on the West Coast.

However if Obama carries Pennsylvania and Virgina then McCain is toast.

:-)"


I doubt they will have to wait for polls to close to call California, Oregon, and Washington. Nevada, maybe, but I don't think Nevada will matter.

Colorado and New Mexico are Rocky Mountain time, correct?

And to think this would actually be an election where I would want to celebrate all night, Obama seems intent on getting us to bed at a reasonable hour.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 27, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

Government Computers Used To Find Information On Joe The Plumber "State and local officials are investigating if state and law-enforcement computer systems were illegally accessed when they were tapped for personal information about "Joe the Plumber." Columbus Dispatch

the Liberal brownshirts begin their work.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | October 27, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse
------------------

Are you kidding. I can look up and see if you have paid your taxes with little more then your address and tax liens are public information. You also do know he is wanted in another state and will have to deal with that. Seems he got fake ID and a new drivers license in a different state because his licenses was suspended.
He is not a very nice guy. You also know he has a relationship to John Mccain? He was the son-in-law of one of Mccains friends. Obama never went to Joe's house but Joe chased Obama down in the street. (see the vedio). The whole thing may have been a set up in the first place.

Posted by: popasmoke | October 27, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

king_of_zouk wrote "When Libs get near other people's money, you can only be sure they will try to steal all of it by any means necessary."

Wow how you ignore reality king. You do realize that Bush came into office with a surplus and the republican congress gave Bush all the spending he wanted, and lowered taxes on the wealthy reducing revenue, leading to our current $10T debt. But that was not other people's money was it?

If a republican wastes money on bridges to nowhere its a waste of public expenditures. If a democrats raises taxes to pay for the debt created by republican wasteful spending its "stealing".

Turn off Fox News king and go out into the real world, maybe take a deep breath, and see what the republicans at all levels of government have done to this nation by action and inaction. Your statements make it sound like you have been living in a basement for 8 years with only Fox News and GOP TV for information.

Posted by: bevjims1 | October 27, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

On the contrary, we have about the worst two candidates available. We have a communist and a socialist. One wants to have the government take over everything, the other just some things. One is totally unprepared for executive office, the other is clueless on his voters desires. One is all talk and no action, the other is fliting around confused. they both think that they can spend in a heavy downturn, maintain the staus quo on pretty much everything and never respond to questions.

Pitiful that marketing now rules the Lib establishment and seniority rots the Repubs.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | October 27, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Whether this will be a blowout along the lines of Clinton v. Dole remains to be seen, but I've been impressed by the Obama campaign's focus on fundamentals like fundraising, volunteer organization, voter registration, and message discipline across a range of surrogates, advertising buys, and free media opportunities. No one could have predicted the political opportunity presented by the ongoing economic crisis, but because Obama had his campaign fundamentals in train, he has been much better positioned than McCain to pivot toward that opportunity. I know that the CW is that the Democrats have the street cred on kitchen table economic issues, but without the well-organized campaign structure to drive that down into the electorate, ringing up a victory at the polls would remain talk, not fact.

Posted by: thewolf1 | October 27, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

I am not so sure about the landslide, because I am at heart a bit pessimistic. But if Virginia, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina can be turned blue on November 4, then Obama will indeed rack up an historic victory.

I think it is highly plausible that this could happen because Obama will spend this last week of the campaign setting forth his positive vision for the future of our nation. Millions of everyday citizens are mobilized to work for Obama to ensure that the election is carried out with grace, harmony, and determination, just as he has run the entire campaign.

In contrast, McCain and Palin will spend their final days wallowing in the depths of slimy baseless attacks against Obama and against all of us who support him. They have nothing fresh or optimistic to offer America and this is why they will be defeated next week.

Obama/Biden '08

Posted by: dee5 | October 27, 2008 11:47 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl writes
"I still think we are lucky this year to have two very good candidates. John McCain is a good man and passionate public servant who would be an honorable and open president (even if he does overreact to a hostile, partisan press)."

I mostly agree, except with your parenthetical note. When Sen McCain was challenging his party leadership, he loved holding court with a compliant press on the couch of the Straight Talk Express. Now that he's toeing the party line, the press is hostile and partisan? Give me a break.

Otherwise though, I agree with AsperGirl's main point: we have two great candidates, either of which will be an improvement on the incumbent.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 27, 2008 11:44 AM | Report abuse

McCain's campaign is a mess. Not surprising that his disjointed, desperate, flailing attacks on Obama have failed miserably.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | October 27, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Dem Playbook Shows Dirty Tactics Documents show the Democratic Party encouraged party activists to accuse the GOP of intimidating minorities on election day, even if no evidence of intimidation existed, in the 2004 presidential election. The tactic is being used again in 2008 Townhall

Next up - burn the Reichstag.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | October 27, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

"The Fix" is certainly an appropriate name for this column when it comes to this election. The real fix (illegal registration,voting, and financing) will all come to light in the near future. If you think Clinton and the foreign $$ was bad, wait until we learn about the activities of the Obama campaign. Chicago politics has been nationalized!

Posted by: prarieplow | October 27, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

So Palin has gone rogue? That cannot be good news.

Rogue waves. Rogue elephants. Rogue agents. All bad.

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | October 27, 2008 11:37 AM | Report abuse

Government Computers Used To Find Information On Joe The Plumber "State and local officials are investigating if state and law-enforcement computer systems were illegally accessed when they were tapped for personal information about "Joe the Plumber." Columbus Dispatch

the Liberal brownshirts begin their work.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | October 27, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Obama Seeks Delay In Voter Fraud Investigation Obama's campaign is pressuring the Department of Justice to put off a probe of voter registration fraud allegations leveled against the now infamous liberal group ACORN One News Now

anyone surprised. Chicago, corrupt politics coming to DC.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | October 27, 2008 11:35 AM | Report abuse

I understand that Obambi is incensed that we would dare raid across the border in syria. He demanded that we immediately stop striking our enemies and begin talks and negotiations. He did proclaim that we should be preparing to invade our allies instead, such as Puckistun.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | October 27, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

king_of_zouk wrote "you can pay 15% cap gains tax now or pay 30% in two months. even a Lib can figure that one out."

What cap gains!?! And I find it more than sad that republicans point the finger at democrats for making life on Wall Street too easy, leading to this crisis, and at the same time saying democrats are going to make life hard on Wall Street. As usual the republican fantasy world allows two directly opposing statements to exist at the same time.

king_of_zouk wrote "Of course many of you are looking forward to higher taxes and massive joblessness. I suppose you wish for surrender overseas as well. Amerika deserves to be punished. We are a mean people."

You obviously do not know democrats, their history of fighting for this nation, the wars they has won and those they prevented, and the elevation of this nation from obscurity to greatness in a short few decades. Then we look at the two great republicans, Reagan and Bush2. Both left this nation weaker, both left this nation with huge debts, both took this nation into questionable wars, both left a mess for the democrats to clean up, which they did and will do again. Why don't republicans just clean up after themselves instead of waiting for the adults to come along and do it for them?

Posted by: bevjims1 | October 27, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

In truth, though I have switched my vote to Obama, I still think we are lucky this year to have two very good candidates. John McCain is a good man and passionate public servant who would be an honorable and open president (even if he does overreact to a hostile, partisan press). John McCain can be trusted to listen to all sides and to do the right thing. Barack Obama has powerful leadership skills and makes few mistakes and has a deep bench of good advisors. Barack Obama can mobilize the population and lead on issues.

We are lucky to have, in an election year of several crises, two candidates that have a lot to offer.

Whomever wins will be faced with a lot of serious work to try to help lead the country through a lot of problem-solving and some hard times. Whomever wins needs to have our support and open minds, so that they can be the best kind of president according to their own natures and given their own talents, so that they can do a good job for us in tough situations.

If the winner is Barack Obama, any fearful Republicans can retain their skepticism but should check their attacks and derision at the door and embrace and celebrate his historic presidency.

If the winner is John McCain, any pathological Republican-haters should go to counseling or stay drunk, but appreciate the simple fact that a bipartisan consensus builder who loves his country and the people in it, and who is open to listening to and working with ideas, is in the White House ready to work with Democrats on their terms.

IMO we are lucky to have both good candidates coming from the two parties, and whomever wins on election night, we will be better off come January 20, when the new president is sworn in.

Posted by: AsperGirl | October 27, 2008 11:31 AM | Report abuse

bevjims1 asks
"When is Sarah Palin's next press conference? Hmmm?"

Actually, Gov Palin has been doing more talking to the press. So much, in fact, that her 'handlers' are trying to stop it from happening. Several reports over the weekend noted that Gov Palin is going off-message, one source went so far as to call her efforts a 'rogue' campaign. Apparently the mini-maverick is staying true to form... I'm guessing that by now Senator McCain really wishes he'd fully vetted his running mate before making the pick.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 27, 2008 11:30 AM | Report abuse

It ain't over till it's over.
I'm watching a Palin rally in Virginia and she is spreading the B.S. about Joe the McCain Ringer. Excerpts of these rallies
are really McCain commercials run by CNN and MSNBC. As such, they are almost scripted with attendees synchronizing their chants and sign displays, very Bush-like and impressive.

It occurs to me that everything about McCain's campaign is orchestrated and controlled, although sometimes badly.

I think those mistakes can be attributed to McCain's bad judgment rather than to his Karl Rove advisors.

If McCain had made a more realistic pick for a running mate, he would be leading now instead of heading for defeat.

The risk of Palin becoming president is too great for most Americans to accept.
Her limited public exposure has shown that
Palin is an ignorant demagogue but a dangerous one.
She has incited racial and ethnic hatred beyond control in Clearwater Florida where shouts of "kill him" referring to Obama were tolerated. Blacks were intimidated with racial epithets at this rally and others. In North Carolina a reporter was assaulted during an interview by a McCain supporter after Palin condemned the "liberal media".
Palin is not only unfit to become president , she's shown she's unfit to hold office in a diverse democracy.

Posted by: seemstome | October 27, 2008 11:27 AM | Report abuse

"Interesting, where did you hear this, in your own head?"

I was talking to myself the other day, and I heard the strangest thing...

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 27, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

considering that Obama reneged on his pledge to accept public funding of his campaign, the minute the dollar sings twinkled in his eyes, I would attach about zero reliability on his pledge to tax only the top 5%. When Libs get near other people's money, you can only be sure they will try to steal all of it by any means necessary.

It only took bill clinton two months to reverse his pledge for tax cuts.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | October 27, 2008 11:24 AM | Report abuse

People make a lot of Obama's diverse associations, out of fear and/or prejudice, too much slanted toward negative.
They're human; and that's the point;
... Obama has a broad experiential viewpoint and due to his tempermant and intelligence, his life experiences are huge assets.

i.e. He is no uncle Tom, and not a racist, but a sensitive, successful black man who is not stuck in reactive mode.

McCain's temper and erratic behavior (this is not new for McCain btw) stand as contrast.
Ironically and in contrast to Obama, McCain's privileged life as son of Admirals, seemed to propel rebellion in a consistent pattern, unfortunately not completely matured out of him after POW experience (drummed out of military).
While McCain has leveraged the POW thing (Cindy's money too) into a political career, erratic, rebellious, irresponsible traits still linger.
Most if not all his MANY jet crashes can be atributed to his emotional challenges.

Posted by: ukeman | October 27, 2008 11:23 AM | Report abuse

I heard today that the Fannie Mae aspect of the housing collapse will be ignored until after the election. That is so typical of Dem politics.

In the same vein, I see that Obama will no longer be holding any press conferences ever and that biden will be muzzled thoroughly from now on. no sense letting any more truth get out. those pesky reporters might try and embarass the candidate. Imagine a Dem having to tolerate that!!

Posted by: king_of_zouk | October 27, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse
--------------

Interesting, where did you hear this, in your own head?

Biden by the way is out today and he has really hit his stride. I just heard him do a really that had the people entranced. Very few attacks on Mccain but a vision of the future by him and Obama. There were no chants, or boos by the audience, just closing the deal with the people who count.

I also heard Palin this morning and she spent 15 minutes on "Joe the plumber", he clothes, as well as lame attacks on Obama that were laughable. One week left and this is what they think are important.

The deal is being closed, Obama and Biden are really hitting the top of their game in this last week.

Posted by: popasmoke | October 27, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

ddawd - you can pay 15% cap gains tax now or pay 30% in two months. even a Lib can figure that one out.

Of course many of you are looking forward to higher taxes and massive joblessness. I suppose you wish for surrender overseas as well. Amerika deserves to be punished. We are a mean people.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | October 27, 2008 11:19 AM | Report abuse

king_of_zouk wrote: "In the same vein, I see that Obama will no longer be holding any press conferences ever and that biden will be muzzled thoroughly from now on. no sense letting any more truth get out. those pesky reporters might try and embarass the candidate. Imagine a Dem having to tolerate that!!"

When is Sarah Palin's next press conference? Hmmm?

Posted by: bevjims1 | October 27, 2008 11:18 AM | Report abuse

"I think you maxed out BHO's possibilities, too. But I will be surprised if BHO carries NC and FL and OH, the three horse parley."

My predictions are based on expected turnout. I think the pollsters are not properly modelling the electorate, giving too much weight to GOP voters and too little to first time voters. The enthusiasm gap is enormous - the only people enthusiastic for McCain are actually for Palin, not McCain. I expect a lot of GOP voters to stay home, unable to bring themselves to vote for Obama or McCain. That will produce surprising results in unexpected places.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 27, 2008 11:14 AM | Report abuse

"The market is fluctuating exactly because it is afraid of an Obama presidency. This whole financial crisis will be exposed to be a largely Democratic problem. "Blame Bush" is old and stupid-"It's the Economy Stupid," and the Congress has been controlled by the Democrats. Bush warned about this. If you had money, would you put it in a Socialist system? We desperately need the people with money, but Obama is threatening them."


I love it. Republicans say that the economy was good under Clinton because it took Bush's policies four years to have an effect. However, Obama can screw up the economy months before he even takes office.


Riiiiiiiiight.

Posted by: DDAWD | October 27, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

Yes a landslide. Its been coming no matter who the candidates were. It would have happened if it were Hillary versus Mitt. The republican party has brought this nation to the worst possible outcome after 8 years of governance and even they are no longer blaming everything on Clinton. The landslide is brought to you by the Bush administration, its arrogance, its negligence, its total disregard for their sworn duties, lack of candor and like 911 and Katrina ignoring the warnings.

The other aspect of this is race. No one wants to bring it up since it has negative ingredients, which I am sure will come up as some people vote, but there is the positive side, those who are energized because Obama is of color, because he is not the same old white guy running. The numbers of non-whites going to the polls will be very high, adding to Obama's level of victory. I don't think race should be used as a reason to vote, positively or negatively, but we cannot ignore that it will affect the outcome, and positively for Obama.

The real question is what Obama will do with his presidency and the support he has after this election. We can only hope he gets the best advise and acts wisely, but Congress is the one that will be in the best position to act to bring America out of the many crises and situations the Bush administration has placed us in. We should stop worrying about the White House and start paying attention to Congress.

Posted by: bevjims1 | October 27, 2008 11:13 AM | Report abuse

I see some of the crazies are still writing about socialism- you don't even know what it means. To the person who wrote about Obama and the Constitution- I'm sorry -did you just come up out of your basement? The current Administration is the one who shredded the Constitution- President Obama and our Democratic Congress will restore it. Finally, as a Jew who supports Israel strongly(I do not believe in the one state "solution") and visited as recently as last year, I would say if you are looking for an anti-semite-Look at Sarah Palin. Jews know what someone means when they say "real Americans"- even though my family has been here over 100 years.

Posted by: silverspring25 | October 27, 2008 11:10 AM | Report abuse

Good to see you back, AsperGirl.

Posted by: officermancuso | October 27, 2008 11:07 AM | Report abuse

Bassomatic: "...one of the very few candidates that has ever run...from the incumbent party but not the sitting President..."
How about Taft, Hoover, Stevenson, Nixon, Humphrey, G. H. W. Bush and Gore. That's just since 1908. Go back further and there are even more.

Posted by: rgab1 | October 27, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse

I heard today that the Fannie Mae aspect of the housing collapse will be ignored until after the election. That is so typical of Dem politics.

In the same vein, I see that Obama will no longer be holding any press conferences ever and that biden will be muzzled thoroughly from now on. no sense letting any more truth get out. those pesky reporters might try and embarass the candidate. Imagine a Dem having to tolerate that!!

Posted by: king_of_zouk | October 27, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse

So strange the RNC decided they could win by reusing the same attacks the Clintons wore out.

Nothing about vision, the dawn of a new America etc., they just used endless variations on Obama is the devil.

The Clintons were actually nastier than McCain which says more about them than it does about John.

Posted by: shrink2 | October 27, 2008 11:00 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl - I still think you are by far the best writer to ever visit these boards. Great summaries always, and excellent points...albeit biting, but very well written.

Posted by: J_thinks | October 27, 2008 10:14 AM

Thank you. It's kind of you to say that. It means a lot to me. I worked really hard at trying to learn how to write coherent opinions this year.

Posted by: AsperGirl | October 27, 2008 10:59 AM | Report abuse

OK4obama, I think for most of us supporters, we have invested time, money, blood, sweat and tears into this campaign. Many of us from the beginning. And we fought hard for Obama to get here. It would be too much of a waste now to simply not vote.
For many of us, we worked to get here for the chance to vote for Obama to be president and our dream is almost coming true. Voting for Obama.
I hope the rest of the Obama supporters think of it this way. We worked for the chance to vote for him so, now it's time to make it come true.

If predictions by the Fix and rest of the sages of the political world come true, obama will turn half the country blue.
That would be a great thing.

Posted by: vwcat | October 27, 2008 10:52 AM | Report abuse

When something looks too good to be true, it usually IS too good to be true.

Posted by: bdukore | October 27, 2008 10:51 AM | Report abuse

When something looks too good to be true, it usually IS too good to be true.

Posted by: bdukore | October 27, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Obviously, this video would do great damage to Obama who struggles with Jewish voters due to his circle of close anti-Semitic friends.
Maybe this is the reason it is not being released?
Barack Obama funnelled thousands of dollars of cash to Rashidi's anti-Israel Foundation through his work on the Woods Fund.
Posted by: thecannula | October 27, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse
-----------------

Obama currently has support of 75% of jewish voters as of yesterday. The story sounds not to be plausible. Maybe it will come out the same day as the "whitie" tape.

Posted by: popasmoke | October 27, 2008 10:47 AM | Report abuse

bsimon, I think you maxed out BHO's possibilities, too. But I will be surprised if BHO carries NC and FL and OH, the three horse parley.

bondjedi, I suspect the praise for Aspergirl was not from a sock puppet. She actually does write succinctly; even her long posts are straightforward. That is not to say that I find her convincing. Her POV moves with graphic strong amplitude. If her reactions could be charted on a scale of 1-10 she would be closer to the ten on most of her responses to the pols or posters she considers to be foolish. That is not an attempt at armchair analysis but a suggestion about her written replies. She may not BE like that, at all.

You are often amusing and while your war of words with Leichtman was worth the price of admission I suspect that you do not take this as seriously as Aspergirl :-).

I remain dull, but curious.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | October 27, 2008 10:46 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl - ... excellent points...albeit biting, but very well written.

Posted by: J_thinks

I have to learn how to be more constructive with stating my opinions, and not be mean and "biting".

Posted by: AsperGirl | October 27, 2008 10:46 AM | Report abuse

"I am so sick of conservatives blaming Obama's success on skewed media coverage..."

Posted by: greatscott47

Well, they are right that Obama wouldn't even be competitive without all the fairy-tale coverage of the media, how it runs interference for him by attacking and undermining his opponents and critics, and how it ignores his own ticket's problems, mistakes and weaknesses.

But the fact that McCain is suffering so much from the media bias is in part his problem. It's not as if he were on some other planet during primary season, and the fact of the media bias (including outrageous, vicious sexism) is a totally new phenomenon in the past few weeks. It's as if they were not even paying attention during the primary season when Clinton had to map out her strategies for puncturing the media ignoring her plusses and hammering her minuses or when Bill Clinton was getting spun as an unstable, erratic old man with latent racist tendencies, as McCain is being spun.

The games that the media are playing are the same games but with different flavors, that they played this Spring. What other candidate could have had his opponent's primary season so completely map out for him not only his opponent's weaknesses and limits, but how his opponent can be beaten. In the end, Clinton had a formula for beating Obama and she would have won outright had there been about a dozen more states.

Were McCain, et al, not awake? How stupid are McCainiacs, that they weren't taking notes during the historic Democratic primary season about how to deal with the media bias problem?

Finally, John McCain had a blow-up against the media this year shortly after his convention. He got huffy, cut them off and stiff-armed the media. At the time, it seemed like some kind of strategy, but it turned out to be some kind of self-destructive dysfunctional tendency on his part, instead, to develop a quick poisonous grudge, apparently. By cutting off his campaign from the media, he only isolated it, made it more vulnerable to attacks and criticisms he couldn't answer, and created a newly hostile atmosphere among those few journalists who had remained favorable toward him. by cutting off the media in September, McCain set up the more openly hostile atmosphere that subsequently developed against his campaign.

These two things above are two more reasons I've switched my vote to Obama. John McCain is totally outclassed. Obama turns out to have a powerful, effective and first-class campaign. If Obama makes thoughtful decisions, his presidency could turn out to be a great one, because he has so many people on his side and because he makes so few mistakes.

Posted by: AsperGirl | October 27, 2008 10:40 AM | Report abuse

I have been working for Barack for almost 3 years....I am dyed in the wool as it were.

Landslide... Someone has had too much Maui Wowie.

8 days to go. Too many things to happen. Big one/worst case. October Surprise tomorrow night or Wednesday. Real cynics say. Iran gets bombed. All American Airspace gets closed down. Bush delays the election 2 weeks.

Otherwise RNC turns the dogs loose and bankrupts the party if it loses. All or nothing. More than likely, middle gets cold feet. McCain could carry by 2 electoral votes.

I live in a dark blue state. Got alot verbal abuse heaped on me this weekend in Home Depot and other big box store partking lots. Election day will be a mess. Huge turnout. Lots of Broken machines.

GOd forbid the rabid conservative 'gun rack on the pick-up truck' crowd gets lathered up at a Pain Fest.

I can only imagine what it is like in Rural Ohio, Indiana and Pennsylvania.

This election will turn on how many elctoral challenges RNC makes and how many roadblocks people face in Florida and Ohio.

It aint over till its over.The true venom of the campaign has yet to come out.

Posted by: poorrichard | October 27, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Are you so sure that Florida's Blue, Chris?
I've been concerned with Obama's committment to Israel after he changed his stance on Jerusalem immediately following Palestinian complaint 1 d after AIPAC-

Gateway Pundit
Friday, October 24, 2008
Confirmed: MSM Holds Video Of Barack Obama Attending Jew-Bash & Toasting a Former PLO Operative... Refuse to Release the Video!

LA Times writer Peter Wallsten wrote about Barack Obama's close association with former Palestinian operative Rashid Khalidi back in April.
Wallsten discussed a dinner held back in 2003 in honor of Khalidi, a critic of Israel and advocate for Palestinian rights.
Barack Obama has denied his close association with Khalidi, too.
According to Wallsten the evening not surprisingly turned into a classic Jew-bash:
"During the dinner a young Palestinian American recited a poem accusing the Israeli government of terrorism in its treatment of Palestinians and sharply criticizing U.S. support of Israel. If Palestinians cannot secure their own land, she said, "then you will never see a day of peace."
One speaker likened "Zionist settlers on the West Bank" to Osama bin Laden, saying both had been "blinded by ideology."
Barack Obama also praised the former PLO operative during the event.
And, Obama confessed that his family often shared dinner with the Khalidis:
His many talks with the Khalidis, Obama said, had been "consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots and my own biases... It's for that reason that I'm hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation -- a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid's dinner table," but around "this entire world."
...The event was videotaped, and a copy of the tape was obtained by The (LA)Times.
Khalidi and the Obamas were great friends in Chicago and often shared meals together.
By the way, Khalidi was also best friends with Bill Ayers.
Wallston was one of the few mainstream media reporters to report on this radical Obama associate.

Wallston said that the article was written after he watched video taken at the Khalidi going away party. When I asked him about the video he said that as far as he was concerned he was through with the story.

I asked him if he was planning on releasing this video of Obama toasting the radical Khalidi at this Jew-bash. He told me he was not releasing the video. He also would not comment on his source for the video. So, there you have it.
The LA Times has video of Obama toasting a former PLO operative at a Jew-bash but will not release the video.
This is outrageous.
Obviously, this video would do great damage to Obama who struggles with Jewish voters due to his circle of close anti-Semitic friends.
Maybe this is the reason it is not being released?
Barack Obama funnelled thousands of dollars of cash to Rashidi's anti-Israel Foundation through his work on the Woods Fund.

Posted by: thecannula | October 27, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

I went to the Obama rally in Albuquerque on Saturday night - 45,000 people - the largest polical event in New Mexico history! By contrast McCain spoke in Albuquerque that same day and drew less than 1,000. McCain is foolish to spend one more dime here - he's done.

Posted by: NMModerate1 | October 27, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

The cannula writes
"Two states with no state corporate tax, South Dakota and Wyoming , have 2.8 and 3.0% unemployment."

Whoops! You just blew your argument there, unless you're claiming that low corporate tax rates increase the likelihood of discovering oil and natural gas deposits in a state.

I should thank you though, for making my point for me. Corporations do not make decisions solely on tax rates. Here in MN, we have many startups, several fortune 500 companies' headquarters, and a higher corporate tax rate than many neighboring states. Companies choose to locate here because we have an educated workforce, and a high standard of living - two benefits of higher tax rates. Point being, tax rates are only one variable in the equation that businesses use to make their decisions.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 27, 2008 10:37 AM | Report abuse

That was yesterday, this is today. If you go to Realclearpolitics.com, the best blog on political matters, and read Bill Whittles's article, you will find that Obama is an avowed socialist who wishes either to change the Constitution or subvert the Consitituton through legislation. He wants to create postive rights to income and spread the wealth. The election is over. Obama hung himself.

Posted by: JohnMarshall1 | October 27, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

jpsbr2002 writes
"There may also be a few surprise flips in the air, of these I'd include AZ, WV and SC."

I see electoral-vote.com is showing AZ as 'barely Repub' based on a close Oct 19 poll. That feels like an outlier to me, though without their own senator in the race, I'm guessing AZ would be more blue. It looks like earlier predictions about WV tightening (in Obama's favor) were likewise based on limited & likely flawed polling.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 27, 2008 10:31 AM | Report abuse

"Both Jack Welch and I are supporting McCain..."

Ha ha ha. Did you sit down with him to hash it out? What about his gold-digger wife?

Posted by: bondjedi | October 27, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

I have to agree with starthom about how Obama would govern. Lots of folks on both the Left and the Right are convinced that President Obama and a solidly Democratic Congress are going to usher in all of Dennis Kucinich's dreams. But I'm convinced that Obama is a historian who knows that one-ideology government doesn't work. At his most powerful, Bush terrorized half the U.S. population (and most of the world) with his NeoCon strong-arming. I believe that people will be surprised by Obama's inclusiveness.

Posted by: dognabbit | October 27, 2008 10:28 AM | Report abuse

bsimon's updated picks:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008/pick-your-president/13235/

bold? yes. SouthernerinDC, below, writes of the 'McCain' voters who tell pollsters McCain on the phone, but vote for Obama. I doubt there are many such people out there. What the GOP do need to be concerned about are the voters who are so dispirited about their party's prospects this year that they don't bother to vote at all. There is going to be unusually low Repub turnout next Tues, compared to unusually high Dem turnout. Landslide ensues.

Posted by: bsimon1 | October 27, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

"AsperGirl - I still think you are by far blah blah blah"

There has never been an easier sock-puppet to spot.

Posted by: bondjedi | October 27, 2008 10:27 AM | Report abuse

Well I guess it's just about all over and John Mcain is definitely not going to win this election. Furthermore, I don't think he will ever win another election, not even in the senate! He's finished and you ask why? I'll tell you why, he exposed himself as a staunch republican and that's bad as it gets! The republican party should be exterminated and replaced as the independent party.

Posted by: carlcap1491 | October 27, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

What will you all do with all the free time you will have on Nov 5th?

Posted by: J_thinks | October 27, 2008 10:09 AM | Report abuse
----------

For me it is coming up on a year and maybe six when this has been almost a full time thing for my wife and I. There will have to be a come down period after Nov 5th. Our whole life is consumed by Obama. I am getting on the boat and going to the islands for a few weeks. When I get back I will get back to business, it has been running almost by itself. The hardest part will be renewing friendships that have fractured over this election. We don't even go to our church anymore. I had no idea how bigoted so many of our friends are.

Posted by: popasmoke | October 27, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Sure, it'd be very enjoyable for the majority of Americans if Senator Obama destroys Senator McCain in a humiliating defeat of the GOP nationwide.

But even with 270, well, we'd all be happy with just that. The only thing that matters is that Senator Obama is sworn into office on January 20, 2009.

Posted by: szang@sbgnet.com | October 27, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Come on, folks, smarten up. It is ridiculous to compare Obama's plans to socialism. It's even more ridiculous to accuse him of "latent socialism".

Canada, France, England, most of Europe also have socialistic policies. Does that make them communist? In fact, until the recent slowdown, Europe was doing quite well financially.

Let's seperate fact from fiction. 1. Socialism is NOT communism. 2. We have been practicing socialistic policies for decades via medicare, medicaid, and social security. 3. Subsidies are a form of socialistic policies.

NO presidential administration, either Democratic or Republican, has ever proposed eliminating our already existing socialistic policies regarding our existing social programs and subsidies.

To call Obama a socialist or accuse him of socialistic tendencies is to pretend that you, the voter, have not voted to elect your representatives that have supported socialistic policies. You the voter, by default, has supported socialistic policies. All of us, democrat or republican, have voted to support medicare, medicaid, food stamps, and subsidies. We have done so since the 1930's.

Do not believe the hypocrisy of McCain's campaign. Do you own research into history and learn exactly what socialism is before you pull the lever.

Posted by: TheMiddleRoad | October 27, 2008 10:21 AM | Report abuse

My gut feeling is Obama will get over 400 electoral votes when all the counting is done. I'm looking at just those states currently held by Mccain and I'm seeing several that either are very likely to flip or may possibly flip...these include NC and Indiana but also states like Montana, ND,GA.
There may also be a few surprise flips in the air, of these I'd include AZ, WV and SC.

Posted by: jpsbr2002 | October 27, 2008 10:20 AM | Report abuse

All this landslide talk. You know, if we're not careful, a lot of people on both sides may choose to skip the voting booth, muttering, "My vote's not going to make a difference, anyway."

If you're thinking of not voting, think about this: You don't want your candidate to simply win. You want him to WIN BIG! In the popular vote, not just the electoral college. You want to run up the score, make a statement.

And think about this: Don't you want America, land of democracy, to have the highest voter turnout in the world? Don't you want America to be Number 1?

So go out and be a good American, huh? And be sure to vote for...

Posted by: dognabbit | October 27, 2008 10:16 AM | Report abuse

AsperGirl - I still think you are by far the best writer to ever visit these boards. Great summaries always, and excellent points...albeit biting, but very well written.

Posted by: J_thinks | October 27, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

The problem is that anyone who thinks Obama is a socialist also thought W was a good choice for president, Iraq made sense, $6 trillion in debt was no big deal....

In other words, it doesn't matter how accurate these opinions may be. The messengers have been so wrong for so long no pays them any attention any more.

And for the record, Obama as President would steer straight down the middle. He's shown way too much political savvy to this point to turn everything over to Pelosi and Reid if he gets to the White House.

Posted by: starthom | October 27, 2008 10:12 AM | Report abuse

Instead of talking about the supposed Bradley Effect, which by the way is not proven to even exist, I would think that Republicans would be worried about their fellow party members who are lying in polls when they say they will vote for McCain but are secretly planning to vote for Obama.

Posted by: SouthernerInDC | October 27, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse
--------------------

I mentioned it in my other post but I think we have a "self fulfilling prophesy" coming. Door knockers are running into more and more Mccain people who just don't care anymore. They may not go out and vote for Obama but will just stay home. They are so completely disgusted with this whole election they don't even want to talk about it anymore. By contrast, Obama voters are car pooling to the polls. I just talked to a cashier this morning who was taking off early so she could vote. No past models used by pollsters fit this election. It is unique. I know it is bad luck to say so but this is going to be a landslide. I think Obama is even going to carry Georgia.
I am still listening to Mccain right now. He could not sound worse. don't know if he is sick or what but you can hardly follow what he is saying. His speaking is very weak. This campaign has really taken a toll on him. I don't think he has more then another week left in him. We are really seeing the end of the man. The old tired man I am watching right now does not look very presidential. He is a sad shell of what he once may have been 10 years ago.

Posted by: popasmoke | October 27, 2008 10:12 AM | Report abuse

What will you all do with all the free time you will have on Nov 5th?

Posted by: J_thinks | October 27, 2008 10:09 AM | Report abuse

Aspergirl,
The market is fluctuating exactly because it is afraid of an Obama presidency. This whole financial crisis will be exposed to be a largely Democratic problem... would you put it in a Socialist system? ...

Posted by: allinthegame

Actually, I agree with you. I do think that Obama, et al, are dangerously latent socialists who don't understand markets and the effects of taxation on productivity of entrepreneurs.

But what I also know now about how the economic failures developed under Republicans' watch. While the seeds and fundamentals of the problem were put in place by Democrats (subprime mortgages, Fannie Mae, lowered banking and lending standards, derivatives market deregulation, etc), these problems grew and got out of control and are being mishandled under Republicans' watch.

I see now that the modern culture of Republican free market conservatism among politicians is that "free market" means that the economy and markets will take care of themselves and they don't have to allocate any brain cells to economic thoughts. I.e. supposedly everything economic is optimal under a "free market" so they just don't think about economics at all. This administration even ignored problems that economists were screaming about for the past few years, until the banks started failing.

With his blunders and missteps and being caught flat-footed and incoherent this Fall, John McCain showed that (1) he's an idiot when it comes to strategic planning for leadership (he was still a Phil Gramm hugger up to the Wall Street failures and had no real economic advising bench) and (2) he's a "fiscal conservative" of the no-brain-cells-allocated-to-thinking-about-economics type. John McCain is totally vacuous, spastic and incoherent when it comes to economics, like many so-called "free market" politicians who allow themselves to develop into economic idiots, believing that free markets is a kind of magic so that they can even run and regulate and police themselves.

At this particular point in time, it's better to have a thoughtful socialist with a deep bench of good advisors, like Obama has, than a fiscal idiot who is totally clueless about anything economic.

Posted by: AsperGirl | October 27, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

OK - Freeze the frame right here - no more changes to the electoral map. The map today is exactly what I projected in the Pick a President contest. Looking at the election as state by state battles, it isn't until you look at the final numbers 359 to 189 that you see a LANDSLIDE.

Chris - you were pretty good on MSNBC the other night -it's hard to get a work in edgewise! Next time, don't let them slick down your hair!

http://obama-bidenforthewin.blogspot.com

Posted by: annieb346 | October 27, 2008 10:03 AM | Report abuse

All of these pre-election polls are BS. Who are the people who are actually being polled? I'm an Obama supporter, and I don't know anybody who has been included in these polls. This election is in no way shape or form going to be a landslide for Obama. But voter turnout is likely to be so high in urbanized areas that the shaky system of actually collecting votes (you know, 80-year-old election judges and volunteers trying to handle brand new technology)is going to be severely overburdened in these areas, raising questions about the legitimacy of any results, no matter who wins. I am looking forward to next Tuesday with high anxiety. If Obama wins, it'll be by the skin of his teeth, not by the span of his ears.

Nevertheless, vote OBAMA 2008!

Posted by: GreenMeansGo | October 27, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse
------------------

I have actually been called several times this year alone for both state wide and national polls. Either way, someone listens to polls. Politicians make major decisions based on polls. I think Obama will win in a landslide simply because even if it only comes down to party lines the Dems will have a huge turn out and win big. I know a lot of Mccain people who could care less if they vote or not. I get this from door knocks and what they say. The republicans just seem to have given up. Chuck Todd said they expect the black vote to be maybe a 90 to even 100% turn out. This is impossible for Mccain to over come.
As a side note. I am listening to John Mccain right now and he sounds sick. His voice is weak and he is not very animated. He is stumbling over his own talking points as he keeps clearing his throat. He looks and sounds very bad.

Posted by: popasmoke | October 27, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

Instead of talking about the supposed Bradley Effect, which by the way is not proven to even exist, I would think that Republicans would be worried about their fellow party members who are lying in polls when they say they will vote for McCain but are secretly planning to vote for Obama.

Posted by: SouthernerInDC | October 27, 2008 9:58 AM | Report abuse


.


"I see their crappy rental homes, with peeling paint and sagging porches. Their kids don't get needed medical treatment because of the three pediatricians we have (for a county of 70,000) only one takes Medicaid."

There was a '60 Minutes' piece back in July
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/28/60minutes/main3889496.shtml

about a charity called Remote Area Medical
that does basic healthcare for the poor (dental checkups, glasses, etc.).

What's unbelievable is that they do their work right here in the US.

People line up before dawn, just to get a cavity fixed.

It's a travesty that that's the case here in America.

Because of this mythical so-called supply-side economics the Republicans have been pushing for the last 30 years (which failed miserably) the industrialized country with the highest poverty rate is the US.

While it's technically true that the US is the 'richest' country in the world, the income disparity is so great, that it really doesn't mean anything.

Look at it this way: if Bill Gates walked into a bar, the wealth of the average guy in there would be 1 billion dollars, but that doesn't mean that anyone's actually richer.

I would gladly trade Bill Gates's and Donald Trump's fortunes, if it meant that your average American had decent health insurance.

And if you think that's Socialism, then you better start investing in dental floss.


.

Posted by: el_barto | October 27, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Could be an early night next election day.

The polls in Virginia close a 7 PM. The election usually won't be called until the polls close on the West Coast.

However if Obama carries Pennsylvania and Virgina then McCain is toast.

:-)

Posted by: toritto | October 27, 2008 9:50 AM | Report abuse

GreenMeansGo - So because you personally don't know anyone who has been one of the 1000 or so called for a poll, all polls are BS? Interesting logic. Obviously, pollsters extrapolate their results based on certain assumptions, which are sometimes off, but historically the polls (particularly when taken in the aggregate) are quite accurate, usually showing results that are within the statistical error range. Check out RCP's site and look at the results for the 2000 and 2004 elections vs. the polls prior to elections.

Posted by: Bassomatic76 | October 27, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

Note to thecannula: Business taxes are at the lowest level they have ever been. The truth is that corporate taxes and taxes on the investment classes generally have been steadily reduced since the 1980s when Reagan ushered in the era of conservative rule. Since that time, conservatives have enjoyed electoral successes in varying degrees, culminationg in the so-called "republican revolution" of 1994 which gave them control of the House of Representatives for 12 years.

The notion behind low taxes on the wealthy and corporate classes has been the notirious "trickle down" theory. Yet, in the period of conservative rule with this supply side methodolgy in vogue, income for average working Americans has stagnated while coroprate profits have exploded and the management classes have taken a preposterously outsized portion of the created wealth through lavish golden parachutes upon retirement.

Add to that the massive deregulation of business during that time which allowed a numver of scandalous excess on Wall Street and numerous corporate scandals. and we have arrived at the sad state of affairs we now find ourselves in.

And here we are with ideological sycophants on the right trying already to rewrite the history of this eral to blame everyone but themselves.

No thecannula, not this time. We're not buying your revisionist crap any longer.

Posted by: jaxas | October 27, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Bassomatic76, are you JD?

Posted by: mark_in_austin | October 27, 2008 9:45 AM | Report abuse

gandalf, I know that Street Corner's style is reminicent of "svreader", but I am quite sure that they are different persons.

"svreader" was thin skinned and engaged with those who disagreed with him until he was so outnumbered that he fell behind. StreetCorner does not engage - he copies and pastes his own message again and again and again. He has no interest in engaging - he is interested using as much space with each post as he can, and in redirecting posters here to his own web site.

svreader's "inside knowledge" of Chicago, of DC, and of the entire universe of human behavior may have been seminal for StreetCorner, of course.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | October 27, 2008 9:43 AM | Report abuse

Also, Sen. Obama can very well end up winning Georgia, West Virginia, North Dakota, Montana, and maybe even Arizona if he goes on the air there this week.
Bob Barr is predicting a Georgia win for Obama. Every recent poll I've seen from North Dakota has him running even or ahead. West Virginia and Montana are close, and so is Arizona.
It's possible he could surpass 400 EVs.

Posted by: jdunph1 | October 27, 2008 9:42 AM | Report abuse

Classic response, allinthegame. I make an argument against your oversimplifying and vilifying those who would oppose you and ask you to flesh out your argument – to be fair, I did assume that you wouldn’t be able to due to your clear lack of understanding of the subject you are preaching about to other posters here as if you had some sort of authority – and true to form, you respond by oversimplifying and vilifying me. You insinuate that I am against free speech – I am not and I never suggested removing anyone from the radio…quite the opposite; I am just asking you to back up your claims, which you don’t. So, in the absence of real substance, you attempt to build yourself up by touting your degree and your common sense (interesting how you think it is sensible that this macro problem could be resolved using your ‘common sense’), while questioning mine. Not that it matters, but since you asked, I have a masters degree in economics.

So…now that we have the niceties out of the way, how do you respond to the questions I asked about political parties and how they relate to the financial crisis?

Posted by: Bassomatic76 | October 27, 2008 9:41 AM | Report abuse

Hey GreenMeansGo,

The reason that you don't know anyone who's been polled is that any poll has only 1000 participants or so, randomly selected. There are ~200,000,000 adults in the US. So for any poll a person has a 1 in 200,000 chance of being called. Unless you have 200,000 friends, you're not likely to meet anyone whose been called. Lets say that there have been 1,000 polls done this year, you'd still only have a 1 in 200 chance of having been polled. That's why you don't know anyone who has.

Posted by: watercao | October 27, 2008 9:32 AM | Report abuse

Hey Observer23;Finally an intellient post; I was getting a little nervous for a while.

Yes, I was a Democrat in 2000 and 2004 and I was mad as h--l when they lost by a small margin. What changed, however, was 9/11. This is not a John Kennedy world anymore and Obama is actually the one who is living in the past, not John McCain. The lies surrounding Obama, who his is, what he stands for, the "D's" rejection of Hillary have turned me into an alternative media consumer. I never would have voted for a Bush of any kind. But I would vote for a man of the stature of John McCain.

Posted by: allinthegame | October 27, 2008 9:30 AM | Report abuse


.

I would also consider this year ripe for a Democratic landslide, but for the mythical "Bradley" effect.

Now this might not be the case in every state, certainly in states that went for Bush last time, or where Kerry barely won this could have an impact.

In the following article: http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/10/27/undecideds/

The author argues that unless a Black candidate is over 50% and ahead beyond the margin of error, he usually gets a lower share of the vote than polls indicate. This is because undecideds tend to vote for the Honky candidate :-)


The good news for Barack is that he's up by more than 50% in Colorado, New Mexico, New Hampshire and Virginia, as well as other "Blue" states, giving him 286 electoral votes--more than enough to win, but by no means a landslide.

It's true that he's ahead by a whisker in Florida and Ohio, but I wouldn't count on Barack winning those states necessarily.


.

Posted by: el_barto | October 27, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

pgiaquinto - Thank you for the citation to Pollster.com. Your prediction is an apparent plausible inference, not a lottery choice. We stand corrected.

Posted by: MoreAndBetterPolls | October 27, 2008 9:27 AM | Report abuse

All of these pre-election polls are BS. Who are the people who are actually being polled? I'm an Obama supporter, and I don't know anybody who has been included in these polls. This election is in no way shape or form going to be a landslide for Obama. But voter turnout is likely to be so high in urbanized areas that the shaky system of actually collecting votes (you know, 80-year-old election judges and volunteers trying to handle brand new technology)is going to be severely overburdened in these areas, raising questions about the legitimacy of any results, no matter who wins. I am looking forward to next Tuesday with high anxiety. If Obama wins, it'll be by the skin of his teeth, not by the span of his ears.

Nevertheless, vote OBAMA 2008!

Posted by: GreenMeansGo | October 27, 2008 9:20 AM | Report abuse

The Way That We Should See McCain & Palin From Now On:
Maverick Personality Disorder: A New Diagnosis
http://tinyurl.com/5ggtte

Posted by: janawalter87 | October 27, 2008 9:19 AM | Report abuse

@37thandOSt

No one cares about Wright. No one cares about Ayers. No one cares about socialism.

You lose. Just accept it, and try again in four years with a message that doesn't sound like it came out of the 1950s.

Posted by: drgrepper | October 27, 2008 9:16 AM | Report abuse

This clearly poses a crisis of historic proportions for our great land: if all those states are going for Obama, then clearly we are infested with not "pro-American" people, and, ipso fatso, as Archie Bunker put it, all these darn states are anti-American! Is there a way to banish every state except for those going for McCain and Palin? A sort of probationarys status: "Listen, you don't get back into the USofA until you vote Republican, now snap to it!" Palin, like Bachmann a keen observer of anti-American infiltration (after all, that's why she's so great to have in Russia, keeping an eye on the proverbial Bear swimming across the Bering Strait), has warned us that unless you're in a small town or a deeply red state, you're not "pro-American." That's a wake-up call we all need. Darn! Guess I have to cancel my membership in the Communist Party! Or was it "socialist"? Is it possible to be a "limousine socialist"? Something to think about.

Posted by: Plutonium57 | October 27, 2008 9:16 AM | Report abuse

I am so sick of conservatives blaming Obama's success on skewed media coverage. I guess us Democrats must be too stupid to read different sources and examine the issues and make up our own minds. God forbid that they acknowledge their own flawed candidates.

So, if everyone's taxes are to be cut, including that of huge corporations and people making more than $250K per year, then how is the government supposed to pay for things? The largest expenditures in the government have very little to do with welfare (which doesn't really exist any more). The three largest line items in the federal budget (2007) are: Defense (22.8%), Social Security (21.5%), and Medicare/Medicaid (19.1%). All other government spending COMBINED make up 24.6% of government spending. Check it out: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/financial/reports/citizens_guide.pdf. Unless government cuts spending, the money HAS to come from somewhere!

What about conservatives listening to the hate filled crap on Hannity and O'Reilly? Oh, I forgot, Fox's slogan is "We report, you decide" so that must all be unslanted truth. Give me a break!

Posted by: greatscott47 | October 27, 2008 9:05 AM | Report abuse

.


.


.


Let's all review how this year, not decades ago. OBAMA REFUSED TO DISAVOW Rev. Wright and his BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY TEACHINGS.


What is worse is that Obama exposed his children to the HATE OF BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY FOR YEARS.


EXPOSED HIS CHILDREN TO THAT RACIST HATE UNTIL IT BECAME POLITICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR OBAMA TO CONTINUE TO BRING HIS CHILDREN TO THE RACIST CHURCH !


IF A WHITE candidate had a similar church, the Washignton Post would be railing against that candidate.


The bias is great, the racism is unbelievable. The media has given Obama so many passes.


Then they have to go and get some FALSE CHARGES FROM DECADES AGO.


Investigate Obama and his democratic friends in Chicago.


Investigate his friend REZKO who has been indicted and whose story much of America does not know.


Investigate all the connections between Michele Obama and Farrakhan.


BE SERIOUS MEDIA.


YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING DRINKING THE KOOL-AID OF THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN TALKING POINTS AS IF IT WERE TRUTH.


.


.

Posted by: 37thandOSt | October 27, 2008 9:05 AM | Report abuse

Who are you people that think welfare (or Aid to Families with Dependent Children where I live) is some sort of great shake? Even combining all the aid that these people get only brings them to about $15,000 year.

I am an attorney who does a lot of court appointed criminal and mental health work, and those on assistance cannot afford attorneys. I see their crappy rental homes, with peeling paint and sagging porches. Their kids don't get needed medical treatment because of the three pediatricians we have (for a county of 70,000) only one takes Medicaid. I see them at the grocery, paying with their Bridge card (like at ATM card instead of food stamps). They aren't buying steaks and chops. Everyday, someone comes to my church asking for assistance to pay the light bill, or put gas in their tank. We have to turn them away because we are tapped out.

And once a month, the Red Cross has a mobile food pantry that serves 800-1000 people. They are lined up for hours. Maybe its your idea of a good time to stand outside in a line in the cold just to get some peanut butter, cans of food and some bread - it certainly isn't mine. There isn't any work where I am in rural Michigan, not even part-time or temporary work. And please don't tell me that these people could just move to another area or state. They don't have reliable cars, they don't have a place to live or a job to go to. My husband teaches in a poor area, and the families often leave for another state, just to return 5 or 6 months later without finding jobs or affordable housing.

If you know where some decent jobs are, please tell me so I can advise my clients and the parents of my husband's students.

Posted by: corridorg4 | October 27, 2008 9:01 AM | Report abuse

I think the electoral map could end up giving us a few more states than Chris has predicted here on election night. I have a feeling Georgia (amazingly) is going to go blue, given the monster turnout they've had among early voters. I think North Dakota and Montana are going to flip, as well-there hasn't been a ton of polling done, but of the polls that have been taken, Obama looks pretty strong in those states, and Ron Paul is on the ballot in Montana, which could siphon votes away from McCain. I think Indiana is going to flip, and I think there's a remote possibility that West Virginia will, too.

Also, if McCain's campaign continues the circular firing squad this week, with more conservatives blaming McCain's imminent loss on his mismanaged campaign, etc., I think we might see a couple more surprise flips on November 4th-Arizona? South Dakota? Mississippi?

Posted by: ASinMoCo | October 27, 2008 9:01 AM | Report abuse

Hey, Chris..how come we're not doing that video thing that we did a month or so ago? Seems I remember one guy who predicted just exactly what you're writing today. And didn't everybody else tell him he was crazy?

--Just wondering.

Posted by: mytake1 | October 27, 2008 8:57 AM | Report abuse

The time is at hand, 37th&O, JakeD and the rest of the right wing trolls will soon go the way of svreader. Bye bye.

A long time ago I knew if we could beat the Clintons the republicans would beat themselves. They just thought it would be too much fun to destroy a black candidate for president - so that is all they tried to do. Laughably, the Clinton's had already rolled out every dirty trick - so there was nothing new at all, let alone anything redemptive, about the McCain/Palin message.


Posted by: shrink2 | October 27, 2008 8:57 AM | Report abuse


Chris, I notice Rhode Island's blue, but after reading the NY Times yesyerday, I can't understand why? Higher corporate taxes have nearly driven all large employers from their state.

Both Jack Welch and I are supporting McCain and we feel the most important articles in the NY Times yesterday were the lead article on Increasing Unemployment/Corporate Layoffs in the United States and the follow up article on the Job Disaster in Rhode Island. Rhode Island is suffering with 8.8% unemployment and, not coincidentally, is the state ranked 50th for business tax treatment by the nonpartisan Tax Foundation. Neighboring Massachusetts is ranked 34th, with 6.1% unemployment. Two states with no state corporate tax, South Dakota and Wyoming , have 2.8 and 3.0% unemployment. The conclusion of the NYT article is that State officials in RI are rethinking and planning to alter their business tax policy. Do you think this article has implications in the coming election? Jack and I do!
Jack said so on This Week with George Stephanopoulos this morning. He said that he moved GE out of RI because of their state corporate taxes! Do you think we should increase or decrease corporate taxes in the current recession (hint-Herbert Hoover increased them)?

Why would anyone vote for a candidate who wants to turn all 50 states into Rhode Island?

Lowering business taxes leads to JOB creation...$900 is a cheap price to pay for a job (Obama wants to give the middle class a $1200 annual tax cut and McCain wants to give them a $300 cut). Just ask the people of Rhode Island.

Posted by: thecannula | October 27, 2008 8:55 AM | Report abuse

Bassomatic76,

Glad to see that "allinthegame" got such a rise. You seem to be against first amendment rights of free speech. And I can assume from your post that you would like to remove "Right Wingnuts?" from the radio. By the way, you did not mention YOUR credentials on economics. I'll grant you that I only have a master's degree, but I never would let any degree get in the way of my commonsense and I am not one to be told that black is white. I noticed that you and others did not see fit to answer other bloggers who spewed what really was manure. Hmm...Strange.

Posted by: allinthegame | October 27, 2008 8:48 AM | Report abuse

Yes; it's the big bad press that's causing McCain to lose. It has nothing to do with common sense and facts.
And it's happening all across America! Gasp!

People; if you actually believe this, then your train of thought leading to that conclusion got derailed a long, long time ago. Now, you're blowing smoke, but your trolley is off the track!

Posted by: easysoul | October 27, 2008 8:41 AM | Report abuse

Hey popasmoke

McCain had no roots when he went to work for Cindy's dad. He smirked that his stay at the Vietnam prison was his longest stay in one place.

Posted by: theodosia1 | October 27, 2008 8:38 AM | Report abuse

McCain has one hope, a narrow electoral victory(tough to see at this point)while losing the popular vote. Just as Bush did in 2000.

Hardly a recipe for a successful presidency.

Posted by: mathas | October 27, 2008 8:37 AM | Report abuse

The press has been 100% negative against McCain the whole time. This morning on NBC, Tom Brokaw highlighted that there "dissensions" in the McCain camp. Really?!?!? In an organization of hundreds of people, you mean to tell me that they don't all have the same opinion?!?! Shocking?!?! Maybe McCain needs to steal Obama's book, "How to Make Droids". The American press needs to take a long, hot bath.

Posted by: forgetthis | October 27, 2008 8:32 AM | Report abuse

RickJ - You touch on two topics that are often overlooked: (1) McCain shouldn't be discredited entirely for what has been an unfocused campaign. He is, after all, one of very few candidates that has ever run who from the incubant party but not the sitting president. Couple that with the dismal approval ratings of the current administration and McCains meanderings suddenly become more understandable (although still not commendable). (2) Obama should be given credit where credit is due, whether you are voting for him or not: he has kept a consistent message.

Posted by: Bassomatic76 | October 27, 2008 8:31 AM | Report abuse

.


.


.


Let's all review how this year, not decades ago. OBAMA REFUSED TO DISAVOW Rev. Wright and his BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY TEACHINGS.


What is worse is that Obama exposed his children to the HATE OF BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY FOR YEARS.


EXPOSED HIS CHILDREN TO THAT RACIST HATE UNTIL IT BECAME POLITICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR OBAMA TO CONTINUE TO BRING HIS CHILDREN TO THE RACIST CHURCH !


IF A WHITE candidate had a similar church, the Washignton Post would be railing against that candidate.


The bias is great, the racism is unbelievable. The media has given Obama so many passes.


Then they have to go and get some FALSE CHARGES FROM DECADES AGO.


Investigate Obama and his democratic friends in Chicago.


Investigate his friend REZKO who has been indicted and whose story much of America does not know.


Investigate all the connections between Michele Obama and Farrakhan.


BE SERIOUS MEDIA.


YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING DRINKING THE KOOL-AID OF THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN TALKING POINTS AS IF IT WERE TRUTH.


.


.

Posted by: 37thandOSt | October 27, 2008 8:31 AM | Report abuse

I really hope everyone can, for once, get behind whoever is elected so that we can fix some serious problems. Luckily, it looks like we'll be able to get it done whether the Republicans are on board or not, but it would really be refreshing if the two parties could work together for a change. One thing's for sure, there are going to be some great pajama parties next Tuesday night! http://www.ojamas.us.

Posted by: Ojamas | October 27, 2008 8:30 AM | Report abuse

Okay back to the landslide.

I don't want the traitor and mob connected John McCain in the white house. I don't want his mob connected wife in the white house.

Landslide!

Posted by: theodosia1 | October 27, 2008 8:29 AM | Report abuse

I sure hope there is an Obama blow out. I am glad people finally started calling out the hateful "real American" crap the Republicans have been spewing for so long. It is like a kick in the teeth every time I hear the likes of the sanctimonious Hannity, Limbaugh, and just as likely a santimonious Republican politician decry my "family values" or my patriotism or my love of this country.

P.S. I was shocked to see AsperGirl has turned on McCain. She had been one of the most fanatic anti-Obama ravers. Either McCain has really lost it or someone is posting as AsperGirl.

Posted by: jswallow | October 27, 2008 8:25 AM | Report abuse

Are you going to tell me to tell me John Mccain with his high school education and next to last in his class navel academy finish you want for the leader of the country? He has never held a job in his life or even brought home a paycheck.
He never built a business ran a company in fact did anything on his own without someone else doing it for him. First his family, then his wife, whose father by the way, bought him his political career. The man is in such an intellectual rut, he can't even turn on a computer. Heck, I would like to know how he manages his senatorial duties being to technologically illiterate? This is the man we want to lead our country? A man who even lacks the intellectual curiosity or initiative to even keep up with the times. Lets be honest, he is a moron and it would take an even bigger moron to vote for him.
John Mccain is a complete and utter dunce. Totally lazy and unaccomplished his whole life all the way back to his high school days. I won't even get into his years as an admitted drunk confirmed by everyone who knew him. Please, give me a break. John Mccain, they really scrapped the bottom of the barrel when they nominated this loser.

Posted by: popasmoke | October 27, 2008 8:23 AM | Report abuse

McCain refuses to acknowledge his black relatives. His brother Joe has attended family reunions with the black McCains.

Posted by: theodosia1 | October 27, 2008 8:22 AM | Report abuse

37thandOSt = svreader

Posted by: gandalfthegrey | October 27, 2008 8:20 AM | Report abuse

As usual, most of the posts have nothing to do with the topic. (And those who keep banging on about the leftist MSM keep forgetting that Fox exists. If the MSM had so much sway, we'de be celebrating the end of 8 years of President Gore... Additionally, the McCain/Palin campaign has been one of the most poorly managed and executed in electoral history.)

On topic: I think it will be a landslide for Obama and the Democrats (and I would add NC to Obama's column). The fact that Obama./Biden have run a near perfect campaign has also helped move them toward landslide territory. (There's apparent animosity between the McCain and Palin camps as their ever changing tactics and themes are gaining no traction.) This is also a change election, making it difficult for the party in power.

Posted by: RickJ | October 27, 2008 8:20 AM | Report abuse

Slavery? Let's talk about McCain's horney white grand parents who fathered African babies.


Lillie McCain is watching the presidential campaign from a singular perspective.

A 56-year-old psychology professor whose family spans five generations from the enslavement of her great-great-grandparents to her own generation's fight for civil rights, Ms. McCain appreciates the social changes that have opened the way for Sen. Barack Obama to be the first major-party black contender for the White House.

But she also has an uncommon view on another American passage. Ms. McCain and her siblings are descended from two of about 120 slaves held before the end of the Civil War at Teoc, the Mississippi plantation owned by the family of Republican nominee John McCain's great-great-grandfather.

In a year when the historic nature of Sen. Obama's candidacy is drawing much comment, the case of the Teoc McCains offers another quintessential American narrative in black and white. For the black McCain family, it is a story of triumph over the legacy of slavery; for the white McCains, it is the evolution of a 19th-century cotton dynasty into one rooted in an ethic of military and national service.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/17/tale-mccains/

Posted by: theodosia1 | October 27, 2008 8:19 AM | Report abuse

37thand0street said, "IF A WHITE candidate had a similar church, the Washignton Post would be railing against that candidate."

There is a white candidate from a similar church: Sarah Palin. Go onto the site for the Assembly of God church she has attended for years and read the sermon transcripts. Yet little to nothing has been made of it by anyone in the media.

And while you are looking that up, look up 'demagoguery' and 'fascism', see how they relate, and pay attention to how they manipulate the electorate by making scapegoats, particularly of the media. Entire swaths of people, like pawns, listen and do as they are told: label media as biased and willingly deprive themselves of information except from those sources that don't question the propaganda (i.e. FoxNews, talk radio, and all the pundits that are 'real Americans'). Do you really not see this?

Posted by: Bassomatic76 | October 27, 2008 8:13 AM | Report abuse

McCain spilled his guts to the enemy while a prisoner in Vietnam. Read his own words.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/2008/01/28/john-mccain-prisoner-of-war-a-first-person-account.html?PageNr=2

Posted by: theodosia1 | October 27, 2008 8:13 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: 37thandOSt wrote: Obama and his wife do not APPRECIATE what the affirmative action programs have given them - Obama refused to be a lawyer - Obama and his wife appear to have a chip on their shoulders - THEY APPEAR TO ADHERE TO THE THINKING OF DOROTHY TILMAN MORE THAN THE US CONSTITUTION.
(Look at what GWBush and co have done to the constitution. Think hard before you point a finger at a party not your own)

Someone had to sacrifice to get the spoiled adults the money which they do not appreciate - and their ultra-liberal arrogance is based on not merit but being spoiled. Bratty kids come from this mess - bratty kids who cheat and lie to get what they want -


That is what we have here - two spoiled brats who believe that they DESERVE compensation for slavery and the jim crow era - Not that they were victims of those eras however they believe they deserve compensation for the pain of other generations.

(Barack Obama didn't come from a family with a background of slavery. His father was actually born in Africa. Have you ever even listened to him speak? And let's talk about spoiled brats. John McCain and Cindy McCain, who never worked a day in their lives. At least not like the working middle class. Yes, John got his millions the old fashioned way. He married it.)

Posted by: biggirl90 | October 27, 2008 8:10 AM | Report abuse

We give AIG a $32 Billion welfare check and they spent close to a million on themselves.

Posted by: theodosia1 | October 27, 2008 8:10 AM | Report abuse

Republicans always make a word or phrase that is good and right, a dirty word, example liberal. Redistribution of wealth, means that everyone gets to share in the pie, everyone has opportunity, not just the special few! AND

If the American public is truly concerned about the Voting Problems in America, then they should vote Dems all the way down the chain, because Republicans have fillibustered or stoped any kind of legislation to reform our voting system from fraud and hacking time and time again. We need a voting system we can believe in. This you will see reformed with a Dem President and legislation, along with enacting badly needed regulatory rules on our economic systems.

Posted by: dsoulplane | October 27, 2008 8:09 AM | Report abuse

Whose getting the $850 Billion welfare check?

My main quesiton is where is the Trillions of dollars now missing for 401k and other savings and investment of trusting American citizens.

Posted by: theodosia1 | October 27, 2008 8:07 AM | Report abuse

Let's all go on welfare instead of working.........it's the obama way.

Posted by: charlietuna666 | October 27, 2008 7:41 AM | Report abuse

There are only two "welfare" programs that still exist after President Clinton reformed welfare in 1996. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and Foodstamps. The total for both programs is about $45 billion, or approx 1.5% of the nation's total $2.9 trillion budget. I just want to put this in perspective.

The refund checks to the poor that is being attributed to Obama's plan is actually the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) which was enacted in 1975 by Gerald Ford. Enhanced by Reagan in 1984 and voted for by McCain. Obama is simply proposing increasing the amount of the credit temporarily by about $500. This credit costs the US govt about $35 billion annually - about 1% of the nation's total budget.

Do some research before accusing either candidate of socialism.

Posted by: Obama--08 | October 27, 2008 8:00 AM | Report abuse

.


.


An affirmative action guy with the thinnest of resumes whose only economic or business experience is buying cocaine - are you people completely insane?


If the economy tanks because of Obama's high taxes, you have only yourself to blame.


If your retirement accounts do not recover, you can blame your vote on Obama and the mass insanity in this nation.


.


.

Posted by: 37thandOSt | October 27, 2008 7:59 AM | Report abuse

Arizona!

Well, The Arizona Republic has indorsed John McCain since 1982. So, what's new.

John had no money in 1982 so his father-in-law (James W. Hensley) loaned the local republican party 137,000. Then he was sponsored by a civic group known as the Pheonix 40. Hensley (Cindy McCain's dad) worked for the mob.

James w. Hensley (father of Cindy McCain): In 1948 James and Eugene Hensley, his brother, were convicted of filing false liquor documents and conspiracy to distribute. 5 years later James Hensley and Kemper Marley, Sr. charged with violating federal liquor laws again, but were aquitted when represented by William Rehnquist (future Chief Justice of Supreme Court).

Kemper Marley, Sr.: Ordered the death of Don Bolles. In 1976 Don Bolles, an investigative reporter for The Arizona Republic who specialized in crime, was killed by a bomb concealed beneath his car. John Harvey Adamson, the only person whose conviction in the slaying has been upheld, said in court documents that he had been hired by Max Dunlap, a wealthy contractor who had been reared by Mr. Marley, to kill Mr. Bolles for writing articles damaging to Mr. Marley.

Posted by: theodosia1 | October 27, 2008 7:59 AM | Report abuse

allinthegame - When I read your post I remembered the words of the old maxim, 'Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt'. As you are quite ready to school others on this board as to source of the current financial crisis (Democrats...or 'liberals' as I'm sure you like to call them among friends), then might I be so bold as to request to give us the basis for your conclusions?

For example, how did the Democrats contribute to the excess liquidity in the system post-Nasdaq crash? How did the Republicans? Were the Democrats more instrumental in the development of correlation credit derivatives like CDOs and CDOs of CDOs? Were they the problem? Or was the problem more related to money supply (or structural/regulatory errors)? Or did none of these components prove to be relevant in your regression analysis? (I assume you have done regressions to arrive at your quite conclusive predictions about us all seeing very shortly that this all is 'a largely Democratic problem'.)

I am just playing with you, of course, Mr (Ms) allinthegame, to prove a point: that from your comments, you probably couldn't tell Money Supply from Air Supply, yet you have the audacity to spread your 'knowledge' like so much manure in the springtime. The fundamentalist mindset of 'I'm right...you're stupid', stoked by clowns like Limbaugh and Hannity, is a cancer to democracy. It refuses to be reasonable, and stifles debate by drawing infantile conlusions (like pinning the current financial crisis on Democrats) about complex issues that would be best resolved through rational debate - bringing all ideas to the table, testing them, and implementing the ones that are the most pragmatic.

Posted by: Bassomatic76 | October 27, 2008 7:52 AM | Report abuse

Aspergirl...I too was a Clinton supporter but I knew that McCain would never work for the goals that Hillary espoused so it was easy for me to back the nominee. You however, seem to have had your feelings hurt and it clouded your judgement. You spewed some particularly vile anti-Obama rant after he got the nomination. I'm glad you have seen the light, but don't you see the damage people like you did to the Obama campaign.

A good old "I'm sorry" would renew my faith in you.

Posted by: willandjansdad1 | October 27, 2008 7:52 AM | Report abuse

charlietuna666 wrote..
Let's all go on welfare instead of working.........it's the obama way
____________________________________

Sorry Charlie, the GOP purged your name from the rolls so you won't be able to collect. Oh well, back to work for you....Would you like fries with that?

Posted by: pgiaquinto | October 27, 2008 7:51 AM | Report abuse

.


.


.


Let's all review how this year, not decades ago. OBAMA REFUSED TO DISAVOW Rev. Wright and his BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY TEACHINGS.


What is worse is that Obama exposed his children to the HATE OF BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY FOR YEARS.


EXPOSED HIS CHILDREN TO THAT RACIST HATE UNTIL IT BECAME POLITICALLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR OBAMA TO CONTINUE TO BRING HIS CHILDREN TO THE RACIST CHURCH !


IF A WHITE candidate had a similar church, the Washignton Post would be railing against that candidate.


The bias is great, the racism is unbelievable. The media has given Obama so many passes.


Then they have to go and get some FALSE CHARGES FROM DECADES AGO.


Investigate Obama and his democratic friends in Chicago.


Investigate his friend REZKO who has been indicted and whose story much of America does not know.


Investigate all the connections between Michele Obama and Farrakhan.


BE SERIOUS MEDIA.


YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING DRINKING THE KOOL-AID OF THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN TALKING POINTS AS IF IT WERE TRUTH.


.


.

Posted by: 37thandOSt | October 27, 2008 7:48 AM | Report abuse

Why Obama strikes a global chord
UPDATED ON:
Sunday, October 26, 2008
06:34 Mecca time, 03:34 GMT

By Barnaby Phillips in Athens


In Athens' Hard Rock Cafe, just around the corner from my flat, hundreds of
Americans of all political persuasions turned up to see the McCain-Obama debate on a giant screen.

Even the US ambassador showed up. I was there too, not an American, (albeit
married to one), just one of millions of foreigners caught up in the excitement of
this election.

And let me start with a confident assertion; the overwhelming majority of
non-Americans who follow international events will be cheering for an Obama
victory on November 4.

If you doubt this, take a look at the global election being conducted on the
website of the Economist magazine.

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2008/10/2008101617552834210.html

Posted by: theodosia1 | October 27, 2008 7:48 AM | Report abuse

MoreAndBetterPolls wrote:

pgiaquinto, why do you predict that Obama will in Arizona? Where are the polls that support your prediction? Do you live in Arizona? Or do you also think that you will win the lottery?

_______________________________________
Take a look at Pollster.com. Two recent Polls, one has McCain up 44-40, the other 44-42....Both polls taken 10/23 and 10/19...

The trend is obvious. If McLoser can't get a blow out win in his home state, what do you think the liklihood is that he will manage 270 EV's? I'll answer for you...

NONE!

Posted by: pgiaquinto | October 27, 2008 7:48 AM | Report abuse

Allinthegame wrote...
"Obama says he can save the world with the wave of his hand. Unfortunaely children usually have to learn the hard way. Too bad for good Americans."

So according to your logic, this blue-collar, tax-paying, father of a Marine in Iraq is a "bad American" because he supports Obama.

You just don't get it. The GOP is the divisive party and most of us are way past tired of it. I voted last week and 800 students a day voted at the college. Guess who we voted for here in NC. The affiliation of early voters was over 50% Democratic and under 30% Republican according to state election officials.

Posted by: willandjansdad1 | October 27, 2008 7:46 AM | Report abuse

.

.


What America Faces Is Control By Two Spoiled Brats


The rich are of two groups - 1) Conservatives who believe in low taxes and capitalism 2) spoiled children of the rich who have not worked for their money who are ultra-liberal and somehow believe the answer is in government programs giving minorities everything just like their daddy gave them everything and thus became spoiled.

My theory is this: Obama and his wife are like the 2.0 version of the second group - the spoiled rich children have created affirmative action so now we have spoiled bratty children of affirmative action. Obama and his wife do not APPRECIATE what the affirmative action programs have given them - Obama refused to be a lawyer - Obama and his wife appear to have a chip on their shoulders - THEY APPEAR TO ADHERE TO THE THINKING OF DOROTHY TILMAN MORE THAN THE US CONSTITUTION.


Someone had to sacrifice to get the spoiled adults the money which they do not appreciate - and their ultra-liberal arrogance is based on not merit but being spoiled. Bratty kids come from this mess - bratty kids who cheat and lie to get what they want -


That is what we have here - two spoiled brats who believe that they DESERVE compensation for slavery and the jim crow era - Not that they were victims of those eras however they believe they deserve compensation for the pain of other generations.


What has already been handed to them with affirmative action Harvard, Columbia, Princeton, Micheles's $300,000 a year job MEANS NOTHING. THIS IS A JOKE.

What America Faces Is Control By Two Spoiled Brats


If you think the economy is bad now WAIT for these two spoiled brats to wreck it further with higher taxes, higher capital gains and massive government programs which will lead to STAGFLATION which will erode your savings and ruin your retirement plans and savings.

.


.

Posted by: 37thandOSt | October 27, 2008 7:43 AM | Report abuse

Let's all go on welfare instead of working.........it's the obama way.

Posted by: charlietuna666 | October 27, 2008 7:41 AM | Report abuse

Allinthegame, in a sense, I share your concern about all the power in the hands of one party. I mean look at what happened with W, every war plan, every spending plan, every abuse of power was rubber stamped by the Republican Congress. I assume, if you were being consistent, 8 years ago you railed against the possibility of centralizing power in one political party. If so, good for you. Unfortunately, many of the neo-cons-come-latelys saw centralized power in the Republican party as a sign that the American people had seen the light of the right. Therefore, their warnings of the coming Dem landslide are laughably arrogant.

Posted by: observer23 | October 27, 2008 7:41 AM | Report abuse

I think Obama's chances in GA are far from sunk. He has a real opportunity that will depend on the registration and turnout of Black voters. Taken with the fact that Sarah Palin has gone off the reservation I think Obama takes 55%+ of the total vote count with McCain coming in at 39%, Barr and Nader at 3% each.

Posted by: AndyR3 | October 27, 2008 7:38 AM | Report abuse

pgiaquinto, why do you predict that Obama will in Arizona? Where are the polls that support your prediction? Do you live in Arizona? Or do you also think that you will win the lottery?

Posted by: MoreAndBetterPolls | October 27, 2008 7:37 AM | Report abuse

We live in Punkin Center, Mo, and we listened to that McCain Fella on the radio. It sounded like there was two birds in that Bush. We is voting for Obama. ............

http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/10/26/missourians-for-obama/

Posted by: glclark4750 | October 27, 2008 7:20 AM | Report abuse

To allinthegame, you're is just an other example of the Right Wingnuts and their manure spreader philosophy, along w/the simpleton automatons that follow it like lemmings w/their mouths open, thus becoming full of cr@p!!!!!

Posted by: jonnybullet | October 27, 2008 7:19 AM | Report abuse

Obama WILL WIN North Carolina and he will do so by a surprisingly large margin. Obama will also take North Dakota and Montana....

Here's the shocker, Obama will also win Arizona. Take it to the bank.

Posted by: pgiaquinto | October 27, 2008 7:04 AM | Report abuse

With all the Democratic pigs now at the trough, I'm sure all our problems will now disappear. Barney Frank said he wished he could eat and not gain weight. Obama says he can save the world with the wave of his hand. Unfortunaely children usually have to learn the hard way. Too bad for good Americans.

Posted by: allinthegame | October 27, 2008 7:01 AM | Report abuse

Thanks to mstavros for bringing up the misuse of unique...but the Fix is not unique. Last year, Paul Begala described Hillary Clinton and Barqack Obama as "two of the most unique..." [cringe]

I share your great admiration for the Fix. While it isn't unique, it is the best place to keep up on politics, and I check it daily.

It was nice to see something constructive in the comments section. Generally all we see is what Stephen Colbert calls "truthiness."

Mike

Posted by: mikedow1 | October 27, 2008 6:48 AM | Report abuse

Aspergirl,
The market is fluctuating exactly because it is afraid of an Obama presidency. This whole financial crisis will be exposed to be a largely Democratic problem. "Blame Bush" is old and stupid-"It's the Economy Stupid," and the Congress has been controlled by the Democrats. Bush warned about this. If you had money, would you put it in a Socialist system? We desperately need the people with money, but Obama is threatening them.

Posted by: allinthegame | October 27, 2008 6:47 AM | Report abuse

I like the map here. I think North Carolina goes Democratic. So that would up the Electoral Vote total to 364. Prediction on the Popular Vote, Chris? I'm guessing 53% Democrat, 46% Republican, 1% other.

Posted by: OHIOCITIZEN | October 27, 2008 6:47 AM | Report abuse

Finally, Chris, you have acknowledged the obvious. I guess with only a week until the election, you no longer have to pimp your column with vague "too close to call" sentiments. Obama and the Dems win in a landslide, not necessary because of better ideas, but, generally speaking, the American voting public has tired of the snake oil peddled by the neo-con Republicans.

Posted by: observer23 | October 27, 2008 6:43 AM | Report abuse

This Benedict Arnold media will be judged by good Americans. The studies done and the books written on this Obamamania media will expose and alter the course of the next election coverage. When the media spouts off before election in a careless, random way, people will be defrauded of their vote, because the media has already decided. You will be lucky if there is not a class action suit brought by the voters. The studies have already sited the bias, and they will continue. Did you think past the election about your tactics?

Posted by: allinthegame | October 27, 2008 6:38 AM | Report abuse

I see this happening. McCain has totally gone off the rails since the Wall Street meltdown struck. McCain's arguments against Obama are more or less meaningless, since he demonstrated his own lack of preparation on economic issues and incompetent crisis leadership tendencies.

McCain's behavior convinced me to switch my vote to Obama, and I had been a Clinton supporter-turned-McCain supporter. It's hard to believe undecideds won't decisively fall into the Obama campaign despite McCain's closing arguments attacking him.

The election is Obama's to lose. He can blow it, but if he doesn't there is a likely landslide, IMO.

There is just no reason to vote for McCain after he imploded so badly and has run his campaign so badly since the convention.

Posted by: AsperGirl | October 27, 2008 6:38 AM | Report abuse

I understand Alaska, Arizona and Texas hoping for the perks, THE MONEY, coming from having a candidate in executive office ... but WHY? WHY?? WHY??? would the other "red" states ever vote for more of the same horrible mismanagement that has destroyed middle America???

Just look at the mismanaged McCain campaign... only more of this is to come if you vote republican. Why would you do it??

Posted by: tphishs | October 27, 2008 6:36 AM | Report abuse

Chris,

I love your blog and very much appreciate your reporting and analysis. I just wanted to let you know that you're using the word "unique" incorrectly. I think you mean to say "potentially" or "imminently" possible.

MGS

Posted by: mstavros | October 27, 2008 6:35 AM | Report abuse

As an Obama supporter, the only poll that counts is the poll on election day!! Get out and VOTE!

Posted by: OK4obama | October 27, 2008 6:32 AM | Report abuse

A REPUBLICAN HALLOWEEN TRADITION
THE OCTOBER SURPRISE

Race innuendos, terrorist stew
More Reverend Wright evil brew
No money left, do the sums
But something wicked this way comes

Palin opens her crooked mouth
To fan the hatred in the south
‘Kill him’ blurts from drunken gums
When something wicked this way comes

October surprise will tell the tale
Will Evil win or will it fail?
Karl Rove schemes with his vile chums
And something wicked this way comes

McCain has shown that there is nothing that he will not do,
nothing he will not say to get elected.
A man of Honor?

Corporations First, Country Last.


Posted by: seemstome | October 27, 2008 6:32 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company