Gallup’s three-day tracking poll shows the situation in the US presidential race throughout September as follows:
Barack Obama held a slight lead as the month began, which seems to be the long-term status quo. Then came the Republican convention and Sarah Palin bounce, which briefly put McCain well ahead. This moderated into a slight lead when the dust settled, before being wiped out with the onset of the banking crisis. However, Obama’s six-point lead at the start of this week has narrowed, despite polls giving him a clear lead on economic issues – surely a great boon in the current environment. Much is being said of an ABC-Washington Post poll which has Obama nine points in front, but this appears to be out on a limb. In any case, Gallup’s historical analysis reminds us that a lot can happen in the next six weeks, one way or the other.
1,141 Comments
I think a lot now depends on whether the economic situation starts to bite middle America. There isn’t a lot of time for it to do so and it probably wont which could play out badly for Obama either way. If it doesn’t he could still lose. But it will take years for the effects of the credit crisis, spending in Iraq etc to flow through. If Obama wins he may get the blame for the messes that have been delivered. Voters and totally unforgiving of an incumbent when things bite and it wont matter whether the problems were based in his presidency or the current administration.
My best guess at this point is that he will win this election but become the first one term president in a long while due to being blamed about the real and significant drop in real-term income that I think is inevitable for many Americans in the coming 3-4 years.
‘Twood be a shame … but that’s politics for ya.
All of those polling trends including 3 Polls listed hav moved to Obama in last week & with Obama leading by 12 points (46/34) on who is best to improve th economy & Wall Street meltdown likely to dominate balance of campaign , Obama has a clear advantage
What was surprising was only a 35/30 lead on who is best to handle Wall Street crisis meaning there ar alot of ‘undecided’ , perhaps because they do not fully understand causes of th meltdown Should these “undecided” move correspondingly to Obama , then die may be cast and that seems both candidates immediate challenge
Gallups historical analysis back to 1936 unfortunately only shows last 3 elections of registered vs likely voters , with remaining 15 elections ‘estimated vote’ unknown as to if it was based on registered or likely voters
other intereasting part of Gallups 18 elections is 15 of 18 winners were leading at Labor Day , adding 2 weks to that for change in convention timing makes 13th September when there was a polling tie , but a very non historical event has since occured …Wall Street collapse which favors Obama
No one has mentioned this aspect during Wall Street collapse , one one of my pet policys Kyoto/CC negotiations for 2009 Coppenhagen meeting were already tainted by both McCain & Obama disgracefully NOT supporting Kyoto ratification…whoever is elected now has a stronger ‘excuse’ making a required for CC emmissions reductions target level less likely
I’d contend whatever th total cost of that ‘excuse’ , its still far less than th costs of delay
Odd that the Gallup tracker has closed right up – level-pegging at 46-46 today – whilst Rasmussen has gone the other way. Obama +3 today and +2 yesterday, after being no more than a point in it in the eight days previous.
Thus I don’t know if we can read too much into these movements. Probably more noise than signal.
GGGRRRRRRR …… but should expect no less in the way of tricks from them, hope that this gets full press in the US. I’m forwarding via email to everyone I know who is still over there ….
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/25/during-suspension-mccain_n_129280.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pete-cenedella/bush-may-be-stupid-but-he_b_129228.html
McCain aide claims credit for deal, says “We’re going into a debate”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/25/mccain-aide-claims-credit_n_129336.html
(includes video clip)
Here is a clue about how Michigan might go, this is a cut and paste from comments section of one article.
Facts about Oakland county from Wikepedia which might help show how the vote is breaking out there according to what this lady says above – The racial makeup of the county was 82.75% White, 10.11% Black or African American, 0.27% Native American, 4.14% Asian American, 0.02% Pacific Islander, 0.84% from other races, and 1.86% from two or more races. 2.43% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race. 14.4% were of German, 9.0% Irish, 8.5% English, 8.5% Polish, 5.7% Italian and 5.5% American ancestry according to Census 2000. 87.4% spoke English, 2.0% Spanish, 1.3% Syriac and 1.0% Arabic as their first language. In 2005, the U.S. Census Bureau estimated that non-Hispanic whites (including Arabs and Chaldeans) were 78.6% of the population; African Americans, 11.8%; Asian Americans, 5.3%; and Hispanic or Latino people (of any race) 2.8%.
A take on the vote in Florida
http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/state/article818181.ece
New Rasmussen NORTH CAROLINA Poll
OBAMA 49
McCAIN 47
Juliem 6
I agree; I don’t dislike Bush because he seems stupid – its because he is a lying sociopath. Anyone who deals with him is a fool.
Nevertheless it looks like the whimpocrats are going to doa deal with him:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/26/business/26bush.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
When all the financial facts finally come out in the future, this will hurt the democrats terribly. Obama should steer clear of this whole dodgy, non-transparent $800B deal.
The Dems road to 270 seems to mean Kerry states + IA (now a lock) + NM (almost a lock) + CO (same as NM).
However, Obama needs to hold onto NH (only a 1 point lead there), PA (2 point lead), and MI (variable, but looks increasingly safe).
In the other direction, he’s been doing increasingly well in OH (1 point deficit), NC (2 point lead) and VA (prob a little better than NC). And, of course, there’s Florida, where he’s about 2 points behind…
Socrates,
I have almost given up hope that the USA will ever straighten themselves out. Probably one of a myriad of reasons why I left in 2004. I’ve no plans to go back either. All of that having been said, Obama or any Democrat is the last best hope to straighten out the messes over there. Don’t know in the long term if they can do it but we can live and hope.
Partisan politics, porkbarreling (believe that they call it now earmarking but not sure if that is the same thing or not, that term is new to me since the 08 campaign here); it has always been the case. The first election I can really remember clearly was 1972 [I was 11 at the time]. I can’t remember a single election/administration where things were really any different with the probable exception of Clinton 1992, to a lesser extent 1996. What that says to me is that Republicans simply can’t turn things around. Democrats can if you give them half a chance. Problem Clinton had (if memory serves) was a hostile Congress so he had challenges getting his legislation passed. [Not too dissimilar to problems Rudd is facing in the Senate at the moment, but with the executive branch being separate in the USA, it is possible for both houses of Congress to be hostile].
What we need is for Obama to come in and take the nation in a whole new direction via leadership and example a la Roosevelt (who fundamentally changed the economics of the US coming out of the Great Depression) or Johnson (who fundamentally changed the course of civil rights in the mid 1960’s [although while you can legislate those changes, they are a lot harder to get in practice than the economic/monetary changes in the 1930's as you are dealing with people's learned behaviour, they have to unlearn it]). If Obama can carry that off, we will have a h*** of a wonderful president and the alignment of the electorate, as well as the racial opinions of a vast majority of Americans, will be fundamentally altered forever.
I am hanging out for that Wednesday and the election news, God, I hope beyond hope that it comes to pass. The mood of the electorate in the US right now is comparable to what it might be here IF we had been up against 20+ years of Howards rule a la Menzies (in time in office) before the Kevin07 election. As I was only born in 1961 and have only lived resident in Oz since December 2004, can someone who lived through Menzies time in power AND is a Labor voter comment on whether or not they think that the comparison I am making about the “despair” of left side of the electorate in the US is an apt one?
Thanks much
We were right, they are trying to help McCain and it isn’t going to fly folks
……
“White House Meeting Fails to Yield Bailout Deal
Republicans Resist Agreement Met By House, Senate Negotiators”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/25/AR2008092500268.html?hpid=topnews
The Dems can easily turn this on McCain. They just need to say that they had a deal all sorted in Congress and then McCain stuck his nose in and ruined the whole thing.
Come on Dems, come on Obama. I’d like to see the Repugs thrashed in November.
So what’s the latest? Is McCain going to turn up to the debate? Or is he still too scared of Obama?
Now a 46-all dead heat from Gallup: McCain up two, Obama down one.
Anne Davies, the American correspondent for the Melbourne Age writes today:
“This crisis and Iraq will define George Bush’s stewardship as one of the most disastrous in America’s history”.
I have always found Davies to be even handed in her writings so that is a big call and probably represents the general mood that is sweeping the US at the moment. It is surely not going to help McCain very much.
Juliem (14) I think there’s little doubt that the Whitehouse is trying to turn this into a rescue McCain mission and make it sound like he has played a big role in saving the US and the world..
Do you think the American people would be collectively stupid enough to fall for that?
If he hadn’t have ’suspended’ his campaign they might have, but it pretty much telegraphed that he was just playing politics, and the Dems in Congress can so easily turn this on him
Sill question I know but is the syntax for using quotes and italics the same here as the old Pollbludger site. ?
McCain blamed as rescue deal staggers:
“TOP Democrats angrily accused Republican White House contender John McCain of sabotaging an astronomically expensive deal to bail out Wall Street and shore up the US economy.
The $US700 billion ($840 billion) package stalled at talks convened by President George W Bush with top lawmakers and both the men vying to succeed him — Senator McCain and Democrat Barack Obama.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced a new round of late-night discussions in a bid to get the deal back on track, set to be joined by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve chief Ben Bernanke.
“John McCain did nothing to help, he only hurt the process,” the senior Democrat said at a joint news conference with Senate banking committee chairman Christopher Dodd. ”
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24405395-12377,00.html
So this rescue package my not play out the way McCain wants.
Why did McCain even think he could be of any use? He admitted during the primaries that economics wasn’t his strong suit.
Not sure about italics, but to quote something just put square brackets around it
Thanks Dario.
I guess you just have to be American to get it because I can’t see what they see.
Observing McCain and his campaign so far and from this distance he looks to me incoherent, uncertain and somewhat eratic and looks like he could or will have health issues. And it seems having adopted lying a an accepted part of his campaign strategy (and his team as much as admitted that) he seems empty of any moral or ethical grounds. To me you would have to feel very nervous having this man as President – not to mention his VP candidate who obviously is incapable of even campaigning properly, being protected from those nasty reporters who migh ask relevant questions of a potential VP. And the contrast is a calm stable man who addresses the issues, is obviously intelligent, thougtful and articulate and all that stuff.
Yet McCain is still fairly close in the polls. Seems Americans are Republican at heart and are loath to change even when whipped and abused by them over a period of time and presented with pretty much a dudd candidate team. You can just see President McCain saluting as the USS America slips beneath the waves, the captain going down with his ship.
This is not about Obama I don’t think, it is amount American psyche – the reality couldn’t be more clearly spelled out to them and yet it seems a great many refuse to see. Maybe it goes back to their proclivity to religious faith where one has to suspend reality to believe and remain faithful. They adopt the same approach to politics – and have faith in the Republicans which overcomes much of the obvious wrongs.
But in Australia we did the same I guess – hung on to a racist bigotted government that fed the wealthy at our expense and etc etc…but many kept on voting for them. Seems like people are happier to be fed b/s than face reality.
Hate to sound like a broken record TP (27) but I believe a lot of it can be explained by skin colour. McCain is white, as is his lovely wife. Obama and his wife are black. Sadly, for a lot of people that’s all they need to know. The best we can hope for is that this financial crisis will help Obama sneak over the line by a small margin – and at the moment there is a very good chance of that happening..
I don’t know the American people – but yes I think the polls did say that was going to be a significant issue.
Darn and Thomas Paine, it’s more that Obama is seen as a Northern Liberal elitist than his race. In 1964, Johnson crushed Golwater 61-39; since then, the only Dem to get over 50% was Carter in 76, and only barely (50.1%). Bill Clinton’s two victories were both won with less than 50% of the vote, due to Ross Perot’s influence. Al Gore and John Kerry were white, but were both beaten narrowly by Bush. Repugs have won 7 of the 10 Pres elections since 64, and the 3 Dem triumphs have all been by southern governors.
This is all due at least partly to the Johnson Civil Rights Act, which alienated the poor white southerners from the Democrats; previously, these people had voted Democrat, and were represented by nasty Democrats, commonly called Dixiecrats. The polling trends show Obama doing well among the educated and young, while McCain’s base is the ill-educated. The demographic shifts are that more people are becoming better educated, so eventually this will work in the Dems’ favour, and a northern liberal will be able to win. Due to the economic meltdown and the Palin pick, there’s a very good chance it’ll happen this year.
The Dems nominate a totally unknown and unqualified candidate, a Harvard educated liberal lawyer, who has never worn a uniform, never run a business, never governed a state, never done anything except teach law and make pretty speeches, and they are *surprised* that he doesn’t romp away with the election? They never learn, it seems. And neither to people here. McCain may be all Thomas says he is, but after the success of Reagan, Thomas should know that US voters don’t think the same way about these things as we elitist liberals do. They look at McCain and they see a war hero, a patriot, a man of experience and character. Given what is happening, the fact that McCain is even remotely competitive this year is a terrible indictment on Obama, and on the people who nominated him. After the Wall St debacle I now think Obama will probably win, but it’s far from a done deal. He couldn’t close the deal on Clinton until the last days, and he can’t close the deal on McCain either, and for the same reason. And if he does win, it will only be because Bush so badly damaged the Republican brand that any Democrat could have won.
Well I gather to win Obama has to have a good a margin as possible in polls come election day if there is such a thing as the Bradley effect or if it is large enough to give McCain the victory.
I agree. If there is only a couple of points in it on 3 November, McCain will win. Racial prejudice will be *part* of this effect, but only part of it. The same thing happened to both Carter and Clinton. Carter was miles ahead in September and only just scraped in. Obama needs to be at least 5 points up to be regarded as the favourite. And he ain’t there yet.
That all depends. The big unknown is whether pollsters have made allowances for a large likely increase in black voter turnout. If they haven’t then all the numbers are vastly undersampling them based on past elections.
Adam i thought Obama closed the deal mathematically
on Clinton months before the convention. Clinton just could not face it.
Darn @ 20,
As noted by some others, there will be a racial component to the vote. Fortunately, in that regard, USA does not have compulsory voting and unlike Adam, I feel that the numbers who will vote with race as their top priority won’t make enough of a difference. That’s because they will come in parts of the voting bloc as a whole where they won’t do fatal damage. Outside of that, no I don’t think that Americans are dumb enough to fall for McCain’s antics. There will always be a component of voters who will always vote Republican no matter what. There will be Democrats too who will vote Republican (they will couch their choices with “not enough experience” or similar to mask to the surveyor that they are racist). In the bottom line, now that the economy has tanked, I can’t see McCain getting up by election day. Bush has so tainted the Republican brand that it isn’t going to happen. Prior to the economy going, I was worried. Now, while not overly confident, I am quietly confident that Obama will hold out even though it might be close ….
Julie, since you are by your own admission so liberal that you have actually emigrated to escape the reign of Bush, I think your judgement must be regarded as ever so slightly suspect. Americans were dumb enough to fall for Reagan (twice), Bush Sr (once) and Bush Jr (twice), so there’s no reason why they won’t fall for McCain, who is a good deal smarter and more presentable than any of them. I do think the Bradley effect will harm Obama somewhat in places like MI, OH and PA, which Obama needs to win. But most white racists are already Republicans. The real weakness Obama has with white working-class Democrat voters is that he’s a Hardvard elitist who has never worn a uniform, not that he’s black. If Colin Powell had run, that demographic would have fallen over themselves to vote for him.
Well I guess all the psephs are going to have a ball analysing the data from this election.
Why ? Why after Bush one of worst POTUS in US history AND a Wall Sreet collapse is not Obama leading by a massive landslide ? Reagan like 489 E/V to 49 or better)
Reason is he’s black Hell NO , Obama won th Democat primarys 51%/49% Obama supporters said this proved his magnetic great appeal transcended colour Fact is there is statiscally a Bradley and reverse Bradley factor , Obama’s colour helps him in key States with lesser reverse effect elsewhere where they vote Republican anyway , so th ‘he’s black excuse cuts no mustard
Reason is uneducated don’t support Obama so its there fault Hell No , over 80% of US citizens ar high school graduates so being so educated they ar CHOOSING with there educated intelect NOT to support Obama , so that excuse won’t wash
Reason is th fault of traditional working familys who polls say do not support Obama That’s true simply demonstrating Obama is not a Labor left type policys candidate
Obama would not get elected to a senior electoral position in Labor Party in ‘oz’ because of his non ‘left’ views on Kyoto , universal healthcare , economic models etc and so similarly would not appeal to vast majority of ‘oz’ working familys either
Compounding Obama’s “left” policy weakness’s , and apart from asociations , is he is an “elitist” who like all “elitist” hav detestable cultural attitudes on other citizens “Elitists” snobs ar regarded with contempt by probably 90% of egalitarian ‘oz’ …”elitists” th wannabe elite rarely attaining elite , th elite if humble being those who ar admired , Obama being an “elitist liberal” simply compounds electoral demagraphic problems and 6 key statistical factors of which were evident in th Pimarys
Obama likely will win election because of Wall Street but that’s not much of a “postive” recommendation but not by 1980 Reagan levels , But win in spite of Obama but not because of Obama…win because of Bush and Wall Street , not because landslide wise US voters want Obama Most voters in there hearts just reely don’t want another ‘Republican’ (possibly meaning polls may be understating ‘likely voters’ & turnout)
This is why rusted on Obama supporters do not “get it’ , and why they still do not understand that “an Al Gore” Democrat (th antithisus of Obama culturally & key ‘left’ policy wise) would be leading by a landslide right now Rusted on bought th cupboard but did not look in th drawers & ar intellectually locked in , probably saved by th Wall Street timing fluke being th likely decider , but then this site is not a demographic of th average intelligent person facing life’s normative hurdles
Adam @ 37,
Colin Powell will be in Obama’s cabinet. You heard it here first
…….
Adam @ 37,
For the record to set it straight, I married an Aussie in the mid 90’s and we were always coming home as he wanted to live back where he grew up and we agreed to that up front in our relationship. The fact the the timing of the move back to Oz (in 2004) conincided with getting away from Bush’s mess was only a timely coincidence. Cheers
Hope you’ve enjoyed the move julie!
As what? He’s already been Sec of State. I suppose the Pentagon might interest him.
Julie @ 40. Understood. An excellent decison if I may say so.
Fast forward to Sept 2010, 2 months before the November election.
Australian Govt has to bail out Comm Bank, Macq Bank and AMP and Rudd said”if we dont take the money out of the Future, Education and Infra-structure funds, this Sucker Could Go Down”
How do you think the News and Nielson poll would read?
Newspoll – Rudd Vs Turnbull – Tie
Nielson Poll – Turnbull +3.
No way, there will be no contest.
Because this is how it reads at the moment for Obama and McCain:
Gallup Tracking 09/22 – 09/24 46 46 Tie
Rasmussen Tracking 09/22 – 09/24 49 46 Obama +3
I ask you, what is wrong with effing Obama?
Adam and Finnegans: I’m a Hillary fan too, but she didn’t win the nomination!
I’m supporting Obama, I’d back whoever was the Democrat candidate, simple as that!
There’s an element here of a few desperately hoping McCain wins, so you can glorify in “I told you sos”.
There’s nothing ‘wrong’ with him, but there are and probably always will be racial divides in the US
Did everyone see how pissed off Letterman was with McCain? LMAO
And rightfully so. McCain is nothing but a liar.
How ironic that it’s the Republicans in Congress holding up a deal on the bailout, not those horrible Democrats – so much for McCain’s intervention!
So let me get this straight. McCain deliberately scuttled the $700bn bail out that was close to being negotiated because? Some Republicans wanted to use the opprotunity to make the market even more unregulated.
These guys are hard core viscious and greedy.
That proposal reportedly includes even more deregulation and further tax breaks to the financial sector, plus a prayer that Wall Street can rescue itself if the restraints are removed.
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2008/09/26/republicans-scuttle-gop-bailout-plan/
Why should McCain appear on a comedy show? He’s trying to signal “no business as usual” and that was a good way of doing so. Letterman is a Democrat who has ridiculed McCain as senile all year, and McCain owes him no favours.
Honey is viscous, Republicans are vicious. Which did you mean, TP?
But McCain and his wife recently appeared on “The View”, and that’s hardly a high brow political show!
TP, yes, McCain and his colleagues in the Congress scuttled it. McCain is pretending he is “above” it all but that is bs. He is buried in it up to his eyeballs. Obama will take him to the cleaners in the debate tomorrow. 11am to 1pm on ABC1
But Julie, will McCoward turn up to the debate? If not, I suggest Obama debates Sarah Palin instead!
Has McCain decided to do the debate now?
I think the problem was that McCain canceled the Letterman because he was going to be out of town – however what happened was he was doing an interview with Curic a few blocks away – which Letterman was able to bring up on screen – exactly at the same time he was supposed to be on his show.
Got to count your fingers when you do negotiations with Mc Cain
He was booked to appear
McCain has said he will only do the debate if there has been a deal on Wall St. As of now there is no deal, and the chances one by Friday evening US time seem not very good.
Well he unbooked himself. Lettermann will survive – he can fill the space up with a special edition of “Will It Float?”
He won’t be able to back out of it and save face as I see it …… Obama will be there no matter what
Both bits from the Washington Post, articles from today US time so 24 hour prior to debate time. The last bit seems to imply if you read between the lines that they will be there. I’m guessing that the whole thing of what McCain has been doing over the last 48 hours has been just a stunt.
When McCain does anything unusual it is always a stunt, but when Obama does anything unusual it is always a bold new departure. I doubt the liberal media even know they are doing it, it is just hard-wired behaviour.
If he doesn’t show up he will get hammered in the press, and the polls, regardless of what he pretends he is doing instead
Well Obama ought to do the debate, you can’t be manipulated by your oponent like that. People will tune for at least the first part of it and it will certainly make all the news for the very fact McCain stayed away, with no doubt sound bites form Obama saying a President should be able to do with two or more issues at a time.
The thing with McCain and Letterman is dishonesty. McCain booked to be on the show – McCain canceled because he was going to be out of town – it was a lie. It seems that McCain is even more at home with dishonesty than GWB which is a bit of a worry.
He’ll get hammered in the liberal press, and praised in the conservative press. So what else is new?
Political candidates have (or should have) better things to do to pander to the self-importance of jumped up comedians who think they rule the world.
Bye for now.
In the Roosevelt Room after the session, the Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., literally bent down on one knee as he pleaded with Nancy Pelosi, the House Speaker, not to “blow it up” by withdrawing her party’s support for the package over what Ms. Pelosi derided as a Republican betrayal.
“I didn’t know you were Catholic,” Ms. Pelosi said, a wry reference to Mr. Paulson’s kneeling, according to someone who observed the exchange. She went on: “It’s not me blowing this up, it’s the Republicans.”
Mr. Paulson sighed. “I know. I know.”
The question is how this will all play out in the public’s eye. Will they see it as Republican’s or McCain playing games.?
Re 68,
Seems like Paulson ought to have been talking to the Republican leader in the House, not the Speaker. She can’t order the Republicans to get in line ……. Speakership doesn’t work like that in the HOR ….
TP (68)
Or perhaps they’ll see it as the Democrats being obstructive. Isn’t that the big danger?
Does anyone know how many people in the US usually watch these debates?
What’s new is that the polls on the subject have shown very few support postponing the debates. Regardless of the press, simply skipping the debate will hurt him with voters.
Not when polls of voters have shown that most are for strict conditions being placed on the bailout, which is what the Democrats are trying to impose
About the way the university in Missouri is getting ready for the debate tomorrow night US time
…..
“Ready, set, play presidential debate bingo!”
McCains a joke already. At least with Bush we had to wait for a few week after his election.
Frank: Republicans “winced” when McCain was mentioned in meeting
Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) said that “nobody mentioned McCain” during the several-hour-long meeting on the $700 billion market rescue plan, other than Frank and that his Republican colleagues “winced” when he did.
“He’s been irrelevant to the process. He remains to be,” said Frank. “I was afraid that his dropping in here, like Andy Kaufman’s Mighty Mouse—’here I am to save the day’—I thought that would slow things down. I didn’t see any sign of our Republican colleagues paying any attention to him whatsoever.”
Franks went on. “Nobody mentioned him. The man’s irrelevant to the whole process. No Republican mentioned his name. I’m the only one who raised his name. They winced when I did,” he said.
“I don’t think anyone takes that seriously,” said Frank of McCain’s suggestion that Friday’s debate be delayed. “Sen. McCain trying to use the necessity for his presence to reach a deal that we’ve already reached as a reason to duck the debate is unworthy of him. There is absolutely no reason not to go to the debate.”
http://www.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/0908/Frank_Republicans_winced_when_McCain_was_mentioned_in_meeting.html?showall
Oh yes and this funny little bit:
Adam @ 57,
Obama will have a televised event tomorrow no matter what McCain does. Obama and McCain are playing a huge game of chicken and when it came time for Obama to make his move, he didn’t blink
….. [ Barack Obama is committed to hosting a public, televised event Friday night in Mississippi even if John McCain does not show up, an official close to the Obama campaign tells the Huffington Post. In McCain's absence, the Senator is willing to make the scheduled debate a townhall meeting, a one-on-one interview with NewsHour's Jim Lehrer, or the combination of the two, the official said. Such a course of action could make life incredibly difficult for McCain, who has called for the suspension of the debate in light of the current economic crisis. Should he stay in Washington D.C. -- if a bailout is not completed by then -- and let Obama alone reach tens of millions of television viewers? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/25/obama-will-make-debate-a_n_129250.html ]
FINNS
Posted Friday, September 26, 2008 at 3:37 pm | Permalink
“Gallup Tracking 09/22 – 09/24 46 46 Tie
Rasmussen Tracking 09/22 – 09/24 49 46 Obama +3
I ask you, what is wrong with effing Obama?”
As you see Amigo , you got NO answer !
Just silence , and thus has it been from day one , an incapacity of Obama supporters to undrstand psephology , but then of those those who believe in elitist intellegentsia don’t find reality comforting anyway
Re #78 [ for those who don't care to link through and read the whole article],
McCain has no bloody idea what he is going on about.
I already responded to his question Ron. Way to ignore as you usually do. How are the sour grapes?
I wonder if McCain will try and ban short selling on his campaign
Ron (79)
I think most people would have interpreted it as a rhetorical question
I don’t think anyone knows what the political effects of any of this stuff will be just now. We are in totally uncharted waters at the moment. The electorate is very angry, but they haven’t decided yet at whom to direct their anger. That’s why the Congressional Repubs are running away from the Bush-Paulsen plan. They don’t want to be associated with it if the voters decide it’s all a giant swindle. The Dems are the majority in Congress so they will have to take responsibility, either for passing the plan, or for not passing it. They don’t know which alternative is worse. I don’t think McCain knows what he is doing, but at least he’s giving an impression of action, whereas Obama isn’t doing anything as far as I can see. Over the next week or two we will find out who has positioned themselves better.
One thing I have found about searching through a number of papers around the country and networks in the USA is the wide diversity of opinion.
You get strong Republican and Democrat papers and in betweens – thus if you support one side or the other fairly strongly there is a paper for you but, if your a swinging voter you get to see a variety of views. Unfortunately you dont get that in Australia.
That is the wonder of diversity in the media. And I get the feeling that the quality of political analysis is much higher than we often get in Australia.
Adam @ 85, I read one article this evening which says point blank that Pelosi has said the Democrats will NOT sign onto ANY deal period UNLESS both McCain and a majority of Republicans also support it. Dems are playing hardball on this and that way they can not be wedged.
The Wall St Journal is being quite scathing about McCain. They are backing the Paulsen plan and they don’t like the way McCain and the Congressional Repubs are trying to run away from it. But who’s to say what next week’s polls will show?
Julie, yes if I was Pelosi I’d do the same thing.
Actually Adam,
I think this is the defining moment of the campaign.
What impression of action? He said he was suspending his campaign and immediately going to Washington then, went and did TV interviews for the rest of the day and didn’t get to Washington until over 24 hours later! He’s a fraud, and has been called out on it.
Yes GG I agree. McCain is behind, and when you’re behind you have to take more risks. He took a big risk with Palin, and so far it has paid off. Now he is gambling again. Maybe he will crash and burn. Maybe he won’t. Maybe Obama’s bland platitudes won’t cut it either. I don’t claim to know what will happen.
Dario, if McCain can claim to have cut the deal that gets a package through Congress with bipartisan support, and make that claim stick, he will be a big winner, and Obama will be seen as Professor Waffle again.
He’s got very little chance of that. He’s on none of the committes and the Dems won’t let him run the show. They’re not stupid. The guy just seems totally unhinged.
Adam,
At the end of the day you stand or fall by what you believe.
McCain and the Repubs believe the market will ultimatley fix all.
Obama and Co believe that you need controls and regulations.
People are really peeved atm re the economic situation. But, I believe the US belief in markets is too inculcated to believe their will be a massive change of attitude.
Attitudes change over time, but not instantly.
GG: No, at the end of the day you stand or fall by what the voters decide about you. Obama ought to be 20% ahead after such a catastrophic policy failure by the incumbent administration as this represents. So why isn’t he?
Dario: It’s all about impressions. Maybe the Repubs are pretending to oppose the Paulsen so that they be “won over” by McCain and he gets all the credit. Who knows? You don’t, and nor do I.
Adam (96)
I wondered about that scenario myself. There’s not much they wouldn’t do to hang onto power.
Aam,
Umm, Umh, Umhe……….
And I remind you that at this point in 1976 Jimmy Carter *was* 20% ahead of the hapless bonehead Gerry Ford, who was carrying Watergate on his back, and in the end he won by just 2%. There’s lots of juice in this race yet.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. He’s black.
Dario (100)
Ditto
Oh yes, if Obama loses that will be the Dems’ excuse – it was all racism. Bollocks. Most Americans would be happy to elect a black president. If Colin Powell had run in 2000 he would have won in a canter.
Adam (102)
Two big statements in that lot. Any evidence to support them?
It doesn’t matter whether ‘most’ would, as long as there are large enough sections of the community that won’t it will be a factor against him. I’m not saying he won’t win, but it will make it harder. To argue the opposite is naive in the extreme.
Um, Dario, “most” is by defintion more than 50%. So yes it does matter.
Are the values at intrade of any predictive value?
I don’t know what intrade is.
Possum runs some stuff on it as well.
http://www.intrade.com/jsp/intrade/trading/t_index.jsp?selConID=409933
I am in the Yahoo USA poltics chat rooms – boy is it hot.
Um no, for starters its not compulsary voting in the US, and just because more than 50% of those that vote may not have a problem with it, that doesnt mean they will vote for him
http://www.mahalo.com/Obama_Race_Factor_Poll
Dario,
Where did this recent information come from?
Dario “I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. He’s black.”
Darn “Ditto”
Then yous & other Obama supporters were illjudged in supporting Obama in first place & giving th Republicans a chance to win
Where is th evidence to support this statement , Tell me which States being black huts Obama ???
(because Obama beeing black is HELPING him in Republican VA & NC wher there ar big black populations ! , I’m saying its not th colour of his skin thats th problem , but th colour of his politics)
TP, you’ll have to explain what all those numbers mean, but not now because it’s too late in the evening.
As I have said before Ron, I was originally behind Hillary
How are the sour grapes?
Read the link
Dario
Posted Friday, September 26, 2008 at 10:43 pm | Permalink
Where is th evidence to support this statement , Tell me which States being black huts Obama ???
Read the link
Well if you’d not been lazy in just reading headlines but read th main poll its talking of ELECTION day not now !
Your sour grapes is you can not explain why Obama is not leading by a landslide now , whereas I hav , he’s not supported by working familys traditional labor supporters
I am really puzzled about this $800B rescue plan from the USSR (United States Socialist Republic) because nobody asks the most obvious questions:
1. Where’s and how the money coming from?
2. How many cents in the $ of the “toxic asset” they are paying?
I’m glad to see that the Hillary fans here have acted so predictably. When Obama won, I commented that we would get endless comments that “Oh, you are so silly. If you only had chosen Hillary, we would have won easily. Why oh why don’t you liberals ever listen to the voice of reason?” Repeated ad nauseum like a mantra.
George W Bush beat that windbag, powder-puff, lazy slob Gore, who was a centrist. Kerry was also a pathetic, born to rule centrist and he lost to The Imbecile as well. Obama is up against a much more electable McCain. Gore or Kerry would have been slaughtered by McCain.
It’s time a few Billary supporters got over themselves.
Finns,
Something must be done.
This is somehing.
Therefore, it must be done!
spoken like a typical precous elitist intellegentsia , whose phoney candidate SHOULD be winning by a landslide and isn’t because he’s not left policys so working familys don’t support him
And the difference is?
I just did. You haven’t explained anything, as usual. Back to your fantasyland Ron.
Amigo FINNS
US markets in financial ruins , democrats hav majority…why are they not passing there own legislation…could it be Obama’s presidential interests ar greater than US economys ?
I know that Sarah Palin just loves me.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/hunters-dont-kill-finns/2008/09/25/1222217427624.html
You seem to be excluding the thousands of African-American working families who supported Obama during the primaries, and who are keeping him ahead of McCain on the national vote.
You don’t need to win in a landslide, all you need is 270 electoral college votes.
I’d also point out that the Republican base is comprised of the wall street executives who are almost completely responsible for the current melt down in the U.S., and thus the world, economies. What exactly does McCain know about economics? He even said during the Republican primary that it isn’t his strength.
Because if the Democrats pass legislation that Bush disagrees with he will veto it.
The U.S. political system is a lot different to ours.
ShowsOn
you wrote a long post but avoided th question WHY Obama is not leading by a landslide given Bush & Republicans ar on th nose and Wall Street collapse
ShowsOn
another post this time on economic avoiding th question
Ron
“US markets in financial ruins , democrats hav majority…why are they not passing there own legislation…could it be Obama’s presidential interests ar greater than US economys ?”
ShowsOn
“Because if the Democrats pass legislation that Bush disagrees with he will veto it. The U.S. political system is a lot different to ours.”
Ron
so what , then bush & Republicans can be blamed , read th proposed Bill
‘The proposed bill, largely crafted by Democrats with only modest Republican input, would also likely have included caps on the pay of executives of firms that take federal assistance, mortgage relief for families facing foreclosure, equity stakes for taxpayers and an oversight board to hold the Treasury secretary accountable, reports BS News correspondent Bob Orr. ‘
Can someone prove that Hillary would be further ahead than Obama? No. It is a matter of faith, like a religion. Just keep repeating your mantra and it will become true for you. It proves NOTHING.
Your faith is very strong. Your faith was also very strong when you ignored all possible evidence that Hillary was going to LOSE to Obama, which she did. WE WERE RIGHT.
As a great man said;
I think Nietzsche might have been a prophet.
Oh so sorry, I didn’t realise that it is my job to write things that you agree with! But here are some of my speculation, perhaps the polls are close because:
Because Obama is relatively young.
Because Obama is an African-American, and there has never been a non-white President.
Because some people think they should stick with Republicans because of national security issues.
Some people want Sarah Palin to be Vice President
Some people think John McCain still believes everything he believed in in the year 2000.
However, just because the polls are close now doesn’t mean the election will end that way on November 4th. A stuff up or two by either side (like McCain saying he would suspend his campaign when he hasn’t) could kill off their chance at victory.
Diog, if Obama is such a great candidate, why then he is not as amigo Ronnie has stated:
Please Explain.
Its alright diogenes , yous “elitist liberals” (your admission) live with different cultural attitudes & policy priorities to 90% of aussies so just keep telling yourselves your selection will win in a landslide
So what are you complaining about? Why don’t you just wait for this largely Democrat bill to be passed. Then see if Bush dares to veto it.
You should stick to making your own points rather than just cut and pasting things other people have written.
What are you talking about!? The current Federal Government, and every state and territory excluding W.A. currently has a Labor government, which are ideologically much closer to the Democratic Party than the Republican party. If John McCain was an Australian politician he would be in the Liberal party.
I have no idea how you come up with this “90%” figure, I figure you just made it up because you haven’t provided any evidence for it. “Elitist liberals” is simply a derogatory term invented by the Republican party to win elections. They even campaigned against Clinton as an elitist, even though he was a centrist. If you fall for that sort of rubbish you’ll fall for anything.
ShowsOn
I copied what was in th proposed Bill per CBS What you did NOT like is was th content of th Bill was drafted by DEMOCTATS and that DEMOCRATS hav th Congress majority & could pass pass it if they wished
so I said to YOUR point in #125
“Because if the Democrats pass legislation that Bush disagrees with he will veto it.
The U.S. political system is a lot different to ours.”
I replied “why do NOT th Democrats enact it ?”
You hav so far been unable to give an answer !
Wall St drops 130 pts the first 2 minutes and dropping
Try to type slower, there are so many errors in this that it is hard to understand exactly what you are saying.
You are completely ignoring the fact that they don’t have disciplined parties in the U.S. Just because a few senior democrats wrote most of the legislation doesn’t mean ALL democrats will vote for it.
I still have no idea if you think it is good or bad that the Democrats are mainly responsible for writing this legislation. Nor do I have any idea what this has to do with Obama.
Of course McCain has hardly anything to do with any of this, because he knows bugger all about economics, and admitted it earlier this year.
Finns
See 129
I would also add that McCain is as far from being a Repug as is possible so the Repug disaster taints him less than any other Repug candidate.
If anyone is wondering why McCain is still hiding Yup Yup, just watch this video of Couric interviewing her. It’s just pathetic that such a stool-pigeon could be a heartbeat from being POTUS. She’s a clown. (But at least she’s not a witch because we have seen her beong protected from witches also on youtube)
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/
If it was the year 2000 I’d agree with you, but since then he has changed most of his positions on major issues.
He was against the Bush tax cut plan in 2000, but now he is for it. He didn’t think a surge in Iraq would work in early 2003, but now he goes around saying he was his idea. He was for comprehensive immigration reform last year, but now he says he opposed it because the Republican base is opposed to it.
If John McCain version year 2000 was running in this election HE would be ahead in the polls. But the fact he has flopped around to get the nomination means he is struggling against a first term Senator.
Diog,
Exactly, exactly, exactly, so Obama should be 30pts in front!!!!!!! Not -
GW/Battleground Tracking 09/21 – 09/25 1000 LV 46 48 McCain +2
Gallup Tracking 09/22 – 09/24 2731 RV 46 46 Tie
Rasmussen Tracking 09/22 – 09/24 3000 LV 49 46 Obama +3
Please explain.
“The proposed bill, largely crafted by Democrats with only modest Republican input”
Democrats hav majority in congress to pass what they want , again you’ve avoided puting responsibility with them If Republicans were in majority you would be criticising them Thats double standards Th politcand there hav failed in this crisis
(yes I support th legislation in principal)
You also failed to answer why Obama isn’t leading in a landslide , last 4 of your points would not be supported by most Democrats
you also misstated ‘elitists liberals’ , they ar here on this site as well as in US They do not share egaltarian oz cultural attitudes nor key ‘left’ policy priorites at all , and your suggestion otherwise is nonsense
The election is 6 weeks away.
I doubt everyone has made up their minds yet. The polls could be close now, but either candidate could still win comfortably (by 50+ E.C. votes) on election day.
Finns
VPs don’t make any difference to voting. We’re up by 3.5% nationally on RCP and we’re winning by EVERY measure.
I love a good rant and Bill O’Reilly goes berserk about the crash on this piece and attacks right-wing talk radio as liars, and has a few home truths for the Dems as well. Bill’s not going to be happy if there isn’t a bail-out.
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=182023
Oh rubbish. Palin is a clown Republican, but they elected Bush twice ffs. Being a clown Republican doesn’t make you unelectable… it adds votes!
Adam 102
“Most Americans would be happy to elect a black president.”
I’m sure most Americans would be happy to elect an honest, sane, competent president who used his powers for the national interest. Yet they almost elected Dubbya in 2000, and did elect him in 2004. Go figure. Who they elect is who they elect, however much you might wish for your side to win.
Rasmussen have Obama 50/45 today – I had the feeling that this poll was usually the lower one for Obama.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Finns
I should also add that Americans are cretins and can easily be persuaded to vote their country into becoming a septic tank. Democracy sucks when you have a nation whose education system allows you to graduate if you know which end of a pencil to hold.
OH FFS! You are applying Australian standards of party discipline (where everyone in the same party 99% of the time votes the same) to the U.S. system. It just doesn’t work like that. They have no party discipline, they vote however way they want.
What!? So you are criticisng an American politician because he doesn’t have Australian cultural values? Um, doesn’t that criticism apply equally to McCain and Obama? What exactly are these Australian cultural values, and why should American politicians adopt them?
When Republicans call Democrats elitist liberals it is because they support things like equal rights for gays, ethnic and religious minorities, low paid workers, trade unionists and indigenous Americans (Native American Indians).
What of those cultural values do you oppose? Which of those values does our current Federal government oppose?
FINNS
#139
Please explain.
Amigo you ask , and you ask , and you ask….for 6 month you hav asked …but alas an answer of either phoney or flawed non key ‘left’ policys candidate shall not come from there keyboard lips
Well there you go. Maybe that will shut Ron up a bit but somehow I doubt it.
No 146
Outrageous Diogenes. You obviously know very little about Americans.
and
“Rasmussen Markets data shows Obama as the clear favorite and currently gives the Democrat a 56.3 % chance of victory”
This from the Rasmussen release is quite telling:
Given the massive lead in voter registration that the Democrats have, that spells severe problems for McCain
Which coincidentally matches the current intrade price for Obama.
ShowOn
Its time for you to get off th fence about “elitist”
Obama talking about millions of working familys in Pennsyvania & other mid west towns
And he is talking ABOUT them BEHIND there back 3,000 kilometres away to an AFFLUENT fund raisers in far off San Francisco on 5/4/08 , and reported in ALL credible US media
“And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations”
No context can hide this is “elitist’ , a poor cultural attitude of other citizens for whom you claim you wish to be elected to represent ONLY an “elitist” would deny these snobby condecending words were not “elitist”
Interesting. About 12% of Republicans voted for Clinton in 1992, and about 15% in 1996.
Ron
If Obama only appeals to elitist liberal, how come more than 50% of the US is voting for him? They must have a hell of a lot of elitists over there.
GP
By almost every measure, the US has the most ignorant population of any Western country. Only 13% believe that evolution is the sole reason we are here. 55% believe in God and creationism. You just can’t buy ignorance like that in any country other than the US. No country comes close.
Dario (152) – or anyone else who knows (Juliem?):
What are the actual voter registration figures for the two parties at present?
Also, what, if any, data is available on the registartion of blacks compared to previous elections?
LOL! After you…
Yes, Obama is overwhelmingly leading in the low income voting demographics, particularly African-Americans and hispanics. So, what’s your point?
Well those African-Americans and Hispanics (who tend to be religious) don’t seem to care about what he said. The fact he didn’t use weasel words like the current president probably worked in his favour.
But WTF does this have to do with “egaltarian (sic) oz cultural attitudes” (hint: I’m quoting you)? You attack Obama as a liberal elitist, and then have a go at him for attacking people who are anti-immigrant and anti-trade.
Are you an anti-immigrant protectionist? Did he offend your anti-immigrant sensibilities?
registration
The reason he is leading is because he is starting to eat away at McCain’s lead with white middle-class voters. I guess they are the new elites.
Plus most Americans think humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time, angels are real, and that there is a literal placed called “hell”.
ShowsOn
another question (my #154) you avoid…you don’t like hard questions , it was quite simple , did you see anything wrong in Obama’s remarks I quoted in #154
Last I checked the Dems were 11 million registered voters ahead… forget the totals but will see if I can find a link
Listening in to Yahoo US politics chat rooms the main topics of heated discussion was if Palin should be home with the kids and how that reflected on her family values.
Thanks Dario
I would also be interested in what percentage of the registered voters actually vote.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/neuharth/2004-01-22-neuharth_x.htm
Why should I have to respond to your questions? It isn’t like you have tried in the slightest way to respond to any of the points I have made in my last 6 posts.
I’ll answer your question after you can explain what Obama said has anything whatsoever to do with “egaltarian (sic) oz cultural attitudes”.
To help you on your way, I think one important “egaltarian (sic) oz cultural attitude” is something called FREEDOM OF SPEECH. I think Obama was using his right to free speech. So he was expressing a cultural value that all liberal democratic countries share.
I also note that you haven’t explained how or why Obama is wrong, instead you have just attacked him as a person by calling him a “liberal elite” (a term you haven’t even defined). I consider ad hominem arguments ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem ) completely useless and unconvincing irrespective of how many times you repeat them.
LOL! Letterman complains that McCain skipped his show because he had to go to Washington. But then he found out that McCain actually stayed in New York City, and didn’t leave for Washington until the morning after he was meant to appear on Letterman’s show.
What a clown, McCain’s “campaign suspension” is a joke.
Dario
That’s a huge difference. Do you think it is likely to even up a bit before polling day?
I won’t pretend to know the minds of Americans other than those I have met, who have generally been pleasant though I suspect unrepresentative because they were better educated than average. But I don’t think education is the (main) problem with the US today. I think its their national psyche. I think they are a nation that is outwardly optimistic but inwardly live in fear. That is why they wrap themselves up in reassuring, simplistic religeons and easily fall for the childish fear campaigns that the republicans have given them in recent years. They have changed from moral leaders to self interested neurotics. If the objective of terrorists is to win a struggle through instilling enough fear in their opponents to prevent sensible act, then Bin Laden defeated them in 2001.
So I won’t presume they will vote for Obama, an imperfect but intelligent man who can change them away from the path to further stagnation. They may prefer McCain, a once decent old man who is in decline with old ideas that have already proven to fail, and incapable of understanding their economy, much less fix it. But for their sake, and ours, I hope they don’t. If they can’t see it after Iraq, Katrina, and having $800 billion of their own money thrown away to save a bunch of con men masquerading as financial managers, then nothing will save them from the slide to a secondary power.
It seems pointless to try to convince some posters here that McCain is a disaster waiting to continue. Most right wingers seem incapable of admitting they’re wrong, no matter what their side of politics does. I woudl describe myself as centreist, which puts me to the left of the majority in todays politics. I can still admit though, that some left/labour/democrat politicans or governemtns don’t deserve election – like Latham or NSW Labour. But I rarely see the same honesty reciprocated, so such discusion seem pointless.
Poss I think I’ll stay on your elitist tree and hope in November that average Americans realise that electing an idiot like themselves is not a good idea.
Democrats always lead on registrations, it is getting them out to vote which is the hard part.
http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/voting/004986.html
In 2004 there was a voter turnout of 64% of the voting age population, while approximately 72% was registered to vote. So that works out to about 89% of registered voters actually turning out to vote.
My first link with registration numbers was from 2004 so it’s probably changed a fair bit since then…
GG
What is FINNS and I to do with either rusted on believersor or elitist liberals believers , we ask , and ask , and they can not give straight answers , perhaps th questions ar too difficult
#130 WHY Obama is not leading by a landslide given Bush & Republicans ar on th nose and Wall Street collapse
#122 “US markets in financial ruins , democrats hav majority…why are they not passing there own Bailout legislation ? (then Bush & Republicans can be blamed) …could it be Obama’s presidential interests ar greater than US economys ?”
#154 Ar Obama’s words on 5/4/08 snoby condecending “elitist ?
“And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations”
SHOWSON , th fact you can not simply say these ar snoby condecending elitist words demonstates you ar either an “elitist” also and afraid of ” outing”or ar incapable of even saying Obama on this occasion was 100% wrong….th former is more likely
addition “liberal”
Diogenes (156)
I have a university education, am not in any way religious and I think the theory of evolution (that’s what it is – a theory) has enormous problems. So I don’t share your view that the American people are necessarily ignorant because large numbers of them don’t accept it as a proven fact.
I do find it amazing however that in this day and age more than 50% of them believe that God is a proven fact.
Correction… I think those census.gov figures above are wrong.
Here is a better link which had voter registration at 65.9% of the VAP in 2004, and an actual turnout of 58.3% of the VAP. So that’s still around 88% of registered voters turning out to vote.
http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/voting/cps2004/tab01.xls
So your argument is that Obama is an elitist because he says things that are elitist? Well, there’s a term for this, it’s called a circular argument: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
I don’t find circular arguments convincing, they lack a) logic b) content
I hope you realise that if something ever replaces the Theory of Evolution, it will be another scientific Theory. If your problem is with the fact it is a Theory, that means you shouldn’t believe anything in science at all, because science only produces theories. You simply aren’t using the term “theory” in its scientific sense, you seem to assume that it means that it is opposed to “practice” (i.e. how things happen in the actual world), well, that’s exactly what scientific theories seek to explain.
Science doesn’t produce “facts”, it produces theories, which are “provisional truths” (the best explanation of truth given currently available evidence). Science does not produce “absolute truths” that never change irrespective of evidence.
I find it amazing that you don’t accept evolution even though it is supported by thousands of examples of evolution from the fossil record to DNA analysis. It is supported by an overwhelming amount of evidence, which is why it is the central unifying theory of all biology.
Obama
“And it’s not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations”
Either you ar comfortable with Obama’s words on 5/4/08 describing millions of working familys in Pennsyvania & other mid west towns…OR you ar not …you refuse to say so , implying you reely do agree with Obama but ar uncomfortable admitting it
Biggest problem for “elitists” is outing themselves
As for Evolution , your argument is typical athiest dogma for which athiests can not alnswer all questions neither can religion (which is based on faith)
Well, why is Obama leading in most mid-western states!?
One of your biggest problems is that you attack people, instead of arguments. I think this is because you struggle to make arguments that are coherent and concise.
The Theory of Evolution has nothing to do with atheism. Ken Miller, one of the most famous evolutionary biologists still working, is a strict Catholic:
http://www.amazon.com/Only-Theory-Evolution-Battle-Americas/dp/067001883X/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1222441775&sr=8-1
Darn
The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. The main reason people have problems with it is that they haven’t looked at the science. There are lots of good books on evolution such as Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters by Prothero, or The Ancestor’s Tale by Dawkins.
I think it’s because science education in high schools has been declining over the last 10 – 15 years. I teach in the humanities at university and occasionally refer to evolutionary explanations for certain psychological phenomena. Sadly most of my students find this extremely difficult to understand because they either didn’t do any science in years 11 and 12, or didn’t understand evolution when it was taught so superficially at high school.
Ron
Atheists/science can answer about 99% of questions. Religion can answer none because it’s based on faith. As I said before “A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything. “
Seems McCain has a habit of pulling this kind of stunt.
McCain resurrects an old stunt
The candidate has used his ‘country-first’ rhetoric before. But will the Great Man act turn into a self-parody?
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-welch26-2008sep26,0,5641824.story
No surprise, McCain heading for the airport now to go to the debate. Nothing but a dumb stunt.
LOL! What a clown. I hope Obama raises his attempted evasion during the debate itself.
ShowsON
A simple yes or no to my #177 post & 6 earlier posts asking same , was simply needed
We know know your avoidance is because you ar an “elitist liberal” , deal with it
I might add now that you’ve burned your bridges for an hour , is that a non elitist Labor supporter would simply say I don’t agree with Obama’s comment , its non Labor language & “elitist” but I’m still going to sort Obama in preference to a Republican
Diogenes
an admitted “liberal elitist” , do not like cultural attitudes of elitists on other citizens As to atheism , you ar also dogmatic & dismissive of people who believe in religion
My view is both science & religion hav not got all answers , so I respect people of genuine religous faith , th issues & questions complex
So rather than forming a coherent argument, now you are creating an ad hominem attack against ME as well as Obama. Stop it, you’re making me laugh.
Great. Does this mean you’ll start working on an argument now? Or are you just going to keep attacking the person, rather than their arguments?
So if we go back to Obama’s quote, that means you are endorsing prejudicial treatment of immigrants (bring back the White Australia policy?), reduced gun control, and you are opposed to free trade. OK, thank you for admitting that, but I think all those policies are nonsense.
I respect people to pursue any religion or other system belief that they want. That is anyone’s liberal democratic right.
However I am opposed to religion, faith, intelligent design, astrology, or homeopathy being taught to students in a science class room and told it is all supported by evidence, logic, and thus scientific.
Ron
That’s partly true. I am dismissive of the arguments of people who believe in religion. I am also dismissive of the arguments of people who deny the Holocaust. I happen to think they are wrong. While I think they are fundamentally wrong about an important topic, I certainly respect them as people still, after all my wife and daughter are both religious. I have high hopes for my son though. Many of the best ‘bludgers are religious. They have a lot of qualities that I admire greatly.
It’s about time McCain got his sh!t together. I used to like the guy but he’s really dropped in my elitist liberal opinion, which probably explains why he’s still going OK in the polls.
McCain will go to debate
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13970.html
I liked McCain circa 2000, but it seems he sold out all his major principles to win the nomination.
Sad really, now he is just a parody of his former self. I think the U.S. would be in better shape now if McCain won instead of Bush.
Hahahahahaha now the McCain camp has jumped the gun and accidentally run ads declaring that he won the debate, a day early! So much for a ’suspended’ campaign! MCCAIN IS A TOTAL FRAUD
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/09/mccain_wins_debate.html
Well he had suspended the suspendable ads, but the unsuspendable ads weren’t suspended so they didn’t face suspension.
A conservative columnist from the National Review says Palin is so bad at interviews that she should pull out. They really are cringe-inducing.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiMDhjYTU1NmI5Y2MwZjg2MWNiMWMyYTUxZDkwNTE=#more
McCain’s next ten campaign stunts, according to Slate.com
http://www.slate.com/id/2200927/
1. Returns to Vietnam and jails himself.
2. Offers the post of “vice vice president” to Warren Buffett.
3. Challenges Obama to suspend campaign so they both can go and personally drill for oil offshore.
4. Learns to use computer.
5. Does bombing run over Taliban-controlled tribal areas of Pakistan.
6. Offers to forgo salary, sell one house.
7. Sex-change operation.
8. Suspends campaign until Nov. 4, offers to start being president right now.
9. Sells Alaska to Russia for $700 billion.
10. Pledges to serve only one term. OK, half a term.
Obama now up by FIVE in Virginia on the latest Rasmussen! McCain is falling apart…
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/virginia/election_2008_virginia_presidential_election
This gimmick of McCain was seen through immediately and showed a desperate man. The moment he stalled was the moment Intrade went straight up for Obama.
But worse for McCain as it appears he had a hand in ruining the bail out package and now No.3 in the run, this omniscient victory.
Not only is his VP starting to fade into shallowness he too is starting to look like a joke.
I guess it is fitting that the immoral activity of Wall street greed culminates simultaneously with the immoral election campaign of the Republicans – they both sit grinning at each other – different sides of the same coin.
Even worse for McCain, I reckon a lot of the debate will be on the economy, a topic he generally sucks at. So I guess he will pull out some jargon and buzz words, but if more time is spent on that topic, rather than say national security, then it will just make Obama look even better. Obama leads McCain on “better for the economy” by 10 – 15%.
This week just killed off any chance of Bush having any positive legacy whatsoever. I mean some people say that it may turn out to be Iraq in 10 years time, but he will be remembered as the President who did basically nothing until the financial crisis reached the point when banks just didn’t want to lend each other any money. Only THEN he comes out saying that the entire economy is at risk. What has he been doing for the past year!?
Socrates @ 144,
Catching up on overnight chatter here. Glad to see that through the white noise
that someone posted something intelligent 
….
GOOD on you, you are the only one that I can recall in days, if not weeks, that has noted this point
Darn @ 157, don’t know but will look for an answer between now and when the debate starts. After the debate, it is full on with the GF the rest of the afternoon …..
Dario, glad to see those Virginia numbers. If memory serves from the Dems convention, their governor is a Democrat and quite popular too so that might continue to give Obama some “coattails” in Virginia …..
Unique campaigning story in the US State of Michigan where I am from. Note for those who aren’t aware – in the US, petrol/fuel = gas. What we call gas, I can’t remember what they call it, I never used it while living there so I don’t remember.
****
[ Obama gas? Detroit station swaps signs, lowers prices
By KELLY KOZLOWSKI • Free Press staff writer • September 25, 2008
Read Comments(153)Recommend(15)Print this page E-mail this article Share this article: Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Buzz up!
When it comes to campaigning for the presidency, sometimes a T-shirt and a pin just don't cut it. Sometimes you need a really big sign and a price cut on gas.
Whether or not either method guarantees a win remains to be seen, but Detroit Sunoco station owner Samir Bazzi and son, Nick, are giving both a shot.
Bazzi replaced his Sunoco sign with an Obama campaign sign five days ago and lowered gas prices to $3.49 per gallon. "Everything's down," Bazzi said. "We're trying to support people."
Bazzi is also selling Obama hats and T-shirts.
The owner of the station for the past seven years, Sammi said he has been a Democrat since he came to America from Lebanon in 1986.
“I supported Bill Clinton when I started voting and now I support Barack Obama. He is a good man who supports the poor people and looks out for those who have lost their homes and businesses.”
Bazzi said he plans to continue keeping the price of gasoline below those of his competitors and said if Obama wins the election in November he will throw a big party at the station, offering free food and drinks to his customers.
“Obama is a good man in the greatest country on earth and we need someone like him to lead us.”
"This is an Obama neighborhood," Nick Bazzi said, adding that sales have increased since the signage switch.
Many patrons voiced support as they filled up on fuel.
"It looks nice--real nice," said Eric Joye, 36, of Detroit. "That's free advertising. It just shows who he supports."
"I think it's wonderful," said Alma Raymond, 54, of Detroit. "He's going to get a lot of business, just like Obama's going to get a lot of votes. [Obama] is going to be our next president.”
Samir Bazzi echoed expectations of an Obama victory. “We support Obama they way he’s going to support us,” Bazzi said.
Phillip Young, 39, of Detroit called the gas station sign “unique.”
“It did get my attention when it first went up. With about 40 days and counting, I think everybody should come out and vote. Eight years is a long time, and it’s way past due.”
Nick Bazzi said the sign will stay up through Nov. 4. ]
Obama up by 4.2% nationally on RCP. Virginia goes blue. All the “Obama” states holding nicely (ie the Kerry states plus NM/CO/IA) with NH the most at risk. And Missouri enters the field as a strong contender as the next to flip.
McCain shown to be full of sh!t again by going to the debate when there is still no bail-out, largely because they’re still trying to explain it to the old man and Yup Yup. That could take some time.
Debate on ABC at 11am AEST.
Well McCain seems to be under pressure the past 24 hours with David Letterman attacking him for a second day over the non show on his program and Palin giving one of the worst interviews I’ve ever seen.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/25/letterman-attacks-mccain_n_129467.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WkCZV83Cp8
Possum,
You ought to especially enjoy this one
…. lots of nice bar graphs and charts 
…. another source of data on the US elections and numbers registered vs. turnout.
http://www.census.gov/prod/2006pubs/p20-556.pdf
Diogenes @ 201,
I will be SO happy if Missouri goes, oh my goodness …… I’m the oldest of 4 children and between mother, father and 4 kids only one left the fold and is a Republican. She and her family (spouse also a Republican) live in Missouri ….. If Missouri goes AND Obama wins, she is going to hear about it
……
Since when have the opinions of late night hosts like Letterman ever meant a hill of beans?
Looks like a lot of the Obamaphiles here have swallowed the left wing media narrative hook, line, sinker and fishing reel.
GG loved the ad of yours in the paper.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/images/26Sep_Friday_WSJ.JPG
The House rollcall on the Economic Stimulus Bill.
http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2008/09/26/1919254-house-roll-call-on-economic-stimulus-bill
as my canadian friend said in an email yesterday
McCain looks like an evil chipmunk and sounds like an evil chipmunk and speaks like a an evil chipmunk.
So if the good ole us of a can elect a moron then i suppose even a chipmunk is a better option
as ive said all along (post hill that is) barry is goin to washington
(McCain will go back to storing more nuts for winter in his cheeks)
I told you so
……
Since late night TV hosts started showing the blatant hypocrisy of the McCain campaign.
McCain stayed in New York City, even though he told Letterman that it was urgent that he fly to Washington.
We also know that McCain’s campaign suspension was a disaster, because he didn’t actually suspend his campaign! It seems that he tested the waters, and when he realised it wasn’t focus grouping well, he bailed on his own bail out.
Wall St to GOP -Drop Dead.
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/9/26/wall-street-to-gop-drop-dead.html
Funniest Palin video ever!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8__aXxXPVc
She can’t think, she just speaks in a meaningless jargon language. Maybe it is Alaskian?
Ted Kennedy Hospitalized
(at this point, seems not to be a grave situation)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/26/ted-kennedy-hospitalized_n_129737.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/26/ex-adviser-mccain-blinked_n_129611.html
Shows on @ 212:
I have to say that the commentators in the US don’t mince words do they. She will get torn apart in the debate with Biden. I was trying to find an Aussie politician that imitates Palin and I have to say that I can’t think of one.
Whoever is coaching her in her answers has a lot of work to do. So much stupidity, so little time.
Can you imagine Palin up against Julia Gillard. ?
I predicted that Palin was going to be dismal. A certain commentator, who I won’t name, said what a great camapigner she would be. She needs to be hidden in an attic like the monstrously deformed family secret of the past.
The polls are continuing to go Obama’s way. I think we know now what effect the economic meltdown is having on each candidate.
Here’s a funny cartoon that is doing the rounds.
http://www.joyoftech.com/joyoftech/joyimages/1155.gif
The only thing that comes close to that clip is Danna Vale giving some absolutely terrible answers in Question Time when she was minister for veterans affairs. Howard dumped her 6 months later.
[Can you imagine Palin up against Julia Gillard. ?] LOL! Gillard knows the meaning of different words AND the right context to use them in. It seems that Palin knows neither.
Check out this video. Scroll to the 6m30s mark.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjkCrfylq-E
At that point of the show’s taping, Letterman finds out that McCain skipped his show NOT to fly to Washington as he said, but to appear on the CBS News show with Kati Couric! He then stayed in NYC and didn’t fly to Washington until early the next morning!
They literally cut to the live news feed showing McCain having his make up done in the CBS News studio, even though he had told Letterman that he had to rush back to Washington to help fix the economy. (Of course Letterman jokes that after being on Kati Couric’s show he went on CBS’ cooking show).
She has her own unique nonsense speak instead.
OMG …. shades of Nixon all over again, McCain looks so fake, phoney, uptight ….. Obama looks organized and presidential ….
First question on the economy and Obama won a random coin toss so gets to answer first
McCain speaking to the moderator and NOT looking into the camera as if he were speaking to the people which he is ……. BIG boo-boo ……
McCain is looking off screen at Jim Lehrer, whereas Obama looked straight down the barrel of the camera lens during the opening addresses.
Yes what you said!
WHOAH ….. McCain tells another lie ….. “people will be held accountable in my administration (vis a vis the economy)” …… HUH? …….
He just said that the economy has fundamental problems, even though last week he said it was fundamentally sound!
He’s flip flopping again.
What!? They need to get spending in control, even though they are just about to buy $700 billion worth of credit from Japan and China to buy bad debt from banks!
So does this mean McCain is going to vote against the bail out deal?
Pinged Obama on earmark spending
I think he told Jim Lehrer that he “hoped he could vote for the plan” but don’t think he came outright and said yes. However, per Nancy Pelosi, the Dems will not vote for the plan at all UNLESS McCain and a majority of the Republicans sign on first.
Yeah, Obama should’ve mentioned that Palin supported the bridge to nowhere before opposing it.
Now McCain tells the truth – “I didn’t win Miss Congeniality in the US Senate”
Everyone expects Obama to win the debates, so all McCain has to do is hold his ground. He’s doing that so far.
ShowsOn, no real reason why he should, this debate is between the two of them and if he brings Palin’s name up it isn’t a good look. McCain has enough dirty linen of his own, he need not bring up Palin’s dirty linen as well
…..
When was it decided that this debate would be about domestic issues?
Adam
I thought this one was agreed to be on foreign affairs. The second one is free-wheeling and the third one is on domestic affairs.
When the U.S. economy started completely tanking.
No, there was an agreement that this debate would be on security issues
At the beginning of the show, Jim said that the current economic situation because it was a world wide phenomenon (sp?) fell under the broad umbrella of national security …..
……..
Adam, I sense you are a little edgy this morning
Adam
I disagree about the debate though. All Obama needs to do is get a draw. He’s winning at the moment with the momentum. And Yup Yup’s debate is on in a week’s time. How do you think she’ll go? Seen the interview with Couric?
Do you honestly think either candidate wants to talk about Iraq etc after what has just happened over the last week?
Wouldn’t that be the perfect way for them to show that they are completely out to touch?
Obama talking about rebuilding infrastructure, making education affordable ….. where have we heard that before? Come on down to QT, Obama, we’ll give you a seat of honor on the Speakers right hand side
I’ve got to agree with Adam on this one. McCain has been shafted by the change in topic. There’s going to be a lot of complaining from his campaign.
Julie, I’m very relaxed thanks.
Diogenes, it’s a well-known rule of debates that the front-runner has more at risk. Obama’s whole reputation is based on his rhetorical skills. (Since he hasn’t actually done anything.) Obama needs to win big to gain any benefit. All McCain needs is a draw, and I think so far he’s getting that.
Who’s Yup Yup?
I presume he agreed to the change.
Yup Yup is Palin. That was the answer she gave when she was asked if she was ready to be President.
This way he gets the national security debate closer to election day. That will be to his advantage.
I don’t think that makes. McCain has to demonstrate that he can understand economic issues as well as national security issues.
This is the national security debate.
Lehrer opened saying that this is the debate on security and foreign affairs. THIS IS IT!
Again, expectations for Palin will be very low, so unless she totally f*cks up it won’t matter much.
No, no change in debate topic. Jim Lehrer said at the beginning that the debate was going to be on foreign policy and national security and because the global economic situation fell in the area of national security (albeit “loosely”) that he would ask questions on that area.
Is anyone running the “worm” thingy that we saw in our last fed election?
In that case McCain is being robbed.
I agree, it would only kill of McCain’s chances of becoming President.
So are you saying he should’ve stayed in Washington?
Write a complaint to the independent Presidential debates commission:
http://www.debates.org/
Adam
Yep. He’s being robbed. It’s pretty poor really.
Oh, here we go … lessons of Vietnam vs. lessons of Iraq
…..
ShowsOn, I don’t respond to childish sarcasm (except sometimes).
McCain claiming a la Bush that we will “win” in Iraq and come home with honor ….. Bush’s 3rd term I say ……
He’s quite right.
Doesn’t this count as a response?
I like how the aim of creating a “democracy in Iraq” has turned into trying to create a “fledgling democracy”. It seems that the easiest way to make Iraq look good is to redefine the word “democracy” so that it includes political parties completely divided on sectarian lines.
This is the closest I could find to a worm:
http://mediacurves.com/
Independents are breaking to Obama over every issue so far.
ShowsOn, that was my comment ….. Adam isn’t that left of center
[ or if he is, I haven't seen it yet this morning 
]
cheers
Pinged Obama on not meeting Petraeus or going to Iraq. Obama contradicting himself on the Surge.
Possum, that URL won’t load ….. ??
Juliem – it seems it just crashed. Has been working for the last 20 minutes
Duh! CNN has the worm!
Obama’s problem is that no matter how “right” he is about Iraq on an intellectual level, he puts himself in the position of not supporting the troops in Iraq, which will cost him bigtime in the key demographics.
Possum, if you are watching on CNN PLEASE give as much running commentary with the worm as possible as I am watching this via the TV chip in my computer therefore I only have free to air channels, I’m watching on the ABC. We’ve got the large TV and cable on pregame for the GF ….. thanks
…..
This is a CNN studio audience working the worm? Who chose the audience?
The independents on the CNN worm are breaking to Obama over National Security in what looks like 2 to 1 with the CNN worm
Can do juliem
Adam @ 274, thanks for that
…. I am gathering from your comment that the audience that you are looking at is voting for Obama? 
……
McCain is getting slightly smaller peaks with independents than Obama, and over the full spectrum of his answers is getting what looks to be about half the Independent approval that Obama is getting on Nat Sec issues
SNIP: Defamatory comment deleted – The Management.
Possum, you are a legend, keep it up
……
This Obama answer is a flat worm, but they jumped over the “alienating the local population in Afghanistan”
Obama is getting murdered on foreign policy.
McCain’s screwed then.
The economic events of the past week will just help Obama in general. It just emphasises that the U.S. needs a clean break on so many different issues. What better way to do that than to elect a (relatively) young African-American for the first time? The whole thrust of the issues and mood is just working towards Obama’s favour. Maybe it will change over the next month, but I doubt it.
McCain talks about his record – slowly builds but can’t peak. Audience hesitancy… not good news for McCain on his strong suite. Jumps 15% over Kosovo remarks, flattens over Somalia, mentions the word “record” and down she goes to a nuetral flatline
Albert Ross, I loathe Nazi architecture, I post here under my real name, and I know some good lawyers. So watch your step.
GP @ 282, in your book perhaps, but the worm doesn’t lie mate
We’re a half hour behind in SA. 30 minutes in and I can’t imagine many Americans who haven’t fallen asleep yet. Both of these are pretty ordinary debaters.
Indies go negative on McCains answer – dont like using servicemen deaths as political props. Slowly moves up from initial negative reaction to be slightly positive
It all depends on who chose the audience. CNN has a broadly liberal audience. You can bet that if Fox News chose the audience, the worm would be behaving differently.
poss
is there signs of any fat ladies begining to warble and trill
ps obama comes across more statesmanlike whereas Mccain seems egotistic and a tad nasty
Obama is neutral on the bracelet thang, increases rapidly when he praises the troops, remains high on “taking eye off afghan”
No 286
The worm is stupid. As Howard knows, it often isn’t reflective of the election result.
It was reflective of the last result GP
Yes I agree, it’s a dull debate. Where is Al Gore when we need him?
McCain tanks, the worm goes south
Anyone appreciate the delicious historical irony of an American person of colour walking onto a stage at Ole Miss not pushing a broom but as a candidate for the presidency of the United States.
He comes to the door, he couln’t get in
All because of the color of his skin
What do you think about that, my frien’ ?
Interestingly, the Republicans reacted better to Obama than the Dems did to McCain.
McCains closing is about 10-15% above neutral and stable
The Indies live imposing sanctions on Iran
McCain: “We can’t allow a second holocaust, let’s make that clear.”
LOL! But the first one was so POPULAR!
Adam @ 289, likely that PBS chose the audience. PBS is like our ABC here BUT is more evenhanded than the ABC in Oz …… Jim Lehrer is from the PBS staff …..
Averaged 15-20% positive
I have to say that McCain is performing better than I expected.
wtf is the league of democracies that Mccain talks of??
McCain doing ok so far, but Obama probably ahead just. The change of topic at the start to the economy has definitely wrongfooted McCain, but given the situation in the US it’s hard to argue with the change.
Obama flatlining at about 5% positive, lists to 10% then 15% stable over Iran
Yes, sorry, I am watching on CNN but of course PBS is running the debates. But that’s OK, because PBS’s audience is even more elite and liberal than CNN’s.
Interestingly, Obama gets a more positive boost over Israel remarks than McCain did by about 2 to 1
No 300
Rubbish juliem. Our ABC is balanced.
Obama stable post Israel remark at about 20% positive, slightly higher than McCain
I have to say, Obama just comes across as a heap more Presidential than McCain. A lot more delivery to camera, and more confidence in his answers
No one seems to buy McCain on Iran/Israel, Indies going south over McCain digging at Obama. Worm asleep
McCain is doing as well as he needs to, given the general assumption that Obama is a better orator – in fact his whole reputation is as an orator. All McCain needs is an honourable draw, and I think he is getting that, whatever PBS’s audience think.
292,
Seems to me that the result was in sync with the worm – Kevin won mate
Generally flat for Obama – Indies like the word “diplomacy”. Work is running at about 15% positive, about twice the size of McCains last answer
Possum @ 297, that is good to know as that means there is yet some hope for my Republican sister in Missouri
……
On this answer – Indies and Democrats are giving the same size positive score to Obama…. interesting.
No 312
I agree Adam. Obama isn’t wiping the floor with McCain – at least on foreign policy.
The independents are probably worried that McCain will start another war with Iran.
GP @ 302, were your expectations that low?
Obama just smacked him
No 313
Howard lost the worm test in 2001 and 2004 and won both subsequent elections, julie.
McCain running between neutral and 5% positive
But I thought foreign policy is McCain’s strong suit (we know economics isn’t, he told us so himself). Shouldn’t McCain be wiping the floor during this debate?
The League of Democracies is McCain’s proposal to get around the China-Russia veto at the UN and the dominant appeasement bloc in NATO. I don’t think it’ll get off the ground, but it’s a noble ideal.
Now running stable at +10%
gp@317
why did i suspect that you and adam would agree LOL
Obama is making mccain look very ordinary indeed
maybe mccain should be the one pushing the broom
McCain speaks , audience laughs, worm goes nuetral to slight negative., now negative, now stable negative.
Audience doesnt like flustered McCain
I haven’t seen McCain flustered.
321, I wasn’t in Australia then, I didn’t know that.
Obama growing to 20+% postive and stable
Argumentative Adam – wasnt getting his way in convo
No 327
He wasn’t flustered, he was energised.
Obama stable at 20-25% positive through the whole answer.
This is his best Nat Sec prolonged reaction so far, best of both candidates
GP – whatever he was, audience didnt like it, including Repubs
I think one is allowed to be argumentative in a debate.
“I looked into his eyes and saw three things: a K a G and a B.” LOL
McCain started slightly negative, moved to nuetral, sitting on 0-5% positive, moves up to 10% on energy answer
Why isn’t McCain wearing a flag-pin? Obama has one. Where’s his patriotism?
I don’t think it was argumentative, it was kind of patronising. How many times has McCain said “The senator doesn’t understand…” “There’s a bit of naivete there…” “He doesn’t understand this issue…”
Obviously McCain’s game plan is to make Obama’s relative youth a hindrance, i.e. to connect it with inexperience.
He suspended his flag-pin until other people sort out the economic crisis.
Indies move up to 15% positive on including Ukraine and Georgia in Nato process. Drops slightly back when he gives his travelling tales. Overall an average of about 10-15% positive average across whole answer
Utterly unpresidential
Diogenes @ 338, Probably left it in Washington in his suspended campaign’s disorganized efforts to get out of town to Mississippi
How ungentlemanly of him, to draw attention to the fact that Obama has no qualifications whatever to be president.
I reckon most viewers will have switched off by now. The economy is what seems to be on their minds the most, and the foreign affairs stuff is just getting bogged down in details that the average viewer doesn’t have a clue about.
Obama flat on about 5% positive. Lifts up to 10% thereabouts on energy policy
I don’t think Obama’s lapel-pin is a flag, if you look it on full screen.
Indies like positive plans rather than when the candidates start blaming each other – surprise surprise
No, only a Harvard law degree. They come a dime a dozen.
But it isn’t like executive experience helped the guy who is currently President. He’s managed to screw up basically anything on any policy area you care to name.
What a boring debate so far. For a brilliant orator, Obama is a lousy debater. For a lousy orator, McCain is not a bad debater.
McCain: “Offshore drilling is a bridge.”
Yeah, and the internet is a series of tubes.
ROFL at the idea that a Harvard law degree is a qualification to be president.
Indies like offshore drilling – stable 5-10% positive. Indies like storing nuclear waste safely. Smart people those indies.. like apple pie too.
No 349
A Harvard Law degree is no mean feat, but frankly it’s not enough to be President.
Agrees with Finns, it’s a flat debate, both are being careful to be polite.
Alan Dershowitz for President!
Whenever McCain mentions walking across the isle – it kills anypositive momentum he was building. Takes him a few sentences before it start building again. The indies like what happens when he talks about what he did when he reached across the isle, but the cliche itself takes a smallish nick out of him, or kicks his momentum around about 2 times out of three. Weird
Overall about 10% postive as an average across the whole answer
It’s more relevant than a qualification from a Naval academy!
No, you still need 270 electoral college votes.
Um, no it’s not.
Only someone who knows nothing about the US could make a statement like #358
Adam
It’s a US flag on my TV. I think these two guys would like each other if they weren’t pitted as enemies. God, this is getting even worse. Howie and Rudd’s had more life.
Indies like this answer. 20% positive, dips slightly over them terrorists, goes bacl to 20% with a bit of downside variability of a few percent, slowly drops to ten and stays stable until cooperation is mentioned, jumps to 20% and stays there with “Americas Standing” remarks, get’s up to 25% positive.
I didn’t realise the U.S. was a military dictatorship.
obama mentioned the shining beacon on the hill!
getting back respect for the usa!
Mccain blathers!
game set match
McCain attacks Obama, Indies go negative 5%, then 10%, “fragile sacrifices” lift it back to negative 5%, Petraues quote moves back to nuetral.
It’s a country which reveres its armed forces, and detests lawyers. Anyone who has ever set foot in the US knows that.
Obama hangs around 5% postive, moves to +10 over CHina, then +15 and remains stable, healthcare lifts to nearly +20, health as national security +25 to +30, goes back to +25 for rest of answer
If we were to judge the debate by the old saying of “the medium is the message”. I would say McCain has come across as more credible in feeling the pains of the punters.
McCain goes negative, Indies go negative 10%.
I find McCain rather condescending, and arrogant!
Heads back up to neutral, lifts postive 5% then 10% with remarks on Veterans,. Prosperity and peace sinks back to netrual
Yet some of its most popular presidents like Lincoln, FDR and Clinton were all lawyers.
Thanks for the laugh.
I hope the Obama campaign take up this “What Obama doesn’t understand…” mantra and focus some advertising on shooting it to bits.
Indies like this answer, +15% and stable.
No 373
Reagan was more popular.
Obama runs down the US! Very dangerous. That clip will appear in Republican ads.
He is being condescending to Obama, it is the only way he can imply that he is more experienced. He hasn’t actually clearly demonstrated that he has superior ideas.
McCain POW/MIA/Vietnam issue gives plus 5% and stable. Peaks at +10 at end
Yeah, and he was a trade unionist!
And no surprise that the Pro Hillary people here are bashing Obama!
Adam and Finnigans: you desperately want McCain to win!
If this is excruciating to watch, I shudder to think how painful 90 minutes of Palin vs Biden will be like. It would potentially come under the torture conventions.
First poll out in 2 hours
361 Adam,
I grew up there, you didn’t. I know what I am talking about. ShowsOn is right. When you have lived 43 years in the USA, then and only then can you tell someone what is right or wrong about that country. I don’t purport to have all the knowledge about what has happened in this country before I moved here (although I read and try to be up on my knowledge and information). I even asked the PB readership for background information on Menzies within the last few days. I don’t recall that anyone answererd me but that was beside the point. I can sort out my own answers in time by reading and learning about my adopted county.
Good on you, ShowsOn …….
Poss
does the worm do an aggregrate over the 90 mins?
I would say I *somewhat* want McCain to win. I only get *desperate* about Australian elections. I think McCain would make a better president, and certainly a better one as far as Australia’s interests are concerned.
The best candidate was not there.
No 384
Julie, you’re only saying that because you’re a Democrat supporter.
Julie, I of course acknowledge your superior knowledge of the US. But, do you *dispute* my statement that the US is a country that reveres its armed forces, and that McCain’s Navy record is an asset to him *vastly* superior than a Harvard law degree is to Obama?
No 387
I’d have to concede that Clinton would have easily defeated McCain.
Grrr “vastly superior TO”
Oh no, I liked that comment by Adam. It demonstrated that he had no argument, so he just attacked me as a person.
The idea that you need to be a graduate of a military academy to be President is just absurd. Plus, McCain is no Ulysses S. Grant.
How exactly? We have a free trade agreement with the U.S., so trade isn’t an issue. McCain says he wants to move quickly on climate change, but his right wing backers probably won’t let him. I think you are overstating this. Either administration would be fine for Australia. But Obama would be better for the U.S. economy than McCain, so over all that would be better for the world economy, which includes us.
How do you know this?
That wasn’t actually my point. But nice points for a well executed slide.
Well it was *my* point, and you disputed it, using your status as an American to do so. So kindly answer my question.
I’m not an American. I think you are confused.
all obama needs to say to mccain from now on is-
“your part of the problem,not part of the solution”
Adam: there’s an element of sour grapes in all your commentary!
390 “I’d have to concede that Clinton would have easily defeated McCain.”
Oh Please, GP. And the Hammock Man is convinced he would have beaten Rudd.
I am still waiting for the explanation of why McCain would be better for Australia than Obama. I really don’t think it would make a huge difference in terms of world security, but I think Obama would be better for the world economy. McCain has said that economics isn’t his strong suit, but now is the time for an Democratic administration to go in there and get the rich paying taxes again so the middle class can get a tax cut, so we can get money moving again in the U.S., and thus the world economy.
ShowsOn, even you should be able to see that my 394 is in response to Julie’s 393.
Even you should be able to quote text using square brackets.
Gus at 385 – not that I saw
What a day; presidential debate out of the way, and still the AFL Grand Final for lunch.
I try to assume I am dealing with people of at least average intelligence here. Probably an overoptimistic assumption.
Now now, Adam.
btw, hate to ask again, whatever happen to that all inspiring, kumbaya Obama with the “change you can believe in”? Has Obama put him under the bus as well.
GP, apart from death and taxes you can take it from me that another certainty is that anybody not starting, or eliminated from a race by definition cannot be the winner of that race.
So who won?
Why do you just end up attacking people when they disagree with you?
I asked you a serious question. Can you explain why you think McCain would be better specifically for Australia? You’ve proposed it as an opinion, I am just wondering what your reasons for it are? For the record, I think you are a very smart person who runs an extremely well researched and informative website!
I wanted Gore to win in 2000, because he basically would’ve continued most of Clinton’s policies which helped balance the U.S. budget (which IS indirectly good for Australia). Sadly Gore shot himself in the foot with this strange kind of radical populist campaign that helped Bush win.
I wish McCain had been the Republican in 2000, because that wouldn’t of been so bad. But the way he has flopped around to win the nomination has completely changed my opinion of him. He is now GWB Lite. I honestly don’t think he would do much different on the economy, because he doesn’t know any better than the Republican mantra of the trickle down effect. Or more to the point, that is what his economic advisers like that whiner Phill Gramm will tell him to do.
Obama won everything at the start concerned with the economy. McCain to me sounded more credible than Obama when discussing Iran and Russia. I think it was a dead heat on Iraq.
This debate was meant to be on McCain’s strengths, so if this debate is perceived as a draw, then that really counts as an Obama win.
But maybe it won’t matter, if Americans are primarily concerned with keeping their jobs on November 4, then they will vote for Obama. They won’t be thinking about what’s going on in Iraq, Iran, Russia or North Korea.
Diog, “who won”. More to the point, we all lost.
What we have here are two dud POTUS candidates plus two even more dudder (?) vice POTUS candidates. God help America, because nobody else will.
I don’t attack people when they disagree with me (well not always). I do attack people when they make stupid statements or engage in cheap sarcasm as a substitute for debate.
But we won’t pursue that or William will wield his Wand of Power.
I think McCain would be a better President for Australia because he keep the protectionist instincts of the Democrat Congress in check, because he will consolidate the west’s victory in Iraq rather than fritter it away, because he will stand up to Putin and support endangered democracies like Georgia and Ukraine rather than pander to European defeatism, and because he will be a genuine fiscal conservative and stop the US jeopardising the world economy with its gigantic deficits. He will need prodding on climate change but he is much smarter than Bush and can be brought around.
I meant to include Afghanistan in here, because Obama pointed out correctly that Afghanistan is turning to crap again, and will require a huge injection of troops sometime in the next 4 years.
I agree McCain is running 8 years too late, and perhaps Obama is running 8 years too early, but like it or not, they are the two candidates in 2008.
In retrospect it’s all the sadder that Al Gore didn’t run.
McCain performed much better than expected and was the victor, in my opinion.
Doesn’t really matter though. Americans seem to have fallen into the trap we did last year, throw a vacuous, non-entity into office who is clearly not up for the job. Rudd and Obama deserve one another.
We have a free trade agreement with the U.S. Do you honestly think the U.S. senate is going to tear up that agreement? Why would they do that to one of their most reliable allies?
Moreover, we are a net importer of U.S. goods. So if they tear up the agreement, it will work out worse for the U.S.! Why exactly would they do that?
Oh come on! There was a cigarette paper between McCain and Obama on policy towards Georgia and Ukraine in today’s debate.
Bush said exactly the same thing, but look what happened! I would’ve agreed with you on this point during the period that McCain was opposed to the Bush tax cut program – which is why the U.S. has such a huge deficit in the first place – but McCain realised that he had to support the Bush tax cuts (making them permanent) in order to get the nomination. So McCain is one of the people who helped create the huge deficit that he is now complaining about.
I don’t think his right wing backers will let him act properly on climate change. 50% of Republicans in the U.S. congress still don’t even think climate change is man made! So if he gets a deal, it will be thanks to Democrats. Well, why not make it even easier and have a Democratic president so the policy gets through even faster. Now that would be in Australia’s interests.
CBS Poll declares Obama the winner of the debate!
Adam, as a well known Hillary supporter here at PB. I have no prob with McCain winning the POTUS. But I do have prob with Sarah Palin as the VP because of McCain’s age and medical condition, then with the possibility of Sarah Palin becoming the POTUS if McCain drops dead.
On that score, Obama for POTUS for me.
#417 –
That is a credible as “Foxnews Poll declares McCain the winner of the debate!”
420 – Did a Fox poll declare McCain the winner?
OK I’m off to watch the footy. Normal vituperation will be resumed later. Go Cats.
William, why do all the default avatars look like fascist symbols?
McCain said HE won the debate.
Well, thats what his ads said, even before the debate had begun.
Mediacurves is back up – Obama won the Indies on every issue, including the pointy end of the Nat Sec ones.
http://mediacurves.com/
Those numbers are actually really consistent with the dreaded CNN worm and the Indie movement on that throughout the debate.
Adam, lots of people go to the military academies, but you do not go to those institutions with the aim of achieving a non military career in life. You go there if you are after a military career. If you are looking at life outside of the military you chose some where else. Noting you said “Naval military record”. That implies his military service which is apples and corn compared to what university he went to. The Reserve Officers Training Corps [ROTC] trains officers as well as the service academies. My ‘ex husband was commisioned an officer in the US Air Force through the ROTC program. ROTC units are components of regular universities across the USA.
McCain may have well had a stellar service career, no one is knocking that. At least I am not. If you end up doing other things in your life other than a straight out military career [like McCain is at present, moved into politics], good on him. But he didn’t chose his university with that in mind when he was 18. People pay through the nose for Harvard and for good reason. Yes, Harvard is a superior academic school. When McCain chose the Naval Academy he wasn’t thinking of a life long career outside of the military.
Now off to the footy at our house
…. chat with you later 
66% of independents supported Obama’s comments on Russian policy. I’d suggest this is because Obama explcitly said something like “we don’t want another Cold War posture”.
I don’t think the U.S. population could handle fighting terrorism, AND another Cold War at the same time.
Woah, I just noticed the last segment “Who won the debate?”
61% of independents said Obama.
The McCain campaign declared him the winner before the debate even began.
Finn (419)
I’ll give you full marks for clear thinking on that one. Frankly, it’s a frightening prospect for the world.
So Obama won the debate on national security.
McCain has dropped to 42% on Intrade. The punters weren’t too keen on him losing on his home ground.
Finns
If you think that now, just wait until you’ve seen 90 minutes of Palin next week. I have NEVER seen someone so badly out of their depth as watching her in those interviews. She should drop out for the good of the country she loves.
Before the debate McCain was expected to peform well as he has a reputation of being good at these things – and that it would be more difficult for Obama.
Listening to American commentators on the radio it appears McCain was able to get the more cutting phrases out there so would have got his message through more to voters but, say his ‘win’ on security issues was only small and that it was a failure for McCain as he should have been expected to clearly win this subject.
It is a failure for McCain in that he couldn’t dominate Obama and that Obama win or not win was able to demonstrate he was across the issues and knew what he was talking about – ie a safe pair of hands with national security (ie Kev a safe pair of hands with the economy). Thus the horses wouldn’t have been scared away by Obama and national security which is what the Republicans would have hoped for.
At the end of the day it was a tie.
The commentators said Obama should expect a small bump in the polls.
Dio at 431 – make sure you look at the right Intrade market – the Presidential Winner by Political Party (effectively the two party preferred market). The Contender markets have a lot of legacy contracts that are getting closed out and all sorts of silly buggers going on it it.
That winner by party market started the day with the Democrats on 59% and after a bit of up and down, have settled back on the Democrats at 59%.
The State markets are interesting. The Dems improved in a dozen or so States straight after the debate – many key states like Colorado and Florida. Only Virginia moved away from them.
Regarding the economic crisis in the US, here is a link to an excellent article in the NY Times that gors ot one of the root causes of the crisis – the shift to voluntary self-reulation (!!!) of the non-bank financial sector. Chris Cox teh head of the SEC has now aditted this was a failure and wound the program up.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/27/business/27sec.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Note that this is firmly in Bush’s court (2005 decision) and Cox is linked to Gram.
I listened to the debate on the wireless and note that apart from the content of what was being said that I found Obama quite easy on the ears and that McCain creates a sense of unease (reminded me of late Howard) – at times I couldn’t listen to him. Something about that voice or his style.
As for content Obama didn’t sound flowing and really doesn’t get to the point quick enough for this format – like Kev too much detail or intro before the point maybe. McCain is more direct in style but was negative quite often which on the radio is more pronounced and quite off putting and, it was apparent he made a habit of misrepresenting Obama’s position or so Obama quite often said – which simply reinforces the messages coming out about McCain’s campaing generally.
However I thought McCain did ok, spoke well and direct to the topics but Obama proved his point on National security. I would have expected Obama to come over stronger on the economic questions.
IMHO
The funny thing Thomas is that none of the polling so far on the debate agrees with those commentators (now where have we seen that before!) in terms of McCain’s performance on National Security issues being a small win over Obama in the debate.
Possum
How wrong you are!!! The Drudge Poll has McCain 68% to Obama 30%.
I think McCain supporters got what they wanted and Obama supporters weren’t scared away – so it is an Obama victory really.
Looks very good for Obama in the polls.
He wins all of them as Possum said.
McCain really got shafted with the first 30 minutes being on the economy. Without that, he would have won. But he tanked on the economy questions.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/26/debate-reviews-go-to-obam_n_129803.html
I think McCain shot himself in foot over the economy so many times it is probably gone. His last effort, to stop the world so he could save it, ended in his ridicule as it was obviously a gimmick, there was nothing he could personally do anyway, and his own side didn’t want him and for all the world it appears as though he stuffed it all up.
And who are we mere mortals to argue against the Drudge Poll!
Debate focus group discussion up on:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video_log/
As is the debate.
Evan @ 418, CBS are more right wing as a TV station than The West is as a paper
…….. would expect no less from them 
441,
Possum, we won’t have the Drudge poll up in our perch in the tree
…….
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/26/obama-to-mccain-on-iraq-y_n_129796.html
Direct Nixon to Kennedy debate comparison ….
Madeline Albright …. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/madeleine-albright/a-breakthrough-night-for_b_129786.html
I just listened to Palin’s interview.
Holy f.
Which one? Do you have a link?
Curic interview
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=6hELjmWfVBU&eurl=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video_log/
Or in short all you need to see…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/26/jack-cafferty-if-sarah-pa_n_129724.html
[Or in short all you need to see…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/26/jack-cafferty-if-sarah-pa_n_129724.html
Oh yeah, this is hilarious. She is like a first year cultural studies student; they use lots of jargon, but don’t know how to think to save their lives.
The problem is I am sure McCain would love to change her but that would cost votes as well.