Poll of Polls: Close, But Obama's Very Much in the Game

Everyone is talking about polls.

Fair enough. We are finally in the season when, to some minor extent, polls can be consulted for a sense about where what appears to be a very tight race for the presidency is headed.

So let's get clear about some basics:

1. John McCain got a traditional post-convention "bump," which brought the Republican into serious competition with Democrat Barack Obama. But McCain, who seemed last week to be opening up a lead, is now slipping back toward a tie. If we average the most recent national polls, the Republican is only ever-so-slightly ahead of Obama. (The Real Clear Politics average has McCain up 0.8 percent.) That is deep within the margin of error for every survey conducted, so we end up with what can honestly be called a dead heat. When we remember that McCain is riding a wave of enthusiasm created by a.) his unexpected choice of a woman, Sarah Palin, b.) that woman's edgily dynamic acceptance speech at the convention and c.) the generally favorable – yes, favorable – media coverage she has gotten since the convention, this should be neither surprising nor unsettling for Democrats.

2. What should unsettle Democrats, at least a little, is evidence of a lingering Palimania among Republican diehards and some Republican-leaning independents. Palin has moved from "Sarah Who?" to more than 90 percent name recognition in two weeks. She is the political "rock star" of this first stage of the fall campaign. And she is connecting with voters in a meaningful way. How well? Consider the "gets it" question in the latest Fox News/Opinion Dynamics survey: "Q. Which one of the following four candidates do you think best understands the problems of every day life in America?" Answer: Sarah Palin 33 percent, Barack Obama 32 percent, John McCain 17 percent, Joe Biden 10 percent. McCain's greatest challenge in the 2008 race was a general sense that he did not have any sense of what voters were going through. Palin boosts the GOP ticket by humanizing it, and that provides a tangible and legitimate benefit for McCain and the Republicans. By the same token, Republican prospects become wedded to her: If Palin slips -- as there is some evidence that she is beginning to do -- the ticket slips.

3. There is no question that Palin has boosted Republican enthusiasm and solidarity. More Americans are comfortable identifying as Republicans now than at any time in months, perhaps years. Before the GOP convention, Democrats enjoyed a remarkable 11 point advantage when it came to party identification. That's narrowed to 5 percent or less in recent surveys. And Republicans, who never cared that much for McCain, are excited about the McCain-Palin ticket: 90 percent of self-identified Republicans surveyed in the latest Rasmussen national poll said they would vote for their party's ticket, while just 82 percent of self-identified Democrats said they would back their party's ticket.

4. The Republican surge of last week narrowed the gap between Democrats and Republicans in generic polling of congressional races. Democrats had enjoyed a huge, frequently double-digit advantage earlier this year. Now, it averages between 4 and 5 points. That's still significant, but the shift troubled Democratic congressional leaders and candidates enough to make them the loudest advocates for the tougher approach Obama adopted at the end of last week. The biggest worriers are southern Democrats, several of whom have won their seats in recent special elections. Their fear is that, as the McCain-Palin ticket opens up wide leads in states such as Louisiana and Mississippi, they may be vulnerable to a previously unexpected Republican coattail effect.

5. The presidential race is not, of course, a national popularity contest. It is a state-by-state race for a total of 270 electoral votes. But the national polls are reasonably relevant. That's because they tend to roughly parallel numbers in competitive "battleground" states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Virginia, Colorado and New Mexico. In all those states, fresh polls have the race within the same margin of error range that we see in the national contest. What's significant is that the numbers err a little more toward Obama. McCain has taken leads in some states, such as Missouri and Montana, which had been competitive, and the race has tightened in other states, such as Wisconsin, where Obama was thought to have a clear advantage. But in many other states, the Democratic has held its lead through a challenging time. A fresh Des Moines Register poll of Iowans, for instance, shows a state that went narrowly for George Bush in 2004 now giving Obama a 12 point lead.

If the polls are right, and if the election were held today, Obama would win 22 states (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin) and the District of Columbia to secure 273 electoral votes.

McCain would take the rest (including the battleground states of Florida, Missouri, Nevada, Ohio and Virginia) for 265 electoral votes.

My sense is that Ohio is very much in play, however, so I think that giving it to McCain at this point is silly. The same may be true for Nevada, where a strong Democratic registration advantage ought not be discounted.

Where does this leave us? The race is closer now. Republicans who had been dispirited are suddenly enthusiastic. But the Republican convention "bump" has not given the McCain-Palin ticket a wide lead nationally, and it still trails in the electoral-vote race that matters most.

The fall campaign begins as the competitive one that most serious observers always expected.

That is cause for excitement among Republicans who had experienced something akin to depression during a long, Obama-centric summer. Palin has given fellow partisans some of the commodity that the Democratic nominee had previously dealt in: hope.

But the polls ought not be cause for despondency on the part of Democrats.

Rather, the numbers offer a dose of reality that was needed by grassroots Democrats – and perhaps even by an Obama campaign team – who had grown too confident as McCain seemed to wander in the political wilderness.

A vice-presidential nominee from the frontier state of Alaska has, indeed, led Republicans out of the wilderness. But she has not taken them to the promised land of another presidential term.

Palin has made the Republicans competitive. But they will only remain the case for so long as she continues to shine. If the Alaskan governor's reputation is tarnished – as the McCain camp fears it will be by the "Troopergate" scandal – or if the Republican ticket is simply identified with the current Republican leadership in Washington, the Democratic advantage will likely be restored.

Indeed, if conservative and laissez faire economic policies get their appropriate share of the blame for the current economic crisis, the Republicans are finished.

Bottom line: Approval ratings for both John McCain and Sarah Palin have surged. But they are not particularly higher than those for Barack Obama and Joe Biden. All the contenders are in the 50 percent to 55 percent favorable zone. In contrast, George Bush's favorable ratings have dipped to around 30 percent.

To the extent that McCain and Palin succeed in running away from Bush, they will remain competitive.

To the extent that McCain and Palin are linked to Bush, all of the progress the Republicans have made since their convention will be undermined.

For Obama and Biden, George Bush and Dick Cheney -- and their economy -- continue to form the silver lining amid the clouds that have appeared over the political map.

Comments (44)

1. Too early.

   "It might take until roughly the time of the first debate on September 26 for the convention effects to dissipate completely. The polls are going to be extremely difficult to read in the interim: we don't quite know how these two curves are going to interact."

   http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/ what-convention-bounce-looks-like.html

   Posted by srjenkins at 09/17/2008 @ 10:44am

2. Aren't polls only conducted through landlines? If that's the case, then how can we trust them with everyone using cell phones now a days.

   Posted by Z3Lasher at 09/17/2008 @ 11:07am

3. See, now THIS is a lot more relevant than Nader, Feingold, or Franken....

   and more interesting, given it shows that one of the main things, if not the ONLY thing that gets the Republican base fired up for a McCain Presidency...is his Vice-President, who will NOT be a "Cheney", but a "Quayle".

   Ergo, ol' Maverick is hoodwinking them with a little red meat in hornrims and a skirt...into ignoring the fact that HE, not she, will be setting the agenda if he wins.

   After all the cries from the Right about how the Left is "being taken in by star power"..."investing too much hope in a 'Messiah'"....etc.....

   McCain is doing EXACTLY that to them with Saint Sarah of Wasilla!

   I do love irony!

   Posted by Maskdelta at 09/17/2008 @ 11:42am

4. LvLiberty-One person is a giant leap?

   Posted by i'm nobody at 09/17/2008 @ 12:03pm

5. Nothing like an unknown politician who is busy trying to end an investigation into her own wrong doing to energize modern republicans.

   Posted by i'm nobody at 09/17/2008 @ 12:06pm

6. Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/17/2008 @ 11:51am

   It's more often called the Bradley effect. Clinton counted on that too, and we know how that turned out.

   Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/17/2008 @ 11:51am

   Not according to the averages on Real Clear Politics. You would also do well to note that most of the averages are within the sampling error.

   Posted by srjenkins at 09/17/2008 @ 12:08pm

7. John Nichols,

   McCain's fortune will rise AND fall with Palin!

   When it is generally known that PALIN IS NOT A REFORMER, but a corrupt politician who abuses her power in office, McCain will take a nose dive.

   Also, Virginia is not a given for McCain at all.

   Posted by Metteyya at 09/17/2008 @ 12:14pm

8. Can any of you cons tell me anything about Palins policy positions yet?

   If not, it sure looks like your party is riding on "star power" from a pretty speech.

   Gosh, we should NEVER elect someone because they give pretty speeches, should we?

   sheep.

   Posted by crabwalk at 09/17/2008 @ 12:25pm

9. Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/17/2008 @ 11:48am

   Sorry, Darin, no can find your "66% Obama wins" post....do you still think that?

   But YES, do have your post wishing McCain an early departure from this mortal coil!

   "Best scenario: Palin's as wonderful as I imagine her to be (honestly, that's not possible) and McCain dies in office after a couple years and Palin runs as the incumbent."----Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/10/2008 @ 2:39pm

   Posted by Maskdelta at 09/17/2008 @ 12:26pm

10. And all of a sudden the polls mean something to the Cons!!

    They have taken their previous world views and stood them on their heads. So much for "fixed convictions".

    Baa

    Posted by crabwalk at 09/17/2008 @ 12:26pm

11. Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/17/2008 @ 12:08pm

    Enough to close the gap of $66 million for Obama in August and $47 million for McCain? Wishful thinking.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/17/2008 @ 12:10pm

    You should check out the article I posted at the top of the page - which basically explains why all polls at this point are more or less meaningless. So I'll save on looking deeper until the convention bumps level out and Palin has had a bit more time to put her foot in her mouth. Then, we might see where it all stands. Give it a week or two.

    Posted by srjenkins at 09/17/2008 @ 12:27pm

12. Posted by Z3Lasher at 09/17/2008 @ 11:07am

    Z3 ... saw something on the news about this. Yes, it appears that youth/younger voters (sub 35 crowd), if they are indeed as active as some would have you think, are woefully under-repped in landline polls.

    Could be an interesting Nov

    Posted by leftofcenter at 09/17/2008 @ 12:28pm

13. Darins best case is that the liberal that the repub masses picked in primaries at the head of the ticket dies, and the completely inexperienced journalism major with ethical issues and a nose for earmarks assumes command of the USA?

    Scary sheep.

    Have you sheep picked out your national lipstick color yet? Does it go with those purple band-aids?

    Posted by crabwalk at 09/17/2008 @ 12:30pm

14. lvliberty-Sorry,but that isn't a giant leap nor do we know what is going to happen now that it's been announced that the McCain camp is busy trying to end this investigation and now that more people are actually learning something about Palin.The original energized reaction to her was knee jerk.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 09/17/2008 @ 12:33pm

15. It took people two decades to figure that out about Bill Clinton. What makes you think anyone will figure that out about Palin in a mere 45 days?

    Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/17/2008 @ 12:27pm

    the "liberal media" will expose her foibles?

    sorry, I almost got that out with a straight face.

    Will Caribou Barby the Barracuda ever grow the female version of stones large enough to face down the Ogre of the Media, Katie Couric? Or will she continue to hide behind her lies and pretty speeches? I think she will continue to hide from "the vast leftwing conspiracy", cuz she is One Tough chick!

    Posted by crabwalk at 09/17/2008 @ 12:34pm

16. Why would McCain The Reformer want to end an investigation that might clear his pick? Especially after we have been told for years that those with nothing to hide should have no fear of Justice ?

    why is that cons? Is it anything like Family Values or experience, just so much white wash for the sheeple?

    Posted by crabwalk at 09/17/2008 @ 12:36pm

17. My sense is that Ohio is very much in play... posted by JOHN NICHOLS on 09/17/2008 @ 10:11am

    I wouldn't count too heavily on Ohio just yet.

    As for polls, I looked at half a dozen yesterday. My conclusion: they are all over the place.

    I've never based any decision on poll data. No matter how scientifically based the polling practice is, the sampling groups are almost always tiny. Historically, poll accuracy vs. eventual political outcomes is not high, particularly in close races.

    Posted by jackwells at 09/17/2008 @ 12:37pm

18. Lynn Forester de Rothschild has said she thinks Democratic nominee Barack Obama is arrogant and has a problem connecting with average Americans.

    Rothschild is a member of the DNC's Democrats Abroad chapter and splits her time living in London and New York. She was one of Clinton's top fundraisers, bringing in more than $100,000 for her presidential campaign. She built a multimillion-dollar telecommunications company before marrying international banker Sir Evelyn de Rothschild.

    _____ I can't see how anyone could write (much less read) that second paragraph after the first with a straight face.

    Posted by bobfunland at 09/17/2008 @ 12:40pm

19. It took people two decades to figure that out about Bill Clinton. What makes you think anyone will figure that out about Palin in a mere 45 days?-----Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/17/2008 @ 12:27pm

    Interesting from a supposed fan of Sarah Palin...to compare her to Bill Clinton?!?!?!?

    Regardless, you might be right.

    Obviously the McCain Campaign is hoping to sweep "Trooper-gate" (as well as other things) under the rug or cry "sexism" and then hope to ride out the storm later after Inauguration Day.

    Plus, once the election is over (if McCain wins) they might not CARE if Palin gets nailed for the firings or other abuses...since the whole point of her being picked was just to shore up the GOP base.

    Once McCain was President...if he's not planning on running in 2012...he can cut her loose.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/17/2008 @ 12:44pm

20. John Nichols, isn't something very wrong with Sen Obama's campaign that you have to write, if effect, that he is still in the game? This, after the GWB presidency? This, with an economy in shambles?

    Isn't this what Ralph Nader has been saying all along: that the Democrat's strategy of being Republican "lite" doesn't work? It didn't work for John Kerry. It didn't work for Al Gore.

    You may argue that Gore should have been president and that Kerry had not been assertive enough, but they were running after unsuccessful Republican presidents. A centrist strategy is the Democrat's mantra. They repeat it senselessly. Maybe, if Obama loses, the Democrats will divide into a Republican "lite" wing and a progressive, anti-imperialist wing. Now, wouldn't that be "loverly", owwww!

    I wonder which wing Ms vanden Heuvel would find more comfortable? I mean, considering she has fit so well into Democrat "lite"?

    Posted by goedel at 09/17/2008 @ 12:52pm

21. goedel-Gore ran after a democrat was in office and Kerry ran against a war time incumbent.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 09/17/2008 @ 12:54pm

22. i'm nobody: Thanks for the correction on Gore! It's just so hard for me to distinguish between Democrats and Republicans, except on "cultural" issues. These are certainly important, but they are secondary compared with imperialism, militarism, globalism, all Clinton's "high" points!

    Yes, Kerry ran against the Commander-in-Chief. I met an Iraq vet in October of 2004, while I was waiting for me car at Wal-Mart auto service. I asked him how he intended to vote, now that we have a mess over there. He said, "Yes, we do, but Bush made the mess; let him clean it up!" An example of what you wrote.

    Still, I think that Kerry did not appeal to the working-class, which used to be the Democrats' base. He was, like Clinton, Republican-lite.

    If you want progressivism, you want a new party. Imperialists do not make life better at home - or anywhere, come to think of it!

    Posted by goedel at 09/17/2008 @ 1:22pm

23. goedel-I'm not big on progressives,but do like them better than most modern conservatives.It would be nice if we had more than two viable parties,but that won't happen any time soon and one must go with reality because thumbing your nose at the system,by voting third party, will just get you more Bushs.Had McCain picked Romney then many evangelicals would have voted third party which would have opened it up for other third parties,but the Palin choice made it a two horse horse race.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 09/17/2008 @ 1:30pm

24. God I'm good. The Gallup poll has is at 47-45. I said last week that by wednesday of this week Obama would be back up in the Gallup by two points.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/17/2008 @ 1:33pm

25. Why when everything points to a extremely strong year for Democrats is Obama unable to have a strong lead at this point?

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/17/2008 @ 1:25pm |

    I think it is arguable that Obama does actually have a strong lead and that the polls are flawed. For an example from a personal standpoint. My son and daughter and all their friends I know of who are voting in this election have cell phones and no land lines. About 90% of them from my tally are voting Democrat. I know that doesn't mean much, but if you multiply my experience by millions of others it could be.

    Posted by chaoszen at 09/17/2008 @ 1:40pm

26. lvliberty-One reason is because many Americans are quite partisan and only vote one way.The democrats in congress aren't at all popular which,also,explains some of it.The fact that McCain caught up because of an unknown politician, who is under investigation, is the bigger mystery.Had McCain picked Huckabee,who has a strong following, then the rise in the polls would make sense,but this rise in the polls will never make sense nor will anyone be able to explain it.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 09/17/2008 @ 1:42pm

27. Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/17/2008 @ 1:25pm

    Finally, an interesting question. By rights, he should be creaming McCain. I suspect it says more about Republican message management and campaign capabilities than it says about much else.

    Posted by srjenkins at 09/17/2008 @ 1:43pm

28. Posted by goedel at 09/17/2008 @ 1:22pm

    But goedel makes the same point that even the media is asking.

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/17/2008 @ 1:25pm

    Why do I always find it so strange...and yet NOT...that the Naderites are always cheerleaded on by the Right?!??!?!?

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/17/2008 @ 1:59pm

29. lvliberty-the fact that Bush is so unpopular does not mean that everyone will automatically vote democrat.In fact,after doing much research on Huckabee I decided that I would have voted GOP had he been the nominee despite the fact that I'm not big on Bush.I like the Huckster.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 09/17/2008 @ 2:00pm

30. lvliberty-We won't know,for awhile,what the Palin effect will turn out to be.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 09/17/2008 @ 2:01pm

31. Posted by i'm nobody at 09/17/2008 @ 2:00pm

    Actually the LL Contingent support of Palin is good news in the long run...

    1. They can no longer promote abstinence-only sex education...without a picture of Palin's grand-baby being shown.

    2. They can never again make the argument that "children do better if their mother stays at home and the father works"....without pointing at Palin herself.

    3. With McCain, they can no longer claim they support sexual morality in their leaders....after voting for a man who married his mistress.

    So...evolution IS occuring...

    oh...and of course THAT's bad news for them too!

    LOL

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/17/2008 @ 2:14pm

32. Try coupling that announcement that a member of the DNC Platform Committtee is now supporting McCain with the article last week by the Washington Post that there has been a 20% swing of women voters from Obama to McCain. There will be more. Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/17/2008 @ 12:08pm

    Why is it when Republicans were jumping ship to go for Obama it meant nothing. Now all of a sudden two Democrats go and you are saying it's a huge deal. Like SRJ said, you can't trust the polls right now. Post convention there is always a bump. Post Demo convention YOU were deriding Obama because he didn't have a double digit lead. Why are you not doing the same for McCain? McCain barely breached 4 points in national polls. His lead is slipping. I think once this all levels out the race will end up with Obama ahead slightly. Then the real sprint begins and I don't think McCain can run in his shoes.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/17/2008 @ 2:14pm

33. Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/17/2008 @ 2:14pm

    Their dream of "mass Hillary voter defections"....never happened.

    The polls show that Obama actually FIRMED UP his support among Democratic women voters (aka "Hillary voters")...

    they try to cite McCain picking up INDEPENDENT women votes...but those are the "Hillary voters". Aside from a few stragglers like HELENDAO, FRANKGRITS, and a few fading PUMAs....it just didn't happen.

    Of course most of them know it's a lie...but lead by McCain The Untruthful....no surprises there.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/17/2008 @ 2:16pm

34. Of course most of them know it's a lie...but lead by McCain The Untruthful....no surprises there. Posted by Maskdelta at 09/17/2008 @ 2:16pm

    It's been a common theme of this election to over-inflate the minimal. How often have we heard about the HUGE defections from Obama, yet the polls haven't changed. We have heard about these HUGE in roads McCain has been making with bringing in independent votes and shoring up his party but he is barely ahead and the only reason he IS ahead is because of his convention bounce. There has been nothing but perception politics in this race based on zero provable fact.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 09/17/2008 @ 2:23pm

35. LvLiberty-I very much understand forgiveness and have no clue as to how you arrived at your conclusion that I don't.The fact that I questioned a politicians timing when they said that they felt bad about something,like I did with McCain's timing of his I'm sorry and who continues to profit from his "sin",does not mean that I don't understand forgiveness.It just means that I'm not naive.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 09/17/2008 @ 2:39pm

36. Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/17/2008 @ 2:29pm

    1. If the BEST case scenario..."a good, conservative, Christian family"...doesn't work for abstinence-only....why would it work in the general populace?

    And how about the fact that the research (yes, yes..."lib'rul atheist scientists") shows that it fails as well?

    2. You make excuses for the Palins because it's in your political interest. The only "unique condition" is she's a Republican conservative running for Vice-President and you want her ticket to win. If a Dem ...or any OTHER "unique condition"...you'd say something different and we all know it.

    3. Tell me with hand to God that you accepted Clinton's apology for the Lewinsky case and chastized fellow conservatives who kept bringing it up?

    If not...then again, you seem to only be concerned about "Christian forgiveness" when it could help your political agenda.

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/17/2008 @ 3:12pm

37. LvLiberty-I have never attacked McCain for committing adultery, itself.I could not do that because,as I have said before,I have done that one myself. It is who he dumped and why he dumped her that I have attacked and the age he was when when he did it and that does shows something about his character.I have stated that I thought that this showed a double standard when it came to the issue of adultery and other issues because each side is a little quicker with forgiving those on their side of their fence.I am not playing God nor am I judging his heart.I,simply,questioned a politicians timing with the I'm sorry just as I do when a criminal says they are sorry just before sentencing. There is a big difference between playing God,like you guys do when you judge pretty much everyone,and questioning ones timing when they decide that they are sorry nor do Christians accept a criminals I'm sorry and then let them go.Forgiveness does not mean that one must be blind and naive.McCain has kept the fruits of his sin by staying wealthy and powerful.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 09/17/2008 @ 3:12pm

38. To "I'm nobody":

    I don't vote for Ralph Nader to thumb my nose at anyone. I have the clear goal of trying to destroy the Democratic Party as a presidential party. If after the Gore-Kerry-Bush^2 experience, they can only again offer Republican-lite and a sqeaker at that (!), then I am hopeful of seeing the Party splintered into factions that really represent a choice for voters - not merely an electoral mechanism. If we get GWB-2 as a result, two things could happen: we would spend ourselves into bankruptcy or the American people would finally wake-up and take to the streets to end our empire. Either way, we would finally have the "change" I hear so much about.

    Posted by goedel at 09/17/2008 @ 3:24pm

39. goedel-We already did the take to the streets to end our empire thing and while it was really fun there was a price to pay.Kent State,Carter,Reagan,pointless destruction in the name of peace,etc.Some of the change was good and some not so good.That is the way it is when we humans go through our changes as we have been doing since WW2 turned us into one world with technology.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 09/17/2008 @ 3:38pm

40. Posted by i'm nobody at 09/17/2008 @ 2:39pm

    "...your continue attacks on McCain for this indicates you are playing G-d in that you are judging his heart, and you do so without any personal knowledge to the contrary."

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/17/2008 @ 2:52pm

    I have never met "i'm nobody", but there is considerably more evidence of his exsistance, than "god".

    If god chooses to forgive, that is all well and good. But, the rest of us don't have to.

    Seriously, if god is not a citizen and can't vote, how are ancient biblical quotes relevant to the debate?

    WTF does god have to do with American polotics?!?

    Focus!!

    Posted by Malcontent at 09/17/2008 @ 3:42pm

41. I was willing to accept Clinton's apology and for the most part do, except he has never demonstrated a sincere change from his behavior.----Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/17/2008 @ 3:19pm

    Well, setting aside the other lies and "Who cares if it means more pregnant teens, just SAYING it makes us good people!" stuff....

    HOW DO YOU KNOW that Clinton "has never demonstrated a sincere change from his behavior"?!??!?!

    National Enquirer or World Net Daily gossip?

    Seems I don't recall any PROVEN stories of any more marital infidelity by Bill Clinton since Lewinsky...

    do YOU have some? Or is it just your natural inclination to distrust those who you disagree with politically...and TRUST those more towards your ideology.

    After all, there ARE rumors and gossip about McCain cheating on Cindy....

    and BTW, I don't care. Not about McCain or Cindy or "how they met" or any of that or Clinton....but then again I don't set myself up as a "defender against moral turpitude"...and then "set it aside out of Christian forgiveness" when it suits my political aims!

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/17/2008 @ 3:45pm

42. Oh, yeah....and GOT to save this-

    "...your continue attacks on McCain for this indicates you are playing G-d in that you are judging his heart, and you do so without any personal knowledge to the contrary."----Posted by lvliberty1 at 09/17/2008 @ 2:52pm

    And watch LL COMPLETELY contradict himself next time it's a Democrat!

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/17/2008 @ 3:46pm

43. LvLiberty-You must remember that none of the personal stuff about McCain has anything to do with my not supporting him now.I would have supported him back in 2000 and I knew about that stuff.I'm not judgmental.I can't be but, I'm having fun with it.I just can't go with McCain now because he isn't who he was back in 2000.Losing that did something not good to him.I am,also,quite concerned about his age.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 09/17/2008 @ 3:57pm

44. Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/17/2008 @ 4:01pm

    Boy, and haven't THEY done a bang-up job.

    But again, feel sorry for poor ol' Maverick...knowing guys like Darin hope he croaks and they get a change in leadership to Saint Sarah.

    GOPalin version of "Hope & Change" I guess!

    Posted by Maskdelta at 09/17/2008 @ 4:05pm