Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditOne week ago, after the Republican National Convention had nominated John McCain and Sarah Palin, the Republican ticket enjoyed a 53-34 lead among white women over Democrats Barack Obama and Joe Biden, according to polling conducted for CBS and the New York Times.
What a difference a week can make.
The new CBS/New York Times poll has the Biden-Obama ticket leading among white women by a 47-45 margin.
That's a 13 point jump for the Democrats, and it has radically shifted the character of the race for the presidency.
Where a week ago, the average of national polls had the McCain-Palin ticket leading by almost three points, the Obama-Biden ticket is now up by two points.
And the momentum is entirely in the Democratic direction.
Consider the Gallup Daily Tracking Poll.
One week ago, the Gallup had the Republicans ahead 48-44.
Now, the Democrats are up 48-44.
Translation: Obama, who has been gaining a point in the polls each day since Monday -- the day when the economy became the issue -- has reversed McCain's lead.
The Gallup Survey is not an anomaly.
The aforementioned CBS/New York Times poll has Obama up by five points. That means that, in this survey, Obama now enjoys the same level of support he did immediately after the Democratic National Convention.
The new Quinnipiac poll, echoing the Gallup and CBS surveys, puts Obama up by four points overall.
In each survey, the movement to the Democrats is most dramatic among white women -- the group that Sarah Palin was supposed to be drawing into the Republican camp.
What's up with Palin? The governor's overall favorable rating has fallen to just 40 percent in the CBS/New York Times survey -- down four points from last week. Palin's unfavorable rating is up 8 points to 30 percent. But the shift is even more dramatic among women, with whom Palin's star has fallen 11 points in one week.
Share this article
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Ezra Klein
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Pandagon
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Utne Reader
- Wonkette
- ZNet
RSS
"Where would all you lefties be without Nichols to blow sunshine up your ass when thing look bad?"
~ Darin the droll troll
I dunno......where would you be without those silly leftist ideas like.... say.....the Constitution or say.....market regulation.
But keep the good queries a' comin'.
Posted by b_kool_66 at 09/18/2008 @ 9:43pm
I think Darin's in what would best be called...
a hang-over.
Drunk off his ass with Palin's Alaskan Vineyard Cherry Apple Wine last week....
now, comes the morning after.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/18/2008 @ 9:49pm
Shit, I'd be spinning in circles like a drunk too if I even remotely thought conservative economics worked. Yes, yes, yes free markets! They work! Wall Street crashed! No, no, no free markets! They don't work! But my leaders said they do! But they are using socialism and bailing out these investment banks!
What's a sheep to do, much less a drunk one?
Posted by onthehelm at 09/18/2008 @ 10:06pm
Posted by onthehelm at 09/18/2008 @ 10:06pm
Actually, with panic in their hearts, even the most hard core Righties are bailing on "free markets", "less regulation"...even going for "greed on Wall Street" "class warfare".
As I noted on another thread, heard McCain on Sean Hannity yesterday...he was talking re-regulation and the "greed of Wall Street" like he was Chuck Schumer or BARBARA BOXER...
and the Boy Blunder was ...not stopping him. Nary a peep, tacit agreement even.
A week ago and that kind of stuff would be called "typical liberal class warfare" and "trying to control the free market"....NOW?
They want to sound like their New Dealers!
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/18/2008 @ 10:17pm
*They want to sound like their New Dealers!
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/18/2008 @ 10:17pm*
Republicans have always been in favour of the New Deal, but in reverse: whatever benefits the top of society at the expense of the rest. Look at who got bailed out: Bear Stearns and AIG (though the lack of a Lehmans Bros loan shocked me) but a weak housing bailout at best. Reverse New Deal, socialization of losses but don't you dare allow anything that takes away profits! I did have a rather wicked thought though: if the government keeps buying larger and larger chunks of more and more businesses, are we going to become a socialist state by default? Just wondering.
Posted by yutsano at 09/18/2008 @ 10:27pm
Ads gone attacking (lipstick on a pig! who's the pig? Palin?), war room set up, ... And this is the elite man who knows no wars. Not beautiful.
---------
Study: Recent Obama Ads More Negative Sept. 18, 2008 by Howard Kurtz.
Despite perceptions that Sen. John McCain has spent more time on the attack, Sen. Barack Obama aired more negative advertising last week than did the Arizona Republican, says a study released yesterday.
Seventy-seven percent of the Illinois Democrat's commercials were negative during the week after the Republican National Convention, compared with 56 percent of the spots run by McCain.
Posted by HelenDAO at 09/18/2008 @ 10:28pm
Crisp and clear, as always Mask.
And as they morph from "conservatives" for eviscerating the middle class, the environment, the reputation of America across the world -
TO reformers - ha!
TO whatever this brand new desperation might be,
the one consistent theme is they are sure they are RIGHT
Posted by winyahn at 09/18/2008 @ 10:30pm
Helen you now officially make no sense. To the iggy pile with thee!
Posted by yutsano at 09/18/2008 @ 10:30pm
Bill Clinton is without doubt a superb politician (whether one agrees with his policy positions or not) this: (reported CNBC 18 Sep)
Asked if he was surprised by the bounce McCain saw in the polls after selecting Palin, Clinton disagreed.
"No, she is an instinctively effective candidate with a compelling story and I think it was exciting to some that she was a woman that she is from Alaska," Clinton said. "And she grew up and came up in a political and religious culture that is probably well to the right of the American center but she didn't basically define herself in those terms. She said ‘this is where I am from, I am not going to impose this on you, this is what I want to do that I think we can all be a part of.'"
He added: "She handled herself well so no, I wasn't surprised. I think that you know I disagree with them on many issues and that's why aside from my party affiliation I would be for Obama and Biden anyway but I get why she has done so well. It would be a mistake to underestimate her…her intuitive skills are significant."
To which all we neo-cons and religious fanatics can say a hearty amen.There are quite a few donkeys here who imagine they know more than the savvy Bill.
Until the Gallup poll has one side climbing into the 50s all it is saying is that voters are still making up their minds. This is not much more than a fluctuation. The EC is all that matters and at present (given the states now tending in McCain's favour) if Ohio and Virginia go to McCain it is all over for Obama.
Holding Palin back from national over- exposure for the debates with the foot-in-mouth Biden may prove to be a stroke of GOP genius that gets old Mac his bounce for a kangaroo hop all the way into the White House.
Posted by lrjones4 at 09/18/2008 @ 10:34pm
Posted by yutsano at 09/18/2008 @ 10:27pm
Actually, the old 'socialist' claim is a strawman.
The term is corporatocracy. The merging of mega-multinationals with government-military.
Socialists in theory have some concern for the populace, the middle class, for 'safety net' issues, habeas corpus - and would oppose corporate welfare on steroids.
Posted by winyahn at 09/18/2008 @ 10:36pm
Posted by HelenDAO at 09/18/2008 @ 10:28pm
Seriously I wonder about Helen. PUMA or always was, always will be Republican operative.
I realize from that Rothschild woman (and of course FRANKGRITS) that there IS a small, but vocal contingent of Hillary cultists out there (less now after Denver Convention...polls show that too)....
but I wonder how much of it is feed by the GOP...or was started by the GOP.
Regardless, if Obama wins (or even if he doesn't), it'll be interesting to see where Helen goes...back to talking up Hillary for '12....or disappears?!??!?!
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/18/2008 @ 10:49pm
Posted by lrjones4 at 09/18/2008 @ 10:34pm
LR, that same "superb politician" (I agree)...
said Obama would win easily.
But you don't want to quote or cite THAT, do you?
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/18/2008 @ 10:50pm
Bill Clinton is the second best politician ever!
Second only to George Wallace.
The question is; who is Bill trying to get elected?
Obama in '08 or Hillary in '12?
Posted by bleedingheart at 09/18/2008 @ 10:53pm
Hello everyone. I have reviewed all comments, and I note that the obligatory conservative troll has not yet posted here. Therefore allow me to make your evening complete:
CAPITALS! MORE CAPITALS! CAPITAL LETTERS EVERYWHERE!
PROFANITY! BLAME! SWEEPING GENERALIZATION! BROAD BASED INSULTS DIRECTED AT EVERYONE WHO READS THE NATION!
DIATRIBE AGAINST KVH! MORE PROFANITY!
RACIST COMMENTS ABOUT OBAMA! SNEERING NICKNAMES! GRATUITOUS USE OF THE ADJECTIVE 'LIBERAL' WHICH MAKES IT CLEAR I DON'T KNOW WHO JOHN STUART MILL IS!
SMUG CONCLUSION. IN WHICH I ESTABLISH THAT I DO NOT REALIZE I HAVE JUST MADE A COMPLETE ASS OF MYSELF.
Thank you. I now feel that the comments section is complete. I am sure that everyone else feels the same way.
Posted by canaro71 at 09/18/2008 @ 10:59pm
Pregnant defense minister? ANd so what? That's much better than Obama. make love, no war?
------------
Spain's Pregnant Defense Minister By Lisa Abend/Madrid Tuesday, Apr. 15, 2008 When Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero's new cabinet members took their oath of office before King Juan Carlos on Monday, one of them, the recently-appointed Defense Minister, stood out from the rest. Literally. Carme Chacón, 37, is not only the first woman to head Spain's armed forces. She is also seven months pregnant.
By now, no one should be surprised by Zapatero's commitment to gender equality. In his first term, he passed a sweeping law against domestic violence, legalized gay marriage, eased divorce laws, and required political parties to practice gender parity. He also appointed equal numbers of men and women to cabinet positions, and named María Teresa Fernández de la Vega as his deputy prime minister.
Posted by HelenDAO at 09/18/2008 @ 11:20pm
sure. economy is tanking and women are digesting the whole palin...
or not...
Posted by dexter666 at 09/18/2008 @ 11:26pm
Seventy-seven percent of the Illinois Democrat's commercials were negative during the week after the Republican National Convention, compared with 56 percent of the spots run by McCain.
Posted by HelenDAO at 09/18/2008 @ 10:28pm
You didn't read the rest of it, did you, Helen? You know, the part that defined a negative ad as an ad that simply mentioned the opponent. Or maybe you read it and chose to ignore it, as it blows a gigantic hole in your ridiculous argument. So, you didn't read it and are fundamentally ignorant of the matter of which you speak. Or you did read it and you're a liar.
Posted by jmusolino at 09/18/2008 @ 11:38pm
Posted by canaro71 at 09/18/2008 @ 10:59pm
I'd say that pretty much sums it up, and eloquently so!!
Posted by jmusolino at 09/18/2008 @ 11:41pm
But you don't want to quote or cite THAT, do you?
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/18/2008 @ 10:50pm
Mask you really are unique but love your diversionary style because it helps give the neurons (mine) a bit of exercise.
First let me suggest a general proposition.
Not one of us (unless we be in the loony bin or are sycophantic) agree 100% with the opinions of anyone.
You may be familiar with the expression "it takes one to know one".
Let me spell that out for you. I think Bill's evaluation of Palin's intuitive political skills has infinitely more value than your opinion or any journo or poster here and most other places as well, simply because he has those finely honed intuitive political skills himself plus he is a Rhodes scholar which gives me confidence he is also bright, and has enough self awareness to know what he is talking about.
So if I want to know something about Palin, the politician, who better to ask than this superb, twice-president politician?
Now as far as his opinion about the outcome of the election goes: I have no knowledge whether he is accurate at predicting future events. Perhaps a fortune teller or professional gambler would be a better choice. However we can all read EC maps and there is heck of a lot of red and pink over it and if Ohio and Virginia go red, and all the other pinks go red, it's seeya later big O baby.
I did expect you to point to Bill's suggestion that Palin's political and religious background was a little right of centre but I guess there is still time for that. I've noticed Bill carries his bible into church (when he goes) and that may or may not be a right wing practice but who knows? Perhaps it's just to get the loony religious right thinking he is one of them.
Posted by lrjones4 at 09/18/2008 @ 11:49pm
What a great opportunity to seize to get the office! As the fat lying liar Mike Moore would say: thank God for sending Hurricane to disrupt GOP convention. Now Obama, say thank God for this crisis. Ugly. Dangerously ugly.
----------
McCain aides: Obama 'cheerleading' market crisis By GLEN JOHNSON Sep 18 12:04 PM US/Eastern
CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa (AP) - Top aides to Republian John McCain are claiming Democrat Barack Obama and his advisers are exploiting Wall Street's financial problems for political gain. Aide Steve Schmidt, who worked for the Bush-Cheney team in 2004, told reporters Thursday aboard McCain's plane that Obama is "cheerleading this crisis." He said McCain is seeking a bipartisan solution although Schmidt and aides Mark Salter and Nicole Wallace also said Democratic congressional leaders should be condemned for considering adjourning without addressing the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, the sale of Merrill Lynch and the emergency government loan to insurer AIG.
Posted by HelenDAO at 09/19/2008 @ 12:13am
C'mon, stop with the hourly polls already. What is this, American Idol?
Who, honestly, didn't know months ago that, regardless of what the GOP pulled out of its rump, The Economy, tanking even way way back then, was The Issue.
And The Economy is a GOP Economy.
The debates will be a bloodbath. So gruesome, the GOP pigeons might even earn a few sympathy votes.
Obama/Biden: around 7% in the "popular" vote, around 70 votes in the EC.
Watch.
But if the Dems want to accomplish miracles next year, after inheriting the GOP disasters, they'd better work miracles now, winning big majorities in House & Senate.
Posted by sloper at 09/19/2008 @ 02:58am
"the savvy Bill."
Right, he of the 2 Clintons who want to get back in the White House.
We'll trust whatever he says.
Bill votes in NYS. Bill's vote doesn't count, as NYS already belongs to Obama.
Bill is spinning the media, hoping to tilt the gameboard.
Too late, because ... It's the economy, stupid.
Meanwhile, are we hearing correctly? Do it like the bogeyman?? Krugman today: "We don't know yet what that "comprehensive approach" will look like. There have been hopeful comparisons to the financial rescue the Swedish government carried out in the early 1990s, a rescue that involved a temporary public takeover of a large part of the country's financial system. It's not clear, however, whether policy makers in Washington are prepared to exert a comparable degree of control. And if they aren't, this could turn into the wrong kind of rescue -- a bailout of stockholders as well as the market, in effect rescuing the financial industry from the consequences of its own greed.
Furthermore, even a well-designed rescue would cost a lot of money. The Swedish government laid out 4 percent of G.D.P., which in our case would be a cool $600 billion -- although the final burden to Swedish taxpayers was much less, because the government was eventually able to sell off the assets it had acquired, in some cases at a handsome profit."
I can still hear the US hoots of derision from the time of that Swedish bailout ... "SOCIALIST!!"
It's rather like war, isn't it, where there are said to be no atheists in trenches & foxholes.
So now ... who still wants 4 more years? Besides Bill & Hillary.
Posted by sloper at 09/19/2008 @ 03:05am
Posted by lrjones4 at 09/18/2008 @ 11:49pm
LR, aside from your cherry-picking partisanship...
Why is Bill Clinton "savvy" on the wonders of St. Sarah Palin....
but not so much when he predicts Obama will win?!???!?!?
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 07:15am
Posted by HelenDAO at 09/18/2008 @ 10:28
Uh, yeah... tell you what. Go to politifact.com and look at the attacke profiles. Lemme know who has more lies under their belt...OK?
Posted by leftofcenter at 09/19/2008 @ 08:00am
I'm still tripping that bleedingheart thinks George Wallace was the best politician ever. I would think Lincoln but what do I know.
I am not surprised by the numbers. It be best to keep Palin hidden from the media. For her to have to answer questions off the cuff is not hr string suit. Sure she has her talking points but they don't help in an interview because you don't know what the questions are gonna be. If only she had a "cone of silence" then she might have an advantage. Besides, shouldn't all Republicans know what the "Bush Doctrine" is? I figured it would atleast be on her study sheet.
Posted by k330k at 09/19/2008 @ 08:01am
i bet ol bill also thiks mrs. mooseburger is a hot number...
oh well...no prob...
Posted by dexter666 at 09/19/2008 @ 08:52am
Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/19/2008 @ 08:42am | ignore this person | warn this person
nice story. i have some issues with some on my own side as well.
on some websites i have been accused of being a rightwing troll...lol...
but thats the way the donkey farts, eh?
Posted by dexter666 at 09/19/2008 @ 09:02am
Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/19/2008 @ 08:42am
Darin, simply....
1. What was I wrong about that I didn't admit? (I believe the last one was thinking Alberto Gonzales would NOT resign and would "ride it out"...I was wrong, and HSUBFOOLS has spent much time reminding me of that.)
and 2. What hypocrisy am I guilty of?
Examples and if valid, I'll happily admit I was wrong and apologize if need be.
For instance, if I said that "he parents of ONE child love themselves much more than the parents of 5 children. The parents of 5 children are more selfless than the parents of one child"...and insulted parents with only one child...
I'd apologize for that.
or if I said "No wonder Obama called her (Palin) a pig." and then a few hours later, said "I'll admit he wasn't calling Palin a pig....."
I'd have to 'fess up to that.
or if I said "Democrats are far worse when it comes to personally attacking candidates than Republicans are." and then tried to deny I said that....
obviously, a hypocrisy there.
Those kind of things.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 09:05am
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 07:15am
Well, maybe old Bill want to be the Sect'y of her Interior!
Posted by leftofcenter at 09/19/2008 @ 09:06am
Posted by leftofcenter at 09/19/2008 @ 09:06am
It's just LRJONES pickin-n-choosin' his "Clinton is so smart when it comes to politics"...because he praised the Palin pick.
but mention that Bill also said "Obama WILL win" and suddenly our Australian friend says "Well, obviously, I don't agree with everybody about everything!"
Point is...he was trying to use Clinton as "authority" (i.e. He's a Democrat and former President) to say "See? See? You lefties, even Bill Clinton likes Palin!"....
but not for other stuff which LR DOESN'T like!
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 09:20am
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 09:20am
Yes .. he ignores the fact that Bill is, well, Bill. Its got a skirt on so he wants to "field dress" it .. so to speak
Posted by leftofcenter at 09/19/2008 @ 09:27am
Posted by leftofcenter at 09/19/2008 @ 09:27am
Again, don't leave ol Macho Maverick out of that...again, look at the YouTube video of him announcing Palin as Veep in Dayton....
he's checking out the boobies!
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 09:40am
"Now Obama, say thank God for this crisis. Ugly. Dangerously ugly. ---------- McCain aides: Obama 'cheerleading' market crisis By GLEN JOHNSON Sep 18 12:04 PM US/Eastern CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa (AP) - Top aides to Republian John McCain are claiming Democrat Barack Obama and his advisers are exploiting Wall Street's financial problems for political gain. Aide Steve Schmidt, who worked for the Bush-Cheney team in 2004, told reporters Thursday aboard McCain's plane that Obama is "cheerleading this crisis." He said McCain is seeking a bipartisan solution although Schmidt and aides Mark Salter and Nicole Wallace also said Democratic congressional leaders should be condemned for considering adjourning without addressing the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, the sale of Merrill Lynch and the emergency government loan to insurer AIG."
Ah, I see how this works. If McCain's aides claim something, then it must be true. And we know from all those ads, that McCain is a pillar of truth.
Posted by onthehelm at 09/19/2008 @ 09:46am
Why is Bill Clinton "savvy" on the wonders of St. Sarah Palin....
but not so much when he predicts Obama will win?!???!?!?
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 07:15am
Mask not sure if the problem you have is unique to you, or whether you owe it to being educated in the American public school system. However I have noticed others here, whom I assume were also educated in the same system, don't appear to have the same difficulty you seem to have with making sense of words.
As you were unable to decipher my answer you may be interested to know that students doing English Expression in Aussie schools, who have comprehension problems or the inability to think clearly don't progress through the system to a higher grade. How does your education system handle those sorts of deficiencies?
Of course if it is the idiom that is causing you problems I'm quite willing to decode it for you if you let me know which parts are unintelligible to you.
You remind me very much of Will (C was it?), who seems to have disappeared. Perhaps you both attended the same school?
Incidentally I have probably seen Bill Clinton as you Americans have never seen him. He was interviewed several times on our national broadcaster (TV) after his presidency. In was more like a sympathetic "fire side" chat. The interview was very wide ranging and I was immediately impressed with his grasp of facts on many subjects, his quick intelligence, his ability to analyse complex situations and his warmth and charisma.
Posted by lrjones4 at 09/19/2008 @ 10:16am
Posted by HelenDAO at 09/19/2008 @ 12:13am
Why wouldn't Obama use this opportunity for his campaign? He's not a supply sider and this is the perfect opportunity to attack the trickle down theory, which in almost thirty years has never benefitted anyone except the super rich.
"fat lying liar" What are you, eight years old? Stop your posts, please. I've yet to see a comment from HelenDAO that expanded the debates here into meaningful dialogue.
By the way, the negative campaign ad numbers have been debunked by the very people that put them together. The numbers simply mean that Obama has mentioned "the other candidate" more often in his adverts.
Stop grasping at straws.
Posted by HAL9000 at 09/19/2008 @ 10:21am
Posted by lrjones4 at 09/19/2008 @ 10:16am
No, LR, your answer was quite clear...
"Let me spell that out for you. I think Bill's evaluation of Palin's intuitive political skills has infinitely more value than your opinion or any journo or poster here and most other places as well, simply because he has those finely honed intuitive political skills himself plus he is a Rhodes scholar which gives me confidence he is also bright, and has enough self awareness to know what he is talking about.
So if I want to know something about Palin, the politician, who better to ask than this superb, twice-president politician?"----Posted by lrjones4 at 09/18/2008 @ 11:49pm
Now, take that same logic and apply it to Obama and Clinton.
The man knows his politics...knows the electorate...and KNOWS "Obama, the politician".
Now why is it his evaluation of Obama and a deductive prediction that Obama's skills and political abilities will lead him to victory in November....LESS valid to you?
The reason is simple...that same authority (Bill Clinton) says something you disagree with...on virtually the same topic, the value of a political figure and their impact on this election.
You WANT Clinton to praise Palin...you DON'T WANT Clinton to say Obama will win.
Ergo, you pick one...and when the other comes up, suddenly Clinton's authority on political matters...evaporates.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 10:30am
lrjones-Your juvenile, and not very intelligent, attempts at put downs show a lack in your education as does your inability to apply the theory that you learned in school to the real world.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/19/2008 @ 10:38am
lrjones-You,just,keep repeating the same put down and if you were as brilliant as you believe you are you would be able to come up with something new.
Posted by i'm nobody at 09/19/2008 @ 11:04am
We have a winner!!!
[WASHINGTON - People would rather watch a football game with Barack Obama than with John McCain -- but by barely the length of a football.
Obama was the pick over McCain by a narrow 50 percent to 47 percent, according to an Associated Press-Yahoo News poll released Friday that generally mirrored each presidential candidate's strengths and weaknesses with voters. Women, minorities, younger and unmarried people were likelier to prefer catching a game with Obama while men, whites, older and married people would rather watch with McCain]-YahooNews
Posted by crabwalk at 09/19/2008 @ 11:37am
"I'm still tripping that bleedingheart thinks George Wallace was the best politician ever. I would think Lincoln but what do I know."
A great politician doesn't necessarily make a great president and vice versa.
Lincoln was a great president maybe the greatest.
But Wallace, a great politician.
Posted by bleedingheart at 09/19/2008 @ 11:39am
Allow me to get a jump...
"polls don't matter."
posted by FRANKGRITS, LUVSLIBERTY1, DARINTHETROLL, (2)SooHAPPY anytime ignore this person
Posted by crabwalk at 09/19/2008 @ 11:45am
LR, can YOU tell me what Palins positions are on international issue?
You see, I have been asking around and nobody can tell me about her, other than that she is a "good Christian", she is "tough", and she abhors abortion. You are a smart feller, maybe you can explain to me why you cons are so in love with her. I would think that the smart folks on the Right would have strong, well thought out reasons involving her known positions on crucial issues facing the US and the world. After all, we are undergoing a financial hiccup (one sentence of Palins is that we are fine, the next sentence is "only John McCain can fix this crisis", but I digress), involved in 2 wars and are facing the dynamic rising economic tigers of China and India. What is it about Sarah Palins positions on these issues excites you? Educate me, LeeRoy.
Posted by crabwalk at 09/19/2008 @ 11:52am
Posted by bleedingheart at 09/19/2008
Interesting. Well to each his/her own.
Posted by k330k at 09/19/2008 @ 11:57am
" I was immediately impressed with his grasp of facts on many subjects, his quick intelligence, his ability to analyse complex situations and his warmth and charisma. Posted by lrjones4 at 09/19/2008 @ 10:16am"-LRJONES
LeeRoy, Clintons intelligence and ability to analyze complex situations has led him to the belief that Barak Obama/ Joe Biden is the better pick than Sarah Palin/John McCain.
But, this is AmeriKa, and we want a president that we can drink Fosters with.
Posted by crabwalk at 09/19/2008 @ 11:58am
Now, take that same logic and apply it to Obama and Clinton.... ...The reason is simple...that same authority (Bill Clinton) says something you disagree with...on virtually the same topic, the value of a political figure and their impact on this election.
You WANT Clinton to praise Palin...you DON'T WANT Clinton to say Obama will win.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 10:30am
Logic demands seeing the difference between Clinton's appraisal of Palin and the mental process Clinton needed to predict an election winner viz predicting the EC outcome. One is a considered opinion of something (Palin) that can be observed; the other is a guess on an event that has not yet happened and that can only be based on his experience of the electorate and political trends.
Thus his two opinions do not have the same value.
This is the conversation you referred to:
"Before reporters were ushered out, Clinton was asked where he sees the race between Obama and McCain.
"I predict that Senator Obama will win and win pretty handily," he said.
Obama interjected: "You can take it from the president of the United States. He knows a little something about politics."
Below* is the spin on your fabrication that can't be found in the above conversation however you twist it.
Neither Clinton nor Obama said anything about "and knows Obama, the politician" nor did they mention"Obama's skills and political abilities".
You did.
Your connection of his opinions is not only illogical but also misrepresents what was actually said.
*"The man knows his politics...knows the electorate...and KNOWS "Obama, the politician". Now why is it his evaluation of Obama and a deductive prediction that Obama's skills and political abilities will lead him to victory in November....LESS valid to you?"
Posted by lrjones4 at 09/19/2008 @ 12:46pm
Posted by lrjones4 at 09/19/2008 @ 12:46pm
So we assume nothing in Clinton's prediction of an Obama win that he was making an assessment of Obama's political skill and the current state of the polity...but we take a full value his assessment of Sarah Palin?
Again...allow me to quote-
"Bill Clinton is without doubt a superb politician (whether one agrees with his policy positions or not) this: (reported CNBC 18 Sep)"
"There are quite a few donkeys here who imagine they know more than the savvy Bill."
"Let me spell that out for you. I think Bill's evaluation of Palin's intuitive political skills has infinitely more value than your opinion or any journo or poster here and most other places as well, simply because he has those finely honed intuitive political skills himself plus he is a Rhodes scholar which gives me confidence he is also bright, and has enough self awareness to know what he is talking about."
BTW "It would be a mistake to underestimate her…her intuitive skills are significant."....why is saying we shouldn't "underestimate her" not a PREDICTION of her skills in UPCOMING electioneering?!?!???!
And if that IS a prediction....you again contradict yourself.
BUT...if he says Obama is going to win and win pretty handily....we ignore that.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 1:00pm
Instead he picked an admirably personally accomplished but otherwise ill-advised evangelical loon.
Posted by Zero at 09/18/2008 @ 9:30pm
Zero, You're right. He could have chosen Olympia Snow. But that 28% wouldn't have liked it. I think both parties need to stop catering to the SE United States. The rest of the country is starting to get a little tired of it.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/19/2008 @ 1:38pm
They want to sound like their New Dealers!
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/18/2008 @ 10:17pm
Yep, next thing you know, they'll be telling us that if FDR would have been president today, he'd have been a republican.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/19/2008 @ 1:41pm
are we going to become a socialist state by default? Just wondering.
Posted by yutsano at 09/18/2008 @ 10:27pm
Under a "neoconservative" president no-less. They're up to something I tell you, and it ain't good whatever it is. When you hear rethugs talking about doing something for the "good" of the American people, you can bet your bottom dollar it's for the good only the richest American people.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/19/2008 @ 1:44pm
BUT...if he says Obama is going to win and win pretty handily....we ignore that.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 1:00pm
Well at least you have perseverance. What Clinton said about Palin is a general statement such that Clinton's language would indicate it to be true even if she were not a VP candidate in this coming election. Thus there is no predictive element in Clinton's statement about her.
So unlike his statement about Obama and the election it is not a guess about something in the future. But is what he believes to be true of Palin at the time he made that statement:
" she is (present tense, so no prediction here) an instinctively effective candidate with (already has it) a compelling story".
or again in the present tense:
"…her intuitive skills are significant."
So the point you try to make out of Clinton's two statements is simply not there at any level no matter what mental gymnastics you perform.
Mask you would make a good spin doctor. Maybe an opening in the Obama organisation
Posted by lrjones4 at 09/19/2008 @ 1:50pm
Posted by HelenDAO at 09/19/2008 @ 12:13am
Pull your head out Helen. The reason Wallstreet and the banks are in such turmoil is because of Cheney, McCain, Bush and the rest of the let the market dictate how things run. The market knows all and is self correcting. Yes indeed, it's self correcting itself right into chapter 11. If wallstreet was a person, it wouldn't be able to declare to be bankrupt, but since it's a business, the GOP congress will allow them to do it.
Pro country my ass. These folks are pro business at any expense including the countries.
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/19/2008 @ 1:53pm
Well, maybe old Bill want to be the Sect'y of her Interior!
Posted by leftofcenter at 09/19/2008 @ 09:06am
Now you've got me wondering if she drives a hummer!!! lol
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/19/2008 @ 1:59pm
according to the sarah palin baby name generator,
maskdelta is "bullet bodycheck palin"
frosty zoom is "rot pipeline palin"
leroy jones is "rifle panzer palin"
and,
FACTS TRUTH is "steam fangs palin"
god bless.
http://politsk.blogspot.com/2008/09/sarah_13.html
Posted by frosty zoom at 09/19/2008 @ 2:15pm
Posted by Wolfgang1 at 09/19/2008 @ 1:59pm
LOL ... give the man a cigar!
Posted by leftofcenter at 09/19/2008 @ 2:17pm
Did I just hear that McPOWhowmanyMANSIONS just say that if president, he'd fire Putin too, while Palin spots him of course...
Posted by hsuBfools at 09/19/2008 @ 2:20pm
Or was that the other way around? Palin...Putin...
McPOWhowmanyMANSIONS is starting to get ever more really really confused.
Posted by hsuBfools at 09/19/2008 @ 2:22pm
Posted by hsuBfools at 09/19/2008 @ 2:22pm
Hey .. don't pick on Grampa ... mebbe he just forgot to take his Aricept!
Posted by leftofcenter at 09/19/2008 @ 2:35pm
Posted by lrjones4 at 09/19/2008 @ 1:50pm
No, my point is one of Occam's Razor simplicity....
1. Bill Clinton was right about Sarah Palin's qualities.
2. Bill Clinton was right when he said Obama would win handily.
OR
1. Bill Clinton was wrong about Sarah Palin's qualities.
2. Bill Clinton was wrong when he said Obama would win handily.
And you don't get to "mix and match" to suit your own partisan requirements of "Look what this brilliant politician and twice-elected President just said!!!!"....
without looking like a hypocrite.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 2:38pm
"I thought Democrats were more selfish than Republicans because Republicans have larger families."----Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 09/19/2008 @ 2:53pm
Darin, the implication...is the SAME. "Small family = 'less selfish'" "If some one is 'more selfless' than somebody else, then the other person is 'more selfish'"
Which means if you have one child, you're "selfish".
Which is an insult.
BTW, love to see you say that to a LOT of REPUBLICAN families (and I could find many) who only had one or two children.
oh, and BTW, BTW....I'm still waiting on examples on me?
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 3:55pm
Posted by frosty zoom at 09/19/2008 @ 2:15pm
HEY, HEY, HEY....FROSTY's back.
Just in time, need some research into the past and LVLIB's take on "government intervention into the 'Free Market'"...
seems NOW....he likes it!
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 4:04pm
These CBS/NY Times "polls" must reflect that "hope" Obama keeps talking about.
Isn't Palin the only one of the four on stage who isn't a Washington insider and whose fingerprints aren't all over the roots of the "economic crisis"?
In light of that fact, and the relationship Obama has with Raines, etc, does Obama really want the economy to be THE issue?
Haha, doesn't really matter. Most americans have absolutely no idea whatsoever what is happening to us anyway. There's no real difference between Obama and McCain at all.
Posted by freiheit1 at 09/19/2008 @ 4:14pm
YEAH, LIKE NIGHT AND DAY...
Posted by hsuBfools at 09/19/2008 @ 4:31pm
Oops forgot the caps lock...
irony or ynori
same
see
Posted by hsuBfools at 09/19/2008 @ 4:33pm
My commune is so excited today! We think that the great wave of nationalization has begun. All we have to do is collectively (love that word) keep shorting different segments of the economy. As each one falls, the gov't will step in to take it over. Soon, the gov't will own it all, and the great socialist age will begin. I can't wait to attend my first workers council where we all get to vote on production quotas. I hope to get elected to a council position where I will get to attend meetings with other councils, where we vote on what products to make, and make sure we fit in with the new 5 year plan. Our commune is filled with joy at the prospect of meeting our pledge to greater productivity. Don't lose hope. The current atmosphere of fear is the catalyst for a new day of collective celebration!
Posted by sntauri at 09/19/2008 @ 4:38pm
Posted by hsuBfools at 09/19/2008 @ 4:33pm | ignore this person | warn this person
dyslexics of the world untie!!!
Posted by dexter666 at 09/19/2008 @ 4:38pm
I do not suffer from lysdexia!
Posted by sntauri at 09/19/2008 @ 4:44pm
ya see, croc, over here the conservatives have this crazy ass satano-aynrando reality denying ideology, and they are stitched together at the hip to those OTHER republicans, the christo-fascist cromwellian theocrats...
those guys deny scientific reality and want their daughters to get genital warts if they cant keep their pants on...
so those guys got enough of the marching morons to tromp off into their little satano-aynrando/roundhead christofascist coalition from hell rocket ships to venus, economically speaking, and now we americans must elect democrats to fix the mess...
thats how it works over here, croc...
Posted by dexter666 at 09/19/2008 @ 4:49pm
dognmadit!
Posted by dexter666 at 09/19/2008 @ 4:54pm
Posted by sntauri at 09/19/2008 @ 4:38pm
:-) It is the New World Order evolving in front of our blind eyes.
Posted by freiheit1 at 09/19/2008 @ 4:54pm
Posted by sntauri at 09/19/2008 @ 4:38pm
Well, we have been ruled via a corporate new con repub petty dic'tatorship (unitary executive) for the last 7 years or so and no one seemed to make much of a fuss. What's really the dif if corporations run the gov or the gov run the corporations, us lowly citizens aren't in the loop, but bare the no bid brunt of the BS results anyway.
1000 years of Indentured Servitude ring anyone's bell?
Posted by hsuBfools at 09/19/2008 @ 4:55pm
"We keep you alive to serve this ship. Row well and live"
Ben-Hur 1957
Posted by sntauri at 09/19/2008 @ 4:59pm
You have to be dubious of anyone saying they're switching at this point. It'd be interesting to know the stats on those 'white working class' claiming to be for Obama who pull the lever for whitey. I've seen some stats suggesting this behavior falls in the 5-10% range. Plenty to make polls look good for Obama, and reality good for McCain.
Posted by winyahn at 09/19/2008 @ 7:23pm
And you don't get to "mix and match" to suit your own partisan requirements of "Look what this brilliant politician and twice-elected President just said!!!!"....
without looking like a hypocrite.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 2:38pm
Mask for some strange reason your spin-doctor mind has linked two independentopinions as being logically dependent. ie A if and only if B.
Here are the the possibilities: A+B or A+not B or notA+B or notA+notB
Now it is very easy to show the absurdity of your linking of these two independent opinions of WC by considering the following outcome.
If Obama loses the election, which is a possibility when one considers the current *EC position, then on your reckoning Palin is NOT all that Bill Clinton claimed her to be.
Is that what you are saying?
If so that is far from being the simplest solution (which is what Occam's Razor proposes). It is in reality a concocted absurdity.
Stated then in your terms: If Obama loses the election then Bill Clinton was wrong in his evaluation of Palin's political skills.
Come, come mask please stop doing a Willie on us, as you really are not that stupid. I wouldn't have spent so much time on this one but you really do need some help with thinking through your attempts at logical connections.
If you learn to break down your "logical" premises as I did for you above you and show they are independent, by drawing a logical conclusion from them, you will pick up where you are going wrong and will not make so many foolish claims in future.
*Dick Morris recently suggested the EC stood at McCain 290 Obama 172 with 76 up for grabs.
The NYT is only prepared to put Obama at 238 and McCain at 227, which leaves 76 in the more doubtful category.
Posted by lrjones4 at 09/19/2008 @ 8:18pm
"We keep you alive to serve this ship. Row well and live"
Ben-Hur 1957
Posted by sntauri at 09/19/2008 @ 4:59pm
"This is the gulag Rura Penthe. There is no stockade. No guard tower. No electronic frontier. Only a magnetic shield prevents beaming. "Punishment" means exile from prison to the surface. On the surface, nothing can survive.
[A naked man is dragged out of the prison and thrown into the tundra]
Work well, and you will be treated well. Work badly, and you will die."
Commandant of the Klingon penal colony.
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 8:46pm
Speaking of absurdity...
"*Dick Morris recently suggested the EC stood at McCain 290 Obama 172 with 76 up for grabs."-----Posted by lrjones4 at 09/19/2008 @ 8:18pm
LR, who did Dick Morris ASSURE us was going to be the Democratic nominee in 2008 and "only Condi can stop her"?
Even wrote a book about it?
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 8:48pm
http://www.amazon.com/ Condi-vs-Hillary-Great-Presidential /dp/0060839139/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s= books&qid=1221871926&sr=8-1
BTW, LR...you can buy used copies for a penny!
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 8:53pm
Even wrote a book about it?
Posted by Maskdelta at 09/19/2008 @ 8:48pm
"Well, in dick morris' defence, he is a lying sack of shit."
Posted by Malcontent at 09/19/2008 @ 10:44pm
Posted by crabwalk at 09/19/2008 @ 11:52am
Crabs ... heard something that details Palin's foreign policy experience.
http://tinyurl.com/4n5m8j
Guess we should all give up and giver the crown .. after all she now thinks its a Palin - McCain ticket
http://tinyurl.com/3e8t6l
LOL
Posted by leftofcenter at 09/19/2008 @ 10:59pm
Do you mean to tell me that not all white women are glassy eyed evangelicals? And by the way: why did dear Sarah call all hockey moms dogs? I'm a hockey fan and I know some really pretty hockey gals. Granted there are some really ugly ones too, but that is true of any demographic, isn't it?
Posted by lachatte at 09/20/2008 @ 09:20am
Why do all you lefties sit around and chatter about this Palin the Ass? She has nothing EXCEPT the ability to make people want to talk about her.
When people raise her as a topic, dismiss her briefly and talk instead about the important things: Climate change. The economy. The war. America's high poverty and illiteracy rates. [your favourite Important Thing here].
Posted by mikecope at 09/20/2008 @ 09:34am
The Palin bounce was merely a sign of the women of the republican base. Independents who watched the Gibson interview and the entire Palin drama of "hide-the-candidate", figure that she must be a dangerous bet if she can't stand up to VPOTUS questions.
Posted by cnthom87 at 09/20/2008 @ 11:27am
Boo!
Posted by crabwalk at 09/20/2008 @ 3:37pm
Most of you bloggers are too young to remember the "bad old days" when abortion was illegal. However, the rich among us could always "buy off" a doctor to do their bidding. I lost a life long friend to a back alley abortion in the early 60's. It radicalized not only me but also my Mother. How dare anyone tell a woman what to do with their bodies!!?? If men had babies, not only would there be a clinic on every other street corner, but at one end of the waiting room would be a wide screen TV, and the other would have an open bar! I am pro-choice, which simply means a woman can have a CHOICE whether to keep her child or not. The fact that Sarah Palin would condemn a young victim of rape or incest to have the baby not only nauseates me, it scares the living hell out of me! She has the right to her opinions, but she needs to stay the hell out of mine!
Posted by Barbara1945 at 09/21/2008 @ 3:31pm