Zogby: McCain Leads; Rasmussen: It's All Tied
Nick Gillespie | September 7, 2008, 11:03am
Take all of this for what you will, what's it worth, etc. But here are two polls about that there presidential election in November that show Republican John McCain doing well about Democrat Barack Obama:
The McCain/Palin ticket wins 49.7% support, compared to 45.9% backing for the Obama/Biden ticket, this latest online survey shows. Another 4.4% either favored someone else or were unsure.
The Ticket Horserace | 9-5/6 | 8-29/30 |
McCain-Palin | 49.7% | 47.1% |
Obama-Biden | 45.9% | 44.6% |
Others/Not sure | 4.4% | 8.3% |
In the two-way contest in which just McCain and Obama were mentioned in the question, the result was slightly different, with McCain leading, 48.8% to 45.7%.
One-on-One Horserace | 9-5/6 |
McCain | 48.8% |
Obama | 45.7% |
Others/Not sure | 5.5% |
In a Zogby Interactive survey conducted last weekend, just after the McCain announcement that Palin would join his ticket, McCain Palin won 47.1% support, while Obama/Biden won 44.6% support.
The interactive survey of 2,312 likely voters nationwide was conducted Sept. 5-6, 2008, and carries a margin of error of +/- 2.1 percentage points.
More here.
In the first national [Rasumussen tracking] polling results based entirely on interviews conducted after Sarah Palin's acceptance speech, Barack Obama gets 46% of the vote and so does John McCain. When "leaners" are included, it's all even at 48%....
This past Tuesday, Obama's bounce peaked with the Democrat enjoying a six-percentage point advantage. Before the two conventions were held, Obama had consistently held a one or two point lead over McCain for most of August (see recent daily results).
Tracking Poll results are based upon nightly telephone interviews and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. As a result, tomorrow (Monday) will be the first update based entirely upon interviews conducted after McCain's speech. By Tuesday or Wednesday, the net impact of both political conventions should be fairly clear....
Forty-two percent (42%) of voters say that economic issues are most important this year and Obama holds a 34-point advantage among these voters.
Twenty-four percent (24%) of voters say the national security issues are most important. Among these voters its McCain by 39.
More here.
Forget about Tuesday or Wednesday—I suspect we'll have a clearer sense of where things are in a week's time, after the memory of the conventions has faded (thank god) and we've got a solid week of slinging back and forth from the campaigns.
It does seem that the presidential debates (and to a lesser degree, the vice presidential version) might have a really serious impact on the presidential vote this time around. And it should be an interesting matchup, with two very different personalities and oratorical styles on display.
I'm very interested to see how Bob Barr fares over the next couple of week, too. He was pulling 5 percent in a Zogby poll a week or so back, and polled as high as 8 percent in an Ohio survey, but seems to have faded since then.
joe | September 7, 2008, 2:25pm | #
J, NM,
According to that same source - the Brookings/Tax Policy Center study - the top 1% would fare as follows under the two plans:
McCain: -$31,943
Obama: +$114,238
That is for those making $619,561 per annum.
If the average person in the top 20% gets a $2856 tax cut from McCain, but the top 5% of that quintile (ie, the top 1%) gets a $31,943 tax cut, that means that people in the 80-99% range average a tax cut of $2562.
If the average person in the top 20% get a $6770 tax increase under the Obama plan, but the top 1% gets a $114,238 increase, that's a $5684 increase for people in the 80-99% range.
However, that top quintile begins at $117,535 per year, and Obama's plan includes no tax increases on people earning below about $250,000, so if we assume that that figure is right about at the 90% level, that means that half the people in the top quintile get no tax increase, the people above 99% get a $114k tax increase, so the people between 90% and 99% get a $2351 tax hike.
So the Obama plan is, roughly:
Bottom 20%: -$617
Second 20%: -$950
Middle 20%: -$1035
Fourth 20%: -$757
Next 10%: About even
Next 9%: +$2351
Top 1%: +$114,238 (This is an average for the top 1%, which includes a population with the lowest income a little above $600k, and the highest over $1 billion.)
All figures subject to my assumptions, Brookings' assumptions, and joez math skeelz.
joe | September 7, 2008, 9:50pm | #
You keep watching his lead get smaller, smaller.. No, I don't. This was a completely manufactured media story. Before the conventions, Obama had a remarkably, historically unprecedented, steady lead of 2-4 points. There were not flip-flops in the lead, and it never got larger than that. You just looked at every outlier poll in one direction, and one direction only, and freaked out about it. I told you after you freaked out about the August 20th Zogby poll - which you threw a holy queen of a tantrum over - that is was an outlier, and that it would quickly be followed by a bunch of polls in the familiar small-Obama-lead range, and what happened? There were a bunch of polls released in the next week showing exactly that small Obama lead. You completely ignored them.
Then, Obama got a big convention bounce, went up over 50%, grew his lead to 6-8 points, and you completely ignored that. As did I, because it's just a convention bounce. And then McCain gets a convention bounce, too, like every candidate from either party has done since the beginning of polling, and you're back to your mooing "Dooomed! Dooooomed!"
Well, maybe not, but who wants a stupid and clumsy candidate You really can't see anything but the man's color and name, can you? A stupid, clumsy candidate? You are delusional, or you are putting on an act.
Get this through your head: no Democratic candidate in your lifetime has performed this well in a campaign. No Democratic candidate since LBJ was an incumbent has held an unbroken lead from April through the Republican convention. None. Never happened. Not Carter, running against Nixon's VP two years after Watergate. Not Bill Clinton, the most talented (southern, White, male) politician of our time, running against an incumbent Republican in the middle of a recession. Nobody.
If Barack Obama was as weak a candidate as your personal reflexes tell you, he would not have set the record for the longest unbroken period leading the polls in modern history. We don't have to guess at this anymore; we have a track record now, actual evidence from the world outside your head.
Marie | September 7, 2008, 11:08pm | #
New Story Breaking - Track Palin School Bus Vandalism in 2005?
I know, another story about Palin's family but this one may actually lead into current problems with Palin's abuse of power investigation. For those not aware, its an old story from 2005 concerning school bus vandalism in Wasilla, Alaska with a new twist previously unreported.
It was reported today in Anchorage on progressive talk 1080 KUDO - and quoted from a non-disclosed judicial source, that Track Palin was the unidentified minor who was involved with the vandalism at the time. The minor was reported to be 16 years old. Here is the news article I found relating to this back in 2005. The judicial source's reason for disclosing the data was that it would be released 'sooner or later'.
Even more interesting is the fact that the Alaska State Troopers did the investigation and report on the incident. To add fuel to the fire, Trooper Wooten (the trooper Palin has tried to get removed from the Alaska State Troopers) was assigned to that post at that time and may have worked on the case. I'm trying to secure a copy of the police report.
Published on Monday, December 5, 2005 7:47 PM AKST
Four teens arrested Monday for criminal mischief, trespass
December 6, 2005
JOEL DAVIDSONFrontiersman reporter
MAT-SU - Alaska State Troopers arrested four teenage boys at their Mat-Su homes Monday after they were charged in last week's vandalism of 44 Mat-Su school buses - an incident that forced the Mat-Su Borough School District to close schools for a day on Nov. 29.
Trooper spokesman Greg Wilkinson said the boys were in the custody of their parents over the weekend while troopers continued their investigation. The arrests Monday were pre-arranged so parents could be present when the boys were taken away to Mat-Su Youth Facility in Palmer.
Deryck Harris, 18, and the other three boys - ages 16, 17 and 17 - were each charged with third-degree criminal mischief, first-degree criminal trespass and conspiracy to commit criminal mischief, troopers said. The 16-year-old was also charged with fourth-degree theft and furnishing alcohol to a minor, for allegedly stealing a bottle of vodka from the liquor store at Tesoro 2-Go in Wasilla.
“They stopped at a liquor store where he went in and stole a bottle of vodka and provided it to the others in the group,” Wilkinson said. “Three of the four boys consumed alcohol.”
Troopers did not release names of the juvenile suspects, but David Coon's mother confirmed her son was one of two Burchell High School students involved in the incident. The other two boys are Wasilla High School students.
Mat-Su Youth Facility Superintendent Bruce Collins said youths in this situation must see a judge within 48 hours of their detention at the facility.
“The clock is ticking,” he said. “These guys will probably go to court today or tomorrow.”
Depending on the situation, Collins said the youths could face a number of different scenarios when they go before a judge.
“It can go a whole bunch of directions,” he said. “If they can't go back home, we don't have a whole lot of foster homes in the Valley. In that case they might stay with us. If they order psychological evaluations, they will stay with us until that can be completed.”
The boys are suspected of deflating tires in 44 First Student buses, breaking mirrors and unplugging 110 buses from their engine-block heaters, which caused the buses not to start in subzero weather on Nov. 29.
Contact Joel Davidson at 352-2266 or joel.davidson@frontiersman.com.
Print this story Email this story Post A Comment Digg del.icio.us
Copyright © 2008 Frontiersman
Comments
8 comment(s)
Jay wrote on Sep 6, 2008 4:58 PM:
" Why can't you people take the truth. No way will McCain/Palin win. Oh of course if they steal the election which by now the Repubs are masters at. "
Sue wrote on Sep 6, 2008 1:14 AM:
" 16, male, are you crazy? Why does this come up now that Gov Palin is running w/Sen McCain? More garbage, who is behind this? Obviously the Obama camp. Did you realize he went to the the most expensive, elite Academy in the nation? Punahou is the Harvard of High School, the elite of the nation. I was accepted to Wesley, Harvard & Stanford & disappointed & bored as we learned in our Sophmore and Junior yrs the curriculum taught in college. But boys will be boys & Obama was Barry Obama! "
Foobar wrote on Sep 5, 2008 2:59 PM:
" Pwned.
The entire Palin family is like a well-dressed episode of Jerry Springer. "
MrUniteUs wrote on Sep 5, 2008 5:31 AM:
" Very serious if true. The brake lines were cut on 50 buses!!
Was Sarah Palin's son "Track Palin" arrested for vandalism ... Most recently there is discussion that Track Palin, then 16, was one of the 3 boys arrested for vandalizing 44 Mat-Su school buses - an incident that forced ...
answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080904193702AAGlSCL - "
aklocal wrote on Sep 2, 2008 8:07 PM:
" I remember that story. Timeline makes it loosely plausible. Don't think this will catch fire without more fuel, though. Good luck. "
Destyne Pope wrote on Feb 12, 2008 4:20 AM:
" How do you get out there when you are blind? You must be really brave "
vacation wrote on Jan 30, 2008 12:39 PM:
" Hi! I'm John Strass and i like your site!
Thank you! "
Nyakeh Sam Suale wrote on Nov 14, 2007 10:59 AM:
" I think i love Wasilla High More than all high schools in the United States. They have the best Soccer team and coaches....oh.. they won the Basketball State Championship at the Sullivan Arena....Thats so cute. I like all the students over there. "
Luke | September 8, 2008, 3:13am | #
McCain's Speech
We all knew that McCain would give a decent speech. I think he probably gave the best speech of his career to date. McCain is not an "Obama-esque" orator. Governor Palin is actually a better speaker than her boss. But what John McCain lacks in oratorical skills, he more than makes up in passion and sincerity.
I've disagreed with John S. McCain on several issues, but I respect him. His wife has done more for the people of this world than Obama and his wife ever will. Some of you may get angry with this next statement, but I don't particularly care - It's the truth. Obama might talk a good game, but he is not a leader and he isn't fit to be the President of the United States.
I think the biggest difference between Obama's speech and McCain's speech was the difference between dependence and independence. Obama told us what government was going to do for us and McCain emphasized that we should be out there doing something worthwhile.
My friends, if you find faults with our country, make it a better one. If you’re disappointed with the mistakes of government, join its ranks and work to correct them. Enlist…
Enlist in our Armed Forces. Become a teacher. Enter the ministry. Run for public office. Feed a hungry child. Teach an — an illiterate adult to read. Comfort the afflicted. Defend the rights of the oppressed.
Our country will be the better, and you will be the happier, because nothing brings greater happiness in life than to serve a cause greater than yourself.
By contrast, Obama wants to give you everything:
For over two decades -- for over two decades, he's subscribed to that old, discredited Republican philosophy: Give more and more to those with the most and hope that prosperity trickles down to everyone else.
In Washington, they call this the "Ownership Society," but what it really means is that you're on your own. Out of work? Tough luck, you're on your own. No health care? The market will fix it. You're on your own. Born into poverty? Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps, even if you don't have boots. You are on your own.
In other words, Government will do it for you! We will take from the rich and give to the poor. We will give you what you need. Depend on us! Never mind that that concept is the actual discredited one. What the Ownership society really means is that the welfare of individuals is directly related to their ability to control their own lives and wealth, rather than relying on government transfer payments, Government transfer payments is simply taking money from me, the tax payer, to give to you, the tax taker.
Government does not cause prosperity. You cannot tax companies into success.
McCain speaks of the real American way and Obama wants to give you a false way that has absolutely nothing to do with real American values of individualism and hard work.
Obama is an empty suit with no experience. He has no accomplishments. He has no record of any legislation. We don't even know what he really did as a community organizer! He is, however, good friends with William Ayers. An avowed America hater and unrepentant terrorist.
The company you keep...
Luke | September 8, 2008, 3:19am | #
Why Obama Should Not Be President.:
I realize that liberals do not understand this concept, but regardless of what they think, the facts are that the United States is free and remains that way as long as we keep a strong, technologically advanced military.
This should scare the living hell out of you!!!!
"I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems."----
You mean like what was used to shoot down that satellite? This hearkens back to the days of Reagan and "star wars". I'm sure that there are parts of it that need work or improvement, but to toss out a program because it is, as yet, unproven is just plain wrongheaded.
At one point in time, airplanes were unproven technology and yet in 1909, the military bought their first rudimentary military airplane. Talk about unproven technology!!!! Good thing Obama wasn't President!
"I will not weaponize space"---
Too late, Bucko! It already is. The Chinese are already deploying them. To not do this puts a lot of technology at risk. Your TV (Even cable is transmitted to your town via satellite), the internet, GPS and a host of military technologies depend upon Satellites.
"I will slow development of future combat systems"---
This one should scare the living hell out of you!!!!! The post WWII US Military has relied on technology to give us the edge. During the Cold War, the Soviets had us in numbers. They had more men, missiles, airplanes, and bullets, but we had them in technology. We could get there faster, kill more of them then they could us and do it with precision accuracy. It was our edge, our ace in the hole. And now, this man wants to destroy it!
The Chinese, through espionage and other means, are trying to catch up and take the lead in technology. It would be absolutely irresponsible to allow our technological edge to completely disappear.
"I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons and to seek that goal, I will not develop nuclear weapons..."---
The world is nuclear. The genie is out of the bottle and will not be put back in. We must be ready to counter any and every threat.
Obama will destroy the military and their technological edge. In a battle, that could mean the difference of a few lives lost and hundreds or thousands, not to mention his plans call for putting our entire safety as a nation at risk..
Luke | September 8, 2008, 3:20am | #
Why Obama Should Not Be President II
Last February, I wrote a post titled, "Why Obama Should Not Be President". In that post, I discussed Obama's view of the military and why that would jeopardize this country's security. Yesterday, Obama again told us why he should not be President - this time he aimed his remarks at the very heart of America.
At a fundraiser in Terre Haute, IN that was closed to the press (natch!), someone recorded a video of Obama (oops!) saying:
"You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them," Obama, an Illinois senator, said.
"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," he said. (Emphasis added)
This is typical liberal elitism. You people out there in the small towns and rural areas are considered to be nothing but uneducated rubes who marry your siblings, drink your moonshine and attend your KKK rallies. You are too stupid to understand your world and the events that shape it. This drives you into your churches where you burn your sacrifices and crosses. When you go home to your double-wide, you sit out on your porch with your three dogs, four junk cars in the yard and and knee-high weeds for a lawn, drink your Budweiser and shoot at outsiders (especially if they are a different color) with your shotgun or assault rifle.
Trust me, that isn't much of an exaggeration of how liberals think. To many of them, Conservatives and poor white people are not much more than knuckle-dragging, racist rubes. I admit, I'm generalizing a little myself, but I'll bet I'm a bit closer to the mark. Trust me, I've gotten comments from some of these people.
Obama's attitude is clear here and his clear disregard for the the values and beliefs of middle America is blatantly on display.
It's just one more reason why Barak Obama does not deserve to be the President of this country.
Luke | September 8, 2008, 3:21am | #
Who Would Keep Their Pledge?
232 years ago, the grandest experiment in self governance in political history was set in motion when 56 men signed their names to an eloquent and daring document whose words still echo in the hearts of free people around the world. No other political document on earth, either before or since, has impacted world history so profoundly than our Declaration of Independence. The only document that even comes close was written eleven years later and is our own Constitution.
The men who wrote the Declaration of Independence did not just write some flowery sounding words. These were not men looking for earmarks and pork. When they signed this Declaration, they did so knowing full well that the consequences could be deadly. The very last sentence of the the Declaration indicates that they knew the weight and significance of their words:
—And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
Most people never get that far in their reading of the Declaration. If they know anything about it at all it is probably connected with the "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" phrase and even then, most people probably assume that particular phrase is part of the Constitution.
As I was contemplating the upcoming Fourth of July Holiday, that last sentence popped into my head. Long ago, I had a US History teacher take time in class to point out that sentence and its importance to us and the Declaration. It was in eighth grade and our teacher was an Estonian immigrant whose parents came here to escape the Nazis. I wish I could remember her name as she had a profound influence upon me and my love for history.
The point to all of this is to compare McCain and Obama and decide which one would sign such a pledge and if they signed it, would they keep their word.
Rather than beat around the proverbial bush, I'll come straight out and say that McCain would sign it and mean it. Obama might sign it it, but as soon as the political heat started rising, I believe he would disavow it as soon as he could. He has a history.
On March 18, 2008, Senator Obama said this:
"I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him (Jeremiah Wright) than I can my white grandmother."
Six weeks later, on April 29th, Senator Obama disavowed Wright.
Since his disavowal of his former spiritual adviser, Mr. Obama has since disavowed others and changed his position on a number of issues. Michael Crowley , editor of the New Republic, a center-left publication, pointed this out in an op-ed in the Guardian yesterday:
During the Democratic primary season, all those eons ago, Barack Obama deployed no more powerful line against Hillary Clinton than his insistence that 'we can't just tell people what they want to hear. We need to tell them what they need to hear'. More than just a catchy couplet, the phrase was a deadly arrow into the heart of Clintonism.
Few things crippled Hillary's campaign like the belief that she would say or do anything to get elected, from supporting the Iraq War to claiming she'd dodged sniper fire at Tuzla. In Obama, Democrats seemed to have found something refreshing: a brave truth-teller unmoored to pollsters such as Mark Penn, someone who had spoken out against Iraq the war and could at last restore integrity and honesty to Washington politics.
But since Obama dispatched Clinton, he has seemed rather more attuned to what the people want to hear or perhaps he has simply traded the wants of a liberal audience for those of a more moderate one. Either way, he is treading that reliably time-worn path every nominee follows to the political centre. And the question for Democrats is whether to applaud Obama as a cunning politician who knows how to win or fret that he's given undecided voters reason to think his 'politics of hope' are just politics as usual.
McCain, on the other hand has shown that he doesn't march to any drumbeat but his own. In conversation, I' often described McCain as a bit of a loose cannon, but never have I gotten the impression that his vote or his opinion was for sale and that includes polling results. McCain's experience as a combat pilot, POW and subsequent years of service both in and out of the US Navy and US Senate have molded him into someone who has had to face more than just some angry words. In other words, he isn't afraid of much and he isn't afraid to take unpopular stands if he thinks he's right. I sometimes disagree with his stances, but I respect him for not putting up a finger to check the political wind.
No one is perfect and that goes for McCain. However, if the Declaration were to be signed today, it could be argued that both would sign it given a similar set of circumstances, but there is only one that you could trust to keep his word and it isn't Obama.
Luke | September 8, 2008, 3:23am | #
Obama Is A Hack
Back during the 2004 campaign, we all watched in some kind of OMG, wide-eyed disbelief/fascination/humor as Kerry marched up to the podium at the Democrat Convention, saluted and announced he was reporting for duty. We were told that his three scratches and his four months in country qualified him to be Commander in Chief. Also make note that the normal tour in Vietnam was 12 months. Kerry's three scratches allowed him to hightail it out of there and run he did.
McCain spent 23 years on active duty, retiring with the rank of O-6. That is a Captain in the Navy or a full bird Colonel in the other services. McCain broke both arms and a leg when he shot down on his 23rd Bombing mission. McCain also has a Silver Star, a Bronze Star in his medal collection.
As soon as Kerry had the chance, he ran from Vietnam. McCain was offered early release from his prison camp and turned it down. Kerry went back to be an aide to some Rear Admiral. McCain worked his ass off in physical therapy to become able to fly again.
If you listen to the idiot left, Kerry was more qualified and McCain's service essentially meant nothing.
If you listen to the Obama cultists, All of McCains years of service in both the Navy and the Government means nothing. Obama, whose resume is thinner than a super model on a diet, is somehow more qualified than McCain simply because he's...well... because he's Obama!
There is no requirement in the Constitution to serve in the military. As a matter of fact, other than being a natural born citizen and 35, there isn't any qualification. It is left up to us to decide what is necessary in a Presidential resume (Religion being a notable exception).
Given the resume of both Obama and McCain, Obama is severly lacking. He is proving to be nothing more than another Democrat hack who will say or do anything if he thinks it might get him a vote.
Luke | September 8, 2008, 3:24am | #
We Lost WWII...Or Ich Bin Ein Idiot
As I was reading through the Obamessiah's speech in Berlin, I saw a line that made me take a real double take. Obama apparently thinks we lost WWII. Combined with his "the bomb that fell on Pearl Harbor" gaffe of last week, he is showing a stunning lack of knowledge concerning history.
From the transcript:
On that day, much of this continent still lay in ruin. The rubble of this city had yet to be built into a wall. The Soviet shadow had swept across Eastern Europe, while in the West, America, Britain and France took their stock of their losses and pondered how the world might be remade.
Pssst...hey Mr. Messiah, I got a news flash for you...WE WON WWII!!!!
We weren't taking stock of our losses in 1948! To be sure we were navigating in unknown waters with the beginnings of the Cold War (which we also won, by the way) and getting our footing after the war, but after three years, I think we'd already taken an inventory.
This whole citizen of the world crap that he started out with is the kind of thing that makes the Euro-Twits think they should be voting for our President! He might be a citizen in the world, but his passport says United States of America.
His whole speech was nothing but a list of platitudes thinly disguised as a "non-political" speech.
It was an OK speech as far as speeches go, but it wasn't anywhere near Reaganesque.
Luke | September 8, 2008, 3:26am | #
Obama - Bad Judgment
Obama allowed his kids to be interviewed recently by Access Hollywood. Ordinarily, this would be a minor dust-up because he's said many times that he wants to keep his kids out of the fray and his family life private. That's entirely understandable and even laudable. I think that's probably wise. On the other hand, he is the presumptive Democrat Nominee and he could presumably become our 44th President and a dignified interview of him and his family would be wholly appropriate if it was done by someone from a major news network- - but Access Hollywood?? Access Hollywood is like the National Enquirer on steroids. It's all tabloid, all the time. (Transcript from Michelle Malkin):
LAUER: …some people said wait a minute, the senator is trying to have it both ways. On the one hand, you want to protect your private life. On the other hand, here you are sitting with your two daughters and allowing them to answer questions. Did you make the right call on that?
OBAMA: Uh, you know, I think that we, uh, got carried away in the moment. We were having a birthday party and everybody was laughing, and suddenly this thing cropped up. And, uh, I didn’t catch it quickly enough. And I was surprised by the attention it received as well.
LAUER: Senator, if you had to do it over again?
OBAMA: Yah, I won’t be doing it again and we won’t be doing it again.
As Malkin points out, this interview was about as spontaneous as a planned vacation. Set up, make up, sound checks, etc. are not spur of the moment things.
Essentially, by admitting he made a mistake, he is saying he used bad judgment. That's not exactly something you want to hear from someone who might someday have his finger on the proverbial nuke button. "Ooopsie, I just got carried away in the moment!" It's a little disconcerting.
Had he said something to the effect that he was a aware of his past statements, but felt like it was time to briefly introduce his whole family to the public, probably no one would have said much. If asked "why AH?", he could have said he possibly could have chosen another network, but they were there and it went off well. It would hardly have raise an eyebrow after that. No harm, no foul, no big deal. It would have been quickly forgotten and could have even got some political hay out of it.
The problem is that when he was asked about it, he told us he screwed up. He didn't act fast enough.
That brings it from the minor leagues into the big leagues. If he can't keep track of what's going on in his own family, how in hell is he going to keep track of a country?
Bad judgment. One more reason not to vote for Barack Obama.
Luke | September 8, 2008, 3:27am | #
Power was out at work (they were doing some kind work near our building) so I was out of the loop this morning. Now I'm playing catch-up.
I am so pleased with McCain's choice of Governor Palin. She's a gutsy, take-no-prisoner kind of fighter and reformer that won't rollover for anyone.
She is probably the one Vice Presidential choice that has kept Obama awake at night.
What's funny is that the the Obamunists are knocking her for her "inexperience. Does that mean that we can now ask Obama about what qualifies him, outside of being a liberal African-American, to be President. (Yes I made reference to his race - why not - HE does!)
I fully support the McCain/Palin ticket. I'm excited and I expect to remain so for the duration. Palin is a game changer!
Here is a list of Democrat responses that I've gleaned from reading around:
She has no foreign policy experience!
Well neither does Obama and Biden isn't exactly Secretary of State material having royally pissed off the Iraqis.
She was only the mayor of a town of 9000 people!
Yeah and and now she's the governor! She went in as a reformer and she's run the state well enough to have an 80% approval rating. (I assume the other 20% are the crooks and liars she is putting out of business!)
The GOP is using taking advantage of a young, naive woman for their own benefit.
Anyone who thinks that is true is just an idiot. It's obvious sexism.
How will she take care of her Downs Syndrome son?
The same way she does now, dumba**!
She was picked for purely political reasons.
Yeah and name me a Veep pick who isn't. They are all window dressing to a large degree.
I feel confident that she would make a great President should the need arise. The country would be in good hands. I listened to her speech from my car today and I was impressed. I was shouting!
Go Sarah Barracuda!
Oh, and let me add, that she is a Blue Star mom! He will soon be serving in Iraq! Put that in your damn chicken Hawk pipes and smoke it!
Luke | September 8, 2008, 3:28am | #
Iranians Hoping for ‘Muslim’ Obama Victory
Iran’s leadership has expressed “great pleasure” at the prospect of a Barack Obama victory in November, according to Menashe Amir, the Iranian-born head of Radio Israel’s Persian language service.
But Iranian President Ahmadinejad has said he doubts that the American establishment “will allow” Obama to win.
“One of the Iranian religious leaders said if Obama will enter the White House, then Islam will conquer the heart of the American nation,” Amir told Isracast.com.
The Iranian leadership likes Obama “mainly because he is a Muslim,” according to Amir. His first name, Barack, comes from “al-baraq,” which is the name of the horse that Muslims believe Muhammad rode on his way to paradise.
His middle name Hussein is also a Muslim name, and he was “born in a Muslim family,” said Amir.
In fact, Obama is a Christian. His deceased father was a Muslim, and though Obama attended a Muslim school in Indonesia, he never pursued the Muslim faith of his early childhood. While some commentators have suggested that this qualifies him as an apostate — a “crime” punishable by death according to Islamic sharia law — Menashe Amir disagreed.
“If he wins the election, Muslims will be very proud of such a conquest, such a win. He didn’t convert [to Christianity] after he was 18. It happened much, much before,” so the sharia law judgment does not apply.
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSS
