Advertisement

Archive for Wednesday, August 6, 2008

New poll shows Obama losing support

August 6, 2008

Advertisement

— Barack Obama has lost ground among some of his strongest bases of support, including young people, women, Democrats and independents, according to a new ATV/Zogby poll.

The Illinois Democrat has also lost some support among African-Americans and Hispanics, where his lead over Republican John McCain has shrunk, and among Catholics, where he's lost his lead.

The net result, pollster John Zogby found, is a race that's neck and neck, with McCain supported by 42 percent; Obama by 41 percent; Libertarian Bob Barr by 2 percent; and independent Ralph Nader by 2 percent. Another 13 percent supported other candidates or were undecided.

Zogby called the results a "notable turnaround" from a July survey he did that showed Obama leading by 46-36.

"McCain made significant gains at Obama's expense among some of what had been Obama's strongest demographic groups," Zogby said.

Comments

bondmen 6 years, 2 months ago

Young Barack Hussein Obama was tutored (pseudo fathered) by an admitted Marxist in Hawaii and the AP, which wrote a big story on this, didn't have respect enough for the truth to print it! They had full knowledge of this man's background yet refused to print it! Can't trust the AP, that's for sure.The more we learn about Barack Hussein Obama's secret past the more we understand where he wants to take US! And the less we want to go there! See: "AP Lies About Obama's Red Mentor"http://www.aim.org/aim-column/ap-lies-about-obamas-red-mentor/

0

Mkh 6 years, 2 months ago

Perhaps the "liberals" are finally waking up from their wet dream tizzy and are realizing that Obama is just another shill of the private central bankers.Did anyone catch Obama's call for everyone to serve the New World Order in his Berlin speech?

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

scott..."Shock of all shocks, the corporate media has brought us, as predicted, to an exact tie."The polls are done by independent organizations. Another reason I think the media may not only care about a close race, and the possibel increase in viewership, is based on the facts. Even when Obama had a significant lead in the polls there was still a huge disparity in coverage between Obama and McCain. You would think they would cover McCain more their only goal is to keep the race close.

0

notajayhawk 6 years, 2 months ago

Because you haven't been paying attention, Bossa. The RCP average in the polls has had Obama's lead dropping for a while, down to less than 3% from the 6% it was a month earlier, with the tracking polls of likely voters tending to show McCain ahead.

0

BigDog 6 years, 2 months ago

It will be interesting to see if he rebounds among certain demographic groups or slides.His popularity rose soooo fast that many assumed it would eventually start falling some ... how much will be the question.I compare it for many guys being infatuated with a very good looking female ..... at first they are all gaga for them based upon first appearances only ... then when they talk with them and learn more about them ... sometimes that infatuation starts to fade a bit. The American people are in that getting to know phase and the infatuation is fading a bit .... time will tell how much it fades.

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

Scott:Since you obviously can't defend Obama you have to attack McCain. No surprise, you probably don't know enough about him to defend him. How about we make a deal? I will discuss one of your perceived issues with McCain, and we can also discuss one of Obama's.First, the non-voting is an issue that both Obama and McCain have given they are running for President. (many politicians have this problem).Second, McCain has consistently stated he is against wasting money on expensive military research that produces no results. This is the likely reason he is rated so low by these groups. He may oppose legislation that is very broad when he only has a disagreement with a particular issue.Last, I don't think there is doubt in most people's mind the McCain would have visited the wounded troops with or without the media, given his 5 years as a POW for this country.Now we can talk about one of Obama's problems. How about his opposition to the surge in Iraq? Who am I kidding you will want to keep the topic on McCain because talking about Obama will just show this guy lacks judgment and has no political core.

0

sdinges 6 years, 2 months ago

A note about citizenship: The child of any natural born citizen of the United States is always a citizen at birth (regardless of who or what the other parent is). Thus, whether McCain and Obama were born in Hawaii, Panama, or a spaceship orbiting Mars, since both have at least one parent who is a natural born citizen of the U.S., both were citizens at birth.A naturalized citizen does not necessarily have the automatic right to pass on U.S. citizenship if the child is born off U.S. soil. Nevertheless, this is not an issue for either candidate.The constitution does not require that you be born on U.S. soil, only that you are a citizen at birth.And as a further note - Hawaii became a state two years before Obama was born there, so it's even further a moot point.---As for Obama losing support - it's predictable. It's hard to keep the shine and interest going for months on end. People get bored. The candidates start looking like the same old political candidates that voters have seen time and time again.

0

Haiku_Cuckoo 6 years, 2 months ago

"Trying to pin any single issue (vote on wiretapping????) to a single poll is just foolish"So you're okay with wiretapping? That's fine. When it comes to candidate support, however, some people may consider it a deal-breaker.

0

cato_the_elder 6 years, 2 months ago

Hillary and Bill are dug in with their track spikes, are poised, and are waiting for the starter's gun. Hi-yo, Denver.

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

Scott:"Why didn't McCain demonstrate his support by voting on the GI bill."From CNN....(The proposed GI Bill) would be a disincentive for service members to become noncommissioned officers, which he called "the backbone of all the services.""In my life, I have learned more from noncommissioned officers I have known and served with than anyone else outside my family," McCain said at a Memorial Day event in Albuquerque."They are very hard to replace. Encouraging people to choose to not become noncommissioned officers would hurt the military and our country very badly."McCain, along with Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Richard Burr of North Carolina, has introduced an alternative bill that would increase education benefits on a sliding scale based on an individual's years of service. McCain argues his bill would have a smaller impact on retention rates than the legislation that the Senate passed."The office of president, which I am seeking, is a great honor indeed, but it imposes serious responsibilities," the presumptive GOP nominee said."I can only tell you, I intend to deserve the honor if I am fortunate to receive it, even if it means I must take politically unpopular positions at times and disagree with people for whom I have the highest respect and affection."------------------------------------------------------------------------Ok, if you claim you want to keep the topic on supporting the troops, how about you defend Obama's choice to schedule a visit to the wounded troops, then be told the press weren't allowed but he could still attend, and then deciding the trip wasn't important.

0

Haiku_Cuckoo 6 years, 2 months ago

Obama recently voted for the wiretapping bill. McCain did not. That's just one reason why people are growing disenchanted with Obama.

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

Tom:."And I have not been able to confirm this or pin it down, but now the rumor circulating is that he legally can not even be president"I haven't heard this at all. Although I did hear it about McCain since he was born on a Naval air station in Panama.

0

bearded_gnome 6 years, 2 months ago

for those who want to know how to properly assess Loggy's postings:http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/aug/04/fbi_investigates_attacks_scientists/and, above he posts a link to huffingtonpost, hahahahahahahaha. that's funny. only recently did she put measures on to stop her bloggers from gloating over injury and death to conservative leaders. wren and barry you are right. and what's making it worse is barry h. obama's supporters, and liberal white apologists in the media putting it out very broadly that if someone opposes obama, they are certainly racist! we've seen some of our own illustrious fellow posters here doing the same!right on Janeb. obama's own words spoken in london indicate that he did snub the wounded troops when he learned he couldn't take his campaign manager in the hospital with him! **the numbers in this poll are entirely believable: obama has been opposed to increased drilling (over 70% of americans strongly favor that), then he flips but still insists that it won't help and we should all start checking tire pressure---you got your obama energy plan tire gage yet? he goes before a foreign audience and disses his own country while behaving as if he's already president? americans also hate presumptuousness. read this carefully: this poll is only the start. by the time of the convention, the demorats will be so desperate, they'd rather nominate Gary Condit (sp?) former congressman from the valley in california.

0

beatrice 6 years, 2 months ago

Oh no, sliding in the polls!!! That means Barack wins by just 6 percentage points, not 7. Story I read today showed that Obama had a firm lead in the polls, and that voters give even stronger support in wanting to see Dems in Congress. Obama for President and Democrats in Congress! Sweet.

0

scott3460 6 years, 2 months ago

No, Satirical, the issue being discussed is support for the troops. Why didn't McCain demonstrate his support by voting on the GI bill. It is not a "non'issue" and it is clear for all to see. Your guy claims his support and regard for the troops is superior. The veterans groups and McCain's actions suggest otherwise. And when are you guys going to quit using the "I was a POW" issue as a get out of jail free card. Enough of the poor, poor pitiful me bit. It has almost nothing to do with how he'd govern, whether he'd be competent. What policies he'd pursue, etc. Veterans groups across the board rate McCain's performance as Senator as horrible (and that may be generous.) There is a reason for this. Of course, McCain wants to talk about non-issues and celebrities and the Messiah, it all takes people's eyes off of his shabby record.

0

blessed3x 6 years, 2 months ago

Maybe it's because people are tired of hearing about him every 30 seconds on the liberal media channels.http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080806/ap_on_el_pr/poll_obama_overexposure

0

scott3460 6 years, 2 months ago

OK, Satirical, I think we all probably think certain people consistently dodge the issues on these board. Here's a simple exercise for you, any veteran, or any one with an opinion:Which is more beneficial and supportive to veterans:1. a visit by a political candidate to troops in a military hospital, 2. a Senator's voting in favor of this year's GI Bill, that is ultimately passed and signed in to law,3. a Senator's proposing alternative GI Bill legislation that does not ultimately pass and is not signed in to law, or4. a Senator failing to show up to vote on this year's GI Bill legislation. I say #2 represents the single most supportive thing from this list either candidate may have done on behalf of veterans.

0

janeyb 6 years, 2 months ago

Obama snubbing the wounded US soldiers is certainly a touchy subject, but when it couldn't be a "Kodak moment" for Barry he was no longer interested. How arrogant is that? When Barry's handlers couldn't dangle a hunk of steak under is nose and lure him into the hospital the whole thing had to be scrapped. (sorry to steal from Lewis Black)

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

How about we ignore the numbers and talk about where we think Obama will lead this nation. It is hard to tell given his consistently inconsistent positions. Although it may not be impossible to know what Obamanation (abomination) will look like. Given his far left voting record; his opposition to the Second Amendment, his radical associations to people like Rev. Wright, his lack of meaningful experience, his lack of judgment on issues like the Surge in Iraq, and his insistence in injecting race into the Presidential election, we have several clues as to America's future as Obamanation.

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

"Except that's not at all the reason he didn't go."Do we have to prove this to you again Duplenty? We have had this discussion several times and it has been unequivocally shown that Obama planned to go, then the Pentagon clearly stated he could go but the press could not go; so he then decided to not visit the wounded troops.

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

Sdinges:I am not claiming you are wrong, but can you provide the law that states, "The child of any natural born citizen of the United States is always a citizen at birth"?

0

WilburM 6 years, 2 months ago

Well, most recent Gallup tracking has Obama up 4, and AP/Ispos (Mon.) has him up 6. And Zogby can be all over the place. Still, Real Clear Politics site does have average margin at 2.8%. In any of these match-ups, it's probably best to look at RCP, fivethirtyeight.com, and pollster.com to get a broader sense of where the race is. By and large, the most interesting element of the '08 presidential race is that Obama-McCain is close, while every other indicator shows Democrats winning substantial margins (Senate, House).

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

Yeah, max1 is back with his constant cutting and pasting articles (often off-topic), and inability to provide anything useful other than an inferred argument. Actually I am beginning to believe that maybe max1 only has one hand which is the reason he can only cut and paste with his mouse, and can't type.

0

Flap Doodle 6 years, 2 months ago

Will the O'dude even be able to get nominated?

0

gccs14r 6 years, 2 months ago

I don't like that he intends to continue on with Bush's funding of faith orgainzations and that he's backing off his no drilling pledge. Neither of those things is going to make me vote for McCain, though.

0

scott3460 6 years, 2 months ago

Shock of all shocks, the corporate media has brought us, as predicted, to an exact tie. Lucky for them that means more ad revenue and more interest and reader/viewership in the horse race. The electoral vote total, of course, is the relevant measure of how the race is shaping up. I wonder why the corporate media does not report that.

0

WilburM 6 years, 2 months ago

Trying to pin any single issue (vote on wiretapping????) to a single poll is just foolish, unless the issue is huge and visible. Moreover, polls vary, but averages don't nearly as much. See, for example a coherent explanation of variation (or lack thereof) in Gallup tracking polls.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/05/is-obamas-lead-in-gallup_n_117058.html

0

jaywalker 6 years, 2 months ago

Scott says:"First, he skipped the vote on this year's 21st Century GI bill. A move of political cowardice, he was not willing to come off the campaign trail to indicate his support with his vote. Voting yes or no on a billis what he is paid to do, of course, and he di not bother to do his job on that issue""A move of political cowardice.."? Scotty, you're middle name isn't Hyperbole, is it?Not a good idea to attempt to use 'skipping a vote' as an attack against McCain. Obama's abstention record is humongous and he's supposed to chair a Senate Committee yet he's been present for one session.As far as not voting on the last GI Bill, McCain didn't want to back it because he has an alternative plan of his own. Granted, it's political manuevering, but it's NOT because he's dissing the troops and doesn't care about them, nor an act of 'political cowardice', which is just as dumb a line as "duh duh duh corporate propaganda arms and duh corrupt military industrial complex are propping up the election to sell papers". Your last name wouldn't be Stone, would it?

0

scott3460 6 years, 2 months ago

Jaywalker, Satirical:All the distortion and misdirection in the world will not allow you to escape the fact that your guy refused to stand up and be counted in his opposition to the 21st Century GI bill. He simply refused to be counted & we all know why he did so. His actions were a display of political cowardice - that is my opinion and one that I am confident is shared by a majority. Further, I suspect that most troops have a higher regard for those politicians that voted in favor of the new GI Bill and the benefits and rights it grants them, than those who voted against it, or who skipped the vote for anything other than legitimate reasons. As I said, I think we all know which camp McCain falls in to. I further suspect that most troops care more about the substance of the new law than they do whether a politician came to visit them in a hospital. GI Bill benefits and rights will have a far greater impact on their life than will a visit of a few minutes.Further, I suspect that Obama's vote in favor of the GI Bill did far more good for the average soldier, and for veterans as a group, than either McCain's skipped vote or any politician's visit to a veteran's hospital. Veteran's groups do not rank McCain so poorly, after all, for no good reason. He's one of their own. He's earned his horrible ratings.Still further, if, as he claims, he was in favor of his own competing approach to the GI Bill, it is clear that he is not an effective legislator or persuader of his peers in the Senate. It is well-known that he is not well liked because of his temper and generally disagreeable personality. We do not need another President that cannot, or won't, work cooperatively with the Congress. Finally, there is the shameful matter of george bush claiming, via the corporate media, that McCain had, in fact, supported and voted in favor of the GI Bill. McCain, to my knowledge, has never had the decency to correct the lie. All of these facts and considerations would be far more than enough reason for most troops to support Obama and despise McCain. Fortunately, for McCain (not the troops) the corporate media and professional bloggers keep the issues focused on pressing matters such as tire guages, and celebrities, and whether Obama thinks he's the Messiah.

0

scott3460 6 years, 2 months ago

Whew, Jaywalker, don't blow a gasket. I see I've touched a nerve. My point, had you bothered to try to follow along, is that actually doing something substantive for the troops shows far more commitment than a mere hospital visit to see a handful of soldiers. Obama voted in favor of the GI Bill. McCain did not. "yet now you want to come off as someone who, along with Obama, knows and admires the troops enough to vote on a bill?" No, I absolutely do not. I think we waste too much money on the military and in support of the active military. As I have said, clearly, I do not admire or hold the vast majority of military personnel in all that high regard. I reserve the use of words like hero and brave for people that have actually exhibited those characteristics. But my own thoughts on the military is not what we are discussing. The issue is Obama and how his failure to visit troops in a hospital allegedly establishes that he is somehow deficient in HIS support for the troops. Arguably, McCain's dismal approval ratings by veteran's groups and his failure to even show up and vote yes or no on the major GI Bill suggest that the Senator wrapping himself in the flag and military has a good deal to hide.

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

Scott:"Having secured the nomination the media needed to immediately pull back on the reins in order to create the desired competitive horserace."Have you not read the numbers of the huge disparity in coverage? "In the end I am not sure it matters much. McCain is likely a moderate liberal anyway, so the end result from a policy perspective is not going to change much."Unfortunately you might be right. Which is why I will not decide who I will vote for until the VPs are picked.

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

Sdinges:Not attempting to debate an irrelevant topic but your link only states, "jus sanguinis (which holds that the country of citizenship of a child is the same as that of his / her parents)"It is plural "parents" not "parent". This is the reason why I questioned your earlier statement that as long as one parent is a citizen, the child is a citizen.

0

Godot 6 years, 2 months ago

Obama is in the pocket of the most corrupt forces on Capitol Hill:"Given his decision not to accept public financing, Obama is counting on his bundlers to help him raise $300 million for his campaign for the general election and another $180 million for the Democratic National Committee.An analysis of campaign finance records shows that about two-thirds of his bundlers are concentrated in four major industries: law, securities and investments, real estate and entertainment. Lawyers make up the largest group at about 130, with many working for firms that also have lobbying arms. At least 100 Obama bundlers are top executives or brokers from investment businesses - nearly two dozen work for financial titans like Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs and Citigroup. About 40 others come from the real-estate industry.The biggest fund-raisers include people like Julius Genachowski, a former senior official at the Federal Communications Commission and a technology executive who is new to big-time political fund-raising; Robert Wolf, president and chief operating officer of UBS Investment Bank; James Torrey, a New York hedge fund investor; and Charles Rivkin, an animation studio head in Los Angeles....."and"Obama has pledged not to accept donations from federally registered lobbyists or political action committees. But some top donors clearly have policy and political agendas. Hedge fund executives, for example, have bundled large sums for Obama at a time their industry has been looking to increase its clout in Washington......"from the August 5,2008 NYT, in a piece written by Michael M Luo and Christoper Drew.There are more nuggets of painful and distateful truth in that article, it is worth the read.One of the changes Obama will make will be give the crooks on Wallstreet even more power. He uses hedge fund managers as his economic advisors. OMG.

0

inatux 6 years, 2 months ago

Polls fluctuate a lot before any election, which is the only poll worth caring about.

0

janeyb 6 years, 2 months ago

Of course the Obama handlers jump in and state many of his supporters are the cell phone generation and aren't polled. I think he may max out at 46%. He better treat the Hillary supporters like royalty at the convention, he is fighting them right now, and he better choose his VP wisely, because McCain gets to announce VP last. McCain challenging Barry to go to Iraq may have been a brilliant campaign move because it seems to have lost Obama support. Obama should not have snubbed the wounded soldiers. What were his handlers thinking??

0

scott3460 6 years, 2 months ago

"Even when Obama had a significant lead in the polls there was still a huge disparity in coverage between Obama and McCain."No, you've got to step back and observe the corporate media's methods. Obama was the favored candidate clearly during the primary run against Hillary. He sold paper, increased viewership, created something for the talking heads to talk about, as opposed to the slow inevitable march of Hillary to the nomination (which is what most people thought would happen.) Having secured the nomination the media needed to immediately pull back on the reins in order to create the desired competitive horserace. That is what we have been seeing during the last two weeks. From now through the election we will see the corporate media carefully calibrate their coverage to ensure both candidates have a plausible chance to win & finally some sort of media driven and hyped event will tip the scales at the last moment to McCain who will win an improbable victory. Sound familiar? It should, it is what your corporate and military/industrial complex masters have foisted upon you for the last two cycles. In the end I am not sure it matters much. McCain is likely a moderate liberal anyway, so the end result from a policy perspective is not going to change much. McCain seems to change his position on every major issue every year or so, so I am not too frightened by his current, hard right persona. The only thing that scares me is one more kook in the vein of Thomas or Alito on the Supreme Court will set the country back significantly. McCain may or may not hold true to his promise to nominate an Alito like judge, but the majority Democrat Senate will never approve anything more extreme than a moderate Republican in the Kennedy/O'Connor mode.

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

People are starting to find out who Obama really is and they don't like it. From his radical associations to people like Rev. Wright, to his pandering to a flock of Germans (who have impeccable taste in leaders). He clearly lacks the experience, and was dead wrong about the Surge in Iraq showing poor judgment.It would be nice to know where Obama stands on the issues. It seems like every week brings a new flip-flop. The last two were his stances on his Energy policy. First he is against off-shore drilling, then he supports it. He was against using the Strategic Oil Reserves to reduce the price of gas, and his latest energy plan advocates such use. He is shifting so fast to appear moderate he is even confusing Dems. With all the hatred of Bush, this race is Obama's to lose. It appears he is getting his political advice from John Kerry, and Al Gore.

0

chet_larock 6 years, 2 months ago

"Obama recently voted for the wiretapping bill. McCain did not."McCain didn't for it or against it, he didn't vote on it at all."Obama should not have snubbed the wounded soldiers."This is wing-nut propaganda that has only gained traction among those who wish to look no further than wing-nut talking heads.This "tightening" of the race is brought to you by the liberal MSM. It keeps sheeple tuned in.

0

jaywalker 6 years, 2 months ago

"His actions were a display of political cowardice - that is my opinion and one that I am confident is shared by a majority"Then you're a fool."Further, I suspect that most troops have a higher regard for those politicians that voted in favor of the new GI Bill and the benefits and rights it grants them"You 'suspect'? As if you have intimate knowledge of what drives our soldiers? Why, it was only a short while ago that you spouted that soldiers, particularly 'grunts' at Ft. Leavenworth, would have nothing meaningful enough to say that could teach you anything. And that you knew 'their' mindset because you had grown up near a base. It was a slyly derogatory ranting concerning people you asserted to know better than and were somehow above, yet now you want to come off as someone who, along with Obama, knows and admires the troops enough to vote on a bill? Lay off on the second helping of ego, you've had your fill.And you can spout on 'political cowardice' 'til your face turns blue, but that's a load....'and one that I am confident is shared by a majority'. McCain has a plan of his own he believes is better for all parties concerned. Therefore voting 'yea' was not something he wanted to do. But, he would not oppose the bill if it had solid backing as it is for the betterment of our troops, so voting 'nay' was not a legitimate option either. McCain could have been present at the vote, Scotty, but I 'suspect' he would have abstained due to such reasoning. Instead of wasting that time to 'not vote', which again is something Obama may very well lead the House in, he remained on the campaign trail. Oooooooooo, how evil!"Still further, if, as he claims, he was in favor of his own competing approach to the GI Bill, it is clear that he is not an effective legislator or persuader of his peers in the Senate"Wha ha ha..at? Jump to conclusions much? First of all, that connection is as tenuous as floss across the Grand Canyon. And if you're wondering why he hasn't been lobbying for greater support on his version of the bill, in case you haven't noticed, he's been a little busy."All of these facts and considerations would be far more than enough reason for most troops to support Obama and despise McCain"Again, lighten up on the helpings of ego. 'Facts and considerations'? Don't you mean 'opinion and speculations'? You find yourself so insightful and b..b..b..brilliant (pardon me, just threw up in my mouth a little bit), why exactly are you not a major player on BO's staff? Such an enlightened individual as yourself surely must have more value in defeating the 'despised' McCain than posting on lowly blog posts. But thank you ever so much for imparting your wiiii..sdom (pardon me) on all of us.

0

cato_the_elder 6 years, 2 months ago

DP, your left-wing blog sites have painfully tried to twist it, but what happened in Germany happened. What he did in Germany underscores his unfitness for leading this country, especially in a time of war.

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

Screedposter:"Maybe he had a medical emergency. Maybe a brain hemorrhage? Might explain why every position he's taken since then is the opposite of before."You would think a medical emergency would have been a greater reason for him to visit a hospital. Maybe the liberals can give us a better explanation of why he scheduled to visit the troops but then ditched the plan after he was told the press wasn't allowed but he could still go.

0

canyon_wren 6 years, 2 months ago

barrypenders--I feel like you do. It is a sad situation. I never thought that Obama was sufficiently qualified to be considered, but most of his strongest supporters are not really reflective enough to recognize that. So much of what people think is just "hype" anyway, and he's been hyped to the max. If he doesn't get nominated/elected, he should thank his lucky stars.

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

Looks like no one is willing to defend Obama. I hope the liberals have better ideas other than typical "tax and spend" solution to all of life's problems.

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

""I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead," says a swimsuit-clad Hilton in the video, posted Tuesday on the Web site Funny or Die.McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds said: "Paris Hilton might not be as big a celebrity as Barack Obama, but she obviously has a better energy plan.""http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed7/idUSWRI65624920080806?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=10112

0

canyon_wren 6 years, 2 months ago

I originally thought I could NEVER vote for Hillary, but alongside the revealed Obama, she is beginning to look half-way decent. I still would bet money that at the last minute, the Dems will pull Saint Al (Gore) out of the mix to offer to the voters.

0

scott3460 6 years, 2 months ago

"Obama didn't go, because he was not allowed to bring his entourage. I think that's what she's talking about."Except that's not at all the reason he didn't go. You can continue trying to push this Hannity talking point, but it's untrue - the Pentagon sez so, as does Chuck Hagel."Ok, end of that non-story. Let's discuss McCain's voting record on veteran's issues, which I think is a far, far greater indicator of one's regard for the troops. First, he skipped the vote on this year's 21st Century GI bill. A move of political cowardice, he was not willing to come off the campaign trail to indicate his support with his vote. Voting yes or no on a billis what he is paid to do, of course, and he di not bother to do his job on that issue. Second, the group Disabled American Veterans gave McCain a 20% (out of 100) rating for the most recent rating. Third, the group Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America gave Mccain a "D" in its most recent rating.Fourth, the Vietnam Veterans of America note that since 2001 McCain has voted this the organization 9 times, against the organization's view 15 times and, again, failed to vote 8 times. The fact so many veteran's groups rate him so poorly reveals the real reason McCain & the corporate media are focusing on a single visit and a supposed character falw of Obama, rather than on the real issue of McCain's shoddy treatment of veterans where it really counts.

0

jonas 6 years, 2 months ago

Man, did anyone think after 2 months into the Dem primaries that this eventual race was going to be anything other than neck and neck? Something big and legitimate will have to come to light about one of the camps in order for that to change.

0

sdinges 6 years, 2 months ago

Satirical: I probably can if I look. But I'm afraid I don't have the time to comb through the Immigration and Nationality Act. Though a term search for jus sanguinis might pop it up. I happen to know because I myself am a naturalized citizen, and it's good to know these things if you have kids.If you're happy taking USCIS's word for it, here's a link:http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=85d3744a400ae010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=96719c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRDBarrypenders isn't wrong either. Basically, if Kenya follows the same rules we do here, his father was just as entitled to pass on his citizenship at birth, by the same principle of jus sanguinis. Now, interesting point to you all - renouncing your citizenship isn't as easy as it sounds. It's not up to you. It's up to the country in question whether or not it accepts your renunciation. Furthermore, by law, the United States does not recognize your citizenship to another country. So while Kenya might consider Obama a citizen, the United States does not recognize his Kenyan citizenship in any way whatsoever.Holding a high political office in another country is a good way to get your citizenship revoked, mind you. But again, that's up to Kenya, not Obama.Naturally, since the U.S. does not recognize dual citizenship, there is nothing in our laws to prevent a dual citizen from becoming president.

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

Scott:What a surprise, you refuse to talk about Obama even when it is on topic. It is clear you are trying to hijack the discussion because you can't defend Obama's actions.Spin it anyway you want it, but McCain didn't vote for one version of the GI plan because he had a better GI plan. Not voting for a bad GI plan doesn't mean you don't care about the troops, it means you care about the country. And if your criteria for failure is not getting a bill passed, then any politician who has ever proposed legislation which has not been signed into law is by your words, "not an effective legislator or persuader of his peers in the Senate." Hasn't Obama made several proposals, and did they all pass? If you are going to continue to dodge an on-topic question about Obama because you want to keep the conversation on McCain then maybe you should come up with better arguments. I am willing to have a civil discussion about a signel topic or many, including the candidate's position on supporting the troops, but you seem to only want to talk about McCain, so maybe our discussion should cease unless you are willing to talk about both candidates on this issue including Obama not visiting the wounded troops.

0

Bossa_Nova 6 years, 2 months ago

why do i not believe this poll?

0

cato_the_elder 6 years, 2 months ago

LS04, given the tax burden that young people will face very soon just having to take care of the baby-boomers, in light of Senator Obama's plans for greatly increased taxes of all kinds young people in this country with any desire to retain what they lawfully earn would be crazy to vote for him - and many are starting to realize it.

0

Satirical 6 years, 2 months ago

Ag:"Conservativeman is certainly a full-on Obamaniac today."Who is "Conservativeman"?

0

kujayhawk 6 years, 2 months ago

I believe it. I've normally voted Republican and was considering voting for Obama this election until I started researching Obama's tax plan. This guy is starting to scare the crap out of me.

0

sdinges 6 years, 2 months ago

Satirical, I'll let it drop after this! In the United States, you only need one parent. Your parents don't need to be married, and it can be either parent. I've heard you need to (and can be ordered to) submit to a paternity test if a non-citizen woman wants her child - born overseas - to have citizenship through a citizen father, and that there's some outlet for her to petition through an American consulate for that, even if you refuse.It's probably in the same Act somewhere, but it's clear if you start looking at the paperwork required for a kid.Now, outside the United States, some discrimination takes place. England is a good example - female citizens did not have the right to pass on their citizenships automatically and the parents had to be married to get it from the father. That changed in the 80s. Obviously that sort of thing can't stand up in court. Nor would it here. Hence one parent only.But you're right, it's all off topic really.

0

scott3460 6 years, 2 months ago

"And yet you cling to the toddler's argument of "if I have to do it so does he"." I am the one clinging to the argument? I don't think so, I am attempting to defend my candidate from a vicious slander. Here are some more of those inconvenient facts you guys love to avoid:"The most solemn duty of a commander in chief is to fulfill his responsibility to the men and women who serve this country in uniform," retired Lt. Col. Joe Reypya, speaking on behalf of the McCain, said in a statement. "Barack Obama ... broke that commitment, instead flitting from one European capital to the next."And in a McCain ad that began airing ....., Obama is chided for making "time to go to the gym" instead of visiting with wounded troops. ""For a young man so apt at playing president, Barack Obama badly misjudged the important demands of the office he seeks," Reypya said in Saturday's statement. "Visits with world leaders and speeches to cheering Europeans shouldn't be a substitute for comforting injured American heroes," he added."McCain himself joined in the rebuke, the AP reported, saying in an interview to be aired Sunday by ABC's "This Week" that "if I had been told by the Pentagon that I couldn't visit those troops, and I was there and wanted to be there, I guarantee you, there would have been a seismic event."In April, the Department of Defense prohibited the McCain campaign from visiting a military base. Steve Schmidt, from the McCain Campaign, agreed that the campaign should "follow the rules."I don't recall hearing of any seismic events from the Senator. Is this yet another one of those issues on which he has changed positions? I wonder why the "liberal" media has not pounced on these facts & trumpeted them day after day?

0

jaywalker 6 years, 2 months ago

"Except as part of campaigning trips, which this was."No, dupedaplenty, his trip to Europe and his visits with foreign dignitary's was a campaign trip. BO was more than welcome to travel to Landstuhl as a Senator, without his campaign staff, and without the media. The Pentagon said so, even BO said so. YOU even said so...."The Pentagon said he couldn't go as a presidential candidate, only as a senator:"Again, his trip to Europe was as a candidate, BUT he's always a senator!!!!!!!! He could have gone as afunctioning rep of the House, seperate from the campaign. Period. End of story."The Pentagon said he couldn't go as a presidential candidate..."Read it carefully, 'as a presidential candidate'--- that means the visit could not be in furtherance of a campaign, not with campaign staff, not with media to cover it as a photo op for a campaign. Be careful now, don't hurt yourself, it's not that difficult to understand, just think, Forrest, think!!!!

0

jonas 6 years, 2 months ago

Phoo. This reads almost like a cartoon.

0

ASBESTOS 6 years, 2 months ago

MY the "True believers" are all riled up now that their "Messiah" is dropping in the polls. WIth a weak supported McCain, and a GOP with listlusness, and a base that is depressed, STILL is now leading the O'baby!Yeah, you really have a solid guy there, LOL!" yes but he is gaining support in California and Texas where they have yard signs:"TEXANS for Obama""There are not that many signs for Obama. You need to start listening to the AM stations around Dallas, and the talk among ghe "hillary Supporters" is absolutely NOT favoring the "Messianic Oops'bama. You guys need to look at reality, and reality is pretty boy should be skunking McCain, and he is not. Wake up and smell the reality.

0

jaywalker 6 years, 2 months ago

"The issue is Obama and how his failure to visit troops in a hospital allegedly establishes that he is somehow deficient in HIS support for the troops."That's the issue? I thought you said it was a 'non-story'. Personally, I don't find great fault in it as others do. It was, without a doubt, a tremendous political blunder. If he had to go at 2 in the morning he should have made the trip, the political mileage he'd have gotten for going without the press would have been huge, and his people should know that. But I don't really think it paints BO as non-supportive of troops."My point, had you bothered to try to follow along..."There's that ego again. I got your point, brain trust, you're not nearly as complex as you like to believe. And to that end...."Obama voted in favor of the GI Bill. McCain did not......and his failure to even show up and vote yes or no on the major GI Bill suggest that the Senator wrapping himself in the flag and military has a good deal to hide"Satirical explained this in simple terms as did I. And yet you cling to the toddler's argument of "if I have to do it so does he". So for you then, BO blowing off a visit to the troops is not representative of his commitment to the military. But BO is obviously more patriotic than McCain because he voted for a bill that the Veteran candidate, who has served and understands the military, abstained from voting on because he does not believe it serves everyone's best interests. Brilliant.

0

bearded_gnome 6 years, 2 months ago

oh QHays,I do have to add, I've lived in Lawrence for, let's see ... twenty-four years! funny you make the "crotch" reference...you have a sexual inadequacy?for most of us, that's a perfectly fine respectable part of the body. but wait, more and more bad noises from the hilaroids: a group promises to protest at Denver under the banner: PUMA=Party Unity--My @$$!oh and speaking of Denver, obama and the other dem senators refused to even consider the federal gas tax holiday to help individuals and our economy; yet, demorat party poobahs in Denver to set up the convention worked out a scam to avoid federal and state taxes by tanking up their cars at a city of Denver gas pump! there's your demorat party! perks for the comrads, the big dogs, not even crumbs for the masses!

0

jaywalker 6 years, 2 months ago

"self-interested hate-filled conservatives " "'crotch of America' ""rethugs ""racist, selfish, retarded" "losers ""d-holes"Yes, qhays, with that post there is no doubt that you are representative of "all the people with brains (the people with brains who care about America and Americans".Now stop playing with daddy's computer.

0

scott3460 6 years, 2 months ago

"As I said, it was a tremendous political blunder."You may think it was a blunder, but what it was, in fact, was a political trap. McCain and the bush DOD had it set up so that he was damned no matter what he did. Had he visited, we would have spent the last two weeks arguing over whether he was using the troops for political gain. That McCain would engage in such tactics is despicible, but then he is not the same McCain that he was several years ago. He has, in my opinion, sold his soul to get this nomination and Presidency. I am extremely worried by someone that is so willing to abandon principle for personal gain. We have lived through 7+ years of such an ordeal and are much worse off as a country because of it. Going to the other main things you and I have argued over: the alleged mainstream media liberal bias. As noted in my prior messages, McCain engaged in the same exact behavior vis-a-vis a scheduled troop visit to a hospital in April & elected to stay away for the same reasons cited by the Obama campaign. Why did we not hear about this during the frenzy of coverage regarding Obama's supposed "blunder?" Even if the media did not connect the dots for the American public, McCain himself knew what had taken place in April. What sort of man engages in such a behavior? Is that something that you, Jaywalker (or reader) admire? Is such a man worthy of the office of President? No amount of "....but Obama, " or "....but Clinton" in response is going to changes what these things reveal about McCain.

0

jaywalker 6 years, 2 months ago

Scott blathers:"You may think it was a blunder, but what it was, in fact, was a political trap. McCain and the bush DOD had it set up so that he was damned no matter what he did."Oh, for the love of all that's good and holy! Put down the bong with the three foot extension, man. You've got to be kidding! You have spouted some absolutely ridiculous garbage on these strings, but with that we may have a winner. You disprove your own assinine theory with your very next sentence: "Had he visited, we would have spent the last two weeks arguing over whether he was using the troops for political gain". Re he he eally? Obama visited the troops in hospitals in Iraq and Afghanistan, without cameras, and where are the arguments that he did it if for political gain? And besides, that's exactly the reason you go without the cameras, so noone has a leg to stand on when they say it was a photo op for political gain. Let's pretend...."NBC reports that Obama visited recuperating troops at Landstuhl AFB yesterday. When asked why he chose to visit without media present, his simple response was that the Pentagon had deemed that it would be improper to do so under the limelight of campaign coverage, and since his intention was only to pay his respects to our soldiers, he proceeded with the pre-planned visit sans cameras." Sorry, Scotty, that would have been political GOLD!!!! He blew it, his people blew it, period.It doesn't matter, attempting to assert that it was some conspiracy between the DOD and McCain is....(sorry, I can't stop laughing and shaking my head in disbelief)...is....is......I'm at a loss. Your last name wouldn't be O'Donnell, would it? Please, tell us some more about the 'vast right wing corporate media military industrial complex conspiracy' against poor, neglected, Barack. I've already advised you once today ( and responded to your 'I know you are but what am I' retort, by the way), but it's much better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt. Now it's waaaaaaay too late for that.

0

bearded_gnome 6 years, 2 months ago

wow,Screedbuster, nice work here buddy! and they fail to put a glove on you or diminish one fact you present!scott3.1415926 tries to say he has all this concern for veterans/troops!!!!do a search on his posting history. you'll find he has criticized members of the military, just for being in the military; he's called them "gun toters" among other lovely terms. and, he, in this very thread, tries to make out that the pentagon (which is the military scott9-1-1) allowed itself to be politically manipulated by the Bush Whitehouse! Scot86 thinks that the whitehouse/mccain campaign set up a "trap" for obama with the hospital trip? the so-called "new GI bill of rights" will be vetoed, and should be. if Scott66045 paid attention, he'd know that McCain's arguments are correct, that bill will have the effect of diminishing longterm commitments in the services! maybe that's what the dems want though. Scotty5150 really is silly. and on another thread he claims to know that some of us who oppose him and his liberal ilk on here are "professionals" paid to post on here. his paranoia is showing! so, Scott|~*@ your concern about the troops is transparently only a means to try to criticize McCain/republicans. now, that's settled. why he scheduled to visit the troops but then ditched the plan after he was told the press wasn't allowed but he could still go.---saty,obviously, he had the Basketball jones! thanks QHays,you illustrate here all along. what I've been saying about the uncivil left on here all along: intolerant; opposed to free speech when it disagrees with them. they have tolerance for everything except the traditional values of this country.
Obama's muslim/arab outreach guy had to resign for one small brief contact to an islamic radical. obama's appointment of this guy makes it clear obama doesn't know there are arab christians, arab animists, and other nonmuslim arabs who are often oppressed by the arab muslims. Lebanon has been bleeding arab christians for decades; forced out by muslims. how'd you think they feel about obama havin' a muslim in charge of outreach to them? oh, I guess that's okay just as long as no women sit with hijabs on in obama's pictures! why'd he have to resign, that's far less than Obama's connection to his own unrepentant domestic terrorist bomber buddy? and besides the arab muslim outreach guy, there's obama's buddy, the jailed mayor of Detroit who also had an affair with a member of his staff. ***every statement in this post is entirely true. I don't have to rely on out-of-context out-of-date irrelevant cut-and-paste like Maxy1; you get him outa posting his cut-and-paste and you find he's an extremely dim bulb, 30Watt bulb in 100Watt bulb box! he posts these to hide his obvious inadequacies.

0

jaywalker 6 years, 2 months ago

"I am attempting to defend my candidate from a vicious slander."Well, good luck, but it's an exercise in futillity. As I said, it was a tremendous political blunder. Since he was criticized for not wearing a flag pin and the play that got, you'd think his handlers and BO should have foreseen the firestorm that would occur if he didn't make the trip to Landstuhl but did address thousands of Europeans. As I said, I don't think he meant to 'snub' the troops and personally don't find the whole story important, but that's just to me. But there's no getting around the fact that the decision, whether his or one of his campaign staff was exceptionally dumb, naive, short-sighted -- take your pick.

0

chet_larock 6 years, 2 months ago

The Pentagon in a statement cited longstanding Defense Department policy that prohibits military personnel or facilities from association with partisan political campaigns and elections. "We told him he could visit Landstuhl (Regional Medical Center in western Germany) with his Senate staff, but not with his campaign staff," said Army Lt. Col. Elizabeth Hibner. They told Obama that after his Senate staff had already left to come back to America with along with Reed and Hagel. Only Afghanistan, Iraq and Israel were fact finding Senate trips. Germany, France and the UK are being paid for by Obama's personal presidential campaign money. He could not go to see the troops under the law. If he had tried to sneak off and go see them and the media found out.. which they would have.. then Obama would have been in legal trouble. Hope that clears it up for you.

0

ASBESTOS 6 years, 2 months ago

"those of us who know Lawrence, know that it is the only bastion of good in an otherwise ridiculous state"he.. hehe, Hawhaw haw haw, gugaww gufaw, HeHaw (nose running eyes tearing!!) That is delusion!Ohh!Talk about disconnedted from rality

0

qhays 6 years, 2 months ago

I have a great idea. How about all the people with brains who aren't self-interested hate-filled conservatives leave these ridiculous LJW comment boards to the afore-mentioned. It's Kansas after all folks. Those of us who grew up in Lawrence or have spent much time here/there and were lucky enough to leave this 'crotch of America' (Kansas, not Lawrence specifically) realize that the rethugs run the show. It's going to go red, for racist, selfish, retarded or what-have-you reasons, and all the losers who sit around and complain about all the good things we (the people with brains who care about America and Americans) want can just continue to verbally massage each other over the internet. This is a Dolph Simon paper after all, and luckily, those of us who know Lawrence, know that it is the only bastion of good in an otherwise ridiculous state... We all also know that when the next generation of Americans matures (including Kansans), the country will finally pull its head out of its proverbial arse. Let's just hope the world doesn't become irretrievably f'd before then. As evidenced by other posts on other subjects, most of these d-holes live in other towns anyway...Oh ya: Obama builds map lead... (from yesterday). http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/08/06/1249422.aspx

0

beatrice 6 years, 2 months ago

"You're being lied to!" Yes screed, we know. We have read your posts. tony, charges of racism of some of the fine folks who post here just because somebody wants a United States Senator and graduate of Harvard Law to go into rap music following the election? I'm shocked you would make such an observation based on that. Shocked. And I'll bet I know what McCain will be after the election -- Senator. Obama for President! It will drive "those" people crazy!

0

JHOK32 6 years, 2 months ago

At least Obama will return $1000 to every middle class family from the outlandish profits of the big oil companies.

0

jaywalker 6 years, 2 months ago

"We told him he could visit Landstuhl (Regional Medical Center in western Germany) with his Senate staff"So he, as a Senator, could go, Chet. Are you insinuating that he had to have his staff with him? Like chaperones, or baby sitters? Who cares if his Senate staff had left, HeCouldHaveGone."He could not go to see the troops under the law"It's not a "law"! It's a Pentagon policy (you wrote such yourself), which is founded in the philosophy that using our troops as campaign photo op fodder will not be permitted. Any congressman or senator is welcome to visit most bases at any time.Hope that clears it up for you.

0

scott3460 6 years, 2 months ago

Bearded Gnome:"every statement in this post is entirely true....""the so-called "new GI bill of rights" will be vetoed, and should be. if Scott66045 paid attention, he'd know that McCain's arguments are correct, that bill will have the effect of diminishing longterm commitments in the services! maybe that's what the dems want though."Reality:bush signed the bill in to law on June 30, 2008. Scott3460 commentary:Evidently bush does not understand how harmful the law will be to veterans. Why does bush hate veterans? My question of several days ago hangs out there unaddressed & uncontested: In April, 2008, Mccain cancelled a trip to visit the troops at a hospital because it could be construed as a campaign event. Mccain's people crowed, "they played by the rules" so of course they cancelled it. So when he criticized Obama & has allowed others to do so, he knows that he has done the exact same thing. What a piece of hypocritical garbage! Is that the man we want as President. Someone who would allow the slander of a political opponent for activity he himself has engaged in. You have no answers here you mealy-brained little creeps, but you'd better get your people working on something, because once the Olympics are over, gramps is going to have some serious explaining to do. Also, scoff if you like at the allegation that bush would politicize the DOD. Lord knows we've seen nothing in these last 7 years that would suggest that may be the case. But Newsweek magazine reported that Mccain had two ads in the can ready for Obama's decision on the troop visit. One ad that criticized him for visiting the troops while on a campaign financed trip & thereby politicizing the troops, and another, which we ultimately saw, criticizing him for not visiting. Draw your own conclusion about whether there were prior political arrangements made, or whether this was just dumb luck or a lucky move on Mccain's part. Then ask yourself if you really want to allow these same deviant, unAmerican criminals to remain in power.

0

scott3460 6 years, 2 months ago

"Scotty5150 really is silly. and on another thread he claims to know that some of us who oppose him and his liberal ilk on here are "professionals" paid to post on here. his paranoia is showing!"From today's news:John McCain has started a program in which people who post favorable comments about McCain to blogs and vote for favorable stories on digg.com and other aggregators get points redeemable for autographed books, tickets to McCain events, etc. In the blogosphere this is being called the Frequent Liar program.Why would McCain have to bribe/pay for favorable comments? And doesn't this just call in to question the sincerity of every pro-McCain post? I know it does for me.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.