harSon said:He was questioning why people are enraged with the large increase of oil costs and not produce or milk.
ah ok... i didnt see the comment... kinda stupid
harSon said:He was questioning why people are enraged with the large increase of oil costs and not produce or milk.
We fought a war with Japan and Germany. Afterwards we maintained a military presence there, which we are doing today. We fought a war in Korea, we maintained a military presence in Korea, which we are doing to this day. The first Gulf War, we threw Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait, and we have a military presence there to this day, McCain told reporters aboard his campaign plane.
v1cious said:![]()
hmm...
v1cious said:![]()
hmm...
Zaptruder said:Experience? What's it amounted to for McCain? Senility, judging by a few choice comments.
thefro said:[]http://www.pollster.com/blogs/03-31dayofweek_avg.png[/IMG]
Tuesday's always Clinton's best day in Gallup.
tanod said:More importantly, what are the positive/negatives for today?
Yeah, who could be more sincere than Edwards? My honest opinion is nobody.Mandark said:Yeah, screw that phony Edwards!
He's obviously in the pocket of the Big Poverty lobby.
terrene said:Yeah, who could be more sincere than Edwards? My honest opinion is nobody.
JCreasy said:Obama gaining in Penn: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/01/poll-clinton-pennsylvani_n_94413.html
v1cious said:i don't buy it. SurveyUSA has her up by 12, and i trust them a lot more.
By either poll, he's gaining. SUSA had Clinton up 19 in their last poll, three weeks ago. Rasmussen has a much worse track record, but they both show him closing the gap. (Though I'm inclined to think the gap is what SUSA shows and not Rasmussen.)v1cious said:i don't buy it. SurveyUSA has her up by 12, and i trust them a lot more.
v1cious said:i don't buy it. SurveyUSA has her up by 12, and i trust them a lot more.
Well, Obama got better and better at the debate thing, but it's not really his strongest suit. On the other hand, you are right, he's going to beat the Metamucil out of McCain. I mean, check McCain out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqKaU2fZkAcToyMachine228 said:Believe me, McCain's lack of competence will be pretty clear when he's put head to head in a debate against Obama who's very articulate and witty.
Then it's a lock. The Republicans were lucky last time that they had such a gifted public speaker in the form of George W. Bush to outmaneuver the Democrats with his silver tongue in two successive elections. But McCain? Come on now. He just doesn't have that kind of magic.terrene said:Well, Obama got better and better at the debate thing, but it's not really his strongest suit. On the other hand, you are right, he's going to beat the Metamucil out of McCain. I mean, check McCain out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqKaU2fZkAc
Obama's no Kerry dude.Steve Youngblood said:Then it's a lock. The Republicans were lucky last time that they had such a gifted public speaker in the form of George W. Bush to outmaneuver the Democrats with his silver tongue in two successive elections. But McCain? Come on now. He just doesn't have that kind of magic.
What they were lucky about was that they were up against the McCain of the left, who's rambling responses lost everybody and made Bush's "one track mind" responses seem coherent.Steve Youngblood said:Then it's a lock. The Republicans were lucky last time that they had such a gifted public speaker in the form of George W. Bush to outmaneuver the Democrats with his silver tongue in two successive elections. But McCain? Come on now. He just doesn't have that kind of magic.
typhonsentra said::lol Clinton actually addressed the bowling thing.
typhonsentra said:
This is our next president guys.typhonsentra said:
Or hopefully Al Gore for that matter? I know that Obama isn't as unlikable as Kerry, or as boring as Gore, but I'm just saying that with our current president providing an endless array of late-night comedy fodder for all 8 years of his presidency, I think it's a little naive to go "I can't wait to watch Obama slaughter senile, out-of-touch McCain" as though that's what this general election is going to be about.Azih said:Obama's no Kerry dude.
harSon said:He was questioning why people are enraged with the large increase of oil costs and not produce or milk.
typhonsentra said:
:lol God help us if she gets the nom.typhonsentra said:
GhaleonEB said:By either poll, he's gaining. SUSA had Clinton up 19 in their last poll, three weeks ago. Rasmussen has a much worse track record, but they both show him closing the gap. (Though I'm inclined to think the gap is what SUSA shows and not Rasmussen.)
THWACK!!!!!!!!!!!Azih said:Obama's no Kerry dude.
Justin Bailey said:Damn a 37? Really? 37?
How the hell do you do that
ZealousD said:The cost of oil has essentially tripled in the past 10 years.
Has produce risen at equivalent rates?
I do recall what margin of error refers to (one of the only things I recall from my college stats courses). In general, I don't put too much stock in any one poll, even SUSA. But when multiple polls show the same trend - say, the gap closing in PA - then I'm inclined to think that's what actually is happening.tanod said:IIRC, Rasmussen's polling margin of error is 7%. When you compare that to Gallup's, which is 2%, and a large number of other organizations whose margins of error is considerably lower than Rasmussen's, it puts them firmly in the position of not being all that useful, especially since the contest is so close.
For those who aren't familiar what the margin of error actually means (some statistical knowledge required): A margin of error is a measure of reliability of the polling methodology used. The margin of error indicates that if the polling organization used the exact same methodology to conduct another poll using a different sample of people in the same time period as the original poll, that the second set of results are not likely (~95% chance) to differ more than 2% (the margin of error but I'm using Gallup as an example) from the first set of results.
Obama doesn't give rambling responses in debates? He's been awful in the debates, and partly due to his incoherent blabbing. Wolf Blitzer won't always be there to keep the kid on topic.terrene said:What they were lucky about was that they were up against the McCain of the left, who's rambling responses lost everybody and made Bush's "one track mind" responses seem coherent.
typhonsentra said:
Yeah! I know! How stupid of me to point out that a candidate's skills to debate articulately really don't have THAT MUCH of an impact to typical voters.irfan said:THWACK!!!!!!!!!!!
GhaleonEB said:I do recall what margin of error refers to (one of the only things I recall from my college stats courses). In general, I don't put too much stock in any one poll, even SUSA. But when multiple polls show the same trend - say, the gap closing in PA - then I'm inclined to think that's what actually is happening.
GhaleonEB said:I do recall what margin of error refers to (one of the only things I recall from my college stats courses). In general, I don't put too much stock in any one poll, even SUSA. But when multiple polls show the same trend - say, the gap closing in PA - then I'm inclined to think that's what actually is happening.
I haven't been able to stand Clinton for this entire primary season, but she gets props for that. She can't deliver a "joke" for shit, but (I think) that was an attempt to lighten things up, so you can't put her down for poking fun at herself and Obama. Although claiming it was time for Obama's campaign to get out of the gutter was ridiculous.typhonsentra said:
Nintendo should sponsor a Wii Sports Bowl-Off.He should accept using a Nintendo Wii
Steve Youngblood said:Yeah! I know! How stupid of me to point out that a candidate's skills to debate articulately really don't have THAT MUCH of an impact to typical voters.
But no, you guys are right. Debates are very important. After all, it was Obama's great performances in the Ohio and Texas debates that allowed him to finally shut the door on Hillary and win those states. Oh wait...
I think that was more true in the beginning than the later debates in TX and OH. He tightened up considerably over time. It is kind of hard to see how McCain v Obama would pan out. McCain gets very blunt and brief when he is feeling testy enough, which is actually very debate-friendly, but he will suddenly go completely out to lunch when he isn't coasting on PTSD-rage or whatever it is. Obama seems to know what he wants to say but constantly self-edits to try and get to the best wording. If he accepts that he might need to be a little "canned" (and I think getting his "lines down" was what tightened him up) I think he'll appear a lot more coherent than McCain a lot of the time.APF said:Obama doesn't give rambling responses in debates? He's been awful in the debates, and partly due to his incoherent blabbing. Wolf Blitzer won't always be there to keep the kid on topic.
Still, the fallout from a debate can definitely crater your run, stop its momentum, or expose vulnerabilities people otherwise wouldn't have thought were there.electricpirate said:Steve is right, Kerry CREAMED bush in 2/3 debates, and the third was a draw. Debates can localized effects, but media narrative, is far more important.
Obama has improved substantially as a debater, he went from poor early debates to edging out Clinton in the most recent debates. Still, debates in the modern era of politics don't swing anyone.
typhonsentra said: