Polls promising for both candidates
Posted By: sm on 2008-09-09
In Reply to:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/26627956#26627956
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
But it is obama that keeps promising he
is going to *change the world,* always first the country then the world in his speeches.
He is already promising redistribution of wealth and he ...
doesn't even have the job yet. That is not a lie. He has campaign commercials about it and he is Barack Obama and he approved that message. Have you read anything about his voting history and the people he has associated with most of his adult life? Of course he is socialist. Way left socialist.
I never said Democrats were socialists. I did say Hillary Clinton was one, and Obama is to the left of her on that particular issue.
You think calling someone a socialist is name calling?
If you believe in polls good for you - The King of Polls said
So the polls only poll a few small areas with certain demographics. You trust that. Sure maybe they only poll Hollyweird and the other liberal cities. They also reflect all the phone voter registrations, so maybe to your cat and cartoon characters it matters that Obama is ahead. Me - I'll wait for election day to find out the truth about who is ahead in the race. I've said it before and I'll say it again (and glad to know Mr. Rassmusin backs me up on this one) - polls do not matter and do not reflect a real vision of who is ahead in the race.
The polls that supply that electoral map are just that....polls...sm
Polls mean less than nothing to me. Polls intimidate and mislead the voters, in my opinion. Thanks for asking.
candidates
I think they will both be true in the future to who they are now (as well as they can be with having to work with Congress to get things done), but "what you see" depends on where you're looking and who's doing the talking.
Candidates
Why not let felons vote? No different than providing amnesty to millions of illegals to get their vote, which is going to happen whether we like it or not.
Obama certainly talks the talk. I have a couple of problems with him. One his pastor. He might also consider running as an AMERICAN, not an African-American. It matters not that he happens to be a black AMERICAN. Let's be done with racism on BOTH sides. Sometimes I think the only way we, who happen to be Caucasian, can ever satisfy the African-American community is to become slaves for a few hundred years. Let it go already. There is not one person alive today who ever was a slave or ever owned a slave. Let's move on.
McCain.........while I honor his service to this country, if I hear about his POW years one more time I think I'll vomit. I saw him on a talk show where he was asked about how many houses he owns and he immediately launched into his "years as a POW where he didn't even have a table much less a house".
God save this country, neither candidate is going to help Him.
Yes...too bad the candidates don't
talk to real Americans, not the CEOs, the Hollywood elite (why anyone take any political advice from a so-called movie star is beyond me) when cameras aren't around. Most candidates perceive us as being sheeple, say some pretty things and we will follow, no matter how high the cliff is you're brining us over. I don't care how many houses you own, what faith your father was, if you had an affair or if you wear a flag pin. Get to some frickin' issues when you debate each other, don't give us the run around and jab each other. Neither one of you are stellar candidates. You both have faults, you both have good points, but for cripe's sake, talk about something that matters to us!
candidates
instead of obama or mccain, any other candidates you may vote for?
http://www.votesmart.org/election_president.php
I hope each one of these candidates
wins! They've been there, done that, and in my opinion, should have the strongest voices. I just hope it isn't too late for this country by next election day!
then again, they ALL scare me - all the candidates
   
Presidential candidates
I think MTs should run the country!!! 
Candidates cars
This was fun to read
http://www.newsweek.com/id/160091
Do either of the candidates have a plan
for this financial crisis that does not involve the taxpayers bailing out the US?
Independent candidates have to
have at least 15% in opinion polls in order to participate in the presidential debates. Right now....the only candidates eligible to participate in the debate are, of course, McCain and Obama. To me....that says that no independent has enough backing to do any good except for take votes from the other two. There is nothing wrong with voting for an independent though. If you feel Ron Paul is a better candidate, you have the right to vote for him. However, some say it would be throwing your vote away since the likelihood of him actually win is slim. You never know though. Do what you feel is best and go with your gut. If you truly believe in Ron Paul, vote for him. No one can knock you for that.
If one of the candidates was not Obama I would be...
tempted. However, in my view, it is way too important for the future of this country to doa protest vote. same reason I am voting a straight republican ticket. The thought of Obama as president and a majority in congress...makes it way too important for a protest vote this cycle...at least for me.
Here are some other parties and their candidates.
The Libertarian Party has nominated former Congressman Bob Barr, the Constitution Party has nominated pastor and radio talk show host Chuck Baldwin, and the Green Party has nominated former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney. Ralph Nader declined to seek the Green Party nomination and is running as an independent candidate. That is in addition to the Ron Paul fans as well as McCain and Obama.
What did we get out of the debate last night? That same ole crap Obama and McCain have been throwing around since the get go. Imagine what that would be like with all these other people thrown in the debate as well.
They only cover 2 candidates because
we don't demand that they do otherwise. Power to the people!!!!
I wish there was a rule that the candidates HAVE TO
avoid them and go off in a direction of their own choosing. Especially when it's something they already said before. This second debate had me yawning.
here are a few if my candidates lose -
1. Get up Wed. AM, after election, turn on TV. See my faves didn't win. My reaction: 'Oh, cr@p!'
2. my actions: Eat cereal and drink coffee.
3. Where to go from thERE?
BACK TO BED!
4. What will I flee? My low-paying MT job, which most likely will never get any better.
Now I know how the candidates feel!
Say one thing and everyone wants to dissect your every move! LOL
sbMT for President! who wants to be my running mate???
HAHA J/K
Anyone interested in the candidates houses? SM
On the www.apartmentherapy website, they feature the candidates homes. I love that site. Anway...spoiler alert, if anyone cares.
________________________________
What I found interesting is Mitt Romney lives in a comptemporary home on the water, which is pictured next to Barack Obama's conservative georgian style home.
OK, not of vital interest, I just love looking at homes. 
Scary that you would support either of those candidates.
p
and now they've found out all 3 candidates'
Reminds me a lot of LA hospital employees getting fired for snooping in Britney Spears' medical records. I don't know what exactly there is to snoop in passport records, but it's still a privacy breach.
Differences in Wives of the candidates...
So I have only seen Michelle and Cindy speak few times.
However I have noticed something that sticks out to me tremendously, and this was the attitude of the two.
Last night Cindy was calm, sweet, and caring.
Michele seems hard, negative, and loud.
Obviously I am a Republican, but I pride myself on trying to be objective. Do we see these things differently or is this agreed upon? Cindy definitely seems like a weak little doe, and Michele a tough ox.
I'm not saying either is worse, just something I observed.
I have a great idea! I think the candidates should be...sm
hooked up to lie detectors during the debates. Wouldn't that be interesting?
Of course she does.....all the candidates use planes for some things...
my point was, that they SOMETIMES use buses instead of flying everywhere, Obama does not use buses, and I would venture a guess that one flight uses more energy than her tanning bed does in a year.
Go Lou Dobbs - he's really ripping both candidates
A new one. Boy oh boy was he going off. He is so disgusted with the whole crisis going on and that the mainstream americans are going to end up paying for it. First he went off on John McCain and boy did he go off. Then he went off on Obama and boy did he let him have it too. He never once said one has a better solution that the other or one was more to blame than the other. He ended it by saying something to the effect (I forget exact words) but something about these two candidates are running to be president and they both won't answer questions with a straight answer. And if they can't even answer then they both shouldn't be running (or don't want it bad enough). Like I say I forget the exact words but I do have to say I'm going to start listening to Lou Dobbs from now on because he's not taking sides.
If you get to see his show on CNN tonight you should catch it. Very good points he brings up (and you could see the spokespersons for both sides cringing at what he was saying). He didn't let them get away with anything.
I wish both candidates were black! Then no one would be able to say it is about race. It is not abo
x
I have truly wished for a while that both candidates were black (sm)
because I thought that would take racism out of this election. One of my black friends, however, says that it would still be a racial election, because some people would think one candidate was catering more to "white" people and others would think they were catering to "black" people. I just hope we can get through all of this and have a country that can all get along, regardless of race or religion.
Americans for Tax Reform: The Candidates
Dear Friends,
1. ATR Presidential Primer: Everything You Should Know about the Candidates’ Tax Proposals (read more >>)
ATR Presidential Primer: Everything You Should Know about the Candidates’ Tax Proposals
The 2008 election is only days away. Soon you’ll be called on to vote for your next President, U.S. Senator, and U.S. Representative. Are you familiar with all their tax policies? Do you know where the candidates stand on the issues closely related to your family budget?
Americans for Tax Reform has compiled a list of all the recent materials we’ve put out on the Presidential candidates. We think you’ll find these resources and links to be very useful in your decision-making process.
Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform, discusses his thoughts on the two presidential candidates in the Politico. You may want to take a quick read to see what he thinks hinges on this election.
Educational Resources:
- Which candidates have signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge? See if your candidate has promised never to raise taxes. (Incumbents and Challengers)
- Americans for Tax Reform and Rutledge Capital Release Version 2.0 of Obama-McCain 401(k) Tax Calculator
- McCain v. Obama on Taxes
- McCain vs. Obama on Energy Taxes
- He$$ in a Hand basket: Life Under a Democrat Congress
- Five Things You Might Not Know About Obama’s Small Biz Tax Hike
- Obama’s “Spread the Wealth” Plan Raises Taxes on two-thirds of Small Business Profits
- If Obama Wants to “Spread the Wealth,” He Ought to Start With His Personal Tax Gap: Barack Obama Has a Tax Gap of Over $250,000
- Obama to U.S. Companies: “Don’t Let the Door Hit You on the Way Out” Obama Supports Keeping U.S. Business Rate Second-Highest in World
- Worried About Your 401(k)? Start Asking Obama About the Corporate Income Tax Rate
- Obama Advisor Changes the Definition of “Welfare”: Free Money Handouts Are No Longer Enough
- Joe the Plumber cares about more than just his higher tax rates: Expensing his Equipment in year one
Please consider making a $10, $15, or $20 donation to help Americans for Tax Reform continue our work. Thank you for your generous support.
(<< back to top)
Onward,
Grover Norquist
Candidates on both sides of the aisle have talked about...
affordable health care as long as I can remember. What they NEVER talk about is how they are going to realistically fund it. Hillary's plan ends up by being funded by the people who never get sick, who end up paying for all those who do get sick (that is the reader's digest version). And that is unfair in my book. That is what I am interested in seeing. When people say "America should provide health insurance for all Americans" what that means is, we will be paying for it through taxes. There is no other way to pay for it. The government has no money in and of itself...it is our tax money they fund things with. So, while your premiums may go down, your taxes will inevitably go UP, because that is how they are going to fund it. There is no magic answer here, at least from where I am sitting. One candidate talked about funding it through raising taxes on cigarettes. That is all well and good, but is it really the responsibility of people who smoke to pay for health care for America? And fewer and fewer people are even starting to smoke...so when smokers die off or quit because cigarettes get too expensive...then what? What will they tax next to pay for it? I am always interested in the specifics of how to pay for it. I don't like to hear "we will figure that out later." And, again, any plan is wholly dependent upon whether you can get both sides of the aisle on board for it...President can't pass it on his own. I just hope they will be honest and forthcoming about how they intend to pay for it.
None of the top tier of Democratic candidates will commit...
to having the troops out of Iraq during their 4 years. I know some of you have posted that you would not vote for Hillary for that reason. What if she is the candidate? Second question...if none of them are going to end the war immediately and that seems to be a major issue for most of you...I assume you are going to vote for one of them anyway...whichever one gets the nomination?
Voters do this when candidates spout fvalues.
nm
I agree totally, but unfortunately I feel all candidates do and say
whatever they want to get the votes and once they are in office, they do as they please or do what they said they would not do. It is very scary. AND everyone is so blown away by Palin. She is not running for President is she??? That scares me even more. I am still undecided.
I understand your confusion. I would suggest that you look at both candidates....
and their stand on all the issues that are important to you, and please, exercise your right to vote, no matter which candidate you choose. And try not to get bound down in the gotcha politics, concentrate on the issues, and vote for the one that most closely follows what you want for your country.
This is true - least qualified of all candidates to be the President
Sorry but sitting in on the senate and voting "present" more times than not, and being a community organizer does not make one qualified to be President. I think its like I heard the other day. When it comes time to vote and we have a war going on, an economy that's crumbling, jobs going overseas, no matter what people say now they are not going to go with someone who is new and inexperienced. They will go with someone who has been in politics, is a war hero, stands up for his fellow americans, and is obviously not for either side. Plus having Gov. Palin is the biggest plus for the ticket. A new face to Washington, hard on the big boys, won't back down, has the intelligence and know how to get our economy back on track, fights for the rights of citizens, and has the experience of balancing a budget, the smarts to know we need to drill here (and not just smooth talk like the dems are giving us). She and Sen. McCain will help bring this country to be energy independent and not let big CEOs walk away with millions while people like us have to pay. I for one among many are very excited to see what good things President McCain and Vice President Palin will be doing for our country.
If your still upset when McCain & Palin win, don't worry though, if you submit your names that you voted for the democrats I'm sure they will let you all pay more in taxes than the rest of us. After all you seem to think Biden was okay in trying to convince you that its your patriotic duty to pay more in taxes when the CEOs and other execs will walk away with money in their pockets (to include Obama, Clinton & Dodd).
Why don't we discuss the Republican candidates for a change?
This is just like a dog chasing his tail!
webmd.com has healthcare plans of both candidates
in a very informative fashion, front and center. take a look. i am also very concerned about o's idea for changing medical records technology....
Executive power survey by presidential candidates.
In case you haven't seen this article, I am posting the link:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/12/22/candidates_on_executive_power_a_full_spectrum/?page=2
This is very enlightening for those who want to know their candidates thoughts about executive power.
Lets put this nonsense to bed. Pres candidates born outside US
Here's the link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born_citizen
Here's the text. See. Isn't this EASY?
US presidential candidates born outside the US
"The constitutional wording has left doubts about whether those born on foreign soil are on an equal footing with those whose birth occurred inside the country's borders, and whether they have the same rights."[2] Though every president and vice president to date (as of 2008) has either been a citizen at the adoption of the Constitution, or else born in a U.S. state or Washington D.C.,[3] a number of presidential candidates have been born elsewhere.[4]
Barry Goldwater, who ran as the Republican party nominee in 1964, was born in Arizona while it was still a U.S. territory. Although Arizona was not a state, it was a fully organized and incorporated territory of the United States.[5]
George Romney, who ran for the Republican party nomination in 1968, was born in Mexico to U.S. parents. Romney’s grandfather emigrated to Mexico in 1886 with his three wives and children after Utah outlawed polygamy. Romney's parents retained their U.S. citizenship and returned to the United States in 1912. Romney was 32 years old when he arrived in Michigan.
Lowell Weicker, the former Connecticut Senator, Representative, and Governor, entered the race for the Republican party nomination of 1980 but dropped out before voting in the primaries began. He was born in Paris, France and acquired his citizenship at birth through his parents. His father was an executive for E. R. Squibb & Sons and his mother was the Indian-born daughter of a British general.[6]
John McCain, who ran for the Republican party nomination in 2000 and is the Republican nominee in 2008, was born at the Coco Solo U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone to U.S. parents. Although the Panama Canal Zone was not considered to be part of the United States,[7] federal law states: "Any person born in the Canal Zone on or after February 26, 1904, and whether before or after the effective date of this chapter, whose father or mother or both at the time of the birth of such person was or is a citizen of the United States, is declared to be a citizen of the United States."[8] The law that conferred this status took effect on August 4, 1937, one year after John McCain was born — albeit with retroactive effect, resulting in McCain being declared a U.S. citizen.[9]
The mere fact of Constitutional ineligibility has not deterred some minor parties from nominating candidates for President who could not possibly serve in the office. For example, although some states have blocked ballot access for such candidates, the Socialist Workers Party nonetheless successfully placed its candidate, Róger Calero, on the ballot in Mississippi in 2004. [10]
Gotcha. Reject candidates who promise what we know they can't deliver.
...although that does raise the little problem of who, then, we could possibly vote for?
I read an interesting statement over the weekend and can't find it now, but basically it was this: When we scream at our politicians we're really screaming at the electorate that put them in office. And at bottom, that really is the problem. The politicians are exactly what our electorate has chosen. And frankly, I don't see the electorate changing for the better - especially younger voters - for which I think we can thank at least one generation of parents who didn't parent, and teachers who didn't teach.
Marital Fidelity and Family Values in Republican Candidates?
Should cut both ways, shouldn't it?
I'm providing the link to the article because I run the risk of posting profanity if I copy what some of these Republicans did, and as we all know, the words describing the deed is unacceptable, although the deed itself will be defended in Neoconville, as long as it's done by a Republican.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0607.benen.html
There have been lots of states who have elected candidates and wished they hadn't. sm
I, too, find the Viggo mortensen tie-in a little strange. I had to reread the entire thread and I only saw Hollywood, no one specific named, was there? Other than Willie and he isn't Hollywood. Anyhow, I don't like Dennis either. I can remember when he was all over the news going to do something about the gasoline prices and never heard another word out of him after he was elected. He's no different than most of them and no better than any of othem.
Take a look at these polls.sm
Just to give you an idea, take Denver's Rocky Mountain News poll (the state is very conservative) below, and look at the results. Almost every poll I have seen shows large percentages of Americans think the same way as the theorists.
http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/denver/rockytalklive/archives/2006/08/the_government_and_911_2.html#more
Here is another one from Ed Schultz at Air America with a 50/50 split.
http://www.wegoted.com/index.asp
Polls
Make that alter-ego. Changing names according to post content = literary license. I'm sure you've heard of it before, being so intimately acquainted with the literary world and all. Makes things a bit more intriguing. Enables one to dial back rabid mad-dog rhetoric.
Case in point. You don't launch into your "5-paragraph volleys" unless you think you are talking to GT. As BW, I enjoy the luxury of not having to drag out an entire arsenal of put-downs just to make myself understood, since you can’t quite figure out who you are talking to. Usually I am pretty good about revealing the aliases eventually, but not always. That is another prerogative of free speech.
BTW, when you lift content and ideas from somebody else's post, it's customary to use quotes. Disciple? Shades of the gospel according to Saint Hannity. Another suggestion would be that when you plagiarize thought or content, at least be careful not to put it into responses addressed to the original author.
Yes, Congress has a lower rating than Bush. He wields a powerful weapon that empowers him to obstruct, stall and reverse any sort of viable legislative initiatives. It's called the veto pen. In this last session, he has used it 8 times but Congress has managed to override him on 4 of those vetoes. They at have at least shown more ability than Bush to cross the aisle and engage themselves in effective bipartisan initiatives and convince them to vote against their fearless leader.
You and the pubs make no excuses for being too inept at reaching consensus (a decidedly American concept). Obstruction, stalling and reversals are akin to dodges, deceive and deflections. They are the strategies used by petty dictators and their parties in a setting of “might makes right,” that divide and conquer approach, rather than taking the high road and exerting the effort or harboring the desire to create a representative government body. Bipartisanship has never been his forte anyway. No surprise there.
Polls are interesting, but not terribly reliable, given the problems that arise when you start to consider the source, sift through bias, skewing and the like. More than likely, the polls offer the most reliable reflection of public opinion would be the approval ratings of the candidates, not that status quo that is destined to be decimated come November. Most dems are just about as frustrated with the whole mess as you are. On that we can agree. But my take on approval ratings, at least in terms the current state of affairs in Congress and the executive branch, is that the low numbers reflect a much more deep-seated frustration and anger toward being lied to about the war and the incalculable costs in terms of human life as well as tax dollars, the state of the economy and the perception that nobody anywhere is doing anything, typical of a lame duck in a campaign year. The nation as a whole is in a really bad mood, to be sure. They simply don't approve of anything, at the moment.
More than likely, this will play itself with a major overhaul on both sides of the aisle. Who comes out on top in Congress in terms of numbers is anybody’s guess.
Polls are even at 42%
per a CBS poll taken on Wednesday, so this does not include Palin's speech or McCain's acceptance speech.
Polls & More
Remember, this is the party that prides itself on being "tolerant." Yeah, sure. How tolerant have they been of anything a conservative has to say? This why they lie in wait here, so the few times I even bother to take the time (more like waste it) to post something, I try to make the subject line not stand out as a "right-winger" view.
This board is no better than DailyKos, HuffingtonPost, etc. Go to those sites and see how well the libs behave. I look at this forum very seldom now after seeing what the bulk of my industry thinks and how totally nasty they behave. They make having a cat fight look like a tea party.
While polls mean almost nothing to me, Rasmussen is a very reputable one. Below is from Media Resarch Center (excellent; Bret Bozell, Libertarian). Included in the article are links for a great deal of info for anyone interested. Nasty posts, etc. mean nothing to me, so do as you please. I've made my pitstop here for the day (or week), and see that each time I look here it's only gotten more nasty.
**********************************************************************************************
A new Rasmussen poll of 1,000 likely voters shows that by a
stunning five-to-one margin, Americans believe the media
are actively trying to help Barack Obama win the Presidential
Election.
The new poll comes on the heels of last week's survey that
discovered by a margin of 10 to 1, the public believes the
media are trying to hurt Republican Vice Presidential
nominee Sarah Palin.
Shockingly, Democrats and "unaffiliated" voters both believe
that journalists are attempting to help Obama.
For the complete CyberAlert report:
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10831&RID=16855646
Much has been made of Barack Obama's "lipstick on a pig" remark,
but few, if any worked harder to run cover for Democrat
Presidential hopeful more than MSNBC’s Chris Matthews, who
questioned if the comment "insults...everyone's intelligence?"
But did Matthews insult his viewers' intelligence on Monday,
when he accused Palin and Rudy Guiliani of using coded racist
language when they referred to Obama’s experience as a
"community organizer?"
For the full CyberAlert report:
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10832&RID=16855646
Is CNN the talking parrot on the shoulder of the Democrat Party?
A closer look reveals the "best political team on television"
parroting the Democrats dismal view of the economy by mimicking
the claim that the Republicans are shying away from the issue.
In fact, in true parrot form, CNN repeated the charge at least
12 times during its September 4 coverage.
For the complete Business & Media Institute report:
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10833&RID=16855646
Haven't yet signed up for The Business & Media Institute's Balance
Sheet? It’s a free, weekly e-mail newsletter auditing media coverage
of business and economic issues. Packed with analysis of the top
issues in the news from a free-market perspective, it is essential
reading for everyone who wants to know what the media aren't
telling you.
The Balance Sheet also delivers expert commentary and links to
valuable resources. Click here to sign up:
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10834&RID=16855646
P.S: MRC's exclusive, special report "Obama's Margin of Victory:
The Media" is shipping. If you haven't yet reserved your copy
of this 60 page booklet that shines the white-hot light on the
media's overt role in Obama's meteoric rise to prominence do so
now by clicking here:
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10835&CID=500&RID=16855646
********
MRC News Report
09/11/08
********
***Brent Bozell's Syndicated Columns
MSNBC's Doomed 'Experiment'
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10836&RID=16855646
Toxic Beverly Hills
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10837&RID=16855646
***CNSNews.com
Passage of Year Makes Petraeus Look Good, Congressional Critics Look Bad
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10838&RID=16855646
Moms Say Palin Is Role Model for All Women
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10839&RID=16855646
Chavez Hails End of ‘Yankee Hegemony’ As Russian Bombers Arrive
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10840&RID=16855646
Palin Stars at Virginia Rally, Then Heads Home
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10841&RID=16855646
Biden's Bishop Seeks Prayers to Help Biden Become Pro-Life
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10842&RID=16855646
Democrat Leader Raises Specter of Government Shutdown over Oil Drilling
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10843&RID=16855646
***MRC.org
By 5-to-1 Public Thinks Most Journalists Trying to Elect Obama
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10844&RID=16855646
Matthews: Obama's 'Pig' Not Sexist, 'Community Organizer' Racist
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10845&RID=16855646
CNN Labels Palin's Environmental Stances 'Outside the Mainstream'
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10846&RID=16855646
'Non-Partisan' Liberal Group's Critique of Palin Cited by CNN
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10847&RID=16855646
ABC's Brian Ross Highlights Angry Librarians Opposed to Palin
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10848&RID=16855646
MSNBC Hosts Mock and Distort Prayer Request by Sarah Palin
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10849&RID=16855646
CBS Highlights Dem's Anti-Palin Plea: 'We've Got to Go After Her'
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10850&RID=16855646
NYT's Herbert: "Arch-Conservative" Clarence Thomas' "Self-Hatred"
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10851&RID=16855646
Couric Uses sex Scandal to Show Bush Admin 'Close' to Big Oil
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10852&RID=16855646
***Culture and Media Institute
Newsweek's Female Columnists Pile on Palin
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10853&RID=16855646
The Cost of Killing Palinzilla
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10854&RID=16855646
Palin Heat Threatens Planet
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10855&RID=16855646
Crude MTV Award Host Mocks Palin, Purity
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10856&RID=16855646
Stop the Presses! Palin's Church Holds to Bible's Teaching on
Homosexuality!
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10857&RID=16855646
***TimesWatch.org
Public Editor Says Palin Coverage Fair, Parenting Angle "Legitimate"
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10858&RID=16855646
Obama's Terrorist Colleague Bill Ayers Makes Cameo in Story on Education
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10859&RID=16855646
Rev. Jeremiah Wright Compares Obama to Virgin Mary -- Times Doesn't Blink
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10860&RID=16855646
Seelye Shrugs Off Dem. Ed Rendell's "Big Lie" Smear of McCain
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10861&RID=16855646
Bob Herbert Unleashed: "Arch-Conservative" Clarence Thomas's "Self-Hatred"
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10862&RID=16855646
***Business and Media Institute - businessandmedia.org
CNN Parrots Dems on Republicans and Economy
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10863&RID=16855646
Greenspan: Recession Still Percent or More' Likely
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10864&RID=16855646
Media Error Causes Steep Loss for United Airlines
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10865&RID=16855646
ABC: Manmade Global Warming Causing Worse Allergies
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10866&RID=16855646
CEO: Fannie/Freddie Bailout Makes America 'More Communist than China'
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10867&RID=16855646
***NewsBusters.org
Covering for Dems: NYT Reporter Certain Obama's 'Pig' Wasn't Palin
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10868&RID=16855646
WaPo Religion Blogger Attacks Sarah Palin's Religion
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10869&RID=16855646
MRC's Bozell Discusses 'Lipstick' Smear, MSNBC Meltdown on 'Fox & Friends'
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10870&RID=16855646
Mitchell: Obama 'Clearly' Wasn't Talking About Palin
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10871&RID=16855646
Joe Klein: 'Obama is the precise opposite of Mountain Man Todd Palin'
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10872&RID=16855646
Former Time Columnist Unveils New Obama Spokesman: Buckwheat
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10873&RID=16855646
***Worst of The Week
The Trashing of Sarah Palin
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10874&RID=16855646
*** NewsBusted
For a Lighter Look at the News: Watch the Latest Episode of NewsBusted!
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10875&RID=16855646
***Eyeblast.tv
For the best in video, check out Eyeblast.tv!
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10876&RID=16855646
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
(Note: Please do not reply directly to this e-mail message. This
e-mail address is not designed to receive your personal messages.
To contact the Media Research Center with comments, questions or
to change your status, see the link at the end of this e-mail.)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ + Comments? Questions?
http://www.mrcaction.org/r.asp?U=10877&RID=16855646
+ + + + +
The Media Research Center is a research and education organization
operating under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
Contributions are tax-deductible for income tax purposes.
How much do you believe polls?
Yahoo had some info on the Rasumussen Polls and I went to their website to check it out: www.rasmussenreports.com
They have an electoral college page that shows the current "vote" at 248-163 in favor of Obama. I'm going to have to do some research and see how accurate polls were in previous presidential elections. They have it broken down by state and it is pretty interesting, if numbers are your thing!
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/election_2008_electoral_college_update
For all who believe in polls
I don't believe in polls but a lot of posters like to use them to try to make some sort of point....
Today's Gallup poll (one of the most trusted) - Obama 49, McCain 47 -
Like I say....way to close to predict a winner. I also heard some students after last nights debate that said they were still undecided said if they had to vote right now they'd choose McCain. Goes to show not every single person/young person voting Obama.
polls
Thanks, it is
49.5 for Obama
42.7 for McCain.
Obama is 6.8 points ahead.
Well, actually there are polls to confirm this
I don't believe the word "sick" was part of the poll but it comes pretty darn close to the majority of America's current view of this administration and this war.
|
