home

Ras FL Poll: McCain By 8

In direct contradiction to recent Q and ARG polling, Ras sez McCain by 8 in Florida, and the off shore drilling issue does not hurt McCain:

The Florida survey also found that McCain currently leads Obama in the state by a 47% to 39% margin. Six percent (6%) said they would vote for some other candidate while 8% are undecided. However, after voters were told that McCain favored offshore drilling and Obama opposed it, McCain’s lead increased to eleven points, 49% to 38%. While a three-point net gain is not stunning, it is significant that the issue didn’t push voters towards Obama. All of McCain’s gains on the offshore drilling issue came from male voters.

Who is right? To be honest, this seems more in line with my feel for the state of the race in Florida.

By Big Tent Democrat

< Victory at Last | SCOTUS Upholds (Subject to Limits) Right to Self-Representation >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    I think Rasmuseen is right in both cases (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by andgarden on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:27:19 AM EST
    Ras took a snapshot yesterday and the day before, Q poll and ARG picked up the unity bounce.

    I think what's right is that Obama has some headroom in Florida, and he might think about spending some of his uncapped funds there pretty soon.

    Agreed. (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by Pegasus on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:33:52 AM EST
    I'm taking yesterday's polls as... let's say aspirational.

    Parent
    Heh. (none / 0) (#99)
    by Robot Porter on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:33:58 AM EST
    What ad does he run? (5.00 / 6) (#4)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:34:30 AM EST
    The one that brags about how he fought for the right of Floridians votes to not be counted? Or the one where he says that old, white Democrat's don't matter because he's building a new Democratic majority based on youth, minorities, and Republicans?

    Parent
    I rated this up because - (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:43:32 AM EST
    Florida voters have a justified bad opinion of Obama. This is what he will need to counter to get the FL dem base behind him.
    Snark was justified.

    Parent
    You know what, I'm getting tired of this (4.56 / 9) (#6)
    by andgarden on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:35:27 AM EST
    I know. (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Molly Bloom on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:36:10 AM EST
    you should chin up (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:38:01 AM EST
    because it isnt going away.

    Parent
    I'm sure the McCain campaign (4.00 / 4) (#16)
    by andgarden on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:39:24 AM EST
    will pay top dollar for it too.

    Parent
    adopting the strategy (5.00 / 4) (#29)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:43:40 AM EST
    of calling anyone who questions the O a McCain republican is not going to advance your cause.
    just sayin.

    Parent
    It's a pretty obvious one though (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:11:08 AM EST
    at teh very least Gore can't go down there and conplain about the rigged System in Florida that lead to Bush winning.  That's out the window for Dems this year.

    Parent
    Truly a pathetic (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by talex on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:11:34 AM EST
    and lazy response.

    Parent
    You'll (5.00 / 6) (#15)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:38:57 AM EST
    get really tired of it, because the 527s are going to happily and readily use it.

    Parent
    You are absolutely correct....yesterday (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:48:35 AM EST
    I posted this and was downrated, but it is true like it or not:

    Repubs will go for obama's throat and (2.00 / 1) (#173)
    by PssttCmere08 on Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 12:08:06 PM
    heart and will have little compunction about tearing them out.  obama has been on a cakewalk; and now he will be shown no mercy, not matter how rose-colored the glasses are that obama followers are wearing.


    Parent

    People Shouldn't Troll Rate Disagreement (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by daring grace on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:20:23 AM EST
    Don't you agree?

    Down rate? I have no opinion since I only use 5s myself.


    Parent

    There is no troll rating here (5.00 / 0) (#93)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:25:12 AM EST
    Trolls are dealt with by the moderator's. I don't rate much, except in closed threads where I can't comment, or when I don't have anything relevant to say but want to express agreement or disagrement with a comment. But please don't take a "1" too seriously. It simply means that somebody disagrees. There are no repercussions. A "1", or even a series of "1"'s, will not get somebody kicked off the site or have their comment hidden. It's just a way of expressing an opinion.

    Parent
    From Them (5.00 / 0) (#82)
    by daring grace on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:18:06 AM EST
    it's expected. Predictable, even.

    Parent
    1000 papercuts till DemCon, Big Ammo comes later (5.00 / 2) (#97)
    by Ellie on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:29:28 AM EST
    No worries, gang-trollrating hoping to bury uncomfortable truths about Obama's own words and actions will counteract the Rethug onslaught.

    Also the hundreds of Hope Ya Got Change oPods deployed to press their 2min "personal stories" on schlubs trapped in No (Wo)Man's Land between vehicle and mall.

    Parent

    OK (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by samanthasmom on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:40:45 AM EST
    What message do think Obama should use to garner votes in Florida? Many of the people in Florida are McCain's demographics so "I'm not McCain" isn't likely to play really well.  What positive message do you think will?  This isn't snark.  I really want to know what you think might work.

    Parent
    Issues (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by andgarden on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:42:38 AM EST
    Remember Hillary's concession speech? Start there.

    Parent
    More detail please (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:45:49 AM EST
    Which issues? How does he spin them? Which parts of Clinton's speech should he use?

    Parent
    I suggest an ad with the following clip: (5.00 / 3) (#45)
    by andgarden on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:48:25 AM EST
    today, I am standing with Senator Obama to say: Yes we can.

    Together we will work. We'll have to work hard to get universal health care. But on the day we live in an America where no child, no man, and no woman is without health insurance, we will live in a stronger America. That's why we need to help elect Barack Obama our President.

    We'll have to work hard to get back to fiscal responsibility and a strong middle class. But on the day we live in an America whose middle class is thriving and growing again, where all Americans, no matter where they live or where their ancestors came from, can earn a decent living, we will live in a stronger America and that is why we must elect Barack Obama our President.

    We'll have to work hard to foster the innovation that makes us energy independent and lift the threat of global warming from our children's future. But on the day we live in an America fueled by renewable energy, we will live in a stronger America. That's why we have to help elect Barack Obama our President.

    We'll have to work hard to bring our troops home from Iraq, and get them the support they've earned by their service. But on the day we live in an America that's as loyal to our troops as they have been to us, we will live in a stronger America and that is why we must help elect Barack Obama our President.



    Parent
    An actual clip? (5.00 / 4) (#51)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:51:53 AM EST
    Oh ... no.  Really. Not good. People who chose Clinton, who believed in her candidacy, are not going to like having him use her words, however magnanimous, to try to convince them to vote for him. It's a great clip, and it was a great speech, but he has to win them over with his own words, his own ideas, or he's just going to feed the resentment a lot of people have left over from the primaries.

    Parent
    Frankly, I disagree (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by andgarden on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:53:24 AM EST
    We saw how powerful the unity bounce apparently was. Let's cement it.

    We have seen that people who were going to be bitter rejected the speech in the first place. To hell with them.

    Parent

    There's a world of difference (5.00 / 0) (#73)
    by mmc9431 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:11:24 AM EST
    between sour grapes and criticism of a candidate or the position that the Party has taken. In this election cycle the Democrat's have a golden opportunity to really institute major changes. The country is begging for it. Moving to the right in order to win isn't going to work. If we do that we're no different than the Republican's So I will continue to push back when I hear Obama (or whatever the candidate's name may have been)trying to appease everyone. It's time for Democrat's to show some backbone.

    Parent
    Won't work (5.00 / 0) (#94)
    by americanincanada on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:25:27 AM EST
    Obama has to do this on his own. The best thing he could do, and it's still playing with fire if she isn't on the ticket, is have Hillary campaign with him there.

    As a Florida voter I am telling you, using a clip of Hillary's suspension speach is NOT, NOT, NOT going to help him.

    Parent

    As I Florida (half) voter, (5.00 / 0) (#103)
    by Nike on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:50:00 AM EST
    I want Obama to come and try to explain to us why he values our votes and the kinds of things he would hope to do that might convince us to give a full vote to him. (I have already heard Hillary's speech.) It's his case to make everywhere. Here in Florida, though, there are clearly both special burdens and big electoral votes at stake. There are assuredly some traditional base democrats who might want to hear why we should not follow Donna's Brazile's advice to the base, just stay home. This is a state that has been hit hard by the mortgage fallout, and so the economy might be a good place to start.

    Parent
    Umm...he's already shown you he doesn't (none / 0) (#169)
    by derridog on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 03:24:30 PM EST
    value your votes.  Maybe you could give him half a vote.

    Parent
    Wasn't a unity bounce (none / 0) (#178)
    by Valhalla on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 07:19:57 PM EST
    it was a nomination bounce.  Just about the same bounce Kerry got after the convention.

    Plus, even if it was a 'unity' bounce, unity is not a one way street.  Otherwise it's a 'submission' bounce.  And I'm having none of that, thank you.

    Parent

    FL is the perfect place for Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by ruffian on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:28:19 AM EST
    herself to campaign for or with Obama. I expect to see some of that. Hope so anyway -I would go!

    Parent
    I agree on that (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:36:59 AM EST
    But it's one thing for Clinton to campaign for/with Obama, and another entirely for him to use her words in a campaign commercial. I guess it's subjective, but I think it would turn people off. Obama has to start making his case himself, not depending on others to do so.

    Parent
    Not A Turn Off (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:45:36 AM EST
    But a hat tip to Hillary and further evidence that the two candidates that "split" the party actually share the same vision for the future of our country.

    Parent
    BIG turn off for this Florida voter (5.00 / 1) (#111)
    by americanincanada on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:03:15 PM EST
    it will not show me that the two candidates that "split" the party actually share the same vision for the future of our country.

    Instead it would illustrate to me that we have the wrong candidate nominated.

    He either needs her to campaign, with him not for him, or put her on the ticket.

    Parent

    Good For You (5.00 / 2) (#115)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:09:59 PM EST
    Knock yourself out and vote for McCain, it is a free country, for now.

    Parent
    How insulting is it (5.00 / 2) (#122)
    by americanincanada on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:16:47 PM EST
    for you to assume that everyone who is critical of Obama, or doesn't at this moment support him, is going to vote for McCain? If you don't listen to the voters you are doomed to lose them.

    At the moment I do not intend to vote for Obama but I have no intention of voting McCain either. I am hoping Obama does something to earn my vote. But I'm not holding my breath.

    What I am doing is pointing out things that, IMHO, won't work. And using Hillary's video taped words won't help.

    Parent

    Poor Baby (1.00 / 2) (#137)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:36:58 PM EST
    But then again it is not
    everyone who is critical of Obama
    that I am talking about here. It is everyone who is only critical of Obama here. And everyone who has acted exactly like everyone who was only critical of Hillary.

    Schoolyard fanclubs wars seem soooooo passé to me. But keep up the hate, I am sure it is exciting for you.

    Parent

    I don't think things like this will help obama (none / 0) (#131)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:32:46 PM EST
    either....just saying

    link

    Parent

    McCain or Obama is a false choice (5.00 / 2) (#142)
    by Ellie on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:48:18 PM EST
    This is just Club Obama fearmongering, besides which a McCain presidency isn't doom.

    I want to make sure we don't have another three decades of untrammeled right wing iron fisted rule aided and abetted by a cardboard "opposition" that exists for the cameras only.

    We need a stronger Congress with real Liberals, not the "people powered" DINOs that the fauxgressive netroots installed on the pay now, f*ck off later plan that hurtled women (AKA "special interests") back to medieval times on rights, health and as political players.

    No more trusting them ahead of time. Show leadership and earn people's support. Don't show it and you can be an answer on Trivial Pursuit, the Ohs.

    (Not my party, not my problem now, not my fault anymore or in the future.)

    Parent

    We all want our revoloution (5.00 / 1) (#145)
    by jondee on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:57:59 PM EST
    now. And the only way you get my Hill is by prying it from my cold, dead, fingers.

    If it's not your problem, your party, your ideal. your world etc etc why do you even bother?

    Parent

    My franchise is mine to use as I see fit (none / 0) (#153)
    by Ellie on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:14:53 PM EST
    You're asking the wrong person why I 'bother'. I don't have to support a political party or the Coke or Pepsi options for president to exercise my franchise.

    I'm taking my vote seriously and not as a free coupon to get on a cheesy bandwagon for the flavor of the month.

    You should be asking Obama supporters why they feverishly support a poor leader and his Me-Only-Ever actions that play behind his We-We-We empty cribbed speeches.

    The outrage about the outrage is tired.

    Parent

    Speaking of tired (none / 0) (#163)
    by jondee on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 02:16:47 PM EST
    so are those bitter, baiting, post-run off "Club Obama" cracks from those who simple cant bear the thwarted ascension of Our Lady.

    One might be inclined to assume that, unlike a MCCain presidency, the primary results really did "spell doom".

    The outrage about the outrage about the outrage is equally tired. But hey, it's your franchise.

    Parent

    It deffinitely bad for the court. (none / 0) (#146)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:58:00 PM EST
    It's probably a wash on Iraq. Obama would be good for civil rights advancement.

    Hard to say what long term net effect having a GOPer in would do for healthcare (structurally) too. If Obama botches it or makes no effort on UHC it would have been better to wait four more years on it.  

    The history of UHC in the UK indicates that Labour sacrificed a second term in order to push through the reform for teh NHS.

    I see none of that willingness to sacrifice career over principle in the current nominee or his backers.

    Parent

    Wow (none / 0) (#147)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:02:38 PM EST
    McCain or Obama is a false choice
      For 99.9% of the voters in America that is the choice. To think that McCain or Obama is simply something coming out of a rarefied internet fan club seems really out there, imo.

    Parent
    I think day after day obama does or says (none / 0) (#116)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:10:11 PM EST
    something to show he doesn't feel he needs Hillary in his corner.  So, maybe it is time for him to step up to show these people why they should vote for him.  Seriously, how much do you think Hillary owes this guy?  In my book...nothing.

    Parent
    Will he appear (5.00 / 0) (#117)
    by LoisInCo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:10:46 PM EST
    at the end and say " Me too!" ?

    Parent
    yeah, that'll work . . . (none / 0) (#152)
    by nycstray on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:14:22 PM EST
    Using a qualified, experienced woman's words to prop up an unqualified, inexperienced man.

    Disgusting.

    It's past time that Obama stands on his own two feet and words.

    Parent

    Which issues? (5.00 / 3) (#42)
    by samanthasmom on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:47:19 AM EST
    Social security? National defense? The economy? What should Obama say directly to the people of Florida?  He's not Hillary. Her relationship to the voters in Florida is different than his.  What should he say?

    Parent
    He can't be too much like Hillary (5.00 / 0) (#90)
    by americanincanada on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:22:08 AM EST
    or peopel are just going to get even more angry that she isn't on the ballot. Us Floridians are an ornery lot. We don't like to be lied to and we don't like having our votes discounted time and time again.

    This time it came from fellow dems and made it worse. this poll is very much in line with what I have been hearing from family and friends. Floridians are also starting to rethink the whole oil drilling thing and some, though not me, are willing to at least look at what that might entail.

    I'm not sure what will work for him but "I'm not McCain" and "Look Hillary supports me!" surely won't.

    Parent

    In FL, I think Obama (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by indy in sc on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:45:13 AM EST
    should play up McCain's wanting to privatize social security and how his saber-rattling about Iran is only going to further destablize the middle east thus making Israel less secure. Florida has also been hit particularly hard by the mortgage crisis.  He should focus on that.

    Parent
    Ummm.. Obama's economic advisor also wants to (none / 0) (#170)
    by derridog on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 03:29:18 PM EST
    privatize social security.

    Parent
    He has (none / 0) (#172)
    by indy in sc on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 04:10:38 PM EST
    a group of economic advisors.  While one of them has expressed favorable feelings towards private SS accounts, Obama himself has voted consistently against it.

    Parent
    Are Floridians some kind of mutants (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by Y Knot on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:19:41 AM EST
    or aliens or living in a different universe where the issues of the war, economy, civil rights, environment, energy etc. are not operable?  (OK, the bugs are mutants.  I'm talking about the people.)

    Pretty sure he'll go with his "this country has been royally messed up, and I'm gonna fix it," meme.

    Parent

    Floridians aren't mutants, (5.00 / 0) (#105)
    by samanthasmom on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:52:52 AM EST
    but people living in different states may have different priorities.  Although offshore drilling may be an issue for people living in Iowa, it's not likely to be as important to them as it might be to someone living in a coastal state with oil reserves offshore. Although we can probably agree on a list of priorities for the country, how we order them might vary from one state to another.

    Parent
    duh -- how about Social Security for starters? (none / 0) (#36)
    by A DC Wonk on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:44:43 AM EST
    McCain wants to privatize Soc Sec.  Obama doesn't.  There are also dozens of other issues where McCain is on the wrong side.  (oil drilling, Iraq, climate change, etc.)  You think all of those would be irrelevant to Floridians?

    Parent
    Well actually (5.00 / 2) (#75)
    by smott on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:11:59 AM EST
    Jeff Liebman, top fin'l advisor for Obama does seem to favor privatization. AT least he did in the paper he co-authored with Marty Feldstein.

    But, we can "hope" he has "changed" !


    Parent

    Nothing much really (none / 0) (#38)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:45:35 AM EST
    The best he could do there is force Mccain to spend ad money in a home state.

    Parent
    So am I, actually (5.00 / 4) (#30)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:43:57 AM EST
    But it's the way things are. You can't make reality go away by ignoring it or wishing it away. Obama screwed up royally during the primary and it will cost him during the general election. If you're tired of the arguments, then find a way to counter them. I would be very happy to see have my belief that Obama can't win the general election in Florida be effectively countered.

    Parent
    buck up (5.00 / 4) (#32)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:44:22 AM EST
    there's a war for the soul of the dem party on!

    The primary may be over, but not the war.

    Parent

    a-freakin-men edgar (5.00 / 3) (#41)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:47:06 AM EST
    A war that entails (none / 0) (#149)
    by MKS on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:04:59 PM EST
    Obama's defeat in the General Election?  That's the goal?

    Parent
    Better find a bed (5.00 / 3) (#69)
    by talex on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:09:45 AM EST
    if you are tired! lol

    Sorry but things like Obama did to the voters of Florida just don't evaporate. He would have done the same anywhere - even your state.

    That you would like to dismiss his blatant and overt attack on not counting the votes of Americans, if not democracy itself, for his own self-serving purposes is appalling.

    He may as well setup road blocks or purged people from the voter rolls because in the end the result is the same.

    Parent

    Some Hillary supporters (none / 0) (#148)
    by MKS on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:03:37 PM EST
    may not support Obama....

    It can become a waste to time to try to convince people who refuse to be convinced.

    Parent

    A waste of time to work for votes? (none / 0) (#167)
    by lmv on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 03:03:10 PM EST
    If Obama can't/won't/can't be bothered to reach out to voters who don't like him, why is he running?

    Honestly, the whole Post-Partisan ship has sailed.  He's NOT going to rack up Repug votes.  

    And, he hasn't sealed the deal with Hillary supporters.  Instead, he's spent most of the last few weeks finding ways to diss her supporters.  (Solis Dolyle?  Elizabeth Edwards as his healthcare guru?)

    My local party (which is flat broke and in dire needs of volunteers) made it clear to Hillary supporters BACK IN MARCH that they weren't wanted.  I left.  I can take my vote with me, too.  


    Parent

    beating McCain there (none / 0) (#21)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:41:01 AM EST
    would be a long shot.

    He's welcom to waste cahs in Florida though.   it may force McCain to counter advertize and waste resources there too.   So, we'll see.

    Parent

    Already on the ground (none / 0) (#61)
    by waldenpond on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:02:24 AM EST
    Some of the items of focus in an article (using consumer marketing data) were silly but it did note he has paid staff and volunteers in FL already.  Don't remember where, but it noted he had 5 paid staff on the ground just before the primary process was done.  Will need to see if he ramps it up.

    Parent
    get ready for an avalanche of (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Molly Bloom on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:33:35 AM EST
     I told you so and he can never get elected.

    Nah.... Why bother? (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:36:13 AM EST
    Polls this early in the season don't matter, whether they look goof for Obama or not. Polling outfits should really just give their people the summer off like schools give teachers time off. I'm sure that they will put in plenty of overtime come this fall.

    Parent
    Such a thing (5.00 / 0) (#12)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:37:48 AM EST
    would be similar to the gloating we saw yesterday about how he's gonna win the Hillary states BIG!

    Parent
    When it was mentioned yesterday that (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:52:58 AM EST
    perhaps the Q and ARG polls were too good to be true, many obama followers were very quick to say "look obama is ahead and gloated their little hearts out".  I did mention that perhaps we should wait a few weeks to see what shakes out, but they were too busy doing the happy dance.  I still say, wait a few weeks to see how it plays out.

    Parent
    Here's One Obama Supporter (4.00 / 0) (#95)
    by daring grace on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:27:12 AM EST
    Who is paying no attention to polls until after the conventions. Fun to watch them now, but zero meaning to them UNLESS they show week to week consistency which many of these (particularly battleground) numbers don't.

    As for gloating my heart out...who would I be directing that gloat at? McCain supporters? What's wrong with that?

    Parent

    First off, I said many, not all.... (none / 0) (#109)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:02:25 PM EST
    Fair Enough (none / 0) (#162)
    by daring grace on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 02:06:32 PM EST
    I respond to these kinds of posts sometimes though because I see a lot of gloating, and related emotional responses fired by both sides, and that's simply not where I'm at with this election. (Or, frankly, usually in any election.)

    It's almost as if there is a separate constituency at play here, people joined not by what candidate they want, but by the nature of their relationship with that candidate: There are the vocally, vituperative supporters (of Obama and Clinton, both) and the supporters who don't see opponents as some evil enemy to be put down and gotcha-ed all the time (Again, Clinton and Obama supporters both.)

    I don't hang out at a lot of Obama-leaning sites for the same reason I sometimes find this one hard to take: Not because of which candidate I support, but because the level of rude passion is so unappealing and uninstructive.

    Parent

    Just like Clinton supporters in summer (none / 0) (#57)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:55:21 AM EST
    touting useless national polls.

    Parent
    Now, now Salo...play nice...yeah most of (none / 0) (#112)
    by PssttCmere08 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:03:28 PM EST
    them were useless...had obama ahead and Hillary smoked him.  We are talking today and the next few weeks.

    Parent
    Not quite (3.66 / 3) (#43)
    by Molly Bloom on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:47:47 AM EST
    Those making a big to do out of an early poll mainly just want a Democrat in the White House. Can't say I blame them, tho I take early polling with a grain of salt.

    Some of the negativity I have seen suggests some of those gloating today would rather lose and then say "see I told you so", regardless of the consequences of a McCain presidency and they will justify their attitude by  trying  to paint Obama as GOP Manchurian candidate.

    Parent

    Trouble is... (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:53:24 AM EST
    ...the difference between McCain and Obama on Iraq is:

    80,000 troops or 60,000 troops respectively.

    Someone who sincerely believes in the value of occupying Iraq and someone who opposed it at the start but shows every intention of maintaining a an opposed occupation with tens of thousands of troops (even though he's not really into it).

    Parent

    Obama also sees nothing wrong with Blackwater. (none / 0) (#171)
    by derridog on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 04:01:16 PM EST
    Don't be insulting (5.00 / 5) (#65)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:06:45 AM EST
    My argument has always been that any polls taken this early mean virtually nothing, whether they are good or bad. It's just too soon. I also believe that Obama will not win in the fall. That is not the same as my not wanting to see a Democratic President in the White House this fall. I'd love to see that, just like I'd love to find out that global warming isn't really serious, that there are wonderful solutions in the works for the oil crisis, and that the Iraq War could really turn Iraq into a Democracy. Saying that people who feel negatively about Obama are against him is like saying that people who feel the Iraq War is a bad thing are against Iraqi Democracy. I'd love to be proven wrong about Iraq. I'd love to see Iraqi's living together in a free society, with all of the rights and freedoms that human beings should have.

    I have never seen a progressive supporting the "Manchurian candidate" idea being promoted by e-mail attacks on the right. I think you are confusing right wing Obama opponents with progressives who are angry/dismayed that the Democratic Party has chosen a lesser candidate.

    I wouldn't rather lose and say "I told you so". I would rather have a decent candidate who would be a sure thing and not ever have the opportunity to say "I told you so". I actually hate saying "I told you so"... it means that something bad happened that was predictable and could easily have been avoided.  

    Parent

    My second comment was not addressed to your (none / 0) (#76)
    by Molly Bloom on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:12:57 AM EST
    original point.

    Parent
    It was addressed to people like me. (5.00 / 3) (#83)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:18:22 AM EST
    It was addressed to people who are critical of Obama. I fail to see why I should not respond simply because you didn't address me specifically.

    Parent
    If you wish to consider (3.00 / 4) (#91)
    by Molly Bloom on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:22:32 AM EST
    yourself in the group of "some people"

    Some of the negativity I have seen suggests some of those gloating today would rather lose and then say "see I told you so", regardless of the consequences

    knock yourself out.

    I did not, by any stretch of the imagination say every person critical of Obama would rather lose...

    Parent

    Confession: I want Obama to win (none / 0) (#130)
    by oculus on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:30:20 PM EST
    but not by too much.

    Parent
    I want Obama (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by Valhalla on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:41:08 PM EST
    to start working on winning the votes of those he's thrown under the bus.  And the ones he's 'trending toward' throwing under the bus, even those who can't see it coming.

    Parent
    LOL (none / 0) (#133)
    by Molly Bloom on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:35:03 PM EST
    I appreciate you oculus. More than you know

    Parent
    Mutual, as I don't need to (none / 0) (#135)
    by oculus on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:36:28 PM EST
    chime in w/SGBTRvW anymore!

    Parent
    Yes (2.33 / 6) (#59)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:59:23 AM EST
    With democrats like these who needs republicans. Criticizing is one thing but the relentlessly bashing from many of the recent flock of commenters here may as well be coming from powerlie or  lgf.

    Parent
    The main trouble has actually been (5.00 / 4) (#62)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:03:58 AM EST
    elected Democrats not following through on policy.  They did not move on UHC, they did not oppose the invasion, they did not strike down the Patriot act....and on and on.  

    All the big claims of change have been dialed back and recalibrated to suit the career plans of these leaders.

    So what is their game?  Don't bash ordinary observers and voters for thinking critically of the trends in the party.

    Parent

    You Have No Credibility (2.60 / 5) (#87)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:20:16 AM EST
    Because feigning taking the higher road by being critical of how the Dems have caved is a poor argument for selectively (and relentlessly) bashing the Democratic nominee. Were you and others here neutral in your criticism of the other Democratic candidates across the board, you might have legs to stand on, but that has not been the case.

    Obama is running against a Republican, that is the cogent comparison. Getting the Democrats to represent our interests is another argument. Your best chance of getting what your purported interests accomplished is to follow Hillary's lead and get behind Obama and work to get as many Dems elected so that our party has some teeth for a change.

    Parent

    He is a sitting senator. (5.00 / 3) (#106)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:57:52 AM EST
    You'll see that Tony Blair took on John Major long before the election campaign that elevated him to the Prime Ministership.

    I do not see Obama tangling with Bush at all. I see lot's of semantic games that he's playing with McCain but we still have the second term of Bush to worry about before we have to worry about a third term.

    My credibility on this doesn't amount to much either way. I'm an observer not a participant.

    Parent

    Uncommitted on Obama, I want a muscular Congress (5.00 / 2) (#113)
    by Ellie on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:06:27 PM EST
    I want a Congress that does its job regardless of who's in the White House, and isn't reduced further to becoming an arm of the Obama Personality Cult.

    He's been a poor senator, a poor campaigner and his Unity Pony schtick is just a garish fundraising gimmick that hasn't even shown it will pay off for the party or for downticket Dems.

    What Club Obama burns to run in place is the political version of the Pentagon's self-sucking ice cream cone. We don't need another version of Bush in the White House, even "ours".

    I genuinely believe that writing Uncommitted on my ballot for Pres (rather than Clinton or other considerations) and helping elect strong spines to Congress is the only intelligent way out of this mess.

    I don't want Clinton or her supporters scapegoated for Obama's messes in his current campaigning or (if he gets to the WH) in governance.

    Donna Brazile can Mama-toss on election day on why an Uncommitted vote actually belongs to Obama.

    Parent

    For some of us (5.00 / 4) (#114)
    by samanthasmom on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:08:48 PM EST
    getting the Democrats to represent our issues is the biggest significant factor in this election.  Giving the Democrats "more teeth" so that they can continue to not represent us is the the crux of the problem. What good would more Democrats be if they are as lily-livered as the ones we already have? (See post on FISA.) Our criticism of Obama centers on not having high expectations that he will deliver on any of the issues that are important to us. Holding his feet to the fire before November is the only leverage we have when the trust isn't there. You mistake criticism for bashing. That's an objectivity problem.  He's not my first choice for President, and if he wants my vote, I get to question him.

    Parent
    Identify one lie (5.00 / 3) (#80)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:15:39 AM EST
    ...being promoted by the "bashers". Having people point out unpleasant truths may not be a very comfortable thing, but it's not fair, or reasonable, to compare people who simply don't agree with your candidate to right-wingers.

    I challenge Obama supporter's to stop using ad hominem attacks (comparing critics to extremist Republcans) instead of countering rational arguments. Some do, but there are a lot more personal attacks flying around than there are rational arguments.

    Parent

    you'd think they would want an argument (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:19:01 AM EST
    harmony on these issues is a least as disturbing as dischord.

    Parent
    The Big Lie (1.00 / 6) (#101)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:40:53 AM EST
    Is that the "constructive criticism" has been extremely selective. Had you been even handed in your criticism during the nomination process you might have an argument for relentlessly bashing Obama now.

    At this point you are in bed with the GOP, or may as well be.

    Parent

    How authoritarian of you (5.00 / 5) (#108)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:00:18 PM EST
    "If you're not with us, you're against us". I was not with you during the primary, when Obama ran the sleaziest campaign in recent Democratic history. I am not with you now, when you refuse to address my concerns, but instead choose to insult me. I am pleased and proud to not be with you. I'm also not with the GOP, although you obviously don't see the distinction between not aggreeing with you and agreeing with your opponent. I actually see positives and negatives for both Presidential candidates. I don't plan on voting for McCain or Obama - but I won't tolerate the b*ls*t argument that anybody who doesn't worship Obama is a GOP troll.

    Parent
    Quite The Contrary (1.80 / 5) (#121)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:16:06 PM EST
    I was not with you during the primary, when Obama ran the sleaziest campaign in recent Democratic history. I am not with you now, when you refuse to address my concerns, but instead choose to insult me. I am pleased and proud to not be with you.

    You voted as I did, but I certainly never lost my self in a cult fantasy that Hillary was anything more than another mainstream Democratic Politician, a really good one, but a Pol who had very little substantive difference than the others who ran against her.

    Your criticism of Obama is worthless, imo, as you have been blinded by intra-partisan love and hate. A fixation has ensued.

    Parent

    You assume too much (5.00 / 4) (#134)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:35:10 PM EST
    I was never a Clinton fanatic. I was an Edwards supporter who was not a Clinton fan and would happily have supported Obama. I gradually shifted to Clinton as I began to feel that she was a better option than Obama, and I came to dislike Obama gradually as I watched him tolerate his campaigns use of race and shallow marketing instead of promoting him based on sound political ideas. I have never felt that Clinton was anything but a polician, but I have no problems with politicans running for political office - why should I? I do have a problem with Politicians basing their campaigns on vague promises that can mean all things to all people, and politicians who constantly change their positions, and policians who choose to run on "don't vote for the other guy" instead of "vote for me, because...".

    My reasons for not supporting Obama are simple, and have nothing to do with Clinton worshp. Obama is not experienced enough to be President. If he had run a fair campaign, he would have lost, but he would have set himself up for a win in 4 or 8 years. He was hungry, or afraid, and he chose to play dirty. I can't support a candidate who won by tarring people who have worked their entire lives for equality for all people as racists.

    Parent

    For Someone Who Is Not (1.00 / 2) (#144)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:55:00 PM EST
    A clinton fanatic you sure seem to have taken this race personally. Were you run out of a pro Obama site before you came here. You sound angry. Is it because some low life idiots showed you how much they hated Hillary and women in general? I know plenty of women who have fought against sexism and mysogeny for years but are Obama supporters. They do not blog though, although I can't imagine that they would focus on the idiots, considering that there are so many more interesting people to focus on.  
    I do have a problem with Politicians basing their campaigns on vague promises that can mean all things to all people....

    So you prefer Politicians who make promises that are specific but nonetheless never delivered?  

    Sorry, I do not believe any of them. A quick look at votes and major policy speeches tell me much more about what to expect than nodding my head to the tune of general or specific campaign promises.

    GIven that Obama, Edwards, and Hillary are all pretty much the same. McCain is miles away, in case you have not noticed.

    Parent

    Squeaky please: 'You sound angry.' (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by Ellie on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:05:19 PM EST
    OMG, where did the site ever find you:

    Were you run out of a pro Obama site before you came here. You sound angry. Is it because some low life idiots showed you how much they hated Hillary and women in general? I know plenty of women who have fought against sexism and mysogeny for years but are Obama supporters. They do not blog though

    Are you that stock farce character that's dressed up like Freud but is actually one of the escaped lunatics from the asylum?

    Yeah, I've run into more than a few low life idiots lately.

    Parent

    Ellie! LOL! (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by Dr Molly on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:13:38 PM EST
    'you sound angry'. Would you prefer, 'you sound:

    -strident
    -shrill
    -humorless
    -emotional
    -like a hillary cultist'

    There's so few new creative dogwhistles, you know? Kind of disappointing.

    Parent

    Fauxgressive Misogyny is so much funnier (none / 0) (#155)
    by Ellie on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:23:20 PM EST
    ... than the thunderingly stupid dinosaur kind.

    I don't know where the big shift came:

    Either I'm getting older or the current version's a little more obvious, but some days the conversation's a lot like Cats vs Laser Pointer.

    Parent

    and here I thought they were 'creative class' (5.00 / 1) (#157)
    by Dr Molly on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:30:35 PM EST
    they need more creative code.

    Parent
    Oh the hateful haters (5.00 / 1) (#164)
    by jondee on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 02:30:26 PM EST
    who are just so full of hate and all things hateful (including hate, or did I say that already?)

    Yeah, it's just something about you that attracts them.

    Parent

    That was for Ellie (none / 0) (#165)
    by jondee on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 02:34:04 PM EST
    Been Here For Years (none / 0) (#158)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:32:01 PM EST
    And hardly angry. I voted for Hillary and lost, no biggie, as I do not see much of a difference with Obama.

    But as for the many refugees who arrived at TL in the last months, they seem really pissed at the treatment they got from Obama cultists. So what did they do, come here and act the same way but for Hillary instead of Obama.

    Parent

    Good politicians deliver (none / 0) (#156)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:24:13 PM EST
    The fact that we haven't seem a decent politican since Bill Clinton does not mean that politicins are incapable of delivering. They compromise, and fight, but they get the job done.

    And I am angry. I'm angry that the Democratic Party fell for a divisive, deceitful, vicious campaign in favor of an inexperienced but charismatic candidate instead of choosing any one of a number of people who would have been much better Presidents. I'm especially angry that people like you think that it's wrong for me to tell the truth as I see it - and instead of choosing to debate the merits of my argumen choose to attack me personally.

    I don't care if McCain is miles away or not. If my only choice is two toally unacceptable candidates, then I choose neither.

    Parent

    Nothing Wrong (none / 0) (#160)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:39:00 PM EST
    With telling the truth as you see it. I just disagree and am letting you know.
    I'm especially angry that people like you think that it's wrong for me to tell the truth as I see it - and instead of choosing to debate the merits of my argumen choose to attack me personally.

    There are no merits to bashing one candidate that is nearly identical to another based on style, imo. I have provided policy speeches, voting records and statements that place Hillary and Obama as mainstream democrats.

    Usually that information is troll rated. So much for content....

    Parent

    Get over the troll rating idea (none / 0) (#161)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:47:12 PM EST
    You can't troll rate here. There is no system for hiding comments or labelling someone a troll by giving them number ratings. Let go of Daily Kos. This site is moderated.

    As for your evidence - I don't agree that voting for Obama because he's just the same as all of the other candidates (except for his inexperience) is a valid argument. If he were better, that would be a good reason. But he isn't. He has the same policies, in general, but he doesn't even know his own positions, he changes his mind with the tide, and he has misled voter's about his intentions (he says "change", but his policies say "no change"). He as also, tellingly, run a vicious, hateful campaign in the primary, tarring some people who didn't deserve it.

    Parent

    Rating Is An Issue Here (none / 0) (#166)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 02:59:32 PM EST
    Jeralyn has expressly stated that rating ones just because you disagree is not cool. Commenters have been banned for the practice here and all their ratings removed. Before the Hillary supporters flooded TL one ratings were very rare. Now they are a matter of course, mostly be Hillary supporters that hate anyone who says something positive about Obama.

    As for the rest of your comment, you are entitled to your opinion, but you state it as fact, which is hardly the case.

    Parent

    I apologize to Jeralyn if I misunderstood (none / 0) (#168)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 03:16:32 PM EST
    Do you have a link to what she said so that I can be sure not to violate site policy in the future? I have been given a number of "1"'s for no obvious reason than that somebody disagreed with me.  I don't take it personally. They have a right to their opinion, just as I do. I have also given out 1's on occasion simply to reflect that I have read a comment and do not agree with it, but do not feel it would be beneficial to continue the discussion. Regardless, there is no "troll rating" here. That is a Daily Kos concept, and the site moderator's take care of trolls here in a different way.

    Parent
    I Am Not Familiar (none / 0) (#173)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 04:25:19 PM EST
    With the system at dkos. Rating ones here is considered troll rating although it is the rater that is usually the troll. I do not have a link for you but if you are unclear and think that handing out ones is fine just because you disagree with a commenter, check it out with TL by email.

    If I am mistaken, I apologize for my misunderstanding TL policy, in advance.

    Parent

    make me a right-wing Republican? (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:47:45 PM EST
    of course it does silly.

    Parent
    Fear not rennies (4.00 / 4) (#119)
    by Dr Molly on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:13:20 PM EST
    The latent Kossian urge to purge all dissent pops up repeatedly here, but usually tapers off quickly. Ignore at will.

    Parent
    you can search Dkos (none / 0) (#107)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:59:20 AM EST
    on my record of commentary.

    Parent
    Not Going There (none / 0) (#129)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:29:41 PM EST
    But I will take your word for it that you have been even handed.

    BTW- I was addressing dianem here, not you.

    Parent

    you'll find (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:36:39 PM EST
    that if I'm a a GOP mole I was burrowed in for about 4-5 years.

    Parent
    Ha (none / 0) (#138)
    by squeaky on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:40:10 PM EST
    good one. Keep it up, your secret is safe with me.....

    Parent
    Let's see more data (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by davnee on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:44:33 AM EST
    Now that we are solidly out of the primary season, I want a couple of weeks of polling to get a sense of the pre-convention state of the race.  No single poll is the gospel.  You need multiple polls to get a sense of the trends.

    The thing that has always struck me as worrisome about Obama is that he is not out farther ahead given the nature of the electoral cycle.  I'm still convinced he needs a strong cushion going into the fall in order to withstand the 527's and the natural disadvantage of being the less experienced candidate, which is typically less appealing to late deciders. But it is way to early to know what the cushion is going to be.

    The one event I'm curious about as far as his summer poll numbers go is the VP selection.  When he finally does announce that he is not picking Clinton will that roil his numbers?  We'll see.

    Parent

    Let's see him pull away in Ohio (none / 0) (#5)
    by andgarden on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:34:32 AM EST
    Then we can get really excited about November.

    Parent
    check out Ohio trend lines (none / 0) (#58)
    by A DC Wonk on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:57:25 AM EST
    It's not "pulling away", but it's better to be on an upward trend than a downward.

    See Pollster.com in Ohio

    Parent

    Well, there's that (none / 0) (#63)
    by andgarden on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:04:49 AM EST
    But my opinion is that the race is fairly fluid. I think Ras's Ohio numbers are right, and that Obama is going to have to work that state hard.

    I do not like that he hasn't been doing serious campaigning around the country this week, especially in the swing states.

    If I were him, I would be going nonstop every day until November. He needs to look at how many events the Clintons were doing in each state during the primary, and aim to at least match that in the swing states.

    Parent

    "The Clintons." That's three people. (none / 0) (#128)
    by oculus on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:27:18 PM EST
    Obama has himself, until Michelle's handlers deem her made-over enough for public consumption.

    Parent
    How about, I feel like a bobble-head (none / 0) (#123)
    by oculus on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:21:19 PM EST
    doll reading these posts on polls.  

    Parent
    One thing for certain (5.00 / 0) (#11)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:36:45 AM EST
    (with regards to Q-P) If ARG agrees with your poll, your poll is probably wrong.

    Veepstakes (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by Blogblah on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:44:40 AM EST
    I think Fla. is volatile with McCain leading and Rasmussen is in line with the polls prior to Q and ARG, making the latter two less persuasive.

    I think the whole country is in a political lull right now waiting for the veep picks.  The kind of folks posting here (including me) get all wired up over the back and forth of the campaigns, but I think most voters are far less engaged.  Generally, VP selections have very little to do with general election results, but this year (IMO) I think they have greater importance at this time than in most pres. election years.

    Then again, I'm flying by my gut on this one.

    The Quinnipac polling agrees with you... (none / 0) (#174)
    by Dawn Davenport on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 04:28:28 PM EST
    When asked how important the v.p. pick was, lots of demographics (including African-Americans) said it was "very important."

    Parent
    Crist came out for the off-shore drilling (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by ruffian on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:48:18 AM EST
    and he is popular here.  They are selling it to us saying it will not be visible from "a 10th floor beach condo". Few seem to care about the environmental damage as long as they don't have to look at it.

    I think a positive, family oriented Obama campaign would do well in FL.  He should get Michelle out here.

    McCain bashing will not sell.

    absolutely agree (none / 0) (#49)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:49:37 AM EST
    this is a winning issue for Johnnie.
    so eventually O will come around.

    Parent
    I'd actually rather see O (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by ruffian on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:55:18 AM EST
    stick to his original plan and live without FL than to come around to this position on off-shore drilling.

    How many electoral votes in CO and NM again?  Is Idaho really hopeless?

    Parent

    I wouldn't count on ID (none / 0) (#64)
    by A DC Wonk on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:05:38 AM EST
    but wins in Ohio and PA would more than cover Florida.  Check out pollster.com for Ohio and PA

    It ain't gonna be easy . . . but it's better to start ahead than behind.

    Furthermore, the "fundamentals" (Bush's historically low approval rating, economy, etc.) typically have had even a better track record for predicting November outcomes than the polls, according to many.

    Parent

    One more example of this bizarro campaign season (none / 0) (#71)
    by ruffian on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:11:06 AM EST
    when supporting off-shore drilling increases McCain support in Florida. If that is really what's going on.  

    I think all polls are just good for conversation starters at this point - like those '100 best movies' lists.

    Parent

    Love the title (none / 0) (#98)
    by This from a broad on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:33:41 AM EST
    Christ came OUT for drilling -- too funny!

    Parent
    Sorry (none / 0) (#179)
    by MichaelGale on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 09:25:41 PM EST
    but I do not believe that Obama will win PA.

    Parent
    What do I always say (5.00 / 0) (#48)
    by Edgar08 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:49:15 AM EST
    Being up in the polls invites complacency.

    Being down, despair.

    You are right... (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:22:36 AM EST
    ...but being rational invites simply acknowledging that any polls taken this early are no more relevant than a poll taken about who will win the Superbowl in January.

    Parent
    Branding Obama and Democrats (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by jb64 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:09:57 AM EST
    The point of offshore drilling is an attempt to paint Obama and the Democratic party as Elitist and out of touch with average Americans. Every time Obama says he is opposed to off-shore drilling, Republicans will take up GWB's talking point that if Democrat's hadn't been obstructing off-shore drilling for the last 7 years the price of gas would be lower now. It doesn't matter whether it's true, anymore than cutting the tax on fuel would have created significant savings. Obama finds himself having been opposed to both.

    I'd say the GOP has finally decided to start the General Election.

    Other arguments... (none / 0) (#79)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:15:12 AM EST
    ...would include:

    More domestic exploitation would lessen the need for intervention in the ME and Central Asia to manipulate prices.

    Building new rigs would kickstart the steel industry and give engineers more jobs.

    Oil men and construction workers could work domestically rather than abroad in dangerous hotspots.  

    Of course both sides seem to have high energy prices as a goal. So it's mainly theatrical BS from both sides.

    Parent

    So, what's the strategy? (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by Anne on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:18:29 AM EST
    I noticed that Obama's spent a lot of time in Michigan of late, which tells me he wants to compete there, but what is his approach with Florida?  Can he afford to ignore it and hope he doesn't need those 27 electoral votes?

    I think he would be foolish to ignore Florida, not just because he ought be working to assuage the anger many Florida Dems still have over what they regard as his failure to push for a re-vote, but because there are a lot of Democrats in other states who are watching to see how he handles things there.

    Andgarden suggested a clip of Hillary's endorsement speech - she says some excellent things on critically important issues, but what made me cringe when I read it was how easily it can be countered by the numerous examples of the constant dodging and parsing Obama has done on those issues, and how, of the two of them - Clinton and Obama - he does not come off as the harder worker.

    With respect to Florida, some have mentioned Social Security as an issue that could be discussed.  The problem is that Obama has a tendency - the influence of some of his advisors, no doubt - to veer to the right on it, acknowledging that there is a problem and it needs to be fixed.  I suppose that message might work okay in an older demographic, but whatever he says in Florida to Floridians is also going to be said to those who live in the other 49 states via media coverage - so is that a message that works nationwide?

    I think the challenges of this election are enormous, and I think Obama has some that are particularly daunting due to his primary strategy and his tendency to say whatever he has to to win whatever happens to be at stake at a given moment.  

    It would help if he would start leading on issues instead of just talking about them - and he has the ability to do that as a sitting US Senator.  His excuse for not attending to his Senate duties has been that he's too busy, but I'm pretty sure that if he would step up and lead there, he would be getting a whole lot of free and positive media coverage that could help him a great deal.  Not sure, and not too confident, he wants to use actual work, though, to accomplish that.


    from first read: (none / 0) (#7)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:35:39 AM EST
    A Gallup poll conducted last month found that 57 percent of those surveyed favored drilling for oil in coastal and wilderness areas that are now off limits,

    btw (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:36:41 AM EST
    that number will increase in direct proportion to the increase in gas prices.

    Parent
    Interestingly (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by Steve M on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:39:49 AM EST
    Here is what our own government says about the effect of lifting the restrictions on offshore drilling:

    The projections in the OCS access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.

    That's a pretty compelling point, if we succeed in educating people.

    Parent

    I am not arguing (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:41:59 AM EST
    that it is a good idea.  I am saying that when gas prices go up voters will be grasping at anything - ANYTHING - that even sounds like it might possibly at some point lower prices.
    lets not act like sane rational thought every has much to do with our elections, hum?

    Parent
    WHat I would like (none / 0) (#23)
    by andgarden on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:41:50 AM EST
    is for Obama to have a simple and good-sounding plan to bring the prices down now. My suggestion would be to propose that the strategic national reserve floodgates be opened for some period of time. It won't do much good, I know, but it will sound good.

    Parent
    The left and maybe the right (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:44:25 AM EST
    for difffering reasons like high energy prices right now.

    The Greens want high prices to force lifestyle changes and would as a matter of policy like to see gas go up to $5 a gallon. The right would like the price to go up because that's more profit for Oil Corps.

    Parent

    Indeed (none / 0) (#40)
    by andgarden on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:46:49 AM EST
    Why not (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Nadai on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:53:36 AM EST
    propose a gas tax holiday at the same time?  I mean, if you're going to pander, why not go all out?

    Parent
    Obama needs gas at 4-5 bucks a gallon to win (none / 0) (#67)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:07:36 AM EST
    High prices are a great thing for an opposition party trying to ouster an incumbent party. So why would he want to see prices go down?  Rub raw the sores of discontent and all that Community Organizing guff.

    I tend to think the price will tumble before October and somehow Bush and McCain will attempt to take credit for the drop.

    Parent

    Gas will come down prior to the election (none / 0) (#81)
    by smott on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:17:05 AM EST
    GOP will ensure that it happens. Count on it.

    Parent
    It will (none / 0) (#89)
    by ruffian on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:21:16 AM EST
    Even if Republicans do nothing obvious they take credit for, their buddies in the oil companies will lower prices enough to settle tempers. It will not be a big issue by October unless Dems keep it in the collective consciousness.

    Parent
    There really is no way to bring prices down (none / 0) (#118)
    by MissBrainerd on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:12:59 PM EST
    The market sets the price and if people will pay $4 then that is the market price.

    Unless people think that Exxon is going to have a special for AMerica Only, Patriotic reduced price, but that is not going to happen.

    And more oil from offshore sources will not be OURS for the government to price lower, it will belong to the multi-national oil company that gets the lease. And they will charge what the market will bear because that is Capitalism.

    Only less demand might bring down prices OR if we find out that speculators are rigging the market to cause panic and open more places to drill...

    Parent

    It'll be manipulated (none / 0) (#127)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:27:12 PM EST
    It's being manipulated now.

    Parent
    Pandering? But I join you in wishing he (none / 0) (#125)
    by oculus on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:23:58 PM EST
    sould make a statement clearly outlining his plans re gas prices, availability.  Of course, with the Iraqi oil entering the market, perhaps we have no worries?

    Parent
    I'm all for it myself (none / 0) (#22)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:41:30 AM EST
    I remember worrying about kids having to fund the war, having the lousy environment, etc.

    But the kids could give a care about healthcare and social security.

    So, if it means lower gas prices -- even if only in 7 years -- and that I can afford to eat in my old age, then drill away.

    Parent

    But it won't mean lower prices. (none / 0) (#120)
    by MissBrainerd on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:14:40 PM EST
    For all the reasons I posted above and because demand keeps rising so if we drill everywhere we will still not outpace demand, unless we find another way to fuel our cars and planes. THAT is the only way prices will ever go down.

    Parent
    Offshore drilling will do nothing to change gas (none / 0) (#175)
    by derridog on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 04:29:48 PM EST
    prices.It could take 20 or 30 years for it to have any effect at all on gas prices.  Even Bush acknowledge that (these actions) "will take years to have their full impact,' Bush acknowledged." (Winston-Salem Journal today, June 19, 2008).  Harry Read also said today that we can't drill our way out of the problem. " We only have 3 percent of the worlds' oil reserves and we use a quarter of its oil." We can't dig our way out of this hole. We have to find alternative energy sources and/or conserve, as the Europeans do.  We could also bring back trains. What an idea! You can get all over Europe without having a car because of their public transportation systems.

    I also read the other day, I think it was in the WSJ, but not sure, that anything over $2.25/gal is due to manipulation of the oil markets.  Lets not forget the 2005 and 2006 energy bill which Obama was the only candidate of the three (Hillary, him and McCain) to support, giving the oil cos. huge tax breaks at the same time they were collecting record profits. (He then tried to "pretend" that they were for it and he wasn't). The oil company execs are fighting any measure that would keep them from profiteering -so the Rethugs are playing games with this issue (what a surprise). However, I wouldn't put it past Obama to be playing games with it either, as he has been with NAFTA (which he now suddenly is for again --see the Nation), as well as unregulated markets, which he has just acknowledged he believes in as well (see the Nation).

    We are faced with a Hobson's choice in this election.  If Karl Rove  was behind it,  he'd be a genius.  We have two Republicans running. Heads they win, tails we lose. Only one of them acknowledges that he is one, however.

    Since, I don't want the Democratic Party to be further polluted by electing fake Rethugs,   I'll vote for McCain (unless he chooses Lieberman or Romney as his veep, in which case I'll have to leave the country just to avoid the gag reflex).

    Parent

    Did the pollster point out that (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by Molly Bloom on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:38:09 AM EST
    no oil from those wells are likely to come on line in less than 7 years and it will not bring immediately relief or was the poll paid for by Exxon-Mobile?

    Parent
    you act as if ratiouality (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:40:07 AM EST
    will have anything to do with anything when gas prices are 5 dollars a gallon.
    it wont.

    Parent
    Guilt them all, let Mother Nature sort Greens out (5.00 / 0) (#60)
    by Ellie on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:01:34 AM EST
    Obscene oil prices are already having an impact when push comes to shove: half the Green friendly people I know are (further) cutting back on power and oil usage and the other shameless half have started acting like the cast of the Road Warrior.

    I've switched from my normal tour bike to a tricked out power-assisted Schwin for longer treks, use public trans and trains more for really long journeys and am signed on with a car service to get the f*ck out of Dodge when the next fascist govt is installed (with whatever Coke or Pepsi mascot gets the White House in November.)

    Parent

    What you are doing is great (5.00 / 3) (#78)
    by MO Blue on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:13:34 AM EST
    but is not an option for many people. Many people could not bike even if they wanted to do so because of physical limitations, many places have no viable public transportation and rural folks need their vehicles to do the work or to commute because of lack employment in their area.

    Also the high cost of gas impacts the cost of everything we purchase especially food.  No way to get around that.

    Parent

    YMMV ... Literally! :-D (5.00 / 3) (#104)
    by Ellie on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:50:07 AM EST
    All true. I'm a short ride (longer walk) from home (& home office) to office-office and meeting spots, so weather and physical baggage dictate my options.

    Making greener options more available and accessibe is a big part of the battle.

    I'm helping to design a pilot program for greening areas that have a lot of car gridlock (and emissions). Short version: using solar power and hybrid (motive charged) bike batteries to make small-journey vehicles available for free to people who don't/can't cycle to tool around the neighborhood.

    Yes We Can faux rock concerts are great for good mouthfeel, but getting real input on what people need to use is what really saves lives, makes people happy, and will rescue the planet from doom. Fear not, the cavalry is coming even though it's maxing out at 50mph right now.

    Parent

    Yes a rational discussion could be had (none / 0) (#66)
    by Molly Bloom on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:07:02 AM EST
    I don't think it is the pollster's job to the Oil Co's propaganda for them

    Parent
    How about a town-hall meeting (none / 0) (#77)
    by ruffian on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:13:22 AM EST
    about it?  Really, isn't that the best way to talk about the pros and cons?  It is a very clear issue, and both candidates can state their positions.

    Parent
    I think that's one reason why (none / 0) (#177)
    by tree on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 04:42:19 PM EST
    Clinton's gas tax holiday(and windfall profits tax) was actually a good pander. It addressed the need for short-term relief without giving up the farm when people are most vulnerable to accepting any "fix" that's proposed.
    Obama was mistaken to come out against it.  

    Parent
    Howvere I guess that is the point. (none / 0) (#26)
    by Salo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:42:30 AM EST
    If the ME melts down in 7 years they will have more exploitable resources domestically, and there will be less pressure to occupy Arab states.

    Parent
    The numbers would he higher... (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by dianem on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:40:25 AM EST
    ...if they actually took the polls at gas stations. Here in California, we are paying over $4.50/gallon everywhere. The highest I've paid so far is $4.63/gallon. I'm not a cheap gas advocate - I think that gasoline has been too low for too long, encouraging profligacy. But this is too much, too soon. $3.50/gallon is plenty to encourage people to give up their SUV's and Hummers without sending the economy into a tailspin.

    Parent
    I read another (none / 0) (#50)
    by mmc9431 on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:51:39 AM EST
    survey that had 70% willing to drill anywhere, and that was after Bush's speech on drilling. I sometimes question my fellow citizen's judgement. These are propbably the same 70% that thought Iraq was a great idea too.  But with gas prices where they are, people will accept anything if they're told it will work.I just don't think we can drill our way out of this.

    Parent
    Those people don't understand (none / 0) (#124)
    by MissBrainerd on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:21:46 PM EST
    Captialism. Drill all you want anywhere you want but until we find another fuel source for cars and planes, demand will outpace any new source here and again, do people get how our system works? The Big Oil company that gets the lease will charge whatever they can. There is no reason to believe that the price of gas will ever be much lower until we have a new fuel source to lower demand.

    Parent
    Interesting (none / 0) (#132)
    by Steve M on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:34:18 PM EST
    I was taught that both supply and demand have an impact on price.

    Parent
    Supply can be manipulated (none / 0) (#143)
    by MissBrainerd on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:51:42 PM EST
    Oil companies don't refine as fast as they could now, because it might drive down prices.

    But demand is increasing in China and India and elsewehere and short of an international depression, demand will outpace these new sources.

    Parent

    But (none / 0) (#159)
    by Steve M on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:36:48 PM EST
    if there is more supply, demand will outpace supply by less than it otherwise would.

    Parent
    The Rasmussen poll tells me that either (none / 0) (#25)
    by tigercourse on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:42:07 AM EST
    candidate would be very smart to focus on gas prices and make whatever empty promises they can.

    When people start saying "Yes, in my back yard!" to oil drilling, you know they are very scared by gas prices.

    One might attack Bush (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by andgarden on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:44:05 AM EST
    Remember when he said that we were "addicted to oil." Well Obama could argue that drilling off shore is like an addict looking for a vein you know where.

    Parent
    in view of recent (3.66 / 3) (#47)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 10:48:40 AM EST
    press conferences I would not advise O to go there.
    like, ever.


    Parent
    I suggest Al Gore do all the talking (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by oculus on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:25:18 PM EST
    from here on out.

    Parent
    Flip (none / 0) (#68)
    by judyo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 11:09:14 AM EST
    interesting (none / 0) (#140)
    by kempis on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:46:05 PM EST
    A friend said yesterday that as gas approaches 5 dollars a gallon, people will be letting the oil companies drill in their front yards. Looks like that's the case.

    Regarding what Obama can do to win Florida, I honestly think it's pretty much what he needs to do to win the general: convince people that he knows enough about policy and has the judgment to run this country.

    After Bush, I think that many Americans will be placing a lot of weight on intelligence and judgment. The candidate who can convince people that he'll be the most competent will win. Well, except for the young folks and African Americans: they'll vote for Obama because his candidacy speaks to them intensely and personally. They're excited about Obama. I don't begrudge them that excitement. I just bring this up because I don't think there's anything Obama can do to lose their votes, just as there's nothing McCain can do to lose Elizabeth Hasselbeck's vote. :)

    In the end, it's going to come down to which conveys competence to those in the vast middle who  mainly want someone who can begin to clean up this god-awful mess that Bush has made of our country. Right now, I have no earthly idea which one will appear more able to do that. But I think that'll be the trick.

    People are worried about the war, our standing in the world, our debt, and the economy. Personally, they worry about creeping inflation and unemployment, preserving the social safety net, and healthcare.

    The ideology of the GOP's movement conservatism has failed. Most people know now that tax cuts aren't magic and neither are wars of aggression. Any other Republican would be toast, but McCain, with his "maverick" rep., can be perceived as a re-brander of the GOP as the party of the middle, much as Obama is rebranding the Democrats as the party of the "creative class," the new symbol of which is a sky-high bus that looks like the top bun of a huge Dagwood sandwich.

    The good news for Dems is that McCain seems to have a crappy organization and not a lot of support within the GOP, which is in even more serious disarray than the Democratic party is. So McCain may not be able to present himself as the guy with the answers and the judgment we need right now to right our ship of state in the world at large and strengthen our social safety net and get our financial house in order and move us toward energy independence.

    Whoever that guy is, that's who will win, with or without Florida.

    Parent

    Are you of the "school" (none / 0) (#154)
    by judyo on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:22:05 PM EST
    that says our votes count?
    I'm not.

    Parent