Rasmussen’s poll also shows that Sen. Biden beat Palin in the debate, 45%-37%
Rasmussen has Obama @ 51%, in what they say “suggests that the McCain campaign faces a very steep challenge in the remaining few weeks of Election 2008″
Gallup has Obama 50% vs McCain 42%
Right now Sen. Obama has what averages out to about an 8% lead over McCain nationally.
And yet the mainstream media consensus is that the election is “tight”. It reminds me a lot of when Bush’s popularity numbers were cratering down to the sub-25% cellar they currently reside in and yet the press insisted he was a “popular war time president”. (We radical far-left out of touch liberal bloggers were ahead of the curve once again on an issue of national import.)
Barack Obama currently leads John McCain by a significant margin nationally. Obama is playing offense while McCain is trying to hold on to red states like Indiana. Obama has more money than McCain does. Heck, Sen. Obama leads McCain in favorability by almost 10%.
At some point, the media coverage might want to reflect this dynamic, even against a barbecue pal like John McCain.
i could explain what you’re getting wrong/ignoring but it would take quite a bit of typing and you’d delete it anyway because it’s not what you want to hear.
you seem like a sharp guy and yet you still remind me of all the insane people (plenty of whom are also smart) who simply will not acknowledge the facts when those facts are odds with what they want to believe.
well, you needn’t worry. as much as i like your page, i won’t be back. i cannot abide censorship, especially when it comes from those who think they are somehow “fighting the good fight.”
when you’re deleting anything that doesn’t fit in with your worldview you are not capable of fighting the good fight. you wouldn’t know the good fight if it came up and punched you right in the mouth.
this is the last post of mine that you’ll have to delete.
remember me on november 5th.
take care and good luck…
LoJ: I would explain what I thought of your post, except that, as far as I can tell, you didn’t actually make a pont.
Anyway, OW, I’m wondering if we should care if the MSM wants to tell people the race is “tight.” IMO, it keeps Democrats motivated and helps prevent complacency. If everyone expects a blowout, people might slack off, and election day may turn out disappointing.
Remember that “McCain wins!” video that was going around last week? (unfortunately I never got around to saving it and it got deleted b/c of NBC IP complaint). The crawl along the bottom during the “announcement” read “turnout low across the country.”
If people think we’re gonna have a nail-biter, it’ll keep people pushing and working. I really think the illusion of a tight race helps our motivation more than it props up their morale.
I could be wrong of course.
I deleted LoJ’s postings because it was rambling blather. Rambling blather from the left is still rambling blather.
I’ve got the video here, and while I agree with you on the from behind theory of motivation (something I’ve preached here for a long time), there’s something to be said about a team that’s winning the division being acknowledged as something more than a wildcard team.
what you’ve left up is “rambling blather” because it lacks context. you really are guilty of the exact same shit you are so quick to decry in others and you can’t even see it. i came back today because i KNEW you’d leave up the stuff that makes no sense to anyone who didn’t see the earlier posts.
again: andrew hacker has an essay in the new york review of books called “obama: the cost of being black” in which he lays out the uphill battle ANY democrat would have in the upcoming election due to the fact that large numbers of whites identify the democratic party with blacks and vote AGAINST the democrats accordingly. (as ugly as that sounds)
hacker then goes on to talk about the commonly acknowledged fact that polls are unreliable when blacks are running for high office since whites polled will often, shall we say, overstate their willingness to vote for blacks.
hacker points out the openly stated disaffinity whites have with blacks according most polls conducted on the subject. and you seem to have a problem with this. why? these are facts, not blather. do you think i’m happy about this? i’m black too, goddamnit! but facts ARE facts. you want to disparage what i write as “rambling blather”? how then to describe your simplistic approach to the issues? “these are the people we’re fighting”? how old are you? 12? wake up.
the enemy isn’t wearing a white sheet while singing “sweet home alabama”. it’s the guy right next to you on your morning commute who smiles in your face but votes against you every chance he gets.
on a certain repulsive level your approach here is effective. if you delete my posts when i make a good point and leave up things that lack context, it’ll serve to marginalize me as a voice here. and those are the sort of underhanded tactics we on the left are supposed to hate. if you have to become what you hate to win, what’s the point?
i freely admit obama means nothing to me other than the promise of competent, sane governance after 8 years of its polar opposite. otherwise, he’s another corporate tool who will do little to change or challenge the system, no matter what color he is.
people need heroes, god knows, that’s a weakness all humans share. but operating at odds with one’s stated beliefs and not knowing that you do so is pathetic. as i said: you can’t fight the good fight if you don’t even know what it is. and if you’re censoring anyone who posts reasonable disagreements then you have no idea what constitutes the good fight.