Rasmussen Tracking Poll [Obama vs McCain]

[Rowan]

McCain should gain tomorrow. A big Obama night will fall off, and we should see some tightening. Looking at the internals, there wasn't much movement.

[Kalimantan]

It's using a position of trust in a dishonest way. That's the actual definition.

And it is 'you guys.'

I can assure you there is only one of me.

I can't argue with your definition. How does that describe Obama?

But you aren't the only one asking silly questions.

As a candidate, Obama is suppose to show the public that he can be trusted. Correct?

Obama has associations with ACORN on several levels. He has given them money (not directly), he has promised them and other community organizations (at an event organized by ACORN), and he has taught classes for ACORN. There are more, but I honestly don't remember them.

Obama also accepts a large amount of earmarks, but overall accepting earmarks is minor in comparison to ACORN connections.

There are other things I'm not thinking about, but Ayers is one thing I wouldn't count among Obama's corruption.

You've accused a presedential candidate of corruption, I've asked you to explain, and THAT's a silly question? What a bizarre world you live in.

I haven't followed the Acorn stuff too closely. As I understand it, Acorn pay people to register voters and those people have turned in bogus registrations. Acorn are bound by law to turn those over to the elections' boards. So its Acorn that are the victims of fraud, no? But as I say, I haven't followed it too closely.

Regardless, you say Obama is supposed to be corrupt because he's taught classes for Acorn? Or because he's donated to them? How are either of these cases "using a position of trust in a dishonest way"? [rhetorical question - of course they're not]

Oh well. You've finally come up with an explanation of sorts. I'm satisfied from your answer that there is no evidence of Obama corruption. If you want to continue this discussion then start a new thread. Sorry to everyone else for clogging up the Rasmussen tracker thread.

Ciao.

[Democratic Hawk]

I am not weary of him, because he is a Dem or a socialist.

A pragmatic Christian Democrat - and that is what Obama is on economic and quality of life issues - is not a socialist. Fairness is inherent in Christian Democratic thought; an ideology born of the social teachings of the Catholic Church. Obama is not a Catholic; yet Douglas Kmiec, formerly the Head of the Office of Legal Counsel for presidents Reagan and George H. W. Bush, has endorsed Obama as the candidate of Catholic values

Pragmatism will guide any Obama presidency, not ideological excess. He'll pursue what's best to realise the "American Promise"

Anyway, here's Rasmussen's new partisan weighting targets for the week October 19-25, 2008:

Link

Democratic 39.7% (+0.4%)
Republican 33.0% (nc)
Unaffiliated 27.3% (-0.4%)

Dave

[Zarn]

@Hawk: Don't preach to me. He is a clear cut socialist.

It's using a position of trust in a dishonest way. That's the actual definition.

And it is 'you guys.'

I can assure you there is only one of me.

I can't argue with your definition. How does that describe Obama?

But you aren't the only one asking silly questions.

As a candidate, Obama is suppose to show the public that he can be trusted. Correct?

Obama has associations with ACORN on several levels. He has given them money (not directly), he has promised them and other community organizations (at an event organized by ACORN), and he has taught classes for ACORN. There are more, but I honestly don't remember them.

Obama also accepts a large amount of earmarks, but overall accepting earmarks is minor in comparison to ACORN connections.

There are other things I'm not thinking about, but Ayers is one thing I wouldn't count among Obama's corruption.

You've accused a presedential candidate of corruption, I've asked you to explain, and THAT's a silly question? What a bizarre world you live in.

I haven't followed the Acorn stuff too closely. As I understand it, Acorn pay people to register voters and those people have turned in bogus registrations. Acorn are bound by law to turn those over to the elections' boards. So its Acorn that are the victims of fraud, no? But as I say, I haven't followed it too closely.

Regardless, you say Obama is supposed to be corrupt because he's taught classes for Acorn? Or because he's donated to them? How are either of these cases "using a position of trust in a dishonest way"? [rhetorical question - of course they're not]

Oh well. You've finally come up with an explanation of sorts. I'm satisfied from your answer that there is no evidence of Obama corruption. If you want to continue this discussion then start a new thread. Sorry to everyone else for clogging up the Rasmussen tracker thread.

Ciao.

No, they have been going around and asking people to re-register. It shows that you haven't been following it.

[Democratic Hawk]

@Hawk: Don't preach to me. He is a clear cut socialist.

Bullsh**t. I tell it like it is and if you don't like it. Tough

[Rowan]

Isn't "spreading the wealth around" the basis of socialism?

[Torie]

Isn't "spreading the wealth around" the basis of socialism?

No, not really. It is about owning the means of production. But as to spreading the wealth around, hasn't Bush been the master of that? Granted a lot of what is "spread" isn't means tested.  Well I guess pumping money into sick banks is sort of means tested actually. Whatever. 

[Alcon]

Isn't "spreading the wealth around" the basis of socialism?

Socialism is an economic system.  And, no, that's the colloquial definition of "socialism," not the real or slightly useful one.

[Democratic Hawk]

Isn't "spreading the wealth around" the basis of socialism?

I'd say taking the means of production into public, that is common, ownership is the basis of socialism

The difference between the pragmatic center-left (Democrats) and the ideological right (Republicans) is the extent to which capitalism requires "guidance" and whether fiscal policy should favor the middle class or the weathiest

Dave

[Lief 🗽]

Zarn and other Republicans, predictably bitter about the loss they're about t endure, are spreading this ACORN trash around to try and de-legitimize Obama's victory. ACORN, as anyone who paid any attention at all/isn't a hack will tell you, has not committed "voter fraud", and most of these fake registrations will not be accepted by the state Secretary of State offices. The few that get through will of course have no real human being to cast a vote in their name, so no voter fraud will occur.

Also, what the Republicans have done in the past few weeks is more socialist than anything the Democrats have ever advocated for or passed.

[Wall St. Wiz]

He is a socialist.  Universal health care.  Universal pre-K.  Universal this, universal that.  Wealth re-distribution.  That is socialism.

[© tweed]

He is a socialist.  Universal health care.  Universal pre-K.  Universal this, universal that.  Wealth re-distribution.  That is socialism.

Obama doesn't support single-payer universal health care.  (nor is his plan really 'universal' at all)

[humder]

He is a socialist.  Universal health care.  Universal pre-K.  Universal this, universal that.  Wealth re-distribution.  That is socialism.

 If universal health care is socialist then that means your NATO allies are socialists and that first world countries are mostly socialist and third world countries are mostly capitalist. That is because most counties have universal health care and almost all first would countries do.

[Lief 🗽]

Guys, there's really no use arguing with him. Right-wing talking heads have told him that anything short of corporate oligarchy is socialism.

[Eraserhead]

Isn't "spreading the wealth around" the basis of socialism?

No, not really. It is about owning the means of production. But as to spreading the wealth around, hasn't Bush been the master of that? Granted a lot of what is "spread" isn't means tested.  Well I guess pumping money into sick banks is sort of means tested actually. Whatever. 

Torie, take your knowledge elsewhere please.

[minionofmidas]

Isn't "spreading the wealth around" the basis of socialism?

No, not really. It is about owning the means of production.

It's about popular control. Or societal control, if you prefer - not state control. Not traditional oligarchy / people with money / unregulated markets control (not the same thing, but too close for comfort).

Mind you, looking around for a catch-all definition of socialism here, not for my own one.

[Gustaf]

@Hawk: Don't preach to me. He is a clear cut socialist.

Bullsh**t. I tell it like it is and if you don't like it. Tough

You don't "tell it like it is" you voice your opinion as if it were an undisputable fact, which is a bit conceited.

Anyway, I doubt Obama is an idelogical socialist. I don't think he has any kind of inner restraint as to what the size or influence of the government should be either though.

But enough hijacking people. I want to be able to read the polls.

[pepper11]

Monday- October 20

Obama: 50 (-1)
McCain: 46 (+1)

Cetrain voters: Obama + 2

Don't know how this jives with one of the worst news day of the campaign for McCain.
 
 
 

[Kalimantan]

Monday- October 20

Obama: 50 (-1)
McCain: 46 (+1)

Cetrain voters: Obama + 2

Don't know how this jives with one of the worst news day of the campaign for McCain.
 

Noise in a stable race

"Obama’s support has ranged from 50% to 52% every day for twenty-four straight days while McCain’s total has been between 44% and 46% during those days. "

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Monday- October 20

Obama: 50 (-1)
McCain: 46 (+1)

Cetrain voters: Obama + 2

certain voters?  please explain

[Ty440]

Monday- October 20

Obama: 50 (-1)
McCain: 46 (+1)

Cetrain voters: Obama + 2

Don't know how this jives with one of the worst news day of the campaign for McCain.
 
 
 

I will take it!

[BlueSwan]

Something concerns me - why are Obamas approval ratings dropping? I don't get it? Are the Ayers ads really starting to work or is it something else?

[pepper11]

 Ras breaks his voters into certain, likely, lean and shows the crosstabs on premium service. 

Yesterday certain voters were 45-39 Obama. Today 43-41 Obama. I know the Thursday sample was pro-Obama, but yesterday must have been a decent McCain sample. A 4 point swing is quite large.

[Ronnie]

Cool

[TheresNoMoney]

Something concerns me - why are Obamas approval ratings dropping? I don't get it? Are the Ayers ads really starting to work or is it something else?

The past 3-4 days have been nonstop Joe the Plumber, "Socialist" and William Ayers on all the news networks.

The media is doing everything it can to drive up Obama's negatives and make this race as close as possible.