October 3-7, 2008
Oct 03 01:59 What They're Saying About Palin-Biden Oct 03 10:21 Summarizing the Debate Oct 03 12:09 McCain Highlights Biden's Whoppers Oct 04 09:54 The Gloves Are Officially Off Oct 04 13:59 Different Pollster, Same BS Oct 05 02:47 Polling As a GOTV Tool Oct 07 02:36 GMHCC Candidate Forum Liveblog Oct 07 09:30 Congress Freed To Blog, Flicker & Tweet Oct 07 10:09 Trouble For Team Barry?
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
What They're Saying About Palin-Biden
I took a spin around the internet tonight to see what people thought. First, here's what the McCain camp said :
"Tonight, Governor Palin proved beyond any doubt that she is ready to lead as Vice President of the United States. She won this debate, putting Joe Biden on defense on energy, foreign policy, taxes and the definition of change. Governor Palin laid bare Barack Obama's record of voting to raise taxes, opposing the surge in Iraq, and proposing to meet unconditionally with the leaders of state sponsors of terror. The differences between the Obama-Biden ticket and the McCain-Palin ticket could not have been clearer. The American people saw stark contrasts in style and worldview. They saw Joe Biden, a Washington insider and a 36-year Senator, and Governor Palin, a Washington outsider and a maverick reformer. Governor Palin was direct, forceful and a breath of fresh air." ; Jill Hazelbaker, McCain-Palin 2008 Communications DirectorYou wouldn't expect Team McCain to say anything but glowing things about Gov. Palin's performance so this isn't a surprising response. Nonetheless, I think it's a pretty accurate summation. Her reply that you have to walk the walk, not just talk the talk was a great one-liner. Her rebuke on what Gen. McClellan said was a sharp response, too. She proved that she's absolutely competent.
Here's what Roger L. Simon of Pajamas Media said:
I actually had some sympathy for Joe Biden tonight (who we all know thinks John McCain is better than Obama anyway ; he's said so, as Palin was correct to point out). He was an aging fellow (like me) forced to debate a young and much more charismatic woman who was easily his equal. You could see in his body language that he knew it.I didn't watch the debate so I'll take Roger's word that Biden's body language said that he knew she was doing well.
Earlier tonight, I called Hugh's 'postgame wrap' and said that people wouldn't buy that John McCain doesn't support the troops like Biden tried convincing people of. Here's what Hugh wrote about tonight's debate :
After the wave of assaults on her, Sarah Palin shows the nation why John McCain picked her and why the center-right loves her. She has a great night. Joe Biden does well too, but this was all about Sarah Palin, and she delivered a strong, strong message of energy and change.I especially agree with Hught that she needs to take time for talk radio from now until Election Day. She's the one who energizes the GOP and wins over moderates, undecideds and women.
The one great line of the debate: "It is so obvious that I am a Washington outsider," Palin says, "soemone just not used to the way you guys operate" as she points out Joe Biden's attempt to doubletalk his way to Obama's position.
Biden's big gaffe came on Iran: "They are not close to getting a nuclear weapon that can be deployed."
The Luntz focus group picked up the decisive Palin win, and Luntz is predicting a move towards McCain in the polls as a result. McCain will have to take on the issue of the origins of the subprime crisis to capitalize on this opening, and Sarah needs to be out on talk radio every day from here on out. She is back as the GOP's best weapon in Election '08.
John Hinderaker titled his post " Grand Slam ". Here's how he justified the post's title:
That describes the first half-hour of Sarah Palin's performance against Joe Biden tonight. She was calm, commanding and articulate. She repeatedly knifed Biden with a smile and showed why she is one of the most effective communicators in American politics. I've been watching Presidential debates since 1960, and I can't recall a more one-sided matchup than the first 30 minutes of tonight's debate. It was all Sarah Palin.John then continues with this keen observation:
With very little adjustment to her schedule, she could do talk radio every day. Earlier this week, she did a ten minute appearance on Hugh Hewitt's show. It was, I believe, the first such talk radio interview she's given. This is madness. Every day, she should be talking with Rush Limbaugh, Hugh, Michael Medved, Dennis Prager, Laura Ingraham, Mark Levin, Jim Vicevich, and so on. Wherever she goes, she should do fifteen minutes with a local talk radio host. If she went on with people like Jason Lewis and Scott Hennen, to name just two out of many, she would cement her relationship with the Republican base and bring the McCain campaign immeasurable good will.The more visible Gov. Palin is, the better the chances for the ticket and for downticket races, too.
It also wouldn't hurt if she sat down for interviews with significant conservative web sites. Hey, we're available! And, while the campaign's focus at this point is naturally on "earned media," I'd like to see a few television commercials featuring Governor Palin speaking directly to voters. As she reminded us tonight, she can do it very well.
Here's TheNextRight's Jon Henke's opinion :
Gov. Palin did one thing very well and one thing poorly:I'll respectfully disagree with Mr. Henke. I thought she hammered Sen. Obama a couple of times. She criticized Sen. Obama for saying he'd meet without preconditions with Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Castro and Kim Jung Il. She didn't come off harsh. She did it by complimenting Sen. Biden for taking Sen. Obama to task on that issue. That's pitch perfect putting the knife in, then giving it a sharp twist, all with a smile on her face.
GOOD: She didn't make any major mistakes. In that regard, Palin beat expectations soundly. She did get some facts wrong, but she didn't have The Gaffe and without that Moment on which all future attention focuses, impressions will largely be shaped by the personalities of the people involved. Fortunately for her, Sarah Palin is likable. However...
BAD: Sarah Palin was speaking, but other people's words were coming out of her mouth. She was clearly trying to cram in as many talking points as possible. As a result, she talked too fast, she talked too much and she sounded more like a scripted politician than a charismatic reformer.
Jim Geraghty, Mark Hemingway, and special guest Eli Lake sat down for a session of Red Meat. Follow this link to watch the video of their conversation. It's worth the watching.
Here's what Erick wrote at RedState:
- Paging Kathleen Parker, Connor whatshisname, etc: If you still want to talk about Palin dropping out, you have beltwayitis and need to leave the NYC-DC corridor of talking heads and cocktail parties for the real United States.
- Gwen Ifill showed her bias tonight repeatedly. She constantly let Joe Biden have the last word. Constantly. Something like 3 to 1. Likewise, she predicated questions negatively toward Palin like the gay marriage issue in Alaska.
- This has got to be embarrassing to the Obama campaign: "But Barack Obama indicated to me he wanted me with him tohelp him govern. So every major decision he'll be making, I'll be sitting in the room to give him my best advice. " Yep, Biden admits the stereotype: Little Barry needs Joe in the room because Barry can't make decisions by himself.
- Palin devastated Biden. She put him on the defensive. She made him sigh repeatedly. He rolled his eyes, licked his teeth, talked down, pontificated, and really did himself few favors. About the only major point score for Biden was talking about being a single parent.
- Biden repeatedly exaggerated, got it wrong, and flat out lied on the coal issue. Not helpful for them.
- At the end of the day, the debate won't matter. In the Luntz focus group on Fox (btw, Biden won the CNN one, but the Luntz one was done by a professional company that specializes in getting it right, unlike CNN, though the Luntz panel thought Obama won last week), most everyone thought Palin won, but very few of the committed changed their minds.
Tonight, Sarah Palin was sharp, articulate, and connected with the middle class. The #1 political effect tonight will have is an important one for the McCain campaign: she shut the doubters up, and then some. In this important sense, she stopped the bleeding. I suspect that a very tough couple of weeks ends tonight, and it will be up to John McCain to get the comeback going next Tuesday. Conservative weak sisters like Kathleen Parker and David Brooks can turn their pens in another direction. Tonight, they've been silenced.Sen. Obama had re-opened the gender gap. I'm betting that Gov. Palin's performance tonight will start shrinking that gap again. Here's another of Patrick's astute observations:
A major contributing factor to conservative despair these last two weeks is that the fear that the Palin choice would be defined as a warped historical error. Conservative and grassroots leverage over the party would be gone, at least for the foreseeable future. Sarah was our gal, and if she messed it up, it would be a long time before the conservative narrative about the future of the GOP would be trusted again. Meanwhile, conservatives were being asked to depart from principle in supporting the bailout. It was a wrenching and sobering couple of weeks.What the GOP needs more than anything is an Army of Patricks. Mr. Ruffini understands grassroots activism. He also understands the middle class. If there's anything the conservative movement desperately needs, it's a nonpopulist appeal to the middle class. Patrick gets it. Sarah is our leader but Patrick is the sergeant that's moving the troops into all the right places.
Just as with her brilliant RNC speech, Palin did not let us down. And once again, she becomes the hope of the ticket and a standardbearer for the young guns who include Jindal, Portman, Cantor, McCarthy, Ryan, and many more.
Palin can no longer be defined as a liability in any meaningful political or analytical sense. Her claim to leadership in the next Right stands stronger than ever.
Of all the opinions I read tonight, I laughed most at Jeremy Lott's observations :
Going into the debate, the expectation on foreign policy issues was that Sarah Palin would be out of her depth. Yet it was Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who seemed like he needed a life preserver. Biden's problem is that there are deep differences between his record and Barack Obama's on the most important policy issue of this election: the Iraq war. Obama was against it from the start. Biden was for it and then pushed the three-quasi-state (partition) solution that was rejected in favor of the surge, the approach that John McCain supported. "Your plan is a white flag of surrender in Iraq," Palin charged of Obama's proposal for a phased, timed withdrawal. Biden didn't mount an effective reply. My sense is that he didn't expect Palin to punch very hard on foreign affairs. What he got was a purse full of quarters aimed right his unnaturally white teeth .BINGO. Sen. Biden should've remembered that the difference between a pit bull and an Alaskan hockey mom is the lipstick. Calling Gov. Palin feisty or combative is understatement. It's apparent that people are getting in the bad habit of misundestimating Gov. Palin. That's a bad habit to get into.
Check back Friday morning for a more polished summary of the debate. That's a post I'll thoroughly enjoy.
UPDATE: This morning's must visit is Jim Hoft's post from the Palin postgame rally in St. Louis. Checking out the pictures is essential.
Posted Friday, October 3, 2008 11:46 AM
No comments.
Summarizing the Debate
The first thing that struck me was Sen. Biden's opening answer. Here's Gwen Ifill's question and Sen. Biden's answer:
IFILL: The House of Representatives this week passed a bill, a big bailout bill, or didn't pass it, I should say. The Senate decided to pass it, and the House is wrestling with it still tonight.Sen. Biden's talking points failed him badly. In fact, staying 'on message' caused him to open with a whopper. "Excessive deregulation" didn't have a thing to do with the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac crisis. Nothing whatsoever. Saying that it was caused by Bush administration policies is another whopper.
As America watches these things happen on Capitol Hill, Senator Biden, was this the worst of Washington or the best of Washington that we saw play out?
BIDEN: Let me begin by thanking you, Gwen, for hosting this.
And, Governor, it's a pleasure to meet you, and it's a pleasure to be with you.
I think it's neither the best or worst of Washington, but it's evidence of the fact that the economic policies of the last eight years have been the worst economic policies we've ever had. As a consequence, you've seen what's happened on Wall Street.
If you need any more proof positive of how bad the economic theories have been, this excessive deregulation, the failure to oversee what was going on, letting Wall Street run wild, I don't think you needed any more evidence than what you see now.
I'm not saying that I agree with all of President Bush's economic policies but the crisis was set in motion when Bill Clinton signed into law a bill that penalized banks that didn't grant enough mortgages to people who were bad credit risks. That had nothing to do with President Bush. In fact, it had to do with a bill that Sen. Biden likely voted on.
Reading through the transcript , something else jumped out at me. Here's Gov. Palin's answer to the same Ifill question:
You know, I think a good barometer here, as we try to figure out has this been a good time or a bad time in America's economy, is go to a kid's soccer game on Saturday, and turn to any parent there on the sideline and ask them, "How are you feeling about the economy?"Gov. Palin's message is simple: John McCain sounded the alarm on Fannie's and Freddie's corruption. Then he tried enacting reforms that would've saved American taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars. The other message that's apparent is that Sen. McCain was proactive and right.
And I'll bet you, you're going to hear some fear in that parent's voice, fear regarding the few investments that some of us have in the stock market. Did we just take a major hit with those investments?
Fear about, how are we going to afford to send our kids to college? A fear, as small-business owners, perhaps, how we're going to borrow any money to increase inventory or hire more people.
The barometer there, I think, is going to be resounding that our economy is hurting and the federal government has not provided the sound oversight that we need and that we deserve, and we need reform to that end.
Now, John McCain thankfully has been one representing reform. Two years ago, remember, it was John McCain who pushed so hard with the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reform measures. He sounded that warning bell.
People in the Senate with him, his colleagues, didn't want to listen to him and wouldn't go towards that reform that was needed then. I think that the alarm has been heard, though, and there will be that greater oversight, again thanks to John McCain's bipartisan efforts that he was so instrumental in bringing folks together over this past week, even suspending his own campaign to make sure he was putting excessive politics aside and putting the country first.
By comparison, Sen. Biden said that Barack Obama outlined a four point plan after the credit meltdown. Sen. Biden's message: Sen. Obama is reactive. He's also a week short and we're a few hundred billion dollars short.
Which person would you rather have running the ship of state?
Another thing that comes through via the transcript is the rallying cry that had Frank Luntz's dials going through the roof. Here's that rallying cry:
PALIN: One thing that Americans do at this time, also, though, is let's commit ourselves just every day American people, Joe Six Pack, hockey moms across the nation, I think we need to band together and say never again. Never will we be exploited and taken advantage of again by those who are managing our money and loaning us these dollars. We need to make sure that we demand from the federal government strict oversight of those entities in charge of our investments and our savings and we need also to not get ourselves in debt. Let's do what our parents told us before we probably even got that first credit card. Don't live outside of our means. We need to make sure that as individuals we're taking personal responsibility through all of this. It's not the American peoples fault that the economy is hurting like it is, but we have an opportunity to learn a heck of a lot of good lessons through this and say never again will we be taken advantage of.That answer scored the highest of all the responses he's gotten during all of the debates. It isn't difficult figuring out why, either. Gov. Palin talked about We The People, Joe Six Pack if you will, using common sense, then appealing to Joe Six Pack to take personal responsibility for their actions. That's an answer that'll play well throughout the heartland, the south and the intermountain west.
Gov. Palin also attacked relentlessly, as witnessed by this excoriation of Sen. Obama on taxes:
PALIN: I would like to respond about the tax increases. We can speak in agreement here that darn right we need tax relief for Americans so that jobs can be created here. Now, Barack Obama and Senator Biden also voted for the largest tax increases in U.S. history. Barack had 94 opportunities to side on the people's side and reduce taxes and 94 times he voted to increase taxes or not support a tax reduction, 94 times.the best that Sen. Biden could do is mount this feeble response:
Now, that's not what we need to create jobs and really bolster and heat up our economy. We do need the private sector to be able to keep more of what we earn and produce. Government is going to have to learn to be more efficient and live with less if that's what it takes to reign in the government growth that we've seen today. But we do need tax relief and Barack Obama even supported increasing taxes as late as last year for those families making only $42,000 a year. That's a lot of middle income average American families to increase taxes on them. I think that is the way to kill jobs and to continue to harm our economy.
BIDEN: The charge is absolutely not true. Barack Obama did not vote to raise taxes. The vote she's referring to, John McCain voted the exact same way. It was a budget procedural vote. John McCain voted the same way. It did not raise taxes. Number two, using the standard that the governor uses, John McCain voted 477 times to raise taxes. It's a bogus standard it but if you notice, Gwen, the governor did not answer the question about deregulation, did not answer the question of defending John McCain about not going along with the deregulation, letting Wall Street run wild. He did support deregulation almost across the board. That's why we got into so much trouble.That answer didn't even sound good when he made it. It's worse now that I've got the time to read and re-read it. Sen. Biden didn't contest Gov. Palin's saying that Sen. Obama whiffed 94 times to cut taxes. After not defending Sen. Obama on the taxes allegations, he returned to blaming deregulation for the Fannie/Freddie crisis.
That isn't the only time Gov. Palin put Sen. Biden on the defensive. Here's the time that stood out most for me:
IFILL: OK, our time is up here. We've got to move to the next question. Senator Biden, we want to talk about taxes, let's talk about taxes. You proposed raising taxes on people who earn over $250,000 a year. The question for you is, why is that not class warfare and the same question for you, Governor Palin, is you have proposed a tax employer health benefits which some studies say would actually throw five million more people onto the roles of the uninsured. I want to know why that isn't taking things out on the poor, starting with you, Senator Biden.That's a pitch-perfect response. It doesn't give Sen. Biden an out. Instead, it really just painted him into an extremely tight corner.
BIDEN: Well Gwen, where I come from, it's called fairness, just simple fairness. The middle class is struggling. The middle class under John McCain's tax proposal, 100 million families, middle class families, households to be precise, they got not a single change, they got not a single break in taxes. No one making less than $250,000 under Barack Obama's plan will see one single penny of their tax raised whether it's their capital gains tax, their income tax, investment tax, any tax. And 95 percent of the people in the United States of America making less than $150,000 will get a tax break.
Now, that seems to me to be simple fairness. The economic engine of America is middle class. It's the people listening to this broadcast. When you do well, America does well. Even the wealthy do well. This is not punitive. John wants to add $300 million, billion in new tax cuts per year for corporate America and the very wealthy while giving virtually nothing to the middle class. We have a different value set. The middle class is the economic engine. It's fair. They deserve the tax breaks, not the super wealthy who are doing pretty well. They don't need any more tax breaks. And by the way, they'll pay no more than they did under Ronald Reagan.
IFILL: Governor?
PALIN: I do take issue with some of the principle there with that redistribution of wealth principle that seems to be espoused by you. But when you talk about Barack's plan to tax increase affecting only those making $250,000 a year or more, you're forgetting millions of small businesses that are going to fit into that category . So they're going to be the ones paying higher taxes thus resulting in fewer jobs being created and less productivity.
Gov. Palin wasn't done with that answer. Here's how she stuck in the dagger and gave it a sharp twist:
Now you said recently that higher taxes or asking for higher taxes or paying higher taxes is patriotic. In the middle class of America which is where Todd and I have been all of our lives, that's not patriotic. Patriotic is saying, government, you know, you're not always the solution. In fact, too often you're the problem so, government, lessen the tax burden and on our families and get out of the way and let the private sector and our families grow and thrive and prosper. An increased tax formula that Barack Obama is proposing in addition to nearly a trillion dollars in new spending that he's proposing is the backwards way of trying to grow our economy.That's one right between the eyes. I'm familiar with this mindset. It isn't exclusive to the middle class. It's a mindset that most everyone is familiar with. Most people simply want to be allowed to prosper. Most people understand that there's a need for government but they understand that it's important that that government, whichever level it's at, shouldn't hinder the growth of prosperity.
Another thing that happened was that Gov. Palin got to talk about one of her biggest accomplishments:
PALIN: I want to go back to the energy plan, though, because this is -- this is an important one that Barack Obama, he voted for in '05."I took on those oil companies..." "the greed there that has been kind of instrumental...that wasn't going to happen in my state." Think of how many people hearing about her standing up for working folks. Does anyone think that they wouldn't love having her as their advocate? I'll guarantee that I'd love having her as Minnesota's advocate.
Senator Biden, you would remember that, in that energy plan that Obama voted for, that's what gave those oil companies those big tax breaks. Your running mate voted for that.
You know what I had to do in the state of Alaska? I had to take on those oil companies and tell them, "No," you know, any of the greed there that has been kind of instrumental, I guess, in their mode of operation, that wasn't going to happen in my state.
And that's why Tillerson at Exxon and Mulva at ConocoPhillips, bless their hearts, they're doing what they need to do, as corporate CEOs, but they're not my biggest fans, because what I had to do up there in Alaska was to break up a monopoly up there and say, you know, the people are going to come first and we're going to make sure that we have value given to the people of Alaska with those resources.
This answer really impressed me:
When we talk about energy, we have to consider the need to do all that we can to allow this nation to become energy independent.Sarah Palin walked America back from the tax cuts for oil companies question. then she gave a great answer about the big picture of American energy, even getting in a shot about "East Coast politicians who don't allow energy-producing states like Alaska" to provide the resources to make America energy independent.
It's a nonsensical position that we are in when we have domestic supplies of energy all over this great land. And East Coast politicians who don't allow energy-producing states like Alaska to produce these, to tap into them, and instead we're relying on foreign countries to produce for us.
PALIN: We're circulating about $700 billion a year into foreign countries, some who do not like America...they certainly don't have our best interests at heart...instead of those dollars circulating here, creating tens of thousands of jobs and allowing domestic supplies of energy to be tapped into and start flowing into these very, very hungry markets.
Energy independence is the key to this nation's future, to our economic future, and to our national security. So when we talk about energy plans, it's not just about who got a tax break and who didn't. And we're not giving oil companies tax breaks, but it's about a heck of a lot more than that.
I was initially worried about Gov. Palin's answer on global warming, too, given Sen. McCain's opinion on the matter. As it turned out, her answer caused Sen. Biden to give the McCain-Palin ticket something to use:
BIDEN: Well, I think it is manmade. I think it's clearly manmade. And, look, this probably explains the biggest fundamental difference between John McCain and Barack Obama and Sarah Palin and Joe Biden, Governor Palin and Joe Biden.When he says that "If you don't understand what the cause is, it's virtually impossible to come up with a solution", I'd turn that back at Sen. Biden, saying that if you buy disproven MMGW data, you'll forever search for a solution to something based on faulty facts.
If you don't understand what the cause is, it's virtually impossible to come up with a solution. We know what the cause is. The cause is manmade. That's the cause. That's why the polar icecap is melting.
Here's my favorite exchange of the night:
PALIN: I am very thankful that we do have a good plan and the surge and the counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq that has proven to work, I am thankful that that is part of the plan implemented under a great American hero, General Petraeus, and pushed hard by another great American, Senator John McCain.As I told Hugh last night, who's going to believe that John McCain doesn't support the troops? This is a man who spent 5.5 years in the Hanoi Hilton. Biden's spin is some of the most creative spin I've ever heard. That's saying alot since I went through eight years of the Clintons.
I know that the other ticket opposed this surge, in fact, even opposed funding for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Barack Obama voted against funding troops there after promising that he would not do so.
And Senator Biden, I respected you when you called him out on that. You said that his vote was political and you said it would cost lives. And Barack Obama at first said he would not do that. He turned around under political pressure and he voted against funding the troops. We do have a plan for withdrawal. We don't need early withdrawal out of Iraq. We cannot afford to lose there or we're going to be no better off in the war in Afghanistan either. We have got to win in Iraq.
~~~~~
BIDEN: Gwen, with all due respect, I didn't hear a plan. Barack Obama offered a clear plan. Shift responsibility to Iraqis over the next 16 months. Draw down our combat troops. Ironically the same plan that Maliki, the prime minister of Iraq and George Bush are now negotiating. The only odd man out here, only one left out is John McCain, number one. Number two, with regard to Barack Obama not quote funding the troops, John McCain voted the exact same way. John McCain voted against funding the troops because of an amendment he voted against had a timeline in it to draw down American troops. And John said I'm not going to fund the troops if in fact there's a time line.
REALITY? John McCain voted to give our troops to win the war. He didn't vote "against funding the troops"; he voted FOR victory. That's a huge difference.
Overall, I thought Gov. Palin had Sen. Biden on the defensive most of last night. Several times, he got so flustered that his spin was easily ridiculed. I'd be remiss, though, if I didn't highlight Sen. Biden's 'blowhard moment':
Vice President Cheney has been the most dangerous vice president we've had probably in American history. The idea he doesn't realize that Article I of the Constitution defines the role of the vice president of the United States, that's the Executive Branch. He works in the Executive Branch. He should understand that. Everyone should understand that.This is coming from a longtime member of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Article I establishes the Legislative Branch; Article II the Executive Branch. The vice president is explicitly mentioned in both Article I and Article II. That's the only office mentioned in both branches of government.
And the primary role of the vice president of the United States of America is to support the president of the United States of America, give that president his or her best judgment when sought, and as vice president, to preside over the Senate, only in a time when in fact there's a tie vote. The Constitution is explicit.
The only authority the vice president has from the legislative standpoint is the vote, only when there is a tie vote. He has no authority relative to the Congress. The idea he's part of the Legislative Branch is a bizarre notion invented by Cheney to aggrandize the power of a unitary executive and look where it has gotten us. It has been very dangerous.
Further, vice presidents are always president of the Senate when they're there. PERIOD. Finally, the vice president is technically paid through the Senate's budget. You'd think that someone who's been in Washington since LBJ's time would know that.
I expect the polls to show a pro-McCain bounce after last night. Now it's up to McCain to release Gov. Palin from her media bubble and let her win over women and independents while exciting the base. Getting her on Rush, Hannity, Medved, Prager and Hewitt is a must, too. There's no sense in holding back now. It's time to let it rip.
Posted Friday, October 3, 2008 10:22 AM
No comments.
McCain Highlights Biden's Whoppers
I predicted this last night that Sen. McCain would clobber Sen. Biden for his whoppers. My prediction was just vindicated. Check this video out:
Alot of the Obama Media Corp. is saying that Joe Biden did what he needed to do last night. They're probably right. He didn't dare speak the truth about Sen. Obama's agenda.
Ace of Spades has the rundown of Biden's whoppers:
JOE BIDEN'S 14 LIES TONIGHTFacts matter. That's why I said that the overnights don't always tell who won the debate, that it's what happens in the 2-3 days after the debate. In this instance, the objective analysis got it right that Palin won for the most part. This is only going to get better because this McCain ad highlights Joe Biden defending a couple of Obama tall tales.
1. TAX VOTE: Biden said McCain voted "the exact same way" as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY.
2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Joe Biden lied when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did say specifically, and Joe Biden attacked him for it.
3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden said, "Drill we must." But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to "raping" the Outer Continental Shelf."
4. TROOP FUNDING: Joe Biden lied when he indicated that John McCain and Barack Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. John McCain opposed a bill that included a timeline, that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of it's passage.
5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden says he's always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate.
6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: According to FactCheck.org, Biden is exaggerating and overstating John McCain's record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times.
7. HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden falsely said McCain will raise taxes on people's health insurance coverage; they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this attack is false
8. OIL TAXES: Biden falsely said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska; she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it's not a windfall profits tax.
9. AFGHANISTAN/GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO's International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.
10. REGULATION: Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation -- he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.
11. IRAQ: When Joe Biden lied when he said that John McCain was "dead wrong on Iraq", because Joe Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war and differed on the surge strategy where they John McCain has been proven right.
12. TAX INCREASES: Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn't see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.
13. BAILOUT: Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn't meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be "part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20."
14. REAGAN TAX RATES: Biden is wrong in saying that under Obama, Americans won't pay any more in taxes then they did under Reagan.
Posted Friday, October 3, 2008 12:10 PM
No comments.
The Gloves Are Officially Off
This ad from the NRCC marks the official taking off of the gloves. This signals that they're bringing the heavy artillery out. Check this out:
It isn't easy to hold people's attention for 90 seconds. This video does. Bravo.
Originally posted Saturday, October 4, 2008, revised 09-Jan 1:55 AM
Comment 1 by Walter hanson at 05-Oct-08 09:07 AM
Gary:
A great theme for the NRCC let alone NRSC and John Mccain is look at what these people did to the housing industry. do you want them to do the same damage to health care? Your taxes? The entire US economy?
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 2 by Rex at 05-Oct-08 03:32 PM
nice link...i hadn't seen that one but it's perfect. here's another site, doesn't have a commercial, but asks for the people's input on this whole crisis situation and how it it/will affect us. check it out.
http://www.friendsoftheuschamber.com/email/wall_street_3.html
Comment 3 by MpsSteve at 06-Oct-08 11:55 PM
What an excellent ad!
Considering the relative lack of attention span among a good share of the voting population, I hope they run this ad on certain shows and/or networks where the IQ is a little higher than the people who are watching "Survivor: Gabon".
Different Pollster, Same BS
Rob Davies isn't conducting the Strib's Minnesota Poll. These results just make it look like he is. Let's be clear about this: this poll is fiction. This headline gives that away:
Franken bypasses Coleman as voters react to attack adsHere's what the poll is reporting:
DFL U.S. Senate candidate Al Franken has moved into his first solid lead over incumbent Republican Norm Coleman, according to a new Star Tribune Minnesota Poll.This memo from Glen Bolger nails it perfectly:
The survey, conducted Tuesday through Thursday by Princeton Survey Research Associates International among 1,084 likely Minnesota voters, shows Franken leading Coleman 43 to 34 percent. Independence Party candidate Dean Barkley is supported by 18 percent of respondents.
Let me walk you through the facts.I've long maintained a rule of thumb with polls is that media polls are generally junk. The only polling done for media companies that have been accurate have been the SurveyUSA polls done for KSTP-TV. Speaking of which, they have a poll out that flips the totals:
In the September edition of the Star Tribune Minnesota "Poll," Senator Coleman led Al Franken 41% to 37%, with former Senator Barkley pulling up the rear with 13%.
Three short weeks later, Franken pulls ahead with 43%, Senator Coleman at 34% and former Senator Barkley at 18%.
Coincidentally, or not, in this poll not only did Franken's standing increase by a net of 13 points, the sample saw a net increase 13% for the Democrats.
Q1: If the election for United States Senator were today, would you vote for: (choices rotated) Republican Norm Coleman? DFL candidate Al Franken? Or Independence Party candidate Dean Barkley?Here's what I find interesting in the SurveyUSA poll:
A: Norm Coleman 43%, Al Franken 33%, Dean Barkley 19%, 5% undecided.
Norm Coleman gets 83% of Republicans, a healthy 10% of Democrats and 39% of Independents. By comparison, Al Franken is only getting 65% of Democrats, 6% of Republicans and 26% of Independents. It isn't that shocking that Al Franken gets less support amongst Independents than Dean Barkley. What's shocking is that Dean Barkley gets 19% of likely DFL voters.
This is worth remembering:
The reality is that since mid-July there have been 11 public polls conducted on the race for the United States Senate in Minnesota. During that time, all but 3 of those polls have shown Norm Coleman leading Al Franken in the race for the U.S. Senate.Mr. Bolger is right in calling the Minnesota Poll the "outliers of outliers."
Of the last 5 polls that have been conducted, Norm Coleman has held leads in each and every poll--including the most recent KSTP/SurveyUSA poll that has Norm up by 10 points.
It has not been since August that a single public poll (up until the Star Tribune poll) had Franken leading Norm Coleman.
Let's not forget that Doug Johnson, an influential Democrat from northern Minnesota, just endorsed Sen. Coleman. That's sure to carry alot of weight with DFL voters in northern Minnesota.
Let's remember that Al Franken posted pathetic numbers in the Sept. 9th DFL primary. He even lost 4 counties from western and Central Minnesota. As I pointed out here , he only pulled 55% of voters from Stearns, Benton and Sherburne counties. Most of the voters that voted against Franken are cultural conservatives. It isn't likely they'll support someone as far to the left as Franken.
I'll leave you with a question worth pondering: Considering the fact that the Minnesota Poll is the only poll to put Franken in the lead in several political lifetimes and considering the fact that most of the other polls have had Sen. Coleman leading by high single digits to low double digits and considering the fact that the Minnesota Poll's history is questionable at best, shouldn't we ignore the latest Minnesota Poll?
Posted Saturday, October 4, 2008 1:59 PM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 04-Oct-08 05:13 PM
We should never ignore the Minnesota Poll. It tells us what we too many seem to too often forget, which is that the Star and Tribulation is a leftist rag. Besides, we can generally just add 10 points to the Republican or conservative side of the issue, and come fairly close to the right answer. In this case, that would have Coleman leading Franken 39-38. About right.
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 04-Oct-08 10:19 PM
Jerry, I don't need to read a Minnesota Poll to remind myself that the Stribulation is a leftist rag.
I do agree, though, that adding 10 points to the candidate with the R behind their name is a legitimate rule of thumb.
Comment 3 by kb at 05-Oct-08 01:37 PM
Just to remind folks, the old pollster's last name is Daves, not Davies.
Comment 4 by Freealonzo at 06-Oct-08 03:58 PM
While I don't think Franken will beat Coleman by 10, you have a couple of exaggerations in your post. First Doug Johnson is not that influential. If you're banking on Northern Minnesota going R in the Senate race because of the Doug Johnson endorsement, you're going to be very sorry on November 5.
Second the Survey USA/KSTP poll is known to be as right leaning as the Strib Poll is left leaning, with it's internals showing a nearly parity in R's and D's. Few can argue that there are more voters who call themselves D's than R's right now in Minn. (although not to the extent in the Strib poll).
Based on the toxic level associated with the Republican brand, I am guessing that Franken holds a 3-5 point lead.
Comment 5 by Gary Gross at 07-Oct-08 02:41 AM
If you're banking on Northern Minnesota going R in the Senate race because of the Doug Johnson endorsement, you're going to be very sorry on November 5.
I don't expect northern Minnesota to go GOP this November. We don't need it to. It's all about keeping margines in Franken's strong areas as low as possible.
Polling As a GOTV Tool
Yesterday, I posted about the Strib's Minnesota Poll . It isn't surprising that King and Michael talked about the STrib's poll during the Final Word this afternoon. King mentioned that the new polling company has been around a long time. If King says that they're a reputable firm, that's good enough for me. That means I won't cast aspersions on the polling company.
What I will do, though, is talk about media polls in general because I think that there are different motives for media polls.
If we're talking about the AP-Ipsos poll, my first assumption is that it's used to 'create news', which is then cited in later stories that follow a desired storyline. That storyline usually is that Democrats are poised to mop the floor with the GOP.
The way that they achieve that storyline is by vastly oversampling Democrats and undersampling Repblicans. Another trademark of the AP-Ipsos poll is that they all but eliminate independents. I recall seeing an AP-Ipsos poll where 47% of the people sampled identified themselves as Democrats, 37% identified themselves as Republicans, with the remaining 16% identifying themselves as independents.
I first noticed the AP-Ipsos polling in 2005, though they've been around longer than that. The reason why I noticed them was that they were tanking President Bush's JA ratings. I didn't think President Bush was doing a great job by any stretch of the imagination but I didn't think he'd tanked that bad at that time. That led me to check the sampling.
What I found was that things broke almost perfectly along party identification lines. the net negative JA Rating was almost identical to the party breakdowns.
Later, in 2006, I noticed how frequently dreadful poll numbers got reported. Certainly, people were upset with Republicans for immigration and their loose spending habits. There was no doubt that conservatives were upset with President Bush. Still, I got the impression that the constant drumbeat of dreadful poll after dreadful poll was intended to drive down conservative turnout.
Was it inevitable that GOP turnout would be less in 2006 than in 2002? Definitely. That isn't the most important question though. This is: Did these polls drive turnout down more than if they hadn't been reported with that frequency? I can answer with total certainty that the 2006 polls drove down turnout.
The point is this: The various polls show tha the race is over. That's what they said in August, too.
GOP strategists stuck inside DC's Beltway say that this might be a worse year for the GOP than 2006. These so-called strategists aren't getting their information from GOP activists because we're ready to run through walls for the House GOP caucus and for Sarah Palin.
MSM Effect
In this instance, the MSM I'm referring to isn't the mainstream media. I'm referring to a new MSM, namely that Message Still Matters.
It's time we stopped paying attention to the polling. It's time our candidates started running with a Palin-like confidence. It's time that we stood for 3 simple principles that Reagan and Goldwater stood for. Those 3 principles are liberty, prosperity and security.
- If we tell people our vision for achieving longterm prosperity, we'll appeal to alot of voters.
- If we explain to voters how our policies translate into greater security, whether we're talking about national security, retirement security or homeland security, we'll win lots of elections.
- If we tell people that our policies must pass the 'liberty test', meaning that we won't pass legislation that limits our freedoms, then we'll appeal to alot of voters.
"It isn't like the American people suddenly said that they got sick of stable marginal tax rates, that they didn't suddenly say tha they got sick of seeing their taxes being spent too efficiently, that they didn't stop saying that they felt too safe against future terrorist attacks."
Polls matter but message matters more.
Posted Sunday, October 5, 2008 2:48 AM
Comment 1 by J. Ewing at 05-Oct-08 08:23 AM
HEAR! HEAR!
I'm firmly convinced that we lost in 2006 because we spent the last 72 hours trying to get out the vote, when we had spent the previous 6 weeks giving them absolutely nothing to vote FOR. How can we give the Party that message?
Comment 2 by Walter hanson at 05-Oct-08 09:01 AM
Well there is one nice thing about John Mccain if he loses. we have been told we have to reach out to the liberals to win. Well if Mccain has his ass handed to him doing what these stupid pundits have said they will finally be unenmployed and politicans who want to win will find the pundits who want to fight and run on conservative principals.
One quick way to win is if our House and Senate Candidates put out another contract with America.
You think they might remember what happened with the last one:
* We got controlled of Congress!
* We passed some very good legislation because we promised to vote for it.
What on Earth do those pundits not understand about that!
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 3 by Gary Gross at 05-Oct-08 12:00 PM
Jerry, I totally agree with you on not giving voters something to vote for.
Here's how we change that: We adopt a specific list of pro-prosperity items as part of an overall agenda. This list should also include specific plans for protecting us from terrorist attacks & an agenda for giving people a greater list of options on a wide range of issues.
To me, our highest priorities should either make us more prosperous, more safe or more free.
Agree or disagree???
Comment 4 by J. Ewing at 06-Oct-08 09:42 AM
I agree that the key to victory, up and down the line, is a clear, specific, simple, BELIEVABLE (and common sense conservative, which is redundant) agenda. It can be done otherwise, but it is more difficult to get through the media filter in 30-second commercials and 10-minute sound bytes on the highly liberal evening TV news. The key is getting the message out-- "GOTM"-- meaning a) having a message, and b) getting it out through the liberal media filter.
Walter, I applaud your optimism. For me, though, I have every faith that, if McCain loses, the Republican Party will conclude we need somebody even MORE liberal to win! After all, if Obama wins it will be proof that 50%+1 of American voters want the most radical leftist in US history to be President.
Comment 5 by walter hanson at 06-Oct-08 04:31 PM
J Ewing:
Part of the problem is that this country is conservative. The battleground poll has shown a consistent 20% edge for those people who consider themselfs to be conservative over liberal.
What has Mccain in trouble:
* He isn't running on a real conservative message. When you have two liberals running the people vote for the real liberal!
Conservative wins when it is run against liberalism.
* The people think the economy sucks and blames Bush and the Republicans. The trouble as the public doesn't understand like with the mortage crisis is that it is liberal democrat policies that caused the mess. Part of the job of Mccain which he isn't doing is to properly educate the public.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment 6 by J. Ewing at 07-Oct-08 08:26 AM
Walter, you are right that a considerable majority of the country is conservative at its core, but that isn't necessarily the way people vote, for two reasons:
1) the most obvious is that Democrats lie, all the time, and the liberal media amplify their lies until they're believable. Thank you, Dr. Goebbels.
2) Republicans do a poor to middling job of delivering their message but are frustrated by the same liberal media.
Find a way around those linked problems, and we have a winner. McCain, if he wins, can be thankful that he is running against a candidate who is completely unqualified and dangerously radical. Now all we have to do is get the rest of the country to figure it out.
GMHCC Candidate Forum Liveblog
6:40-- They're just starting with the introductions.
Stauber, Haws, Dorsher aren't here yet. Hosch, Gottwalt, Behling, Severson, Jacobs are here.
NOTE: Steve Hennes is sitting in for Rep. Haws.
Q1-Do you support & will you help pass John Marty's Health Care Act?
Rep. Severson: No. I won't. It simply isn't sustainable. We need more competition. We need to introduce accountability.
Rob Jacobs: We need to tell health insurance companies that they can't deny people with PEC's. One thing I don't agree with Dan on is letting the free market dictate. Government must play a substantial role.
Rep. Hosch: We require everyone have car insurance. Hints that we should do the same.
Rep. Gottwalt: We've got to get over the notion that it's all free market or all government. The state isn't paying health care providers what they need, which causes cost-shifting. HSA's are important.
Steve Hennes: One of the best ways to keep costs down is to keep people healthy. Hennes said that 9% of Minnesotans don't have health insurance. Actually 93% are insured.
Josh Behling: There's not one answer for health care. He's talking about how electronic medical records would add efficiency to health care. Josh also calls for bigger pooling.
Q2: County-based purchasing
Rep. Gottwalt: There is a place for county-based purchasing. It CAN'T be the only option. It can't be a monopoly. Competition keeps everybody sharp. Too often it doesn't meet costs.
Steve Hennes: I'm going to look at health savings accounts at my job. (At the Chamber of Commerce forum, Larry talked extensively about putting more people on MinnesotaCare, not about HSA's.)
Rep. Severson: County-based budgeting was over budget by $22 million in Dakota County. Who pays for the shortfall? Does it drive up property taxes? Does it go on the taxpayers? HSA's must be part of the solution.
Q3: What effect will high gas prices have on the economy?
Rep. Hosch: It will affect consumers & eventually the state budget. "Opponents say that factoring in inflation puts government on autopilot. I disagree."
Rep. Gottwalt: The inflation thing is a red herring. We can recognize that on our own. The devastation of high energy costs are enormous. Seniors are telling me that we need to be more efficient.
SH: I think we've built homes that aren't energy efficient. We've got to be creative.
JB: It's impacting everyone immensely. It gets passed along to everyone. It affects hospitality industry. We're looking at a wind turbine for Capital Granite.
DS: Cap & Trade will have an impact on prices. It's driving up costs. We've got to go to 4th generation nuclear. We need to drill on the OCS.
RJ: We need to be researching alternatives. We need to be looking at all of the alternatives. We can get out of this mess but we need get off fossil fuels. Our future isn't with fossil fuels.
Q4: Will you help find their help for heating bills for the needy?
SG: We'll find help for the needy. We need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
JB: What can the government do to set the example? Why are the fanciest buildings in towns the fire departments, the city halls & police departments?
DS: Place of hope is reworking their boilers, which is helping immensely.
RJ: Maybe we need to look at minimum wage. ??? HUH???
Q5: Mortgage foreclosure relief?
SH: Financial counseling.
JB: There's a lot of keeping up with the Joneses. A friend bought a home with nothing down for $280K. He shouldn't get assistance. Help those that are victims of predatory lending.
DS: We forgot about the right principles. We need to get back to saving & investing. We need to teach our children about credit.
RJ: We need to come up with a program that helps them get back on track.
SG: We put in place some credit counseling. A lot of this started with greed. A lot wanted it right now. They kidded themselves into believing they could have it all on credit. We need accountability.
Q6: Cut back or more revenue? The DFL increased their budgets by 17.8% when they took over.
JB: We have to make decisions. It isn't fair that government spent the $2.2 billion surplus.
DS: We grew our government by 9.8% the last biennium. We put out $4 billion in grants.
RJ: I have to defend Democrats. The DFL kept it at 4.45%. The GOP had it at 5.7%.
SG: I've got to respectfully disagree. We blew $2.2 billion. We went beyond that. We've got to live within our means. HHS is planning on another 28% for the next biennium. We're taxing capital gains too much. Former Herbergers executive is leaving the state because capital gains is too much. We don't have a 10 foot tall fence around the state.
Originally posted Tuesday, October 7, 2008, revised 26-Oct 7:08 AM
No comments.
Congress Freed To Blog, Flicker & Tweet
I just got an email from Gabriela at the Sunlight Foundation. She's proud to announce that, thanks to the Sunlight Foundation's supporters, congresscritters are now free to use blogs, Twitter and YouTube. Here's the text of the email:
Dear Sunlighters,Anytime that We The People win another battle for disinfectant of transparency is a good day. Our work must continue, though, because politicians, by nature, are resistant to transparency. This victory is sweet but the fight continues.
Good news! Thanks to your help, the House and Senate recently updated the guidelines that govern how members of Congress can use the Internet to communicate with us about their work.
The new rules now allow members of Congress to interact with us on sites such as Twitter, YouTube and Flickr. Sunlight advocated for these rules changes through our bipartisan collaborative effort; the Open House Project, http://www.theopenhouseproject.com/, and through our popular Let Our Congress Tweet campaign, the first Twitter-based petition to Congress. Thanks to the hundreds of you who joined our call for change!
To show our gratitude, we've created Capitol Tweets at http://sunlightfoundation.com/CAPITOLTWEETS/. This widget, which you can embed on your site, lets you follow the latest tweets from members of Congress who use Twitter.
Get the code to embed the Capitol Tweets widget here:
http://sunlightfoundation.com/capitoltweets/
While you're at it, be sure to check out PC Magazine's list of the "5 sites That Will Boost your Political Knowledge"
http://tinyurl.com/pcworld5sites
You might recognize a few Sunlight friends such OpenSecrets.org, OpenCongress.org and FedSpending.org, who do great work to bring more transparency to work of our federal government.
Thanks again for your support,
Gabriela Schneider & the Sunlight team
Congratulations to the vigilant efforts of the Sunlight Foundation.
Originally posted Tuesday, October 7, 2008, revised 18-Nov 2:47 AM
Comment 1 by sam steinfeld at 11-Oct-08 04:05 PM
Fannie Mae Preferred and the American Senior
I am appealing to the readers of Let Freedom Ring. Maybe there is someone in it's vast readership that can help millions of seniors around the country. It seems as if no one cares about the investors of Fannie Mae's just the mortgage-holders.
Why is it that when you do the right thing, the right way, you are always the first one hurt!! When you don't speculate and borrow foolishly, but instead invest your savings in American institutions you get royally screwed. It seems that seniors would have been better off, if we had speculated on mortgages rather than invest in Fannie Mae Preferred. The Government is saving the Mortgage holders and destroying the investor...the backbone of America.
A government appointed commission has claimed to have solved the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac issue, by putting all their debt on hold and virtually destroying the Preferred stock.
They saved these mortgage giants by ceasing to pay dividends on the preferred and making them almost worthless.
The government bailout put a tremendous portion of the senior population in danger!!! They forgot, or did not want to remember, that we American seniors bought these preferred shares in our retirement accounts for income and safety.
We were under the impression that these investments were safe, since there was an implicit gov't guarantee, due to its connection to the Federal Gov't. Many of the Fannies and Freddies were sold with this
connection.
Please.....Please, don't forget the thousands and possibly
millions of seniors who put their life savings into Fannie and Freddie
preferred. We put our money here to draw a decent income so we could live comfortably in our retirement years.
The press and the Government has cast us aside and forgotten about us.
WHAT CAN WE DO????????
PLEASE HELP!!!
Comment 2 by Gary Gross at 11-Oct-08 04:37 PM
Sam, I'm sympathetic with what's happening to seniors.
One thing that we should push for going forward is tax cuts for seniors who invested in equity markets. I'm thinking that the tax cuts should come in the form of a tax holiday when you withdraw from your 401(k).
Another thing that I'd recommend is notice who said that there wasn't a problem. Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, Greg Meeks & others said that there wasn't a problem with Fannie & Freddie.
Let's be clear about something. Elections have consequences. Had Republicans not lost their majority, the rescue bill would've looked much different. There would've been more accountability provisions in it.
Here's something else that shouldn't be ignored: The Democrats' original bill would've sent $20 billion to ACORN over the life of the bill. It didn't have serious accountability/oversight provisions in it.
Remember these things this November. Elections have consequences.
Finally, electing conservatives isn't enough. Don't be bashful. Don't hesitate to hold Republicans accountable. Think of it this way: it's always right to do the right thing for the right reasons.
I hope you can ride this out. I wish you nothing but the best.
Stay in touch, too. I appreciate your comments.
Trouble For Team Barry?
This information makes me question the validity of the recent polling:
A major supporter of Hillary Clinton and member of the Democratic National Committee's Platform Committee, on Monday said the Democratic Party has nominated "the worst candidate" while Republicans have nominated the best.Last election appoximately 120 million votes were cast. When you factor in the steadfastness of Hillary's supporters, it's fairly certain that these PUMA's are very likely voters. This must worry Team Barry.
Lynn Forester de Rothschild helped open the Democrats for McCain headquarters on Main Avenue in West Scranton. About 30 supporters turned out to welcome de Rothschild and speak out for the Republican ticket.
"What it came down to was that I decided I love my country more than my party," de Rothschild said, explaining her support of Sen. John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin. "I'm really worried. I do not want (Obama) in the White House."
De Rothschild, 54, said she sees Northeast Pennsylvania ; specifically Luzerne and Lackawanna counties ; as the key to winning Pennsylvania's 21 electoral votes. And, she said, whoever wins Pennsylvania will likely become the next president.
"Barack Obama has never had the mandate of Democrats," she said. "And Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi ignored the 18 million people that voted for Hillary Clinton. They can't be surprised at the 5 million to 7 million Clinton supporters who are now supporting McCain."
One organization ; PUMA, which stands for Party Unity My Ass ; has more than 5 million members across the country, she said. Jamie Brazil, a longtime friend of the Clintons and the Rodham family, is serving as national director of Citizens for McCain. Brazil accompanied de Rothschild on her Scranton visit.
Brazil and his wife, Dee, will be godparents to Simon Rodham, son of Tony and Megan Rodham at his baptism Oct. 12 in Scranton. Tony Rodham is Hillary Clinton's brother. The Clintons will attend the post-baptism brunch at the Brazil home in Scranton.
Posted Tuesday, October 7, 2008 10:10 AM
Comment 1 by Freealonzo at 07-Oct-08 01:55 PM
This is the best you got? A Rothschild who supports McCain and not Obama? The PUMA issue is dead, it's been dead since the DNC, and in spite of the pick of Governor Palin, women are strongly supporting Obama.
What next, Obama's lock on New England is in jeopardy because Senator Lieberman supports McCain?
Comment 2 by christmasghost at 07-Oct-08 02:54 PM
The PUMA issue is hardly dead....but keep dreaming.
The dems sure are acting worried for a group of people who are so "sure" that they have a lock on the election.
I suspect it's because they know what will happen come November...AstroTurfing David Axelrod-style doesn't really equate to more votes in the end and we may see McCain beat Barry by quite a bit.
But it's the old socialist BS about telling a lie often enough...
Sadly, Barry's supporters seem to be believing the PR more than Barry does himself.....
