Yes, polls aren't everything, but they sure can do a lot to shape the storyline of a campaign. Thus, based on the pro-Republican trend in recent polls, including favoring John McCain and Dino Rossi here in Washington, there are some other surveys it would be nice to see:
1) Dave Reichert v. Darcy Burner. Last we heard, public polling had Reichert ahead by six...in July. Individual polls always need to be taken with a grain of salt, but an updated barometer in light of recent events would be helpful.
UPDATE: ask and you shall receive...
SurveyUSA says Reichert up 10.
Is he actually up that much? I don't know. But I note his lead is either way likely significant, even while Burner has been on TV and he has not.
2) McCain v. Obama in Oregon, a state devoid of reported, post-Labor Day polling thus far. Our southern neighbor trends slightly less blue than the Evergreen State. If the supposed tightening in the Presidential race locally also extends south then there will be increasing evidence Obama might not have the usual Democratic havens of the Pacific Northwest locked down.
Obama's campaign having to forgo red states they once hoped to make competitive (Alaska, Georgia, North Carolina, etc.) is one thing. Having to play defense in blue states is another.
Not saying it's going to happen. But if polling in Oregon shows a similar trend to Washington, and if that state continues its pattern of being slightly more competitive than our own, then it wouldn't be far-fetched to see a spate of stories about how Obama is going to have to play defense in the Beaver State.
That's not what his campaign needs right now.
Posted by Eric Earling at September 13, 2008 10:43 AM | Email Thishttp://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/house/wa/washington_8th_district-947.html
The article says McCain "twisted Obama's words" when Obama talked about "putting lipstick on a pig". I guess that explains the explosion of cheering from Obama's audience the moment he used the phrase.
As the left sees the November elections they had taken for granted slipping away we will see this kind of "reporting" every day. Their desperation is showing.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on September 13, 2008 12:48 PMIt's wonderful to hear Democrats wringing their hands over Republican "lies".
David Boze never did find out who that poor guy was in Pennsylvania whom Obama claimed "couldn't even afford to buy gas so he could look for a job".
Yeah right. But don't expect any big New York Times articles about Democrat lies.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on September 13, 2008 02:09 PMDon't get me wrong lefties, I agree, Bush has been a big problem. And I agree that there are systemic problems in the US. But socialism is not the way to address our problems. Nor is hiding from real energy needs, bankrupting our economy with Global Warming Hysteria mandates, passing Universal Healthcare so we can wait in long lines in the US just like they do in Canada and the UK, etc.
For all of the problems on the right, the left's solutions will make things far worse. That's why it is important to vote Republican in most cases.
There are a few exceptions. If we can get Norm Dicks to get off of the Pelosi anti-energy bandwagon, then he will get my vote.
But we all know the game the Democrats play when Republicans cut spending. They and their media buddies go on endlessly about how cruel and unfeeling "big business" favoring Republicans are. It's always the same, Republicans hate kids and old people, want to "privatize social security" as a favor to their Wall Street buddies, and don't want anyone to go to college. We all saw the short lived lie they tried to tell about how Palin had "slashed funds for unwed mothers". Except it turned out that she actually had approved a massive funding increase.
I think it is true. For the first time since Ronald Reagan Americans who generally don't pay much attention to politics are wising up to who Democrats really are. They may not get that they are closet Marxists. They just might before this election cycle is over.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on September 13, 2008 02:54 PMIn running the sleaziest campaign since South Carolina in 2000 and standing by completely debunked lies on national television
I'm sorry, which lies are those? You mean about Rev. Wright being a racist, America-hating Slaver? Or about the 20 year relationship between Obama and self-confessed-and-unrepentant terrorist William Ayers? You mean about the decade of corruption and cronyism with Tony Rezko?
Or maybe about Obama's support for "post birth abortion" - murder of newborn babies.
Or maybe about Obama's complete support for teaching sex ed to kindergarten classes?
I'm sorry, I've lost count of the huge number of "nuanced corrections" from the Obamassiah that I'm not sure which ones are the lies you're referring to.
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on September 13, 2008 03:32 PMPalin gets a bad apple State Trooper fired and suddenly it is the second coming of Watergate.
The more this shameful media goes after Sarah the more votes Republicans will get.
This truly is the worst of all nightmares for liberals...the year America found out what a bunch of lying slimy creepoid lawyers they are.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on September 13, 2008 04:08 PMEven Palin Praises Hillary, who Obama threw out with the bathwater, and it will likely be written as his biggest mistake in this campaign.
Biden was a disasterous pick, Palin has even surprised me as being a risky but wise pick.
In Obama's first stretegic choice amoung many he would have had to make, he flat blew it.
McCain will go far with Palin as his pick.
I am worried about the level of PMS (Palin Madness Syndrome) that is out there though and I don't think it will ever stop. Since the media and left have so much invested in destroying her they just can't stop until they destroy her. If they stop they have to sort of admit they were wrong, so they can't stop till they take her down or she finally snaps and takes her self down.
It is pathetic and I think it is what we will see for several more presidential elections, regardless of who we (the GOP) nominate.
McCain Now Winning Majority of Independents.
So who's the one uniting the country? Bringing their party together and building a broad coalition with Independents? Why, it's the same one who has a PROVEN track record of bipartisanship, not the big-mouth-empty-platitudes cokehead.
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on September 14, 2008 03:51 PMRepublicans responsible? Hey, when you have the DEMOCRAT CHAIRMAN OF THE WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE as a self-admitted tax cheat, it seems the Slavery Party hacks are the ones with the current blood on their hands...
Ask Chris Dodd about Countrywide Financial. Or Obama about the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac donations. Or Charlie Rangel about how taxes are ignored by Slavers...
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on September 14, 2008 10:31 PMAlso, remember everyone: Ignore what you heard with your own ears when listening to Obama's "pig" comment. Instead, believe the spin from the NYT, after all, we know how totally impartial they are, huh?
The audacity of the left is so far removed from the real world that sometimes you just have to laugh.
Posted by: johnny on September 15, 2008 07:38 AMYour ignorance is stunning - simply stunning!
Question 1: WHO is responsible for regulations on the industry.
Answer 1: the CONGRESS, which makes the laws upon which regulations stand.
Question 2: WHO runs Congress, and has for the last two years?
Answer 2: The Slavery Party (you know, people like you - Democrats).
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on September 15, 2008 08:07 AMWhat, three times now you've been given info on who is in charge. Yet 3 times now, you have missed it. (or refuse to answer)
So tell me Billy, why did everything start it's down turn after the Dem's took over?
All Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008
Name Office State Party Grand Total Total from
PACs Total from
Individuals
Dodd, Christopher J S CT D $165,400 $48,500 $116,900
Obama, Barack S IL D $126,349 $6,000 $120,349
Kerry, John S MA D $111,000 $2,000 $109,000
Billy Chav will only ever respond with an ever more wearying set of statements. It's the tried and true track of - make a claim, when claim is destroyed, change the claim a bit and call that a victory. Repeat until people stop responding and claim victory.
It's the, "Oh yeah, but....." debate tactic. A favorite on Democrat Underground, Horses Ass, KOS, Wonkette, etc.
Posted by: MrRcguy on September 15, 2008 12:15 PMPay attention Billy boy, an grasp a FACT or 2
"The sub-prime mortgage collapse is another tale of unintended consequences. The crisis has its roots in the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, a Carter-era law that purported to prevent 'redlining' --denying mortgages to black borrowers--by pressuring banks to make home loans in 'low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.' Under the act, banks were to be graded on their attentiveness to the 'credit needs' of 'predominantly minority neighborhoods.'...[T]o earn high ratings, banks were forced to make increasingly risky loans to borrowers who wouldn't qualify for a mortgage under normal standards of creditworthiness. The CRA, made even more stringent during the Clinton administration, trapped lenders in a Catch-22. 'If they comply,' wrote Loyola College economist Thomas DiLorenzo, 'they know they will have to suffer from more loan defaults. If they don't comply, they face financial penalties... which can cost a large corporation like Bank of America billions of dollars.' Banks nationwide thus ended up making more and more 'sub-prime' loans and agreeing to dangerously lax underwriting standards--no down payment, no verification of income, interest-only payment plans, weak credit history. If they tried to compensate for the higher risks they were taking by charging higher interest rates, they were accused of unfairly steering borrowers into 'predatory' loans they couldn't afford. Trapped in a no-win situation entirely of the government's making, lenders could only hope that home prices would continue to rise, staving off the inevitable collapse. But once the housing bubble burst, there was no escape. Mortgage lenders have been bankrupted, thousands of sub-prime homeowners have been foreclosed on, and countless would-be borrowers can no longer get credit. The financial fallout has hurt investors around the world. And all of it thanks to the government, which was sure it understood the credit industry better than the free market did, and confidently created the conditions that made disaster unavoidable." --Jeff JacobyPosted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on September 15, 2008 01:01 PM
This financial mega-mess is the same sort of event as the collapse of the USSR's centrally planned economy...In the future, we will see a similar breakdown of the U.S. government's Social Security system, with its ill-fated pension system and its even more inauspicious Medicare system of financing health care for the elderly. These government schemes are fighting a losing battle against demographic realities, the laws of economics, and the rules of arithmetic. The question is not whether they will fail, but when--and then how the government that can no longer sustain them in their previous Ponzi-scheme form will alter them to salvage what little can be salvaged with minimal damage to the government itself...
The trouble is, however, that now, even more than then, the American people have little interest in liberty. Instead, they want the impossible: home ownership for those who cannot afford homes, credit for those who are not creditworthy, old-age pensions for those who have not saved, health care for those who make no attempt to keep themselves healthy, and college educations for those who lack the wit to finish high school. Moreover, they want it now, and they want somebody else to pay for it.
Now gee, let me think... WHO promises that kind of "stuff" from the "government"???
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on September 15, 2008 01:19 PMI'd really like to get into the specifics but, seriously, you're just not packing enough wattage.