McCain-Obama Election Preview
[Guest post by DRJ]
Barack Obama’s race may be the least of his worries during the general election.
His biggest problem may be that voters believe Obama is an elitist, inexperienced, and holds views well to the left of the average voter:
“A survey released this month by the independent Pew Research Center found that most voters described Arizona Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, as “a centrist whose views are fairly close to their own,” even though McCain describes himself as a thoroughgoing conservative. The same voters described Obama as the most liberal of the candidates still in the race, well to the left of what they saw as the midpoint of American politics.
And Obama ranked below both McCain and New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, his rival for the Democratic nomination, on the question of whether the candidate was “tough enough” to protect the nation’s security.
Obama has “handicaps and potential problems, race being one of them, [but] it’s not the only one,” Pew Center President Andrew Kohut said. “He is perceived as a liberal. He is perceived by many voters as not well grounded on foreign policy and not tough enough . . . and he has a potential problem, distinct from race, of being seen as an elitist, an intellectual.”
Obama’s strengths include his ability to attract black and young voters, as well as the fact that this election year favors Democrats in a nation that has tired of an incumbent Republican. In addition, so far Obama has put together an effective campaign organization. Finally, Obama believes one of his strengths is his “specific plans for how we improve the lives of Americans.”
Obama’s campaign strategist David Axelrod, a long-time and trusted adviser to Richard M. Daley, has acknowledged Obama is weak with white voters but noted that the “white working class has gone to the Republican nominee for many elections, going back even to the Clinton years.”
Ultimately, I think the GOP will try to paint Obama as a liberal in the mold of Carter, Dukakis and Kerry. Obama will try to link McCain with the Bush Administration and run on an anti-Bush platform.
Barack Obama may be the new face of politics but the next election could be Bush-Kerry all over again.
— DRJ
Obama benefits from a yearning on the part of white voters to put race behind them. Had Colin Powell run in 1996, this would be over as he probably would have beaten Clinton and blocked his second term. Powell did not run, largely because of fears on the part of his wife that he might be assassinated.
Now, we have Obama with virtually no qualifications for the office except skill at making speeches and his race. Stewart Taylor points out today that race is his big advantage rather than a handicap. Were this another time, the experiment with such an inexperienced candidate might be a worthwhile gamble. Unfortunately, Obama’s rhetoric and his amazing willingness to lie about his positions makes this too big a gamble.
Mike K (f7870a) — 5/11/2008 @ 2:57 pmHillary is at her Rubicon. It’s time this country had enough of boy Presidents and elected a girl President. She should not allow a grumpy old white man or a callow hippie to be the leader of this great Country. She must run as an Independent in the general election. It’s her destiny and at stake is our great Nation’s destiny.
nk (8f20b5) — 5/11/2008 @ 3:06 pmOooooo, I like nk. He thinks evil.
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/11/2008 @ 3:23 pmMore on Obama’s cluelessness about the Midle East and the danger we would face with him in office. Among other things, the Israelis would feel abandoned and might kill Iran if there is even a hint of an attack by the mullahs. As Tony Cordesman has written, that would end the Petroleum Age.
Mike K (f7870a) — 5/11/2008 @ 3:54 pmThe bit about “those who influence” Hezbollah is pretty pie in the sky–but the rest of Obama’s formula is realistic. Electoral reform and revamping the patronage system (this is the Middle East, and even in Israel you can’t get rid of all the “proctection”) would satisfy the Lebanese Shia and cut back on the power Hezbollah has to attract them.
(rolling the dice: what do I need to roll on a d20 to get past the spam filter/)
kishnevi (4fe729) — 5/11/2008 @ 4:30 pm#4 If push comes to shove, we just seize the oil that we already covet and went to war for according to the “patriotic” left. No need to invade Iran with ground troops. Let the air force and navy pick up some of the slack, such as firing cruise missiles to wreck Irani infrastructure. How much ability does Iran have to wage war given that they are dependent on others to refine THEIR own oil. Personally, I think Isreal could handle Iran alone, but of course the fecal heads in the UN and Europe would be put out and the Islamocreeps in the Mideast would be outraged, not that their great Allah could do much about it.
madmax333 (0fc6fc) — 5/11/2008 @ 4:44 pmDo you think most Americans would be so tolerate of Muslims within the US if those great far left cities like San Fran or NYC were leveled by terrorists or populations deciimated by WMD? What would the Obamanation do?
Drop the “elitist” and “leftist” bs. Only 30% of the country is gonna go with that. Both candidates are elistist in their own way. The “too liberal” shtick isn’t going to work with more than 30% either coz nobody else cares about all that idealogical culture wars crap when gas is 3.70 a gallon and thier cousin/son/daugter/etc. is getting shot at somewhere. Go after the inexperience. That’s seems to be the only narrative that has really stood up over the last few months. That and his ties to the Illinois underworld.
It wouldn’t surprise me if Hillary pulled a Lieberman. Well…. if she weren’t broke. She maybe could win too if McCain can’t consistantly keep his muslims straight.
EdWood (5fd404) — 5/11/2008 @ 5:12 pmI find it interesting that the chattering class is suddenly cognizant of the ‘white working class’ yet there is scant mention of the percentage of black vote going to BHO, 90% according to what I’ve read.
As vet, BHO’s casual dismissal of the things I consider necessarily emblematic of our president leaves me deeply concerned about his allegiance to our historical customs.
As the owner of a small manufacturing business who has had more than his fair share of governmental interaction I really get tired of all of these politicians at all levels who’ve never had to make a payroll, yet they are quick to propose more mandates.
I’m already the Gov’s tax collector at the City, County, State and Federal level. I get to collect and remit the Child support payments shoud I hire someone with that obligation, however I’m not supposed to inquire about that beforehand.
And where pray tell in the Constitution does it say anything about ‘Social Justice’.
What is it and Who defines it?
So I get to choose between three Senators, one who believes in restricting free speech, ‘Campaign reform’, one who is a liar and rank opportunist, and one who beyond being is a socialist prefers I not pay any attention to anything else in his background.
This old vet will stick with honor, loyalty and fidelity.
Buckshot (62b062) — 5/11/2008 @ 5:33 pmThe chances of McCain winning this year are pretty slim so I don’t think Obama has that much to worry about.
Gabriel (26752d) — 5/11/2008 @ 6:35 pmShe could form the Hillary Clinton Party and technically run on that but hold herself out as an “independent Democrat.” Hey, it worked for Lieberman!
Xrlq (62cad4) — 5/11/2008 @ 6:47 pmagrees with DRJ’s analysis.indeed, gallup has just run the numbers recently on obama VS JMAC and at this point in the contest it’s an exact match of kerry/bush in 2004. obama is going to have issues in this election, no doubt about it. he’s green as new money and we are still a nation at war
james conrad (7cd809) — 5/11/2008 @ 6:48 pmEdWood – I’m so glad you brought up gas prices. Even though McCain does have some bothersome positions in this area, your laughable suggestion to drop the leftist bs should not work if Johnny has any guts.
Over the past 30 years:
Which party blocked the development of new sources of petroleum?– Democrat
Which party blocked drilling in ANWR?– Democrat
Which party blocked drilling off the coast of Florida?– Democrat
Which party blocked drilling off of the east coast?– Democrat
Which party blocked drilling off of the west coast?– Democrat
Which party blocked drilling off the Alaskan coast?– Democrat
Which party blocked building oil refineries?– Democrat
Which party blocked clean nuclear energy production?– Democrat
Which party blocked clean coal production?– Democrat
h/t Gateway Pundit – shamelessly lifted.
It’s an issue that Republicans need to hammer the Democrats hard on because of their total irresponsibility.
daleyrocks (906622) — 5/11/2008 @ 7:06 pmWhich party blocked drilling off the coast of Florida?– Democrat
Link
steve (a502f6) — 5/11/2008 @ 7:28 pmAnd, mind you, those areas mentioned in Steve’s link, are Republican territory.
kishnevi (202292) — 5/11/2008 @ 8:00 pmYou’re right, Steve. I would say let the Republicans learn how badly business-as-usual works to stay in office except we are in a war and only half the country realizes it. As I wrote, we might survive an Obama presidency but the cost is probably too high.
Mike K (86bddb) — 5/11/2008 @ 8:20 pmHah. I think this is gonna be a popcorn-eating election all the way down to the wire. Mike K is right – Obama can’t tell the truth when a lie will do. It’s probably an asset in local elections when your odds of getting caught are small, but when people have the inclination and the resources to dig it becomes a problem.
Eric (605286) — 5/11/2008 @ 8:23 pmsteve linked and quoted:
Not so fast buddy. From 1998:
Besides, you have the wrong Bush as to who actually started it:
As for the 2002 deal, think that this threat may have had something to do with it?
Which party do you think members of the Florida Public Interest Research Group vote for? For that matter, the writers of the article?
Paul (cf2458) — 5/11/2008 @ 8:27 pmUh, DRJ? My comment is in the spam filter…again.
Paul (cf2458) — 5/11/2008 @ 8:28 pm[Paul – I found your comment there and it’s now #17, but I also found 3 more comments by other people. It seems like more comments end up in the filter than in the comments section, but at least you are in good company! — DRJ]
steve – That’s just part of the story, the near in drilling. Here’s a story on a House vote to end the 25 year annually renewed ban on drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13573049/
I didn’t check to see how it fared in the Senate. I’m pretty sure the dems controlled congress in 1981.
daleyrocks (906622) — 5/11/2008 @ 8:50 pmPaul – I noted those poking around. Thanks for linking them. Those are Presidential Orders apparently as opposed to acts of Congress. Congress passed the first Outer Continental Shelf Moratorium in 1981 and had been renewing it up until 2006, when the House took action otherwise.
daleyrocks (906622) — 5/11/2008 @ 9:50 pmI’m pretty sure the dems controlled congress in 1981.
The ban was renewed annually from 1981, including years the GOP was in the majority.
Why was there only “lukewarm” support from the White House to completely lift the moratorium in 2006?
I didn’t check to see how it fared in the Senate.
The Senate on a 79-9 vote, renewed the moratorium but allowed drilling in part of “Lease Sale 181” south of the Florida panhandle. The House acquiesced. The ban on drilling in other FL waters was extended to 2022.
steve (1454f6) — 5/11/2008 @ 9:58 pm“The ban was renewed annually from 1981, including years the GOP was in the majority.”
Thank you for the blinding statement of the obvious Steve. Any idea whether the vote breaks out on partisan terms annually or partisan and coastal terms?
daleyrocks (906622) — 5/11/2008 @ 10:10 pmThe question is: Are there enough blacks, students who vote, white people who feel guilty about slavery, and elitists to sweep Obama into the oval office?
Very well could be.
Mark (82d64b) — 5/11/2008 @ 10:12 pmMcCain has serious issues that hold advantage to the middle and working class white voter:
*Affirmative Action, Obama wants to expand it and it hurts Whites to benefit Blacks.
*Crime, Obama wants to let a lot of Black criminals out of jail, and generally go soft of crime. Crime lowers housing prices, and otherwise makes people who are not really rich lead miserable, fearful lives.
*National Security, Obama would hug first responders if America is nuked, apologize to the world, and hug Ahmadinejad unconditionally. People generally don’t like planes flying in the office window.
*Taxes, in tough times people need every cent. McCain proposes a gas tax holiday, Obama wants to raise them and other taxes. To give money from working/middle class Whites to Black Organizations (like Rev God Damn America’s) through block grants.
This last is key. White voters know they generally receive no benefit from taxes. Taxes are to pay political organizations (Trinity United) and so on, or various ethnic-racial machines. Health Care? Any White voter who has been to an emergency room knows they will wait in the back of the line. It will be coverage well for Mexico. Or the inner City. Not white voters in the suburbs who will simply see more of their wages go to someone else.
Thus the transition for Dems from the FDR style “put people back to work” pander to various Tammany Hall–University panders (that government spending that does not pander to Blacks and other minority organizations to pay for mansions, goes to Universities for various “studies” programs).
Really, when Dem Strategists run “So Long White Boy” pieces in the Atlantic, it’s a self-fulfilling idiocy.
Jim Rockford (e09923) — 5/11/2008 @ 11:03 pmObama “holds views well to the left of the average voter.” Certainly left of my views, and probably left of the views of the avg Patterico reader, but don’t underestimate the leftiness of the current electorate. There’s a lot of hatred of W (Obama says McCain == W), hatred of the Iraq war, economic anxiety, anger at CEOs and financiers, and a good sprinkling of conspiratorial nuttiness about.
[I got a kick out of the 280,000 words VDH has written so far about how “average voters” won’t buy Obama. Because nobody knows more about average voters than a classical historian/vineyard operator.]
I still don’t get the “Obama is an intellectual” thing. He’s obviously an intelligent Ivy League lawyer. But that doesn’t give him any more intellectual bonafides than the Clintons.
gp (7e91e3) — 5/12/2008 @ 12:10 amHillary shouldn’t quit the race, she has to oblitereite Obama’s chance to be nominee againt Mccain.if mccain win in the fall election, All people around the world will excite to see US’s meltdown (again) under Mccain presidency…
syakeeb (7dbfb6) — 5/12/2008 @ 12:55 amThe ban was renewed annually from 1981, including years the GOP was in the majority.
Why was there only “lukewarm” support from the White House to completely lift the moratorium in 2006?
Ask the NIMBY crowd.
Paul (cf2458) — 5/12/2008 @ 2:12 amI Axlerod is a long time and trustred advisor to Mayor Daley, just how long before we find out about Axlerod’s tiespolitical corruption/organized crime/omestic terprism and last but not leaat the white slaverr racket.
davod (5bdbd3) — 5/12/2008 @ 3:37 amObama has already made it pretty clear what he would do to the military if elected: Withdraw from Iraq regardless of the consequences. Cut 10s of billions from defense. “Slow” [read: CNX] the FCS program. Stand down our nuclear alert forces. End Strategic Defense Initiative (Star Wars). No weapons in space. Not improve our existing nukes. Stop producing fissile material. Replace the quadrennial defense review with his own “independent” panel.
Unilateral disarmament is a dangerous lesson we have already learned.
arch (e1a7e3) — 5/12/2008 @ 3:47 amSorry for earlier misjointed posts. Corrected post is:
If Axlerod is a long time and trusted advisor to Mayor Daley, just how long before we find out about Axlerod’s ties to political corruption/organized crime/domestic terrorism and last but not least the white slavery racket.
davod (5bdbd3) — 5/12/2008 @ 4:01 am“Which party do you think members of the Florida Public Interest Research Group vote for? ”
The article said 75% of Floridians oppose offshore drilling. Stop seeing this through your partisan filter.
stef (85d45c) — 5/12/2008 @ 5:02 amSomebody needs to make the argument that the reason we have four dollar gas is the absence of a domestic oil industry outside of Texas. No refineries built in California in 30 years, and so on. Unfortunately, Bush doesn’t seem able or willing to d it and I’m not sure McCain is the one to do better. I still have a hard time swallowing McCain and the recent immunization nonsense that he still hasn’t disavowed is one reason. We have a school in Northern California closed due to whooping cough. Of course, it is a “progressive school” but the trend is not good and McCain has made it worse.
Mike K (86bddb) — 5/12/2008 @ 7:09 amHeck even Paul Begala told Donna Brazile that Obama was the do over of the EggHeads and African-American supports and couldn’t win with that.
It would be a total rerun of the Dukakis Caucus.
SlimGuy (ea6549) — 5/12/2008 @ 7:28 ambob barr, former georgia congressman, will be running as a libertarian. i would vote for him over mccain, obama and clinton.
assistant devil's advocate (0e4563) — 5/12/2008 @ 8:26 amThere comes a point stef, where politicians and especially Democrats are going to have to get past NIMBYism. The nuclear waste disposal facility at Yucca Mountain and oil drilling.
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/12/2008 @ 8:57 amSPQR – Maybe they could put windmills in front of Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid to harness the power of their bloviations.
daleyrocks (906622) — 5/12/2008 @ 9:01 amdaleyrocks, sure but do you want to do the environment impact statement on the release of ketones, esters, and such from Ted’s emanations?
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/12/2008 @ 9:28 am^ I would drive a Kennedy mobile. The Camelot. When it sinks, you float.
Vermont Neighbor (747787) — 5/12/2008 @ 9:33 amHere is another aspect of an Obama presidency. Muslim countries might not speak to him.
Mike K (f89cb3) — 5/12/2008 @ 10:26 amDaleyrocks
“Which party blocked the development of new sources of petroleum?– Democrat
Which party blocked drilling in ANWR?– Democrat
Which party blocked drilling off the coast of Florida?– Democrat
(rest of screed)
It’s an issue that Republicans need to hammer the Democrats hard on because of their total irresponsibility.”
Yeah OK, but notice that you didn’t talk about socialism up there. There is no link between socialists and people who don’t want to drill oil. A socialist government strapped for cash might drill the hell out ANWR and then take all the money and give it to thier cronies ….um to “the people! TM” Squawking that Obama is playing right along with the narrative of the Kieth Olberman’s out there that the cons are all a bunch of chicken littles trying to Scccccaaaaare everybody! Socialist! booga booga!
EdWood (06cafa) — 5/12/2008 @ 12:57 pmAlthough I think drilling an ANWR would be dumb, The “Dems (Obama) won’t let us get oil we need” style approach seems more likely to get some traction.
In politics more often than not perception trumps the reality of fact and truth – Barack Obama is not qualified to be President of the United States of America.
Thank you for your time.
The Outlander (18f9fc) — 5/12/2008 @ 1:15 pmBarack Obama is not qualified to be President of the United States of America.
The times make the man as much as the experience level.
Bob Barr may be over-qualified.
Walter Mondale had curriculum vitae out the ass and no vision.
steve (9d73eb) — 5/12/2008 @ 1:53 pmYeah OK, but notice that you didn’t talk about socialism up there.
EdWood – Socialism wasn’t part of your comment that I was responding to so I find it a little disengenuous on your part to fault me for not mentioning that aspect of Obama’s flawed candidacy for the presidency in my response.
I am certainly more than happy to address Obama’s socialist leanings if you want to go down that road, but try some intellectual consistency on your part first.
daleyrocks (906622) — 5/12/2008 @ 2:17 pmThere is no link between socialists and people who don’t want to drill oil.
EdWood – The link is berween the AGW kool-aid drinkers, many of whom are socialists, and those who don’t want to drill for oil. Draw yourself a few Venn diagrams and see where the circles intersect buddy. With AGW it’s socialism and garbage in, gospel out.
daleyrocks (906622) — 5/12/2008 @ 2:21 pm“your laughable suggestion to drop the leftist bs should not work if Johnny has any guts.”
Daleyrocks- This part of your response confused me into thinking that you were sort of backhandedly equating socialists with drilling for oil…
“With AGW it’s socialism and garbage in, gospel out.”
Which apparently you were..????
Doesn’t matter becuase although I did accuse you of writing a screed above I was actually agreeing with your assessment that the Reps should go after O on whether he is willing or savvy enough to give Americans what the NEED as opposed to what he thinks they WANT.
EdWood (06cafa) — 5/12/2008 @ 2:54 pmThe article said 75% of Floridians oppose offshore drilling. Stop seeing this through your partisan filter.
stef, you are assuming the article is correct in such an statewide assessment. I quoted and linked to it to show the tenor of the opposition to the Bushes, not because I believe the accuracy of the article. That is why the full ending of my comment reads:
For you to tell me to “stop seeing things through your partisan filter” is comedy gold, for once again, you prove your need to look into reading comprehension skills.
Paul (cf2458) — 5/12/2008 @ 3:47 pmJust wait until Obama officially wraps up the nomination. When the big political battle stops being between Hillary and Obama, and is instead between McCain and Obama, McCain will be crushed. McCain can’t go more than a few hours without saying something unbelievably retarded, and when he’s in what is now Hillary’s spotlight, his currently inflated poll numbers will plummet.
Levi (76ef55) — 5/12/2008 @ 3:58 pmOne cannot say that Obama is “unqualified” to be President. The Constitution tells us that the qualification is to be a natural born citizen, a resident of the US for 14 years and of age 35.
That said, it is obvious that – if nominated by the DNC in August – Obama is the least qualified and least accomplished person to be nominated by a major party.
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/12/2008 @ 4:21 pmJust wait until Obama officially wraps up the nomination. When the big political battle stops being between Hillary and Obama, and is instead between McCain and Obama, McCain will be crushed. McCain can’t go more than a few hours without saying something unbelievably retarded, and when he’s in what is now Hillary’s spotlight, his currently inflated poll numbers will plummet.
Hey, Retard Boy is back! With entire slew of brand-new assumptions!
Paul (cf2458) — 5/12/2008 @ 5:10 pmSo Levi, you finally got over Obama throwing Wright under the bus, eh?
Paul (cf2458) — 5/12/2008 @ 5:12 pmEarth to EdWood…
“…A socialist government strapped for cash might drill the hell out ANWR …”
Except, this gov’t couldn’t drill for oil if it was as simple as using a hand-drill on the side of a storage tank – they don’t have the expertise.
Drilling contracts would have to be let, at a price the drillers would accept – and it wouldn’t be cheap.
All they have to do is put it out for bid (like they usually do) and let the private market set the value of exploring, developing, and producing oil in a hostile, harsh, & very cold environement.
And, the last thing we want is a “socialist” govt controlling all aspects of production and marketing. They were horrible at allocation during the seventies (see oil-shortages following the Yom Kippur War and the Iranian Hostage Crisis), and wouldn’t be any better now.
Another Drew (8018ee) — 5/12/2008 @ 5:28 pmFirst, Obama is a liberal of the first order.
Second, McCain is NOT a conservative. I feel absolutely betrayed by this guy. What is this bs about man-made global warming? And illegal immigration lovefest?
I will not give one dime to either of them. My stomach turns.
dianne (6c2470) — 5/12/2008 @ 5:51 pmI had a big argument at a Mother’s Day picnic last night. Bunch of career diplomats and their Omaphile kids were there. Nice people, but very misguided.
Nobody has screwed this country over more than the U.S. State Department employees, not even Al Qaeda. They are truly out of touch real America, just as their man O is. I told them “Obama is toast” much to their derision, but I firmly believe that will be the case. I even bet a lunch on it.
driver (faae10) — 5/12/2008 @ 6:03 pm“I quoted and linked to it to show the tenor of the opposition to the Bushes, not because I believe the accuracy of the article.”
I see. In the future please let me know what things you quote are bullshit and which aren’t.
But you said: “As for the 2002 deal, think that this threat may have had something to do with it?”
For the threat to make hey, it has to be that offshore drilling is something that floridians care about. It looks like drilling isn’t an issue that just dems and enviros care about. At least not in FL.
“So Levi, you finally got over Obama throwing Wright under the bus, eh?”
It doesn’t seem like wright has been hurt. Isn’t that what ‘throwing under the bus’ means?
stef (2e999f) — 5/12/2008 @ 6:11 pmMcCain can’t go more than a few hours without saying something unbelievably retarded,
Levi – Examples please, preferably spaced hours apart, moron.
daleyrocks (906622) — 5/12/2008 @ 6:44 pmstef – Not necessarily. From the word-detective:
“To throw someone under the bus” is defined as meaning “to sacrifice; to treat as a scapegoat; to betray,” but I think the key to the phrase really lies in the element of utter betrayal, the sudden, brutal sacrifice of a stalwart and loyal teammate for a temporary and often minor advantage. There is no retirement dinner, no gold watch, for poor schmuck “thrown under the bus.” On the contrary, the scapegoat’s name is liable to disappear from the website overnight.
daleyrocks (906622) — 5/12/2008 @ 6:52 pmI liked “bomb bomb bomb Iran.”
stef (b7ee98) — 5/12/2008 @ 6:52 pmI liked “bomb bomb bomb Iran.”
That was pretty funny, stef. It horrified the left, who have been scientifically proven to have no sense of humor, and created hillarity on the right because he was obviously joking.
daleyrocks (906622) — 5/12/2008 @ 7:48 pmIsrael is a constant wound, this constant sore, does infect all of our foreign policy…….according to an interview Barack Hussein gave to Atlantic magazine. See latest http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com
Some of us support state of Israel attacking Iran and Syria prior to any potential Obama presidency because it is damn sure he won’t assist Israel in any way vis a vis them attacking the islamomutant creeps. Geez, Carter II 2009 edition.
madmax333 (f4705d) — 5/12/2008 @ 8:14 pmLet’s send more aid to the poor Palis. Let’s try to make peace so we can secure Dubya’s and Rice’s legacy. Bwaahhh.
Screw “attacks”… I support Isreal’s right to just freaking nuke them.
Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec) — 5/12/2008 @ 8:44 pmLevi is a constant sore, one that infects every thread with his vile rantings. But, I support Levi. Some of my favorite jeans are Levis.
JD (5f0e11) — 5/12/2008 @ 8:52 pmJD – So you are saying you wrap Levi around your crotch?
daleyrocks (906622) — 5/12/2008 @ 9:41 pmWow, I love with when you guys go at it on each other’s throats. Dont stop the back and forths. pass me the pop-corn!
love2008 (d2a57f) — 5/13/2008 @ 5:34 amlove2008 is a constant sore, one that infects every thread that it visits. 😉
According to Baracky, this language shows support for love2008.
JD (75f5c3) — 5/13/2008 @ 6:20 amBarack Obama is a constant sore, one that infects every discussion about him, BUT … the same can be said of those who misquote him.
Xrlq (b71926) — 5/13/2008 @ 11:37 amAnother Drew #51
EdWood (06cafa) — 5/13/2008 @ 1:52 pmMy comment was pointing out that a “socialist” government isn’t going to necessarily be some sort of ANWR loving anti oil drilling government. Socialists like oil and money too,they just like to give it all the the Govt. for redistribution.
I see. In the future please let me know what things you quote are bullshit and which aren’t.
Sorry, stef, I gave you too much credit. Next time I’ll try to remember that you are incapable of comprehending anything you read.
But you said: “As for the 2002 deal, think that this threat may have had something to do with it?”
For the threat to make hey, it has to be that offshore drilling is something that floridians care about. It looks like drilling isn’t an issue that just dems and enviros care about. At least not in FL.
Let’s examine the paragraph in question, shall we?
Does it not occur to you to ask, “Which polls?” “What is the sample size?” “Who are they talking to?” “What are the questions?”
Secondly, you also may want to check out the website the article is pulled from…it ain’t exactly what I would call objective. Especially not the article, which contains lines like:
Oh yeah, then there’s this line:
Think there’s any Righties in that group promising a “battle royal?”
Third, perception is reality in politics because too many people lack the critical thinking skills to sift through the incredible amount of information and discern fact from fiction (like you.) A few loud-mouthed, against-the-current swimming wackos can drown out an entire ocean of voices crashing in the other direction…a ‘talent’ the Left excels at. Especialy when they declare a “battle royal.”
Moving on: you berate me for what I write, then you pen this museum-grade ignorant statement:
stef, you really are an clueless idiot, and this passage at the end of your comment proves it.
Paul (cf2458) — 5/13/2008 @ 6:54 pmJD – So you are saying you wrap Levi around your crotch?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Paul (cf2458) — 5/13/2008 @ 6:55 pm