Support NeoGAF

[SouthernDragon]

please tell me this isnt obama, or mccain, please god

Both.

Obama's going to use the federal police to raid houses, looking for guns.

McCain plans on making us all register for national identification.

Both are going to raise taxes.

To 500%.

: p

None of that is real, for either candidate. It's only fear mongering. Obama is on record that he supports the right to own guns. He only wants some kind of limitation, such as what types (I know you oppose this, but... can you agree that there should be some limit?) and some registration (so that you can prove you are mentally prepared to own a gun, and aren't just able to go to a gun show and get one).

Far from the "OMG GET ALL THE GUNS ARGH" message that you/Nicodimas quoted.

 

[Imm0rt4l]

BTW, this whole episode could've just been avoided if Obama had just said "You can put lipstick on a cunt, but in the end, you still know it's a cunt"

lmfao

 

[Slurpy]

What the fuck is this?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVLQhRiEXZs

Sickening.

 

[soul creator]

if anyone needs a "guide" to inform people about Obama's policies, this just came out today. It has a bunch of his policies (probably similar to what's on his website) and also the text to 7 of his speeches.

 

[Zeliard]

Obama is now down among both white women and independents, and he's been staying above the fray the entire campaign. He simply does need to go on the attack more, because quite frankly, it's necessary. The reason mudslinging is such an infamous and popular political tactic is because it works rather brilliantly. I'm certainly not saying that Obama/Biden should sink to the level of the McCain/Palin campaign, but they need to stop being so reactionary and go on the offensive if they hope to win this election.

And obviously, these attacks need to be kept on the issues. Obama simply repeats himself too much, though, and often only responds to attacks on him in the same fashion with "they're not the change we need", or "they're continuing Bush's policies". These are no longer effective talking points, however accurate they are, because people simply tune them out due to repetition and lack of specifics. It's frustrating to hear, and that's probably why his "lipstick on a pig" comment was received so well by a lot of the left, and seen as a breath of fresh air. He was still essentially saying that they're Bushites, but he added a zing to it that fit perfectly. That's what resonates with the electorate.

 

[NullPointer]

None of that is real, for either candidate. It's only fear mongering. Obama is on record that he supports the right to own guns. He only wants some kind of limitation, such as what types (I know you oppose this, but... can you agree that there should be some limit?) and some registration (so that you can prove you are mentally prepared to own a gun, and aren't just able to go to a gun show and get one).

And just to clarify a bit re: Obama and Dems on guns. They realize gun control is a pretty dead issue, and ideological purity doesn't cut it in a country this diverse.

So while he favors some limitations on gun ownership, he's really talking about metro areas with high rates of gun crimes, not out in the country. The Dems have been making gains because they are willing to adapt to local constituencies without needing a 100% party platform litmus test.

And yeah Flight, that last post was a breath of fresh air. I guess I get so caught up in the moment to moment I lose track of the big picture sometimes. Apologies out to my conservative brothers and sisters that aren't in the Bush/Cheney mold.

 

[Diablos]

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=7264ba9c-caa0-40cc-a462-b2806a8a809e

Democrat Barack Obama’s once double-digit lead in Washington state is no more, according to this latest SurveyUSA poll conducted exclusively for KING-TV Seattle and KATU-TV Portland Oregon. In an election today, eight weeks till votes are counted, it’s Obama 49%, McCain 45%. Compared to an identical SurveyUSA poll 4 weeks ago (before both candidates had named their running mates), Obama is down 2 points; McCain is up 1. Compared to an identical SurveyUSA poll 8 weeks ago, Obama is down 6; McCain is up 6. Obama led by 17 points in June, led by 16 points in July, led 8 points in August, leads 4 points today.

Among voters with no college education, there is continuing movement to McCain. Obama led by 15 points in July, now trails by 8, a 23-point erosion. Among voters who earn less than $50K a year, there is continuing movement to McCain. Obama’s once 26-point lead among the lower-income group is now 5 points, a 21-point erosion. Among voters older than McCain, Obama had led by 24 points in July, now trails by 1, a 25-point erosion. McCain always has run well among Conservatives, but his advantage among Conservatives has grown from 4:1 in May to 11:1 today. In Eastern Washington state, Obama led 5:4 in June, but McCain leads 2:1 today.

Among women, McCain is up 9 points from June, Obama is down 11 points from June. McCain had been gaining ground among female voters before he picked Sarah Palin. That continues. Among men, Obama leads by 4 today, a 5-point shift toward Obama from last month, when McCain led by 1. This is one of the few bright spots in today’s poll data for the Democrats.

Full results and tracking graphs are here.

Heh... indeed we are coming off a convention bounce, but it's funny to see it tightening up in Washington state :lol

Anyway:

- "Lipstick on a pig" comment may come back to haunt him, even though it's been said long before anyone knew who the hell Sarah Palin was (and that -- would you believe -- she WEARS LIPSTICK WOW THAT'S SO COOL I THINK I WANT TO VOTE FOR HER NOW)

- NBC poll is interesting

- The pollsters tinkering with the % of Republican, Independent and Democratic voters is bullshit, to put it simply

- WTF IS THE AD SAYING OBAMA WANTS SEX ED BEFORE KIDS LEARN HOW TO READ? McCain must not be feeling very good about his convention bounce. What an asshole. I hope Obama has a good response ad to this. He cannot let them get away with this crap. I mean seriously, that's 527-like smearing, and he puts it in an official ad

I read the Obama campaign is kind of indirectly doing a *wink wink* *nudge nudge* to 527 organizations to go after McCain. I wish he didn't need to, but at least he didn't start it:

http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/politicalinsider/2008/09/a-loophole-to-go-negative.html

Today we learned that the Obama campaign has quietly embraced 527 groups -- organizations set up via a loophole in the campaign finance laws that can raise and spend nearly unlimited funds. Of course, Obama cannot ask anyone to form these groups; the campaign can only communicate its intentions through the media, hints and winks.

However, this reversal on Obama's part is not necessarily because he finds his campaign in a fundraising slowdown. Instead, as Rick Hasen write, "he needs groups that can go more negative on Palin and McCain. Obama is trying to run as a different kind of politician, and it would interfere with his branding to go overly negative. But outside can attack in ways that Obama cannot (think of the recent union ads attacking the cost of McCain's shoes), and with the race tightening, especially in the battleground states, negative advertising probably is what the campaign wants and needs right now."

 

[deadbeef]

But that's not what brought us to this point.

That's not what put Obama on the map and found him his audience.

He marginalized his opposition and their tactics by working above and around them. If he gives up on that now, in the home stretch, and loses the luster and the vision that brought him this far - then he'll just be another Democrat reactionary snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

If the battlefield favors your opponents you change the battlefield, or you move the fight to another front where the enemy has no means of counter-attack.

In the words of the great politician, Spock, you can't fall into the trap of exhibiting two dimensional thinking.

They're already doing that now. Ever since Palin was announced as the V.P. pick, they've been responding to her. The Republicans have been controlling the dialog ever since. They (Republicans) are also galvanizing their conservative base and getting the religious folks on board. The Democrats have either been off-message, or the media is just giving their message no play recently.

She's about to get a cakewalk interview with Charlie Gibson that is going to make her look even better, and it will be on Sept. 11, which plays to the Republicans perceived strengths even more. All the while, you know she is getting groomed by the Republicans for the debate season. They can do this (keep her away from the media) while playing the victim card because people are trying to dig up dirt on her and her family.

She's gonna come out swinging with both fists at the debate, and if Biden wants to talk issues while she throws haymakers, Biden might "win" the debate intellectually, but from a sound-bite perspective, Palin will play much better.

if anyone needs a "guide" to inform people about Obama's policies, this just came out today. It has a bunch of his policies (probably similar to what's on his website) and also the text to 7 of his speeches.

It looks like he's smoking a joint or something.. lol

 

[Guy Legend]

BTW, this whole episode could've just been avoided if Obama had just said "You can put lipstick on a cunt, but in the end, you still know it's a cunt"

 

[Haunted]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/09/2360240.htm?section=world



Too bad Americans are dumb...

Hey, I contributed to something related to Obama.


And I know it's of no concern to most of you, but the rest of the world will mock/scorn/laugh/shake its head in disgust towards all US citizens if the Republicans win again - considering the past 8 years, pretty much no one predicts this to happen, but still. When my gf heard that McCain was ahead in some polls she just shook her head with a "wtf are they thinking?" look on her face. She was speechless, and that doesn't happen often.

I mean, the kind of shit you guys had to put up with Bush in the White House? There have been coup d'etat's made for much, much less. >_<

 

[Slurpy]

That sex education ad is the lowest thing I've seen in this campaign so far. Simply abhorrent. How you've fallen, McCain.

 

[Diablos]

That sex education ad is the lowest thing I've seen in this campaign so far. Simply abhorrent. How you've fallen, McCain.

I'm thinking the Weather Underground ad is the worst so far. Of course, that's not an official one... but I'm sure McCain didn't mind!

 

[AndyIsTheMoran]

Hey, I contributed to something related to Obama.


And I know it's of no concern to most of you, but the rest of the world will mock/scorn/laugh/shake its head in disgust towards all US citizens if the Republicans win again - considering the past 8 years, pretty much no one predicts this to happen, but still. When my gf heard that McCain was ahead in some polls she just shook her head with a "wtf are they thinking?" look on her face. She was speechless, and that doesn't happen often.

I mean, the kind of shit you guys had to put up with Bush in the White House? There have been coup d'etat's made for much, much less. >_<

Bush isn't the embodiment of conservative ideology, in fact his spending has been much more in tune with leftist ideology. McCain isn't Bush either. Besides people tend to forget that Democrats control the House and the Senate, where legislation is made.

 

[artredis1980]

you guys wanted Obama to throw the mud, well Obama has now entered the mud where Palin and McCain stands and he is throwing it, all of you should get ready, its going to get very dirty the next 60 days

 

[Agent Icebeezy]

Hey, I contributed to something related to Obama.


And I know it's of no concern to most of you, but the rest of the world will mock/scorn/laugh/shake its head in disgust towards all US citizens if the Republicans win again - considering the past 8 years, pretty much no one predicts this to happen, but still. When my gf heard that McCain was ahead in some polls she just shook her head with a "wtf are they thinking?" look on her face. She was speechless, and that doesn't happen often.

I mean, the kind of shit you guys had to put up with Bush in the White House? There have been coup d'etat's made for much, much less. >_<

I've said this a long time ago

 

[speculawyer]

if anyone needs a "guide" to inform people about Obama's policies, this just came out today. It has a bunch of his policies (probably similar to what's on his website) and also the text to 7 of his speeches.

Nice . . . he stole the tagline McCain tried to steal. :lol

 

[Steve Youngblood]

She's gonna come out swinging with both fists at the debate, and if Biden wants to talk issues while she throws haymakers, Biden might "win" the debate intellectually, but from a sound-bite perspective, Palin will play much better.

It depends. Biden is a very sharp individual. One I believe to be more effective at making an intellectual point than, say, Kerry was in 2004. Yes, Palin throwing haymakers may play more dramatically for some, but it is entirely possible that if Biden is well-prepared, he could succeed in raising the level of discourse enough to connect with independents.

When we look at history and cry that Democrats need to be more aggressive, arguing that in the past, Americans are uninterested in truly intelligent discourse ("just look at Bush"), I think we're ignoring to an extent just how ineffective candidates like Kerry and Gore were at connecting with the public when they ran. Yes, they might have scored points among the intellectuals at home, but Gore seemed mechanical, and Kerry waffled constantly to nail his point home. Sure, he had a legitimate argument, but it got lost somewhere in translation.

If Biden can appear sharp, in touch with the issues, and passionate in his answers, I think there's a very good chance that he could succeed with this strategy. Furthermore, sticking with the issues does not mean that he can't go after her at all. It just means that he has to focus more on things like her feigned, disingenuous maverick stance on government pork, and not going after her character.

 

[NullPointer]

They're already doing that now. Ever since Palin was announced as the V.P. pick, they've been responding to her. The Republicans have been controlling the dialog ever since. They (Republicans) are also galvanizing their conservative base and getting the religious folks on board. The Democrats have either been off-message, or the media is just giving their message no play recently.

She's about to get a cakewalk interview with Charlie Gibson that is going to make her look even better, and it will be on Sept. 11, which plays to the Republicans perceived strengths even more. All the while, you know she is getting groomed by the Republicans for the debate season. They can do this (keep her away from the media) while playing the victim card because people are trying to dig up dirt on her and her family.

She's gonna come out swinging with both fists at the debate, and if Biden wants to talk issues while she throws haymakers, Biden might "win" the debate intellectually, but from a sound-bite perspective, Palin will play much better.

You make some good points, painfully good points. Its a setup, and it has been for some time. The Republicans are attacking with faux outrage at everything, and the media is going along with the narrative because Palin is shiny and new, and out of left field.

I do think Obama needs to attack, to try and wrestle attention and focus to what is important to the voters, but its *how* he attacks that I think is important here. Getting "into the mud" brings everyone down. He has to attack, but not on the ground the Republicans are shoring up right now. President is a serious fucking job, especially when in the middle of two wars, with sabers rattling everywhere from Iran to Russia. Its McCain and Palin that are turning this into a game, and they need to be called on it - not joined on their turf.

 

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Obama is now down among both white women and independents, and he's been staying above the fray the entire campaign. He simply does need to go on the attack more, because quite frankly, it's necessary. The reason mudslinging is such an infamous and popular political tactic is because it works rather brilliantly. I'm certainly not saying that Obama/Biden should sink to the level of the McCain/Palin campaign, but they need to stop being so reactionary and go on the offensive if they hope to win this election.

And obviously, these attacks need to be kept on the issues. Obama simply repeats himself too much, though, and often only responds to attacks on him in the same fashion with "they're not the change we need", or "they're continuing Bush's policies". These are no longer effective talking points, however accurate they are, because people simply tune them out due to repetition and lack of specifics. It's frustrating to hear, and that's probably why his "lipstick on a pig" comment was received so well by a lot of the left, and seen as a breath of fresh air. He was still essentially saying that they're Bushites, but he added a zing to it that fit perfectly. That's what resonates with the electorate.

i think obama/biden would love to go on the offense, but in the light of palin they're kind of of struggling to come up with an effective line of attack

 

[Haunted]

I've said this a long time ago

*salutes* I just wanted to remind everyone to do his duty.

Don't fuck this up, guys.

 

[soul creator]

Bush isn't the embodiment of conservative ideology, in fact his spending has been much more in tune with leftist ideology. McCain isn't Bush either. Besides people tend to forget that Democrats control the House and the Senate, where legislation is made.

Democrats have only controlled Congress for 1 1/2 years of Bush's terms. And no Republican in the past 30 years has been the "embodiment of conservative ideology". Clinton was probably the closest, actually...

...SPECULAWYER JPG POWERS ACTIVATE

 

[Thunder Monkey]

Bush isn't the embodiment of conservative ideology, in fact his spending has been much more in tune with leftist ideology. McCain isn't Bush either. Besides people tend to forget that Democrats control the House and the Senate, where legislation is made.

He's the very definition of modern conservative.

There's nothing conservative about Republicans in this country anymore, in fact you'll find fiscal conservativism in the Democratic Party before you will Republican.

The people that wanted to reign in spending are the people that have left the party. All that's left is the social conservative bunch.

 

[AndyIsTheMoran]

Democrats have only controlled Congress for 1 1/2 years of Bush's terms. And no Republican in the past 30 years has been the "embodiment of conservative ideology". Clinton was probably the closest, actually...

...SPECULAWYER JPG POWERS ACTIVATE

Clinton was a self proclaimed Goldwater conservative, which leans much more towards libertarianism.

 

[TreIII]

i think obama/biden would love to go on the offense, but in the light of palin they're kind of of struggling to come up with an effective line of attack

I don't think there's really any "struggle" involved, they're just letting time progress. And as word gets out more about Palin, she'll lose her "new and shiny!" air, and people will have to be willing to deal with the "real" Palin.

THAT is when they'll go on the attack. For now, let the media have their fair shake at her, and do some of the work for them.

Again, that's what happened with MacKendale and Ferraro back in the 80s, and I wouldn't be surprised if history goes on to repeat itself with McCain and Palin.

 

[speculawyer]

Wait . . . so this Palin gaffe was in an Op-Ed in the WSJ?

Who makes a gaffe in print? Don't they have people to proof-read these things?

Oh but it gets worse . . . McCain/Palin whine about the lobbyist influence Fannie & Freddie had . . .

Fannie, Freddie spent $200M to buy influence
John McCain’s presidential campaign manager, Rick Davis, has lobbied for the mortgage giants.
If you want to know how Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have survived scandal and crisis, consider this: Over the past decade, they have spent nearly $200 million on lobbying and campaign contributions.

But the political tentacles of the mortgage giants extend far beyond their checkbooks.

The two government-chartered companies run a highly sophisticated lobbying operation, with deep-pocketed lobbyists in Washington and scores of local Fannie- and Freddie-sponsored homeowner groups ready to pressure lawmakers back home.

They’ve stacked their payrolls with top Washington power brokers of all political stripes, including Republican John McCain’s presidential campaign manager, Rick Davis; Democrat Barack Obama’s original vice presidential vetter, Jim Johnson; and scores of others now working for the two rivals for the White House.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11781.html

So the guy running McCain's campaign was one of those guys? :lol WTF?

Yeah, Obama's former presidential vetter Jim Johnson lobbyied for them . . . but guess what . . . he stepped down due to conflict of interest.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=5047811

So who are the reformers.

 

[AndyIsTheMoran]

He's the very definition of modern conservative.

There's nothing conservative about Republicans in this country anymore, in fact you'll find fiscal conservativism in the Democratic Party before you will Republican.

The people that wanted to reign in spending are the people that have left the party. All that's left is the social conservative bunch.

who in the Democrat party represents conservative values with increasing tax revenues and nationalizing health care?

 

[SpeedingUptoStop]

JENNIFER GRANHOLM is training Biden?


...

 

[Slurpy]

I'm thinking the Weather Underground ad is the worst so far. Of course, that's not an official one... but I'm sure McCain didn't mind!

Yeah, but this is approved by McCain. Its an official ad. And its sickening. The repeated use of Obama's face and the language used makes it look like they want him to come off as a black pedophile or child-offender or something. The ironic thing is, the bill they're referring to was supposed to protect kids from child-offenders. I dont know how the fuck they that bills translated to the conclusion in that ad.

 

[soul creator]

He's the very definition of modern conservative.

There's nothing conservative about Republicans in this country anymore, in fact you'll find fiscal conservativism in the Democratic Party before you will Republican.

The people that wanted to reign in spending are the people that have left the party. All that's left is the social conservative bunch.

Given the combination of dishonesty, corruption and incompetence that has marked the current administration, it's hard to blame the American people for their distrust. Republicans argue that government can't do anything right, then set about to prove it once they grab government's reins. Each successive Republican administration only provides more evidence for their contention that government is a bumbling beast incapable of solving problems. Few notice that they never deliver on their promises to reduce its size and scope; as a portion of GDP, the postwar federal government was at its biggest during the years of that famed enemy of big government, Ronald Reagan.

link

 

[Jonm1010]

if anyone needs a "guide" to inform people about Obama's policies, this just came out today. It has a bunch of his policies (probably similar to what's on his website) and also the text to 7 of his speeches.

Yep picked this up today along with Bob Woodwards new book. You would think after this book we would stop hearing from the media "We still don't know where he stands on the issues" "Obama doesnt define change and has no substance" but we know it wont.

 

[deadbeef]

Did anyone discuss the article in the New York Times this morning regarding Obama's fund-raising? It sounded like they might not be doing so great, but they could have just been trying to make a story out of nothing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/us/politics/09donate.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=funding&st=cse&oref=slogin

After months of record-breaking fund-raising, a new sense of urgency in Senator Barack Obama’s fund-raising team is palpable as the full weight of the campaign’s decision to bypass public financing for the general election is suddenly upon it.

Senator Barack Obama, who spoke Monday in Flint, Mich., has bypassed federal financing, giving him more freedom but requiring continuing fund-raising.

Pushing a fund-raiser later this month, a finance staff member sent a sharply worded note last week to Illinois members of its national finance committee, calling their recent efforts “extremely anemic.”

 

[LCGeek]

Hey, I contributed to something related to Obama.


And I know it's of no concern to most of you, but the rest of the world will mock/scorn/laugh/shake its head in disgust towards all US citizens if the Republicans win again - considering the past 8 years, pretty much no one predicts this to happen, but still. When my gf heard that McCain was ahead in some polls she just shook her head with a "wtf are they thinking?" look on her face. She was speechless, and that doesn't happen often.

I mean, the kind of shit you guys had to put up with Bush in the White House? There have been coup d'etat's made for much, much less. >_<

coup d'etat's are performed in countries with a legit chance of such conditions being performed. There are a few components missing to that here. US citizens have not sunk low enough for such a power struggle to happen. How does one do such a thing in a country where the elite and those behinds the curtains control much of what goes on if they choose to know such information. Only way it would happen is if the elite started fighting with themselves to the point it spills out.

 

[Mahadev]

Clinton was a self proclaimed Goldwater conservative, which leans much more towards libertarianism.

O... M.... G....

So Clinton is a conservative and Bush was a leftist, right? You don't know crap about politics but you keep up with your condescending posts like you know better than everyone else when you fail miserably in each and every single post. You make APF look like a good poster.

 

[AniHawk]

Yeah, but this is approved by McCain. Its an official ad. And its sickening. The repeated use of Obama's face and the language used makes it look like they want him to come off as a black pedophile or child-offender or something. The ironic thing is, the bill they're referring to was supposed to protect kids from child-offenders. I dont know how the fuck they that bills translated to the conclusion in that ad.

They seriously need to go after him for not wanting to protect our children from sex offenders. This shit is Family Guy bad.

 

[artredis1980]

it begins

 

[Thunder Monkey]

who in the Democrat party represents conservative values with increasing tax revenues and nationalizing health care?

Just about anyone in the Democratic Party?

To try and tie Bush to liberal ideology is beyond idiocy. For one thing Bush lowered taxes, increased spending, and got us into war.

Any self-respecting liberal would have a plan for how to pay for these ideas. Obama's plans include increased taxation of the wealthy.

McCain wants to continue the spending of dipshit in the Oval office, while lowering taxes further and tossing in a couple of extra wars to completely bankrupt the country.

Fiscal conservativism is just as much about being smart with spending as it is... not spending.

 

[Tamanon]

Did anyone discuss the article in the New York Times this morning regarding Obama's fund-raising? It sounded like they might not be doing so great, but they could have just been trying to make a story out of nothing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/us/politics/09donate.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=funding&st=cse&oref=slogin

He raised at least 55 million in August. Don't have the exact figure yet.

 

[Incognito]

Did anyone discuss the article in the New York Times this morning regarding Obama's fund-raising? It sounded like they might not be doing so great, but they could have just been trying to make a story out of nothing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/us/politics/09donate.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=funding&st=cse&oref=slogin

He raised more than $55 million in August. That's not taking into account what the DNC raked in, either.

 

[Dolphin]

JENNIFER GRANHOLM is training Biden?


...

 

[AniHawk]

EVERYONE IN A BLUE STATE: MOVE TO COLORADO!

 

[Nabs]

hannity is so damn annoying.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

EVERYONE IN A BLUE STATE: MOVE TO COLORADO!

Can I just buy a shack there, claim it as my residence, continue to live in Illinois, and take a trip there on November 4 to vote?

 

[Incognito]

EVERYONE IN A BLUE STATE: MOVE TO COLORADO!

I'm in a safe McCain state and this Saturday I'll go through 9 hours of CampObama training and then sometime in the near future, I'll be off to Colorado. Like I said earlier, it'll be ground zero. Should be quite the trip...

 

[AniHawk]

Can I just buy a shack there, claim it as my residence, continue to live in Illinois, and take a trip there on November 4 to vote?

Eh, sure. What the hell.

 

[speculawyer]

who in the Democrat party represents conservative values with increasing tax revenues

When you are running 1/2 Trillion DEFICITs, raising taxes IS CONSERVATIVE.

Creating massive deficits isn't conservative or liberal IT IS JUST STUPID.


But then again, perhaps running massive deficits is 'conservative' since that is what self-named conservatives have done in the last 30 years.

 

[Cloudy]

I don't know how to interpret that.

I don't gamble but I think as of today, every $100 you put down on Obama earns you $62.50 if he wins. On the other hand, if you bet $100 on McCain, you win $120 if he bcomes prez. Obviously if you win, you get your original money back as well..

So if I bet $100 on each guy:

Obama win = 162.50 or 61.54% odds
McCain win = 220.02 or 45.45% odds

This is a very simplistic explanation as the numbers change depending on what side has more action. The change from before the RNC is because a lot more people are putting money on McCain now

Someone correct me if I'm wrong on this

 

[AniHawk]

I'm in a safe McCain state and this Saturday I'll go through 9 hours of CampObama training and then sometime in the near future, I'll be off to Colorado. Like I said earlier, it'll be ground zero. Should be quite the trip...

About how long will you stay? I think both you and Stooge are going.

 

[Haunted]

coup d'etat's are performed in countries with a legit chance of such conditions being performed. There are a few components missing to that here. US citizens have not sunk low enough for such a power struggle to happen. How does one do such a thing in a country where the elite and those behinds the curtains control much of what goes on if they choose to know such information. Only way it would happen is if the elite started fighting with themselves to the point it spills out.

Point taken, although I was just trying to emphasise the shittiness of Bush's presidency, not to seriously propose a coup d'etat to be made - these rarely happen in advanced and wealthy democratic countries

But yeah, I know what you mean. There are times where one just thinks "man, this system needs a complete overhaul". :/

 

[speculawyer]

hannity is so damn annoying.

Oh God. I sometimes take my daughter to this McDonalds that runs Fox News a lot and Hannity is on after I pick her up from daycare.

I got to hear him whine about the lipstick/pig comment for 30 minutes. WTF? Key-rist, don't you have anything REAL to talk about?

Oh that's right, this election isn't about issues . . . its about personality.

 

[AndyIsTheMoran]

O... M.... G....

So Clinton is a conservative and Bush was a leftist, right? You don't know crap about politics but you keep up with your condescending posts like you know better than everyone else when you fail miserably in each and every single post. You make APF look like a good poster.

No Clinton grew up a self proclaimed Goldwater conservative. Bush isn't a leftist in many respects but has had enormous amount of spending which isn't a conservative idea. Instead of getting pissed because i post why don't you actually read what I'm saying. Bush was not the embodiment of conservatism and many conservatives would tell you that. Seriously i dont know why so many of you get so mad at dissenting and opposing opinions from what you believe, then you proceed to attack me personally.

Then you turn around and get pissed at people for taking what Obama says out of its meaning or context.