Trakdown said:ROFLMAO: Fallout 3 on Countdown!
Apparently, some jackass found pictures of a destroyed DC and claimed they were Al-Qaeda's- they're screenshots from Fallout 3!
typhonsentra said:I cannot believe this Pfleger made as much noise as it did in this news cycle.
Tamanon said:Not just some jackass, but a government think-tank!
I already gave the short version last page, which is pretty much the same, but here goes:grandjedi6 said:oh and repost your thing on Ohio, I would like to see it
Outside of what any poll says, I think that it would take a miracle for Obama to win Ohio. In the past two general elections, the democrat has won Franklin county (high population, Columbus, lots of students from OSU) very narrowly, Cuyahoga (Cleveland, high population, high african-american population) handily, and Mahoning (Youngstown, depressed county, lots of racism) by a lot. Those are the three big counties for the democrats in Ohio, and just about everywhere else is low population and heavily republican (cincy is high population, slightly republican).
Now, Ohio outside of the cities is very rural, so I would imagine that Obama's numbers in the smaller, less important counties would be even less than Kerry's.
The keys will be:
Will Students in Columbus give Obama a big win in Franklin County?
Will the high african-american population in Cleveland lead to a really big win in Cuyahoga?
Will the rampant racism in heavily-democrat Mahoning lead to a win there for McCain?
Amir0x said::lol
Well, at least the Republican party can KEEP the stupid
maximum360 said:Good. Axelrod just called out CNN on their "less than effective reporting" (aka hitjob piece) on Obama's run for state office.
Guderian said:Great, now O'Reilly is gonna call Fallout 3 a terrorism simulator or some equally dumb shit.
reilo said::lol :lol :lol :lol :lol
In his BUSHED segment, Olbermann just made fun of an intelligence group that found a password protected image in a folder, and labeled it as something mocked up by terrorists as to "what they wish Washington DC should look like."
What was it?
![]()
:lol :lol :lol :lol
maximum360 said:Good. Axelrod just called out CNN on their "less than effective reporting" (aka hitjob piece) on Obama's run for state office.
KRS7 said:McCain Obama polling trends in Ohio:
http://www.pollster.com/08OHPresGEMvO600.png[IMG]
I live just outside Dayton and think Obama will win Montgomery county handily as well. The key to winning Ohio this year will be voter registration. Luckily Blackwell is out of the picture and we have a better chance of increasing the democratic rolls. There should be no widespread purging of voting rolls this year. Registering enough new voters may be enough to offset the racist vote. I agree Hamilton is not likely to go heavily democratic, but if he can tie there, that will help a lot. I guess I am more optimistic than you to think Ohio will go for the democrats this year. I've only lived here three years, so I might not have a realistic view of the rest of the state.[/QUOTE]
I wish I had your enthusiasm. Having lived in the state my whole life (Youngstown is where my whole family is now, I live in Columbus), I just think that Ohio is filled with a lot of dumb, stubborn people. :(
But man, if he does win I will give everybody I see a hug for the next week.
Nope. But the media is trying to create one.so_awes said:wait what? Obama has another pastor problem??
so_awes said:wait what? Obama has another pastor problem??
thekad said:So where did the video come from anyway? Does ABC have someone staked out in the Church every Sunday?
thekad said:So where did the video come from anyway? Does ABC have someone staked out in the Church every Sunday?
thekad said:So where did the video come from anyway? Does ABC have someone staked out in the Church every Sunday?
thekad said:Does ABC have someone staked out in the Church every Sunday?
If there's one particularly absurd storyline about Obama's early political career, it's the claim getting a rival knocked off the ballot in his first State Senate race was a form of something called "hardball," a dastardly form of politics endemic to Chicago.
I don't mean to pick particularly on CNN, because the story has appeared all over the place for the last year and a half, but that's where I happened to see it last.
I covered New York politics for quite a while, where the ballot access rules are, as in Chicago, stringent. You can argue that they set up an unjust barrier, aimed to protect incumbents. But that's hardly relevant here: Obama was the challenger, Alice Palmer the incumbent. These challenges are utterly run of the mill; with some exceptions, it's considered madness to let a rival who hasn't met the legal qualifications stay on the ballot.
It's also the case that anybody with the wherewithal to mount a large scale campaign and convince a lot of people to vote for her really should be able to gather, in the Obama-Palmer case, the signatures of 757 local Democrats. Candidates usually gather several times that number to be safe, a shadowy urban political activity involving feeding pizza to a bunch of volunteers.
In any case, Obama was hardly engaging in some horribly brutal form of politics specific to Chicago. His opponent had failed to meet a minimal legal qualification for running for the office. It would have been political malpractice for him to, essentially, give her a pass and say, "No, please, run anyway, it's on me."
To have let her on the ballot would have been the equivalent of, say, his giving John McCain some money.
There are other things they do in Chicago, New York, and most everywhere else that should provoke moral scruples. But they mostly involve breaking the law, not insisting on it.
Tamanon said:Exactly. And they'll ask the reaction of everyone they possibly can so they can come up with "New reactions to Obama's pastor problem!"
BTW, Ben Smith actually explains why this "hardball" story CNN is pushing is baloney.
Jason's Ultimatum said:I thought Obama has known this Catholic priest for years??
So close it's ridiculous. I was expecting him to have a much more impressive lead.KRS7 said:McCain Obama polling trends in Ohio:
![]()
Diablos said:So close it's ridiculous. I was expecting him to have a much more impressive lead.
Obama needs to really sit down and think about who should be his running mate. He needs to pick someone that will help him in Ohio. If he doesn't, that'll be a huge mistake.
Are these states really as competitive as we think they are, though? Ohio just seems like a safer bet -- you carry Ohio and you win the election.Francois the Great said:he doesn't really need ohio, though. states like new mexico and colorado are more important for him.
i'm still shilling for richardson.
Diablos said:Are these states really as competitive as we think they are, though? Ohio just seems like a safer bet -- you carry Ohio and you win the election.
Also, one state no one seems to bring up is Wisconsin. Isn't McCain polling really well there? Obama needs everything Kerry got plus Ohio or Colorado, New Mexico and Iowa (or all four if he's super lucky). But he can't lose anything else from that 2004 map or he could (well, let's face it -- will) be in serious trouble.
I definitely agree that Iowa is a lock for Obama, which is awesome.Francois the Great said:iowa and colorado are pretty much gonna go obama no matter what this november. all he would need is any other state (he would be within 2 electoral votes of mccain at this point.) new mexico is obviously the perfect choice, but there is also nevada (richardson would help him in all three of these states.)
he also has as good of a chance of flipping virginia as he does ohio. so really, ohio isn't the top priority (though he will probably win that too).
it's still early for WI, they always vote democratic don't worry.
that isnt a worry, the house dem dem demDiablos said:The House decides! :lol
DopeyFish said:http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=512750
obama is starting the GE campaign where the GOP convention is taking place
it's like a smack in the face![]()
Diablos said:Virginia, ehhh. I'd still say that its wishful thinking at this point. NoVA will obviously help, but the rest of the state could offset it.
suaveric said:Couldn't Obama decide to be really magnanimous tomorrow and ask for both Florida and Michigan to be seated as-is? Assuming that the committee will halve the delegates coming from each state no matter what, then I think that is the highest road Obama could take and it would help win over some of these people who think he stole the election.
The uncommitted delegates from Michigan could choose to go with Clinton or Obama at the convention (I'd guess most would side with Obama). Clinton would have no leg to stand on to keep this fight going past Tuesday.
DopeyFish said:http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=512750
obama is starting the GE campaign where the GOP convention is taking place
it's like a smack in the face![]()
But a different analogy occurred to me the other day, one perhaps less comprehensively apt but so delightfully ironic that it would be a crime not to point it out. As anyone politically sentient in 1988 will vividly recall, the endgame of the Democratic primaries that year revolved around a challenger seen by his fans as a historic figure and his foes as a potential party-wrecker, and what concessions he might insist upon in order to fade quietly into the background. The inescapable question of the hour was, What does Jesse Jackson want?
Hillary Clinton, of course, is no Jesse Jackson (but neither, pace Bill Clintons comments on the eve of the South Carolina primary, is Obama). But the question posed by her behavior in the home stretch of this years nominating contest is precisely the same: What does Hillary want?
She wants to be president. Duh. And if it aint gonna happen this year, then her central objective is to make it as likely as possible in 2012. As Ive written many times, Hillary believes with every fiber of her being that Obama is going to lose this year. (And so does her husband.) So her aim is to put herself in the best position possible to stand up on November 5 and say, if perhaps a tad more subtly than this, I told you so.
1. Is she going to quit sometime soon or fight on to the convention?
The former. Indeed, my guess is that she might very well be out of the race by the end of next week. For Hillary to be the Democratic nominee in 2012, she must limit the extent to which shes seen as having caused Obamas (in her mind, inevitable) loss this fall. And setting off on a scorched-earth march to Denver runs in diametric opposition to that goal. True, she keeps saying that shes going all the way; true, she continues to press for the seating in full of the Florida and Michigan delegations. But Clinton has other things she might want from Obama, from a prominent speaking slot in Denver to help paying off her campaign debt. The more delegates she has in the end, the stronger her bargaining position.
2. Does she want to be offered the VP slot?
No, she does not. If its offered, she has to take it, because turning it down would be a signal to her supporters that she doesnt support Obama (see above). And if shes on the ticket and Obama goes down (again, as shes convinced he will), she is then complicit in the loss, and her prospects in 2012 are damaged. Does Hillary want be the next John Edwards? The question answers itself.
3. So whats with all the leaks that Bill wants her on the ticket?
He probably does. The idea of Hillary as veep must sound like a sweet deal to him: It would be history-making, it would cement the Clintons status as one of Americas great political dynasties, and in the second-fiddle job his wife would pose no danger of overshadowing him.
4. Will she work hard for Obama or undermine him in the fall?
Shes aware that even as shes become a much larger figure in the course of this race in one segment of the party, her reputation has taken a beating in another. She thinks its unfair, but she knows its the reality, and also that whether Obama wins or loses, its difficult to imagine a promising future for herself without repairing her standing among those who regard her poorly. I suspect there wont be many louder Obama cheerleaders this autumn or more insincere ones.
5. If Obama wins, what will she do next?
One rumor going around New York is that shell run for governor an eventuality only marginally more likely than my pursuing that office. HRC cares not a whit about state government. She loves Washington, thinks of it as home, and of Albany as hell (smart gal!). Consider further that becoming governor would require taking on the incumbent, David Paterson, who has indicated no intention to be a temporary fill-in. Hillary challenging another African-American in a Democratic primary? Fat chance.
The problem with such early horserace polls, however, is that they are not very accurate predictors of the actual election results. ..... Instead of using early horserace polls, political scientists generally rely on measures of the national political climate to make their forecasts. That is because the national political climate can be measured long before the election and it has been found to exert a powerful influence on the eventual results.
Three indicators of the national political climate have accurately predicted the outcomes of presidential elections since the end of World War II: the incumbent president's approval rating at mid-year, the growth rate of the economy during the second quarter of the election year, and the length of time the president's party has held the White House.
The higher the president's approval rating and the stronger the growth rate of the economy, the more likely it is that the president's party will be victorious. However, if the president's party has controlled the White House for two terms or longer it is less likely to be successful. Time-for-change sentiment seems to increase after eight years regardless of the president's popularity or the state of the economy.
These three factors can be combined to produce an Electoral Barometer score that measures the overall national political climate. The formula for computing this score is simply the president's net approval rating (approval minus disapproval) in the Gallup Poll plus five times the annual growth rate of real GDP minus 25 if the president's party has held the White House for two terms or longer. Mathematically, this formula can be written as:
EB = NAR + (5*GDP) - 25.
In theory, the Electoral Barometer can range from -100 or lower to +100 or higher with a reading of zero indicating a neutral political climate. In practice, Electoral Barometer readings for the fifteen presidential elections since the end of World War II have ranged from -66 in 1980 to +82 in 1964. A positive Electoral Barometer reading generally predicts victory for the incumbent party while a negative reading generally predicts defeat.
The information required to calculate the final Electoral Barometer score for 2008 will not be available until August when the federal government releases its estimate of real GDP growth during the second quarter of 2008. However, it appears very likely that the Republican Party is dealing with the dreaded "triple whammy" in 2008: an unpopular president, a weak economy, and a second term election. Based on President Bush's net approval rating in the most recent Gallup Poll (-39), the annual growth rate of the economy during the first quarter of 2008 (+0.6 percent), and the fact that the Republican Party has controlled the White House for the past eight years, the current Electoral Barometer reading is a dismal -63.
The current national political climate is one of the worst for the party in power since the end of World War II. No candidate running in such an unfavorable political environment â Republican or Democrat - has ever been successful. If John McCain manages to overcome the triple whammy of an unpopular president, a weak economy, and a second term election, it will be an upset of unprecedented magnitude.