<p>“Sometimes I just shake my head at Democrats.”</p>
<p>What’s the expression? Circular firing squad?</p>
<p>For a long time (many years) I have felt crowd size was a way to measure enthusiasm for a D and campaign contributions was a way to measure enthusiasm for a R. Both are metrics that tell you something polling doesnt. </p>
<p>Todays news summery is, the Ds are raising more money than the Rs, Bushs poll numbers are at his all time low, the Wall Street Journal is writing articles about the business community moving away from the Rs, and some in the R base are thinking about forming a 3rd party. </p>
<p>With 13 months to go, I would rather be in our shoes than theirs.</p>
<p>The Religious Right, under the leadership of James Dobson and others, is seriously considering <em>not</em> supporting Guiliani, should he be the Republican nominee. The rumor is that they would support Tony Perkins (of the Family Research Council…not the one from the Bates Motel) as a third party candidate. This would be a humongous factor in the 2008 race. Approx. 25% of Republican support is the Religious Right (aka the ‘Family Values’ crowd) . In a country where the points between wins and loses can be counted with 3 fingers, this could mean a Democratic landslide of historic proportions.</p>
<p>not the one from the Bates Motel</p>
<p>are you sure?</p>
<p>ID, I missed it: where/when did Obama say that he would go with public financing for the general election? That would be criminal.</p>
<p>
Perzackly.</p>
<p>Early in the campaign, back last spring, B-Rock said that he would go with public financing in the general election if his Republican opponent agreed.</p>
<p>I agree it would be insane. That’s the kind of publicity stunt you pull when you are trailing in the money chase, not when you are blowing the roof off fundraising. The Democrats have a legitimate chance to bury the Republican candidate early. Clinton already has $17.6 million in the bank for the general election.</p>
<p>At the time he said it, B-Rock probably thought it was freebie; that the Republicans would never agree. As things stand right now, the Republicans might jump at the offer.</p>
<p>Pretty sure, TommyBill…the one in the motel was much nicer!</p>
<p>post 267… thanks </p>
<p>great way to start my day</p>
<p>“Despite rivals’ efforts to portray her as too polarizing to win the general election, a clear majority of those surveyed, 57 percent, said Clinton is the Democratic candidate with the best chance on Nov. 4, 2008. The percentage saying Clinton has the best shot at winning is up 14 points since June. By contrast, 20 percent think Edwards is most electable and 16 percent think Obama is, numbers that represent a huge blow to the “electability” argument rivals have sought to use against her.”</p>
<p>Read Article…<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...202365_pf.html[/url]”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...202365_pf.html</a></p>
<p>ABC NEWS/WASHINGTON POST POLL: 2008 PRIMARY </p>
<p>PREFERENCEShttp://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/1046a208Primary.pdf</p>
<p>Former president Bill Clinton has emerged as a clear asset in his wife’s campaign for the White House, with Americans offering high ratings to his eight years in office</p>
<p>Two-thirds of Americans said they approve of the job he did while he was in office – virtually the reverse of President Bush’s current approval rating, which stands at 33 percent. Clinton remains overwhelmingly popular among Democrats, and 63 percent of independents and even a third of Republicans also gave him positive marks.</p>
<p>Forty-one percent of those surveyed said they definitely would not vote for Clinton in the general election if she were the Democratic nominee, one of the lowest “reject rates” among the leading candidates in either of the two major parties
Americans currently view the top four Republican candidates in equally or even more negative terms. Forty-four percent said they definitely would not vote for Giuliani, while 45 percent said the same of Sen. John McCain (Ariz.). More than half of all Americans said they definitely would not vote for former senator Fred D. Thompson of Tennessee (54 percent) or former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney (57 percent).</p>
<p>Read full article <a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/03/AR2007100302036_pf.html[/url]”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/03/AR2007100302036_pf.html</a></p>
<p>Former president Bill Clinton has emerged as a clear asset in his wife’s campaign for the White House, with Americans offering high ratings to his eight years in office</p>
<p>Two-thirds of Americans said they approve of the job he did while he was in office – virtually the reverse of President Bush’s current approval rating, which stands at 33 percent. Clinton remains overwhelmingly popular among Democrats, and 63 percent of independents and even a third of Republicans also gave him positive marks.</p>
<p>Forty-one percent of those surveyed said they definitely would not vote for Clinton in the general election if she were the Democratic nominee, one of the lowest “reject rates” among the leading candidates in either of the two major parties</p>
<p>Americans currently view the top four Republican candidates in equally or even more negative terms. Forty-four percent said they definitely would not vote for Giuliani, while 45 percent said the same of Sen. John McCain (Ariz.). More than half of all Americans said they definitely would not vote for former senator Fred D. Thompson of Tennessee (54 percent) or former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney (57 percent).</p>
<p>Read full article <a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/03/AR2007100302036_pf.html[/url]”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/03/AR2007100302036_pf.html</a></p>
<p>Check out this MSNBC poll:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21209617[/url]”>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21209617</a></p>
<p>I really liked Obama when I saw him talk at the Democratic Convention. But lately he seems to have sold out…too homogenized. In fact, all the candidates, whether Democrat or Republican, seem to be regurgitating the same thing…with the exception of RON PAUL!</p>
<p>I’ve historically always voted Democrat, only because I considered the Democratic candidate to be the ‘lesser of the 2 evils.’ So you may be very surprised to hear that I plan to vote Republican for the very first time in my life, if Ron Paul wins the nomination. (If he doesn’t, it’s back to the lesser of the evils again, so let’s hope he does win!)</p>
<p>Why? Why would I suddenly be excited about a candidate who is so…conservative?</p>
<p>I believe that conservative and liberal ideals both have their time and place: conservative when ‘good’ principles and tangible things like finances need to be preserved, and liberal when things need changing (like the civil rights movement and the end to slavery, both of which were brought about by liberals, although the party affiliation has changed several times over the years). Therefore, I have never really ‘fit the mold’ - being conservative on some issues and liberal in others. </p>
<p>Ron Paul, Republican candidate, stands out from all the rest. He has NOT been bought out by anyone! I have been absolutely blown away by his courage, honesty and integrity…and, most of all, his dedication to RESTORING OUR CONSTITUTION!</p>
<p>(Ron Paul at GOP debates - excellent!)</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNvoaGfwZcc[/url]”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNvoaGfwZcc</a></p>
<p><a href=“http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3330187011438423016&hl=en[/url]”>http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3330187011438423016&hl=en</a></p>
<p>Congratulations lealdragon. You just aligned yourself with one of the most racist organizations in modern American history:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.jbs.org/[/url]”>http://www.jbs.org/</a></p>
<p>??? What do you mean? Are you saying that if a Catholic group supports Ron Paul, that I have become Catholic?</p>
<p>??? I am offended by your insinuation so please explain.</p>
<p>
</a></p>
<p>Don’t worry about it lealdragon - he must have never taken a logic course and instead opted for “Sensationalism 101.”</p>
<p>Thanks. That must be it.</p>
<p>I invite you to actually listen to what he says. Here is one of the best interviews with him, because he actually has time to explain his views more thoroughly. (2 parts)</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CA7jHaowNME[/url]”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CA7jHaowNME</a></p>
<p><a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWdz1pnAFUA[/url]”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWdz1pnAFUA</a></p>
<p>Saying that someone has aligned themselves with an organization is neither Sensationalism nor is claiming the person has joined the organization. </p>
<p>Words mean something, please read them carefully and respond to words as written. It is not appropriate the read something someone has written, and attack the person or what has been written, claming what has been written, says something it doesnt say. </p>
<p>While attacking someone or their statement using false descriptions of what has been said is inappropriate, it is a tactic that has be use by those who would govern by demagoguery for centuries.</p>