Gallup Daily: McCain 48%, Obama 43%

[nowhereman 1]

Palin was a good pick, we agree on that point. I will also concede that her being on the ticket is part of the reason for the shift in the polls, but my comments about the American public reacting to smear campaigns has been proven again & again.

[IAMX 3,055]

Palin was a good pick, we agree on that point. I will also concede that her being on the ticket is part of the reason for the shift in the polls, but my comments about the American public reacting to smear campaigns has been proven again & again.

A good pick for what? I don't think just because someone has a ####### that immediately means they're suddenly best qualified. I've seen Republicans pick minorities or females merely to point at others and say, "look, they don't like women and minorities" if they get criticized. It was a political stunt picking her and nothing more. Sadly, it may actually work in November, to make the Republican cheerleaders proud.. of, who knows what. Same would be if the Obama/Biden ticket wins, Democrats would be happy for.. something.

Edited September 12, 2008 by SRVT

[nowhereman 1]

Palin was a good pick, we agree on that point. I will also concede that her being on the ticket is part of the reason for the shift in the polls, but my comments about the American public reacting to smear campaigns has been proven again & again.

A good pick for what? I don't think just because someone has a ####### that immediately means they're suddenly best qualified. It was a political stunt picking her and nothing more. Sadly, it may actually work in November, to make the Republican cheerleaders proud.. of, who knows what. Same would be if the Obama/Biden ticket wins, Democrats would be happy for.. something.

A good pick in the sense that it has energized the McCain ticket... I wasn't judging her ability to be VP (that remains to be seen). She is pretty and likeable. Right, wrong or indifferent people vote on that as much or more than the facts. Biden is infinitely more qualified but Palin has nicer legs!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Palin was a good pick, we agree on that point. I will also concede that her being on the ticket is part of the reason for the shift in the polls, but my comments about the American public reacting to smear campaigns has been proven again & again.

I agree. McCain's Camp is gambling on the gullibility of enough Americans. Starting from the RNC, they are an all out assault to distract voters from the consequences of 8 years of failed policies which mostly are bread and butter Republican issues. As much as all this sleight of hand trickery is giving the Republican Ticket a boost, the 'ground war' is what really matters. If the Republicans can fool enough voters that they deserve another 4 years then more power to them, but I remain optimistic that voters will rise to the occasion and make an informed vote based on the facts and not on campaign smears.

[IAMX 3,055]

Palin was a good pick, we agree on that point. I will also concede that her being on the ticket is part of the reason for the shift in the polls, but my comments about the American public reacting to smear campaigns has been proven again & again.

I agree. McCain's Camp is gambling on the gullibility of enough Americans. Starting from the RNC, they are an all out assault to distract voters from the consequences of 8 years of failed policies which mostly are bread and butter Republican issues. As much as all this sleight of hand trickery is giving the Republican Ticket a boost, the 'ground war' is what really matters. If the Republicans can fool enough voters that they deserve another 4 years then more power to them, but I remain optimistic that voters will rise to the occasion and make an informed vote based on the facts and not on campaign smears.

The only thing I can agree to is Americans deserve whichever President they get. Just can't say how much the world will let this country continue the status quo without further breaking alliances and friends, and making more enemies out of neutral countries, and further instigating potential enemies.

Confrontational policies aren't exactly peace promoting, nor do they tend to have that sort of result. Both McCain and Palin are two big talkers aiming at making plenty of countries around the world potential bomb targets. What's another 4 or 8 years of war?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Palin was a good pick, we agree on that point. I will also concede that her being on the ticket is part of the reason for the shift in the polls, but my comments about the American public reacting to smear campaigns has been proven again & again.

I agree. McCain's Camp is gambling on the gullibility of enough Americans. Starting from the RNC, they are an all out assault to distract voters from the consequences of 8 years of failed policies which mostly are bread and butter Republican issues. As much as all this sleight of hand trickery is giving the Republican Ticket a boost, the 'ground war' is what really matters. If the Republicans can fool enough voters that they deserve another 4 years then more power to them, but I remain optimistic that voters will rise to the occasion and make an informed vote based on the facts and not on campaign smears.

The only thing I can agree to is Americans deserve whichever President they get. Just can't say how much the world will let this country continue the status quo without further breaking alliances and friends, and making more enemies out of neutral countries, and further instigating potential enemies.

Confrontational policies aren't exactly peace promoting, nor do they tend to have that sort of result. Both McCain and Palin are two big talkers aiming at making plenty of countries around the world potential bomb targets. What's another 4 or 8 years of war?

Well, in spite what most people believe, I think that Palin as VP will hurt McCain more than help him. Many Republicans have come out and openly criticized Obama for not choosing Hillary for his VP, however, that choice would have brought a lot of scrutiny as well as she had high negatives. Let's not forget just how much the Republicans despised the Clintons and particularly Hillary back when she was First Lady. They looked upon her own political ambitions as something to laugh at and really hated that she was getting involved in things such as national healthcare back when Bill was President.

McCain has to deal with the negatives that Palin brings to the ticket - unqualified candidate with a checkered past whose personal beliefs may turn off as many voters as it has supposedly solidified the Republican Party. All this talk of experience....no one here can say with straight face that if you put Biden and Palin in a debate over Foreign Policy, she'd even have a chance.

[SteveLaura 0]

Well, in spite what most people believe, I think that Palin as VP will hurt McCain more than help him. Many Republicans have come out and openly criticized Obama for not choosing Hillary for his VP, however, that choice would have brought a lot of scrutiny as well as she had high negatives. Let's not forget just how much the Republicans despised the Clintons and particularly Hillary back when she was First Lady. They looked upon her own political ambitions as something to laugh at and really hated that she was getting involved in things such as national healthcare back when Bill was President.

McCain has to deal with the negatives that Palin brings to the ticket - unqualified candidate with a checkered past whose personal beliefs may turn off as many voters as it has supposedly solidified the Republican Party. All this talk of experience....no one here can say with straight face that if you put Biden and Palin in a debate over Foreign Policy, she'd even have a chance.

I don't believe that the number of people who will be turned off by Palin, the more they get to know her, will be greater than the number who will embrace her. Cast me as elitist if you like, but I don't believe that your average voter pays enough attention to politics to make this an issue-based election. That's true in the UK (where only 30-40% of the population vote) and I haven't seen anything here to convince me otherwise. And it's true across party lines. You are as likely to hear someone support Obama because he is black as you are someone support Palin for being a woman. We're fed soundbites & catchphrases precisely because they're easily digestible: Hockey Mom, Yes we can, lipstick on a pig, uppity. You don't have to know where Iraq is or what Freddie Mac is to have opinions on these types of non-issues.

People do care about their wallets, but taking the time to educate yourself about how each candidate will hurt or help you is beyond a lot of voters - either for lack of time, interest, availability of the information or whatever. The media don't help - they know it turns viewers off. It's not in their self-interest. They can wrap it up in a 'we're being independent' catch-all, but it's about ratings, and by extension, money. Wanna watch a clip of Obama saying 'lipstick on a pig' or a McCain speech on Georgia?

The election, I believe, will be fought and won on two personalities - Obama & Palin. I regret that it may be Bush-Gore all over again.

[metta 0]

Palin was a good pick, we agree on that point. I will also concede that her being on the ticket is part of the reason for the shift in the polls, but my comments about the American public reacting to smear campaigns has been proven again & again.

I agree. McCain's Camp is gambling on the gullibility of enough Americans. Starting from the RNC, they are an all out assault to distract voters from the consequences of 8 years of failed policies which mostly are bread and butter Republican issues. As much as all this sleight of hand trickery is giving the Republican Ticket a boost, the 'ground war' is what really matters. If the Republicans can fool enough voters that they deserve another 4 years then more power to them, but I remain optimistic that voters will rise to the occasion and make an informed vote based on the facts and not on campaign smears.

The only thing I can agree to is Americans deserve whichever President they get. Just can't say how much the world will let this country continue the status quo without further breaking alliances and friends, and making more enemies out of neutral countries, and further instigating potential enemies.

Confrontational policies aren't exactly peace promoting, nor do they tend to have that sort of result. Both McCain and Palin are two big talkers aiming at making plenty of countries around the world potential bomb targets. What's another 4 or 8 years of war?

Well, in spite what most people believe, I think that Palin as VP will hurt McCain more than help him. Many Republicans have come out and openly criticized Obama for not choosing Hillary for his VP, however, that choice would have brought a lot of scrutiny as well as she had high negatives. Let's not forget just how much the Republicans despised the Clintons and particularly Hillary back when she was First Lady. They looked upon her own political ambitions as something to laugh at and really hated that she was getting involved in things such as national healthcare back when Bill was President.

McCain has to deal with the negatives that Palin brings to the ticket - unqualified candidate with a checkered past whose personal beliefs may turn off as many voters as it has supposedly solidified the Republican Party. All this talk of experience....no one here can say with straight face that if you put Biden and Palin in a debate over Foreign Policy, she'd even have a chance.

Don't count on it Steve.

In every debate during the primaries, Hillary outshone Obama with her grasp of knowledge. But yes, as you said, she had a lot of negatives. negatives generated by years of expeirence in the national political arena.

So the democratic poobahs picked Obama, the Rock Star who got his delegates from Red States claiming he could redraw the electoral map.Remember? you guys were claiming he could change NC and Georgia and the South from Red to Blue. And, experience? What do we need it for ? Afterall, Obama is the post partisan, transformative candidate! Right? All those experienced guys are the ones who have screwed up this country except for the chosen few like Biden who came to Washington

10 years ahead of McCain.

Well, we have to admit that we live in a "celebrity culture". So, we had Obamapaloozas everywhere he goes and yes, we got the latest celebrity as Democratic nominee.

The only thing the Dems forgot in their reckoning was that Reps know the game well and plays it better too.

So we now have Palin the latest celebrity!

Infact she is the Angelina Jolie of politics. She's hot, she's physical and yes, got six kids too. What's more, she comes with more executive experience than Obama.

Dems are hoping that Palin will hurt Mccain. Possible, but right now, she is the one holding palinpalooza s energizing both the Republican base and the independents. latest I heard, McCain is garnering the independents in the polls.

Obama has been celecrity for two years now and his star power is fading... Palin just exploded on the scene so her star power is likely to last all the way through November?

So there's no surprise that even the Intrade market odds is showing:

Intrade Market Odds47.351.5

Edited September 12, 2008 by metta

[IAMX 3,055]

Infact she is the Angelina Jolie of politics. She's hot, she's physical and yes, got six kids too. What's more, she comes with more executive experience than Obama.

This is when you know people are reaching very hard to justify their candidate.

[SteveLaura 0]

he is the Angelina Jolie of politics. She's hot...

Palin is good-looking. I fail to see 'hotness', though. Anyway, isn't merely discussing the attractiveness of a female candidate sexist? In fairness, someone should start a poll on Biden's physical attributes.

[metta 0]

Infact she is the Angelina Jolie of politics. She's hot, she's physical and yes, got six kids too. What's more, she comes with more executive experience than Obama.

This is when you know people are reaching very hard to justify their candidate.

Oh, really?

I'd admit that Obama does have some executive experience . That in managing his senate and campaign staff. Do you want to know what kind of decisions he made in that capacity? here's an example...

<h1 class="rdheadline">Obama only talks good game on gender pay equity</h1> DEROY MURDOCK

Now is the time to keep the promise of equal pay for an equal day's work," Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama said Aug. 28 in his convention acceptance speech. He told the crowd in Denver: "I want my daughters to have exactly the same opportunities as your sons." Obama's campaign website is even more specific. Under the heading "Fighting for Pay Equity," the women's issues page laments that, "Despite decades of progress, women still make only 77 cents for every dollar a man makes. A recent study estimates it will take another 47 years for women to close the wage gap with men at Fortune 500 corporate offices. Barack Obama believes the government needs to take steps to better enforce the Equal Pay Act..."

Obama's commitment to federally mandated pay equity stretches from the Rockies to Wall Street and beyond. And yet it seems to have eluded his Senate office. Compensation figures for his legislative staff reveal that Obama pays women just 83 cents for every dollar his men make.

A watchdog group called LegiStorm posts online the salaries for Capitol Hill staffers. "We have no political affiliations and no political purpose except to make the workings of Congress as transparent as possible," its website explains. Parsing LegiStorm's official data, gleaned from the Secretary of the Senate, offers a fascinating glimpse at pay equity in the World's Greatest Deliberative Body.

The most recent statistics are for the half-year from Oct. 1, 2007 to March 31, 2008, excluding interns and focusing on full-time personnel. For someone who worked only until, say, last Feb. 29, extrapolating up to six months' service simplifies this analysis. Doubling these half-year figures illustrates how a year's worth of Senate employees' paychecks should look.

Based on these calculations, Obama's 28 male staffers divided among themselves total payroll expenditures of $1,523,120. Thus, Obama's average male employee earned $54,397.

Obama's 30 female employees split $1,354,580 among themselves, or $45,152, on average.

Why this disparity? One reason may be the under-representation of women in Obama's highest-compensated ranks. Among Obama's five best-paid advisors, only one was a woman. Among his top 20, seven were women.

Again, on average, Obama's female staffers earn just 83 cents for every dollar his male staffers make. This figure certainly exceeds the 77-cent threshold that Obama's campaign website condemns. However, 83 cents do not equal $1. In spite of this 17-cent gap between Obama's rhetoric and reality, he chose to chide GOP presidential contender John McCain on this issue.

Obama responded Aug. 31 to Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's Republican vice-presidential nomination. Palin "seems like a very engaging person," Obama told voters in Toledo, Ohio. "But I've got to say, she's opposed -- like John McCain is -- to equal pay for equal work. That doesn't make much sense to me."

Obama's criticism notwithstanding, McCain's payment patterns are the stuff of feminist dreams.

McCain's 17 male staffers split $916,914, thus averaging $53,936. His 25 female employees divided $1,396,958 and averaged $55,878.

On average, according to these data, women in John McCain's office make $1.04 for every dollar a man makes. In fact, all other things being equal, a typical female staffer could earn 21 cents more per dollar paid to her male counterpart -- while adding $10,726 to her annual income -- by leaving Barack Obama's office and going to work for John McCain.

How could this be?

One explanation could be that women compose a majority of McCain's highest-paid aides. Among his top-five best-compensated staffers, three are women. Of his 20-highest-salaried employees, 13 are women. The Republican presidential nominee relies on women -- much more than men -- for advice at the highest, and thus, best-paid levels.

If anyone on McCain's Senate staff is unhappy, McCain's male staffers might complain they seem to get a slightly raw deal.

In short, these statistics suggest that John McCain is more than fair with his female employees, while Barack Obama -- at the expense of the women who work for him -- quietly perpetuates the very same pay-equity divide that he loudly denounces. Of all people, the Democratic standard bearer should understand that equal pay begins at home.

Deroy Murdock is a columnist with Scripps Howard News Service and a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University. E-mail him at deroy.Murdock@gmail.com

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Palin was a good pick, we agree on that point. I will also concede that her being on the ticket is part of the reason for the shift in the polls, but my comments about the American public reacting to smear campaigns has been proven again & again.

I agree. McCain's Camp is gambling on the gullibility of enough Americans. Starting from the RNC, they are an all out assault to distract voters from the consequences of 8 years of failed policies which mostly are bread and butter Republican issues. As much as all this sleight of hand trickery is giving the Republican Ticket a boost, the 'ground war' is what really matters. If the Republicans can fool enough voters that they deserve another 4 years then more power to them, but I remain optimistic that voters will rise to the occasion and make an informed vote based on the facts and not on campaign smears.

The only thing I can agree to is Americans deserve whichever President they get. Just can't say how much the world will let this country continue the status quo without further breaking alliances and friends, and making more enemies out of neutral countries, and further instigating potential enemies.

Confrontational policies aren't exactly peace promoting, nor do they tend to have that sort of result. Both McCain and Palin are two big talkers aiming at making plenty of countries around the world potential bomb targets. What's another 4 or 8 years of war?

Well, in spite what most people believe, I think that Palin as VP will hurt McCain more than help him. Many Republicans have come out and openly criticized Obama for not choosing Hillary for his VP, however, that choice would have brought a lot of scrutiny as well as she had high negatives. Let's not forget just how much the Republicans despised the Clintons and particularly Hillary back when she was First Lady. They looked upon her own political ambitions as something to laugh at and really hated that she was getting involved in things such as national healthcare back when Bill was President.

McCain has to deal with the negatives that Palin brings to the ticket - unqualified candidate with a checkered past whose personal beliefs may turn off as many voters as it has supposedly solidified the Republican Party. All this talk of experience....no one here can say with straight face that if you put Biden and Palin in a debate over Foreign Policy, she'd even have a chance.

Don't count on it Steve.

In every debate during the primaries, Hillary outshone Obama with her grasp of knowledge. But yes, as you said, she had a lot of negatives. negatives generated by years of expeirence in the national political arena.

So the democratic poobahs picked Obama, the Rock Star who got his delegates from Red States claiming he could redraw the electoral map.Remember? you guys were claiming he could change NC and Georgia and the South from Red to Blue. And, experience? What do we need it for ? Afterall, Obama is the post partisan, transformative candidate! Right? All those experienced guys are the ones who have screwed up this country except for the chosen few like Biden who came to Washington

10 years ahead of McCain.

Well, we have to admit that we live in a "celebrity culture". So, we had Obamapaloozas everywhere he goes and yes, we got the latest celebrity as Democratic nominee.

The only thing the Dems forgot in their reckoning was that Reps know the game well and plays it better too.

So we now have Palin the latest celebrity!

Infact she is the Angelina Jolie of politics. She's hot, she's physical and yes, got six kids too. What's more, she comes with more executive experience than Obama.

Dems are hoping that Palin will hurt Mccain. Possible, but right now, she is the one holding palinpalooza s energizing both the Republican base and the independents. latest I heard, McCain is garnering the independents in the polls.

Obama has been celecrity for two years now and his star power is fading... Palin just exploded on the scene so her star power is likely to last all the way through November?

So there's no surprise that even the Intrade market odds is showing:

Intrade Market Odds47.351.5

The part you bolded - I don't quite follow your counter argument on that issue. People squabble over what constitutes as experience for this or that, but in doing so the miss a very important issue when it comes to looking for presidential qualities in the candidates - and that's whether they have extensive knowledge and understanding of such important issues as Foreign Policy. We can argue over whether Hillary or Obama trumped the other in terms of grasping it, but lets be honest, they both are very knowledge and both have a good grasp of understanding the complexities of foreign relations. Whatever Sarah Palin has experienced, there is no history and no indication of the kind level of knowledge and understanding of foreign relations that is even close to that of either Obama or Hillary. Furthermore, her recent remarks and comments about Russia demonstrate her limited understanding or knowledge. That isn't bad for an Alaskan Governor and mother of 6 per se, but for someone who is being considered for the highest office in the United States, that's worth taking note...and I'm optimistic that voters will see past whatever glitter and glammer both parties have brought to this election to see what each ticket represents. I have faith in the voters and this process no matter how much the flim flam gets magnified by the media. There's way too much at stake going into this election for far too many Americans to simply vote on a whim or a feeling.

[metta 0]

Palin was a good pick, we agree on that point. I will also concede that her being on the ticket is part of the reason for the shift in the polls, but my comments about the American public reacting to smear campaigns has been proven again & again.

I agree. McCain's Camp is gambling on the gullibility of enough Americans. Starting from the RNC, they are an all out assault to distract voters from the consequences of 8 years of failed policies which mostly are bread and butter Republican issues. As much as all this sleight of hand trickery is giving the Republican Ticket a boost, the 'ground war' is what really matters. If the Republicans can fool enough voters that they deserve another 4 years then more power to them, but I remain optimistic that voters will rise to the occasion and make an informed vote based on the facts and not on campaign smears.

The only thing I can agree to is Americans deserve whichever President they get. Just can't say how much the world will let this country continue the status quo without further breaking alliances and friends, and making more enemies out of neutral countries, and further instigating potential enemies.

Confrontational policies aren't exactly peace promoting, nor do they tend to have that sort of result. Both McCain and Palin are two big talkers aiming at making plenty of countries around the world potential bomb targets. What's another 4 or 8 years of war?

Well, in spite what most people believe, I think that Palin as VP will hurt McCain more than help him. Many Republicans have come out and openly criticized Obama for not choosing Hillary for his VP, however, that choice would have brought a lot of scrutiny as well as she had high negatives. Let's not forget just how much the Republicans despised the Clintons and particularly Hillary back when she was First Lady. They looked upon her own political ambitions as something to laugh at and really hated that she was getting involved in things such as national healthcare back when Bill was President.

McCain has to deal with the negatives that Palin brings to the ticket - unqualified candidate with a checkered past whose personal beliefs may turn off as many voters as it has supposedly solidified the Republican Party. All this talk of experience....no one here can say with straight face that if you put Biden and Palin in a debate over Foreign Policy, she'd even have a chance.

Don't count on it Steve.

In every debate during the primaries, Hillary outshone Obama with her grasp of knowledge. But yes, as you said, she had a lot of negatives. negatives generated by years of expeirence in the national political arena.

So the democratic poobahs picked Obama, the Rock Star who got his delegates from Red States claiming he could redraw the electoral map.Remember? you guys were claiming he could change NC and Georgia and the South from Red to Blue. And, experience? What do we need it for ? Afterall, Obama is the post partisan, transformative candidate! Right? All those experienced guys are the ones who have screwed up this country except for the chosen few like Biden who came to Washington

10 years ahead of McCain.

Well, we have to admit that we live in a "celebrity culture". So, we had Obamapaloozas everywhere he goes and yes, we got the latest celebrity as Democratic nominee.

The only thing the Dems forgot in their reckoning was that Reps know the game well and plays it better too.

So we now have Palin the latest celebrity!

Infact she is the Angelina Jolie of politics. She's hot, she's physical and yes, got six kids too. What's more, she comes with more executive experience than Obama.

Dems are hoping that Palin will hurt Mccain. Possible, but right now, she is the one holding palinpalooza s energizing both the Republican base and the independents. latest I heard, McCain is garnering the independents in the polls.

Obama has been celecrity for two years now and his star power is fading... Palin just exploded on the scene so her star power is likely to last all the way through November?

So there's no surprise that even the Intrade market odds is showing:

Intrade Market Odds47.351.5

The part you bolded - I don't quite follow your counter argument on that issue. People squabble over what constitutes as experience for this or that, but in doing so the miss a very important issue when it comes to looking for presidential qualities in the candidates - and that's whether they have extensive knowledge and understanding of such important issues as Foreign Policy. We can argue over whether Hillary or Obama trumped the other in terms of grasping it, but lets be honest, they both are very knowledge and both have a good grasp of understanding the complexities of foreign relations. Whatever Sarah Palin has experienced, there is no history and no indication of the kind level of knowledge and understanding of foreign relations that is even close to that of either Obama or Hillary. Furthermore, her recent remarks and comments about Russia demonstrate her limited understanding or knowledge. That isn't bad for an Alaskan Governor and mother of 6 per se, but for someone who is being considered for the highest office in the United States, that's worth taking note...and I'm optimistic that voters will see past whatever glitter and glammer both parties have brought to this election to see what each ticket represents. I have faith in the voters and this process no matter how much the flim flam gets magnified by the media. There's way too much at stake going into this election for far too many Americans to simply vote on a whim or a feeling.

Obama's claim was his judgement on foreign policy citing his stay in Indonesia as a 9 year old and his speech on Iraq. I wont belabor the point here but this issue has been covered quite extensively.:

<h3 class="r">Obama foreign policy claim stirs controversy</h3>

[IAMX 3,055]

Infact she is the Angelina Jolie of politics. She's hot, she's physical and yes, got six kids too. What's more, she comes with more executive experience than Obama.

This is when you know people are reaching very hard to justify their candidate.

Oh, really?

I'd admit that Obama does have some executive experience . That in managing his senate and campaign staff. Do you want to know what kind of decisions he made in that capacity? here's an example...

How much executive experience does McCain have?

ZERO.

He's been a goddamn Congressman his whole political career.

So what is this bullshit you try to make of executive experience?

Oh yes, cherrypicking. Not exactly surprising. As mentioned, reaching very hard to justify their candidate. Obama will be at 10 years of experience serving the people, which is relevant experience just like John McCain. Palin will be at.. 8 years. And that's including both Mayor and Governor.

The funny thing is the idiots running on the "experience" part can't diss Biden either.

If you want to compare John McCain's experience with Joe Biden, Joe Biden has 10 years on McCain.

This experience ####### is just that -- #######. It has been from the start and will be every time it's mentioned. Especially in your case where you attempt to manipulate what "experience" means.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Palin was a good pick, we agree on that point. I will also concede that her being on the ticket is part of the reason for the shift in the polls, but my comments about the American public reacting to smear campaigns has been proven again & again.

I agree. McCain's Camp is gambling on the gullibility of enough Americans. Starting from the RNC, they are an all out assault to distract voters from the consequences of 8 years of failed policies which mostly are bread and butter Republican issues. As much as all this sleight of hand trickery is giving the Republican Ticket a boost, the 'ground war' is what really matters. If the Republicans can fool enough voters that they deserve another 4 years then more power to them, but I remain optimistic that voters will rise to the occasion and make an informed vote based on the facts and not on campaign smears.

The only thing I can agree to is Americans deserve whichever President they get. Just can't say how much the world will let this country continue the status quo without further breaking alliances and friends, and making more enemies out of neutral countries, and further instigating potential enemies.

Confrontational policies aren't exactly peace promoting, nor do they tend to have that sort of result. Both McCain and Palin are two big talkers aiming at making plenty of countries around the world potential bomb targets. What's another 4 or 8 years of war?

Well, in spite what most people believe, I think that Palin as VP will hurt McCain more than help him. Many Republicans have come out and openly criticized Obama for not choosing Hillary for his VP, however, that choice would have brought a lot of scrutiny as well as she had high negatives. Let's not forget just how much the Republicans despised the Clintons and particularly Hillary back when she was First Lady. They looked upon her own political ambitions as something to laugh at and really hated that she was getting involved in things such as national healthcare back when Bill was President.

McCain has to deal with the negatives that Palin brings to the ticket - unqualified candidate with a checkered past whose personal beliefs may turn off as many voters as it has supposedly solidified the Republican Party. All this talk of experience....no one here can say with straight face that if you put Biden and Palin in a debate over Foreign Policy, she'd even have a chance.

Don't count on it Steve.

In every debate during the primaries, Hillary outshone Obama with her grasp of knowledge. But yes, as you said, she had a lot of negatives. negatives generated by years of expeirence in the national political arena.

So the democratic poobahs picked Obama, the Rock Star who got his delegates from Red States claiming he could redraw the electoral map.Remember? you guys were claiming he could change NC and Georgia and the South from Red to Blue. And, experience? What do we need it for ? Afterall, Obama is the post partisan, transformative candidate! Right? All those experienced guys are the ones who have screwed up this country except for the chosen few like Biden who came to Washington

10 years ahead of McCain.

Well, we have to admit that we live in a "celebrity culture". So, we had Obamapaloozas everywhere he goes and yes, we got the latest celebrity as Democratic nominee.

The only thing the Dems forgot in their reckoning was that Reps know the game well and plays it better too.

So we now have Palin the latest celebrity!

Infact she is the Angelina Jolie of politics. She's hot, she's physical and yes, got six kids too. What's more, she comes with more executive experience than Obama.

Dems are hoping that Palin will hurt Mccain. Possible, but right now, she is the one holding palinpalooza s energizing both the Republican base and the independents. latest I heard, McCain is garnering the independents in the polls.

Obama has been celecrity for two years now and his star power is fading... Palin just exploded on the scene so her star power is likely to last all the way through November?

So there's no surprise that even the Intrade market odds is showing:

Intrade Market Odds47.351.5

The part you bolded - I don't quite follow your counter argument on that issue. People squabble over what constitutes as experience for this or that, but in doing so the miss a very important issue when it comes to looking for presidential qualities in the candidates - and that's whether they have extensive knowledge and understanding of such important issues as Foreign Policy. We can argue over whether Hillary or Obama trumped the other in terms of grasping it, but lets be honest, they both are very knowledge and both have a good grasp of understanding the complexities of foreign relations. Whatever Sarah Palin has experienced, there is no history and no indication of the kind level of knowledge and understanding of foreign relations that is even close to that of either Obama or Hillary. Furthermore, her recent remarks and comments about Russia demonstrate her limited understanding or knowledge. That isn't bad for an Alaskan Governor and mother of 6 per se, but for someone who is being considered for the highest office in the United States, that's worth taking note...and I'm optimistic that voters will see past whatever glitter and glammer both parties have brought to this election to see what each ticket represents. I have faith in the voters and this process no matter how much the flim flam gets magnified by the media. There's way too much at stake going into this election for far too many Americans to simply vote on a whim or a feeling.

Obama's claim was his judgement on foreign policy citing his stay in Indonesia as a 9 year old and his speech on Iraq. I wont belabor the point here but this issue has been covered quite extensively.:

See, you keep relying on trying to quantify experience as the ultimate litmus test for presidential qualities, meanwhile ignoring that knowledge and understanding are far more important. Seriously, how much foreign relations experience did Dubbya have back in 2000 when he ran? That dumba$$ still doesn't know half of what he thinks he knows when it comes to foreign relations. The argument over quantifying experience is just a smoke screen. The Obama/Biden ticket is far more qualified in terms of knowledge and understanding of such issues as foreign relations than the McCain/Palin ticket, and the American people will see that before election time if they haven't figured it out already. McCain took a gamble with Palin and unfortunately, it's not going to pay off. Your hopes for Hillary 2012 are just not in the cards, metta.