The Next President of the USA will be?

[Dancin'Days]

It's amazing how much of my post you were scared to quote. You know, the part about Obama's character being in question because of his friends that are anti American and racist. You just want to gloss that over, don't you kermit. Kind of like the way you admitted that Obama makes the same sort of mistakes that McCain has. You try to cover it up with your cute little photo shopped pictures degrading McCain, a U.S. veteran. Keep on posting, like I said...................you are helping McCains cause. Since you started your post's mcCain has drawn to almost a dead heat in many polls. You are the best thing that has ever happened to McCain around here.

What if McCain starts having flashbacks when he visits Asian countries and goes ballistic?

[Hermit_]

It's amazing how much of my post you were scared to quote. You know, the part about Obama's character being in question because of his friends that are anti American and racist. You just want to gloss that over, don't you kermit. Kind of like the way you admitted that Obama makes the same sort of mistakes that McCain has. You try to cover it up with your cute little photo shopped pictures degrading McCain, a U.S. veteran. Keep on posting, like I said...................you are helping McCains cause. Since you started your post's mcCain has drawn to almost a dead heat in many polls. You are the best thing that has ever happened to McCain around here.

Good lord, muh-man,.. you sound like a broken gramophone disc.

Tell us, R-51,..

If Hillary Clinton had won the democratic party nomination, would you be

supporting her or John "Help! I've Fallen And I Can't Get It Up" McCain?

[Fwiw,.. I only ask cuz there's this guy who used to post here.. before he got banned (numerous times).. and he used to support Hillary Clinton.. rabidly.. and he swore that if Obama won the dem nomination, he'd vote for John McCain.. cuz he really hates Barack Obama.. you know, like you do.. and this guy was obsessively focused on the people Obama "associated with".. you know, like you are.. and he liked rant about Obama's "20 years" of listening to Rev Wright.. you know, like you do.. and went on an on about Obama's so-called "anti-American" and "racist" friends.. you know, like you do.. and he had really bad spelling and grammar.. you know, like you do.. and.. bizarrely enough.. this guy wore a pink tutu.. you know,.. like you do.. and every time this guy got banned he'd come back again under a new user name.. but you know what?.. he hasn't been back since you arrived.. and it all just seems like an amazing coincidence to me.. you know?

So.. that's why I ask if you'd be voting for Hillary if she'd won the dem nomination. See? ]

Hi, buddy.

[isn't it about time you break out your Bill Ayers diatribe? ]

[marolyn]

ok boys...not trying to diffuse your fun... just spent 2 weeks in the czech republic and slovakia and spent the whole time calling it "czechoslovakia"...old habits die hard i guess...or else i'm just getting REALLY FUCKING OLD...thanks hermit... ....and planet-51(welcome back, missed us, huh?)...went to the same church for nine yrs and would hardly call my pastor my "friend"...irrelevant

Fwiw,.. I only ask cuz there's this guy who used to post here.. before he got banned (numerous times).. and he used to support Hillary Clinton.. rabidly.. and he swore that if Obama won the dem nomination, he'd vote for John McCain.. cuz he really hates Barack Obama.. you know, like you do.. and this guy was obsessively focused on the people Obama "associated with".. you know, like you are.. and he liked rant about Obama's "20 years" of listening to Rev Wright.. you know, like you do.. and went on an on about Obama's so-called "anti-American" and "racist" friends.. you know, like you do.. and he had really bad spelling and grammar.. you know, like you do.. and.. bizarrely enough.. this guy wore a pink tutu.. you know,.. like you do.. and every time this guy got banned he'd come back again under a new user name.. but you know what?.. he hasn't been back since you arrived.. and it all just seems like an amazing coincidence to me.. you know?

and here i was thinking he just had too much to DRINK...

[Katuschka]

...or else i'm just getting REALLY FUCKING OLD...

...maybe.

[cryingbluerain]

What I DO think is funny, though, is you posting that picture in this thread as though it's a slam on the Obamas and not at all getting that it's actually a slam on people like YOU and the political party that manipulates you like the fearful little pawn that you are.

The New Yorker cover is a satire piece ridiculing, exposing and criticizing certain *ahem* peoples' stupidity. It does so by way of depicting a caricature of the Obamas that is not based any real characteristics of the Obamas, but rather is based on lies repeatedly told about the Obamas by the republican fear-and-smear machine... lies that people like you believe.

It's a very clever satire.. perhaps even too clever by half.., and it's certainly understandable that the Obama's would be offended by it.

By just looking at the New Yorker cover itself there is no way of knowing whether it is a "slam" on Obama or as you say a satire piece ridiculing "other people's stupitidy". Yes, I do think it looks funny, but not for the terrorist and Muslim aspects but for the cartoonish caricatures of the Obamas themselves. I cracked up when I saw it unlike your pic of McCain which just looks sad to me. Maybe other folks think it is funny but I was being sarcastic when I said I found it amusing. The New Yorker cover was very thougtful and clever as you said whereas your attempt at humor I really didn't find that funny.

Get it Hermit (liberal pawn of the Obama campaign machine)?

BTW, I think the New Yorker magazine really shot themselves in the foot with their attempt at mocking satire. I think that most people will remember the funny image itself and not necessarily the message the magazine was trying to get across. Maybe that's the real reason the Obamas are so offended by it..

[Speed Racer]

Good question. I sure wish we had more qualified candidates to choose from. I find many not knowing who they will vote for. Not because they have no idea where to stand. But because the candidates have no idea where to stand.

Kinda sad really.

[Hermit_]

ok boys...not trying to diffuse your fun... just spent 2 weeks in the czech republic and slovakia and spent the whole time calling it "czechoslovakia"...old habits die hard i guess...or else i'm just getting REALLY FUCKING OLD...thanks hermit... ....and planet-51(welcome back, missed us, huh?)...went to the same church for nine yrs and would hardly call my pastor my "friend"...irrelevant

It could be that you're getting really fucking old, marolyn,.. ( ).. but at least you're not running for POTUS and touting yourself as a foreign policy expert. If you were, you're Czechoslovakia gaffe would be as concerning (and humorous) (and pathetic) as really fucking old man McCain's. But in your case.. it's just funny.

[and dont worry,.. compared to John McCain.. you're still really, really.. really.. young. ]

And speaking of "old habits dying hard"..

(you know.. as in.. I Cant Quit You Babe.. or icantquityoubabe as it may be)..

and here i was thinking he just had too much to DRINK...

..thats a good guess, but although R-51 does hail from over the hills and far away..

or overthehillsandfaraway as it may be.. he isn't our old friend CHRONIC INEBRIANT.

..which isn't to say R-51 hasn't had too much to drink, mind you.

how else do you explain the pink tutu and magic wand.. right?

[cryingbluerain]

More on the New Yorker magazine topic..

Barack Obama tries to repair a PR blunder, but 2 days too late

(excerpt)

So, last night on "Larry King Live," right out of the box before asking about Obama's main message, his big Iraq speech, old Larry goes right to the top issue: "We welcome to 'Larry King Live' Sen. Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. He made a major foreign policy address today in Washington. We'll get to that in a moment.

"But I've heard a lot of others comment on it. We haven't heard you speak about it yet. That New Yorker cover which depicts you and your wife, and you dressed in a Muslim outfit, your wife in a kind of military outfit, Osama bin Laden's picture burning [sic], what do you make of that?"

And Obama calmly replied: "Well, I know it was The New Yorker's attempt at satire. I don't think they were entirely successful with it. But you know what? It's a cartoon, Larry, and that's why we've got the 1st Amendment.

"And I think the American people are probably spending a little more time worrying about what's happening with the banking system and the housing market, and what's happening in Iraq and Afghanistan, than a cartoon. So I haven't spent a lot of time thinking about it."

Smart stuff. Too late.

Imagine what else we might all be talking about this morning if that had been the campaign's opening response Sunday.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington...a-muslim-1.html

[Electrophile]

[Fwiw,.. I only ask cuz there's this guy who used to post here.. before he got banned (numerous times).. and he used to support Hillary Clinton.. rabidly.. and he swore that if Obama won the dem nomination, he'd vote for John McCain.. cuz he really hates Barack Obama.. you know, like you do.. and this guy was obsessively focused on the people Obama "associated with".. you know, like you are.. and he liked rant about Obama's "20 years" of listening to Rev Wright.. you know, like you do.. and went on an on about Obama's so-called "anti-American" and "racist" friends.. you know, like you do.. and he had really bad spelling and grammar.. you know, like you do.. and.. bizarrely enough.. this guy wore a pink tutu.. you know,.. like you do.. and every time this guy got banned he'd come back again under a new user name.. but you know what?.. he hasn't been back since you arrived.. and it all just seems like an amazing coincidence to me.. you know?

[Suz]

Hermit said the F word........

[Electrophile]

Suz, was it talking to me?

[Suz]

It could be that you're getting really fucking old

No, this was to Marolyn

posts 3341 and 3345

[Hermit_]

Suz, was it talking to me?

Yeah,.. I think "it" was talking to you, Elizabeth.

[but hey.. at least it didn't accuse you of slander.. this time.. and it

was even impressed by your lady-like absence of sailor language! ]

"Abra cadabra.. low gas!

Abra cadabra.. LOW GAS!

Abra cadabra.. LOW %@$*^% GAS!

...dammit! "

[Suz]

Yeah,.. I think "it" was talking to you, Elizabeth.

[but hey.. at least it didn't accuse you of slander.. this time.. and it

was even impressed by your lady-like absence of sailor language! ]

"Abra cadabra.. low gas!

Abra cadabra.. LOW GAS!

Abra cadabra.. LOW %@$*^% GAS!

...dammit! "

Oh, for fuck's sake Now I get it

[Hermit_]

Kermit, you think McCain is doing so bad..........

.........I guess that is why he is gaining in the polls, some almost even.

...........I guess you expect us to take your word on that, eh son?

No go. We know better than to take your uniformed, self-deluded

word on anything pertaining to this general election, muh-boy.

--------------

*Obama leads by 8 points in poll

Economy remains the top concern*

July 15, 2008: Sen. Barack Obama holds his biggest advantage of the presidential campaign as the candidate best prepared to fix the nation's ailing economy, but lingering concerns about his readiness to handle international crises are keeping the race competitive, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Overall, the Democrat has a lead of 50 percent to 42 percent over Republican Sen. John McCain among registered voters nationwide, lifted by a big edge among women, and he has also regained an edge among political independents. But it is Obama's 19-point lead on the economy that has become a particularly steep challenge for McCain.

------------

And.. from RealClearPolitics.com (a notoriously right-leaning website, btw):

I like the looks of that trend, P-boy;.. how about you?

[marolyn]

Obama went for 20+ years to this Church and reffered to this Rev. as not only a friend but that he was as close to him as a family member. Big difference. Why did Obama not leave this church long before he felt that he had to for "political" reason's?? If McCain had a friend that was this anti American and racist he would have been forced to step down out of the race. But most of the media will give Obama a pass on anything............................. and his robot's like kermit keep covering up for him.

again...rev. wright is his own person, not an extension of obama...you obviously need to diversify your own inner circle if you cannot comprehend this...

[Pb Derigable]

The Race is a Dead Heat

My hermit you are spinning the numbers

There is only one poll in the last two weeks that claims he has any think near 8%

The Gallup indicates a 2% lead for him and the Rasmussen indicates a fucking tie.

A fucking Tie and 2% no where fucking near a god damn 8% lead for Nobama.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/20..._obama-225.html

See i can spin those fucking numbers.

How in this fucking world is McCain anywhere near in number the polls with so much against him. Maybe because Obama and his fucking supporters are dumb.

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll

Thursday, July 17, 2008

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows Barack Obama attracting 44% of the vote while John McCain earns 42%. When "leaners" are included, it’s Obama 46% and McCain 46% (see recent daily results). McCain is viewed favorably by 56% of voters, Obama by 54%. Tracking Polls are released at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time each day. State polling released yesterday showed Obama with a steady lead in Oregon and McCain with a twenty-point lead in Kansas.

McCain is supported by 82% of Republicans and holds an eleven-point edge among unaffiliated voters. Obama is supported by 76% of Democrats. Obama leads among voters under 30 while McCain has the edge among those over 65. The two candidates are even among voters aged 30-64 (see other recent demographic highlights). Thirty-four percent (34%) of voters are certain they will vote for Obama and not change their mind before November. Another 34% are that certain about voting for McCain. That leaves 32% open to changing their mind before voting and creates a potential for either candidate to open a significant lead in the fall. Other key stats on the race for the White House can be found at Obama-McCain: By the Numbers.

Please sign up for the Rasmussen Reports daily e-mail update (it’s free)… let us keep you up to date with the latest public opinion news.

New data released this morning shows that 48% of voters agree with Obama and believe Iraq is not the central front in the War on Terror. This comes a day after polling showed that growing numbers of Americans see the U.S. winning the War on Terror. Other new data shows that Democrats are trusted more than Republicans on seven of ten key issues tracked regularly by Rasmussen Reports.

Senate polling released yesterday showed Oregon Senator Gordon Smith remains vulnerable this election cycle. But, Republicans can take more comfort in the Senate polling from Kansas.

At noon Eastern today, Rasmussen Reports will release new polling data on the Presidential race in North Carolina. At 5:00 p.m. Eastern, new data will be released on the race in Nevada and Arkansas. A North Carolina Senate update will be released at 3:00 p.m. Eastern.

Monday, Rasmussen Reports released new state polls in South Dakota, Louisiana, Michigan, Iowa, and Minnesota. The Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator shows now Obama leading in states with 210 Electoral College votes while McCain leads in states with 168 votes. When leaners are included, it’s Obama 293, McCain 227.

Rasmussen Markets data gives Obama a 65.7% chance of winning the White House.

Daily tracking results are collected via telephone surveys of 1,000 likely voters per night and reported on a three-day rolling average basis. The margin of sampling error—for the full sample of 3,000 Likely Voters--is +/- 2 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Results are also compiled on a full-week basis and crosstabs for the full-week results are available for Premium Members.

A review of last week’s key polls is posted each Saturday morning.

Rasmussen Reports is an electronic publishing firm specializing in the collection, publication, and distribution of public opinion polling information.

The Rasmussen Reports ElectionEdge™ Premium Service for Election 2008 offers the most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a Presidential election.

Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, has been an independent pollster for more than a decade.

[RoundRobin]

What an Obamanation if Barack is elected!

I don't see it happening.

[Speed Racer]

Speed Racer. The next president of the USA.

[Electrophile]

Are you seriously a gimmick poster?

[Hermit_]

My hermit you are spinning the numbers

I'm not your Hermit. [Ewww!]

And.. ..how exactly did I "spin the numbers", P-diddy?

All I did was post an article and a graph. I didn't comment on them at all (other than to say "I like the looks of that trend"); I let the facts, as presented in the article and the graph (of several different polls) speak for themselves.

See? -->

...........I guess you expect us to take your word on that, eh son?

No go. We know better than to take your uniformed, self-deluded

word on anything pertaining to this general election, muh-boy.

--------------

*Obama leads by 8 points in poll

Economy remains the top concern*

July 15, 2008: Sen. Barack Obama holds his biggest advantage of the presidential campaign as the candidate best prepared to fix the nation's ailing economy, but lingering concerns about his readiness to handle international crises are keeping the race competitive, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Overall, the Democrat has a lead of 50 percent to 42 percent over Republican Sen. John McCain among registered voters nationwide, lifted by a big edge among women, and he has also regained an edge among political independents. But it is Obama's 19-point lead on the economy that has become a particularly steep challenge for McCain.

------------

And.. from RealClearPolitics.com (a notoriously right-leaning website, btw):

I like the looks of that trend, P-boy;.. how about you?

Where's the "spin", P-diddle?

Lemme save you some time by answering the question for you: there is none.

[Do you even know what it means to "spin" an issue? ]

Next!

[Hermit_]

What about all of the daily flip flops were Obama keeps changing his earlier positions? A couple of post's back, I listed just a few. And why do you keep avoiding the fact that Obama listened to Rev. Wright and gave money to that church for over 20 years. Then 20+ years later, and only because of political reasons he quit that church. What do you say about the flip flops that I listed, ol' kermit?

And by the way kermit, Pb derigable's poll's have come from more reliable sources then yours. Yours must have been drug out of your cave, pull some info out of that cave to try and defend Obama's flip flops and why he hung around with Rev. Wright so long.

1. You NEVER address the points I raise, so where do you get off

constantly whining about me "avoiding" the points that you make?

2. I've responded to your Rev Wright claim multiple times. Get over it already.

My response isn't going to change P-diddle. Like I said, I consider it a stale non-issue.

You know.. more stale than a 71 year old cracker. Get it, homey?

3. If you weren't brain dead, you'd realize that the poll source Pb cited is THE EXACT SAME SOURCE I cited (realclearpolitics.com); and he references 'Rasmussen' and 'Gallup'.. poll sources THAT WERE INCLUDED in the graph I posted. Hell-Ohhh!

See for yourself. What Pipeboy posted: -->

The Race is a Dead Heat

My hermit you are spinning the numbers

There is only one poll in the last two weeks that claims he has any think near 8%. The Gallup indicates a 2% lead for him and the Rasmussen indicates a fucking tie.

A fucking Tie and 2% no where fucking near a god damn 8% lead for Nobama.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep..._obama-225.html

-----------

[Hermit reply: in your realclearpolitics.com link, the Reuters/Zogby poll shows Obama with a 7% lead and the Qunnipiac poll shows Obama with a 9% lead. Furthermore, the Wash Post/ABC poll I posted shows Obama 50% and McCain 42%. Do the math, muh-man.. that's an 8% lead. I don't know about you, Pipeboy, but I'd say all three of those poll results show "fucking near a god damn 8% lead" for Obama. ]

And what I posted: -->

*Obama leads by 8 points in poll

Economy remains the top concern

*

July 15, 2008: Sen. Barack Obama holds his biggest advantage of the presidential campaign as the candidate best prepared to fix the nation's ailing economy, but lingering concerns about his readiness to handle international crises are keeping the race competitive, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Overall, the Democrat has a lead of 50 percent to 42 percent over Republican Sen. John McCain among registered voters nationwide, lifted by a big edge among women, and he has also regained an edge among political independents. But it is Obama's 19-point lead on the economy that has become a particularly steep challenge for McCain.

------------

And.. from RealClearPolitics.com (a notoriously right-leaning website, btw):

As you might have notice (though probably not),

..the polls included in my post include the polls cited by Pb (in bold below):

CBS News/NY Times

ABC News/Wash Post

Reuters/Zogby

Gallup

Rasmussen Tracking

Quinnipiac

Newsweek

And the source we both used was realclearpolitics.com.

"Pb derigable's poll's have come from more reliable sources then yours."

Are you a total moron, or do you just play one on the internet, P-51?

[and I'm not even referring to your spelling and grammar. ]

[Hermit_]

Ok,.. I'll humor you, P-diddle.

JUST AFEW OF OBAMAS FLIP FLOPS

The Iraq war:

His problem here is that he has changed his emphasis to flexibility from a hard-nosed end-the-war stance — including his recent position that withdrawing combat troops could take as long as 16 months — will now be heard loud and clear by an anti-war camp that may have ignored it before. So he could face a double-whammy in their feelings of betrayal and other voters' belief in the Republican charge that he is craven.

What you fail to recognize, you bonehead, is that democrats appreciate and respect "flexibility" in a head of state/political candidate. And democrats realize that Obama has not wavered on his commitment to end the war in Iraq. Democrats are aware (and more and more of the general electorate is becoming aware) of the fact that Obama has been right about Iraq from the very beginning and McCain has been wrong. Democrats also recognize that John McCain is now adopting Obama's year-plus-old plan for Afghanistan and Pakistan. McCain is following Obama's lead.. because Obama is right. Democrats are also well aware that George Bush has now adopted Obama's plan for having diplomatic talks with Iran.. a tactic you birdbrains criticized as being "naive" just a few weeks ago.

Obama is leading the way on national security issues and McCain and Bush are following.

Obama is showing the leadership, wisdom, foresight, and judgment that McCain lacks.

So beat your 'Obama Iraq flip-flop' drum all you want, Rick.

The only person you're fooling is yourself, muh-boy. ..as usual.

Special Interest groups:

He described Union contrbutions to Hillary and Edwards as "Special interest money". Now, he happily excepts it saying that he is thrilled by their support.

Obama's agenda was to reduce the influence of "big donors" and "special interest money" on the political process. His campaign is receiving its money by-and-large from small donors.. millions and millions of them. Because you cant comprehend the principle at work here doesn't mean Obama has flip-flopped; it merely means you're too intellectually challenged to comprehend it.

Cuba Embargo:

Obama said it was time to end it, then while speaking to a Cuban group in Miami said that he would not.

When speaking to Cuban-Americans in Florida Obama said he would adopt a policy they might not like; he indicated that he would maintain the Cuban embargo, but with some modifications: he would allow travel to Cuba and would allow Cuban-Americans to send money to their families in Cuba. By reporting that policy to the group of voters, he risked losing their votes. That is NOT pandering.

Obama changing his position on this issue was not a matter of pandering, it was based on his having given further thoughtful consideration to the issue and having adjusted his position accordingly. You can call that a flip-flop if you want (and surely you will), but given that he did not change his position as a matter of pandering for votes, I have no problem with his change of position. As far as the general election goes, the Cuban embargo is not an issue of much concern to most people. And to those to whom it is an issue, Obama told them to their face that his policy is one they might not agree with. Kudos to him for that, I say!

Illegal workers:

In March 2004 he said that he would "oppose" a "crack down" on businesses that hire illegals. In Jan. 2008 Obama said that we do need to "crack down" on these same businesses.

In 2004 he checked the "oppose" box on a questionnaire.. *yawn*.. otherwise, he has been entirely consistent in indicating that he thinks businesses who hire illegals should be held accountable. His position is consistent with the position held by most democrats. He is now representing the democratic party and his position on this illegal immigration reflects as much.

Marijuana:

In 2004 Obama told Illinois college students that he was for the decriminalization of marijuana. In Oct. 2007 he joined other Dem. candidates in opposing this very thing.

This is very likely a disingenuous claim of position change.. to avoid the predictable right wing specious attacks that would surely claim that he advocates illicit drug use. The intelligent position on this issue (the position he really takes) is clearly too nuanced and thought-intensive for many people who vote in general elections (so-called "low-information".. ie, uninformed.. ie, ignorant.. voters). Right wing smear groups would seize the opportunity to make hay of any dem candidate who comes out in support of legalizing marijuana, and they would use this lower-tier issue as a distraction from more important issues. I think Obama is doing the right thing, politically,.. the wise thing.. by choosing not to fight the marijuana legalization battle as a candidate for POTUS.

You can call it a flip-flop all you want (and surely you will),.. but again its an issue that is not high (pun intended) on most voters' list of important issues in this election. In other words.. its a non-issue. His move is prudent,.. if not politically expedient.. and I support it.

Government eavesdropping:

He now supports a much broader goverment program after opposing it last year.

What he opposed initially was not the FISA bill, per se, but the portion of that granted immunity to the telecoms. The bill he voted for does grant immunity to the telecoms (and thus the uproar over his support for the bill), but that immunity is only against civil prosecution. Obama is aware that the bill does not grant the telecoms immunity from criminal prosecution, and thus telecoms in essence do not have immunity. Plus, criminal prosecutions of telecoms may uncover evidence of criminal activity within the Bush administration which may lead to criminal prosecution of people within the Bush administration, perhaps even Cheney and Bush.

Obama's support for the compromise FISA bill was not an example of him abandoning his anti-immunity principles on the issue; he maintained his anti-immunity principles while also allowing for the FISA bill to be renewed, a bill that now includes much stricter oversight.

Second Amendment:

After always having a F- rating by the NRA, and being the most anti gun Senator in recent history, he now supports an individuals right to own a gun. (convenient now isn't it)

Obama has never opposed the Second Amendment; he has always supported an individual's right to bear arms. That does not mean he supports individuals rights to bear assault weapons though. Your assertion that his support for the Second Amendment is new is totally bogus.

Abortion:

He "now" says that "mental distress" should not count as a health exception for a late term abortion. This is a matter crucial to the abortion activists, that he no longer supports.

Obama has been consistent in his overall pro-choice position; his opposition to partial birth abortions is more restrictive than the position taken by the most liberal of pro-choice supporters. Good for Obama, I say. His position is based on own his own conscience and his own determination. His position is not going to win over any pro-life voters, so his position is clearly not an act of pandering. Nor is it a flip-flop as he is still squarely Pro-choice.

You're grasping at straws, muh-man.

I could go on and on, but I do not want to bore you like ol' kermit does.

Since you plagiarized most of that list from an internet source that you did not cite (I came across that list on several websites), I highly doubt that "you" could go on and on.. unless of course you mean "you" could go on and on plagiarizing.

Anyway..

You might might take exception to any or all of my replies to your (plagiarized) list of so-called "Obama flip-flops", and thats fine with me, muh-boy.. but let it be known here an now that I have responded to your every point.. whereas you have NEVER responded to any of the points I've made about John McCain's pervasive and persistent pattern of shameless pandering, shameless lying, and all-too-frequent memory lapses/mistakes/gaffes.. the frequency of which calls into question his mental fitness to be POTUS.

You hide behind the claim "I don't want to bore you like Hermit does" when the simple truth is that you lack the intellectual capacity to articulately, thoughtfully, substantively and insightfully (or any one of the above) refute my assertions.

Hell,.. you didn't even notice that Pb and I had cited the exact same poll source when

you claimed "Pb derigable's poll's have come from more reliable sources then yours.".

Go sit in the corner and contemplate your incompetence, P-diddle.

Next!

[Pb Derigable]

Alright, Ill admit, Obama did have a 8% lead in two polls, but he is also tied in another and only has a 2% lead in another and the RCP avg poll suggests a no more than a 5% lead. So claiming 8% lead by obama when the latest polls indicate somewhere below 5% is quite Obama like.

[Hermit_]

Alright, Ill admit, Obama did have a 8% lead in two polls, but he is also tied in another and only has a 2% lead in another and the RCP avg poll suggests a no more than a 5% lead. So claiming 8% lead by obama when the latest polls indicate somewhere below 5% is quite Obama like.

I appreciate you acknowledging where you were wrong, Pb. Kudos to you.

Chances are that our friend Planet-Zero won't be big enough to do the same.

For the record,.. I didn't personally "claim" anything; I merely posted an article that reported on the Wash Post/ABC poll that showed Obama with a 50%-42% lead over McCain (ie, an 8% lead), and the title of the article announced Obama to have an 8% lead over McCain. The Obama 8% lead "claim".. made by the author of the article, not by me,.. was in fact a true claim.. was a factual claim.. was an accurate claim.. based on the actual Wash Post/ABC poll results.

For the record 2,.. I went out of my way to include the Real Clear Politics numbers which included the results of several polls, including a few that showed Obama with a 3% lead, one poll that showed he and McCain to be tied, and a couple that showed Obama with a 7% and 9% lead respectively. The overall RCP (realclearpolitics) average of all the polls showed Obama with a 4.8% lead. In other words, my posting of poll results was fair and balanced.

For the record 3.. a lead of 4-8% on a national level can be indicative of a huge lead. According to Chuck Todd (a reputable pollster and poll analyzer) at MSNBC, a 3% lead translates to a close general election race (for perspective: GWB won by 3% in 2004); 4% indicates a comfortable win; and 5% and above translates to a big victory. In that regard, the polls showing Obama with an average lead of 4.8% is very good news for Obama.