It's only April, and in general polls leave much to be desired, so take these results with a grain of salt. Still, the SurveyUSA numbers are not what I'd like to see, and in part I blame it on the nasty, extended Democratic nomination contest.
*McCain 55%-Clinton 39% (McCain +16 points)
*McCain 52%-Obama 44% (McCain +8 points)
As I said, these numbers are not great, but I would note that Barack Obama does far better in Virginia than Hillary Clinton does, at least according to this poll. Also, once Obama wraps up the nomination, the party can start to pull together for the general election. Unfortunately, unless Obama beats Clinton in Pennsylvania -- or possibly Indiana -- I don't see that happening until sometime in June, possibly not even until the convention in late August. As DNC Chairman Howard Dean said yesterday, in asking superdelegates to "say who they're for starting now":
We cannot give up two or three months of active campaigning and healing time...We've got to know who our nominee is.
No argument here.
Once Obama is the nom, he'll likely get a bump in the polls, but come November I still think he'll pull up short in VA. I hope I'm wrong.
More troubling to me: he's only two points ahead of McCain in Massachusetts. (Although he does extremely well in the Midwest--Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa.) I continue to be baffled by these supposed Democratic strongholds that show weak support for the presumptive nominee.
Well, first we need to work hard to get Mark elected as the next Senator from Virginia regardless.
Maybe a miracle will occur and voters will actually reject the
National Enquirer inspired "issues": lapel pins, and 6 degrees of separation scenarios, (you "are" by who "knows" you even if they really don't know you). Colbert hit the nail on the head on that "issue" last night.
Thank you, Colbert, for pointing out the sheer stupidity of the "connections" between Obama and just about everyone who was ever in any kind of trouble of any kind in the last few decades who might somehow know or be known by Obama.
In Virginia, you have a lot of military bases; a lot of military personnel; and outside of NoVa, Richmond suburbs and part of the Virginia Beach-Norfolk area, a lot of social conservatives. So, even if the rest of the country sweeps in the Democrats, it will be an uphill battle here. That's not to say it's impossible, but it's going to be hard.
I still think the primaries have to play out until the last one in June. If either side senses unfairness, it will be extremely difficult to re-unite the party. Likewise, although the candidates will have to remain competitive, it would be good for their surrogates and supporters to tone down the rhetoric that insults the other side's supporters. And that goes for both sides.
This is the year for Democrats to win. With the Iraq war going badly, the economy in terrible shape, and public confidence in the Republicans at an all time low ebb, it's ours to lose.
I personally am going to spend more time debunking the McCain as moderate maverick image than going after either Democrat. Somebody has got to start focusing on him and stop the free ride the press is giving him. Since our primary has passed, the other states can focus on their horse races. I'd rather concentrate on McCain.
AIAW is correct by the way but because of the troll rating I get to be harsh now
I was just following the lead of all of you. Instead of saying why you should support candidate X you attack candidate Y.
P.S. that really doesn't work most people that read this are strong Ds anyway and the few actual undecideds on here I hope are actually smart enough to be more concerned about what a candidate stands for instead of being motivated to vote out of fear or as a lesser of two evils exercise or who donated to who or what clever little nickname of the week you came up with.
I usually refrain from any kind of negative kind of rating, and this might be my first troll rating ever.
The problem with your comment is not your opinion that "Obama is a liberal who has no intention of bringing people together." I don't agree with argument. I agree that Obama is a liberal, but I don't agree with the part in which you profess some knowledge of Obama's real intentions as being different than what he say. Allowing for the possibility, however, that you possess some super-human power of perception that permits you to discern true motives of people you don't know that an average guy like me lacks, I admit you could be right.
My problem is with the vaguely threatening tone of the post, the "If you do that, I'll do this" part.
If you really believe this, then you ought to expose Obama for its own sake, not because AIAW intends to express herself regarding McCain.
It really ticks me off when he goes about his no red state blue state kumbaya stuff. He is willing to kumbaya if you agree with him.
He wants every state to be a Blue state
To be clear I don't fault that part hes a democrat. He believes the democratic party principals are the best. Thats fine if he would stop there.
I fault the pandering that he somehow wants to work with you when in fact on every issue its a democratic party talking point
;)
As for your statement
He is willing to kumbaya if you agree with him.
I first want to congratulate you on your use of "kumbaya" as a verb. That's the first time I've seen that, and I'm impressed.
But your argument mischaracterizes what Obama has said. He has made it clear that, first, he will try to persuade you to see things his way, and second, if you don't agree with him, he will respect your beliefs and pursue the policies he believes in with sensitivity and empathy.
What exactly is wrong with that? Obama is pretty clear about it. If there is a misperception about him, it is yours. but by all means, if you think because you can't see that Obama is pulling the wool over everyone's eyes, then make your case on its merits.
The difference with McCain is that McCain pretends to be someone he is not, or more accurately, that he claims to be contradictory things, namely, a maverick and a mainstream conservative. You can't be both. But the media lets him get away with this because, apparently, he is a nice, funny, self-deprecating guy who lets reporters hang out with him and he serves up a pretty good BBQ.
And I ask, what is wrong, or even negative, about exposing that? All AIAW is saying is she want to show John McCain for who he really is.
I really can't fathom why you have an objection to that.
P.S. Even Dubya promised he'd try to "change the tone in Washington." Unfortunately, the majority of Americans didn't realize he intentionally didn't add the phrase, "for the worse."
No harm intended, just experimenting.
I agree with some in the blogosphere that McCain's support is soft, and has more to do with where we are in the campaign cycle than actual preferences in November.
Don't for get to link!
It took The Establishment a while to figure out that Barack was a real threat; they ran various attacks up the flagpole to see if any could be effective: he attended a madrassa, was a Muslim, won't wear a flag pin, has a pastor who said something hateful, and so on. We had an excellent view of the counterattack by the Establishment media in the last so-called debate.
The heavy artillery has been rolled out to assist The Establishment's horse in the Democratic race: Hillary Clinton. When she of her volition brought up the Republican code word "elitist" and applied it self-righteously to Obama, I recognized that the fix was in. Mark Penn is not gone, just moved out of center stage; his union-busting, anti-labor lobbying outfit is still in place. While Obama does have some ties to big donors himself, it is very clear that we have Clinton as The Establishment Freidman Chicago economics school candidate (Wall Street is embedded) on the one hand and Obama as the non-Establishment candidate. The big old white guys of The Establishment are determined to set things aright and return the 2008 campaign to their original scenario.
Hillary give it up and get back to New York and continue with your duties as a Senator. Think of someone else but yourself. Polls are already showing that they don't believe Mrs. Clinton. Her true self is coming out. There's a place for Mrs. Clinton in politics--but being the wife of a president and a few years in the senate doesn't give her an automatic pass to back to the White House.
Based on the demographics alone its pretty much impossible for an R to win this region anymore
However if you include more counties in NoVa than it changes things