Obama's stuttering in debate...Why

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Actually Powell is thought to be a Dem by most. In college he supported a democrat and had a sticker and his buds said he was. He could have changed though but then I remember reading his book and read up on him and he is definately Dem material.

Means nothing. I was a Dem in college, too. But, then you grow up.

[villaspurs 65]

Ok Spooky I will tell you. You are my friend right? I am more of a Ron Paul voter. I lean very heavily to the Libertarian party. I know Ron Paul had no chance at all and would be frozen out but that is where my politics lie.

No bashing, I was just curious. On the Democrat side, I wasn't moved by Hillary or Obama. I wish Colin Powell would have run. I think he would have been a strong contender.

Colin Powell would have been a formidable one to beat. McCain would have crapped his pants and cried.

Hillary and Obama seemed to me that the Dems were not serious about winning the white house.

Why would Colin Powell have run as a Democrat? (That's a serious question, by the way.)

Actually Powell is thought to be a Dem by most. In college he supported a democrat and had a sticker and his buds said he was. He could have changed though but then I remember reading his book and read up on him and he is definately Dem material.

Unless he's changed since leaving the Bush cabinet, he's a Republican. (Although I can see where you would think he's a Dem--he certainly has Dem-like qualities!)

[luckytxn 2,265]

Please direct me to any substantive point you've made about McCain or Palin. Seriously. YOU are the one attacking people. If you want to have a substantive debate, fine--let's do it. Thus far all you've done is make accusations. Oh--and you've called people names. I forgot about that one.

You must be kidding. Where is everyone getting blow from?

Seriously, one substantive post.

I haven't seen a substantive post from you, or at least one that isn't funny. But, it's a known fact that Obama supporters are not the best arbitors of substance, so that wuld be an exercise in futility.

Almost had to bring up dictionary.com. I am not the shiniest apple in the barrel so be careful with big words.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Whomever is arguing that political polling is reliable, I have one question for you. Why? The proof is in how unreliable polling results have been in the last two national elections. It's rife with dependencies that negate and reliability. The only polling about this election that counts anyway is the election itself, and some would argue that.

[villaspurs 65]

Please direct me to any substantive point you've made about McCain or Palin. Seriously. YOU are the one attacking people. If you want to have a substantive debate, fine--let's do it. Thus far all you've done is make accusations. Oh--and you've called people names. I forgot about that one.

You must be kidding. Where is everyone getting blow from?

Seriously, one substantive post.

I haven't seen a substantive post from you, or at least one that isn't funny. But, it's a known fact that Obama supporters are not the best arbitors of substance, so that wuld be an exercise in futility.

Exactly my point.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Ok Spooky I will tell you. You are my friend right? I am more of a Ron Paul voter. I lean very heavily to the Libertarian party. I know Ron Paul had no chance at all and would be frozen out but that is where my politics lie.

No bashing, I was just curious. On the Democrat side, I wasn't moved by Hillary or Obama. I wish Colin Powell would have run. I think he would have been a strong contender.

Colin Powell would have been a formidable one to beat. McCain would have crapped his pants and cried.

Hillary and Obama seemed to me that the Dems were not serious about winning the white house.

Why would Colin Powell have run as a Democrat? (That's a serious question, by the way.)

Actually Powell is thought to be a Dem by most. In college he supported a democrat and had a sticker and his buds said he was. He could have changed though but then I remember reading his book and read up on him and he is definately Dem material.

Unless he's changed since leaving the Bush cabinet, he's a Republican. (Although I can see where you would think he's a Dem--he certainly has Dem-like qualities!)

McCain has Dem-like qualities, too. That's nothing to brag about.

[luckytxn 2,265]

Ok Spooky I will tell you. You are my friend right? I am more of a Ron Paul voter. I lean very heavily to the Libertarian party. I know Ron Paul had no chance at all and would be frozen out but that is where my politics lie.

No bashing, I was just curious. On the Democrat side, I wasn't moved by Hillary or Obama. I wish Colin Powell would have run. I think he would have been a strong contender.

Colin Powell would have been a formidable one to beat. McCain would have crapped his pants and cried.

Hillary and Obama seemed to me that the Dems were not serious about winning the white house.

Why would Colin Powell have run as a Democrat? (That's a serious question, by the way.)

Actually Powell is thought to be a Dem by most. In college he supported a democrat and had a sticker and his buds said he was. He could have changed though but then I remember reading his book and read up on him and he is definately Dem material.

Unless he's changed since leaving the Bush cabinet, he's a Republican. (Although I can see where you would think he's a Dem--he certainly has Dem-like qualities!)

Most make this mistake because he served Bush so faithfully. He also served Clinton faithfully but most forget this. He was a champion at being able to serve who was in power so well.

He subscribes to quotas and is in favor of many of the socialized programs that are popular with the Dems. In fact of the two parties his ideas would go very well with the Dems. A couple of things he leaned toward Reps but forgot what they were. I am sober here after all.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Please direct me to any substantive point you've made about McCain or Palin. Seriously. YOU are the one attacking people. If you want to have a substantive debate, fine--let's do it. Thus far all you've done is make accusations. Oh--and you've called people names. I forgot about that one.

You must be kidding. Where is everyone getting blow from?

Seriously, one substantive post.

I haven't seen a substantive post from you, or at least one that isn't funny. But, it's a known fact that Obama supporters are not the best arbitors of substance, so that wuld be an exercise in futility.

Exactly my point.

Good! I thought you might have one.

[luckytxn 2,265]

Ok Spooky I will tell you. You are my friend right? I am more of a Ron Paul voter. I lean very heavily to the Libertarian party. I know Ron Paul had no chance at all and would be frozen out but that is where my politics lie.

No bashing, I was just curious. On the Democrat side, I wasn't moved by Hillary or Obama. I wish Colin Powell would have run. I think he would have been a strong contender.

Colin Powell would have been a formidable one to beat. McCain would have crapped his pants and cried.

Hillary and Obama seemed to me that the Dems were not serious about winning the white house.

Why would Colin Powell have run as a Democrat? (That's a serious question, by the way.)

Actually Powell is thought to be a Dem by most. In college he supported a democrat and had a sticker and his buds said he was. He could have changed though but then I remember reading his book and read up on him and he is definately Dem material.

Unless he's changed since leaving the Bush cabinet, he's a Republican. (Although I can see where you would think he's a Dem--he certainly has Dem-like qualities!)

McCain has Dem-like qualities, too. That's nothing to brag about.

I think I have brought this up many times already. Glad to see I am not the only one that see this.

[IAMX 3,055]

Most make this mistake because he served Bush so faithfully. He also served Clinton faithfully but most forget this. He was a champion at being able to serve who was in power so well.

He subscribes to quotas and is in favor of many of the socialized programs that are popular with the Dems. In fact of the two parties his ideas would go very well with the Dems. A couple of things he leaned toward Reps but forgot what they were. I am sober here after all.

I don't know who tricked you into believing Republicans can't be for social programs and increased taxes to pay for them. Last I checked there is no single point of view or Republican bible for how everyone in the party votes or thinks.

Edited September 28, 2008 by SRVT

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I think I have brought this up many times already. Glad to see I am not the only one that see this.

It's not the first time I've said it, but probably, the 101st. Posts fly by sometimes, we miss alot.

[luckytxn 2,265]

Most make this mistake because he served Bush so faithfully. He also served Clinton faithfully but most forget this. He was a champion at being able to serve who was in power so well.

He subscribes to quotas and is in favor of many of the socialized programs that are popular with the Dems. In fact of the two parties his ideas would go very well with the Dems. A couple of things he leaned toward Reps but forgot what they were. I am sober here after all.

I don't know who tricked you into believing Republicans can't be for social programs and increased taxes to pay for them. Last I checked there is no single point of view or Republican bible for how everyone in the party votes or thinks.

Well Duh!

I thought I had said this before. Maybe I am not posting clearly. Apologize if my politics have not been shining through.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Most make this mistake because he served Bush so faithfully. He also served Clinton faithfully but most forget this. He was a champion at being able to serve who was in power so well.

He subscribes to quotas and is in favor of many of the socialized programs that are popular with the Dems. In fact of the two parties his ideas would go very well with the Dems. A couple of things he leaned toward Reps but forgot what they were. I am sober here after all.

I don't know who tricked you into believing Republicans can't be for social programs and increased taxes to pay for them. Last I checked there is no single point of view or Republican bible for how everyone in the party votes or thinks.

In fact, the two parties are becoming more alike than not, which is not an improvement, at least not for the Republicans.

[luckytxn 2,265]

I think I have brought this up many times already. Glad to see I am not the only one that see this.

It's not the first time I've said it, but probably, the 101st. Posts fly by sometimes, we miss alot.

Preaching to the choir here.

[villaspurs 65]

Whomever is arguing that political polling is reliable, I have one question for you. Why? The proof is in how unreliable polling results have been in the last two national elections. It's rife with dependencies that negate and reliability. The only polling about this election that counts anyway is the election itself, and some would argue that.

What? That doesn't even make sense...

Polling is useful when used correctly and conducted according to acceptable standards. This isn't my opinion, this is science. No one claims that polls are 100% accurate--that's why they have margins of error associated with them. Most of the survey results we use have an 8 point "spread" based on the margin of error, and unfortunately these are often unreported.

As I've been saying, surveys conducted right now show a very tight race and cannot possibly predict who will win. On top of that, thanks to the Electoral College, national polls are MEANINGLESS IN THE UNITED STATES except to provide a picture of the electorate and to have something for the media to write. Lest we all forget, Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000. The Electoral College is all that matters. That doesn't mean that the surveys are incorrect--it just means they don't matter in practice for anything besides gauging popular opinion.