GatewayRedbirds.com

Colorado is going to be a very blue state. Democratic governor, Democratic senators and they're going to elect Obama.

Ben, your arguments for why the race is going to be close (I think it's going to be close too, 291-247) are the equivalent of arguing that the Cubs can't win the World Series because they haven't done it in a 100 years. Yes, the race will inevitably be close in many states, but like Clement said, something weird would have to happen for the polls to show something normal for a sustained period of time then suddenly on election day they were wildly wrong for six months.

Richie Allen wrote:

BW23 wrote:

[/youtube]

Yeah, Obama's the only candidate that you could do that with.

BTW, what's with that [expletive] music?

Yeah, I don't think you have to try very hard to find conservatives/Republicans being wary of McCain or Palin. After all, they're a team of mavericks.

McCain is spending money in Pennsylvania because he thinks that it's his best chance of winning. Obama is spending money there because he's got lots and wants to be sure and defend the state. I don't know how we went from that to concluding that the very extensive polling is all totally bogus. Polling is a complex art and certainly subject to significant error, but there would need to be very bad errors to overcome Obama's lead. What evidence do you have that such errors exist? It sounds like pure speculation to me. Many things have changed since the past elections you mentioned including since 2004. Just to mention one thing, the Republican base has shrunk significantly. The polling reflects that.

In any case, get thee to the polls tomorrow.

BW23 wrote:Obama will likely get more votes because he's black than he'll lose because he's black.

He should lose because of how extremely left he is and how suspect, at best, his judgment is, but he talks a good game (without saying anything) that all of that is mostly glossed over.

Sure, he says something. He says he'll end the Bush tax cuts. That alone should get the vote of anyone who understands economics.

Arthur Dent wrote:In any case, get thee to the polls tomorrow.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

No excuses. Vote. And don't forget your free cup of coffee at Starbucks.

GatewaySnayke wrote:

BW23 wrote:Obama will likely get more votes because he's black than he'll lose because he's black.

He should lose because of how extremely left he is and how suspect, at best, his judgment is, but he talks a good game (without saying anything) that all of that is mostly glossed over.

Sure, he says something. He says he'll end the Bush tax cuts. That alone should get the vote of anyone who understands economics.

Or anyone gullible/stupid enough to believe he'll do what he says economically, especially since what he says he'll do and what he's done (voting-wise, since he's really never accomplished anything) are two different things. Sure.

Richie Allen wrote:

BW23 wrote:

[/youtube]

Yeah, Obama's the only candidate that you could do that with.

BTW, what's with that [expletive] music?

The spot was done under a time constraint. 15 minutes. Beethoven was the first instrumental song found. No access to music beds.

Popeye_Card wrote:

BenNX74205 wrote:
If it's stupid for McCain to spend there when it's hopelessly lost, isn't it even stupider for Obama to spend there when it's already won?

Well Obama has quite a bit more money to spend than McCain. And it's smart to run ads, etc. in states even where you have a comfortable lead to ensure that your support there doesn't get complacent. I'm sure McCain is still running ads in Texas, etc. too.

I think Obama is running ads where polls are a point or two within the margin of error. I had heard a week or so ago that Kerry was criticized for leaving money on the table in 2004 - not doing more to campaign and get out the vote. Obama's organizers don't want to risk leaving anything up to "what if?" I think that's also part of the reason behind the infomercial.


I have done a quick search and can't find any indication that Obama has increased spending in Maine. In fact, the RNC pulled out of Maine two weeks ago, so I find that hard to believe. It seems that once the RNC conceeded, they'd each reallocate their funds to the "battlegrounds". (Like they did in MI.) Do you have a link?

BW23 wrote:

GatewaySnayke wrote:

BW23 wrote:Obama will likely get more votes because he's black than he'll lose because he's black.

He should lose because of how extremely left he is and how suspect, at best, his judgment is, but he talks a good game (without saying anything) that all of that is mostly glossed over.

Sure, he says something. He says he'll end the Bush tax cuts. That alone should get the vote of anyone who understands economics.

Or anyone gullible/stupid enough to believe he'll do what he says economically, especially since what he says he'll do and what he's done (voting-wise, since he's really never accomplished anything) are two different things. Sure.

thats weak

jim wrote:

Arthur Dent wrote:In any case, get thee to the polls tomorrow.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

No excuses. Vote. And don't forget your free cup of coffee at Starbucks.

Whaaat?! They're giving away coffee? Hadn't heard that.