Comments on: These guys suck

By: moondancer

moondancer — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 01:39:53 +0000

Two of them admitted heavy weighting to seniors, who tilt towards the calcified one. And the under weigh the 18-24, and under adjust for cell only. Besides that, they are science in action.

By: Phoenix Woman

Phoenix Woman — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 00:37:10 +0000

The McPalin-Bush campaign is so bad, the GOP/Media Complex has to fudge the polls to make them look good.

The Big Three polls are now suddenly oversampling Republicans even as Democratic registrations go through the roof:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....25158.html

The new poll from Investor’s Business Daily (as conservative as it gets) that shows Obama up 45-40 would seem to lend some support to this:

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/.....dtipp9.php

By: paulbeard

paulbeard — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 20:20:46 +0000

Oh, yeah, I know how we got here, but you’d think a party that expects to be taken seriously would be able to identify good candidates, not just let the Usual Egotists go after it, especially given the top-down style they use.

By: zumpie

zumpie — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:00:10 +0000

On the plus side, I notice no mention of the latest polls this morning (McCain’s bounce must be dropping off–remember how even when Obama led by 8 points, it was “just a bounce and shrinking”?) and sulky acknowledgemnt of Iraq status quo and burgeoning deficit.

Oh yes, and Michelle Obama dancing on Ellen. Cause sadly, this is a GOOD day for us in the MSM.

Oh, P.S. Apparently McGrampy and Caribou Barbie want to reform Fannie Mae. How exactly do they plan on doing that when they don’t what it is, what it does, or hwo it’s structured?

By: MNGus

MNGus — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 16:45:38 +0000

Hate to break it to ya, but “four years old and recently potty-trained” is an excellent description of the mentality of the average American voter.

By: TheRealityBasedDave

TheRealityBasedDave — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 15:53:10 +0000

McSame got the nomination by default. He snuck in after the others were eliminated. They all had something about them that even the rethuglican base couldn’t stomache.
Huckabee – too christocrazy for the big buisness wing.
Romney – wrong flavor christocrazy.
Guiliani – one note wonder, waayyy too liberal.
Thompson – empty suit, doa, zzz…
Ron Paul – libertarian. Has crazy social ideas (against the war), even though he is allied with the KKK.
Tancredo – never really wanted the nomination, just wanted to build a wall.

By: captphealy

captphealy — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 15:25:50 +0000

It’s very simple. These people view truth as relative, morality as not.

By: Lori

Lori — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 15:05:19 +0000

What on earth is so appealing about the Senile/Ignorant combo?

Now thingwarbler I think you know the answer to that. The right-wing nuttery wants someone in the White House that they can identify with. Someone that is just as senile and/or ignorant as they are. They’re threatened by someone that appears to have more book learnin’ than they do. See Gore, Kerry, Obama…

I, on the other hand, prefer the Leader of the free world to be a hell of a lot smarter than I ever dreamed of. Now who should be allowed to choose said Leader? Once again, I’m advocating testing for voting privileges. You gotta take a test to get citizenship, to get a driver’s license, so why not a test to vote?

Of course, somehow the test would end up being compiled by the wingnuts, and would consist of questions on Conservative Principles as articulated by Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.

By: moondancer

moondancer — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 14:56:37 +0000

Yes but how will the flock of Sheep(voters) get that message when she won’t do an interview, or the campaign will not tell the truth.
Watch what happens at the “debate”. She will not address anything from Biden or the moderators that is not on 3 3X5 cards. Just parrot generic radio commercials.

By: heydave

heydave — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 14:08:41 +0000

Tucker Bounds never got through a lunch period unscathed, did he?
Give that fool a bow tie and you got a pile o’ classic.