For 'tripper, et al...(DON'T LOOK, FRED!!)

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12656.html

and the referenced realclearpolitics poll:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...ama_vs_mccain/

No, I don't think it is anything other than a slight shift in what has
been shaping up to be, ahem, a dead heat within the margin of error of
the various polls.

I would, however, offer that whereas McCain's veep choice, assuming it
to be from among the likely suspects, won't effect (net sum) his chances
a great deal, whereas Obama's will matter a fair bit (if not
significantly) and he has no, er, realclearchoice as an across-the-board
positive from his likely suspects.

HTH,
R

wrote in
:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...ama_vs_mccain/

http://electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pr...raph-2008.html

Check out the graphs of "safe" votes, though. The drop in overall numbers
certainly is a bit disconcerting, but Obama hasn't been campaigning hard
for at least two weeks.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply
Hak mir nisht ken tshaynik

Thanks for the warning

I will not look
Oh OH!!
I have cheated and peeked

However, I really do not care anymore.
I have learned to live w political posting on this ng esp yours
Other ng's are even worse
You would be amazed

However I am still truly amazed and utterly disgusted w the choices given
the US Public.

But again thanks for the warning
It would be nice if you posted OT

Thanks
Fred

On 20 Aug 2008 16:41:41 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

wrote in
:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...ama_vs_mccain/

http://electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pr...raph-2008.html

Check out the graphs of "safe" votes, though. The drop in overall numbers
certainly is a bit disconcerting, but Obama hasn't been campaigning hard
for at least two weeks.

He could "campaign hard" 24/7 and it won't change the numbers
dramatically (positive or negative), same for McCain. This thing has
about 10(ish) points of spread and I wouldn't be surprised to see MUCH
closer state races than many predict if the election were tomorrow - I
could see all states except Arizona being no further than 56-44 or even
54-46, either way. What hurt him _badly_ (in relative context) was
Saddleback - he looked like a Clintonesque, finger-in-the-wind pol and
McCain looked about as straightforward and honest as pols can. I'd say
he lost somewhere in the neighborhood of 2-3 points permanently, and
took a real ding in his play for the highly-religious types whereas
McCain soothed a lot of Christian conservative nervousness (most would
have likely broken for him behind the curtain, anyway, but if they come
forward now, it'll give him a little overall boost).

Plus, it appears the best the Dems can do is attempt to subjectively
(and incorrectly) associate McCain - "he's just the 3rd Bush term..."
whereas the GOP can label Obama (and Hillary) - "he _is_ too liberal, he
_is_ too inexperienced, she _is_ Hillary Clinton...

TC,
R

Fred typed:
snip
It would be nice if you posted OT

Quit the incessant nagging about OT. You read and reply to all those, too,
so what the hell is the difference?

Who loves ya, Fred? ;-)
--
TL,
Tim
-------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj