Laexile wrote:

momadance wrote:Pol Pot would have a better approval rating than Bush.

Then we know that Pol Pot wouldn't be in Congress, since Congress has been running way below Bush.

People dislike 'Congress' as an idea. They like their own congressman.

BUSH IS SO STOOPID HE EVEN MISSPELLS WORDS THAT HE SAYS

Can you imagine the hell that would break loose if a torturpublican had flyers like this?



My neck already hurts from the spinning to come.

VoxOrion wrote:Can you imagine the hell that would break loose if a torturpublican had flyers like this?



My neck already hurts from the spinning to come.

is Obama printing these /endorsing or someone else?

France sucks.

pacino wrote:

Laexile wrote:

momadance wrote:Pol Pot would have a better approval rating than Bush.

Then we know that Pol Pot wouldn't be in Congress, since Congress has been running way below Bush.

People dislike 'Congress' as an idea. They like their own congressman.

Polls like this don't tell much. If you look at Congressional polling it has only been above 50% once since 9/11. If things aren't going well it's easy to project your feelings on the President and Congress. It's easy to find a reason to disapprove. President Bush's approval rating is around 30%. While I doubt he'd win I think Bush would have at least 45% of the vote if he were running again.

That's what "surrogates" are for... keeps your hands clean.

What McCain is selling is that his surrogates don't play dirty either. If his surrogates are smearing it should come right back on him. I think it will.

I'm sure there are (or will be) a buncha Republicans out there that just don't want a Democrat to win, and they'll put together some 527's (if they're not doing so already).

McCain billed himself as running a respectful campaign. America won't look at the 527s as being separate from him. McCain has such high poll numbers because he's not Bush. One of the top reasons people vote for him is straight talk. If he loses that image he's sunk.

Right--the key for McCain right now is that he's basically coasting--and yet he still trails both Obama and Clinton, despite the fact that the Democratic primary has to be one of the most annoying political contests ever.

The Democrats have an enormous advantage right now. They are on the news all day every day. Every speech they give is covered. John Edwards announces who he's endorsing and it's big news. If Mike Huckabee or Mitt Romney gave a speech no one would care. Most of the time when John McCain's name is mentioned these days it's a Democrat saying he wants to be at war for 100 years. The media knows he's irrelevant.

Both Democrats are running millions of dollars in ads. McCain isn't running anything. As soon as the Democratic race that changes. Sure, Clinton and Obama have taken hits but most all publicity is good publicity.

OBAMA

I just like typing it.

VoxOrion wrote:Can you imagine the hell that would break loose if a torturpublican had flyers like this?



My neck already hurts from the spinning to come.

my guess is it's out there to avail fears that he's a dirty filthy muslim. cause they're the bad guys.

real americans, republicans, don't have to shoosh those fears...but they do try to curry favor from robertson

Vox fails to understand that it's totally cool to pander to Christians if it's poorly veiled Anti-Muslim statement but if you're honestly appeaingl to Christians, you better stand-by.

FlightRisk wrote:Vox fails to understand that it's totally cool to pander to Christians if it's poorly veiled Anti-Muslim statement but if you're honestly appeaingl to Christians, you better stand-by.

actually, i'm an atheist so i'd much rather none of this crap was in anything. the guy's a christian, and a much more palatable one to me than some of the more conservative ones.

i really don't understand half your posts though. 'poorly veiled anti-muslim statement'? vox dislikes obama. i like obama. you like to be high and mighty on the mountaintop snickering at the idiots below. we all have our vantage points.

pacino wrote:i really don't understand half your posts though. 'poorly veiled anti-muslim statement'? vox dislikes obama. i like obama. you like to be high and mighty on the mountaintop snickering at the idiots below. we all have our vantage points.

pacino, it's ok not to 'get' non sequitur humor - that's at least more or less than half the point of it. Even the 'giver's not necessarily supposed to get it, or at least show s/he gets it.

You're selling yourself short to imagine that it carries some superior 'tude.

For Fight Risk, as we all know, is harmless as a fly. A dirty, filthy Muslim convert fly.

We'd be BFFs if you understood the other half of my posts, I just know it.

The Red Tornado wrote:

VoxOrion wrote:Can you imagine the hell that would break loose if a torturpublican had flyers like this?



My neck already hurts from the spinning to come.

is Obama printing these /endorsing or someone else?

Obama - targeted toward those low Americans who cling to their guns and crucifixes (instead of the government) and stuff in Kentucky.

VoxOrion wrote:

The Red Tornado wrote:

VoxOrion wrote:Can you imagine the hell that would break loose if a torturpublican had flyers like this?



My neck already hurts from the spinning to come.

is Obama printing these /endorsing or someone else?

Obama - targeted toward those low Americans who cling to their guns and crucifixes (instead of the government) and stuff in Kentucky.

yea, & not well targeted at that.

My personal feeling he should have gone with the alternate "Faith, Hope, Crucifixion" tagline.

drsmooth wrote:...For Fight Risk, as we all know, is harmless as a fly. A dirty, filthy Muslim convert fly.

Thank you for this testimonial to my impotence.

drsmooth wrote:

VoxOrion wrote:

The Red Tornado wrote:

VoxOrion wrote:Can you imagine the hell that would break loose if a torturpublican had flyers like this?



My neck already hurts from the spinning to come.

is Obama printing these /endorsing or someone else?

Obama - targeted toward those low Americans who cling to their guns and crucifixes (instead of the government) and stuff in Kentucky.

yea, & not well targeted at that.

My personal feeling he should have gone with the alternate "Faith, Hope, Crucifixion" tagline.

Even better:

"OBAMA: Meet the new Jesus, better than the old Jesus"

Or just:

"This is the new $h1#"

FlightRisk wrote:

drsmooth wrote:...For Fight Risk, as we all know, is harmless as a fly. A dirty, filthy Muslim convert fly.

Thank you for this testimonial to my impotence.

I felt it important that you not be misconscrewed

Say. "Good bye." to Reverend Wright....
Say, "Hello" to Reverend "Right On!"

some hilariously ignorant racist white people on The Daily Show

Here's an interesting story about Brad Ellsworth, a Democratic congressman from Indiana, who pledged to vote for Clinton at the convention--but admitted that he cast his primary vote for Obama.

I've followed Ellsworth a little since 2006, when he knocked off a Republican incumbent in (I'm pretty sure) a Bush-voting district. Tom Cole probably would call him a Republican in Democratic clothing (well, he'd leave off the "ic," but you know what I mean): he's a former sheriff, a Blue Dog, anti-abortion rights and gun control, voted against funding stem cell research, et cetera. He's more traditionally liberal on pocketbook issues.

My understanding is that his pledge to vote for Clinton at the convention--which he's evidently at pains not to describe as an "endorsement"--is meant to honor the primary votes of his constituents. But that he personally chose Obama is interesting to me, if only because he seems like the sort of surrogate Obama's going to need to bring back some of those "working-class whites" in November.