Same guy calling people delusional by...showing polls that McCain had tightened the gap?

So Obama visits the rest of the world and has amazing stops in France and news that the Bush administration tried to spin on Iraq and this is EVIDENCE of his incompetence? Meanwhile McCain is back home fumbling every time he says a sentence?

You should really stick to the questioning his moral character attack...stacking Obama and McCain side by side in a "competence" battle looks bad for McCain right now.

Hope, hope, change, hope, change, change, hope, change, hope, hope, hope, change, hope.

OP,

I get the feeling you just don't want to "hear reasoning from Obama supporters as to how Obama's proposed economic and tax policies will help create a stronger economy" as much as you want to argue with Obama supporters as to how Obama's proposed economic and tax policies will help create a stronger economy. If you just wanted to "hear" his policies or just want to make yourself aware of them, go to the campaign website imo.

See economic performance under Bill Clinton.

just goes to show you don't do **** but give the **** out and the country can run its self


we don't need no stinking president, just a qween

Yes i should probably take some time off from polls, but I've been volunteering for The Obama campaign since Feb. of 2007, and i have been following it non stop since then. I have never really put this much time or effort into anything outside of work, so I'm kind of invested in it. I doubt i could pull myself away before November.

4H,

I'd limit yourself to just following 538. That distills the polls to the state ones and deemphasizes the national ones, plus it gives you a better representation of how much a single poll matters (read: not much).

No, I am actually very curious as to why his supporters think the policies will be effective at creating long term economic benefits.
Here are some specific points I am interested in hearing your analysis of:

Tax cuts for the middle class while rolling back tax cuts on the highest earners.

Another round of stimulus checks.

You need an explanation of why tax cuts for the middle class while help the economy?

No, I would like an explanation of how they think the cutting of middle class taxes while rolling back taxes such as capital gains will help the economy.

Tax cuts for the middle class will help the economy.

What do you think raising the capital gains tax will do to the economy?

Ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

This is one flip-flop that doesn't bother me. It seems much more honest to me to keep these taxation issues on the table rather than campaign on a promise he knows he might not keep.

Since we live by following our celebrities, perhaps we should read what they say:


Angelina Jolie's Dad: 'Barack Obama Falls Short in Every Way'


VOIGHT: My concerns for America

Are you confusing "competence" with the ability to read a teleprompter and endlessly repeat the same platitudes?

Seems so.

oh please

obama offers middle class tax cuts

mccain wants to make bush's tax cuts for the rich permanent

and we are debating who is better for the average american?

i'm not getting drawn into that no sir

Nate does a good job explaining that Gallup poll showing McCain with a lead

Other than the dubious assertion that he's the safe alternative, you may be on to something.

Two former Bush Advisers Now Advising Obama, Will Appear at Economic Meeting Today

No he doesn't? He ignores the fact that LV screens are based off of the question "Did you vote in the last election?" and greatly increase the accuracy of polls.

Wouldn't that be a bad thing? LOL. Bush 3rd term FTW!!!

He doesn't ignore this ikes. I think everyone agrees that likely voter models are fine and dandy when used appropriately.

From pollster.com, Emory Pol Sci Professor Alan Abramowitz -- who Nate cited:

Nate, on this:

So while you may favor likely voter models (and you should), the problem here is that math of this particular iteration is too incredible to believe.

Nate then (to further demonstrate he didn't "ignore" that likely voter screens are "more accurate") cited Erickson's study of why Gallup's Likely Voter screen is extremely volatile. From the Erickson study:

Which is why Gallup editor Frank Newport cautions using his own model as a predictive measure:

From Gallup -- Who Likely Voters Are and Why They Matter:

So "likely voter screens" are more accurate when the poll is taken the night before an election, not 100 days out, by Gallup's Frank Newport's own admission.

From what little I know about both of them, they both apparently had a good amount of dust-ups and disagreements with the Bush administration; one reason why they are both former advisers, not current.

Edit: The article linked in fact says just that.

I think that's an interesting yet risky move for the Obama camp. On one hand people who who hate all things bush will never like this move even if it is a good one. But perhaps they thing that Obama has that crowd so in the bag he does not need to worry about them leaving ship. Which is think is true.

Also this move could make him appear better in the eyes of conservatives who are worried about Obama being too liberal on economic issues. These two points only hold true about the people who not look into any information about these people outside of the party they represent.

I think overall it is too risky to be going after people associated with this administration. He stands to loose more than he can gain in my opinion.