Republican National Convention '08

[Motorboat Cruiser]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

???
And for the first time, McCain has a measurable lead. Zogby has him up 4, Gallup has him up 3,

How can something within the margin of error be a measurable lead?

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Motorboat Cruiser

How can something within the margin of error be a measurable lead?

I didn't say it was outside the margin of error. It is the first time he has been above a virtual tie in either of those polls.

The 10 point USA Today poll is certainly outside the margin of error.

[BarTopDancer]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

And for the first time, McCain has a measurable lead. Zogby has him up 4, Gallup has him up 3, and USAToday has him up 10 (that's likely voters....I believe the other two were registered).

Still within Gallup's margin of error.

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I didn't say it was outside the margin of error. It is the first time he has been above a virtual tie in either of those polls.

The 10 point USA Today poll is certainly outside the margin of error.

When all other polls are within the margin of error wouldn't that make the USA Today poll an outlier?

Don't forget that a large part of the base that would boost Obama can't participate in the polls because many don't have landlines.

More importantly, the base of McCain is now excited....I have actually become a solid McCain supporter. He still wouldn't have been my first choice, but I am no longer reluctant to vote for him.

What changed for you? His running mate who proclaims to be a bitch? She's just a mini-Me with boobs of McCain.

[Stan4dSteph]

Someone made an interesting comment to me regarding polls. They are not allowed to call cell phones, thus a large portion of the people who are Obama supporters (young voters) are likely being missed on these polls.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by BarTopDancer

Still within Gallup's margin of error.


When all other polls are within the margin of error wouldn't that make the USA Today poll an outlier?

You are indeed correct. Please note I have been very careful not to say the McCain now has a clear cut lead. I have only said this is the first time it has been beyond tied in the polls in McCain's favor. I have certainly acknowleged that the Gallup and Zogby polls are within the margin of error, and also noted that the USA Today poll is slightly different because it is likely voters rather than registered voters.

There is no doubt, however, that momentum has shifted in McCain's favor based on the swing in the polls.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by BarTopDancer

What changed for you? His running mate who proclaims to be a bitch? She's just a mini-Me with boobs of McCain.

Wow. Going all out on the pit bull quote?

Palin is indeed similar to McCain...or at least what McCain has been saying recently. McCain had changed his tune over the last months to align more with the conservative base. If he had chosen a running mate who was not a conservative, I would have far greater doubts of his sincerity in those changes. For example, while I like Leiberman, if he had selected Leiberman there is no way I would have voted for McCain.

I am disenchanted with the republican party. Palin has been aggressive pursuing corruption within her own party in Alaska, and I like that. I was also exceptionally happy that McCain acknowledged the failings of the republican party.

That pretty much sums up why. Has NOTHING to do with boobs.

[BarTopDancer]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Wow. Going all out on the pit bull quote?

It insulted me as a woman, as a hockey fan and as a [hopefully] future mom of a kid who plays hockey. A pit bull comparison is not flattering. Pit bulls are vicious, mean attack dogs. I don't expect, nor do I want our President of VP to be a push-over; but this comparison just really irks me. While I was open to hearing what she had to say and maybe respecting some of her views that comment overshadowed, still overshadows any positive feelings I may have had.

[innerSpaceman]

ok, real or imagined, they win.


you say potato, i say tomato.

[innerSpaceman]

And so, did we need more troops to turn over Anbar to the Sunni? Once the place was already ethnically cleansed, who's left to kill anyway?

How many more brigades were required to arm the folks who used to shoot at us? How long will the-enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend last anyhow?

What does any of the violence reduction have to do with the surge except for coincidental timing?



(Actually, I think some of the violence in Baghdad was quelled by the presence of more troops at the start of the surge ... but as you can tell from my somewhat rhetorical questions, I don't think it's been responsible for the overall reduction in Iraq violence.)

[scaeagles]

In urban warfare where the enemy hides among and behind the general populace, it is necessary to do a building by building search for weapons, enemy combatants, terrorists, etc, to get them out. This require vast numbers of troops. It is much simpler to keep them out than to get them out. Therefore, after time and dangerous work, the Iraqis have taken charge there to keep out the elements.

The violence reduction has to do with what I just described. Once the hidden combatants have been eliminated, they don't have the man power (or woman power of child power or whatever) to have the suicide bombings as they don't have the capacity to get the necessary explosives to the desired targets.

This is why so many of these suicide bombings occur at checkpoints. It's the only way they can attack because they no longer have anything (or at least it is vastly reduced) inside the controlled areas.