Obama at all time LOW.. 11.21.07 Since announcing candidacy

Rasmussen

11/21/07


Clinton...41%


Obama.....17%


Edwards...14%

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/daily_presidential_tracking_polling_history

I'm sure Iowa voters will not be blinded by the soporific tones of the Edwards/Obama team.

And Clinton will prevail in Iowa!

America will be just fine with either Hillary or Obama, or Edwards.

I know you have your horse in the horse race, but Jesus Christ.

They're all good candidates.

BO is my last choice

Also I don't want nor need your advice on what is idiotic

Over the years my decisions have worked out superbly for my family

each and every one.:eyes:

So, it must be wrong, right?

Odd, but the primary system was built that way.

WaPo-ABC Iowa polling puts Obama ahead of Clinton:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/postpoll_111907.html

"Don't trust the WaPo polls. In all three of their polls, they've put Obama on top even though all other polls taken at around the same time showed him trailing"

Rasmussen looked at the same polling results released by WaPo-ABC and interpreted that at best it's a three-way tie with nobody leading.

Rasmussen agreeing with Wapo? Wow. They might as well go out of a business they've been in for decades!

...

Here is what's clear and obvious is that virtually all the recent polling puts the race within the margin of error in Iowa. This week's Washington Post poll apparently showed a surge for Barack Obama, but when they screened for certain caucus participants the 4% lead the poll showed the Illinois Senator enjoying became a 2% advantage.

Similarly, the Rasmussen polling which showed Hillary apparently 4% ahead actually projects a much closer contest when you get into the substance of the data. Among certain caucus voters, Senator Clinton's lead evaporated and she fell into a three way tie with Edwards and Obama. Finally an ARG research poll showed the race deadlocked, with Senator Clinton again holding a narrow 2% advantage over Obama.

...

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_commentary/commentary_by_douglas_schoen/what_is_really_happening_in_iowa

She's deadlocked with Obama. Let me retract the earlier notion that she's in a three-way deadlock.

in that 2% difference..

Fine, they're being honest. I can live with it. Students on vacay...oh, yeah, they are sure to be there with bells on!

Rasmussen, I guess to your chagrin, will be in business for a while yet!

Anyway, it's anybody's ball game. I was hoping Gore would get in at this point, but oh well.

I guess when your own candidate has nothing to offer, you go after those who do.

His supporters are bleating he already has a lock on Iowa.

I'm unconcerned at this point. Hillary will Win Iowa, handily.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

:rofl:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I'm sure Iowans are not living in a bubble and are looking outward on both sides, top and bottom, for insight from other states as to who is the "real deal".

The only candidate projecting that message is Hillary Clinton. She has not wasted her time dreaming up attack schemes like Edwards and Obama, who are devoid of clear plans for shoring up our ailing country. Hillary has not strayed from attacking Republicans, the next battle after winning the Nomination.

Seriously. Its all candy and lollipops for you, like a fantasy land thing.
Yuck.
Glad you are on my side, sad you wallow in Hillarys' projected G_d like qualities.
To you anyway.
Yuck.

We're on the same side? How so?

if he can't win the general election....

Much better than Clinton, who loses to McCain:

Link: http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=2d211d2a-ee13-40ab-8455-5a70b9b55bfe

your point is moot!

your point is moot as well!

And both of them are betting that in the 2-on-1 happening there, they'll hurt her, while evenly distributing the backlash between both of them.

Neither Edwards nor Obama are mental giants. Unfortunately for them, Edwards is not lobbying in front of a jury summarizing an emotionally charged empathetic plea possibly resulting in a huge financial settlement including punitive damages of which he is partnered with the plaintiffs.

No one has forgotten Edwards inclination for deal making. He openly announced his willingness to delegate his caucus votes over to Kucinich in 04' if DK's final totals were close. There is a strong indication Edwards is willing do the same for Obama if his numbers are close enough to Hillarys to make a difference.

We're not asleep at the wheel in Hillary's camp. We know who and what we are dealing with.

That's why I take a wait and see attitude. I think all of our candidates are good. Any one of them is better than the best Repub.

Too bad all of their recent national poll numbers seem to be "outliers" while other polls show Obama moving up fast
with Clinton stagnating or falling. Hmmm....

Not that national polls mean much. But I understand how Rasmussen and his partner/Clinton campaign manager Mark
Penn's best friend Schoen would give you comfort in these times of Clintonian trouble.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Hillary's numbers have been constant. In spite of all the media hype and one or two polls showing Obama with a slight surge over the last week or so, is not a verifiable indication of a trend.

Denial is not only a river in Egypt.

:rofl:

"Fluff" is not only a marshmallow spread for sandwiches!

I'll leave you with words from the dean of Iowa politics, David Yepsen:

'Yepsen says he detects a shift in the mindset of Iowa Democrats that may bode well for Obama and may pose problems for Clinton. I asked him
to evaluate the Clinton argument on behalf of her experience versus Obama’s appeal based on change.

"I think experience is important, but I think caucus goers are weighing the value of experience versus a fresh face and turning the page. And it’s, I think,
a close call. But right now, fresh face is starting to outweigh experience. Too many Democrats think she (Clinton) has too many negatives, too many
polarizing things in her past. They don’t want to go back to the past."'

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312505,00.html

But you keep comforting yourself with Rasmussen national polls. I understand.

in this cycle is the psychology and tactics. I spend time reviewing posts at Hannity (and have since 2004) and for the past year have been at DU. It is just interesting how some people, who align in groups, think. For example, over at Hannity, whenever anyone posted anything negative regarding or even questioned Bush then immediately a link was requested, then a cohort would jump in and demean the person, usually with comments like "take off that tin foil hat." It was always the same group, who only felt comfortable if backups were available to discuss a point. At Hannity it became real easy to identify these people quickly by looking at their avatar. They would have some bad ass avatar, like a guy shooting an automatic, or a girl with big breast holding a machine gun, or a hulk like cartoon character.

I've never looked at his site, don't even know what the man looks like. I get my information in real time not someone's pre-digested notion of what is..

You missed the point entirely, you should look at the Hannity forum. You might learn a lot ... about yourself!

edit: by the way in your narrow arrogant viewpoint you assume that I have the problem. Again check out the Hannity site, you will find many overthere with the same gaps in logical thinking.

:rofl:

You are so proud of yourself but read again, the POSTS AT HANNITY!

So some people who post over there are so self absorbed that they do not have the ability to open their mind. They resort to tactics such as, provide me a link, (even though they don't read it) and taking shots at anyone who disagrees. They also tend to way over use Emoticons!

and your analogy is one of the worst piss poor examples I've ever read to the point you are trying to make.

Some tools over at Hannity do not have the ability to consider any other perspectives nor solutions only the ones that come directly from Bushco. When challenged they just become obnoxious. You, although having a different chosen leader use very similar tactics.

GET IT!

Considering both devote themselves to attacking Democrats.

His44 is devoted to updates debunking the spew of the Edwards and the Republican supported Obama campaigns against Hillary.. Free Republic is supporting Obama...what does that tellya?

Because all I know is Bush II endorsed Clinton along with Tom DeLay, New Gingrich, and Karl Rove.

"Our definition of success doesn't necessarily mean coming in first," explains Clinton spokesman Mark Daley.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3751966

Live in OC California, want to know where my friends and neighbors get the information. It allows you to be prepared with facts to refute their claims.

These next few weeks mean everything to our campaign and I hope Hillary supporters continue our hard work for the future of the country and to make history.

To my Obama and Edwards supporter friends. Your candidates appear to be in secure leads so you can rest assured as you go off to continue your Christmas shopping.

when is the national primary again?

Obama leading in Iowa. Clinton's lead shrinking in NH.

Thought you'd hide behind the national polls instead?

get with it pal. The world is moving around you and you're standing still like a bump on a log.

Get over yourself and the stupid national polls you hid behind that are meaningless.

Oh and stop bringing up Kerry. He has nothing to do with Obama leading Iowa, and Clinton's NH lead shrinking. He's in the Senate, NOT running for President.

In the words of Teresa Heinz Kerry..."shove it"!

Isn't her lead in NH shrinking?

How did I lie? I didn't. And to change the subject, you brought up Senator Kerry. Why, I'm not quite sure. I guess that's the best way to change the subject, but I won't let you. Face the facts, and stop hiding behind the national polls. This is a three person horse race, Hillary isn't inevitable like you want her to be. Stop bashing and beating on Obama and Edwards, and John Kerry (???) for that matter, to try and accomplish your goal. You get Hillary no where when you do this.

In the words of Hillary Rodham Clinton, I sincerely hope your words are "accurate and not out of the Republican playbook"

But they are to Hillaryworlders as thumb sucking are to anxious toddlers.

lol

Hillaryworlders? As in not dealing in reality - the real world?

I'll answer a question you asked in another thread, where someone said Obama supporters had pretty much ruined his chances. You asked "how so?" Well it's the condescending, rude, disrespectful and arrogant comments from some Obama supporters here to anyone who refuses to bow at the altar of the big O.

And please, if Ras was showing Obama overtaking Hillary you'd post it every other hour, you know it as well as everyone else. The inconvenient fact that you continue to ignore is that this is the ONLY poll that has been taken entirely after the last debate - the couple of polls that show Obama on the move were taken at least partially before that last debate, when Hillary was taking some hits and went down in several polls - INCLUDING Rasmussen. This is also the only poll to begin to measure how Democrats feel about Obama using the word of a treasonous right wing hack to bash Hillary. That really rubbed me the wrong way as I'm sure it did many Democrats. The polls you continuously site to show some Obama "surge" would not be able to accurately measure that.

But keep on sucking your thumb if it makes you feel better.

lol

And hold the Hillaryous ritual shaming. Why don't you police your own before you preach Kumbaya to me?

But I already knew...it's so um, O - O something. O...O...Obvious, that's what it is, Obvious. See right through ya.

:rofl:

You've just set a new schizoid record for Hillaryworld Hypocrisy. Thank you for being such a willing case study.
Now take your medication and try to calm down. And wipe the drool off your chin.

You do realize you are doing your guy no favors, don't you?

if you are representative of the caliber of her worshippers.

Carry on. You are really doing yourself and your parents proud.

Don't let us down.

I think we all know why.

that's really rich coming from you

not entirely unexpected tho...

Does her Kyl-Lieberman vote make you even prouder? Does her saber-rattling on Iran during the last debate make you the proudest of all?

He said he wanted to get the troops out of Iraq and onto the "right battlefields" - one of which is Pakistan. You might remember the outcry here and in Pakistan. Not quite pride material, is it? Talk about sabre-rattling.

On Hillary, yeah, I think she's shown enough contrition over that vote. She's said she was misled. She's said she regrets the vote. That's good enough for me. And the Kyl-Lieberman vote, well, I do believe her when she says it was to strenthen our diplomatic leverage. She, and many others did sign onto language saying that that bill in no way was to be seen as any authority for military action against Iran. That works for me, for now.

I'll tell you this - I'd much more likely support a Democrat who is focused on beating the repukes, rather than one who constantly compares his top Democratic rival to bush/cheney and uses the unsupported word of known traitorous right wing hack Novak to attack his Democratic opponent.

Oh yeah, no contest.


Plus, I wanna win next Nov. Mr. Attack Pakistan would be torn to shreds by the repukes. His amateurish mistakes might be easy for some to overlook now, but would be fatal in the GE.

k?

What's wrong with that, again? I'm surprised you would want Osama bin Laden to go free. Funny that you would take
a Pakistani dictator's side over America's national security interests. No wonder Hillaryworld is so mixed up in their
positions. TIme for more of Mark Penn's focus groups, I guess...

"Obama, who had the bulk of the Chicago crowd with him during the tense exchange, fired back at Clinton and Dodd by
contrasting his early opposition to the Iraq war with the pro-war votes cast by his Democratic rivals in 2002."

"I find it amusing," said Obama, "that those who helped to authorize and engineer the biggest foreign policy disaster in
our generation are now criticizing me for making sure that we are on the right battlefield and not the wrong battlefield
in the war against terrorism."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/08/sparks-fly-over.html

Obama's foreign policy plan was called "refreshing" by Senator Jim Webb. I'll trust Webb's interpretation over yours, thanks.

If you "wanna win" maybe you should support the candidate who polls best (you Hillaryworlders love polls, right?):
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=2d211d2a-ee13-40ab-8455-5a70b9b55bfe

Clinton can't even beat McCain. I prefer the candidate who gets the most crossover votes and beats every Republican
by a wide margin. I want to win, too - and I want the candidate with the longest coattails: OBAMA. I am wary of the only
Democratic candidate endorsed by Bush, Tom DeLay, Karl Rove, and Newt Gingrich: Hillary Clinton. Her politically
expedient vote for IWR and her equally politically expedient vote for Kyl-Lieberman disuqalifies her from any
further consideration in my antiwar eyes. I won't even go into her swift boating whispering campaign or her lies
about SS during the last debate, much less her incestuous financial relationship with lobbyists and special interest PACs
because I don't want to waste my breath pointing out the obvious.

So Hillaryworlders can continue to swift boat Obama and attack his DU supporters, but know that more and more Iowans
are choosing Obama over Clinton every day for the same reasons I chose him in the first place.

But hey, thanks for keeping this thread kicked.

:D

The politics of hope includes correcting swift boating smears by Hillaryworld replicants. As for kicking this thread,
I'm happy for people to read the facts I'm presenting on my candidate and the lies that I'm correcting.

Supporters resemble whom they support, I guess. Clinton deserves you and vice versa.

Congratulations for finding a perfect match for your abilities.

Hillaryworld replicant now, am I?


I guess it'd be ok to call you an Odrama queen then?


:rofl:

I'm also more interested in getting Osama bin Laden than fretting about how "Martial Law Musharraf" feels, unlike you.

To be clear, I said you were Hillaryworld talking point replicant. Which you are. Stop smearing Obama with deliberate
misinformation and I'll stop.

I think it could be dangerous in a postiion of power.


And you've called me several things in this this thread, which amount to, if I'm not forgetting anything, thumb-sucking Hillary worshipping Hillaryworld replicant. But hey, you're pimping a guy who calls his opponents bush/cheney lite and compares them to mitt romney or guliani, and who gets played by the likes of rw hack novak to attack Hillary for something she didn't even have a part of. So it looks like a case of birds of a feather - arrogant, intolerant, and insulting toward anyone who refuses to join in the faux hero-worship of our savior Barak.


And I should stop...

:eyes:

And given your vindictive rant against me, here's a thread directed right at you:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3751993&mesg_id=3751993

Thanks for providing another eye-opening example of Hillaryworld Hypocrisy.

After the string of insults you hurl, you want to play victim?

I want to see Osama go free. You said that to me, just up above.

And you want to lecture on hypocrisy?

Please, you're embarrassing yourself.

and think they're making a point. Dumb bunnies.

Elections are about choices. Should Obama be the only candidate to drop out, or should all of Hillary's challengers roll over and play dead, so that she can be properly crowned? How democratic. :eyes:

Your guy is doing well. John isn't leading, but I'm sure he'll have a very competitive finish with Barack and Hillary. Should be an interesting race, and these stupid national polls mean shit in the big picture!!

So kudos on leading in Iowa ;)

President Obama sounds nice, huh?

...I can't wait to see the MSM sharks go for her in all directions.

I have the "Jaws" movie theme ready to go...

:rofl:

Just because. :evilgrin:

kicker and made only 1 of 12 I would fire him. If he batted 1 out of 12 I would send him to the minors. If he shot 1 out 12 I would bench him. If he were 1 out of 12 in meeting his objectives as a ceo I would summit to the board that he be replaced by someone that is more experience and understands what the task of a ceo are.

Can you Obama folks understand America this time is looking for someone that can bring this country back. Not someone with having to learn as they go.

Ben David

That's why they NEED to win Iowa while Clinton can afford to not win Iowa

Obama's hot on her tail ... only 14 back. Sorry.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2008__1/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll