McCain is beating Obama by a margin of 48% to 45% in the daily Gallup poll.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/110050/Gallup-Daily-McCain-Moves-Ahead-48-45.aspx
(that's among registered voters)
A new USA Today/Gallup poll has the McCain lead at 10 points!http://www.gallup.com/poll/110050/Gallup-Daily-McCain-Moves-Ahead-48-45.aspx
(this is among likely voters)
Realclearpolitics now has McCain up by 1 point when averaging all polls together.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
This includes the new daily gallup poll (McCain +3), the new USA Today/Gallup poll (McCain +10), Rasmussen tracking for Fri-Sun (McCain +1), another poll from tue-thur of last week (does not include McCains speech) that has Obama +6, a CBS poll from Mon-Wed that's a tie (does not include the Palin/McCain speeches), and another that has Obama +1 that was before the RNC even started.
Can't wait to see RCP poll averages after they get all fresh polls this week.
But ....wow! A 10 point lead? In any poll? Who would've thought that would happen for McCain? He was down 7 points before the convention, according to the USA Today/Gallup poll taken at that time. Meaning (at least according to them) that he had a 17 point bounce!
I was hoping for 10, and I was half-kidding.
Indeed, debates are coming up and many more things that could sway voters.
But for the moment, the McCain/Palin ticket is where all the buzz is.
Originally posted by KidRock
His support of the gun bans in Illinois and his support of the Washington DC gun ban say otherwise.Well when a politician comes out and says "a local government has the right to constrain your Constitutional rights" and the reply is "Deal with it" it says a lot.
We have restraints on freedom constantly. You need to, to an extent. For example, the 'you can't shout fire in a theater' as far as restraints on freedom of speech are considered. Or gun control for the second amendment.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No it doesn't. Have you seen the weapons military forces use?
The Iraqis and the Taliban have done a mighty job of kicking our ass a little bit.
The North Vietnamese was a determined citizenry with some guns and they held off everything we had to offer.
A determined citizenry with guns, never underestimate them.
Originally posted by Aster Phoenix
Okay prove that speeding is not a factor in motor accidents and death.
So it being there, really is irrelevant to speeders, crashes and deaths correct?
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
[B]"and in ways that would actually be beneficial"I'm not naive enough to think he won't do anything or that he's perfect, I just think he'll do less and with less destructive effect for the rest of us.
Obama is just more of the same. So is McCain. Both will just do the usual tinkering of the status quo here and there.
That status quo needs a damn overhauling.
Originally posted by BigRed
The Afghans held off a superpower (Russia).
Originally posted by BigRed
The Iraqis and the Taliban have done a mighty job of kicking our ass a little bit.
Originally posted by BigRed
The North Vietnamese was a determined citizenry with some guns and they held off everything we had to offer.
Originally posted by RocasAtoll
With US military help.Taliban had and still have military grade weapons, and the Iraqis are getting outside help from Syria and the like.
Yes, because they didn't get any help at all from Russia or China.
But not the fullest extent of actually winning a war or having help in actually fighting the war.
Look, the point is this: there are well over two hundred million gun owners (last time I looked), with a multitude of weapons. Then of course you have those that aren't even in the statistics probably because their criminals. There are only at the most five million people in the military. Do some guerilla warfare and I think you could stand a chance against the United States military.
That's why I think any country would be foolish to invade the United States. Not because of our military, but because of our gun owners.
Originally posted by sithsaber408
McCain is beating Obama by a margin of 48% to 45% in the daily Gallup poll.http://www.gallup.com/poll/110050/Gallup-Daily-McCain-Moves-Ahead-48-45.aspx
(that's among registered voters)
A new USA Today/Gallup poll has the McCain lead at 10 points!http://www.gallup.com/poll/110050/Gallup-Daily-McCain-Moves-Ahead-48-45.aspx
(this is among likely voters)
Realclearpolitics now has McCain up by 1 point when averaging all polls together.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
This includes the new daily gallup poll (McCain +3), the new USA Today/Gallup poll (McCain +10), Rasmussen tracking for Fri-Sun (McCain +1), another poll from tue-thur of last week (does not include McCains speech) that has Obama +6, a CBS poll from Mon-Wed that's a tie (does not include the Palin/McCain speeches), and another that has Obama +1 that was before the RNC even started.
Can't wait to see RCP poll averages after they get all fresh polls this week.
But ....wow! A 10 point lead? In any poll? Who would've thought that would happen for McCain? He was down 7 points before the convention, according to the USA Today/Gallup poll taken at that time. Meaning (at least according to them) that he had a 17 point bounce!
I was hoping for 10, and I was half-kidding.
Indeed, debates are coming up and many more things that could sway voters.
But for the moment, the McCain/Palin ticket is where all the buzz is.
One change:
The realclearpolitics average has been updated to show a McCain lead of 2.1 points. This comes from the poll that had Obama +6 being changed to a tie.
Seeing what it looks like when CNN, CBS, and NBC/WSJ update their polling this week will be interesting.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
Click on the link, only one poll (from before the RNC) has Obama up. (and by only +1) All others have a tie or McCain winning.
Originally posted by sithsaber408
One change:The realclearpolitics average has been updated to show a McCain lead of 2.1 points. This comes from the poll that had Obama +6 being changed to a tie.
Seeing what it looks like when CNN, CBS, and NBC/WSJ update their polling this week will be interesting.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
Click on the link, only one poll (from before the RNC) has Obama up. (and by only +1) All others have a tie or McCain winning.
Polls will not really matter until after the debates.
Originally posted by sithsaber408That's weird since it has Obama with a 53% chance of winning, and McCain with 47%.
One change:The realclearpolitics average has been updated to show a McCain lead of 2.1 points. This comes from the poll that had Obama +6 being changed to a tie.
Seeing what it looks like when CNN, CBS, and NBC/WSJ update their polling this week will be interesting.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
Click on the link, only one poll (from before the RNC) has Obama up. (and by only +1) All others have a tie or McCain winning.
Go here: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10
It's the RCP electoral map with no toss-ups. (they assign the toss-ups to each candidate based on trends and polls)
Click on CO and select "change to McCain".
He wins.
You'll also see, if you click on CO (which is listed under Obama) that in the polls they have, 4 are for McCain, 2 are for Obama. The ones for McCain have a higher number of registered voters polled (670, 570) and a higher number of likely voters polled (1060 and 700). The 2 Obama polls have less likely voters (450 and 400) and no registered voters.
Yet, the RCP still gives the state to Obama! (in the 2 polls, he was up by more % points) Again, he had less polls in his favor, and the polls in his favor were among lower amounts of voters polled.
Also, all polls are from before the RNC, where Palin/McCain gave a stunning performance.
Also, the RCP average has been updated again to include a new Daily Gallup poll (the one that I listed previously was from Sunday)
It shows McCain up by 5 points, now making the RCP average: McCain by 3.2
Every poll is from Fri-Sun, none have Obama in the lead. 2 are tied, and 3 have McCain in the lead.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
In other news, NBC's Chuck Todd is all over the Today Show and other news outlets saying that these polls (the +10 USA Today/Gallup and Daily Gallup in particular) aren't accurate, and that they show the "energy level" of certain voters.
When the NBC/WSJ poll comes out on Wed (the "gold standard" of polls according to Todd), then we'll apparently see how things are shaping up.
Love it. Polls show Obama's popularity among the electorate, but when McCain wins, the left-leaning NBC attempts to discredit them. But wait,...if our poll is released, it'll be accurate.
I'm betting now that it'll show Obama +2.
Originally posted by BigRed
Sure they had help.But not the fullest extent of actually winning a war or having help in actually fighting the war.
Originally posted by BigRed
Look, the point is this: there are well over two hundred million gun owners (last time I looked), with a multitude of weapons. Then of course you have those that aren't even in the statistics probably because their criminals. There are only at the most five million people in the military. Do some guerilla warfare and I think you could stand a chance against the United States military.
Originally posted by BigRed
That's why I think any country would be foolish to invade the United States. Not because of our military, but because of our gun owners.
LMAO. If the US military were to use it's full force against the US citizenry, and the citizenry tried to fight back against it with shotguns and handguns... the end result would simply be a whole lot of dead US citizens and some very slightly dinged tanks.
Handguns against heavily armored tanks, helicopters, planes, battleships, missiles. Good luck.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
LMAO. If the US military were to use it's full force against the US citizenry, and the citizenry tried to fight back against it with shotguns and handguns... the end result would simply be a whole lot of dead US citizens and some very slightly dinged tanks.Handguns against heavily armored tanks, helicopters, planes, battleships, missiles. Good luck.
Agreed, but they should still have them.