StrangeSox

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 4, 2008 -> 11:53 AM) While I generally agree that the VP is a pretty small part of the decision, its not entirely irrelevant. For one thing, as time has gone on, VP's are more and more part of the decisionmaking processes. They are involved in policy. So, think of the VP as a known part of the cabinet. That does have some importance, though not a ton. This election in particular, I hate to say this, but for BOTH candidates, the possibility of the VP coming to power is higher than normal. McCain due to his age and mileage, Obama because I think he's going to be much higher risk for violence against him. I honestly hope I am wrong on both, and I am not saying the chances are big. Just that they are slim, as opposed to very slim, if you follow me. Cheney greatly expanded the power of that office. It was the most useless office ever created for a while, but I don't think that is true anymore.

QUOTE (Texsox @ Nov 4, 2008 -> 10:05 AM) I waffled a few times in voting this time. I literally selected McCain and Obama at different times before pushing the bright VOTE button. I really liked both candidates and wish I could have split my vote 51-49 or some such nonsense. Like many are reporting, as usual we did not have any Republicans running for 95% of the offices here. With a self declared DEM population of roughly 90%, it just isn't worth it. After voting ® Cornyn last time, I switched to (D) Noriega for Senator. I also proudly cast a ballot for my Congressman (D) Hinojosa. Damn fine gentleman who really works hard for South Texas. He has a s***ty, gerrymandered, district (thank you Hammer) and does pretty damn good with it. For those familar with Texas, his district runs from the Mexico border to north of Victoria. About 25 miles wide and 200 miles long. They sliced up South Texas like fajitas. I am excited to see what Obama will do if elected, and have confidence in McCain. Basically, like many players, I believe Obama has the bigger upside, but also the potential to be a bust. I see McCain as the safe pick, an aging veteran who will keep a steady, albeit, unspectacular hand at the wheel. Here in DuPage, we had just the opposite. Many of the positions were uncontested and held by Republicans.

QUOTE (bmags @ Nov 4, 2008 -> 09:47 AM) Family Guy is probably the worst show on television nowadays. I found it funny in high school, but i watched a rerun on TBS of the newer ones and I was almost angry it wasted my time with a 15 minute too long joke. Seth MacFarlane isn't smart enough to do political commentary let alone write words on a paper. It's been awful since it came back on the air a few years ago.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Nov 4, 2008 -> 10:31 AM) We've discussed this at length. And I've been saying all along, this plus the general fear factor seem likely to give McCain a few extra points. The other X factor I had mentioned though, Obama's ground game, has been HUGE. So the effect may not be felt at all. It also wasn't really present in the primaries, and hasn't really been all that present since Bradley. It's even debatable if there really was a "Bradley Effect" in that race or if it was just bad polling, because IIRC Bradley's campaign's internal numbers showed the race much closer than what the media polls showed. There's also the cell phone effect. Polls that are including cell phones are polling several points more in Obama's favor than landline-only polls.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Nov 4, 2008 -> 08:55 AM) I voted for Obama. This is the first time i've voted dem. The old folks at the polling place were nice and hopped up on way too much coffee. I've never seen so many people in such a good mood at 6AM.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Oct 24, 2008 -> 02:55 PM) 1st Soxtalk vote for Bob Barr Make me #2. I'm more of a libertarian than D or R, but I still didn't like voting for Barr very much. I couldn't bring myself to vote for Obama or McCain.

Since I usually leave at 6 AM and the polls are at my condo complex's front office, I voted for work. It only took about 20 minutes to get in and out.

How about everyone just stops the petty personal bickering? If I ever had a personal problem with what someone said, I would send them or a moderator a PM. Bickering like this over who exactly is being moderated by exactly how much just takes away from the forum. This place is, by far, the best-moderated site I visit. A large part of that is because little moderation is needed -- people have just been respectful of each other and their differences. That really seems to have changed over the last couple of months.

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Nov 3, 2008 -> 11:56 AM) I was sent a link to the newspaper article online, thats how i found it...i just assumed, having it come from a newspaper, that it was probably okay. Who knows how much is BS and what is fact. It looks like it was in their editorial section, so you always have to read pieces like that with large amounts of skepticism.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Nov 3, 2008 -> 10:45 AM) I wonder h ow long it will be until he is 'reassigned' somewhere else, or outright let go? Maybe for crappy journalism? He wrote an article about a talk show radio host reading part of another chain email about Obama. There are no sources, either for claims of what Obama said or for the "facts" that are "revealed." He didn't do any research to actually verify the claims. http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/50lies.asp

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ Nov 3, 2008 -> 10:53 AM) He's caught Dick Cheney disease (where you say one thing on tape... then deny you ever said it): I'd like to know the context of that second interview. I have no idea what question he's answering there.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Nov 2, 2008 -> 08:31 AM) According to Nate Silver you should ignore 1 day polls taken on a holiday. According to Matt Drudge, a one-day Zogby sample is headline-worthy.

Now Tillman goes down.

This has just been an awful game. This defense is terrible.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15161.html

QUOTE (Texsox @ Oct 31, 2008 -> 12:13 PM) Couple areas. Sampling differences Phrasing of the questions Identification issues "I'm calling from the Obama campaign and would like to ask you a couple questions . . ." That makes sense when talking about one poll or even a small handful of polls, but we're talking about numerous polls put out by multiple independent (none from the Obama campaign in that list) sources. They'll each have their own slightly varying samples and phrasing, but when they all tend to agree with one candidate having a lead of +10 or so, you can be reasonably sure that that is a good representation of how the population actually feels. If McCain's internal polls put Iowa at a close race, they're either outliers or they know something about sampling Iowa that every other pollster missed.

The latest "Obama staffer" email making the rounds on the conservative blogs. Either this is made up BS, or the Obama campaign's internal numbers run counter to what every other pollster is seeing. The comments on skewing the polls don't make much sense to me, because as far as I know the pollsters that do weight for party are basing this on actual registration numbers, not Obama press releases.

QUOTE (longshot7 @ Oct 29, 2008 -> 05:53 PM) I think Jon Stewart said "Why is bipartisan a good thing? The Republicans screwed everything up. If you want anything good done, why would you include them on the process?" That's a good point. Let's be as partisan as we can if we have big majorities. Screw them. My opinion would be that the Democrats are just as likely to screw everything up, and they still need to represent the millions of Americans who are not Democrats.

QUOTE (PlaySumFnJurny @ Oct 29, 2008 -> 03:24 PM) I didn't realize some of those Midwest states had broken by that much. I'd color anything in single digits grey. McCain would have maybe 100 votes then.

50-50. Hopefully more fiscal conservatives prevail and reshape the party in that image. There wouldn't be anything for me to like in a Palin-led GOP. She's a social conservative and fiscally liberal (sorta, but she definitely isn't minimal-government conservative).

QUOTE (PlaySumFnJurny @ Oct 29, 2008 -> 03:05 PM) The only thing I see that's really silly there is the red in Indiana, given the grey everywhere else. Giving McCain Indiana (which is actually averaging Obama +1 something) and not giving Obama a state like Michigan, where he's up +17, just doesn't make any sense. He's up by double-digits in Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota, too. North Carolina is currently polling Obama +1.3 as well, and he has that for McCain.

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 29, 2008 -> 11:51 AM) maybe the dumbest article I've ever seen. Comparing things you don't like to "Orwellian"/ 1984 references are gaining on ground on Nazis/ Hitler.

My view is that marriage should be left to private institutions all together and that the government should only recognize civil unions. But, as long as the government does recognize marriage, we should not be using religious beliefs to dictate morals to others. Doesn't this go back to the whole "separate but equal is not equal" thing?

Now some conservatives are attacking Obama for using the phrase "negative liberties." I think they think Obama means "bad liberties" but they just don't really know what negative means. It's a concept they must have missed in grade school civics. http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/neg...nd_obama_n.html

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Oct 28, 2008 -> 07:40 PM) Well, seeing as how it's been policy for 5+ years to NOT extend the cuts, why would all of a sudden they reverse course when they get power and make them permanent? And STILL pay for all the crap he wants to take over? It's not going to happen. Well, he frequently talks about "tax cuts for the wealthy." Why is it hard to believe that, given his rhetoric and his previous vote, that he would allow the ones on the upper end to expire while keeping the lower ones?