The new poll question is up:
Two part question: Who won the first presidential debate, and did it change your vote?
Here are the results of last week's poll question:
It appears Americans responding that Jesus came in God's interest, which was the correct answer, overshadowed all other responses, while the answers of our International friends where mostly all but that. Click on the maps to try to find your own brightly colored flag, bearing in mind Vizu tracks only the most recent 500 votes....
As always, make comments to either this or last week's poll here, not on the Vizu website.
Sad story: Banker leaps to his death in front of express train, leaves behind wife and son:
If you become president, you are president of all US citizens, not just the ones you like. The class warfare game you play is despicable in itself, and you can bet Jesus would have with met with wall-street bankers too.Posted by: Jasper at September 28, 2008 9:12 AM
The big news from this poll is that 1 in 5 of the respondents do not think Jesus ever lived.Posted by: Jerry at September 28, 2008 9:32 AM
you know what they say:the best man for the job is a woman...Posted by: Patricia at September 28, 2008 9:55 AM
the American People need to know this about Obama:
Barack Obama Constitutionally Ineligible to Serve as President of the United States
Please spread this Far and Wide!Posted by: James at September 28, 2008 10:15 AM
If anyone should be worried about Constitutional ineligibility, it should be McCain, because he was born in Panama.
Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii.Posted by: reality at September 28, 2008 10:22 AM
But McCain's never been anything but a US citizen. I think that speaks volumes for both of them.Posted by: xalisae at September 28, 2008 10:30 AM
There is compelling evidence to support that Obama was born in Kenya. The Birth certificates that have been produced are forgeries. Obama has yet to produce "The" Birth certificate. Obama and company are trying to get the case dismissed because Obama can't produce his birth certificate.Posted by: James at September 28, 2008 10:37 AM
Barack Obama has also never been anything but a natural born US citizen.Posted by: reality at September 28, 2008 10:43 AM
There is compelling evidence to support that Obama was born in Kenya.
No, there isn't.
The Birth certificates that have been produced are forgeries.
No, they aren't.
Obama has yet to produce "The" Birth certificate.
Wrong. He has produced his birth certificate. It's even on the Wikipedia entry.
Obama and company are trying to get the case dismissed because Obama can't produce his birth certificate.
You are mistaken.Posted by: reality at September 28, 2008 10:45 AM
Really, reality? Then why was he listed as a citizen of Indonesia when he was an itty bitty Barack getting registered for school?
Posted by: James at September 28, 2008 11:04 AM
Jasper @ 9:12,
What a tragic story. I fear it will not be the last. We need to pray for everyone affected by this economic mess we are in.Posted by: Janet at September 28, 2008 12:08 PM
you know what they say:the best man for the job is a woman...
Posted by: Patricia at September 28, 2008 9:55 AM
Posted by: Falilli Ferzip
at September 28, 2008 12:26 PM
So you think Jesus should have been a woman.
No, Jesus was not a mere man, he was God, made flesh.Posted by: Janet at September 28, 2008 1:32 PM
Obama is winner. Everybody knows.Posted by: Falilli Ferzip at September 28, 2008 3:02 PM
It's early, believe me here those numbers will drop like stones. Not to mention, there are typically 1000 (or more?) responses to her polls, just over 10% of the way there. Far too early to tell.Posted by: Dan at September 28, 2008 3:08 PM
Yep, all liberals know that Obama won the debate. Even if they didn't watch it and can't speak English.Posted by: John Lewandowski at September 28, 2008 5:08 PM
John, you sound like a grouchy young man who woke up on the wrong side of the bed.Posted by: Falilli Ferzip at September 28, 2008 5:46 PM
Falilli, you sound like a typical, anti-American, morally bankrupt liberal nightmare who woke up on the wrong side of the government-provided bed.Posted by: John Lewandowski at September 28, 2008 5:51 PM
learn to ignore John. Works out better that way. He pretty much seems to think any liberal position is below debate (solely ridicule), and any conservative position is above discussion.Posted by: Dan at September 28, 2008 5:55 PM
No, Dan, I pretty much think that anyone who is too dishonest to take part in a real discussion is not worth having a real discussion with, and is therefore worthy only of ridicule. I have had serious discussions with liberals before, but it rarely happens, since few liberals are honest. One honest liberal was SoMG, the only honest pro-abort on this blog. If you remember, I often commended him for his honesty. Alas, he's gone now.
By the way, what the hell do you think you're doing going back to the Catholic Church? Are you doing that just to annoy me? I do advocate a smaller Catholic Church, after all. That's another way I differ from the rest of my Catholic friends.
I should clarify. I believe in honesty. I believe that people should say what they mean and mean what they say. I don't accept the dishonest BS which passes for "discussion" with people like you and in 99% of the "discussions" on this blog. You live your entire life on lies built upon lies. That is beyond disgusting to me.
I also think it's ridiculous for apostates and heretics to attend the Catholic Mass. Every time they recite the Creed, every time they say "Amen", every time they partake of the Eucharist, they are condemning themselves through their dishonesty. They would be better off staying out of the church and begging God for forgiveness than committing blasphemy on a weekly basis.Posted by: John Lewandowski at September 28, 2008 6:09 PM
Indeed I was planning on rejoining the church. However, I dont have the time I can commit to be re-introduced and undergo the confirmation procedure, the only sacrament I have yet to take that would make me an official member of the Church.
But school is eating up my time right now, as is my search for a job. I'll be meditating on the topic though and continue reading my Bible and praying. I didn't do it to annoy you, I'm doing this for myself. The fact that it may just annoy you is a bit of a bonus though ;).
I will continue to maintain I am a Christian, as I always have.Posted by: Dan at September 28, 2008 6:12 PM
Dan, I am satisfied that for the time being you will refrain from speaking, eating, and drinking damnation upon yourself... within the church, anyway.
Unless you're lying about that, too. See, this is why it's stupid to have a conversation with a morally bankrupt liar.Posted by: John Lewandowski at September 28, 2008 6:19 PM
I am one of the most honest people you are ever meet. So now I'm a morally bankrupt liar because overall my positions are more to the left than yours eh? Interesting generalization.Posted by: Dan at September 28, 2008 6:20 PM
Dan, shut the hell up.Posted by: John Lewandowski at September 28, 2008 6:23 PM
My point exactly.Posted by: Dan at September 28, 2008 6:26 PM
Dan, glad we agree.Posted by: John Lewandowski at September 28, 2008 6:30 PM
we dont agree, you just proved my point.Posted by: Dan at September 28, 2008 6:35 PM
Dan, I differ profoundly with John on a few points, but have had a couple spirited go-arounds with him, and he seems just fine to me. I fully understand his disdain for the empty suit known as Obama.Posted by: xalisae at September 28, 2008 6:37 PM
I've tried engaging John in debate, and yet he always seems to just go at me with insults in the end regardless. I've had others here comment in the middle of arguments defending me and then he says he was exaggerating to try and make me angry or some other (often moot) point. I've pretty much given up on having an actual debate with him and try to ignore him.Posted by: Dan at September 28, 2008 6:40 PM
i guess i just take insults better than most.Posted by: xalisae at September 28, 2008 6:48 PM
xalisae, you're honest, so I don't intend to insult you.Posted by: John Lewandowski at September 28, 2008 7:12 PM
well, ok, not so much insults, but blunt honesty that some people might see as an intent to offend. :PPosted by: xalisae at September 28, 2008 7:42 PM
Just so you know, if you've made your first communion and your first confession, all you need to do is go to confession and you can go to mass and receive communion. You don't need to be confirmed.
Also, you might check into just getting confirmed without going through RCIA...my husband did it that way. Doesn't take nearly the prep.
But either way, please, go to confession, go to mass, receive communion and come home....Posted by: mk at September 28, 2008 8:14 PM
they do have a special program at a nearby church where they do a preparation for confirmation, involving a confession and communion.
Aside from that, I'm still not entirely sure, I trust more in the Bible than church doctrine which I feel doesn't quite always jibe which could pose issues in the future, we'll see.Posted by: Dan at September 28, 2008 8:19 PM
There is in fact a program running near by. I just e-mailed the pastor in charge of the program in terms of when/how long it runs. Need to be sure I can handle it along with my studies and any job I may get.Posted by: Dan at September 28, 2008 8:35 PM
YES! My Lethbridge flag prevails!!!!!
That's really all that matters, you know.Posted by: Leah at September 28, 2008 8:41 PM
Yep, all liberals know that Obama won the debate. Even if they didn't watch it and can't speak English.
Posted by: John Lewandowski at September 28, 2008 5:08 PM
Dan, shut the hell up.
Posted by: John Lewandowski at September 28, 2008 6:23 PM
John, shut the Hell up.Posted by: Hal at September 28, 2008 9:05 PM
I'd have to say that the debate completely cemented my vote for Obama, who was the clear winner. I was apathetic with regards to him before I saw the debate: after, I was very excited about his candidacy. I was for Clinton in the primaries, so seeing Obama as the candidate was a big disappointing at first. Now I'm very excited to see how his campaign goes.Posted by: HumanAbstract at September 28, 2008 9:47 PM
Welcome to the light, HumanAbstract. I agree, Obama did well. I bit soft on McCain, but I think that's what the "independent" voters want. Less attacks and more leadership. Go Obama!Posted by: Hal at September 28, 2008 9:49 PM
Posted by: Doug at September 28, 2008 9:54 PM
Doug, if that's an internet poll, it doesn't really tell us anything. The "scientific" polls, however, also show Obama kicking butt.
Aside from that, I'm still not entirely sure, I trust more in the Bible than church doctrine which I feel doesn't quite always jibe which could pose issues in the future, we'll see.
Posted by: Dan at September 28, 2008 8:19 PM
Heed those internal warnings, Dan. You have a brain,(as your posts evidence) continue to use it.Posted by: phylosopher at September 28, 2008 11:24 PM
Hal, certainly agreed that the AOL poll isn't "scientific," but it is almost 30,000 more people saying that Obama won, many of whom vote.Posted by: Doug at September 29, 2008 2:09 AM
Aside from that, I'm still not entirely sure, I trust more in the Bible than church doctrine which I feel doesn't quite always jibe which could pose issues in the future, we'll see.
Which issues are those? Unless you'd rather not get into it...Posted by: mk at September 29, 2008 6:22 AM
We've discussed them before :). Would rather not get back into it, if that's alright, lol.Posted by: Dan at September 29, 2008 7:33 AM
I think that Obama supporters have skewered(sp?)this poll.
I think McCain won! where do I vote?
Is the Poll closed?
Doug, sure. It's good. But that would suggest a Fox New poll at their website showing Mccain ahead would mean something. If you poll primarily like-minded voters, like WND, you get a poll of those voters, not US Voters. AOL might be a cross section of the American electorate, but probably not. Might be younger, more liberal, more computer literate (or older, more conservate, less computer liberate. Who uses AOL anymore?)
Anyway, the important this is the state by state race. Check out www.fivethirtyeight.com
Posted by: Hal
at September 29, 2008 11:09 AM
My dad has an AOL email account, and he is older and computer illiterate. (My sister has to log on for him) I used to have an AOL email account, but it kept deleting mail after I read it once.Posted by: JKeller at September 29, 2008 11:44 AM
Hal, AOL polls are often surprisingly "conservative." But, your points are certainly good ones.
I hear you on the electoral vote. If Obama could latch onto my home state of Ohio, I'd say it's pretty much a done deal.
I was looking at the counts this morning at realclearpolitics.com, and McCain's people have got to be hoping to turn things around here.
I do expect at least a blip back the other way, with McCain temporarily getting a bit of momentum - just since it's been so one-sidedly going Obama's way of late.Posted by: Doug at September 29, 2008 12:49 PM
One rumour is that McCain will drop Palin for Rudy. Rudy went to the debate with McCain. I don't see it happening. But oh what fun .Posted by: Hal at September 29, 2008 12:54 PM
I think McCain would probably do better with Paln than Rudy. Rudy would just tick the base off. He ought to drop Palin though, even the base isn't buying it anymore.Posted by: Dan at September 29, 2008 12:59 PM
McCain Is Stuck With Palin
Commentators on the left, right and center, reacting with near-horror to Sarah Palin's interview with Katie Couric, have each suggested that John McCain ought to put Palin on the next flight to Ketchikan, and replace her with another vice presidential nominee.
Now, none of these folks are necessarily arguing that this would be a good move for McCain electorally. They instead seem to be arguing, in essence, that it would be good for the country (how small-minded of them!).
But could such a move actually help McCain at the ballot box? My feeling is absolutely not, for several reasons:
1. Destroys Base Morale. No matter how well this is spun -- Palin withdrew to tend to her family because the liberal media are big meanies! -- Palin remains a major reason why conservative activists are showing up every day to make phone calls for John McCain. And to remove her from the ticket now would be a slap in the face. Now, I had argued before that McCain essentially ought to call the base's bluff -- nominate someone who appeals to independents, and almost literally dare them to vote for Barack Obama. But that was at least assuming that McCain would have a full two months or so to smooth things over, and convince them that Tom Ridge (or whomever) wasn't such a bad guy. If McCain were to drop Palin now, however, a lot of these folks would be heartbroken -- and a lot of them would not turn out, particularly if an Obama victory appeared inevitable anyway. Not only would this hurt McCain, but it would also harm downballot candidates; the odds of Democrats finishing with 60+ Senate seats or 260+ House seats would increase markedly.
2. No Obvious Alternative. If the Republicans had some obvious next-runner-up like Hillary Clinton sitting on the sidelines, this maneuver might become more viable. However, they do not, which is part of the reason that Palin had been picked in the first place.
With less than zero time for a roll-out of the replacement, he would almost have to be a familiar brand name. Mitt Romney? With the nation's attention focused on the economy, he'd seem to be the most likely choice, but a lot of people don't like him, and "Bain Capital" is not exactly compatible with "Main Street". Besides, would Romney really want to associate himself with what would probably be a losing ticket, when he could instead position himself as Mr. Fix-It in 2012? Rudy Giuliani? He's tested.ready.now but that's moving in the direction of national security credentials at a time the country is interested in other things. And talk radio would revolt. Joe Lieberman? I'm not even sure that McCain could pull that off even if he wanted to; some prominent members of the RNC (who have a veto) might object, happy enough to throw what they'd think to be a losing nominee under the bus for the sake of preserving the conservative movement. Fred Thompson? Actually might be the least-bad alternative, as he rehabilitated his image some with a strong convention speech. But he ran perhaps the most indifferent campaign in modern history, and the last thing the Republicans need is another VP nominee who doesn't seem particularly serious about the office of the Presidency. Which brings us to...
3. McCain Has Overplayed the Game-Changer Card. McCain already runs the risk of his campaign appearing to be something of a three-ring circus, with Britney Spears in one ring, Palin in another, and the "suspension" of his campaign in a third. To replace Palin now might make his campaign seem like a farce. And when was the last time the candidate who was the butt of more jokes won the election? Possibly 1992, but the presence of Ross Perot -- not to mention Dana Carvey's terrific George H.W. Bush -- made the comedy inherent in that election more or less an equal opportunity affair.Posted by: Hal at September 29, 2008 1:44 PM
Hal - have to laugh - I've seen some Republic ans advocating that Palin be replaced, but it's way too late, as your post detailed; stuck it is.Posted by: Doug at September 29, 2008 2:19 PM
Tell you what, too - for any objections I have to him, Ron Paul is one straight-shooter when it comes to economic stuff. Gotta give him respect about his positions in light of the current ups and downs.Posted by: Doug at September 29, 2008 2:21 PM
There are many things I respect about Ron Paul too.Posted by: Hal at September 29, 2008 2:30 PM
The KOS kids here are for Obama--no surprise. That Obama crammed for the debate and tried his darndest to look presidential and won accolades from Obama supporters--again, no surprise.
The two opinion leader polls published after the debate really had more to do with style than substance. No one seriously believes that Obama's opinions during the debates reflect any more then a few well marshalled facts strung together to make a good sound bite or two. Obama has never published or delivered a single major foreign policy speech/position paper of consequence to any mainstream, well respected, bi-partisan group anywhere. Furthermore, Obama's lack of experience qualifies him for, well, for what???
McCain is not only light years ahead of Obama in experience, but is far more qualified to serve as a steadying hand in a time of domestic financial uncertainties and international tensions. This is certainly not (nor will it ever be) a time for a young, and relatively unknown quantity ACORN/Saul Alinsky socialist to take the reigns of the presidency of the United States. About the only thing we know for sure about him is his extreme pro-abortion position.
There are many things we can extrapolate from Obama's long term association with the unrepentant bomber William Ayers, and his associations with Rezko and Wright, but we do not even have to go there. If the MSM was not so in the tank for Obama this race wouldn't even be close.
Bottom line: We still have a month to go--lots of up and downs for both sides. The poll that counts comes Nov. 4. It's going to be a wild ride.Posted by: Jerry at September 29, 2008 7:48 PM
Jerry, agreed that we still have a real horserace here.
I think that whoever wins will be associated with the bad economic times, and that their party will suffer for it.Posted by: Doug at September 30, 2008 11:52 AM
steadying hand? Freak out John McCain? He's all over the map. I agree we have a long way to go, but let's not give McCain's "judgement and experience" too much credit. He picked Palin didn't he. What do conservatives think of that decision?
"I think [Palin] has pretty thoroughly — and probably irretrievably — proven that she is not up to the job of being president of the United States. If she doesn’t perform well, then people see it. And this is a moment of real high anxiety, a little bit like 9/11, when people look to Washington for comfort and leadership and want to know that people in charge know what they are doing," - David Frum.Posted by: Hal at September 30, 2008 12:34 PM
"What do conservatives think of that decision?"
Most conservatives think Palin ignited the base. With regard to her not living up to expectations, i.e. not being able to do a slam dunk in every interview, one wonders how the prophet himself would have fared had he been received from the outset with the same level of scrutiny.
Actually, Palin's performance to date and her credentials are quite good. Now, if she had stated that Roosevelt sat down on TV at the onset of the great depression and had a nice little chat with the American people, I would agree we have problem. Funny, isn't it, how Biden can get away with something like that, and Obama can get away with having visited 57 states, but a hyper scrutiny surrounds every move Palin makes. If Palin had said she wanted to visit the other 56 states, the MSM would have gone bonkers!
The MSM is in the tank for Obama, and that is the only reason this is close.Posted by: Jerry at September 30, 2008 1:48 PM
As more and more stuff has come out about Palin, the McCain/Palin ticket's popularity has seriously slid, and despite many Republicans now seeing that she is a huge liability, there's not time to replace her and have it be a net positive, so McCain is stuck with her.Posted by: Doug at September 30, 2008 8:02 PM
Obviously we differ on the Palin effect. But if time is the issue, would that preclude Obama dumping Biden for Hil as some are saying is in the works?Posted by: Jerry at September 30, 2008 10:12 PM
Jerry, Intrade has categories where one can bet on the outcome of various things.
You buy or sell the issue, and this is people putting up real money.
Obama is a heavy favorite at this time.
On the Vice-Presidential candidates and the odds of them being replaced prior to the election, Palin is currently at 10.5 - the odds are still low despite her performance thus far.
Biden is at 5.2 - slimmer odds yet.
Not impossible that Biden would be replaced, but I do think that it's getting so late in the game that it's very unlikely, and that the Obama camp would have to be really worried - a thing I doubt for now.
He's been gaining ground as far as electoral votes and now that Ohio is leaning toward Obama, the desperation, if any, is going to be with the McCain side.Posted by: Doug at October 1, 2008 9:30 AM
(By Paul Campos, Rocky Mountain News)
(Published October 1, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.)
The parody "rockumentary" This Is Spinal Tap features a scene in which a fictional rock band's manager defends a particularly idiotic decision by pointing out that he was merely following the instructions of Nigel Tufnel, the band's profoundly clueless lead guitarist.
Lead singer David St. Hubbins replies, "But you're not as confused as him, are you? I mean it's not your job to be as confused as Nigel."
The latest in a string of revelations about the depths of Sarah Palin's ignorance - a Sept. 29 blog post by Politico.com's Jonathan Martin that she's apparently incapable of naming any Supreme Court opinion other than Roe v. Wade - is a reminder that it's not the job of someone who could be a heartbeat away from the presidency to be as confused as the average American.
John McCain's nomination of Palin has turned out to be what can be called an attempt to pull off the Full Nixon. Forty years ago, Richard Nixon figured out that there were a lot of votes to be won by tapping into widespread resentment of "arrogant elites," who thought they were smarter and better informed than their fellow Americans.
For months now, McCain has been hammering away at this theme in regard to Barack Obama, whose Ivy League education is supposed to have infused him with the arrogance and elitism that makes him contemptuous of ordinary folk like, for example, Sarah Palin.
Palin has spent almost her whole life in a very small town in a sparsely populated and extremely isolated state. For reasons that remain obscure, she attended five colleges in six years where, if her public performance to date is any indication, she seems to have learned nothing.
If Palin knows anything at all about national politics or foreign affairs or history or economics or almost anything else one would want a president to know something about, she has till now kept that fact remarkably well hidden.
She is, in other words, the ultimate representative of a kind of out-of-control populism. In its more extreme forms, populist resentment of elites flows from the belief that any ordinary person knows enough to be a good political leader, since political leadership is all about having the right values, and good character, and a pure heart.
This is of course nonsense. It makes about as much sense as saying that performing open-heart surgery or piloting a jumbo jet is all about having the right values.
McCain and his advisers know this, which is why they've spent the last month trying to stuff Sarah Palin full of plausible sound bites of information, so she can at least pretend to know what she's talking about when she's asked questions about the federal government or foreign policy or economics or history, etc.
It's a cynical and incredibly reckless strategy, especially given McCain's age and precarious health. (McCain's odds of dying of natural causes in the next four years are, conservatively speaking, at least one in seven).
It's a sign of how successfully political know-nothingism has been exploited in America that it's even necessary to say this: To do a decent job, the president of the United States needs to be vastly more educated and knowledgeable than the average American.
This is a necessary, though far from sufficient, requirement. And, as Palin's cringe-inducing performance on the national stage illustrates, there are plenty of politicians who are no more qualified to be president than I am to be an NBA power forward.
Consider that the most recent of Tina Fey's hilarious yet horrifying Saturday Night Live parodies of Palin included merely repeating, word for word, one of Palin's rambling and nonsensical answers to CBS interviewer Katie Couric's questions.
That fact by itself ought to disqualify John McCain from the office he seeks.Posted by: Rhovan Archetravian at October 1, 2008 10:28 AM
Hey I just heard the term Palinista!! That would be me!! :)Posted by: Carla at October 1, 2008 3:23 PM