Blog @ MoreWhat.com

Democrats are concerned that Obama/Biden cannot close the deal and Biden as usual tries to paint over the shortcomings of the ticket and the party.

ABC must be trying to look fair by posting this mild, small report. They use a Biden quote for the title but the important part is in the subtitle that has been used here for the title of this post.

Continuing to harp on the lame argument that McCain is the same as Bush is ridiculous. For all you liberals out there, that would be like saying Obama is the same as Biden, Kerry, Clinton or Edwards. They may all be in the same party but they have differences.

If you look at some recent history like the 2000 primaries, how do you remember George Bush and John McCain then? If McCain works against Bush he gets criticized. If McCain works with Bush he gets criticized. How about understanding by his record John McCain as he has said many times is willing to work with anyone on either side of the aisle to get America’s work done.

The American voter by virtue of this curious report from ABC and the polling data for months plus commentary from around the country is waking up to the fact that Obama is a mirage. His associations, his politics and the little history of him he cannot hide indicates many of the allegations against him are true.

Wouldn’t a reasonable person meet charges head on and provide the necessary proof to defeat them if they existed? Why would a person run the risk of being viewed as something they are not if they had evidence to vindicate themselves?

Joe Biden has done more to uncover the real Obama than the main stream media. It would be fair to say that Barack Obama may be regretting his selection for Vice-President. But it could be a good thing for the rest of us.

More recent records like Obama’s interview on local Chicago public radio in 2001 give support to the notion the media is trying to dismiss about socialism. Barack Obama opened the door with his comments to Joe the Plumber. The media and Obama dismissed it. Now the interview from 2001. More discussion of the redistribution of wealth and Obama is still trying to talk his way out of it.

Maybe this is why Obama cannot close the deal and why Biden dismisses the evaporating lead in the polls and that the public does not know if their ticket can achieve change. It is not that the public does not know. They are coming to understand how dangerous an Obama presidency would be.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Could the media be changing after all the media bashing protesting bias? Or is this just a matter of polls changing to reflect more voters getting involved? A Boston Herald report opened with ‘a nine point lead’ for Obama at Gallup, one of the three polls monitored here, but did not lead with the other model from Gallup which is five points. This morning Zogby and Rasmussen are hovering around five points and then there is the video presented in this post. How about that one poll with a double digit lead? Hmmmm.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

There is good reason for McCain to dismiss the polls. This blog has regularly followed three polling sources, Gallup, Rasmussen and Zogby. The double digit spreads suggested by some polls over recent weeks has been a curious development. This observer noted that of the three being monitored here, Gallup was reporting double digit spreads occasionally and was frequently releasing polls with larger spreads than the other two. Zogby approached double digits spreads recently but by and large all three have shown mid single digits as the best lead by Obama. With or without margins for error the 2008 Presidential election campaign is much closer than the main stream media would have you believe.

This is the polling situation at Gallup currently.
‘Barack Obama leads John McCain in both of the latest Gallup likely voter estimates — 50% to 45% using the traditional model, and a slightly larger lead with 52% to 43% in the expanded model.’

And at Rasmussen it is Obama 52%, McCain 44% with Obama gaining one point since Friday. Zogby shows the spread between McCain and Obama at a mere 5.3% after being nearly ten or twelve points the last three days.

And like many these days this blog puts limited significance on the polls as they are just another thing to look at during the campaign.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

McCain Dismisses Polls Showing Him Behind Obama

By VOA News
26 October 2008U.S. presidential candidate John McCain has dismissed recent opinion polls that place him behind his Democratic opponent, Barack Obama.

During an interview on NBC’s Meet the Press Sunday, McCain — a Republican — said the race is very close. He added that he believes he will win the November fourth election.

Recent polls show McCain trailing Obama — in some cases by double digits.

Senator McCain was to hold a rally today in the midwestern state of Iowa before heading to Ohio, considered one of the most important states to win in the election.
Senator Obama will appear at two rallies in Colorado. On Saturday, he campaigned in the neighboring state of New Mexico, and even farther west in Nevada.

The Illinois senator returned to the campaign trail Saturday after visiting his gravely ill grandmother in Hawaii. Madelyn Dunham, who raised Obama, turns 86 Sunday.

In a separate development, Obama’s aides announced former President Bill Clinton will campaign with the Democratic candidate for the first time at a rally this week in Florida.

If you think the topic of this video is no big deal then you are not really thinking. Biden and Obama try as they might cannot gloss over the supreme Biden gaffe. Arguably the single most dangerous effect of a potential Obama Presidency with a Vice-President Biden is presented in this video.

Not in this video is Biden’s additional comment that the American people would have to be patient with Obama as it would appear he was making a grave mistake in responding to the crisis Biden guarantees will happen. The details were never revealed. And people would vote for these guys?

Support McCain/Palin with your vote to keep our country secure.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Let’s not forget what Joe Biden said about Barack Obama and John McCain BEFORE he was placed on the Democratic ticket.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The Joe the Plumber story has, regardless of anything else, raised the consciousness of many voters to understand and see beyond the mirage that is Obama. The understanding comes from the realization that the Democratic party, while touting McCain as four more years of President Bush, has successfully reminded citizens of their decades of overtaxing Americans. Obama’s statement of ’spreading the wealth’ exposed that flaw and woke up a nation.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

For all the abuse Joe the Plumber took from the ’spread the wealth’ liberals after being lifted onto the national stage for having the AUDACITY to ask the Messiah about his tax plans, his own words should get more play. They do in this video.

Just had to add this video to the blog as it does have entertainment and political value. Not unlike most of what John McCain does, he outperforms Barack Obama here as well.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

The story below features a topic about which this blog author knows a thing or two. Not so much about the auto plant but some of the notions presented about the election and the people of Wisconsin. For instance, I have not heard one single person express the economy as the central theme in their consideration of the candidates. Yet ’some independent groups’ according to the story below claim that may determine the election in this state. Don’t misunderstand. The economy weighs heavily on people’s mind as it does anytime, election or not, when it is not living up to expectations. But the candidates and how they are viewed as leading this country overall dominate the discussions heard from this part of the world.

If you look at the voting history of Wisconsin coupled with the fact we have two Democrats in the US Senate and one in the US Congress and a Democrat for Governor viewing this state as ‘clearly’ in Obama’s camp or ‘leaning that way’ is not a big leap. The bulk of the population in this state lives in Milwaukee and the People’s Republic of Madison. And guess which way those two liberal bastions lean. So yes, Wisconsin is quite blue.

Recent election results were Dukakis, Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Kerry. Granted Nixon and Reagan won with Carter winning a narrow margin over Ford. But you get hte point. You could call much of the other political history as mixed to some degree but this state leans blue at the very least. The point is to place this state as clearly or leaning in favor of Obama and attributing it to the economy while featuring a failing GM plant is, well, nonsense. How about the reason for the plant failure is putting all your eggs in one basket. Mid-size trucks and SUV’s even with gas at a buck a gallon is a limited marketing mix. So how biased is reporting these days?

And Obama says if the government is here for you the plant will remain for another hundred years. And they call this man prepared to lead this country? Pander, pander, pander. And to whom is he pandering? A guy who worked at a two vehicle plant and his kids work there or at auto related businesses. Was there mention of all your eggs in one basket? Yes there was. And there was mention of pandering that includes growing goverment and use of taxpayer revenue to subsidize all these eggs in a basket that failed. At least by implication it is there in Obama’s speech. You can bet laid off plant workers are buying it.

It would be fair to say that life is in the dumper for many people in Wisconsin and elsewhere. No one this blog author knows is looking for Obama to solve their problems. And even the life of this blog’s author is hovering about the dumper but Obama is not viewed as the solution.

If you want more information on Barack Obama feel free to take a look around this blog. It’s everywhere. Vote McCain/Palin this November or early and often if that’s your thing.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

US Election Wisconsin report - Download (WM)
US Election Wisconsin report - Watch (WM)

When voters in the U. S. Midwestern state of Wisconsin head to the polls on November 4th, high gasoline prices coupled with job losses will weigh heavily on their minds. For both Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, Wisconsin is important to winning the White House. Lately, some independent groups charting the 50 states and their electoral votes have put Wisconsin either clearly in Obama’s camp or leaning that way. The outcome in Wisconsin could largely be determined by how voters see the economy and its future. VOA’s Kane Farabaugh recently traveled to Janesville, Wisconsin and filed this report.

GM Auto plant in Janesville, Wisconsin

For almost 90 years, this automobile plant has been in Janesville.

The plant has survived tough times — the Great Depression and World War Two. Since 1919, thousands of workers like Bill Breidenstein have passed through its doors.

In December, General Motors will close the plant.

“It’s heart-wrenching when you think you put in your life of trying to keep a company going then to have this happen,” Bill Breidenstein said. He is a retired auto worker.

Bill Breidenstein

High gasoline prices brought thick clouds to Janesville. Once the producer of iconic American cars like the 1957 Chevrolet, the plant currently makes mid-size trucks and sport utility vehicles. Sales of those cars have plummeted due to the high cost of fuel.

In addition to job losses at the plant, some six thousands more jobs throughout the region will be affected by the closing.

Senator Obama visited the GM Plant in early 2008 prior to the announcement of plant closure

In this part of America, jobs are the greatest concern for voters like Bill Breidenstein. Barack Obama tapped into this when he visited the plant earlier this year, before GM’s announcement.

“If our government is there to support you,” Obama said. “This plant will be here for another hundred years.”

Breidenstein was there for Obama’s speech. He worked at the plant for more than 30 years. Most of his children work at the plant or at its suppliers.

Breidenstein supports Obama. “We have an administration in there now that has done nothing but promote companies moving overseas,” Breidenstein said. “We cannot have that, and Obama after he gave his speech, he says one thing we need to do is penalize companies that move overseas and not give them tax breaks like they’ve been getting for the last eight years.”

But McCain supporters like Jim Chesmore disagree. Chesmore is a former plant worker. “I can’t say the problems this plant is having is actually political,” Chesmore said. “I think it’s more economy from gas prices, has a big thing to do with it.”

Jim Chesmore

Chesmore worked at the Janesville plant for almost 40 years. He supports offshore drilling which Obama initially opposed. Chesmore believes that jobs at the plant would have been saved if drilling were already underway. “It’s there, it just has to be tapped into,” Chesmore said.

Many issues intersect at Janesville, from the economy to jobs to the high cost of fuel. All contributed to the plant closure. Despite the political rhetoric, it seems no solution can be reached in time to save the plant and the people employed there.

When Wisconsin voters head to the polls on November 4th, they are expected to cast their ballots for the candidate they feel has the best plan for their future and their jobs.

It sounds good enough and is not the first time this scenario has been suggested. But the flaw of the argument or the fly in the ointment lives within the other words of the commentary referenced here.

Which brings me back to why the Republicans need to get throttled: A humiliated, decimated GOP that rejuvenates and rebuilds around the principles of limited government, free markets, and rugged individualism is really the only chance for voters to possibly get a real choice in federal elections down the road.

The wake up call for the GOP was with the midterms in 2006 where they lost the majority. And the author above is also right about the Dems interpreting any defeat of the GOP as an endorsement of their failed agendas. To wit: the new direction for America marketed by Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats has resulted in nothing. Nothing except an approval rating for Congress lower than that of the President. This is not just a GOP problem but a GOP and DNC problem. Ousting what is left of the GOP from Congress and putting a Democrat in the White House will not solve the problem. Giving the Dems the majority in Congress in 2006 is enough proof of that.

It’s hard to think of how Obama could be worse. He’ll just be bad in different ways. And that is where the author loses his argument. To object to the recent interventions of the federal government in response to allowing the subprime mortgage mess to dismantle the credit markets and put just about everyone as risk and call it GOP socialism is a bit over the top not to mention wrong. What should have been done? Let everything fall where it may? That is poetic justice but the crisis itself if it can be called that was also proof enough how well that strategy works. Something had to be done and nearly any response would be judged inadequate or simply wrong. There was no way to win once the problem had been allowed to develop in the first place. The Dems have plenty of complicity in the subprime mess and the GOP is not without guilt either.

This isn’t to say that Barack Obama would be any better. Government would undoubtedly grow under his watch. And from my libertarian perspective, he has been increasingly disappointing even on the issues where he’s supposed to be good. There it is. Obama won’t be an improvement. The government will grow on his watch. He is increasingly disappointing.

You cannot engage in politics only during an election cycle and expect things to go the way you want. Even if you are diligent year round this is a republic and we elect representatives who are not required to do as we ask. They are to represent us in what they believe is the best way. If we disagree we can vote for someone else. Rather than throw out the baby with the bath water as this author suggests, we need to retain the GOP in the White House and at least hold where the member numbers are in Congress. Along with that expressing our reactions to what happens in Washington as individuals must be maintained. It was in evidence in the summer of 2007 when Congress considered amnesty for illegal immigrants. The measure was soundly defeated due to an enormous public outcry rendering the Congressional phone system unusable from overload or simply being turned off to stem the tide. That is what gets the public’s opinion listened to in Washington.

The biggest problem with the author’s suggestion to throw out the GOP in hopes of reforming their lost ways is the damage that would be caused by Obama and friends and no guarantee of when the GOP would be able to return renewed. Unbridled power to the left may be a tipping point the republic cannot withstand.

Abandoning the GOP is not the answer. Doing your part to keep Washington honest is the answer. And voting for John McCain and Sarah Palin is the start. Doing your part after that by continuing to let your voice be heard in Washington throughout the year and beyond is the finish. That’s what keeps government working for you. Don’t blame everything on the GOP or Washington. As citizenz we share in the blame for how things are no matter who is in charge.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

On the one hand it is understandable that ordinary citizens would hold money matters as central to their thinking especially in an election year. On the other hand that thinking may be flawed and the average voter may be selecting a candidate based on something over which they have little or no control. It is again the MSM who is fanning the economy flames in this election. If it wasn’t obvious to you in months past it should be now. The coverage if you can call it that is now all Obama, all the time with constant reminders that the economy is the big issue.

It’s not the economy, stupid!!! The MSM knows that wallet issues are sensational and drive readership, viewership and ad revenue. They are supporting the notion that the 2008 US Presidential election is all about the economy. Early in this campaign season when it appeared the war in Iraq would be the central issue in the election the MSM supported the notion that everything was wrong with Iraq and the GOP was to blame. The Democratic party Presidential contenders were all about immediate withdrawal and their surrogates like MoveOn were shamelessly attacking General Petraeus with outrageous insults. When they learned that immediate withdrawal from Iraq would be a disaster they all changed their tune and MoveOn became silent. Now they push the economic issue as the war issue failed them.

The excerpt and link below suggests a realistic view on the economy and the President’s limited influence over it. Something lost on most MSM treatment of the topic now that election day is so close.

No matter which party you belong to, or which Big Idea or school of economic policy you subscribe to, one thing is clear: Globalization has overwhelmed Washington’s ability to control the economy. Whether you’re a Republican supply-side tax-cutter, a Wall Street deficit hawk of either party, or a Silicon Valley techie type, your preferred levers of economic policy just don’t work as well as they once did.

As recently as 10 years ago, the U.S. economy was still relatively self-contained. Then-Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan–often called the most powerful man in the world–could be sure that the U.S. economic machine would eventually respond when he called for higher or lower rates. Tax and spending decisions made in Washington could set the course for growth, while economic events in the rest of the world, such as the Asian financial crisis of the mid-1990s, were felt as minor bumps.

That has changed. Since 1995 imports have risen from 12% of gross domestic product to about 17%. And foreign money finances about 32% of U.S. domestic investment, up from 7% in 1995. In other words, the U.S. is more open to the global economy than ever before, and the links run in both directions. Now many of the levers affecting the U.S. economy are located not in Washington but in Beijing, London, and even Mexico City.

Below is another reference to why the economy is not something a President can control. While it is true that Presidents like to take credit for a good economy and their opponents like to tag them with responsibility for a bad one the fact remains they have little to do with it beyond a mistakenly perceived connection.

It Ain’t the Economy, Stupid
Why no president can control our $14 trillion engine

As the economy weakens and the campaign intensifies, we’ll hear more of James Carville’s familiar refrain: It’s the economy, stupid. Well, it ain’t or, at least, shouldn’t be. I’m not claiming that Carville is wrong about voting. People vote their pocketbooks. In the latest Washington Post-ABC NewS poll, the economy overshadows Iraq as the most important issue by 39 percent to 19. What I’m saying is that this sort of voting is shortsighted. It rewards or punishes candidates for something beyond their power.

A surprising report from a member of the MSM questioned the value of the economic issue in an election some time ago. But of course the topic is receiving another type of attention lately.

Economy May Not Influence Election As It Has in Past
Polls Contradict Forecasting Models

Economists who say economic conditions can be used to explain the outcome of almost every presidential election since at least the 1950s are perplexed.

The character, personal attributes, history and experience of candidates should be placed more prominently in the mind of voters before casting their vote. If you review economic events throughout the last few decades you will find that Presidents had little to do with it and we all survived just like we will this time. The short sighted view of the economy as the central issue in this campaign only serves the left in dismissing and distracting from the flaws of the Obama candidacy. Voting merely on economic matters and supporting Obama for that reason will render those voters accomplices in the single largest scam ever perpetrated against the public in the US.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

October 16th poll reviews:

Zogby has it Obama 49%, McCain 44%

Rasmussen is Obama 50%, McCain 46%

Gallup shows Obama 50%, McCain 43%

less than ten days ago Gallup showed an Obama nine point lead, Rasmussen an Obama 8 point lead and Zogby had a 7.7 lead for Obama. The polling from these three tightened in McCain’s favor after the last of three debates which of course was last night.

Obama has 5-point lead on McCain
Thu Oct 16, 2008 10:21am EDT
By Andrew Quinn

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat Barack Obama has a 5-point lead over Republican John McCain in the U.S. presidential race, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/ZOGBY poll released on Thursday.

Obama leads McCain by 49 percent to 44 percent among likely U.S. voters in the latest four-day tracking poll, up slightly from a 4-point lead on Wednesday. The poll has a margin of error of 2.9 percentage points.

The curious nature of political polling cannot be emphasized enough. But one day after the final 2008 Presidential debate and at least one announcement from none other than George Stephanopoulos of ABC that Obama won all three debates, how does one account for McCain closing the polling gap the morning after the last debate?

Is the Messiah’s ‘cool’ no longer enough to win an election. Is Barack Obama’s failure to adequately explain associations like domestic terrorist William Ayers more of a problem than the media reports? Is the economy being addressed near equally by both candidates? That would fly in the face of media coverage of the campaign also. Maybe the makings of a perfect storm of voter reaction is gathering in the last moments of the 2008 countdown to election day. McCain may be finally getting through to voters. They may finally be seeing the problems with the Obama campaign that his supporters and the media have tried to play down.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 16 (UPI) — Democratic nominee Barack Obama narrowly beat Republican John McCain in the final U.S. presidential debate, results from a snap Politico poll indicated.

Forty-nine percent of respondents indicated Obama won the debate while 46 percent believed McCain won, results from a Politico-InsiderAdvantage survey of undecided debate-watchers indicated Thursday. Five percent said they were unsure.

So how did CBS News and the fish wrap NYT’s come up with this polling data reported by the AP?

A new national poll by CBS News and The New York Times showed Obama leading McCain by a commanding 53 percent to 39 percent _ a huge leap over the 48-45 lead Obama held in the same poll before last week’s town hall debate. Other polls have also shown Obama leading, but by a lesser margin.

Could the noted CBS News/NYT poll be the sort of information that fuels complaints of bias in the media? How can one poll show a 14 point spread when the bulk of the others are in the low single digits? You can view that as a rhetorical question.

When some state that a few weeks can be a lifetime in politics, the 2008 Presidential campaign may support that notion. For all the help Barack Obama’s campaign has received from sources which should not be helping candidates, the narrow margin between McCain and Obama as election day nears may indicate a change in voter sentiment. The questions of Barack Obama’s choices and judgments may finally be getting through. It is often stated that most voters do not pay close attention to a political race until shortly before voting. If that is the case the polls may be shifting as a result of that trend. And the race has always been closer than some would have you believe.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

In case it is not obvious to you this blog author is voting for Senator John McCain for President of the United States of America on November 4, 2008.

YouTube removed McCain campaign videos from their site and the McCain campaign was unsuccessful in convincing the parent, Google, from changing their mind. At issue is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and whether ‘fair use’ has been applied to portions of the videos with copyrighted material included. Or is it? The first question might be to ask how difficult or time consuming would it be to get approval from the copyright owners to use the material and eliminate Google’s ‘expressed’ concern. But then with all the videos on YouTube that include copyrighted material how many have been removed? Google claims the quantity of video available does not allow them to proceed as suggested by the McCain campaign. This has to remind people of the egg on the face Google, Yahoo and others received when outed for assisting China in limiting citizens access to the net. Are they now limiting voters access to the candidates by barring some McCain video ads?

Update: McCain protests YouTube’s removal of his campaign videos
GOP candidate says YouTube acted too quickly to comply with copyright notices that are ‘without merit’

McCain’s campaign sent a letter Monday to YouTube parent company Google Inc., protesting YouTube’s removal of unnamed videos from the site after receiving take-down notices claiming copyright infringement under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The McCain camp goes on to suggest that YouTube set up a special process for reviewing the legal merit of take-down requests for YouTube accounts associated with candidates or their campaigns.

And Google responded with this….

In a letter sent yesterday to the McCain campaign, YouTube said that performing a substantial legal review of every DMCA take-down notice that it receives is not a “viable solution.”
It is not possible because of the scale of YouTube’s operations, the letter said. “Any such review would have to include a determination of whether a particular use is a ‘fair use’ under the law, which is a complex and fact-specific test that requires the subjective balancing of four factors,” the letter said. “No number of lawyers could determine with a reasonable level of certainty whether all the videos for which we receive disputed take-down notices qualify as fair use.”

Since Viacom sued Google last year for copyright infringement over clips shown on YouTube one can understand how this topic would concern the internet giant’s legal and financial teams. The real question may be how is the McCain camp video(s) treatment compared with others who have had their video banned? And an explanation from Google’s legal guru may or may not resolve the issue. The other (major) issue here is that YouTube can’t make accurate fair use decisions anyway, since it doesn’t know most of the key facts about the cases at issue. For instance, YouTube doesn’t know if the DMCA takedown issuer truly does control the rights claimed, and it doesn’t know if the uploader had a contract to use the clips in question. “When two parties disagree,” writes Levine, “we are simply not in a position to verify the veracity of either party’s claims.”

Reviewing a selection of reports on this story finds many expressing the notion that McCain’s campaign is seeking special treatment. Getting back to the question of having approval to use copyrighted content in advance of offering the video on YouTube, it seems that may not even satisfy Google according to their own mouthpiece. While the McCain camp can certainly be accused of pursuing their own best interests the Google/YouTube folks can certainly be accused of having the ability to use DMCA to their advantage while also using it for cover from public opinion.

Google/YouTube enjoys the benefit of serious traffic to their site and one has to wonder if an estimate of over $90 million in ad revenue for 2008 does not provide sufficient resources to better apply the DMCA in a manner similar to that suggested by McCain’s campaign. While you can argue that Google is just covering their butts on this one and should not be criticized for avoiding legal trouble they had to know showing Viacom clips would expose them to the possibility of legal action and went ahead with it anyhow. This seems more a case of selective enforcement than universal treatment.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

Ayers is a campaign topic that should not go away and conerned voters who expect honesty, sincerity and responsible judgment from elected officials do understand the importance even if they are not alarmed by William Ayers. The question of Obama’s dishonesty is not lost on one writer from the San Diego Union Tribune.

I put no stock in the politics of guilt by association. And even associating with ghouls should not hurt someone’s bid for the presidency. But lying about it is another story. It could be a warning of things to come.

The judgment or lack of it demonstrated by Barack Obama upon first distancing himself from the Ayers question by saying he was ‘just a guy in the neighborhood’ to having his campaign say for him that Ayers and he were ‘friendly’ and all but dismissing their work together promoting radical ideology in a scam perpetrated through funding from the Chicago Annenberg Challenge and other work through the Woods Foundation is a disturbing track record for a candidate.

Obama’s work with Ayers in the CAC also involved other questionable relationships which increases the significance of the troubling nature of his conduct. A piece from Dick Morris reinforces that fact. What makes ACORN particularly embarrassing for Obama is that he used to be one of them. He served as general counsel for ACORN in Illinois, channeled millions to the organization from the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (whose funds he distributed), and has lately spent $800,000 of his campaign money to subsidize the group’s activities. For this emolument, ACORN has registered voters 15 times over, canvassed the graveyards for votes and prepared to commit electoral fraud on a massive scale.

While the media and other Obama supporters dismiss everyone of the Democratic party nominee’s questionable associations and related judgments the voting public may not be so sure even though another attempt to prop up Obama was delivered by ABC’s Nightline, Terry Moran and George Stephanopoulos. The final debate post game show offered by ABC’s late night program also featured Donna Brazil, Matthew Dowd and Jake Tapper aiding and abetting the left leaning appraisal which inserted patronizing and meaningless notes on McCain obviously designed to avoid a criticism of bias.

Beyond Obama’s associations, judgments and mysterious past other notions have been thrust upon the campaign. At different times and from different sources the ‘race card’ has again been inserted. From the white bashing characterizations of small town folks clutching their bibles and guns to the ‘bubba’ reference and also ‘joe sixpack’ there was little reverse discrimination announced. And there is the suggestion that whites will show support for Obama in public but when filling out their secret ballot racism will rear its ugly head and they will vote for the white guy. Has someone been trying to guilt white Americans into voting for Barack Obama? The fact that the media and others have to insert the notion of the race card whether real or imagined ignores the fact that it is obvious one candidate is black and one is white. While all that is true it seems the underlying question will be dismissed based on race. Meaning the situation regarding dismissal of any Obama’s negative attributes get a pass other politicians may not get as it may be seen as racist to criticize the Messiah.

It general it seems the view is candidates and those who observe them may only discuss positive messages or the charge of negative campaigning appears. The trend is becoming a competition about what feel good promises each candidate proposes and any analysis of their weakness or downside is off limits. Do you decide on which brand of product or service to buy based only on advertisements? Do you not seek out information about a product or service that may disqualify it as your choice? Then why would you dismiss facts about a candidate that would disqualify them as your choice? Why would you abandon seeking more information about allegations of wrongdoing related to a candidate? You certainly would want all those facts if an elected official was accused of wrongdoing in office so why not find out if a candidate should be disqualifed before election day? Are you so worried about your wallet that you will rely on the fallacy of picking the candidate simply because they are a member of the opposition party? American voters may be making a choice on a single issue by an invalid analysis of that issue.

A fact that needs repeating based on the concern the public holds now on economic issues is campaign tax plans. As noted on this blog earlier, Senator John McCain is favored by a host of citizen tax groups. This favored ranking has been maintained over much if not all of McCain’s public service career. It may be difficult to decide on which plans are better, those from Obama or McCain, as numerous analyses from various sources provide too many pro and con points about them. Even if each candidate’s tax or economic plans were about equal there is a wild card not being discussed. Whether the next Congress has a liberal or conservative majority both parties have held the majority in recent years and their approval ratings have been poor all along. And these are the people necessary for any President to pass legislation on their respective plans. As is the case with most legislation, it doesn’t look much like the initial proposal if and when it becomes law. So for those deciding their November vote on the single issue of their wallet the outcome may not be what you expect.

And on the issue of VP choices perhaps too much has been made about Biden and Palin. History would suggest that the possibility is remote either would need to assume the office of President. It may be prudent to suggest that if either VP had to take the oath as President due to a tragic circumstance that the worst case scenario would be a lackluster performance equal to the that of past VP’s who were thrust into the role of POTUS by unexpected events. The best case may also be a probability that either one would rise to the occasion and perform so well as to be elected at the end of such a term.

Much of what is supposed to separate Obama from McCain in this race is intangible. Many pundits focus on the typical campaign analysis which focuses on what can only be described as marketing. Speeches, campaign appearances, stage presence, campaign promises and other fluff are claimed to demonstrate a candidate’s ability to perform in the office which they seek. It may be fair to say that Obama’s experience to date compared to John McCain’s life long public service is proof of something about the two candidates. If you take away the support staff of both and have to choose a candidate based on each individual’s ability it is likely John McCain could lead on his own whereas Obama would be lost without the likes of Joe Biden, et al, to explain everything he would need to do as President. The fluff is sort of fun to watch but when it comes right down to it John McCain has an entire lifetime of experience to rely on where Barack Obama does not have his own experience to guide him. He would be a President of others as most decisions would come from his staff.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com

qoute of the day: “If you wanted to run against President Bush you should have run in 2004.” (John McCain)

It is this blog’s opinion that the Gallup polls have trended noticeably higher than others like Rasmussen and Zogby. Similarly the Zogby polls seem to have favored McCain more than others. The bottom line is as many pundits express that polling data may not be as revealing as it sometimes appears. There seems to be no doubt that Obama has an edge in the last month before the November 4th election. However, puzzling polling data or not, the outcome of the 2008 Presidential election still remains uncertain. And the three items that have received the most attention recently are the economy, Obama’s associates and the growing number of investigations into voter fraud. Another noteworthy item is the negative trends by both campaigns and their ads and sound bites in which the MSM focuses largely on the McCain campaign and various attempts by them at fact checking that resolves little.

Could it be that voters, undecided or not, are having second thoughts about Obama’s associates and his tendency to provide distractions away from the topic rather than addressing voter concerns? His repeated responses when available have simply dismissed questionaable associations as mere coincidental contact or relationships that have no bearing on his role in politics or outright lies that he did not have any contact as in ‘just a guy in the neighborhood’ in reference to William Ayers.

With the number one issue in the campaign currently being the economy and voters worrying about their wallets more than the character of presidential candidates, Obama’s advantage with respect to the issue seems to be fading according to recent poll results.

Gallup Daily: Obama-McCain Gap Narrows
Obama leads, 50% to 43%
October 12, 2008
Barack Obama continues to hold a lead over John McCain in Gallup Poll Daily tracking, 50% to 43%, among registered voters. Obama’s lead has narrowed slightly after being in double-digits several days last week. Two Gallup likely voter estimates show the race slightly closer.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows Barack Obama attracting 50% of the vote while John McCain earns 45%. That’s a bit closer than numbers from a week ago when Obama enjoyed an eight-point advantage, his largest lead of the year.

Released: October 13, 2008
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby Poll: Obama 48%, McCain 44%

Obama’s lead declines

UTICA, New York – Democratic Party presidential nominee Barack Obama slipped back into a statistical dead heat with Republican Party nominee John McCain, but still holds the advantage over McCain, the latest Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby likely voter poll shows.

In this latest report, McCain gained eight-tenths of a point, while Obama lost one full point.

For all the flak the MSM and others have tried to hand McCain and Palin for focusing on Obama’s associations the relative closeness of the 2008 race may demonstrate voters are not just concerned about the economy. And that would reflect well on the American voter. No one should be criticized for worrying about their wallet and what the next President can do for them in that regard but history may indicate that such concerns were never really a matter of just one person, a candidate, and their ability to improve the financial position of average citizens. It takes more than just one person, the President for instance, to affect the economy whether that is a boon or boondoggle in the public view. That is why Obama’s associations, choices and judgments in concert with his history and how his views have been shaped are of such importance. Whether you believe McCain is equipped to deal with the nation’s problems or not at least you have information for making the voting decision. Such is not the case with Obama. The primary reason is that he keeps that sort of information to himself and has been shown to be reluctant to give it up.

Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com