Thursday, October 30, 2008
Friday, February 8, 2008
WHY , because it is true !!
Who Beats John McCain?
It's with great caution that any head-to-head match-up polling numbers between presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain and potential Democratic nominees Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton should be evaluated (it's pretty clear, not only from past elections but from common sense reasoning, that once each party has it's nominee and once the general election gets under way, the context of the election can really affect exactly who is up and who is down). That being said, the secondary effect of these polls is the perception that one candidate is "stronger" than another candidate, something that can be rather powerful in these kinds of high-profile campaigns. Taking a look at the most recent head-to-head match ups, there's no doubt that the Obama campaign will be shouting these poll results from the highest mountains, or at least during the upcoming debates in Ohio and Texas.
Time (Feb 1-4)
Obama 48 (+7)
McCain 41
Clinton 46 (+0)
McCain 46
CNN/Opinion Research (Feb 1-3)
Obama 52 (+8)
McCain 44
Clinton 50 (+3)
McCain 47
Cook Political Report/RT Strategies Poll (Jan 31-Feb 2)
Obama 45 (+2)
McCain 43
Clinton 41 (-4)
McCain 45
ABC/Washington Post (Jan 31 – Feb 1)
Obama 49 (+3)
McCain 46
Clinton 46 (-3)
McCain 49
Fox News (Jan 30-31)
Obama 44 (+1)
McCain 43
Clinton 44 (-1)
McCain 45
Rasmussen (2/04-2/07)
Obama: 47 (+5)
McCain: 42
Clinton: 43 (-3)
McCain: 46
It's with great caution that any head-to-head match-up polling numbers between presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain and potential Democratic nominees Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton should be evaluated (it's pretty clear, not only from past elections but from common sense reasoning, that once each party has it's nominee and once the general election gets under way, the context of the election can really affect exactly who is up and who is down). That being said, the secondary effect of these polls is the perception that one candidate is "stronger" than another candidate, something that can be rather powerful in these kinds of high-profile campaigns. Taking a look at the most recent head-to-head match ups, there's no doubt that the Obama campaign will be shouting these poll results from the highest mountains, or at least during the upcoming debates in Ohio and Texas.
Time (Feb 1-4)
Obama 48 (+7)
McCain 41
Clinton 46 (+0)
McCain 46
CNN/Opinion Research (Feb 1-3)
Obama 52 (+8)
McCain 44
Clinton 50 (+3)
McCain 47
Cook Political Report/RT Strategies Poll (Jan 31-Feb 2)
Obama 45 (+2)
McCain 43
Clinton 41 (-4)
McCain 45
ABC/Washington Post (Jan 31 – Feb 1)
Obama 49 (+3)
McCain 46
Clinton 46 (-3)
McCain 49
Fox News (Jan 30-31)
Obama 44 (+1)
McCain 43
Clinton 44 (-1)
McCain 45
Rasmussen (2/04-2/07)
Obama: 47 (+5)
McCain: 42
Clinton: 43 (-3)
McCain: 46
Friday, February 1, 2008
Los Angeles Times Endorses Barack Obama
The Los Angeles Times, the most widely-read newspaper in California, endorsed Barack Obama today.
> Barack Obama for Democratic nominee
>
> Endorsements for president 2008
> February 3, 2008
>
> Democrats preparing to vote in Tuesday's California primary can mark their ballots with confidence, knowing that either candidate would make a strong nominee and, if elected, a groundbreaking leader and capable president. But just because the ballot features two strong candidates does not mean that it is difficult to choose between them. We urge voters to make the most of this historic moment by choosing the Democrat most focused on steering the nation toward constructive change: We strongly endorse Barack Obama.
>
> The U.S. senator from Illinois distinguishes himself as an inspiring leader who cuts through typical internecine campaign bickering and appeals to Americans long weary of divisive and destructive politics. He electrifies young voters, not because he is young but because he embodies the desire to move to the next chapter of the American story. He brings with him deep knowledge on foreign relations and on this nation's particular struggles with identity and opportunity. His flair for expression, both in print and on the stump, too easily leads observers to forget that Obama is a man not just of style but of substance. He's a thoughtful student of the Constitution and an experienced lawmaker in his home state and, for the last three years, in the Senate.
>
> On policy, Obama and his rival Democratic candidate, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, are a hairsbreadth apart. Both vow to pull troops from Iraq. Both are committed to healthcare reform. Both offer candid critiques of the failed George W. Bush presidency, its blustering adventurism, its alienating stance toward other countries and its cavalier disregard for sacred American values such as individual liberty and due process of law.
>
> With two candidates so closely aligned on the issues, we look to their abilities and potential as leaders, and their record of action in service of their stated ideals. Clinton is an accomplished public servant whose election would provide familiarity and, most important, competence in the White House, when for seven years it has been lacking. But experience has value only if it is accompanied by courage and leads to judgment.
>
> Nowhere was that judgment more needed than in 2003, when Congress was called upon to accept or reject the disastrous Iraq invasion. Clinton faced a test and failed, joining the stampede as Congress voted to authorize war. At last week's debate and in previous such sessions, Clinton blamed Bush for abusing the authority she helped to give him, and she has made much of the fact that Obama was not yet in the Senate and didn't face the same test. But Obama was in public life, saw the danger of the invasion and the consequences of occupation, and he said so. He was right.
>
> Obama demonstrates as well that he is open-eyed about the terrorist threat posed to the nation, and would not shrink from military action where it is warranted. He does not oppose all wars, he has famously stated, but rather "dumb wars." He also has the edge in economic policy, less because of particular planks in his platform than because of his understanding that some liberal orthodoxies developed during the last 40 years have been overtaken by history. He offers leadership on education, technology policy and environmental protection unfettered by the positions of previous administrations.
>
> By contrast, Clinton's return to the White House that she occupied for eight years as first lady would resurrect some of the triumph and argument of that era. Yes, Bill Clinton's presidency was a period of growth and opportunity, and Democrats are justly nostalgic for it. But it also was a time of withering political fire, as the former president's recent comments on the campaign trail reminded the nation. Hillary Clinton's election also would drag into a third decade the post-Reagan political duel between two families, the Bushes and the Clintons. Obama is correct: It is time to turn the page.
>
> An Obama presidency would present, as a distinctly American face, a man of African descent, born in the nation's youngest state, with a childhood spent partly in Asia, among Muslims. No public relations campaign could do more than Obama's mere presence in the White House to defuse anti-American passion around the world, nor could any political experience surpass Obama's life story in preparing a president to understand the American character. His candidacy offers Democrats the best hope of leading America into the future, and gives Californians the opportunity to cast their most exciting and consequential ballot in a generation.
>
> In the language of metaphor, Clinton is an essay, solid and reasoned; Obama is a poem, lyric and filled with possibility. Clinton would be a valuable and competent executive, but Obama matches her in substance and adds something that the nation has been missing far too long -- a sense of aspiration.
> Barack Obama for Democratic nominee
>
> Endorsements for president 2008
> February 3, 2008
>
> Democrats preparing to vote in Tuesday's California primary can mark their ballots with confidence, knowing that either candidate would make a strong nominee and, if elected, a groundbreaking leader and capable president. But just because the ballot features two strong candidates does not mean that it is difficult to choose between them. We urge voters to make the most of this historic moment by choosing the Democrat most focused on steering the nation toward constructive change: We strongly endorse Barack Obama.
>
> The U.S. senator from Illinois distinguishes himself as an inspiring leader who cuts through typical internecine campaign bickering and appeals to Americans long weary of divisive and destructive politics. He electrifies young voters, not because he is young but because he embodies the desire to move to the next chapter of the American story. He brings with him deep knowledge on foreign relations and on this nation's particular struggles with identity and opportunity. His flair for expression, both in print and on the stump, too easily leads observers to forget that Obama is a man not just of style but of substance. He's a thoughtful student of the Constitution and an experienced lawmaker in his home state and, for the last three years, in the Senate.
>
> On policy, Obama and his rival Democratic candidate, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, are a hairsbreadth apart. Both vow to pull troops from Iraq. Both are committed to healthcare reform. Both offer candid critiques of the failed George W. Bush presidency, its blustering adventurism, its alienating stance toward other countries and its cavalier disregard for sacred American values such as individual liberty and due process of law.
>
> With two candidates so closely aligned on the issues, we look to their abilities and potential as leaders, and their record of action in service of their stated ideals. Clinton is an accomplished public servant whose election would provide familiarity and, most important, competence in the White House, when for seven years it has been lacking. But experience has value only if it is accompanied by courage and leads to judgment.
>
> Nowhere was that judgment more needed than in 2003, when Congress was called upon to accept or reject the disastrous Iraq invasion. Clinton faced a test and failed, joining the stampede as Congress voted to authorize war. At last week's debate and in previous such sessions, Clinton blamed Bush for abusing the authority she helped to give him, and she has made much of the fact that Obama was not yet in the Senate and didn't face the same test. But Obama was in public life, saw the danger of the invasion and the consequences of occupation, and he said so. He was right.
>
> Obama demonstrates as well that he is open-eyed about the terrorist threat posed to the nation, and would not shrink from military action where it is warranted. He does not oppose all wars, he has famously stated, but rather "dumb wars." He also has the edge in economic policy, less because of particular planks in his platform than because of his understanding that some liberal orthodoxies developed during the last 40 years have been overtaken by history. He offers leadership on education, technology policy and environmental protection unfettered by the positions of previous administrations.
>
> By contrast, Clinton's return to the White House that she occupied for eight years as first lady would resurrect some of the triumph and argument of that era. Yes, Bill Clinton's presidency was a period of growth and opportunity, and Democrats are justly nostalgic for it. But it also was a time of withering political fire, as the former president's recent comments on the campaign trail reminded the nation. Hillary Clinton's election also would drag into a third decade the post-Reagan political duel between two families, the Bushes and the Clintons. Obama is correct: It is time to turn the page.
>
> An Obama presidency would present, as a distinctly American face, a man of African descent, born in the nation's youngest state, with a childhood spent partly in Asia, among Muslims. No public relations campaign could do more than Obama's mere presence in the White House to defuse anti-American passion around the world, nor could any political experience surpass Obama's life story in preparing a president to understand the American character. His candidacy offers Democrats the best hope of leading America into the future, and gives Californians the opportunity to cast their most exciting and consequential ballot in a generation.
>
> In the language of metaphor, Clinton is an essay, solid and reasoned; Obama is a poem, lyric and filled with possibility. Clinton would be a valuable and competent executive, but Obama matches her in substance and adds something that the nation has been missing far too long -- a sense of aspiration.
Prominent Edwards supporter switches to Obama
By Ralph Thomas
Seattle Times Olympia bureau
OLYMPIA — The woman who chaired John Edwards' 2004 and 2008 presidential campaigns in Washington state announced today she is now backing Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.
Jenny Durkan, a Seattle attorney, said she was disappointed that Edwards fared so poorly in other states and had to bow out of the race earlier this week. But she said she feels strongly that Obama is a better choice than Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.
"I truly believe the country needs a new direction and it needs it both on a political level and on a spiritual level," Durkan said. "We need someone who can appeal to our better angels ... and I think he's the person best equipped to do that."
Durkan said Obama has been more consistent than Clinton in opposing the Iraq war, a stance she said will be key in winning the general election. And, after nearly three decades of having a Bush or Clinton in the White House, Durkan said it's time for a change.
"We're not a country of dynasties," she said.
Durkan is a close political ally of Gov. Christine Gregoire, who plans to announce next week who she is endorsing.
With the Feb. 9 precinct caucuses approaching, the Obama and Clinton campaigns are both aggressively pursuing Edwards supporters and prominent Democratic leaders who remain uncommitted. During a campaign swing through Washington on Friday, Sen. John Kerry — the party's presidential nominee in 2004 — met privately in Seattle with some of those people to try to persuade them to back Obama.
One person in the meeting was Yvonne Ward, an attorney from Auburn who was a Kerry delegate to the 2004 national convention. But Ward, a strong Edwards supporter, said after the meeting that she remained undecided.
Ward said she and most of the other Edwards supporters she knows are "kind of at sea. We're all a little bit lost and trying to figure out what to do."
Meanwhile, the latest campaign finance reports show that Obama continues to outpace all other candidates — Democrat or Republican — in raising money.
Obama raised more than $700,000 from Washington donors during the final quarter of 2007 and now has taken in more than $1.7 million here. Clinton raised about $540,000 during that period, bringing her state total to nearly $993,000.
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is tops among the Republicans, raising more than $700,000 here through the end of the year.
Ralph Thomas: 360-943-9882 or rthomas@seattletimes.com
Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company
Seattle Times Olympia bureau
OLYMPIA — The woman who chaired John Edwards' 2004 and 2008 presidential campaigns in Washington state announced today she is now backing Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill.
Jenny Durkan, a Seattle attorney, said she was disappointed that Edwards fared so poorly in other states and had to bow out of the race earlier this week. But she said she feels strongly that Obama is a better choice than Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.
"I truly believe the country needs a new direction and it needs it both on a political level and on a spiritual level," Durkan said. "We need someone who can appeal to our better angels ... and I think he's the person best equipped to do that."
Durkan said Obama has been more consistent than Clinton in opposing the Iraq war, a stance she said will be key in winning the general election. And, after nearly three decades of having a Bush or Clinton in the White House, Durkan said it's time for a change.
"We're not a country of dynasties," she said.
Durkan is a close political ally of Gov. Christine Gregoire, who plans to announce next week who she is endorsing.
With the Feb. 9 precinct caucuses approaching, the Obama and Clinton campaigns are both aggressively pursuing Edwards supporters and prominent Democratic leaders who remain uncommitted. During a campaign swing through Washington on Friday, Sen. John Kerry — the party's presidential nominee in 2004 — met privately in Seattle with some of those people to try to persuade them to back Obama.
One person in the meeting was Yvonne Ward, an attorney from Auburn who was a Kerry delegate to the 2004 national convention. But Ward, a strong Edwards supporter, said after the meeting that she remained undecided.
Ward said she and most of the other Edwards supporters she knows are "kind of at sea. We're all a little bit lost and trying to figure out what to do."
Meanwhile, the latest campaign finance reports show that Obama continues to outpace all other candidates — Democrat or Republican — in raising money.
Obama raised more than $700,000 from Washington donors during the final quarter of 2007 and now has taken in more than $1.7 million here. Clinton raised about $540,000 during that period, bringing her state total to nearly $993,000.
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney is tops among the Republicans, raising more than $700,000 here through the end of the year.
Ralph Thomas: 360-943-9882 or rthomas@seattletimes.com
Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company
obama and mccain
I believe, Obama and McCain going to win the nomination so this site is all about their activities. I will add news, video, Poll data and all about them here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
