USA Presidential Politics - 2008

[roni]

Originally Posted by MikeW

Whenever I get surveyed I make sure I'm part of the plus or minus 5%. I lie.

I told them the truth. I do not lie

[Just Lucky]

Originally Posted by roni

Yes.

Were they merely polling to see how you'd vote or did they go into issues?

It's OK to answer in a more lengthy way, I'm quite relaxed and have time to read.

[MikeW]

Originally Posted by roni

I told them the truth. I do not lie

I do.
I hate it when they call me at home.

[roni]

Originally Posted by Just Lucky

Were they merely polling to see how you'd vote or did they go into issues?

It's OK to answer in a more lengthy way, I'm quite relaxed and have time to read.

Only issue was which one was the top one: war, economy or health care.

Series of questions to get at who you would vote for in primary, on each candidate, on whether you would vote for your non-favored candidate if they were nominated, heads-up match up with each and McCain - how would you vote.

Questions about whether you though one or the other had more character, whether Obama agreed with Wright a lot, some, not much, not at all

That kind of thing

Education level, income level, race/ethnicy - whether gender or race made any difference to me - stuff like that.

I answered like any good, loyal, sensible Democrat would - oh, they did ask about my political affiliation, whether I was a union member,etc.

[MikeW]

Originally Posted by roni

...I answered like any good, loyal, sensible Democrat would - oh, they did ask about my political affiliation, whether I was a union member,etc.

I guess I'm showing my true colors
Neutral.
People hate neutral.
Not sure why.
Sitting on the fence allows me to see both sides fairly clearly.

[Just Lucky]

Originally Posted by roni

Only issue was which one was the top one: war, economy or health care.

Series of questions to get at who you would vote for in primary, on each candidate, on whether you would vote for your non-favored candidate if they were nominated, heads-up match up with each and McCain - how would you vote.

Questions about whether you though one or the other had more character, whether Obama agreed with Wright a lot, some, not much, not at all

That kind of thing

Education level, income level, race/ethnicy - whether gender or race made any difference to me - stuff like that.

I answered like any good, loyal, sensible Democrat would - oh, they did ask about my political affiliation, whether I was a union member,etc.

Cool! It'll be interesting to see the size of the sample. Can't wait until it's published.

I seem to somehow get polled far too often for my liking.

[BonnyW]

Originally Posted by roni

Only issue was which one was the top one: war, economy or health care.

Series of questions to get at who you would vote for in primary, on each candidate, on whether you would vote for your non-favored candidate if they were nominated, heads-up match up with each and McCain - how would you vote.

Questions about whether you though one or the other had more character, whether Obama agreed with Wright a lot, some, not much, not at all

That kind of thing

Education level, income level, race/ethnicity - whether gender or race made any difference to me - stuff like that.

I answered like any good, loyal, sensible Democrat would - oh, they did ask about my political affiliation, whether I was a union member,etc.

Good for you. At least you get the well-organized polls. I get the ones that are uni-directional and are poorly worded so that the answers given are directed towards the objectives of the party/situation/cause/etc...I call them on it, and typically they actually hang up on me.
Those polls make me not want to answer any polls-however the guilt (because I asked people for their opinions) for school stuff makes me compelled to answer many of the questions... before I truly give up.

[roni]

Originally Posted by BonnyW

Good for you. At least you get the well-organized polls. I get the ones that are uni-directional and are poorly worded so that the answers given are directed towards the objectives of the party/situation/cause/etc...I call them on it, and typically they actually hang up on me.
Those polls make me not want to answer any polls-however the guilt (because I asked people for their opinions) makes me compelled to answer many of the questions... before I truly give up.

I cut them off pretty quickly if it is not a legitmate survey - usually as soon as they will not tell me who is sponsoring the survey, or who the client is. This person told me up front it was the AP

[Just Lucky]

Originally Posted by roni

I cut them off pretty quickly if it is not a legitmate survey - usually as soon as they will not tell me who is sponsoring the survey, or who the client is. This person told me up front it was the AP

The last one I had was obviously trying to show that Austnites were biased against Tom Delay. The woman was practically arguing with me on the phone as to what my opinion was.

[MikeW]

Originally Posted by Just Lucky

The last one I had was obviously trying to show that Austnites were biased against Tom Delay. The woman was practically arguing with me on the phone as to what my opinion was.

I guess you failed the test, er survey.

[ryberg]

I have a question for Melliedee, BonnyW, and any other women who are around here these days and care to answer.

What will be the reaction of women if Obama selects a man as his running mate, in this election year of firsts?

Please answer on behalf of all women.

Steve

[Just Lucky]

Originally Posted by MikeW

I guess you failed the test, er survey.

I just told her I seldom have opinions about politics and would have no problems being an impartial juror for the corrupt rat-bas#@rd

[ryberg]

And another! I quote at unusual length to capture the whole wonderful story.

Sen. Bob Corker, a Republican elected in the face of the 2006 Democratic sweep, understands the panic that took hold in his party this week following its loss in a ruby-red district.

Corker is familiar with the feeling. His readiness to tell his story says much about the alienation of many Republicans from the national party's stale approach to politics and the limits of negative advertising. It is also a warning to GOP strategists who think that personal attacks on Barack Obama will be sufficient to win the presidency.

Facing a tough contest against Harold Ford Jr., a young, telegenic African-American congressman, Corker says he watched his campaign flounder as his consultants ran television ads that tried to paint his opponent, a moderately conservative Democrat, as a "liberal."

"They were grotesque," Corker said of his own commercials in an interview this week. "It was just the same old stuff." By contrast, he said, Ford's spots were "fresh and refreshing."

Corker, the former mayor of Chattanooga, called in new consultants and switched to a more positive campaign. "We kept the race about Tennessee," he said. "We focused on my life, on who I was as a person." Independent voters who had been attracted to Ford started moving Corker's way.

Yet the national party almost blew the race near the end, Corker said, by running an ad that many saw as racist. The commercial, aired without Corker's knowledge, included a young, blonde, white actress declaring that she had met Ford "at the Playboy party." It ended with her whispering the words: "Harold, call me."

Corker was furious, and not just because his six-point lead melted into a four-point deficit. The party eventually pulled the radioactive ad and Corker won narrowly. The senator has advised Republican colleagues in tough races this year to resist national party ads that mention their opponents... [source]

Are you getting all this, Jacko???

Steve

[BonnyW]

Originally Posted by ryberg

I have a question for Melliedee, BonnyW, and any other women who are around here these days and care to answer.

What will be the reaction of women if Obama selects a man as his running mate, in this election year of firsts?

Please answer on behalf of all women.

Steve

I am not a sexist. In that I am not promoting one candidate over another because of their gender.
As long as the person is qualified for the job, I don't have a problem if they are green, yellow, purple male, female or have an extra X or Y chromosome.
..whatever...as long as they can do the job.
And Steve, I answer on behalf of myself. Woman are quite capable of answering not as a group, but as individuals

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by ryberg

I have a question for Melliedee, BonnyW, and any other women who are around here these days and care to answer.

What will be the reaction of women if Obama selects a man as his running mate, in this election year of firsts?

Please answer on behalf of all women.

Steve

I think there are a group of female Clinton supporters who will feel cheated and robbed. Especially after the "right man for the job" display at the Edwards endorsement. Why didn't they just bump chests?

I don't count myself in that group, like Bonny, I do not make choices based on gender. I just want a qualified VP who will be a good balance politically and demographically to the ticket. And maybe a nice head of presidental hair? Yeah, chicks dig that.