A double digit lead in the polls?

[Mr PC]

Ah yes, Fox News warning you about the "Liberal media".

So how come the "liberal media" is busy arguing over Kerry's war record but paying as little attention as possible to Bush's (and Cheney's, Rumsfeld's'...) draft-dodging?

They have already been over Bush and Cheney's Vietnam record earlier in the year. Had Kerry not made his service in Vietnam the answer to every stinking question, his war record wouldn't be such a big issue. Kerry invited the attacks.

Bzzzt!!! Wrong again - Kerry has put up plenty of stuff about what he'd do in office. You were once again repeating one of Republican lies about Kerry's campaign.

You know, everything that doesn't flatter the Kerry campaign isn't a "republican lie". Give me a break. I've heard Kerry invoke Vietnam about a million times. WHAT THE HELL DID HE AND OTHERS BRING UP AT THE FEKKING DEMOCRAT CONVENTION 10 MILLION TIMES? VIETNAM!!! Who rode into Boston harbor on a boat with veterans? Who touted the "band of brothers"??? Who invoked Vietnam at a midnight rally after Bush's speech last Thursday??

Don't tell me something is a republican lie when I've seen it for myself. Kerry chose to focus on his biography during his convention. It doesn't appear to be working out for him.



PC

[howiemarx]

[underthebigtree]

Again, Vietnam is past history - the service records of Kerry, Bush, and Cheney are seriously moot, and a smokescreen to divert attention away from the incontestible facts:

1) Nearly 1000 dead Americans in Iraq
2) Thousands of horribly wounded Americans in Iraq
3) Tens of thousands of dead and horribly wounded Iraqis in Iraq
4) Dozens of dead and wounded non-American foreigners in Iraq
5) The American military disobeying the Geneva Convention, torturing prisoners, which will only lead to horrid retaliation on American POW's now and into the future
6) Osama Bin Laden cooling his heels eating veggie Pakoras and Chicken Tandoori somewhere in Pakistan
7) The complete loss of respect (read: loathing) of America by a majority of the rest of the world.

I don't even need to get into the environment or the economy. That is bloody enough. Bush, please do the world a favor and go back to Crawford for good. Forget about Kerry; I would take Ronald MacDonald over you as a president any day of the week.

[TrumpsHair]

Someone please tell me this is a temporary bounce from the RNC, or that the folks at Newsweek are in Carl Rove's pocket, or that some funny hackers hijacked Yahoo's front page and put this story in just to make me insane.

I can't handle another 4 years of this. It is exhausting to loathe the policies of your government every day.

Gillespie/Zappa in '04. The only sane choice.

Really sad, isn't it? I hope Kerry can manage to spit out the facts before it's too late. Replublican lies and distortions have a great possiblity of fooling the ignorant masses. The ignorant masses, including, especially, one Mr. PC.

http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e ... to0&src=ap

[TrumpsHair]

By the way, be sure to watch "60 Minutes" tonight. The guy who put Bush's national guard application papers on the 'top of the pile' is being interviewed. Apparently, he is very, very sorry to have done that.

It should be good to watch his belated apology.

[Mr. Dipity]

Someone please tell me this is a temporary bounce from the RNC, or that the folks at Newsweek are in Carl Rove's pocket, or that some funny hackers hijacked Yahoo's front page and put this story in just to make me insane.

I can't handle another 4 years of this. It is exhausting to loathe the policies of your government every day.

Gillespie/Zappa in '04. The only sane choice.

Really sad, isn't it? I hope Kerry can manage to spit out the facts before it's too late. Replublican lies and distortions have a great possiblity of fooling the ignorant masses. The ignorant masses, including, especially, one Mr. PC.

Before we loose our breath, let's call it what it is guys. A double digit lead in a (singular) poll. An 'unscientific' (whatever that means) poll of less than 1,700 people.

This is what you get when media coverage that chases dollars instead of stories.

[Mr PC]

" Really sad, isn't it? I hope Kerry can manage to spit out the facts before it's too late. Replublican lies and distortions have a great possiblity of fooling the ignorant masses. The ignorant masses, including, especially, one Mr. PC."

Put it right up your bung-hole, Trumpy. You prove your ignorance in every post. All attitude, very little substance. You are a wafer-thin little punk in these debates--

If you can't come up with anything of substance, then shut your pie-hole.


PC

[A.L.]

" Really sad, isn't it? I hope Kerry can manage to spit out the facts before it's too late. Replublican lies and distortions have a great possiblity of fooling the ignorant masses. The ignorant masses, including, especially, one Mr. PC."

Put it right up your bung-hole, Trumpy. You prove your ignorance in every post. All attitude, very little substance. You are a wafer-thin little punk in these debates--

If you can't come up with anything of substance, then shut your pie-hole.

Way to refute him with the facts! Hi-five.

[Mr PC]

" Really sad, isn't it? I hope Kerry can manage to spit out the facts before it's too late. Replublican lies and distortions have a great possiblity of fooling the ignorant masses. The ignorant masses, including, especially, one Mr. PC."

Put it right up your bung-hole, Trumpy. You prove your ignorance in every post. All attitude, very little substance. You are a wafer-thin little punk in these debates--

If you can't come up with anything of substance, then shut your pie-hole.

Way to refute him with the facts! Hi-five.

The question is, the point of my post is---what facts???? I would like to have a friendly yet pointed exchange of ideas. Where are the facts coming from TrumpsHair? A zingy sounding retort isn't a substitute for real ideas.

I stand by my previous post.

PC

[A.L.]

The media, truth be told, is largely biased only towards what sells. The New York Times, however, is independantly showing a certain bias regardless, one I am honestly less critical of because it's one I'm personally alligned with.

Sad but true.

Edit: MrPC, he specifically accused the Republicans of various 'lies and distortions', it seems the proper course would be to find out what these 'lies and distortions' might be then refute them with published facts. I realize he pointed a finger directly at you but regardless you might have risen above it.

[Mr PC]

I think we are at a point now where media outlets should just forget the idea of being completely objective. They should be up front with their points of view, and then do the best job they can. The NY Times is not objective, but they could be fair if they just owned up to their biases. That goes for most if not all other outlets. There are so many to choose from, the thoughtful news consumer can make up their own mind--

PC

[A.L.]

I would agree with that.

[A.L.]

Though I see the Times might have had a special interest in dissecting President Bush's speech, given that therein he mis-cited and mis-represented the publication in question.

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/g/germany-iran.htm

Bush: "America has done this kind of work before and there have always been doubters. In 1946, 18 months after the fall of Berlin to allied forces, a journalist in the New York Times wrote this:

"Germany is a land in an acute stage of economic, political and moral crisis. European capitals are frightened. In every military headquarters, one meets alarmed officials doing their utmost to deal with the consequences of the occupation policy that they admit has failed."

End quote. Maybe that same person is still around, writing editorials. Fortunately, we had a resolute president named Truman, who, with the American people, persevered -- knowing that a new democracy at the center of Europe would lead to stability and peace. And because that generation of Americans held firm in the cause of liberty, we live in a better and safer world today."

[Greenlander]

Wasn't this topic supposed to be about the polls? Those particular ones weren't accurate. When polls are conducted, they have to take into account the % of people that consider themselves repubs and dems, so that they can weight the sample accordingly. Over the last whatever amount of years, 3-4% more of the population consider themselves democrats than republicans. One of those 11 point lead polls had more republicans than democrats by something like 3-4% (can't remember exactly) which skewed the poll. The other poll had some other defect.

I would consider the polls released in the later days to be more accurate ,which gave Bush anything from a 2-4% lead, a very similar bounce to the one Kerry got after the Democrat convention. I've read articles that say that both republican and democrat internal polling suggests the same.

So no panic yet. Kerry got a bounce. Bush got a bounce. If it fades like Kerry's one then we're back to even soon enough. My guess is that will happen, or maybe one of them will maintain a small lead.

I think either candidate can still win or lose this thing. That said, I wish Kerry wasn't being such a pussy. Seems he's getting more aggressive though and it's about time.

[ubertar]

This is somewhat tangential, but, please don't say, "Democrat Convention", or "Democrat party", "Democrat Senator", etc. The word is Democratic. Sometime, around the '80s, I think, the Pubes started saying Democrat instead of Democratic, I guess because it doesn't sound as good (not to mention it's ungrammatical). Somehow it stuck, and the media uses it all the time. It's the Democratic party and they have a Democratic convention. The people who go there are Democrats.