MontanaHatchet said:
I have to wonder where that logic was when McCain was leading in dozens of polls. Are people scared of being judged by a random pollster? If someone asks you who you'd vote for over the phone and you respond with a candidate they don't like, will they track you down and kill you? I'm not entirely sure of how these polls are conducted, so I wouldn't know. As for the battleground states, McCain would have to win nearly all of them to beat Obama in electoral votes. I'm sure McCain "could" win the election, just like I said it was "almost" certain. It would be pretty difficult for him at this point.
|
This, people were trumpeting the new coming of McCain when he was leading by +3 when you averaged all the polls.
Now Obama is leading at +6 on average, and has a bigger margin in the electoral college than EITHER candidate has had this entire race.
We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls. The only thing that really worried me was the ether. There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke
It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...." Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson
