Obama is in the news and the public eye far more than Mccain. At this point, I really don't see how he could lose.

Bursche said: I really doubt that the Senate will get a super majority. The Republicans up to 2006 were really screwing the pooch, but lately they have really been on top of their game. I really hope for just a small majority like it is now so we can see if Obama or McCain can handle reaching across the aisle like they both say they can (McCain already has proven he can, but I really doubt Obama can.)

 A super majority would be 67 members, enough to override a presidential veto. I don't think the Democrats will be able to pull that off this election.. Although, We're picking up at least 4 seats (New Hampshire, Virginia, Colorado and New Mexico) and it looks like we'll be winning in Alaska as well. There are a few other races where Democrats are in a great position (Oregon comes to mind) 

I say net gain of 6 seats, for a majority of 55 (not counting Lieberman and Sanders). Not too shabby.

 

damkira said: Bursche said: I really doubt that the Senate will get a super majority. The Republicans up to 2006 were really screwing the pooch, but lately they have really been on top of their game. I really hope for just a small majority like it is now so we can see if Obama or McCain can handle reaching across the aisle like they both say they can (McCain already has proven he can, but I really doubt Obama can.)  A super majority would be 67 members, enough to override a presidential veto. I don't think the Democrats will be able to pull that off this election.. Although, We're picking up at least 4 seats (New Hampshire, Virginia, Colorado and New Mexico) and it looks like we'll be winning in Alaska as well. There are a few other races where Democrats are in a great position (Oregon comes to mind)  I say net gain of 6 seats, for a majority of 55 (not counting Lieberman and Sanders). Not too shabby.

I was not refering to the Article 1, Section 7 requirment to override a presidential veto. If Obama is elected as I predict, a Democratic supermajority to override his veto would be superfluous. I was refering to the requirment to end a filibuster in the Senate. That is also refered to as a supermajority. In 1917 the Senate adopted rule 22 (cloture) to end a filibuster. This required a two-thirds majority to end debate. The Senate revised rule 22 in 1975. The revisement changed the requirement from a two-thirds majority of 100 senators to a three-fifths majority of all senators sworn in. Considering there are usually 100 senators sworn in, this would create a supermajority threshold of 60 senators. In addition to the states you have mentioned, there are a few other states I think Democrats have a good chance of winning. I believe Musgrove is likely to beat Wicker in the election for Lott's seat in MS. Barrasso in WY may also be vulnerable. I disagree about Smith in Oregon. Although he is an incumbent and polling below 50%, he was comfortably ahead of his challenger in the latest Rasmussen poll.  And even if Lautenberg and Landrieu lose their seats, I doubt it will be enough to mitigate Democratic gains.

 

If the election were held today:

That's from electoralvote.com a site that tallies up the polls... For those of you keeping score, its Obama 344-mcbush 194

Yeah. Polling data just released shows Obama hugely ahead in PA, and ahead in OH and FL as well. The reason for this gain seems to be primarily a large increase in women supporting him. When Hillary was still running, a lot of women said they would vote for McCain if she lost, but it looks like they're singing a different tune now.

Obama just put out his first commercial hitting all the battleground states. A lot can happen in the next 4 months, but the way it's looking, McCain is facing quite the uphill struggle.

I vote none of the above. I wish there was a reset button to pick a viable canidate for both parties. Out of the 2 I'd prefer McCain but I'm afraid Obamas got it.

I would go with Obama, he seems to be very popular where I live.

I want obama, but I'm going to say mccain.

Most people who support obama are the non-voters (remember how useless the vote or die campaign was when most of them backed Kerry?) and by those people I mean the younger generation.

Older voters are the mccain because: his old, his white (alot of conservatives in that age bracket) and he is also conservative.

CAL4M1TY said: I want obama, but I'm going to say mccain. Most people who support obama are the non-voters (remember how useless the vote or die campaign was when most of them backed Kerry?) and by those people I mean the younger generation.

 

You mean all the young non-voters who voted in the primaries?

According to many historians McCain doesn't have much of a chance...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080615/pl_politico/11090_1

"One week into the general election, the polls show a dead heat. But many presidential scholars doubt that John McCain stands much of a chance, if any.

Historians belonging to both parties offered a litany of historical comparisons that offer little hope to the Republican. Several saw Barack Obama’s prospects as the most promising for a Democrat since Roosevelt trounced Hoover in 1932.

“This should be an overwhelming Democratic victory,” said Allan Lichtman, an American University presidential historian who ran in a Maryland Democratic Senatorial primary in 2006. Lichtman, whose forecasting model has correctly predicted the last six presidential popular vote winners, predicts that this year, “Republicans face what have always been insurmountable historical odds.” His system gives McCain a score lower on par with Jimmy Carter’s in 1980.

“McCain shouldn’t win it,” said presidential historian Joan Hoff, a professor at Montana State University and former president of the Center for the Study of the Presidency. She compared McCain’s prospects to those of Hubert Humphrey in 1968, whose loss to Richard Nixon resulted in large part from the unpopularity of sitting Democratic president Lyndon Johnson.

“It is one of the worst political environments for the party in power since World War II,” added Alan Abramowitz, a professor of public opinion and the presidency at Emory University. His forecasting model—which factors in Gross Domestic Product, whether a party has completed two terms in the White House and net presidential approval rating—gives McCain’s about the same odds as Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and Carter in 1980—both of whom were handily defeated in elections that returned the presidency to the previously out-of-power party. “It would be a pretty stunning upset if McCain won,” said Abramowitz."

(more at link)