Haha you should have just edited your post and left "Edit: nevermind, misread your post"

And he didn't imply Obama sucked at speaking or thinking. He was pointing out Bush also had reasons to not want to debate more often. Different reasons than Obama's though.

No I accused Bush of sucking at speaking.  That's why Bush limited the debates.

I think Obama limited the debates because not many people know what he's about.  Ask people what his policies are and they'll give you different answers colored on what they want... and not really based on what he's said.

The Debates will flesh out Obama's actual plans... and people will know what he's about more.  He may lose voters by this who find out he doesn't quite support what they think he does.  I know I thought he stood for a whole other list of things when I listened to him in the primaries... and now to hear his positions now.  Night and Day from the primaries.  Had I known, i'd of voted Hilary.

That and the other political reasons of course.

Hrmm, I'll grant its a possibility. But the more I think on it, I think they were really capitalizing on the media drought the McCain campaign was suffering.

Hillary and Obama don't differe very much on their stances. Can you be specific? Is it in regards to policy differences on universal healthcare?

Also, it looks like Obama is starting to hit hard with some specifics on the economy in last night's speech. THIS is what I've been waiting to hear from him, and I hope he really fleshes it out even more in the debates - http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/09/16/obama_s_economic_plan/index.html

Hilary Clinton was oddly harder on Nafta in the end.

Obama promised reforms to help American workers... then he went back on his word.  Saying he only wants to improve the enviromental concerns and raise mexican wages.  Saying in Germany he wants world wide Free trade.

Talking about making a real change in renewable energy, yet having a plan that focuses on Clean Coal, and Biofuels.  (The current stance of the UN being that Biofuels are criminal and the leading cause of the global food crisis.  Ok he never said he was against biofuels, but that's what bugs me the most about his campaign.  The fact that if he's president he will make the global food Crisis a lot worse.)

I guess Biofuels due count as a renewable resource though... it's just... the worst kind of rennewable energy because of the problems it causes.

Calling McCain and Clinton crazy for saying they'd go to war with Iran.... then saying he'd go to war with Iran.

His disowning of preemptive tactics in general, yet saying he'd do things like invade conduct operations in Pakistan even if they didn't give us the permission to.  What's his actual stance I when it's ok and not ok to send unauthorized troops in a country?  I can't tell...

It seems like what he's really saying is "The way Bush did things wasn't so bad... it's just Iraq was the wrong target."

All and all too I'm just frustrated the Global Food Crisis isn't even an issue... at all.  McCain getting rid fo Ethanol Subsidiaries would do a lot to help that, and i've yet to here anything from Obama to even mitigate the problem he'd be causing via raising ethanol subsidaries.

(All and all being my biggest issue.  Only thing i've really been able to do to help out is go Vegetarian for half the week... hopefully can go full, or 6 day eventually.)

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/17/1413539.aspx
Some good battleground numbers for Obama.

Hillary Clinton harder on nafta? Pure rhetoric from her

I have concerns about ethanol too, but regarding the list of flip flops, that's what politicians do. I mean, look at McCain right now. I'm just still in shock after hearing the words "we need more regulation" come out of his mouth.

As far as Pakistan, that wasn't about pre-emptive strikes. One of Obama's biggest criticisms of Bush is that he has not pursued the actual terrorists involved in 9/11 hard enough. If there are known terrorists that participated in attacks on America, he is saying he is willing to cross borders to get them. Again, not about pre-emptive strikes.

Talking tough on Iran is something I see as Obama trying to shore up popular opinion on foreign policy, and I think IS about pre-emptive strikes (although god only knows why people want a politician that says he'll attack Iran). Just like now that the markets have crashed, McCain is calling for regulation, because he knows the public are looking for someone to point fingers at.

Check out the Federal Houseing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005.  It's not really a flip-flop. 

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/record.xpd?id=109-s20060525-16&bill=s109-190

He actually proposed regulation, way back in 05... however it got stalled out by the democrats i believe... because it would stop poorer people from getting loans. (they couldn't afford... of course this is when they were popular by the voting public)  Obama I believe was in congress and was part of the blocking effort at the time.  Though I may be wrong.  Heck McCain even predicts the current crisis.

"I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole."

Granted it was just for those two companies... but if it had passed those two wouldn't of needed bailing out.... and if that couldn't get passed because the democrats blocked it(and really right wing Republicans paid off by lobbiests)... how could other plans do so?

Regardless... John McCain does change his mind quite a bit... but every time I can see reasons why that aren't politically motivated.

For example he was against offshore drilling.  Then we get an Energy Crisis... then he's for Offshore Drilling easy.

Obama was against Nafta and would change it to help America Workers, Now he's not.. why?

Yeah, I saw those.  They were all pretty surprising except the Wisconsin one, which is about where I would expect it.  I would still say McCain has a slight advantage in Florida and Ohio, and a much larger one in NC, but those polls are good news and may reflect the shift we see in the OP.

Now it's tied:

Nearly all of the ones with McCain up are from a week ago.