by JerryColorado23, Sat Sep 13, 2008 at 10:53:44 PM EDT
It is a well known fact that McCain was/is not comfortable with Palin assuming the role as VP, but wants the votes she will bring. Unconfirmed anonymous sources have alluded to a deal being made prior to her selection. Here are a couple questions that the McCain campaign should have to answer:
Did McCain approve the Palin pick only after she agreed to resign the position between victory and inauguration?
Is it true that Joe Lieberman has agreed to assume the position as McCain's VP on inauguration day?
It is important to get this issue resolved so that we can be sure that John McCain isn't going to bait and switch his base. Voters need to trust their candidate and if John McCain is willing to undermine his supporter's trust by using Sarah Palin as a pawn to win their votes but intending to never let her take office, then how can his supporters be sure he won't bait and switch on his stance on protecting the rights of the unborn or appointing the correct Supreme Court justices?
note: this is probably not true, but they make shit like this up (and worse) about our candidate all the time and we should start giving it back.
There's more...
Loading

by Tatan, Fri Jun 06, 2008 at 11:12:11 AM EDT
Well folks we've managed to track down the most damaging piece of video tape ever produced about a presidential candidate.
The source of the rumor, of course is Jarry Lohnson (jack-ass extraordinaire). And Jarry claims he hasn't seen the tape, simply heard of it... so where-o-where did he hear of it from?
Let's turn to our friends the folks in the right-wing blogasphere for the answer.
There's more...
Loading

by the mollusk, Fri May 23, 2008 at 11:13:10 AM EDT
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsm
emo.com/2008/05/hillary_accuses_obama_ca
mpaign.php
TPM is reporting that Hillary is not only denying the stories that she has been seeking a VP pick with Obama, but apparently accusing his campaign of being behind these rumors as a way of prematurely ending the nomination contest.
OK, so I'm totally confused. Granted, gossip has never been a strong suit of mine, but I'll play out a few scenarios until their logical breakdown in my mind.
1) Hillary is right. Obama is just saying that Hillary has been asking him for the VP slot. Why do this? It just seems to cheese off Clinton supporters at a pretty critical time. The benefit may be to end this sooner and then let Clinton supporters come back to the fold afterward. But did he really think this would work without a backlash from Clinton or her campaign? That is either dumb politics or extremely brave.
There's more...
Loading

by Todd Beeton, Sat Jan 26, 2008 at 08:50:31 AM EST
...that this is even necessary.
When Obama's pollsters found that older African-American women in the coastal Pee Dee region in the northeastern corner of the state often asked in these sessions whether Obama was really a Muslim, the campaign immediately cut radio ads to emphasize Obama's Christianity.
...and Jonathan Alter had to disabuse Ross Perot of similar notions.
When I asked about Barack Obama, Perot said he admired his eloquence but thought it "a little odd that we would be less concerned about his background than being a Mormon." Perot was pleasantly surprised when I told him that Obama was a Christian, not a Muslim, and relieved when I informed him that the e-mail Perot (and untold others) received about Obama not respecting the Pledge of Allegiance was a fraud.
I haven't gotten any of these e-mails, actually, but it puzzles me that people in this day and age aren't more skeptical of them, after all the urban myths that have been spread via e-mail and then debunked.
The really depressing thing is that it's not just Republicans doing the spreading of this mis-information. That is a fact, and if I see anything like it on this site, you're gone. We've already had to delete diaries and ban users but still others have used some questionable judgment and seem to be edging right up to that line. We as a party and as a community should be better than that.
There's more...
Loading

by Chris Bowers, Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 12:47:59 PM EST
Don't know if these are accurate, but I just heard these.
Democrats leading in:
- VA: 52-47
- RI: 53-46
- PA: 57-42
- OH: 57-43
- NJ: 52-45
- MT: 53-46
- MO: 50-48
- MD: 53-46
Republicans leading:
Double super caution: These numebrs are both unconfirmed and they are exit polls. I am going to keep looking into this.
Update: The numebrs I saw didn't change. I just noticed some typos.
Loading
