Troll,

It's her bad policies - her support of abstinence-only education and her opposition to Roe v. Wade - that we are attacking, not the daughter.

And it's McCain's incompetence that we are attacking as well.  You can tut-tut all day about how the media should ignore this, but you know they won't. You know they will make a gigantic deal out of it.  McCain and Palin had to know it as well, yet they went ahead with the VP pick anyways.  This is colossally stupid.  I can't understand what kind of woman would subject her daughter to this shit.  Hubris indeed!  It's the equivalent of Edwards running for prez, and hoping nobody would find out about his secret affair.  What did they think was going to happen?

Amateur hour on the part of the McCain camp.

Lol @ rather obvious trolling

Great find!

Time to start me up a meme... <ctrl-c> <ctrl-v>

Thanks!

Cycloptichorn

Well, he certainly got a bounce in the Gallup tracking poll - from -2 to +6, a healthy 8 points.  

I think the Palin news sat on the end of that a little bit.  McCain, though he made a shitty pick, did manage the pick better then Obama did - the press was caught flat-footed and this lead to a lot of one-day excitement.

Now, are the Republicans going to get a convention bounce?  It seems likely that they will not.  After all, their convention is currently a wreck.  They have no major speakers.  Palin and McCain are not strong speakers.  Jindal and Schwartzy aren't going to be there.  Who the hell is going to lead the attack against Obama?  

I can't see anything good coming for the Republicans out of this.

In other polling, only a third of women approve of the Palin pick.  Those numbers are better then I ever could have hoped for.  It says to me that almost no Hillary holdouts are swayed by her, for it's likely that nearly every Republican woman approves of her...

Shit, she's doing great!

He/she is a troll, don't waste your time responding to it

F*ck off and die, troll.  Nobody's comments on a website are costing Obama votes.  I think it's a sign of weakness to bend over backwards to kiss the ass of every dead-ender, who is more concerned with being RIGHT then with doing what is best for America.

At the end of the day, you're either a Dem, or you're not.  If you're not, fine - there's no shame in not being a Dem.  If you are, you're supporting Obama this cycle, period.

Well, you see, I don't think that DTaylor is willing to have 'civil discussions.'  I think that DTaylor is willing to Concern troll it up until the cows come home.  And I'm sick of it, and we don't have to take it.  We don't have to put up with this shit.

When someone says 'I believe McCain is less Evil then Obama,' they deserve to be told to f*ck off.  They aren't going to vote for Obama.  They are merely stirring up shit on Dem websites for fun, for this is what many mouth-breathing Republicans DO for fun.  Don't legitimize it by acting as if we need to be all sensitive and caring towards their position.  We don't.  We aren't going to win or lose this election based upon confronting a concern troll on Mydd.

F*ck off and die, troll

Man, I'm so sick of this shit, I can't even tell you.  

Obama knocked the intro out of the park.  It truly was a compelling narrative as to why he picked Biden.

Let's see if Joe can follow is up with a winner as well.  He needs to address some of the criticisms of him with humor in order to forestall some Republican attacks.

'Should?'  She lost the election.  There's no 'should' about it.

You might think that she's a better candidate, but too f*cking bad; she lost, and those days are done.  

What a bunch of projection.  Nobody here HATES Senator Clinton; she's just irrelevant to the current conversation.

If you don't want to read about news having to do with Senator Obama, our nominee, then why do you come to this site?  For you know that is exactly what you will find, over and over again, as this is a Dem site for electing the Democrats who are running for office.

As for this

Seriously this constant rehash is hurting your candidate.

Seriously?  No, it isn't.  At all.  There is no more validity to this then the other bullshit scare scenarios Hillary supporters put forth during the primary.  Obama is currently as far in the lead as he's ever been, and TWICE as far ahead as Kerry or Bush EVER were over each other in a lot of polls; he's winning the Electoral votes race; he's winning the money race.  How is he being hurt, exactly?

You'll either vote Obama or you won't; we would like for you to, but if you won't, whatever.

Do you not understand, that the more 'independents and republicans' who vote in our primaries, the more of those groups will be voting for us in the general election?

I'm also sure you are quite aware that Republicans voted for Hillary in large numbers in several of her best states, such as KY, IN, and WV... fully 1/4 of Clinton's voters in some primaries didn't plan on voting for her in the Fall!

Bull.  Nobody is being called out besides those who would actively hurt the Dem chances to win this Fall.  

If it wasn't for a bunch of dead-ender Hillary supporters, there would be no 'rehash mode.'  You bunch have a habit of keeping the topic alive by puling and whining about how you just can't support Obama...

Your counter-anecdote, however, doesn't even have any bearing to the discussion; your friend 'guessed' that a helmet would have made his injury worse.  It doesn't even provide anything close to any sort of evidence at all; it's an anecdote about a supposition, to which you conclude "See?  helmets don't always help!" or something to that effect.

The 'original study,' which was hardly an in-depth project, found that the average passing difference was at all times FOUR FEET, helmet or not.  That's plenty of room and the closer averages were not indicative of real increased dangers on the part of the rider.  However, an accident can hurt your head at any time, traffic or not.

Educate yourself:

http://www.bhsi.org/stats.htm

You'll do better in discussions such as this if you do.