digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at cbsnews.com

CBS Poll: Support For Obama Rebounds

cbsnews.com — Democrat Barack Obama appears to have rebounded from some of the damage caused by the controversy surrounding his former pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright, according to the latest CBS News/New York Times poll.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • ityity38, on 05/05/2008, -30/+222Of Course he rebounds. He will win Tuesday and the nomination and then The Presidency!! Go Obama
    • digitronix, on 05/05/2008, -50/+8Ron Paul 2008
    • yojiffyskippy, on 05/05/2008, -55/+8Of course he rebounds...... being at rock bottom, his support could only go up.
      • yuutokun, on 05/05/2008, -6/+4***** you in the bladder
      • TopherT, on 05/05/2008, -7/+7I remember something like this happening to Ron Paul back in the day. First he showed up and no one knew much, alot of people got excited and some went overboard posting Ron Paul stories and digging the high heaven out of them. Then the trolls showed up, spamming every story with hate until people started to lose interest in the comments sections, then the stories themselves. I see Barrack going the same way on digg (except he is going to win the presidency). Couldn't we just agree to disagree on politics and not have immature assholes clouding up all possibility of substantive discussion on this site?
        • drewedman, on 05/05/2008, -5/+1I am Andrew Edman and I approve this message
      • MsArtGeek, on 05/05/2008, -1/+6By rock bottom you mean... still leading Hillary Clinton as he has for the last several months, and now showing polls where he edges out McCain in the general election?
    • 11b1p, on 05/05/2008, -9/+21some of the best rebounders in america are black...

      comm. stern
    • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -60/+5Go Obama Go. Straight to hell.
      • FallenWings, on 05/05/2008, -3/+24Uh oh, ANGSTY conservative! Check out his profile pic, I think all that hair gel is killing your brain cells buddy!
        • MoofTheStoof, on 05/05/2008, -2/+20EmoCon - LukasSmith is hereby designated the first Emo Conservative. There are too few to rule, thank god, but enough to annoy.
      • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -23/+3Why are community college students so bitter? Did Obama command this? Obama commands you to be bitter! Obey.
        • archiesteel, on 05/05/2008, -2/+9Wow, you just keep making less sense with every passing day. Amazing.
        • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -13/+2Who are you? Why should I care? Apparently I notice you less every day. Amazing.
          • chaosium, on 05/05/2008, -1/+4"Apparently I notice you less every day."

            Kind of like your genitals.
          • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -3/+1I'm so glad you pay so much attention to your balls. Are you stroking them now? I have no hands. so I have to have your mother stroke them for me.
        • chaosium, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5"Why are community college students so bitter? "

          Unlike your candidate of choice, exit polls show higher education from Obama voters.
        • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -6/+2Fallenwings doesn't sound that educated. Community College doesn't count as educated. Community College is like Highschool + 1. If you libs weren't so busy circle jerking you might see the light. yeah jerking makes you blind.
          • FallenWings, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2Hah you ignorant *****, I went to Davidson College (a top 10 liberal arts institution) for two years before leaving to pursue a career in Information Technology. I now run my own IT consulting business and work for a future state senator, and have an SAT score that would make you ***** your pants. Don't presume to know ANYTHING about me.
          • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -3/+1ow woweee. liberal arts. consulting. not.
        • iainc, on 05/05/2008, -0/+5@everyone replying to LuKKKasSmith:

          Please don't bother replying to this turd because you'll only encourage him. He's a fool and he's only here to annoy you.
        • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -4/+1Are you annoyed? Does the truth annoy you so much?
      • PoonGnarfler, on 05/05/2008, -1/+7Oooh, another day, another politically astounding troll comment by LukasSmith. Anyone noticed: 1789 comments, 39 diggs? Don't feed the troll, people.
      • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -8/+1Just admit it poon the only disappointment you feel is knowing I'm destroying your black rain parade. See the problem with Obama fanatics is they think Obama is the biggest thing since cotton candy. ahaha. And yes I expect "troll" comments from libs. Typical way to deflect what they perceive as a threat. Im glad I threaten you sooo much. Or is it just the offense of knowing a different opinion can exist in a country run by liberal media? Before you deny liberal media exists take a long breath and look around you.. at digg.com.
        • ruyen, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4lulz @ Digg being the "liberal media"
        • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -5/+1Everything posted here is liberal propaganda so yes "liberal media." please good sir find me anything posted here political that is not. Oh wait those articles never get dugg up. I should know.
          • chaosium, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Hahahha all those LGF articles are apparently marxist to Lukas.
      • JakobVirgil, on 05/05/2008, -1/+4I think you need to come to terms with your homosexuality before someone gets hurt.
        Your obsession with Obama is a little to sexual to be just about politics.
        -Jake
      • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -7/+1aahhaha. Digg has been obsessed with Obama for months. You Obama fanatics have been spamming my favorite channel, politics, with your crap. I'm hoping he will lose fast so we can go back to Ron Paul fanaticism.
      • iamnobody8614, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3Dugg: 39
        Comments: 1809
        I'd say this is a troll.
    • lajaw, on 05/05/2008, -36/+6And our rights and freedoms will continue to be eroded. Sheep.
      • chanop, on 05/05/2008, -3/+19Yeah, because under republican presidents, our civil liberties are never destroyed
        • lajaw, on 05/05/2008, -21/+4If you'll read my statement, you will see I said "continue". Both parties are equally guilty. Sheep.
      • freshyill, on 05/05/2008, -3/+15At least you didn't say "sheeple." You're still a douche.
        • lajaw, on 05/05/2008, -19/+2And your comment has no substance. Sheep.
          • blackcloud333, on 05/05/2008, -1/+7I think I am talking for a lot of people when I respectfully ask that everybody using "sheep" and "sheeple" please come up with a new insult. It's not very effective and it makes you trolls look like a bunch of sheep.
          • lajaw, on 05/05/2008, -5/+2blacksheep333---------

            It bothers you knowing you can't think for yourself. And you want mother government to take care of you.
      • HillerMylife, 13 hr 8 min ago, -1/+7baa
      • Gemfinder, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2H O W W W W W W WL L L L L L L L L L L
        Run.
    • jzuska, on 05/05/2008, -35/+7Most Liberal senator currently. FAIL.
      • pb125, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3Oh the Iron-Knee!
      • vat0r, on 05/05/2008, -3/+11Let's see. The Fed prints money at will and basically passes it out to the fortunate few. So when people believe that maybe just maybe normal Americans should get a piece of that monopoly money pie they are called liberals. Well consider me the biggest bleeding heart liberal there ever was. The people deserve to reap the benefits of their own taxes, not huge companies and insiders.
        • lajaw, on 05/05/2008, -11/+3no-one deserve anything except the rights recognized by the constitution.
      • azAZ09, on 05/05/2008, -2/+12Even if liberalism were to stand for falsehoods that conservatives try to associate with it; compare between liberal theory and eight years of conservative practice. Modern conservatism is an ideology that has everything wrong and rotten to its core. Everything they do say is opposite.

        I prefer a small government, strong constitution approach. A LIBERAL government.
      • chaosium, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1What do you expect, after Bush?
    • DeFex, on 05/05/2008, -14/+4One way or another he will not be allowed to win.
    • Pritchard, on 05/05/2008, -19/+3Mmm... I'm still hoping to see the delegates take over the Republican Convention this year and get Ron Paul elected. To say that "Ron Paul is so 2007" shows a complete misunderstanding of his campaign.

      What is Obama, exactly? He's your 4 year revolution this year? Well that's not what I'm looking for. I'm looking for more people who back up their campaigns with their policies. Spreading the knowledge they know so that one day, as the revolution continues, we'll find stability in peace and prosperity.

      Would I rather than Obama over Hilary and McCain? Yes. Would I rather have Ron Paul over Obama? Definitely. Ron Paul's more to more to me than just a Presidential Candidate, but at the same time, so much less, because his revolution belongs to all of us...
      • theonedigg, on 05/05/2008, -3/+11Ron Paul is an interesting guy. To say he has deeply thought through his policy ideas is a stretch.
        • rezonq3, on 05/05/2008, -2/+3I think he has thought through them as much as any other candidate. His vast stores of knowledge he spews at debates shows that. His conclusions on the current status of the economy, governmental power and corruption, and foreign policy has pushed him to a different place which has, in turn, affected his policy decisions. And make his views seem crazy to the status quo.

          I feel that Ron Paul believes that the current status of the nation is so ***** up that he feels that a 'reboot' is necessary to put it in my fellow geek language. He feels wiping the slate clean and starting at the beginning would be the best way to remind ourselves about personal responsibility and interdependency. He may be wrong, he may not be. The next few decades of presidents will let us know.

          "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." - JFK
        • Pritchard, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1How is that a stretch? He's an 11 term Congressman to be who's worked his entire life towards spreading his message. A message that's solid, and damned hard to challenge.
      • petebot, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3I wish Ron Paul would just wise up and run as an independent.
        • sugarazor, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2So people could somehow be less interested in him?
          • petebot, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1I just think third party candidates make for a more interesting election, especially in the debates.
          • sugarazor, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2He wouldn't even be invited to any of the debates.
    • Cowboy1015, on 05/05/2008, -24/+2The last Obama frontpage i've seen here is all about Obama leading the Polls? All of a sudden, the frontpage is he "Rebounds"?
      What happened in between? Where's the frontpage about it?
      You Obama fanboys,,, hahaha
      • jchrome, on 05/05/2008, -1/+8You don't really get the concept of polling, do you?
        • Cowboy1015, on 05/05/2008, -4/+1you think so? you're a moron for not getting the point...
      • t3rmv3locity, on 05/05/2008, -1/+6Buried for ",,, hahaha'
        If you want to get dugg up you need to be
        #1 polite (or funny) and
        #2 (if not funny) intellegent
    • skipdog172, on 05/05/2008, -9/+2***** you, Frank!!!!
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2Dugg for Penn & Teller, but is this really the appropriate comment?
    • monoa, on 05/05/2008, -6/+1Well, I hope that happens, but if you visit places like http://www.townhall.com/, and read the xian Taliban all foaming at the mouth, it's not so certain.
    • Shuk, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5And he'll be going back to washington to take back the white house... BYAAAAAEEEEAARGH!
    • swiftekho, on 05/05/2008, -4/+1GO RON PAUL
      I lost the game.
    • juliocgrajales, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1Actually, why doesn't Ron Paul endorse Barack? and I am serious
  • CokeBear, on 05/05/2008, -18/+101Obama 51 - McCain 40
    Thats a landslide. And it can only get better for Obama once the Hillary supporters come around. (There are very few people who are currently supporting Obama who would switch to McCain after the primaries, on the other hand, there is some number of Hillary supporters who are either lying to pollsters or lying to themselves when they say they will support McCain in November. If even half of them switch to Obama, it will only push his numbers even higher after the convention.)
    • didiman, on 05/05/2008, -29/+5You obviously don't know how our system works. It doesn't matter what the national poll numbers are, it all depends on electoral votes. In order to win the presidency Obama has to win ohio, pa, florida, etc., which he will never do. Obama is Dukakis part II.
      • catachip, on 05/05/2008, -4/+23Thank you for accurately repeating the Clinton supporter talking points that you heard on CNN.

        Are you even old enough to really even know who Dukakis is? because I sure as hell am not.
        • dafunkmonster, on 05/05/2008, -10/+2It's called Google, lazy ass.
      • biotch, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2right didiman .... we all just love to pay attention to the poll numbers because they have nothing to do with how the electoral votes turn out. Go study how uniformly the electoral votes follow the votes in each state before you tell someone else they "obviously dont know how our system works"
    • yojiffyskippy, on 05/05/2008, -23/+6I can tell you are very informed person by the way you use all those specific phrases like "very few people", "some number" and "even half of them". You must work for CBS. And "landslide"? You are clearly dreaming if you think Obama is going to win anything by a landslide.
      • rationalist, on 05/05/2008, -2/+679.3% of Americans think yojiffyskippy is a shmuck.
        The rest still support Bush, too.
    • thebaron2, on 05/05/2008, -1/+10In all fairness, it's a bit early to be giving too much weight to polls re: the general election. They've been all over the place for awhile and each candidate has spent some time in the lead, only to have the polls drastically change the next week. Personally, I think it's due to the outdated methods of polling, which are making the polls, in general, less and less accurate.

      Right now the only polls that matter are the primary polls for Barack/Hillary, and even though those are probably off also, they'll still play some part in the superdelegates' decision as to who gets the nomination.

      On a different note, what makes you jump to the conclusion that Hillary supporters threatening to defect to McCain must be lying? The race between Hillary/Barack is definitely getting heated enough that supporters from each camp are going to refuse to vote for the other. Just look at the vitriol being spewed on Digg re: Clinton - if she got the nod do you really think Obama supporters on digg would vote for her? Unfortunately it works both ways, and the bickering between the two stands a real chance of giving this election away.
      • Mejari, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3Well, Obama has more of a claim on the nomination, so Obama supporters would have more of a beef if it was taken from him. Hillary is in the lead in no legitimate way, so it's not like by giving it to Obama they're taking anything from her.
        • jgzman, on 05/05/2008, -3/+1While I agree with you, I should point out the difference between actual wrongs and percived wrongs. The Clinton supporters I have seen/heard from are pretty damn convinced that she deserves the win, and do not seem the type to play nice if she looses.
          I, certainly, will not play nice if she wins, (unless she wins fairly [not bloody likely]) and will, in fact, probably vote McCain, or not vote at all.
          • Mejari, on 05/05/2008, -0/+5a) loses, not looses
            b) Everyone says that they will vote for the republican if their candidate isn't the nominee, and a certain % actually mean it, and most likely if Hillary stole the nomination Obama supporters would abandon the Democratic party as fast as possible, simply because of the view that she stole it. But in reality, while their tactics are completely different, their stances on issues are very similar, so when it comes right down to it the Hillary supporters will hopefully realize that Obama is leagues ahead of McCain when it comes to things that matter to them. This could be wishful thinking, but it's played out that way for most elections. I mean, most uber-conservatives don't like John McCain, but they'll vote for him cause he's a lot better (to them) than any Democrat. Same thing goes for Hillary's supporters and Obama. We just need tog et this false uncertainty about whose going to be the nominee out of the way. The longer that the illusion exists that Hillary can win it, the worse off the party gets.
          • chantron, on 05/05/2008, -0/+5Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama agree with each other 95% of the time. One is going to get the nomination over the other. OK, you’re bitter and upset, I get that. Are you also ***** stupid? Are you REALLY going to vote for John McCain, a guy completely on the opposite side of practically EVERY issue of them, just because one won’t win?

            Give me a break. McCain is a chump. He and the RNC are going to use every dirty trick they can imagine to throw Obama or Clinton under the bus.
          • jgzman, on 05/08/2008, -0/+1Not because my candidate didn't win. I went into the season fully prepared to vote for either of them. I object to Clinton CHEATING, and behaving in a way that leads me to believe that she will be no different in many important ways than a republican president.
            As I stated clearly, if Clinton wins fairly, I will be thrilled to vote for her. I have no objection to a woman president, I have no objection to another Clinton president, I have no objection to her ideas or policies. I object to the 'lie, cheat, manipulate to win' attitude. So far as I can tell, Obama is a straight shooter. That is who I want running the country.
    • dafunkmonster, on 05/05/2008, -12/+1Obama can't even win his own party's nomination by a landslide. What makes you think, after all the Republicans, Independents, and Hillary supporters have weighed in, that Obama is going to win by a landslide?
      • colomboj, on 05/05/2008, -0/+6Did you happen to notice who he is running against? Where he started at? When Hillary announced she was running it was dubbed inevitable for her to be the nominee. So much so that she almost made the mistake of not campaigning in Iowa. So to say that Obama should win by a landslide is just asinine.
        • bignerd, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1I almost ripped this guy a new one, thanks for doing it for me!
      • kball75, on 05/05/2008, -0/+0Well what the hell does that say about Ron Paul? He can't even come close to winning his party. Does that mean he sucks?
      • cranium, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1That's like saying if the Knicks have a tough time beating the Lakers then they can't beat JFK High School.

        McCain is toast because of the economy and because of the war.
    • IllBeBack, on 05/05/2008, -4/+2"There are very few people who are currently supporting Obama who would switch to McCain after the primaries"

      Yeah and how do you know that or any of the other crap you were spouting as fact? You sound like all of the usual know-it-alls who really don't know *****. Shut up.
      • DaDrake, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2What makes this funny is he is absolutely correct. Polls show that 24% of Hillary supports will go to McCain if Obama wins (versus 8% of Obama supports). This shouldn't be surprise since Hillary gets the more moderate older generation. Maybe you should shut up =)
        • ruyen, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3I see those Hillary supports who might not support Obama as:
          -Old bigoted whites (much of my family) that care more about race than the war and other real issues that matter.
          -Big business people who know Hillary will be good for them and Obama wouldn't.
          -Neocons (like Coulter) who secretly support her and fear Obama with every inch of their beings.
          -Sexist Women (like a few I know) who are voting for reproductive organs and will be pissed at Obama beating their woman.

          Personally I'd think the other way around. Other than those things listed, I can't see why a Hillary supporter wouldn't support Obama but I could see Obama supporters not going for Clinton because of the negative tone her campaign took a while back.
        • biotch, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1nah ruyen ... the majority of them are just lying to make it seem like McCain will win if Hillary isnt chosen. Its a poll that came out during hillary supporter desperation.
          Obama is actually vastly more similar to Hillary than McCain. McCain is basically Bush jr. II. There is virtually no way most people who support Hillary right now would go and support McCain over Obama once it comes down to the general election.
    • diggrnumber1, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2i wouldn't say that's a landslide, but obama certainly has the momentum in his favor right now.
    • jasoninoakland, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2He's going to win this for several reasons. First, he REALLY is getting vetted now - the dirt on McCain is being held in reserve. By June, people will have become completely sick of hearing about Wright, but they might not necessarily know anything about Hagee & Falwell's connection to McCain.
      Also, McCain is an old war hero that doesn't really inspire anyone under the age of 60. Sound familiar?
      The GOP always trots out these guys when someone charismatic and competent is running on the Democratic ticket.
    • pdxvanyel, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Apparently I'm one of the few: Hillary's sleazeball politics show that if you want the whitehouse to continue politics as usual, just vote for her. McCain is not a great alternative, but he's been staying above the slime so far, and his main negatives come from pandering to the far right, which is the only way republicans think they can get elected. I think he'll actually be even more moderate in office.

      Hillary can't even manage her own campaign, what would she do with the white house?
      She's attacking Obama on gun control, when in fact it's one of her priorities, while Obama merely goes along with it.
      She's jumping on the McCain bandwagon for the "gas tax vacation", when Obama's right: it wouldn't make a noticeable difference to most people and cost roads a ton, which are already falling apart. Now if they did that for diesel, or even just big rigs, it would take a bite out of inflation and make a real difference to shippers.
      Her comments on nuking Iran show a lack of understanding of the mindset of the people we're fighting: that would play right into their hands, instead of being the deterrent that it was in the cold war.

      Hillary is definitely a very dead last in my book.
  • jlee2081, on 05/05/2008, -9/+25they pray and pray on my downfall
    but when I hit the ground I bounce up like round ball
    • Deodrus, on 05/05/2008, -14/+1that was a stupid poem.
      nice try, but sorry, didn't quite work right.
    • runCMD, on 05/05/2008, -17/+1Sounds like something that would come out of Hillary Clinton's mouth. : ) She is the underdog now. She is still the better choice.
      • jchrome, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4Sorry, we're gonna have to completely wipe your HDD, it's infected with multiple copies of Billary (polymorphic virii).
        FDISK /MBR
      • Mejari, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4I agree, the woman with the most powerful connections in the entire Democratic party, a *****-ton of people that love to throw money at her (although they're getting harder to find these days) and the name recognition any other candidate could only dream of is definitely the underdog in her race against a senator that almost no one ever heard of before this campaign who no one thought would make it past Super Tuesday. Good logic there! I know you want to be all proud that it's your candidate that is the underdog and that she's being picked on and that people are just being mean to her, but give it up. She had this nomination in the bag, and it's America's realization that we don't want just another politician that's keeping it from her. It's not the media (who are her lap-dogs. "Come, Stephanopolis, come!"), it's not anybody but Hillary herself finally showing the country who she really is, and the country doesn't like it. She's not the underdog, she's just a bad candidate, there's a difference.
    • boardtrick, on 05/05/2008, -1/+9it's obvious that neither deodrus nor runCMD have ever listened to jay-z
  • eminiguy, on 05/05/2008, -8/+14He was bound to rebound. ;)
    • Deodrus, on 05/05/2008, -7/+1better than the one before you.
      amusing at best.
      • scallon, on 05/05/2008, -2/+7wtf, did someone nominate you as official judge of digg comments or something? go away.
        • Jwoey, on 05/05/2008, -0/+108.0 | 9.5 | 9.0 | 9.5

          Nice comment. The russian judge screwed you though.
          • AndrewDB, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3Damn, how much did Clinton pay off that Russian judge?
          • Mejari, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Paid him off with a tire-iron to the knees
    • wrillo, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3he wasn't ever "down" - the media is just feeding us "interesting" stories, even if they have to fabricate them
  • swrostmore, on 05/05/2008, -10/+55This seems like a kind of small sample (~300) for a national poll.
    • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -37/+5These libs will believe anything fed to them. They are hungry for change. But not the change you can believe in. Unless your stoned. Or maybe high. Or maybe deaf dumb and mute.
      • vat0r, on 05/05/2008, -3/+26Yeah cause us "libs" are all stoned, deaf, dumb or mute. Funny how a conservative accuses liberals of buying anything fed to them. Especially considering the pile of crap their White House has been feeding EVERYONE for eight years.
      • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -22/+3Your hippies of course your stoned.
        • TopherT, on 05/05/2008, -2/+14"You're" hippies of course "you're" stoned.

          You're an Idiot of course you're spamming digg w/ meaningless hate.
        • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -18/+3Hate? I see no hate. If you think this is hate then you don't know what hate is. Go to a holocaust museum if you need a refresher. I think hate would be something like, "***** you assholes ***** you and your dirty tree hugging hippie asses." I just said you are stoned. Seriously you guys are just experiencing PMS. OH my bad I was just joking. please Please don't digg me down.
        • rationalist, on 05/05/2008, -3/+11"your" [sic] illiterate. Are all conservatives so manifestly uneducated?
          • TopherT, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Hey, conservative is just as silly a phrase to use without defining as liberal. Us Paul-bots have some learnin' in us, we just value our freedom from government above the services that government purports to bestow. If thats not a conservative sentiment then the definition of conservative no longer means anything.
        • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -17/+3I throw in "your" for amusement. I like to leave the hippies a bone. I know they have nothing to say about my comment worth hearing. Hear them barking? They leap on it so nicely. yes, yes, come little doggies, fetch my bone. Bite! You are all such good dogs. ahahah.
        • jchrome, on 05/05/2008, -3/+6YOU'RE* a moron.
          *See what I did there?
        • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -13/+4Are Liberals so easy to use? Oh yeah I forgot Obama has you wrapped around his holy black finger. Yup liberals are dang right usable. You guys could go to Harvard or Yale and obtain a degree in science and still come out fools.
          • archiesteel, on 05/05/2008, -3/+5What's pathetic about this is that you *really* believe that you're more intelligent that thos "libs" you keep bashing, while everyone with half a brain can quickly spot you as the immature idiot you really are. You must really being publicly humiliated to make so many posts on so many threads.

            Keep doing it, though, as it reinforces the notion that conservatives are, on the whole, intellectually inferior to moderates and liberals.
          • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -9/+2yes because you proved we are intellectually inferior how? Let me put this in terms that grasp reality. YOU, and I meant the guy with the weird looking icon, YOU think your superior. Means absolutely nothing to me. Just sounds a bit well... conceited and disgusts me more then impresses. Maybe the Next Hitler will be a democrat. Because apparently they believe they are the superior race. In fact they will tell you what a superior race looks like. Oh yes, like themselves.
          • IllBeBack, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2"dang right?"
            What? Dang me, dang me, they oughta take a rope and hang me.
          • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -8/+1Omg so gullible. I put in the little "dang right" just for you buddy. And you swallowed it whole.
          • sgglynn, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5Wow, you're dumber than you look.
          • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -8/+1wow I really care what you think. oh my god I lied.
          • SpeedSteamBoat, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2"Maybe the Next Hitler"

            Oh lawd, someone get Godwin on the phone. Btw, Lukas, saying "I just said that so you would say THAT! HA!" was a sophisticated retort on the elementary school playground, but after puberty most people are just going think you sound like an idiot. It's alright though, because you do.
          • archiesteel, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2"yes because you proved we are intellectually inferior how?"

            Oh, I didn't prove anything. If you go back and actually read what I wrote, you'll see I said your drivel "reinforces the notion" that conservatives are intellectually inferior. I never said if I agree or not with that notion, only that your inane postings (your misrepresentation of what I said included) reinforce it.

            "YOU, and I meant the guy with the weird looking icon, YOU think your superior."

            Thanks, I love that icon. A friend did it for me.

            As for being superior, I don't think I am, really. You see, I personally don't ascribe a hierarchical value to intellect - the fact that I score around 150 on IQ tests is rather meaningless, since it didn't prevent me from doing stupid things in my life. Also, someone can be stupid/uneducated but still be of value to society.

            What I *do* know, however, is that I am intellectually superior to you. That can easily be gleaned from reading your posts (and from the fact that English is not my mother tongue, and yet I write it better than you). However, just because I'm smarter than you doesn't mean I'm better than you - it just means that you'll have a harder time arguing rationally against me, and you're more likely to use logical fallacies, ad hominem attacks and such when you run out of arguments.

            "Maybe the Next Hitler will be a democrat. Because apparently they believe they are the superior race. In fact they will tell you what a superior race looks like. Oh yes, like themselves."

            Right on cue. This sentence has nothing to do with what I spoke of earlier; I make no mention of race anywhere, nor that Democrats believe they are "superior" to Republicans. All I said was that your epistolary idiocies reinforced the notion that conservatives aren't as intellectually proficient as liberals, and then you proceeded to reinforce that notion further by completely missing the point.

            Oh, and no one buys the "I said something stupid on purpose and you bough it omg you are so gullible" line. That is very, very weak.

            You know, you should really go away for a few weeks and hope people forget about you, or start using another nickname, because no one takes you seriously anymore.
      • kenedamick, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3Not only have you made the most ***** retarded posts in this entire thread, you look like a dumb hick in your profile. Shocking!
    • thebaron2, on 05/05/2008, -2/+8Understatement of the thread.
    • BirdsofaFeather, on 05/05/2008, -0/+0"This poll was conducted among a random sample of 671 adults nationwide, including 283 Democratic primary voters, interviewed by telephone May 1-3, 2008. Phone numbers were dialed from RDD samples of both standard land-lines and cell phones. The error due to sampling for results based on the entire sample could be plus or minus four percentage points. The error for subgroups is higher. The error for the sample of Democratic primary voters is five points."

      I'm assuming you meant the 300 Democratic primary voters polled, for which the sample error was 5%. While this is a higher error than normal for a poll, it isn't unusual (typical error is about 3 or 4%), and honestly, I felt they were pretty up front about their polling methods. If CBS is 95% confident that Obama is leading among Democratic primary voters 50 - 38 to Clinton with a 5% error, that's more than enough for me to know that he almost certainly has a sizable lead in that group.

      Besides, I can't imagine how difficult it is to find 300 Democratic primary voters out of a randomized sample of registered Democrats that are actually willing to do a phone poll. Come on, give CBS a break, the poll is sound.
  • tcbishop12, on 05/05/2008, -15/+46Zogby - most accurate to actual results over last 11 weeks -- show a sharp rebound, too. Onward, upward.
    • Isandunk, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2Reliable polls, awful website. http://www.zogby.com/
    • JointVenture, on 05/05/2008, -9/+7Zogby? I know why you like Zogby.

      RCP Average 04/28 - 05/04 -- 47.2 42.6 Clinton +4.6
      Suffolk 05/03 - 05/04 600 LV 49 43 Clinton +6.0
      Zogby Tracking 05/03 - 05/04 636 LV 42 44 Obama +2.0
      Insider Advantage 04/30 - 05/01 478 LV 47 40 Clinton +7.0
      Downs Center 04/28 - 04/30 689 LV 52 45 Clinton +7.0
      Rasmussen 04/29 - 04/29 400 LV 46 41 Clinton +5.0

      The ONLY poll to show Obama ahead in Indiana.

      Keep HOPING!
      • identitymatrix, on 05/05/2008, -2/+3uh dude he didn't even mention Indiana.
        • JointVenture, on 05/05/2008, -2/+2Zogby always favors Obama, thats the point I was making.
        • ComeOutSwingin, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Thanks Jointventure. I want Obama to win but the "polls" that are on the front page seem to be abnormal of most of the other polls that show the race close or even with Clinton leading.
    • johnfn, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Zogby? The most accurate poll? The poll that showed Obama winning in Pennsylvania AND California? How on earth is Zogby the most accurate?
  • spacetheater, on 05/05/2008, -7/+32Not too suprising. Seems kind of odd that people would judge the guy on the views of his preacher. Most people don't shop around for preachers they agree with on politics...
    • yojiffyskippy, on 05/05/2008, -13/+4No but when they do realize that their mentor is racist, anti-US and mentally challenged then they usually start "shopping" around for another mentor. You may not have heard but Obama has condemned him and is trying to move on. I suggest you and the other Obama supporters follow his lead and stop trying to somehow justify his relationship with his mentor. Obama screwed up, he's sorry and he's moving on. Nuff said.
      • troub, on 05/05/2008, -2/+5"Mentor" schmentor. My grandparents are a good example. 80-something years old, lifetime church goers. They don't really get along all that well with their church's current pastor. But they are committed to the church itself, the other members of that church, and most of all the teachings of the bible. I respect them for that (even though I'm a dirty heathen). For seriously devout people, it takes nearly an Act of God (hehe) to get them to "shop around" for a new church.
        • thebaron2, on 05/05/2008, -3/+1Hasn't been my experience, but as long as we're talking about anecdotal evidence, my family left our church (along with a ***** of other people) after it came to light that our pastor was cheating on his wife. Eventually he was fired (or resigned, same difference) and they got some guy that was always on TV. A lot of people returned but my mom didn't like the guy so she left.

          The pastor is the cornerstone of the church, which is what it really comes down to.
    • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -18/+3Im sorry if you think there hasn't always been a connection between religion and our government you are too stupid to vote.
      • Mejari, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3Just because there has been doesn't mean there should be.
      • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -9/+1Why tell me? Tell that to the last 43 presidents.
        • Mejari, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4I would but...
          *looks around conspiratorially*
          *whispers*
          Most of them are dead

          And don't give me that *****, because plenty of presidents kept religion out of government. You know, I seem to remember this whole part in our nation's guiding laws that says something about how the government and religion should act regarding each other. How does that go again?
        • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -2/+1Now your just being stupid A. believe it or not I know they are dead. B. I didn't say I approved of religion in government. C. I am an Atheist.
      • iainc, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2For the love of all that is decent, someone please give LuKKKasSmith a keyboard with a working shift key so that he can use apostrophes.
    • bonhoeffer, on 05/05/2008, -4/+2Obama is judged on his association with, support for, reliance upon, and consent to the views of his preacher.
      Otherwise, what his preacher said wouldn't matter.
      • identitymatrix, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3That's exactly the point, what his preacher said doesn't matter on this national/political level. At least not as much as a whole slew of other more important things. Consider a hypothetical situation: Would you pick a candidate with a good preacher but continued to destroy civil rights, the economy, and foreign policy, or someone who fixed the economy, restored foreign relations and civil rights, but had a weird preacher?

        If we stoop to the level of making the argument that a preacher defines everyone he preaches to at some point in their lives, we might as well be arguing about which candidate has the friendliest dog or fluffiest cat, because all 3 of these have virtually no effect on politics or foreign policy.
    • identitymatrix, on 05/05/2008, -1/+6I agree with you completely. I wish the media spent time focused on the real issues instead of trying to find dirt on everyone each candidate may have known at some point in their lives. For example, what is more important: what some preacher said, or what Obama's stance on the occupation in Iraq and his plans for the economy are. Somehow the media thinks the former is more important, which is stupid.
  • pseudononymist, on 05/05/2008, -21/+6For the love of all that is sacred and holy--stop with the ***** polls. You wanna see polls, I got one for ya right here, sweeties. Other than that, put the polls back in their drawers, because, as the contrast between this latest poll and its predecessor shows, they are utterly meaningless at this point.
    • momsshizzle, on 05/05/2008, -11/+3Nah, Digg is just grasping is what is left of their god....until they choose another candidate. McCain '08.
    • theomacy, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3then why the hell did you read the article?
      • pseudononymist, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Just because I bookmarked it on digg doesn't mean I read the article. And I'm not talking about being annoyed that the article showed up on digg, either, just that our political news has come under the sway of polling as if they were the voice of God, but with polls coming out on a seemingly daily basis, each one hardly means anything as far as "electability" goes. See digg is telling me electability isn't even a word, and digg is right because it shouldn't be. I totally agree with Jon Stewart on this one.
  • MJDub, on 05/05/2008, -5/+27That thumbnail is well-chosen.
    • Oktoeatfish, on 05/05/2008, -3/+2Heeee's on fire!!
    • momsshizzle, on 05/05/2008, -10/+2Not all black people can play basketball, boy.
      • MJDub, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3True, but he can.
      • freshyill, on 05/05/2008, -1/+4Yeah, but when the title includes the word REBOUNDS, the visual works. Retard.
    • RRJackson, on 05/05/2008, -12/+1Yes, it foreshadows all the motivational speaking he'll be doing to inner-city youth once his bid for the presidency has failed.
      • Mejari, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5I'm pretty sure he'll win, but 1 question: how is a failed bid for the presidency inspirational? Your insults don't even make sense.
        • RRJackson, on 05/05/2008, -8/+1He's not even going to win the nomination, let alone the general election.

          Have you ever seen any of the people who tour as motivational speakers? Guys like Les Brown and Craig Harper make a fortune doing these tours and their biggest accomplishment is that people know who they are. I can already hear Obama's opener...

          "I overcame adversity to become a member of the United States senate. Some said I might even make a good president. I'm here today to share my experience with you. To tell you that if you follow three simple steps you can have your own success. What are those steps? Well, over the next hour I'm going to explain each of them in detail, but quickly they're; Kill Whitey; Tell the White Man What He Wants to Hear and Never Trust Your Pastor."
          • archiesteel, on 05/05/2008, -1/+6Hillary can't win. Sorry to burst your bubble.
          • RRJackson, on 05/05/2008, -7/+1Oh, she'll win the nomination. She just won't win the general election.
          • archiesteel, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1No, she'll lose the nomination. She can't mathematically win.

            Obama will win the nomination, then win the general election. If we're lucky, you'll be so ashamed that you'll never come back to post here.
    • GrammarNazi3000, on 05/05/2008, -2/+1I see what he did there.
  • Hillsfar, on 05/05/2008, -9/+67Barack Obama has stayed mostly positive on his message. Hillary Clinton's dirty mud-slinging has kept her hands dirty.
    Another poll shows 70% of voters think the gas tax holiday is a political ploy to get elected. Good for Obama!
    • Suricou, on 05/05/2008, -5/+2Of course voters can see it is a political ploy. That doesn't mean it won't work. It's the classic political technique: "Vote for me and I will ensure you get a generous lump some extra after taxes to treat yourself." People know they are being bought, but... their votes are affordable.
      • Mejari, on 05/05/2008, -1/+4Yeah, they get a whole half-tank of gas. It's not like it costs the country 9 billion dollars and 300,000 jobs or anything. Wait a minute...
      • IllBeBack, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2A "lump some [sic]," huh? Nice.
    • dralezero, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Their tactics may be different but they are still one and the same just like Kerry vs Bush.
  • Codee, on 05/05/2008, -11/+13It's time to get back to business Obama and stick a fork in that bird. We need a change buddy. Hillary's done.
  • AndrewDB, on 05/05/2008, -9/+31Both my father and I voted early for the Indiana primary that's coming up tomorrow. We both voted Obama.

    I'm so happy to of cast my vote early for the man who will get my vote in the actual election.
  • momsshizzle, on 05/05/2008, -33/+9They forgot the caption: "This poll was paid for the by the Obamabots for change without Knowing the Issues Association." McCain '08 baby!
    • eibborjames, on 05/05/2008, -6/+15McCain has no chance what so ever of being elected president.
      • 11b1p, on 05/05/2008, -8/+4So he should just give up right? What if I said Obama has no chance to win. Then you would be all pissy.
        • Mejari, on 05/05/2008, -2/+6Who said he should give up? Putting words in other people's mouthes makes you look stupid. Just because he has no chance doesn't mean he should give up. It'll be fun election night to see all those blue states up on all the news networks, and Fox crying in a corner.
          • momsshizzle, on 05/05/2008, -2/+1You are obviously talking about Obama.
    • srondizzle, on 05/05/2008, -1/+8Your claim that Obama supporters don't know the issues is laughable considering your CANDIDATE doesn't know the issues.
      What's the difference between Sunni and Shiite Muslims again?
    • IllBeBack, on 05/05/2008, -0/+5We have had ***** enough of evangelical Christians running the country. Say NO to McCain and his evangelical Christian friends.
  • minox, on 05/05/2008, -11/+19This poll was racist. They are trying to play on white fears by insisting that Obama is a "rebounder."
    • Jware, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1oh my god digg this guy up that was fantastic
  • eibborjames, on 05/05/2008, -9/+9My guess is all of this will be over 2morrow by midnight.
    You always know when Hillary is behind in the polls because the media does not discuss it.
  • Atlatal, on 05/05/2008, -26/+6CBS ??? (Communist Broadcasting System !)
    Only a left-wing Dumbocrat would believe anything from them!
    CBS = Fake But Accurate!

    • IllBeBack, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2And your point ... was not made.
    • bignerd, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Wow, Dumbocrat.... Really? Are you serious!? How old are you!
  • MrFurious2k, on 05/05/2008, -29/+8It'd be nice if the Obamabots would just have their own section for their ass kissing and leave the front page open for more important things like videos of "how to fold a shirt."
  • whalt, on 05/05/2008, -12/+11Obama/Barkley in '08!
    • Zipko, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1I would definitely vote for any ticket that has Charles Barkley on it. That guy is the man.
      • shakajumbo, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1hey Hey HEY!! GET ME THEM SOCKS!!!
    • atbnet, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1Vote for me you knuckleheads.
  • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -33/+6OBama Propaganda REbounds.... again. Am I supposed supposed to be excited?
    • freshyill, on 05/05/2008, -2/+4Who sent you here to troll?
    • Deanblackoak, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5We'd be excited if you would learn how to type.
    • kenedamick, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3You're a ***** retard, but wow, what an amazing acronym!! **sarcasm**
    • LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -3/+2hahaha. Such weak responses. I swear if you had just answered my question with "Yes" I might have been impressed.
  • SpinningHead, on 05/05/2008, -9/+38Why is Wright an issue, but voter suppression isnt?
    http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/ ...
    • runCMD, on 05/05/2008, -13/+1They are both issues Spinninghead - but the supression isn't attributable to Senator Clinton. The bigotry of Obama was revealed first by himself in the book 'dreams of my father'. Add instances of bigotry sprinkled through his early adulthood - and then nothing obvious until now that his long time mentor and fellow bigot has called him out as a liar. The brother went undercover with his bigotry - and got outed during the campaign. Hating anyone based on color is not something that belongs in the whitehouse. If a candidate for president has ever HATED because of COLOR they don't belong in the whitehouse. IMO.
      • SpinningHead, on 05/05/2008, -1/+8So Obama hates his white mother and grandparents who raised him? McCain is not a racist even though he uses the term "gook" and does not renounce the support of the likes of Hagee who blames Catholics for the holocaust. Sounds like an inconsistent set of standards there.
        • Mejari, on 05/05/2008, -1/+4Sadly it's pretty consistent: This person agrees with me, he is wonderful. This person disagrees with me, he is a racist liberal facists sonofabitch.
          It's simple enough for the likes of runCMD to understand.
        • t3rmv3locity, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2'liberal fascist'
          you sir have discovered the oxymoron of the century
          • SpinningHead, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2Yeah, Ive noticed the right wing pundits have been throwing that term the past few years. Unfortunately, their followers don't generally have the best grasp of history or politics. Its kinda like calling someone a Jewish Nazi.
    • nebion, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3Because Wright makes for easier sound-bites.

      If you can play a short video tape that illustrates the controversy of the issue over and over, it's much easier for the media to keep it in people's minds compared to something that you have to actually explain.
    • colomboj, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1I find that to be disturbing.
    • DavidYeah, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1boooooooooooooring.
      /sarcasm.
    • ruyen, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Because the press knows how big of a story the primary is for them if it continues. So they're biased towards Hillary winning so it casts a false sense of hope that she's still in the race (when mathematically it's basically impossible) so they continue to come up with cheap news stories about the primary "race".
  • shiftclick, on 05/05/2008, -34/+6O-spama. And buried as such. http://www.dontvoteobama.net
    • RohanXI, on 05/05/2008, -0/+10I looked at your web page, brings me back to 1996 when all websites looked like *****, and you put a web counter/told everyone how many people visit your web page daily so they think it is a great resource.

      Maybe if you spent a little less time making up stupid *****, and a little more time learning CSS then people may take notice.
    • sqwirl, on 05/05/2008, -0/+12You should be ashamed to be any part of such a hateful, fearmongering site. That site is full of flat-out lies and you know it. Ugh, ***** rednecks.
    • Isandunk, on 05/05/2008, -0/+7What a ***** ***** site. And what a crock full of ***** too. Buried.
    • iainc, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Dugg down and reported for spamming your web *****.
  • jzuska, on 05/05/2008, -26/+9booo Obama stinks
  • VinnieDaMac, on 05/05/2008, -7/+14It's sad that someone's pastor from the past was an issue in the first place.
    • MagMarCat, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4It was his current pastor when this whole thing started! He subscribed to the church's beliefs until it was outed how crazy the beliefs were, and his popularity started slipping. Rev. Wright is correct in saying that Obama was politically posturing when he "denounced" Wright's words.
  • SuperVepr308, on 05/05/2008, -2/+7He may be the next Rodman.
  • JointVenture, on 05/05/2008, -21/+858% Say Obama Denounced Wright for Political Convenience, not Outrage.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/pol ...

    have a nice day
    • bonhoeffer, on 05/05/2008, -4/+2Besides, Obama denounced Rev. Wright for his speech to the National Press Club last week. What about his anti-American denunciations and slurs in the previous 20 years of their cozy relationship?
      • pb125, on 05/05/2008, -3/+3WHO GIVES A *****. Should Obama denounce every wrong-doing by this nutjob? Maybe he should denounce the time he stole a cookie from the lunch line.
        • JointVenture, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Apparently a lot of people considering the downward spiral Obama has taken in the polls.

          Cant wait for Tuesday night to watch the big boo hooo hoooo.
  • Sapperlite, on 05/05/2008, -0/+8Rasmussen reports something totally different. Obama now only holds a one point lead over Clinton in democratic primary voters. Also, it looks like she is closing the gap in North Carolina. Now don't explode on me I am just stating results from other sources. http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/pol ...
  • bonhoeffer, on 05/05/2008, -3/+4The CBS/NYT poll appears to be a national pole. As Democrats learned in 2000, whether they get 51% or 91% of the CA and NY vote it doesn't get them any more electors. Is there a state by state breakdown?.
  • amightywind, on 05/05/2008, -23/+5Wishful thinking. Indiana and North Carolina were to be the latest primaries where Obama would "knock Hillary out". Because of Obama's carnival of missteps this clearly will not happen. Hillary has shown (to late) that she can take a punch. Obama has also shown (to late) that he has a glass jaw. This doesn't bode well for him in the general election.
    • Darksoul, on 05/05/2008, -2/+1Wow a glass jaw and can take a punch your kidding me right I think you have those two mixed up. After all the crap Hillary has started with him he has taken blow after blow after blow and keeps coming back but Hillary on the other hand has lost and is refusing to give up and is destroying the Dem's chance to be the next president anytime she takes a loss she kicks her feet and cry's like a little girl she threatens lawsuits and all kinds of crap just to try and win she is almost as pathetic as you are if that's even possible.
  • JointVenture, on 05/05/2008, -18/+8North Carolina Democratic Primary
    Poll Date Sample Obama Clinton Spread
    RCP Average 04/26 - 05/04 -- 49.0 42.5 Obama +6.5
    Insider Advantage 05/04 - 05/04 781 LV 48 45 Obama +3.0
    Zogby Tracking 05/03 - 05/04 624 LV 48 40 Obama +8.0
    Rasmussen 05/01 - 05/01 831 LV 49 40 Obama +9.0
    Research 2000 04/29 - 04/30 500 LV 51 44 Obama +7.0
    Mason-Dixon 04/28 - 04/29 400 LV 49 42 Obama +7.0
    SurveyUSA 04/26 - 04/28 727 LV 49 44 Obama +5.0


    Wow, he went from a double digit lead to in some cases a 3pt lead.

    Thats one hell of a rebound.
    • BufordT, on 05/05/2008, -1/+4This article references a national poll.
    • BufordT, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1FTA "He now leads presumptive Republican nominee John McCain in the hypothetical fall contest by eleven points, 51 percent to 40 percent."
      How did you interpret that as a poll of a state primary contest?
  • OC73, on 05/05/2008, -15/+7They said the same ***** last time after his lame speech on race.
    • Deanblackoak, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1That's right, he takes a licking and keeps on ticking. Hilldrone.
  • dreesemonkey, on 05/05/2008, -13/+11Why does it need to rebound? According to digg there is no one in america left that does not have obama posters hanging in their bedroom *swoon*
    • Wormfather, on 05/05/2008, -2/+3As far as Digg goes, Obama is the new Apple! Now lets be dugg down together.
  • Wiinii, on 05/05/2008, -9/+6I must have missed the Digg post saying that his support had declined...Hrmmm
  • RRJackson, on 05/05/2008, -22/+5His numbers are WAY up among Black Panthers and members of the Nation of Islam. Among the rest of America he's still in the toilet waiting for the big flush tomorrow.
    • srondizzle, on 05/05/2008, -0/+5How is this a valid point? Were you expecting Black Panthers to vote for a white candidate?
    • archiesteel, on 05/05/2008, -2/+2Why do you hate other races so much?
      • RRJackson, on 05/05/2008, -4/+2The better question is, "Why does Obama have a 20-year relationship with someone who hates white people?" And the answer to that question is the reason he's not going to win the nomination.
      • archiesteel, on 05/05/2008, -2/+3Again, why do you hate other races? Wright does not hate white people, he's angry at them (with good reason, though he fails to see that things have changed a bit since the 60s, as Obama himself pointed out); I can't, however, see any mitigating circumstances for your constant stoking of anti-black paranoia.

        I can understand why you didn't answer my question, though: it's not easy to declare oneself a racist - even if that's what you are.
        • RRJackson, on 05/06/2008, -4/+2You don't put someone in charge of the United States who has a grudge against its predominant race. Taking issue with that isn't racism.
        • archiesteel, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2For starters, races don't exist. There is no white race, no black race, etc. These are artificial constructs, holdovers from a less enlightened past. You should let go of this hate you have for people who are not like you. Racism is not based on science, but on irrational fears and delusions of superiority; you should really reject it.

          Second, I wasn't aware we were electing Wright. Oh, wait, we're not. I guess to you they all look the same, right?
          • RRJackson, on 05/06/2008, -3/+1Lil' Bammie spent 20 years in Wright's church and even dedicated his book to him. It's safe to say that he shares Wright's racist beliefs. Because even though, according to you, "race doesn't exist," Wright certainly believes it does and feels a lot of animosity towards Whitey.
          • papipablo, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2Race-baiting and name calling are the only tricks RR Jackson has--said an anonymous stalker who thinks RR Jackson is a fat douchebag.
          • RRJackson, on 05/06/2008, -3/+1Well, at least now he's a self-proclaimed stalker.
      • papipablo, on 05/06/2008, -1/+2I love how RR poses as a non-racist but if you read through his comments you can see him advocating for segregation and encouraging the people of Pennsylvania to lynch Barack Obama.
        • RRJackson, on 05/06/2008, -3/+1More distortions and lies from my stalker.
  • colonelcarter, on 05/05/2008, -8/+6Obama has been getting so much more attention than McCain has, so when the election does come around, anyone who doesn't know who to vote for will go with Obama. The Democratic primaries may very well be the actual presidentrial election.
    • mozert, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Interesting analysis
    • DavidinBoston, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1So many pundits said that McCain being out of the fray during all this Obama vs Clinton stuff had made him look above it all and had put him ahead in the polls. Well, guess what: "OUT OF SIGHT, OUT OF MIND." The pundits never heard that aphorism? Please. McCain is a non-entity in this race. No one gives a crap about him. He's the Republicans' Bob Dole for the 21st century.
  • clippypog, on 05/05/2008, -15/+3Obama bites -- and he's ready for a big chunka your income!
  • dafunkmonster, on 05/05/2008, -7/+3I never trust polls, because I know for a fact that you can word polls to force fence sitters to answer the way that best suits your agenda.
    Also, sample size, sampling location, and sampling diversity can be played with to govern the results of a poll before it is even taken. I wouldn't be at all surprised if half the people polled were from the south side of Chicago.
    • makeitloud, on 05/05/2008, -2/+3No need to be afraid of polls; just make sure you're looking at the right ones. True, you can game the polls if you want. Heck, just look at Fox's polls for examples of that. But real polls are actually very accurate, because they account for most or all of those biases.
    • DaDrake, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2What is so bad about Fox's news polls? I've done a lot of campaigning with delegates and senators and fox news produces some of the most accurate polls in their 10 year history. The reason for this is because they often use an average of different polls and often triple the necessary sample size. Another thing I like about Fox News polls is they provide the information of who is asking the question (sex, race, and the question). Believe it or not.... how it is phrased and by who makes a significant difference.
      • makeitloud, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1Well, here's a Fox poll question that probably doesn't have a place in any reputable poll:

        #40: Do you personally think the world would be better off if the United States loses the war in Iraq?
        (from http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/100407_Iraq_pr ...

        ... On the surface, it seems like a straightforward question. Until you think about it a bit.

        I don't believe you can answer this question without the question affecting your answer. It contains a couple implications that can seriously influence the response: 1) The war is winnable; 2) the U.S. is responsible for the stability of not just Iraq, but the entire world. It's a yes or no question, implying only two possible solutions to the Iraq problem.

        But there's a third option (withdrawal) and myriad political/diplomatic solutions that fall somewhere in between "win" or "lose."
    • dafunkmonster, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2LOL I got dugg down for saying that polls are BIASED. WHICH THEY ARE.
  • dafunkmonster, on 05/05/2008, -6/+3Also, I find it amusing that the Obama supporters come out and call the home run to right field before Obama is even in the on-deck circle. On top of that, Obama isn't a veteran slugger, he's a rookie with a bit of a streak.
    You can't place bets on a general election until the nominees have been decided, and they have debated each other.
    • colomboj, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3I'm a very proud Obama supporter, and I'm calling a home run for any democrat no matter who that may be. If it's Hillary I'm still voting for her, if it's Obama I'm dancing while I'm voting for him. There is only one choice I won't make this year, and that would be McSame.
  • liquisoft, on 05/05/2008, -5/+9...and then we're taking back the whitehouse! BEYAAAAAAAAHH!
  • dajernts, on 05/05/2008, -3/+11It's amazing how something as ridiculous as the Rev Wright ordeal can affect the polls at all. People are so fickle.
    • HencheMann, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2...you mean gullible, stupid, idiotic, don't you? (You should apologize to fickle people!)
  • homah, on 05/05/2008, -1/+11It cracks me up that there are still people who are still bouncing back and forth between candidates. One would think these polls would come out pretty much the same every time now (aside from the margin of error). I mean, come on, there have been 20-some debates already. Make up your mind.
    • dralezero, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Yea since no one can decided between these two we need a tie breaker like Ron Paul.
  • postalblowfish7, on 05/05/2008, -4/+6JUST. WAIT. FOR. THE. VOTES.
  • aarogh, on 05/05/2008, -3/+308ama FTW
  • kronzdigg, on 05/05/2008, -9/+4neosocialists
  • Codylan, on 05/05/2008, -4/+4The american voting public is such a finicky bunch. So easily impressed and swooned back-and-forth by stupid, unimportant side dishes like flag pins. It used to be said the average intelligence or reading level of the average american was at about the 7th grade level. Welcome to Kindergarten voters!
    • d3mag0gu3, on 05/05/2008, -5/+1Yeah but that's still a grade ahead of these preschool obamabots...
    • Darksoul, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2Between you and codylan I don't know I don't know who is more of an idiot its ok I don't have to make up my mind I will go with both of you as the awnser.
  • SkittlesUSA, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1I thought, according to you guys, he never lost any support?
  • Moviespo, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Aren't the people in the poster supposed to be the original cast of the movie?
    http://moviespoofmaddness.com/Images/T3.gif
  • gstevenson, on 05/05/2008, -5/+3I'm sure this comment will get buried...but what I find so funny, is all these Digg articles about 3-4 months ago referrencing "Do the Math Hillary! You can't win" If that was the case, why are the Obama supporters even worried about how his support has now "rebounded"....I thought Hillary literally couldn't win due to "the Math"???
    • Stevo23, on 05/05/2008, -2/+1She can't. That doesn't mean we're not sick of listening to her *****. It's time to end this!
    • Darksoul, on 05/05/2008, -2/+1She can't win do to the math if she wins other wise that would mean she cheated why can't you grasp that concept and also I am not worried about it most of us are not. And what did you know I am going to digg you down.
  • warringgael, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Things are starting to look up in this country
  • dautontx, on 05/05/2008, -3/+2New USA/Gallop poll shows Hillary leading Obama by 7 points with the headline "Flap over pastor hurts Obama" so when he loses both tomorrow don't be shocked; http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008 ...
  • BlackJackJester, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2Voters are fickle retards. Nothing of importance has changed between the candidates in the past 6 months. I still like Ron Paul, but he's out, so I'm in for Obama. Their views are the same, Clinton is still spouting ***** that will never happen. How can people change their mind so much, and so quickly?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 64 of 64 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.