Polls show McCain winning the general election...

[SUBMAN1]

I kind of believe this one - The Angry White Man will carry the day, and elect the man who will do the least damage to the country! :p

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-poll27feb27,0,5452138.story

-S

[sonar732]

I kind of believe this one - The Angry White Man will carry the day, and elect the man who will do the least damage to the country! :p

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-poll27feb27,0,5452138.story

-S

The only thing about that is I've seen polls that state the exact opposite (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/26/schneider.poll/index.html). It's a combination of multiple polls that this is based on.

[Tchocky]

In head-to-head contests, the poll found, McCain leads Clinton by 6 percentage points (46% to 40%) and Obama by 2 points (44% to 42%). Neither lead is commanding given that the survey, conducted Feb. 21-25, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

I hate to be the Margin-Of-Error Guy, but...

[SUBMAN1]

In head-to-head contests, the poll found, McCain leads Clinton by 6 percentage points (46% to 40%) and Obama by 2 points (44% to 42%). Neither lead is commanding given that the survey, conducted Feb. 21-25, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
I hate to be the Margin-Of-Error Guy, but...Doesn't matter - the people that will be voting for him are the very same people that are likely to decline a poll in the first place. If a pollster calls me, I always tell them that I do not answer polls or surverys. SO if I had to guess, the score listed for McCain is probably low.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

I kind of believe this one - The Angry White Man will carry the day, and elect the man who will do the least damage to the country! :p

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-poll27feb27,0,5452138.story

-S
The only thing about that is I've seen polls that state the exact opposite (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/26/schneider.poll/index.html). It's a combination of multiple polls that this is based on.I don't know - seems to be everyone today is reporting that McCain would win -

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/02/27/campaign_poll_0227.html
http://www.wkyc.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=84083

Its the big news today.

-S

[Tchocky]

Guessing its a sympathy boost after the NYT article.

[SUBMAN1]

Guessing its a sympathy boost after the NYT article.Hardly because I doubt any conservatives pay much attention to the NYT.

-S

[geetrue]

I thought New England was going to win too ... :lol:

What do Polls know anyway ... Polish people don't know anything :rotfl:

Sorry polak ... I just had to do it.

Seriously speaking presidential hopeful Barack Obama has a lot of support from the young people.
All kinds of people are turning out for these primaries in every state like never before.

Twice as many democrats are voting than the republicans ...

It has been reported that in years past when it comes down to the actual election day the young people don't vote in massive amounts
like the middle age and seniors do.

It's almost like it has been predestined for Obama to run and win the office of the President of the United States,
besides where he is going to go if he loses?

2012 would be his for sure even if he loses to McCain ... :yep:

[SUBMAN1]

...Twice as many democrats are voting than the republicans ......
That is probably true. The democrat race is way more polorized than the repub race so I don't think there is as much concern as to who gets the nomination on the repub side. On the democrats side however, I swear they are going to start pulling maching guns out soon and take each other down.


It's almost like it has been predestined for Obama to run and win the office of the President of the United States,
besides where he is going to go if he loses?Back to the Senate where maybe he can start showing what he is really made of - then people might get an idea of what to expect if he actually won in 2012.

-S

[geetrue]

It's almost like it has been predestined for Obama to run and win the office of the President of the United States,
besides where he is going to go if he loses?Back to the Senate where maybe he can start showing what he is really made of - then people might get an idea of what to
expect if he actually won in 2012.

Just from memory write down everything Obama stands for and then write down everything McCain stands for ... no google.

My memory banks can't remember Mr Obama being for anything besides a medical plan
that will help our country have better health for the people that would vote for him.

Plus the little comment in one primary where he wants to get all of the rouge nations together and have a little talk
with their leaders without any pre-conditions.

He is anti-USA in Iraq and that's about all I get from six months of watching him.

Mr McCain on the other hand has a clear record of what he is for and what he is against ...

[SUBMAN1]

[quote]My memory banks can't remember Mr Obama being for anything besides a medical plan
that will help our country have better health for the people that would vote for him.Yeah - they keep throwing the Canadian health care system in our faces as examples. I have family up there. Takes them 6 months to see a primary care doctor. Seems your cold will be over in that amount of time. For an Uncles knee surgery, he is praying he gets in there within a couple years to have it done, but it will probably take him 3 years to get that surgery. His only option is to come across the border and have it done in the US of A.

Nice. This countries health care system is not screwed up. The people who are uninsured are ones who have chosen to be uninsured. They make enough money to afford it but choose not to. Everyone else is on welfare and gets health care from the state already.

Plus the little comment in one primary where he wants to get all of the rouge nations together and have a little talk
with their leaders without any pre-conditions.Crazy. THis is a sign of weakness to their misbehaving. Clearly he needs more foriegn policy training. The best way to difuse a terrorist is to ignore him and not give him, his platform to speak his rhetoric. He then goes home in shame since no one is listening.

He is anti-USA in Iraq and that's about all I get from six months of watching him.I'm anti USA in Iraq too, but refuse to leave them to their own devices till they can take care of themselves.

Mr McCain on the other hand has a clear record of what he is for and what he is against ...You can see it in his votes. Of course, I hate some of his ideas - amnesty for illegals. Crazy.

Anyway, I don't like McCain either, but at least he isn't purely Socialist/Communist - just semi.

-S

[ReallyDedPoet]

Yeah - they keep throwing the Canadian health care system in our faces as examples. I have family up there. Takes them 6 months to see a primary care doctor.
More related to the lack or resources than the system itself :roll:. There was not really much prudent planning with regards to work-force labor shortages, thus this has created problems within the system.

It's not perfect by any means, but nonetheless it was provided this Canadian Citizen with adequate care throughout the years. Could it be applied to the US, I am not even going to go there, just the sheer size of the US as compared to Canada would cause some major headaches, both cost wise and also how it would be applied.


RDP

[Tchocky]

I wish the Democratic Party would just get it over with and rename itself the Communist Party. Or at least the Domestic Insurgent Party.

I hear China's got the bomb, too. Dangerous times, these.

[SUBMAN1]

Yeah - they keep throwing the Canadian health care system in our faces as examples. I have family up there. Takes them 6 months to see a primary care doctor.
More related to the lack or resources than the system itself :roll:. There was not really much prudent planning with regards to work-force labor shortages, thus this has created problems within the system.

It's not perfect by any means, but nonetheless it was provided this Canadian Citizen with adequate care throughout the years. Could it be applied to the US, I am not even going to go there, just the sheer size of the US as compared to Canada would cause some major headaches, both cost wise and also how it would be applied.


RDPWell you know, it could be argued that the lack of resources is a direct result of the system, so I don't buy that. At least to hear my Uncle talk, he will set you straight on that one. Pay rate is also a direct result of the system and apparently that system doesn't attract any news recruits because of it.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

I wish the Democratic Party would just get it over with and rename itself the Communist Party. Or at least the Domestic Insurgent Party.

I hear China's got the bomb, too. Dangerous times, these.Well considering the Communist party over here has them in their back pocket, I agree.

ANd yeah, CHina having the bomb and making threats towards Taiwan and to the US if they interfere is kind of a scary thing, so I have to agree there too! :D Latest is they are in an outrage over Taiwans request to become part of the UN. WWIII is going to be triggered by something like this, you can bet your hat on that one.

-S

[bradclark1]

The people who are uninsured are ones who have chosen to be uninsured. They make enough money to afford it but choose not to.
I didn't see a smiley on the end of it but have a hard time believing that comment was serious.

[ReallyDedPoet]

Yeah - they keep throwing the Canadian health care system in our faces as examples. I have family up there. Takes them 6 months to see a primary care doctor.
More related to the lack or resources than the system itself :roll:. There was not really much prudent planning with regards to work-force labor shortages, thus this has created problems within the system.

It's not perfect by any means, but nonetheless it was provided this Canadian Citizen with adequate care throughout the years. Could it be applied to the US, I am not even going to go there, just the sheer size of the US as compared to Canada would cause some major headaches, both cost wise and also how it would be applied.


RDPWell you know, it could be argued that the lack of resources is a direct result of the system, so I don't buy that. At least to hear my Uncle talk, he will set you straight on that one. Pay rate is also a direct result of the system and apparently that system doesn't attract any news recruits because of it.

-S
There was a time when we were losing many to the US because of the dollar, that has changed some what in the current climate. Just look at the demographics with regards to boomers etc, folks just are not having the amount of children that they once had, couple this with the amount baby boomers retiring each year and you have your labor shortage. Planning with regards to this has been very poor and we are seeing the results.

Of course the issues are not all related to this, it is more complex than that, but the above is a definite driver.

Maybe I could put your Uncle in touch with my Mother ( retired RN ) and Brother in Law, who is an Orthopedic Surgeon, I am sure it would be an interesting disussion :D


RDP

[SUBMAN1]

The people who are uninsured are ones who have chosen to be uninsured. They make enough money to afford it but choose not to. I didn't see a smiley on the end of it but have a hard time believing that comment was serious.It is. Even the Mexicans have figured out the system to fre health care, and the people who are not on welfare can afford it anyway. If you do a demographic, the majority lions share without health care is the 20 somethings that assume they are bullet proof. Of course, there is the odd family that gets caught up and has a situation where they are unprepared, but this is due to lack of planning and should not affect the rest of us.

This is what annoys me about the latest health care debate - The people who are most effected made it by choice or lack of proper planning. THese are not my problems. Forcing health care on these people is just pathetic since its their responsibility.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

...Maybe I could put your Uncle in touch with my Mother ( retired RN ) and Brother in Law, who is an Orthopedic Surgeon, I am sure it would be an interesting disussion :D


RDPOh my gosh! You have no idea how interesting it would get! :D

-S

[Tchocky]

The people who are uninsured are ones who have chosen to be uninsured. They make enough money to afford it but choose not to. I didn't see a smiley on the end of it but have a hard time believing that comment was serious.It is. Even the Mexicans have figured out the system to fre health care, and the people who are not on welfare can afford it anyway. If you do a demographic, the majority lions share without health care is the 20 somethings that assume they are bullet proof. Of course, there is the odd family that gets caught up and has a situation where they are unprepared, but this is due to lack of planning and should not affect the rest of us.

This is what annoys me about the latest health care debate - The people who are most effected made it by choice or lack of proper planning. THese are not my problems. Forcing health care on these people is just pathetic since its their responsibility.

-S
The idea of universal insurance sounds awkward, as if your freedom to choose is being removed.
Think of it this way - as a step to lower general prices. If insurance is optional, then those who consider themselves to be low-risk won't buy it. Those who are at high risk will, naturally, alleviate that risk through buying insurance. Now that healthy people aren't buying insurance, the relative number of claims will rise, leading to higher premiums, pricing some people out of the market. Iterate as desired.
If everyone has to have insurance, then the risk-spread is better for the companies, and average prices are lower.

Health insurance costs are rising faster than wages or inflation, and medical bills are overwhelmingly the most common reason for personal bankruptcy in the United States.

[SUBMAN1]

The idea of universal insurance sounds awkward, as if your freedom to choose is being removed.
Think of it this way - as a step to lower general prices. If insurance is optional, then those who consider themselves to be low-risk won't buy it. Those who are at high risk will, naturally, alleviate that risk through buying insurance. Now that healthy people aren't buying insurance, the relative number of claims will rise, leading to higher premiums, pricing some people out of the market. Iterate as desired.
If everyone has to have insurance, then the risk-spread is better for the companies, and average prices are lower.

Health insurance costs are rising faster than wages or inflation, and medical bills are overwhelmingly the most common reason for personal bankruptcy in the United States.You are on the right track, but you forgot to include the fact that health care insurance goes up as risk goes up. A 20 something pays next to nothing for health care insurance already, whereas a high risk person pays more so there is already a balance.

Also, a universal system does not build the infrastructure that a market system builds, resulting in an overall decline in the actual quality of health care since someon is dictating what you can and can't spend.


This is the reason for the increase in health care costs - the infrastructure is getting more expnsive. This is a good trade off for getting the 'best' health care the world can provide. Universal health care is a downward spiral where a government decides on who lives and dies based on cost.

I will reiterate - peoples personal bankruptcy is not my problem due to their lack of planning.

You know where that lack of planning really stems from? Consumerism and people who can't control their out of control spending. That nice shiney new car is a much better choice to them than the welfare of their family. And how again am I supposed to be responsible for this pathetic choice?

And you know who is really driving universal healthcare? The credit industry. They are looking for a more stable system to lend money and rape people of theirs. THey want more stability so that they can get every last cent out of people.

Universal healthcare has its roots in an evil greed based mindset, and not on the best healthcare for an individual. :down: This is a catch 22 statement for socialism who is supposed to be out for the best for all. THe best system for all is the system we have right now which give myself and others the best health care the world can afford. I live for a world of choice, and peoples poor choice is not of my concern, though I am willing to help someone out who is ready to make an effort back to a way of proper choice.

-S

[bradclark1]

http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/05/uninsured-cps/fig3.gif
http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/05/uninsured-cps/fig2.gif


http://aspe.hhs.gov/health/reports/05/uninsured-cps/index.htm#Conclusion

[SUBMAN1]

Well that about sums it up. But as I said, even the Mexicans have figured out how to get 'free health care' and that simply makes use of the emergency rooms so non of this uninsured matters. We are still footing the bill with our current insurance.

SO that chart is a big whoop! :p

-S

PS. Matter of fact - the majority of people that are uninsured (The friggen illegals) won't even be getting the free insurance (At least I hope not).

[Tchocky]

Guessing its a sympathy boost after the NYT article.Hardly because I doubt any conservatives pay much attention to the NYT.

-S Well, those people would already have been voting for McCain over Obama/Clinton, so they wouldn't figure in a recent change. He's only pulled ahead of either since the article was published, I think he picked up a lot of swing voters there.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll??

McCain has consistently held a modest lead over Clinton but he moved ahead of Obama only after publication of the controversial New York Times article last week

[geetrue]

Polls stand for what people think ... :yep:

Votes count for what people thought ... :know:

[Stealth Hunter]

These polls don't mean a damn thing. We've seen this same stuff before, and it normally turns around the other way.

Either way, I doubt McCain would survive long enough to run the White House. The man is old, and he's looking sick, too. I respect his military career, but his politics... no, I must disagree. I'm afraid he would run the country too much like Bush has in these past years.

[bookworm_020]

Polls mean nothing. It's who win's on the day (or in the cort case afterwards!:lol:)

[Tchocky]

Polls mean plenty. Not exact, not completely correct, but indicative.