CNN Flash Poll: Clinton Or Obama Would Beat Any Republican

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,987
1
0
Story here.

Frankly, the only one that stands a chance from those numbers is McCain.

Fred Thompson was right the other night. We're locked in a battle now for the heart and soul of the Republican Party. And we'd better make the right decision, because these numbers are ominous. There's a long time to go and many a rise and fall of a campaign yet to play out, of course, but this is a warning siren. And we'd better be listening.
 

yankeesfan

Diamond Member
Aug 6, 2004
5,923
1
71
They didn't ask about Ron Paul. CNN is trying to bury him! Boycott it.
-------

Now that I got that out of the way, there are really no Republican candidates that appeal to me. Obama appeals to me me more than them even though I am against a whole bunch of his positions. I'd like to vote Republican, and my views on most of the issues would probably indicate Ron Paul support, but he's crazy. Some of his ideas are insane. I want a fiscally conservative candidate who is socially liberal. That's libertarian, right?
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
The Republican party fucked up standing with Bush and his marvelous adventures. Too bad people don't also put some blame on the Democrats for doing much the same.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,987
1
0
Originally posted by: bamacre
The Republican party fucked up standing with Bush and his marvelous adventures. Too bad people don't also put some blame on the Democrats for doing much the same.

No, the GOP fucked up by abandoning core principles and conservative values. Particularly in the fiscal arena.
 

Slick5150

Diamond Member
Nov 10, 2001
8,760
3
81
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: bamacre
The Republican party fucked up standing with Bush and his marvelous adventures. Too bad people don't also put some blame on the Democrats for doing much the same.

No, the GOP fucked up by abandoning core principles and conservative values. Particularly in the fiscal arena.

I'd agree with this, though it does tie into the idea of standing with Bush and his marvelous fiscally irresponsible adventures.

 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,052
30
86
Originally posted by: Pabster
Story here.

Frankly, the only one that stands a chance from those numbers is McCain.

Fred Thompson was right the other night. We're locked in a battle now for the heart and soul of the Republican Party. And we'd better make the right decision, because these numbers are ominous. There's a long time to go and many a rise and fall of a campaign yet to play out, of course, but this is a warning siren. And we'd better be listening.

Pabster -- I still don't have a clue why a neocon parrot like you is putting on this dog and pony show of starting thread after thread pretendint to obsess on Democratic candidates, but this one is particularly dishonest.

1. You start with a title calling attention to Clinton and Obama.

2. Your "source" is Matt Drudge, who's blather seldom includes much in the way of facts.

3. Your entire text is about Republican issues and chances in the coming election.

If that's what you want to discuss, go for it, but at least, have the common courtesy to go straight for your intended subject instead of posting misleading titles that don't honestly reflect the content of your threads.

That's me talking, not me as a mod. Getting back to your post, as I've posted many times, Fred Thompson's an ethical turd who should have stuck with acting, and McCain sold his soul for political gain when, after being swiftboated as much as Kerry and Max Cleland by the same Karl Rove gang, he stood that stage and endorsed your Traitor In Chief.

He didn't have to endorse anyone else. He could have remained silent, but he didn't. That's when he pissed on his own history and past sacrifices, and I lost all respect for him.
 

bamacre

Lifer
Jul 1, 2004
21,030
2
61
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: bamacre
The Republican party fucked up standing with Bush and his marvelous adventures. Too bad people don't also put some blame on the Democrats for doing much the same.

No, the GOP fucked up by abandoning core principles and conservative values. Particularly in the fiscal arena.

I would say that a $1.3 Trillion unnecessary war falls in the fiscal arena, among others.
 

CellarDoor

Golden Member
Aug 31, 2004
1,574
0
0
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: Pabster
Story here.

Frankly, the only one that stands a chance from those numbers is McCain.

Fred Thompson was right the other night. We're locked in a battle now for the heart and soul of the Republican Party. And we'd better make the right decision, because these numbers are ominous. There's a long time to go and many a rise and fall of a campaign yet to play out, of course, but this is a warning siren. And we'd better be listening.

Pabster -- I still don't have a clue why a neocon parrot like you is putting on this dog and pony show of starting thread after thread pretendint to obsess on Democratic candidates, but this one is particularly dishonest.

1. You start with a title calling attention to Clinton and Obama.

2. Your "source" is Matt Drudge, who's blather seldom includes much in the way of facts.

3. Your entire text is about Republican issues and chances in the coming election.

If that's what you want to discuss, go for it, but at least, have the common courtesy to go straight for your intended subject instead of posting misleading titles that don't honestly reflect the content of your threads.

That's me talking, not me as a mod.

Umm, what the heck are you talking about? I see nothing wrong with his post or the title. His title mentioned how Obama and Clinton would beat any REPUBLICAN and then his posts refers to how the Republicans need to get their act together. I disagree with Pabster on a number of things but I think you've lost it.

http://www.realclearpolitics.c...latestpolls/index.html

For a non-Drudge link to the polls.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,052
30
86
Originally posted by: CellarDoor
Umm, what the heck are you talking about? I see nothing wrong with his post or the title. His title mentioned how Obama and Clinton would beat any REPUBLICAN and then his posts refers to how the Republicans need to get their act together.

I'm talking about my opinion of Pabster's recent history of obsessing on Democratic candidates for no particular reason of his own interest, and I'm talking about the fact that I think the way he put this particular thread together is misleading and dishonest.

I disagree with Pabster on a number of things but I think you've lost it.

I disagree with Pabster on almost anything and everything, primarily because of how wrong he is other than not wanting Hillary to be the Democratic nominee, but that's what forums are for.

And I don't give a sh8 what you think about what I've lost. :laugh:
 

Siddhartha

Lifer
Oct 17, 1999
12,502
1
81
Considering Mr Bush's poll numbers I am surprised that the Republicans are not in a deeper hole.

But it is too early for anyone to slit their wrists or jump up and down and start planning on what room in the White House to keep their dogs yet.
 

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,520
1,575
126
A poll? Why would anyone trust a poll? Particularly after the last election cycles and the recent primary.

 

Uhtrinity

Platinum Member
Dec 21, 2003
2,251
197
106
Originally posted by: Harvey

He didn't have to endorse anyone else. He could have remained silent, but he didn't. That's when he pissed on his own history and past sacrifices, and I lost all respect for him.

That is when McCain lost me too. I had respect for the guy before he kissed Bushes Ass and would have voted for him.
 

Uhtrinity

Platinum Member
Dec 21, 2003
2,251
197
106
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: CellarDoor
Umm, what the heck are you talking about? I see nothing wrong with his post or the title. His title mentioned how Obama and Clinton would beat any REPUBLICAN and then his posts refers to how the Republicans need to get their act together.

I'm talking about my opinion of Pabster's recent history of obsessing on Democratic candidates for no particular reason of his own interest, and I'm talking about the fact that I think the way he put this particular thread together is misleading and dishonest.

I disagree with Pabster on a number of things but I think you've lost it.

I disagree with Pabster on almost anything and everything, primarily because of how wrong he is other than not wanting Hillary to be the Democratic nominee, but that's what forums are for.

And I don't give a sh8 what you think about what I've lost. :laugh:

It is no different than the way Rush Limbaugh will say Obama is a better candidate than Hillary. This is simply to hurt Hillary's chances, knowing full well that if / when Obama gets the democrats nod he will turn on him also. Last week Rush was even suggesting that republicans vote for Obama in South Carolinas open primaries to hurt Hillary's chances.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
The time for the GOP to refind itself was after 11/2006. Now that train has long ago left the station and the GOP just flat out missed the train. Right now Ron Paul is the only one on the GOP side who has a single answer. While John McCain has a better answer to the war in Irag than Dumsfeld or GWB, he still does not have any answers the voting public will vote for. GWB lost the peace in Iraq the same year he invaded. Anyone who thinks we can win at this stage is nutso. Its now a matter of cutting the losses in an optional war GWB&co totally bungled.

In both foreign and domestic policy, the GOP has been an unmitigated disaster. If the predicted recession occurs, the GOP will become an endangered species after 11/4/2008.

Quite frankly Pabster, you have been a one man cheerleading squad for the GOP as the dems have failed to prevent GWB&co. from running amok. But now that you finally confront the failures of GOP policy, you can't admit to yourself that it was really the GOP committing suicide. And now you are praying for a miracle because the GOP can't possibly dig themselves out of the grave they dug for themselves.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
I hope I'm not the only republican voter who's taking note of the fact that McCain is the only candidate not getting completely obliterated by the dems.
 

EXman

Lifer
Jul 12, 2001
20,079
15
81
Originally posted by: loki8481
I hope I'm not the only republican voter who's taking note of the fact that McCain is the only candidate not getting completely obliterated by the dems.

As a consevative voter McCain isn't a good choice. He's a Liberal and Clinton is a socialist. Obama shouldn't even be in the senate. I'd rather put up a real conservative and lose than put up a schmoo neocon and have people more pissed. Real consevative could win but a Lib like McCain unelectable. N.H. does not a race make! If the Dems want to put up an Ultra polorizing figure like Clinton I think the best thing to do is put her polar opposite up.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,987
1
0
Originally posted by: Harvey
Pabster -- I still don't have a clue why a neocon parrot like you is putting on this dog and pony show of starting thread after thread pretendint to obsess on Democratic candidates, but this one is particularly dishonest.

1. You start with a title calling attention to Clinton and Obama.

2. Your "source" is Matt Drudge, who's blather seldom includes much in the way of facts.

3. Your entire text is about Republican issues and chances in the coming election.

If that's what you want to discuss, go for it, but at least, have the common courtesy to go straight for your intended subject instead of posting misleading titles that don't honestly reflect the content of your threads.

I took the thread title straight from Drudge...Not my words, and I have no reason to question the CNN Polling Data he put up. I'm sure you could verify it on CNN somewhere.

That's me talking, not me as a mod. Getting back to your post, as I've posted many times, Fred Thompson's an ethical turd who should have stuck with acting, and McCain sold his soul for political gain when, after being swiftboated as much as Kerry and Max Cleland by the same Karl Rove gang, he stood that stage and endorsed your Traitor In Chief.

He didn't have to endorse anyone else. He could have remained silent, but he didn't. That's when he pissed on his own history and past sacrifices, and I lost all respect for him.

We'll have to agree to disagree on Fred Thompson. ;)

My point in posting this is 1) It is news; and 2) I hope it wakes up the party faithful to perhaps rethink their current strategy. Then again, they might look at these numbers and decide McCain really is the man to put up there. And that would be a damn shame too.
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,987
1
0
Originally posted by: EXman
Originally posted by: loki8481
I hope I'm not the only republican voter who's taking note of the fact that McCain is the only candidate not getting completely obliterated by the dems.

As a consevative voter McCain isn't a good choice. He's a Liberal and Clinton is a socialist. Obama shouldn't even be in the senate. I'd rather put up a real conservative and lose than put up a schmoo neocon and have people more pissed. Real consevative could win but a Lib like McCain unelectable. N.H. does not a race make! If the Dems want to put up an Ultra polorizing figure like Clinton I think the best thing to do is put her polar opposite up.

I agree on McCain, EX, but the problem with your last statement is the "polar opposite". We don't need 9/11 vs Clinton. ;)
 

jman19

Lifer
Nov 3, 2000
11,221
654
126
Originally posted by: EXman
Originally posted by: loki8481
I hope I'm not the only republican voter who's taking note of the fact that McCain is the only candidate not getting completely obliterated by the dems.

As a consevative voter McCain isn't a good choice. He's a Liberal and Clinton is a socialist. Obama shouldn't even be in the senate. I'd rather put up a real conservative and lose than put up a schmoo neocon and have people more pissed. Real consevative could win but a Lib like McCain unelectable. N.H. does not a race make! If the Dems want to put up an Ultra polorizing figure like Clinton I think the best thing to do is put her polar opposite up.

Why shouldn't Obama be in the Senate? :confused:
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,234
701
126
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: bamacre
The Republican party fucked up standing with Bush and his marvelous adventures. Too bad people don't also put some blame on the Democrats for doing much the same.

No, the GOP fucked up by abandoning core principles and conservative values. Particularly in the fiscal arena.

That's exactly what bamacre said.
 

Nebor

Lifer
Jun 24, 2003
29,582
12
76
Originally posted by: senseamp
Would GOP really nominate McCain? I thought they hate him as much as Clinton.

We don't hate anyone as much as Clinton. Personally, I like Osama Bin Laden better than Hitlery.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,195
126
Originally posted by: Nebor
Originally posted by: senseamp
Would GOP really nominate McCain? I thought they hate him as much as Clinton.

We don't hate anyone as much as Clinton. Personally, I like Osama Bin Laden better than Hitlery.

Excellent. This type of blind hatred makes me want to vote for Hillary so much more. :D
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,563
9
81
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: Nebor
Originally posted by: senseamp
Would GOP really nominate McCain? I thought they hate him as much as Clinton.

We don't hate anyone as much as Clinton. Personally, I like Osama Bin Laden better than Hitlery.

Excellent. This type of blind hatred makes me want to vote for Hillary so much more. :D

In other words, blind devotion. Silly, silly little partisan fool...
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,989
47,944
136
Originally posted by: Nebor
Originally posted by: senseamp
Would GOP really nominate McCain? I thought they hate him as much as Clinton.

We don't hate anyone as much as Clinton. Personally, I like Osama Bin Laden better than Hitlery.

That's really stupid.