Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I find it interesting that in 2004 this time Bush was leading slightly in Ohio and he won Ohio barely. Its reversed now. Based on this map, Obama can pick up 5 states that Bush won in 2004.
That website was a good predictor in the 2004 and 2006 elections. Looks like it's still on target.
If you read Obama's tax plan, it details that 85% of American households will see a reduction in taxes. Overall tax will increase by $560bn over ten years (remember that double that figure has already been spent in 5 years in Iraq). The $560bn will come from a higher corporate tax (especially by those who have offshore operations), but lower on small businesses. It will also come from a higher tax on those earning over $250k, and from a diversion of funding to the war (once it is ended responsibly), plus a cut in what Obama's administration would deem as inefficient federal programs.
You may not agree with higher corporate taxes, or higher taxes on the top 1% of earners, but at least that money will be invested in R&D, infrastructure, and alternative fuels (also creating jobs). Also, if the majority of Americans are paying less taxes, they well consume more, and therefore business opportunity and profit should still prosper. Now, I know that sounds very idealistic.. but compare those intentions with the past 8 years, and the promise of more from Mccain/Palin.
Sorry, Ian, but read all of Obama's plans for increasing the number of programs and bigger government and then tell me how you can actually lower taxes for "85 percent of the country" and then add all of that extra spending. America is already swimming in debt -- we're owned by the Chinese. We do NOT need to add more.
And please don't tell me Obama's pat answer "through savings from ending the Iraq War." Do remember that one of Obama's own aides told a British newspaper that the "ending the war" thing was just a campaign promise, not to be taken seriously. We already have an agreement reached to withdraw by the end of 2009 but it takes a lot of time, equipment and MONEY to bring home troops. We will not see a huge savings for a while. And don't forget that troops numbers will have to grow in Afghanistan and other places.
That website was a good predictor in the 2004 and 2006 elections. Looks like it's still on target.
Thats one reason why I think Obama will win. These are accurate and credible polls and they were on the mark in 2004 and 2006. Another thing is that people are forgeting the surge of support behind Obama which eclipes the Palin mania. I think what will put Obama over the top are the MILLIONS of new registered voters that will support Obama. Turn out in the primaries already set new records. Just wait til election day. In North Carolina we have early voting so expect the lines on early voting days to look like election day. I know thats the way it looked when I voted early for the primaries. But what I find interesting in some of the republican states thats leaning towards McCain, Obama has really closed the gap in many of these states. In 2004 Bush had 30 point leads in many of them. Now Obama has closed the gap to like 10. I think this is going to be an interesting election and I dont believe its going to be close as people think. Turn out is key and there is such enthusiasm behind Barack Obama. Through this whole election cycle the politital pundits have been wrong. I also think that Palin not only energized republicans but she energized support behind Obama. Also people shouldnt underestimate the black vote.
Sorry, Ian, but read all of Obama's plans for increasing the number of programs and bigger government and then tell me how you can actually lower taxes for "85 percent of the country" and then add all of that extra spending. America is already swimming in debt -- we're owned by the Chinese. We do NOT need to add more.
Indeed, all the more reason to dump the "borrow and spend" Republicans. Need I remind you which party's administrations have been the ones to ring up the vast majority of the national debt? It sure as heck WASN'T the Democratic Presidents. The GOP preaches fiscal responsibility but they FAR outspend the Democrats - it's not even close. EVERY single Republican President since Nixon has left us deeper and deeper in debt - while Carter left us even and Clinton left us FAR ahead.
Just to refresh your memory, here's the raw numbers of how they left the country:
Nixon/Ford: -$49 Billion change
Carter: Negligible change
Reagan: -$81 Billion change
Bush 1: -$135 Billion change
Clinton: +$526 Billion change
Bush 2: Uncertain because of phony bookkeeping by the administration (ie not including the cost of Iraq/Afghanistan in the budget). In other words, it SO BAD they want to hide it from us, but most estimates place it at over -$400 Billion NOT INCLUDING the cost of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Keep in mind too that he started with Clintons's $236 Billion SURPLUS.
The fact of the matter is that despite their propagandistic claims to the contrary (which admittedly still seem to fool the idiot masses of the Republican party) it's the Republicans (not the Democrats) that are the BIG SPENDERS who have put our financial fate in the hands of the Chinese and others - and the facts CLEARLY show that.
ANYONE preaching that the Republicans somehow are fiscally superior to the Democrats is either lying or ignorant. When it comes to Presidents, it's the Republicans who know how to BORROW BORROW BORROW and SPEND SPEND SPEND, and the Democrats who know how to balance the budget.
Despite all their talk, the Republicans have NO credibility on this issue
None
Nada
Zip
Also people shouldnt underestimate the black vote.
The black voters are not enough to put him in the WH. Obama will lose BIG in the south. He's already abandoned Georgia, even though it has a high population of blacks.
The black voters are not enough to put him in the WH. Obama will lose BIG in the south. He's already abandoned Georgia, even though it has a high population of blacks.
70% of the electorate is white.
Black people dont only live in the south you know. In close contest in other regions of the country Black people could put him over in some states. This year will probabally be the biggest African-American turnout since blacks were allowed to vote. Virginia is tied right now and the black vote could be what tips it in Obama's favor, especially in areas near Washington, DC and Maryland which many are saying is the reason Virginia is tied. So dont belittle the black vote.
Interesting article in yesterday's WSJ about college students.
College enrollment is at a record high. Which means a historic number of east coast and California students were not admitted to schools near their homes and instead enrolled in southern and midwestern schools.
Those students may play an important role in turning red states purple.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
