Oh, No, ... O!!!!!!!

These polls are meaningless in predicting the election right now. However, as a comparative view of dynamics within the race, they have merit. In short, the ups and downs do matter. And for now at least, Obama is heading the wrong way. Zogby has it 42 - 41 McCain. Rasmussen has it 47 - 46 McCain. That's a far cry from where Obama was a week ago. And that ain't good ... for him, anyway.

If you look at the longer-term trend via Real Clear Politics, the movement for McCain is easy to see. The lack of separation and now the coming back down to earth must be extremely troubling for Obama's camp, especially when you take the over all anti-Republican sentiment into account. Is it panic time? Not in the sense of, we might lose this thing, perhaps. But Obama has to do something to turn this trend around.

The attacks McCain's people have been launching are as peremptive as they are designed to hurt Obama right now. The celebrity attack could be said to be a sort of immunization against Obama getting too big a jump from an all-star looking convention performance.

While it is far too early to think about what might actually happen come November, what Obama and his people are seeing can't make them feel very good. If the Big O's inexperience kicks in a causes him to panic and start making even bigger blunders than he already has, that's when you'll really start to see the knives come out on the Left. They've lost so consistently for so long at the National level, they already feel snake-bitten. And I doubt they can wait until they might actually lose this thing before they come totally unhinged.

McCain made significant gains at Obama’s expense among some of what had been Obama’s strongest demographic groups. For example:

McCain gained 20% and Obama lost 16% among voters ages 18-29. Obama still leads that group, 49%-38%.
Among women, McCain closed 10 points on Obama, who still leads by a 43%-38% margin.
Obama has lost what was an 11% lead among Independents. He and McCain are now tied.
Obama had some slippage among Democrats, dropping from 83% to 74%.
Obama’s support among single voters dropped by 19%, and he now leads McCain, 51%-37%.
Even with African-Americans and Hispanics, Obama shows smaller margins.

Comments

[WAHOO WILLIE]

Of course these polls are meaningless (they all are really) Now as soon as the numbers flip-flop Moses will come off the mount and present them as gospel. Silly Rabbi, kicks are for trids.

[PA]

People are starting to realize Obama is such a light weight that he'd float away without someone hanging onto those tether lines.

[Fred Beloit]

Heck, and we've been told this Marxist would win in a walk.
"You rat, how dare you call Obama a Marxist."
I call him a Marxist for the same reasons some others do. Just for example, Obama wants to steal profits from the stockholders of oil companies, to whom the profits belong, and give these profits to the Democrats, i.e., the majority in Congress. It looks like the oil companies already pay more taxes than they have in profits, according to the WSJ via the Flopping Aces blog:

"Mr. Obama didn’t bother to define “reasonable,” and neither did Dick Durbin, the second-ranking Senate Democrat, when he recently declared that “The oil companies need to know that there is a limit on how much profit they can take in this economy.” Really? This extraordinary redefinition of free-market success could use some parsing.

Take Exxon Mobil, which on Thursday reported the highest quarterly profit ever and is the main target of any “windfall” tax surcharge. Yet if its profits are at record highs, its tax bills are already at record highs too. Between 2003 and 2007, Exxon paid $64.7 billion in U.S. taxes, exceeding its after-tax U.S. earnings by more than $19 billion. That sounds like a government windfall to us, but perhaps we’re missing some Obama-Durbin business subtlety."

[Fred Beloit]

Now, PA, you'd better stop this racist talk. The libs are onto us and all the code words we use. You have either implied Obama is a blimp or he is skinny. Either way you are using racism against Obie. The lib eggheads are defining any adjective or adverb used by a conservative or Repub in connection with Obama as racist. From Slate:

"The Journal stumbles over racial subtext.
By Timothy Noah
Posted Monday, Aug. 4, 2008, at 6:06 PM ET

In the Aug. 1 Wall Street Journal, Amy Chozick asked, "[C]ould Sen. Obama's skinniness be a liability?" Most Americans, Chozick points out, aren't skinny. Fully 66 percent of all citizens who've reached voting age are overweight, and 32 percent are obese. To be thin is to be different physically. Not that there's anything wrong, mind you, with being a skinny person. But would you want your sister to marry one? Would you want a whole family of skinny people to move in next door? "I won't vote for any beanpole guy," an "unnamed Clinton supporter" wrote on a Yahoo politics message board. My point is that any discussion of Obama's "skinniness" and its impact on the typical American voter can't avoid being interpreted as a coded discussion of race."

This statement bears repeating. Tim Noah wrote:
"My point is that any discussion of Obama's "skinniness" and its impact on the typical American voter can't avoid being interpreted as a coded discussion of race."

There is a possibility this Noah guy is kidding. Honestly, I remain uncertain. If he intended this as a joke, his intentions should have been made a little more visible. Or it may be that I just have no sense of humor.

[seekeronos]

"--- Take Exxon Mobil, which on Thursday reported the highest quarterly profit ever and is the main target of any 'windfall' tax surcharge. Yet if its profits are at record highs, its tax bills are already at record highs too. Between 2003 and 2007, Exxon paid $64.7 billion in U.S. taxes, exceeding its after-tax U.S. earnings by more than $19 billion. That sounds like a government windfall to us, but perhaps we’re missing some Obama-Durbin business subtlety. ---"

That's a double or maybe even a triple tax:

- a tax on dividends and other capital gains from profitable oil companies
- a "windfall profits tax" which will in part or in whole be passed on to the consumers as "the additional cost of doing business".
- a tax ($0.625/gal in NY) at the pump, which will also accrue against any price hikes at the pump to cover "the cost of doing business".

I'd say that the gub'mint has the most likely chance to profit from this, and you can be assured that no small part of it will be used to make sure that our fine, hard working congresscreeps will give themselves multiple bonuses and pay raises for all their wise decision making.

[Jimbo]

McCain=Bush.

Enough said. Are you better off than you were 7+ years ago? Gas prices got you down? Is your house payment current? How about your job opportunities? Are your kids going to be able to go to college? How's that illegal invasion and occupation going in Iraq? How about Afghanistan? Were they good decisions?

McCain=Bush

[Fred Beloit]

Another stark raving regressive, I say another because we've just heard from Jimbo, takes on the McCain ad and interprets it the way an egotistical sex addict would. And a Newsweek nitwit agrees with him, what else?

"Olbermann Sees '3 Phallic Symbols, 2 Blondes & Barack Obama' in Ad
By Brad Wilmouth (Bio | Archive)
August 5, 2008 - 05:38 ET "
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2008/08/05/olbermann-sees-3-phallic-symbols-2-blondes-barack-obama-ad

[Fred Beloit]

Jimbo thinks:
(1)A President can stop you from sending your kids to college
(2)A President can manipulate the price of crude oil and gasoline
(3)A President is responsible for your house payments being what they are
(4)A President is responsible for your job opportunities
(5)A President alone authorized a war in Iraq
(6)Ditto Afghanistan
(7)Obama will immediately withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan when Obama's plan for Iraq is stay the course, for Afghanistan it is a troop surge, and for Pakistan it is an invasion.

I am sorry to say that Jimbo seems to be a dope.

[Fred Beloit]

If you have read the link about the McCain ad a la Olbermann, I'm sure a question has popped into your mind: Why did Obama chose a phallic symbol for the site of his speech in Germany?

[WAHOO WILLIE SEZ]

" Are you better off than you were 7+ years ago?"

Why...Yes I am, even in retirement. Dont drive half as much as I used to, so gas prices are a minor annoyance. Kids have graduated and I'd never, ever be stupid enough to get a variable loan (house is paid for though)So I'm doing just fine...thanks for asking

[seekeronos]

Well, Fred... FWIW, Obie did want to do his spiel in front of the Brandenburg Gate, which is of all things, a giant gate.

A yonic symbol, as it were. However, The Chosen One, Obama the Great, was denied his original request.

Given the analogue of a tower to a phallus, and a giant gate to a yoni (something through which a phallus might be received >>>> http://www.rox.com/vocab/yonic/ ) ... does that mean the Obama is not properly in touch with his masculine animus?

[Fred Beloit]

Good question, seek. However I must refer all questions of this nature to Herr Doktor Olbermann who seems to be some sort of expert in phalli.

[templar knight]

Are you better off than you were 7 years ago? Yes.
Gas prices got you down? Nope.
Are your kids going to be able to go to college? Sure, if they want to.
How's that illegal invasion...going in Iraq? Looking pretty good right now.
Afghanistan? Jury is still out, but it is the war the liberals wanted.
Were they good decisions? Hard to say right now, time will tell.

Any more questions, jimbo?

[SacTownMan]

Wow, our new troll friend Bimbo used Moonbat Talking Point # 1 (McCain = Bush 3) not just once but twice in the same post.

As is often the case with some of our left leaning visitors here troll central's marching orders came through loud and clear.

Let's see what else did he have to offer:

Are you better off than you were 7 years ago?

Doing great thanks for asking: 7 years ago my wife and I had an annual income just over $100,000/yr, now it's over $200,000/yr so give me a check mark on the "better off".

Gas prices got you down? Not a problem bro!

When I purchased my house 20 years ago I picked a prime area that was less than a mile from where I worked. My work did move to new location that caused me to now be 1.1 miles from home. It's a stressful commute, but hey I live with it. I even have to stop for a traffic light sometimes!
My 2002 Ford F-150 4X4 pickup has less than 38,000 miles on it, is paid off and looks brand new. Fine American engineering at work.

Are your kids going to be able to go to college? With their college savings funds and my yearly income it's not if but where that is the biggest decision! Thanks for asking!

How's that illegal invasion...going in Iraq?

Kicking butts and taking names!

Afghanistan?

Next up on the Kicking butts and taking names list!

Were they good decisions?

I don't know hindsight is always 20/20 but I would just look in the mirror and thank god your parents weren't abortion lovers like you.

Fred asks,
"Why did Obama chose a phallic symbol for the site of his speech in Germany?"

My guess is he was a big Monty Python fan as a kid.

As far as the Olberfuhrer goes maybe that phallic fetish he has explains the tingly feeling crawling up his favorite sex partner, Chris Matthews leg.

Speaking of the Olberfuhrer,I haven't seen a good old fashioned spittle flecked diatribe in long time!

[Worst President Ever]

Eight years ago we had a budget surplus. Now, we've got the biggest deficit in our history. Courtesy another Fiscal Conservative. Eight years ago, the economy was pumping out new jobs. Now, not so much. GM and Ford were making money. There was no mortgage crisis, gas was $1.50 a gallon and we weren't fighting Wars for Oil.

As for the Iraq War, it's a $3 trillion mistake we'll be paying off for decades to come.

And college expenses continue to soar. News for you guys - the more people that go to college and graduate, the better off the country is. Science is the driving engine for the success of our economy, and we're falling behind way behind China in graduating engineers and scientists.

[Wahoo Willie]

"Eight years ago."

C'est la vie

[seekeronos]

"--- we're falling behind way behind China in graduating engineers and scientists. ---"

Not very surprising, considering that China has over 5x our population, and it is a rapidly developing nation with considerably less regard for individual freedoms as us.

In fact, if Red China doesn't destroy itself environmentally and internally through ruthlessly stepping on its own minorities - it will eventually have a middle class that easily would be double the entire population of the US, effectively controlling the world once more as the single largest economic engine dwarfing all others put together.

That's if they don't foul their own nest to the point of being unliveable, in which case they might just adopt a "lebensraum" policy to their own downfall.

That's not to say that we (and our British cousins) haven't had a nice run of things for nearly 200 years - but the sun is setting on us finally, and is rising once more for the dragon of the east, upon whose Middle Kingdom 中国 it shone for the better part of civilisation.

[Fred Beloit]

"Jimbo[and Worst] thinks:
(1)A President can stop you from sending your kids to college
(2)A President can manipulate the price of crude oil and gasoline
(3)A President is responsible for your house payments being what they are
(4)A President is responsible for your job opportunities
(5)A President alone authorized a war in Iraq
(6)Ditto Afghanistan
(7)Obama will immediately withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan when Obama's plan for Iraq is stay the course, for Afghanistan it is a troop surge, and for Pakistan it is an invasion.

I am sorry to say that Jimbo[and Worst] seems to be a dope.

[Worst President Ever]

More moronic posts from Fred. Yes Fred, who is president really can affect things.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, no WMDs, no Al Qaeda, etc. It's a three trillion $$$ hole in the ground. Al Qaeda and Bin Laden - remember, those were the guys that attacked us - were using Afghanistan as their training center and base - not Iraq.

[Fred Beloit]

"Al Qaeda and Bin Laden - remember, those were the guys that attacked us - were using Afghanistan as their training center and base - not Iraq."
This is untrue in a way. The attackers were Saudis, were they not, Worst, you sly dog. Should we have attacked Saudi Arabia in your view? Besides we were already shooting back and forth with Iraqis during the pre-war no-fly zone era. The Congress, in its proper role, approved the war and continues continues continues continues continues continues continues continues to support it vote after vote.

550 metric tons of yellow cake, anyone? http://www.nysun.com/editorials/iraqs-yellowcake/81328/

[Fred Beloit]

By the way, Worst, how can the President prevent me from sending my kids to Jimbo University?

[Fred Beloit]

It is good to know though, Worst, that you support the surge in Afghanistan and a lot of little incursions into Pakistan.
"in·cur·sion (n-kûrzhn, -shn)
n.
1. An aggressive entrance into foreign territory; a raid or invasion.
2. The act of entering another's territory or domain.
3. The act of entering or running into: homes damaged by the incursion of floodwater."

[Worst President Ever]

I'm all for killing Bin Laden and wiping out Al Qaeda. I guess you're not. Some tough guy patriot you are.

I have nothing against going to war when there's no other option - it's unneeded wars I'm against - think Iraq. Which really is a stupid, waste of a war. Everyone involved that backed and voted for it - Republican or Democrat - deserves to be ridiculed for their lousy judgment, the lives destroyed, and the $3 trillion wasted.

Bush cut a number of loan and grant programs for low-income college students. So yeah, he did stop some kids from going to college. And the stupid war has affected the price of oil. As has the fall in the dollar brought about by unending Republican deficits.

[Fred Beloit]

A little evidence for this please: "Bush cut a number of loan and grant programs for low-income college students."

Worst say: "I have nothing against going to war when there's no other option."

I suppose you will be volunteering for service in Afghanistan then. God speed and be careful. Thanks for your future service.

[Worst President Ever]

In 2005/6, President Bush pushed for and signed legislation that cut $12.7 billion from student loan programs - the largest single cut in history. The legislation imposed higher fees on students and increased the interest rate on parent loans. The bill also put billions of dollars in student aid at risk by cutting all of the critical funds ($2.2 billion) used to carry out and administer the student aid programs.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/12/22/pf/college/congress_loans/index.htm

[Fred Beloit]

See there, Worst, you sly fox:
"Bush cut a number of loan and grant programs for low-income college students. So yeah, he did stop some kids from going to college."

Your statement implies the President acted alone, just the kind of crazy Jimbo tried to sell here. Congress reduced future increases and Bush did not oppose them and rightly so. Yes, I said reduced future increases. It cut nothing. A "cut" to the MSM is double-talk for holding steady or reducing budget increases. It seems you haven't noticed this MSM trickery. You should pay more attention. I hope you will listen with more attention when your DI orders "Tench HUT". Stay safe over there in the Afghan, Worst. Do your best.

[Worst President Ever]

Gee Fred, you must have a little Clinton blood in you. Next you'll be arguing about what the meaning of 'is' is.

"It cut nothing". Would you care to prove that with numbers? Or are you just being willfully ignorant?

[Fred Beloit]

Like John Simon, I've been out of my depth before, Worst, but this is the first time I have been out of my shallowness. Our Government doesn't cut costs. It may on rare occasions cut projected costs.

[Fred Beloit]

From your own link, Worst, note use of "current rate" and "new rate".

"If a student consolidated a typical Stafford loan balance of $20,000 at the new rate compared with the current low rate, he would be paying over $2,000 more in interest over a standard 10-year life of the loan. With PLUS, parents would be paying nearly $3,000 more, the Journal said."

[Worst President Ever]

Shallow is right Fred. You also have a problem with reading comprehension.

The government is RAISING loan rates so payments for students will be HIGHER. Since students will pay MORE for their loads, that is a CUT in support for education by the government. The government pays LESS, students pay MOLRE.

As the article clearly states:

"The move to fixed rates will cost students and their families thousands of dollars over the life of the loan, the report said, citing estimates from Mark Kantrowitz, a financial aid expert."

[Fred Beloit]

God you're slow, Worst. Trying to make you understand anything is Sisyphian. If you show me after 2009 that the government spent more dollars this year (2008) on the same program than it did in 2009, that would be a cut. If they spend more on the program in 2009 than in 2008, that is an increase. The rest is plain BS. See you in 2010 for a wrap-up.