The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Archives => Politics => Election 2008 => Topic started by: Wretched Excess on June 18, 2008, 07:39:52 AM
-
and we were just saying yesterday that his poll numbers haven't moved since he clinched the
nomination. :whatever: I tend to suspect this entire poll because I just don't believe the numbers
for florida.
but this could represent hillary supporters and independents shifting to Obama.
52-40 in PA
48-42 on OH
47-43 in FL
It looks like Sen. Barack Obama got the expected "bounce" out of wrapping up the Democratic nomination for president.
Advertisement
A Quinnipiac University poll released today shows Obama leading Sen. John McCain in three important swing states, but his lead is relatively small in Florida. The Quinnipiac pollsters said women and young people are the mainstays of Obama's support in all three states.
"Finally getting Sen. Hillary Clinton out of the race has been a big boost for Sen. Barack Obama," said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. "Sen. Obama is certainly not out of the woods, but these results are a good indication that he enters the summer slightly ahead in the race to be the next president."
Most political experts agree that Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania are the key states next November, and that whoever wins two out of three of them will be president. Today's poll showed Obama leading McCain by 52-40 percent in Pennsylvania, 48-42 percent in Ohio and by 47-43 percent in Florida.
That's well beyond the poll's margin of error in all three states.
Quinnipiac said McCain is trailing by 10 to 23 points in those states among women voters, while the vote among men was too close to call. Obama also has double-digit leads among young voters in all three states.
The polls were conducted over the past week in all three states, with a margin of error of 2.6 percent in Florida and Ohio, and 2.5 percent in Pennsylvania.
The poll also indicated that putting Clinton on the ticket for vice president wouldn't help Obama in the three states, which she carried in the primaries. Brown also said that "picking a Floridian for vice president apparently won't help either nominee carry the state's 27 electoral votes."
Gov. Charlie Crist has been prominently touted by Florida party officials as a running mate for McCain. There has also been speculation about Sen. Bill Nelson teaming up with Obama.
Link (http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080618/NEWS01/80618010/1075)
-
RCP says the poll was taken 6/9 through 6/16. there's a weekend in there, which, historically, tends to
depress republican numbers . . . .
-
I read this story/poll earlier this morning. I went to the website. I could not find any internal information about how when or where the poll was conducted. I could not find out how many of these likely voters polled were democrats and their independent cousins and how many were republicans.
These polls are getting to the saturation point. Everyday another ten unsubstantiated polls hit the public square. They are all free commercials for Obama. They remind me of the widely broadcast polls in 2004 which showed John Kerry with a national advantage of 9-12% over President Bush. It took some digging to find out that those polls were based on the answers from (at least) one and one quarter democrats for every republican.
"Likely voters" doesn't mean a thing. It doesn't tell us a thing. A real poll, if one exists, would tell us that McCain has a pretty easy ride into the White House. Of course, no one wants to admit it. The over all picture is so bleak for Obama, I am still not convinced he will be the democrat candidate. Obama is a liability and cannot pull off an electoral election.
-
Even if it's true, it's early.
-
Even if it's true, it's early.
and realistically, McC has hardly begun to campaign. no value in it really. only political junkies care before fall.
-
Sorry to object, and to strenuously object, but it's w-a-a-a-a-a-a-y too early to be bothered by polls.
I've seen this all my life; the only polls that illuminate are those taken just before an election, like a week or a few days before. Polls taken months and months before elections don't mean squat.
The only usefulness one can get out of early polls is an early indication which way people are trending, and candidates usually have a campaign staff to devise strategies to influence people to gradually swing in their favor.
I've lived my whole life through this; I'm not seeing anything I haven't seen before.
Barry "Goldwater" Obama is bound to make some major gaffe somewhere along the line, and by late October, we're going to see the same thing we saw in 1972 and 1984, the big-city machine bosses abandoning the top of the ticket and working desperately creating votes to save those Democrats further down the ballot.
Wait and see if I'm not right.
I wish I could articulate why I feel this way--muddyemms asked me to, but I couldn't--but there you have it, my gut instinct. Wait and see if I'm not right.
-
and we were just saying yesterday that his poll numbers haven't moved since he clinched the
nomination. :whatever: I tend to suspect this entire poll because I just don't believe the numbers
for florida.
but this could represent hillary supporters and independents shifting to Obama.
52-40 in PA
48-42 on OH
47-43 in FL
It looks like Sen. Barack Obama got the expected "bounce" out of wrapping up the Democratic nomination for president.
Advertisement
A Quinnipiac University poll released today shows Obama leading Sen. John McCain in three important swing states, but his lead is relatively small in Florida. The Quinnipiac pollsters said women and young people are the mainstays of Obama's support in all three states.
"Finally getting Sen. Hillary Clinton out of the race has been a big boost for Sen. Barack Obama," said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. "Sen. Obama is certainly not out of the woods, but these results are a good indication that he enters the summer slightly ahead in the race to be the next president."
Most political experts agree that Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania are the key states next November, and that whoever wins two out of three of them will be president. Today's poll showed Obama leading McCain by 52-40 percent in Pennsylvania, 48-42 percent in Ohio and by 47-43 percent in Florida.
That's well beyond the poll's margin of error in all three states.
Quinnipiac said McCain is trailing by 10 to 23 points in those states among women voters, while the vote among men was too close to call. Obama also has double-digit leads among young voters in all three states.
The polls were conducted over the past week in all three states, with a margin of error of 2.6 percent in Florida and Ohio, and 2.5 percent in Pennsylvania.
The poll also indicated that putting Clinton on the ticket for vice president wouldn't help Obama in the three states, which she carried in the primaries. Brown also said that "picking a Floridian for vice president apparently won't help either nominee carry the state's 27 electoral votes."
Gov. Charlie Crist has been prominently touted by Florida party officials as a running mate for McCain. There has also been speculation about Sen. Bill Nelson teaming up with Obama.
Link (http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080618/NEWS01/80618010/1075)
I tend to agree with you WE. I think political strategists publish "poll" number to infulence votes. Theory is everybody wants to vote for the winner. I don't believe the Florida votes either. McCain had better use good sense and put Mitt Romney on his ticket. He will carry Michigan and Ohio.
-
RCP says the poll was taken 6/9 through 6/16. there's a weekend in there, which, historically, tends to
depress republican numbers . . . .
That's a little too long to do a poll, ther best ones over two or three days, not seven.
Still, Barack Hussein Obama should be 10-20 points ahead at this point, and I don't see any "bounce" - those numbers haven't changed much at all.
-
I don't trust polls.
-
I read this story/poll earlier this morning. I went to the website. I could not find any internal information about how when or where the poll was conducted. I could not find out how many of these likely voters polled were democrats and their independent cousins and how many were republicans.
These polls are getting to the saturation point. Everyday another ten unsubstantiated polls hit the public square. They are all free commercials for Obama. They remind me of the widely broadcast polls in 2004 which showed John Kerry with a national advantage of 9-12% over President Bush. It took some digging to find out that those polls were based on the answers from (at least) one and one quarter democrats for every republican.
"Likely voters" doesn't mean a thing. It doesn't tell us a thing. A real poll, if one exists, would tell us that McCain has a pretty easy ride into the White House. Of course, no one wants to admit it. The over all picture is so bleak for Obama, I am still not convinced he will be the democrat candidate. Obama is a liability and cannot pull off an electoral election.
how is he not going to be the democrat candidate? :???:
-
It's June. Polls mean little to nothing now outside of campaign fundraising.
Lots of mud to be thrown, VPs to be picked, conventions to be had..... and of course the October surprise.
McCain has been up, down, and around the block many times. His closet has been completely emptied. The lock just got popped off of Obama's closet......
-
I read this story/poll earlier this morning. I went to the website. I could not find any internal information about how when or where the poll was conducted. I could not find out how many of these likely voters polled were democrats and their independent cousins and how many were republicans.
These polls are getting to the saturation point. Everyday another ten unsubstantiated polls hit the public square. They are all free commercials for Obama. They remind me of the widely broadcast polls in 2004 which showed John Kerry with a national advantage of 9-12% over President Bush. It took some digging to find out that those polls were based on the answers from (at least) one and one quarter democrats for every republican.
"Likely voters" doesn't mean a thing. It doesn't tell us a thing. A real poll, if one exists, would tell us that McCain has a pretty easy ride into the White House. Of course, no one wants to admit it. The over all picture is so bleak for Obama, I am still not convinced he will be the democrat candidate. Obama is a liability and cannot pull off an electoral election.
how is he not going to be the democrat candidate? :???:
Presumed candidates can find all sorts of forks in the road to the White House. You being a political junkie makes me surprised you asked.
-
how is he not going to be the democrat candidate? :???:
if the supers decide to change their minds, he's out.
that presumes something very significant coming to light.
likely ? maybe not. impossible ? hock up that Michelle whitey tape and lets see !
-
this poll smells. the florida numbers are suspect, and I'm not buying the PA numbers, either. in 2004, kerry
carried PA 51-49 (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/PA/P/00/). I just don't see how 12 points can be accurate.
same with OH; kerry only won by 2 points in 2004.
-
this poll smells. the florida numbers are suspect, and I'm not buying the PA numbers, either. in 2004, kerry
carried PA 51-49 (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/PA/P/00/). I just don't see how 12 points can be accurate.
same with OH; kerry only won by 2 points in 2004.
When did Kerry win Ohio by 2 points?
-
I read this story/poll earlier this morning. I went to the website. I could not find any internal information about how when or where the poll was conducted. I could not find out how many of these likely voters polled were democrats and their independent cousins and how many were republicans.
These polls are getting to the saturation point. Everyday another ten unsubstantiated polls hit the public square. They are all free commercials for Obama. They remind me of the widely broadcast polls in 2004 which showed John Kerry with a national advantage of 9-12% over President Bush. It took some digging to find out that those polls were based on the answers from (at least) one and one quarter democrats for every republican.
"Likely voters" doesn't mean a thing. It doesn't tell us a thing. A real poll, if one exists, would tell us that McCain has a pretty easy ride into the White House. Of course, no one wants to admit it. The over all picture is so bleak for Obama, I am still not convinced he will be the democrat candidate. Obama is a liability and cannot pull off an electoral election.
how is he not going to be the democrat candidate? :???:
Presumed candidates can find all sorts of forks in the road to the White House. You being a political junkie makes me surprised you asked.
barring some hopelessly unlikely and earth shattering revelation, I don't see any way that he won't be the democrat nominee. that was what I questioned.
-
this poll smells. the florida numbers are suspect, and I'm not buying the PA numbers, either. in 2004, kerry
carried PA 51-49 (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/PA/P/00/). I just don't see how 12 points can be accurate.
same with OH; kerry only won by 2 points in 2004.
When did Kerry win Ohio by 2 points?
Well, a prominent vote-fraud activist was ten bucks away from proving the Bostonian Billionaire won Ohio over George Bush, but then the malicious cartoon character primitive tripped her up, and she never got that last ten bucks.
-
this poll smells. the florida numbers are suspect, and I'm not buying the PA numbers, either. in 2004, kerry
carried PA 51-49 (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/PA/P/00/). I just don't see how 12 points can be accurate.
same with OH; kerry only won by 2 points in 2004.
When did Kerry win Ohio by 2 points?
brain damaged typo. :thatsright: bush won by two points, of course. :-) but the point remains; these numbers just seem totally out of kilter with past polls and past electoral history.
-
this poll smells. the florida numbers are suspect, and I'm not buying the PA numbers, either. in 2004, kerry
carried PA 51-49 (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/PA/P/00/). I just don't see how 12 points can be accurate.
same with OH; kerry only won by 2 points in 2004.
of course its suspect.
if you suspected that polling in the past might have been slanted, it goes double this cycle.
but they also had polls showing JFK winning easily, didn't work out that way in real life.
-
this poll smells. the florida numbers are suspect, and I'm not buying the PA numbers, either. in 2004, kerry
carried PA 51-49 (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/PA/P/00/). I just don't see how 12 points can be accurate.
same with OH; kerry only won by 2 points in 2004.
of course its suspect.
if you suspected that polling in the past might have been slanted, it goes double this cycle.
but they also had polls showing JFK winning easily, didn't work out that way in real life.
I am well versed in how polls work, their past history of success, and what their overall value is at this point in a presidential election. nonetheless, I find them interesting, and so I post them. others like to discuss them, too.
but none of us here are so deluded as to think that the world has ended because of the results of a single polling firm that has nothing but a history of inaccuracy.
-
this poll smells. the florida numbers are suspect, and I'm not buying the PA numbers, either. in 2004, kerry
carried PA 51-49 (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/PA/P/00/). I just don't see how 12 points can be accurate.
same with OH; kerry only won by 2 points in 2004.
When did Kerry win Ohio by 2 points?
brain damaged typo. :thatsright: bush won by two points, of course. :-) but the point remains; these numbers just seem totally out of kilter with past polls and past electoral history.
I though the State of Oh may have been one of those states #51 - #57 that only you and Obama know about. :)
-
this poll smells. the florida numbers are suspect, and I'm not buying the PA numbers, either. in 2004, kerry
carried PA 51-49 (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/PA/P/00/). I just don't see how 12 points can be accurate.
same with OH; kerry only won by 2 points in 2004.
of course its suspect.
if you suspected that polling in the past might have been slanted, it goes double this cycle.
but they also had polls showing JFK winning easily, didn't work out that way in real life.
I am well versed in how polls work, their past history of success, and what their overall value is at this point in a presidential election. nonetheless, I find them interesting, and so I post them. others like to discuss them, too.
but none of us here are so deluded as to think that the world has ended because of the results of a single polling firm that has nothing but a history of inaccuracy.
OK, you obviously still have a problem with me. Its your bat and ball, I get that.
-
this poll smells. the florida numbers are suspect, and I'm not buying the PA numbers, either. in 2004, kerry
carried PA 51-49 (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/PA/P/00/). I just don't see how 12 points can be accurate.
same with OH; kerry only won by 2 points in 2004.
When did Kerry win Ohio by 2 points?
brain damaged typo. :thatsright: bush won by two points, of course. :-) but the point remains; these numbers just seem totally out of kilter with past polls and past electoral history.
I though the State of Oh may have been one of those states #51 - #57 that only you and Obama know about. :)
I just think the poll is all f*cked up. that is a highly technical term from the world of statistics. :-)
-
this poll smells. the florida numbers are suspect, and I'm not buying the PA numbers, either. in 2004, kerry
carried PA 51-49 (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/PA/P/00/). I just don't see how 12 points can be accurate.
same with OH; kerry only won by 2 points in 2004.
of course its suspect.
if you suspected that polling in the past might have been slanted, it goes double this cycle.
but they also had polls showing JFK winning easily, didn't work out that way in real life.
I am well versed in how polls work, their past history of success, and what their overall value is at this point in a presidential election. nonetheless, I find them interesting, and so I post them. others like to discuss them, too.
but none of us here are so deluded as to think that the world has ended because of the results of a single polling firm that has nothing but a history of inaccuracy.
OK, you obviously still have a problem with me. Its your bat and ball, I get that.
now I am confused. :???:
-
New ARG Poll (http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/):
Florida:
June 18, 2008 - Florida General Election Preference
Florida
Likely voters June 13-17
McCain 44%
Obama 49%
Undecided 7%
Sample size: 600 likely voters
Sample dates: June 13-17, 2008
Question wording: If the general election were being held today between John McCain, the Republican, and Barack Obama, the Democrat, for whom would you vote - McCain or Obama? (names rotated)
Barack Obama leads John McCain 77% to 16% among Democrats (43% of likely voters). McCain leads Obama 75% to 18% among Republicans (38% of likely voters). And Obama leads McCain 47% to 43% among independent voters (19% of likely voters).
Obama leads McCain 48% to 46% among men (47% of likely voters). Among women, Obama leads 49% to 43%.
McCain leads Obama 48% to 45% among white voters (73% of likely voters). Obama leads McCain 88% to 8% among African American voters (11% of likely voters). And McCain leads Obama 50% to 41% among Hispanic voters (16% of likely voters).
Obama leads McCain 52% to 42% among voters age 18 to 49 (45% of likely voters). Among voters age 50 and older (55% of likely voters), Obama and McCain are tied at 46% each.
35% of likely voters say they would never vote for John McCain in the general election and 46% of likely voters say they would never vote for Barack Obama in the general election.
When Bill Nelson and Charlie Crist are placed on the same ballot as possible vice presidential running mates, McCain leads Obama 43% to 42%, with 15% undecided.
June 18, 2008 - New Hampshire General Election Preference
New Hampshire
Likely voters June 13-17
McCain 39%
Obama 51%
Undecided 10%
Sample size: 600 likely voters
Sample dates: June 13-17, 2008
Question wording: If the general election were being held today between John McCain, the Republican, and Barack Obama, the Democrat, for whom would you vote - McCain or Obama? (names rotated)
Barack Obama leads John McCain 89% to 5% among Democrats (31% of likely voters). McCain leads Obama 74% to 10% among Republicans (31% of likely voters). And Obama leads McCain 53% to 38% among independent voters (38% of likely voters).
Obama leads McCain 48% to 47% among men (48% of likely voters). Among women, Obama leads 54% to 32%.
Obama leads McCain 48% to 41% among voters age 18 to 49 (47% of likely voters). Among voters age 50 and older (55% of likely voters),Obama leads McCain 53% to 37%.
43% of likely voters say they would never vote for John McCain in the general election and 25% of likely voters say they would never vote for Barack Obama in the general election.
In the race for US Senate in New Hampshire, Jeanne Shaheen leads John Sununu 54% to 40%, with 6% undecided. Shaheen leads Sununu 53% to 38% among independent (undeclared) voters.
In the race for Governor of New Hampshire, John Lynch leads Joseph Kenney 65% to 21%, with 14% undecided. Kenney leads Lynch 46% to 38% among registered Republicans. Lynch leads Kenney 62% to 16% among independent (undeclared) voters.
-
Polls are Bullshit. Here is a recent one from Ohio.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_Ohio_617081.pdf
(http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f85/Servonaut/poll.jpg)
Do a little digging and you get this nugget.
(http://i45.photobucket.com/albums/f85/Servonaut/poll2.jpg)
:whatever:
-
I'd be willing to bet my paycheck that Obama loses Florida. :-)
-
I have beaten the internet bloody looking for the internals on this poll. I can't find them. they are
conspicuously absent.
a potential flaw in this type of poll is that they attempt to project turnout on election day, and
intentionally skew their sample size to properly reflect what they think turnout will look like in
november.
given the dem turnout in the primaries (and that's all they have to go on at this point), it would be easy to
create a turnout model that produces flatly insane and hysterical results. it's my completely uneducated
guess that this is what has happened here.
just for the sake of reference, a rassmussen poll (http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/ohio/election_2008_ohio_presidential_election) taken on yesterday shows mccain up 1 in ohio, 44-43. that
is the same margin as the same poll in may, which was 45-44.
and rasmussen has a much better track record.
-
not to belabor the point, but . . . .
The latest Rasmussen poll (http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/florida/election_2008_florida_presidential_election) , taken yesterday, has mccain up 8 points in florida, 47-39. that is down two points from last month's poll, but it's a far cry from the crap quinnipiac was peddling yesterday.
disclaimer: Sorry, I just like playing with poll numbers, guys. I don't necessarily believe any of them, and I certainly didn't buy the quinnipiac poll when it came out yesterday. I posted it because I knew it was going to be controversial, and it seemed a worthy topic of discussion. ultimately, I don't think polls can really be used to identify anything but very general trends. but then, they can perhaps indicate what sort of events are moving the numbers, changing people's minds, & etc. I just find all of that very interesting.
-
My daughter (30), who is THE definition of a political independent, came in my house loaded for bear this morning. She said that yesterday opened her eyes to the democrats. She said regardless of what I have told her her whole life, she had to find out for herself, and she did find out yesterday.
My daughter was speaking of the President's oil speech yesterday and the democrat reactions and statement afterwards. She is livid.
I don't think my daughter is unique in her newfound vision of the democrats.
-
Rebel said it best. Polls aren't to be trusted. Undies also nailed it. They are nothing more than crack for the Oooobama zombies and an attempt to change public perception. Mind games. That is all.
Last July, the media was saying this about McCain:
July 15: Republican strategist Mike Murphy and Chicago Sun-Times reporter Robert Novak weigh in with NBC's Tim Russert of "Meet the Press" on whether Sen. John McCain's, R-Ariz., campaign hit this week cost him a chance at the election.
http://video.msn.com/dw.aspx?mkt=en-us&from=truveo&vid=291dd401-34f1-4eed-8de8-0a1d90c59754
You can't trust the media or polls. But they are doing the heavy lifting for Ooooobama.
-
My daughter (30), who is THE definition of a political independent, came in my house loaded for bear this morning. She said that yesterday opened her eyes to the democrats. She said regardless of what I have told her her whole life, she had to find out for herself, and she did find out yesterday.
My daughter was speaking of the President's oil speech yesterday and the democrat reactions and statement afterwards. She is livid.
I don't think my daughter is unique in her newfound vision of the democrats.
the dems are caught between a rock and a hard place on this one. energy costs, drilling, & etc., are going to be huge wedge issues this year. and the dems can't back away from this absolutist position that they have staked out for themselves, or they will infuriate half their base. and rahm emmanuel's "use it or lose it" comment yesterday went over like "let them eat cake".
mccain should come out in favor of drilling off every cost that has oil, drilling in ANWR, drilling in areas that snail darters may live, drilling in TR's forehead on freaking mt. rushmore if they find oil there.
-
Hopefully, in the age of instant news and the internet, people won't fall far the Carter-esque style of leadership. The Dems are going to have to play dirty (okay, hold the jokes :-) ) if they want to pull the wool over everyone's eyes this time around.
-
Rebel said it best. Polls aren't to be trusted. Undies also nailed it. They are nothing more than crack for the Oooobama zombies and an attempt to change public perception. Mind games. That is all.
Last July, the media was saying this about McCain:
July 15: Republican strategist Mike Murphy and Chicago Sun-Times reporter Robert Novak weigh in with NBC's Tim Russert of "Meet the Press" on whether Sen. John McCain's, R-Ariz., campaign hit this week cost him a chance at the election.
http://video.msn.com/dw.aspx?mkt=en-us&from=truveo&vid=291dd401-34f1-4eed-8de8-0a1d90c59754
You can't trust the media or polls. But they are doing the heavy lifting for Ooooobama.
I fling myself on the ground at the alter of common sense and beg forgiveness for my apostasy. :tongue:
I like polls. I like knockin' 'em around. I like identifying trends. I think you get a unique insight into the mind of the electorate that you simply cannot acquire any other way than playing with polls. I don't have to "trust" them. they are what they are, tools to be used. :-)
-
Nah, we like it when you play with political crack :-) Somebody needs to parse this stuff.
-
Sorry to object, and to strenuously object, but it's w-a-a-a-a-a-a-y too early to be bothered by polls.
I've seen this all my life; the only polls that illuminate are those taken just before an election, like a week or a few days before. Polls taken months and months before elections don't mean squat.
The only usefulness one can get out of early polls is an early indication which way people are trending, and candidates usually have a campaign staff to devise strategies to influence people to gradually swing in their favor.
I've lived my whole life through this; I'm not seeing anything I haven't seen before.
Barry "Goldwater" Obama is bound to make some major gaffe somewhere along the line, and by late October, we're going to see the same thing we saw in 1972 and 1984, the big-city machine bosses abandoning the top of the ticket and working desperately creating votes to save those Democrats further down the ballot.
Wait and see if I'm not right.
I wish I could articulate why I feel this way--muddyemms asked me to, but I couldn't--but there you have it, my gut instinct. Wait and see if I'm not right.
'Tis true, Coach. I've got a feeling, though, that you may be right--better than 50%.
Thing is, he's already made the gaffe. What is the gaffe?
His declaration that he will do nothing to increase the domestic supply of oil. Gas will go to close to $7 a gallon if he's elected, probably right on January 21, 2009.
While there is a time lag between when oil is discovered and when it gets to the refineries, in North Dakota, now, there is a huge oil discovery that is just now being tapped. Some of that oil is getting to refineries now. Not much, but it can only get bigger.
His declaration that "ANWR oil won't get to market for 10 years" is exactly the type of mentality that got us in this position in the first place. It's gonna take a long time, so why bother to try to get it now?
If ANWR was opened, the psychological shock of that would cause speculators to drive the price down. The mere threat that they could lose millions on oil contracts that they bought at elevated prices, when the supply of oil is suddenly increased (even at a later date), would drive the price lower. How low? It's been said that speculators add $60 to $70 to a barrel of oil. So, for argument's sake, let's say that the price of oil drops half that--to close to $95 to $100 a barrel. Speculators lose a mint--maybe billions. And, our enemies in the world--Iran and Venezuela among them--see their take of the oil pie drop.
But, the Dems don't want to do this. Makes one wonder just whose side they're on--the side of the American driver and consumer, or the side of America's enemies. If they choose the latter, isn't that treason? (BTW--this needs to be stressed every chance one gets.)
So, the gaffe's been made. Will Team McCain exploit it?
-
^let's hope.
Maybe you could start a thread that explains the speculation process. I admit to not fully understanding it but every American needs to bone up. FAST.