Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin

[PujolJunkie]

SurveyUSA

Indiana: Obama 47 McCain 47 (Obama up by 20 points among early voters)

New Hampshire: Obama 53 McCain 42

New Jersey: Obama 52 McCain 42

On the Indiana poll, Indy will have 105,000 early and absentee voters in 2008. The highest early turnout in a Presidential year was 27,400 before this.

The Lake County early turnout is at an even more impressive 450% pace over 2004.

Every city/county in Indiana with more than 75,000 voters is running at no less than 250% of 2004 levels for early voters.

This may provide the margin for Obama in Indiana.

[Leroy]

Why or who is releasing early voting numbers? That seems wrong.

[PujolJunkie]

Why or who is releasing early voting numbers? That seems wrong.

Pollsters, when they ask "Do you support Obama/McCain?" are first asking "Have you voted yet?"

If the answer is Yes, they ask for who. That's how you get the Obama +20 among early voters.

The only real statistics being released are the actual demographic breakdowns and percentages of Dem/GOP voters. Nothing else.

[wart57]

But every one of the Dems increase revenues....how much of that was from increased taxes?

Some, but there are only three things you can do to reduce the debt and the deficit. Grow revenue through taxes, grow it through increased GDP which also helps tax revenue, and reduce spending. Clinton got lucky in some ways because the economy mushroomed under him. That's the biggest factor in his increased revenue. But it's notable if in fact he only increased spending that much, given all that revenue. Supposedly Democrats are the big spenders.

When it comes to the deficit, I don't care that much if taxes are raised a little. Republicans seem to think all you have to do is give tax cuts, but that doesn't work by itself. They like that because it's popular and they don't have to touch the spending they like. You can argue tax cuts help the economy but that's cyclical. Clinton did raise taxes and the economy grew anyway. Bush cut them and it shrank. I'm not arguing those are related, but it's not cut and dry. The bottom line is that you can't expect to make sustained inroads on debt if you're not willing to raise taxes and/or cut spending.

I've never voted for a Democratic president before yesterday, but I've changed on that because Republicans don't deliver on these fiscal issues.

But I thought Obama was going to cut my taxes....

He's stated up front that he's raising it on higher incomes, so the overall revenue would be greater. The levels will be what they were under Clinton, which is lower than what they were under Reagan.

If it is the right thiong for the country and it will help those less fortunate than I, I have no problem paying a little more in taxes, just don't tell me you are going to give ma a tax cut just to get elected, and then turn around and raise my taxes. I guess we will soon see, because it sure looks like Obama will be the next POTUS.

[jim]

But every one of the Dems increase revenues....how much of that was from increased taxes?

Some, but there are only three things you can do to reduce the debt and the deficit. Grow revenue through taxes, grow it through increased GDP which also helps tax revenue, and reduce spending. Clinton got lucky in some ways because the economy mushroomed under him. That's the biggest factor in his increased revenue. But it's notable if in fact he only increased spending that much, given all that revenue. Supposedly Democrats are the big spenders.

When it comes to the deficit, I don't care that much if taxes are raised a little. Republicans seem to think all you have to do is give tax cuts, but that doesn't work by itself. They like that because it's popular and they don't have to touch the spending they like. You can argue tax cuts help the economy but that's cyclical. Clinton did raise taxes and the economy grew anyway. Bush cut them and it shrank. I'm not arguing those are related, but it's not cut and dry. The bottom line is that you can't expect to make sustained inroads on debt if you're not willing to raise taxes and/or cut spending.

I've never voted for a Democratic president before yesterday, but I've changed on that because Republicans don't deliver on these fiscal issues.

But I thought Obama was going to cut my taxes....

He's stated up front that he's raising it on higher incomes, so the overall revenue would be greater. The levels will be what they were under Clinton, which is lower than what they were under Reagan.

If it is the right thiong for the country and it will help those less fortunate than I, I have no problem paying a little more in taxes, just don't tell me you are going to give ma a tax cut just to get elected, and then turn around and raise my taxes. I guess we will soon see, because it sure looks like Obama will be the next POTUS.

Obama has been crystal clear...
* >250K your taxes go up on that over 250. So if you make 300K, only 50K will be subject to the higher rate.
* 200-250K you will not see a change to your taxes.
* <200K you will have your taxes cut.

The net change in total tax revenue is more than McCain's, because the 250+ crowd will be taxed at a higher rate.

[ghostrunner]

But every one of the Dems increase revenues....how much of that was from increased taxes?

Some, but there are only three things you can do to reduce the debt and the deficit. Grow revenue through taxes, grow it through increased GDP which also helps tax revenue, and reduce spending. Clinton got lucky in some ways because the economy mushroomed under him. That's the biggest factor in his increased revenue. But it's notable if in fact he only increased spending that much, given all that revenue. Supposedly Democrats are the big spenders.

When it comes to the deficit, I don't care that much if taxes are raised a little. Republicans seem to think all you have to do is give tax cuts, but that doesn't work by itself. They like that because it's popular and they don't have to touch the spending they like. You can argue tax cuts help the economy but that's cyclical. Clinton did raise taxes and the economy grew anyway. Bush cut them and it shrank. I'm not arguing those are related, but it's not cut and dry. The bottom line is that you can't expect to make sustained inroads on debt if you're not willing to raise taxes and/or cut spending.

I've never voted for a Democratic president before yesterday, but I've changed on that because Republicans don't deliver on these fiscal issues.

But I thought Obama was going to cut my taxes....

He's stated up front that he's raising it on higher incomes, so the overall revenue would be greater. The levels will be what they were under Clinton, which is lower than what they were under Reagan.

If it is the right thiong for the country and it will help those less fortunate than I, I have no problem paying a little more in taxes, just don't tell me you are going to give ma a tax cut just to get elected, and then turn around and raise my taxes. I guess we will soon see, because it sure looks like Obama will be the next POTUS.

Well, you never know who's going to keep their word on things. At the same time, if circumstances change, I'm not going to be upset if there's good reason to raise everyone taxes. I doubt it comes to that though. He's got pretty good economic advice, as far as I can tell.

[jim]

SurveyUSA

Indiana: Obama 47 McCain 47 (Obama up by 20 points among early voters)

New Hampshire: Obama 53 McCain 42

New Jersey: Obama 52 McCain 42

On the Indiana poll, Indy will have 105,000 early and absentee voters in 2008. The highest early turnout in a Presidential year was 27,400 before this.

The Lake County early turnout is at an even more impressive 450% pace over 2004.

Every city/county in Indiana with more than 75,000 voters is running at no less than 250% of 2004 levels for early voters.

This may provide the margin for Obama in Indiana.

There is some weird stuff going on in Indiana during the early voting. I'm not saying the GOP is trying any tricks to keep people from voting or any other accusations.

Just some weird stuff.

[PujolJunkie]

SurveyUSA

Indiana: Obama 47 McCain 47 (Obama up by 20 points among early voters)

New Hampshire: Obama 53 McCain 42

New Jersey: Obama 52 McCain 42

On the Indiana poll, Indy will have 105,000 early and absentee voters in 2008. The highest early turnout in a Presidential year was 27,400 before this.

The Lake County early turnout is at an even more impressive 450% pace over 2004.

Every city/county in Indiana with more than 75,000 voters is running at no less than 250% of 2004 levels for early voters.

This may provide the margin for Obama in Indiana.

There is some weird stuff going on in Indiana during the early voting. I'm not saying the GOP is trying any tricks to keep people from voting or any other accusations.

Just some weird stuff.

That kind of info does show, though, why the GOP in Indiana were trying to sue to stop early voting in Lake County.

[PujolJunkie]

More incessant praise for the Messiah. Sigh.

Columbus — Georgia Republican Party chairwoman Sue Everhart said Saturday that the party's presumed presidential nominee has a lot in common with Jesus Christ.

"John McCain is kind of like Jesus Christ on the cross," Everhart said. "He never denounced God, either."

Everhart was praising McCain for never denouncing the United States while he was being tortured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam.

"I'm not trying to compare John McCain to Jesus Christ, I'm looking at the pain that was there," she said.

[ghostrunner]

SurveyUSA

Indiana: Obama 47 McCain 47 (Obama up by 20 points among early voters)

New Hampshire: Obama 53 McCain 42

New Jersey: Obama 52 McCain 42

On the Indiana poll, Indy will have 105,000 early and absentee voters in 2008. The highest early turnout in a Presidential year was 27,400 before this.

The Lake County early turnout is at an even more impressive 450% pace over 2004.

Every city/county in Indiana with more than 75,000 voters is running at no less than 250% of 2004 levels for early voters.

This may provide the margin for Obama in Indiana.

There is some weird stuff going on in Indiana during the early voting. I'm not saying the GOP is trying any tricks to keep people from voting or any other accusations.

Just some weird stuff.

That kind of info does show, though, why the GOP in Indiana were trying to sue to stop early voting in Lake County.

This is the latest on that:

Tim Sendak, a Crown Point attorney for the Republicans, said a motion was filed Thursday afternoon with the court seeking an emergency hearing in the party's bid to close the voting centers in Gary, East Chicago and Hammond.

"This is a matter of great public importance and it needs to be settled quickly," he told the Post-Tribune of Merrillville on Wednesday.
The motion was filed one day after a special judge named by the state Supreme Court ruled that the voting centers in county clerk branch offices should remain open and that closing them could jeopardize people's fundamental right to vote.
Republicans contend the voting centers increase the risk of voter fraud. They also argue that state law allows only one such voting center -- in suburban Crown Point -- unless both parties agree to locations.
It was unclear when the state Supreme Court would hold a hearing on the motion. Telephone messages were left Thursday with Kathryn Dolan, a spokeswoman for the state Supreme Court.
In Wednesday's ruling, Lake Superior Court Judge Diane Kavadias Schneider acknowledged that Lake County "has had a history of public corruption and voter fraud."
But she said several safeguards are in place for in-person absentee voting, including a state law requiring voters to present photo identification, and access to registration checks through a state voter database.

I don't understand anyone's rationale for denying early voting anywhere at this point. The Photo ID law is a new one, and was somewhat controversial. I'm not sure why, as I thought it was sensible, and Republicans were for it. If they believe in the law, they should let it work.

Also don't understand why political parties have a say in where voting centers are located. Put them next to gun shops and auto factories for all I care. The more that can be run successfully, the better.