Nightwing

538 is good, though I prefer Pollster. I like their Flash-using Poll charts. Really neat stuff.

Seriously? People might follow the Lions, but I don't think there nearly enough fans to have the #2 spot, especially with how the franchise is killing its support. And the Tigers had the one year honeymoon, but I don't see them as the #3 team in this town. In all honesty, it's a fight for Michigan football at the top, because I know way, way too many State supporters and other people who hate U of M; maybe across the country you get more supporters, but I think it's much more divided than people are thinking. I think the Red Wings are at least tied for it, because there simply isn't the competition. And the Pistons should at least be 3rd.

Haha, remember when all the Republican strategists were delighted at an Obama victory because of how easy it would be to trounce him in the election? Cut to two weeks before the big day: I thought the Republicans desperately wanted Hillary to win because they thought all of her skelotons might allow them to beat her. Remember Republicans For Hillary, or whatever? Remeber the Czech Republic? Yeah. You wouldn't have to unite the Republican Party with a Palin pick if Hillary was running, simply because of the raw hatred Republicans have for her.

I dunno, I got a completely different feel from it. I mean, when Jim Baker has a Texan-accent, I knew I wasn't going to like it. It still feels really tilted towards the Democratic side; the Recount montage when they are getting close, the showing off of "dirty Republican tactics" and such, and Warren Christopher being a total pussy.

Just a clarification here: there is a big difference between voter fraud and voter registration fraud. One is actually falsifying votes, and one is falsely registering voters.

A "couple" thousand would generally mean "2,000", or in that range. Your own article talks about 200,000 people with mismatches, and might not be able to vote. But hey, what should we expect from a fucking racist, right? (And if you don't understand that last sentence, it's just me crashing Marvin's own logic train back into him.)

Wow. The Palin effect in its most tangible form.

Actually, the last episode of Season 11 includes her. Overall, I loved the episode. The reference to Snatch during the last half of the episode was beyond awesome. Watching Cartman attempting to avoid his comeupance is always good, especially how he goes from "begging" to "shit-talking" instantly.

Hey, I was just asking for a clarification "trolling" and debunking panthermatt's usual response.

But it's not that it's an opposing viewpoint, it's more the inanity which the view is expressed. Most of the time he posts stuff, it's often unsubstantiated crap (Birth Certificates, ACORN, "Criminals for Obama"), not a thought-out and articulate viewpoint. If that continues, he should be banned for trolling, as he isn't actually presenting anything real for discussion, only crap to debunk. Secondly, it's not "all opposing viewpoints". Again, I defended conservatism earlier until I just couldn't support McCain from moving away from his moderate base. It's not like anyone is calling for Bob or 909 to leave, either, because they can properly express a conservative viewpoint without resorting to the crap Marvin posts. The only reason people want Marvin to leave is that he posts unintellectual crap that often times is off-topic or is easily torn down. Can someone explain to me the difference between "trolling" and "expressing a viewpoint" in the CE folder? Because I think we need to reevaluate the standards.

[Glenn Beck]But he was a Socialist!!![/Glenn Beck] FDR was directly responsible for the Depression lasting longer in the United States than any other country in the world. While the rest of the world was out of the Depression, we were still stuck in it and it took entering WWII to finally get out of it. I'd debate that. They're ignoring the social upheveal at the time and the general distrust of the market. It's not comparable to any Depression we've had before; people saw this as the downfall of Capitalism. If we didn't have the New Deal, we we're about one minute away from midnight and a social revolution. The country would have fallen apart long before the market would have had a chance to recover. The New Deal didn't solve the Depression, but I don't think it lengthened it like they are suggesting. I'd also point out that countries such as Germany and Britain both had socialistic policies implimented which helped them work through the Depression (ESPECIALLY Germany), so faulting our socialistic policies when their socialistic policies got them out is hypocrasy or ignorance. It should also be pointed out that Britain's actual recovery from the Depression occurs because of their early rearmanment and mobilization in the face of Nazi Germany, as well as their early jump off the Gold Standard. Really, the lateness of our entry in World War II, combined with our later (but not by much) jump off the Gold Standard held us back longer than FDR's policies. In fact, I'd say it's downright stupid to suggest that's the reason why we were slower. Who actually does? Source I like the last paragraph: Id like to know where the hell these two guys are now. Probably still there? Criticizing the New Deal isn't a big thing nowadays, even if I disagree somewhat with it. I still don't think they understand the social implications at the time (There was a very real belief that Captialism had "failed" on a large scale, which would distinguish it from modern economic crises, as there just wasn't the hope of market recovery), and the fact that we wouldn't have made it to 1936 in one piece without New Deal policies giving people confidence back in the government and the workplace. The Supreme Court thing was necessary, though, and any historian can tell you that. The Supreme Court was playing "Superlegislature" by going around and ruling against many of Roosevelt's policies, due to the fact that most of them were Republican appointees. They were grossly overstretching their power (This is the same Supreme Court that was denying Labor Rights on the concept of a "Right to Contract" in the Constitution, which is up there with the Right to Privacy in "Horriblely Abused Made-up Rights"). While it may have been a governmental faux pas, it put the Supreme Court back in their place, which was absolutely necessary. Japanese internment is unsupportable, but relatively minor in comparison to so many other Presidents' actions. And you're talking about the America First Committee? Seriously? Well, those "Non-interventionist" policies sure helped us in the long run... didn't they? Just imagine if he had gotten his way with that. We'd all have a job (in the mines, yay!),a decent home, retirement money, health insurance, food, clothing and FUN TIME, guaranteed by the government! Doesn't that sound just like the greatest nation ever? Beyond your own retarded interpretation (We'd all work in mines!... Or shops, or industries, or... well, shit, he doesn't really restrict where we work, since he said "jobs like". But far be it for me to understand the meaning of the word "like"...), I don't see a problem with proposing these. They are certainly part of America's ideological belief structure ("Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness"), and they actually focus on helping the American people. You deride him for this, but I'm sure your fine with an "Abortion" amendment or a "Marriage" amendment, right? At the very least, FDR has a much greater basis for these proposals. Your little retarded spiel really doesn't change the fact that he's hitting on the ideals of America; a better life for its citizens. I can't fault him for that.

I don't see how anyone can be more UnAmerican than a bitch who has given a speech at a "Secession Party" convention and has a close family member be a member of said party. Thank you, Sarah Palin. Oh, and if you can somehow explain how the Alaskan Secessionist Party and their values are similar to your "constitutionalist" take on government, get back to me, please.

Yeah, expand it one year in each direction (1995-2003), and you have: - 3 Cups for Detroit - 3 Cups for New Jersey' - 2 Cups for Colorado - 1 Cup for Dallas That was a sort of "multi-dynastic" era there, where you had 4 great teams competing with each other and a few flavor of the years (Washington, Florida, Buffalo) sneaking in. But the real rivalry was between Detroit and Colorado. That's where the hate really was during those years... and man, was it awesome.

But Bush was plenty negative in a whole slew of other places: Flip-flop, Cut-and-Run, and a dozen other different attacks straight from Bush-Cheney. While Swift-Boat played a part in it, I'd say "Flip-Flop" played a far bigger part in the overall picture. And I don't think they were above the fray: they simply motivated people to vote for Bush, rather than simply voting against Kerry. Kerry's biggest problem is that he never made the election about himself; he never truly defined himself, and allowed the Republicans do that for him. Along with this, his biggest argument was really "Look, I'm not Bush". He didn't motivate people to actually vote for himself, but against Bush. Bush supporters often times weren't voting because they didn't like Kerry, but they honestly wanted Bush. You can see a parallel in this election: The Republicans are basically putting a candidate up as "Not Obama", while Obama has made this election about him and change. When you have both candidates focusing on one side, that side will inevitably win. People have more motivation voting for someone rather than against someone.

I disagree with almost losing "huge". For the most part, I think he was going very well on policy (even if I disagreed with him) until the Ayers and social issues part. While the polls disagree, I think (substance-wise) this debate was a lot closer than most would like to admit. Of course, the public is picking the President, and not just me, so maybe I'm wrong. But I really think this was an important debate, because I think it proves that "Offense First" mindset that Republicans have been crying for is not a working combination anymore. All these Republicans are asking for "Attack! Attack! Attack!", the pundits want him to go after Obama and are praising Palin for doing so... but the polls keep moving away from him. And I think this debate is really indicative of the move away from the attack-oriented campaigns. I think the people aren't as interested in hearing people defame one-another. They want to hear policy. They aren't being moved by these stupid attack ads linking Obama and William Ayers. Perhaps the electorate isn't as informed as many would like, but I think we've finally hit a wall when it comes to attack ads, and we're simply desensitized to them; we know the voice, the picture montages and statistics... but how many of us really trust those sorts of ads anymore? Maybe I'm being a little too optimistic, but I think there's been a breakthrough in the American electorate when it comes to what they'll really listen to. It's no longer about defaming the other guy; it's about actually liking your candidate.

So, apparently Bill Ayers had one firebomb left: John McCain's presidential hopes.

Holy shit, McCain apparently got schooled, judging by the flash polls. His favorablity rating also went down.

So, McCain's best performance... does it give him a bump? Or is it still not enough? I think (And I can't believe this, because I'm not a fan of him) Begala had it right when he said McCain concentrated too much on appealing to the base. He had a great debate, but I don't think he made a good appeal to independents in his points. Obama came off more to the center, trying to agree with McCain, trying to find common ground on things like Abortion, which I think people want. Overall? A quiet, close victory for Obama, though McCain was in the spotlight a lot more.

I think forming a line of attack ads against Joe would be better. "Joe says he wants to own a plumbing business... but in 2007, he spent half his savings on a pair of Jetskis. Is that the sort of small business leadership we need in tough economic times?"

Obama owned the Abortion answer by using his "Common Ground" theme on educating kids on sexuality and such. Excellent strike at McCain.

If so I want discussion about federal protection from plunger attacks. What about Stem Cell research to grow back his nose?

Ohio Male Voters are like Dwight Schrute: "We don't get sick, and we can use our mind to raise and lower our bloodpressure."

Oh God, McCain looked like a "Deer in Headlights" just now on the "Small Businesses are exempt" comment. His face was like "Wait... that can't be!"

Men and women have serious disagreements about Joe the Plumber.

SCORE! And McCain is going get destroyed on ACORN. He did a keynote speech for them in 2006.