I do not know what Guiliani did 9/11 that was so outstanding. Will someone elucidate the issue? He ran around town like a scared rabbit, sent hundreds of firemen and police to their deaths and we are supposed to make him president for that? I do not get it. Americans are so dumb!

US President Tim Kalemkarian, US Senate Tim Kalemkarian, US House Tim Kalemkarian: best major candidate.

Three reasons we Republicans should nominate Giuliani as our 2008 Presidential Candidate:

1) He is conservative where it truly counts for a president. He would lead in foreign policy in general and the War on Terror in particular the way he squeezed the Mafia as U.S. Attorney and fought New York City crime as Mayor: proactively. He would be a true fiscal conservative the way he turned NYC from a bloated, welfare-riddled cesspool into a dynamic, thriving success, and he did it against a bogged down liberal establishment that fought him at almost every turn. He understands the importance of strict constructionist judges over judicial activists and is dedicated to nominating the former, which is what social conservatives most care about in a president regarding social issues. And his views on social issues are not so far from social conservative thought as common wisdom suggests. Plus, under his watch, New York City abortions dropped dramatically while adoptions rose, and who could forget how he took on "civil rights" groups over federally funded obscene art?

2) He is a true leader with a powerful resume as a no-nonsense chief executive. He knows how to delegate and how to get results.

3) Nominating Giuliani would short circuit the mindset of the Left, and send them into a monstrous panic. So far, they think just about all conservatives are reactionary troglodytes that don't have it in their DNA to nominate someone with Rudy's social views, and he'd therefore never pose a real threat to the Democratic candidate. It would be almost worth it to nominate ANYONE who'd prove the Left wrong on yet another issue, let alone an impressive conservative like Rudy who could win a general election.

I'm not saying that Rudy Giuliani WILL win the nomination, but for all the above reasons, I believe he can and sure hope he does. The fact that SO FAR he's leading in the polls has got to be making at least a few lefties nervous...

Analysis, analysis,analysis, and only one thing is missing. Common sense.
Every Republican explicator knows why polls don't mean that they will lose. They just need the proper candidate. Every Republican journalist knows why all these polls aren't right. They just need the proper match up. Every Republican Administration Official knows why these polls don't mean anything. We just need to properly understand the Republican version of Dialectic Truth.

No Republican seems to feel that the Republican Party ought to look at what it is doing wrong (obviously because they simply can't actually be wrong) and begin trying to decide what Republican policies they can change to be more in tune with the desires of the American Center. So they keep looking for their Great White Hope.

As a raving leftist radical I just pray that they will continue this blindness until September, 2008, at which time they will be in denial about their looming burial in a landslide that will make even AUH2)'s defeat look respectable.

Keep up the Good Work, George, because you couldn't have happened to a more deserving party.

Too bad the Democrats can't run Mr. Generic and must actually pick a candidate. Since 1968 the polls usually show the public prefers a "generic" Democrat but they normally vote for a specific Republican.

Snarkyness aside I am begining to wonder if Republicans can beat any of the top three Democrats but Hillary.

My first time voting was 1968 -- Richard Nixon -- and I can tell you with all honesty that I consider Nixon a better President than GW Bush.

Polls are about trends. This poll shows a good trend for Team Democrats. Head-to-heads are more like MVP, and just as confusing at this point.

Some points to be considered, if we are gamely predicting:
~ GOP has 21 Senate seats up for grabs in 2008; Democrats 12. Bad for Team Republican. Good for Team Democrat.
~ GOP continues to get their headlines for supporting Bush's Iraq policy. Bad for Team Republican. Good for Team Democrat.
~ Democrats now have Oversight Authority. Bad for Bush. Bad for Republicans.
~ The 2006 GOP campaign slogan was "Nancy Pelosi is very scary." They appear to have the same message for their 2008 GOP campaign slogan. Good for another Thumpin'.

In other words, if the GOP keeps doing what they're doing right now, the trend for Democrats in 2008 looks somewhat skyward.

Someone asked if we had a second choice, if Hillary doesn't make it.
I find it hard to be a woman and not be absolutely stoked about the possibility of America having its first female POTUS.

Having said that, my first choice in 2004 was Bob Graham and I still think he would have made the best President hands down. Unfortunately, he wasn't "articulate." So, I'll take Mr. Articulate himself after Hillary.
And after that, I'll honestly be extremely proud with any of our choices ending up as the eventual candidate.

Good analysis, Chris. The other recent ones have been a bit haphazard but this might just have a grain of truth.

Mark: 1960 for JFK, I was in the AF.

Thanks, Lylepink, for the insight. I suspect that your first presidential vote was in 1964, as was mine, and that like me you have never seen a more inept Administration than this one.

I never root for a failed presidency, and I want both parties to offer competent and decent candidates - no matter which side one chooses in America, one must acknowledge that the other side has half a chance of winning.

Apart from Sen. Clinton, have you seen among your circle enthusiasm for anyone as a second choice?

C'mon Chris, there's no election this spring.

There will be so many candidates trying to get their feet out of their mouths this spring and summer, we should start seeing the winnowing of the field by August, if not before. Witness Romney's "hunting" credentials, Guiliani's clumsy failure to bond with common people over food prices and McCain's assinine comments from Baghdad.

The only polls we should be looking at this far out would be in Iowa, NH, SC and Nevada--the early states for next spring. Those are the places where it will count as candidates try to create momentum for Super Tuesday.

Andy R and Mark: I am disabled and am 67, my friends, voting age, range from 18 to late 80's. I live in WV and it is considered fairly conservative, and a swing state. A lot of them were doubters about Bubba in 92 and then were pleasantly suprised by his years in office. Some think Bubba will be a big influence on how Hillary will do the job as POTUS and this is a factor. All the women think a woman in The White House would take a very different view of the problems we all face in our daily lives, and women in general have a better chance of getting things done. This may come as a result of raising their own families and taking care of the home. A lot has to do with the failure of this Administration on just about everything. Btw, bhoomes, Pelosi had the blessing of State on her trip, so these reports are wrong.

Hello Drindl -

I have thought about your take on the geography issue and I suspect that the southwest bias against "easterners" is based more on what issues are pervasive to us, rather than ideology.

Southwesterners are far more concerned about the border and about water. The "illegal immigration" issue is different IN KIND in Laredo, Lordsburg, Tuscon, and Calexico than it is in New York, and easterners are thought to snicker at us about water shortages. Austin and L.A. have School Districts with huge multilingual problems - beyond bilingual. My close friend, the attorney for the AISD, points to one school in Austin with 57 different primary languages spoken among its kids. The border counties are like third world countries. We think the rest of the country does not "get it".

These two issues actually tend to forcibly unite Dems and Reps in the southwest over local and state matters.

But the youth response to Sen. Obama does seem to transcend the engrained political climate, or regional bias.

Reid Invokes Pope In Setting Senate Back to Work

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid quoted from Pope Benedict XVI's Easter message in a speech reopening Senate business this week following the recent Easter recess.

http://onthehillblog.blogspot.com/2007/04/reid-invokes-pope-in-setting-senate.html

Chris, when is your post coming about how shameful it is for Fred Thompson to consider a presidential run when he has cancer and not much time left to be with his family? We'll all be waiting for that one.

reason: "AG Gonzales will testify soon. I believe, that after his testimony, the storm will pass over and he will remain as AG for the next 2 years."

Ahh, it must be nice to live in a world where everything is so simple. Reason's comment reminds me of former Dallas Cowboy's assessment of unheralded QB Clint Longley's amazing comeback against the Redskins on Thanksgiving Day, 1974: "The triumph of the uncluttered mind."

Hello, Andy R. and Lylepink -

Andy, Austin is a heavily Dem city in a heavily Rep state, largely influenced by the University of Texas and the pervasive high tech industries. So our young folks here would probably share some of the same enthusiasms as yours in Cambridge.

Lylepink, your point of view about geography is, of course, well taken. My friends are over 50, well educated, and tend toward ticket splitting, but only among Dem activist women friends have I seen enthusiasm for Sen. Clinton. Active Dem men among my acquaintance here want to see Gov. Richardson and Sen. Edwards on the ticket because they are thought to be the only ones who could actually help Texas elect more Dems to public office.

Active Reps I know are largely McCain supporters. Texas considers itself a southwestern state so it would not be surprising if Richardson and McCain had more early traction here than do "east coast" candidates.

Personally, I will likely remain uncommitted until I must vote in the primary. I have always respected Sen. Biden, and I have an abiding respect for Sen. McCain who will probably extinguish his campaign on the cross of Iraq; thus I know not to project my own predisposition as evidence of "public" views, and I continue to study each of the prospective candidates and engage in discussions like this one.

From the NY Times article by Adam Nagourney and John Broder on Republican worries about their '08 candiates
================
"Katon Dawson, the party chairman in South Carolina, expressed confidence that the party would recover from any internal damage it suffered as its candidates took shots at each other.

"We don't do well until we have a common enemy," Mr. Dawson said. "Right now, our enemy is ourselves."
============
It's so typical of repubs to think of Democrats as enemies rather than opponents. Their polarization of the country disgusts me. When they are in power they barely bother to give lip service to moderates or heaven forbid, liberals. Now that there is a Democratic Congress, they're all preaching bipartisanship. Our country needs and deserves better!

Why is it everytime a poll comes, that casts republicans in a bad light, the Republican party attacks it as partisan? Anyother example of how the truth has a left wing bias. When are these people going to get out of pluto and start looking around at the world around them. Fox "News" is not news and is lying to OUR elderly.

for all the stress on anonymous postings here, i should mention that i have posted previously as dc voter. Loudon Voter just reminded me. i suppose i should stick to one moniker.

William: there's a better chance of "Generic Republican" being the GOP candidate than there is of "Rudy Giuliani" being that candidate.

In any event, I thought you Republicans didn't care about polls?

Rudy doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning his party's nomination. Polls that put him up against particular candidates are still based on cursory knowledge of his policies and history. He is just the 9/11 superstar mayor to most people. A real primary season that exposes his multiple weaknesses will eliminate him as a candidate. This stuff is just all way too early for candidate-to-candidate comparison.

BTW-- pelosi had clearance from the state dept, you moron -- no elected official goes overseas without it.

well, how aboutthis? rudy says he supports keeping vegetative patients [like shiavo] alive, even against the wishes of their families--and that the gov should pay for it.

but he supports abortion rights and says the gov shuold pay for ppor women.

kind of like the flipflopping marathon worst of both worlds, wouldn't you say?

Who cares? I don't have the slightest idea what milk costs, because I don't drink milk. And I'm not exactly sure how much I pay for bread, because I just don't pay attention. (And it depends on the brand of bread and the store.) Is that really a qualification for president?

The future of the country is at stake. Is it too much to ask that people pick a president based on substance, not whether the candidates know the price of milk or seem like fun drinking buddies?

Republican candidate off the mark on cost of milk, bread
4/10/2007, 8:51 p.m. CDT
By PHILLIP RAWLS
The Associated Press

MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) -- Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani hasn't done a lot of grocery shopping lately -- at least based on his answers about the cost of milk and bread.

Campaigning in Alabama on Tuesday, the former New York City mayor portrayed himself as a fiscal conservative and an aggressive fighter of terrorism who has a lot in common with the Deep South state.

But when asked about more mundane matters -- like the price of some basic staples -- Giuliani had trouble with a reporter's question.

"A gallon of milk is probably about a $1.50, a loaf of bread about a $1.25, $1.30," he said.

A check of the Web site for D'Agostino supermarket on Manhattan's Upper East Side showed a gallon of milk priced at $4.19 and a loaf of white bread at $2.99 to $3.39. In Montgomery, Ala., a gallon of milk goes for about $3.39 and bread is about $2.

Later Tuesday, the Giuliani campaign pointed out that the national average for bread is $1.17 per pound, as listed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The government agency also lists milk as costing, on average, $1.60 per half-gallon.

Giuliani was closer to the mark on the price of a gallon of gasoline.

"Gas, I think, is $2.89," he said.

His difficulty with grocery items recalled another Republican's supermarket run-in. In 1992, President George H.W. Bush expressed amazement at a high-tech supermarket scanner, prompting critics to argue that he was out of touch with average Americans.

§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000953----000-.html

it says nothing about elected officials. it is rarely enforced because of its vaugeness.the last time it was even used was in 1936 against an oil company. next time try reading the law before spouting off gibberish!

I agree with William that Rudy is Republicans best hope of retaining the White House. But if more stuff like the business of his police commissioner's connections with the mob comes out, he will no longer be Mr. Clean. And in that event, after all the sleeze, cronyism and scandal of the last several years, who is going to want to vote for more of the same?

Now, I am really depressed, Fred was the only person I could get excited about supporting. Hope its not to serious. From my understanding of the Logan Act is that private citizens or public officials who do not represent the Executive Branch cannot engage in private diplomacy or pretend to represent the Govt. Richardson had the blessing of the State Dept. so he's cool but Pelosi was foolishly (even the lib WP agrees with me) trying to negotiate between the Isaelis and Syrians. This is clealy illegal (as stated by the Wall Street Journal)and she did a great diservice tto her country. Not that a traitor like her(see Jane Fonda) would care.

I think that generic polls are particularly unreliable in this presidential race. The generic candidates that they ask about don't really exist in this race.

First, look at the Republican frontrunners. McCain has some moderate/independent credentials from 2000, though he pretty much sticks with the party line now. Giuliani obviously isn't a generic Republican, because of his 9/11 connections and moderate social stances. So there are plenty of independents, and maybe even Democrats, who say that they wouldn't vote for a generic Republican but would support McCain or Giuliani.

The situation is a bit different for Democrats. Hillary is close to a generic Democrat, in terms of her policies. But a lot of people dislike her on a personal level, so she'd get less support than a generic Democrat. And Obama is a wild card; some people don't like the Democrats but support him, and some Democrats refuse to support him because of his race or lack of experience.

Basically, it's the same issue as Congressional approval ratings. People generally hate Congress but like their own Congressman. I think that applies to this generic poll also. Plenty of people wouldn't vote for a generic Republican, but they'd vote for a Republican candidate who differs from that generic candidate. So this poll isn't as bad for the Republicans as it might look.

It seems I spoke to soon and Fred Thompson has lymphoma but it has been treated and he should be OK. The report said that since he is disclosing this fact it should be seen as a signal that he is going to run.

Also Lylepink, I don't know where you live but nobody I know is a supporter of Hillary. There are concerns over Obama but people are genuinly excited about him. Now I do live in the most liberal town in the US (Cambridge MA) but if we are a barometer for the "liberal activists" of the party then Obama has that group pretty much locked up.

Sad news about Sen. Thompson. Hopefully he will focus on his health and family & not consider the grueling & hectic pace that a presidential race probably takes on someone's health. Lymphoma is a terrible disease & I hope he will not see it again.

Some sensible ideas for getting out of Iraq:
http://www.slate.com/id/2163598

We have no shortage of good ideas, only good leadership.

Mark: My friends that I have talked with about the 08 race is just the opposite of what you are getting, Each and every one is a supporter of Hillary and all of them think Obama has little to no chance of getting the nomination, much less winning The White House. My friends range from Doctors, Lawyers, Teachers, Nurses, Skilled and Non-Skilled labor. This tells me that it all depends on where you are from and the folks you mingle with. These are repubs and dems, btw.

Everyone said the 2006 generic polls were virtually worthless, but frankly, they foretold the Democratic takeover of Congress. Chris is right in asserting that the current environment strongly favors Democrats in 2008. Bush and the war will be a big drag on the Republican ticket, top to bottom, and the Republicans know it. That's why they are so glum and their candidates are having a difficult time raising campaign cash.

Are there any generic polls on Obama vs Romney? My guess is they will be the eventual nominees. Obama will blow Clinton out of the water in super duper Tuesday and Romney will win by default because he's at least pleasant and the other Republicans are ghastly.

Interesting thought, Mark. Might be a regional phenomenom, though. You live in a conservative state. However, even the young people there are trending Obama -- and I'm seeing a great deal of that here in the Northeast. Every college kid I know [which is not all that many, granted] supports Obama. Now among older people, there's a much bigger split.

The republican party barely exists in the county I live in and if people are republicans, at this point they are pretty quiet about it. So the only signs and bumper stickers and what have you I've seen are 100% dem, but split significantlly among Edwards, Obama and Hillary. However, the overwhelming majority of signs, discussions, and concern is opposition to the occupation.

So I think that will unite people to strongly support whichever dem is nominated. There's been a tremendous willingness to volunteer-- last year Iit was the easiest ever to get campaign volunteers, and there's just a tremendous energy, albeit a lack of enthusiasm over Hillary.

i just saw on CNN that Fred Thompson has a treatable form of Lymphoma. I hope everything turns out allright for him, but I seriously don't think he will be jumping into the presidential race anytime soon.

When you take the political pulse of your friends and acquaintances, do their opinions fit the current polling patterns? My friends' choices do not.

But... my four adult children are all completely at odds with my generation of friends [Obama supporters one and all; but the youngest, a relatively apolitical senior chemistry major, thinks that having an Arabic name will hurt him]. And my secretary's daughter, a rising college freshman, wants to work for Obama this summer - her father is a Republican.

My male friends' views differ significantly from my female friends.

My attorney colleagues are somewhat more consistent than my engineer friends. My friends who are retired officers, Viet Nam era, are more consistent than my friends who served as non-coms.

I am guessing that none of your groups of friends fit the poll patterns - AND IF THAT GENERALIZATION FITS, IT MAY ACTUALLY INDICATE THAT POLLS GIVE "SNAPSHOTS" THAT ARE COUNTERINTUITIVE FOR ALL OF US.

'Halliburton announced today that they were finally pulling out of Iran today -- after bailing out of KBR and America.

There are a variety of ways one could respond. I'll let you choose:

a) Could it be that Dick Cheney wants them out of there so he can be comfortable about shooting at Iran without hitting any of his old friends?'

b) It's not actually over just because they say they're finally out of there: There's still a potential criminal case here, folks. The Treasury Department (OFAC) referred the issue to the Justice Department in early July 2004, prompting the Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Texas to ask a grand jury to subpoena company documents related to its business relationship with Iran.

Three years later, the Justice Department still hasn't closed the case. Why? They won't say. Perhaps they're a little short-handed. Or ... could it be because the charges might implicate Dick Cheney, who suggested when the issue first came up while he was CEO in the late 1990s that the company "is allowed to operate legally in Iran through its foreign subsidiaries."?

("What we do with respect to Iran and Libya is done through foreign subsidiaries, totally in compliance with US law," Cheney told ABC Television's Sam Donaldson. When Donaldson suggested, "it's a way around US law," Cheney replied: "No, no, it's provided for us specifically with respect to Iran and Libya."5 If you're a big multinational that's able to incorporate around the world, you don't have to worry.) (Ref: This Week, ABC News, July 30, 2000.)

I agree with everyone else that generic polls are about the most worthless thing at this stage of the game, especially for presidential races. Even the head to head stuff is suspect, but it is a little more accurate.
On that point CC why don't you mention that Edwards beats all three GOP candidates in a head to head match up? Edwards is slowly putting togethor a solid campaign. I think when the rest of the country starts to care about this (my guess is septmeber) then they will already be sick of Hillary and Obama, and Edwards will be a nice well known alternative.

Gonzo is dead meat. He's doing so poorly during the days-long preparation drills they're giving him before he testifies -- he's got a script and acting coach and everything -- but apparently he keeps stumbling. So badly that they pulled him off Sunday's Tim Russert show to keep him from blowing it.

Close to 80% of the country thinks he should resign.

'If the tobacco industry sells death one person at a time, the hydrocarbon and other dirty industries sell it one planet at a time. George Bush's own Pentagon, (yes, under Rummy), published a report indicating that global warming could result in a greater threat to the United States than terrorism. It was ignored---certainly by Bush, but also, shamefully, by the US press.'

;Responding to Mr. Giuliani's comments yesterday, political observers appeared both surprised by his position and confused by his lack of preparation.

"My first thought was, he didn't seem ready for the question," the president of American Values and a former Republican presidential candidate, Gary Bauer, said. "It sounded like he was thinking about his answer as the question was asked.

"That's amateur hour 101," A Republican pollster, Tony Fabrizio, said. "How do you send a guy to the state, and the county, where this took place and expect you're not going to get a question?"

As for the candidate himself, Mr. Fabrizio asked: "How do you, on something like this, on something that was important to the rank and file, not know what your position was? And then how do you try to straddle it?"

Mr. Giuliani was always expected to walk a tough road as a pro-choice candidate in a prolife party. But a comment last week -- during the same swing through Florida -- that abortion must be funded with taxpayer dollars because it's "a constitutional right" has made the road even tougher.

If Mr. Giuliani expects to win over pro-life voters by siding with them in the Schiavo matter, he's likely to have another thing coming. "He's not going to make anybody happy," Mr. Fabrizio said. "It only probably makes them more angry. ... You'll do anything to keep people alive, but you'll abort fetuses?"

WASHINGTON, April 10 -- Republican leaders across the country say they are growing increasingly anxious about their party's chances of holding the White House, citing public dissatisfaction with President Bush, the political fallout from the war in Iraq and the problems their leading presidential candidates are having generating enthusiasm among conservative voters.

In interviews on Tuesday, the Republicans said they were concerned about signs of despondency among party members and fund-raisers, reflected in polls and the Democratic fund-raising advantage in the first quarter of the year. Many party leaders expressed worry that the party's presidential candidates faced a tough course without some fundamental shift in the political dynamic.

"My level of concern and dismay is very, very high," said Mickey Edwards, a Republican former congressman from Oklahoma who is now a lecturer in public policy at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton. "It's not that I have any particular problem with the people who are running for the Republican nomination. I just don't know how they can run hard enough or fast enough to escape the gravitational pull of the Bush administration."

"We don't have any candidates in the field now who are compelling," Mr. Edwards said, adding: "It's going to be a tough year for us."

AG Gonzales will testify soon. I believe, that after his testimony, the storm will pass over and he will remain as AG for the next 2 years.

bhoomes: Check out your assertions concerning The Logan Act. You just may be a little bit off.

Chris: A generic poll by itself simply measures public attitudes toward a candidate's party, which is only one factor (but an imporant one) in how a voter will ultimately vote. On the other hand, at this early pre-election stage when party is unidentified and voters are asked to select among or between names, then the poll becomes much more a name identification poll.

The best reflection (at this admittedly early stage) is to poll asking something like "If the election were held today, would you likely vote for REPUBLICAN John McCain or DEMOCRAT Barack Obama"? Such a question tempers both name ID and party ID to give a better indication of the current relative strength of a party's potential nominee.

While I know of no polls currently structured like this, I would be very surprised if any of the Democratic candidates did not best any of the Republican candidates in such a head-to-head poll (at this time).

The most revealing feature of polling structured in this manner is that "consensus" candidates like John Edwards who are not running at the top of the pack, but who are acceptable to a wide range of voters, will suddenly vault to the top. At the same time, well known candidates who also have high negatives (Hillary Clinton) begin to bump against their numerical ceiling.

'Some administration critics said the ideas miss the point. "An individual can't fix a failed policy," said Carlos Pascual, former State Department coordinator of Iraq reconstruction, who is now a vice president at the Brookings Institution. "So the key thing is to figure out where the policy is wrong."

'Sheehan, a 35-year Marine, served on the Defense Policy Board advising the Pentagon early in the Bush administration and at one point was reportedly considered by then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to be chairman of the Joint Chiefs. He now works as an executive at Bechtel Corp. developing oil projects in the Middle East.'

You see what it's all about, bhoomes? Oil projects in the middle east. That's all it ever was. Our military is privatized and compromised by oil companies, just what Rumsfeld wanted.

We now have no ability to defend ourselves if we are attacked, no military reserves at all to deploy. They're all too busy guarding oil fields and ministries and pipelines.

The one thing with the state vs the national is the large differences.
You look at SC where Obama leads clinton by 14 points and is at a tie in Georgia. Same in NH and Iowa. But, national polling shows Clinton a far front runner.
Another thing is that with Clinton showing so front runner is that online she has virtually no support. Straw polls show her in the bottom.
Who are the people they are polling?? Why such a difference with the states individual and online vs national polls.
So why would the so called head to heads be any different. Why would we think they are any more acurate and showing a republican advantage when they are so off in the democratic races.

obama vs. rudy is like good vs. evil

"The very fundamental issue is, they don't know where the hell they're going," said retired Marine Gen. John J. "Jack" Sheehan, a former top NATO commander who was among those rejecting the job. Sheehan said he believes that Vice President Cheney and his hawkish allies remain more powerful within the administration than pragmatists looking for a way out of Iraq. "So rather than go over there, develop an ulcer and eventually leave, I said, 'No, thanks,' " he said.'

No, bhoomes, the WaPo didn't get it wrong. Look at who they quoted -- this guy has tremendous credibility. and he knows Cheney has no intention of EVER pulling out of Iraq. Why should he? He's making bagloads of cash from his Halliburton stock.

And why should american and british oil companies pay for their own security over there, when they can get american taxpayers to foot the bill?

-- An ABC News undercover investigation showed Army recruiters telling students that the war in Iraq was over, in an effort to get them to enlist.

ABC News and New York affiliate WABC equipped students with hidden video cameras before they visited 10 Army recruitment offices in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut.

"Nobody is going over to Iraq anymore?" one student asks a recruiter.

"No, we're bringing people back," he replies.

"We're not at war. War ended a long time ago," another recruiter says.

Last year, the Army suspended recruiting nationwide to retrain recruiters following hundreds of allegations of improprieties.

"generic" polls, as someone already said, have only limited value. despite everyone wanting to get the 08 election started NOW (me too), we are going to have to wait until after some debating has been done, and some more active campaigning, to get polls that really mean anything. i would guess that the majority of voters at this point still cannot identify the candidates' positions on various issues in any detail. that will change only when the positions themselves, rather than the candidates' electability, is the main concern.
note, however, that obama is stronger against each republican - ties rudy! - than is shrillary.

May 12, 2006 -- The Army's recruitment of an autistic teen has once again put the spotlight on the pressures recruiters face in trying to get new volunteers in a time of war.

Earlier this week, 18-year-old Jared Guinther from Portland, Ore., was released from his four-year military committment after The Oregonian newspaper reported that he should not have been enlisted, given his medical condition. He was diagnosed with autism at age 3.

Guinther signed up to be a cavalry scout, one of the Army's more dangerous assignments.

The two Army recruiters involved in Guinther's enlistment are now being investigated for potential recruiting improprieties.

'April 10, 2007 -- ABC News has learned that the Pentagon is considering extending the tours of duty for every active duty soldier in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Forget small extensions and trickles of National Guard troops. Under the proposal, deployments for active duty soldiers would be extended from the current 12 months to 15 months. Senior Defense Department officials say the idea has already been presented to Defense Secretary Gates. A decision is expected as early as this week.

"These soldiers have paid the price for this policy for four years. Now they are being given an additional burden to bear, and it will be a cause of concern for the soldiers and even more so for the families," says retired Gen. William Nash.'

"If there is anybody more repulsive than Hillary, its Newt."

Yup, Bhoomes is back! Put away everything that's breakable.

'Rudy Giuliani told Alabamans that flying the Confederate flag is a states-rights issue.... '

The man is a complete wh*re. Utter, complete, $2 ho.

What about secession, rudy? Is that a states-rights issue, too?

WASHINGTON Apr 10, 2007 (AP)-- President Bush's spy chief is pushing to expand the government's surveillance authority at the same time the administration is under attack for stretching its domestic eavesdropping powers.

National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell has circulated a draft bill that would expand the government's powers under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, liberalizing how that law can be used.

The changes McConnell is seeking mostly affect a cloak-and-dagger category of warrants used to investigate suspected spies, terrorists and other security threats. The court-approved surveillance could include planting listening devices and hidden cameras, searching luggage and breaking into homes to make copies of computer hard drives.'

Other 'security threats'? Like maybe the 'security' of someone in government's job? Let's just erase that pesky little 4th amendment-- just bring that constitution right over to the paper shredder:

'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'

Hopefully the WP got the story wrong (wouldn't be the 1st time) on War Czar, that is the stupiest thing I ever heard of: that is why we have Cinc's for different regions of the world. But what is really criminal is the way congressional democrats have tried to usurp the powers on Commander in Chief and Secretary of State(Pelosi). Pelosi violated the Logan act and should be prosecuted. Not holding my breath due to AG having enough to worry about for the time being.

The Democrats may have generic edge, but we all knows what happens when you put them heads up with Rudy.

From http://www.solidpolitics.com

Al Sharpton can't be happy.... Just minutes after saying he'd appear again on Imus, Rudy Giuliani told Alabamans that flying the Confederate flag is a states-rights issue....
Fox News launched a vicious attack on John Edwards, who was the first presidential candidate to tell the "fair and balanced" network to take their debate and shove it.... And some black activists say Barack Obama didn't condemn Imus fast enough....

'How shocking. A federal panel's report overruled the conclusions of election experts who determined there was little evidence of significant voter fraud in US elections. Read this. This is an important part of the US Attorney puzzle.

You have to put all these pieces together to see the whole picture. The Republican party is heavily invested in hyping and inventing claims of voter fraud which they then use to stymie legitimate voter registration drives and institute 'ballot integrity' efforts which have the actual goal of limiting voting by racial minorities and under-income voters. The truth can hurt but that's the unvarnished truth. And the backdrop to the US Attorney Purge was a concerted effort to enlist US Attorneys to put the power of the state criminal prosecution apparatus behind this partisan gambit.'

I do not know how Cilliza, and other spinning heads, keep their jobs, when they are wrong, 100 percent of the time, any other profession and he would last 1 week.

On behalf of all of the math majors out there, it's an 18-point difference, not a differential.

I agree that generic polls do not mean much as far as specific races with particular candidates. They do, however, reflect the mood of the electorate at the time of the poll. Right now the public mood is definitely anti-Republican. However, 19 months is an eternity in politics and much can change by November 2008.

I agree, bhoomes, these type polls are not worth much at this stage of the game, but watch how quick whoever it shows in a pretty good light will jump in with both feet.

'A poll in the Los Angeles Times conducted for the paper and Bloomberg shows 60 percent of those surveyed believe a recession is somewhat or very likely in the next year, with more than a third saying their own finances are shaky.'

WASHINGTON, April 10 -- A federal panel responsible for conducting election research played down the findings of experts who concluded last year that there was little voter fraud around the nation, according to a review of the original report obtained by The New York Times.

Enlarge This Image

Jim Wilson/The New York Times
Poll workers in Columbus, Ohio, last year for the first time recorded ID card information presented by voters.
Multimedia
Graphic
Voter Identification Requirements
Related
Voting Fraud and Voter Intimidation (Draft Report) (pdf)

Election Crimes: An Initial Review and Recommendations for Future Study (Final Report) (pdf)

Instead, the panel, the Election Assistance Commission, issued a report that said the pervasiveness of fraud was open to debate.

The revised version echoes complaints made by Republican politicians, who have long suggested that voter fraud is widespread and justifies the voter identification laws that have been passed in at least two dozen states.

Democrats say the threat is overstated and have opposed voter identification laws, which they say disenfranchise the poor, members of minority groups and the elderly, who are less likely to have photo IDs and are more likely to be Democrats.

Though the original report said that among experts "there is widespread but not unanimous agreement that there is little polling place fraud," the final version of the report released to the public concluded in its executive summary that "there is a great deal of debate on the pervasiveness of fraud."

'The Washington Post leads with word that the White House wants to appoint a new czar to oversee the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but, not surprisingly, is having a hard time finding someone who wants the job. '

A 'czar?' wtf? Because that worked really well in russia. I mean what the hell is this about? Umm, isn't that what we have a Commander in Chief and a SecDef for?

No other president in history has needed a freaking 'czar' to run a war. Is this just a flatout admission that Bush isn't up to the job?

Generic polls are the most useless polls of all, they don't mean a damn thing, I don't even know why they do them. If my wish comes true, Fred Thompson will be our nominee and he will blow away Hillary or Obama in the General election. But if the worse happens and the nominees are Newt and Hillary, it won't matter because we will all move to Canada. If there is anybody more repulsive than Hillary, its Newt. I want to puke everytime I see him on TV.

'whether the United States can "win" the war.'

thank you for finally acknowledging that there is no way an occupier can 'win' a civil war. thank you.

WASHINGTON -- In a Capitol Hill debate about global warming touted by its moderator as a "smackdown" between former House speaker Newt Gingrich and Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, Gingrich praised Kerry's recently released book about environmentalism, acknowledged that global warming is real, and offered what amounted to an unexpected apology for his party's inaction on curtailing greenhouse gas emissions.

"I'm not going to stand up here and defend our failure to lead," said Gingrich, who is considering a run for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008 and plans to release a book in the fall burnishing his environmental credentials. "There has to be a green conservatism."

--don't hold your breath, newtie. we're still waiting for your party to admit the world is round.

Above all else, one simply can't associate the GOP with either sense or decency. Which explains the generic numbers. Timid platitudes however won't get it done for Democrat's in '08 as the polls reflect for both Clinton and Obama. If I'm not mistaken, Edwards is doing better in the one on one polls and his campaign has been much bolder.

http://intrepidliberaljournal.blogspot.com