Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SilentZ who wrote (367601)	1/21/2008 2:09:15 AM
From: bentway	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575344

If McCain gets the (R) nod, I'll be spamming this picture constantly:

To: SilentZ who wrote (367601)	1/21/2008 3:29:03 AM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1575344

The funny thing is, that McCain did badly on head-to-head polling last summer. But that comes back to the point that he's been under the radar for so long. I think McCain has gained more popularity recently among Republicans because the surge is working. Last summer, it still was pretty unclear. McCain was a big proponent behind the surge and now it appears he knows the right direction to take to win the war. And in recent weeks as opposed to last summer, polls show more Republicans in favor of the war. I have to believe McCain is benefiting from that uptick.

To: SilentZ who wrote (367601)	1/21/2008 7:38:20 AM
From: Road Walker	Respond to of 1575344

Debunking the Reagan Myth By PAUL KRUGMAN Historical narratives matter. That’s why conservatives are still writing books denouncing F.D.R. and the New Deal; they understand that the way Americans perceive bygone eras, even eras from the seemingly distant past, affects politics today. And it’s also why the furor over Barack Obama’s praise for Ronald Reagan is not, as some think, overblown. The fact is that how we talk about the Reagan era still matters immensely for American politics. Bill Clinton knew that in 1991, when he began his presidential campaign. “The Reagan-Bush years,” he declared, “have exalted private gain over public obligation, special interests over the common good, wealth and fame over work and family. The 1980s ushered in a Gilded Age of greed and selfishness, of irresponsibility and excess, and of neglect.” Contrast that with Mr. Obama’s recent statement, in an interview with a Nevada newspaper, that Reagan offered a “sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.” Maybe Mr. Obama was, as his supporters insist, simply praising Reagan’s political skills. (I think he was trying to curry favor with a conservative editorial board, which did in fact endorse him.) But where in his remarks was the clear declaration that Reaganomics failed? For it did fail. The Reagan economy was a one-hit wonder. Yes, there was a boom in the mid-1980s, as the economy recovered from a severe recession. But while the rich got much richer, there was little sustained economic improvement for most Americans. By the late 1980s, middle-class incomes were barely higher than they had been a decade before — and the poverty rate had actually risen. When the inevitable recession arrived, people felt betrayed — a sense of betrayal that Mr. Clinton was able to ride into the White House. Given that reality, what was Mr. Obama talking about? Some good things did eventually happen to the U.S. economy — but not on Reagan’s watch. For example, I’m not sure what “dynamism” means, but if it means productivity growth, there wasn’t any resurgence in the Reagan years. Eventually productivity did take off — but even the Bush administration’s own Council of Economic Advisers dates the beginning of that takeoff to 1995. Similarly, if a sense of entrepreneurship means having confidence in the talents of American business leaders, that didn’t happen in the 1980s, when all the business books seemed to have samurai warriors on their covers. Like productivity, American business prestige didn’t stage a comeback until the mid-1990s, when the U.S. began to reassert its technological and economic leadership. I understand why conservatives want to rewrite history and pretend that these good things happened while a Republican was in office — or claim, implausibly, that the 1981 Reagan tax cut somehow deserves credit for positive economic developments that didn’t happen until 14 or more years had passed. (Does Richard Nixon get credit for “Morning in America”?) But why would a self-proclaimed progressive say anything that lends credibility to this rewriting of history — particularly right now, when Reaganomics has just failed all over again? Like Ronald Reagan, President Bush began his term in office with big tax cuts for the rich and promises that the benefits would trickle down to the middle class. Like Reagan, he also began his term with an economic slump, then claimed that the recovery from that slump proved the success of his policies. And like Reaganomics — but more quickly — Bushonomics has ended in grief. The public mood today is as grim as it was in 1992. Wages are lagging behind inflation. Employment growth in the Bush years has been pathetic compared with job creation in the Clinton era. Even if we don’t have a formal recession — and the odds now are that we will — the optimism of the 1990s has evaporated. This is, in short, a time when progressives ought to be driving home the idea that the right’s ideas don’t work, and never have. It’s not just a matter of what happens in the next election. Mr. Clinton won his elections, but — as Mr. Obama correctly pointed out — he didn’t change America’s trajectory the way Reagan did. Why? Well, I’d say that the great failure of the Clinton administration — more important even than its failure to achieve health care reform, though the two failures were closely related — was the fact that it didn’t change the narrative, a fact demonstrated by the way Republicans are still claiming to be the next Ronald Reagan. Now progressives have been granted a second chance to argue that Reaganism is fundamentally wrong: once again, the vast majority of Americans think that the country is on the wrong track. But they won’t be able to make that argument if their political leaders, whatever they meant to convey, seem to be saying that Reagan had it right.

To: SilentZ who wrote (367601)	1/21/2008 11:33:47 AM
From: RetiredNow	Respond to of 1575344

Yes, he's been making a strong comeback.

To: SilentZ who wrote (367601)	1/21/2008 5:17:50 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575344

Wow! I don't know how good Marist is but this is quite a poll. Guiliani is only splitting NY and its suburbs with McCain and upstate, McCain wipes his butt. As for Clinton and Obama, NYC is nearly evenly divided between the two.......its NY's suburbs and Upstate that are going for her in a big way. If I were Obama, I would concentrate mostly on NYC, Long Island, Buffalo, Albany and maybe Rochester......I think they are the most likely places where he could pick up more votes. If he could cut her lead to a few percentage points in NY, that would hurt her big time. January 21, 2008 This WNBC/Marist Poll of New York State reports: REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY 2008 SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN LEADS AMONG REPUBLICANS IN NEW YORK STATE: John McCain outpaces the Republican field of presidential candidates including former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani among New York’s registered Republicans. Despite Giuliani’s hopes for a strong showing in New York, right now, 34% of registered Republicans including those leaning to a candidate support McCain compared with 23% for Giuliani. Among Republicans likely to vote in the February 5th primary, McCain maintains his support of 34%, but Giuliani is tied for second with former Governor Mitt Romney at 19%. Former Governor Mike Huckabee receives 15% among Republicans likely to vote. THE CANDIDATES’ SUPPORTERS: John McCain runs strongest against his opponents upstate where the lion’s share of the Republican vote will come on primary day. Giuliani competes better in the suburbs surrounding New York City and among the handful of Republican voters who reside in New York City. McCain does well among Republicans with higher income and higher education. WHEN FACTORING IN VOTERS’ INTENSITY OF CANDIDATE SUPPORT, MCCAIN STILL NEEDS TO CLOSE THE SALE: This is a contest that is still in flux. Many Republican voters are not particularly enthusiastic about their choice. Among Republicans who are currently supporting a candidate, only 41% say they strongly support their choice, and 30% say they may change their mind by primary day. 35% of John McCain’s supporters are firmly committed to him. This compares with 42% of Mitt Romney’s voters and 51% of Rudy Giuliani’s backers. THE REPUBLICAN PRIMARY ELECTORATE THE VOTERS’ AGENDA: Three in ten Republicans are looking for a strong leader in their presidential nominee. Although John McCain is ahead of the other presidential contenders among this group of voters, 22% of Republicans who see this as the most important quality in the next president are still undecided about whom to support in the primary. 21% of Republicans want someone who is close to them on the issues. 20% would like someone who can bring about change and another one-fifth of the Republican electorate wants a candidate who shares their values. THE VOTERS’ PRIORITIES: The economy, the war in Iraq, and security from terrorism top the list of concerns on the minds of New York Republican voters. 24% of Republicans say the economy is the most important issue when deciding their vote for president, 18% mention the war in Iraq, and 16% cite security against terrorism. ELECTABILITY: 46% of registered Republicans in New York think John McCain is the Republican most likely to beat the Democrat in November. 19% of Republicans in the state have this view of Mitt Romney, and only 15% think Rudy Giuliani is most electable. PRESIDENTIAL POLITICS AND RELIGION: Many New York Republicans do not think it matters that a candidate shares a voters’ religious beliefs. In fact, 41% says it doesn’t matter at all. In contrast, 71% of Republicans who support Mike Huckabee think the candidate they support should share their religious beliefs at least somewhat. DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY 2008 NEW YORK SENATOR HILLARY CLINTON LEADS THE DEMOCRATIC FIELD OF CANDIDATES IN THE STATE: Hillary Clinton receives the support of 48% of Democratic voters likely to vote in New York’s Democratic Presidential Primary on February 5th including those currently leaning towards a candidate. She is followed by Senator Barack Obama with 32% and former Senator John Edwards with 9%. Dennis Kucinich receives 3%, and 7% of likely Democratic voters are undecided. WHO’S SUPPORTING WHOM? The New York State Democratic Primary is most competitive in New York City where about half of the state’s Democratic voters reside. Clinton receives support from 43% of likely Democratic voters in New York City compared with 39% for Obama. Clinton outdistances Obama upstate 59% to 22%, and she has an 18 percentage point lead in the suburbs which surround New York City. Barack Obama leads among African Americans likely to vote on primary day. African American voters historically comprise between one-fifth and one-quarter of the state’s Democratic primary vote. He is very competitive among younger Democrats. He receives 47% among likely Democrats who are under 45 years of age compared with 43% for Clinton. Among Democrats likely to vote who are 45 years of age or older, Clinton leads Obama 50% to 27%. INTENSITY OF SUPPORT: Overall, 68% of likely Democratic voters strongly support a candidate for their party’s nomination for president. 79% of likely Democrats who back Hillary Clinton say they are strongly committed to her. This compares with 58% of Barack Obama’s supporters who are firmly committed to him. THE DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY ELECTORATE THE VOTERS’ AGENDA: The number one quality Democratic primary voters in New York are looking for in a presidential candidate is someone who can bring about change. 27% of likely Democratic voters want a presidential candidate who is an agent of change followed closely by 24% who are looking for a candidate who is closer to them on the issues. 19% want a candidate who is a strong leader, 13% want someone who shares their values or has experience, and 4% are looking for a candidate that has the best chance of being elected in November. THE VOTERS’ PRIORITIES: The economy is the number one issue on the minds of likely Democratic primary voters in New York. 37% of likely Democratic voters are most concerned about the economy followed by 20% who cite the war in Iraq , and 19% who mention health care as the most important issue. ELECTABILITY: A majority of likely Democratic primary voters in New York think Hillary Clinton has the best chance of beating the Republican candidate for president in November. 59% think Clinton is the most electable Democratic presidential candidate compared with 24% who believe Obama is. NATURE OF THE SAMPLE: 1,467 NEW YORK STATE REGISTERED VOTERS This survey of 1,467 New York State registered voters was conducted January 15th through January 17th, 2008. Registered voters were interviewed by telephone in proportion to the voter registration in each county in New York State and adjusted for turnout in statewide elections. The margin of error is +/-3%. There are 679 registered Democrats including 426 Democrats likely to vote in the February 5th primary. The results for these sub-samples are statistically significant at +/-4% and +/-5%, respectively. There are 401 registered Republicans including 175 likely Republican primary voters. The results for these sub-samples are statistically significant at +/-5% and +/-7.5%, respectively. The error margin increases for cross-tabulations. CLICK HERE FOR THIS MARIST POLL: 01.21.08: NYS POLL: FEBRUARY 5TH PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES [PDF] maristpoll.marist.edu