Page 1 of 2

Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 1:16 am
by Funkywhiteboy
...and succeeds in putting his foot in his mouth.

http://gretawire.foxnews.com/2008/08/15 ... -update-3/
August 15th, 2008 7:53 PM Eastern
Campaign Update!!!
by Greta Van Susteren

Check out the email I just received from an FNC colleague…this email gets copied into the FNC urgents file:

From: Oinounou, Mosheh
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2008 7:44 PM
To:
Subject: Urgent: McCain camp denounces Dean attack on GOP as “white”
party

Victory 2008 Chair Carly Fiorina issued the following statement on Howard Dean’s comments on NPR today:

“It is disappointing to see Howard Dean trying to use gender and race to
divide voters. His comments are insulting, inappropriate and have no
place in this election.” –Carly Fiorina


Dean On NPR Today:

Dean: “If you look at folks of color, even women, they’re more
successful in the Democratic Party than they are in the white, uh,
excuse me, in the Republican Party.” (NPR Interview Of Howard Dean)

<http://www.breitbart.tv/html/153493.html> , 8/15/08)
I can only imagine the flak a Republican would take if he or she called the Democrats the "black party".
Time enough, I think, to update the ol' sig. :P

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Sun Aug 17, 2008 7:00 pm
by Nishlord
Your lot are starting to sound really desperate.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 5:48 pm
by titlover
Nishlord wrote:Your lot are starting to sound really desperate.

Obama is going to get trounced. be ready.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 5:58 pm
by BSmack
titlover wrote:
Nishlord wrote:Your lot are starting to sound really desperate.
Obama is going to get trounced. be ready.
Care to give me a reason that isn't a McCain campaign talking point?

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 6:32 pm
by titlover
BSmack wrote:
titlover wrote:
Nishlord wrote:Your lot are starting to sound really desperate.
Obama is going to get trounced. be ready.
Care to give me a reason that isn't a McCain campaign talking point?
you saw it Sat. night. the debates will only get worse..... :lol:

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 6:45 pm
by BSmack
titlover wrote:you saw it Sat. night. the debates will only get worse..... :lol:
You mean McCain will get to hear the questions before the debates as well?

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 7:33 pm
by BSmack
Nice try mv. Have you got anything from an objective source?

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 7:35 pm
by War Wagon
BSmack wrote:Nice try mv. Have you got anything from an objective source?
Do you?

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 7:36 pm
by Tom In VA
BSmack wrote:Nice try mv. Have you got anything from an objective source?

Bwahahahahahahahahaha


Good one BSmack. Laugh of the Day.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 7:46 pm
by JayDuck
mvscal wrote:
The Bradley Effect. Onogga barely has his head above water as it is and his showing on election day will certainly be far worse than his pre-election polling numbers.
It might be true for the general, but it didn't work out that way in the primary. He performed better than polled in many states.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 7:50 pm
by BSmack
War Wagon wrote:
BSmack wrote:Nice try mv. Have you got anything from an objective source?
Do you?

sin

LT
FTFY

I'm sure absolutely no cell phones were allowed in McCain's motorcade. No way they would have tried to conduct any prep while in the limo, or even in the green room. :meds:

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/08/18 ... 8523.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:02 pm
by War Wagon
BSmack wrote: I'm sure absolutely no cell phones were allowed in McCain's motorcade. No way they would have tried to conduct any prep while in the limo, or even in the green room. :meds:

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/08/18 ... 8523.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
That link and the NY times link embedded in that article proves nothing. It's just some weak-assed insinuations. And even if those were true, having less than an hour to prepare is hardly ample time to come up with anything remarkable.

Phffft... Tempest in a teapot.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:06 pm
by Sirfindafold
JayDuck wrote:but it didn't work out that way in the primary. He performed better than polled in many states.

Surprising, what with that tough competition he faced, Billary, John Edwards, etc.

go fuck yourself.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:12 pm
by War Wagon
mvscal wrote:The fact that he is an empty suit with no sincerely held convictions isn't exactly breaking news to anybody who has been paying any attention at all to his act.
Now wait just a damn minute. It's pretty damn apparent that he's sincerely convinced he's already been appointed President. George Cloony told him so.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:21 pm
by JayDuck
War Wagon wrote:
mvscal wrote:The fact that he is an empty suit with no sincerely held convictions isn't exactly breaking news to anybody who has been paying any attention at all to his act.
Now wait just a damn minute. It's pretty damn apparent that he's sincerely convinced he's already been appointed President. George Cloony told him so.
I'd say it looks more like the GOP tried to appoint him President when they trotted out John McCain as their candidate.

They knew they were going to be going up against a Black guy, or a Woman and that it would take a seriously incompetent candidate not to be able to muster up enough support to keep one of them out of the White House.

In John McCain, they've got just the guy who might do it.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 9:05 pm
by BSmack
mvscal wrote:Are you seriously trying to suggest that McCain aced Oflimsy with a 30 minute prep session in his motorcade?
You don't think that's within the intellectual capability of John McCain?

Well there's a ringing endorsement. :meds:
Oskidmark's vague, arm waving generalities aren't cutting it and it's starting to show. The fact that he is an empty suit with no sincerely held convictions isn't exactly breaking news to anybody who has been paying any attention at all to his act.
Millions of people have been paying attention to Obama. Two million have gone so far as to give Obama's campaign a donation. He's maintained a consistent lead over McCain even after being bloodied in the longest primary campaign ever. And once the conventions are over and the real general election begins, just hang on.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 9:21 pm
by War Wagon
BSmack wrote:He's maintained a consistent lead over McCain...
Bullshit. Depending on which poll you ascribe to, what was once an 8-10 point gap is now a statistical dead heat with-in the margin of polling error. Consistent lead, my ass.
And once the conventions are over and the real general election begins, just hang on.
You got that right. This is going to be a barn burner.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:07 pm
by JayDuck
War Wagon wrote:
Bullshit. Depending on which poll you ascribe to, what was once an 8-10 point gap is now a statistical dead heat with-in the margin of polling error. Consistent lead, my ass.
The polls fluctuate on a weekly basis, but Obama has consistantly held a lead over McCain.

Obama has been as high as 49%, and consistantly above 45%.

McCain hasn't been any higher than 45% and has been closer to 40% than to 45% for most of the time.

There are certainly enough people willing to vote for Obama. Whether they actually will or not, remains to be seen. Its not so certain that there are even enough people willing to vote for McCain, yet.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:13 pm
by Sirfindafold
JayDuck wrote:There are certainly enough people willing to vote for Obama. Whether they actually will or not, remains to be seen.
Unfortunately, for you and your ilk, they are not US citizens.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:15 pm
by JayDuck
Sirfindafold wrote:
JayDuck wrote:There are certainly enough people willing to vote for Obama. Whether they actually will or not, remains to be seen.
Unfortunately, for you and your ilk, they are not US citizens.
I'm pretty sure they are only polling US citizens.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:29 pm
by War Wagon
JayDuck wrote: The polls fluctuate on a weekly basis, but Obama has consistantly held a lead over McCain.
Currently 46-43, which leaves 11% undecided. Needless to say, those undecideds will swing this election one way or the other.

But my point is that what was once an insurmountable 8-10 point lead for Obama has been shaved to the point where McCain has a punchers chance.

And punching away, is he. Whilst Obama's campaign has tried to shift towards the "center" in order to be all things to all people. Trouble is, it makes him look like a vacillating douchebag even to his own far left constituency.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:46 pm
by JayDuck
War Wagon wrote:
JayDuck wrote: The polls fluctuate on a weekly basis, but Obama has consistantly held a lead over McCain.
Currently 46-43, which leaves 11% undecided.
Well, some of those are planning to vote 3rd party, but yes, there are still undecideds that will play a role in the vote. McCain needs to get two thirds of them, though, if things don't change for him and the polling of the Independant vote has never been close to that in either direction.

War Wagon wrote: But my point is that what was once an insurmountable 8-10 point lead for Obama has been shaved to the point where McCain has a punchers chance.
Yeah, but your point is pointless. Its been fluctuating, up and down for a long time. It hasn't been whittled away and it was never "insurmountable".

Image

The lead for Obama will go both up and down from here, depending on the day. McCain needs to improve a lot more than Obama does. McCain hasn't broken 45% since Obama clinched the Nomination the beginning of June and he's spent more time closer to 40% than 45. If McCain comes into the election around 40%, he's done.

McCain very well might win the election. Its certainly too close to call. But, he's behind and he's trailed the whole way. You don't sit around and say the other team doesn't have a chance when they've been ahead of you all game, even if they're only ahead by a few points. You've got to take a lead at some point if you want to win.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:25 pm
by War Wagon
JayDuck wrote: Yeah, but your point is pointless. Its been fluctuating, up and down for a long time. It hasn't been whittled away and it was never "insurmountable".
Lame_B_Duck... may I now call you that? Your poll graph only goes back 3 weeks. How about you look at those numbers at right around the time Billary conceded? You know, when Obama had an 8-10 point lead.
You've got to take a lead at some point if you want to win.
Right. :roll:

The only poll that matters happens on November 4th. National opinion polls at this point are practically worthless. The states and then the electoral college are going to decide this, not Gallup.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:17 am
by JayDuck
War Wagon wrote:

Lame_B_Duck... may I now call you that? Your poll graph only goes back 3 weeks. How about you look at those numbers at right around the time Billary conceded? You know, when Obama had an 8-10 point lead.
It looks like that all the way back to when Obama clinched the nomination, douchehelmet. Only each of these graphs is only for a couple weeks. I didn't think it was necessary to post 4 separate graphs, to go all the way back.

You can check it out all for yourself here:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Inter ... ction.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And, not surprisingly, you're talking out of your ass. When Hillary conceded to Obama on June 6th, the highest Obama got was a 48-42 lead. Its been following relatively the same fluctuation pattern for months. Obama has gotten up as high as 48%, and a 6 to 8 point lead a few times, and down as low as tied a couple times, but he's mostly stayed about 3 or 4 points ahead. His biggest lead was actually just a few weeks ago, at 9 points, when he was in Europe, not when Hillary conceded.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:39 am
by War Wagon
Which part of "polls are meaningless" did you fail to comprehend, B_Duck?

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:11 am
by JayDuck
War Wagon wrote:Which part of "polls are meaningless" did you fail to comprehend, B_Duck?
Probably the part where you just backtracked into that statement after attempting to argue the idea that McCain has whittled away Obama's "insurmountable" lead (in the polls).

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:28 am
by War Wagon
JayDuck wrote:
Probably the part where you just backtracked into that statement after attempting to argue the idea that McCain has whittled away Obama's "insurmountable" lead (in the polls).
I didn't backtrack. You admitted yourself that at one point the lead was 9 points, which indeed would be an insurmountable hill to climb.

How old are you, 12?

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:47 am
by JayDuck
War Wagon wrote:
JayDuck wrote:
Probably the part where you just backtracked into that statement after attempting to argue the idea that McCain has whittled away Obama's "insurmountable" lead (in the polls).
I didn't backtrack. You admitted yourself that at one point the lead was 9 points, which indeed would be an insurmountable hill to climb.

How old are you, 12?
How old are you, 112? Because your short term memory and your reasoning have obviously started to go.

Let me 'splain it to you, old man.

Either the polls are meaningless, or they aren't. If they are, then so is Obama's lead and so is McCain whittling away that lead.

So, when you say that "the polls are meaningless" you make the very arguments you are trying to make meaningless.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 8:11 am
by RadioFan
Sirfindafold wrote:
JayDuck wrote:There are certainly enough people willing to vote for Obama. Whether they actually will or not, remains to be seen.
Unfortunately, for you and your ilk, they are not US citizens.
Go fuck yourself.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 8:12 am
by RadioFan
mvscal wrote:If Onogga doesn't have at least a ten point lead going into the election, he's going to lose.
Yep.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:40 pm
by titlover
JayDuck wrote:
Sirfindafold wrote:
JayDuck wrote:There are certainly enough people willing to vote for Obama. Whether they actually will or not, remains to be seen.
Unfortunately, for you and your ilk, they are not US citizens.
I'm pretty sure they are only polling US citizens.

so you think they check for a valid ID before they ask them? are you gay or stupid or both?

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 8:07 pm
by JayDuck
titlover wrote: so you think they check for a valid ID before they ask them? are you gay or stupid or both?
Apparently I'm at least a little bit smarter than you are, since I'm aware of the fact that they only poll registered voters.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:05 pm
by War Wagon
JayDuck wrote: Either the polls are meaningless, or they aren't. If they are, then so is Obama's lead and so is McCain whittling away that lead.

So, when you say that "the polls are meaningless" you make the very arguments you are trying to make meaningless.
Sheesh, the 'tard is strong in this one. Let's try again, from the top.

B_Spin - Obama has held a consistent lead.

Me - No, it went from 8-10 points down to 3, which is a statistical dead heat and with-in the margin of polling error. McCain has whittled that lead away.

B_Duck & Spin - He's had the same lead all along, here's this graph of the last 3 weeks that proves it.

Me - Umm, no... your selective graph doesn't prove shit. But what was once an insurmountable lead is no more.

B_D & S - In order to win, he's got to have a lead at some point.

Me - umm, again no... the only poll that matters happens on Nov. 4th. At this point, opinion polls are meaningless.


That about get us up to date?

Now, you seem like a reasonably intelligent sort, so i really shouldn't have to explain that when a candidate is up by 8-10 points in the polls, as Obama once was, that isn't meaningless. What it means is that there's going to be a landslide.

Conversely, when the polls are with-in 3-4 points, that means they are with-in the statistical margin of polling error, and therefore become meaningless.

Hello? Is any of this sinking in?

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:04 pm
by JayDuck
War Wagon wrote: That about get us up to date?
No. Though I see part of your problem might be the fact that you don't understand the nuances of the English language when you speak it.

1. There is a difference between "having a consistant lead", which implies that the lead has stayed the same and "consistantly having a lead" which is what I said.

2. The graph that I linked to ( http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Inter ... ction.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ) is not selective. It shows every single day of the poll back to January. Go ahead and actually look at it. What it shows is that every single day since Obama clinched the nomination, he has led. McCain has not had the lead even one day. That is, by definition, "consistantly having a lead".

3. Saying that "polls are meaningless" is perfectly fine, If you aren't trying to use them to argue that McCain is gaining on Obama as you did.

Now, you are saying that what you really meant was that big leads in polls aren't meaningless but small ones are? :lol: Talk about spin.

Even with that weak spin, you still miss the point. follow the fucking link and actually look at the graph. Its not some "insurmountable" 8 point lead that has been whittled down. Obama's lead has gone up and down. The trend in the graph doesn't show a steady decline to this 3 point margin, it shows fluctuation up and down and based on the data he will likely be up at 8 points again. Perhaps we should just stop talking about it until then, when polls can matter again. He's spiked that high multiple times.

3 or 4 points is within the margin of error. However, the fact that its been consistantly (there's that word again) Obama on top tells you that the margin of error is not what is creating a lead for Obama.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 11:54 pm
by War Wagon
JayDuck wrote: I see part of your problem might be the fact that you don't understand the nuances of the English language when you speak it.

There is a difference between "having a consistant lead", which implies that the lead has stayed the same and "consistantly having a lead" which is what I said.
I understand nuance just fine, and I wasn't responding to your drivel when I replied to this from Bri... who btw runs circles around you when it comes to nuance and twisting of words to suit a purpose.
He's maintained a consistent lead over McCain.
See the difference, or must I explain that also? Fuck off. I'm not doing it. Get somebody else to push your tike bike with the training wheels attached down the Cul-de-Smack, junior.

B_, come get this chump before he gets hurt playing in traffic.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 11:11 am
by Terry in Crapchester
War Wagon wrote:Now, you seem like a reasonably intelligent sort, so i really shouldn't have to explain that when a candidate is up by 8-10 points in the polls, as Obama once was, that isn't meaningless. What it means is that there's going to be a landslide.

Conversely, when the polls are with-in 3-4 points, that means they are with-in the statistical margin of polling error, and therefore become meaningless.
Actually, any poll that mirrors a national popular vote is meaningless, since that isn't the way a President is elected. Only state-by-state polls have any meaning, and those provide a snapshot at best. But those polls have favored Obama all along.

Image

This map is updated daily at http://www.electoral-vote.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, and this current map is about as unfavorable to Obama as any has been. The states in blue or red border are states within <5%, i.e., states that probably are within the statistical margin of error or very close to it. You'll note that McCain is holding 85 electoral votes in that category, Obama only 14.

Now, if Obama can carry all the states that Bush failed to carry at least once (not guaranteed, but he certainly has a very good chance of it), that gives him 264 electoral votes. In that scenario, he only needs to carry one of the following states to win the election:

Florida (27 electoral votes)
Ohio (20 electoral votes)
North Carolina (15 electoral votes)
Virginia (13 electoral votes)
Colorado (9 electoral votes)

Note too that in this scenario, Nevada (5 electoral votes) would produce a tie in the electoral vote, and therefore would throw the election into the House of Representatives. With the Democrats likely to pick up seats in the House this year, that scenario would look promising for an Obama win as well. The upshot of all of this is that McCain probably needs to sweep those six states -- five of which he leads narrowly, and the sixth is currently tied, all within the statistical margin of error -- to have any shot at winning the election.

In addition, McCain needs to win at least two of the following states: Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota (all have 3 electoral votes). Not to mention that Alaska could come into play as well. McCain currently has a 5-point lead there (close to if not within the statistical margin of error), and incumbent Republican Alaska Senator Ted Stevens is both under indictment and up for re-election. If Begich beats Stevens in a landslide, that could have a "reverse coattail" effect for Obama in that state.

The electoral map doesn't guarantee Obama a win by any stretch of the imagination at this point. What it does show, however, is that McCain will have to campaign heavily in a number of states which ordinarily are reliably Republican, at least in Presidential elections, if he is to have any chance of winning the election (of the ten states I mentioned, only Ohio and Nevada have gone Democratic in a Presidential election more than once since 1964). Throw in the likelihood of a financing disadvantage for McCain, and this scenario doesn't look anywhere near as rosy for McCain as the majority on this board (or at least in this thread) are painting it.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:38 pm
by titlover
JayDuck wrote:
titlover wrote: so you think they check for a valid ID before they ask them? are you gay or stupid or both?
Apparently I'm at least a little bit smarter than you are, since I'm aware of the fact that they only poll registered voters.

you believe that?

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:41 pm
by poptart
Thanks for the map, Terry.

Still shows Ohio leaning B.O.'s way.

Still full of total shit.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Wed Aug 20, 2008 2:44 pm
by War Wagon
Terry in Crapchester wrote: Actually, any poll that mirrors a national popular vote is meaningless, since that isn't the way a President is elected. Only state-by-state polls have any meaning, and those provide a snapshot at best.
That's exactly right, and what I've been saying all along.

In other news, McCain has turned This Poll upside down.

Read it and weep, liberal douchebags.
McCain leads Obama among likely U.S. voters by 46 percent to 41 percent, wiping out Obama's solid 7-point advantage in July and taking his first lead in the monthly Reuters/Zogby poll.

Re: Howeird Dean Plays The Race Card

Posted: Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:57 am
by Terry in Crapchester
poptart wrote:Thanks for the map, Terry.

Still shows Ohio leaning B.O.'s way.
Huh?

Let me explain to you how the map is read.

Blue=Obama
Red=McCain

Dark blue/red states are states that a candidate leads by >/= 10%.
Light blue/pink states are states that a candidate leads by 5-9%.
States with light blue/pink borders are states that a candidate leads by </= 4%, i.e., within the statistical margin of error of most polls.
One state (Virginia) is exactly tied at the moment, so Virginia has no color on the map.

Ohio has a pink border, therefore, Ohio is leaning McCain's way.

That having been said, your concentration on Ohio seems to be a case of missing the forest for the trees, as I will explain below.
Still full of total shit.
You have a different map relying on different state-by-state polls?

I'm not saying this is the way the election will go. I posted the map for a few reasons.

First, the map shows that the electoral support Obama has is more solid than the electoral support McCain has, at the moment anyway. Among states where the lead is >/= 5%, Obama leads the electoral vote by 250-176. That puts him only 20 electoral votes away from an electoral majority.

For the moment, there are 11 states within 4%. Those states (with electoral votes in parentheses) are:

Florida (27)
Ohio (20)
North Carolina (15)
Virginia (13)
Minnesota (10)
Colorado (9)
Nevada (5)
New Hampshire (4)
Montana (3)
North Dakota (3)
South Dakota (3)

The upshot of that is that if Obama wins either Florida or Ohio, it's over. McCain has to win both to even have a shot. And Obama could lose both and still have a shot at winning the general election (although the odds get a little longer in that case).

Strictly at random, there are 2,048 possible scenarios for those states, assuming that Obama or McCain will win all of them. If my math is correct, there are 1,964 scenarios in which Obama wins an Electoral College majority, 74 scenarios in which McCain wins an Electoral College majority, and 10 scenarios which result in an Electoral College tie, thereby throwing the election into the House of Representatives (which would likely work to Obama's advantage this year). Granted, this model is purely random on a state-by-state basis, and therefore doesn't consider the probability of each candidate winning a particular state. But even after that's factored in, given the overwhelming advantage Obama has on the random model, I'd have to believe that the likelihood of him winning the general election, at least at this point, is > 50%.

You'll also note that most of the states up for grabs this year have been reliably Republican states in most years. Of the list above, only four -- Ohio, Minnesota, Nevada and New Hampshire (combined 39 of 112 electoral votes within that group) -- have gone Democratic in a Presidential election more than once since 1964. This year, McCain will be forced, at a minimum, to defend states that Republicans traditionally have not put much effort into keeping in the Republican column. Yes, some of those are small states, but with McCain likely to have little or no margin for error, those states could prove to be more important than you think.

The second reason I posted the map is to refute what most of this board seems to be saying. It seems that a majority, or at least a very vocal minority, of this board "think" (if that's the right word for it) that McCain's election is a foregone conclusion. This current map is the most favorable to McCain since both nominees were known, and represents something pretty close to McCain's best-case scenario. And even then, McCain's election under this map is no sure thing.

Offer of a sig bet on the general election still stands, btw.