« Kaine: From the Short List to the Short Term | Main | WOW WOW WOW WOW WOW »


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference McCain-Palin Logo:


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

That's mean. Very funny, however.

Ha! I wonder if McCain will have an affair with Palin, seeing as his wife is getting a little old for him....and this one matches his newfound conservative values.


Did you notice how he kept twisting his wedding ring while Palin was speaking? Really, he did!


That is mean, agreed, and very funny. Also, if you do an image search on Flickr for Palin, you'll see some funny photoshopped pics. (You'll also see on Google Images a lot of pics of her with troops from 2007 -- including at the hospital in Germany that was a source of controversy during Obama's Germany tour.)

Oh, while I'm here, I think the article on Politico quoting historians about Palin has been tarnished -- here's an update added to the article:

There is now an update to the Politico story:

Update: After reading this article, the McCain campaign issued the following statement: "The authors quote four scholars attacking Gov. Palin's fitness for the office of Vice President. Among them, David Kennedy is a maxed out Obama donor, Joel Goldstein is also an Obama donor, and Doris Kearns Goodwin has donated exclusively to Democrats this cycle. Finally, Matthew Dallek is a former speech writer for Dick Gephardt. This is not a story about scholars questioning Governor Palin's credentials so much as partisan Democrats who would find a reason to disqualify or discount any nominee put forward by Senator McCain."

I would add that Goldstein is a heavy Dem donor and Dallek also held a political job under Matthew Kennard, the former Dem chairman of the FCC.


Old Man Shaking Fist/Granddaughter '08

I much enjoy your fact checks.
Keep up the good work.


Well, the young lady in this picture actually has more experience than Palin (I remember someone saying that was important). But I am so heartened that Ben thinks this is a good choice- it really affirms for me what a complete disaster this sort of wishful thinking is going to be for McBush. Mid-September, when this does turn into an unmitigated and complete disaster for McSamey, I'm wondering how you are going to give Hillary credit for the whole thing. Oh, Palin got booed loudly today for mentioning your hero in a speech today. Don't kid yourself and think any of those troglodytes liked Hill. They hated her. And the polling? Biden may have given Obama nothing, but Palin is about to lose a good deal for McCheatsonwives:

From Gallup

Was this supposed to make a play for Hillary voters?

Among Democratic women — including those who may be disappointed that New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton did not win the Democratic nomination — 9% say Palin makes them more likely to support McCain, 15% less likely.

Is that important?

As one McCain aide put it: "We either get Hillary's voters and we win, or we don't. It's not a mystery."

Hey doug,
Remember your H.S. math (assuming you have gotten that far)

When discussing actual executive experience

Palin > Biden > Obama

Guess that puts your boys last on the experience scale

I'd say that McCain would be very pleased if he picked up 9% of Hillary voters. And excite his base in the process.
That doesn't even count those Obama voters who now realize that Oblahblahblahma is all talk and McCain is providing real change.

Sounds like a win, win situation.
When McCain wins 300 plus ECV will you and all of your alias' congratulate him on the stunning choice of VP?


Nice idiotic try at math, but if you mean actual executive experience, you would have to include this, and probably modify the equivalencies. Though, how you say Biden has more than Obama I don't understand (committee chairmanship? Did you include Obama's state senate chairmanships?). I'll assume you base executive experience on two things: time served in the executive branch of the government and running large and medium scale private business. So I get:

Doug > Palin > Biden = McCain = Obama

What's your point?


And, jackass, that poll shows McCain picking up 9% of Hillary supporters while losing 15% of them. Care to discuss math, simple statistics, or shall we get into a discussion of advanced algorithms for say capacity modelling, earned value management, etc. I seriously doubt you or Sarah would understand those too well. Actually, I take that back, I have no clue if she would or not.

Now, scientific methodology, carbon dating, the basics of evolutionary science, I think those I could kick her ass in.

Wow douggie,
you and biden should compare IQ's..lol

However before you run for smartest in the room you might want to read what I wrote..

"I'd say that McCain would be very pleased if he picked up 9% of Hillary voters."

Yes I know it is a simple statement and one that a genius like you may have difficulty with but, to those of us who are mere mortals "words mean something"

You really should remember that trying too hard to make youself something that you are not only makes you look more foolish.

now who is the jackass???

btw doug,
it's morons like you that put companies out of business (children playing in adult world), put some time in, grow up and maybe you will have a real business someday


Gallup said, simply, that he gained 9% of Hillary voters and lost 15%. That is a 6% net loss.

What is your point? A net loss is a loss. Enron was run by Bush Pioneers, not by progressive idealists like myself (say someone who has run successful companies for 15 years and have never once lost money). Now, Mr. 6% loss, you are going to have to explain to me again how you would view a P&L statement that reads "Net Profit = -$6,000,000"? A 9% gain like Enron executives might?


If I gave you a $1 dollar bill and in exchange you gave me a $5 dollar bill, would you run around screaming- "I GOT A DOLLAR! I GOT A DOLLAR!"


You are really starting to bore me with your complete lack of ability to understand the English language. It does not make for a very strong argument regarding your intelligence.
I am typing very very slowly so you can keep up.

If McCain gets 9% of Hillary voters in the election that happens in November, you know the one for President (of all 57 states according to Obama). I think that he will be very pleased to have picked up these voters. If he gets more, he will be more happy.

Maybe this is more on your level:
If you get one extra piece of candy on Halloween night you are happy, if you get two you are more happy. Do you understand now douggie?

Forgive me if my babytalk is not up to par but I hope I have gotten it far enough down to your level to understand.

Also, in my experience those who find it necessary to blow their own horns are not very good at what they do or are extremely insecure. Want to tell us which category you fit in?



He never had the Hillary voters to begin with. So picking up 9% is not a net loss. It is a net gain.

You want to play too?

Doug’s quote:

“9% say Palin makes them more likely to support McCain, 15% less likely.”

Ok lets start with simple English. Nowhere did it state that these folks were going to support McCain.

Now lets look at my statement:

"I'd say that McCain would be very pleased if he picked up 9% of Hillary voters."

So McCain picks up 9% of these voters and loses nothing because he never actually had these voters in the first place.

Simple enough for you kids?

ty 11:36 at least someone has some common sense.

btw.. don't invest in doug's business, the boy don't have a clue

oh, and doug,
you were saying something about a jackass earlier?

Slumber now in the peaceful silence of dougs continuing education.
Rest well grasshopper, the lessons begin anew tomorrow.


Are you guys serious? What part of "less likely" do you not understand? When a particular development results in a larger portion of a voter bloc being less likely to support the candidate than the portion that is more likely to support that candidate as result of the development- the development is NOT a good thing.

Geez, I feel like I'm talking to children.


Another thing you guys should understand is that it's pretty typical to have 15-20% party crossover both ways. So no, by no measure whatsoever is 9% good.

you must read the post before you comment on them. ignorance of the post will be no excuse for lack of understanding.

we started with zero votes and picked up 9 another 15 said maybe not. it's all good with us because we got 9 more than we had when we started. It is simple logic based on dougs. givens.

no storm clouds showing up no fires or dead registered voters are allowed in this conversation. It has to be clean to be effective.


Re: the picture.

Reminds me of Alan Cranston and Madonna.

She is only with him because of his money.

Ask him if he cares.


You guys are convincing only yourselves. NO ONE HAS VOTED YET. So I'm happy with any development that turns off more voters to McCain that it turns on. Keep up that great campaign strategy- that'll work!

I don't want to be the first to tell you but they were your voters...

ouch.. back to basics for brimur.. ok..
brimur you have your 100 voters I have my 100 voters. lets call that even. If i take 9 of yours and you take none of mine... I win...
if 24 of yours want to come vote for me that's great, but only 9 fulfilled the promise and came over. I still win the election by 18 votes.

55 and I sent doug and brimur walking away holding their asses

Normally dougs alter ego pete shows up for the fun, but not today.
Guess we’ll have to bask together in the glory of another victory

had all the fun i can stand for one night. rest up boys, well be back at it at o light thirty


Anon. 12:52 - That is so cutely simplistic. Two glaring problems: you miss the fact that some amount of party crossover (between 15-20%) is typical - in both directions. So if you take 9 out of 100, you're still short about 10 to come even to what the average person is going to take from you. Second, just b/c they voted for Hillary does not AT ALL mean they were ever interested in supporting Obama. That's a huge leap but it's clear that you need a tad more experience in politics to even appreciate your own naivete.

So that being said, campaigns are about persuading independents and people leaning toward supporting your opponent. So if McCain keeps making decisions that by a 2:1 margin he turns off those decisive voters- GREAT! Meanwhile, Obama is picking off McCain leaners.

Not Larry Sabato

Wow, I am sorry to have missed this numbers debate tonight.

I think both sides here are wrong. The Hillary voters are not all solid D voters- so it is not a straight pickup.

The Obama people claiming 15% of Hillary's voters being turned off by Palin is a good thing are total idiots (sorry Brimur and Doug). Obama probably need 75-80% of Hillary's voters to win- so only pissing 15% of them off with a VP was a big win for McCain.


Hahaha, the authority speaks. Pardon me if I don't roll with your analysis buddy.

The facts from the numbers are that 91% are unmoved toward McCain by the pick- that far exceeds your 75-80%.

Not Larry Sabato

If you asked Dem primary voters what they thought of Cheney in 04 it would have 90% negative.

In contrast Palin is 15% negative.

Not good- and one reason why Dems are moving so fast to attack her- they must move that number up quick.


Obama's campaign is actually doing the smart thing. Focusing their fire on McCain. This Palin thing is really just a distraction. (It's just fun for us nerds.) No one votes based on running mates.



Meanwhile, McCain's message is still shot to hell by this. No MSM figure is going to carry his experience message after this.


The larger point missing from this numbers conversation is that Palin is just very unknown, and thus will have very little impact on those crucial voters up for grabs.

And across all voter groups the VP choices are virtually indistinguishable- Biden was a net +7 positive, while Palin was a net +7 positive. http://www.gallup.com/poll/109951/Palin-Unknown-Most-Americans.aspx

I do not understand why you and doug can not read simple English, and translate simple logic. Why you feel the need to interject probabilities not even discussed in the original statement.
Here is the basic argument from the first post in this discussion I have Capitalized the important parts for you to make it easier;
“Among DEMOCRATIC women — including those who may be disappointed that New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton did not win the Democratic nomination — 9% say Palin makes them MORE LIKELY to support McCain, 15% LESS LIKELY. “
FACTS from statement:

DEMOCRATC = not original McCain supporters (he is republican if you didn’t know)
(That actually means that 76% are neither more or less likely to vote for McCain because of this pick, but that is a different argument in favor of McCain)

Now lets look at this “controversial” statement. (which is actually pretty simple):

“I'd say that McCain would be very pleased if he picked up 9% of Hillary voters”

Now, leaving out party crossover and carbon dating and the gravitational pull of the earth, it seems that this would be pretty clear to any thinking person.
However if you are still too obtuse to understand, I hereby turn in my teaching degree on this subject, take the 9% and congratulate President McCain on a job well done.

Remember the first rule when you find yourself in a hole???


You guys are crazy if you think this nominee will net any significant votes from Clinton supporters. It is likely to backfire. Clinton supporters want Clinton. If not, clearly they want a woman with experience. Did I mention that Palin is firmly on the opposite side of almost every issue women care about?

She basically said in her own speech that they main thing she had to offer was she was a woman. That won't sell. In the end she will pick a very, very small sliver of those voters.

In the process, she will loose huge numbers of swing voters and moderates due to her extremist conservative positions.

Once again, it seems the Republicans want to help us win. It seems McCain is taking cues on how to pick candidates from the Virginia Republicans. Plain is Chris Craddock #2.

I don't know what women you are hangin with but the ones I have spoken with are excited about this pick and believe that this is something entirely different than the “politics as usual” direction that Obama has taken.

that idiot kerry interviewed on "this week" just said

"how stupid do they think Hillary supporters are?"

I suppose this moron works from the assumption that her supporters are "stupid" but not "that stupid"

what an ass


Without even devling into the other points, 9% crossover is poor. I'll take that. Because Obama will steal a lot more than that from Republicans.


Ben- you know you are reading my comment, the original one, and the numbers wrong. It was simply in the Gallup poll that Palin makes 9% of Hillary supporters more likely to vote for McBush and 15% less likely to vote for McBush. I said nothing more. I said nothing less. I said nothing about Dems or the % of Hillary voters who support McCain. Gallup actually didn't poll that, so you and I do not know.

Palin, alone, is a net loss among Hillary supporters, that is all. And that is only for now. But from what I have read of her, I have a very strong notion that she is going to turn into a complete disaster for McSame.

Your bitterness and your rank decision to post nothing positive about Obama or support him in any way, goes quite contrary to how Hillary feels and it is very dissapointing. Obama is no Connelly, and I completely agree with you on not supporting that man, but you know Obama is not cut from the same cloth.


Ben- where do you get that Palin is 15% negative? There is no poll on that yet. I'm pretty sure if there were the poll would have a result of "80% say who the hell is Palin?" I don't claim to know jack shit about her. She is easy on the eyes and fiesty, but that just makes me worry about Cindy.

Hokie Guru


Yikes, I'm still in mourning after the Virginia Tech Hokie loss to ECU yesterday. The offense was attrocious and steps need to be taken in regard to the Hokie offensive coordinator, Bryan Stinespring. Maybe hire a co-offensive coordinator with knowledge of the spread offense.

Independent expenditure groups will shed some light on the record of Palin (and McCain) regarding their stances on social issues, like abortion (and the Supreme Court). These Hillary voters only have one place to go here on this issue and it's not a McCain/Palin ticket. In short, opinions from the Hillary voters will slowly change.


Despite Hillary's beautiful words and beautiful speech at the Convention, it is in the best interest of both Hillary and her cause, for Obama to lose this year.

If Obama loses, she is the IMMEDIATE frontrunner for 2012. If not, she may never get the opportunity to run again.

Hokie Guru

That's a pretty good point in a dark underground sort of way... and I know this is wrong, but I agree with T.


Hokie- I'm in a state of rage myself. After a long 13 hour day (did you get stuck below the accident on 77?) I cannot believe Stinespring is not tarred and feathered in the central square. I personally started the chant last year "Stinespring is a dingaling". It's high time he was shown the road so we can have someone the caliber of Bud Foster on that side of the ball.

not matter how you guys (doug and brimur) want to change the numbers around you still look like idiots. Try to just say "I was wrong" and Stop Digging

Hokie Guru

Doug, the Hokie Guru did not take I-77... he was smart and took W. Morehead Street to I-85 and avoided that mess.

Here's my choice for an offensive coordinator for the Virginia Tech football team:


He's had one of the top 10 offenses at Tulsa, runs the spread, and Tyrod Taylor, the receivers, and RBs would love to play in this type of offense... we, perhaps, offer Stiny a downgrade to TE coach (he's done a good job there) and we bring in Gus Malzahn... he will come for the right prices.


Your background research is far beyond mine Hokie. I stand behind all of your guidance 100%.

As for responding to anyone without an ID, I have to learn to stop doing that, as advised. I've completely lost track of caring about what that Gallup poll was for, but I think now I'll just watch McSame implode and enjoy myself instead of trying to figure out Ben's motives.

Here's an actual number. John Kerry got 89% of the Democratic Party member votes. Obama needs to be near that, but he does a whole lot better with independents. He is currently at 80% (polled) with Dems. He needs to be at 85% at least, and Palin will help him a few points in that direction, but I think Gallup and Rasmussen show he got there with his speech already. (oh right, it was Hillary's, although the polling ACTUALLY STATES it was Obama that pushed his own numbers up). Everything is going very well for Obama so far.

Current info is not always the easiest thing to locate. Fortunately, this article/post includes the latest info available. - William B. Doyle, http://www.wbdoyle.com/tsfls/

Logo Design

Haha. Thats funny dear.

coach sale

Luckily to read your article,thank you. With very best wishes for your happiness in new day.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment


NLS Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    Facebook Fan Page


    Blog powered by Typepad