With less than a week till Election Day, any movement in the polls is big news. In the Real Clear Politics national poll average, Barack Obama's 8-point lead from Saturday has decreased to 5.9, due mostly to a gain in John McCain's average.
Three major polls have seen a significant squeeze in the past five days, causing this trend. Today, a Rasmussen poll put Obama at a 3-point lead. McCain has gained 3 points in their survey since Saturday and Obama has lost two, putting the race at the narrowest margin this poll has seen since late September.
This followed the drastic squeeze seen in the Reuters/Zogby/C-SPAN this weekend. After enjoying a 12-point lead in their poll last week, Obama's lead shrunk to around 5 points and held steady there for a few days.
The latest poll to close was Gallup. Their traditional likely voter turnout model has Obama up by three, after having a 7-point lead at one point last week. (Take note: Gallup has multiple voter models. Which one is right depends on who shows up to vote. The other models have Obama up by 7-points today.)
This report from NRO could be the first serious indicator of a backlash from Jewish Democrats against Barack Obama.
Within the last hour, the first exit poll of 817 Americans in Israel, who attended U.S. election voting events in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv on Tuesday evening to vote by absentee ballot, has been released.
A startling 76 percent of those polled said that they had voted for John McCain. This contrasts sharply with pre-election polls of American Jews in the U.S., which indicate a strong preference for Obama.
The exit poll findings of American voters in Israel are all the more surprising because less than one in four were registered Republicans, and 46% of registered Democrats living in Israel said they had crossed party lines to vote McCain. By contrast, the Republican crossover to Obama was minimal – just 2%.
The votes are significant as almost half of the 42,000 registered U.S. voters living in Israel come from key swing states including Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania.
In the 2000 and 2004 elections, Israel had the third-largest group of American voters abroad, after Canada and Britain.
The exit poll was commissioned by Votefromisrael.org, an independent, non-partisan organization dedicated to promoting voter registration and participation amongst American citizens living in Israel.
Interesting…these Jewish Americans voted just as the story about Barack Obama and Rashid Khalidi was hitting the mainstream media outlets on Tuesday. I would expect that story to continue to fuel a backlash among Jews residing in the US, as Election Day next Tuesday approaches.
RICHMOND, Va. -- A Washington lobbyist sued The New York Times for $27 million Tuesday over an article that she says gave the false impression she had an affair with Sen. John McCain in 1999.
Vicki L. Iseman filed the defamation suit in U.S. District Court in Richmond. It also names as defendants the Times' executive editor, its Washington bureau chief and four reporters.
In February, as McCain was seeking the Republican presidential nomination, the Times reported that McCain aides once worried the relationship between Iseman and McCain had turned romantic.
The article said that both McCain and Iseman denied any romantic relationship, but the lawsuit says most readers would find that obligatory.
"That The New York Times would make such aggressive and sensational allegations and insinuations in the face of on-the-record denials by Ms. Iseman and Senator McCain only reinforced the message to readers that The New York Times in fact believed that Ms. Iseman and Senator McCain had indeed engaged in an `inappropriate relationship,' a relationship that was romantic, unethical, and a conflict of interest," the lawsuit says. "Otherwise, reasonable readers would conclude, The New York Times would never have printed the story at all."
Richmond lawyer W. Coleman Allen Jr., who represents Iseman, said she waited until after the presidential election to file the suit because she didn't want it to become a distraction.
The lawsuit claims that other media outlets were investigating McCain's ties with Iseman and that the Times was so concerned about being scooped that it printed a story "to pack the maximum sensational impact with the minimum factual support." The lawsuit contends she suffered an "avalanche of scorn, derision, and ridicule" that damaged her health.
The lawsuit cites accounts from other media, political pundits and the Times' public editor, Clark Hoyt, that interpreted the article as meaning that McCain and Iseman had an affair.
"Ms. Iseman's relationship with Senator McCain was entirely professional, ethical, and appropriate," the lawsuit states, adding that it "was not different in kind from the cordial yet professional relationship that hundreds of lobbyists have with hundreds of members of Congress."
Vicki Iseman has settled her $27 million defamation lawsuit against The New York Times and several of its reporters.
Iseman, a Washington lobbyist, sued the Times over a story published last February during the presidential campaign season that she claimed inaccurately depicted her as having an affair with Republican candidate Sen. John McCain.
Iseman says, "I am pleased that The New York Times on behalf of its reporters, editors and company has issued a retraction and clarification."
Iseman’s statement continues, "The New York Times, its reporters and editors, should and must be held accountable when their investigations, reporting, and written words migrate from legitimate to illegitimate with the affect of destroying human beings based on innuendos, rumors and the reckless attributions of 'anonymous sources.'"
Iseman filed the lawsuit in December in federal court in Richmond, Va.
Right, I mean the protesters like the ones outside the Post that are mad they compared congress to the dead monkey. Shouldn't they be upset that the paper thinks all women sleep(fuck) their way through the business sector?
Right, I mean the protesters like the ones outside the Post that are mad they compared congress to the dead monkey. Shouldn't they be upset that the paper thinks all women sleep(fuck) their way through the business sector?
I don't believe the story ever said all woman sleep(fuck) their way through the business sector. Do you honestly feel it does that?
I wonder how Carlos Slim feels about his money going to pay her from the settlement. Probably won't be much longer until there is a full on Aussie-Mexican New York Newspaper War.
Right, I mean the protesters like the ones outside the Post that are mad they compared congress to the dead monkey. Shouldn't they be upset that the paper thinks all women sleep(fuck) their way through the business sector?
I don't believe the story ever said all woman sleep(fuck) their way through the business sector. Do you honestly feel it does that?
no i don't, but those idiots in front of the post think a cartoon about congress is a slur against all black people.
McCain's Democrat opponent sings a campaign song against McCain, "Sweet Home Arizona". Patterned after the melody of... gee, I don't know, what song could it possibly be?
This guy posted it separately because the free-speech-minded liberals who posted it were deleting any comments critical of it.
Contrarian that I am, I'm voting for John McCain. I'm not talking about bucking the polls or the media consensus that it's over before it's over. I'm talking about bucking the rush of wet-fingered conservatives leaping to Barack Obama before they're left out in the cold without a single state dinner for the next four years.
I stand athwart the rush of conservative ship-jumpers of every stripe -- neo (Ken Adelman), moderate (Colin Powell), genetic/ironic (Christopher Buckley) and socialist/atheist (Christopher Hitchens) -- yelling "Stop!" I shall have no part of this motley crew. I will go down with the McCain ship. I'd rather lose an election than lose my bearings.
First, I'll have no truck with the phony case ginned up to rationalize voting for the most liberal and inexperienced presidential nominee in living memory. The "erratic" temperament issue, for example. As if McCain's risky and unsuccessful but in no way irrational attempt to tactically maneuver his way through the economic tsunami that came crashing down a month ago renders unfit for office a man who demonstrated the most admirable equanimity and courage in the face of unimaginable pressures as a prisoner of war, and who later steadily navigated innumerable challenges and setbacks, not the least of which was the collapse of his campaign just a year ago.
McCain the "erratic" is a cheap Obama talking point. The 40-year record testifies to McCain the stalwart.
Nor will I countenance the "dirty campaign" pretense. The double standard here is stunning. Obama ran a scurrilous Spanish-language ad falsely associating McCain with anti-Hispanic slurs. Another ad falsely claimed that McCain supports "cutting Social Security benefits in half." And for months Democrats insisted that McCain sought 100 years of war in Iraq.
McCain's critics are offended that he raised the issue of William Ayers. What's astonishing is that Obama was himself not offended by William Ayers.
Moreover, the most remarkable of all tactical choices of this election season is the attack that never was. Out of extreme (and unnecessary) conscientiousness, McCain refused to raise the legitimate issue of Obama's most egregious association -- with the race-baiting Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Dirty campaigning, indeed.
The case for McCain is straightforward. The financial crisis has made us forget, or just blindly deny, how dangerous the world out there is. We have a generations-long struggle with Islamic jihadism. An apocalyptic soon-to-be-nuclear Iran. A nuclear-armed Pakistan in danger of fragmentation. A rising Russia pushing the limits of revanchism. Plus the sure-to-come Falklands-like surprise popping out of nowhere.
Who do you want answering that phone at 3 a.m.? A man who's been cramming on these issues for the past year, who's never had to make an executive decision affecting so much as a city, let alone the world? A foreign policy novice instinctively inclined to the flabbiest, most vaporous multilateralism (e.g., the Berlin Wall came down because of "a world that stands as one"), and who refers to the most deliberate act of war since Pearl Harbor as "the tragedy of 9/11," a term more appropriate for a bus accident?
Or do you want a man who is the most prepared, most knowledgeable, most serious foreign policy thinker in the United States Senate? A man who not only has the best instincts but has the honor and the courage to, yes, put country first, as when he carried the lonely fight for the surge that turned Iraq from catastrophic defeat into achievable strategic victory?
There's just no comparison. Obama's own running mate warned this week that Obama's youth and inexperience will invite a crisis -- indeed a crisis "generated" precisely to test him. Can you be serious about national security and vote on Nov. 4 to invite that test?
And how will he pass it? Well, how has he fared on the only two significant foreign policy tests he has faced since he's been in the Senate? The first was the surge. Obama failed spectacularly. He not only opposed it. He tried to denigrate it, stop it and, finally, deny its success.
The second test was Georgia, to which Obama responded instinctively with evenhanded moral equivalence, urging restraint on both sides. McCain did not have to consult his advisers to instantly identify the aggressor.
Today's economic crisis, like every other in our history, will in time pass. But the barbarians will still be at the gates. Whom do you want on the parapet? I'm for the guy who can tell the lion from the lamb.
my father linked me to the article. and because he's smarter than me, i posted it here.
In the rare case of McCain’s hero image lasting longer than four hours, readers should seek immediate medical attention.
From McCain’s lackluster record at the Naval Academy to his self-important tenure as a United States Senator, John McCain has an eerie history of enlarging himself. Unfortunately, leadership is not about the size of one’s election. It’s about character, competence, and respect.
Like any poster child for the Democrats, former POW John McCain possesses the victim status necessary to insulate himself from factually transmitted criticisms – at least while he’s serving liberal purposes. However, most men are judged on how they conduct themselves throughout their entire lives, not on five ill-fated years in their pasts.
None of us know for sure what McCain experienced during his time as a POW. All we know is that he survived and came home while many other POWs did not. What was it about McCain that was different? Was it family heritage or was it his proclivity for compromising to get what he wants?
At the Academy, McCain rebelled and barely graduated. In The Nightingale’s Song (authored by fellow Naval Academy graduate Roger Timberg) McCain proves to be more of a playboy than a midshipman. Disobedience, demerits, and distraction mark McCain’s Academy days. Today, McCain continues to demonstrate that he lacks the self-discipline, tact, and integrity on which the Academy prides itself. The Academy’s honor code states clearly, “[Midshipmen] tell the truth and ensure that the full truth is known.”
Just this week, McCain demonstrated the value he places on honor. He intentionally misrepresented Governor Romney’s position on the war. But such behavior is consistent with McCain’s conduct throughout his life. However, it contrasts sharply with the heroic portrayal of McCain’s time as a POW. How did a man with McCain’s inferior track record suddenly become a super-human leader of fellow POWs?
In fact, an article by investigative journalist Greg Szymanski depicts John McCain as no friend to POW families. While the article clearly has a Ron-Paul-like feel, Szymanski raises many questions about McCain’s classified POW files. McCain is now the Democrats’ darling Republican, but one must expect these questions will come to light should McCain become the GOP Presidential Candidate. Regardless, McCain should open his POW files in the interest of honesty, as well as to eliminate speculative controversy.
Nevertheless, Szymanski’s article seems more consistent with McCain’s track record than McCain’s own version of the story. According to the widow of POW and Navy pilot, Larry Van Renselaar, “I remember my husband saying, [McCain] was not well-liked [by other pilots] and thought of as a hot dog and a punk.” Does this sound consistent with what McCain’s “fellow” Republicans might think today?
Upon his heroic return to America, McCain’s repugnant propensity to look out for himself suddenly resurfaced. While he was a POW, McCain’s first wife, Carol Shepp, was involved in a horrible car accident. She was a former model, but the accident left her four inches shorter and on crutches. Though she suffered serious injuries, she refused to allow news of the accident to reach McCain in Vietnam, as she feared the news would only add to his suffering as a POW. Not long after his homecoming, however, McCain revealed his appreciation for her loyalty and faithfulness by engaging in extramarital affairs.
Six years later, McCain met Cindy Hensley. She was 25 and attractive. She was also the daughter of Jim Hensley, founder of the nation’s third largest Anheuser-Bush distributor. McCain divorced his wife and then married Hensley a month later. He followed her to Arizona where her millionaire father helped McCain begin his political career.
As a senator, McCain continues to conduct himself unfaithfully. He has betrayed his party time and again: McCain-Kennedy for amnesty of illegal immigrants (enough said); McCain-Feingold for campaign finance reform (suppressing free speech); McCain-Lieberman for energy tax (global warming); and McCain-Edwards for a Patient’s Bill of Rights (socialist medicine).
Is it any wonder McCain is a poster child for Democrats and EDS? Apparently, he has always needed a little artificial help to get the job done. He talks tough to compensate for his raspy little voice. But his tough “hawk” image mainly covers up his waning male virility.
Don’t be surprised if McCain joins real hero Bob Dole in Viagra commercials. Then again, McCain would probably jump to Cialis if Kennedy or Clinton would extend an invitation.
With his kind of loyalty, is it really all that ironic how hard McCain is on pharmaceutical companies?
...John McCain. Warts and all, I still think even McCain would have been a far better president than Barack Obama.
Though I think Romney was a better choice in 2012. And not even 12 months later, so do a majority of the American people polled.
