That is the case. While the legitimate arguments against McCain are there they pale beside the Dem "choices."

The nomination process has stirred up the Democrats, and the vitriol coupled with nominee partisanship is real. That being said, all this talk about voting for McCain is strictly posturing for effect. Democrats know either of their candidates will be better than a continuation of Bush policies under the Republican standard bearer. This poll is simply a media  talking point and  distraction from the growing economic obstacles the country needs to address, and quickly. 

I think people forget in January how so many Republicans were saying that if John McCain won, they'd vote for a Democrat.  Ann Coulter pledged to work for Clinton over McCain for instance.

Ms. Clinton’s pastor speaking about Rev Wright this morning:

“”The Reverend Jeremiah Wright is an outstanding church leader whom I have heard speak a number of times,” Snyder wrote. “He has served for decades as a profound voice for justice and inclusion in our society. To evaluate his dynamic ministry on the basis of two or three sound bites does a grave injustice to Dr. Wright, the members of his congregation, and the African-American church which has been the spiritual refuge of a people that has suffered from discrimination, disadvantage, and violence. Dr. Wright, a member of an integrated denomination, has been an agent of racial reconciliation while proclaiming perceptions and truths uncomfortable for some white people to hear. Those of us who are white Americans would do well to listen carefully to Dr. Wright rather than to use a few of his quotes to polarize.”

 Hard for me to say---lots of things to consider (running mate is just one) before I vote. Right now, I'm leaning toward Obama. I really, really have issues of trust with Hillary. For all her speeches and interviews, I don't know what she has in mind for a new direction for the country. I'm likely to vote for McCain before I vote for Clinton.

I was leaning McCain over Clinton myself,if it came to that. Now the more I see of McCain ,I will hold my nose and vote Democrat.She is at least,consistent. Maybe not good consistent,but nonetheless consistent. McCain just does not seem to get that we need a plan to get out of Iraqi .

Of the three choices, I'd vote Obama, then Clinton and not vote, before I'd vote for McCain.

 People will say a lot of things but the proof will be in the pudding..and in the voting booth.

Now tell me again which movie stars are still living in the US of A who swore they'd leave the country if..............?

Which ones moved out of the country again?

Not that their wild promises meant anything to anybody with any sense.

 I've been thinking about posting a separate blog on this, but it (kinda) fits here.  This is Mike Huckabee talking about Rev. Wright:

HUCKABEE: [Obama] made the point, and I think it's a valid one, that you can't hold the candidate responsible for everything that people around him may say or do. You just can't. Whether it's me, whether it's Obama...anybody else. But he did distance himself from the very vitriolic statements.

Now, the second story. It's interesting to me that there are some people on the left who are having to be very uncomfortable with what Louis Wright said, when they all were all over a Jerry Falwell, or anyone on the right who said things that they found very awkward and uncomfortable years ago. Many times those were statements lifted out of the context of a larger sermon. Sermons, after all, are rarely written word for word by pastors like Reverend Wright, who are delivering them extemporaneously, and caught up in the emotion of the moment. There are things that sometimes get said, that if you put them on paper and looked at them in print, you'd say "Well, I didn't mean to say it quite like that."

JOE SCARBOROUGH: But, but, you never came close to saying five days after September 11th, that America deserved what it got. Or that the American government invented AIDS...

HUCKABEE: Not defending his statements.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: Oh, I know you're not. I know you're not. I'm just wondering though, for a lot of people...Would you not guess that there are a lot of Independent voters in Arkansas that vote for Democrats sometimes, and vote for Republicans sometimes, that are sitting here wondering how Barack Obama's spiritual mentor would call the United States the USKKK?

HUCKABEE: I mean, those were outrageous statements, and nobody can defend the content of them.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: But what's the impact on voters in Arkansas? Swing voters.

HUCKABEE: I don't think we know. If this were October, I think it would have a dramatic impact. But it's not October. It's March. And I don't believe that by the time we get to October, this is gonna be the defining issue of the campaign, and the reason that people vote.

And one other thing I think we've gotta remember. As easy as it is for those of us who are white, to look back and say "That's a terrible statement!"...I grew up in a very segregated south. And I think that you have to cut some slack -- and I'm gonna be probably the only Conservative in America who's gonna say something like this, but I'm just tellin' you -- we've gotta cut some slack to people who grew up being called names, being told "you have to sit in the balcony when you go to the movie. You have to go to the back door to go into the restaurant. And you can't sit out there with everyone else. There's a separate waiting room in the doctor's office. Here's where you sit on the bus..." And you know what? Sometimes people do have a chip on their shoulder and resentment. And you have to just say, I probably would too. I probably would too. In fact, I may have had more of a chip on my shoulder had it been me.

MIKA: I agree with that. I really do.

BTW, this is one of the reasons as a Democrat I'm really glad Huckabee isn't the nominee.  As much as I disagreed with his positions, I really liked the guy.

Fair enough that we won't know until we know, but...

The Gallup poll had only 59% of Clinton's Democratic supporters saying they would vote for Obama over McCain.  And 28% said they would vote for McCain over Obama outright.  That's pretty bad news for the Democrats.

McCain has as much or more of a chance to solidify and expand that 28% number as Obama has to undo it.  McCain's choice of Condi Rice as VP would expand that number.  A bitter Democratic National Convention would expand it as well.

This poll is a bit odd, because the national head-to-head polls presumably already incorporate this dynamic in their numbers.  So it's at best unclear why it matters.  The problem for Obama is that the national likely voter polls have him falling further and further behind McCain as both independents and Clinton supporters head to McCain. 

Rasmussen has McCain leading over Obama by 10% today...  That is a landslide for McCain if it holds or expands...

...and miles to go before we sleep.  

 Publican, I've been watching RaMu.  It's sort of an outlier right now and Gallup has been tracking the other way.  Any idea on methodological differences?  I'm also a bit shocked since the Reuters/Zogby poll taken in the midst of the Wright scandal only had McCain up by 6.

Gallup has another poll out showing around 20% of registered Republican voters are planning on either not voting, writing in a candidate or voting for the Democratic candidate.

I'm trying to find a link.

 Hey Tom.

They seem roughly  consistent which is probably about the best we can expect.

The Reuters/Zogby was of likely voters and gave McCain +6% on March 13-14.  That was nearly identical to Rasmussen at the time: from the 15th to the 19th Rasmussen had McCain +5% or +6%.

Gallup has been moving back to parity some, but it still gives McCain a 2% lead over Obama.  That is roughly consistent with Rasmussen.  Gallup is a poll of registered voters while Rasmussen is a poll of likely voters.   Registered voter polls consistently bias towards Democrats so any sort of Republican lead among registered voters is very bad news for Democrats.  The amount of the bias is anyone's guess, but that 8% difference between Gallup's registered voter tracking and Rasmussen's likely voter tracking is certainly not out of line.  Likely voter polls are only as good as the pollster's ability to predict who and how many registered voters will actually show up at the polls.  But, for the larger polling firms, they are generally accurate at selecting the likely voters out of the larger pool of registered voters.  Generally. 

TSM

Yeah...  that is one of the more surprising things about this Presidential election.  If the Democrat is Obama, the electoral college map looks a lot different than if the Democrat is Clinton.  A lot of people move in both directions depending on who the Democrat is.  Presidential Red Rover at its best.

  Publican, likely vs.registered is really weird now based on the expanding registration gap.  It's just strange since Rasmussen is giving McCain +10 where all the other recent polls have him at +6 (the Reuters/Zogby poll from a week and a half ago) to minus 5.  I'm wondering if they've adjusted the underlying methodology based on who they consider "likely".

I'll not presume to tell you what's what though.  :)

I don't know if Rasmussen has adjusted their "likely voters" selection recently or not. 

Capitalism really shines in situations like this, though.  If Rasmussen gets it wrong, its clients go to their competitors, but if Rasmussen nails it, then they get the demand for accurate prediction.

But...  538 just gave McCain the Electoral College lead.  It has been a huge shift in only a couple of weeks.  The Wrong Reverend Wright's gentle ministrations are only now being tallied up.

McCain now leads Obama 270.3 to 267.7 after taking a decisive lead in Missouri.  That is here.

 Still want hear who's being considered for running mate; after all, this guy will be a chicken bone away from having his finger on the nuke button. Barack & Hill won't be together, they'll kill each other at the first cabinet meeting.

Condi with McCain may sound good, but she's said a number of times that she's through with politics after this gig with George. Poor lady probably feels like she's been in jail for a crime she didn't commit. 

Huckabee might get the fundamentalist vote but that would make me nervous after saying he wants to "take back the country for Jesus." I'd be happier if he wants to take back the country for Americans.

On the other side, Romney? Edwards? Neither? I just gotta be patient and wait. 

These poll numbers are meaningless. Give the polls a rest, and stop feeding a lazy national media that has proven to be, at best, a mediocre horse race announcer. The media spends all its time looking at where the candidates are in relation to one another. How does this help decide an important political election.

Who stands for making the tough changes needed to  guarantee health care for all and get our costs in line with the other nations that have solved this dilemma? Who will address the lobby issue in government that has perverted our democratic principles of open governance? Who has the best solution to extricate ourselves from the morass in Iraq and Afghanistan? Who has the best ideas on energizing the economy and getting opportunities back for the American worker? Who offers the best plan for alleviating the growing financial hardships of higher education costs?

These are the questions our national media should be asking. Not questions of what will be the gambit of Hillary's, McCain's or Obama's campaign in response to some affiliation with some supporter or some Youtube clip.

We have two candidates from the old schools of political gaming and  tactics.  We have one one candidate who has been an inspirational force during this entire, and extremely lengthy, campaign primary process. These are all bright candidates.

Where do we as a nation want to be in four years?

Do we accept the current policies as prudent and wise given the economic meltdown, housing freefall and credit collapse?

I am for some one new. I am for the candidate with new ideas on how to move the nation utilizing different policies  and approaches to  instill competitiveness in the marketplace. I want someone who believes government is more  than a rubber stamp for cartels and monopolists. I want more choices than a Bud or Miller, and don't believe I should have to pay three times more for the privilege.