The millions of newly registered democrats are not included in the polling, since there has not been enough time to relay their contact information to these giant polling organizations for polling. Factor that in.

I give up - the process is junk, and produces morons by claiming to be for issues that morons care about, while the same morons are being systemically destroyed by the policies. America has finally become an Idiocracy. I'll let the American people get back to The View or The Insider.

Because some things are more important than tax policy...like the Constitution.

The Obama campaign should bring up the fact that McCain wants to tax your company health benefits. And repeat it over and over and over again.

Be a Maverick, vote Obama.

They are following Saint Nicolo Machiavelli:

"For the great majority of mankind are satisfied with appearances as though they were realities. and are often more influenced by things that seem than by those that are."

sad, really and goes to show how unoriginal and vile these tacticians are.
You would think with more tools at hand people would be more wary.

"The more the New York Times and The Washington Post go after Sarah Palin, the better off she is, because there's a bigger truth out there and the bigger truths are she's new, she's popular in Alaska and she is an insurgent," Feehery said. "As long as those are out there, these little facts don't really matter."

This is, really, the right-wing rhetorical strategy and philosophy in a nutshell: as long as they can sell the, often ludicrous, propaganda points they have defined as "truths" (whether its McCain-Palin's "maverick" status, the Republican Party's status as "fiscally responsible" or in favor of "small government", or Creationism) the actual, demonstrable concrete facts (McCain-Palin's near-perfect alignment with the Bush-Cheney regime and its style of government , right down to the politicization of processes legally insulated from politics and outright corruption and abuse of power, the massive deficit run up under the actual Republican government of the last several years, the massive expansion of the federal government under Republican rule, the overwhelming evidence for evolution) just don't matter.

But its sort of odd for a campaign advisor to outright admit that the campaign he works for is more interest in truthiness than facts, and one would think that if we had a media that had one wit of integrity they would fall all over this.

Where the fuck is Bill Clinton? Just this morning, I tuned to Scarborough to see if there were any developments about this sex ed sleazeball add. I was really hoping to see a clip of Obama repudiating this vile and sick attack, coming as a father and not a politician. Nope, didn't see it.

However, Joe made a point in saying that when Bill Clinton got attacked, he came out swinging, gloves off, same news cycle. That's why he won.

So again I ask, why the hell isn't Bill Clinton out there on the road, mocking and belittling the McCain campaign in his own formidable style?

Facts are fun. Lies are boring. Democracy lives.

Lies are fun. Facts are boring. Democracy dies.

In other words, a lot of voters have been fooled on bogus tax claims, but they still plan to vote for Obama.

Its hardly a new phenomenon that Republicans have to lie like a rug to create false images ("Compassionate conservative", "Maverick") and then lie like a rug about their Democratic opponents to make national elections even competitive.

It is certainly worth pointing out, but it should not be a source of much comfort, since they've done it successfully enough in the last couple of Presidential elections to make them close enough to win, or at least to steal without provoking rebellion.

I dont know...I think there must be a simple way to dramatize the differences in tax policy between McCain and Obama-- a visual sweep of who would gain under which candidate. And Obama should use the 95% number-- it's easy to remember. Meanwhile, make the point that the only areas of expansion under McCain will be war and luxury.

The Palin/McCain ticket is going to crash and burn. They are both cowards and liars and people are going to catch on.

"John Feehery, a Republican strategist, said the campaign is entering a stage in which skirmishes over the facts are less important than the dominant themes that are forming voters' opinions of the candidates."

And if the dominant theme is your candidate is a liar?

This really is like a boxing match where one fighter stands, out on his feet, being repeatedly pummeled in the face.

Of course, Obama will raise my taxes. Obama is either lying or not facing reality when he says he will give me a tax cut.

On the other hand, McCain will eventually raise my taxes too.

I really don't care who raises or lowers my tax bill.

I care about how much I have in my pocket AFTER paying taxes.

I firmly believe that I will be better off financially if Obama is President. Obama's far better for the economy than McCain.

Steve,

The fact that 51 percent of people believe that Obama would raise their taxes and 47 percent say they plan to vote for Obama could mean that only 4 percent of respondents have been fooled and plan to vote for Obama. It is unlikely that "a lot of voters" hold these views.

Two notes about the tax lies and the poll:

1. The 51% of Americans who think Obama will raise their taxes need not overlap with the 47% who support Obama over McCain; those numbers *don't* add up to over 100% (more about that in a moment). The scarier proposition for Republicans is/was the existence of a disconnect on warmongering: there've been polls in the last several years in which the percentage of people who thought Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11 was over 40% and the percentage of people who thought we should get out of Iraq was over 60% (or if not those precise phrases/numbers, similar things), such that there *was* a chunk of the population which must've bought the GOP lies about a connection, *yet* wanted to get out of Iraq. *That*, I bet, was a larger source of concern to Republicans, since the existence of *those* people meant that even the TERRA!!!1! card was losing its luster -- even for people who *bought* the underlying lies.

2. Okay, fine, I *don't* think the 47% Obama voters and the 51% tax-lie-believers don't overlap at all, but you have to remember, we *are* dealing with a nation in which about 20% of us think we're in the top 1%. So, if you *say* you're going to raise taxes on a tiny percentage -- say, the top 2-3% -- you *must* realize that there are a shitload of people who have such an inflated view of themselves and their finances (yeah, even in *this* economy) that they're going to overreact and say, "Oh, you must mean *ME*!"

And if the Washington Post wants to discuss campaign mendacity and why it continues to work, then it's a real fucking shame that they don't begin every article about John McCain's policies and attacks by saying, "John McCain lied about Barack Obama yet again (and give details)."

Every article, every day, as long as the lies continue.

McCain would rather see cub scouts molested than lose an election.

"This is, really, the right-wing rhetorical strategy and philosophy in a nutshell -- cmdicely"

Exactly. Good post, CB.

Didn't McCain just hire the guy that Bush used to create all those sleazy ads against him in 2000?

Guess it didn't take him long to get busy.

The 'Sex' and 'Lipstick' ads are simply jaw-dropping lies. Obviously, he's going for the same low-information, racist voters that just wanted to have a beer with George.

and noted that the McCain campaign, as long as the polls look good, has no reason to "back down from statements he believes are fundamentally true,"

Ah, the Deanna Troi defense....we used to get that as evidence of George Bush's mendacity became overwhelming, too. "If he believes it, it isn't a lie!"

Feh.

I just tried to find out just how common (or rare) it is for mayors to attempt to fire librarians, and I'm coming up empty. As far as Google can tell, Palin is the one and only mayor who has tried. Isn't this an angle that's worth pursuing?

The fact that Sarah Palin is a lying hypocritical dirtbag who represents the worst qualities of Republican leadership, who is enmeshed in all sorts of scandal in part because she doesn't learn how to properly govern and in part because she doesn't want to properly govern, shouldn't take away from the overall theme that she's a delighful popular reformist maverick delight.

Should it?

Stop whining and start acting!

I've been suggesting this, but I'll repeat it. For people who live in small communities covered by local newspapers, get together with ten of your friends and buy a full- or half-page ad about Palin, about McCain's lies.

Put it in your own words, so that these ads, popping up around the country will all be different, so it is obvious that it is not a co-ordinated campaign. Make it plain that you are NOT acting on behalf of the Obama campaign, but are acing independently.

Be very careful to have every claim in the article documented, keep it to the issue of competency and character -- for example, if McCain chose Palin without vetting her, who would he choose for other offices. If McCain was willing to tell lies this big, what does this say about him.

(Possible opening line for some of the ads, from MLK,
"...where a man is judged on the content of his character and not on the color of his skin."

Another line is the famous one from the McCarthy Era, "Have you no shame, sir!" If you can get the whole comment, including 'look elsewhere for your forgiveness' maybe it is worth using in its entirety.)

The point is that if these ads start popping up, it will become a story that the newsmedia have to cover. Be prepared to answer questions as to why you did it.

DON'T DEPEND ON OTHERS WHEN YOU CAN DO IT

The Palin/McCain ticket is going to crash and burn. They are both cowards and liars and people are going to catch on.

Counterpoint: Bush/Cheney are both cowards + liars, + enough people voted for them in '00 and '04 to allow the GOP to steal each election.

-Z

As long as we're dwelling in the realm of image, not fact, we could use more lines like this:

"...she is an insurgent..."

Must be true. I heard it on the Internets.

This is 'country first'?

what neil said. the poll didn't ask people about what Obama and McCain *say* they will do, it asked them what they thought would happen in the future.

but also, do you think it would be possible to stop treating taxes like cooties? that tax Cuts are always good, and only tax cuts can be good?

it's not about who would raise or lower your taxes, it's about what will they do with those taxes.

A Washington Post-ABC News poll taken Sept. 5 to Sept. 7 found that 51 percent of voters think Obama would raise their taxes, even though his plan would actually cut taxes for the overwhelming majority of Americans. Obama has proposed eliminating income taxes on seniors making less than $50,000 a year, but 41 percent of those seniors say their income taxes would go up in an Obama administration.

It apparently never occurred to the writer that the reason people believe these lies are truth is because we don't have a functioning media in this country.

If we did, my TV wouldn't have been fouled by the out-of-context lipstick remark this morning. Instead, it would have been loaded with analysis of their proposals, giving Americans the info they need to make intelligent, informed decisions.

Maybe that's the problem: There's not enough profit to be made by intelligent and informed consumers.

**sigh**

I can only hope Obama does better in the debates with McCain than he did against Hillary.

You have a Republican strategist feeding to the media claims that facts don't matter? Can they tell the difference between analysis and propaganda? He is essentially telegraphing this to the media, and surprise! that is how the media will cover this.

Isn't that what Rove used to do? Wait a minute, he's an "analyst" now too, isn't he?

Of course, the media have no control over this process! It just happens every four years!

You have a Republican strategist feeding to the media claims that facts don't matter? Can they tell the difference between analysis and propaganda? He is essentially telegraphing this to the media, and surprise! that is how the media will cover this.

Isn't that what Rove used to do? Wait a minute, he's an "analyst" now too, isn't he?

Of course, the media have no control over this process! It just happens every four years!