@ballpeen said:

We are the land of the free because of the brave.

It is a shame we are inhabited by a bunch of wimps in this era.

Was Thomas Jefferson a hillbilly? George Washington? John Adams??

We are the land of the free because of the brave.

It is a shame we are inhabited by a bunch of wimps in this era.

@calfoxwc said:

Shocking development!, says Hillbilly Jim.

In other news, sushi sales also lagging in WV.

President Barack Obama remains unpopular with West Virginia voters.By Scott Finn

var s0 = new SWFObject('js/player.swf','ply','220','30','9','#ffffff'); s0.addParam('allowfullscreen','true'); s0.addParam('allowscriptaccess','always'); s0.addParam('wmode','opaque'); s0.addParam('flashvars','file=http://www.wvpbmedia.com/news/2009/0602Obamapoll.mp3&duration=135&plugins=googlytics-1&skin=/js/dangdang-source.swf&usefullscreen=false'); s0.addVariable('plugins', 'googlytics-1'); s0.write('mediaspace'); June 1, 2009 · A new poll of West Virginia voters shows President Obama with a 39 percent job approval rating.The poll shows more than half of voters approve of the jobs being done by the state’s three top Democrats – Gov. Joe Manchin and Sens. Robert Byrd and Jay Rockefeller.

The group Public Policy Polling interviewed 1,366 registered voters May 26 and 27.

The 39-percent approval rating is the second-lowest of 15 states that PPP has polled recently, said spokesman Tom Jensen.

Obama did worse in Oklahoma – the state that gave him his largest margin of defeat on election night.

Fifty percent of West Virginia voters disapproved of Obama’s job performance.

When he was a candidate for president, Barack Obama struggled to connect with Appalachian voters, and West Virginians in particular.

In West Virginia’s May primary, Obama suffered his second-largest margin of defeat.

In November, 43 percent of West Virginians supported Obama over Republican John McCain.

At the time, some pundits said Obama lost West Virginia because he didn’t campaign there. They said West Virginians would warm up to Obama as they got to know him as president.

But this new poll suggests that if anything, he’s less popular now than in November.

“In West Virginia, voters don’t like the president. He has one of the worst approval ratings of any state in the country,” Jensen said.

The main problem for Obama is that only 61 percent of West Virginia Democrats approve of his job performance.

So, what’s going on?

“People say West Virginia is such a Democratic state, but it doesn’t like Obama -- it must be so racist. But that’s really not true,” Jensen said.

Jensen says the low rating comes from West Virginia’s tiny black population.

West Virginia’s whites support Obama at about the same rate as other Southern whites.

“Obama’s approval rating among white people in West Virginia is almost identical to North Carolina, where he won in 2008 and where he has a very good approval rating.

“But the black population is just so small in West Virginia, you don’t have that propping up his overall numbers,” Jensen said.

West Virginia’s other leading Democrats all did better in the poll.

Governor Joe Manchin and Senator Robert Byrd both received a 53 percent approval rating. Fifty-two percent of voters said they approved of the job Senator Jay Rockefeller was doing.

That’s down from previous surveys and may not sound so great, but Jensen says it’s better than most governors and senators are doing, amid the current recession.

Raleigh, N.C. – More than half of Minnesota voters say they have an unfavorable opinion of Norm Coleman and his actions during the recount for his Senate race is partly to blame, Public Policy Polling’s newest survey finds.

52% of respondents said they now view Coleman negatively, with 38% still holding a positive opinion of him. 72% of Republicans but only 10% of Democrats give him good reviews, and independents are split 49/37 against him as well.

54% of voters in the state said the way he handled the recount against Al Franken made them less likely to support Coleman in the future for Governor or some other office, compared to 26% who said it made them more inclined to vote for him in a later contest.

Pitted specifically against a trio of potential Democratic contenders for next year, Coleman trails Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak 43-37, has a 41-39 deficit against fellow former Senator Mark Dayton, and leads House Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher by a 42-34 margin.

“Clearly the recount saga damaged Norm Coleman’s chances at being elected to office again in Minnesota,” said Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling. “You have to wonder how much more goodwill he would have been able to earn with voters in the state if he had decided to take the high road and concede six months ago.”

Polling data here (.pdf)

and greed. With the politics of personal hate and destruction, let's call it "bowling over people for dollars".

And Acorn is one big corrupt asinine creation.

Founded and spawned by the desire for a socialist welfare state.

And don't think they will not try to keep the power no matter what they have to contrive.

@mr.-t said:

Uh huh.

If ACORN did indeed steal the election for Obama, they are the by far the most effective organization ever.

Nominee Barack Obama John McCain

Electoral vote 365 173

States carried 28 + DC + NE-02 22

Popular vote 69,456,897 59,934,814

Percentage 52.9% 45.7%

So ACORN was responsible for at least ten million votes? Really??

Did Spencer and Heidi tell you this during their Alex Jones interview or something?

As far as stealing an election and voter fraud that is what we have gotten out of this past election with early voting & Acorn stuffing ballots in the battleground states.

We need to go back to the old way of one day voting and there will be less of these shenanigans.

Or, something. Or maybe all Republicans in Minn. are possums. wth?

Whatever. Or, maybe you were saying I was a possum. the pic is kind of strange, with no explanation.

I didn't get it. But I did respond in teasing you about it. Poetic justice. Bring it up, don't explain what it means,

get response.

Just yet ANOTHER strange diversion from the current subject.

And, any lib can answer: Name ONE Dem in public office, who has had their children and family unmerifully ridiculed.

Name ONE gov. that has had a bunch of frivolous, politically oriented legal attack lawsuits on "ethics", like holding a fish,

or wearing a ball cap of her husband's team.

What I said was true. Political attacks of personal destruction are a Democratic thing, a new low.

@choco said:

so, stealing a senate seat is not quite like stealing the presidency?

Are any of you guys going to list the instances of vote tampering in Florida that you prattle on about?

Just tell us how it was done.

WSS

@calfoxwc said:

*****************************

But, Minnesota, before the last election (I forget who Minn. went for), had not gone for a

Republican since Nixon, in the 60's.

@diehardbrownsfan said:

Seeing Franken on Capital Hill was hilarious. Kind of like having a numskull like mz the pussy elected to public office. God help us all, the Christians anyway.

Wow, two guys who constantly cry to the mods about the flinging of personal insults by "libs" are insulting me personally in one thread. Kinda puts everything into perspective...

*****************************

But, Minnesota, before the last election (I forget who Minn. went for), had not gone for a

Republican since Nixon, in the 60's.

@calfoxwc said:

Florida is not.

Bush won Florida every recount. Gore tried and tried, but couldn't do it, even to the point

of trying to deny overseas veterans in our military their votes, since most of them would have

been Bush votes.

Gore was unsuccessful in stealing the election in the courts.

Franken WAS successful, because Minn. is a goofball, liberal state.

Florida is not.

@mr.-t said:

so, stealing a senate seat is not quite like stealing the presidency?

consider that opinions of the matter differ depending on where you stand....

were you sreaming bloody murder when Jeb's state gave your man another 4 years?

none of this means the shenanigans that occur are right, but everyone does it......to sit looking down from your soap box like your hands are clean is rather amusing to me.

@osusev said:

Again your oversimplification of a situation is your arguments...

It's accurate and you overlook the reality.

YES Saddam Wanted Nuclear options... So did Libya and most other countries worried about keeping soveriegn integrity...... Yes he definately would have pursued Nukes... Just Like Iran is...... or North korea...... Or Pakistan DID or India DID WITHOUT OUR BLESSING.....

What you're missing (possibly due to your inflated ego) is that Saddam had a tacit fellowship with te US that worked to his advantage as long as he played ball.

Which is why his new allies the French tried so hard to protect him.

Like the Saudi royals. It isn't religion, it's oersonal power.

Had the US not done the UN bidding in destert storm there would still be an arrangement.

A nuclear Iraq is not as big a threat if they're NOT our sworn enemies.

Use that "realism" you boast about.

Yes Saddam WAS a check on Iranian influence....WHY? Because he was a SUNNI that brutally was in charge of a military that already beat down the Iranians once... Iran is SHIA dominated so regardless of what state Iraq was in.. it still was a definate check against the Iranians......

See above.

To get back to the original argument of this thread.... BOTH parties are crooked and will employ any means necessary... Do I think Franken won legitimately? About as legitimate as any of these close contested races are.

Again I think it definately gives the Dems an edge policy wise but... there are moderate democrats who are almost the same as moderate republicans = Republicrats which means a fight on major policy shifts like Health care.

Again the charges on the Franken side are miscounted and bogus ballots that turned up magically, in some areas outnumbering the voters.

And filtered through the fact that 2 to 1 election "workers" were dems.

On the Bush side it's bullshit like having de Po lice at polling areas to scare off voters and arranging the ballot so that stupid dems mistakenly voted for Buchanan.

WSS

Personally I was pissed that Coleman pulled out without a fight. Who knows maybe his wallet was running thin due to the fact that Franken (stewart) was able to get the rules of the game changed during the course of the game.

Lets use the same scenario in a football game, lets say that one team say Pittspuke is allowed to use 12 men on offense while playing the Browns, wouldn't you cry foul play?

This is not like a hanging chad thing, this is nothing more than a rip off of an election.

including their spouses and children.

There are good people on both sides, thats not the problem by any measure. The "system" of who and what choices are given to the people in the first place are. Franken.... seriously? what track history of success in governing does he really bring to the table? Or any sort of track history in leadership or expertise in subject matter?

Truthfully Cal has SOME merit here... Franken was the "best" democratic candidate for a Senate seat?

The "Disputed" numbers of what vote gets counted and those that dont are discretionary and were challenged back and forth and I find the truth probably lies in the middle.

Like Bush vs Gore a Supreme court had to step in and decide because both sides "claim" numbers and votes/disputes.... Where is the real truth? I just find it all shades of grey.

Yes I see ideology differences between parties.. but the almighty BINDING agent which makes the act in concert is MONEY. Inflluence and quid pro quo does not distinguish between ideology and party leadership. Both sides need it and draw from virtually the same pool, their maybe suble lobbying diffences but all parties pushing money all operate the same way on making sure "their" party wins in the money investment/influence game. EVERYONE plays hardball.

Say, where DID that experience is required thing by liberals go?

Franken-Stein has NO experience.

Rules changsies again? and again? and again?

Yep.

YES Saddam Wanted Nuclear options... So did Libya and most other countries worried about keeping soveriegn integrity...... Yes he definately would have pursued Nukes... Just Like Iran is...... or North korea...... Or Pakistan DID or India DID WITHOUT OUR BLESSING.....

Yes Saddam WAS a check on Iranian influence....WHY? Because he was a SUNNI that brutally was in charge of a military that already beat down the Iranians once... Iran is SHIA dominated so regardless of what state Iraq was in.. it still was a definate check against the Iranians......

To get back to the original argument of this thread.... BOTH parties are crooked and will employ any means necessary... Do I think Franken won legitimately? About as legitimate as any of these close contested races are.

Again I think it definately gives the Dems an edge policy wise but... there are moderate democrats who are almost the same as moderate republicans = Republicrats which means a fight on major policy shifts like Health care.