FL Poll: McCain beats Obama, not Clinton

4/30-5/1 robo poll of 623 registered Florida voters by War Room Logistics of Gainesville: John McCain 47%, Barack Obama 40% (independents - 45% McCain, 38 percent Obama); McCain 44%, Hillary Clinton 45% (independents 39 McCain, 39 Clinton).

52% said Gov. Charlie Crist is doing a good or excellent job, and 47 percent said fair or poor. 51% said the economy was the top issue, followed by the Iraq war at 15%.

favorable/unfavorable ratings:
Crist: 66/31
Clinton 51/47
McCain: 53/43
Obama: 48/50
Nelson: 48/29
Martinez: 39/39

Comments

[Dave]

Polls this early on before either Clinton or Barack secures the Democratic nomination and before either one of them have an opportunity to properly campaign and get their message out have no meaning and are strictly ratings for the media. Either Clinton or Barack, as the Democratic nominee, will win Florida because people over the next 6 months will get to know the real John McCain and realize he represents another 4 more years of the same failed policies.

We need change, and while I strongly prefer Barack (as he is the only candidate left who was against the Iraq war from Day 1), the only way we can achieve the minimum appropriate level of change in this country for not only ourselves, but mostly for future generations, is to make sure that the next President of the United States is a Democrat.

For good measure, we need to also undo the mistake that Florida made in 2004 and defeat Martinez in 2010.

Hey Dave, what change do you want? Higher unemployment? Higher taxes? More goovernment spending?

You Democrats really need to bone up on your economics...

Start here: Windfall Profits for Dummies

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120977019142563957.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

You Republicans really need to bone up on your economics...

Start here: Corporate Welfare for Dummies... and... War, Death, and Profit for Dummies...

www.bushcostsyoumorethanyou'lleverknow.incom/petent

You Republicans really need to bone up on your economics...

Start here: How a child born today in America, is born with 45K of debt.... for Dummies.

www.bushcostsyoumorethanyou'lleverknow.incom/petent

The lefties on here really are way off base. They can't even back up a refute to their positions with facts. That's why they are going to get creamed in November! All rhetoric and no substance--that is for sure Obama.

Veto HB 679

Well, the "home court advantage" HOA bill passed and boy are homeowners going to be sorry!!!! This is another "full employement for attorneys" bill. If your HOA doesn't like something you're doing - their attorney will be contacting you - if you agree to stop doing it you pay the fine, you fix the problem AND you pay their attorney's bill - the HOA never has to give you notice - your notice is from the attorney.

If you disagree with the HOA about what you're doing you'll need to WRITE A BIG CHECK to pay for - up front - 1/2 the cost of a lawyer/mediator SELECTED BY THE ASSOCIATION'S ATTORNEY.

If you don't reach "settlement" and you want to proceed - you'll need to WRITE ANOTHER BIG CHECK to pay for -up front - 1/2 the cost of a lawyer/arbitrator SELECTED BY THE ASSOCIATION'S ATTORNEY. If you win you get your money back. If you lose you pay all of the assocation's cost (mediator and arbitrator), plus the fine, plus change whatever they were compling about but never gave you notice about.

If you don't want to go the mediation/arbitration amount you can go to court but if you do that you won't be able to get your attorney's fees if you win and you'll still pay for the association's attorney, plus fine, plus change or fix whatever they complained about but didn't give you notice.

Yep - attorney's are going to make out like bandits with this bill unless CHARLIE VETOS IT!!

[Dave]

10:28a: I want to get the heck out of Iraq and start spending money on things like infrastructure, education, healthcare (a not-for-profit system should be our eventual goal). I fully favor repealing the 01 and 03 tax cuts for the ultra rich and giving those as the bottom the tax cuts.

This country cannot afford to have John McBush be the next President. It must being a Democratic president.

Dave,

From IRS data 2005:

top 1% of wage earners paid 39.38% of all income taxes.

top 10% paid 70.30% of all income taxes.

top 50% paid 96.93% of all income taxes.

bottom 50% of wage earners paid 3.07% of all income taxes.

The fact is that those "at the bottom" for the most part don't pay any federal income taxes.

Those people in the top 50% are the people who will be starting businesses and hiring the people who are in the bottom 50%, so tell me why it makes sense to soak the people who are providing jobs?

The wrongies on here really are way off base. They can't even back up a refute to their positions with facts. That's why they are going to get creamed in November! All rhetoric and no substance--that is for sure McSame as Bush.

11:30 -

Want facts? see 11:25 above then see for yourself at irs.gov

Facts sure are stubborn things.

I say we just euthanize the “at the bottom” 50%. That way, there will only be rich, fat, white, closet pervert, Republicans in America.

Oh wait: someone has to cut the crass and wash the dishes… oh, never mind, we have illegal immigrants to do that… carry on!

11:34 -

What an utterly ridiculous comment.

All you people have are baseless assertions that go beyond reason and logic.

Good luck using that idiocy to get one of your retarded candidates elected.

McBush!!McBush!!McBush!!

vote johnnie mcAiNUS for FOUR MORE YEARS of deception, deficits, death and duplicity!!

50 years?
100 years?
10,000 years?

yes, johnnie mcAiNUS, I DO GIVE A DAMN!!

anybody think the drunk would have even gotten into andover or yale without his family pedigree?

and graduated?

anybody think johnnie mcAiNUS would have gotten into the usna and stayed long enough to graduate FIFTH FROM THE BOTTOM, without his family pedigree?

yeah, sure!!

talk about ELITISTS!!!!

McBush!!McBush!!McBush!!

for FOUR MORE YEARS OF KRAP!!!!

"All you people have are baseless assertions that go beyond reason and logic."

"Good luck using that idiocy to get one of your retarded candidates elected."

Seems to have worked for your retards, Dubya and Disckey... twice!

11:33 Your "facts" also only tell half the story. WE THE PEOPLE decided a long time ago that the rich should pay more taxes because the corporations they own/operate cause so much collateral damage to other taxpayers.

Intangible damages such as pollution, global warming, loss of natural areas, and consumption of land and resources that belong to all US citizens are difficult to express in terms of exact dollars, so that's just the system WE THE PEOPLE decided was the most equitable way to recover some of the excess.

I understand that you GOPer conservatives have a vested interest in denying that these things should be part of the economic equation; I guess thats where we don't agree - I think it's called responsibility.

In addition, you also fail to state that the very rich are actually paying much less in taxes as a percentage of income than they did a few decades ago. Profiting more and paying less - that's "THE FACTS."

11:58

You and Marx would be great together. Ever thought about moving to Europe so your economic wet dreams could be satisfied?

Robo-call polls are worthless. Rasmussen and Zogby robocall polls are laughed at in the political community. Doesn't matter whom they show leading, they are just too unreliable.

11:58-- if things are so awful here, I am sure we would be happy to take up a collection to buy you a one way ticket out of America!! Negative, whine and complain-- you people make me sick! You don't want to work, you want everything GIVEN to you and are the first to stand up and point a finger. You hate it? LEAVE!! PLEASE!!

Agree 12:17. One less freeloader to take care of.

11:38=stupid childish comments

Republicans,

Trickle-down economics do not always work. They don't always create jobs and they don't always increase government tax revenues. Please google Laffer Curve and read up.

Once you account for FICA and Social Security taxes, tax revenues did not increase during the 1980's and they have not increased during Bush's tenure.

Finally, if tax cuts lead to more jobs, why has our economy been shedding jobs for the past few months? Why did the Clinton administration create more jobs with higher tax rates?

Tax cuts for the rich in the past 3 decades have resulted in bigger deficits, slower job growth, reduced government revenues, and rising inflation. That's it.

11:58=stupid childish comments!

11:58 = Inconvenient Truth GOPers don't want you to know about.

12:05 etc, etc (same obtuse GOP hack) Struck a nerve, did I? I think you'll be leaving before I do - following your profits to the offshore tax havens and American jobs to China and India. Where are your "facts" now, bigmouth?

“You can have your Tiger Woods (R-code for n_ger), we’ve got Senator McCain (R-code for old, senile, white, rich, and McSame as Dubya)."

McSame/Whoever ’08!… For God’s sake; NO!

You're one sick puppy!!!

I didn't know McSame was sick!

Notes on the Laffer curve:

"Complexities arise when taking into account possible differences in incentive to work for different income groups and when introducing progressive taxation."

"Another contentious issue is whether a government should try to maximize its revenue in the first place."

"Laffer himself, in article published at the Heritage Foundation, has pointed to Russia and the Baltic states who have recently instituted a flat tax with rates lower than 35%, and whose economies started growing soon after implementation. He has also referred to the economic success following the Kemp-Roth tax act, the Kennedy tax cuts, the 1920s tax cuts, and the changes in US capital gains tax structure in 1997 as examples of how tax cuts can cause the economy to grow and thus increase tax revenue."

"Tax cuts for the rich in the past 3 decades have resulted in bigger deficits, slower job growth, reduced government revenues, and rising inflation. That's it."

Let's break this down:

bigger deficits: True because government grew far larger than it ever should have. Spending is out of control and that is because of both parties.

Slower job growth: Only recently, but it is certainly not because of tax cuts. If anything, further tax cuts will stimulate job growth. As businesses expand (due to having more money), they can hire more people. Simple economics.

reduced government revenue: False. This is just simply dishonest. Revenues to the Federal government continue to grow at a ridiculous rate.

Rising inflation: Bad Federal Reserve policy in response to short-term problems.

"Profiting more and paying less"

Ummmm...less than what?

Did you not understand the figures above?

The guy is so fixated on John McCain that he is almost in a psycho state. Wouldn't be surprised to hear he is put on suicide watch after McCain is elected. You should stop confusing him with the facts. After all, left wingers don't understand facts--only government hand outs.

The guy is so fixated on John McSame that he is almost in a psycho state. Wouldn't be surprised to hear he is put on suicide watch after McSame isn't elected. You should stop confusing him with the facts. After all, bathroom stallers don't understand facts--only tap.tap.taptap.tap...

[Buzzard]

Florida doesn't have an outstanding record when it comes to racial bias, so I am impressed that a black man has fared so well in these rigged polls. I'd vote for him if he wasn't a democrat.

I'd vote for anyone who is committed to limited government and individual liberty.

Unfortunately no one who possesses these qualities is running.

1:31,

Income tax revenues have fallen. Period. Although tax revenues as a whole may have ticked up slightly, that is due to increased revenues from FICA and Social Security taxes which were unaffected by Bush's tax cuts.

Spending is out of control. But Bush's tax cuts certainly contributed as explained in the preceding paragraph.

On jobs, the point is that if your argument--that tax cuts stimulate job growth--is correct, we shouldn't be shedding jobs right now. That's the problem with Republicans, you think that it is "simple economics" and you sell your failed policies to ignorant American's who are then baffled when our economy is in shambles. It happened with Reagan's economic policies and with Bush II's.

There is no such thing as "simple economics."

(There is no such thing as "simple economics.")

Yes there is, I'll prove it...

1+1=1

or

Dubya+McCain=McSame

No, on jobs, many of those were in the housing or financial sector of the economy.

This is nothing more than a market correction. Some people bought more house than they could afford, some lenders offered money to people who had no business taking it.

This, in turn, leads to losses in construction, lending, retail, etc, etc.

It will bounce back, but will take time.

The worst possible thing you could do at this point, though, is raise tax rates, and that is exactly what both of the Democrat candidates are proposing.

Please learn some real economics before commenting on things you clearly do not understand.

“You can have your Tiger Woods (R-code for n_ger), we’ve got Senator McCain (R-code for old, senile, white, rich, and McSame as Dubya)."

McSame/Whoever ’08!… For God’s sake; NO!

No, on jobs, many of those were in the housing or financial sector of the economy... but most were shipped overseas by Bush and his corporate profit hacks.

This is nothing less than a recession. Some people bought more house than they could afford, some lenders offered money to people who had no business taking it. And republicons were digging it all the way.

This, in turn, leads to losses in construction, lending, retail, life, etc.

It will difficult to bounce back, and it will take time.

The worst possible thing you could do at this point, though, is continue with tax breaks, corporate welfare, and an un-winnable and useless war, and that is exactly what the Republicons are proposing.

Please learn some real economics before commenting on things you clearly do not understand.

... freaking dope!

we are currently sufering thru one jackassdrunkofapresident who got where he is 'cause of his family name...we dont need another who coasted thru school and usna and then politics 'cause he dropped his first wife for reallyreallrich broad!!

marginal mediocrity is not a virtue in a complex world!!!!

I would venture to guess that 4:20 and 4:35 went to government schools.

Your parents should be charged with child abuse.

I would venture to guess that 4:40 went to republicon schools.

Your parents, along with Dubya and Dickey, should be charged with child abuse.

[david flagg]

At last a meaningful, insightful and objective low cost political poll. Thanks WRL of Gainesville. And thanks St. Pete Times Buzz for sharing.

In response to the statement that "many economists oppose the gas tax policy believing it does not work", Hillary Clinton said that "that was an elitist" position.

Between that, and her shrills to lower interest rates even further (also economically stupid)...how can anyone really want this stupid b_itch to be our next President.

She makes George Bush look like Adam Smith.

[GOP inside]

Racist Barack Obama with Jeremiah Wright will lose big if nominated.

McCain/Rice - YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST.

[Longing for Leadership]

Crist 52 very fav or fav
47 unfav or very unfav

RUN ROD RUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!