Obama losing Florida?

Barack Obama could be on the verge of falling out of contention in Florida. Despite spending an estimated $8-million on campaign ads in America's biggest battleground state and putting in place the largest Democratic campaign organization ever in Florida, Obama has lost ground over the summer. Florida has moved from a toss-up state to one that clearly leans toward John McCain, fueling speculation about how much longer the Democratic nominee will continue investing so heavily in the state.

Obama can still win Florida despite the polling gains McCain has made since naming Sarah Palin his running mate, and there is no sign Obama is pulling back in Florida yet. Far from it. Obama allies say he has about 350 paid staffers in the state and about 50 field offices, including in places not known as fertile ground for Democrats, such as Sun City Center, Lake City and Sebring.

But for all the attention to Florida from the Obama campaign, there's little tangible evidence it's paying off. More here.

Comments

The Obama staffer that stays at a friend of mine's house told me that they all found out a week ago from Steve (whoever is in charge in Florida) that if things don't get better in the next few weeks, they will begin quietly relocating their staff to places like Virginia,Ohio and Colorado.

The Obama campaign is asking which of their staff have family and friends in those states that they can crash with for a month or so.

Sounds to me like they are going to move on from Florida soon.

I wish they wouldn't give up but apparantly they think they don't need Florida to win the White House

[Steve's sister's cousin]

I heard them say that they are going to pump 3 million into tampa tv next weekend - final push to do some separation -
that's what the guy near the place with the thing told me - so i know its true

[zenator]

It is way too early to predict how Florida will vote in the general election in November.

It is obvious, however, that the Dems do not have their act together. The national party has rejected the Clintons and their pragmatic centralism. Instead, the party under Howard Dean has returned to its liberal roots and nominated the most left-wing candidate in a generation.

The basic Obama message is similar in content to that of Hubert Humphrey--more government, more taxes etc. Obama himself oftentimes seems to be the personification of an effete, intellectual snob. The members of liberal media are so busy fawning over Obama that they fail to understand that their "favorable"news coverage is having the opposite effect with key elements of the electorate.

Media creations like Obama and Crist spend so much time with their rich money people and the media that they lose track of what real voters care about. They mock conservatives and forget about real America. Obama is about to learn the hard way and Crist's time is coming next.

* If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're "exotic, different."

* Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, a quintessential American story.

* If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.

* Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're a maverick.

* Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.

* Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.

* If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.

* If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.

* If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.

* If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.

* If you teach teach children about sexual predators, you are irresponsible and eroding the fiber of society.

* If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible.

* If your wife is a Harvard graduate laywer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America 's.

* If you're husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that hates America and advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.

OK, much clearer now.

just keep putting palin in front of the cameras and let her speak....it will pull right back to 'tied'

Bomb, bomb, bomb,
Bomb, bomb' obama,
Bomb bomb,bomb,
Bomb,bomb, obama
Oh Hussein Obama,
You just got bombed,
Mc Cain and Palin gotcha,
Now get back to Chicaga,
Get back to Chicaga,
McCain and Palin gotcha,
Bombed, Bombed, Bombed,
Bombed loser man.

I think a more appropriate anthem for Obama is "He's A Real Nowhere Man"

Obama lost the election at Noon, on Friday, Spetember 5, 2008 in Ohio.

10:43 put down the kool aid. Mrs. Obama is a hospital administrator with a 6-figure salary who got a huge bons when her hubbypulled in some fat earmarks for her hospital.

350 paid staffers, 50 field offices and about $7 million spent on advertising in Florida, and he's losing worse than ever. Well, a foreshadowing of things to come.

[zenator]

Anon at 10:43

Your post makes my point. First, you fall into the trap of comparing a VP candidate to your presidential candidate thereby allowing McCain a free pass. Next, you assume that the American people are stupid because they don't hold Harvard etc in the same esteem that you do. Finally, you ignore the fact that most Americans went to public school with and liked people such as the Palins, have beer drinking friends with nicknames like "First Dude," are struggling to raise their family etc. In other words, they relate to the Palins and are willing to invite them into their homes.

So, the answers to your rhetorical questions are the opposite of what you suggest. The truth is that neither Barack Obama nor his wife represent middle class, family values. They are not perceived as regular folk nor are they. Right now, most American voters are not willing to invite the Obamas into their homes.

[Liberal slayer]

Charlie Gibson's Gaffe

"At times visibly nervous . . . Ms. Palin most visibly stumbled when she was asked by Mr. Gibson if she agreed with the Bush doctrine. Ms. Palin did not seem to know what he was talking about. Mr. Gibson, sounding like an impatient teacher, informed her that it meant the right of 'anticipatory self-defense.' "

-- New York Times, Sept. 12

Informed her? Rubbish.

The New York Times got it wrong. And Charlie Gibson got it wrong.

There is no single meaning of the Bush doctrine. In fact, there have been four distinct meanings, each one succeeding another over the eight years of this administration -- and the one Charlie Gibson cited is not the one in common usage today. It is utterly different.

He asked Palin, "Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?"

She responded, quite sensibly to a question that is ambiguous, "In what respect, Charlie?"

Sensing his "gotcha" moment, Gibson refused to tell her. After making her fish for the answer, Gibson grudgingly explained to the moose-hunting rube that the Bush doctrine "is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense."

Wrong.

I know something about the subject because, as the Wikipedia entry on the Bush doctrine notes, I was the first to use the term. In the cover essay of the June 4, 2001, issue of the Weekly Standard entitled, "The Bush Doctrine: ABM, Kyoto, and the New American Unilateralism," I suggested that the Bush administration policies of unilaterally withdrawing from the ABM treaty and rejecting the Kyoto protocol, together with others, amounted to a radical change in foreign policy that should be called the Bush doctrine.

Then came 9/11, and that notion was immediately superseded by the advent of the war on terror. In his address to the joint session of Congress nine days after 9/11, President Bush declared: "Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime." This "with us or against us" policy regarding terror -- first deployed against Pakistan when Secretary of State Colin Powell gave President Musharraf that seven-point ultimatum to end support for the Taliban and support our attack on Afghanistan -- became the essence of the Bush doctrine.

Until Iraq. A year later, when the Iraq war was looming, Bush offered his major justification by enunciating a doctrine of preemptive war. This is the one Charlie Gibson thinks is the Bush doctrine.

It's not. It's the third in a series and was superseded by the fourth and current definition of the Bush doctrine, the most sweeping formulation of the Bush approach to foreign policy and the one that most clearly and distinctively defines the Bush years: the idea that the fundamental mission of American foreign policy is to spread democracy throughout the world. It was most dramatically enunciated in Bush's second inaugural address: "The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world."

This declaration of a sweeping, universal American freedom agenda was consciously meant to echo John Kennedy's pledge in his inaugural address that the United States "shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." It draws also from the Truman doctrine of March 1947 and from Wilson's 14 points.

If I were in any public foreign policy debate today, and my adversary were to raise the Bush doctrine, both I and the audience would assume -- unless my interlocutor annotated the reference otherwise -- that he was speaking about the grandly proclaimed (and widely attacked) freedom agenda of the Bush administration.

Not the Gibson doctrine of preemption.

Not the "with us or against us" no-neutrality-is-permitted policy of the immediate post-9/11 days.

Not the unilateralism that characterized the pre-9/11 first year of the Bush administration.

Presidential doctrines are inherently malleable and difficult to define. The only fixed "doctrines" in American history are the Monroe and the Truman doctrines which come out of single presidential statements during administrations where there were few other contradictory or conflicting foreign policy crosscurrents.

Such is not the case with the Bush doctrine.

Yes, Sarah Palin didn't know what it is. But neither does Charlie Gibson. And at least she didn't pretend to know -- while he looked down his nose and over his glasses with weary disdain, sighing and "sounding like an impatient teacher," as the Times noted. In doing so, he captured perfectly the establishment snobbery and intellectual condescension that has characterized the chattering classes' reaction to the mother of five who presumes to play on their stage

[jaguar]

Obama. The more America sees of him the less they like him.
Do you hear that fffffllllffflll sound? Its the sound of air escaping from that overblown con-artist, Obama.

[Alan]

Obama might be too smart to be president. Many Americans seem to feel intimidated by intelligence, and that's a shame.

The end result of this rejection of intellectuals in public office is a nation in decline. America is rapidly falling behind China and Russia, and is already behind Japan, Germany, and most other Western nations. You cannot be a world leader when you elect people of mediocre intelligence to lead your nation.

Obama is a brilliant man, but that will be his downfall in America. He will be painted as "elitist" by the media (a remarkable and blatant lie, considering he is of a race that was not even allowed to drink from the same drinking fountains as the elite a mere 45 years ago), while McCain, the son of Navy admirals who owns so many houses that he doesn't remember how many he has will be seen as the "everyman". Just because McCain isn't intellectual doesn't mean he isn't elite, because he certainly is. And Obama's intelligence does not make him "out of touch" with regular Americans.

Wake up America. We don't need an "everyman" to lead us, we need an exceptional man, a hard working, brilliant yet humble man that has ascended the ladder of society against all odds: Barack Obama.

Steve Schale, Obama's Florida campaign manager.

"Compared to what McCain has on the ground at this point, our operation is far superior."

And McCain is still kicking your butt!!!

[JOHN MCCAIN IS A LIAR.]

JOHN MCCAIN IS A LIAR.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091203450.html

Clinton's 100,000 policeman=Obama's 350 offices-WHERE ARE THEY? We looked and are they are all e-offices?
Street address anyone.

In Pinellas County we have three real victory offices, with real people working in them.

Where's the beef!!!!!!

I think one of the shockers of this elction is florifa will go "blue". Mark this down, you heard it here first.

Why is Palin STILL a part of this church that preaches that jews deserve being attacked. Why did she not speak out or leave the church.

Palin could rob McCain of Jewish vote
Posted on Sat, Sep. 13, 2008
Miami Herald
BY BETH REINHARD
breinhard@MiamiHerald.com

John McCain has a strong chance of siphoning votes from Jewish Democrats who never voted for a Republican in their lives -- if his new running mate doesn't get in the way.
It's not because Sarah Palin backed Pat Buchanan for president, as Barack Obama's own campaign co-chairman in Florida, Democratic Rep. Robert Wexler, falsely claimed to scare off Jewish voters who see Buchanan as an anti-Semite.

Yes, Palin did wear a Buchanan pin when he campaigned in her hometown in 1999, but she later joined the state's team to help elect Steve Forbes. Nevertheless, Wexler two weeks ago called Palin's pick a ''direct affront to Jewish Americans'' and tarred Buchanan as a ''Nazi sympathizer'' in an over-the-top tirade that hurt his credibility on Jewish issues.
Palin puts Jewish votes in play for reasons that have nothing to do with campaign buttons.

Last month, her church hosted Jews for Jesus leader David Brickner, who suggested that terrorist attacks on Israelis were God's ''judgment'' against Jews who haven't accepted Christianity.

FAILED TO ACT
A campaign spokesman acknowledged Palin was in the audience but said she did not know Brickner would be speaking and does not share his views. But she could have walked out or raised questions later.

And back in June, Palin nodded in agreement when her former pastor said Alaska should be ready to minister to nonbelievers at the end of the world.
'I believe Alaska is one of the `refuge states' -- come on, you guys -- in the Last Days,'' said Pastor Ed Kalnin, who joined Palin on stage after she gave a speech. ``And hundreds of thousands of people are going to come to this state to seek refuge. And the church has to be ready to minister to them.''

Does Palin agree? Jewish voters should demand an explanation.

Consider that the Republican Jewish Coalition affirms her ''commitment to the Jewish community'' on the basis of a postcard-sized Israeli flag displayed in her capitol office. The headline on a YouTube video of an interview with Palin in which the flag is visible gushes, ''Sarah Palin has an Israeli flag in her office!'' Please.

The Republican Jewish Coalition also commends her ''strong working relationship'' with the Jews of Alaska. All 12 of them.
Actually, there are 4,500 to 5,000 Jews in the state, according to the Alaska Jewish Historical Museum. Jewish voters will be glad to know Palin gets along with less than 1 percent of the state's population, but that's not a strong test of her solidarity.

Still another reason Palin is a mensch,according to the RJC: She attended the reading of Alaska's resolution commemorating Israel's 60th anniversary. Again, hardly a feet-to-the-fire trial.

UNRESPONSIVE ANSWERS
Palin could have proved that she gets Israel's right to security in an interview this week with ABC's Charles Gibson. Instead, she proved only that she was well-coached.
When asked how the United States should respond if Israel felt it needed to strike at Iran's nuclear facilities, she said, ``I don't think that we should second-guess the measures that Israel has to take to defend themselves.

''Should the United States cooperate? `I don't think we can second-guess what Israel has to do to secure its nation.

''So it would be OK for Israel to strike? ``We cannot second-guess the steps that Israel has to take to defend itself.''

Americans who care about Israel have a right to know more.

[Obama's Marxist Utopia fading fastly]

Bob Herbert of the New York Times castigates the "dimwittedness" of Palin supporters while flaunting his own laziness, ignorance, and/or dishonesty.

While watching the Sarah Palin interview with Charlie Gibson Thursday night, and the coverage of the Palin phenomenon in general, I've gotten the scary feeling, for the first time in my life, that dimwittedness is not just on the march in the U.S., but that it might actually prevail.
Before Mr. Herbert throws this stone, he needs to get his own facts straight within the NYT glass house.

Here is what the Mr.Herbert writes about Sarah Palin:

Ms. Palin may be a perfectly competent and reasonably intelligent woman (however troubling her views on evolution and global warming may be), but she is not ready to be vice president.

With most candidates for high public office, the question is whether one agrees with them on the major issues of the day. With Ms. Palin, it's not about agreeing or disagreeing. She doesn't appear to understand some of the most important issues.

"Do you believe in the Bush doctrine?" Mr. Gibson asked during the interview. Ms. Palin looked like an unprepared student who wanted nothing so much as to escape this encounter with the school principal.

Clueless, she asked, "In what respect, Charlie?"

"Well, what do you interpret it to be?" said Mr. Gibson.

"His worldview?" asked Ms. Palin.

Later, in the spin zones of cable TV, commentators repeatedly made the point that there are probably very few voters -- some specifically mentioned "hockey moms" -- who could explain the Bush doctrine.

The Bush doctrine, which flung open the doors to the catastrophe in Iraq, was such a fundamental aspect of the administration's foreign policy that it staggers the imagination that we could have someone no further than a whisper away from the White House who doesn't even know what it is.

Let's deconstruct this line of attack:

The evolution/creationism canard

Palin is in favor of open inquiry in education. Isn't that the purpose of education?

In an Oct. 25, 2006, debate, when asked about teaching alternatives to evolution, Palin replied:

Palin, Oct. 25, 2006: Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both. And you know, I say this too as the daughter of a science teacher. Growing up with being so privileged and blessed to be given a lot of information on, on both sides of the subject - creationism and evolution. It's been a healthy foundation for me. But don't be afraid of information and let kids debate both sides.

A couple of days later, Palin amended that statement in an interview with the Anchorage Daily News, saying:

Palin, Oct. 2006: I don't think there should be a prohibition against debate if it comes up in class. It doesn't have to be part of the curriculum.

After her election, Palin let the matter drop. The Associated Press reported Sept 3: "Palin's children attend public schools and Palin has made no push to have creationism taught in them. ... It reflects a hands-off attitude toward mixing government and religion by most Alaskans." The article was headlined, "Palin has not pushed creation science as governor." It was written by Dan Joling, who reports from Anchorage and has covered Alaska for 30 years.

Source: factcheck.org

So Palin's position is: if the issue comes up-raised by a student, it can be broached. How does that fit with Herbert's allusion/illusion?

Global Warming issue

Does Herbert watch the news or read a paper? Palin addressed this issue two nights ago -- well before his column was set to publish. Palin told ABC News journalist Charles Gibson

"I believe that man's activities certainly can be contributing to the issue of global warming, climate change."

Her past comments may have been a bit murkier on this topic but she was very clear and on record two nights ago.

The Bush Doctrine

Does Bob Herbert read anything beyond left-wing publications? Does he get only information fed to him by the Obama campaign?

There is no single definition of the Bush Doctrine. The definition has evolved over the years. Charles Gibson got it wrong,too. ABC News has had varying definitions for the Bush Doctrine over the years. Andrew McCarthy notes that there has been ever shifting definitions of the Bush Doctrine. Lliberal columnist Kirsten Powers, who writes for the New York Post (or does Herbert refuse to read one of his hometown newspapers) wrote that ABC News bungled the Bush Doctrine. Charles Krauthammer and others have cited the evolving history of the term.

Then he has the gall to criticize Palin for not being able to condense this elusive, contested concept into a sound bite?

Worse, his use of the term "hockey moms" is transparently offensive. She was a mayor, she is a Governor (the most popular in the nation, which gives some indication about how successful she has been).

Bob Herbert is a columnist whose columns are so predictable and devoid of creativity that they have been mocked at a website that can generate Bob Herbert columns by just dropping a topic into a program that computer generates a faux Herbert column.

What else is notable in the Herbert column? He rails against Palin on the issue of the Bush Doctrine yet does not even define the Bush Doctrine himself.

Who is dimwitted?

Finally, Hebert has this gem:

John McCain, who is shameless about promoting himself as America's ultimate patriot, put the best interests of the nation aside in making his incredibly reckless choice of a running mate. But there is a profound double standard in this country. The likes of John McCain and George W. Bush can do the craziest, most irresponsible things imaginable, and it only seems to help them politically.

I guess that makes people who support John McCain and Sarah Palin dimwits.

What is curious about his use of "double standard" is he fails to see the irony from earlier in his column when he wrote:

For those who haven't noticed, we're electing a president and vice president, not selecting a winner on "American Idol."

Barack Obama, Mr. Herbert, is the one who is playing the "American idol" role here: a man with a tissue-thin resume and a record of few accomplishments and responsibilities who has been propelled upwards because of personal charisma and a top notch ability to read a teleprompter when giving a speech. He might as well be lip synching. That is an American Idol for you.

But maybe we should be happy for columnists like Herbert who condescendingly look down at so many Americans. They give us an insight into the reason so many in the media support Barack Obama. They identify with his and his wife's view of Americans -- we are "bitter", we are "downight mean". Now we are also "dimwitted".

[Commie Watcher]

Obama sounds a lot like his father. We better watch out—Communism???????

http://www.ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=303952499910291

[If you like George Bush you are going to love Sarah Palin.]

If you like George Bush you are going to love Sarah Palin.

At 77 years of age McCain will die in office if he is elected. Then you get Sarah Bush-Palin.

Don't just parrot the RPOF's press releases.

[I-4 Centrist Democrat]

1996: Clinton 49 winner
Dole 42

2000: Gore 49 winner, yes, winner
Bush 48

2004: Bush 51 winner
Kerry 47

2004: McCain 52 or 53 winner
Obam 45 or 46

Mark my words !!!!!Obama will lose FL !!! He is way too liberal...Hillary Clinton whom I voted for in the primary could have won because she is a moderate, centrist, middle of the road, democrat just like Bill Clinton and Al Gore.

What will all of the $50 dollar supporters do during the next cycle when they come to realize how their money was wasted by Obama? Remember liberals are not use to hard work and perserverance. They want instant gratification at a nameless taxpayers expense. A McCain/Palin landslide could result in a political sea change.

I think these high gas prices under the obsinate leadership of Pelosi and Reid is about to really backfire in a big way.

If you feel so compelled to post such long stories, please confine them to just one thread. please. Please. I like McCain, but those long postings are ridiculous.

It has been revealed that one of Palins children was addicted to Heroin.

Family Values?

Put a fork in it: McCain wins!

What some don't understand is that Sarah is now bulletproof.

The more the liberal media elites attack her, the more support she will get from Americans. Bash away New York Times. I'll thank you, when Sarah is elected in Nov.

THE TALK IS THAT THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN MAY BE PULLING OUT OF MONEY PIT FLORIDA & GEORGIA.

Let's get real folks. There was not that big of a chance that Obama was going to carry the south any way.

Florida luvs Sarah!

Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!Sarah!

4:45:

What will all the cronies do when they realize that thier money can't win an election?

[South florida]

Remember 2000. It was going to be a breeze for Bush. Baby brother Jeb had scrubbed the rolls and guaranteed victory. The Gore campaign had left Florida. Sound familar. There is no butterfly ballot now. Just wait for the south florida turnout. They are not polling that.

[Realist]

There are 60 million americans without health insurance. There are 60 million people without health insurance. Why would anyone vote republican.

: Realist | September 13, 2008 at 09:08 PM

Do yourself a favor and look up socialized health care in Britain, Canada and Germany.

You will be against it to if you choose to educate yourself.

[3]

South florida | September 13, 2008 at 09:05 PM\

Did ACORN start stuffing ballot boxes with the homeless and dead people already?

Just more ties Obama has to another radical organization.

Yes Obama is a member of ACORN and they have been caught stuffing ballot boxes in multiple states.

At least I found out what he was doing as a community Organizer

ACORN’s Voter Fraud in Ohio is Part of Larger Pattern
http://www.epionline.org/news_detail.cfm?rid=171

ACORN Voter Registration Fraud Allegations Are Just the Tip of the Iceberg, Says Employment Policies Institute
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/www/story/10-13-2004/0002275937&EDATE

ACORN Is A Bad Seed
Something’s rotten in the state of New Mexico, and Ohio, and Michigan, and Pennsylvania, and Florida, and…

http://www.rottenacorn.com/

[Realist]

9:29...Go look up the Obama plan. It is not a single payor system like Medicare which I'm sure you will reject at age 65 cause its...socialist. Rather it is a private programs with private insurance. Educate yourself...Dont listen to just to Fox news. I need health insurance.

Realist

Read it again without the rose colored glasses.

[Richard]

Sept 13,2008 at 09:08

If Obama gets in there will be 150 million without health insurance. If he institutes his plan that will give Corporations a means of dropping health insurance as a benefit and no one will be able to afford it. The corporate execs will love that, with the huge savings to the company they'll get an even bigger bonus.

[Ted]

Mr. Smith,
Mark my words about methods of current and past polling techniques. In 2008 we will all learn that these methods don't apply anymore. The media daily talks about changes in how people are communicating, ex. MyFace but never asking how could this change polling.

The mere fact that pollsters do not capture cell phones should be the biggest indicator that current results are not including the millions of people who no longer depend on land lines.

In 2009 MSM, who is the pollster largest customers, will realize its back to the drawing boards.

I'm not counting FL out for Obama.

Obama has pulled out of Georgia. They on the verge of pulling out of North Carolina and Florida. So much for that 50 State plan.

[AARP for $50,000 limit on income taxes]

If you're a senior citizen and earn less than $50,000 a year, Barack Obama has a deal for you: a life free of federal income tax.

That's right, Obama will get rid of income tax for Seniors making less than $50,000.

Senior Citizens for Obama

Let me get this straight, Obama has 350 community organizers working in Florida, has spent 8 million on TV and is doing worse now than Kerry was at this time 4 years ago.

Boy that Steve Schale sure is one helluva Wonder Boy...

[Pick Hillary to Win]

Pull out of FL?

Heck, Obama needs to pull out of the US!

Obama "jumped the shark" after he dissed the troops in Germany and gave his celebrity speech to young Germans who can't vote here.

If the dems want to win, they should remove Obama from the ticket and replace him with Hillary.

Na na na na

Na na na na

Hey Hey Hey

Goodbye!

Pack it up Obama, Florida is regaining its senses!

10:23 Do you really believe that? I have some swampland I want to sell you!

Realist...Not!

Hey Left Wing Nuts. Accusing absolutely everyone of being a liar because you don't like them is getting really old. Try getting some real ideas.