Everyone ignores hypothetical polls vs McCain because Obama hasn't been attacked. YET.

[Proud2BAmurkin]

He will be attacked and scrutinized on both legitimate grounds (one year in the senate, national security weakness, Rezko) and non legitimate.

His numbers would sink to the high 30's a week after nominating and would never recover. Flameout.

[Kermitt Gribble]

1. I think you're right. n/t

[bowens43]

2. More nonsense.

No one is as vulnerable to attack as Clinton. Why do you think that republican talking heads have been pushing her as inevitable for the last few years? A Hillary candidacy is their wet dream. There won't be enough time from now to Nov to bring out and air all the dirt they have on Hill.

[griffi94]

4. sorry i call bullshit

everything that can be thrown at a clinton has already been thrown...hell most of it twice.
she's been vetted more than any candidate in my lifetime.

[jackson_dem]

14. Yup

[AtomicKitten]

3. The Clintons gave it their best shot and failed.

He's golden.

[griffi94]

6. sure he's golden

at least until talk radio and fox news quit taking shots at mccain and turn on obama
and if he's ever done anything questionable...like say under tipped a waitress...they'll whip
up the frenzy and then the msm outlets will take it and run with it...and all the world democrats will
gnash their teeth and claw at their faces...and the repubs will gloat and smirk and hand us our ass again

[AtomicKitten]

7. Were you born after 2000?

You apparently missed the 1990s.

[smalll]

5. 100% correct. I continue to meet people who think of themselves as politically aware who...

still didn't know what Obama's middle name is.

[Greyskye]

13. What the hell does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

:wtf: I mean really, :wtf:

[CyberPieHole]

8. This should be so patently obvious but it escapes the Obama supporters.

I wonder why?

[Proud2BAmurkin]

9. They don't care because they would rather lose with Obama than win with anyone else

[jenmito]

10. He HAS been attacked. By YOUR candidate and her camp. And do you think she wouldn't be

attacked further if she's our nominee? You think the Clintons have had no NEW shady business deals? A leopard can't change its spots.

[cali]

11. Actually, all polls this far out are useless, muckbrain.

but you're still pushing that idiotic crap about how he'd lose and blah blah blah. Your filth is completely unreliable. Put down the crack pipe, mucky, and go get shot up with anti-psychotice.

[jackson_dem]

15. More vile attacks on fellow DU'ers from cali

:puke:

[anigbrowl]

12. Legitimate grounds?

One year in the senate: Obama was elected in 2004. By the time of the election, he will have been in the senate 4 years. I guess you meant one term.

National security weakness: He wants the US out of Iraq, is clear that it was a bad idea to be there in the first place, and favors aggressive diplomacy. So does a majority of the country. I'm really looking forward to seeing McCain try to explain why we should be there for 100 years.

Rezko: yawn - a non-scandal that people are desperately trying to make into something of substance to sell newspapers. Funny how none of these stories contradict (and very few even link back to) the interview Obama gave to the Chicago Sun-Times back in 2006, in which he gave answers to over 20 questions posed by the newspaper: http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/124171,CST-NWS-obama05.article

I looked into the Rezko story almost a year ago when I was first considering who I wanted to support for the Democratic nomination. As far as I am concerned, it's a dead story. Obama has given forthright answers to all the questions he was asked, and nothing I've seen since then has contradicted his version of events. We should also remember that Rezko's trial is not about Obama, but about whether Rezko received kickbacks from contracters in return for his influence with state officials. The main political fallout from his trial is what it may expose (if anything) about Illinois governor Rod Blagejovic.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-tony-rezko_webfeb01,1,2765450.story and http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/blagojevich/783119,gov020708.article for the latest news.

Funny how the folks who go around asking pointed questions about Rezko like it was political dynamite seem unaware that those exact questions were asked and answered a long time ago. I guess it's easier to go around repeating allegations than it is to do research.

[no name no slogan]

16. Actually, Obama was elected in '06

nt