Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin

[Leroy]

Wow. Another accountant on board. What's that now, five of us?

[Freed Roger]

Wow. Another accountant on board. What's that now, five of us?

five.... out of the closet.

[Hungary Jack]

Wow. Another accountant on board. What's that now, five of us?

five.... out of the closet.

Just remember: Cash flow is King.

[Jocephus]

This board needs more scientists.

i technically graduate from a "soft science" field...

[Jocephus]

This board needs more scientists.

i technically graduate from a "soft science" field...

< fist bump >

are we terrorists?


heres another article on that plumber guy...if anyone is bored/interested

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27207215/

[Freed Roger]

i noticed last night

both guys are southpaws.

come january we'll have a left-handed president and this will hopefully bring and end to persecution of our class.

- first order of business - law mandating reading and writing from right to left. second - scissors and can-opener reform... third - move flush handles to right side of toilets, so we don't have to demean our precious left hands any longer....fourth- govt retribution for all the hardship we've endured...

...and much much more to come.

Lets see...what other right minded lefties have we had as president before.
James Garfield, 1881
Herbert Hoover, 1929 – 1933
Harry Truman, 1945 – 1953
Gerald Ford, 1974 – 1977
Ronald Reagan, 1981 – 1989
George Bush, 1989 – 1993
Bill Clinton, 1993 – 2001


at least a few of them were decent.....nevermind

[GatewaySnayke]

"Analysis from the Wisconsin Advertising Project of Sen. John McCain’s television advertising for the week of September 28 to October 4 shows, in fact, that all McCain campaign TV advertising did have significant negative content – either spots that were comprised completely of attacks on the Democratic nominee or ones that combined attacks on Sen. Barack Obama with some talk about Sen. McCain’s own plans. We reported this finding in a press release last week that was widely publicized and this was clearly the number that Obama was citing in last night’s debate. That said, McCain’s advertising has not been completely negative over the course of the entire campaign. Looking at the tone of all of McCain’s advertising from June 4 to October 4, we found that 47 percent of the McCain spots were negative (completely focused on Obama), 26 percent were positive (completely focusing on his own personal story or on his issues or proposals) and 27 percent were contrast ads (a mix of positive and negative messages).

But what about Obama? Our analysis reveals that 39 percent of all general election Obama TV ads have been positive (solely about his record, positions or personal story), 35 percent have been negative (solely focused on McCain) and 25 percent have been contrast ads – mixing a bit of both. So, on a proportional basis, the McCain campaign is and has been more negative than Obama.

But, Obama has aired over 50,000 more ads than McCain. So, hasn’t he simply aired more of everything – including negative ads – than McCain has this year, or than anyone in history, as McCain may have alleged?

If one just looks at pure airings of negative ads, McCain has aired more than Obama. If one allocates contrast ads as half positive and half negative or considers contrast ads as negative – as the Advertising Project does – the tone of the McCain and Obama campaigns has been absolutely identical.

According to some press reports, the McCain campaign is backing up its claim with an analysis of TV ad spending from September 12 to October 11 that shows that Obama spent more on negative ads than McCain during this time period. Does that analysis mean that the Obama campaign has aired the most negative ad campaign in history? Well, since, there was no television for most of history and we only have systematic data since 1996, we’ll have to restrict our analysis to the last four contests.

And it was in 1996 that former Sen. Bob Dole aired the greatest proportion of negative ads in recent presidential elections. Seventy percent of his ads in his contest against then-President Bill Clinton were pure negative spots and 12 percent were contrast. In 2004, 60 percent of President Bush’s ads were negative and 12 percent were contrast. Multiplying the proportions by ad expenditures in 2004 reveals that the Bush campaign aired the greatest number of negative ads in recent history and spent the most money doing so. While there are still three weeks left in this contest, President Bush in 2004 has the record for the most number of negative spots aired in a race.

[jim]

"Analysis from the Wisconsin Advertising Project of Sen. John McCain’s television advertising for the week of September 28 to October 4 shows, in fact, that all McCain campaign TV advertising did have significant negative content – either spots that were comprised completely of attacks on the Democratic nominee or ones that combined attacks on Sen. Barack Obama with some talk about Sen. McCain’s own plans. We reported this finding in a press release last week that was widely publicized and this was clearly the number that Obama was citing in last night’s debate. That said, McCain’s advertising has not been completely negative over the course of the entire campaign. Looking at the tone of all of McCain’s advertising from June 4 to October 4, we found that 47 percent of the McCain spots were negative (completely focused on Obama), 26 percent were positive (completely focusing on his own personal story or on his issues or proposals) and 27 percent were contrast ads (a mix of positive and negative messages).

But what about Obama? Our analysis reveals that 39 percent of all general election Obama TV ads have been positive (solely about his record, positions or personal story), 35 percent have been negative (solely focused on McCain) and 25 percent have been contrast ads – mixing a bit of both. So, on a proportional basis, the McCain campaign is and has been more negative than Obama.

But, Obama has aired over 50,000 more ads than McCain. So, hasn’t he simply aired more of everything – including negative ads – than McCain has this year, or than anyone in history, as McCain may have alleged?

If one just looks at pure airings of negative ads, McCain has aired more than Obama. If one allocates contrast ads as half positive and half negative or considers contrast ads as negative – as the Advertising Project does – the tone of the McCain and Obama campaigns has been absolutely identical.

According to some press reports, the McCain campaign is backing up its claim with an analysis of TV ad spending from September 12 to October 11 that shows that Obama spent more on negative ads than McCain during this time period. Does that analysis mean that the Obama campaign has aired the most negative ad campaign in history? Well, since, there was no television for most of history and we only have systematic data since 1996, we’ll have to restrict our analysis to the last four contests.

And it was in 1996 that former Sen. Bob Dole aired the greatest proportion of negative ads in recent presidential elections. Seventy percent of his ads in his contest against then-President Bill Clinton were pure negative spots and 12 percent were contrast. In 2004, 60 percent of President Bush’s ads were negative and 12 percent were contrast. Multiplying the proportions by ad expenditures in 2004 reveals that the Bush campaign aired the greatest number of negative ads in recent history and spent the most money doing so. While there are still three weeks left in this contest, President Bush in 2004 has the record for the most number of negative spots aired in a race.

And, in other news, the sky is blue.

[GatewaySnayke]

Well, not only that, but McCain was being a crybaby last night and talking about how every ad Obama runs is a negative one and he's Mr. Negative and all that other [expletive].

[InvincibleCakeEater]

Well, not only that, but McCain was being a crybaby last night and talking about how every ad Obama runs is a negative one and he's Mr. Negative and all that other [expletive].

You actually believe that? Man, you need to watch more Fox News.