Political Punch

Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

McCain Thinks We're Better Off Than We Were 8 Years Ago - But Worse Off Than We Were 4 Years Ago (Huh?)

August 05, 2008 3:11 PM

Sen. John McCain's new TV ad (watch HERE) asserts that "Washington's broken. John McCain knows it. We're worse off than we were four years ago."

But the Obama camp notes that this is a somewhat different note than the one Sen. McCain sang during the primaries. The CNN debate January 30 (watch HERE) featured the following exchange:

"Are Americans better off than they were eight years ago?" asked CNN's Anderson Cooper.

"I think you could argue that Americans overall are better off, because we have had a pretty good prosperous time, with low unemployment and low inflation and a lot of good things have happened," McCain said. "A lot of jobs have been created."

"But let's have some straight talk," McCain continued. "Things are tough right now. Americans are uncertain about this housing crisis. Americans are uncertain about the economy, as we see the stock market bounce up and down, but more importantly, the economy particularly in some parts of the country, state of Michigan, Governor Romney and I campaigned, not to my success, I might add, and other parts of the country are probably better off."

"But I think what we're trying to do to fix this economy is important," McCain said. "We've got to address the housing, subprime housing problem. We need to, obviously, have this package go through the Congress as quickly as possible. We need to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, which I voted for twice to do so. I think we need to eliminate the alternate minimum tax that sits out there and challenges 25 million American families."

Observed Cooper: "It sounds like that we're not better off is what you're saying."

"Pardon me?" asked McCain.

"It sounds like you're saying we're not better off," repeated Cooper.

"I think we are better off overall if you look at the entire eight-year period, when you look at the millions of jobs that have been created, the improvement in the economy, et cetera," McCain said.

Can one think that we're currently better off than we were eight years ago, during the Bill Clinton presidency, but worse off than we were four years ago, during the Bush presidency?

Does that make any sense?

McCain is basically arguing that things were best in 2004, are worse than that now in 2008, but were the absolute worst in 2000.

Our unemployment rate is currently 5.7%. That's higher, worse, than it was four years ago -- 5.4%. But it's also worse than it was eight years ago: 4.1%.

Our inflation rate was 5.02% in June of this year.

That's worse than it was four years ago -- in August 2004, the rate was 2.65%. But it's also worse than it was eight years ago. In August 2000, the inflation rate was 3.41%.

ABC News Polling Director Gary Langer points out that in the ABC News Consumer Comfort Index, Americans' ratings of the national economy, the buying climate and their personal finances all are drastically worse than either four or eight years ago.

Housing on the other hand seemed great four years ago...but the housing market has since collapsed, as Dan Arnall in ABC News' Business Unit points out. So four years ago the economy was propped up by that tent pole. And the bubble burst, to mix metaphors. To be fair, Clinton benefited from the tech bubble in 2000 as Bush did in 2004.

In any case, there are any number of economic matrices by which to measure this. I eagerly await the McCain campaign's explanation.

- jpt

August 5, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (102)

User Comments

A lot has changed since January 30th. Home foreclosures are up, unemployment is up, gas prices are up, etc. People are far less optimistic now that they were in January.

All of which adds up to bad news for Obama who ought to be leading by double digits simply by grace of being a Democrat.

Posted by: marylou | Aug 6, 2008 2:02:28 PM

The more McCain talks the more I am convinced he is simply a confused old man who forgets what he is saying mid-sentence many times....The man as a war veteran should be honored. The man as a politician is simply un-inspiring.

Posted by: indy_voter | Aug 6, 2008 12:35:34 PM

We're better off than the Clinton tech stock market crash and the bear markets of the late 1990s. We're better off to not have to listen to the indescretions of the last DEM president and his administration. However, many Americans are now earning less than 8 years ago, many have no retirement, many lost lives or loved ones in wars, many good tech jobs are still going off-shore. We are on the decline. Obama has no solutions and would make things much worse for most Americans. It was the Democrat years that set us up for terrorist attacks, the terrorist planning was taking place in the airports under Clinton's watch, and he didn't get the word out about the threats or these attacks might have been stopped. McCain is the lesser of two evils and because of his military background, he is more trustworthy when he commits to get us out of the middle east wars.

Posted by: Jilly | Aug 6, 2008 9:43:32 AM

McCain graduated 894/899 out of his class. He was smarter than 5 people.
He crashed an airplane 5 separate times as a pilot.
McCain's grandfather/father were both admirals thus giving preferential treatment to McCain allowing him to continue to fly until he crashed again in Hanoi.

Obama graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School and became the President of the Harvard Law Review, a coveted and highly prestigious position.

Obama grew up middle class and never crashed an airplane. He served his country by organizing in poor communities.

It's time to pick the smartest and brightest to lead our nation America.

Posted by: Iraq Vet | Aug 6, 2008 12:31:58 AM

John McCain can not be trusted, he is nothing more then a empty suit who happens to have 26 years in the Senate. Just goes to prove just because you have many years of service, that does not mean you are fit to be the next President of the United States. Their is always some out their smarter and more qualified to represent all Americans. That Person is Sen. Barack Obama next President of the United States. P.U.M.A for Obama08 and Obama/Clinton 2012.

Posted by: Orlando B. Fremont Ohio | Aug 5, 2008 10:48:47 PM

With McCain, we'll have a seamless transition from the Bush administration. This is a good thing, eh?

Posted by: Rick_VT | Aug 5, 2008 10:46:50 PM

Straight Talking in Circles

Posted by: The Retrospectivist | Aug 5, 2008 10:10:34 PM

In 2004, McCain's family had received HUGE taxcuts. He thinks ‘America’ was better of 4 years ago than 8 years because HE was.

He thinks he is America

Posted by: Willem van Oranje | Aug 5, 2008 8:56:59 PM

Before we conclude we need more oil everyone should read Senator Ron Wyden's investigative report titled"The Oil Industry, Gas Supply and Refinery Capacity: More than meets the eye"
This report suggests the Oil industry has done all it can to reduce supplyand increase demand for gasoline. The way this is done is to curtail or shut down refinery operations which creates shortages of refined gasoline without really effecting the supply of crude oil.
This sin't the only report which says this. See the November 17, 2007 article in the Arab News which says much the same thing. Both document are online and are available to all who want to know the truth which we are not being told by either candidate for President.

Posted by: Chucklwillswidow | Aug 5, 2008 8:29:07 PM

Dictionary definition of "maverick"--

A person who REFUSES TO ABIDE BY THE POLICIES OR VIEWS OF A GROUP.

When this "group" happens to be the American people, it is a hideous thing to call yourself.

Obama 08

Posted by: Desmond | Aug 5, 2008 7:45:16 PM

"John McCain is an adorable pathetic Pillsbury Doughboy."

Not really, he's more like the creepy old man who offers to have his wife dance topless and brag that he made a video with Paris Hilton.

Posted by: Mike | Aug 5, 2008 7:34:51 PM

Kerry was never up 13 points on Bush. I'll give you Dukakis up by 17 points on Bush 1 but both the 2000 and 2004 races were much closer and changed but not as much as what occurred in 1988 or for that matter in 1980.You can check Real Clear Politics for a pretty good analysis as well as other sites. And again those that don't check the facts--the Democrats didn't take control of both houses until after the 2006 election and even then they didn't have a veto proof majority or 60 votes to really get things done in the Senate. Bush is still the decider who needs to be derided for his failures in both foreign policy, respect of individual rights and deficit disaster, among other shortcomings.

Posted by: bhciapol | Aug 5, 2008 6:34:01 PM

I don't get the punchline here. This guy is truly an idiot!

Posted by: Pat | Aug 5, 2008 6:29:19 PM

John McCain is an adorable pathetic Pillsbury Doughboy.

Posted by: FilmMD | Aug 5, 2008 6:25:49 PM

The man can't even figure out the logic behind a simple chronology - we sure as heck don't want him as President!! Obama will eat McSame alive if they debate.

Posted by: SickofGOPcorruption | Aug 5, 2008 6:17:55 PM

This is another reason why McCain is not qualified. He is a very ignorant man, who will do nothing to help the middle class with the economy, but be an ignorant fool. OBAMA O8

Posted by: Matt | Aug 5, 2008 6:15:17 PM

"I don't think anybody really thinks the polls mean much at this stage; but I'm still pretty sure it is better to be ahead than behind." Posted by: jock59801

Well Jock, the latest Rasmussen poll shows that McCain is actually ahead. I realize this is just ONE poll, however, in every OTHER poll, Obama appears to be going down. He is not increasing his lead, he is decreasing it. McCain is going up.

I've also noticed Nancy Pelosi continues to "postpone" the vote on oil drilling.

If you're right about McCain losing the election and the Democrats increasing their hold on Congress next fall, then I'm sure Pelosi would have no trouble having her party vote on the oil drilling issue right now. The majority of the public is against more oil drilling, right Jock?

If the Democrats were to vote their conscience and put their foot down and say "no drilling, we need to be concerned about global warming", the public would cheer them on and their campaigns next fall would not be in danger.

.... Then why does Nancy Pelosi not want a vote on the issue?

Posted by: jfm125 | Aug 5, 2008 6:09:07 PM

Do you really think politicians have any idea what the rest of America deals with? They are so insulated from the hardships of life that their brain can not possibly relate to everyday people.

Posted by: j | Aug 5, 2008 6:07:15 PM

McLame is all hot air above and oil down below. He can no more get us out of this economic mess than he could get us out of a closet. Dementia is setting in. All you have to do is listen to him talk about foreign affairs (wrought with mistakes) and silly ideas on the economy. Is this the best the repubs have? What a sorry state for them, indeed.

Posted by: truthbetold | Aug 5, 2008 5:47:10 PM

How the heck would he know???

Posted by: Hopeless | Aug 5, 2008 5:45:02 PM

Poor John seems like he is confused again -- do people really want such confusion runing out country?? After this election, I really think both political parties should get together and determine an age cut-off.
I am 64 and McCain has aged sooo much in the past year it's amazing -- unfortunately, this campaign will damage his senate reputation and that is something that it never did against John Kerry. And, I agree with Kerry, I think John McCain is danagerous.

Posted by: Paulet | Aug 5, 2008 5:44:49 PM

McCain by his own admission is not good with economics. If he thinks we are better off he is also not good at listening to the American people. You're just a nuisance to his big oil and war economic plans, the only thing he knows. I guess you can not teach an old dog new tricks.

Posted by: Tom | Aug 5, 2008 5:37:33 PM

Some one had a good idea. We should all buy tire gauges (we should make sure our tires are properly inflated) and buy an extra one and send it to McCain.

Posted by: Iam4thisCountry | Aug 5, 2008 5:27:35 PM

Well said Brian!

Posted by: Mary | Aug 5, 2008 5:21:11 PM

Republicans are great at attack adds and lousy at governing.

Posted by: Will Full | Aug 5, 2008 5:19:38 PM

None of this matters until they get into the debates. Then the real people will show their face to america. Anybody can look good through attack ads and sound bites. John M will show his ignorance on the economy, Obama will show his arrogance. I will remain undecided until after 2-3 debates.

Posted by: Brian | Aug 5, 2008 5:09:50 PM

Republicans have been in charge for 8yrs but what America to beleive Democrats are that fault for the state or America.

Sorry but it is Bush and Chenney and Republicans that set the energy policy and have put America where it is today with lie after lie. History will not look favorably at Republicans.

Republicans = Zero Credibility

They are willing to lie about anything and everything just read their posting here.

Republicans are what is wrong with America!

Posted by: Stupid Republicans | Aug 5, 2008 4:59:05 PM

McCaine IS the laughing stock of the country, NO way will he win

Posted by: braylon | Aug 5, 2008 4:58:06 PM

It seems most people responsing to this article are not interested in Sen. McCain's confusion over the economy. He can't make up his mind, when things were better and when things were worst. However, he did admit, he knew little about the US economy and it really does show... "It's the economy stupid" McCain is obviously weaker in our domestic affairs than he is in our foreign affairs...

Posted by: Bruce | Aug 5, 2008 4:58:00 PM

Ha ha. The McCain campaign can't think past their next childish stunt. They can only go so far before they've tied themselves in a knot. Shortsighted amateurs. The gang that couldn't shoot straight. I don't want them anywhere near the White House!

Posted by: SpaceCat | Aug 5, 2008 4:56:17 PM

House conservatives, engaging in a third day of political stunts on the floor of the House, are now claiming that gas prices across the nation have dropped in response to their theatrics calling for a vote on offshore oil drilling. “I think the market is responding to the fact that we are here talking,” said Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) in a GOP press conference today.

Shadegg claimed that “gas prices have gone down” because of the “pressure” coming from pro-drilling conservatives:

“Gas prices have gone down, and they’ve gone down in part because the market is realizing that this kind of pressure from the Congress may actually cause a change in American policy,” said Rep. John Shadegg (R-Ariz.), one of the ringleaders of the protest demanding that Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) bring Congress back to vote on oil exploration measures.

But actual experts don’t believe the political stunts have anything to do with the drop in prices. In fact, oil and gas prices are down because of simple economics as the high energy prices and the weak economy are “curbing consumer demand” for gas:

Oil prices kept falling Tuesday, sinking as low as $118 a barrel on growing concerns that a U.S. economic slowdown and high energy costs are curbing consumer demand for gasoline and other petroleum products

One analyst told the Los Angeles Times that demand has “finally hit a wall” while another put it more bluntly to the AP: “$4-a-gallon gasoline has clearly killed demand.” As evidence of this decreased demand, the Transportation Department recently reported that Americans drove nearly 10 billion fewer miles in May 2008 than May 2007.

Conservatives have previously tried to give credit for lower prices to President Bush’s call for offshore drilling, but even the White House rejected that logic. Though they’re crediting their theatrics for the drop in prices, The Hill reports that the conservatives refused to “answer questions about whether they would take the blame if gas prices go up again.”

Posted by: BlueJersey | Aug 5, 2008 4:51:28 PM

Something else to contend with this year

18 million Hillary supporters who loathe Obama and are mad as hell at her treatment.
Just another reason Obama will lose.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:24:36 PM

Jo, first and foremost Hillary didn't still have the 18 million voters that voted for her, alot of them who voted fro her in Ohio and Texas stated they wish they could change there votes after some of the negative campagining she did. Look dream all you want Barack will beat McCain just like he beat Hillary, and there is nothing you can do about it.

Posted by: atl | Aug 5, 2008 4:49:23 PM

Polls only reflect the turnout at any one given time. It certainly doesnt include the mass majority of younger and minority voters either as far as I'm concerned. Polls shmolls. It's a carrot for people in power to manipulate the stupid types.

Posted by: Eruc | Aug 5, 2008 4:48:32 PM

I would like to say that I am not sure which way I am voting this year but I can't really understand how people can look at the party in power right now and say hey they have done a great job. Maybe I am in a different country right now and not seeing what is going on but my goodness. Please wake up.

Posted by: Dennard | Aug 5, 2008 4:47:15 PM

Stop taking for granted everything the media reports! Everyone, with the exception of most Americans, know how biased the media is!! Americans are so easily, and stupidly led, like a bunch of sheep!!


Posted by: Diane - Dallas, TX | Aug 5, 2008 4:46:36 PM

jock - Great point! Obama didn't say it would bring down the cost of oil. It would decrease usage, so we wouldn't need to buy as much.

Here's the problem with that position - OPEC doesn't oversee an open market. It's an organized cartel to control supply.

When demand is high, they say "we're at full production capacity!" When demand falls, they get together and pinky swear to decrease production.

I've said it before. The US has a 150 million car problem. You can't just wish the internal combustion engine away in the next couple months or years. Even if there was a suitable replacement, the average American cannot afford to ditch their current car - esp if it's financed.

We have to invest in alternate energy sources. But we also need to decrease our dependence on foreign oil. We buy Wal-Mart cr@p from China because the labor is cheaper there. But we can get some of our own oil here - so we're not at the mercy of OPEC forever.

Posted by: FishMonger | Aug 5, 2008 4:45:52 PM

On that tire inflating comment from Obama...

that same exact idea has been raised by big-wigs in NASCAR and the Bush administration. The overall savings of oil is in the millions of barrel turf if people would just keep their cars tuned up and tires properly inflated... Fact.

Posted by: Eruc | Aug 5, 2008 4:45:44 PM

Jo

Obama never said inflating your tires would bring down the cost of oil.

Posted by: jock59801 | Aug 5, 2008 4:35:11 PM

I don't think anybody really thinks the polls mean much at this stage; but I'm still pretty sure it is better to be ahead than behind.

Posted by: jock59801 | Aug 5, 2008 4:33:24 PM

Has anyone seen my tire gauge? I want to bring down the cost of oil.

LOLOL.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:31:08 PM

jm,

Oh, my bad! I thought he was referring to ole "57 states" Obama.

Sorry. Lol.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:30:35 PM

Jock, no it's not enough to win. There are plenty of undecideds out there.

And again the 18 million Hillary voters to contend with.

Kerry was ahead by about 13 points by now and he still lost.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:29:52 PM

18 million Hillary supporters. At least a third of them will stay home or vote McCain. You can't win without them.

Giving McCain the victory. Yahooo.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:28:14 PM

Jo: "Then why are all the tv shows (all of them) talking about his being statistically tied AND talking about that big 9 point lead evaporating?"

That's a really good question. No one else can figure that out either. Either they got over-excited by a blip in a couple of polls, or they just really want this election to look like it's a close as possible.

But in composite polls, Obama has been hovering around 3 points ahead for the last 2 months. Nobody has been paying enough attention for that to change very fast.

You think it should be more than 3 points? Why thank you, I agree. But it's enough to win, and that's all that matters.

Posted by: jock59801 | Aug 5, 2008 4:28:04 PM

Jo,

Clue Alert! There is a little thing called the Electoral College. Remember, that is how we elect our Presidents! Today is

Obama 238
McCain 163

Posted by: jmc663 | Aug 5, 2008 4:26:45 PM

Mike, I agree. The lights are on, but Obama is clearly not home.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:26:23 PM

Jock, yes in 2004 people weren't paying attention either.

And yet Kerry was waaay ahead in the polls.

Sorry, but your argument doesn't hold up.

Next.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:25:47 PM

I wouldn't trust this man to deliver my mail, never mind run the free world. He doesn't appear to be able to answer even simple questions in a logical manner. I think the lights are on, but nobody is home.

Posted by: Mike | Aug 5, 2008 4:25:03 PM

Something else to contend with this year

18 million Hillary supporters who loathe Obama and are mad as hell at her treatment.

Just another reason Obama will lose.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:24:36 PM

I agree, McCain is a lousy candidate. We ALL agree on that.

And we can all agree that it's a bad year for republicans.

We can ALL agree too that the media is giving Obama 99.9% positive press.

Combine all three of those and Obama should be at least 15 points ahead.

He's not. And he won't win.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:23:26 PM

The gloves will ocme off, and the old coot will be up against the ropes. He doesn;'t have the mental capacity to go toe to toe. His latest ads reveal this.

Obama is about change, and I just cannot trust republicans.

I laugh at these blind republican supporters... what the hell has the republican party done right... I can't thinkof much

Posted by: Pete | Aug 5, 2008 4:22:58 PM

Sorry, Jo, most people are not even paying attention. They are on vacation and getting ready to watch the Olympics. As soon as the conventions kick off the fall campaign, we may see the polls move a bit more. And Obama always, ALWAYS increases in the polls when doing his final campaigning before a contest.

See you in November!

Posted by: jock59801 | Aug 5, 2008 4:22:54 PM

Steve, let's see where have I heard that before?

Oh yeah, in 2000 and 2004.

Nice try. Maybe you can cross your fingers.

Obama should be way ahead by now and he's not. Period.

Love it.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:21:57 PM

Jo wrote:
McCain can win this thing with his brain tied behind his back.

*********
Good thing, because the one in his head isn't doing him any good, LOL!

But we do love the blank stares he gives when he fails to understand the question.

Posted by: jmc663 | Aug 5, 2008 4:20:47 PM

Jock, really he's ahead?

Then why are all the tv shows (all of them) talking about his being statistically tied AND talking about that big 9 point lead evaporating?

Lol. You guys are really humiliating yourselves with your avoidance.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:20:45 PM

Jo,

2008 is no 2008.

Obama will win this by lanslide.

State-by-State Electoral College math today shows

Obama 308
McCain 230

All other polls show this.

Give me you numbers and let me know who the polster is. Even Karl Rove agrees Obama is way ahead.

.

Posted by: Steve_NJ | Aug 5, 2008 4:20:32 PM

Jo

Maybe McCain should UNTIE his brain from behind his back. And Obama has been consistently ahead in the composite polls for months.

Posted by: jock59801 | Aug 5, 2008 4:18:34 PM

Obama lost about a 9 point lead in 6 days. And this with 99.9% positive coverage by the MSM.

Me thinks americans are hitting the internet and discovering Obama ain't such a Messiah after all.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:18:17 PM

The tale is the same among white women. Bush won that demographic by eleven percentage points, 55% to 44%. Obama is doing five points better and trails by only six, 48% to 42%.

Remeber Jo, a Dem has not won with white women in 20 years.

Posted by: jmc663 | Aug 5, 2008 4:18:12 PM

Poor Obama. After his media fawning world tour it must be tough to come back to merely tied in the polls.

LOL.

Reality bites.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:16:28 PM

Gee, it's nice to know that mcCain's campaign admits that the Republicans broker things on their watch...and why should we allowe them a chance to further screw things up? Rather than wasting all the money in the middle east (rebuilding Iraq etc.), why can't we spend some money to improve things here at home? How about improving our infrastructure so bridges don't fall down? Better education so our children will be more competitive? Research to develop alternate energy? The Republicans only seem to be happy in a world where they can manipulate the imginary threat of terrorism to benefit the pockets of large corporation...the industry that has grown around anti-terrorism is astounding...Eisenhower was right when he warned about the military-industrial complex...it is alive and well...creating a true soceity of haves and have nots...just the way the Republicans like it.

Posted by: Dirik Lolkus | Aug 5, 2008 4:15:34 PM

Steve,

We heard the "younger people not interviewed" prediction back in 2004.

Kerry was about 13 points ahead in the polls during this time in 2004.

Gosh, how did that election turn out?

Lol.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:14:50 PM

McCain can win this thing with his brain tied behind his back.

In a year when it's almost impossible for a democrat to lose, Obama is behind or tied in the polls. Wow. Now THAT is quite an accomplishment.

Love it.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:13:19 PM

Saying Clinton benefited from this, Bush benefited from that is baloney. Clinton turned massive deficits into a surplus and grew the economy creating more than 20 million new jobs. Eight years later, Bush has plunged us into record deficits and run the country into a ditch. The U.S. enjoys neither peace nor prosperity, and our standing and security has been greatly diminished.

Posted by: hopesprings52 | Aug 5, 2008 4:12:20 PM

I listen to a guy like McCain and his nonsense, and I'm reminded of something my grandfather told me:
If God had meant us to vote, he'd have given us a candidate.
Does this mean if the republicans don't have one, they don't have to vote in November?

Posted by: DAVID NH | Aug 5, 2008 4:12:18 PM

Jo,

So what?

Obama is still leading in ALL POLLS.

Obam will win by a landslide considering the the younger voters are not even interviwed in these surveys. Only oldies of the McCain mold get called.

Posted by: Steve_NJ | Aug 5, 2008 4:11:39 PM

McCain has run a horrible campaign and still Obama can't pull away in the polls.

Now he's losing support among typically loyal democrat constituencies (younger woman).

Imagine if McCain were running at least a decent campaign how far behind Obama would be.

President McCain - get use to it!

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:11:16 PM

This is an example of a disconnect, or not paying attention to detail, or simply not caring enough to try anymore.

Posted by: MyAudacity | Aug 5, 2008 4:03:58 PM
*****
No, I sincerely beleive that McCain does not have the intelluctual capacity to process the information. I think McCain doesn't understand the Economy because he can't.

Posted by: jmc663 | Aug 5, 2008 4:10:52 PM

Anyone see the polls, McCain is losing votes among low and middle income whites to Obama.

Posted by: mykolas | Aug 5, 2008 4:10:03 PM

geecee, you have your facts wrong (surprise, surprise)

And it's Nancy who will not allow an up or down vote on drilling.

Even some demcorats are furious with her.

Nice try but you lose.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:09:56 PM

Anyone see the latest polls? Obama losing support among younger women.

Ouch.

Posted by: Jo | Aug 5, 2008 4:08:26 PM

Jake needs to report that McCain went on David Lettermen just days after the first Anthrax attack and claimed it "may" have been the Iraqi's.

McCain lied to let Bush begin his run up to the Iraq invasion.

McCain = Bush

Posted by: jmc663 | Aug 5, 2008 4:07:34 PM

Jim Rod - get a life and stop blaming Obama for the Republicans mess for the last 8 years.

Posted by: gl | Aug 5, 2008 4:05:58 PM

Very odd. One question was asked 6 months ago and one question was asked now. Jake, if I were to ask you now, "Is the state of the economy worse now than it was 6 months ago?" Would you say no? I don't think so. Many people had a more optimistic view of the economy in January. Jake, why would McCain be any different?

Posted by: John | Aug 5, 2008 4:04:18 PM

I'm almost tempted to vote for McCain, because I'm nearly convinced that he really does not want to win and inherit the mess Bush is leaving behind.

Has anyone noticed that every since the article came out about how much deficit the next President will inherit, McCain has been saying and doing the most outlandish things....all in the name of fun?

Is it possible that he want to lose the election?

This is an example of a disconnect, or not paying attention to detail, or simply not caring enough to try anymore.

Posted by: MyAudacity | Aug 5, 2008 4:03:58 PM

Frank sorry, your argument does not set with me. We was in a sorry state before Dems took both houses. That is why after Bushes first 4 years we put Dems in both, thinking we might get ahead. What it lead to was Bush and his people creating more trouble then they are worth. As long as Bush was in office we was doomed.

Posted by: beck | Aug 5, 2008 4:00:12 PM

Jim... Pelosi didn't want a vote on drilling for oil because she knew it would pass. Kind of makes us wonder where SHE is getting her money; does she speak Farsi?

Posted by: Rhys | Aug 5, 2008 4:00:04 PM

The Democrats got a slight majority in 2006 - not 2004. And still, the Republicans block every vote the Dems try to pass. Bush vetoes just about anything so the Dems won't get credit for anything good happening to this country. It's called "gridlock" and has been going on since our system of government has begun. Don't give the other party the upperhand by voting with them. Vote against anything and everything - whether it's good for America's people or not - cause we sure don't want the other party taking credit for anything good now, do we? Nope, never!!

Posted by: geecee | Aug 5, 2008 3:58:43 PM

Obama holds office now. He is a part of that 8 years. Congress shut down friday to stop a vote to drill for oil. Where is that story here on abc?
Polosi thinks she is queen of USA

Posted by: Jim Rod | Aug 5, 2008 3:57:38 PM

What a combination! One candidate who wants to push America over a cliff and one who doesn't know whether he's pushing or pulling. Jeez!

Posted by: Rhys | Aug 5, 2008 3:57:34 PM

Of course we're better off. Just asked McCain's financial advisor (former US Senator Phil Gramm). Stop whining. OOPS - forgot, McCain's former financial advisor. Let's face it, there's a wall between this congress (McCain is still a US Senator, as well as Obama)and the tax payer. They are using the system to improve their personal financial wealth at the expense of the public.

Posted by: Don | Aug 5, 2008 3:56:31 PM

Hey OxyCon, don't you know that it takes a 2/3rds majority for either party to have a filibuster proof majority? Currently, the Dems have 49 in the Senate, plus 2 independents that normally caucus with the Dems. That's far from the 60 needed. They have an advantage of 11 seats in the House. Furthermore, Bush has vetoed a number of bipartisan bills put in front of him. You can't even begin to blame the Democrats for this mess. By the way, the Dems took control in 2006, not 2004.

Posted by: Geeez | Aug 5, 2008 3:56:04 PM

The Jobs market is better???... we created more jobs???... oh oh ya... he must be talking about canada or columbia, mexico, maybe india... where he voted to put all of our jobs.... he is confused. Must have missed that nap!

Posted by: beck | Aug 5, 2008 3:55:53 PM

None of these people in politics, the media or any other controlling factor in American life have a clue about the reality of life for the majority of Americans. Those that do don't care. it's all the same, a facade of 'democracy' to mask the reality.

Posted by: YOMAMA | Aug 5, 2008 3:55:41 PM

>What happened around four years ago
>when this country started rapidly
>going down hill?
>That's right, the Democrats took
>control of both houses of Congress!

ROFL...I think you need to check your calendar! The Dems did not take over Congress until Jan 07. Hmmmm, if I calculate that properly, that doesn't add up to four years ago. Sounds like both McCain and yourself are confused on the state of the nation.

Posted by: Frank | Aug 5, 2008 3:50:43 PM

An opinion is exactly what it is - an opinion. We are all free to disagree with his opinion and discuss it. The questions preceding the opinions are what are dumb.

Posted by: Susan | Aug 5, 2008 3:50:27 PM