While some Alaska polls had McCain and Obama close, the nomination of Palin will likely move Alaska solidly red in upcoming polls. (Barring a complete Obama landslide, we were pretty skeptical that Obama could win there, so ultimately this is a non-event in terms of the expected outcome for Alaska). Alaska has only voted Democratic once, in 1964. See Alaska voting history.
Delaware has participated in all 55 presidential elections, and has had 3 electoral votes (same as Alaska) for 53 of them. Delaware has become a very blue state over the last 4 elections, so the Biden nomination will not change anything in terms of the electoral outcome for that state. See Delaware voting history.
{ 74 comments… read them below or add one }
← Previous Comments
http://www.gallup.com/poll/110137/McCain-Now-Winning-Majority-Independents.aspx and yet more polls
dear 270 staff.thats a valid point..about the deaths…but again…I was pointing out american deaths……{which was the topic}. I happen to love chicago…………….GO CUBS!!!!!!!
Sorry Mark, while you may have meant just American deaths you never said that. You just said there were more deaths in Chicago than Baghdad. As for that being undisputable proof, let me ask this. How many Americans are in Chicago? How many in Baghdad? What’s the death rate per capita?
I re-read my post………..and I will redact only one thing………I claimed it was in the month of august…..it was actually over the entire summer……The rest is quite accurate….{and if it is over the entire summer, my point is just reinforced due to a longer time frame with which to work}………you asked for death rates………the comparison was clearly just death rates due to violence….heart attacks, cancer, lou gerhigs disease were not included……..
I will submit that there are twice as many weapons in Baghdad……and yet chicago still had a higher rate of violence associated with death…..so think clearly…..twice as many guns and yet.1/2 as many deaths in Baghdad……..That is a clear indicator of my original statement…………..
According to http://www.gulfnews.com/region/Iraq/10195540.html there were about 34,500 US troops in Baghdad in March. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago the population of Chicago is 2,833,321.
So that’s 2 times as many people shot and killed in a city with about 82 times as many Americans. While my numbers may be off a little, not sure how accurate they are, I think they are close enough. Seems to me that Chicago is safer.
That’s why when they compare murder rates they go by population, not just by number of murders.
ok………I would like to point out that your time frame of march is not even clost to the summer.but lets not quibble……….my main point is still intact……..and by any reasonable standard.Iraq is much more under control…….I dont want to get lost in the weeds……..I love chicago..Iwent to basic training at the naval training center by chicago……I would love for chicago to be safer than it currently is……..I dont see the need to continue this line of discussion………kinda played out.dont ya think???
I don’t doubt your love of Chicago. I’m just saying you are wrong about Chicago being more dangerous. There are alot more Americans in Chicago than Baghdad. If you take the number of mureders per American in each city I believe you will find that it’s higher in Baghdad. And unless the number of troops in Baghdad went up about 1 milllion then the March numbers are valid. Even if there were 100,000 there over the summer the rate per person is still much higher than Chicago.
You complain about people not having facts to dispute your claim, then when I give facts you deicded there’s no point to continue.
does the fact that chicago isnt loaded with sunni and shiite terrorists factor in?…………I know chicago has gangs but last time I checked there hasnt been any beheadings at the local mosque……..is chicago the central front in the war on terror?………..I will concede the numbers argument………………..yes.per capita chicago is safer…….chicago also isnt a war zone..I think any reasonable person would have to acknowledge that with Iraq being a war zone {canada hasnt invaded chicago} and the fact that chicago isnt under a mandatory night time curfew plays into the argument.along with the fact that baghdad is over loaded with weapons……..{I have no way to verify that, but its a matter of common sense}…….so take all those factors into consideration……..so strictly speaking chicago is safer.the point I was attempting to make is how remarkable things have changed in Iraq since the surge…………..so.you win fred……….
If we had taken the Republican Guard up on their offer to help, the situation in Iraq would be entirely different from what it is right now. More than likely the fighting would be at a minimum, our troop losses would be significantly lower, and Iraq would be stable.
alex.huh? that entire post makes absolutely no sense………unworthy of a response
Personally, I’d like for McCain/Palin to say something about the issues. Their inability to say anything of substance is telling. They will not do well at the debates methinks.
see mark it is that easy, just keep making those kind of statements and no one will take you seriously when you post.
As for my post on the Republican Guard, I was referring to the opening days of the Iraq War. During the first few days of the war our military forces received a message from the Republican Guard. The message stated that they would offer no resistance and help us handle security in Iraq during the time of transition. If the invading forces refused the help of the Republican Guard, they promised to began waging guerilla warfare and undertaking acts of terrorism. The American forces were given three days to make up their mind. During that period of three days the Republican Guard promised not to attack. We did not seek their help and as a result the Republican Guard kept their word.
From my point of view if you are invading a country and that country’s own military offers to join forces with your army, you should always take them up on it. Iraq would probably be a very different place and perhaps our troop casualties would be lower.
alex……………thats ridiculous………first of all……….in your post you make the claim that “fighting would be at a minimum”….guess what.it already is…and has been going in the right direction for the last 6 months….{the surge}………..second:……..the republican guard was corrupt.no way to trust them…….by the way.where is all this intense fighting you claim is going on?…………you need to worry about your own credibility……..any level headed analysis shows that Iraq is more stable….and gets more so.every day…………..Iraq’i forces are in control of 90% of all military operations.hell.we just turned over anbar province.or did you forget?
Mark I have numerous friends in the military and do not rely on fox news for information about the intensity of combat going on in Iraq. If you sincerely believe that Iraqi forces are in control of 90% of all military operations, then should be able to provide supporting evidence.
The Republican Guard hated Saddam and the Baath party, they would have helped us. Only a very few number of troops was loyal to Saddam.
alex……….you are quite the kool-aid drinker……….have another shot…..
Tell us about the bang up job bush has done (and McSame would do) in Afghanistan. You know Afghanistan? … Where our real enemy was…
I’d be happy to inform you………but its probably a waste of my time…….
william..what do obama and usama bin laden have in common?………..they both have friends that bombed the pentagon.{bill ayers}…………ouch………thats gotta hurt
Well mark you have made it painfully obvious that you are to close-minded, misinformed, and lack the maturity to discuss these issues in a non-hostile manner. Perhaps when you grow older we can reopen the dialogue.
Respond to this if you want, but I am not gonna take the time to return to this conversation. There are more interesting discussions going on in other parts of this website.
you didn’t inform me the first time b/c there’s no tenable argument for you to make.
like I said.enjoy your kool-aid
You guys are serious? just stop posting and we can move on. Mark can’t help himself, just stop everyone else
What is it with the Kool- Aid??? Jonestown??? Was that 1979???
I understand your frustration………Its really amazing….you cant debate on the merits……..so you attack …..sort of like obama.
← Previous Comments