Sarah Palin is Spiro Agnew in Drag

By Peter B. Collins

McCain and his lobbyist-heavy campaign team have lobbed the grenade named Sarah Palin into this year’s political combat. While they will go to great lengths to protect the young governor from close scrutiny by the press or Obama/Biden, I think it will be hard to keep her leashed and on script. Her extreme religious zealotry includes a righteous streak that is clear in her record in Wasilla and Juneau, and even in the town halls with carefully selected crowds, I expect she will define herself in ways that will drive up her negatives in the polls.

But Palin is connecting with some Republicans who were lukewarm about McCain. On a hot Saturday night, we made mojitos and BBQ for our neighbors Hank and Gail, who define themselves as low-tax, small government Republicans; they soured on Bush only in the last year or two, and have the fear of Dems and Libs you get from regular exposure to Fox News and conservative talkradio. They buy into the concoction the GOP served up in St. Paul—that McCain and Palin are peacemongers and reformers, and that the liberal media will try to destroy her.

I mentioned that I thought the McCain team was employing the strategy used by diehard Hillary supporters at the end of the primary; even though it was clear she could not beat Obama, a group funded by a San Francisco millionaire ran ads portraying Senator Clinton as a victim of sexism and misogyny. The GOP has played the victim card almost from the introduction of Governor Palin, and their talking points demonize the media for “attacks” that have been mild and reasonable, and often based on family matters that clearly conflict with Republican ideals of “family values”. Giuliani and Palin both took big swipes at the media in rhetorical brushbacks that have, unfortunately, intimidated much of the media.

But Hank changed the subject to his biggest concern, which is Obama’s connection to Reverend Wright and Black Liberation Theology. His indictment was rich in the disinformation that is Sean Hannity’s signature product, and included, of course, the out of context soundbite “God Damn America." While Hank conceded that the quote was way out of context, his outrage was undiminished. So I made the point that Wright is not running for president, but that Palin’s own comments that mix religion and politics were “chilling” to me. This put Hank over the top—he had seen the same video on YouTube, and found her comments quite acceptable, even the part about the war in Iraq being one of “God’s tasks”. My comparison of his candidate’s religious extremism to that of Obama’s former pastor was way out of line; he said he couldn’t listen to me anymore, and got up to clear the dishes.

I see Sarah Palin as an updated Spiro Agnew in a skirt. Her injection into this campaign will enhance the fearmongering and division that have been effective GOP tools in recent years, and if Hank and Gail are any indication, many Republicans and some independents are ready to buy the incredible package they are being sold: a 25-year veteran of Washington who will extend our sorry status quo has repackaged himself as the reformer who is running against Washington and his own party.

We have a lot of work to do, and we can start by pressing the corporate media to provide full, honest coverage of Palin and not allow her to avoid scrutiny and contact with the media.

Comments

(204)

It's about time these bloggers started putting their

pictures on their byline. It's nice to see who's putting this garbage out. Anyway, she's not Agnew in drag, she's Reagan in drag. You guys know it and that's why it smells like fear and shit in here.

You mean she has alzheimer's disease?

It would explain why the GOP is spending so much time coaching her on what to say.

By IlluminatiHottieSeptember 8, 2008 - 1:45pm

...she's Reagan in drag...

Poor Todd. He's awfully young to be worrying about changing his wife's dirty diapers.

Support the Troops.
End the Occupation.

actually i think that smell...

is coming from you, IH.

"Reagan in drag"?

You mean, along with being a liar and a coward, she's got Alzheimer's?

Wow. Who knew? Certainly not Jet-go-Splat McJukebox. If he did, he shouldn't have named her as his running mate.

McCain/Palin '08: the also-rans.

Spiro Agnew is Sarah Palin in Drag

.
You had it bass ackwards.

ZZZZZZ......

.
Wake me up when Obama votes for the Troop Surge...should be any day now.
.
By the way, I heard about Lionel's book signing. Will Al Gore be along signing copies of his new book entitled,"How to Run For President and Lose Because You Can't Carry Your Home State?"
.
Can't wait for that one!!...
.

Bush lost his home state

of Connecticut 2 times. Gore recieved 600,000 more votes than Bush. When all the votes were counted in Florida, Gore won. Bush was selected by the Supreme Court, not the American people.

By hufflarry2000September 8, 2008 - 2:13pm

If you cling to that argument though you have to admit that Bush beat Kerry in '04, since Bush had the popular vote. You like to make sure you have that cake and can eat it though. In one case you want to declare Bush a cheater since he didn't win the popular vote, and in the other case you say popular vote doesn't matter, Bush stole enough electoral votes. Time to choose Huff.

The popular vote is as irrelevant in presidential election as it

was in the primaries. Bush lost in 2000 because a full recount of Florida shows he got less votes there. Bush should have lost in 2004 because voting machines switched votes in the middle of the night, thousands of legal voters were given provisional ballots that were never counted and in both cases, thousands more of legal voters had their names removed from the rolls by illegal caging.

Anybody but Huff would agree.

By gt6September 9, 2008 - 8:05pm

A logical answer, but that truly complete recount was never possible in '04 hence the court decision.

It was possible

but inconvenient to GWB. The lawsuit filed was on grounds that it would be damaging to GWB not the country.

Just curious.

.
Do you believe the "troops surge" worked?
There were 1.4 million Christians in Iraq. Any idea where they are now?

By BooBoSeptember 8, 2008 - 2:03pm

"Wake me up when Obama votes for the Troop Surge"
I keep hearing the surged worked. Maybe Condi can explain the verb tense to me so that I can understand why significant troop draw downs aren't happening now.

ATTENTION ALL CONTARDS:


Methinks thou dost protest too much.

NOW GET THIS, CONTARDS... Nobobody's sweating, nobody's scared, and if you smell fear, Illuminutty... I suggest you try a feminine hygiene spray.

YOU'RE the ones running in circles, screaming and shouting here because you sense an advantage... well maybe that's true for the moment.

HOWEVER "Caribou Barbie" has yet to face a single fucking journalist, much less face-off in a debate, and just today made an enormous gaffe by revealing SHE DIDN'T HAVE A FUCKING CLUE WHAT FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC ARE ABOUT, OR HOW THEY FUNCTION.

She's got six weeks to know as much about foreign policy as Joe Biden. Good Luck With That. It's mathematically impossible.

So you clowns go ahead and yuck it up while you can... You can market a fucking can of soda and make people want it... BUT WHEN PEOPLE FIND OUT IT TASTES LIKE SHIT, IT IS DOOMED TO FAILURE.

By A GSeptember 8, 2008 - 2:42pm

I thought for sure Palin's first interview was going to be with Helen Thomas.

Obama will not regain a lead

in the polls from now until the election. McCains lead will grow a little and will remain steady. We are doomed, again. Thanks libtards!

Huff, when did you become a freeper troll?

Let's impeach the president for lying-Neil Young

I am not a troll

I just live in the real world.

If you honestly expected there to be no convention bounce,

then you were being naive and unrealistic. I have consistently said that I don't believe in the sampling methods of the current polls, as they don't reach the prime voting block of Obama supporters, young people who have only cell phones and not land lines. I think in reality, Obama probably has a 10 point lead right now, one that will grow as we see the debates in the coming weeks. McCain is almost as bad at debates as he is at giving speeches, and Palin is going to display her lack of knowledge very quickly versus Biden.

So, stop your worrying. I see absolutely no reason to be a defeatist at this point.

I expected the Dem candidate to be ahead

by at least 10% but some of us chose the only candidate who will lose and I am pissed. If McCain had a convention bounce he should still be behind by 10 points. A little bit less than half the American people are frightened, uneducated, racist, religious nutcases but the trouble is that they actually figure out how to vote and make up the majority of voters. They do not care about the issues that we do. Young people do not vote in large numbers and wont this time.

The right wing controls the media, both TV and talk radio, they have already started the caging process in Ohio. Obama is running another wimpy campaign like Kerry did. Issues are not going to matter to ignorant people as has been proven with Bush being elected 2 times. I certainly hope we win big in the congressional elections and I am sure we will. It is the only hope we have.

First of all, how could Obama be ahead by 10 after the RNC

when he was only up by 6 before the convention? Secondly, young people came out in droves for the primary, and they were overwhelmingly in Obama's camp, so I feel pretty sure they are going to seal the deal in November. Thirdly, Obama has run a campaign that is nothing like Kerry's wimpy campaign. They instantly respond to any lies that come out of the McCain camp, and they run far tougher ads than Kerry ever did.

So, once again, I think you will see that your pessimism over Obama's chances is just as misplaced as your confidence over Hillary.

I am saying that ANY Dem should be

winning by 10% even before the conventions. Obama was running even. Any Dem should still be winning by 10% after the conventions. Obama is behind due to racism in this country and NOTHING else. Young people never vote and the Obama fad has faded. Obama has run even a more wimpy campaign than Kerry. They do not attack like the Republicans and no one seems to care about Republican lies.

Face it. The Dems nominated a horrible candidate who will lose. Only Democrats can turn a sure win into a sure loss. At least I knew better as did the majority of the primary voters. This is a catastrophe of major proportions.

By hufflarry2000 September 8, 2008 - 3:54pm

I am saying that ANY Dem should be winning by 10% even before the conventions
-----------------------
Yeah. But who really cares what you say?
____________________
"We can bomb the world to pieces, but we can't bomb it into peace."
"Power to the peaceful..."
--Franti

I am WELL aware that you dont care

about much at all. That is why you backed the candidate who will lose the election and trashed and smeared the candidate who would have won. But you do care about what YOU want.

By chickenlittle2000 September 8, 2008 - 5:43pm

The candidate who would've won is the candidate who already lost?
Someone else will have to untangle that Chicken Shit.
It makes no sense to me.

Then again, I don't speak in Alarmisms...
____________________
"We can bomb the world to pieces, but we can't bomb it into peace."
"Power to the peaceful..."
--Franti

The candidate who would have won

was the choice of the primary voters and got the most votes. But who cares? She wasnt YOUR choice.

By chickenlittle2000 September 8, 2008 - 5:59pm

Keep on cluckin', chicken little. We don't need you (emphasis mine).

[...]
To the majority of diarists and commenters who are keeping your eyes on the ball – registering voters, donating and raising money, phone banking and going door to door, sharing with us what you’ve experienced doing the hard work, sharpening your arguments, and offering constructive and creative suggestions, fact checks, and analysis – keep it up. We’ve got each other’s backs.

To the Chicken Littles - those attention-seeking armchairmen, wanna-be campaign managers, and increasingly boring sub-group of Johnny-and-Janey-One-Notes that have begun to join the PUMAs in this year’s absurdity index - I’m hereby officially filing for divorce...
[...]
No more holding your hands and wiping your tears. From here to November 4, any more response I have to you will be, if at all, to counter and mock you for your sabotage of the best shot to win the White House so far in this century.

You’ve become an embarrassment to our side, the loose lips that sink ships, the willful spreaders of panic and despair, mere props and morale boosters for the real enemies that have been winding you up...

I’m going to repeat some very basic truths here:

1. Panic and fear never won an election (or anything else).

We’ve all seen the movies where there is a conflict and the bad guys are coming to destroy the good guys or the innocents and there’s always some idiot who starts screaming hysterically thus gets everyone else massacred. Chicken Littles: that’s you. The heroes and heroines are the ones that are putting their hands over your mouths to protect the larger flock from your panicked instability and its consequences. No team or army or campaign has helped itself without discipline in the troops.

2. Just because you’re “worried” or “concerned” (read: panicked) doesn’t mean we’re ever going to join you.

You know who is not panicked right now? Everybody that is doing enough of the real work – let’s repeat what that is: phone banking, going door to door, registering voters, raising money, etcetera. Yes, those of you that want your panic to be shared are feeling increasingly lonely, and you’re becoming more shrill about it in the process. Not even the recent (and long predicted) GOP convention “bounce” in the polls has caused the rest of us to join you. We’re inoculated. We have our eye on victory and our feet on the ground. We never believed this would be a cakewalk. And we’re used to coming from behind anyway; it’s what we do best. While you’re whining and crying, we enjoy an underdog fight. We had one in the primaries and we’ve never thought we wouldn’t have one in the general. Your attempts to make us share in your panic are and will continue to be a gigantic fail.
[...]
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/8/133841/3210/755/591133

Just as your efforts in the primary were a gigantic fail.

And while you continue in your efforts during the general to assist Mr. McSame and the GOP, the rest of us will double up our efforts and pick up the slack you're leaving while wringing your hands...

...to see to it that you fail... gigantically...

yet again.

http://my.barackobama.com/modules/votercontact/login_signup.php
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/actioncenter
http://action.barackobama.com/page/s/volunteer/
____________________
"We can bomb the world to pieces, but we can't bomb it into peace."
"Power to the peaceful..."
--Franti

My candidate got more votes

in the primary. You DO need me plus about 5 million more voters. Wont happen.

By chickenlittle2000 September 8, 2008 - 6:22pm

At best, you represent about 1% of Hillary voters. The simple fact is: We don't need you or the rest of the handwringers determined to bring about defeat.

We'll be just fine with the other 99% of her supporters committed to ensuring a Dem victory.

Cackle away, chickenlittle.
You're becoming an increasingly irrelevant lone voice in the PUMA wilderness...
____________________
"We can bomb the world to pieces, but we can't bomb it into peace."
"Power to the peaceful..."
--Franti

I represent alot more than that dumbass

Many, many people like me who are voting for Obama know he will lose. We have backed MANY losing Dems. The fun part will be blaming you moronic libtards for your horrible choice of a nominee and running you idiots out of the party so we real Dems can regroup.

All you libtards are more shrill than ever today because everything I said about the election is coming true.

A G got it right

 huff
"you are a libtard. clang. you are a libtard. clang. you are a libtard. clang..."

By chickenlittle2000 September 8, 2008 - 6:42pm

All you libtards are more shrill than ever today because everything I said about the election is coming true.
---------------------------
Starting with what you said about Hillary winning the nomination "easily", of course.
Don't mind my pointing it out, but: thou doth project too much.

Next inane remark for chuckles, please...
____________________
"We can bomb the world to pieces, but we can't bomb it into peace."
"Power to the peaceful..."
--Franti

By SJerseyIndySeptember 8, 2008 - 6:50pm

I think he was also telling us that things would look so bad that at the convention Hillary would steal the nomination.

[guess what stat is coming next off of huff's fingers]

You also think that Obama will

win the election. You are wrong about that too.

By f u bush2 September 8, 2008 - 6:53pm

I think he was also telling us that things would look so bad that at the convention Hillary would steal the nomination
-----------------------------
:lol:
I forgot that one. I also forgot that in the Land of Delusion "getting it all wrong" translates to mean "everything I said about the election is coming true". What a wild, whacky world!

guess what stat is coming next off of huff's fingers
-----------------------------
The smart money is on "Some form of general stat contradicted by conveniently-ignored specifics"...
____________________
"We can bomb the world to pieces, but we can't bomb it into peace."
"Power to the peaceful..."
--Franti

If there really are 5 million

Hillbots that are so mad they will change sides. WHY WON'T THEY PONY UP 5 BUCKS APIECE AND RETIRE HER DEBT?

Who said that there were

5 million Hilbots that will change sides? I said Obama will need 5 million more votes than he will get to win. Read much?

Your inference

has always been that Hillary would have won. That would mean she had the missing 5 million. Are you saying now that she wouldn't win?

By hufflarry2000September 8, 2008 - 7:45pm

What is your voter turnout #?

I have not read that number from you previously.

All too plausible and yet $10 billion a month.

The billions were to be derived by other means.

By UffdaguySeptember 8, 2008 - 3:45pm

Obama's at LEAST 10 points ahead when you take people my age without land lines into account.

There are also the misleading "likely voter" polls that only count people who have voted in the last 3 elections. I wonder why the same media that breathlessly reported on the MILLIONS of new voters registering for the Dem primaries never see fit to point that out.

Support the Troops.
End the Occupation.

You are making shit up

you dont know that. Young people have never voted in large numbers and they wont this time. The Obama fad is over and you young buzz brains have moved on to the next video game.

By hufflarry2000September 8, 2008 - 4:18pm

Don't you have a lake to set afire?

Support the Troops.
End the Occupation.

Go fire up a blunt

buzz brain. It was the river on fire, not the lake. It was only 40 years ago and you dont have a clue. I dont want youngsters choosing my president.

He's got nothing better to do since both his baseball

and football teams are disasters. Guess they're just following Hillary's "successful" campaign. :)

By UffdaguySeptember 8, 2008 - 4:41pm

I was actually pulling for the poor Brownies yesterday. I loathe the Cowboys.

Support the Troops.
End the Occupation.

I have plenty of reasons to hate the Cowboys

I particularly hate any team that has the arrogance to call themselves "America's Team". You also gotta hate a team with a quarterback who is dumb enough to date Jessica Simpson!

That America's teeam BS

has always rankled me. With Staubach at the helm it was one thing and I understand it was not a name they chose, but once Danny White took over and they headed for mediocrity it was ludicrous. Now, 30 years later it is just presumptuous

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a long time Giants fan. Go Blue!

By gt6 September 8, 2008 - 7:35pm

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a long time Giants fan. Go Blue!

Real men and women wear "Silver & Black". GO RAIDERS!

There was a period

in the 70's after being away at college where I didn't get the Giants games that I followed the Raiders. They really did have a counter culture image that was attractive.

I particularly liked the story of Jim Plunkett after being traded and cut elsewhere, he worked his way back into the lineup and stepped up when Pastorini went down. It bugged the crap out of me when a newspaper article ranked the playoff QBs and had him last, AFTER Danny White and Dan Fouts. A few weeks later, he was Super Bowl MVP.

damn!!!

did the cowboys lose yesterday? Another year w/no football to watch. This after a season of l'Astros!!!!!
Arrrrggggghhhhh

btw GF

You DO realize that the Browns moved to Baltimore and now call themselves the..........Oh crap what is the name of that drunken poets piece @ a bird?

Ravens thats it.
& I'm guessing Uffy is an Atlanta fan. Dogs are lovers man, not fighters. =~P

By justintymeSeptember 8, 2008 - 5:01pm

Yeah, Art Modell was a dick, but the city sued to keep the Browns name after he moved the team to Baltimore in the dead of night. Then they got an NFL expansion franchise that uses the name & uniforms.

Support the Troops.
End the Occupation.

Thus quoth the

Raven
nevermore!
Sorry I'm enjoying the distraction from some of the posueres here!

I have plenty to do

watching this disastrous Obama campaign and seeing you libtards slip into a deluded insanity.

Go away Repub Troll! --

Go away Repub Troll!

-- McCain = Four more years of the same --

Do you realize how retarded

you look saying that? Probably not as you are deluded as most here at AAR.

Go Away

repub troll.

Go away Repub Troll!!

Go away Repub Troll!!

By Guy FawkesSeptember 8, 2008 - 4:10pm

"Obama's at LEAST 10 points ahead when you take people my age without land lines into account"
I keep hearing this land lines bit. I've never seen anything quantitative.

And, stop acting like you're younger than you actually are.

By Dr_BillionaireSeptember 8, 2008 - 5:54pm

I've never seen anything quantitative.

No shit! Maybe they should take some sort of poll...

How am I acting younger than 28, Perfessor McPoopypants?

Support the Troops.
End the Occupation.

By Guy Fawkes September 8, 2008 - 6:12pm

By Dr_BillionaireSeptember 8, 2008 - 5:54pm
--------------------------
Pew Research Center dove into this topic some time ago before the start of the primary season. Their findings were that cell phone-only voters would, by large margins, overwhelmingly favor Democrats but may not end up being a large enough sample to drastically shift overall polling. I believe they actually took the time to do some cell-only polling recently in an attempt to confirm the original findings. If you poke around a bit over at Pew, you should be able to find it.

I'd go looking for it for you guys, but I'm having too much fun ridiculing chickenlittle2000 at present.
____________________
"We can bomb the world to pieces, but we can't bomb it into peace."
"Power to the peaceful..."
--Franti

By Guy FawkesSeptember 8, 2008 - 6:12pm

"No shit! Maybe they should take some sort of poll..."
Then the question obtrudes, where did your 10% come from?

"How am I acting younger than 28, Perfessor McPoopypants?"
Great! now you've killed my delusion that you are actually a former Franken blogger who was about my (painfully older) age. Then again, perhaps I can perserve my delusion and use your actual age to make the case that I'm still not thirty.

That was of course just a smartass comment. I had no idea how old you were until now.

Btw, I would have gone with Poopfester McStupidpants.

By Dr_BillionaireSeptember 8, 2008 - 6:35pm

Granted, I pulled the 10% out of my ass. I just happen to believe, & I've seen nothing amongst my contemporaries to dissuade me, that the number of people without land lines comprises a much larger percentage of voters this election cycle than anyone seems to believe. I'm gonna go see if I can dig up that poll that SJI referred to.

Support the Troops.
End the Occupation.

Why wouldnt you have a landline?

Are you homeless? Does your cell run on nuclear power? Everyone with a job should have a land....oh nevermind, I forgot, young slackers dont have jobs.

First, Go away Republican

First, Go away Republican troll!!

And second, I think the question should be why would you have a landline.

My cell phone does actually work on nuclear power; I live relatively close to a nuclear plant so I'm sure some of the power that charges my phone is "nuclear power". I'm really not sure why you would ask such a silly question. It also works on any kind of power transmitted through the grid, regardless of how it was generated. Well actually, it usually works on stored power (in the battery), but that battery is charged via the grid.

Why should everyone with a job have a landline? That makes no sense. If I can use my cell everywhere, for every phone call I make, even in my house, why would I pay at least $30/month for a landline, a second phone line?

I forgot, young slackers dont have jobs

That's because your party, the Republican party, has driven the economy into the ground and there are no jobs for the young people. But I'm neither young nor unemployed. And I don't have a landline.

And third, Go away Republican troll!!

By Guy Fawkes September 8, 2008 - 6:42pm

A quick poke around found me this:
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/901/cell-phones-polling-election-2008

That looks to be the follow-up to their original study.
But it's a starting point if you're interested...
____________________
"We can bomb the world to pieces, but we can't bomb it into peace."
"Power to the peaceful..."
--Franti

By SJerseyIndySeptember 8, 2008 - 8:58pm

Thank you, that's quite interesting, but it still leaves a bit of room for doubt in their numbers. I bookmarked it for reference on their future polls.

Support the Troops.
End the Occupation.

By Guy FawkesSeptember 8, 2008 - 9:14pm

More importantly it validates the credibility of your butt.

By Dr_BillionaireSeptember 8, 2008 - 10:21pm

Hahaha! My ass hasn't been incredible since I accidentally sat on a plunger that some joker left in the toilet. Wait a minute, you said "credibility". Never mind...

Support the Troops.
End the Occupation.

By Guy FawkesSeptember 8, 2008 - 6:42pm

I'm older. The albums I mention to show I'm still in touch are 12 years old now.

Perhaps is relates to the SJI chart up thread.

Insteading of pissing and

Insteading of pissing and moaning and saying "I told you so" about a percieved mistake made by Obama in not picking Hillary at VP, why don't you FUCKING DO SOMETHING to support the CANDIDATE WE DO HAVE?!!?!?

You are obviously a Republican troll! Sod off!

-- McCain = Four more years of the same --

Go fuck yourself

I have registered over 100 Dem voters as I do every election. I use my dining hall for campaign meetings for Dems and may even use it as a polling precinct as it was in 2004 if it is needed. I have donated heavily to the Dems as I always do. What have you done?

I am not getting caught up in this over confident bullshit like I did the last 2 elections. I think Obama will lose and the polls are showing that it is headed that way. I am sticking with my prediction.

Simply put, I don't believe

Simply put, I don't believe you. You are a republican troll. And I'm sure most of the real liberals on this forum agree with me.

You CLAIM to be a Dem, yet all you do is bash the Dem candidate. Why? Because you think Hillary was a better choice? So what, I thought Dennis Kucinich was a better choice, but when the chips are down I support the Dem candidate. And Obama is a great candidate, so I have no qualms about supporting him fully.

Why can't YOU stop your "I told you so" bitching and do something PRODUCTIVE !?!?!?!

(hint, the answer to that is that you are really a repub troll, so this is "productive" from your perspective)

-- McCain = Four more years of the same --

and even more simply put

I dont give a flying fuck what you think.

You don't give a fuck about

You don't give a fuck about the Democratic party either, apparently.

Go Away Troll

-- McCain = Four more years of the same --

I was polled yesterday.

I actually ended up laughing at least three or four times throughout the questions. I was asked "Do you plan to support the tax and spend liberal Barack Obama or John McCain, who has a plan to balance the budget"? All of the questions were leading and ridiculous. No wonder some of these polls are favoring McCain.

Let's impeach the president for lying-Neil Young

That wasnt a poll

It was a campaign call from the Republicans.

I absolutely love those push polls.....

It's pretty evident early on where they're going, so it's loads of fun to respond in whatever way will piss them off the most. I've actually had some of the pollsters stuttering and stammering as I give them opinions that really roast the campaign they're working for. Who says you have to call a 900 number to have fun on the phone? LOL