If he did that, I might vote for him in 2012.

I view him favorably. He’s a genuine war hero. I’d just rather sit home than vote for him for POTUS.

jaime on August 24, 2007 at 12:26 PM

There are many many genuine war hero’s that you never ever even hear about, and go on in life to make an HONEST living, MY FRIEND. HONEST being the key word here. McCain sided with the Kennedy’s and the Osama’s the Hillary’s to sell us out, as long as they and all their brood have their(gov.paid healthcare gov.paid pensions gov.paid is their favorite word). Most of them already have everyone down to their 2nd and 3rd cousins already in LIFETIME gov. jobs, with FREE FREE FREE stuff being the key word here. MY FRIEND.

Lamest. Insult. Ever.

Nonfactor on August 24, 2007 at 3:37 PM

No I’ve been and will be much more lame.

Did your own opinion of McCain change from favorable to unfavorable because of his stance on immigration? I’ve never liked him as a presidential candidate, so shamnesty didn’t change that picture for me. At the same time, in the broader political spectrum, I wouldn’t give him an unfavorable rating either. He’s always been a mixed bag for Republicans. What’s remarkable is just how highly regarded he actually was among Democrats two years ago. It’s definitely worth noting, however, that the 2005 poll was taken in October.

(P.S. Why have a preview window if you can’t use it to check your links?)

NightmareOnKStreet on August 24, 2007 at 2:08 PM
Huh? Where did you get that from what you quoted? Sorry if you’re offended by my pointing out a 2% difference means vets view him just like non-vets, because, that’s exactly what it means.

TheBigOldDog on August 24, 2007 at 2:24 PM

I don’t get offended, online, that is. I was referring to the subject of this thread (which is also 2%, which is also within Pew’s ±2 margin of error: )

Allah says, “How to explain this from Pew, though?”

[Box Graph shown above (won't allow me to cut and paste, sorry): "McCain's Favorability Slides" from Pew shows McCains favorability rating dropped 2 percentage points from 2005 to 2007 among Republican voters]

Allah continues, “…He’s only lost two points among Republicans in the past two years?…”

BigOldDog, when you said, “2% has got to be within the margin of error so therefore, 2% means there’s no real difference”, I just applied your conclusion “2% means there’s no real difference” to the original question posed here.
Allah’s Question: Why has McCain only lost 2%?
BigDog’s Answer: 2% = no real difference/change..
I’m just sayin, “Then what’s the point of this thread? The End.
AND The Beginning of a great weekend, even for big old dogs, I hope. No harm. No fowl foul. *extended olive branch*
God, I luuv this preview button! ;o]

He needs to get out of the race before he embarrasses his crack head wife.

TheSitRep on August 24, 2007 at 1:30 PM

Lamest. Insult. Ever.

I suppose you could call PEW and volunteer your opinion. Heh.

jaime on August 24, 2007 at 1:41 PM

Haha. Pass. I was just thinking about the kinds of people who do and don’t have land lines (age, children, technophobe/phile, etc), and wondering if that would make a difference in political polls.

I wouldn’t want to lose him in the senate when you combine everything he believes. That’s different.

lorien1973 on August 24, 2007 at 12:27 PM

I’d gladly lose him if Hayworth ran against him in the primary.

NightmareOnKStreet on August 24, 2007 at 2:08 PM

Huh? Where did you get that from what you quoted? Sorry if you’re offended by my pointing out a 2% difference means vets view him just like non-vets, because, that’s exactly what it means.

NightmareOnKStreet on August 24, 2007 at 1:20 PM
2% has got to be within the margin of error so therefore, 2% means there’s no real difference.

TheBigOldDog on August 24, 2007 at 1:38 PM

This entire thread’s subject is asking why hasn’t McCain lost more than 2% among Republicans? So, according to you, uh Allah is wasting everyone’s time here, I guess.

My husband wants to join us in wasting time by offering his theory about the Vets unfavorable rating. He thinks it is because of McCain’s stance against our government torturing prisoners. I’m not sure if I want to waste any more time on this so I’m not offering my opinion… ;oP

Gotta be an easier way of doing this…. Hey, Allah!

Let’s see here. He lost 28% on the Democratic side which means he lost any flattering headlines from fawning press who are the liberals mouthpiece and he is down 15 among Independents. I wonder how many of those Independents used to claim themselves Republicans?

LakeRuins on August 24, 2007 at 12:27 PM

I agree. He has lost his media pedestal. Funny how the big were tripping over themselves to cover McCain when he was directly challenging Bush’s policies.

Your point about ex-Republicans is spot on IMHO.

Does anyone know, is there any way to be polled if you don’t have a land line?

Since incoming minutes are a cost to the called party, no one’s in a hurry to publish wireless phone directories. In fact, it might be against FCC rules.

I suppose you could call PEW and volunteer your opinion. Heh.

NightmareOnKStreet on August 24, 2007 at 1:20 PM

2% has got to be within the margin of error so therefore, 2% means there’s no real difference.

Indeed, but not that much difference. He’s essentially paid no price for his amnesty support in terms of approval ratings?

Allahpundit on August 24, 2007 at 12:22 PM

It isn’t an approval rating. It’s a favorable rating. I think lots of people still view him favorably even though there’s great disagreement over immigration and they would not support him for President.

I wouldn’t say I view him unfavorably simply due to immigration just as I wouldn’t say that of Bush.

He paid a heavy price in his support for the presidency.

As for polling, I get polled at least once a month or so by Harris for business issues. Never been polled for politics that I can recall. My phone is blocked to anonymous CID and if it’s a long distance or toll free number I don’t recognize I don’t answer the phone.

To me, that truly defies explanation.

NightmareOnKStreet on August 24, 2007 at 1:20 PM

Good point.

Or, perhaps polls are all just meaningless crap.

Polls are uncannily accurate. Like the early results from PA in ‘04. /s

it is even more confounding that his UNFAVORABLE rating is actually 2% HIGHER among Veterans than Non-Vet

Those guys are fighting for this country. They don’t want it to lose its sovereignty. Maybe.