Obama has long made it clear that he intends to be the president of all Americans... that is a welcome break from the 8 horror-filled years of GWB. Obama understands he needs the support of Americans -- not some narrow faction thereof -- if we are to solve the huge problems facing our country. It is time for us to act like grown-ups instead of a bunch of brats fighting in the backseat of the family car.

If you are going to filibuster, at least have the gonads to debate on the Senate floor as opposed to having Senate staff pulling the strings behind the scene.

More importantly, Obama understands the importance of creating a process that will take us well into the mid 21st century in the same way FDR did. It isn't about 2, 4, or 8 yrs... its about 10, 20, 30, and even 100 years. It is about building a new progressive era.

First, it is not about Democratic versus Republican. Depending upon the historical period, it varies depending upon where either party is at the time. In fact, it is not even about liberal vs conservative. Second, it is probably dangerous to judge folks purely by their wealth. FDR, a very wealthy man (especially when you include his inheritance rights), was the most progressive president of the 20th century. Dubya, a very wealth man (when you include his inheritance rights), was the most ass-backward president of the first decade of the 21st century. Some folks with money actually have a principled, moral fiber about them: think FDR. Some folks, with money, actually have no principles nor moral fiber nor even a minimal intelligence: think Dubya and John McCain.

The flip side of the coin are the poor white KKK, religious right crowd vs the many African-Americans who also struggle to survive.

The difference is that the KKK/religious right crowd wrongly believes they should be given preferred treatment because their skin is white and their religion is hate-based. Struggling African-Americans correctly understand their struggles are based on the institutional limitations imposed on them based on skin color.

Fortunately and unfortunately, we have economically successful African-Americans like Colin Powell, a well-educated and intelligent African-American, who understands he has been especially lucky, and a Clarence Thomas who has spent his entire life denying he is black, denying his intellectual inferiority, and in the process denying there is racism in America.

Finally, you have the strange creature of Condi Rice who knows there is racism in America and who unfortunately, choose the wrong side of history 20 years ago when she unknowingly went to bed with the GHWB crowd as its token African-American. Hence, it is no surprise that Condi has been and remains the only sane, intelligent, and often confused voice within the Dubya administration. This being said, one must believe that GHWB wished he'd used a condom or that Barbara Bush would have had a headache the night GWB was conceived.

I'm an old man. I remember the days when a Republican/conservative could be described as honorable and intelligent. That does not mean I agreed with them. But, it does not mean they were trying to take the country to hell, a.s.a.p. Everything changed in 1968 when Nixon decided he needed the ignorant, delusional, bigot vote to win. He won, with those votes. Reagan took the strategy to a new level using code words.

20 years ago, Barry Goldwater warned what the religious fundamentalists would do this country. William F. Buckely, Jr., did the same subsequently. In the old days, the Republican line was about economics. But, RMN changed that. Now, we have a GOP VP nominee who thinks the earth is less than 6,000 years old contrary to all the physical evidence to the contrary. Now, we have a GOP VP nominee acting like a prostitue on the campaign stump who cannot identify a single newspaper she reads. Of course, the sad fact is Palin doesn't read newspapers. This is characteristic of the modern GOP: no facts, all phantasy. Now, we have a GOP presidential candidate who has achieved nothing in his life except explointing his cooperation with the Vietcong. Most troubling, neither McCain nor Palin have shown any ability to tell the difference between fact and fiction. However, it is important to note that the GOP has been fact-free ever since Ronald Reagan came onto the national political scene.

The proof is in the pudding: counties that vote liberal have a 5:1 greater economic growth rate than counties that vote conservative. Hence, it is no suprise the American economy has only prospered during Democratic administrations over the past 100 years.

I have difficulty with the idea of the rural-urban divide as I understand the geograhic distinctions to be the effects of economic insecurity (to a lesser extent) and educational inequality (to the greater extent) rather than the cause of particular attitudes and political behaviors. In other words, we must be careful not to confuse correlation with causation.

A county-by-county analysis of the 2000 presidential election data against the 2000 census data suggests (1) voting behavior in a small geographic unit (county) is best predicted by the relative level of education in that geographic unit; (2) the relative level of education those same small geographic units is an even better predictor of economic insecurity; and (3)the relative economic wealth (income levels, property values, and economic output levels) is greater in so-called blue (liberal) counties by a factor of nearly 5:1.

Admittedly, there are counties which are exceptions to the general rule; however, the exceptions are statistically insignificant whereas the exceptions to the more generalized rural vs urban construct are so numerous as to bring that construct into question.

A brief thought relative to the initial posting. For nearly 40 years, research has shown a strong correlation between low economic security/less education and anti-black racist attitudes. This is readily evident in the success of the GOP's "Southern Strategy," which is, on its face, undeniably racist. This is, also, the most probable explanation for the difficulties the African-American and Hispanic communities have had in developing political alliances despite their similar political interests. In other words, when two demograhic groups feel themselves in direct economic competition, differences are exaggerated and similarities diminished.

Enough said. Would be most interested in your thoughts.

As to the general discussion here. I expect MO to go Obama by 3 - 5 points based upon the polling we have been seeing. Until the various pollsters figure out how to better measure folks with cell phones only and young, first-time voters, the pollsters are going to undercount Obama voters and overcount McCain voters. I recently read an online article which presented very persuasive evidence of Obama being undercounted in polls by about 3%.