This is an unusual time we are experiencing.  Michigan has historically gone Democratic but this time it is running pretty darn close.  You usually see nothing but signs for the Dems but this time you seen plenty of McCain/Palin or Family for McCain signs around. 

I think absolutely anything can happen at this point.  I think Biden was a lousy VP pick and now that he's starting to get out there and speak more he's showing how lousy he is.  I think the only one who can destroy Palin at this point is Palin.  I don't think any of the trash being slung about her will stick at all.  I also think there's a pretty big percent of voters who pick their party and make excuses for their candidate no matter what stupidity they show prior to election day.

No Im actually an independent who votes mostly republican in my state elections, who loves to cling to his gun, but hates the crap that both parties serve up at the federal level.

That's a very interesting comments considering Bush felt both Obama and McCain were important enough to have a meeting with them directly.

Wrong, McCain is part of the Senate, the people who have to approve this bill so this is his job. What you failed to understand was if a person can show they can do their work and do it good that they can most likely apply the same responsibility to every job. Example:

With all the "Present" votes Obama made, how would you feel him voting "Present" when being President? Not that I am saying he can do that but just humor me here.

"To insinuate the 'present' vote means you're indecisive, that you don't have the courage to hold public office, that's a stretch. But, it's good politics," said state Rep. Bill Black (R), a 22-year veteran of the House and his party's floor leader.

In fact, he said, Illinois legislators get attacked for their "present" votes nearly every campaign season. "It's always been a campaign gimmick, really. If you vote 'present' once in 23 years, somebody will bring it up."

The "present" vote in Illinois is sometimes cast by state lawmakers with a conflict of interest who would rather not weigh in on an issue. Other times, members use the option to object to certain parts of a bill, even though they may agree with its overall purpose.

"The 'present' vote is used, especially by more thoughtful legislators, not as a means of avoiding taking a position on an issue, but as a means of signaling concerns about an issue," said state Rep. John Fritchey (D)

YOu say you are an independant - just like all the seminar Democrat talking parrots.  If you did not spout the talking points, you would be more believable, but since rule one of the seminar democrats is to "deny you are a democrat so it appears Obama has a larger base", words are worthless.

I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.  Things seemed to be moving forward earlier in the day but then came to a grinding halt as far as the bailout bill is concerned.....Hard to get past the spin its flowing from both sides full force. Its the house reps. holding things up so I don't think McCain can do anything in any case so he might as well fly to Mississippi.

Im certainly not a registered democrat but I would probably say I lean left at this point in time particularly when it comes to federal policy. A decade ago I suppose I leaned right of center but that just shows how much things have gone to the right over the past 3 decades. I do vote republican in my state tho but that is because the republican party in my state is moderate.....mostly fiscally conservative socially liberal.....Very different from some of the other republican states.  Somewhat libertarian but when I look at their party it almost seems like they want anarchy.

Smoothseas

So what you are saying is that a politicians opinion about the "present" vote outweighs my opinion about it? They can say what they want, in the end it's we the people who get to decide whether or not the "present" vote is indicative of what we believe could be a leader who does not seem to make up his mind. But then Obama has a nack for putting his foot down on certain issues only to find himself liftng it up after he realises he was wrong (drilling for oil and the surge come to mind right off the back). That's not to say McCain has not done the same, but this is normal politics and Obama claims to be for change and not politics as usual yet here we are him never sticking to an issue or a promiss.

I insuate nothing. The statements are made by members from the illinois legislature. One statement from a republican and another from a democrat. I added no opinion of my own to that specific post. Its more just to point out to some who may or may not know what the present vote is all about.

Its no different from manipulating a politicians nay vote on a particular bill regarding an issue when often the nay vote is used because someone disagrees with a certain part of a bill and not the overall intent of a bill.

yes, but again, regardless what they say, they can't cover the fact that a "present" vote does not yield well for anyone. Especially a man, like Obama, who has been on the Senate for a very short amount of time.

lets stop the BS and be honest here. A "present" vote is not a realistic vote. How would you feel if you life depended on the vote of a number of people and the some decide to vote "present"?

It sounds like you might be a bit confused.  You do realize that the "present" votes took place over the course of 8 years in the IL legislature and not in the US Senate, right?

It does not yield well for those who do not take the time to look at the record and see exactly what each present vote pertains to and try to figure out why the present vote was used.

I am being honest. If you knew anything about the system used in the illinois legislature you might realize that.  Look at the instances where McCain voted no on certain bills because of earmarks even though we all know he supported the issue. And the Dems create commercials and make claims that try to say he doesnt support the issue even though some of us know that he does. The Reps do the same thing. That is why Illinois has 3 voting buttions and it just so happens an Illinois Dem is running for Pres. If it was Illinois Rep running I bet the Dems would be making the exact same claim.

So... speaking of all these plans... Am I the only one doubting the capabilities of our duly elected representatives (instead of, say, economists) to determine the best course of action?

I was never too happy with voting for our top general either.

The problem is they turned it into a political circus from the start. Since they can't go back their districts to campaign they are doing it from the halls of congress.

When (in modern memory) have they not?