We know Bush and GOPs are going to use Kangroo Tribunal to paint democrats as weak on national security.

Now the senate has a bipartisan solution offered by McCain. It's a perfect cover for democrats to run preemptive ads to counter GOP's claim they are strong on national security. However, It's striking that democrats have not seized this opportunity to strike back.

All the democratic candidates should run ads immediately and ask Allen, Santorum, Talent why they would not vote for a bi-partisan bill to defend America's national security interest.

If Karl Rove teaches us one lesson, it's to play into the enemy's strength. Democrats just don't know how to play offsense, they are always playing defense. Stop the 'don't play politics on national security' crap, don't whine. It always makes democrats look weak, no wonder voters don't trust democrats on national security.

Run these preemptive ads. When you opponents have to whine about your misleading ads, you then have an opening to explain to the voters that democrats want strong national security, GOPs only want to be the rubber stamper for George King, they want to use national security as an excuse to spy ordinary people and their political opponents. You can then remind them of Watergate scandal.

It's frustrating to see all the democrats are playing defense on the same subject all the time. That's why I don't believe they can win a lot of seats this November, needless to say majority.

Real Politics is reporting a new Rasmussen poll shows Tester is opening a big lead over Burns(52%:43%). Last poll they were tied at 47%.

Duckworth, the Iraq war veteran who's engaging in a tough battle in a GOP district, is speaking out.
I am wondering whether puritist Matt Stoller will continue to brand her as 'pathetic', 'xenophobic' 'loser' after reading the following?

http://www.dailyherald.com/search/search story.asp?id=227496

"Democratic 6th Congressional District candidate Tammy Duckworth said Wednesday the Iraq conflict is not part of the war on terror, taking the opposite view of President Bush and her Republican opponent.

"I absolutely do not agree that Iraq is part of the war on terror," said Duckworth, an Iraq war veteran, at a news conference in Oakbrook Terrace. "I think a very small percentage of what's happening in Iraq is terrorist activity. I think most of it is sectarian violence. It's Sunni fighting Shiites."

That view drew a raised eyebrow from her Republican opponent Peter Roskam.

"The notion that theater of conflict (in Iraq) is de-coupled from the war on terror, I just disagree with that," said Roskam, a state senator from Wheaton. "I'm actually surprised she would say that."

Roskam agrees with Bush, who stressed in his Monday speech commemorating the five-year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks that Iraq is a key front in the war on terror.

"Al-Qaida and other extremists from across the world have come to Iraq to stop the rise of a free society in the heart of the Middle East," Bush said. "They have joined the remnants of Saddam's regime and other armed groups to foment sectarian violence and drive us out."

But Duckworth, a Hoffman Estates Army reservist who saw combat action in Iraq, disagreed.

"I think that to try to tie Iraq into the war on terror is a disservice to the real work that has to be done on the war on terror," she said.

Duckworth lists capturing Osama bin Laden, finishing the job in Afghanistan and enacting the 9/11 Commission recommendations on homeland security as the "real work."

Duckworth favors bringing U.S. troops home as Iraqi troops are trained. Roskam backs the Bush administration's stand that the nation needs to stay the course.

The two will debate for the first time next Friday in a WBBM radio/Daily Herald forum that will be broadcast at 9:30 p.m. Sept. 24 on 780-AM.

Re: Primary Returns Thread (none / 0)
Wow, I can not believe the accuracy of my own prediction. Remember, we had this primary forecast thread, and I predicted the following:

AZ-08: Graf

MD-04: Wynn, by 4 points

MD-Sen: Cardin, a squeaker

RI Sen: Chafee, a relatively comfortable win.

WI-08:  Kagen

I can't believe it while coming across this poll #.

http://u.tv/newsroom/indepth.asp?id=7661 4&pt=n

And the Chancellor picked up a surprise endorsement from former US president Bill Clinton, who told the Sunday Telegraph: "I have known him since 1990 and I think he`d be a good Prime Minister."

A poll for the Sunday Times suggested that Mr Blair is now more unpopular than Margaret Thatcher at the same stage in her premiership.

The Ipsos Mori political monitor found that 66% of people questioned were dissatisfied with Blair`s performance as PM, with only 26% satisfied - an overall rating of minus 30.

:: Ipsos Mori interviewed 1,886 adults for the Sunday Times between August 31 and September 6.

We have seen all the rosy predictions on blogs and MSN these day that Democratic party will definitely take control of at least the House, maybe even the Senate. MyDD and others forecast that Democratic party will win around 15-25 seats.

But frankly, I am quite suspicious about these rosy predictions. All the forecast is based on very flawed and fluid generic polling results that D has from high single digits to low double digits lead over R.

Despite these good generic #s, what has troubled me is that I have NOT seen a single independent poll that has shown Democratic challenger is in the lead in those so-called toss-up districts. All the polls including the internal ones are showing close races, but unfortunately not a sigle poll has shown the democratic challenger is leading. This is extremely puzzling.

If democratic challenger can not poll at least 5 points ahead of R incumbents, there's little chance they can actually pull it off in the end because we all know R had better turnout operations in 2002 and 2004.

On the senate side, polling results are also showing warning signals. I would say PA is the only definite pickup at the moment. OH and MT are tossups at the moment, but will probably go to R simply because of their R leaning nature. MO also seems to be slipping away. The worst part is that two polls(one is Rasamussen) coming out in NJ have actually shown R candidate is leading D by 4-5 points. Anti-incumbent sentiment works both ways, it's very possible that D will lose NJ.

If we get PA but lose NJ, that's going to be a wash.

At the moment, I see no net pickup for democrats, needless to say, a takeover.