McCaskill's last ad + Predict Missouri
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 10:27:44 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  McCaskill's last ad + Predict Missouri
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Who will be the next Senator from the great state of Missouri?
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 0

Author Topic: McCaskill's last ad + Predict Missouri  (Read 2006 times)
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: November 04, 2006, 02:33:15 PM »
« edited: November 04, 2006, 02:40:12 PM by MarkWarner08 »

What a powerful way to end a campaign. She ties with an emotional call to action that appeals to the undecided voters that have been bombarded by negative ads for the past year.

This campaign has been the best run of the cycle. McCaskill has made extensive efforts to win over rural voters, while Talent has courted inner city blacks. Both sides have reached their votes and both sides have had the resources necessary to win the race.

Talent could win because of his 3-1 COH advantage or because of his ability to avoid the stain of scandals in Washington. McCaskill could win because of the wave or her personal popularity.

McCaskill's closer: http://youtube.com/watch?v=GHfCg78mP9M
Logged
MarkWarner08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,812


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: November 04, 2006, 02:39:44 PM »

 Missouri Prediction:

49.4%: McCaskill
49.3%: Talent
1.3%: Others

Logged
Eraserhead
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,405
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: November 04, 2006, 03:23:02 PM »

McCaskill 52%
Talent 48%
Logged
Conan
conan
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,140


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: November 04, 2006, 04:03:17 PM »

This election will probably decided by less then 1000 votes.
Logged
Nym90
nym90
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,260
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: November 04, 2006, 04:12:43 PM »

McCaskill by a narrow margin. This one and Virginia will probably go late into the night before a winner is called.
Logged
nini2287
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,616


Political Matrix
E: 2.77, S: -3.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: November 04, 2006, 04:24:48 PM »

That ad had absolutely nothing relevant (although most ads don't, this one is even worse).
Logged
HardRCafé
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,364
Italy
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: November 04, 2006, 05:21:08 PM »

McCaskill did not look evil in person, but she is all style and no substance.  Talent in another squeaker.
Logged
Saxwsylvania
Van Der Blub
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,534


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: November 04, 2006, 05:27:29 PM »

McCaskill did not look evil in person, but she is all style and no substance. 

I was going by the photo on her wikipedia page.  To say I got a feeling of unease would be an understatement.  A very, very evil-looking lady.

Logged
okstate
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 383


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: November 04, 2006, 05:36:00 PM »

I have McCaskill winning by 3/10ths of a point.
Logged
Adlai Stevenson
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,403
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: November 04, 2006, 05:40:18 PM »

What an idiotic thing to say!  If anyone looks evil its George W. Bush!  McCaskill reminds me of my mother for God's sake - about as harmless as middle-aged, middle-class white women can be.  I thought that was a really effective nice ad and really hope she wins.  My prediction:

MISSOURI SENATE
McCaskill (D) 49%
Talent (R) 48%
Others 2%
Logged
RBH
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,210


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: November 04, 2006, 06:54:21 PM »

Claire wins by at least 2 percentage points.
Logged
Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,703
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: 2.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: November 04, 2006, 10:49:49 PM »

Ugh.  We cannot afford to have Claire McCaskill in the Senate.  Now, don't get me wrong, on paper she looks like a good candidate.  But I'm getting really negative vibes from her.  I think she's evil.  When I heard that her husband was murdered last year, my suspicions (that word doesn't look spelled right) were confirmed.

She even looks evil too.  I find it really disgusting how she took advantage of someone with mental retardation just for a campaign ad.

That statement has got to rank among the biggest load of crap I've read on this Forum. And to refer to someone with Parkinson's Disease who, is very appropriately, supporting a candidate who favors stem cell research, as being someone who is mentally retarded and being taken advantage of is, frankly, disgusting

Dave
Logged
7,052,770
Harry
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,223
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: November 04, 2006, 10:57:12 PM »

I thought that ad was really dumb fluff.  But what do I know?

McCaskill by 1.5
Logged
Deano963
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,866


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: November 04, 2006, 10:57:25 PM »

I find it really disgusting how she took advantage of someone with mental retardation just for a campaign ad.  .

In case you didn't know, it was M.J. Fox who approached the McCaskill camp about doing the ads, not the other way around. Therefore he is not being 'taken advantage of' as you say.

Get your facts straight before you bloviate.
Logged
Saxwsylvania
Van Der Blub
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,534


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: November 04, 2006, 11:26:13 PM »

Ugh.  We cannot afford to have Claire McCaskill in the Senate.  Now, don't get me wrong, on paper she looks like a good candidate.  But I'm getting really negative vibes from her.  I think she's evil.  When I heard that her husband was murdered last year, my suspicions (that word doesn't look spelled right) were confirmed.

She even looks evil too.  I find it really disgusting how she took advantage of someone with mental retardation just for a campaign ad.

That statement has got to rank among the biggest load of crap I've read on this Forum. And to refer to someone with Parkinson's Disease who, is very appropriately, supporting a candidate who favors stem cell research, as being someone who is mentally retarded and being taken advantage of is, frankly, disgusting

Dave

I apologize, I did not think carefully enough about what I wrote.  I do not wish to offend anyone with Parkinson's. 

However, I still maintain that Claire McCaskill *looks* evil.  Whether she is evil or not is a matter of dispute.  Hopefully it shall not be a relevant issue after Tuesday.
Logged
Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,703
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: 2.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: November 04, 2006, 11:42:03 PM »

Ugh.  We cannot afford to have Claire McCaskill in the Senate.  Now, don't get me wrong, on paper she looks like a good candidate.  But I'm getting really negative vibes from her.  I think she's evil.  When I heard that her husband was murdered last year, my suspicions (that word doesn't look spelled right) were confirmed.

She even looks evil too.  I find it really disgusting how she took advantage of someone with mental retardation just for a campaign ad.

That statement has got to rank among the biggest load of crap I've read on this Forum. And to refer to someone with Parkinson's Disease who, is very appropriately, supporting a candidate who favors stem cell research, as being someone who is mentally retarded and being taken advantage of is, frankly, disgusting

Dave

I apologize, I did not think carefully enough about what I wrote.  I do not wish to offend anyone with Parkinson's. 

However, I still maintain that Claire McCaskill *looks* evil.  Whether she is evil or not is a matter of dispute.  Hopefully it shall not be a relevant issue after Tuesday.

Smiley. As you will have ascertained, it was more than the mentally retarted comments that I took issue with. You are entitled to your opinion of Claire McCaskill, though I'd agree to differ. I've been known to call some politicians worse than sh**t in my time, so I can't criticise you for that

Dave
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.231 seconds with 14 queries.