He is very upset about the fact that the media is paying more attention to Barack Obama. I think he is falling apart. However i think this will be one of the closest elections in history. there is still no telling who could win.

No i don't think so - i think his plan is - well i don't think he has one - despite how it looks i do think he will win

Yes, I do think the McCain campaign is falling apart due to the blizzard of lies and deception he has told. Furthermore, every time I look and listen to John McCain now I am reminded of just how different he is than he was in 2000. The John McCain of 2008 is willing to sell his soul to win the election, even if it means losing his credibility, integrity and honor at the same time. Simply put, he has been running a dishonest and disgraceful campaign. Also, I strongly believe that this country was founded on the fundamental principles of honesty, integrity, patriotism, equality, freedom, liberty and justice and for all. That being the case, the dishonesty of the McCain campain goes completely against very basic principles that our forefathers founded this country upon. Most of all, I believe this country is heading in the wrong direction, and I am voting for the change we need and Obama/Biden! Blizzard of Lies Saturday, September 13th, 2008 By PAUL KRUGMAN | Did you hear about how Barack Obama wants to have sex education in kindergarten, and called Sarah Palin a pig? Did you hear about how Ms. Palin told Congress, “Thanks, but no thanks” when it wanted to buy Alaska a Bridge to Nowhere? These stories have two things in common: they’re all claims recently made by the McCain campaign — and they’re all out-and-out lies. Dishonesty is nothing new in politics. I spent much of 2000 — my first year at The Times — trying to alert readers to the blatant dishonesty of the Bush campaign’s claims about taxes, spending and Social Security. But I can’t think of any precedent, at least in America, for the blizzard of lies since the Republican convention. The Bush campaign’s lies in 2000 were artful — you needed some grasp of arithmetic to realize that you were being conned. This year, however, the McCain campaign keeps making assertions that anyone with an Internet connection can disprove in a minute, and repeating these assertions over and over again. Take the case of the Bridge to Nowhere, which supposedly gives Ms. Palin credentials as a reformer. Well, when campaigning for governor, Ms. Palin didn’t say “no thanks” — she was all for the bridge, even though it had already become a national scandal, insisting that she would “not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that’s so negative.” Oh, and when she finally did decide to cancel the project, she didn’t righteously reject a handout from Washington: she accepted the handout, but spent it on something else. You see, long before she decided to cancel the bridge, Congress had told Alaska that it could keep the federal money originally earmarked for that project and use it elsewhere. So the whole story of Ms. Palin’s alleged heroic stand against wasteful spending is fiction. Or take the story of Mr. Obama’s alleged advocacy of kindergarten sex-ed. In reality, he supported legislation calling for “age and developmentally appropriate education”; in the case of young children, that would have meant guidance to help them avoid sexual predators. And then there’s the claim that Mr. Obama’s use of the ordinary metaphor “putting lipstick on a pig” was a sexist smear, and on and on. Why do the McCain people think they can get away with this stuff? Well, they’re probably counting on the common practice in the news media of being “balanced” at all costs. You know how it goes: If a politician says that black is white, the news report doesn’t say that he’s wrong, it reports that “some Democrats say” that he’s wrong. Or a grotesque lie from one side is paired with a trivial misstatement from the other, conveying the impression that both sides are equally dirty. They’re probably also counting on the prevalence of horse-race reporting, so that instead of the story being “McCain campaign lies,” it becomes “Obama on defensive in face of attacks.” Still, how upset should we be about the McCain campaign’s lies? I mean, politics ain’t beanbag, and all that. One answer is that the muck being hurled by the McCain campaign is preventing a debate on real issues — on whether the country really wants, for example, to continue the economic policies of the last eight years. But there’s another answer, which may be even more important: how a politician campaigns tells you a lot about how he or she would govern. I’m not talking about the theory, often advanced as a defense of horse-race political reporting, that the skills needed to run a winning campaign are the same as those needed to run the country. The contrast between the Bush political team’s ruthless effectiveness and the heckuva job done by the Bush administration is living, breathing, bumbling, and, in the case of the emerging Interior Department scandal, coke-snorting and bed-hopping proof to the contrary. I’m talking, instead, about the relationship between the character of a campaign and that of the administration that follows. Thus, the deceptive and dishonest 2000 Bush-Cheney campaign provided an all-too-revealing preview of things to come. In fact, my early suspicion that we were being misled about the threat from Iraq came from the way the political tactics being used to sell the war resembled the tactics that had earlier been used to sell the Bush tax cuts. And now the team that hopes to form the next administration is running a campaign that makes Bush-Cheney 2000 look like something out of a civics class. What does that say about how that team would run the country? What it says, I’d argue, is that the Obama campaign is wrong to suggest that a McCain-Palin administration would just be a continuation of Bush-Cheney. If the way John McCain and Sarah Palin are campaigning is any indication, it would be much, much worse.

It does exist except it is split the czech republic and slowvakia. He's going to make a fine president for one term though.

http://www.electoral-vote.com/ By this map he is ahead and ahead for the first time I might add. Seems he is suring up his election the Pundits on TV are starting to look like the liberal loons they are and that is good for the god Ole USA.

Nope. He's not done for. Certain members of his constituency will vote for the ideology every time. They don't care about lies, geography, competence. Nothing. An example is Rush Limbaugh. He preached on his show about hating drug addicts, they should be killed. When it was discovered that HE was a drug addict, did he lose his show due to his hypocrisy? Nope. If you are a right-wing ideologue, you can do anything and still be welcomed back into the fold even if you are a bold-faced liar.

I liked the one where he talks about the 'Iraq-Afghanistan border'!!!

Actually the guy is ahead according to most polls and the Democrats have been scrambling for an answer to the boost McCain got from Palin in recent days. Biden did not help Obama's campaign in the same manner, that is certain. It will be interesting to see how it all shakes out in November.

McCain is grasping at straws at the moment - he knows he's the underdog and is doing anything that comes to mind to try to reverse that status. He really can't do much at this moment but hope that Obama screws up somewhere - he can't go more negative than he's been doing because the public has had enough of it allready, he will be doomed if he has debates so he has to avoid that, and all the numbers in the electorially importaint states are trending heavely for Obama. No, McCain is pretty much washed up unless a miracle happens - but they have happened in the past. Vegas odds are almost 2 to 1 for Obama at the moment, which says a great deal about McCains chances in November.

Dude I think this election is going to be an even bigger upset to the Democrates than the last one.