What will be the result of Monday's Gallup Presidential Poll?

I am still new to Hubdub but will so miss this market! Thanks for putting it up every week Jenni!

Barack is getting outside help!

Palestinian students in Gaza are cold-calling US voters to urge them to support their hero Barack Obama.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/3330446/Palestinians-toil-for-Barack-Obama-win.html

they are following bush logic: someone who is enemy of my enemy is my friend.
quite simple, isn't it?

The are also interfering with something that is none of their business!

none of their business? are you serious?

I think it is in the best interest of everyone around the world who our next president is. While America may be struggling we are still the only true superpower left in the world and have the ability to make an impact on the world. I think it shows how important it is to be a citizen of the world, and not someone that is only focused on their immediate surroundings. I say congrats to people outside the United States who are participating in the process of democracy.

Yes.

Read it again - these are not American citizens.

I would never dream of setting up a call center to intefere with elections in the Gaza strip - that is their business, and what these people should be focusing on.

A "citizen of the world" should be running for some UN position, not President of the United States.

Thankfully democracy allows people to disagree with you on that notable

I predict America will decide on Nov. 4 to stop alienating itself from the rest of the world and it will be in the best interest of everyone including America. Hopefully it won't take 4 years to undo the damage done in the last 8. Tough task indeed.

you are beyond belief notable

That´s the difference between you and 99 percent of the people on the planet, NN. You don't care what happens outside the United States and probably aren't real concerned about what happens outside of your hometown. The rest of us, Americans, Palestinians, Mexicans, Chinese and everyone eles, are concerned about the whole world. As a result, they are of course concerned about who the "leader of the free world" will be.

You might consider how deeply the US government, particularly under Republicans, involves itself in the internal affairs of foreign, sovereign countries, even in their elections.

I understand your concerns, and I also disagree with that. It bothered me deeply when John F Kerry sent his daughter to Australia, for instance, to campaign against John Howard.

Or when Barack Obama when to Kenya on tax payer money, to campaign in the election there, and then proceed to try to broker a power sharing deal after his canidate (Odinga) failed to win

Or when some of these analysts went to France to offer advice on their election strategy, as reported in http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/13/news/paris.php

i like how people are already coming up for excuse's for obama if he wins. bush has the USA so screwed it it will take forever to get it straightened out. if obama wins the buck stops at his desk. no more crying about bush, no blaming bush on mistake's obama makes. imho the USA comes first to whoever is prez. screw this world community BS! does anybody give the USA credit for the good they do? Palestinians, Mexicans, Chinese and everyone else..what have they done for you lately? so we should worry about-put them ahead of our concerns? give me a break!

What you are not acknowledging is that America alienating itself from the rest of the world is not in it's best interest.

@notable
How do you feel about the CIA's covert coup in Iran in the '50s?
That kinda backfired didn't it?

another thing i noticed and it baffles me. we have all these non-american's bashing bush and mccain. if the USA is such an evil place, why not vote in anti american canidates in your country? why ragg on our leaders? elect a leader in your country that will de-friend the USA. trust me we won't mind not having to help you in your time of trouble. you can become like cuba, the sudan, north vietnamese, etc and the USA will just stand by and watch.

Quite the contrary.
We completely support and adore your leader!
The next one!

If America want's to forget about the rest of the world it should start by getting off Saudi Arabia's hind teet.
Saudi Arabia...Remember...Where Osama and 9/11 came from?!?

i don't see saudi's bashing are leaders. you can't elect an anti american to run your country not my fault your fellow citizen's don't agree with you.

At a time like this, when most of the world has fallen to socialism, it is only natural for the other nations to want to drag America down with them. It is an expected process and America's new path will show whether or not it has enough integrity to withstand such an easy way out.

There's a reason America has been the best for awhile now.... I just think people confused as to what kind of "change" they want. Do they want to change the fundamentals of America? Or do they want to change the way corruption has entered the system?

I'm guessing most want the latter but are confused as to who can do that for them.

diesel: remember Germany did not participate with Bush's axis of evil strategy. Germany decided to do so because the German people did not want it.
roba: didn't the US put up a bail out itself? how large was it? oh, right, that's not socialism because it just honors the mistakes of some greedy hedge fond managers and makes the rich only richer. That's capitalism.

kruijs - you don't understand america as good as you think you do. no offense you sit from afar and cast stones. germany don't do much of nothing as far as aggression in world affairs. are the german troops on the frontline anywhere? thats their choice and i respect it. i don't go around bashing their heads of govt for making the choice. when the bailout was thought to benefit the rich it didn't pass. only after the "joe the plumber" type of people was brought into the equation did congress pass it. you think the bailout only helped the usa? imho it was a mistake to pass it.

Joe the plumber" that's a laugh mac called for him and he wasn't there also Joe was a registered republican what a joke?

Capitalism has always been the drudge of the world. look at the world to day. if the fatties in countries where not so greedy perhaps we would not be in the poor position we are in to day. but as long as there as been a world it has always been the position .what did Christ do in the temple, he turned there table over?

More about interfering in things where a person has no business:

Senator Barack Obama indicated that he was visiting Africa to help nurture relations between the continent and the United States. His mission, therefore, was warmly welcomed by the Government and the people of Kenya. The fact that he has roots in Kenya endeared him to the people of this country.

However, during his public address at the University of Nairobi, Senator Obama made extremely disturbing statements on issues which it is clear, he was very poorly informed, and on which he chose to lecture the Government and the people of Kenya on how to manage our country.

( More at: http://www.communication.go.ke/media.asp?id=284 )

Kenyans, understandably, don't like it when he does that to them. By the same token, foreigners should not meddle in American affairs either!

@kruijs

actually.... i would agree with you that the bail out is socialism. And this would never have been done 20 years ago. I think that shows I have a point when I say we are trending to the left

And, from the UK telegraph comes this revelation:

Barack Obama Will Hurt US Firms and the World Economy
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/03/do0301.xml

dieseldog: you do not understand me as good as you think you do. 1) Germany is on the front line. They just do not play the aggressive role. 2) the bailout honors the rich because it save the rich from getting broke. Quite simple, isn't it? How do you think things are decided (not only in the US)? It just lobbying. Who is lobbying for the plumber? No one.

roba, I think the bail out is correct - only it is wrongly addressed. That huge amount of money should not have been spend to pay the bonuses to the managers and scalpers, but to help those who can't pay the mortgage. In the end, it were these greedy bankers who sold them, well knowing these home-owners could not pay them. But nevertheless, with their own provisions in mind, they sold them.

Don't get me wrong: I am no communist. But I prefer fair play.

@notables........its a pity you did not find out a little more like where is support from the 8year demon (bush)? poor aged mac,

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/philip_sherwell/blog/2008/11/03/wheres_the_leader_of_the_free_world_george_w_bushs_disappearing_act

kruijs - we have a differnt definition of "front line." to me front line is the people doing the actual fighting-shooting-hand to hand combat. germany is NOT do any of that. see what you don't understand is the bailout failed to pass the first time cause it was thought to only benifit the rich. then after a week of people making the case that the "joe the plumber" would also be hurt congress passed it. it woulda took longer for the negative impact to reach the plumber's of america, but eventually it would. NO it's not quit simple!

you use the typical class warfare of a liberal. the rich are bad people, and we need to take their money to give to the less fortunate. who hires the plumbers of america? if you take more of their money are they gonna hire more plumbers? who set's the price's of their products? if you take more of their money are they gonna lower their price's?

you think if the plumber get's takin advantage of by some rich guy it's the govt's job to bail the plumber out? it's just as much as the plumber's fault! they shouldn't have bought a house they knew they couldn't afford. the congress already passed a $300 billon package to help with people facing foreclosure. now you think they need more? come to the USA and show me where all these mansion's are.

Diesel,

Chill out a bit, man. You're a self-described conservative and you presume to speak for liberals. Don't put words in other people's mouths, man.

Let's get some terms straightened out so we can have a constructive conversation.

First, what does the word liberal mean to you? Because to me, it refers to the laissez-faire economic policies of the last eight years.

Second, is everyone who votes Democrats, from where you sit, a liberal?

Third, I've never heard a single Democrat say the rich are bad people. Nor have I ever heard a single Democrat call for class warfare. The only idiot who has spoken of "class warfare" in this campaign is that jackass McCain, who is too senile to find his ass with a roadmap.

Finally, I can show you where the mansions are. They're in Palm Beach, upper Manhattan, Boston, Miami, California and everywhere else. And for every mansion, there are hundreds of people living without health insurance and with the less-than-mediocre education system, which I presume, is responsible for your inability to write a correct sentence, correctly match verbs with nouns, or spell simple words like QUITE (not quit), prices, (not price's), taking, (not takin), because, (not cause).

@jsevigny

I lived for years without health insurance, and now I only have minimal coverage. There are people out there (like me) who choose this. You can't make blanket statements with statistics like that, assuming that the under-insured are necessarily the under-priviledged.

I may not be wealthy, but I certainly don't want the government taking care of me! If I wanted the government to take care of me, I wouldn't have chosen to live in the USA.

@ mork, #15

I'd guess that some of the wingnuts would be OK with that...if they knew about it.
...'course, they *support* democracy in other countries.

#17 Yessir!

http://tinyurl.com/58u9gv

@ notices

"Here's something I will never understand: Yours is the only modern nation in the world in which people who get sick go broke. Let me write this slowly so it will be easier to understand: Universal health care is not socialism, it's just us taking care of each other. Our doctors are good, we have surrendered no freedoms, we live longer than you do, and our infant-mortality rate is better than yours."
http://www.thestar.com/News/USElection/article/529278

The huge profit that bloats insurance costs isn't even efficient...unless you *like* paying $300 for a tongue depressor...

deelilley - there you go again with questionable sources. the USA govt has 3 things they run for health coverage. medicare, medicade, and vertrans's hospitals. two of the three (medicare and medicade) are going to bankrupt the govt in the near future. please show a LEGIT-MSM source that says joe the Columnist's country or any other country has a better infant-mortality than the USA! if Canada's govt run health care is so much better why do they send their people here for medical needs?

jsevigny - eye AIN'T clam'n to spek for librl's. ewe contenu to cry abuot my spellling and grmmmer, but you alwys mange to mention it win ewe have no othr valeed pooointts. sew eye'm guesing u can reed it. your better off not speaking to me anymore.

@deelilley:

If you lived in the United States, you would know that hospitals are not allowed to turn people away for lack of money. In fact many of the people who are here illegally are taking advantage of our health care system without paying hardly anything for it.

One of the crimes of government run "health care" (and there are many), is the conflict of interest often found in countries that have a "death tax" AND a state run health care system that decides what kind of care a person will have. A sane person would not put their doctor's name in their will! And this is a bad idea for the same reason.

jsevigny - one last thing before i iggy you. constructive conversation? see comment 17 on link below. you can also read comment 28 for your answer, and more clarification as to why i no longer will respond to you. maybe someday you'll grow up to be a mature adult, and become a consertive. :O)


http://www.hubdub.com/m20065/What_will_happen_to_Sarah_Palins_campaign_wardrobe_after_the_election

I'd have to agree with dieseldog. I do my fair amount of debating, but there's no reason it can't stay friendly! Of course it can get heated, but no one should be malicious.

@diesel:

do you agree the CIA being a good source?
So: USA, Position 180, rate 6.3/1000
over 40 countries have a better rate than the US. Ups, including Canada. Even Cuba has a better rate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate

Are we talking of the same infant-mortality?

@kruijs,

That is because in many countries, a mother is encouraged to abort at the first signs of any defect in the child - and they don't include that in their official infant mortality statistics. In the United States, they do all they can to let the child live, and if it dies, it is counted in the statistics.

a) in all 40 countries?
b) anyway, does it change you wrong comment into a correct comment?

think again before answering.

kruijs - japan 2.6% was the lowest i saw after a quick glance. these are based on 1,000 births. another thing to consider is the birth rate. canada is lower than the USA. i would say the USA has more births per year. solvakia is 7.12. do you think they have a good health care system? i stand corrected...the USA does not</> have the best infant-mortality rate.

http://www.globalhealthfacts.org/topic.jsp?i=74

http://www.aneki.com/lowest_mortality.html

http://www.geographyiq.com/ranking/ranking_Infant_Mortality_Rate_aall.htm

no i don't consider the CIA as a good source for infant-mortality rates. i doubt they got their numbers on their own. they proablly got their's from the web like i just did. i could be wrong...maybe the CIA tracks these things.

*first link has the japan rate.

"i would say the USA has more births per year."
correct: USA: 14, Canada 10.3 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_birth_rate)

"another thing to consider is the birth rate" - why?
"do you think they have a good health care system?" - I do not think that there is a correlation between quality of health care system and birth rate. But: A good health care system does contribute to a low infant-mortality rate - but is certainly not the only factor.

"*first link has the japan rate.": same source as I referred to, just an older publication. If you don't trust the CIA in this case, you can still take a look at the wikipedia article which contains the United Nations numbers too.

what i ment by birth rate is..i would say the USA has more births per year than canada. therefore the USA would have more infant-mortalities. only source i say you provide was a wikipedia site. their nice but open to error. i have no confindence in anything the UN says. you don't think a good health care system improves the succes of birth rates? maybe we're not understanding each other.

"what i ment by birth rate is..i would say the USA has more births per year than canada."
A rate is no absolute number. And why should anyone compare the absolute numbers of births? Of course the US have a much higher number of births than Canada has.
"therefore the USA would have more infant-mortalities"
You started the conversation with the infant-mortality rate - no one has been talking about absolute numbers.
"only source i say you provide was a wikipedia site."
I provided a wikipedia site which showed two sources of statistics: One from the UN, one from the CIA. If these sources would have been cited incorrectly, I think someone would have noticed and corrected it to reflect the original sources.
"their nice but open to error."
But very likely to be corrected as soon someone notices the mistake. In printed media, you cannot expect that. In fact, in printed media you do not even have a change to track who has written something, nor why. Did you ever read the discussions behind the articles? I don't think any editor-written encyclopedia or similar has such activity behind the scenes.
"i have no confindence in anything the UN says"
If you do not trust the UN nor the CIA, I ask you, who do you trust anyway? Its hard to argument if you dismiss all sources ... (btw: the link you provided referred to the same source)
"you don't think a good health care system improves the succes of birth rates?"
I repeat: I do not think that there is a correlation between quality of health care system and birth rate. But: A good health care system does contribute to a low infant-mortality rate - but is certainly not the only factor.

Makes this clearer what I am trying to say to you?

kruijs - i'm not gonna get into the semantics of infant-mortality rate. i trust the CIA on spy issues. i didn't know infant-mortality rate's was a spy issue. have a good one.

if you put up an argument, you ought to be ready to defend that argument.

so saying you do not want to "get into the semantics" - that disappoints me. I thought you would be open for discussion of the accusations and assumptions you make. seems your quite ignorant if it comes to that.

so if you don't want to defend your arguments and your position, than keep them it you in the first place.

rates are independent to base numbers, so from what I can see, the US does have a higher rate.

In reality though, that means very little and can be a result of many factors that we aren't very likely to know. It should still be taken into consideration when discussing health care, though I do not believe it warrants universal health care. This is especially so since Universal health care isn't exactly known for their great quality or service.

kruijs - i said i was wrong. now you wanna keep discussing the subject. you post links i choose not to trust, so i don't use them. then you call me ignorant. thats real sweet of you. i guess cause you won a discussion that makes you brillant. so when your wrong on a subject (which never happens cause your so intelligent) you wanna keep discussing it hoping the facts will change?

comment 43 - the USA does "NOT" have the best infant-mortality rate.

sorry, you're right, I went too far.