Perhaps the demographics of the poll are skewed, but if you look at the cross tabs it is still representational of the Republican mindset.
Look at the numbers - take the overall opinion (which you claim is what is skewed, and then the numbers from the most moderate - either the youngest, western or northeastern - elements and you get relatively the same picture:
Question: Do you think Barack Obama is a socialist?
overall - yes - 63 no 21- not sure- 16 "most moderate" -`yes - 57 no - 25 not sure - 18
Question: Do you believe Barack Obama was born in the United States, or not?
overall - yes - 36 no - 42 not sure - 22 "most moderate" -yes - 29 no - 47 not sure - 24
Question: Should Barack Obama be impeached, or not?
overall - yes - 39 no - 32 not sure- 29 "most moderate" - yes - 34 no - 35 not sure - 31
Question: Do you believe Obama is a racist who hates white people?
overall - yes - 31 no - 36 not sure - 33 "most moderate" - yes - 27 no - 40 not sure - 33
Question: Should public school students be taught that the Book of Genesis in the Bible explains how God created the world?
overall - yes - 77 no - 15 not sure - 8 "most moderate" - yes - 70 no - 23 not sure - 7
And on and on....
Even the most "moderate" of republicans are predominantly crazy.
This bill, as I understand it, will NOT "cover 30 million more Americans."
This bill will force 30 Million or so Americans to BUY private insurance which they can not afford, even with the inadequate subsidies provided, while doing not much, if anything, to hold down costs for them or the rest of the public. I assume many of these so-called 30 million will, in the end, refuse to buy something they can not afford, so the 30 million figure becomes an illusion.
How would like to be forced to buy a product from a private, for profit company that you really can't afford or be faced with a penalty? Not much? Neither would I, nor millions of voters.
What would you think about politicians or a party that forced you to buy a product from a private, for profit company that you really can't afford? Would you vote for them again? No? Neither would I.
Sorry, but when you have the military telling the commander in chief he needs to act now and the commander carefully reviews all his options and takes time to decide whether what the general is asking for is really the best course in view of the overall strategy then that's GOOD.
Has there ever been a general who has asked for less troops or said that given more resources he couldn't win? Ever? How often have the generals been wrong?
Have you ever noticed that a President doesn't write the laws? Or that we have a Congress made up of competing interests and a Senate full of corrupt idiots and fools who need to be cajoled, bartered with, bought off, pandered to and both gently and roughly pushed (all out of sight, natch) to accomplish anything? Somehow you seem to think that some sort of bully pulpit grandstanding by a President can accomplish all that. I think Obama may tend to disagree. Let's wait and see what actually gets done before we declare a problem.
What makes you think McCain will keep Ohio? Latest polls at pollster have Obama up by two consistently and 538.com gives him a nearly 60% chance of winning the state.
Forget bout the mayor of Detroit. McCain will have to spend all his time trying to get Michigan, and Ohio, and Indiana to forget about the crappy economy, the unemployment rates, the housing crisis and that he was a part of the Bush administration that brought all this about and voted with Bush 95% of the time.
It's hard to run against the people currently in power when you are one of them.
McCain's announcement of his VP pick (and I pity the fool), rather than undermining the impact of Obama's speech will bury the impact of the his selection under the buzz about Barack's sure to be momentous occasion.