Quoting lmoelleb:

Quote:
Quoting Rifter:

Quote:


Actually, I would have to say it the most powerful in absolute terms since we could defeat any nation militarily one to one.  But, it is also the most powerful in relative terms since most of the nations on earth have little or no military beyond a national guard type force, and the few that can field a world class level military are still woefully short compared to the US.  That is not to say that we can't be hurt badly, but I don't think there is anybody that can beat us.  Even economically in the current crisis, we are still much better off than most of the rest of the world.

Again, a question of definition. What I (and others) where referring to as "relative" was related to how much power the previous nations/empires in history had over the world at their time compared to how much power the US has over the current world. The "absolute" comparison matching this is the current US millitary being able to defeat for example the Roman army at the peak of the Roman empire.

Obviously there are also relative comparisons that place the US at the top. Or other absolute comparisons.

We make the historic comparison because you claim the US is the most powerful nation in history. The argument you made above supports the US being the most powerful nation today - which is pretty obvious and none of us dispute.

And yes, I do hate myself for not making that clear in my first post. I considered editing my post to add that it was obviously depending on what you ment with relative, but I made the wrong assumption that it was pretty clear to everyone.

Just to be thorough, a couple of other things I considered in making that statement was how long it took previous powers to gain their hegemony of their world, and how willing they were to use that power to achieve their goals.  The Roman Empire was extant for roughly 2000 years; but it took nearly 1500 years to reach its zenith where Roman power was it.  Alexander's Empire was actually bigger than Rome, and became the power in the world within his lifetime, so I would rank Alexander ahead of Rome.  The Egyptians were in power for nearly 4000 years, but less successful overall than both Alexander and Rome.  All of those empires (and a few others) achieved a level of greatness but had to do so by continuous campaigns of warfare to conquer their neighbors.  The Brits did essentially the same thing, lasting for about 500 years. 

The difference is that the US has NOT tried to create an empire, and any colonies we ended up with were largely the results of spoils of war.  But we have not, as a matter of policy, gone to war against other nations to build an empire, in spite of the fact that we have the ability to destroy the world many times over.  Our power comes primarily from economic prowess and from providing food and technology to less fortunate countries, while still maintaining a military that is second to none, and we've done it in less than 100 years.

The answer to the question asked in the topic of this thread:

HERE

THIS JUST IN!

Zogby just released new poll numbers for Saturday, 11/1, showing McCain has taken a one point lead over Obama.  He is attributing this to a new ad from a third-party GOP group featuring Obama's relationship with Reverend Wright.  The Obama camp is said to be furious, while the ad continues to play in the critical battleground states fueled by over 8 Million in donations received in just the last few days.

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
And, of course, there's the Open Letter to Barack Obama from "Cory The Driller":

HERE

Thanks for posting this, Hal.  I saw him on Fox the other night but missed the part about who he was.

Quoting Snark:

Quote:
McCain gained a bit in today's Zogby poll, but he's still trailing by 5 points.  (49.1 Obama vs 44.1 McCain)

Since the margin of error typically cited is around 3 points, this sounds like Zogby's numbers indicate a dead heat.

Quoting kdh1949:

Quote:
Quoting Snark:

Quote:
McCain gained a bit in today's Zogby poll, but he's still trailing by 5 points.  (49.1 Obama vs 44.1 McCain)

Since the margin of error typically cited is around 3 points, this sounds like Zogby's numbers indicate a dead heat.

If that poll were taken in a vacuum it could be considered in that way, but it wasn't.  A single poll might be off by the margin of error, but when every poll is showing a gap that size (and Zogby is one of the few that shows it even close.  Indeed, the next day showed the gap widening again.) that tends to shoot down the margin of error question. 

It is possible that given the unprecedented nature of this election that the assumptions about what constitutes a" likely voter" is way off and everyone is wrong, but I would be suprised if so that the numbers will break in McCain's direction at this point enough to tip the election.

Remember that the 49.1/44.1 poll is a national tracking poll.  We don't elect based on popular vote, but on the electoral college and the state numbers are not encouraging for McCain given the reletive strengths of the two cantidates on the map right now.  The current Zogby numbers for some of the battleground states:

Quote:


Pennsylvania: Obama 54%, McCain 40%

Ohio: Obama 50%, McCain 44%

Virginia: Obama 51%, McCain 45%

Nevada: Obama 51%, McCain 43%

Florida: Obama 48%, McCain 46%

Missouri: Obama 47%, McCain 46%

North Carolina: McCain 49%, Obama 48%

Indiana: McCain 49%, Obama 44%

To win he has to beat the spread in several states.  Possible?  Sure.  But I don't think it's anything like a dead heat at this point.

Quoting Snark:

Quote:
Quoting kdh1949:

Quote:
Quoting Snark:

Quote:
McCain gained a bit in today's Zogby poll, but he's still trailing by 5 points.  (49.1 Obama vs 44.1 McCain)

Since the margin of error typically cited is around 3 points, this sounds like Zogby's numbers indicate a dead heat.

If that poll were taken in a vacuum it could be considered in that way, but it wasn't.  A single poll might be off by the margin of error, but when every poll is showing a gap that size (and Zogby is one of the few that shows it even close.  Indeed, the next day showed the gap widening again.) that tends to shoot down the margin of error question. 

It is possible that given the unprecedented nature of this election that the assumptions about what constitutes a" likely voter" is way off and everyone is wrong, but I would be suprised if so that the numbers will break in McCain's direction at this point enough to tip the election.

Remember that the 49.1/44.1 poll is a national tracking poll.  We don't elect based on popular vote, but on the electoral college and the state numbers are not encouraging for McCain given the reletive strengths of the two cantidates on the map right now.  The current Zogby numbers for some of the battleground states:

Quote:


Pennsylvania: Obama 54%, McCain 40%

Ohio: Obama 50%, McCain 44%

Virginia: Obama 51%, McCain 45%

Nevada: Obama 51%, McCain 43%

Florida: Obama 48%, McCain 46%

Missouri: Obama 47%, McCain 46%

North Carolina: McCain 49%, Obama 48%

Indiana: McCain 49%, Obama 44%

To win he has to beat the spread in several states.  Possible?  Sure.  But I don't think it's anything like a dead heat at this point.

Except that the one poll that was the most accurate last time around has McCain up by 1.  As I watch the 5 o'clock news, Pennsylvania has moved toward McCain (the coal miners don't like Obama saying he's going to "bankrupt" the coal industry).  This thing ain't over till it's over, so don't count your chickens just yet.

Quoting Snark:

Quote:
Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
Except that the one poll that was the most accurate last time around has McCain up by 1.  As I watch the 5 o'clock news, Pennsylvania has moved toward McCain (the coal miners don't like Obama saying he's going to "bankrupt" the coal industry).  This thing ain't over till it's over, so don't count your chickens just yet.

Ok, I'll bite... which poll is that? The latest numbers I've seen are:

Quinnipiac: 50/43
Strategic Vision: 51/44
Muhlenberg: 52/46
PPP: 53/45
Rasumussen: 52/46
Survey USA: 51/44
Zogby: 53.7/40

The smallest spread I've seen is 6 points and all of them put Obama at 50% or better.  Even if all the undecideds break in McCain's favor he's got a heck of an uphill climb to take PA and without it he's REALLY hurting.

But I am not counting chickens just yet.  I'll be up tomorow night until someone concedes.

The IBDTP (Investors Business Daily Tracking Poll) called it to within .4 percentage points last time around.  Keep in mind also that internal tracking polls are a lot closer to the real figures than the ones done for public dissemination and always have been.  With the media admitting they are pro-Obama as they have, I don't trust ANY of the public domain polling to be close enough to be reliable.