7.08.2008

Has Obama Won the Center? [UPDATED]

Whether or not you agree with the characterization of Barack Obama as a rootin' tootin', no good flip-flopper, bear the following in mind: all else being equal, a politician can expect to be punished if he changes his positions. Therefore, a politician will only change positions if the benefits outweigh the consequences.

Rasmussen has some new numbers out that suggest that Obama may indeed be reaping the benefits. In June, 26 percent of likely voters viewed McCain as a moderate versus 22 percent for Obama. But now, those numbers have -- flip-flopped. Obama is now seen as a moderate by 27 percent of voters, versus 23 percent for McCain.

The salient fact here is not necessarily that Obama is perceived as more moderate than he once was; that's pretty much what you'd expect. Rather, it's that he's somehow managed to make McCain seem more conservative. Presently, 28 percent of voters describe McCain as Very Conservative, whereas only 19 percent did a month ago.
It may be the case that the McCain campaign's inability to define their candidate has left him relatively unable to carve out his own ground; voters are defining him solely in relation to Barack Obama.

What makes these numbers especially tricky for McCain is that he had shifted rightward during the primaries -- and has continued to do so to a certain extent in the general election campaign, with positions like his call for offshore drilling. If he were to attempt to move to the center now, that would not merely be a flip-flop; it would be a flip-flop squared.

There are still a few other cards the Republicans have left to play; their 527's, for instance, will do everything in their power to see that Obama is not able to maintain a perception as a moderate. Even so, having ceded the center ground, McCain might not find it easy to get it back. What I'd find particularly exasperating about all of this if I were a Republican donor is that McCain had the first-mover advantage, having finished his primary months ahead of Barack Obama's. Instead of using that time to preempt an Obama move to the center, he failed to do much of anything in particular. Nor, it seems, has his maverick brand been as rainproof as it was made out to be.

UPDATE: It's rare that I find myself in disagreement with Chris Bowers, but very briefly:

(i) I'm not sure that Obama's numbers aren't improving. It's hard to tell exactly because we've gone three or four days without much polling, and before that we were getting a weird mix of polls from the South and the Northeast that might not tell us much about what the rest of the country is thinking. But our tracking chart does show Obama having gained another point or two after what had looked to be a plateau.

(ii) I'd think the downside of a change in positions will tend to be frontloaded relative to the upside. Obama has gotten some very harsh media narrative out of this, but it hasn't cost him anything in the polls and he may actually be gaining [see (i)]. I'm prepared to be wrong -- maybe the flip-flop label sticks and the moderate label doesn't. But that's not my gut reaction. We'll see.

(iii) Finally, as I argued last week, I don't think this is necessarily a strategy designed to maximize one's number of electoral votes, but rather one's chances of winning the majority of them. This is a risk-averse maneuver, designed to blockade McCain from certain tactical options that he might have wished to take later on.

I also think that in some ways, this has ricocheted a bit on McCain, not precisely in recalling his own flip-flops but revealing a candidate who had yet to stake out any ground of his own. Imagine if McCain hadn't pandered away from some of his more moderate positions during the primaries -- then Obama might be in trouble. But also, in that universe, I'm not sure that Obama would have played his hand this way.

112 comments

SG said...

His maverick brand lost its credibility years ago. I was a McCain booster in 2000, especially after the Bush campaign despicably accused him of supporting breast cancer and exploiting Southern bigotry to win South Carolina. McCain should have done the right thing after those primaries and left the Jed-Clempett party. What's makes it so pathetic to watch is that many of the no-brains now supporting McCain were the same people who cheered on the dirty Rovian tactics against him 8 years ago.

He has since become another GOP drone and is fooling fewer people every day. We've all seen the numerous pictures of him literally hugging George W. Bush (yeah, makes me want to puke as well). Hope some Dem-supporting organizations flash those photos in ads across the country this fall.

SarahLawrenceScott said...
This post has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Its still early into Obama's shift to the center and McCain is shuffling his campaign. Lets wait a few more weeks to see how it all plays out. The good news for Obama is the MSM is Characterizing his shift as a move to the center. I hear it 100 times a day. That must be music to his ears. If voters perceive Obama as a centrist, I think its over.

SarahLawrenceScott said...

Actually, I think the Republicans have ceded the argument that Obama is a liberal. Instead, they chose to argue that Obama is an unprincipled pol who will say anything to get elected.

That's a big gamble for the R's. If it succeeds, Obama is in a huge hole, since any adjustment will play into the narrative. But if it fails, Obama has successfully positioned himself in the center, and since McCain has trouble with his base already, this could turn into a rout.

The key for Obama, in my opinion, is for him to make it clear that he's a "maverick centrist." He can't just tack to the center; he has to stake out some positions that are a bit unusual. The idea of pulling the troops out of Iraq and sending them to Afghanistan qualifies, because it enrages people on both extremes of the political spectrum. And a VP pick like Sebelius would also help--not liberal, but not conventional.

If he gets not just the center, but the maverick center, it will be clear that Obama is authentic and McCain won't have many options left.

Paul Bradford said...

I'd like to echo SG's comment and say that McCain has evolved from a centrist maverick to a talking points conservative. America is sick of conservatives -- they've pretty much had their way since 1981 and most people want to move in a different direction.

Obama has to move to the center to get elected -- he also has to move to the center to govern; but if he can win over the people's trust he can start changing the definition of "center" and move it to the left. During an Obama administration America will stop thinking that liberal is a dirty word and start to think that maybe government can do some good.

Anonymous said...

I don't think the republicans have ceded the "liberal" argument. That's bandied about daily. But they also call him one not to budge the party line and is a typical pol. To me that's extremely contradictory. It doesn't seem that they know how to attack him on anything. That bodes well for Obama, because the attacks seem scattershot, but I don't know how long that will last.

Anonymous said...

Not terribly surprising as reports come out about the RNC pushing McCain to change his platform on climate change, stem cells, and immigration. It'll be interesting to see just how much he caves.

Anonymous said...

Obama rallied his base in the primary to such an extent that he can run center, right...wherever. McCain didn't really garner much enthusiasm at all and now has to keep running back home to his base to prove he's a real conservative and marring his previously held centrist image in the process. The GOP has McCain on a very short leash while Obama roams freely.

Stephen C. Rose said...

Barack is beginning as he always does to weave the perceptions of the MSM into his Town Halls and remind people of his consistency on the issues. A WIN WIN. There are days when I hope McCain survives this so we will actually have an election to win. I have never seen such a tired effort.

Modeler said...

I think a relevant data point is who thinks McCain is a conservative and Obama a moderate. If liberal voters are less likely to think of Obama as a liberal, and conservative voters are more likely to think of McCain as conservative, then this might be a net plus for McCain in terms of the enthusiasm gap. Witness Daily Kos over the last couple of weeks.

With that said, I think this is the most relevant part of the article:

Also, Obama has made gains among unaffiliated voters who are key to the outcome of the election. Where 28% viewed the Democrat as Very Liberal in early June, only 21% felt that way by the end of the month. For McCain, again the opposite is true. Rated Very Conservative by 24% of unaffiliated voters in the survey June 7-8, that number was up to 29% by June 28-29.

I don't know how unaffiliated voters self-identify to Rasmussen, but we can get a clue from Rasmussen's party ID polls:

Rep: 31.5%
Dem: 41.0%
Other: 27.5%

Compare to:

Conservative: 39%
Liberal: 25%
Moderate: 34%

These numbers suggest that unaffiliated voters lean conservative, which is why the recent shift is probably more imporant for Obama than McCain. Being viewed as right-of-center is not such a bad thing in this country.

hosertohoosier said...

I don't know why people keep counting on the Republicans being the ones to run 527. The only attempts at swift-boating I have seen have been from the Dems, and as a NY times article mentioned recently, there are no anti-Obama 527's. The wingnut folks who have backed Republican 527's before don't like McCain, while the nutbar lefties love Obama (and probably love him even more when he is screwing them over).

Anonymous said...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/08/obama-issues-response-to_n_111417.html

nieddu said...

One does not need to be a genius to see Obama as being the more convincing and better candidate.
At this point I'm more than confident that Obama will win the election in November, however as this becomes clear in many people minds, I fear mechanical sabotage to his chartered civilian airplane.
I wonder whether Obama can get the air force or some other secret service provided air transportation for his traveling.

Redshift said...

SarahLawrenceScott: "The idea of pulling the troops out of Iraq and sending them to Afghanistan qualifies, because it enrages people on both extremes of the political spectrum."

Er, who on the liberal side is "enraged" by this? I haven't seen it even raise a comment in any forum I frequent. The fraction of the antiwar movement that is against having troops in Afghanistan is fairly tiny compared to the contingent on the right that wants to stay in Iraq, so this seems like a false equivalence.

Brian said...

One point that should be noted is that for the first time in a while, the Democrat is a solid favorite. This means that McCain needs to be the one attacking and drawing contrasts, so, seen in that light, Obama's more moderate positioning can be seen as an offensive move. McCain is being forced to the right to find space to make distinctions with Obama, making him seem more conservative. It's a tough spot to be in.

As long as Obama doesn't leave any room to his left for McCain (which is very unlikely with McCain's base being so far right on every issue), it's tough for McCain to avoid getting squeezed out like this. And as long as Obama doesn't suffer too great a loss of enthusiasm in his base (which I also think is unlikely), he'll be on offense all fall.

Redshift said...

"These numbers suggest that unaffiliated voters lean conservative, which is why the recent shift is probably more imporant for Obama than McCain. Being viewed as right-of-center is not such a bad thing in this country."

Hmmm, combined with the fact that "liberal" positions on most issues have strong support from people who self-identify as independents, it could also reflect that the right has been very effective in demonizing the word "liberal," but not the actual concepts behind it. In other words, I don't trust the polling of how many people call themselves liberal to accurately reflect the political leanings of the country.

Herunar said...

Simply because more people see him as moderate doesn't mean he won the center. It could simply mean that more liberals now believe he's not that liberal. Maybe the center hasn't changed it's opinions of him at all.

In response to Hosertohoosier said...

The 527's are coming. Three launched yesterday. McCain might not have a lot of money, but the RNC is flush. After the conventions when this thing heats up, Obama will have a comfortable lead and the GOP will have only one way to win, the nuclear option. It will get ugly, Obama will need every cent he can raise.

Chuck in Seattle said...

Off topic: does your model have room to include polling from part of a state? http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_CD8_708.pdf

After all, you can at least compare to 2004.

Anonymous said...

@Herunar RTFA:

"Also, Obama has made gains among unaffiliated voters who are key to the outcome of the election. Where 28% viewed the Democrat as Very Liberal in early June, only 21% felt that way by the end of the month. For McCain, again the opposite is true. Rated Very Conservative by 24% of unaffiliated voters in the survey June 7-8, that number was up to 29% by June 28-29. "

Another Mike said...

I'll say this about Obama's move to the middle: when Republicans push the flip-flop meme they undermine the he's-too-liberal meme. Republicans had seemed excited about the prospect of painting Obama as too liberal. But, now that he's moving to the middle, it's like he's wrong-footed them. Their messages are at cross purposes, resulting in neither being effective.

Modeler said...

Redshift,

I think it's best to stick to how people perceive themselves and the candidates, under the assumption that most people will have internally consistent personaly definitions of "liberal" and "conservative."

When you or I try to impose our own ideas of liberalism and conservatism, things get very confusing. For example, I used to think that of conservatives as meritocratic libertarians who favored prudent foreign policy. However the "conservative" label is being increasingly co-opted by aristocratic authoritarians who favor a more imperialistic foreign policy. These are completely different ideologies, yet proponents of each call themselves "conservative."

The real question is: which candidate do the voters think most resembles themsevles?

ajb said...

Another Mike,
I think this is a real problem for the Republicans -- actually, it's more or less the problem Hillary Clinton had attacking Obama, too. There are lots of potentially-viable attacks against him, but if you use all of them you reduce the chances that any of them stick.
So far we've seen:
Obama the scary Muslim
Obama the angry black church-goer
Obama the elitist country-club liberal
Obama the aloof Hyde Park intellectual
Obama the extremist liberal ideologue
Obama the shameless centrist flip-flopper
And you know what? I think it would be possible to destroy a candidate's chances with any one of those labels.
If McCain somehow wins in the fall, I bet it will be in part because his campaign focuses on one attack and makes it stick.
I think he'd probably also need to find some issue on which he agrees with a majority of the public, to get in front of that issue and make it the core of the campaign, but a strong line of attack never hurt, either!

Matthew H said...

I don't like Ann Coulter, but I read her stuff on occassion because I want to know what the "other side" is thinking.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucac/20080707/cm_ucac/mccainpumpthis;_ylt=AqHYBr5q61JJGDUTIvQ8Ijv9wxIF

The "other side" seems to think that the only way they can vote for McCain is to get stinking drunk. Wow.

Admittedly, there's the danger of low expectations here. If McCain suddenly sounds a lot more reasonable and people like Coulter decide they love him, it'll look like a big bounce. However, it seems like most minds get set over the summer. Now is the time you have to get your label built, not in the fall. If so, McCain's "regression to the mean" will be too late.

P.S. The state info is MUCH improved over the last couple of changes, from what little I know. I am much happier than I was with the site than a month ago.

jsh1120 said...

One thing to keep in mind about Rasmussen's numbers are that they are "factual" perceptions about the candidates, not "attitudes" or "preferences." That's not to say that the two are unrelated, but the traditional "distance" measurement between a voter and a candidate on a liberal/conservative scale is not straightforward in terms of its ability to predict voter preference.

At this point, it appears that many voters are reconciling their own ideological "location" with Obama's. That's not surprising. If the trend continues, it's likely that voter preference for Obama will follow unless other events, unrelated to the liberal/conservative continuum intervene to impact voters' views.

I am a Fractal said...

The problem with this entire story is that you can go to youtube and find video of obama repeatedly taking the exact same position as he has taken now. nothing has changed at all about his position.

the right wing rove machine hopes nobody will ever bother to look at how obama never changed his position, and ignore all the times mccain says he's against or for things he was for or against before.

this is a very good case study in how cooperative the republican owned media is when they need to make a false characterization.

penalcolony said...

Events, however, may be in the saddle. Will the Iraqis persist in saying they want us off their lawn by a date certain? Maybe not, but if they do, it's the end for McC, who bet it all on voters buying the idea he would protect them by staying in Iraq Forevah.

Halfdan said...

A couple of comments.

First, note that Obama has a pattern of establishing himself as a centrist first, and then once having built a loyal base, occasionally veering off to the left or right, knowing that people who have already identified themselves with his campaign are unlikely to leave. For example, embracing gay marriage is not a tactic of a Democrat who is consciously trying to rebrand himself as a centrist. Rather, it's the mark of a smart politician who knows it will attract more supporters than it will repel. (Call it a "cult of personality" if you wish, but it's much smarter than what Kerry did.)

Second, in the tradition of Rove's standard strategy of attacking a candidate on his strengths, note that being a "maverick" is entirely contrary to what Americans expect from a President. Especially in light of the events of the past eight years...

Redshift said...

Modeler: I wasn't referring to agreement with my ideas of what is liberal, I was referring to studies like this one indicating that the policy views of self-described liberals and self-described moderates are largely identical. There's a general tendency to assume that moderates are halfway between liberals and conservatives, so if there are more self-identified conservatives then it must mean the country is somewhat conservative. If, on the other hand, the true political dividing line is largely between self-identified conservatives and moderates+liberals, then exactly the opposite is true.

"The real question is: which candidate do the voters think most resembles themselves?"

No argument there. The proof is in the pudding.

Cugel said...

Rasmussen has the right idea with asking voters to rate the candidates as "very liberal" or "very conservative."

Bush was rated by 52% as "conservative" in 2000 and that didn't hurt him at all.

But, "very conservative" is largely Pejorative as is "very liberal."

Conservatives don't like to identify themselves very often as "very conservative" unless they're really right-wing. So, it's clearly moderates who are providing that labeling of both candidates.

Other than on FISA, which interests a small segment of Democrats unfortunately, Obama hasn't had to do much of anything to move to the center. McCain has been positioning himself further and further to the right to shore up his unenthusiastic base, who are still suspicious of him and only are tolerating him as a "lesser of two evils" candidate.

It's rather like liberals in 2000 who shot themselves in the foot by voting for Nader. Lots of conservative activists are sitting on their hands in this election. Perhaps 1996 is a better example. In that election their base wasn't totally engaged, Dole ran a lifeless campaign, and got crushed.

Obama is not an incumbent so this election is much closer than it should be. But, you have to think that as people hear more and more about Obama, it's going to be more and more difficult to paint him as "unacceptable" in voters minds.

In 2004 Bush didn't have to do that because most people weren't ready for change (think Wolves ads). They are in 2008 and McCain is thereby forced to make Obama an unacceptable agent of change.

Rhode Island X said...

Two things come to mind.

1) The first polls are characterized as "early June," when Hillary and her supporters were still balking. When we're talking about Obama and McCain's numbers each moving about 4 points, that's pretty small...How much is due to Obama's repositioning, and how much due to fading Hillary-Democrat resentment?

2) Rasmussen has some other interesting numbers...Comparing early June to current (early July), Obama moved from being viewed as "liberal" from 67% to 56%, and "very liberal" from 36% to 22%. This raises some big questions in my mind...

I'm reminded of the article on how Obama isn't Dukakis/Kerry/etc., in the sense of being vulnerable to being painted as a liberal. http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/06/why-obama-isnt-like-dukakis.html But, didn't Obama's bump come almost immediately after the "early June" numbers? Yes, the bump came "Hillary supporters," and we're looking primarily at moderate/centrist voters in this case, but to what extent are these the same people?

Note that, at last check, about 40% of Hillary supporters say they'll stay home or vote McCain--down from 60% at the height of tensions. The 20% who moved aren't the dead-set anti-R/pro-D: they were already saying they'd vote for the D nominee in November. They aren't the Hillary-die-hards/Obama-haters: they aren't backing Obama. We know who they aren't; but who are they? (a) Hardcore Democrat Hillary backers, waiting for her word to pledge support to Obama? (b) Or are they Moderates/Centrists that Hillary wooed, but can't be taken for granted?

In other words...There's a correlation between Obama's boost and his being perceived as less liberal. Is there causation? (Are the Clinton-supporters/moderates/centrists now supporting Obama largely the same people viewing him as "less liberal," or is the "less liberal" perception due to policy shifts recognized by the vast majority of voters who haven't switched support?) If so, Obama may still be vulnerable to attack on his "liberal voting record," and his move to center called as a liberal wolf in centrist sheep's clothing.

I wish Rasmussen had broken this down more, or had conducted the poll an additional time, between the early Hillary boost and Obama's pronounced shift. :p As an Obama supporter, I'm hoping someone can rip this idea to shreds. :p

Mark Nelson said...

I'm not sure I agree with this post's suggestion that Obama's move to the middle is successfully painting McCain as "very conservative". I think it's almost entirely that, as you also point out, McCain himself has moved rightwards. His main positions of the past month have been conservative ones, in particular his vociferous attack on the Supreme Court ruling on habeas corpus, and none of his traditionally more moderate or GOP-bucking positions have been emphasized in the campaign for a while.

That in itself seems like enough for the shift. The sorts of people who considered him moderate because of his support of, for example, the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill, could be forgiven for changing their minds now that he's more or less running away from that bill. Same with his increasingly nuanced position on torture. Regardless of which position you agree with on any of these issues, it's hard to deny that the current position is "more conservative".

Halfdan said...

Also note the distinction between what Obama "talks about" and the specific policies be proposes. He has a habit of making abstract statements that sound traditional or conservative (praising Reagan, embracing patriotism). But then when you track him down on his positions they are moderate to liberal. (The exception so far has obviously been FISA.)

This is why he's such a message Nazi. He knows that what screws Democrats up is not policy per se, but the ability of conservatives to manipulate the meta-narrative. As long as the election doesn't devolve (once again) into a proxy war between Patriots and Hippies, he's got a good chance.

Modeler said...

Redshift,

Point taken. Perhaps my original sentence should have read:

"These numbers suggest that unaffiliated voters lean self-identified conservative, which is why the recent shift is probably more imporant for Obama than McCain. Being viewed as right-of-center is not such a bad thing in this country."

jinchi said...

...and has continued to do so to a certain extent in the general election campaign
I'd say that McCain has moved farther to the right since he effectively sealed the nomination on February 5th.

He'd taken a lot of hits from Republicans for his anti-torture stance during the debates (to his credit), then opposed a bill to outlaw waterboarding on February 12.

He reached out to John Hagee weeks after having lost the socially conservative states of Alabama, Arkansas Georgia, West Virginia, Louisiana and Kansas to Mike Huckabee.

He opposed the GI bill and embraced the Bush tax cuts in April and his solution to the foreclosure crisis (from late March) was for people to get a second job and skip their vacations.

Where has he moved to the center?

Anonymous said...

Obama's move to the center was a big gamble. Tarnishing his brand as not another typical politician could really hurt him. He was getting hammered every day in the media and all I could think was "Barack I hope you know what your doing."

The media has gotten over the Flip-Flop theme and now refers to "Obamas move to the center." Having your campaign described this way every day on every network for weeks may in itself win the election. If Obama can get to the center and be seen as a centrist, he will win.

The far left can have its tantrums over FISA and Telecom immunity, and the more they complain, the more Obama is seen as bucking his party and moving to the center. Its beautiful. As long as he retains his position on Iraq, they won't get to out of line. Who else are they going to vote for, McCain? Nader?

Most of Obama's political calculations have been very good this election season. 4 more months of triangulation and he'll be president. Bill Clintons triangulation may have pissed off the left, but he won twice, and ran a pretty good ship. Obama can do the same, maybe with a little more honesty and integrity.

The country is not ready for a hard left President. George Bush governed as a hard right president in a center right country and look how that turned out. Get to the middle Barack and govern that way. You'll get two terms and go down as one of the most memorable presidents in history.

Judge C. Crater said...

Adding to a comment made earlier about McCain's platform:
"Conservative activists are preparing to do battle with allies of Sen. John McCain in advance of September's Republican National Convention,hoping to prevent his views on global warming, immigration, stem cell research and campaign finance from becoming enshrined in the party's official declaration of principles."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/06/AR200...

In other words, fanatical R's are going to try to eviscerate anything about McCain that seems attractive to anyone outside of Bush's refractory ~28%. This is amazing given that he's 'softened' his stances on just about every one of the above issues over the past year. I see plenty of ammunition for BHO/527's being generated.

McCain’s also pushing the risky idea of SS privatization. Why??!! Seems politically tone deaf to do so as it’s a good way of writing off the retiree vote. If I were McCain, even if I believed in the privatization concept and that SS needed ‘saving,’ I wouldn’t go there as history has shown that talking about fiddling with SS is easily spun into a “third rail.”

Taken together, McCain's lurches to the far right (voluntary or otherwise) are going to push him well away from his own more mainstream views by the time November rolls around. If BHO picks a more moderate VP choice (Chet Edwards, TX rep, anyone?) he'll completely dominate the middle.

jinchi said...

Who else are they going to vote for, McCain? Nader?

I've always thought that that was a stupid perspective, since the obvious answer is that they'll vote the same way that half the country does, which is for nobody at all.

Obama's statements on faith based initiatives and bipartisanship were expected moves to the center - stressing common ground with conservatives. But his move on Telecom immunity was a complete reversal of his previous stance on an issue particularly important to his base and it brings him no obvious constituency (he's now branded a flip-flopper). It would be like McCain "moving to the center" by claiming he supported the right to first-trimester abortions. If Obama were to do the same thing on the Iraq war, he'd be finished.

There's a difference between building bridges and burning them.

Halfdan said...

Except Obama's statements on faith-based initiatives are not a move in any direction. It's the same position he's always had. Likewise, his focus on bipartisanship has always been the bedrock of his candidacy. These statements might be reminding liberals why they were lukewarm on him to begin with, but they are not examples of anything new.

Kennyb said...

I disagree with both Nate and Bowers. You need weeks for this to settle down to see if it has changed voting preferences. I mean, come on, who's following the election news over the 4th of July weekend except for die-hards? Even I missed 4 days of policital news.

Anonymous said...

Iraqi officials just told us to get our troops out of their country.

I wonder how this will play out.

jinchi said...

It's the same position he's always had.

That's my point.

Presidential campaigns typically stress the issues most important to their base in the primary, then focus on issues important to the whole electorate afterwards. That makes each candidate look more partisan at the start, more centrist later and is typically called "moving to the center" even when a candidate hasn't actually changed his political positions. It's also a perfectly honest and uncontroversial way to run a campaign. The idea that you need to throw off your base is nonsense.

such sweet thunder said...

Judge,

I've got to disagree with your take on the upcoming Republican platform bruhaha. I think it is a manufactured controversy: a clever gambit that McCain will use to "show" his independence from the party. What better way to bump the Democrats off the convention news cycle then to have an inter-party squabble that reinforces McCain as at-odds with his conservative base.

It's the only creative-unexpected smart move I've seen from his campaign all cycle.

Michael said...

One of the things lost in this analysis is that both candidates have to cobble together very different consituencies. According to this story on rasmussen reports 24% of the electorate (the largest chunk) describes themselves as conservative on both fiscal and social issues whereas only 9% describe themselves as liberal in both areas. No matter how badly the folks at daily kos want it not to be true, this country is more conservative than it is liberal, and according to that poll, the margin is quite large. The next largest group after conservatives are those that describe themselves as moderate on both fronts. They make up 20% of the electorate.

This means that Barack Obama has to cobble together a much more diverse coalition with more moderates than McCain. Indeed, moderates, of one stripe or another, will make up the vast majority of people that vote for Obama if he is to win whereas McCain only needs about a fifty/fifty split between conservatives and moderates. This also helps explain why McCain has tacked right and stayed there. His base is more important to his electoral success than Obama's base is to his. Both candidates need moderates to win but Obama needs to win them decisively whereas McCain just needs to split them.

Brian Dell said...

As someone who has actually run as a candidate at the state/provincial level, I can assure you that populist pandering is a far more successful strategy than being correct on an issue.

Take trade, for instance. McCain has visited Canada and Mexico to push for free trade and his ad on Colombia (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V22IMLtlmRI) is right on the money in terms of what economists and experts overwhelmingly support. McCain's position on trade has been broadly applauded by the major dailies. Yet where has good policy gotten him? Nowhere. According to the Economist, only a third of Americans support free trade, the lowest level in the western world.

Meanwhile, Obama is running an ad saying he's been raised in "values straight from the Kansas heartland." Can you imagine McCain saying he was raised in "values straight from San Francisco"? Please! Pandering to Kansas "values" is right out of the Republican playbook. Obama has no chance in Kansas so he's clearly trying to market himself to conservatives in swing states. And it's going to work.

Mike barook said...

To Modeler,

And to others who cite the tempest at Daily Kos about Obama's "move to the center." It's mostly the telecom issue. Also a recent poll by member shpilk shows that 85% of Kossacks are 100% behind Obama.

I acknowledge that Marcos, the site owner is in the 15%. Also in the 15% are some libertarians, Greens, assorted independents, disgruntled Republicans, and a few trolls and troublemakers.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

jinchi said...

No matter how badly the folks at daily kos want it not to be true, this country is more conservative than it is liberal, and according to that poll, the margin is quite large.

The key isn't whether people believe that they're conservative or liberal. It's whether they believe that they're closer to Republicans or Democrats. And there the Democrats have a huge edge right now.

ajb said...

Michael,
Something else interesting from that Rasmussen piece about those "Fiscal Moderate-Social Moderate" voters: 49% identify with the Democrats, and 33% with neither party. Presumably, though the report doesn't say so, only about 18% of this demographic identifies with the Republicans.
No doubt that explains why Rasmussen has Obama winning this group 59-30.
So, while Obama certainly needs those voters, they don't seem hard for him to get.

Alex said...

Rhode Island X:

Where are you getting that 40% of Hillary supporters will refuse to vote for Obama? That number seems far higher than even the peak of tensions (except for, perhaps, WV and KY).

Anonymous said...

And yet, McCain is only 2 points down in today's Gallup Poll.

Maybe voters are really perceiving OMUSLOMO as a crass politician with no values and now have lost all confidence inhim to make sound judgments.

Can you really beleive anything he says now!

SooneratND said...

Here's a thought I had when reading about this: Are we seeing Obama win the center or are we still just seeing more Dems come home?

I'm willing to bet that at the height of primary season, many of Hillary's backers would have told pollsters that Obama was "very liberal" in comparison to their choice. It was one of the Hillary camp's preferred line of attacks for months. This may have skewed the baselines in a number of these polls.

However, as most of Hillary's backers have now lined up behind Obama, they may have tempered their assessment and prefer to think of him a more of a moderate now, who is more in line with their beliefs than they would have admitted just a month or two prior.

Matt

Anonymous said...

If your on the left in this country your in the minority. There are going to be positions like FISA where a democrat running for President will have to join the right. Its short term pain for long term gain. Bush has driven the country into the ground and still McCain is competitive in the polls. I don't care what Barack's got to do, just win. Clinton irritated the left at times but it was necessary.

I understand the FISA decision is a principled one on behalf of the left. I agree with them. But for the good of the country Barack has to win this election. The guy is black, he has a name associated with a brutal dictator, and the majority of the countries white people think he went to an openly racist American hating church. If he's seen as a radical posing as a centrist he will lose. If he's seen as a centrist with some liberal views he will win. He won't comprimise on Iraq but he will leave himself some room for maneuverability on the issue or the Republicans are going to hang him with it. Left wing ideologues are as bad as those on the right. The American people want government to work and that takes compromise.

EnzoValenzetti said...

People saying Obama has somehow shifted or moved (in whatever direction), don't know what they're talking about. There might be a difference in emphasis but Obama's positions are generally the same as they were before the primaries.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/7/5/13146/00395/160/546980

Halfdan said...

Yes the Republican convention is going to be very embarrassing. It's not just global warming and immigration, but also abortion and gay marriage. And I'm not following the meta-narrative the last week or so, except to learn that McCain is promising to balance the budget. Balance the budget! We're spending billions of dollars a week in Iraq for the foreseeable future and he's going to balance the freaking budget! During the worst recession in a generation! What a disaster.

I am a Fractal said...

@halfdan:

we are already spending a billion dollars every day on just INTEREST IN GOP DEBT!

can you imagine the smarter things we could be doing with all that money!?

and mccain wants to keep the bush tax scheme that destroyed the surplus permanent? is he CRAZY? or just a CRIMINAL?

wow we need obama so badly right now. help!

Pete Kent said...

You have to wonder who some of these posters are.

They appear to act as if issues do not matter and that all that counts is that Obama should win.

What many here are missing is that the movement liberals out there are furious at Obama's about face on FISA and his other recent shifts.

Some have said here that the only thing that could get the liberals to truly abandon him would be a turnabout on Iraq. Do you really think that he will stick to his 16 month pull out plan in the face of the success of the Iraq war and gains that have been made that will need to be consolidated?

McCain will have a field day if Obama stubbornly sticks to his timetable without admitting that the Surge has worked and if he fails to acknowledge the vastly greater strategic importance of Iraq as compared with Afghanistan.

Can Obama be seen as abandoning the huge oil reserves of Iraq to our enemies? Those reserves are said to rival those of the Saudi's. At $140 a BB he can't.

Thus he is stuck between a rock and a hard place. For him the Center cannot hold. He will either alienate the voters in the middle who can be convinced of Iraq's strategic importance and may even become enraged at those who attempted to deceive them on the issue. Or he can alienate the folks at The Nation, the Daily Kos, MoveOn.Org and George Soros house.

Either way my bet is that all he is left with is a coalition of blacks, kooks and kids.

Now as for this Rasmussen survey. As some have pointed out, the interesting thing is that this remains a conservative country and that people vote ideology more than party. All that Democrat identification won't matter if their standard bearer is cast in a negative light as either too slick or too liberal.

Also the main point about who is the perceived moderate is well within the poll’s margin of error.

Finally, polls are only a snapshot in time. This one was taken June 28 - 29: before the dust up over flip flopping began in earnest on July 3. I suspect that a lot more folks right now are seeing Obama as not only liberal but as a liar!

Judge C. Crater said...

Such: I dunno, I'm having a hard time giving McCain that much credit. The religious right really does think they have God's ear in all of this and that they can speak with total certainty about the need to not have global warming (as an example) in McCain's platform. They've made that very clear. And given that they've not gotten their way on issues dear to them over the past 8 years (abortion is still legal) my expectation is that they'll be pretty pushy about sculpting the platform to their own personal tastes. Don't know if it'll be a bloodbath or not but "take no prisoners" will adequately describe some of McCain's oppo within his own party.


Michael: you say "24% of the electorate (the largest chunk) describes themselves as conservative on both fiscal and social issues." If this accurately/honestly describes this chunk of voters they'll be completely disgusted with a party that has run up the largest deficit in American history. McCain likely won't have a prayer of pulling them in because other than the usual tired promises about cuts in spending (HA!), he shows no signs of actually following the painful path of true fiscal discipline. And by extension this peels off some of the next 20% etc.

To repackage your comment to make it more accurate, no matter how badly the folks at little green footballs want it not to be true, this country is more fiscally conservative than it is liberal, and according to that poll, the margin is quite large.

I am a Fractal said...

@pete...

here take a look at a couple things:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=iT-lxXsrgaE

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/08/obama-addresses-critics-on-centrist-moves/index.html?hp

comment #3 on the nytimes blog is especially helpful.

it clearly shows obama quotes over the last 18 months on iraq, and its quite clear he hasn't changed his position at all.

now it's true that the mccain people and the gop and fox news are struggling to paint a picture that isn't there, but that is difficult when the truth is merely a google away.

Pete Kent said...

Fractal:

It is immaterial whether he has changed his position on Iraq or not. He will need to or suffer dire consequences from an American people who actually like winning wars and promoting freedom.

The great majority out there love this country and admire it. Many liberals, icluding some notable Obama associates (Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, his wife) simply don't like our country and think it malevolent.

You may think Obama is the cure for all our ills, but to many he is part of the problem, not the solution.

Give me McCrankey any day!'

BTW Obama is trying very ahrd to provide some rhetorical cover for himself for the big switch that is coming; don't kid yourself.

Pete Kent said...

Fractal:

Re comment number 3: the left will freak out when he pays those warlords any mind.

Why hasn't he announced his revised position now, then? The strategic, military and poltical shift in Iraq is manifest. It's time for a show of that famouns judgment of his.

Rob said...

Why are people feeding trolls like Pete Kent? Anyone who frames "debate" in these terms is obviously some kind of dittohead troll, so why bother.

ajb said...

Pete,
"He will need to or suffer dire consequences from an American people who actually like winning wars and promoting freedom."

Well, it seems that 59% of Americans want all troops home within the year (actually faster than Obama is suggesting), with 25% of them wanting all troops out NOW.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/the_war_in_iraq/iraq_troop_withdrawal

Other Rasmussen polling has shown that a noticeable majority of Americans also think getting out of Iraq is more important than winning.

So if McCain is counting on winning the election because Americans want to win the war in Iraq... he's in serious trouble.

I am a Fractal said...

Pete,

this is not really the right blog to be having discussions on the efficacy of raping iraq of all its assets and calling that "bringing freedom to iraq."

I am strongly in favor of bringing democracy to wherever we can, but i'm not in favor of killing over a million innocent civilians, displacing millions of others, destroying entire cities left and right, destroying all utilities, like bush has been doing in iraq.

do you know there hasn't been garbage collection in Baghdad since 2003? did you know they haven't even built a school yet? a hospital? any roads? what are they DOING with our billion dollars a day over there besides stealing?

we repaired germany and japan in a fraction of the time we've been in iraq, and we built them into strong democracies at a tiny fraction of the price we pay in iraq.

why?

we aren't trying to save iraq.

we are giving all our money to bush cronies to build shiny toys. we are bombing indiscriminately...

we are stealing iraq's oil while quintupling the price.

if you cannot see this by now, then really, it is not worth having a discussion with you because you have gone out of your way to not understand what is happening over there at all for years, and there's nothing i am going to be able to do to change your mind. i'm not a deprogrammer and its not like i'm going to switch you here without having some kind of huge annoying flame war.

if you like, you can post something on daily kos. i'm on there as "fractal" and i'll be happy to debate you on the facts, over there, where such a debate is welcome.

Anonymous said...

Pete, this site is for reasoned discussion of the issues, not partisan ranting. Shape up or get out.

moondancer said...

Seems to me McCain is still running right. I don't think he has a secure enough base to appeal to indies without lighting his house on fire.
Another thing, I know its early but with the awful job Krusty is doing why the stagnation in Obamas lead?

I am a Fractal said...

moondancer:

that's such a good question. if bush and the gop have only a 28% approval rating, and if a "generic democrat" wins by more than obama against them, then why hasn't he caught up?

what does he have to do to really get the 72% who disapprove of bush?

Anonymous said...

Both major-party candidates could have something to lose my moving to the center. A recent CNN poll has Nader at 6% and Barr 3% while Zogby reverses these percentages. Even the self-reported other candidate numbers on the Gallup tracking poll is 5%.

Nader can clearly push Obama on flip-flopping just as he did Gore (see below from his site).
McCain doesn't have a lot of wiggle room with conservatives or libertarians either.

"Real Deal:

Donate five dollars for Nader/Gonzalez.

Why?

Five reasons:

Telecom immunity.

Gun control.

Death penalty.

Campaign finance.

Faith-based funding.

On July 4, the New York Times documented Obama's flip flops on each of these issues and then proclaimed Obama New and Not Improved.

When we ask our friends who support Obama about his recent flip-flopping on these and other issues, they say something like this:

You have to pander to become President.

Or:

It doesn't matter where Obama stands on the issues -- it's the symbolism of change that matters.

Okay, so if it's the symbolism of change that matters to you, and not the substance, then please go and support Obama.

But if you actually want a candidacy that stands steadfast for shifting the power from the corporations back to the people, then please drop a five spot now on Nader/Gonzalez."

judas_priest said...

@Pete Kent:

Do you really think Obama is going to announce a major revision of his Iraq policy now? He will repreat what he has said, throwing in the line about consulting with the miltary commanders until he makes his trip there. Then, after the trip, he will say that they have reported that things are improving. He will then say that the situation is better and the Iraqi government wants the US combat troops out of there. He will thens ay that he sees no reaspon to change his basic policy but that after he is elected he will revisit the situation, since he will not commit to any cast in stone schedule that ignores what is happening then.

Halfdan said...

If the surge has worked the troops can come home.

counsellorben said...

In this thread, we have let ourselves get baited into responding to irrelevancies, and let others frame the debate.

Winning elections generally depends on two things:  motivating your base, and appealing to the swing voters.

Unless Obama makes a grevious mistake, the Democratic base will remain highly motivated, and will turn out in large numbers.  I do not expect Nader's recent polling to hold up; we were down that road in 2000.

Of course, that means that it is important to appeal to swing voters.  In this election, it appears that swing voters have pocketbook and security issues in mind.  The question is whether such voters will be motivated this year by aspiration or fear.

Re: Iraq.  The Iraquis now are demanding a withdrawal timetable as part of any continued security agreement, so either the US provides a timetable as part of an agreement, or the US must get the Security Council to permit the US to remain over the sovereign Iraqi government's objection.  This makes Iraq a much harder issue for McCain and his surrogates, because the Iraqis are demanding the US set a horizon in US involvement.

This mirrors the majority of US opinion, so Iraq may now become a positive issue for Obama.

Anonymous said...

zogby came out with his electoral map for 08, is somthing wrong with his polling or somthing? he has iowa for mccain, yet obama winning in sc,nc and az for goodness sake somthing got to be fluked with his polling.

Anonymous said...

But if you actually want a candidacy that stands steadfast for shifting the power from the corporations back to the people, then please drop a five spot now on Nader/Gonzalez.

Ignoring the fact that your comment reads like a script from a Nader campaign web site, I, nor many people, will never waste a vote on Nader.

Nader couldn't care less about the American people. Where is he after he's romped during election years? He's nowhere to be found. That speaks volumes to me and many others.

Nader's sole purpose in Presidential elections is to siphon away votes from a candidate. Many of his major donors were Republicans who were major donors to President Bush. He is by design a fail safe. He deserves no ones support.

MVRed.com said...

Zobgy's poll is a joke. I believe he had Romney and Obama winning Cali, both got drilled there.

Obama hasn't won any center YET, it's only July. None of us know if there is anymore garbage they can find on him or the "suspected Michelle video" that could damage their campaign says Bob Beckel...

He can win it, but get real, he hasn't won anything yet... We got 119 days!

Anonymous said...

The zogby map has Iowa´s color messed up. It´s for Obama but colored red.

Anonymous said...

yeah, still even if the color is messed up having obama up by like 8 in nc? when a poll from a dem site came out a few day's ago with obama behind by 4, and obama winning by 3 or w/e in arizona?. seem's really screwy.

same with the sc one he has obama winning? no other poll's have that at all.

just seem's really fluked to me.

Higglytown said...

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/07/putting_the_kitchen_table_issu.html

This article had an interesting analysis. Really makes sense. Explains Obama's lead in economic, kitchen table terms. What are people's thoughts on this? Do you think the perception, as that pole indicated, is that Obama is vastly better on the economy?

By the way, an earlier post by someone said McCain was finally winning, that is how I found this article. The article says he is winning in the top five categories that matter to no one this year.

Higglytown said...

putting_the_kitchen_table_issu.html

I appear to have lost the actual article in cutting and pasting. Its at realclearpolitics.

Higglytown said...

Will we be adjusting for Gallup Tracking going from +4 Obama to +2 Obama this week. This is three straight weeks downward in that poll I believe.

Pete Kent said...

For the record, I am neither a "troll" nor a "dittohead"! LOL I enjoy getting under the skin of name callers . . .

Fractal chastises me for debating here, and then goes on to cite data on garbage collection in Iraq. I think it is important to place the horserace in the context of the issues and events as those are the things that move the polls that we all are living and dying by.

To AJB that poll on Iraq troop withdrawal sentiment is old news and reflects a pessimism cultivated by a left wing media that ignored positive developments in Iraq until they became inescapable. That sort of media bias is why journalists poll at the very bottom of the scale of people Americans respect and will fuel the anger that will promote a major shift in war sentiment by the time November rolls around.

Obama, who is no dummy, knows this and that's why he is desperately trying to tack on the issue and is undoubtedly frustrated by the blow back he is getting from the liberal power structure.

Finally, AJB, the really bad news in that Rasmussen poll you cite on war sentiment is that McCain had a twelve point advantage over Obama on who could best deal with Iraq.

Obama's maneuvering room is growing smaller and smaller.

Anonymous said...

Anyone who is jumping to conclusions based on polls and "moves to the center" in the summer could gain some valuable perspective from this PBS report on the Bush-Gore race from September 2000. To summarize, Gore was toast in July but surged to a lead in September as his base rallied around him and he improved his image among independents. The 90% of you armchair analysts on this board that are writing off McCain need some historical perspective.

SG said...

I thought Zogby was getting out of the electoral-vote predictions game after he got it humiliatingly wrong in 2004?

ajb said...

MVRed,
I don't generally agree with you, but I certainly do about Zogby's latest efforts. This is what his map has to say about Vermont:

"Candidate 1 - 31%Candidate 2 - 24%Candidate 3 - 15%

Obama in a runaway."

That doesn't even make any sense. Not that it matters, since I don't think anybody is expecting Vermont to be close, but still.

As a partisan, I'd love Zogby's results to be accurate, and I honestly think they represent a plausible outcome by the end of this thing if things go well for Obama, but I doubt that's where we are right now.

Director said...

And yet McCain is down only two points in the latest Gallup Poll.

Future 527 Ad: OBAMA talks frequently about the Judgment of John McCain.

But when the heat is on, who showed better judgment.

John McCain held captive by North Vietnam and was going to be set free, but he refused and stayed with his fellow prisoners until all could be released.

Barack Obama went to a church where the preacher God Damned America, made insulting remarks about white people and Jewish people and listened to him for 20 years. When he heard these words did he leave the church, not until well into the Presidential campagain

Who do you trust to sit at the desk in the oval office. The leader who stayed with his fellow POWs or the political opportunist who continued to listen to a racist preacher.

Second 527 Ad:

He fought for his country and was shot down and taken prisoner. While imprisoned he was savagely tortured, while in America, a man named William Ayres joins the Weatherman Terrorist Organization that bombed the Pentagon and New York City. While McCain refused to be released from prison until all POW were released. William Ayres was captured by the FBI, but a Technicality released him. He settled in Chicago and held a fund raiser for a future Presidential Candidate, Barack Obama.

Judgment, the man who stands with America, or the man who goes to fund raisers with Terrorists. Barack Hussein Obama can you trust him in the Oval Office-scenes switches to nuclear bomb going off.

Enough Said.

Higglytown said...

It seems in a lot of national polls I am seeing that the number of undecideds is trending upwards. With some coming from both camps with still the same type of 2-6% split in the lead going to Obama. Does anyone else see this, and how would you explain it?

Pete Kent said...

Brilliant, Director. Your second ad made me laugh -- not because it was funny, but because it was the laugh of recognition.

Obama is still having trouble passing the Commander in Chief test.

BOOM!

Anonymous said...

WOW! The 3:00AM wake up call!

ajb said...

Director said...

"And yet McCain is down only two points in the latest Gallup Poll."

True... "and yet," McCain is down six points, 49-43, in the latest Rasmussen poll, also coming out today.

That's why most of us like this site -- it looks at all the polls coming out, not just at those that happen to be favorable to one side or another.
Oh, and if you need to tout a poll that shows your candidate behind by two, when he hasn't led in that poll or in any other in over a month, you're in trouble.

Director said...

Brilliant, Director. Your second ad made me laugh -- not because it was funny, but because it was the laugh of recognition.

Never meant for it to be funny. Deadly serious. Who is Barack Hussein Obama? All I know about him besides what he tells us is through his personal actions.

1. He walked for twenty years with a racist. If Obama was white, the PRESS would have crucified him and CLINTON would be the nominee.

2. He was friends with a Terrorist.

EnzoValenzetti said...

Zogby isn't that bad. They got Iowa, Nevada, South Carolina, Georgia, Missouri, New York, Texas, Pennsylvania, Indiana and North Carolina right. And they got New Hampshire, California, New Jersey and Ohio wrong.

There's worse.

Political Scientist said...

1. Flip flop charge does seem less effective given (a) generic ballots, (b) McCain's own movements, (c) the fact that 4 years ago we had a choice between strong and steady vs. flip flopper and most Americans can be too easily reminded of which they would have preferred ex post.

2. Look at the main weaknesses/potential narratives by rival camps for each person

Obama
-inexperienced
-an ordinairy politician and too calculating

McCain
-age
-warmonger
-economic cluelessness
-continuation of Bush

McCain can probably address age and warmonger effectively. I am not sure on the economic issues (unfair or not, Republican economic solutions consistently do poorly in polls during poor economic times). The Bush label seems more true today than last month (given oil drilling and tax policies, this oddly has been reinforced - I am in favor of drilling and I see this).

The charge of ordinary politician against Obama is non-fatal given the generic ballots. You could believe this to be true, but you still like the policies and personality more.

Also something is odd where McCain's image as a Maverick has really diminished since 2000 (which would have helped in using the ordinary politician label against Obama) and he really does seem "just like Bush to more voters" - I'm certain McCain's own internal polls and focus groups have picked up on this, but am guessing his campaign has decided to continue to pull to the right in hopes of securing the base and then hitting Obama on some other strategy yet to be developed.)

The inexperience charge is more interesting and could be potentially fatal to me. The more the economy is the issue as opposed to war/terrorism, the less salient it is.

It is also possible that Obama wows people in talks and debates and somehow deflects this. If he is able to do so, it would be a blowout (just as Reagan blew away Carter after the debates in 1980)

I experience remains an issue, it is a close race where McCain has a chance of winning, where the idiosyncracies of who appeals to the working class, what Ohio wants, who is the VP, hidden racism, hidden ageism, etc. all matter (and things like one candidate taking the popular vote and losing are all possible).

Clearly more upside potential for Obama, but a path for McCain getting to 271 is also possible.

EnzoValenzetti said...

Oh and lol @ The Director.

McCain has such awesome judgment that he voted for the Iraq war and in favour of torture, even after he himself experienced it.

But Obama sitting on the board of charities and going to church, that sure is unpresidential!

ajb said...

Looking at those Zogby numbers again...
There's only one state he actually bothered to poll in which he found McCain ahead by double-digits (Alabama, where he has McCain ahead by 11).
He has McCain ahead by exactly 5 in Kentucky, Tennessee and Oklahoma.
Mind you, he has pretty high percentages for Barr, "Someone else," and "Undecided" in a lot of states.
For example, KY:

McCain 44
Obama 39
Barr 3
Nader 1
Someone else 6
Undecided 8

If McCain picks up the undecided/third party vote except for Nader, it'd be 60/40. That sounds more reasonable, and I suspect there might be something about Zogby's methodology that elicits these kinds of responses in unusually large numbers.

Director said...

ajb said...

Director said...

ajb,

u miss the point. With all the pro-Obama posts that glorify how great he is doing and how bad things are for the Republicans, McCain is barely down in the polls.

Other than two weir polls that always pus Dem., McCain is right there. Furthermore, you need not look any further that the last two months of the Dem. Primary where Hillary crushed BHO..

It is now July 8, 2008, and 40% of the electorate is paying attention. Wait till September and October 2008, when the 52% of the electorate, who will vote, begin to pay serious attention to this campaign.

I then bring you back to my commercials. Obama can say over and over that he never heard his preacher use those words in twenty years, but people who go to church who may be thinking about voting for him will begin to have serious doubts about his character.

The same goes for Ayres.

Everybody is in la la land right now. As a strong Clinton supporter, who will probably stay home in November, the center of this country votes on character and who they think will defend this country. Remember, the Democratic candidate in 1988 was 14 pts up in August and lost by 7.

Stay tuned for September and October

The Director

Tom said...

"Other than two weird polls that always pus Dem., McCain is right there. Furthermore, you need not look any further that the last two months of the Dem. Primary where Hillary crushed BHO."

Obama's leading McCain by 5-6 points, which he's been doing consistently for a month now. There hasn't been a single national poll from anybody at any time in the past month that had McCain leading Obama. That's basically the margin by which Clinton won his two terms (+5 in '92, +7 in '96).

And, you know, Barack Obama beat Hillary Clinton. That's why he's the one running against McCain.

It's fair to question why Obama seems to be under-polling the Democratic brand (+10 v. Republicans) or relative to the anti-Bush crowd (60% or so), but, at the end of the day, all Obama has to do is win - margin of victory isn't going to matter, and there's just no numbers out there that can realistically be spun to suggest a McCain victory or even a McCain surge (look at Nate's Super Tracker).

Also, I have no evidence to back this up, so I may be wrong, but I think that one reason why the national polls have been so stable for the last month is that people got engaged in the election much earlier than and have made up their minds already in much bigger numbers than in the past. If McCain waits until after the conventions to make his big push, I think he might be surprised to find that there are a lot fewer undecideds out there than he was expecting.

judas_priest said...

Regarfding the Gallup poll:

It is a one day result and therefore somewhat unstable. Wait for a three day runnign average, which will give a better indication.

The Gallup tracking poll has been consistently showing a lower percentage for Obama than other polls. In fact, it is running about 4-5% less for Obama than Gallup's own polls done for USA today - so which one is more accurate?

I recall reading (I have to go now so I'll look it up later) that Gallup, unlike Rasmussen, make sno attempt to call back the next day voters who are unavaiable on the day they are called. This creates a distorted sample. If no being at home is correlated with partisan choice, even to a small degree, it is a source of systemmatic error. The Gallup/USA Today polls, I believe, use cal backs.

Gallup tracking uses Registered Voters but most of the other polls use "likely voters."

FWIW, Nate's ranking of pollsters shows Rasmussen to be more accurate than Gallup.

Anonymous said...

Jinchi wrote: "Obama's statements on faith based initiatives and bipartisanship were expected moves to the center "

Senator Obama has worked with Republicans in the Senate on a few different bills, and he's supported faith-based initiatives since his days in state senate. He hasn't really moved much at all on those issues.

jinchi said...

Hey Director, don't forget to pick up your McCain points. You wouldn't want to miss the opportunity to get a friendly email from Joe Lieberman!

jinchi said...

It's fair to question why Obama seems to be under-polling the Democratic brand (+10 v. Republicans)

My guess is that a named candidate typically scores more closely to the median than a generic Democrat or Republican does. The generic ballot addresses the background sentiment (e.g. "Republicans are corrupt and incompetent") while the named one focuses on the personalities involved ("but John McCain seems like a decent guy".)

I'd guess that a better measure would be to see where individual Democrats fall relative to their Republican opponents and compare Obama's numbers to that.

Considering that there's at least one Republican running an "I love Obama" campaign, I think he's probably doing pretty well.

jqb said...

Obama has not changed a single position; he was just as "centrist" (an absurd characterization) in "Audacity of Hope". The only change is that he's reneging on his pledge to filibuster against telecom immunity, but there's no position change -- he still opposes it, even though he feels that passing the other provisions of the bill is more important. He's complete and utterly wrong about that, as he is about a number of issues, but he hasn't changed those views.

Cyril Washbrook said...

Party ID is generally not a good way of predicting election results. As has already been noted, there are different dynamics when you ask a generic Democrat vs. Republican and when you ask for opinions on specific candidates. A lot of Southern Democrats wouldn't even consider voting for Barack Obama, because they see him as too liberal. Consequently, they might identify as Democrat, but in the Presidential race they would back a Republican.

Anonymous said...

The polls this year don't matter. Thats not an opinion, its a fact based on everything we currently know.

The polling template used to measure turnout is not even close. Heres how I know:

There have been 5 separate elections thus far this year,

1. Illinois special election
2. Louisiana special election
3. Mississippi special election
4. The republican Primary
5. The Democratic Primary

All three special elections were won by democrats where they had no business of winning. The polls in all of these races were wrong. They misrepresented turnout by 10% on the Democratic side.

The polls had no idea of democratic turnout this year. Nobody had any idea how large the turnout would be, it was huge. Obama got more votes in Iowa than all the republicans combined. The same with Georgia.

The last time the public was this unhappy was 1980 where Reagan entered election day with a 3 point lead in the polls and won by 10. People are angrier this year.Much angrier and much unhappier.

Everyone will vote. People who haven't voted in decades will vote and they aint voting for the republican. They couldn't care less if Obama was a troll from China as long as he aint republican.

On top of this turnout, Obama is a turnout machine. He has energized the electorate like no politician we have ever seen.

This election is over. Enjoy the campaign, but it doesen't matter much.

ajb said...

"It's fair to question why Obama seems to be under-polling the Democratic brand (+10 v. Republicans)"

I think there's another way of thinking about why McCain is over-performing compared to his party, and Obama is under-performing compared to his party.
If the election were being held right away, this would be an asset to McCain, since it would lead him to do better than he otherwise would, but in the longer term it may be an advantage to Obama.
Basically, McCain is getting way more votes than he should given how popular his party is, and he's still behind Obama. Obama's ahead, even though he's less popular than his party is.
So for McCain to win, he'll have to take his current over-performance compared to his party, and significantly over-perform that. All Obama has to do is to keep from underperforming his party much further.
In other words, which outcome is more likely -- that the popular vote on election night converges towards the generic partisan preference figures, or that it diverges further?

Yo Director said...

You are a clown. Your candidate couldn't win the nomination and she started out with a 20 point lead in every state. Does someone deserve to be president when they couldn't put a team together to beat an African American upstart who nobody knew in December. Either she is incompetent or Obama is a much better candidate, it has to be one or the other.

As far as not voting for Obama, it doesn't really matter cause he's going to win fairly easy without the Hillary vote. You Hillary supporters are crying like 8 year olds. Hillary had every single advantage going into the primaries and lost. She was proclaimed the nominee for months before the first vote was cast and lost. She was beaten by a better candidate, period.

Anonymous said...

Peter Kent,
Don't even try to get through the thick skulls of the Obamaniacs. You're the only right-wing person on here who tries to take on the masses. The rest of us, however few we may be, just try to spread sense with a few comments (we're often called trolls for it). It's a hopeless cause. Resign like the rest of us and spread your intelligence where ever you can.

Mugwump said...

The latest Zogby is not a regular Zogby poll (which is bad enough) but the completely worthless Zogby online interactive poll, which no serious website considers valid.

Zogby is an Arab-American and his brother is a strong Obama supporter (and may be a superdelegate for him).

Anonymous said...

As for dirty Rove tricks against Obama, I would guess they might do the following nearer the election:

1. Hire fake "pro-Obama" thugs to vandalize swing-vote neighborhoods, thus hoping people will turn against Obama.

2. Continue to peddle false rumors in the same swing-vote neighborhoods - stuff that stays under the media radar.

3. If that fails, the usual lies telling people the election is on the wrong day, push-polling "If there was evidence that Obama was gay, how would that affect your vote?", a last minute "revelation", etc. etc.

One day, Karl Rove will go to jail, but until then, the lack of accountability is just going to make him feel that he and his operatives can get away with more and more.

Higglytown said...

There is still this odd sentiment that Obama has somehow energized the electorate. If I am not mistaken the popular vote in the primary was a dead heat, with controversy after controversy over who was in the lead depending on what votes the Democratic Party decided held value and which ones they would throw away.

He energizes the electorate just as much against him as he does for him or else he would have done much better in the primary (as opposed to caucuses) which Clinton clearly won.

情趣用品 said...

愛情公寓,情色,舊情人,情色貼圖,情色文學,情色交友,色情聊天室,色情小說,一葉情貼圖片區,情色小說,色情,色情遊戲,情色視訊,情色電影,aio交友愛情館,色情a片,一夜情,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,免費視訊聊天,免費視訊,視訊,視訊美女,美女視訊,視訊交友,視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,情人視訊網,影音視訊聊天室,視訊交友90739,成人影片,成人交友,美女交友,微風成人,嘟嘟成人網,成人貼圖,成人電影,A片,豆豆聊天室,聊天室,UT聊天室,尋夢園聊天室,男同志聊天室,UT男同志聊天室,聊天室尋夢園,080聊天室,080苗栗人聊天室,6K聊天室,女同志聊天室,小高聊天室,上班族聊天室,080中部人聊天室,同志聊天室,聊天室交友,中部人聊天室,成人聊天室,一夜情聊天室,情色聊天室,寄情築園小遊戲,AV女優,A片下載,免費A片,日本A片,麗的色遊戲,色色網,情色論壇,嘟嘟情人色網,色情網站,成人網站,成人論壇,成人小說,微風成人區,色美媚部落格,正妹牆,正妹百人斬,aio,伊莉,伊莉討論區,成人文章,成人圖片區,免費成人影片,成人遊戲,成人影城,本土自拍,自拍,癡漢俱樂部,AV,做愛,做愛影片,av片,a漫,av dvd,線上a片,日本美女寫真集

情趣用品 said...

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,按摩棒,跳蛋,充氣娃娃,情境坊歡愉用品,情趣用品,情人節禮物,情惑用品性易購

免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,免費AV,色情網站,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人影片,成人網站,A片,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,情色網,日本A片,免費A片下載,性愛

A片,色情,成人,做愛,情色文學,A片下載,色情遊戲,色情影片,色情聊天室,情色電影,免費視訊,免費視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,一葉情貼圖片區,情色,情色視訊,免費成人影片,視訊交友,視訊聊天,視訊聊天室,言情小說,愛情小說,AIO,AV片,A漫,av dvd,聊天室,自拍,情色論壇,視訊美女,AV成人網,色情A片,SEX

情趣用品,A片,免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,色情網站,免費AV,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人網站,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,成人影片,情色網


情趣用品,A片,免費A片,日本A片,A片下載,線上A片,成人電影,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,微風成人區,成人文章,成人影城,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,臺灣情色網,色情,情色電影,色情遊戲,嘟嘟情人色網,麗的色遊戲,情色論壇,色情網站,一葉情貼圖片區,做愛,性愛,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,美女交友,做愛影片

av,情趣用品,a片,成人電影,微風成人,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,成人文章,成人影城,愛情公寓,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,寄情築園小遊戲,情色電影,aio,av女優,AV,免費A片,日本a片,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,聊天室,美女交友,成人光碟

情趣用品.A片,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,寄情築園小遊戲,情色電影,色情遊戲,色情網站,聊天室,ut聊天室,豆豆聊天室,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,免費A片,日本a片,a片下載,線上a片,av女優,av,成人電影,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,成人文章,成人影城,成人網站,自拍,尋夢園聊天室

信次 said...

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,美國aneros,rudeboy,英國rudeboy,英國Rocksoff,德國Fun Factory,Fun Factory,英國甜筒造型按摩座,甜筒造型按摩座,英國Rock Chic ,瑞典 Lelo ,英國Emotional Bliss,英國 E.B,荷蘭 Natural Contours,荷蘭 N C,美國 OhMiBod,美國 OMB,Naughti Nano ,音樂按摩棒,ipod按摩棒,美國 The Screaming O,美國TSO,美國TOPCO,美國Doc Johnson,美國CA Exotic,美國CEN,美國Nasstoy,美國Tonguejoy,英國Je Joue,美國Pipe Dream,美國California Exotic,美國NassToys,美國Vibropod,美國Penthouse,仿真按摩棒,矽膠按摩棒,猛男倒模,真人倒模,仿真倒模,PJUR,Zestra,適趣液,穿戴套具,日本NPG,雙頭龍,FANCARNAL,日本NIPPORI,日本GEL,日本Aqua Style,美國WET,費洛蒙,費洛蒙香水,仿真名器,av女優,打炮,做愛,性愛,口交,吹喇叭,肛交,魔女訓練大師,無線跳蛋,有線跳蛋,震動棒,震動保險套,震動套,TOY-情趣用品,情趣用品網,情趣購物網,成人用品網,情趣用品討論,成人購物網,鎖精套,鎖精環,持久環,持久套,拉珠,逼真按摩棒,名器,超名器,逼真老二,電動自慰,自慰,打手槍,仿真女郎,SM道具,SM,性感內褲,仿真按摩棒,pornograph,hunter系列,h動畫,成人動畫,成人卡通,情色動畫,情色卡通,色情動畫,色情卡通,無修正,禁斷,人妻,極悪調教,姦淫,近親相姦,顏射,盜攝,偷拍,本土自拍,素人自拍,公園露出,街道露出,野外露出,誘姦,迷姦,輪姦,凌辱,痴漢,痴女,素人娘,中出,巨乳,調教,潮吹,av,a片,成人影片,成人影音,線上影片,成人光碟,成人無碼,成人dvd,情色影音,情色影片,情色dvd,情色光碟,航空版,薄碼,色情dvd,色情影音,色情光碟,線上A片,免費A片,A片下載,成人電影,色情電影,TOKYO HOT,SKY ANGEL,一本道,SOD,S1,ALICE JAPAN,皇冠系列,老虎系列,東京熱,亞熱,武士系列,新潮館,情趣用品,情趣,情趣商品,情趣網站,跳蛋,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,自慰套,G點,性感內衣,情趣內衣,角色扮演,生日禮物,生日精品,自慰,打手槍,潮吹,高潮,後庭,情色論譠,影片下載,遊戲下載,手機鈴聲,音樂下載,開獎號碼,統一發票號碼,夜市,統一發票對獎,保險套,做愛,減肥,美容,瘦身,當舖,軟體下載,汽車,機車,手機,來電答鈴,週年慶,美食,徵信社,網頁設計,網站設計,室內設計,靈異照片,同志,聊天室,運動彩券,大樂透,威力彩,搬家公司,除蟲,偷拍,自拍,無名破解,av女優,小說,民宿,大樂透開獎號碼,大樂透中獎號碼,威力彩開獎號碼,討論區,痴漢,懷孕,美女交友,交友,日本av,日本,機票,香水,股市,股市行情, 股市分析,租房子,成人影片,免費影片,醫學美容,免費算命,算命,姓名配對,姓名學,姓名學免費,遊戲,好玩遊戲,好玩遊戲區,線上遊戲,新遊戲,漫畫,線上漫畫,動畫,成人圖片,桌布,桌布下載,電視節目表,線上電視,線上a片,線上掃毒,線上翻譯,購物車,身分證製造機,身分證產生器,手機,二手車,中古車,法拍屋,歌詞,音樂,音樂網,火車,房屋,情趣用品,情趣,情趣商品,情趣網站,跳蛋,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,自慰套, G點,性感內衣,情趣內衣,角色扮演,生日禮物,精品,禮品,自慰,打手槍,潮吹,高潮,後庭,情色論譠,影片下載,遊戲下載,手機鈴聲,音樂下載,開獎號碼,統一發票,夜市,保險套,做愛,減肥,美容,瘦身,當舖,軟體下載,汽車,機車,手機,來電答鈴,週年慶,美食,徵信社,網頁設計,網站設計,室內設計,靈異照片,同志,聊天室,運動彩券,,大樂透,威力彩,搬家公司,除蟲,偷拍,自拍,無名破解, av女優,小說,民宿,大樂透開獎號碼,大樂透中獎號碼,威力彩開獎號碼,討論區,痴漢,懷孕,美女交友,交友,日本av ,日本,機票,香水,股市,股市行情,股市分析,租房子,成人影片,免費影片,醫學美容,免費算命,算命,姓名配對,姓名學,姓名學免費,遊戲,好玩遊戲,好玩遊戲區,線上遊戲,新遊戲,漫畫,線上漫畫,動畫,成人圖片,桌布,桌布下載,電視節目表,線上電視,線上a片,線上a片,線上翻譯,購物車,身分證製造機,身分證產生器,手機,二手車,中古車,法拍屋,歌詞,音樂,音樂網,借錢,房屋,街頭籃球,找工作,旅行社,六合彩,水噹噹,台中隆鼻,果凍隆乳,改運整型,自體脂肪移植,新娘造型,婚禮顧問,下川島,常平,常平,珠海,澳門機票,香港機票,貸款,貸款,信用貸款,宜蘭民宿,花蓮民宿,未婚聯誼,網路購物,婚友,婚友社,未婚聯誼,交友,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,未婚聯誼, 婚友社,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,婚友,未婚聯誼,婚友社,未婚聯誼,單身聯誼,單身聯誼,白蟻,白蟻,除蟲,老鼠,減肥,減肥,在家工作,在家工作,水噹噹,台中隆鼻,果凍隆乳,改運整型,自體脂肪移植,新娘造型,婚禮顧問,下川島,常平,常平,珠海,澳門機票,香港機票,貸款,貸款,信用貸款,宜蘭民宿,花蓮民宿,未婚聯誼,網路購物,婚友,婚友社,未婚聯誼,交友,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,未婚聯誼, 婚友社,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,婚友,未婚聯誼,婚友社,未婚聯誼,單身聯誼,單身聯誼,白蟻,白蟻,除蟲,老鼠,減肥,減肥,在家工作,在家工作,婚友,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,婚友,交友,交友,婚友社,婚友社,婚友社,大陸新娘,大陸新娘,越南新娘,越南新娘,外籍新娘,外籍新娘,台中坐月子中心,搬家公司,搬家公司,中和搬家,台北搬家,板橋搬家,新店搬家,線上客服,網頁設計,線上客服,網頁設計,植牙,關鍵字,關鍵字,seo,seo,網路排名,自然排序,網路排名軟體,交友,越南新娘,婚友社,外籍新娘,大陸新娘,越南新娘,交友,外籍新娘,視訊聊天,大陸新娘,婚友社,婚友,越南新娘,大陸新娘,越南新娘,視訊交友,外籍新娘,網路排名,網路排名軟體,網站排名優化大師,關鍵字排名大師,網站排名seo大師,關鍵字行銷專家,關鍵字,seo,關鍵字行銷,網頁排序,網頁排名,關鍵字大師,seo大,自然排名,網站排序,網路行銷創業,汽車借款,汽車借錢,汽車貸款,汽車貸款,拉皮,抽脂,近視雷射,隆乳,隆鼻,變性,雙眼皮,眼袋,牙齒,下巴,植牙,人工植牙,植髮,雷射美容,膠原蛋白,皮膚科,醫學美容,玻尿酸,肉毒桿菌,微晶瓷,電波拉皮,脈衝光,關鍵字,關鍵字,seo,seo,網路排名,自然排序,網路排名軟體,英語演講,托福,Toastmaster,汽車借款,汽車借款,汽車借款,汽車貸款,汽車貸款,借錢,借貸,當舖,借款,借貸,借錢,週轉,

酒店上班請找艾葳 said...

艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要到打工兼差打工,兼差,或者八大行業,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的,還是想去制服店上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作兼差打工假日兼職兼職工作酒店兼差兼差打工兼差日領工作晚上兼差工作酒店工作酒店上班酒店打工兼職兼差兼差工作酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作特種行業內容,想兼職工作日領假日兼職兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有快速賺錢又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!

艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚,無業績壓力,無脫秀無喝酒壓力,高層次會員制客源,工作輕鬆,可日領現領
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已,對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有!艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪,不需擔心!只提供最優質的酒店上班,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。心動嗎!? 趕快來填寫你的酒店上班履歷表

水水們妳有缺現領、有兼職缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學缺錢嗎?妳是傳播妹??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的夜間兼職工作,打工機會和,假日打工,假日兼職賺錢的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??
艾葳酒店台北酒店經紀招兵買馬!!徵專業的酒店打工,想要去酒店的水水,想要短期日領,酒店日領,禮服酒店,制服店,酒店經紀,ktv酒店,便服店,酒店工作,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店經紀人,
等相關服務 幫您快速的實現您的夢想~!!

freefun0616 said...

酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,

,