In certain ways, this sample-size-of-one stuff is antithetical to what we do around here. But I could not let the convention go by with at least one man-on-the-street perspective.
My cabbie and I had a good conversation about politics yesterday night. Interesting guy; he has a masters’ degree but is driving a cab, and says he knows a lot of people in the same boat. This is going to sound a little xenophobic, but one thing I have noticed in Chicago is that the higher the percentage of taxi drivers that speak English without an accent, the worse off the economy is doing. Lately, I've had a lot of cabbies who spoke the King's English.
He’s a swing voter – white, maybe 53 years old, listens to Air America one night, Rush Limbaugh the next. He isn’t buying what John McCain is selling, and thinks it’s pretty obvious that he’ll take the country in the wrong direction.
But he’s yet to be entirely persuaded by Obama. Likes what Obama has to say. Liked Michelle’s speech. But he feels like he’s heard a lot of the same rhetoric before, and seen too many politicians who couldn’t deliver on it. Says he might vote third party instead, or just sit the election out. He didn’t like the Biden pick, and says a lot of his customers didn’t either. Reinforced too much of his sense that Obama is a typical Washington politican, perhaps well enough intentioned, but like most politicians inclined to overpromise and underdeliver.
He also expressed a great deal of admiration for Ross Perot, particularly Perot’s foresight on NAFTA. And this is one that I have heard before – I had a very similar conversation with a man in Austin, who said in essence that Perot was the only politician he’d trusted in the last thirty years.
Perot’s name still has a lot of currency among certain voters, especially here out West. Perot is not any fan of John McCain, but he’s yet to endorse a candidate. If Perot were to endorse Obama, that would be a very big deal – bigger, perhaps, than any endorsement of the general election campaign, save perhaps for Colin Powell. But even if he doesn’t (and it isn’t likely that he will; Perot made a fairly soft endorsement of Mitt Romney in the Republican primary), the Obama campaign ought to invest some thought into what made the Perot voter tick. I know of at least one vote he’d win that way.
8.26.2008
The NASCAR Dad of 2008? It Might be The Perot Voter.
@ 8:05 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
84 comments
First!
Perot endorsed Mitt Romney in the primaries.
He also actually thought Obama was a Muslim until he was corrected by a reporter, FWIW.
Nate,
Your post reminds me of Tom Friedman (aka "the Moustache of Understanding")
http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/moustache_of_understanding.html
I voted for Perot.
It´s obvious, McCain isn´t a conservative.
Of course, it was one vote in Illinois, so it wouldn't really count anyways. :)
The key demographic in 2008 are the so called "kd lang cat women". i.e. Hillary voters. The only thing they love more than Hillary is the sweet vocals of kd lang. and cats.
Heh.
This kind of voter is unlikely to be swayed by an endorsement. They're true independents, and, as you describe, that doesn't mean low information. Trying to convince them that you're like someone they liked before is suicide.
My guess is that if Obama gave a speech in which he admitted to being an intellectual and laid out his personal view of the world and what he wanted to do as President--the kind of tone he took in Dreams of my Father, but updated to his current worldview--he'd stand a good chance of getting the vote of guys like this. Authenticity, clarity, and specificity is what they're looking for.
The problem is, if Obama did that, he'd lose lots of other votes.
Warren Buffet is the endorsement that Obama needs. Forget about Perot.
dario,
Both major parties are practically unrecognizable these days. I really wish one of them would stand up for human rights or the rule of law, but it seems like a race to take the worst possible stance.
ted,
Yeah, we love the electoral college system here in Chicago...we love it so damn much we voted to endorse a national popular vote measure.
And no-one was surprised.
Interesting post. I wish Powell would make an endorsement soon.
Perot ? Couldn't hurt, but maybe those are Barr voters ?
However, if Lieberman can be such a political putz to endorse McCain & speak at the GOPer convention then anything can happen.
Am extremely liberal social 'democrat' being so vindictive [do not try to convince me it it about 'principle' as to loudly support McCain in 2008 is galling.
Obama even stayed out of the Lamont election a few years ago so this is not pay-back.
So now for Lieberman to cut off his nose just to spite his face is appalling & proves he is the ultimate hypocrite. Joe has blown any legacy he might have had & deserves whatever happens to him politically.
If McCain could get Perot on his ticket as VP [doubtful], that might be an out-of-the-box coup.
VC:
If you had read Nate's post you would not had had to repeat what he said - that Perot endorsed Romney.
Perot's belief that Obama was Muslim shows you how much his judgment can be relied on now.
Of course, it was one vote in Illinois, so it wouldn't really count anyways.
Isn't Nate in Colorado at the moment?
Anyways, I agree. I voted for Perot twice.
Here's to hoping Obama puts some of that money into Perot style infomercials.
"Here's the deal, see..."
Ross Perot?!? WOW!!!
No doubt about it, if there were a Perot-like candidate in this race, hed draw enough McCain votes to let Obama in the back door, much like Perot did for Clinton in '92.
Pipe dream though to think he's endorese Obama. He wouldn't go for that redistrbutionistic thinking.
That may be the same reason Buffett hasn't done so, too, although I think he will come around.
A Powell endorsement doesn't have a lot of meaning these days; he has no constituency. It would look like a race-based nod.
You can learn a lot about life, love and politics from talking to cab drivers.
At one time it looked like Bloomberg would be the Perot of '08
Maybe McCain is courting him ?
I hear from a pretty good Obama source that Powell will endorse Barack after the Repub. convention.
We'll see...
On Perot those old charts and easels would be fun again.....he did make some sense...
FILISTRO
ok, so does that mean you have appeared on Taxi Cab Confessions ?
which episode ?
While I would never hold my breath waiting for Perot to endorse Obama, I also would never try to predict what he will or won't do.
I really would have liked to see Obama choose either Hillary or Gov. Brian Schweitzer. I will admit that I'm unhappy with the Biden choice.
Some say his endorsement of Bush in 2000 on the even of the election handed him enough votes to win.
Editor, Warren Buffet has endorsed Obama.
I guess this is just one man's survey, but in Oregon, Perot is widely viewed as not entirely sane. The first time round, Oregonians voted for him in droves largely because we have a high number of small-I independents (including yours truly). The second time, he did no better here than he did nation-wide, and since then, opinion has truly plummeted.
This isn't just some survey of Wilamette Valley liberals; I have family spanning almost all geographic areas of the state, the majority of whom could be classified as centrist or right-leaning independents -- voters, but not members of any party. More than one of them has mentioned in my presence that they never would have voted for Perot if they believed he had any chance of winning; it was a protest vote. And his stock has plummeted since then.
Just from my experience -- so obviously, not necessarily an accurate tally of the whole wide world -- my guess is that a Perot endorsement would be useful to the very small fraction of small-i independents who haven't come to the conclusion that Perot has lost his marbles. (I, for one, am not entirely convinced he had many to dispose of.)
VA Con: A butterfly flapping its wings somewhere probably gave Bush enough votes to win. That election was so close that you can find a million different things that could have turned it.
SLS
I heard it was 'passed gas' that pushed Bush over the top...
I think Bush won because the revelation of his DUI just before the election gave him the hard-drinkin' vote.
If the Perot-voter is the 'swing voter', we might as well get ready for a McCain presidency. Probably 70% of Perot voters will back McCain for his deficit focus (as little as that is, Obama has none). GHWB was a tax-raiser, deficit-spender and a promise-breaker.
The only time I ever rooted for Al Gore was when he bitch slapped Perot in the '93 NAFTA Debate.
VCon, I was just thinking about that debate! Perot kept saying "May I speak? May I speak?" while Gore sat quietly and watched him with a look of disbelief.
God, it was painful.
wow, despite all the doom & gloom that Obama is fading the trend on virtually every election site is Obama widening his EV advantage...
over @ http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/
at this poll tracking site they just widened Obama's snapshot lead again tonight from a generous 294 - 244 earlier today to:
Obama 314 vs. McCain 224 [OH switched]
after calculating in the following polls:
Quinnipiac University Polls the Battleground States
8/26/08
Candidate Diageo FL - PA - OH - NC
Pollster Diageo Qpac Qpac Qpac PPP
Date 8/18-24 8/17-24 8/17-24 8/17-24 8/20-23
Barack Obama 44% 43% 49% 44% 42%
John McCain 40% 47% 42% 43% 45%
Bob Barr - - - - 4%
"If you've been following the polls on this site, you'd realize that there are many more battleground states than the highly touted states of Florida, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. Obama is ahead regardless of the methodology you prefer to use in gauging where the race stands."
Method: Obama - McCain
Latest Poll Per State 314 224
Poll of Polls 283 249
National Average 44.6% 41.9%
Weighted Nat'l Avg 44.5% 44.0%
"Despite the fact that these polls are released today, they were conducted in advance of the Democratic convention. The impact of the Democratic convention on the polls may not be seen until the Republican convention. In fact, it will be interesting to see if the polls do move and if they move a lot, whether it dampens the positive coverage at the Republican convention."
-----------------------------------
Nate has it @ 285 - 253, so go figure...
I feel better now !
Its on YouTube now, I watched it a month ago when I was bored. Al Gore just beat the daylights out of Perot. I think that's the moment the public at large stopped taking Perot seriously.
When Al Gore held up the picture of Smoot and Hawley, whose protectionism prolonged the Great Depression in response to Perot's charts, that was just priceless.
NJ_Moderate. Maybe not!
One surprising nugget hidden in recent polls is that McCain has consolidated the Republican base except for one group: self-identified fiscal conservatives.
Gallup did a piece today which put it another way, finding that people like Obama's tax policy better, even though they think he'll increase taxes. That's partially a deficit hawk thing.
True deficit hawks are gradually starting to trust the Democrats more, considering that Reagan and GWB both ballooned the deficit while Clinton ended with a surplus.
I said I voted for Perot. I did...the first time.
Nowadays, I think of myself as an Independent moderate. I am a high-information voter who spends months reading before choosing a candidate.
I am adamant about fiscal responsibility. I care about the Constitution and most of all about our liberties. I am anti-abortion but NO ONE has the right to tell me what I can or cannot do with my body.
Barack Obama has my vote. I know 15 other Perot voters. Some are independents, some are Republicans, some are Democrats. All but one supports Obama. The one remaining vote is undecided.
sarahlawrencescott,
It's a depressing time for fiscal conservatives...where are they to go? The party of big government? Or the party of bigger government?
Call them what you want, but since 1992, it's essentially been middle-class white males that go back and forth. Blacks are for Dems, Hispanics are, on average about 60-66% Dems, women have trended Democratic.
SL Scott... that's really intersting. I suspect our own VCon is more a fiscal than a social conservative... so any day now he should see the light and announce his support for Obama.
That will indeed be a Good Day :-)
Kathleen Sebelius... "John McCain believes, like all Anericans, that there's no place like home... and home... and home..."
Cute line, but not a very inspiring speaker. I like Joe much better.
I have a feeling a lot of people (liberals) are going to be let down by Hillary shortly. She won't be attacking McCain at all.
SLS
you might be on to something about the deficit.
my concern is that there is a vast unkown # of real people [and a few pundits] who firmly believe that their state & country is best served by split government over one-party control.
again, this might have worked in Clinton's legacy benefit, and Bush again proved them right in his first 6 years with total GOPer control.
so I would tender an estimate that perhaps 10%+ of the electorate might vote against their own apparent interests for McCain to counter-balance the DEMS have complete control of the Congress.
explains also how some Senators & Governors get elected against the apparent grain of the party ID dominance in many states.
I hear this all the time in FL and elsewhere. Obama's task will be to change this opinion or to prove he can be cross-partisan & not over-reach for these voters.
FWIW
Perot? I think it would have something to do with their ears.
Cab drivers of the sort you describe have been around forever. Think taxi driver! I think it does attract the conspiracy theorist type for some reason.
I met one in Chicago once who swore Secret Service had directly confirmed to him that HRC had a lesbian relationship with Markie Post. Years ago, I may have heard it, but forgotten except generally. To this man it was very real, he was ex-military and educated, but a crackpot.
Another man who drove me once declared, “All this country needs is Stalin for one day. This was a Russian Jew. He had immigrated from the Soviet Union before liberation. It amazed me that a person who lived under such persecution would hold such views. I found his resentment chilling.
eponymous,
I'm completely with you. Personally, I hope (sorry) that Obama will prove to be a fiscally conservative President, but I have no idea if he will. He hasn't made it a centerpiece, but has shown some signs of interest. His campaign proposals involve the time-honored trick of reducing funding for a program that Congress will never cut in exchange for funding for a new program. Faced with a real Congress, even one of his own party, does he stick with the commitment to pay as we go, or does he stick with all the programs he's promised? I don't know.
I do know that McCain will just make things worse. He's committed himself to extending the tax cuts, and his budget cutting ideas are limited to pork.
Basically I expect Obama to bring taxes back toward what they were at the end of the Clinton years, and I think that he'll "only" increase spending as much as recent Presidents have. I expect McCain to raise spending a touch less, but without the tax increase. That makes McCain's budget more out of whack.
Sean,
where is your post on OH registration that Nate alluded to earlier today ?
getting late today...
dcm--great point! I'm sometimes inclined to that myself, and have voted that way on the state level before. Right now, though, I'm so mad at the Bush administration that I'm in the mood to give them even more of a thumpin'.
eponymous - It's about the math. The Obama plan is at least $1 trillion less expensive than the McCain plan.
In addition, the Obama plan has greater potential to jump start the economy sooner. It's like the grocery store that runs at a 1-2% profit margin. Those make money based on volume. If the 90% who now pay 60% of the income taxes have an increase in income, then, even though the rate is lower, the volume increases.
Holy shit, Sebelius is boring. And I was rooting for her. We should send her to St. Paul next week, as a Weapon of Mass Drowsiness. The teleprompter sould get a restraining order, it was so badly mangled.
The "former mayor of Denver" who spoke next was more interesting. That's sad.
Just proves that he should have gone with seb and not bi. The obama camp is full of tools.
Fillstro:
Obama has low appeal to fiscal conservatives. A recent poll found more than half the voters expect Obama to raise taxes, while half as many believe that of McCain.
The pivot is coming, my friends, it is coming.
Hillary will attack McCain on the economy tonight and the lines will sound good, but will die a slow death when taken apart by the Republican campaign.
The theme of course will be taxes.
Taxes, my friends, Barack Obama will raise them and McCain will not! It’s that simple.
seb of course needs to work on her rhetorical style if she's to be a candidate in 2012.
Pete, I'm so glad I found you. It's like having Baghdad Bob back again.
Damn, I've missed that guy!
Pete: Usually you're a step ahead of everyone, even when you're dead wrong.
This time, you're behind and wrong.
Yes, more than half the voters expect Obama to raise their federal income taxes, while less than 2/3 of that many think McCain will. But the same poll says they favor Obama's tax policy 48 to 43%.
Yes, I know it's a shock, but when the government's broke, people want their taxes to be raised.
Interestoing point SL Scott made about McCain not consolidated fiscal conservatives. Do you think Portamn would help or hurt?
He is a Bush admin official in addition to being a former congressman. Even I can admit that bush was less than succesful from a budget persepctive. But do you blame OMB?
Dunno. Worth considering.
Sarah & Smitty,
I understand the arguments you're making, but it's just a sad state of affairs when (like with so many other issues) it has to become a matter of which evil is less dastardly.
SLS
I agree with you. And in my mind that is exactly what Obama needs to remind the public.
That he needs a solid majority to undo the damage that Bush has done, but assure them he will not abuse it.
Lay down a gauntlet that they should entrust him for 4 years to prove he can be effective or they can punish him then.
That would be refreshing.
But I cringe when I hear intelligent people worry about the Dems controlling the entire Congress & running amuck.
They rationalize that McCain will be powerless with a solid DEM congress & that even the supreme court nominations will not be bad for them since the DEMS could stop neo-con judges.
I try to argue that appointing good jurists is better than trying to wage war on bad lifetime appointments like Thomas...
But I think this is an issue that explains that lagging party ID #'s somewhat.
I sure wish someone could poll exactly on this thread topic - that only do it around the edges & it gets confusing.
People say they support Obama's positions [but look at the lack of trust for the congress as the counter-balance].
Poll it & tackle it head-on...
Sebelius was Ambien made flesh.
I need a drink after that.
On the issue of the federal budget and fiscal conservatives (I would also consider myself one, and DCM's comment is my biggest reservation about Obama - giving him a Democratic Congress),
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget put out a report in August (http://www.usbudgetwatch.org/files/crfb/usbw082108promises.pdf) that attempted to quantify the impact of Obama and McCain's proposals on the 2013 federal budget.
They get McCain reducing the federal deficit by $183-$196 billion, driven in large part by the last item "Implement Unspecified Cuts to Balance the Budget" for $159 billion.
Obama's at +$38 billion (i.e., he'll reduce the budget by $38 billion) including $50 billion from "Implementing Unspecified Cuts to Slow Spending".
So McCain's a little better and at least has "Balance the Budget" as his goal, but both of their budget-balancing plans seem to be a little heavy on "Unspecified Cuts".
OK, Casey is a bland speaker, but he is getting off a few catchy phrases.
"4 more months"
and
"that's not a maverick, that's a [bush] sidekick' !!!
lovin it...
I want that t-shirt slogan
Bob Casey, you're no Zell Miller.
hehe
on MSNBC Chris M. & Keith O. both just admired those Casey speech taglines...
dcm,
Yeah, just watching him makes me wish Colbert was here (or at the Republican Convention) just for his ability to manipulate a crowd masterfully.
Of course, he wouldn't get a pliant crowd at the conventions like he gets with his show, but still.
Colbert would be a breath of fresh sarcastic air for sure, but he is better suited to the GOPer party next week.
Maybe Ron Paul will let him in the counter-convention in Mpls next week ?
ROFL = not to worry about Dem abuse of total power. Two years from now we have the opportunity to flip House and Senate, if necessary.
It happened to Clinton. It happened to GWB, although a few years too late.
That's assuming Dems ever GET any power.
If you want the Perot vote nowadays, Perot isn't the guy who is going to deliver it to you. His nutbar antics (and Al Gore - my god that was one hell of a smackdown - my favourite part was when Gore smiled and used Perot's "let me finish" on Perot) have destroyed his credibility. Moreover, somebody who was 18 in 1992, barely able to vote legally, would be 34 this year. So a fair percentage of the kind of voters that Perot's message would appeal to have never heard of the guy.
Unfortunately Lou Dobbs is the contemporary water carrier for Perot's protectionist message, which Dobbs has expanded into a generally anti-Mexican theme.
I also have to ask - are American conventions normally this boring? Canadian conventions are usually contested because we don't have staggered delegate elections (and the candidates are usually more regional - you get more "favourite son" candidates). I really hope things keep moving towards a national primary.
Republican conventions are much more exciting.
Gotta go over to watch Hill's speech at mom's house. She is my 'focus group'.
But before I go I wanted to give props to everyone on this thread tonight.
It seems so....[how shall I say] civil & [dare I say] reasonable adult behaviour ?
I certainly appreciate it for a change. THANKS !
ciao 4 now
tomthress: Thanks for the link. It's an interesting document.
There's one nugget hidden in there that can change the figures. McCain is proposing a new "optional" individual income tax system. It's a sort of flatter tax. But the idea is you can choose to use either system. The campaign then assumes this is revenue neutral, and the document you linked to goes with that for their total.
They then note, though, that in reality people would not blindly choose one system or another. Each taxpayer would tend to choose the system that meant less taxes for them (duh). If that happens, the system is no longer revenue neutral; a footnote estimates the cost at $115 billion,
Have you gotten the feeling you have lost yet, and that it’s only a matter of the plaster hardening?
You have not even come together as a party. You have not had to endure a week of the Republican Convention and its focus on the twin themes of Radical Islam and Taxes.
Our convention will be about our issues and Barack. Yours is about yourselves.
I don’t believe that part of the poll about people favoring Obama’s tax plan. I wonder how many of the majority who thinks Obama will raise taxes, support him.
After the Republican Convention we have the anniversary of 9-11. The debates will follow in two weeks.
I think once Obama is fully branded as a naïf on international affairs (Biden the record will show is not much better), and reckless and dangerous on the economy with those quasi-Socialist views and “fairness” perspective on tax policy, those Clinton dems will start bolting the party.
What good will unity do you then?
What you will witness are what happens when the election turns out like those peaks at the leftward most third of the electoral vote dispersion.
Given the dispirited convention you are having, a McCain landslide is more and more plausible.
There is life left in the Rat Pack!
"...a lot of cabbies who spoke the King's English."
Am I to infer that taxi drivers are using British Received Pronunciation now?
That would be shocking.
Hmmmm...Warner, Strikland, and Patrick. All three seem to be definite presidential material in 2012/2016.
At least they all know how to talk, unlike Sebelius.
Holy crap. And now Schweitzer.
Four serious future presidental candidates in a row. Hillary will make 5. Son of a bitch, we've got some good ones coming up.
I just hope we have to wait until 2016 to see them in action.
"Perot’s name still has a lot of currency among certain voters, especially here out West."
Is that confined to a certain part of the West? Because I haven't really heard much about Perot in Oregon, really since 1996 or so. Even references to his comedic aspects don't seem to be common. Let alone some type of deep-rooted nostalgia for the Ross Perot vision, which I couldn't even rightly say what it was.
So yes, I think sample sizes of one are not good.
Hm. I think we can probably quantify this effect to an extent, by looking for a correlation between the percentage of Perot voters in '92 and the "swinginess" of a state's polling. I'll see what I can do...
Oh Lord, here she comes. I'm nervous.
Bear with me. I have a half-decent point to make, since we're going down Perot Lane.
I voted Perot in 92, Powell in 96 just for shits and giggles, Nader in 2000 (thank goodness I'm not from Florida), Kerry in 04 and certainly for Obama this time around.
My voting pattern might be unique but there are millions more like me... this thread has convinced me that the Perotistas from 92 will break HEAVILY for Obama.
People like me are underpolled because we show up to vote when we have a statement to make. We're motivated this time around.
Which got me thinkin'...
Recipe for unexpected Obama landslide:
Begin with millions of people like me;
Add significantly increased black turnout;
Throw in a dash of last-minute deciders' dissatisfaction with the Republican brand;
Pepper with two spices: enthusiasm and GOTV, both clearly on the Dems' side;
Bake until Nov. 4 and voila!
The thing is, none of those five ingredients will show up in the polls. So color me Pollyanna, but Obama is already up 8-12 points nationally in my personal calculations, and EV-wise, it won't even be close, Obama 330 or more, easy.
Dear Nate:
Now that your talking to cabbies, you've obviously firmly arrived as a player in the political game.
Good for you.
Perot opposed the '91 Gulf War. This was a huge positive for many of us. He was the only one of the three candidates in November to oppose it. He got a ton of votes because of this. This has to be part of the Perot conversation.
P.S. I voted for Clinton in '92 and '96.
Regarding the Republic Convention next week. What if, God forbid, the hurricane currently in Haiti is bearing down on the Gulf Coast next Monday, and turns into a Category 3-4 storm? Based on Katrina, certainly, the Republics won't be able to competently deal with the hurricane damage/catastrophe, because they're a bunch of incompetent bluebloods; and the Republics will look like a bunch of out-of-touch d-bags if they're all giddy and celebrating during their convention in Minneapolis. Pete Kent-- please explain how McCain can overcome this?
Your cabbie's comments match up pretty well with what I'm hearing from a lot of "independent" voters. They are all pretty well turned off by McCain, are intrigued by Obama, but he hasn't "sealed it" yet.
Some of these people are true independents and are truly open. For them, the debates may be very important, as a strong performance by Obama will reassure them and get their vote.
There is another breed of independents as well, though, in my admittedly anecdotal experience. These voters, as a point of pride, simply refuse to choose a candidate this early as a point of pride. When discussing politics, they preface the conversation with the phrase, "I'm a true independent." I think a lot of these people have already chosen, but just don't want to admit it (perhaps even to themselves).
As Obama loses traction he is moving to the center and compromising. He needs to stop and stand up for what he believes. Modifying the message is losing votes.
For what it's worth NASCAR dads were thoroughly debunked. See Gary Langer's work on this question. Married women esp. those without kids were key to Bush's win.
There must be a cabbie exchange program(me) going on. Here in London all the taxi drivers have started talking like dudes off Da Bears sketch.
Post a Comment