Due to McCain's bounce in the polls post-convention, our new list of battleground states has changed. According to our current projections, John McCain would win 274-264.
This is different from the pie chart you see in the top left of the site, which averages the electoral vote based on simulation runs. This mid-month update simply gives each state's EVs in full to our projected winner, and we add the totals. It's essentially the same split as the Bush-Kerry race, with Iowa flipped from the Republican column to the penumbra zone for Obama, and a narrow win for Obama in New Mexico.
With Colorado sitting at McCain by 0.3%, any tiny movement and a 9-EV flip would change the winner of the 2008 presidential race. As we leave Las Vegas today for Gallup, New Mexico, we're going from the frying pan into the fire of the ground game battle.
One of the notable aspects of our Penumbra tables below is that the national tracking polls are having a large undue influence on states that aren't getting polled as much. Notice that California, Illinois and Massachusetts have entered our Obama Penumbra chart, but also notice on the righthand column of our individual state polling that it's not because Obama's getting poor polling in these states. For example, our projection model shows Obama winning California by 6.9% but that no individual poll has ever been that low, and that nearly all CA polls show double digits.
For McCain's Penumbra states, you'll notice a lot of "former" battleground states in this column, some of which we believe could still be battlegrounds and will re-tighten after McCain's post-convention bounce fades and the debates begin.
Overall, the national tracking polls have had a more distorted effect on states that don't get polled as often. Colorado, by contrast, has barely moved because it does. In fact, Colorado and Ohio were the states which flipped since our last update in Mid-August. Each moved fewer than three points, but that changes our winner-take-all projection.
Thanks for being patient with us as Nate and I are each on the road (albeit in different places). We'll be checking in with our Las Vegas update later today and of course Today's Polls.
9.16.2008
538's Battlegrounds as of Mid-September
@ 5:07 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
540 comments
Hey guys, is it possible for you to cut off the Supertracker at the start of the general election? We don't really need the data from the primaries, do we? It's impossible to tell where any data points are and on what day - everything is squished so closely together!
FYI, both of the two polls showing OR at 6-7% have been conducted by Republican firms. One, Moore, didn't even release crosstabs and has a horrible track record (they came out with the only poll in 2006 showing our D governor trailing)....
Looking like 2000 and 2004 all over again.
I guess it will go into OVERTIME with a narrow McCain win. ;)
My worst grade in college (many years ago) was in statistics, so I hesitate to post this, but wouldn't a more accurate snapshot be the one you've just described (giving each state's EVs in full to your projected winner) rather than the pie-chart average EV?
Where's New Hampshire?
Are you archiving the old images? It would be cool, after the election, to have animations of each image as it changed.
McCain would win 274-264.
But now we are in September.
Is there are Senate race update in the making?
To the Congratulations guy -- I don't think you followed 2000 and 2004 very closely -- at this point in time, Bush had at least a 5 point lead on Gore and he had close to a 10 point lead on Kerry. Kerry was able to swing back about 5-6 points after Bushed bombed in the first debate.
This thing is even baby, McCain's bounce is over, Palin is being exploited as the neophyte she is and McCain has no message at all to deliver on the economy.
Obama's doing well. However, the republicans are pulling out all the stops. Blatant lying and pandering, and don't be too surprised if a new "osama bin laden" video comes out in late october like it did in 2004...
Months ago, I thought that we were going to have a break from our down-to-the-wire elections and get back to the good old days of 1980 or 1996.
No such luck. I don't know if my heart can take the excitement.
Okay, so earlier I defended Carly Fiorina, arguing that she might have a point about Palin being qualified to be VP but not to be a CEO of a major company. It was a dumb thing to say politically, though, I noted. But now she is standing by her statement and claiming that NONE of the Pres. or VP candidates are qualified to be a CEO of a major corporation. She could easily have weaseled out of it by saying that they would need extra preparation because they are used to the political sphere or that she really meant that they wouldn't get the job because they don't have MBAs or whatever. But to stand by and extend her words?
My question is this: what the heck is she thinking, and why has the GOP let her continue to make these statements? Normally the GOP is on message and disciplined, but this is now a gaffe times two. If I was in the McCain campaign I would be irate and wouldn't put her out as a surrogate in the future. What was she thinking!?!?!?
When 23 states are colored in the Tipper States map, and CA is included, its time to get rid of this metric. Because its meaningless right now. Same is true with ROI. 26 states colored! Come on.
How about a list of the 15-20 most likely outcomes (short handed for Obama wins as Kerry + State - State, etc. or Bush + State - State, etc for McCain wins)
This would be a much better metric.
"
No such luck. I don't know if my heart can take the excitement."
Yup. Get ready for heartbreak again libs. And shouts of election "stealing". ;)
The race is tightening. Stop saying "omfg Obama will defintely win" or "haha McCain is definitely the next president". Swing states can turn red or blue at anytime.
CBS has an interesting bit of news; Michelle Obama's cousin is a rabbi. ( 1st cousin once removed : her grandfather is the rabbit's uncle )
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/16/politics/main4453505.shtml
How will that affect South Florida?
This is great news, especially considering that due to poorly figured party ID that doesn't account for enough Democrat voters, you can add 2-3 points to Obama's totals in each state poll.
Not to mention that Obama's GOTV and the reverse Bradley Effect should combine to give Obama another 3-4 points. Finally, when third parties are added in, give Obama another point.
So basically, Obama is beating McCain something like 56-44 or 57-43 right now, though the polls don't show it because they're trying to drive a media narrative that it's close. But trust me, Obama will get above 300+ EVs no sweat on election day.
*cough**cough*
Second query:
Surely Washington is tighter than CA, MA or IL.
Look at the record since 1968:
Republicans 7 wins, Democrat Party 3 wins.
Who would YOU bet on with those records? ;)
Sedi,
Carly knows nothing. I used to respect her, but have done a complete 180. Check her actual record and you will see that she rode the tech wave, but was a horrible manager when the going got tough and had little clue to interpersonal relations. I worked for HP after her tenure and now I know why they burned pictures of her in the parking lot.
Fiorina should probably not be commenting on what it takes to be the CEO of a major corporation.
Why do you stop at 1968?
What's curious about this post -- and Nate's model more generally -- is that Obama still has a 1.1 lead in the polling averages in CO, yet McCain is favored in the state because of trend adjustments and the 538 regression. Whether these other factors will prove to be useful in a state that is getting polled so often remains to be seen.
"Look at the record since 1968:
Republicans 7 wins, Democrat Party 3 wins.
Who would YOU bet on with those records? ;)"
That doesn't mean anything at all. With that logic, Obama will definitely win because of how much he was ahead in the summer.
'm curious about something.
I appologize if this has been discussed frequently already (i've only been reading this blog for the past week or so), but:
Are polls like the one which "flipped" colorado primarily (or exclusively) done using landlines?
Is as big a portion of colorado's electorate made up of "young" (thirty and under) voters as we're led to believe?
If so, has it been acknowledged by pollsters that a substantial portion of under-thirty households don't have landlines, but exclusively use cellphones?
Has a theoretical "buffer" been figured out that could help us better understand what effect this factor might have on the election? I'm quite curious, as unprecedented elements like this (not to mention the "closet racist" factor which may or may have opposite effects) can be tough to get a finger on.
"Look at the record since 1968:
Republicans 7 wins, Democrat Party 3 wins.
Who would YOU bet on with those records? ;)"
Seriously? THAT'S your logic?
Are you 12 or something?
I can't even remember the last time you made a post with anything of substance or any actual argument. Would it be too much to ask of you to stop singlehandedly dragging down the level of discourse here?
Charles Crook is losing his mind.
Michelle has a Rabbi cousin you say?
Think it will snag up some Florida votes?
Barack Obama has half his freaking family Muslim... should that gain some votes?
STFU
cskendrick: You are correct. Someone needs to ask her if Cainers plan to eliminate golden parachutes for underperforming CEOs would have meant she wouldn't have gotten her 60 mil.
Thanks for making me physically sick, Nate! 274 to 264? CHRIST.
""Look at the record since 1968:
Republicans 7 wins, Democrat Party 3 wins.
Who would YOU bet on with those records? ;)"
The Democratic party. With any standard betting house, the only way to get an edge is to go against false trends that will cause the public to move the line in your favor.
"Has a theoretical "buffer" been figured out that could help us better understand what effect this factor might have on the election? I'm quite curious, as unprecedented elements like this (not to mention the "closet racist" factor which may or may have opposite effects) can be tough to get a finger on."
It's been discussed a lot, and in the end the honest answer is "we just don't know."
Cell phones plus Bradley Effect plus historic GOTV infrastructure = ??? on election day.
Obama has already flipped 2 states and is currently holding Kerry + IA + NM.
Win with any one of Colorado, Virginia, Ohio - all of which are within polling margins of error?
Why the doom and gloom?
Congratulations to President-Elect McCain!!! said...
Look at the record since 1968:
Republicans 7 wins, Democrat Party 3 wins.
Who would YOU bet on with those records? ;)
Wrong, Rep 5 wins Dems 5 wins, Rep 2 steals
"Carly knows nothing."
I don't know her record well enough to comment on this, but she clearly doesn't know when to be quiet and stop digging. Sometimes I think these surrogates get their backs arched and dig in rather than just admitting (falsely, if necessary) that they were wrong and moving on. I just don't see how this distraction helps McCain, though I don't suppose that it will hurt him too badly.
"Complaints of election 'stealing'"?
Oh, you mean like when the McCain campaign sends millions of Democratic voters fake absentee ballot applications?
As reported in the Cinncinnati Enquirer:
http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/AB/20080911/NEWS0108/309110032/
You bet there will be complaints.
"What's curious about this post -- and Nate's model more generally -- is that Obama still has a 1.1 lead in the polling averages in CO, yet McCain is favored in the state because of trend adjustments and the 538 regression."
I find it interesting too, that CO's getting pulled over by the regression. I think it has to do with what Nate said...the model is resistant to change, so it's thinking right now that McCain is a few points ahead and the recent results shouldn't be trusted.
If the national polls sit at dead even for the next few weeks (which I would venture to say most of us expect them to), I would think the projection for an oft-polled state like Colorado would settle to the polling average.
Then again, I would say I have a rudimentary knowledge of Nate's system so I am stabbing in the dark here.
Have you considered just dropping states so one-sided (like CA and WY) that there is no realistic way they will change (and consequently are rarely if ever polled) from the trials?
You could have some sort of metric where these states were just assumed for one side or the other and having them be a base.
Alternatively, you could just exclude them from your national poll adjustment and base everything on the state polls for those states.
I'll take a tied race, thank you. Once you add in Obama's ground game, jaws will drop. Remember the leaked Feb. memo? That showed how EXACTLY he was going to win through May, with the exception of the BLOWOUTS? Pffft. The primaries made me a believer. To be honest I think he already won, he knows it, and is going through the paces needed to close the deal. This is that once in a generation event where no matter how much you poll, the contender outperforms. He did it the first half of the year - think he won't do it again?
Seriously? THAT'S your logic?
Are you 12 or something?
Yes...yes she is.
Where's New Hampshire?
Barack Obama has half his freaking family Muslim... should that gain some votes?
Well, if it gets him the majority of the Muslim vote, then why not.
Man what's wit you guys and Geography.
New Hampshire is in the north east.
It sits in between Maine, Vermont, and Mass.
Geez
Nate and Sean, this are your predictions for now or for the election in November 4?.
What about Virginia? Obama's been 4+ there for the past couple of days. It's got 13 EVs to CO's 9.
RCP gives Obama 0.6% in Colorado and Virginia is Tie.
johnismybyatch: Why would New Hapshire be there, it's not even close to be flippable to McCain...
"Have you considered just dropping states so one-sided (like CA and WY) that there is no realistic way they will change (and consequently are rarely if ever polled) from the trials? "
The think our last couple elections have created the perception that blowouts and landslides are impossible, but they aren't.
"What about Virginia? Obama's been 4+ there for the past couple of days. It's got 13 EVs to CO's 9."
It's one of several tipping points that McCain has to play defense with, unless he successfully brings Pa and Mi into play, which I'm still skeptical he can.
A man died and went to heaven.
As he stood in front of St. Peter at the Pearly Gates, he saw a huge wall of clocks behind him.
He asked, "What are all those clocks?"
St. Peter answered, "Those are Lie-Clocks. Everyone on Earth has a Lie-Clock. Every time you lie the hands on your clock will move."
"Oh," said the man, "whose clock is that?"
"That's Mother Teresa's. The hands have never moved, indicating that she never told a lie."
"Incredible", said the man. "And whose clock is that one?"
St. Peter responded, "That's Abraham Lincoln's clock. The
hands have moved twice, telling us that Abe told only two lies
in his entire life."
"Where's Barack Obama's clock?" asked the man.
"Obama's clock is in Jesus' office.
He's using it as a ceiling fan."
Thank you DarienCrow. I knew it would only be a matter of time before there was a smart alecky reponse.
Still nothing from Sean though. Perhaps he should leave the stats to Nate.
DarienCrow:
Man what's wit you guys and Geography.
New Hampshire is in the north east.
Darien, you win the thread. Thanks for cracking me up.
Also, I think he's keeping Ohio as a 2nd tier: it's not a priority, Smart move - it's a state that just can't help itself and wants to stay red. Missouri is the same. Good for him for not falling for that Missouri=America crap. He'll invest in those two, but I think it's more interesting that he's spending time in Indiana.
Everybody's mum on Indiana.
He's got the moderate Rep. ex-governor of Va. actively endoring him now. + New voters = Va. is a done deal.
He's going to pass on FL, OH, MO.
Only mistake is possibly WV - it's remarkably close. That does NOT bode well for McCain...
dario: As far as I can tell, it's for right now, if all the current trends - +2 national lead for McCain etc. - never let up. The model doesn't know it's modeling a post-convention bounce, so it's slow to accept change - however, once it does, it becomes resistant to flipping back the other way.
So basically, his model has finally understood that McCain is rising in the polls, but it hasn't figured out yet that he's slipping back into his previous position. Give it two or three more days.
Palin has interviews scheduled just 2 days after the first debate? Hmmm... methinks someone wants to blunt the pain...
"He's got the moderate Rep. ex-governor of Va. actively endoring him now. + New voters = Va. is a done deal."
If Va. was a done deal, he'd be able to play defense and kneel out the clock. We'll see.
axmxz, Obama is winning CO in RCP and electoral-vote. Pollster gives the state to McCain for only o.3 points.
VA isn't a dole deal, but for some reason it's moving into Obama's corner ahead of schedule.
"Why would New Hapshire be there, it's not even close to be flippable to McCain..."
Well, he listed every state within 10%, and I think it's extremely likely that NH is settled by less than 10. If Massachusetts is a "close" state, NH definitely is. I think it's an accidental omission.
"It's essentially the same split as the Bush-Kerry race, with Iowa flipped from the Republican column to the penumbra zone for Obama, and a narrow win for Obama in New Mexico."
In other words, it's essentially the same split as the Bush-Gore race with New Hampshire flipped. Wherever that is.
"And where's John McCain's clock?" the man asked.
"McCain's clock is on top of that vehicle over there, which Jesus will use to propel himself back to earth for the second coming."
Where's Mule Rider to provide some colorful humor and insight? I get a kick out of reading that dude's rantings.
VA isn't moving Obama.
It's starting to move McCain and WILL vote for McCain, Virginia will NEVER vote for a Socialist.
"Virginia will NEVER vote for a Socialist."
Agreed, but what does that have to do with Obama?
New Hampshire is certainly close enough to be in the conversation. I think it''ll stay Obama, but I don't think it's 100%.
Sean,
Battleground States is a GREAT table to clearly show where the race is..
Is is possible to make an estimate on which states %s are within the MOE, and show a table of just those states?
Obama is a Socialist in his policies, as all liberals are.
Oh Congratulations, won't you teach us the way?
What is Sarah Palin trying to hide?
Obama isn't passionate enough to win.
He's like Adlai Stevenson and Michael Dukakis.
Congrats said:
VA isn't moving Obama.
It's starting to move McCain and WILL vote for McCain, Virginia will NEVER vote for a Socialist.
Congrats, a charming thing about this site is that the discourse is generally of quite a high level. Most people think before they post which makes the comment thread a joy to read. You've not managed to say anything of substance and all your musings can be summarised as "I want McCain to win". We get it.
Might I suggest Ben Smith's blog as a more suitable home for your commenting talents?
I'd rather have someone who "wasn't passionate enough" than a cheating liar.
For those of you just learning your way around this marvelous site: if you're wondering about a specific topic... say balllot initiatives, or the effect of cell phones on polling, or the Bradley effect... just look over at the left hand side of the home page under the heading "labels."
There, in alphabetical order, are all the topics that have been discussed here by Nate and Sean, along with comments from readers.
It's a great resource.
Well said, Mazza!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080916/ap_on_re_us/convention_delegate_robbed;_ylt=Ai4O8M6H5ObSiweGW5JSyo1H2ocA
Yeah, I always take a $30,000 watch to a freakin' convention, then go out to hang out with some floozy with it. Because, you know, nothing ever happens to watches.
What time is it? It's time to get a new watch, dude!
It's the St. Paul delegates! Dumber than your average Republican. And that's saying a lot.
No reference to the slew of Fox/Ras polls showing strong McCain numbers in PA, Ohio, etc. Also, the tied race in Minnesota is a real canary in the coal mine for the Obama campaign - this is something more than a bounce when a state that hasn't gone Republican since 1972 is in play!?
Also, this constant talk of the Obama 'ground game' as being its salvation is silly. The 50 State strategy (and millions of dollars) is now dead. The 18 state strategy (and millions of dollars) is now dead and the 'ground game' operations with them. This election now comes down to 6 states and this is where a ground game WILL make a difference. The Republican's, this past summer, reactivated its 2004 GOTV (Rove-Schmidt)for those 6 states and added the turbo-charge of the Palin selection to bring back the Christian conservatives bringing home the votes in Ohio, Virgina, Colorado, Nevada, Michigan, and Pennsylania. So we shall see who made the best use of its time and resources in 2008 on November 4th - my bet is McCain.
Palin is going to spread her brand of Christian Conservatism from sea to shining sea! You libtards will be learning Intelligent Design! Too bad!
Socialist/Stalinist/Marxist/etc. comparisons should fall under Godwin's law.
Any new state polls today besides the NY one? I thought there'd be some about now.
Palin Feeeever! Catch it!!
She's HOT!!
I think Obama should make some appearances in the swing states that he registered the most voters. I heard some number like 80,000 new voters in Florida alone.
Does anyone here know about the Iowa Electronic Markets? They, like Intrade, have a market quote for the election...
Right now, the going rate for Obama is 0.575 and for McCain 0.427
Over the past two weeks, it has been consistently 6-10 points higher for Obama than Intrade.
Do you think having Intrade on RCP helps explain that difference?
http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/quotes/Pres08_quotes.html
Congratulations to President-Elect McCain!!! said...
Obama is a Socialist in his policies, as all liberals are.
Right...
Time to study political science.
http://www.marxists.org/archive/bax/1890/11/libvssoc.htm
"Congratulations to President-Elect McCain!!! said...
Palin is going to spread her brand of Christian Conservatism from sea to shining sea! You libtards will be learning Intelligent Design! Too bad!"
Posts like these make me actually doubt evolution.
By the way, I think the Obama campaign knows that they have got Virginia in their bags, especially now that Obama has got the endorsement of former Governor Holton. I don´t know much about him, but he looks like the entry to Virginia moderates and older conservatives, like our poster VA_conservative.
Indeed, it is interesting that this election may come down to Colorado and Virginia.
Too bad Tim Russert isn't here to say "Virginia! Virginia! Virginia!"
Could Obama win Virginia AND lose Ohio? I guess the models say yes
Michael:
As a former MN resident - if you actually think Minnesota is in play, can I proceed to ignore the rest of your post?
You betcha.
Congratulations to President-Elect McCain!!! said...
Palin is going to spread her brand of Christian Conservatism from sea to shining sea! You libtards will be learning Intelligent Design! Too bad!
Yeah right... I would strongly advice you to study Richard Dawkins' God as a delusion on Intelligent design, at the same time not letting the book influence your own christianity.
I'm still trying to process the idea of Barack freaking Obama winning a former Confederate state.
If I'm sitting at home on election night and the networks call VA for Obama, I'm going to start celebrating early.
Okay Congrats: I think you've finally jumped the Barracuda...
To Sedi at 4:23:
And what makes Fiorina think SHE can run HP? She did a bang up job, no? And still got that nice severance pay after getting fired! When was the last time the average Joe got paid after getting fired? She's unbelievable.
Congratulations to President-Elect McCain!!! said...
Palin Feeeever! Catch it!!
She's HOT!!
And thus my theory has proof. If you leave a Republican wingnut to rant alone for just long enough, that wingnut's rants will indeed become a self-parody.
Calling one's opponents "socialists", "extremists", & "libtards" is practically admitting that you aren't smart enough to refute arguments & have resorted to name-calling.
Sheesh. If you want our respect, treat us with respect. Otherwise, find another forum to post in.
Geoff
Don't knock Iowa - it's as blue as anything right now with MN even, PA even, NY O +5, NJ O +3 (twice), WA, OR and other crazy blue states moving red. Even CA is turning up on the board.
My worry is this, and watching the unvarnished ROOTING FOR OBAMA going on here only makes me worry more.
How many strong rooters here would do anything to win?
How about ACORN gets 300 actors in each of 30 cities in big swing states, and uses the new federal law to get them provisional ballots in, say, ten widely spaced precincts. Suddenly, with 90,000 weird artificial votes, on top of all the normal weird votes this law is going to bring out of the woodwork, we have a national nightmare that will make FL 2000 like a tea party. Two or three close states could be screwed up with this kind of gaming, and Election Day turned into Election Month.
Do you guys want to win enough to countenance this kind of strategy to pull off a crooked victory? Election bureaucrats aren't all that brilliant, as we've seen, but there are a lot of weird brilliant college radicals who might think this is a real fun thing to try!
Just asking...
I think you've finally jumped the Barracuda...
Well played.
For those of you love our current Congress, I just heard from Nancy Pelosi, Dick Durbin, and some unnamed republicans that no bipartisan Energy Bill will passed this year.
I guess that is it just not a serious enough issue for our elected representatives. They will take it up again in 2009 because neither the republicans or democrats can agree.
Are there those who believe a Obama administration will address the partisan bickering?
What an interesting election so far. Here's my take: McCain was fundamentally behind so his VP choice was his only big shot changing things. Obama's choice wasn't nearly as important because the Obama ticket was always going to be about Obama and not much else (any older white guy with experience will do). So McCain is faced with 2 routes:
Plan A: Choose a far right conservative to fire up the right wing base and try to replicate the Bush map exactly. This is unlikely to work because structurally the race so favors democrats, and there's no margin for error. Or...
Plan B: Go "maverick" by making a major play for independents and moderates and say he's going to shake up Washington with reform-minded bi-partisan moderate conservatism while thinking screw the base, who else are they going to vote for? This is also unlikely to work because without enthusiasm from the Rove-created evangelical turnout machine, he can't compete with the Obama ground game.
So what does he do? The wiley old guy injects massive confusion into the race by implementing Plan A, while PROCLAIMING LOUDLY that he's actually implementing Plan B! He steals all of Obama's mojo and media attention in the process, and maybe even steals a few disgruntled Hillaryites.
So did it work? No. McCain is still fundamentally behind. Palin is being unmasked and peaked much too soon. By election day, she'll still be a heroine of the far right, but not much more. He has, though, prevented an overwhelming Obama win by forcing the race back to the Bush map. On election day, Obama wins by holding all Kerry states, adding Iowa, New Mexico, Colorado, and Virginia (and coming close but no cigar in Ohio).
This is big news given the narrow McCain lead nationally Rasmussen: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/virginia/election_2008_virginia_presidential_election:
"The race for the White House in Virginia is a tie this week. The latest Fox News/Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds John McCain and Barack Obama each attracting 48% support in the Old Dominion.
One week ago, McCain had a modest 49% to 47% lead over Obama. Neither candidate has led the race by more than two percentage points since June, making the historically Republican state one of the biggest toss-ups in this year’s election.
While McCain's choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate has excited conservatives and his party nationally, it hasn't moved the numbers here."
As goes Virginia, so goes the election (unless Obama manages to win Colorado or Nevada).
It's also interesting that
"The latest poll in Virginia finds McCain ahead 46% to 43% among unaffiliated voters. Last week, he was up 50% to 39% among this demographic. Among men, McCain leads 53% to 44%, while Obama leads 52% to 43% among women.
The Republican has a 59% to 38% edge among white voters in Virginia, while Obama has a 78% to 18% lead among non-whites."
McCain is tanking in Virginia among Independents! There's really no other way you can look at losing 8% in a week, during which there is no negative storyline about the candidate (other than the hopeless neophyte VP candidate he picked -- and that's supposed to be his plus)!
The McCain bounce is also officially over now with 4 days to go (it was predicted to subside within 2 weeks after the convention). Gallup: tie. Rasmussen McCain +1 point.
By this time next week Obama will be slightly ahead. And that will be the beginning of the end for McCain. He'd better hope for a great debate performance or else some economic good news for a change. He's looking like a supreme moron for saying that the "economy is fundamentally sound" only to have to reverse course 3 weeks later and say that we're in a crisis. Well, if we're in a crisis, then who put us there? Republicans.
That would make a great Obama attack ad BTW. "Which McCain do you believe?"
Holton is Kaine's father-in-law...
Still, it adds another Virginia-familiar face endorsing Obama.
So even a state that celebrated "Lee-Jackson-King day" can evolve.
Is it possible that CTPEM is really a democratic troll, sent here just to rev up the angst? I certainly hope so, because the alternative is depressing.
Virginia's polls close at 7; normally the 7pm states are not in contention. But this year is different.
Obama is going to win easliy. The current polls do not reflect the financail events fully from Monday or the rapidly declining Palin effect.
It could end up a real yawner for
PRESIDENT ELECT BARACK OBAMA!!!!!!!
"FloridaGOP said...
For those of you love our current Congress, I just heard from Nancy Pelosi, Dick Durbin, and some unnamed republicans that no bipartisan Energy Bill will passed this year.
Blah, Blah, Blah, They will take it up again in 2009 because neither the republicans or democrats can agree.
Blah, blah, Blah, bluh, bluh?"
Thanks for posting this FloridaGOP! This is the best news of the week!
Now we can forget about stupid "drill, drill, drill" our way to energy independence (the first drop of oil to be produced 20 years from) and take up the issue in January with a Democratic President and 5 or 6 more Democratic Senators, plus another 10-15 Democrats in the House, and actually accomplish something about switching to alternative energy without having to worry about Pres. Bush-child's veto tantrum.
VOLDEMORT/UMBRIDGE '08
That pretty much sums up congrats' entire conversational capability.
"Well, if we're in a crisis, then who put us there? Republicans. "
I'm in favor of Obama not using the term "the economy" for the next 50 days. He should be saying "the republican economy".
My, my. When did John McCain find the time to create the BlackBerry? He must have really admired Al Gore's work creating the internet.
actually congrats is getting a point each time he makes a post - any post - from the mccain (is it action?) game
isn't the scroll bar lovely, we can just skip right past
too bad he's not more creative
Was just watching Romney talk about the economy on CNN. Man he looks good when he is talking about taxes. Guess we dodged a bullet when McCain picked Palin instead of him.
bryen193 said...
"Well, if we're in a crisis, then who put us there? Republicans. "
I'm in favor of Obama not using the term "the economy" for the next 50 days. He should be saying "the republican economy".
Along with "Republican John McCain". Republican needs to be McCain's first name in all of Obama and Biden's speeches.
He should be saying "the republican economy".
Hmmm...last I knew Congress and the Fed controlled the economy and the economy was just fine until the Democrats took over Congress.
to step aside a moment, very interesting article on bob woodward's recovery from traumatic brain injury
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alvaro-fernandez/abc-reporter-bob-woodruff_b_125863.html
Alex Epstein, do not be an idiot, those absentee ballots were mailed to die hard republicans on McCain stationary. It was boneheaded no doubt that they did not know the form had changed, but not election stealing. it would have been election stealing had they mailed them to Obama supporters.
btw, this is bob woodruff, not bob woodward
Sarah Palin will be READY ON DAY ONE!! She's a GAME CHANGER!!
She's a GAME CHANGER!!
Finally! We agree on something! (Although, I suspect it's for differing reasons.)
Joe Biden will be READY ON DAY ONE!!!11!! He's a GAME CHANGER!!!1!!eleven!!!!11!
"bryen193 said...
McCain is faced with 2 routes:
Plan A: Choose a far right conservative to fire up the right wing base and try to replicate the Bush map exactly. This is unlikely to work because structurally the race so favors democrats, and there's no margin for error. Or...
Plan B: Go "maverick" by making a major play for independents and moderates and say he's going to shake up Washington with reform-minded bi-partisan moderate conservatism while thinking screw the base, who else are they going to vote for? This is also unlikely to work because without enthusiasm from the Rove-created evangelical turnout machine, he can't compete with the Obama ground game.
You're exactly right! This is a great summation of the election.
Except for one thing.
The Bush legacy proves that you can WIN by ginning up the base with endless personal attacks to demonize and destroy your opponent, but you can't govern successfully that way.
So, even if McCain manages to win, he loses.
What the 50% + 1 Rove strategy fails to realize is that when you've gotten 1/2 the country to hate you, any little thing that goes wrong tanks your presidency. There's simply NO reservoir of bi-partisan good will to sustain you when you have a policy failure or something like a problem with Iraq hits.
Few Democrats believed that Bush was their President. Over 1/2 the Democratic party is pissed off at Congress for NOT impeaching Bush and Cheney and dragging them out of the White House in chains.
McCain figured he'd win first, and then worry about getting the nation to forgive him for the dirty in-your-face campaign.
But, deliberately polarizing the electorate is what killed the Bush Presidency and this election is even more polarized than 2004.
Bush was well on his way to being a 1 term President when 9-11 gave him an immense boost. He was able to exploit that in 2004 by stirring up fear.
But, by late 2005 polls showed Kerry would have won by 7%. McCain is not going to be forgiven for the way he's campaigned if he manages to win.
And there are endless problems that are bound to go wrong. He'd need real good-will on the part of the American people and he's not going to get it after this campaign of lying and appeals to the most vile and basest human instincts of fear and racism.
Important to note, in cas noone noticed... OBama won last night's polling in all daily polling. At worst, he tied. Certainly McCain can regain the momentum and probably will at some point. But, I think it's important to note, the tide has shifted for the first time since Thursday of the Dem Convention, Obama has momentum and the lead more than likely. Palin changed the game, but Obama is riding a tide right now. My guess is the only thing that can stop Obama from winning is a "Bradley effect" of sorts. If the undecideds swing heavily to McCain because a big chunk don't really want to vote for a black man that really stinks, but I think it's McCain's best chance. IMO McCain's a very poor candidate, but this election is a referendum on Obama. IMO it's really a referendum on white "workin class" voters in the Midwest. Will they vote thier pocketbooks and with the candidate that speaks to them and can deliver on the issues for them or will they not specifically because he's 1/2 black? That question will be answered November 4th. IMO if Obama doesn't win because he can't flip Colorado or Nevada or Virginia fine, but if he loses becauses Michigan, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin flip that will be sad for our country.
Sean and Nate (and others) may have accounted for these already - or probably will soon - but these two new polls are out from Survey USA (9/15/08):
Ohio: +4 McCain
Virginia: +4 Obama
(Ohio: http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/09/16/mccain-7-weeks-out-positioned-to-hold-ohios-20-electoral-votes-for-gop/;
Virginia: http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/09/16/virginia-men-voters-age-50-independents-take-another-look-at-obama/)
Where is NH?
It should be in the battle ground state list what but what are the numbers?
DarÃo said...
McCain would win 274-264.
But now we are in September.
This is arbitrary at best. Nate, I think would admit that. He has to project a winner for all 51 electoral contests, but how accurate is it? Colorado has flipped to being for McCain and that's decisive? Virginia is for McCain even though the last two polls were Obama +4 and tied (both polls were taken when McCain was doing better nationally than today) Nevada, New Hampshire, Michigan, and Pennsylvania are extremely unpredictable. We had a good idea of where this race was a few weeks ago, but today there's a lot of chaos. Predicting the electoral college today is extremely difficult.
Hey, Mr. "President-Elect McCain"...
Try since 1932.
10 Dem wins in 32, 36, 40, 44, 48, 60, 64, 76, 92, and 96.
9 Rep wins in 52, 56, 68, 72, 80, 84, 88, 00, 04
Jeez. Talk about a pile of useless statistics.
1968 was the last major re-aliagnment that broke the Democrat majority.
That's why I use since that year.
How many Democrat landslides since 1964? ZERO!
How many Republican Landslides? FOUR!
Congratulations to President-Elect McCain!!! said...
1968 was the last major re-aliagnment that broke the Democrat majority.
That's why I use since that year.
How many Democrat landslides since 1964? ZERO!
How many Republican Landslides? FOUR!
If you're going to blog, at least get your facts right. Clinton destroyed Dole in 1996. McCain reminds a lot of Dole.
http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?f=0&year=1996
1878 was the last major re-aliagnment that broke the Repuplican majority.
That's why I use since that year.
How many Repuplican landslides since 1878? ELEVEN!
How many Democrat Party Landslides? ELEVENTY!!!111!!!!
Dole didn't really want to win that election. You could see it when he spoke.
You can tell McCain REALLY wants to win this thing. No Bush sr. 92 or Bob Dole in him.
Obama by contrast seems like he doesn't really want it, like he's just coasting. No passion!
What a boring day of polling.
The only state polls we got were, New York, two of New Jersey, and an Ohio poll in line with all other recent polls.
Tomorrow should be fun though, we'll probably have 30-40.
I will concur that prejudice Caucasians in the South make it extremely difficult for a Democrat to win since 1964 when LBJ and the Dem Congress passed the Civil Rights Act. That took courage, knowing what he was doing to his party, but it was the right thing to do. It doesn't take away from the fact that McCain is a very poor candidate. The only way he can win is if there are enough prejudice people out there in the swing states. They won't vote for McCain, they'd be voting against Obama. Here's hoping that's not how it plays out, but those are the facts.
bryen193 said...
"Well, if we're in a crisis, then who put us there? Republicans. "
I'm in favor of Obama not using the term "the economy" for the next 50 days. He should be saying "the republican economy".
Brilliant.
Congratulations to President-Elect McCain!!! said...
Dole didn't really want to win that election. You could see it when he spoke.
You can tell McCain REALLY wants to win this thing. No Bush sr. 92 or Bob Dole in him.
Wanting it isn't enough, you have to add some value. I'd bet less than 20% of McCain's voters are excited to vote for him. A chunk like Palin because A) she's a charismatic woman and B) they like her social values. There's a small group that probably really like McCain because he's military and made a heroic sacrifice, though proved nothing in terms of competence in the arena. But, I'd bet virtually no one looks at him and says that guy really gets it, I'm voting FOR HIM. NO, they're voting against Obama. It's how a big chunk of this country rolls. Either they think he's too liberal or too Black.
ARG has a huge poll dump tomorrow--should be interesting. I'm thinking there will be a McCain lead in either PA or MI.
@Cugel,
>>>>What the 50% + 1 Rove strategy fails to realize is that when you've gotten 1/2 the country to hate you, any little thing that goes wrong tanks your presidency. There's simply NO reservoir of bi-partisan good will to sustain you when you have a policy failure or something like a problem with Iraq hits.<<<<
I am not sure I understand your two responses. I asked "Are there those who believe a Obama administration will address the partisan bickering?" and you made fun of my post.
Now you say that there is NO reservoir of bi-partisan good will to sustain you when referring to McCain.
What is the reservoir of bi-partisan good will to sustain Barack Obama? Is he reaching out to Republicans who survive the 2008 election?
And the shit continues to hit the fan....
Some in Team Obama were caught "giddy" over the market turmoil over the recent days, anticipating the news will benefit their candidate.
Nothing like a little bit of schadenfreude for political gain to win over undecideds. I'm aghast.
Also developing, a boycott of Oprah by conservative women. Evidently, Oprah has suddenly decided that her show isn't a platform for the election even though we have been provided the first woman VP on the Republican ticket. Ever.
Hasn't stopped her from having candidates on earlier this year or in previous years.
Whatever backlash she gets in the ratings for her hypocrisy is well-deserved.
mikelow1885 said...
ARG has a huge poll dump tomorrow--should be interesting. I'm thinking there will be a McCain lead in either PA or MI.
I bet you're wrong and I bet you're Republican for McCain.
FloridaGOP,
In short, no. Barack Obama has no reservoir of bi-partisan good will and will be as much (or more) of a divisive leader as Bush.
McCain has voted with Bush 90% of the time.
Obama has voted with his party 97% of the time.
Obama says he doesn't (and we shouldn't) want just a "10% chance" that we'll get change from Bush's policies by McCain.
I don't want just a 3% chance that we'll get anything other than a straight-line liberal agenda by that measure.
So...the same party of pathetic losers that hates the Fairness Doctrine is boycotting Oprah for not being, well, fair.
How disrespectful.
Maybe if we all 'congratulate' "president elect mccain" on his 'election', he will piss off finally.
FloridaGOP,
There are a lot of reasons I like Obama more than Hillary, but part of it was that he wasn't as polarizing, so after elected could work with Republicans. What I realize now after being very interested in politics for over 20 years since I was a kid is Republicans don't want to work with Dems. So...screw 'em. It doesn't matter whether he wants to work with them or can work with them. Bush 43's attitude can easily be adopted the other way. Scre the Neo-Cons. They can all take a flying leap. Hopefully, we'll have 1933 all over again, 20 years of Dems to fix this crap.
"And the shit continues to hit the fan...."
For Mccain, yes.
I really enjoyed him slamming golden parachutes while one of his top surrogates was a notorious recipient. Par for the course for him, though.
"Nothing like a little bit of schadenfreude for political gain to win over undecideds. I'm aghast."
You're full of shit.
This is no different than "some" expressing "giddiness" at the thought of a terror attack benefitting McCain. Or similar views when the South Ossetia conflict began.
"Also developing, a boycott of Oprah by conservative women."
LOL. Who cares?
Boy, you guys are really digging at the bottom of the barrel for stuff to get 'outraged' over.
I hope she goes on Oprah and someone asks her why she would force a 13-year-old rape victim who got pregnant to carry the baby to term. That one question would be the end of Princess Sarah.
Nothing "disrespectful" about it. People are exercising their right in this democracy to indulge or not indulge (in this case) in certain things.
Nobody has to watch Oprah, and there's nothing respectful or disrespectful about doing so or not doing so.
Your point lacks credibility.
90% of crap is crap. 97% of the opposite of crap is bound to be better, whatever it is.
Why would Obama agree with Bush and the Neo-Cons more than 3% of the time when he's wrong on virtually every issue. I'm a centrist, slightly left of center and I agree with Bush 43 on virtually nothing across the board.
Charles,
I'm not scraping the bottom of the barrel or "enraged" about any of it. I'm just reporting some of the things highlighting the day.
Eric,
To say that the liberal agenda is the "opposite of crap" and invariably better is inherently disgusting.
Obama is pulling his troops out of VA and sending them to PA.
If VA was leaning McCain that would mean it is a lost cause.
BTW my posts no longer show up. Is this place another D closed shop?
@Cugel, MuleRider, Eric.
I reluctantly agree. When Obama first came into this race, I heard that he was going to be above politics, that he would reach across the aisle, and be "bi-partisan". His campaign still uses those WORDS --- It would be helpful to attract Independents and even some Republicans.
looking at his words, actions,and the words of his supporters, I think it is BS... and I am reaching out for other views.
floridagop: he reached across the aisle and found lots of slime. Can you blame him for retreating?
Mikelow,
What are you basing that prediction on?? If you want to say that Michigan is going to be more of a battleground than PA, I'd agree. But why are you predicting a McCain lead there??
@assmole..
floridagop: he reached across the aisle and found lots of slime. Can you blame him for retreating?
No, It is just that Senator Obama promised bi-partisanship. It seems he can not provide it.
We are once again heading for the hateful divisiveness of the Bush and/or Clinton years.
I am a Republican, I do not like Obama's policies BUT I am also looking for a candidate who can "bring this country together" As you all have advised, we need to keep looking.
I'm tired of hearing about Obama's GOTV ground game. It didn't do him much good in the primaries in CA, NY, TX, FL, OH, PA, NJ, MA, NH, KY, and WV and way more people vote in thre general election.
Unless the Dems have an election stealing scheme planned with ACORN, I don't think Obama's superior GOTV will do more than compensate for the Bradley effect.
In spring, Obama was up by 34 in SUSA's VT poll (his best state). Research 2000 now has Barack ahead by 19 in VT (link on TPM polls).
FloridaGOP said...
Republicans are power hungry and never bi-partisan under any circumstance. Try to point out one time where I'm wrong. Obama would prefer to meet them in the center and get some things done that everyone could agree on. The Neo-Cons are nuts though. They won't compromise and they won't back off of their extreme views, so you have to just deal with them. Why for example do ou think Hillary suggested Universal Helath Care and Obama said it doesn't have to be quite that far left, we can meet with the Republicans in Congress somewhere in the middle. Hillary then responded you have to ask for an extrem left position so whn you end up compromising with the extreme right you get some of what you want. Obama might be naive to think the Neo-Con stupid folks will work with him, but at least that was his initial hope. If it doesn't happen it won't be because he's too liberal and uncompromising, it will be because they're too conservative.
MR:
My larger point was the irony of conservatives, who hate the Fairness Doctrine, whining about and boycotting Oprah for not being fair.
The 'how disrespectful' was a slap in the face of the same tagline used in a disgusting McCain ad. Thanks for missing the point entirely though!
MrInsight22 said...
Ground game, what ground game?
Obama will win Virginia because of his ground game.
Obama pulling out of VA? LOL!
Eric,
Go ahead and blame Bush for EVERYTHING under the sun. It was all his fault. Now I'd agree to hang Iraq around his neck as one big negative of his legacy, even if we get out of there somewhat respectfully. It was still a bungled operation for quite a while.
But go ahead and spread the "truth" about all of those other things.
How he bungled Katrina. I mean, that had nothing to do with a Cat 4 hurricane slamming a densely populated, high poverty zone that's got several areas under sea level. It was absolutely Bush's fault. No way it had anything to do with gross inefficiences and failed plans at the local and state levels.
And the housing mess. That's all Bush too. Nothing to do with easy money, packaged in the form of "credity" to waaaaay too many people that didn't deserve it who went on a spending spree they couldn't afford and drove home values ridiculously high. Nope, that was all Bush.
And gas prices. All Bush, Big Oil, and Greed Speculators, no doubt. Not a damn thing with surging global demand and supply imbalances. Nope, Bush is at the heart of that one.
Justice Department...okay, that really was some foul shit from Bush.
Keep spreading hate and bs...it really makes for a pleasant mood for those around you.
Well said, eric. When Republicans controlled the House they held closed-door meetings, put bills on the floor without consulting Democrats, extended votes for as long as they needed in order to win, and generally acted like schoolkids at recess.
Now those same conservatives whine at every slight. It's disgusting.
I could see the anti-Oprah effect really having an adverse effect on the Obama campaign. The conservative women in America are all about being upfront, honest, and hardworking. Oprah has now proven herself none of those.
It's shocking and there's going to be hell to pay.
Cindy McCain should be coming out with a strong statement on this breaking story within the next day.
M Simon... after the posts reach 200, they no longer update on this page. To access posts beyond that point you need to go to the "Post Comments" screen, then click on "newer" posts in the upper right-hand corner.
Bill P,
It's called politics. Both sides do it. If you haven't realized that by now, you haven't been paying attention.
MR:
Care to address the hypocrisy of the right by demanding 'fairness' from Oprah? No? Thought not.
You are dismissed.
If Obama is shifting some "troops" to Pennsylvania it's because it's vulnerable. Those are 21 electoral votes he cannot give away. Dems have a 1,000,000+ voter registration advantage there, but there's also a large potential quasi-"Bradley Effect" there. The polls have gotten very close there and like some of the MSM media say between Philly an Pittsburgh, it might as well be Alabama. In my opinion Pennsylvania is paramount and I have no problem with Obama's campaign sneding big time resources there. Virginia is not a loss. The last two polls there are tied and Obama +4. IF Obama loses Pennsylvania though, Virginia probably won't matter.
millco88 -
Yeah. "Both sides do it" is exactly what conservatives say every time they're called on the carpet for their behavior.
Kids say stuff like that all the time.
To Eric
Democrats are power hungry and never bi-partisan under any circumstance. Try to point out one time where I'm wrong. Republicans would prefer to meet them in the center and get some things done that everyone could agree on. The Neo-Libs are nuts though. They won't compromise and they won't back off of their extreme views, so you have to just deal with them. Why for example do ou think McCain suggested "Drill, Drill, Drill" and fellow Republicans said it doesn't have to be quite that far right, we can meet with the Democrats in Congress somewhere in the middle. McCain then responded you have to ask for an extrem right position so whn you end up compromising with the extreme left you get some of what you want. McCain might be naive to think the Neo-Lib stupid folks will work with him, but at least that was his initial hope. If it doesn't happen it won't be because he's too conservative and uncompromising, it will be because they're too liberal.
floridagop:
1.how is it possible to be 'bipartisan' during a campaign where one party advocates for you and the other tries to throw as much mud as poss. I would say that is impossible for both Obama and McCain.
2.And who on the Republican side is talented enough to serve in an Obama administration?
So you are concedeing PA is a swing state. Told ya. ;)
Bill P,
Grow up. If you don't think that's how politics have been since the first contested election in 1796, you haven't been paying attention. Both sides are hypocritical -- always have been, probably always will be.
Palin is doing a 2-day interview with Katie Couric on Sept 28-29.
Mule Rider,
True enough, the Libs aren't nearly as bad and stubborn as the Neo-Cons though. Not that close really.
"Cindy McCain should be coming out with a strong statement on this breaking story within the next day."
WTF? Cindy McCain is a campaign spokesperson now? Doesn't she have dementia?
Now I don't even agree with everything regarding my exaggeratory mirror copy and paste of what Eric said, but the point, as millco88 pointed out is that it's politics and both sides use the same sickening strategies.
If you don't realize that, you are too blindly partisan to participate in a rational discussion.
I didn't come on to address the Fairness Doctrine, Bill P.
I just made the point that Oprah was getting backlash. Lay off dude. I didn't say anything "right" or "wrong" about it. Just point out that she's getting some heat. You're the one trying to stir up some phantom debate.
Can we agree that the independents and moderates , who will decide this election want to see candidates who are bi-partisan and reach across the aisle?
Can we agree that BOTH the Obama and McCain campaigns say that they are bi-partisan and can bring the country together?
Can we finally agree that these are JUST WORDS from each campaign?
"No, It is just that Senator Obama promised bi-partisanship. It seems he can not provide it.
We are once again heading for the hateful divisiveness of the Bush and/or Clinton years."
What a load of bullshit.
Bi-partisanship is a two-way street. Obama has made a reasonable effort to conduct a clean campaign. McCain has not.
McCain was also the one who deliberately chose a polarizing VP knowing it would divide the nation.
McCain is the one whose campaign openly admits they are using character assassination to win because "issues don't matter".
McCain is the one whose campaign says that lying is their prerogative and the truth doesn't matter either.
So don't blame Obama for a lack of "bipartisanship".
Sarah Palin sure is a hottie. She'll pull the butch lesbian vote from the Dumbocrats for sure.
Congratulations to President-Elect McCain!!! said...
So you are concedeing PA is a swing state. Told ya. ;)
Yes I am. I think Obama will win Colorado or Virginia. He'll hold onto all of the Kerry states including Michigan+ Iowa and New Mexico. The key will be Pennsylvania. I've never been in the rural parts of Pennsylvania, but my sense is that's the key to the battle. I assume Obama is going to spend as much time as possible in he Midwest between now and November 4th.
"Can we agree that the independents and moderates , who will decide this election want to see candidates who are bi-partisan and reach across the aisle?"
NO.
"Can we agree that BOTH the Obama and McCain campaigns say that they are bi-partisan and can bring the country together?"
NO.
"Can we finally agree that these are JUST WORDS from each campaign?"
NO.
John McCain wanted a culture war, wanted a campaign of mudslinging and lies. You can't do that and then call for "bipartisanship" unless you think Americans are morons.
Eric,
I call bullshit. I say there are equal factions on both sides who are equally stubborn and hateful.
I think there are about as many "stubborn" far-left liberals loons as there are "stubborn" far-right neo-con loons. And I think there about the same number of "open-minded" progressive but staunch liberals as there are "open-minded" thoughtful but staunch conservatives.
And a shitload of everybody else. I'd like to think I'm more in line with "everybody else."
"Cindy McCain should be coming out with a strong statement on this breaking story within the next day."
Great move! I hope the GOP really goes after Oprah hard. That will help Obama immeasurably.
What a bunch of fucking lame-ass baby whiners.
"Palin is doing a 2-day interview with Katie Couric on Sept 28-29."
Thanks.
Too bad the "pitbull" is still too much of a coward to give a press conference.
What a fraud.
@Charles,
>>>>
So don't blame Obama for a lack of "bipartisanship".<<<
I think I am asking a different question. Obama wins!!!! What are the chances that he can be perceived as bi-partisan, reaching across the aisle? You can blame the republicans if you want?
Dems worked with Reagan. Reps refused as much as possible to work with Clinton.
Eric,
I think Michigan is more in play than Pennsylvania if only because Rendell is a lot more popular than Granholm. I haven't looked at Nate's metrics on it, but my sense is MI is slightly less blue than PA demographically.
Add that to the fact there wasn't a contested primary there for the Dems (so no big voter registration drives), and it "feels" closer to me, but YMMV.
"What are the chances that he can be perceived as bi-partisan, reaching across the aisle?"
I think they are much better than McCain's chances. Obama is a reasonable person who treats others with respect; McCain is not.
If McCain wins this campaign you can expect there will be hell to pay. Not because he won, but because of how he chose to do it.
I think that CTPEM IS a democratic troll!! What other reasons are there for such idiotic statements?
>>>>Sarah Palin sure is a hottie. She'll pull the butch lesbian vote from the Dumbocrats for sure.<<<<
At least it's Obama vs McCain and not a Romney-Clinton fight- now that would be 'partisan'.
McCain is well known in the Senate for telling colleagues with whom he disagrees to "fuck off" and "eat shit". He's going to be great at reaching across the aisle, you betcha!
Assmole,
Imagine Clinton vs Rudy, which was the chalk about a year ago.
FloridaGOP said...
@Charles,
>>>>
So don't blame Obama for a lack of "bipartisanship".<<<
I think I am asking a different question. Obama wins!!!! What are the chances that he can be perceived as bi-partisan, reaching across the aisle? You can blame the republicans if you want?
He'll want to work with them, that's his nature. He'll be willing to compromise to get good legislation done with Congress. The biggest reason Congress is stuck in quicksand is Bush's stubbornnness and the Republican large plurality that's resentful for having lost control. The Dems don't have enough power by numbers to get anything done. It's not their fault. Obama will not be as destructive and obtrusive as Bush and the neo-Cons. Read Audacity of Hope, he's not as far left as you want to believe. If it fits into a description of some one that doesn't deserve Idependent votes and so will make him lose that's fine to argue that he's not willing to be bi-partisan, but it's not true.
And if Lieberman and not Palin had been picked, then the election would have been all the better still.
Bi-partisanship is a two-way street. Obama has made a reasonable effort to conduct a clean campaign. McCain has not.
Yeah, and bi-partisanship goes well behind how you conduct your campaign. You can be a silver-tongued slick willy who runs a "clean" show and panders to everybody but be an abominable and divisive leader driven by partisan policies when elected.
McCain was also the one who deliberately chose a polarizing VP knowing it would divide the nation.
Wow. Thanks for the loaded rhetoric. Dividing the nation? Whew. I mean, I know I'm ready for my state to secede because we have a moose-shooting woman for VP who has staunch conservative values.
Great move! I hope the GOP really goes after Oprah hard. That will help Obama immeasurably.
Nope. Oprah is a celebrity phenomenom kinda like the candidate she supports. I think there will be a lot of people cheering on the sidelines at people raising such a ruckus. Maybe it rallies a few more of her supporters but likely provokes just as many detractors to stand up too who are encouraged by others doing so. In the end, a net wash at best.
She's a big figure in our culture, but just like people got/get sick of hearing "big name" celebrities talking too much shit about politics (Tim Robbins, Alec Baldwin, etc.), Oprah will face the same backlash.
Get a grip dude. You're losing it on reality.
"And if Lieberman and not Palin had been picked, then the election would have been all the better still."
Exactly. As much as I think Lieberman is a toad, that would have shown the Republicans cared about the country even if it meant they might lose.
McCain has been taken over by the GOP operatives of his campaign and they don't care what they have to do as long as they win. Bipartisanship? Hah.
“I don’t think John McCain could run a major corporation. I don’t think Barack Obama could run a major corporation. I don’t think Joe Biden could run a major corporation. But on the other hand a major corporation is not the same as being the president or vice president of the United States,” Fiorina said.
“It is a fallacy to suggest that the country is like a company. So of course to run a business you have to have a lifetime of experience in business, but that’s not what Sarah Palin, John McCain, Joe Biden or Barack Obama are doing,” she said.
Next time don't bite on the sound bite. Fact is the only one that could run a business is Sarah but none of them including Sarah could run Wal Mart. Leave it to Libs to lie lie lie
congratulations to president-elect mccain!!! said...
Sarah Palin sure is a hottie. She'll pull the butch lesbian vote from the Dumbocrats for sure.
My God- it's like you have Tourettes or something. Are you drunk on the Jeebus wine? Just let the adults talk - run along and play with your Caribou Barbie doll in the other room.
I'm looking forward to the Obama "Keating 5" ad. Johnny boy is gonna get called to the carpet.
assmole said...
And if Lieberman and not Palin had been picked, then the election would have been all the better still.
At least Lieberman and Ridge ar Centrists. Palin is an unqualified extremist and scary. Begal put it best, he's both excited because he thinks she'll hurt McCain in the long run and scared to death because of her extreme views. I could tolerate a McCain/Lieberman or Ridge ticket. There were plenty of centrist women to choose from as well. McCain picking Palin ells me he's willing to let his administration be hijacked by the Neo-Cons. It's possible he'll revert back to the "maverick" once elected, but I don't trust that just yet. He's had a pattern selling out. See his description of the Confederate flag while campaigning in 2000 in south Carolina as an example. In other words, he might have good principles and bipartisanship in his heart, but he won't stand for them when the going gets tough. I'm sure you Republicans will backlash on me for that, but it's just the truth.
FLA GOP... the poster CTPEM appears to be a precocious 12-year-old. He has posted here for some time under various handles, including "John K."
The names vary but the posts are always the same... ridiculous "zingers" with no relevance, no import, and lots and lots of exclamation points.
@Morg
McCain is well known in the Senate for telling colleagues with whom he disagrees to "fuck off" and "eat shit". He's going to be great at reaching across the aisle, you betcha!
I do not think McCain is going to win this election. Do you?
During that period of time, he was on the Gang of 14, cosponsored McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, and McCain-Kerry. His results do not match the personal antagonism for those he disagrees with --
Since, he has always been successful reaching across the aisle in the past, I am wonder whether this campaign will reduce his desire to compromise in a Obama Administration.
Assmole,
If Lieberman's the pick, the only way McCain wins is if Obama makes some huge gaffe in one of the debates, IMO. With Palin, he has another path to victory. Think of a basketball game -- do you want to hope your opponent misses the open shots you give them or would you rather have a way you can make plays as well??
"You can be a silver-tongued slick willy who runs a "clean" show and panders to everybody but be an abominable and divisive leader driven by partisan policies when elected."
Okay, so with Obama we have evidence that he is reasonable and appeals to the center, even though he might be different when elected. In contrast, McCain has SHOWN what he is like and so we would have to hope he acts *better* once he no longer even has to try to be on his best behavior.
"I mean, I know I'm ready for my state to secede because we have a moose-shooting woman for VP who has staunch conservative values."
You're not *really* this clueless, are you? Everyone knows exactly why Palin was picked -- because the "us vs. them" game was the only way to get people interested in McCain. Maybe you need to do some reading.
"I think there will be a lot of people cheering on the sidelines at people raising such a ruckus."
Only among the morons who already support Princess Sarah the fraud.
Like I said, feel free. Go after Oprah. It will make you guys look more childish and desperate than ever.
It's all part of the very divisive culture war you are pretending McCain hasn't started.
And it will also result in more people asking the question you liars and frauds can never answer: "Why is Sarah Palin, who is running for vice-president, so keen on getting onto the Oprah Winfrey show, but afraid to hold a press conference?"
My God the polls have been depressing lately. Wake me up when reality sets in and Obama is solidly back in the "Win" column.
I'd love to hear from some of the stable Republicans on the board whether they'd be comfortable with Palin as President should McCain keel over (assuming they were elected). Would she be a beacon of moral certainty and lead us into a war with a rallying cry of "God's will"?
"I do not think McCain is going to win this election. Do you?"
That depends on Karl Rove's disciples and the stupidity of the electorate.
"During that period of time, he was on the Gang of 14, cosponsored McCain-Feingold, McCain-Kennedy, and McCain-Kerry. His results do not match the personal antagonism for those he disagrees with --"
That was the old John McCain. Nobody who worked with him back then even recognizes the guy currently running for office.
"I am wonder whether this campaign will reduce his desire to compromise in a Obama Administration."
McCain has shot his wad with his behavior in this campaign. If he loses, he's washed up. He will still be in the senate, but frankly, nobody is going to really care much what he thinks or what his 'desires' are.
Post a Comment