It’s important to reinforce what Nate wrote Sunday night. Not gonna happen. It would be overt surrender. As most of you know, I’ve been on the road for the past three weeks, so far visiting at least a dozen McCain campaign offices in six battleground states as well as Palin’s first solo rally in Carson City, Nevada. If McCain dumps Palin, it is over.
In the Colorado Springs volunteer office, “you could hear a pin drop” in the days before Palin was picked. In Reno, the volunteering had been anemic; the Saturday morning after the Palin pick, organizers arrived to an early morning volunteer line waiting at the door.
Our direct observation shows McCain is being overwhelmingly outworked on the ground as it is; take Palin away and you can add 2-5% to Obama’s total in every close state due to ground game. As Bill Paxton once said, "Game over, man, game over!"
There really isn’t much more to say. It’s already the Obama v. Nobama election – you overhear it in all the volunteer-to-volunteer discussions. “Obama Scares Me” is not just the unofficial motto, it’s actually a button we’ve seen sported.
But that’s not good enough to win. Bush v. Not Bush didn’t turn out well for Democrats, and Obama v. Nobama in a huge partisan ID switching and massive new voter reg year isn’t going to get the job done for Republicans.
Taking away Sarah Palin is not an option – it would be worse than having never put her on the ticket in the first place. This ticket is soldiering on til the bitter end, or else they're giving up.
9.30.2008
On Dumping Palin
@ 9:11 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
426 comments
Bah - keeping her around solely for material for Tina Fey is worth far more. This trainwreck is fun to watch...
"If you can run the PTA, you can run the country"
- Ellie Plessinger, Saganaw, Michigan, Palin supporter
But wouldn't dropping Palin be "putting country first?"
You guys are seeing the uninformed still supporting her. I am watching her support fade away in the Texas evangelical community, at least among the educated. People are embarrassed here that they told anyone publicly that they thought she was amazing/awesome/wonderful/etc. People seem to talk about her like a friend who has done something shameful and embarrassing. They're not dropping her (still genuinely like her as a person), but even us evangelicals can get past our biases and see someone who is not cut out for the job when its this obvious.
I just hope Biden doesn't blow it by patronising Palin and annoying a lot of female voters.
BTW - I doubt the debate is going to be quite the train wreck everyone is hoping. Palin is incompetent, but the format has been heavily modified from past VP debates to avoid real exchanges. If Biden answers quickly, and leaves time for her, does that mean more questions and thus topics will turn up? It seems like the more topics she has to weigh in on, the better.
Also, do you guys think the moderator will be doing many follow up questions with her. Asking her to explain or give the pros/cons of any of her positions seems like her Achilles' heel.
The pressure in on Biden to keep the focus on McCain on Thursday. He will do so.
A Repub on POTUS (XM130) this morning - "A good jockey cannot make a bad horse into a winner, but a bad jockey can make a good horse into a loser" - he was talking about Palin.
Ras numbers?
If Palin completely blows Thursday's debate, it is possible that McCain would take the desperate measure of dumping her and his campaign manager, and restarting a McCain of 2000 campaign. Won't work, though.
I'm not sure why even a 'partisan democrat' would WANT Palin dropped at this point...
...let it ride, all the way to its ugly fruition. McCain is stuck with his choice.
Agree with Robert, the debate is unlikely to be a train wreck for Palin and may even give McCain a little bump. Palin is personable and can debate, but needs to stay close to canned responses. As Robert noted, a lot depends on the moderator not settling for canned responses, and on Joe Biden reining himself in.
I agree that Palin can't be dumped at this point, but for a different reason: it would be an admission that McCain made a reckless, uninformed choice in the first place.
Sean, I realize that the Palin choice has done a lot to help the ground game, but weren't there other choices that could have rallied the base? Doesn't Huckabee have all the folksy charm of Palin?
TODAYS RASMUSSEN O 51 M 45. One bit of bad news for Obama is 46% say he is to inexperienced to be president but I assume those are all McCain voters.
Also in regards to Palin isn`t it to late to dump her, some states are already voting, wouldn`t she have to stay on the ballot?
I guess she could quit the ticket and if McCain got elected another VP could be picked by the party?
PS - to avoid confusion people had previously when I posted about TX - it is not going blue. I'm just saying that if TX evangelicals (Baptists and Evangelical Free in Fort Worth, San Antonio, and Austin are what I know) are losing hope in her, or even embarrassed they once vocally sung her praises, this bodes poorly for McCain. If she does blow it, a lot of people are going to have to come up with some fancy reasoning for continuing to support her (because most I know already only grudgingly support McCain himself - they all wanted Huckabee), and many will just drop out of really supporting anyone this year and might not even vote if Obama doesn't do anything that genuinely scares them.
Anyone who supported Palin should be embarrassed.
I am curious if James Dobson can keep supporting her, she has his positions but her family life and personal choices are pretty anti - "Focus on the Family". Can she even hold her base through election day?
I just hope Biden doesn't blow it by patronising Palin and annoying a lot of female voters.
Don't worry about that. There's an old saying about us women, "can go hate to love, but from love to hate - never to return to love again" Once the scales fall from the eyes they won't cover again.
Still curious about the number of topics reached expanding if they give short answers???
PS - MY 2 cents on dropping her: Just the fact (which many others have pointed out) that people in many states are already voting on ballots with her name on the ticket seems like it would make it impossible for her to just go away, unless she died or something. I don't see how it could be a choice of McCain's at this point.
Joel-
Exactly. States control voting, and I am sure some do not allow changes to the ballot after X or Y date, now that said, since it is Federal a vote for McCain/Palin might be able to be turned into a McCain/Romney vote but some lawyers need to do a 50 state survey before I would feel comfy changing from Palin.
Way to go with the Bill Paxton Aliens reference. I love that line.
There is always a chance that McCain could win. For that reason I truly wish that he would replace her (even if might slightly increase his chances of winning the election - doubtful).
it would be an admission that McCain made a reckless, uninformed choice in the first place
Kinda like the way he rode to the rescue on the bailout, and picked a fight with Spain because he can't admit he had a brain fart?
I suspect that cat is out of the bag.
IF Palin bombs for the rest of the election, what are the chances that one day we may be debating 'The Palin Effect'. Where folks were so embarassed to be voting for her, that they just couldn't admit it to their friends/pollsters/etc.
The last thing this partisan Democrat wants is for the Repubs to dump Palin; I think she is 2-3% of our margin!
Emononkari - that is one of the funniest posts I have seen on this site in a long time. That one could be a whole 538 post.
My grandmother is an 89 year-old, Fox-News watching, lifelong Republican living in Florida. One month ago, she told me that Obama scared her and she didn't think he'd be good for the country. I spoke with her a couple days ago and she's 100% behind Obama now.
The reason? Sarah Palin. And she's not opposed to Sarah Palin for any of the reasons that make sense. She firmly believes that that woman should be home taking care of her children, who "are in obvious need of guidance."
This got me to thinking. McCain pretty much has it in the bag with the elderly -- at least he DID. I wonder how many other older women find it "shameful" that a mother of young children is running for office? I know it's the wrong -- but if something like that could change my grandmother's mind, how many more older women who raised families feel the same way?
McCain was never going to dump Palin. Once he chose her, he was committed. Evangelicals didn't trust him before Palin, they do a bit now, but if he drops her from the ticket then they will have very little trust in or excitement for McCain. Plus, it would totally undermine his "good judgment" argument and would leave him just over a month to introduce a new VP. He's not going to drop her, and I'm quite baffled that so many people have even mentioned it as a serious consideration. His only chance at a second-try was in the weekend before the convention -- once she accepted the nomination and gave her speech there was no going back.
Palin in the 2006 Govenorship depate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1-B-OyQ-KI
Game over, man! Game over!!
Agreed. To paraphrase Oscar Wilde, dropping here would be the only thing worse than not dropping her.
meg - even though I have also heard people express the opinion you said your grandmother said, I don't think that focusing on that one is a winner for Obama's supporters. Better to just let others talk about that.
Except for the good of the country. Gotta agree with AintNutnButAThang ChiknWang there.
Some new state polls from Rasmussen today?
Game not over, we have a lead, but the McCain team likes the long ball. If Palin is not a poll mover on Thurs., they have something up their sleeve.
I am mean look at his campaign so far? You really think they coast to an election loss without doing something else insane?
I love this election, I will miss it...
Anyone know if there is any truth to this article?
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/09/biden-palin-oba.html
Plus, there are countless other unassailable reasons for questioning Palin's readiness to be even VP, much less president. I think we do better to focus on those.
Woo, market up 2 percent. Everyone can relax now.
This is good news....FOR MCCAAIN!
Eh, there are ways to pull it off. People have mentioned the health scare out, which is a least neutral. There are also ways to try to turn it into a positive, and McCain is obviously looking for stunts.
One, she is horrified by the personal attacks Obama and the Democrats are making, withdraws to protect her family, and then stays visible and on the offensive, attacking Obama mercilessly and controversially and leading GOTV efforts without ever having to field another policy question.
Two, and not mutually exclusive, McCain replaces her with somebody even more exciting. A fundamentalist preacher! A non-white woman! A Democrat! Palin had to bow out, to let him make history like this.
But I think the debate's going give her favorability ratings a bump--the moderator won't be pressing her for specifics, so she'll be able to get away with a bunch of canned speeches. If she would be forced off-script, she can say something pitbullish as a distraction.
Robert -- I had no intention of using the family argument to persuade people. That would be wrong and counter-productive. I just wonder how many people will come to that conclusion on their own.
Parents are 69 year old life long Republicans in Ohio. Regular, involved, church goers. Upper middle class; Dad's a retired Dentist. Never voted Democrat ever. Think I'm crazy for supporting Obama. Spoke with my Mom last week who informed me that she's now voting for Obama and that she "wouldn't be surprised" if my Dad did too. Why? Palin. They're truly scared at what would happen to America if she were somehow to become President. Amazing!
Dave-
I can't get the LATimes link to load. What does it say?
fred - I agree. I wonder what their next crazy attention getting move will be. I think they've got to be trying to figure out how to capitalize on the crisis. It seems like the only big enough thing to move people's generally very stubborn voting preferences. More Wright ads & such will go nowhere and just make them look desperate (which I guess they already do).
Fred - it's the Biden replaced by Clinton rumor.
Not. Gonna. Happen.
"Anyone know if there is any truth to this article?"
The article is reporting that there are rumors, which is true.
The rumors, however, have no apparent foundation other than speculation.
LOL!
No way Biden gets removed from the ticket. Reminder - Obama is ahead, he does as little as possible to screw that up!
I want Palin removed even if it helps McCain because I'm terrified about the concept of her being President.
What is so funny is that these Clinton rumors seem to be getting placed by the Clintons to "keep her name out there" and increase the prob of an Obama loss. Clinton is really missing the forest for the trees, an Obama win crushes the Clinton's unless BO decides to let them play.
Bill C. - the very definition of modern political hubris.
Palin will not be dropped even if she bursts into tears during the debate and runs off the stage. To drop her would be to admit openly that McCain's one test of executive judgment had been an absolute failure. It would also prove that he made that decision based on what was best for his election prospects than what was best for the country.
If Palin bombs they will say that she has been bullied by a biased media and keep her away from any more interviews.
The reality I suspect, is that she won't bomb as such. There is no cross examination so all she needs to do is read out from memory her pre-prepared answers on each policy category. Yes, she will look weak and out of her depth but she will hold it together and Republican scum like Bill Kristol will pretend that she held her own with Biden. Most independent and swing voters will see through it however and it will be scored a Biden win albeit that he didn't "hit it out of the park".
That is sufficient for Biden who simply needs to make sure that Palin is as damaged coming out of the debate as she is going in such that she is kept off the national stage and has a limited effect going forward.
inkstain, you are usually very reasonable. If we all think that there is no way McCain could drop Palin, and the need to do so is glaring, why would Obama even think about dropping Biden. A few gaffes is about all he's done to hurt anything, and while many ave forgotten about this, his policy cred actually did do a lot to reassure older voters who were nervous about Obama. This is not just a rumor, but a sort of softheaded one to boot.
This debate will be a pretty boring draw (95% chance). She will say little, he will atack McCain and ignore her - but he WILL look at her when she speaks.
No change, pretty much a non-event as most VP debated are.
There is a 3% chance she makes a flub so big it moves numbers, a 1% chance she is able to get a positive bounce, and a 1% chance Biden screws up enough to move numbers.
What happen if Palin wins the debate?
If Obama jettisons Biden, he looks wishy-washy.
Why would he snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?
Some bloggers have too much time on their hands.
Yeah looking from outside Bilden adds a lot to the Obama ticket. Replacing him with Clinton would not do much and could hurt him.
The only scenario I can see it actually happening is the last paragraph
Another possible reason for this candidate swap: What if in Thursday night's VP debate in St. Louis, Biden, an expert debater, figuratively rolls up his sleeves, takes off the gloves and simply demolishes Palin rhetorically and policy-wise. Just destroys her.
Many if not most would find that bullying, an offense that could be rectified by Biden's departure and Obama, the would-be chief executive, stepping in to decisively make things right by naming a woman in his place. And the once-popular Palin would have been neutralized.
In any other election cycle such a scenario would be truly beyond belief. Simply couldn't happen.
Personally I think Bilden should destroy her regardless. The tough hockey mom, the pitbull with lipstick, not able to stand up tot he guy thats been called a gaffe machine for over a month. That will really play out well with the freeper vote.
robert - I agree with all that, but the question was "is there any truth to the article," and the answer is "yes," the article is completely factually accurate.
"What happen if Palin wins the debate?"
McCain gets a base-boost.
McCain could have picked Huckabee and gotten a lot of the same excitement from the Evangelical base. Huckabee had been somewhat vetted during the primary season, and was good on TV.
But no - he picked Palin, and must now endure pain for his reckless choice.
Dumping her would be admitting that they have lost the election. And to be honest, I don't think he can dump her without her agreeing to step down. And I don't see her doing this.
again, I agree with fred - the Clinton hovering makes it almost certain that no one could possibly credit them for Obama's win. Hillary really is doing a lot to help him, but Bill is more than canceling her out in the perception of the public because of the attention any disharmony naturally gets by the press, particularly when there is none to be found in the Obama campaign itself. The Clinton aura would be greatly enhanced if they were seen to have been major factors in an Obama win. Even in future historical works, their putting him over the top is the type of thing that would become obligatory mention in the story of America's 1st AA president. As it is, those notes are certainly never going to be written, but at least that way Obama is going to get more full credit for the amazing campaign he and his people have run.
Palin was attacking Biden pretty harshly yesterday.
She's almost daring him to steamroll her. I don't know what the strategy in that is.
Not sure if someone else posted this but:
What is more crazy? Picking Palin or dumping her.
I am at a loss.
I think Sean is right but I NEVER thought McCain would make such a poor choice to begin with.
What kind of crazy stuff will McCain pull now?
Maybe hanglide nude into DC?
lolo
Drop her?? Heck, I'm praying for that clueless bimbo's good health.
Every dumb, ineligible, nonsensical, moronic comment and assertion she makes is a net gain for the Obama campaign.
"What if in Thursday night's VP debate in St. Louis, Biden, an expert debater, figuratively rolls up his sleeves, takes off the gloves and simply demolishes Palin rhetorically and policy-wise. Just destroys her.
Many if not most would find that bullying"
It depends on how it happens. Obviously, if Biden is dismissive of Palin (much like McCain was of Obama last weekend), he comes across as surly and likely loses the perception of the debate, even if he wins on the issues. But if his focus is on criticizing the viewpoints of the McCain/Palin ticket, rather than just poor inexperienced Palin, it's basically free advertising time. I just don't see how Palin can effectively stand in the way of Biden, based on her piss-poor interviews so far.
The worst news for the GOP is that Palin kills the chances of wresting the party from the hands of the extreme right. So the party will march towards the elephant graveyard without a thought of what happens when they get there.
The only problem for Obama in Battleground states are the dems supporters in Ohio and Florida.
In CO, VA and PA Obama takes a good % of democrats.
A bit % of dems in Ohio and Florida and Obama wlll win this two states.
Eric said...
Dumping her would be admitting that they have lost the election. And to be honest, I don't think he can dump her without her agreeing to step down. And I don't see her doing this.
Yeah. If she's in any way smart she will be looking to the effect at home in Alaska. There is no way she will let her be forced off the ticket.
Hell I suspect thes actually finished in Alaska anyway. She made her name by digging out the dirty laundry of everyone else and setting herself up as a reformer. Now all of a sudden her own dirty laundry is in full view and she may have been fatally compromised. The interviews will have hurt her at home as well.
Actually any polls from Alaska? The numbers there would be interesting.
As everyone knows, Florida has a large elderly population, and the tendency to identify with McCain, an elderly man, is strong.
Health (not just health care) and mortality are very, very big issues for the elderly: if you're 65, chances are you personally know someone who has died of a disease, and you know it can claim you in short order. Death and heirs are not the relatively abstract things they are for much younger people, but are rather imminent.
If Palin comes off looking plausible, elderly McCain supporters and undecideds may continue to feel comfortable supporting him. But if Palin ends up looking like someone who one couldn't imagine being president, then, especially given McCain well-known bouts with cancer, shouldn't one should look for a greater-than-national-average shift away from McCain toward Obama in Florida as the elderly contemplate much more seriously than most others the meaning of a Palin presidency?
Question for Nate and others, I realize there weren't tracking polls back in 1988, but was there *any* bounce for Duke after the "You are no JFK" line? If not, it would seem to indicate that VP's just dont' matter.
inkstain - it is only "completely factually accurate" in that yes, there is an INTERNET RUMOR to that effect. There are a million internet rumors around, and very, very rarely are they borne out. It is a waste of our time here to discuss. Feel free to, but I doubt that many are going to bother to join in. It just doesn't pass even the basic plausibility test.
Rasmussen O 51 / M 45.
All three days include the debate reaction now. If anything, McCain lost 2 points from the debate and Obama maintained the strong lead he went into the debates with, at least in this tracking poll.
Not encouraging for McCain.
"Palin was attacking Biden pretty harshly yesterday."
I saw the comments that got posted on CNN--making fun of his age (yeah, that makes sense, since he's younger than McCain) and pouncing on his coal gaffe. Which, I do have to say, is pretty funny, considering they went on the air just the other day and said it's not fair to assume that answers given in crowded spaces (exactly what the coal comment was) should be used as ammo. McCain called it "gotcha" politics....which his VP candidate is now practicing. Awesome!
Palin will crush Joe
Watch & feel the burn liberals !!!!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAA !!
Isn't it funny how the only people who think that McCain should dump Sarah Palin are democrats and Obama supporters?
moondancer, I think you hit the nail on its head. Base style conservatism is a dying movement (long term view) if the fundamental swings in our country do not radically alter course. This seems especially true with recent economic events eroding their old economic/social conservative cooperative pact. McCain was honestly their best shot at a win this year, but I think the interpretation on their side will inevitably be that he was not pure enough of a conservative, and they might nominate a total national level loser in 2012 in a pendulum swing the other way.
VC-
She is trying to practice, and lower expectations. For all his foibles, Biden is a pro and trusts Axelrod - he will stay on point. Biden wants to be VP, if only to get his son appointed to his senate seat.
Biden plays it straight, and it is irrelevant if he wins or loses. He will make every answer a fact filled filled wonderful Krispy Kreme donut and her lack of facts, the rice cakes approach in comparison, will look really bad.
Let her attack, he will not.
tibor75
As far as I recall, the pundits and partisans LOVED that Bentsen comment, but indies and swing voters saw it as incredibly petty, rude and condescending. Even my parents did, at the time, and they're Dems.
Rich Merritt
Trig will "develop complications" requiring Palin to remove herself from the ticket. McCain will pick Gov. Pawlenty, taking Minnesota's ten electoral votes away from Obama and putting them in McCain's column. Pawlenty will placate the religious right.
"Isn't it funny how the only people who think that McCain should dump Sarah Palin are democrats and Obama supporters?"
And Kathleen Parker.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-092608-kathleen-parker-column-link,0,889134.column
Forget about politics for a second (LOL). I want McCain to dump Palin for the good of the world, since there is still a chance of him being elected and then dying.
We can't take that chance.
Isn't it funny how the only people who think that McCain should dump Sarah Palin are democrats and Obama supporters?
We'll give you a chance to retract that statement before posting the articles written (by Conservatives), wanting her gone.
Let's assume that Palin totally and completely knocks it out of the park on Thursday (hard to imagine, I know). I'm sure that will knock up a couple points for camp McCain for a bit.
But remember that after Thursday there are still two more debates with the actual presidential candidates. And the last one is on the economy.
So even if Palin has a best-case scenario, Obama still has two more chances to redeem the ticket.
Plus, if Obama's idea of raising the FDIC insurance limit to $250,000 catches on and helps the house get behind the idea (which McCain supports as well), it could be a big boost for him as well.
The Reagan coalition is dying, we are getting less religious, younger, more diverse, and the politics of fear are swaying fewer.
This change is occurring a few election cycles early though, thanks to Bush incompetence and Obama running a kick butt campaign.
""I just hope Biden doesn't blow it by patronising Palin and annoying a lot of female voters.""
While many women might be that stupid, I think just as great a concern (if Biden is too harsh) are any silly men who might jump to the defense of a damsel in distress. ;)
Palin - love or hate her, make fun of her or feel sorry for her.... just dont vote for her.
Dru said...
Isn't it funny how the only people who think that McCain should dump Sarah Palin are democrats and Obama supporters
Nice troll Dru, but in case you hadn't noticed the Obama supporters here and everywhere else are praying she stays :)
@VC
Palin was attacking Biden pretty harshly yesterday.
I've been trying to come up with an appropriate analogy for Palin's relationship to the ticket...Something along the lines of, "You don't bring your not-so-bright cousin from out of town to a knife fight.
I had no idea the the LA Times was so National Enquirer-esque. They should just print a headline on the front page saying "Nothing's Happening Here - Go Back to Sleep" and save the paper stock. Tree killers.
The "Top of the Ticket" blog has been pretty good, it is written by pro's - but this article is just laughable.
Sarah Palin spouting cliches and mixed metaphors Thursday night is GREAT NEWS!!! For John McCain!!!
Today's Daily Kos Research 2000 tracking poll has Obama up over McCain 51-41.
"I saw the comments that got posted on CNN--making fun of his age (yeah, that makes sense, since he's younger than McCain) and pouncing on his coal gaffe. Which, I do have to say, is pretty funny, considering they went on the air just the other day and said it's not fair to assume that answers given in crowded spaces (exactly what the coal comment was) should be used as ammo. McCain called it "gotcha" politics....which his VP candidate is now practicing. Awesome!"
And McCain is clueless, if it's the same coal gaffe I'm thinking of. He was asked about this on CNN this morning and he said they were totally different scenarios: Palin was in a pizza parlor while Biden was at a town hall type event.
Except I've seen the video, and he was asked about it by a random young voter while he was outside greeting people and the cameras were there. Seems about EXACTLY the same to me.
Unless he DID say something to that effect at a town hall that I didn't see...
Otherwise, how can McCain continue to comment on things he knows nothing about and has not seen? And that includes the bailout proposal!
I wouldn't say the markets going up helps McCain much at all...more than likely, there are people out bargain shopping stocks at the moment - this is probably temporary - look for the market to take a header after lunch - just my 2 cents.
No frickin' way that NYT article is correct. Like one of those posters said. Obama is like Tiger in golf. He always his it on the fairway and is steady as can be. Why would he take a whack like McCain does frequently when he's got so much momentum behind him.
Maybe, just maybe, it would be a plausible approach if McCain really started to run away with this election but as things stand now, Obama is in a very good position and apart from something like him standing side by side with Wright shouting God Damn America in sync on some video tape, this is his election.
Holy shit!
From Taegan Goddard:
An early look at today's Diageo/Hotline tracking poll shows Sen. Barack Obama now holds a double-digit lead in key battleground states.
Among registered voters surveyed in Colorado, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Wisconsin and Nevada, Obama tops McCain 50 to 40%. Just a week ago, Obama led 45% to 42%.
If we were in a traditional campaign, I'd say you're right. But John McCain is consistently proving himself to be a nontraditional campaigner. (That's not a value judgment one way or the other -- it's just an observation.)
Twice in the past month, he's made decisions described as a "Hail Mary" pass -- first picking Palin, then "suspending" his campaign to go to Washington.
Nate had the best game-theory explanation of the Palin pick: If you're behind by 2%, and a traditional (Romney) pick would ensure that outcome, but Palin had a 50/50 chance of raising your numbers by 3% or dropping them by 10%, you'd pick Palin, because you'd have a 50% chance of winning the election.
We know John McCain is a gambler. He makes bets like these all the time, based on assumed odds and gut instincts about what's likely to happen next.
If the remainder of the Couric interview is as bad as Politico and Howie Kurtz say it is, and Palin doesn't improve in mock debates, then McCain could very well decide that letting her debate would make the 10% drop almost assured. If the alternative (Huckabee, I suspect) has a 50/50% chance of stopping the bleeding, even with the embarrassment of dumping Palin, then he'll make that call.
"He was asked about this on CNN this morning and he said they were totally different scenarios: Palin was in a pizza parlor while Biden was at a town hall type event."
Did he really say that? Good lord. The video is on the internet, I'm not sure if the question is from a voter or a reporter but it's the same exact situation he railed about.
Here's a good commentary on the bail-out bill from Congressman Peter DeFazio, D - OR, a straight up man of the people who opposed the bail-out.
http://www.economicpopulist.org/?q=content/keys-kingdom-congressman-peter-defazio-bailout
"Did he really say that? Good lord. The video is on the internet, I'm not sure if the question is from a voter or a reporter but it's the same exact situation he railed about."
He ABSOLUTELY did and I was literally STUNNED and laughed at him. I couldn't believe how completely ridiculous he is.
And when I watched the video, I'm 99% sure it WAS NOT a media person. It looked like a young voter who was in a line that he was greeting and she asked him about supporting renewable energy. The media just happened to be there and caught it on video.
Palin should be dropped 'for the good of the country' as others have noted, just in case McCain does win. Sadly that is possible.
But she wont be dropped of course because McCain does NOT put the country first.
Of course if she were to be dropped, it would take McCain about 15 minutes to find a replacement - the same amount of time it took to select Palin, right?
---Trig will "develop complications" requiring Palin to remove herself from the ticket. McCain will pick Gov. Pawlenty, taking Minnesota's ten electoral votes away from Obama---
Wow, you don't understand politics *at all* huh? There's is absolutely zero chance Pawlenty would accept.
See if you can riddle out why.
intrade: O up 1.9, M down .6
Palin making fun of Biden because of his age once again points out either:
1- She's clueless.
2- McCain's staff is trying to lose.
And the two are not exclusive.
---I am watching her support fade away in the Texas evangelical community, at least among the educated.---
I think they're probably ok with losing those 3 votes.
Of course if she were to be dropped, it would take McCain about 15 minutes to find a replacement - the same amount of time it took to select Palin, right?
Doesn't Guliani already have a bat in-hand, eagerly waiting for his chance to 'pinch-hit'?
McCain is a charicture of himslef, and thinks this is 1980 where Youtube does not exist.
We should coast in to an easy win, but McCain worries me - he might have something out of left field.
I think I read somewhere that since early voting has already started, it would be political suicide in a real sense, because I'm not sure that those early votes for McCain/Palin would still be valid votes. Someone correct me if I am wrong.
VP wardrobe problem is sorted if Giuliani replaces Palin.
The debate on Thursday will be boring, with the rules that McCain insisted on, it's more like a live, parallel press interview... it certainly isn't debate. And so there's no way for either Palin or Biden to really knock it out the park, but the downside is also limited.
And with the current expectations of Palin set so low, as long as she doesn't just drool into the camera, it will be a wash. I suppose if she starts speaking in tongues, she could do some more damage, but she's pretty much already her charge limit on her credit cards.
As for replacing her. I have no doubt that if John McCain thought he could improve his chance of winning from his current 1% (which is the approximate odds of Obama's team making a horrific campaign ending gaffe) to 2%, he'd do it. But dropping is only half the game, he'd need to replace her. And who'd would he pick? The GOP bench is pathetically weak and if there was a real winner of this caliber, McCain would have already pick them. In fact, if there was anyone that good, they would have beaten McCain in the primaries.
No, the supertwins are stuck with each other until Nov 5th. Then Palin will make millions having someone ghostwrite her memoirs of the campaign while Obama tries to salvage what's left of the country after 8 years of Bush.
Guiliani is the only guy with political career left and thus is the likely choice if Palin falls (she won't though). I cannot see Pawlenty or even Romney becoming this campaigns sacrificial lamb.
it's quite obvious when biden's statement is put in context that the "clean coal" should have been "dirty coal"
kid g-
It depends on the state, as states control the voting rules. I am sure some have a rule that you cannot drop someone, unless there is a death, so in some states the McCain/Palin votes would not count.
Someone needs a law review article on this!
I read an article last night, something about Tony Rezco finally "talking" and working with the prosecutors. I wouldn't put it past the Republican machine to offer him plea deals if he'll come up with some bullshit that links him further to Obama.
To drop Palin would only make McCain look worse because he choose her. Plus, no one that could possibly help the ticket is going to sacrifice their career to put their name on a ticket that has already lost. Most of them don't even like McCain. Except crazy Joe Lieberman. He might do it. I bet the GOP is now wishing that hadn't pushed McCain to not pick Lieberman. He looks like a great pick compared to sarahcuda.
It is too late in the game to change the veep choice. The only time he might have been able to and not immediately lost the election, was when Bristol's pregnancy was announced. Palin could have said it was her decision, that her family needed her.
Gwen Ifill is going to be a great moderator. She will have excellent questions and she will ask follow up questions unless the republicans demanded there be none when the debate rules were negotiated. Biden is very intelligent and knows his job is to praise Obama and criticize McCain.
It will be very difficult for Sarah to do the same as well as Biden because she doesn't understand the issues. As has been pointed out elsewhere, she doesn't always understand the QUESTION. Even without follow up questions, her lack of knowledge will show. Someone might want to explain "hubris" to her when this is all over.
"with the rules that McCain insisted on, it's more like a live, parallel press interview... it certainly isn't debate."
What are these rules? I was under the impression that it would be similar in format to the presidential debate last Friday, except less time (5 min) per question. But still time for interaction.
"Gwen Ifill is going to be a great moderator. She will have excellent questions and she will ask follow up questions unless the republicans demanded there be none when the debate rules were negotiated. Biden is very intelligent and knows his job is to praise Obama and criticize McCain."
I believe that WAS a part of the negotiation. No follow ups and no rebuttals.
Think, folks, think. Expectations for Sarah Palin are so low that she can hardly do anything else but look better.
If we intend to sit around and watch a train wreck we may find that we're watching the train pull out of the station, doing fine thank you very much.
Any recent experiences with blowing elections that we should have won come to mind?
No, the VP debates have very strict rules, and pres debates have very open rules this year.
Agreed by the campaigns about three weeks back.
Here is a synopsis of DeFazio's position. All it takes is a reasonable change in the accounting rules that lets the investment banks use the mortgage bonds for collateral. Avoid direct transfer of $700B to Paulson-Bush.
""Two, and not mutually exclusive, McCain replaces her with somebody even more exciting. A fundamentalist preacher! A non-white woman! A Democrat! Palin had to bow out, to let him make history like this.""
How about replacing Palin with Hillary? That would be reaching across the aisle. She's available and has a uterus, would probably prefer to be second banana to an old guy with melanoma rather than a young healthy guy...
And Bill would come out of his shell to really support that ticket.
Now that would be a real Hail Mary, LOL
I will enjoy laughing at you libs and the media when she blows Joe Windbag out of the water Thursday.
Didn't you see her convention speech? The Alaska debate? The woman is good. I bet she's doing badly in those interviews on purpose to lower expectations. McCain's October Surge will start Friday morning.
It's quite clear the potential McCain voters out there don't have a reason to be motivated to say they'll vote for him in a poll or even perhaps vote for him at all. The question is: if over the next 35 days a reason emerges, McCain soundly beats Obama in the debates or Palin proves she's not weak as previously thought or Obama gives a reason to really dislike him could McCain get these voters back? I think it would be really difficult.
The thing to notice is McCain's number in the nationally polling 35 days out. It's around 40-41%, abysmal. Bill Clinton's theory is throughout the 20th century, the country was split about 40% Dem/40% Rep, the Presidential elections were fought over the other 20%. 1968 (Civil Right Act of '64, Vietnam, social upheaval, etc.), the Conservative Base grew to around 45%. Elctions would be fought over the other 15% as the Dems base stayed at about 40%. This made it impossible for Dems to win. The only excpetion was 1976 which followed the end of the Vietnam War and Watergate. The base disparity gave the Reps a chance at landslides even. When Clinton came along, followed by the Gingrich Revolution, this gave a boost to the Dem base and they've been closing ever since. His guess is we're at bases of about 45% each. So, a landslide election would be very unlikely fighting for just that 10% sliver left. What I'm wondering is is it possible that as the Dem base stays around 45% could the Rep base be shrinking toard that 40% number? I know it's wishful thinking. After all, McCain was ahead 3 weeks ago with about 50% of the vote. I just get the impression that there's a chance the Dems could be THE party for the next generation. Let's not forgetm, the Dems took over right after the Great Depression in 1933. They "reigned" until pretty much 1968. The next time a party dominated was the next great economic mess in 1980 when Reagan took over. We've had Conservative rule ever since. Both Eisenhower and Clinton were centrists for the other party. We could be at another such place. I'd love to see primarily Democrat rule for the next 30 or so years. It might be what this country needs to counterbalance the last 28.
" All it takes is a reasonable change in the accounting rules that lets the investment banks use the mortgage bonds for collateral."
Allowing them to leverage debt into more debt is the absolute worst possible thing they could do. It's the reason we are in this mess at all.
JRoyale said...
The debate on Thursday will be boring, with the rules that McCain insisted on, it's more like a live, parallel press interview... it certainly isn't debate. And so there's no way for either Palin or Biden to really knock it out the park, but the downside is also limited.
This is good for Obama/Biden. Biden = Great Guy/Gaffe Machine
Palin = Pathetically Low Expectations, Homerun would be dangerous for Obama camp.
If she's terrible it would just reinforce what we already believe. Initially when I heard Rahm Emanuel agreed to this change in format i was disappointed and perplexed, but after thinking about it, I think it makes aa lot of sense.
Palin is a genius, rwc? Now we all expect a brilliant debate performance from her and a rubbish one from Biden.
What about Hillary for McCain vp?
Go to CBS News, look at the Couric McCain/Palin interview and turn the sound off. Quite an experience.
Someone'd rather not be there!
What about Hillary for McCain vp?
Hillary DUFF, maybe.
McCain also said on CNN this morning that he was not going to parse everything that Palin says.
If he didn't have to, the media wouldn't be asking him to.
And he looks like a babysitter in that Couric interview, especially when he does the talking for her.
eric-
My hope is that the Republican base continues to dwindle down to basically include only the Evangelical voters. The fiscal conservatives are really in a bind now, they have no future in that party nor can they really offer a viable alternative until after this entire mess has been cleaned up, likely not until 2016. The last component to the Reagan coalition was the foreign policy hawks, and they have been made fools lately by the mismanaged wars and have been marginalized. I think the Democratic party could pull away large numbers of the fiscal and foreign policy hawks by maintaining a centrist policy approach, but I doubt that's going to happen. In any event, the only portion of the Reagan coalition that still has any moral left are the social conservatives and evengelicals.
InkStain said...
" All it takes is a reasonable change in the accounting rules that lets the investment banks use the mortgage bonds for collateral."
Allowing them to leverage debt into more debt is the absolute worst possible thing they could do. It's the reason we are in this mess at all.
Agreed Ink,
#1 Mark to market is essential.
#2 Insurance on toxic mortgages is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard come out of government.
#3 Cantor's rising star status is over with this garbage. To me, he's an unadulterated moron. Taxpayers never get their money back, reinforce bad behavior with a "pure" bailout for the folks that got us in this mess. No help for anyone but them, no consequences. Completely absurd.
#4 The Dems will not vote on this. What will end up passing is a variation of what failed yesterday. Probably happens early next week. Probably tweaked with a couple things here and there, one specific will probably be some way to get the private sector avaialability to buy in with some perks, so the taxpayers aren't on the hook for all of it.
"No, the VP debates have very strict rules, and pres debates have very open rules this year.
Agreed by the campaigns about three weeks back."
Have they changed from this?
http://delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080921/NEWS/80921006/1006
"Palin and Biden will each have 90 seconds to respond to questions, with a two-minute period for discussion between the candidates to follow."
Doesn't this mean there can be follow-ups and rebuttals? And is Gwen Ifill really forbidden from asking follow-up questions?? That can't be, right? (I think it would have been mentioned in this article...)
---Palin = Pathetically Low Expectations, Homerun would be dangerous for Obama camp. ---
Wrong. No matter how well Palin does, it's not dangerous for the Obama camp. She's gone past the point of return on lowered expectations. A good performance will be seen as her having memorized things to say.
The only thing dangerous to the Obama camp is a Biden mistake. Palin can't hurt them in any way at this point.
The only thing dangerous to the Obama camp is a Biden mistake.
A huge Biden mistake. Otherwise, it's just Joe being Joe.
I think McCain picks Carter after dumping Palin. The two old guys ride to victory!
WTF are you idiots talking about, now way Biden gets dumps, no real way Palin gets dumped.
If I didn't know better, I'd think some of these House GOP solutions were actively trying to collapse the entire economy.
The problem: Major financial institutions are overleveraged on debt, causing a credit crunch where no one has enough cash to loan each other and keep business flowing.
The solution: Either allow them to leverage more debt, or ask them for cash up front.
Do they walk around kicking cranial trauma victims in the head?
The Republican leadership walking up to the microphone last night reminded me of the beginning of the movie Resevoir Dogs...before they all got killed.
Eric:
I think the Republican base is now about 42%. That is, McCain has only the base vote right now. I think the best way to calculate the base vote is to look at the percentage that approves of Palin. This number will never go below about 41%. The democratic base, as long as they don't revert to the tax-and-spend policies of the big boss era, is probably around 44%. Again, this is the percentage that Obama has not dropped below in this entire election. You might argue that that is false because of a lot of crossover from the Republican party, but that is compensated for by the percentage of older white Democrats who are voting against him because of race (and there certainly are a significant number of those). These people would still vote for almost any white Democratic candidate.
ARG national poll:
O:49
M:45
O +1, M -1 from last week.
---Allowing them to leverage debt into more debt is the absolute worst possible thing they could do. It's the reason we are in this mess at all.---
No. The reason we are in this mess is that this mess was factored into the quantitative risk analysis when derivatives were priced. The downside risk has always been hedged by the likelihood government would compensate for market failure.
"No. The reason we are in this mess is that this mess was factored into the quantitative risk analysis when derivatives were priced. The downside risk has always been hedged by the likelihood government would compensate for market failure."
Let's just say that's a very cynical way of looking at it.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/09/29/zakaria.sarah.palin/index.html?section=cnn_latest
http://www.newsweek.com/id/161204
I know most folks that think Fareed Zakaria is impressive and non-partisan probably don't like Palin to begin with, but this struck me as the single most damning column or opinion of her I've read. Again I know Fareed is not American and Conservatives like Frum and Will saying bad things about her could hurt worse, but for my minds eye this is the most poignant.
For those of you that don't know Zakaria, he is a foreign policy expert, extremely intelligently, and purely non-partisan. I've never heard him say or read anything from him that could be construed as partisan. His opinion of Palin above is remarkable. In case people don't care what Gergen, Kearns-Goodwin, Frum, or Will think, check out the links above.
Here is the debate org:
http://www.debates.org/
The official press release:
http://www.debates.org/pages/news_092108.html
Vice presidential debate: all topics, moderated by Gwen Ifill
Thursday, October 2, Washington University in St. Louis, Mo.
-Ninety-second answers, followed by two-minute discussion for each question. Two-minute closing statements.
"A good performance will be seen as her having memorized things to say."
I agree with this. Palin has to thread the needle between falling on her face and appearing overly-scripted. Not so much in the minds of the voters, but in the minds of the media.
---Let's just say that's a very cynical way of looking at it.---
Incorrect. It's a statement of fact.
The goal for Palin are about the same as Obama's in the first debate - she has to convince America that she is presidential.
She had done that with her speech - at least to the extent.
But she blew it with the interviews and that might actually be permanent.
She cant just beat out expectations that she will fail - she has to actually look like she could be president.
Biden is more or less irrelvant. Very few potential Obama voters are voting becuase of Biden. But a much larger number of potential McCain voters are going to make their decision based on Palin.
Either they are afraid that he might die and that she might actually become president, or they are worried about what his choice of her says about his abilities as a leader.
Either way - I think she needs to do more than just not screw up, she actually has to make people think that she could be president.
I cannot see Palin doing well, even in the limited format, but it will be fun to watch in any case.
This is a way McCain could ditch Palin without hurting his campaign as much.
Palin was the grand experiment. McCain always had a sure fire way of dumping her and keeping his hands clean. The ethics probe.
Should Palin bomb the debate and cause McCains numbers to fall, Palin will step down because of the ethics probe, which will suddenly rule against her. (This is a bipartisan probe, so getting a few repulicans to sell her out can't be a stretch.)
This will "stun" McCain, who will blame everything on the liberal bias of the probe and the Obama campaign who secretly influenced the vote. McCain will then defend Palin and her decision to fight for her governship and save the state of Alaska from ambitious corrupted liberals who want to "steal" the election. Then he relunctantly choices Romney, who can deliver Michigan and Minnesota, or Huckabee who will protect his base vote, and campaign in spite of the attacks of the vicious left.
The sad part is, it could work.
"Incorrect. It's a statement of fact."
Sort of like your "Fact" that the only reason we were curious about the Battleground poll was that it was not what we wanted to see, and not that it was a full seven points off of next closest recent poll?
Amazing how nothing I've read about the problem, in any blog or financial magazine or newspaper, mentions your "fact."
---For those of you that don't know Zakaria, he is a foreign policy expert, extremely intelligently, and purely non-partisan.---
He's an empty suit with a famous family who is marketable on television.
"Incorrect. It's a statement of fact."
You're speculating on motives, not presenting facts. Your speculation may be shared by others, but that doesn't make it "a statement of fact."
"McCain was honestly their best shot at a win this year, but I think the interpretation on their side will inevitably be that he was not pure enough of a conservative, and they might nominate a total national level loser in 2012 in a pendulum swing the other way."
God, I hope so. Let the Repugnican party lurch ever rightward toward loonball social conservatism and flat-earthism. It will be the welcome death of them.
Zakaria is many things, but surely not an empty suit. The guy is whip smart!
Add my voice to the 'no way will he dump Palin' camp. He is not the type to admit he is wrong.
He is going to lose. He has lost the reasonable indie vote with this move and cannot regain it no matter what he does. If he dumps her he loses the lunatic fringe too and goes down in ignominious defeat!
What Robert said about TX evangelicals is also true about some CO evangelicals. We are increasingly finding Palin an embarrassment. Also, look at the crosstabs on Rasmussen this morning. Obama leads for "certain" voters 44-38 and "likely" voters 6-5. The certain category had been hovering around 40 for both candidates for the longest time. Thus, Obama is gaining support in the most important category.
she has to convince America that she is presidential.
Agreed. There is a 'threshold' that each candidate on the ticket must meet. Kinda like a height-requirement for a roller-coaster ride. Just because someone shrinks down before walking up to the ruler, then stretches upward...it means nothing if they still come up 4" short. Palin has to reach a threshold here. Going from perceived moron to just 'semi-moron' taint gonna cut it.
Meg said...
My grandmother is an 89 year-old, Fox-News watching, lifelong Republican living in Florida. One month ago, she told me that Obama scared her and she didn't think he'd be good for the country. I spoke with her a couple days ago and she's 100% behind Obama now.
The reason? Sarah Palin. And she's not opposed to Sarah Palin for any of the reasons that make sense. She firmly believes that that woman should be home taking care of her children, who "are in obvious need of guidance."
Former New York Mayor Ed Koch stumping for Obama in South Florida
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-flbkoch0929sbsep29,0,5055816.story
Look at this.
"An early look at today's Diageo/Hotline tracking poll shows Sen. Barack Obama now holds a double-digit lead in key battleground states.
Among registered voters surveyed in Colorado, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Wisconsin and Nevada, Obama tops McCain 50 to 40%. Just a week ago, Obama led 45% to 42%".
I think there will be follow up questions. Good! Plus no topics are off the table.
Ifill answering online questions about debate:
"The current plan for the vice presidential debate is for each candidate to answer a question for 90 seconds, with an additional two minutes for follow-up/exchange. I think of it in five-minute chunks."
"Baltimore: How do you approach putting together a debate? Do you have a list of questions prepared, or are you going to cover several themes and leave room for follow-up?
Gwen Ifill: All of the above."
---Sort of like your "Fact" that the only reason we were curious about the Battleground poll was that it was not what we wanted to see, and not that it was a full seven points off of next closest recent poll?---
No, that would be you creating out of thin air an argument I never made. I can only assume because you're so shockingly incompetent rhetorically that you couldn't conceive of an argument against what I actually posted.
That's just a guess, though, I admit it's possible that you literally misunderstood the words.
---Amazing how nothing I've read about the problem, in any blog or financial magazine or newspaper, mentions your "fact."---
Well, since you've read blogs and magazines, I'd have to say you're as educated on the issue as it's possible for one to be? How dare I question your understanding of complex math structured when you've read a dumbed down explanation in "The Economist"
I'm pretty sure you're qualified to be nominated for Treasury Secretary now.
Here's my problem now. You literally can't understand the pricing models used, or we wouldn't be having this discussion. Without you being able to understand them, I can't demonstrate my point to you. For you, this crisis may as well be based on magic. That said, let's examine your position:
You argue that multi trillion dollar bets were made based on a pricing system developed by people with a collective thousand years of education who calculated risk WITHOUT considering government intervention into the markets.
Really? You understand that even without being able to understand the models that this is similar in credibility to believing in Santa Claus, right?
What am I saying, of course you don't. You haven't read a blog telling you he was real in the last two weeks.
InkStain said...
If I didn't know better, I'd think some of these House GOP solutions were actively trying to collapse the entire economy.
The problem: Major financial institutions are overleveraged on debt, causing a credit crunch where no one has enough cash to loan each other and keep business flowing.
The solution: Either allow them to leverage more debt, or ask them for cash up front.
Do they walk around kicking cranial trauma victims in the head?
I think I have about a 50% understanding of the mess. The average American, probably 10%. You, I don't know, probably more than me, but I know you don't work in the biz. Here's the question, Institutions had 30X leverage on money that they don't even have anymore, and the leveraged investments are worth a whole lot less which put these folks into many trillions in potential debt. If these mortgages are made closer to whole in the long run, will that leveraged loss shrink and that's what we're aiming for? In other word are we trying to stabilize say $20 trillion in losses instead of $700 billion or so. The impact on credit and investments and how that trickles down is obvious, but I'm particularly concerned about this if it's like putting a $700BB band-aid on a $20 trillion wound. If those are potentially legitimate losses in the many trillions it could destroy our economy forever and could be much, much worse than the Great Depression. Our American way could be completely over forever. Our whole system could shutdown for the foreseeable future, meaning decades, not years, and possibly forever. Am I interpreting the problem correctly or am I missing something?
""I've been trying to come up with an appropriate analogy for Palin's relationship to the ticket...""
Vote for McCain because he is consistent... He married a trophy wife, and he selected a trophy vp. ;)
Re - Biden Coal Gaffe
>>>
Clean coal is the biggest farce in the world. If you have ever been to China and seen how awful the Pearl River Delta and inland cities look, you would understand. I'm glad that Biden agrees. I'd rather build nuclear plants than "clean coal". That's like saying that 93 octane is "clean gasoline". Completely and utterly ridiculous.
Newt Gingrich and George Will trashing Sarah Palin in the ABC green room
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=RAKjJOnVD60
---You're speculating on motives, not presenting facts. Your speculation may be shared by others, but that doesn't make it "a statement of fact."---
Incorrect. I'm not speculating on motives at all. I'm stating that the pricing models included the possibility of government intervention when calculating the risk premium. This is fact.
While I realize, this can't be established to people who can't understand the models, that doesn't make it less factual. The lack of someone's ability to understand something doesn't invalidate it.
You may not be able to determine the accuracy of what I state. This isn't my problem. Nor am I particularly invested in your ability to do so. Arguing that we both are offering opinion, however, because you don't understand enough to make a finding isn't valid.
Sorry :(
Thanks Rich and Robert for your insight on the evangelical vote. McCain picked her to bring in women and evangelicals with no regard for whether she is qualified. What an insult to both groups. The cynicism of his choice is very telling.
Contrary to popular belief, I'm guessing the longer we go without a bailout, the less likely one becomes. Every day that the world doesn't end, people will find it less likely.
". I'm stating that the pricing models included the possibility of government intervention when calculating the risk premium. This is fact."
You also stated that it was the reason for crisis.
That is speculation.
And it's speculation for which you'll find little support among economic experts.
After watching those Couric interviews I think Socks the cat could win a debate against Palin.
MEOWBAMA
---You also stated that it was the reason for crisis.---
Correct. It's not arguable. Pricing risk too low is the cause of the crisis. If the risk premiums had been higher, there would be no crisis. It's inarguable.
---That is speculation.---
Incorrect.
---And it's speculation for which you'll find little support among economic experts.---
Incorrect. All experts are well aware that the instruments in question were priced with risk premiums far to low to be supported by the market alone. If you can find *one* who has stated otherwise, I'd be interested.
Let me know that works out.
""Contrary to popular belief, I'm guessing the longer we go without a bailout, the less likely one becomes. Every day that the world doesn't end, people will find it less likely.""
You have a point except now that the bailout has become even more of a political tool, both candidates may work much harder to prove they are the 'real leader' to bring about it's passage.
I dont know how hard either will try, but will Obama be able to deliver more Dems or McCain more repubs? McCain couldnt deliver even one rep. from Arizona. Can he now?
"Arguing that we both are offering opinion, however, because you don't understand enough to make a finding isn't valid."
I hope you aren't in a profession that requires you to be persuasive, because the nonstop ad hominem attacks are really not useful.
As inkstain said, you're not just simply saying the market accounted for government intervention in its risk analysis. I'm sure it did (though that still doesn't make it a "fact.") You're saying it's the whole reason for the crisis, which is pure speculation. I'm not disputing your points, necessarily, I'm disputing the fact that you're calling it unquestionable truth, which it most certainly is not.
---Contrary to popular belief, I'm guessing the longer we go without a bailout, the less likely one becomes. Every day that the world doesn't end, people will find it less likely.---
This is an interesting argument. The problem, of course, is that in this case the world will end. The credit market will have a direct impact on average people if this is ignored long enough, by which point any intervention will have to be much more severe.
I agree that US legislation often works this way, though, and it's not impossible that nothing will pass until after the election with a much worse option being a response to panic afterward.
That said, I'd lay 6 to 1 something very unfamiliar to what was voted on yesterday passes this week.
Sean: Are you still on the road? Can we expect another field report or are those done for this election season?
"Of concern to McCain's campaign, however, is a remaining and still-undisclosed clip from Palin's interview with Couric last week that has the political world buzzing.
The Palin aide, after first noting how "infuriating" it was for CBS to purportedly leak word about the gaffe, revealed that it came in response to a question about Supreme Court decisions.
After noting Roe vs. Wade, Palin was apparently unable to discuss any major court cases.
There was no verbal fumbling with this particular question as there was with some others, the aide said, but rather silence.
"
---hope you aren't in a profession that requires you to be persuasive, because the nonstop ad hominem attacks are really not useful.---
I think you'll find I'm not making any ad hominem attacks. That or perhaps you don't understand the meaning of the term.
---As inkstain said, you're not just simply saying the market accounted for government intervention in its risk analysis. I'm sure it did (though that still doesn't make it a "fact.") You're saying it's the whole reason for the crisis, which is pure speculation.---
I'm not sure how you can argue this is the case. Please present any other alternative that would have caused the current situation had the instruments been priced with higher risk premiums.
---I'm not disputing your points, necessarily, I'm disputing the fact that you're calling it unquestionable truth, which it most certainly is not.---
What questions do you have regarding it?
November 2008. A whole bunch of "normal" people end up voting for "our little people representative" sarah palin and mccain scrapes in despite losing popular vote by almost 1%. OH, PA and FL all go red.
sadly, he relapses within 18 months. Dead after 2 years. Sarah Palin is next president of the United States.
By now the russian bear is not only growling but prowling around what it considers to be its den. Border clashes with baltic republics leaves southern half of all three in "soviet" hands.
ukraine and belarus have given them widespread territorial rights after fuel blackmail. Russian troops now occupy a third of Georgia.
NATO is furious but paralysed by fear. Diplomatic and economic blockade do next to zero. Russia this time, has all the cards as oil hits $200 a barrell and western europe and north america are still just as dependent on both russian and middle east oil.
Poland is next on their list in 2011. World considers the next Cold War to be well and truly underway with both sides actively rearming themselves with latest and biggest nuclear missiles.
Into this walks Sarah Palin, talking big and brash to impress the home crowd. Stokes the fires. Endangers 20 years of stand-off diplomacy. Her advisors try desperately to keep her on a tight rein but she just keeps saying dumb things into the first mic she sees.
What does the CIA decide to do? "Take her out of the picture...we need an expert at the helm, especially now, and she refuses to take a back seat."
Large crowd, Iraq troops final homecoming. Rooftop. Sniper. Single bullet to the side of the head.
Too far fetched?
would anybody like to explain to me why McCain has been in Iowa for the last 2 days? What's the rationale there?
I am starting to think the Republican establishment would be wise to lose this election, as a matter of long term strategy. If they were to win, and McCain manages poorly the next four years, the Republican brand would be almost irretrievably damaged -- it'd take a generation for it to be rehabilitated. If they lose the election, they can at least try to spin any difficulties Obama faces (even if not of his making) as Democrat issues.
Viewed in this light, I think the Repub establishment is happy to sacrifice both McCain, who they've never really liked, and Palin, who has shown to be a lightweight, for the chance to rebuild the party in 2012 with a new brand and new players (probably led by Jindal et al).
Thoughts?
---Too far fetched?---
I'm going to go with: Yes.
neil-
That only happens in movies.
I'll be Palin's Umbrella Man.
---would anybody like to explain to me why McCain has been in Iowa for the last 2 days? What's the rationale there?---
Hazarding a complete and total guess, I'd think their internals must be showing movement towards him there.
"November 2008. A whole bunch of "normal" people end up voting for "our little people representative" sarah palin and mccain scrapes in despite losing popular vote by almost 1%. OH, PA and FL all go red."
That's what I'm looking FORWARD to!
Biden will look like such a sexist Thursday.
"Large crowd, Iraq troops final homecoming. Rooftop. Sniper. Single bullet to the side of the head.
Too far fetched?"
Completely, but on a positive note, Jerry Bruckheimer will probably be calling you...
simaon-
I agree, is there Iowa polling I have not seen? The only thing that crosses my mind is they are playing defense and hoping to stop the Kerry states + IA scenarios which all put Obama over the top.
Seems wierd though. Isn't MI better for that?
I, too noticed the Rasmussen poll today showing that 46% of those surveyed thought that Obama was too inexperienced to be President.
I would like to see a 538 analysis of the inexperience issue.
I would also like to see the Obama campaign address this issue. 46% is way to high to ignore, and they've been ignoring it throughout this campaign.
Obama has PLENTY of experience. It only takes a couple of years to figure out how to be effective in the Senate. He's sponsored and passed many bills, including important ones. His executive experience and accomplishments as a community organizer, as well as his success with guiding his campaign prove that he is a highly skilled manager. McCain has managed nothing except his botched campaign. Add to that Obama's major in political science and international relations, and his knowledge of the Constitution (which needs to be reinstated,) and you have a VERY impressive resume.
I think at each speech he should challenge the charge of inexperience, and spend 5 minutes detailing his experience and accomplishments, including how many bills and the important ones in both the Illinois and US Senate. That's all it would take.
Yeah, that's what I thought, but those would have to be some pretty spectacular internals given that all the independent polls are showing him down by high single digits/low double digits.
simon,
I saw that he was holding events in Iowa.
I didn't get it. I get the feeling that McCain kinda does exactly as he wants and goes exactly where he feels.
I bet he takes experience head on at the next debate, because it is almost assured that a question will be asked about either his or Palin's experience.
I just watched the clip of Couric interviewing Palin and McCain together. I'm sorry, but this is just too much. Does she need him sitting there now, holding her hand, explaining what she really meant? Is she so incapable of speaking for herself that she now needs Daddy to do it for her?
This is beyond sexism; it's patronizing paternalism. Can you just imagine interviewing Biden and bringing Obama along to explain what Joe's remarks mean?
He's feeling it out. I'd guess he's trying to see if he can get some movement there. I'd expect him to move on to a few other Obama states if that doesn't work.
If VA and NC fall, even PA isn't really enough to save him, so he's got to start feeling out some places where he could make a dent.
Maybe McCain just really, really likes the results from the Big Ten poll in IA...
emonokari said...
What about Hillary for McCain vp?
Hillary DUFF, maybe.
Hilary Duff is supports Obama
simon: There is no logic to anything McCain does. He does what his gut tells him. And his gut likes to gamble - the higher the stakes the better. Iowa is so blue that he might as well be campaigning in Illinois.
Hilary Duff is supporting Obama
I think McCain is putting his ambition ahead of the world economy. He has shown over and over contempt for the American people, so a little cynical brinksmanship with the economy is nothing to him.
My instinct is to let the economy burn, too. I've been force fed trickle-down, Friedman bullshit so long it would be satisfying to see the free market reagonomics thieves get their just deserts. But, unlike McCain I am grown up and see the need to take the safer course. Will be curious if the 72 year old child does too.
The real problem with Palin is that she is just out of her league. And its not particularly experience, but what that experienec tells us about her and her ambitions.
We know Joe Biden has wanted to be president since college. I would assume the same for John McCain since he got out of the military and Obama since at least the time he got out of Harvard and probably before (why else would he have gone to law school).
That means that these guys have been thinking about national policy for 15-40 years. Writing speeches in their head on the ride to work. Reading books, articles in the papers and magazines on national issues and national campaigns and learning from them.
But the fact that Sarah Baracuda just at the age of 43 decided she wanted to be more than a small town mayor tells me alot about where her head has been. She hasnt spent 10 or 20 years thinking about this stuff, and she cant possible pretend that she has.
it would be like me applying to be director of an opera company becuase I've always liked music, play guitar, and recently started singing opera. Yes, eventually I might have the knowledge base to pull it off, but not a month into it.
I am reading everywhere that the Republican party has cracked up, is on its "last legs," and has simply fractured and broken after 8 years of Bush. Yet for the life of me, I can't understand how this party can retool itself if they have to hold onto the fundies for votes. How will they ever get out of their 19th century mindset vis-a-vis social issues? Their homophobia, their positions on religion/abortion, women's issues, science, etc., are simply no longer in the mainstream. And this is true as more and more people younger than the baby boomers are voting.
Fareed Zakaria is what I call a "classic conservative." He was the president of a conservative debating faction at Yale; the guy comes off as an aristocrat who prefers order. He is also a globalist. He's really non-partisan though. This is the type of guy who the Palin Republican Party is leaving behind.
Well, IA did go red last cycle, but he lost IA big with the ethanol issue. He likely loses IA anyway, I am out there once a month or so on business on they LOVE Obama. The only repub to make a dent there this year was Paul.
people say experience but they vote on qualifications.
I wonder how that question would be answered if it were framed in a context of qualifications rather than experience.
He libs! McCain up +1 in Ohio!
You can't win WITHOUT Ohio, nobody does!
antmatic: Obama, on the other hand, has an intellectual man-crush on him the size of Florida.
i have a question for nate or any of they capable surrogates (in terms of polling expertise) here.
my understanding is that the majority of polls are based on Likely Voters, which is obviously fine.
so, how much of the decrease in Mccain's number is due to the reduction in his supporters likelyhood to vote rather than a switch in allegiance to Obama?
if the surge in Obama's numbers is mainly due to them being disaffectioante (e.g. because of palin, the economy or the debate), it could be temporary and a turn of event (good performance in the debates, for example) could win them back.
if it is a switch, i see it as a much harder hurdle to overcome for Mccain.
Is it possible to extract this info from the polls?
Maybe with any luck, McCain will start campaigning heavily and exclusively in Delaware and Maryland, ignoring the rest of the states. I think this would be his winning strategy.
"You can't win WITHOUT Ohio, nobody does!"
Johnny Kennedy says hi (and asks if you have any aspirin).
Post a Comment