As voters have taken a second look at Sarah Palin in venues like the Charlie Gibson interview and even Tina Fey's SNL sketch, they may not be as enamored of what they're seeing.
The Research 2000 poll for Daily Kos now has Palin's favorability-unfavorability scores at 45-44 -- just a +1. Six days ago, when the poll, launched, she was at a 52-35, a +17.
And I know that some of you don't like or don't trust this poll -- for reasons that I think are a little silly -- but there is a similar decline in her numbers in the Diageo/Hotline poll. Her favorability numbers in yesterday's Hotline poll -- today's isn't out yet -- were a 48-36, or a +12. But a week ago, on September 8, she had been at a 48-24, a +24.
Whether this ultimately has any effect on the Presidential race remains to be seen; Obama's position has improved in the national trackers, but not so much in the state polls. But it seems possible to me that John McCain's recent bounce has had more to do with John McCain -- whose speech at the convention was as underrated as Palin's was overrated -- and less to do with Palin than is generally acknowledged. And if people are voting based on the bottom of the ticket, it seems furthermore that she may yet wind up being a net liability for him.
9.16.2008
Palin's Favorability Numbers Eroding
@ 10:15 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
645 comments
Daily Kos! Haha
I think Governor Palin's favorability is slipping due to the fact that she continues to openly lie about her record, despite proof to the contrary and the fact that the campaign refuses to let her take questions from the media. The public is only so stupid. You can't win an election solely blaming the "liberal" media for every thing that is said about your V.P. selection they don't find favorable.
Maybe with the recent economic headlines, having someone you want to have a beer and go moose hunting with in the white house doesn't make as much sense as it did at first thought.
I don't see how Palin's numbers can go anywhere but down, especially given today's news that she's going to stop cooperating with the troopergate probe. I would also guess that the Republican base would be first on, last off with her -- but if the public eventually perceives her as negatively as the press appears to, I would guess that the Republican base would find that discouraging indeed. And then the Dems will doubtless pile on, explaining that Obama put country first and election second whereas McCain, in spite of all his claims about never doing that, appears to have done so after all.
The problem with the 24 hour news cycle is how easily an issue can become the deciding factor, and yet only days/weeks later pale into significance.
Obama's convention speech dissapeared in hours...the residual effect of Palin's selection will remain, but it will not be groundbreaking.
From here on in the Obama camp needs to tap into '92 Clinton mode and hammer home the economy issue again and again.
At the start of the year there were 5 major American investment banks, now there are only two.
The banking collapse is unparalleled (it is starting to shade '29 in certain ways).
Obama needs to to roll at a big economy speech like he did with regards to race after the Reverend Wright controversy.
There is a real opportunity here Mr. Obama, please don't waste it!
Nate,
Poll wise I see what you're saying about Palin, yet she's drawing bigger crowds than McCain, so the boots on the ground don't seem to agree with the poll numbers?
It seems she's finally getting vetted, and the American people don't like the details beyond their first impression. McCain gambled on her less savory past actions and personal politics being buried in out of the way Alaska for while, but we're in an age of light-speed communications.
The new headlines are dominated by Lehman Brothers, AIG and Merill Lynch, people are finally asking themselves if Miss Alaska, while likeable and no doubt great fun to go hunting moose with, has what it takes to sort out this Big League mess.
It's nice to see that Nate agrees with me: I said from the get-go that Palin's speech was pretty empty and wasn't all that great, whereas McCain's speech -- however poorly it was delivered -- actually had content and marked a smart shift to the center.
We'll see how the Palin effect plays out, but I expect it to be diminished in importance as we get nearer to the election. The financial news might hasten that process.
Daily Kos only polls mac notebook users found consuming various espresso drinks at San Fransisco cafes. Their results are somewhat confusing when compared to the Rassmussen polls, which are generally taken at McDonalds locations in rural Ohio bettween the hours of 6am to 9am.
the Mccain bounce is due to Palin, no doubt. The rest is right and spells extremely well for Obama. Palin is more popular than Mccain who is less popular than Obama. I know many laugh at my googletrending to measure popularity but I believe it reflects it very well. Searches for Palin are dropping - this means people believe they got the whole story and are losing curiosity. Pro Palins don't search news about her because they are scared of negative artiles. Anti Palins don't search for the exact opposite reason. The result is she stepping out of the spotlight. Back to Obama-Mccain (and issues).
Palin is getting the faithful base out not turning on new voters as we are seeing in the polls now back where they were the day the Dems started their convention
Shale,
Your point is certainly fair enough. There is little doubt that Palin has energized the GOP base significantly. She has also helped to energize the Dem base, though perhaps slightly less so. The real question is how she comes across to independents and especially undecideds. If she has no net effect or is a net plus among this group, then she was a smart pick. If she is a net negative, then it's not so clear -- she still might have been a smart pick because McCain was obviously trailing before, and now he has a fighting chance.
McCain's speech was underrated? It was a content-free biography that only served to highlight the complete lack of ideas McCain has to offer. It wasn't underrated, it was just terrible.
The numbers are proving me wrong.
I was of the opinion that Palin was invincible to any policy attacks because she has a monopoly on teh Jesus. She provides a method of government, similar to George Bush, that isn't represented by the other candidates: a casting of our foreign conflicts as religious war; militant stance on abortion; a christian good v. evil approach to policy, etc.
If you're only interested in one issue, teh Jesus, and no other candidate represents that frame, than the claims of inexperience or untruthfulness will have no affect. (I am by no means endorsing or criticizing Palin's use of Christianity for governance, only pointing out that she is the only candidate that uses this approach.)
Looks like people are paying attention. . .
This makes me sick...
Palin's Rape-Gate:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/52266.html
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_09/014669.php
Most of those positives were driven by the excitement of several of her attributes - "motherhood", "popular governor", "pretty", "snarky" - and a lack of any known negatives. Now all that wonderful Wester frontiers-woman positiveness, bogus or genuine, is being balanced by lackluster interviews and scandals. Whether her negatives will continue to rise will hinge on how much artime the media will devote to her corruption charges, and also on her subsequent success or failure in interviews.
Palin is the "Bearded Lady" sideshow in McCain's campaign circus.
And, as you can see, the novelty is starting to wear off.
Just as Chuck Todd predicted in his column... But the key question is, will the drop have a soft landing? Or will it plummet? Wait, what else has plummeted lately? Oh yeah, that's right.. everything!
http://www.VoteRobot.org
Palin "bridge to nowhere" is going to bite her in the ass. New article on Politico today that there were to massive bridge projects. She still distorts the record on the first. But on the second 600 million bridge project she was all for it and still is. This 2nd bridge was derided by her Governor challenger during the campaign as wasteful and not needed.
Palin ultimately will have no importance at all, except for what she has shown about McCain's judgement and his cynical approach to this election.
The whole country is shocked... almost stunned with disbelief... at what it is seeing from John McCain.
My grandmother used to say... "You can start out hating somebody and slowly fall in love with them. But you can't start out loving somebody, and then come to hate them, and then fall back in love. It never happens."
The country is falling out of love... and here is the starkest example I've seen to date. When I read it earlier this morning, it was a genuine shock.
Note the paragrah about Palin. A respected, pro-McCain journalist has finally siad the words aloud: "But..the emperor is naked!"
We'll be hearing it a lot more often from now on.
I'm sure Ann Coulter's poll will balance this one out.
Even the conservative columnusts like David Broder, Will, etc. are expressing the opinion that she is not ready to be a heart beat away from the Presidency. I am trult worried that this might happen
I agree that McCain's acceptance speech was underrated. His recollection of his days as a POW was very powerful.
Palinmania will have officially jumped the shark following her "serious interview" with Sean Hannity.
Do you all think that the focus on Palin will wear off and attention will turn to the debates as the presidential elections usually do?
Pardon my french but Palin is a fucking irrelevance. CBS have a great article today which cuts through the crap and surmises that the Palin factor will fade as the media get bored with their new plaything. Eventually her puff will catch up with her whether it is the preposterous claim that she has foreign policy experience because she can Russia from Alaska (presumably residents of Detroit are ready to be president on the basis that they can see Canada) or the outright lie that her teleprompter broke.
What is more troublesome for the GOP is the financial meltdown that is taking place. That alone sets into shadow the utter irrelevance that is Palin. While Lehman Bros tanks and AIG expires, Palin is still parroting the same meaningless lines/lies about the bridge to nowhere and her teleprompter. What is her economic plan? Does she accept that deregulation (a conservative policy) is responsible for the credit crunch and is she prepared to take on her own party to bring in proper oversight?
Of course she has no real answers for this or any other issue of substance and this painful and obvious reality is fast becoming clear to the American public. That McCain (the king of deregulation) has no answer either is of far greater significance.
Yesterday was a big wake up call to the American people. If they are unable to see through the obfuscation of pigs, lipstick and Republican lies then they deserve to see their savings lost and their jobs exported to China.
I'd rather some other, more reliable pollster be doing this, but I'll take it: ARG is going to be releasing 27 state polls tomorrow.
Obviously Palin's numbers were going to go down - there is no NEW good news about her, so anything you hear about her from here on out is bound to be bad.
McCain certainly does obviously play a part in his bounce. His speech did change the identity of the campaign to one of change. He made a pretty good case that he could change the tone in Washington.
Whether that lasts remains to be seen.
The Republicans love Palin, but they love their investments more. I wish they were honest enough to admit that Bush and the Republican-dominated Congress have been responsibile for allowing Wall St to "get drunk" as our Dear Leader puts it.
Before he entered politics, every business handed to Bush has failed, hand this country over to him and guess what?
Finally, I hate taxes as much as the next Republican, but the country has been brought to its knees in debt. Thank you "deficits don't matter" Dick! If a person is up to his ears in debt, you'd tell that person to stop irresponsible spending, set aside some of his income and the work out a sound payment plan he can live with. You don't tell him to leave his debts to his children.
So first, get angry with the bastards responsible for squandering away your country's wealth. Elect someone who will work out a plan to balance the budget and get us on the slow, long road out of this crushing debt.
The alternative is going Weimar. Print more paper money to pay off the debt until the Dollar becomes junk and people start burning their dollars to stay warm in winter because wood is more expensive like they did in Germany. The insane printing not only robs *all* of your wealth, it will plunge us into an abyss worse than the Great Depression.
The focus is on the economy now, which is where McCain has tried to keep it from going for months. McCain's economic policy is classic RepubliCon and the same as Bush.
Drip, drip, drip. The more info comes out on Palin, the more unfavorable she appears. And it's becoming apparent to many voters that as much as she would like to, she's not going to be able to co opt the well known Las Vegas tagline into "what happens in Alaska, stays in Alaska."
She can't keep her record hidden behind the St Elias Mountains of the Alaska panhandle forever. People are finding out, and evidently, the more they find out, the more they don't like what they see.
Now whether this will translate into fewer votes for McCain-Palin is another story, as conventional wisdom holds that the 2nd person on the ticket usually doesn't move any voters (see Agnew, Quayle, neither of which did). But this has not been a conventional campaign year.
Nate, haven't you noticed that the state numbers are lagging indicators? They tend to follow a step behind the nationals. So if Obama is just now rebounding in the national polls, it'll take a few days before this shows up in the state polls.
The volatility of your model here is of some concern. It hardly seems much better than just looking at current polls would be. Is McCain really more likely to win in a landslide than Obama, for instance? You actually have McCain as more likely to win overall than Intrade does, and Intrade is being stupid to make McCain the favorite.
Yep, a few of us have been noticing this. I have a graph here showing the drop-off from 9/11 to 9/15.
Palin is a liar and a fraud and people are finally seeing through the GOP smoke-and-mirrors show that they've erected around here.
Political Wire got an advance look at several new state polls from American Research Group that show Sen. John McCain has just a 2-point lead in Montana and a 4-point lead in West Virginia.
Meanwhile, Sen. Barack Obama has a 7-point lead in New Mexico.
ARG will release the results of these and 24 other state polls tomorrow.
On this date in history, September 16, 2004,in the Rasmussen PResidential Tracking Poll, John Kerry led President George Bush 49% to 48%.
For fianl results, please see Presidential Inauguration, Janaury 2005.
Nate,
You are a homer-it'll be nice to hear what you have to say when Palin is your Vice-President.
PS,
How about talking about McCAin's Favorable ratings in all of Rasmussen's Polls in the Battleground States. If I'm not mistaken, he was way ahead of ODUMBO. I suggest you quit reading all the posts that agree with you and start reading the ones that are based in reality.
Rasmussen tracker has the McCain lead down to 1 (48-47) despite Rasmussen's reduction of the Dem party ID advantage to 5 points.
I expect Gallup to tighten tonight and new national polls this week to show ties and small Obama leads.
The Rasmussen state polls last night were not good for Obama but given that state polls tend to lag behind national polls, I expect them to mark McCain's high point. We shall see soon enough.
This week is going to be a terrible week for McCain leading up to the first debate next Friday. From then on, lies are not going to make the sale any more. If Obama can best him in the debates (and you can be sure that Biden is going to hand Palin her ass on her plate), I would expect the Dems to regain a 3-4 point lead going into November 4.
Aman (above) is on to something. The financial crisis is a big opportunity for Obama to refocus political debate on the relationship between Wall St and Main St. Repub ideology is more insolvent than Lehman Bros. Misguided policies have to led to more government not less. Swing voters, whoever they are, need to be shown that Obama's policies are sound and will be better for them.
"PResidential Tracking Poll, John Kerry led President George Bush 49% to 48%."
A one-point lead in the afterglow of his convention? Hmm, where have I seen that one recently...
It'll be kinda sad if Obama has to win by exploiting an economic crisis that Congressional Democrats have at least some culpability in.
Sad, but I'll take it.
This was very predictable. The question is can Obama capitalize on it? It was a no-brainer Palin was set up to succeed at her speech. That's what she's good at (broadcasting, pageants, debates, charisma). The media feeling guilty would pander. The publice would go along, but in the end the referendum of Palin would supplant the Rep. convention, McCain not having really had one. Assuming Palin wore off some, what would McCain (an extremely weak candidate) be left with? The answer IMO is a Republican War Machine that's great at winning winnable elections and a referendum back on Obama. The question becomes would 50% of the country rather have Obama as President or not really have a President (Bush 44 is not a bad description)? To me McCain is an empty suit, but I'm not sure 50% of the country is willing to go with Obama. We'll have to see. If you average the 5 major daily polls, they're tied. I think agree with Chuck Todd though, Obama needs to see his numbers up around 48% to feel comfortable that undecideds won't turn into a hidden "Bradley Effect". There are too many close states.
Yeah, and on September 16, 2004, Bush was ahead of Kerry by *13 points* on Gallup. Who cares?
Charles,
Obama/Biden just need to hammer the economy.
Palin's be exposed as taking liberties with the truth and her record.. Daily there is an article on her not cooperating with Trooopergate. The spin that it is partisan is hilarious since the votes have been 12-0 on starting the investigation and on the subpeonas last week and there were more RepubliCans than Dems on the 5 person panel. The 2nd bridge project that was derided as wasteful is on Politico that she supported and she still repeats the lie on the 1st bridge project.
I don't think Obama *need* 50% of the country. With the way the map looks and third-party candidates, I think 47.5% would do.
Nate,
How do these results square with the suggestion on this blog that Dems need to give voters "permission to like" Sarah Palin?
What we're seeing now is how all negative messaging works. You slowly chip away at the favorables while your opponent whines the whole way. I'm not an expert, but I don't think that conceding the popularity and likability of your opponent is often part of this tactic.
That said, I enjoy the site and I hope you keep up the good work!
Biden's margin has grown as large as Obama's.
Expect to be hearing more about McCain's good buddy, financial "guru" and source of "whinergate", Phil Gramm.
John McCain and Phil Gramm -- A Match Made in Hell.
"How do these results square with the suggestion on this blog that Dems need to give voters "permission to like" Sarah Palin?"
That was Sean's personal opinion (and easily the worst posting I've ever seen on 538.)
How dare you ARG? The 3 already mentioned results show exactly the kind of result I would expect...but it´s ARG!
The Sarah Palin issue is done. She gives evangelical excitement and Alaska. She turns off moderates who will listen very closely to what McCain and Obama have to say about the economy. If McCain can´t get a consistent message out he will definitely lose, and NO tactical gain can prevent that. If he somehow gets that message out, Obama has to put out a similar message. I wish he would be a little more populist, or even socialist, but he is doing "ok" at the moment. A safe, small win - but no landslide.
The whole Palin pick should be cast as what it is: a wholly political one. Obama chose Biden to help him govern, McCain chose Palin to help him win.
If the sneak peaks at the ARG polling is true, the "Palin bounce" narrative is officially buried tomorrow.
People are gradually realizing how very little Sarah Palin has to offer; in fact, her liabilities are breathtaking. Given John McCain's health vulnerability, it's not a stretch at all to imagine her face-to-face with Prime Minister Putin, jump-starting the next Cold War. How could she argue that Russia should not facilitate the secession of South Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia, when she herself has supported the Alaska Independence Party? A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and this is a dangerous woman indeed.
p smith is right on many subjects.
With the loss of many important banks and investment firms, individual and corporate wealth being lost in many sectors not related to energy or war, private retirement and public retirement accounts being gutted, gasoline and oil prices still rising even though there isn't any real shortages, etc...
With Republicans in the lead we have come a long way baby!
Maybe that will be worth the 8 points the Dems need to win.
But maybe not if in the key states we have votes being "lost," miscounted, or being being denied the right to vote due to any number of factors we will be seeing come November.
Nate,
I would love to see you do a full post on the Research 2000 poll commissioned by Daily Kos.
I understand why some are queasy to give full weight to this poll because of the obvious bias of Kos, but does it really matter who commissions the poll as long as it is carried out by a reputable pollster and is transparent about methodology?
I for one love the Research 2000 polling on Kos because of the transparency. They release the daily samples, they release the party ID numbers, they really provide a lot of internal info that other dailies don't.
I would think the poll should be considered on its own merits. Include a caveat if it looks like the internals are off, or if you just think Research 2000 is a bad pollster, but to discount it just because Kos is paying for it is folly.
Alex S. said...
How dare you ARG? The 3 already mentioned results show exactly the kind of result I would expect...but it´s ARG!
What 3 results?
It's the Economy, stupid, *always* has been.
Iraq invasion, FISA, Katrina, Abu Ghraib, they've let them blow over but I don't think Americans are so stupid they'd let this one pass. They're no longer just witness to the suffering of others, this one hits home.
That's nice. She's against protecticg our kids from sexual predators. She charges women for the use of a rape kit, if you're poor or unisured you don't get to have one, but she will force you to keep the fertilized egg (b/c every sperm is sacred - even if it comes from a rapist or child molester).
This year is going to be so much fun! Nice to have an interesting race nationwide:
"Fueled by a surge of support from white voters, Republican Sen. John McCain has narrowed a 10-point gap and now trails Democratic Sen. Barack Obama 48 - 45 percent among New Jersey likely voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.
This compares to a 51 - 41 percent Sen. Obama lead in an August 13 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University.
In this latest survey, white voters back Sen. McCain 56 - 37 percent, up from 50 - 42 percent August 13. Black voters support the Democrat 93 - 7 percent, compared to 94 - 1 percent. Men back McCain 53 - 40 percent, reversing a 48 - 45 percent Obama lead, while women stay with Obama 54 - 38 percent, compared to 53 - 38 percent.
But white women back McCain 50 - 42 percent, compared to 46 - 44 percent for Obama Aug. 13. Independent voters shift from 45 - 42 percent for Obama to 47 - 43 percent for McCain.
The Democrat leads 58 - 36 percent among voters 18 to 34 years old and 50 - 43 percent among voters 35 to 54, while McCain leads 52 - 41 percent among voters over 55 years old. "
Jack Black,
Speaking for myself as an Obama supporter, I would like to say thank you for the encouragement. Your posting of John Kerry's 1-point lead on Sept. 16, 2004 in Rasmussen shows that McCain's current 1-point lead is a poor predictor of how this race will end up on Nov. 4. Keep up the good work!
What 3 results?
NM: Obama +7
WV: McCain +4 (everyone who initially filtered out the "West", raise your hand)
MT: McCain +2
The New Jersey news is interesting but not race-changing.
It is far, far easier to cut a big deficit to a small one than it is to cut a small deficit into a small lead.
Ink,
What's that about ARG and Palin?
Here's ARG's numbers from today
September 16, 2008 - National General Election Ballot
National
Likely voters Aug 30-
Sep 1 Sep
6-8 Sep
13-15
McCain 43% 46% 48%
Obama 49% 47% 45%
Undecided 8% 7% 7%
Sample size: 1200 likely voters
Sample dates: September 13-15, 2008
Margin of error: ± 3 percentage points
Question wording: If the general election were being held today between John McCain for president and Sarah Palin for vice president, the Republicans, and Barack Obama for president and Joe Biden for vice president, the Democrats, for whom would you vote - McCain and Palin or Obama and Biden? (names rotated)
I think one thing that maybe indies took from the GOP convention was to reconnect with McCain the war hero. I think Obama had been effective in selling McCain the pol, and one of the reasons maybe Obama is cutting the gap is that he is getting back to that.
I think Obama's next job is to get back to being the transendental figure from the early primaries. Maybe he should be running some of the early spots from the primary season that were just about him. He needs to rise above the arguments again.
I trust the R2000 poll MORE than Nate's reTHUGlican CROOK buddies at Rassmussen and Gallup...who have been manipulating polls for years........
Why would Kos want to fool fellow progressives into thinking we are ahead?...that is bullshit...Kos wants the truth so we know where we stand, on the other hand reTHUG-Rassmussen and Gallup want to manipulate the electorate and it is obvious that they can only go so far......So all you Rove/wannabe's who post here STFU and just give in your Lipstick PIG PAlin is losing her shine...and for good reason
But but but....we have to leave Sarah Palin alone! Heck, you just wrote a post about how wonderful she is, so the Democrats have to say it's OK to like her!
*snicker*
You may not like what the Dailykos types are doing, but it's darn tough to claim that it's ineffective. Negative attacks work.
Anyone noticed the irony of a complete reversal in the election. I think generally bth guys really would prefer to feel like the underdog. Here's my sense of the "Palin Effect"
Before Palin, if you had to push states one direction or the other McCain would probably win the election, but have to play defense and hold off Obama in a list of states (Nevada, Ohio, Virginia, Florida, Colorado, etc.). Lose any of them and he probably loses the election. But, probably favored in all of them. Now, it feels like if the election were held today, you'd have to favor Obama to win tipping point states (any 1 of Colorado, Nevada, Virginia) and yet Obama now has to defend (Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Washington, Oregon, etc.) and try to keep playing offense. Certain folks in the media obsess about Pennsylvania. I never thought it made a lot of sense because I didn't think it was a likely tipping point. I'm getting the sense that it might actually be the key to the election for McCain.
Sorry for the redudancy.
It's hard not to think that Sarah Palin has peaked way too early.
Classic pig in a poke. "An object offered in a manner that conceals its true value, especially its lack of value."
Since she has nothing to offer the country as vice prez or as prez, it is fortunate that the reality is coming to light quickly. The lies, the vindictiveness, the abuse of power, the cronyism, the lack of fiscal restraint, the phony resume, the lack of any knowledge of foreign or domestic policy or even of the common terms used in discussing those issues, and the obvious attempts to fake her readiness plus the fact that in many ways she is not mainstream in many of her beliefs or values has all surfaced rapidly because she has been such front page news.
Her legacy will be as a punch line for the late night talk show hosts.
McCain has shown a shocking disdain for the need of responsible governance. Either that or he is off his rocker.
Lets remember that Obama hasn't sold the economy yet folks. He's getting better at hitting McCain, but he needs a plan to fix it, thats:
(1)Believable
(2)Simple
(3)Can be summed up in 10 seconds or less
If he does this, he will win. If he doesn't, this will remain very close I believe.
Palin had to peak too early, because there's no substance there. The only way they had any chance to get any boost out of her was to fabricate a false narrative about her using the convention, and then hide her from the media as long as possible.
But as many of us have said for weeks, you can't keep up the bullshit screen indefinitely, even with a milquetoast MSM.
"Why would Kos want to fool fellow progressives into thinking we are ahead?.."
Not that I agree that R2000 is biased just because of where the money comes from, that idea would be that it's human nature to overestimate the likelihood of results that you want to happen.
Certainly third part cnadidates could hurt Obama in Pennsylvania (21 electoral votes), but I'm wondering about Montana. Anyone know what third party cnadidates are going to be on the Montana ballot?
I will just say this as a registered Independent: I hate the Palin pick. I wish it was Romney, even though I know McCain hates the guy.
I like Romney. He's a hardcore flip-flopper as far as social issues, but he seems like a smart guy and I trust him on the economy.
Eve, you do realize that the post i am quoting below from you applies with equal vigor to Obama's resume and narrative, right?
Post partisanship? Centrism? Cmon. Obama is a traditional liberal, and his whole campaign is banking on hiding that fact from scrutiny.
Let's see what happens when the press moves on to Obama's background and applies the same scrutiny to OBama's daily reimbursements like Palin. How about some investigations into the money flow to Rezko, 14M total? How about a piece on how those Rezko government subsidized apartments are doing now? How about the endorsements, in 2007, of Daley and Stroger, the heads of the Chicago machine? This cuts both ways, and that's what the left is missing...
Since she has nothing to offer the country as vice prez or as prez, it is fortunate that the reality is coming to light quickly. The lies, the vindictiveness, the abuse of power, the cronyism, the lack of fiscal restraint, the phony resume, the lack of any knowledge of foreign or domestic policy or even of the common terms used in discussing those issues, and the obvious attempts to fake her readiness plus the fact that in many ways she is not mainstream in many of her beliefs or values has all surfaced rapidly because she has been such front page news.
On this date in history, September 16, 2004, Jack Black ate a plate of baked beans. The next day he got stomach cramps and intestinal gas. For final results, note that he spent much of the day on the toilet.
@Franco: so your argument is that the R2000 poll is accurate, since there's no reason to fool fellow progressive, but you also accuse Gallup and Ras of manipulating polls, presumably to fool fellow conservatives?
All three polls are accurate - they just weight party ID differently. You can argue what the actual party ID will be on election day until the cows come home. I would suggest following all of them and paying more attentions to the trendlines (which may be pointing ever so slightly in Obama's direction now).
Does anyone know what the Obama field campaign is like in West Virginia? I know they have classified it as a Swing State but are they putting any actual resources there?
What about McCain?
I would like to put forth that, even if the ARG leak is true, Montana is not in play.
Would those who question the DKos poll please point out where the error in their methodology is? Given that they are completely transparent with the poll and all I think you should back up your claims or shut it.
I put ARG in the same circular file as the Zogby Interactive crap. And that includes the poll they just came out with that has McCain leading Obama by three on the national level.
Eric...
RON PAUL is going to be on the Montana ballot.
Obama has plenty to offer. He has shown excellent judgment on the war. He has a history as a constitutional scholar. He's demonstrated competence in the running of his campaign. He's shown that he is cool under fire, he makes decisions wisely, and he behaves like a leader.
I don't think he's an excellent candidate, and frankly, if the old McCain of 2000 still existed I'd probably vote for him. But he doesn't, and even though Obama is far from ideal, compared to McCain he is the only choice that anyone who cares about competence, integrity and honesty can choose.
"Would those who question the DKos poll please point out where the error in their methodology is? Given that they are completely transparent with the poll and all I think you should back up your claims or shut it."
Their argument is that they are using outdated party identification weighting.
MATT J. H. said...
Lets remember that Obama hasn't sold the economy yet folks. He's getting better at hitting McCain, but he needs a plan to fix it, thats:
(1)Believable
(2)Simple
(3)Can be summed up in 10 seconds or less
If he does this, he will win. If he doesn't, this will remain very close I believe.
Agreed Obama hasn't figured out yet how to close the deal with folks who aren't enamored with him. It's his to win and the window will probably be open to him to close all the way to election day, but can he do it? Dems generally want to vote their hopes and like change, Non-Dems perhaps vote more their fears and no change (I'm a biased Dem). So, can Obama speak to those people including the Hillary voters who obviously saw something they liked more in Hillary. Obama needs to sit down with Carville, Begala, and Bill and say let's brainstorm, we need a 10-second bite. Give me tips. I need to hear a voice other than Axelrod and Plouffe. Good news for Obama is he's competitive, it's probably his to win and he I don't think he ever wants to run again if he doesn't win it this time. If he wants it bad enough, I think he can do it.
Palin got some meatheads who would have voted for McCain anyway to tune in earlier, because she's a MILF.
Oh, and Alaska goes from Lean Republican to Solid Republican.
Props to the McCain campaign for completely pushing Obama's speech out of the news. He could very well have been buried that weekend, and this pick saved him. That's no small feat.
But that's about it.
Bob Barr being on the ballot in PA will only cement Obama's lead there.
The markets are recovering today, despite Democrat scare-mongering.
Real economic recovery begins when the Democrat Congress is thrown out.
McCain overused the POW bit.
By constantly hammering us with it, the story has lost its emotional punch. With it easier to consider it less emotionally, people can see that it is not by itself a reason to vote for him. It is easier to consider that the story is an attempt to distract us from the issues. McCain loses on the issues.
For McCain to bring it up over and over and over also suggests to many people that maybe a hero is not someone who plays this card over and over.
I'm with Alex. I'd love to believe the polls that have leaked but it's ARG darnit!
Right, but don't forget Nader.
Is there a resource that lists each state and who will be on the ballot for each? I know some states can petition for some candidates NOT to be on the ballot (that seems sketchy to me...)
Charles, seriously, cool under fire?
Look at the Obama response to crisis - usually three or four different versions in the space of a few days, until the press guides him to what the right answer is and he sticks to it.
See Wright, See Georgia invasion, See Rezko.
That's not a quality that would be pleasant in a President - led around by what the media wants and ergo what sounds good at the moment.
The markets are recovering today, despite Democrat scare-mongering.
Yeah, pipe down, whiners! Cue Kevin Bacon: "All is well! All is well!"
More like this, please, GOPers.
"The markets are recovering today, despite Democrat scare-mongering."
The DJIA number doesn't represent the economy. It's an easily-manipulated number and has nothing to do with the real problems.
"Real economic recovery begins when the Democrat Congress is thrown out."
LOL. Go back to sucking on Hannity's teat - we prefer thinkers here.
"The markets are recovering today, despite Democrat scare-mongering.
Real economic recovery begins when the Democrat Congress is thrown out."
Admit it. You sat there all morning waiting for a green number on the DJIA just to make that post?
I'm not sure if Obama (or any of us), should continue to attack Palin and McCain - McCain's experiencing "blowback" from his negative ads. He's still above the fray, he should play it Presidential now. Hammer home the state the 8 yrs of Republican government have left us in, talk about the long, slow road to recovery, make us believe we'll get through this and there's a better future. Hope.
State polls don't lag the national poll.
None of the pollsters that Nate uses try to 'rig' the results. This includes Kos, Ras, Gallup.
@ eric:
lol, yes, Axelrod is Mr. Hope´n´Change, and Plouffe is Mr. Unprecedented-ground-organization; but Carville is Mr. It´s the economy, stupid.
Joe the Congress is the real force behind economic performacne.
Since the Democrat Party took control, we've gone into a recession and gas prices have gone through the roof. It's the failure of Pelosi and Reid.
That's correct Ink - Kos overweights the Dem edge as 9 points, which simply isnt consistent with recent polling across the board. Its more like 5-6. That explains the difference.
Also, note that 2M texans dont have phones, and a fair amount of LA people as well. Those states are GOP strong, and therefore their exclusion from national polls, on random statistical choice average, will depress McCain's numbers.
"Charles, seriously, cool under fire?"
Yep. Remember his response to the Palin speech?
"Look at the Obama response to crisis - usually three or four different versions in the space of a few days, until the press guides him to what the right answer is and he sticks to it."
Uh, that's what your boy McCain did in the span of HOURS just yesterday. LOL
Here's what some folks think of your pal:
“I like McCain. I respect McCain. But I am a little worried by his knee-jerk response factor. I think it is a little scary. I think this guy's first reactions are not necessarily the best reactions. I believe that he acts on impulse.” -- Retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton.
“One of the things the senior military would like to see when they go visit the president is a kind of consistency, a kind of reliability. [Obama] is not that up when he is up and not that down when he is down. He is kind of a steady Eddie. This is a very important feature. McCain has got a reputation for being a little volatile." -- Retired Gen. Merrill McPeak, a former Republican, former chief of staff of the Air Force and former fighter pilot who flew 285 combat missions.
“The thought of his being president sends a cold chill down my spine. He is erratic. He is hotheaded. He loses his temper and he worries me.” -- Thad Cochran, senator from Mississippi, who has known McCain for over 30 years.
@Sedi,
"""she still might have been a smart pick because McCain was obviously trailing before, and now he has a fighting chance."
This is what I thought. McCain was losing to Obama pretty clearly throughout the summer. Whether McCain loses big now because of Palin rather than losing a squeaker is a who cares. The real question is , Did McCain take a race that he was going to win and turn it into a loser?
It is hard to believe the latter, just based on Republican enthusiasm. This is the difference between 80& or 90+% of Republicans actually going out to vote.
I do not know if there is any measurement to tell what the Palin effect was -- other than a poll that finds all the people who say either 1) I was going to vote for McCain, but the Palin pick caused me to switch to Obama and 2) I was not going to vote for McCain because of lack of enthuiasm, but his Palin pick now means I'll vote for him.
I am in neither of those categories, and I doubt if many on this blog are.
Marie - Check out The Green Papers for 3rd-party candidate lists. I haven't looked myself, but they're usually a pretty good info source to start with.
Yet another Ohio poll with the same results:
OH - PPP(D)
McCain 48
Obama 44
So many of these polls have had a 4 point spread, I would have to think it's accurate. Throw in some possible Bradley effect and I think Obama's in real trouble in this state.
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_Ohio_9161.pdf
Palin's actuarial chances of being President in first term: 1 in 6, the same as a bad result in Russian Roulette or Kobe Bryant hitting consecutive 3's; better than you catching the flu this winter. Interesting article today at Portfolio.com.
Joe the Congress is the real force behind economic performacne.
No, the private sector is the real force behind economic performance. What are you, some kind of socialist?
Nate you say that Obama has started to come back in the national polls but not the state polls. As I recall, it seems as though after Obama's bounce McCain first gained ground in the national polls and then the state polls. Am I just trying to infer a pattern from only two data points, or is there some logical reason that national polls might respond to a trend before the state polls do?
Obama will never win Ohio, or Michigan, and will have to fight in PA.
The rust belt is a trap for him thanks to the Bubba Vote (thanks, Chuck Todd) and the Bradley Effect.
Sean said...
Does anyone know what the Obama field campaign is like in West Virginia? I know they have classified it as a Swing State but are they putting any actual resources there?
What about McCain?
My opinion is when we're looking at state polls we have to remember how they performed in the primaries. For example, West Virginia, Hillary massacred Obama. Chances of 1/2 of that state voting for Obama seem remote regardless of what the polls say. States like Virginia, Wisconsin, Colorado feel more like winners for Obama. Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, Florida he's probably vulnerable as he lost all 4 about 55-45. I thin earlier posts regarding how McCain performed in states and who was 2nd Romney or Huckabee are indicators along with OBama vs Hillary. Obama's chances seem remote to me in West Virginia.
A mixed bag of news – Recent Polls
If you like Obama then you like (+ = Obama up):
9/16 VA Fox/Ras Tie
9/15 VA SurveyUSA +4
9/14 IA Des Moines Reg +12
9/14 NJ Research 2000 +9
9/14 DE Rasmussen +12
9/12 WA Elway +8
9/12 OR Hoffman +7
9/11 OH Quinnipiac +5
9/11 NH CNN/Time +6
9/11 MI CNN/Time +4
9/11 ME Research 2000 +14
9/11 CO InAdv +3
9/11 MI Rasmussen +5
9/11 NC Civitas -3
9/10 NJ Fairleigh +6
If you like McCain then you like (+ = McCain up):
9/16 PA Fox/Ras Tie
9/16 FL Fox/Ras +5
9/16 CO Fox/Ras +2
9/15 OH SurveyUSA +4
9/15 OH Suffolk +4
9/15 NY Siena -5
9/14 MN Star Tribune tie
9/14 MN SurveyUSA -2
9/13 NV Rasmussen +3
9/13 SD Rasmussen +17
9/12 MO Rasmussen +5
9/12 WA Rasmussen -2
9/11 FL InAdv +8
9/11 MI InAdv +1
9/11 GA InAdv +18
9/11 AK Rasmussen +31
9/11 ID Rasmussen +39
9/11 NC Research2000 +17
9/11 NM Rasmussen +2
9/11 MS Research2000 +18
9/11 VA CNN/Time +4
9/11 MO CNN/Time +5
9/11 GA Strategic Vision +13
9/11 FL Quinnipiac +7
9/10 NC PPP +4
9/10 MT Rasmussen +11
9/10 ND Rasmussen +14
9/10 NC SurveyUSA +20
Thank you Jersey!
FloridaGOP - I think the Palin pick, if anything, is a polarizing pick. As the public becomes more familiar with her, I believe this is what we'll see - she will pick off a few independents and rally the base, but when it all shakes out I don't believe she's someone people feel indifferent about.
"So many of these polls have had a 4 point spread, I would have to think it's accurate. Throw in some possible Bradley effect and I think Obama's in real trouble in this state."
Hurray for racism!
John McCain is such an inspiration.
Joe, the only Socialist is the one your support for President.
Did you know Barack Hussein Obama Sr. was an admirer of the Soviet Union?
And Jr. was a devotee of radical Socialist "community organizer" Saul Alinsky.
joe said...
Palin got some meatheads who would have voted for McCain anyway to tune in earlier, because she's a MILF.
Soon to be GILF, LOL
Uh oh. "Congratulations" took his crazy pills.
@Evan,
>>>Would those who question the DKos poll please point out where the error in their methodology is? Given that they are completely transparent with the poll and all I think you should back up your claims or shut it.<<<<
We had this discussion on whether the Rasmussen Polls were biased. You can not evaluate methodology, it is just too complex for any poll. The ONLY thing that works is the measure the poll over time, compare it all other polls, and state whether it comes out even, leans McCain, or leans Obama.
Palin's selection was a "high risk, high reward" pick by McCain. In the initial two weeks -- indeed perhaps right up to "Saturday Night," the consensus verdict is that the risk was paying off. Obama's campaign was off track. McCain's bounce was strong and long, and Palin was drawing crowds for McCain on the campaign trail.
But if this candidacy derails in the public mind, it won't be just that Palin's being on the ballot is a "neutral." Instead it will be a negative -- because it reflects very badly on McCain himself. The SNL skit conveyed how cynical the pick was if it was intended to draw true Hillary supporters.
And the McCain campaign also badly overreached in its ads.
So now the tide is turning. At the very least the bounce has subsided. I suspect things are going to swing strongly toward Obama. And it won't be the economy that's doing it. It's the poor and risky decision of McCain.
Chuck, the point is the data is holding a solid 4 point McCain lead. As the country is about where Ohio is, generally, nationally, than that spells Dem trouble.
The r2000 poll is a good poll except they have more democrats than Rasmussen, we find out who is right in November.
The rasmussen pollls were actually not that bad for Obama if you read the crosstabs. For instance in Colorado Obama is leading every age group except McCain has a 30 point lead with over 65 group.
Virginia favors Obama if minorities vote in big enough numbers.
his Ohio poll has Obama with a 20 point lead with independents. Florida pretty much is all McCain and Pa, is only tied because McCain has a big lead among independents.
Some of his data is screwy and it was for fox so you know how you want to please the client.
I expect McCain to be behind by next week. He looks like he is about ready to lose it. The debates may be fun, he may have a hard time staying composed.
Obama will never win Ohio, or Michigan, and will have to fight in PA.
Barack Obama has led in every single poll takein Michigan taken in the last four months, save one. Out of three polls taken there this month, he's led in two of them (both of which were taken a week after the Republican convention).
You're putting an awful lot of faith in one poll taken during the most favorable period in the calendar for your candidate.
hilarious Jersey
Cindy McCain was a kleptomaniac drug-addict. By association, McCain is a secret anarchist and crime lord. He´s from Arizona and probably controls the drug traffic from Mexico......
Everything in ARG seems ass-backwards: excellent state results for Obama, but a +3 lead for McCain nationally when everyone else has his lead between +1 and none.
If conservatives such as CTPEM continue to place their hopes in flipping states (michigan and pennsylvania), which they've polled ahead in a combined 3 out of 30 polls, I'm feeling pretty good about Obama's chances.
Chant "Bradley effect" till you are blue in the face, even if it wasn't a defunct myth, it'd be cancelled out by the historic ground game.
BTW, the single Michigan poll that shows a McCain lead had some neat results.
For example, McCain wins the 18-29 age group, while Obama wins all of the older age groups.
Also, McCain wins 17% of the African American vote.
Survey sez: fail.
Obama will rue the day he called hard working folk in rural Pennsylvania "bitter" and "Clinging to guns and religion", mark my words!
Did you know that Prescott Bush tried to overthrow the American government?
Ya know, there are some people's posts here I've quickly learned to consistently ignore and scroll past. I'm just putting that out there as an option. :)
New Public Policy Poll from Ohio:
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_Ohio_9161.pdf
McCain +4
Seems like a pretty consistent number.
I think there is a good case to be made for a *reverse* Bradley effect in this election. I wonder how many whites are reluctant to admit that they *would* vote for a black guy and instead just say they are for McCain/Bimbo.
To Charles M. Kozierok - please don't assume I think that voting for or against somebody because of their race is a good thing to do. Most of the punditocracy seem to think that if there is going to be a 'Bradley Effect' it will be in the rust belt. And this has nothing to do with McCain - people who don't want to vote for a black guy would vote for any opposing white guy no matter who he was. I suspect Ken Blackwell lost some votes in OH in 2006 because of his race - not enough to make the difference, but I'd be willing to bet it happened.
I will mark your words 4 months ago! They are marked, and they are wrong. Shelf-life of outrage.
Also, rue and mark my words in the same sentence? Jesus.
greg: Yeah, Ohio seems pretty stable at +4 McCain. But with the economy stuff just hitting the air, who knows... it migh give up a couple of points yet.
One of my favorite post-election guilty pleasures is to read the blogs of the true partisan believers on the losing side.
After Kerry's loss, they were hilarious. There were a lot of self-indulgent posts about how progressives were like Sisyphus and just had to keep pushing the rock up the mountain, even when the evil conservatives had to push it back down.
I look forward to reading the conservative reaction to this loss, though if McCain pulls a miracle the liberal reaction will be even better.
John McCain will rue the day he mumbled about the economy being strong during a market meltdown.
He will also rue the day he picked Palin. This is just the start of the backlash.
"After Kerry's loss, they were hilarious. There were a lot of self-indulgent posts about how progressives were like Sisyphus and just had to keep pushing the rock up the mountain, even when the evil conservatives had to push it back down."
LOL That's the best part of seeing the Democrat Party defeated. That, their screams of THEY STOLE IT FROM US and the threats to move to Canada! I loved November 2004! I'm looking forward to it again.
@charles: a "reverse Bradley effect" is a bit of a dubious claim IMO. However, we do have evidence from the primaries that shows that there is no longer a Bradley effect.
Geoff said...
Chuck, the point is the data is holding a solid 4 point McCain lead. As the country is about where Ohio is, generally, nationally, than that spells Dem trouble.
Come on Geoff, you seem to run hot and cold with your posts, sometimes rational and intelligent, sometimes severely biased.
In this case, America is not just like Ohio, that's a silly statement.
axmxz
Do you think these pollsters are just calling the same people?
LOL
"Everything in ARG seems ass-backwards: excellent state results for Obama, but a +3 lead for McCain nationally when everyone else has his lead between +1 and none."
Excuse me if I am wrong, but wouldn't this be because most of McCain's national lead comes from making red states redder?
Therefore, Obama will uptick in blue and purple states even as McCain continues to slightly lead or stay tied nationally because of the swell of energized support in safe red states.
inkstain: Look at what conservatives are already saying even now. There won't be any big hand-wringing if McCain loses, it will just be squarely blamed on him and his campaign strategy.
Which is kind of a shame, since there is far more wrong with the GOP than just McCain.
It's because of the stupid environmental no-growth eco-marxist left wing media who turns any minor story into a huge OMG SCANDAL involving Sarah Palin.
Why doesn't the media do this for all candidates? Why does it just have to be Sarah Palin?
The left wing media has twisted and spun any story that has anything to do with Sarah Palin into bad news for her. It's disgusting and it shows that the media has an agenda in getting Obama elected.
The media in this country fears the McCain/Palin ticket because they know its a GOP ticket that can actually win, and is winning. The left wing media is in full meltdown mode and are now running a scorched earth stealth campaign against McCain/Palin.
This will all backfire. Don't worry. The American Public don't want people to tell them how to vote, especially the media and dumb hollywood stars like Pam Anderson and Lindsey Lohan.
"It's because of the stupid environmental no-growth eco-marxist left wing media who turns any minor story into a huge OMG SCANDAL involving Sarah Palin."
YES! Right on man!
PPP (Dem leaning pollster):
"Whites who had been undecided are breaking strongly for McCain"
I'll stipulate the poll doesn't include Monday's arguable mistake on the "Fundamentals" gaffe. McCain et al has hit back this AM on morning shows pretty strong with a anti-CEO // pro reform message. Of course, Obama et al got more face time and less aggressive questioning from media and pushed their "McCain out of touch/Economy means we will" message well.
Truly an interesting tipping point in the election this week....can McCain stay in range so as to allow a decisive blow at the debate if he performs well, and can Obama flip the narrative to Obama as the comeback kid
We'll
greg: Heh, I wouldn't be half surprised.
I think the Ohio numbers will start going up for Obama a bit, since the latest Ohio poll was taken 13th-14th - i.e. pre-Lehman meltdown and the "fundamentally strong gaffe". Obama's people are very quick when it comes to capitalizing on McCain's gaffes, and I'm sure they have ads running all over Ohio hammering the economy point home as we speak.
Silver's Favorability Numbers Eroding
The Buttcrust 2000 poll for Real Clear Politics now has Nate Silver's favorability-unfavorability scores at 25-64.
Six days ago, when the poll, launched, he was at a 32-55.
Fair point.
If Obama loses, it'd probably be a good idea to lock the windows of any liberal friends you may have who work in tall buildings. It will be epic.
dwbh said...
@charles: a "reverse Bradley effect" is a bit of a dubious claim IMO. However, we do have evidence from the primaries that shows that there is no longer a Bradley effect.
All things being equal Dems would probably prefer to vote for the African-American change agent, others (Republicans and Independents, not so much. Just because the "Bradley Effect" seemed a debunked myth, with the exception of maybe New Hampshire in the Dem primaries, doesn't mean it won't exist in the general. My bet is that if McCain wins, that'll be the reason why.
Joe is underestimating the number of black Republicans and independents that will vote for McCain.
Admittedly: I live in Massachusetts and Kerry was on the radio this morning. Said his biggest regret was not foregoing the federal campaign funding - when it came down to the wire in October, there just wasn't the $$ to be more competitive and counter the ads from the Republican side, specifically in states such as Colorado and Virginia.
No other real regrets - at least according to him, today.
"The Buttcrust 2000 poll for Real Clear Politics now has Nate Silver's favorability-unfavorability scores at 25-64."
Door's over there, asshole. You won't be missed.
Considering that Bush Jr. has been the biggest political failure in American politics since Jefferson Davis of the Confederate States (both senselessly sent thousands of troops to die in a war with the WRONG country and ran their economies into the ground), is it possible that Americans would be dumb enough to elect a McCain/Palin ticket that would give us 4 more years of the same pain? Hope is an illogical emotion, but in this case, I sincerely HOPE that the answer is no. No McCain...No Palin...No way. Comments?
SuperstarJ2ThaR: But that's just the thing - look at West Virginia and Montana, they should be as red as arterial blood, and they're +2 and +4 instead. How can Montana be polling better for Obama than the nation at large? It's absurd.
The +4 McCain in Ohio looks real. That´s what the situation was there BEFORE the market turmoil. It´s only interesting to note, that Quinnipiac projects are far too blue result, and Rasmussen a result 3 points too good for McCain. And it´s not only house effect, becuase Strategic Vision has the same +4.
"If Obama loses, it'd probably be a good idea to lock the windows of any liberal friends you may have who work in tall buildings. It will be epic."
This I agree with. If Obama loses, the left is going to go bonkers. There will be people pointing fingers all over the place.
Count me as a Silver loyalist. I've followed him from PECOTA to here, and I can't wait for his next project. If he's taking requests:
Hockeyprospectus.com!!!!
The only people who continue to think Sarah Palin was a bad pick are Obama supporters. The same ones saying "MCCAIN WILL REGRET THE DAY HE PICKED SARAH PALIN" and such are all Obama supporters who aren't voting for the McCain/Palin ticket anyway.
If Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Laura Ingrahm, Karl Rove, Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, Bill O'Reilly, or any other high-influence big name McCain/Palin supporter comes out and says Sarah Palin was a bad pick, then I think its time to worry, but they aren't going to.
The only people who continue to downplay Sarah Palin as a bad pick are Obama supporters because they are afraid.
Eric, actually Ohio tracked the national vote pretty closely the last few elections.
"This I agree with. If Obama loses, the left is going to go bonkers. There will be people pointing fingers all over the place."
I can't WIAT! ;) Because he's lost, it's just not official yet.
@Charles,
>>He will also rue the day he picked Palin. This is just the start of the backlash.<<<
McCain picked Palin because he was losing the election and needed a game changer. It is unlikely that he will "rue" anything. The thinking is that he was going to lose anyways.
I also think he likes her actions on earmarks --- a little messy, but clearly superior to the earmarks sought by Obama and Biden
I agree with you Tyrone. Good or bad Palin needs to stop being pasted on the MSM. The story needs to be about the top of the ticket and the issues.
I'm actually beginnning to feel a little sorry for McCain w/ his more-than-half empty rally seats .... being way less popular than ms alaska. His ego must be taking a terrible beating at this point.
Not that'd we'd ever vote for him!
Geoff, the republicans and the Clinton campaign have spent a great deal of time and money in attempts to discredit Obama. The best McCain has been able to come up with are the two ads he aired that have been completely discredited as lies by both all sides of the media.
McCain is willing to throw any mud possible. He just hasn't found much, so he is lying.
Even the Chicago Tribune, a very pro-republican paper (it has not endorsed the Democratic Nominee for President since 1872), has said the Rezko connection is a non-starter. They investigated it vigorously.
geoffL: The last few elections didn't have a purple West and an indigo Iowa.
"The only people who continue to think Sarah Palin was a bad pick are Obama supporters."
Tell that to the independents in PA in the recent Quin poll, 19% of whom said it made them more likely to vote for McCain, and 30% of whom said less likely.
I guess David Brooks is a left-winger now too, right? LOL
I think if Obama loses, there are some very valid reasons why that will be put forward. One of the biggest I can think of is the extended primary season and the lack of coming together on the ticket.
If the past is any indicator, the divided party usually loses.
In my experience, Conservatives deal better with loss than Liberals do, but that may have to do with the fact that in my lifetime (I'm 41), the GOP has won more often than the Dems. I rarely hear the GOP side threaten to move to Canada or say that the other side is composed of stupid people - nor wish that the US would split into two countries, one being 'Jesusland'. I actually feels sorry for some of my Dem friends (of which I have many) when they lose because they take it so hard - kind of dampens down my joy to be honest. I'm the sort of idiot who wants EVERYBODY to be happy and that can't happen the day after an election.
Having said that, if McCain wins (and it's a coin toss now, IMHO), I'll enjoy going to Daily Kos to make some troll posts because there are some really nasty people there. And tell them if they want to win next time, DON'T pick a freaking liberal! Go for a moderate like the Gov of Montana. A liberal for Prez = Fail.
"Eric, actually Ohio tracked the national vote pretty closely the last few elections."
True. But this election couldn't be more different if it tried.
2000: Old white incumbent VP vs. Old white challenger where one fought for the center while the other rallied the base
2004: Old white incumbent vs. Old white challenger in election where public perception said they had few differences.
2008: Youngish black challenger vs. old white challenger, no incumbent, both fighting broad strategies on a wide map.
People who are discounting ARG, notice they are actually rated slightly higher than both Gallup and Fox/Opinion Dynamics.
"McCain leads among seniors 52-41." This internal has remained pretty consistent thus far.
However I expect it to change in coming weeks when seniors see the new bottom line on the investments they're counting on to provide their monthly income.
"McCain picked Palin because he was losing the election and needed a game changer. It is unlikely that he will "rue" anything. The thinking is that he was going to lose anyways."
He was losing an election. Now he's lost his integrity and his reputation. Even if he wins.
He could have crafted a more solid, rational strategy to argue his case. Instead, he sold his soul to the devil.
Silver For America!
Baseball Between the Numbers was an awesome, awesome read, unless you're Kevin Maas.
THESE ENVIRONMENTAL, NO-GROWTH ECO-MARXISTS RUN EVERY DAMN THING! FROM THE COURTS, TO EVERYTHING ELSE!
FROM THE EPA DEPARTMENT, TO CAPITAL HILL... THEY GOT THIS COUNTRY SO STRANGLED, SO TIED DOWN AND LOADED UP WITH RED TAPE, WE CAN'T EVEN OPERATE!
WHAT KIND OF COUNTRY IS THIS? WE GET TO DECIDE WHAT TO DO!
NOT THE COCONUTS IN CONGRESS!
NOT NANCY PELOSI AND HARRY REID!
WE GET TO DECIDE, DAMN IT! WE OWN THIS PLACE! NOT THEM!
" I'll enjoy going to Daily Kos to make some troll posts because there are some really nasty people there."
Don't be that guy. Seriously, don't be that guy.
Just let them self-destruct on their own and watch, but don't troll.
Geoff said...
Eric, actually Ohio tracked the national vote pretty closely the last few elections.
In 2000 Bush beat Gore in Ohio by 3.5%. Gore beat Bush nationally by 0.5%.
Care to reassess your analysis?
Barack Obama received $365,922 from employees of Lehman, while McCain received $115,800. Obama will not have that populist attack on McCain.
I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight....
- If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're "exotic,
different."
- If you grow up in Alaska eating moose burgers, a quintessential American story.
- If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
- Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're a maverick.
- Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.’
- Attend 5 different colleges before graduating, you're well grounded.
- If you spend 3 years as a successful community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.
- If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, and 20 months as the governor of a state with 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second highest ranking executive.
- If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.
- If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.
- If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.
- If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible.
- If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.
- If you're husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one DUI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.
OK, much clearer now.
Inkstain - on the comparisons - I have to add, on the radio this AM:
Host: "So, I'm not young, but I have to say this is one of the most...interesting, and bizarre election years I've ever seen."
Kerry: "Really? How so?"
I was kinda flabbergasted. :p
Maybe it's because she can see Russia from her house!
Charles, I disagree. I'm looking solely into swing areas in swing states and talking with people on the ground there. There isn't necessarily more Bradley effect than people are willing to admit. That would require undecideds to say "Yes, I'm voting for Obama" and then lie about it once they got into the booth. My evidence is less latent and more visible than that. Lifetime Democrats, especially above the age of 50, have deep emotional hangups voting for Senator Obama.
Yes, I know how that seems so unreasonable and that these people are voting against their own economic self-interest. But the fear and hostility is deep, wide, and real.
Someone get tyrone his inhaler.
Eve, while i commend your obvious sincerity, the Dems and Obama are running the exact same kind of campaign as McCain. Their entire campaign is built upon demonizing Bush and calling McCain Bush. That's not a partisan strategy? Politics of personal destruction?
100 years ad is the same as the sex ed ad - an exaggeration of a position taken by the opposing candidate. Did the media cry for McCain on 100 years? No, they didnt - but they cry for Obama on the sex ed ad because, with all due respect, the media wants Obama to win and reports through that filter.
Nobody believes the "McSame" nonsense.
I cant believe the Democrat War Room still thinks that's a winning strategy!
"Eve, while i commend your obvious sincerity, the Dems and Obama are running the exact same kind of campaign as McCain. Their entire campaign is built upon demonizing Bush and calling McCain Bush. That's not a partisan strategy? Politics of personal destruction? "
To be fair, doesn't everybody hate Bush at this point? Hating Bush isn't partisan.
geoff: Uh huh. And I suppose Obama really did call Palin a pig? Even though McCain admitted he didn't, after making ads about how sexist Obama is?
Come on now.
"Eric, actually Ohio tracked the national vote pretty closely the last few elections."
Not really...
2004: Ohio R+2.11, national R+1.54
2000: Ohio R+3.51, national D+0.51
1996: Ohio D+6.36, national D+8.5
1992: Ohio D+1.83, national D+5.6
1988: Ohio R+10.85, national R+7.8
1984: Ohio R+18.7, national R+18.2
1980: Ohio R+10.6, national R+8.25
1972 was the last time Ohio was bluer than the popular vote. It's usually pretty close, but it clearly has leaned Republican.
Mike: I hear you. Racism has always been the one big thing that Obama has had to contend with. It's just sad that McCain is so willing to try to exploit it. (Not surprising, just sad.)
It may well be that Obama is just ahead of his time; it will take another generation for the racists to die off. In 20 or 30 years, this race would not even have been close.
kennyb, PLEASE continue to compare Obama to Sarah Palin! This is exactly what the McCain campaign WANTS you to do! If the McCain Campaign can make their #2 look as good as the Obama Campaign's #1, that only paints McCain in a better light.
Charles is whining again.
Not all Americans whine.
Just libs like Charles that always whine about what they don't have.
"I don't want to pay for medical"
"I don't make enough money"
"I can't get a loan"
"I can't afford 3 hamburgers"
"I'm too fat, pay for my liposuction"
"Nobody cares about me"
"Buy my house"
"Take me to Miami"
"Change my skin color"
"Pay for my college"
"I don't want to pay taxes... make him"
"I'm American dammit I'm ammune to huricanes"
"I want a new car"
"I want it to run on water"
"What do you mean I have to pay for insurance?"
"I want a lawyer"
"It not my fault"
That's why LIBS are all whiners.
Don't be that guy. Seriously, don't be that guy.
Just let them self-destruct on their own and watch, but don't troll.
You are right of course, Inkstain. I won't post - I'll just watch. I promise. Because in some ways I do feel sorry for them. I have never voted in anger - I have always felt enthusiastic about my candidate and don't think I ever hated the other guy.
Right on Direncrow! They're whining losers.
The Real Mike Is Back said... "Bradley Effect"
I agree. It's not as much people saying they'll vote Obama and then vote McCain or stay home. It's undecideds, who say they're undecided, but really they won't vote for an African-American. Maybe 20 or 30 years from now, before that's rare. Obama, of course makes up for some of that with his overwhelming support from the black community, but those old foagies could be his downfall.
Eric, actually I care not to revise my comments regarding Ohio tracking the national vote closely. 3 points is pretty close, and Ohio is trending Dem - see close Kerry count when Bush was up 3 nationally? Care to revise your analysis of the importance of the Ohio number?
That said, Inkstain's analysis is also cogent.
"I'm American dammit I'm ammune to huricanes"
Our poor redneck children. They hasn't been learning.
Hi all,
great site. I'm a Briton and am hoping for a McCain victory although Obama has many good things to recommend him.
I think it's clear that McCain is losing ground over the last couple of days. The question is how long does the trend last. IMO, it doesn't matter that much if a poll overweights Democrats, eg Kos and Diaego, rather what matters is the movement trend comparing like with like, eg, Kos to Kos. From this McCain has had a small drop off in the last couple of days but appears to be polling more strongly where it counts.
however, there's probably lag from national to state numbers.
"That's why LIBS are all whiners."
"My taxes are too high, my taxes are too high, my taxes are too high."
eric: But old fogies vote overwhelmingly Republican anyway, don't they?
BJB1968,
Try again. Obama has less contributions and he called on regulation in March while mcCain didn;t even have an economic plan written yet by "Mr. America are Whiner", Phil Graham.
"McCain could count five Merrill Lynch and Lehman executives among his bundlers. He’d already received about $1 million from Merrill Lynch employees and nearly $300,000 from Lehman workers.
Democrat Barack Obama had just one Lehman-employed bundler. He’d received $313,000 from Lehman workers and an anemic $173,000 from those at Merrill Lynch.
The money flow reflects key differences between the two candidates on the issue of reform.
McCain has called for a commission to study the investment industry and recommend changes, including consolidating the various institutions charged with regulating them.
Obama gave a speech in March, at the time of the Bear Stearns bailout, blasting the industry and the wealth gap that has emerged between Wall Street and Main Street.
Like McCain, Obama is calling for streamlining the bureaucracy that overseas the business. But Obama also wants greater disclosure for investors and a broader definition of which businesses get regulated."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080916/pl_politico/13486;_ylt=AtII4wsijQgVjP4ZOZgxHvlsnwcF
I suspect old Democrats' reluctance to vote for Obama is already reflected in the polls and is the reason he's had trouble consolidating the Democratic vote, not Clinton.
Tyrone - Is your last name Biggins by any chance?
Finally, American's are waking from their Palin enduced stupor and actually seeing this woman for what she is... a pawn being used by the McCain campaign to grab impulsive women voters and male voters who like her because she's "hot". Which I've actually heard men say. There were so many more qualified Republican women AND men who should have been picked. The choice of Palin was strictly political because she is a pretty, conservative female. And no matter what anyone says about her... there is no remark or action more sexist than McCain choosing her as his running mate. Not when there were so many other "less attractive" but more qualified people to pick from. It's like affirmative action for retired cheerleaders and it's as sexist as you can get.
And the American people are finally seeing it.
Post a Comment