An avalanche of polling today, but a consistent theme emerges:
And what is that theme? Well, it's that the popular vote and the Electoral College are significantly diverging. Although the Republicans seem to be polling stronger than they were in the pre-convention period almost everywhere, the differences are much larger in traditionally red states, particularly in the South and the rural West (Colorado and Nevada, by the way, are not rural states). Basically, I think the Republicans are getting the evangelical vote, and a significant fraction of the Perot vote.
Unfortunately, these are not particularly useful votes for them to have in terms of the electoral math. Here is a comparison of our projected margins of victory on August 26th -- the Tuesday of the Democratic convention, before polling had any chance to take Michelle Obama's opening night speech into effect -- with our projections today in a select group of states that have been polled since the RNC ended.State 8/26 9/11 Change
McCain's gain in our popular vote projection has been 2.1 points. Note, however, that his gains have been less than that in essentially all of the most important swing states, including Ohio, Michigan, Florida, Colorado, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire. Only Virginia is on the other side of the line, and then only barely so.
NH Obama +1.4 Obama +3.3 Obama +1.9
WV McCain +8.1 McCain +7.4 Obama +0.7
ME Obama +12.9 Obama +13.0 Obama +0.1
FL McCain +3.5 McCain +3.8 McCain +0.3
NJ Obama +8.0 Obama +7.5 McCain +0.5
OH McCain +0.7 McCain +1.3 McCain +0.6
NM Obama +2.2 Obama +1.5 McCain +0.7
MI Obama +3.0 Obama +2.0 McCain +1.0
WI Obama +7.1 Obama +5.8 McCain +1.3
CO Obama +1.2 McCain +0.4 McCain +1.6
PA Obama +6.3 Obama +4.6 McCain +1.7
NV McCain +0.5 McCain +2.2 McCain +1.7
==============AVERAGE: McCAIN +2.1 ===============
VA McCain +0.6 McCain +3.1 McCain +2.5
ND McCain +9.1 McCain +12.5 McCain +3.4
NC McCain +3.8 McCain +7.5 McCain +3.7
MS McCain +13.4 McCain +17.4 McCain +4.0
MT McCain +3.5 McCain +8.3 McCain +4.8
GA McCain +8.5 McCain +13.5 McCain +5.0
WA Obama +11.5 Obama +6.3 McCain +5.2
ID McCain +19.1 McCain +30.0 McCain +11.9
AK McCain +6.6 McCain +20.4 McCain +13.8
As a result of all this, the Electoral College remains too close to call, even though McCain has a 1-2 point advantage in the popular vote. Obama now has an 8.4 percent chance of winning the Electoral College while losing the popular vote, which is far and away the highest that this number has been all year. And that number may get larger rather than smaller, once polling filters in from other red states like Texas, Nebraska and South Carolina. Palin may have been a brilliant VP selection -- I think even Palinophobes like me have to concede that right now McCain's looking pretty savvy -- but some of that sheen is taken off by her somewhat lackluster effect on the Electoral College.
9.11.2008
Today's Polls, 9/11
@ 6:43 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
555 comments
Of course, we also haven't had any polls from California, New York, Massachusetts, etc.
To those who think Research 2000 polls should be excluded because Daily Kos is paying for them: there is no more reason to exclude those Research 2000 polls than any other Research 2000 polls.
The exclusion rule that Nate has articulated refers to the selective release of internal polls. It does not speak who who pays for the polls. Does anyone think that pollsters conduct polls for free? Rarely is that so. Does anyone know who's paying for Rasmussen polls, Gallup polls, ARG polls, Mason Dixon polls, Quinnipiac polls? Somebody is.
The main concern should be with the record and reliability of the pollster, not who the sponsor is. Otherwise, we're also going to get into the game of deciding whether polls paid for by FoxNews or CBSNews of the NYT or the LAT should be excluded because we might think these sponsors have a partisan slant. I don't think we can go there.
I for one really welcome pollopoly, where the trends that 538.com shows are not heavily driven by one or two pollsters. That has been the case, unfortunately, up until now, and has (as Charles Franklin showed on Pollster.com) tended to impart a bias to the national trends.
Even Nate's baseline, demographic "538 estimate" is now fading into the background.
And we're finally getting a more dense matrix of polling to work with. Pretty exciting (even if we may be unhappy with the trends).
I don't understand why Colorado has shifted to McCain in your model. We've got three post-convention polls of Colorado and Obama led in all three, by an average of 2.3 points.
I assume the regression changed a lot in McCain's favor there. Was there something specific in the regression that makes you (or 'your model') think that Colorado's leaning red (or at least 'very, very faint pink') right now?
Do the results from CO / NM / NV include breakouts by Hispanic voters?
And has anyone seen Gov. Richardson ( or Ritter, Schweitzer ) working for the Dems lately?
Good point Nick.
I agree with Nate for the most part regarding the redder states theory. However, the battleground states are basically a tie, meaning its all 50/50 right now and the debates will decide. McCain having the popular vote margin now means that if pushes a point or two forward from here for any reason (debates, gaffes, scandals, etc.) then its a McCain landslide, which, you will all note, is now a higher percentage chance than an Obama landslide.
McCain landslide: 10.4%
Obama landslide: 7.6%
Also, I think the numbers show that the only two states that really matter are Ohio and Colorado.
If OBama loses Ohio, than he can only win if he wins Colorado. Obama only has a 16% chance of winning if he loses Ohio.
I assume that you mean that Palin was a good political pick. No one actually pay attention can make the argument that she is a good pick when it comes to governance.
Look at the super tracker!
MCCAIN UP!
I just looked at the Nevada poll, and they had the African American numbers flipped in the table. Not sure if the actual poll had it correct, though.
"Look at the super tracker!"
It's called a bounce. How can you accept Nate's supertracker model, and ignore his model on how bounces work?
I'm encouraged that at the height of McCain's bounce, Obama still has a 50/50 shot at winning.
Great work as usual Nate.
I think everyone is missing the reason why Plain is such a big hit - and why no amount of tabloid/political damage will harm her or McSame's prospects.
It is the idea of Palin (as the first female VP) that is attracting so many evangelical and blue collar voters. Just as for many, and few of us will admit it, are to a certain extent attracted to the idea of Obama (as the first African-American president).
The sooner the Obama camp realises this the better...because I am getting increasingly worried that this election will slip away from them if they step into the pig sty with the Republicans.
They have to accept the new battlelines; forget the South, push hard in the Appalachian as well as making damn sure that New Hampshire isn't even in question when November 4th comes round.
Nate, any chance of getting an article on how the Palin pick has re-drawn the battleground in terms of the swing states?
Gov. Ritter was on MSNBC tonight... basically saying Obama should keep his eye on the ball. I think plenty of us in Colorado realize what is at stake and are planning to work.... hard for the right thing ....
It seems that Michigan may not be heading even close to McCain this year. Colorado and Nevada need to remain McCain or else it is game over.
This polling does have one benefit for McCain. His base. I guess it is good that McCain is wrapping up his base now, that way he doesn't have to worry as much about alienating them away from him.
Republican Voter Suppression
Lose Your House, Lose Your Vote
http://www.michiganmessenger.com/4076/lose-your-house-lose-your-vote
You really ought to read the whole article. It's a perverse use of the Shock Doctrine: A powerful mortgage company, which just happens to be a major GOP donor, boots people ought of homes that they issued questionable mortgages for, then works to see that those people lose their vote. They know a GOP victory means no accountability for literally their own accounting.
Did Florida election officials accidentally trash uncounted ballots?
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Were_missing_Florida_ballots_thrown_out_0911.html
Arrested Arizona Voting Monitor John Brakey FSRN Interview
http://www.fsrn.org/content/election-unspun-sept-11-election-audit-blues/3254
Wisconsin - Van Hollen sues state accountability board over registration checks
http://www.madison.com/wsj/topstories/index.php?ntid=304321
Happy 9/11, folks! GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!
No comment on the higher chances of McCain landslide v. Obama landslide eh?
Of course, we also haven't had any polls from California, New York, Massachusetts, etc.
I doubt Palin will increase Obama's margin there, except perhaps in Massachusetts. Even blue states like California and New York have more red counties than blue, and Palin probably lifts McCain there just as she does in red states.
The only states with more blue counties than red are the New England states, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, and Hawaii.
Most of these polls were taken during the peak of McCain's bounce. It's hard to know whether this is the new steady-state in many of these states, or whether this is temporary. My guess is the latter, but it's hard to know right now. OH, in particular, seems impossible to predict. Quinnipiac has always seemed like a strong pollster to me, but the race might be closer to dead even than either Quinnipiac or Strategic Vision have it.
I think everyone is getting way to worked up, especially Democrats, about this sudden doomsday scenario. McCain's "bounce" has made the election a dead heat and all Obama has done is watch and basically ignored the Republican's plays that are undercutting him. 7 days from now the "McCain bounce" will be a memory...Obama will be surging back on Monday. If anything, the polling today shows that the momentum McCain had is starting to slow.
The Georgia comment is innocuous on tape. Overblown controversy on here. Huffington will run with it, as will Daily Ko's, but not NYT/WAPo.
"I doubt Palin will increase Obama's margin there, except perhaps in Massachusetts. Even blue states like California and New York have more red counties than blue, and Palin probably lifts McCain there just as she does in red states."
Red counties with very few people in them, in comparison with the few blue countries that have most of the state population.
Sorry, but I don't agree with Nate's conclusions about Palin being a great pick. Getting a bounce for two weeks in Septemeber is irrelevant, unless the momentum can be sustained. Palin's appeal is entirely based on people knowing nothing about her, GOP hype and her hiding from the press. There's no substance to it.
Today her first interview got published and it featured headlines about her warning of war with Russia. These are the sorts of things that scare the crap out of people.
Her favorability is falling, and she's going to cost McCain far more EVs than she brings him. It's just going to take another week or two for it to show up.
I'll decide if she was a good pick or not after the debate. I think by then the GOP fans here will be begging McCain to throw her under the bus.
Well, Nate´s model is currently thinking that there is a trend towards McCain and so it projects the election slightly worse than the numbers suggest. But the reality, at least for the moment, is that there was a convention bounce that is going to stay for another week or so, and then to recede completely. If the trend was just a flat horizontal line, the difference in popular vote would not be that big, and I think Obama would be slightly above 50% win percentage.
I am surprised that even the Strategic vision poll of Ohio, a known Republican-leaning pollster, is Obama-friendlier than Rasmussen. I have concluded that Rasmussen´s Ohio model is slightly off, just like the SUSA NC model. InsiderAdvantage is a similar case, with sometimes strange poll internals. They show the first pro-McCain Michigan poll ever, the by far worst Georgia poll for Obama, and well...3 polls that sounds ok. But I have already read in the comments that they messed up even more internals in these 3 other polls.
Anyway, I think the race is almost tied at the moment, but strategically going for Obama, although it´s very close. Simply because he can pick more states to attack and Michigan and Pennsylvania refuse to flip sides.
The Perot vote? Here's the deal, see.
I thought Bob Barr was getting the Perot vote?
What the hell? Why is Colorado leaning McCain in your model?
Also remember that if McCain had picked someone like Romney, he'd be giving Obama a real run for his money right now in MI and NH, maybe PA, and he'd have socked away OH and probably FL. The Palin pick has turned off voters in the areas *not* infested with evangelicals (including many of the swing states) -- and that's *before* the bloom falls from the rose with her.
You'll see.
Nate's point about the geographical distribution of the McCain bounce raises a question. As tomthress said, does the evidence really suggest CO for McCain right now, with all three post-convention polls showing Obama ahead? If the regression still likes McCain to win, that's one thing, but I wonder if the adjustments to bring old CO polls in line with the supertracker aren't pushing those old Colorado polls farther towards McCain than they should. That highly-weighted Quinnipiac poll from 8/18, when Obama was doing better, must be dragging the averages down more than the +1 would indicate.
Or maybe I'm just thinking wishfully. Hopefully there will be enough polling in the battleground states that those old polls will get washed out soon, anyway.
Geoff,
The landslide issue is largely a matter of the SuperTracker, I think. Earlier on, Obama had a huge advantage in landslides, now McCain has a small edge. If I actually had to bet I'd still say that an Obama landslide was more likely, since there still seem to be many people on the fence who are just waiting to see if Obama is acceptable (a low bar). Obama's support is more firm and much of his base is very excited about him.
But the likelihood of a popular vote landslide is minuscule for either candidate, and even a electoral vote landslide is unlikely. Palin really polarized the electorate and thus seriously reduced the chance of a blowout by either side. That's my two cents, at least.
Just as an example, because of the perceived trendline, the model reduces Obama´s advantage in California by 5 points - from 13.5 to 8.5. If we get a new California poll with Obama double digit lead. The popular vote will look a little bluer. New York also loses 3.9 points because of the perceived trend. But again, that trend is the convention bounce, not a fundamental shift.
The liberals have been predicting the dissapperance of the "bounce" for almost a week now.
Maybe its not a bounce, but a permanent Palin Affect?
Alex: Biden is going to seal PA for Obama -- it's just flying under the radar. I did an analysis of independent voter reactions to the Biden and Palin picks -- they love Biden in PA, hate Palin.
This is too funny.
Intrade has has this market going for Sarah Palin to be withdrawn before the election since she was named as McCain's VP pick.
Now they have Joe Biden instead!
Red counties with very few people in them, in comparison with the few blue countries that have most of the state population.
Doesn't matter. If small red counties are moving to McCain while large blue counties stay the same, the margin moves in McCain's direction, not Obama's.
Greg, are you neglecting to see the fact that McCain's lead is declining? It'll be a tie again by next week.
Question for Nate, pollwatchers
If Obama carries Kerry states plus IA, then the two likely scenarios to win (in a squeeker) would be:
1. OH
2. (2 out of 3)NM+NV+CO
Which is more likely?
I think Kerry+IA+NM+CO is the scenario where we may have a Obama EV with a McCain PV victory
(of course Kerry+IA+NV+NM=tie, but as Nate has pointed out, Dem would likely also win tie)
Today's polls seem a bit better for Obama than the previous few days.
CO is still rural enough (unlike NV) so that state will probably lean towards McCain. NV was much closer in 2004 and the registration numbers are not favorable for Obama in CO.
Nate's projection is accurate now as Obama's winning combinations have shrunk dramatically. He either has to win OH or thread the needle in the IA-CO-NM or IA-CO-NV scenarios.
If he loses a Kerry Midwestern state, he loses.
The red states are not going to be a red in the South due to the strong AA turnout. There will be few 25-30 point blowouts here like there were in 2004.
I think I've come to the conclusion that Palin's effect is primarily budgetary. By narrowing the number of states that are battlegrounds, McCain has seriously negated a significant part of Obama's financial advantage, considering that Obama is now invested in a ground game in those states that Palin moved from lean/likely GOP to safe GOP. And if Obama scales back his ground games there, the McCain campaign will be trumpeted over him flipflopping over a 50-state battle and/or "conceding" states.
Of course, it's still a little too early to tell for sure if she's really moved that many red states out of Obama's reach, but by looking at it from a finances perspective, she was a brilliant move.
I'm almost sure the Palin pick will turn out to be a mistake. There's too much wierdness. A small example - she took 6 years to get a bachelors degree in journalism, and went to 5 different colleges ... why? And if really bad stuff emerges the ticket is now Palin/McCain rather than McCain/Palin, so it's going to hurt *a lot*.
The liberals have been predicting the dissapperance of the "bounce" for almost a week now.
Maybe its not a bounce, but a permanent Palin Affect?
Actually, the hybrid graph Nate presented of two conjoined conventions interacting with each other seems to be rather spot on.
All of you who are thinking Obama has an advantage in Colorado are probably unaware of or forgetting the fact that the Republican Secretary of State there has thrown almost 1/5 of all voters (and guess the demographics of those?) off the voter rolls.
Remember everyone: If the election is close, the Republicans will steal it again. If you care deeply about who wins, do whatever YOU can to work for your preferred candidate.
Oh I'm so sorry.
I was laughing so hard about the Intrade thing that I forgot to stay on topic.
Whoa! Look at all the RED on those new polls!
Geoff is the designated douchebag on this thread.
Nate, I have to be honest. Just seeing those numbers puts a pit in my stomach. I hope November 5th I will see these numbers, only reversed.
So the race returns to the status quo, with most of Obama's firewall in place, and Colorado, Ohio and (possibly) Nevada being the game changers.
I do feel that the 50 state strategy, and the hopes for an election based on things other than identity politics, is gone. But c'est la vie.
This election is OVA BABY!!!!!!!
We've got ID and WY...to go along with MT and ND!!!!
WOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!
Just as an example, because of the perceived trendline, the model reduces Obama´s advantage in California by 5 points - from 13.5 to 8.5. If we get a new California poll with Obama double digit lead. The popular vote will look a little bluer. New York also loses 3.9 points because of the perceived trend. But again, that trend is the convention bounce, not a fundamental shift.
Actually, it could be a microcosm of the "red sates getting redder" effect of Palin, only on a county level. Red counties get redder with Palin in blue states as much as red ones.
"I do feel that the 50 state strategy, and the hopes for an election based on things other than identity politics, is gone. But c'est la vie."
Well, you can't blame Obama for thinking McCain put his country first. Many of us believed the lie.
Porridge, you're a hateful smuck.
NJ Moderate...Nate's projection is accurate now as Obama's winning combinations have shrunk dramatically. He either has to win OH or thread the needle in the IA-CO-NM or IA-CO-NV scenarios.
There's also the IA-NM-NV tie to Obama scenario. Distinct possibility. Don't assume Obama will win Colorado before he wins Nevada.
Nate,
I just looked at CO and I also an curious as others are, as to how your model is handling CO. It might prove illustrative to us to understand better how the model works if you could use CO as an example.
Um, Barack Obama isn't running against Sarah Palin. Just sayin'.
geoff,
ditto that for kozierok. can't go 2 posts without some snarky shit-eating comment about McCain, or conservatives.
"Doesn't matter. If small red counties are moving to McCain while large blue counties stay the same, the margin moves in McCain's direction, not Obama's."
No shit, but if small red counties are moving to McCain while large blue counties are moving to Obama, then the margin moves in Obama's direction.
Will this happen? I don't know. I'm just saying we haven't had any polls in traditional blue states to test whether she's polarized the nation, or whether blue and swing states haven't moved, but red states have turned redder.
This is extremely interesting. One question when considering the effects of a bounce is how the bounce is distributed.
For instance, at the Princeton Election Consortium I have been doing a simple, across-the-board shift. This appears to be not right.
However, Nate's correction, while more elaborate, is also not right. If I recall correctly, it is distributed in a complex way based on demographic arguments that is not the pattern observed here.
My view is that because of these uncertainties, one should keep the assumptions simpler. But still, this pattern is really something. It attenuates the benefit to McCain compared with what one would otherwise think.
Does Insider Advantage have a house effect? More generally, is there a list somewhere for all the pollsters?
thanks
Dems need to settle down. There is a huge hurricane barreling towards the 4th largest Metropolitan city in this country, Palin will eventually have to give an unscripted interview or Americans (hopefully) will be smart enough to write her off as a hype machine, and all this State polling is still with McCain's convention bounce. I think you are already starting to see this McCain "surge" coming to an end in the state polling from today. His surge will not last to long, unlike the surge in Iraq.
"This election is OVA BABY!!!!!!!"
Are you suggesting that it will come down to ID and WY, or that it will be a question of which ticket is more fertile. If it's the latter, then I think Palin really was a big asset. Of course, I'd say that ova aren't the whole story, but that's just me.
Colorado is leaning Obama, Natey-Poo.
eric, IA-NV-NM would be too much like Kerry's bid in 2004. If Obama has lost CO and OH, he is going to lose one of those three states as well.
lilnev said...
Does Insider Advantage have a house effect? More generally, is there a list somewhere for all the pollsters?
thanks
One thing is certain, though we dont reall know where Michigan stands right now (best guess is probably Obama with a 2-3 point lead), their poll that has McCain up 1 point is bunk. If you look at the internals in the poll they make no sense at all. According to their poll McCain has a huge advantage with 18-29 yr olds and Obama huge advantage with 65+.
Sam,
Nice site.
nicholas;
I'm encouraged that at the height of McCain's bounce, Obama still has a 50/50 shot at winning.
From the election that couldn't be lost with strong wind in the Dems sails to the encouraging coin toss.
Obama is blowing this election. Of course, the people that put him in ahead of Hillary! made the first blown call, but Obama followed up with the Hillary! snub.
I love how Clinton kept his comments short today following his meeting with Obama. First time for everything.
Oz.
Nate,
Stick to your numbers. Obviously you can't count. McCain need only bring Colorado into his orbit and he wins with 274. It looks like he has brought all other states that he needs to his side.
New Hampshire, Michigan, Penn. are still possibilities.
I'll take McCain's side in this poker game any day.
NJ_Moderate said...
eric, IA-NV-NM would be too much like Kerry's bid in 2004. If Obama has lost CO and OH, he is going to lose one of those three states as well.
I disagree completely. Colorado and Ohio need to flip from being naturally Red. Iowa is Obama's 2nd home, it's not a tipping point and a lock for Obama if he's close. Bush beat Kerry by 6000 votes in New Mexico and 10,000 in Nevada. Since 2004 Nevada has a +60,000 gain for Dems in registered voters and every poll but one has had Obama up in New Mexico. I don't think there's any question Obama could easily win Nevada, New Mexico and Iowa, but lose Ohio and Colorado.
This is a telling number:
Obama loses OH, wins election: 16.74%
I also see that OH has rocketed to the top of the tipping point states.
If Obama ends up having to rely on OH to win the election, he's going to have a very tough time of it on election day. Better hope for some good numbers out of CO...
Bottom line - if McCain doesn't/can't win Michigan, Ohio, AND Pennsylvania, Obama wins the election. Plain and simple.
And right now, Obama has a solid edge in 2 of the 3 (MI and PA) and will be very competitive in the other.
so...what do we do to expose just how much Palin/McCain are lying?
Colorado is a special case because the trendline of the supertracker turns the pro-Obama polls into a pro-McCain result - trend-adjusted. If exactly these numbers of today hold over the next 2 weeks (not even assuming that McCain´s bounce will fade away), Colorado will turn blue again. At the moment, the election is only won for McCain because we voted to dump the convention adjustment model, damn democracy.
The Editor,
Stop worrying about who is "lying" and just vote for who you think is best to lead this country.
I am sorry to say that this election won't even be close. McCain will pick off states that were never thought possible including:
Michigan (a corrupt government keeping its citizens in joblessness and poverty)
Oregon (They will get a temporary visa out of the left coast vortex)
Wisconsin (any landslide will include Wisconsin)
Pennsylvania (Guns, Catholics etc)
Within a few weeks, this site will only be good for commentary, as the decision will already be made. As I said earlier, It is very good that the Reps won't even have to drop the "whitey" tape now. I think it is time to work on a new coalition to take back congress from the liberal robber barons.
States "leaning" OBAMA (Post-Republican Convention):
New Hampshire, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Michigan. New Mexico has had a some "suspect" polling data lately, but I reckon it's in the bag.
The Kerry states should be locked up fairly soon. The path to 270 seems straight forward enough. Am I wrong?
Let's keep it real, McCain is probably ahead nationally by about 1-1.5 points right now and yet if the election were held today, Obama would probably win the electoral college. More than likely if Obama closes on that lead t all or takes the lead himself he wins the election. There's more soft support right now at McCain's topline than Obama. Obama is in a better position and the Publican bloggers don't like it or want to admit it. Though I'm for Obama, I tell it like it is.
Wow, the conservatrolls are in full-on delusional mode tonight. What is it, 9/11 celebrations gone to their head? Could be.
If anybody seriously thinks McCain will win PA and MI, they're delusional. He isn't ahead in the polls...AND he's at the height of the bounce. It can only go downhill for him from here.
For Obama, the "fifty state strategy" is dead.
For McCain it is alive and well.
Howie Dean must be crying in his chabli.
Geoff said...
Porridge, you're a hateful smuck.
LMAO!!!
Btw, what's a "smuck"?
I think this thing is going to turn when they debate. I don't think McCain is actually up to the task of facing the issues. That one interview he gave that i saw over at Politico is a JOKE. I don't understand how we live in a society where for the last 8 years the Republicans have just laid waste to the country, and yet the people who are campaigning to replace them act EXACTLY THE SAME, but get the benefit of the doubt on everything. Isn't it a little suspicious that they are ducking the press? O but it's ok because John McCain thinks that the press is out to get them.Do these robots realize that John McCain has no shame and is just trying to win at any cost? This country better wake up soon, or we are going to wish the particle accelerator blew up the planet!!!! PS: Nate i love the site and check it about 10 million times a day for new posts and comments. Thanks for all the work you do.
What's going on is the Publican bloggers are realizing what we all realize. That what happened to Gore could happen to them. They're simply in denial for the moment.
Of course when people say Palin was a good pick they mean politically. At this point, Palin's ONLY JOB is to get McCain elected. The same is true of Biden for Obama.
Plus, none of these polls mean anything. The correlation between poll results and election outcomes doesn't get that good until mid-October, or so.
Once the Canadian election is over (Oct 14) I can start worrying about yours.
Can one of the libs here explain why Obama stutters and stammers and "uhhs" so much?
Ira, what happens if you get a conservative government? Will the libs have nowhere to threaten to move to when McCain/Palin wins?
way off topic....just started seeing the Gibson-Palin interview. I am scared to death. This woman is not ready, will never be ready. HELP! Please say there is hope that we can avoid this. No place in the world will be safe.
Greg said...
Can one of the libs here explain why Obama stutters and stammers and "uhhs" so much?
Because he's what you call "elite" and we call "smart".
He wants to give you a good nuanced answer for a best course to take and why. That sometimes requires thought. as opposed to:
Does evil exist? Yes What do we do about it? Defeat it
Palin is ok with starting a war with Russia...seriously, this woman has a good chance of becoming our commander in chief. Do we really want a nuclear holocaust? I can't believe people still support this woman...
The Palin interview was so-so, met expectations but did not exceed.
Wow, the conservatrolls are in full-on delusional mode tonight. What is it, 9/11 celebrations gone to their head? Could be.
They are wielding particularly blunt objects today. They've jumped right over McCain getting 270 and trying to sell him getting 370.
Such aggressive pitches tend to indicate a need to convince themselves, not others.
I'll settle for Obama getting to 270. I'm not greedy. And 270 is still looking like a better than even enterprise.
Geoff, I think the chances for a landslide (defined as 375+ EV) are very remote for either candidate.
I believe the tipping point state for 375+ for McCain is New Jersey, which is still projected at +7.5 Obama. Conversely, the 375+ tipping point for Obama is North Carolina, which is +7.5 McCain. It would take an 8 point shift to create a landslide for either candidate.
A 3 point shift towards McCain would move Michigan and New Mexico into his column, which would put him just shy of 300.
Couch, you really think she is "ok with starting a war with Russia"?
Read the quote again, all she did is recite the obligations to a Nato ally.
Geez.
That won't sell with the American people, Eric, even if it were the right answer. Which it isn't.
Obama stutters and stammers and "uhhs" because he is nervous the American people will find him out for the radical leftist he is and vote for McCain in droves. He's hiding an awful lot, and it makes him nervous!
The Palin interview was so-so, met expectations but did not exceed.
It was stump speech redux. She used the exact same answers word for word over and over on more than one occasion.
Yes, Thran, I think a total 18% combined (M and O) chance of landslide is unrealistic. Perhaps a problem with teh model...
"way off topic....just started seeing the Gibson-Palin interview. I am scared to death. This woman is not ready, will never be ready. HELP! Please say there is hope that we can avoid this. No place in the world will be safe."
Millions of Americans are having the same realization. I call it the "tone arm yanked screeching off the record" moment for Palin's little honeymoon with the American people.
The Sarah Soccermom balloon is going to deflate rapidly now. She's the Milli Vanilli of politics.
Nate, i don´t understand why Colorado is in McCain column.
The last 3 polls in this state Obama was leaning.
I actually believe the Obama campaign has a model how to win the electoral vote without winning the popular vote. Losing big in red states, eeking out wins in swingy blue states, is the anti-campaign of their primary campaign. And they had planned for everything even before the Iowa caucus because they might have to go all the way.
It would be a fitting end to the Bush goverment, a story gone full circle.
But I believe Obama will be ahead by a few percent.
Hey Chuck, that's not Palin, that's Obama.
The RCP electoral map is Obama 273 McCain 265.
The popular vote is McCain up by 2,7.
"Such aggressive pitches tend to indicate a need to convince themselves, not others."
They're always like that. It's called 'denial' and 'trolling'. They do it no matter what the numbers show.
Meanwhile, the rest of the country gets to wake up to "Sarah Palin warns of war with Russia".
So all the righteous indignation that Gore Won and Bush Stole the Election is out the window if Obama is in Bush's position? So much for consistency.
I thought that Bush won because he did and the USSC said so. If Obama wins without a popular margin, so be it, he won. At least I am consistent.
"Because he's what you call "elite" and we call "smart".
He wants to give you a good nuanced answer for a best course to take and why. That sometimes requires thought."
Eric: You're talking to someone who thinks *Sean Hannity* is a "great commentator". LOL.
To the talk about New Mexico: How many poor people and Hispanics are going to be forced to vote with provisional ballots, and how many of those will be thrown out again, as happened big-time in 2004 (accounting for Bush's "win" there)? Please, people, pay attention to the preparations to steal the election again. Everyone, please read Greg Palast. Google that name.
Just an aside about Palin and the pork barrel:
Sarah Palin is a typical tax-and-spend conservative.
What's the difference between a tax-and-spend conservative and a tax-and-spend liberal, you ask?
Quite simple: a tax-and-spend liberal wants to tax the rich and spend on the poor and the middle class; a tax-and-spend conservative wants to tax the poor and the middle class and spend on the rich.
Michale is already desperate, trotting out the tired "Bush stole it" meme.
Will it be trotted out the morning after Obama's loss? I think it will.
For all of you nims that don't like the answer on Georgia and Ukraine in Nato, your newbie Dem nominee has the exact same position.
Of course, once someone is in Nato, by treaty definition, they must be defended. Defended doesn't always mean going to war as her answer expounded.
She is very smooth in the interview even as Gibson misrepresented a quote of hers. Her answers to the god question were stellar. Expectations for her are always set so low that sets world records for her answers.
It looks Sexy Sara Barracuda is a very good study. Btw, yes I think she is very sexy. My wife thinks Todd is quite the hunk.
Hey Michael, you do realize that your boy Richardson is in charge of NM right? Any complaints about NM voting, please reference the Democrats.
Greg said...
That won't sell with the American people, Eric, even if it were the right answer. Which it isn't.
Obama stutters and stammers and "uhhs" because he is nervous the American people will find him out for the radical leftist he is and vote for McCain in droves. He's hiding an awful lot, and it makes him nervous!
President of Harvard Law Review vs what 578th out of 583 in his class and they're tied. I won't argue with you. I'm not giving the elctorate more credit than you are. I'm simply saying I've listened to both of their presriptions for everything and Obama gives nuanced answers that requires thorough well-thought out reasoning, McCain tries to be like Reagan, only he doesn't carry it off well. Thin of this election as the Clinton wanna-be against the Reagan wannabe.
David said...
This is a telling number:
Obama loses OH, wins election: 16.74%
I also see that OH has rocketed to the top of the tipping point states.
If Obama ends up having to rely on OH to win the election, he's going to have a very tough time of it on election day. Better hope for some good numbers out of CO...
That would make it the same as every other election. Barack looked like an odd exception: he could actually win without Ohio. If he did so, he'd be one of the only Democrats to do so.
Nate's got the usual problem- one thing is obvious, and his numbers go the other way. For example, he says the bounce has mostly gone away, and will eventually end. However, his 'trend adjuster' goes on the assumption that the bounce will get *bigger*. This is how Colorado turns red.
I like this site, but it takes a *lot* of grains of salt. Nate tends to add adjustments and then forget why he put them in.
Here's a prediction for you- thanks to the 'trend adjuster', in a couple of weeks 538.com will predict a more Blue map than Realclearpolitics and similar sites. That's because the Trend Adjuster is going to think that McCain is going to lose a point a week *forever*, not just the point he's lost from Monday of this week and the point he'll lose each of the next two weeks as the bounce deflates.
We have an essentially even election, with Obama actually winning the electoral college if the election were held today and McCain is at the height of his convention bounce. Some on the right think this is going to be a landslide for McCain. Thats delusional. I expected McCain to be up by 5 in ohio, 5 in CO, 2-3 in Pa and 2-3 in MI. Obama is holding strong and this is as good as it gets for McCain.
geoff:
The Electoral College is an atrocity, regardless of who benefits from it.
Now, can we hope to have Republican partisans like you condemn election-STEALING?
Geoff, it's not only about the party label of who's Governor. Read Palast.
Geoff -
Once the USSC decided and Gore conceded, I accepted. So I would expect the same from conservatives should they be on the short end this time around. Any bets that they'll quietly accept it?
Oh, and Greg, you partisan liar, Palast is explaining how the election is being stolen BEFORE the fact! If it were the Democrats stealing elections, I'd be just as livid. You don't give a damn about the integrity of the process, do you?
Gibson: "Do you agree with the Bush Doctrine?"
Palin: "In what respect, Charlie?"
Gibson: (confused) "What do you interpret it to be?"
Palin: "His world view?"
GOOD LORD.
Charles Chris Matthews just said the answer to that question was excellent.
Bill, I'm a centrist and I certainly would never contest a USSC decision on the election.
The Governor runs the secretary of state, which administers the election. Any complaints about New Mexico, see Richardson.
Didn't everyone blame Jeb Bush on the Florida thing?
Geez.
Could someone please inform me what Obama's platform is. I really have no idea and I would like to know why everyone is caught in Obama. I'm not trying to start an argument, just trying to understand more about Obama, as I am writing about him for the school paper. (I will also, in return, let you know why I think McCain would be the better President)
Thanks,
deanscream
oh, God..here we go with the friggin "steal election" excuse again. Lose excuse lose excuse lose excuse. This is the pattern Dems follow. Sad.
BTW, I don't think that McCain is sittin pretty right now. Clearly he's just taken states out of play that he needed anyways. All that does for McCain is guarantee wasted money by Obama in all those states..which is a good thing.
I have been listening to Chris Matthews. One comment was that Obama could win the electoral vote, but not the popular vote.
When doe sthat statement fall apart? If one candidate wins the popular vote by 3 points, or 4 points, or 5 points (52-47), what value guarantees an electoral vote win?
I will not be surprised if Palin cleans Biden's clock in the debate. That being said, if Tim Russert were alive and she ended up on his show, just once, GAME, SET, MATCH. So much so, I honestly think if Russert were alive they may not have chosen Palin.
"Charles Chris Matthews just said the answer to that question was excellent."
Chris Matthews is about as qualified to be president as you and Sarah Palin.
She doesn't even know what the Bush Doctrine *IS*!
As far as I remember, the election-"stealing" was only brought up by Democrats because the Florida Supreme Court and various other Republican officials torpedoed the recount.
The loss itself was accompanied by the usual criticism of the EC-system, but not much beyond that.
Charles is grasping at straws.
Very sad to watch him realize McCain is sitting pretty, and that the election is slipping out of Obama's fingers.
How long until he accuses the Republicans of stealing it?
Discuss!
alex,
I think you mean the rererererecount.
If McCain DOES win the EC, it's going to be a 264-274 win. Anyone thinking it will be over 300 is delusional, and needs to stop living in fantasy land.
Cainer's up first. Obama about to lose two points in the national tracker.
Nate I agree with your general thesis Palin made the Reds redder.
But what was the alternative that was better?
I toyed with the idea of a female pro-choicer in Olympia Snowe. On paper I think it moved the most EVs but it was a bridge too far politically within the party. Lieberman and Ridge were the same, out of reach politically.
Romney? maybe a 1% pop in the midwest, about what Palin produced, and maybe a little more juice in NV. But its not like the Morman's there weren't already voting GOP.
Huckabee? Palin got everything Huckabee would have delivered and then some.
Pawlenty? Yawn. Probably the safest pick, but I doubt he'd have brought in MN or WI.
Palin has brought Colorado even, she's probably defended FL, VA, NC IN and OH ... that's a lot from a VP
Palin gives us a game in MI.
Bottomline - While you're right that the EV hasn't turned, I think that's attributable to Obama's structural advantage not that there was a better pick than Palin that could have been made politically but wasn't. McCain and Hillary had done their best to overcome Obama. But he was still +2-3 with a 290EV Average and 65% win probability. McCain needed something bold to win an election the GOP should lose.
I'll take my odds now blocking the standard path Kerry-IA-NM-CO and playing for MI. Unless Obama blowsup I don;t know what game there was for McCain to play other than what he's done.
Jack-be-nimble said...
It looks Sexy Sara Barracuda is a very good study. Btw, yes I think she is very sexy. My wife thinks Todd is quite the hunk.
and here is the one million dollar question. Would you hire her as the executive of the company where all your life savings were knowing that she might fire the best accountant you have just ebcause she refused to do what she asked him to do, she might cheat the company for staying at her own home, she might go into a bidding war with a competitor knowing that she might bankrupt the company, for her sexy looks and her hunky husband?
RCP electoral map now is 273-265 for Obama.
And Colorado is Obama up by 2.3%.
I don´t understand why McCain is lean CO in Nate´s proyection.
imo, her worst exchange:
GIBSON: But this is not just reforming a government. This is also running a government on the huge international stage in a very dangerous world. When I asked John McCain about your national security credentials, he cited the fact that you have commanded the Alaskan National Guard and that Alaska is close to Russia. Are those sufficient credentials?
PALIN: But it is about reform of government and it's about putting government back on the side of the people, and that has much to do with foreign policy and national security issues Let me speak specifically about a credential that I do bring to this table, Charlie, and that's with the energy independence that I've been working on for these years as the governor of this state that produces nearly 20 percent of the U.S. domestic supply of energy, that I worked on as chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, overseeing the oil and gas development in our state to produce more for the United States.
GIBSON: I know. I'm just saying that national security is a whole lot more than energy.
couchpotato...you nailed it. he MIGHT squeak it up to 278-260 with NH...but thats about it IMO.
Obama's path is win 1 of 3 Ohio, Colorado, or Nevada and hold onto Michigan. As Tiger would say, I like my chances.
Anyone who says that very obvious evidence of election-stealing is a "loser's argument" is a despicable pawn of or collaborator with election-stealing Republicans. Anyone who is not a "win-at-all-costs" Republican yet denies the POSSIBILITY of election-stealing is ignorant and needs to read what Palast has written about all sorts of things, especially vote-caging, which does NOT require possession of the Secretary of State position in order to do.
deanscream, if you want to know what Obama's platform is, the most obvious research tool is barackobama.com. Please thank me by NOT trying to tell me why McCain would be the better President.
The Electoral College is an atrocity, regardless of who benefits from it.
No,it's a national treasure, and I would defend it as vigorously as the Bill Of Rights.
Each state is a sovereign entity in the Unites States, and presidential elections are a collection of 51 separate elections the results of which are pooled later.
If there were no Electoral College, a voter in Idaho could cancel out a voter in Rhode Island, and vice versa. That's absolutely unacceptable....they are two different elections. They have nothing to do with each other until the the electors that each state votes for cast their votes.
"Charles is grasping at straws.
Very sad to watch him realize McCain is sitting pretty, and that the election is slipping out of Obama's fingers."
What you don't get is -- I don't believe in magical thinking. It doesn't matter if you cheerlead, or lie about numbers, or pretend your candidate has already won. Simply doesn't matter.
What I continue to be appalled about is the realization that a former POW betrayed his country by choosing a running mate he KNEW was not prepared to be president, solely out of a hunger for power. I'm sickened, watching this woman, who clearly knows NOTHING and sounds like a 14-year-old who crammed for a History exam, and thinking that she could soon be in a position to launch a war.
I'm even more sickened to watch craven, moronic fools who don't care about this, only care about "winning". You are the scourge of this nation.
I don't understand how they came to their Electoral Vote totals today. Did they split Colorado?
I've been thinking of the possibility of Obama winning the electoral vote (through the Kerry States + IA, CO, and NM), and losing the popular vote, because he will lose Ohio and Virginia.
Well, under this scenario, if Obama wins the electoral vote but loses the popular by 2-3%, (that's 2.4 to 3.6 million votes!), I cannot see how that would go over well with the American public. He might be "encouraged" to serve only one term by his party.
If we see an extreme version of the 2000 election in 2008, and it's obviously too soon to tell, then we might finally see a popular movement for a constitutional amendment to abolish the electoral vote and establish the national popular vote. That is, once the Republicans understand what it's like to be screwed over politically.
Michael is a leftist loon, and needs help. Michael must also believe 9/11 was an inside job.
P.S. The "poor poor Sarah was beaten up on by mean old Charlie" whining has already started. This country is filled with absolute idiots.
Now she is talking war with Russia....great line Sarah. It shows the rank amatuer you are...ready for the Presidency like we are all ready to die in nuclear war over Georgia??? You do know it is not the one with a capital of Atlanta.....
Rather frightening: in response to the national security question she reels off a list of GOP platform platitudes and then comes up with her being chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission.
Good grief.
Alex S. posted:
"As far as I remember, the election-"stealing" was only brought up by Democrats because the Florida Supreme Court and various other Republican officials torpedoed the recount.
The loss itself was accompanied by the usual criticism of the EC-system, but not much beyond that."
You remember incorrectly, and you NEED to read PALAST!
John McCain stumbles badly after being asked if Palin has National Security experience
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/09/11/john-mccain-stumbles-badly-after-being-asked-if-palin-has-national-security-experience-energy/
So-called "conservatives" should be ashamed of themselves.
@jakom
You are aware that the one that has the lead after the second convention usually leads for the entire 1 month after. According to Gallup that if Obama takes the lead before the one month period is up in there poll it will be the first time ever the candidate that was ahead after the last convention did not maintain there lead. The Closet This ever came to happen in Gallup was When Carter could not hold his 1 point lead and it was a tie one month to the end.
So when i hear Republicans yell and scream its over i laugh. When i hear Democrats complain about the position Obama is in i laugh too. If anyone thinks this race is over there in dream land.
A winner-take-all Electoral College sucks and sucks big time. I live in CA and there's very little value in my vote and my energy. I would at least like a proportional EC system. I hate that elections always boil down to a handful of states.
Charles,
I know this will come as a shock, but when a member of an alliance is invaded, generally the Alliance's most powerful member comes to defend it. Governor Palin was only suggesting force if Ukraine and Georgia as future NATO members were invaded. Isn't that the whole point of a military alliance?
michael,
your partisans are showing.
You rattle off everything that you percieve as cheating on the GOP side but choose to ignore the felons and dead people voting. People of questionable naturalization statuses are fair game as well for the Dems. Remember Wisconsin in 2000? Bums being given cigarettes to go vote for Gore?
BOTH PARTIES CAN PLAY THAT GAME.
IT IS SOUR GRAPES.
james,
you should ignore the obvious lefty spin. Otherwise it's just going to be concrete-meet-head for you.
Barack has refused to release his SAT scores, LSAT score, or undergrad transcripts from Occidental and Columbia.
Rumor has it that Republican operatives have obtained one or more of these items to be leaked after the last debate in October. I do not have personal knowledge on this but I can guess why Barack has been hiding the information.
BTW, Research 2000/Daily Kos poll today shows McCain ahead by 17 points in NC, confirming SurveyUSA's shock poll of NC.
Glenn-in-CO,
Excellent analysis. I don't care for Palin, but I think that it might have been McCain's best pick, given that the map and the odds were tilted against him. He needed a bold move, and she was a bold move. I still believe that there is a serious chance of it backfiring, but who cares if you lose 270-268 or 305-233? It was a risky pick, perhaps, but maybe his best one. I still think Snowe would have been better, but then again I'm not the target audience, since I'm not a persuadable.
"I know this will come as a shock, but when a member of an alliance is invaded, generally the Alliance's most powerful member comes to defend it. Governor Palin was only suggesting force if Ukraine and Georgia as future NATO members were invaded. Isn't that the whole point of a military alliance?"
I think it's funny that whenever Palin says something stupid, people spin it to make it seem like it wasn't a stupid statement. First the "What does a VP do?" and now this.
I try stutter, but sometimes their ignorance and cowardice still shocks me. Tell me Charles, if a NATO member was invaded, should we come to their aid?
Greg, don't tell me what I believe. Meanwhile, it's clear that you think it's fine to steal elections and are pretending that the facts are propaganda.
Everyone, read this:
Greg Palast interview: investigating election theft in the USA
@glenn-in-colorado
>>>>I'll take my odds now blocking the standard path Kerry-IA-NM-CO and playing for MI. Unless Obama blowsup I don;t know what game there was for McCain to play other than what he's done.<<<<
Exactly Correct. I love it when Obama supporters suggest other VP candidates who would NOT have made a difference. Mostly they wanted McCain to lose quietly. Palin is making a difference, and while I do not agree with SOME of her views, she is helping McCain compete.
I think Mccain has a good shot at flipping PA. A much better shot then Michigan. Palin will play extremely well in PA with her small town, guns, and bible charm, but most of all the Jermiah Wright, and Obama's bitter working class cling to guns and religion ad blitz will also play extremely well in October in PA.
I have said this again and again and again, but PA is going to shock people at how close it will be.
To anyone that actually looked at the crosstabs of the insider advantage poll you can disregard them as bogus polls.
OH: they have Obama getting 48% of black vote..Obama is 40 pts behind what Kerry or Gore got in OH among the black vote while winning the Hispanic vote 88 to 9..that's a zero possibility folks.
If you go thru every insider adavantage poll you find gross anomolies.
Btw, according to them in NV McCain is winning the Black vote 73 to 26....ZERO Possiility for any Dem to lose the black vote by 37 in any state.
DISREGARD ALL INSIDER/ADVANTAGE POLLS!
A winner-take-all Electoral College sucks and sucks big time. I live in CA and there's very little value in my vote and my energy. I would at least like a proportional EC system. I hate that elections always boil down to a handful of states.
I deally, all states would do what Nebraska and Maine do...the winner of each congressional district gets 1 EV, and the statewide winner gets the 2 "senatorial" EVs. But failing that, the Electoral College is much preferable to a straight popular vote. With straight popular vote, the votes of several small states could be nullified just by the population of Chicago. With the Electoral College, even small states like North Dakota and Montana actually matter.
otf...reverse those crosstabs. It was already discussed that they were likely transposed.
Did Charlie Gibson even ask Palin any tough questions? That guy's about bad enough to take over from Brit Hume on the FOX Propaganda Nutwork.
dennis,
Even Dukakis was close in PA...I think this is a losing battle for McCain.
mrinsight--with no family connections whatsoever, do you really think he was able to transfer into Columbia and get into Harvard Law without good grades and scores? His SAT may not have been good, but Barack admitted he had a "wayward" time in his youth.
I'd be very surprised if any of his grades or scores were very poor. And considering McCain has been very open about his very poor record in school, it would surprise me greatly if the Republicans released any school records of Obama with the intent of detracting from his record. Unless his scores are "too" good, and if that's a negative, oh god, please kill me now.
I think SAT scores are erased after a few years. Good luck finding them.
Bush was winning PA in the polls after his convention bounce. McCain has yet to. PA is not a question, it's going to stay blue.
James,
Remember WWI? A lot of people thrown into a human meat grinder for similar reasons.
I'm not saying nations shouldn't help other nations they have signed an alliance with but good lord, I would hope my government would try everything possible to avoid WWIII between two nations armed with nuclear weapons..
The chance Obama is getting 48% of the Black vote in OH is ZERO when Kerry got 84%!
The Insider/advantage polls are bogus!
"But failing that, the Electoral College is much preferable to a straight popular vote. With straight popular vote, the votes of several small states could be nullified just by the population of Chicago."
They wouldn't be nullified. A voter in Idaho, Montana, Maine, South Carolina would have the exact same value as one in California, Illinois and New York.
Why should a vote in Ohio mean more than a vote in California? Why should a vote in New Hampshire mean more than a vote in New York?
Nicholas - I live in CA too and have, on occasion, been in other states at election time. I could not put up with the endless barrage of advertisements! We will live in relative peace!
"Exactly Correct. I love it when Obama supporters suggest other VP candidates who would NOT have made a difference. Mostly they wanted McCain to lose quietly. Palin is making a difference, and while I do not agree with SOME of her views, she is helping McCain compete."
Actually, she's making McCain lose. It's just going to take a couple of weeks until most people realize that.
She's already taken PA, ME and NH off the map and probably MI as well. And she's making OH and FL more competitive for Obama.
MrInsight22,
Your screen-name is a misnomer. Who cares what Obama's SAT scores were? McCain finished in the lowest couple of percent in his class at the Naval Academy. Who cares, it was year ago.
An claiming that the Kos poll "confirms" the SUSA poll is a bit clueless. There were 3 other polls that put McCain's lead at 3-4 points during the same period. It isn't clear what the state of the race in NC is right now, and the polls suggest uncertainty and fluidity.
stop_the_stutter:
I care about FREE and FAIR ELECTIONS! _ALL_ election fraud MUST BE STAMPED OUT, and those guilty MUST BE INCARCERATED to deter future election-stealing. This isn't simply about the results of elections, it's about the core question of whether the U.S. is really functioning as a republic, rather than a sham democracy.
Now, if you really want to argue that the Democrats have actually stolen elections in the last few decades and the Republicans have not, make the argument. Some people are listening. I don't think that you can make a good argument, citing evidence fairly. Have you been reading Palast? How do you dismiss the evidence he marshals?
@porridgegun,
I am curious. Who by name, is not in the tank for Obama like Keith Olberman, that you would recommend for Palin's next interview.
I thought that independent of questions Palin was confident, did not gaffe, did not fluster. What interviewer would actually do her harm, and not be viewed as biased and unfairly pick on the candidate?
"I think Mccain has a good shot at flipping PA."
Read this and tell me how he's going to do that given those numbers with independents concerning Biden and Palin.
"I'll decide if she was a good pick or not after the debate. I think by then the GOP fans here will be begging McCain to throw her under the bus."
Just like they (including many of our resident conservatives) were right after the pick and the news about Bristol came out just under two weeks ago...
The excerpts to the Palin interview only proved one thing............she is incredibly arrogant.........and that is about it. Advocating a war with Russia should scare the hell out of people.......
Greg said...
Can one of the libs here explain why Obama stutters and stammers and "uhhs" so much?
You know, I'm gonna take you seriously even though you're just trying to be inflammatory. This is by no means anything scientific when applied to Obama, but I recognized this habit of his very early on because I do the same thing. I can't remember without looking at the paper work from the testing I had done when I was a kid, but it has something to do with spontaneous cognition or some term of that nature.
I was tested when I was a kid for ADD, in my early teens, and part of that involved IQ testing. In all the categories of the IQ test my scores were all in the neighborhood of 130-140, except for that one category which was around 105, about 30 points lower. Functionally it's a learning disability. No matter how smart you are or how well you form thoughts, when you actually have to do impromptu speaking there's a bit of a slow start out and many verbal pauses while your brain's trying to shape what you're wanting to communicate. Basically while your brain might be a 16-lane superhighway, the road from your brain to you mouth is a two-lane country road. And everything you want to say has to be processed more carefully causing you to speak slowly and pause a good bit.
Now, whether that is what is wrong with Obama, I don't know. But seeing as how he works better off of prepared materials and is a fairly intelligent guy, I would suspect he has a common problem. Especially since the difference between interview/debate Obama and stump/teleprompter Obama is virtually night and day. He might not even know it or ever had it diagnosed if this is the case. It's not a handicap or a crutch, but it is an explanation.
OTF,
Somebody earlier pointed out that the AA and hispanic numbers for that Strategic Advantage poll in OH likely got reversed. I'm still not sure that it is correct, but it at least reads as being plausible. Sloppy work by Strategic Advantage, however.
I agree Pennsylvania and Michigan will be hard for Obama to hold. Best bet is Obama wins 2 of 3 of PA, MI, OH.
He then likely needs Nevada or Colorado to win.
Just wondering on the effects of various ballot initiatives on turnout, such as this one in Missouri:
http://www.examiner.net/opinions/x1885995283/Energy-retro-Missouri-voters-to-consider-renewable-sources
Given that McCain's energy plan seems to be fixated on the idea of placing more oil platforms in the path of Gulf hurricanes, this in particular would seem to be an opportunity for Obama in Missouri to drive turnout.
Why should a vote in Ohio mean more than a vote in California? Why should a vote in New Hampshire mean more than a vote in New York?
They don't. Within the context of 51 individual elections, each vote counts the same. Every voter in Ohio has an equal say in who will win Ohio's presidential election. Every voter in California has an equal say in who wins California's presidential election. Every voter in New Hampshire has an equal say in who wins New Hampshire's presidential election.
PA has a 1.1 million more Dems than Repubs and growing. 600,000 rgeisters since January.
PA is safe but McCain is more than willing to waste money in the state!
The SAT score thing is a non-issue.
What's it going to say?
Obama is stupid?
No one will believe that and I can tell it's not the case. No he's a very smart man. I just don't like his thoughts on government.
McCain is winning 73% of the BLACK vote in the INSIDER ADVANTAGE poll??? LOL please don't try and tell me that will happen. Blacks are 8% of NV votes. It should be 90-10 Obama and that puts him up SEVERAL points!!! http://www.realclearpolitics.com/RCP_PDF/IA_Nevada%20General%20Election%20Poll%209%2011%2008.pdf
jakam--I object to your saying that it would be a shame to have the votes of Chicago matter more to a presidential election than the votes of the small states. Um, shouldn't it, really? If Chicago has 30 times as many voters as Alaska or whatever, shouldn't Chicago's vote count 30 times as much? Why should voters in small states count more (proportionally) than in large states?
I really, honestly think the Electoral College is an archaic procedure and should be ended. It's exactly like the "earned" run in baseball....people only accept it because it's been around forever. Why should Vermont, for example, get 0.6% of the vote when it has 0.2% of the population? Is a Vermonter's opinion three times as important as the national average? (Well, they ARE voting for Obama, so maybe it's okay...)
Sedi,
If you flip then Obama is getting 59% of blacks...not a chance when Kerry got 84%!
Rhe poll is bogus!
>>>Actually, she's making McCain lose. It's just going to take a couple of weeks until most people realize that.<<<
@Charles,
I admire your hutspa!!! Going against conventional wisdom on a prediction that Palin will hurt McCain.
I do not THINK you are correct, but I have been wrong before, and if you turn out to be correct, I will bow to the master.
Service Forum:
Q: Are you in favor of more service?
McCain: Yes
I can't wait until Obama comes out and says NO! People should go out and party. We need more selfishness and in general more fun.
Now that would be a game changer.
What a yawn. Is there a reason for this forum? Seriously, I want to know.
"They don't. Within the context of 51 individual elections, each vote counts the same. Every voter in Ohio has an equal say in who will win Ohio's presidential election. Every voter in California has an equal say in who wins California's presidential election. Every voter in New Hampshire has an equal say in who wins New Hampshire's presidential election."
Except in reality some states are naturally more divided than others, so there's an increased chance at any one vote will be decisive and tip the state election, which might tip the national election.
In a national vote, any one vote has the exact same chance to tip the election.
This would dramatically increase turnout and participation in the election process.
Gibson pressed her on her view of the Bush Doctrine. She didn't know what it was.
There is a good reason for the electoral college.
Imagine Florida 2000, except on a national level. Can you imagine the insanity of it? Recounts EVERYWHERE.
jakam,
I completely agree. The Electoral College is the best way to conduct elections as the Founding Fathers wanted them. Each state was meant to be a seperate governing entity, with a central government holding them together. Each state election is like a mini-national election. It should stay this way. The only people I ever hear arguing against it are people angered at Gore's loss in 2000
floridagop: You're a class act. Touche'.
I'm sticking to my guns on Palin. I said the day he picked her that it was his campaign's "jump the shark" moment and I think it ultimately will be.
Sorry, it must have been the other OH poll that showed a McCain lead. One of them had Hispanic and AA numbers reversed, but I forgot which. Frankly, I don't think we know what is going on in OH right now. I'm sure we'll be getting more numbers next week, and maybe they will help to clarify what the state of the race is there.
This flurry of polls is exciting but it's a little hard to keep track of all of them. It's like a downpour after a drought.
PA and MI are going to stay blue, FL, OH, VA, and NC are going to stay red.
Obama has Iowa in the bag, so this election is going to come down to the NM-CO-NV trio.
Gibson: What's your opinion of the Bush Doctrine?
Palin: In what sense, Charlie?
Gibson: I'm referring to the Bush Doctrine.
Palin: You mean his world view?
Um, shouldn't it, really?
Um...no.
The President of the United States is precisely that...the president of the collective fifty states. Each of the fifty states is an equal entity in the Union. The Electoral College reflects the hybrid nature of equal states and population apportionment.
The House represents the people, and the Senate represents the States. That's why I also disagree with the 17th Amendment.
Watching this election has reinforced what I already knew about Presidential elections. The GOP have a PHD in Presidential campaigns, while the democrats are freshman in college.
The GOP have learned how to manipulate the media through spin, fake outrage, and constant disciplined media surrogates who are professional communicators. The GOP have turned Presidential politics into professional business, and they are in it to win it. Winning is the priority above all else including facts, the truth, or integrity. While those on the left deplore these tactics, they work, and they have worked extremely well.
The democrats by comparison want to run an uplifting campaign based on issues with no personal attacks. An honorable campaign. This has failed miserably. The GOP turn elections into questions about character and integrity while at the same time tearing their opponents down and boosting their own. The democrats, not wanting to delve into such things, are constantly on defense and lose the swing voters on personality traits and elitism charges because they believe the voters are smarter than that, or if you ignore it, it will go away.
The only democrats to fight the republicans tooth and nail and may even be dirtier are the Clinton's. For them, its not about honesty, or integrity, its about winning. Hillary lost the Primary for the same reason Obama is on the verge of losing the general. Overconfidence. Hillary's entire campaign thought they had it in the bag and were already laying out general election strategy where they shine. Obama thought this election was in the bag and took the entire summer off. He never got in the game until after his August vacation. Overconfidence, and the lack of presidential campaign infrastructure. Earlier today in a blog on this site we discussed Obama picking up a Clinton campaign operative like Carville or Bigalla who know how to play the media game, because Axelrod, Plouffe and Gibbs do not.
If Obama learned to play Presidential politics through the most important voter outlet, the MSM, he would win, easily.
I don't usually have time that some of you have to dive into the inner workings of polls, but today I clicked on a few. There are some weird ones, especially for Insider Advantage. McCain winning African Americans in Nevada? McCain winning under 29 people in Michigan? There are some of the reverse that are oddly pro-Obama.
I hope with the flurry of new polls, this oddities would balance each other out.
greg--I understand that point, so perhaps I should say I'm not strictly against the electoral college per se...more the way delegates are doled out. If Delaware had one vote, Alaska had one vote, etc....actually proportioned to population, I would have less of a problem.
Wow, McCain just blamed Obama for the tone of McCain's own campaign, because Obama refused McCain's townhall plan.
filistro,
Maybe Palin was so horrified by the Bush Doctrine that she just mentally blocked it out. I know that many of us would like to do the same.
Regarding the NC polls, I think there are 2 different views among pollsters on how to take that state. It´s either a close, McCain-leaning race, or not close at all/deep red.
Civitas and PPP are on the one side. Research 2000 and SUSA are on the other side.
The fact that SUSA has a bad history in NC and that Virginia, taken all polls together is about +2 McCain at the moment, makes it more likely that Civitas and PPP are the way to go. North Carolina is not where Virginia is this year. It will be in 4 years. But I think a 2% difference is much more plausible than a 10+% difference.
About InsiderAdvantage, well, I don´t even think they flipped the AfricanAmerican numbers in Nevada, seeing how, no matter how you flip it, Barack Obama only gets half of the black vote in Ohio. There must be some huge error, if not some intentional distortion.
Post a Comment