When we stopped into Barack Obama’s field office in Nebraska ten days ago, Obama’s State Director John Berge sat down with us for a fascinating conversation about the innards of Democratic efforts in the state, the most overt goal being the attempt to win one single, solitary Electoral Vote in the second congressional district.
Only Nebraska and Maine divide their state electoral votes on a district-by-district basis rather than winner take all. For those who remember the proportional allocation of the Democratic delegate race during the nomination battle, Nebraska is significant because a wider statewide loss can be mitigated by strength in a particular area. Rather than lose 5-0, Obama could lose 4-1 and gain a 2 EV swing. Omaha is a compact congressional district, one of three in Nebraska, and clearly the most Democratic district.
Were Obama to win Kerry states and add Iowa and New Mexico (very strong probabilities, with New Hampshire at Obama +4.5% as the closest current projection and Iowa and New Mexico outside the margin of error), he would have 264 electoral votes. Adding Omaha would pretty much end any thought of a 269-269 tie. In addition, Obama projects leads in Colorado (6.1%), Virginia (4.5%), Florida (2.2%), Ohio (2.1%), Nevada (1.9%), and North Carolina (0.1%).
Berge told us that we’d know if the Nebraska 2d congressional district internals had the McCain camp worried if we started seeing Republican surrogates in the area. With every day's time so precious for each candidate -- an issue of resource allocation -- campaigns have to prioritize where the smartest expenditure of time will be. The nominee or VP nominee going to an area is a big deal.
Tomorrow night, a mere month before the election, not a surrogate but Sarah Palin herself is visiting Omaha, while Barack Obama just opened a second field office. Early voting is already underway.
"Oh c'mon, do we have to?" aside, if the McCain campaign is defending Omaha rather than spending time in Michigan, there is no bluffing going on -- McCain is holding on for dear life at this stage.
Consider Omaha in play.
10.04.2008
Omaha, Nebraska’s One Electoral Vote Is In Play
@ 10:16 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
540 comments
Wow.
Now Obama's just looking to EMBARRASS McCain.
Oh come on. Just because a VP pick shows up doesn't mean that someplace is actually in play. I mean, McCain himself campaigned in IA the other day (or was it two days?), and if you think that IA is in play, I have a bridge that I'd really love to sell you.
Is there any evidence that the Obama folks have to suggest that they have a real chance to steal the Omaha EV?
Checkout my piece on Youth Voter Registration. For every 100 registered voters aged 18-24, the democrats accrue a 9 vote advantage.
Obama 355, McCain 183
Oct 4 Polling Update
What is the chance that this election could really slip away from McCain and he ends up losing states he never thought he would a la Carter in 1980, when a close race became a blowout at the end?
Chris
McShame deserves to be embarassed, and he's doing it to himself. Obama is just not going to leave an EV on the table. Obama doesn't want to embarass anyone. It's not his style.
I'd sure like to see some people show up when Palin is in Omaha holding up "Shame on you for a dirty campaign" signs.
I love it. Scrap for every single EV. The election comes to Maine and Nebraska for the split EV's.
Imagine if the whole process split the EVs. Candidates would be doing real National Campaigns, which is what the thing is supposed to be about.
McCain is competing for one of Maine's electoral votes and now Obama for one of Nebraskas. What's next?
Honestly, I doubt either is in play during a close election. However, it's best to expand the field if the polls show this close.
More on the Bailout Fallout
Buffett's also a big supporter of Obama. I'm sure that might be influencing the polls there.
Actually, to be perfectly honest, I'd see Palin's arrival as a sign that McCain wants to keep her as far away from the spotlight as possible.
I've always lived in Omaha. This is the first time we've seen any national candidate this close to an election. Usually national Republicans only show up here for quiet fundraisers. They don't campaign here as they have never had too - they only come here to raise money. All of Nebraska has been considered a sure Republican win. The EV for the 2nd Congressional District is definitely in play this year. Obama has a strong presence here.
I've always lived in Omaha. This is the first time we've seen any national candidate this close to an election. Usually national Republicans only show up here for quiet fundraisers. They don't campaign here as they have never had too - they only come here to raise money. All of Nebraska has been considered a sure Republican win. The EV for the 2nd Congressional District is definitely in play this year. Obama has a strong presence here.
I think it´s great to see a real national campaign for once. Ok, we already had the democratic primaries that took us to South Dakota, Puerto Rico and Guam. But look what it did to promote the cause of the Democratic party - the 50 state strategy works!
I hope that a national election that plays in more than just 2-3 states is going to have a real impact on the state of democracy. I would like to see Obama in Oklahoma and McCain in Maine - anything that breaks the gridlock of the 2 rigid camps.
I'm guessing this might be addressed in an upcoming post, but what do surveys say about Maine's second district? I'm wondering if one of McCain's strategies is to try to get the 269-269 tie by getting the Bush-Kerry map minus NM and CO, and plus NH (the map which Obama currently has a [url=http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/obama-projects-269-electoral-votes-even.html]six-point cushion[/url]) and getting one more by taking Maine's second. It would be a long shot, of course, but McCain's camp is getting notorious for that.
I had actually forgotten about the split voting in ME and NE because I had assumed that it wasn't anywhere close. Yay for yet ANOTHER layer of intrigue in what's easily the most fascinating election I've witnessed in my 27 years.
Will 538 start tracking the individual congressional districts in those 2 states now?
Dodgers are up 2-0 in the series and the game and Obama is looking really good to win. I am starting to wait for the other shoe to drop or to wake up.
What are the chances of there being a 269-269 tie?
Strategy. Obama is bleeding McCain white. If he has to defend on 10 different places that means there's less of his resources to go round. There's less for him to throw on offense. The wing state strategy just isn't working this time round.
If I was McCain I'd be tempted to stop operations in lost stated and go all out and maybe 2 or 3 states. Make Obama play defense in them, make him think about where he has to take resources. Very risky and not a lot of time to change things round but iF I was in a situation where I had limited resources I'd probably try it. Blanket defense means he might as well start writing his concession speech. He does not have time to get the ground game that that needs set up.
lani,
There's a scenario analysis on the right side of the page, below the maps and before the state polls. That includes the probability of a tie.
"What are the chances of there being a 269-269 tie?"
Nate currently has it at .27%, 27 times out of 10,000 simulations.
Nate, what do you think of these new attacks? Will they stick?
But wait a second. One of Nebraska's EVs is in play. Fine. So is Indiana. But Indiana is not going to be the state that puts Obama over, because if Indiana votes blue it will be part of a nationwide electoral sweep for Obama. If the race is close, Indiana won't be. McCain will take it.
Isn't the same true of Omaha? Omaha could break a 269-269 tie, sure, but if the race is close enough to produce a 269-269 tie, won't Omaha be solidly back in McCain territory?
@Sedi,
The big difference is that Obama doesn't have to struggle to play catch-up and defend several states as his only chance of victory.
He can afford to spend part of a day with the troops. I'd venture that a good number of supporters he spoke to are being sent to work in Nebraska, Missouri, or Colorado.
Here's another issue that ties Omaha with the senatorial race in the state. Scott Kleeb is a longshot to beat Mike Johanns for the seat being vacated by Chuck Hagel in NE. Kleeb is actually well-known in the western part of the state, but his numbers are really struggling in Omaha. If the Obama campaign is serious about snatching that single EV, it would probably be helpful to coordinate with the Kleeb campaign and get two-for-one here.
There would be no reason for Palin to spend time in Omaha unless it was in danger. Not likely that it would be just for fund-raising.
While the Dems don't have to win Indiana, the Reps have to. So the Dems get to play offense on every single contested state, forcing the Reps to defend every state with time and money. The Dems only need one, while the Reps need all. A hard battle.
Look at the skew on that electoral vote distribution. Wow. Obama's odds are hitting the ceiling.
I think it will depend on how the media presents them. If they just say Palin says Obama has terrorist freinds then it will be bad, if they expose them as the thinly concealed lies that they are then Obama will be ok. Will the average dim-witted american too lazy to google it be scared of Obama again or will the security he provides on the economy trump it?
What issues can Palin speak to in Omaha? Drilling for Oil in NE and sticking a terrorist label on Obama. LOL. The Repubs stole the financial system out from under our feet so clearly they need 4 more years to make things worse.
Omaha is BLUE this year. People are sick of Bush and those that sound just like him. Palin is merely Bush with an X Chromosome.
Charles Crook said...
While the Dems don't have to win Indiana, the Reps have to. So the Dems get to play offense on every single contested state, forcing the Reps to defend every state with time and money. The Dems only need one, while the Reps need all. A hard battle.
Its especially hard with the resource disparity between the campaigns, or at least the way it appears. Obama seems to have the funding advantage hands down.
Embarassing McCain? Now that would be the icing on the cake for me.
The Obama Surge Continues
"Tracking Poll Update: Obama Crosses the 50 Percent Threshold
by Jonathan Singer, Sat Oct 04, 2008 at 01:33:55 PM EST
Here are today's numbers:
Obama McCain
Diageo/Hotline Obama 48 McCain: 41 (McCain -1 since yesterday)
Gallup Obama 50 McCain: 42 (Obama +1 since yesterday)
Rasmussen Reports Obama 51 McCain: 45 (Obama +1 since yesterday)
Research 2000/dKos Obama 52 McCain: 40 (Obama +1 since yesterday)
Average: 50.25 42.00
Note that this is the first time since the four tracking polls have been watching the race that Barack Obama has topped 50 percent in his four-poll average. Ought to quiet those pundits asking (and I have seriously heard this in the past couple of days) why Obama hasn't topped the 50 percent threshold.
Note, too, that in the single-day sample of 359 likely voters from R2K (MoE +/- 5%), which occurred in the day after the Vice Presidential debate, John McCain actually slipped below the 40 percent marker, coming in with an unimpressive 39 percent showing. The movement from the previous day when McCain was at 40 percent was not significant. Nevertheless, it cannot be very encouraging to Republicans to be polling in the 30s exactly one month out from election day.
This, of course, does not mean that it is time to let up. Far from it. Get out an knock on some doors this weekend to help work for numbers like today's to get written into the history books on November 4."
oct said...
What issues can Palin speak to in Omaha? Drilling for Oil in NE and sticking a terrorist label on Obama. LOL. The Repubs stole the financial system out from under our feet so clearly they need 4 more years to make things worse.
Interesting question; what is she doing there?
I think she will launch another attack on Obama from there which will serve the other purpose of telegraphing to everyone that she was in Omaha. Attacking Obama gives free advertising remember.
As has been commented, Omaha won't be the district to break a tie if there is one. But it would be fantastic to see it flip blue in a strong Obama victory.
So if it's time to spend wisely in both dollars and time.... WHY was Palin in CARSON, CA today??
mcCain remaining strategy might become to go all in with an uber-maverickian move and spend all he has to flip california
Mike,
Yeah, I was just being sarcastic in my comment. With the McCain campaign opting to pull out of MI a mere day or two after sending their candidate to spend one (or two?) day(s) in IA, I now think that they are really off of their game right now. Personally, I'd call it campaign malpractice. I just have no clue what the McCain camp is thinking right now, so Palin showing up in Omaha just seems like another wacky thing coming out of their camp. I think that if Obama wins the Omaha EV, then he will be winning with 300+ EVs in a cakewalk. Obama's team is absolutely right to keep pushing the ground game everywhere they can to give him as many different routes to victory as possible.
Oh snap!!! "Omaha in play" necessitates the "Dramatic McCain" gif:
http://i367.photobucket.com/albums/oo111/lolpalin/dramaticmccain.gif
Wow! NE is deep red! Would be a shocker if he could get a split EV out of there or turn the state completely blue! Nate, do you think that McCain is running out of cash? I live in Florida and i haven't seen any of his ads in a while. During the Conventions, his ads were on all the freakin' time!...Not that I want to see any but do you know if he is going broke?
Spending all the defense ( concentrating all the campaign resources ) in California abandons the big states MO, FL, OH, VA, NC - with no guarantee of victory in CA.
"
Sean said...
What is the chance that this election could really slip away from McCain and he ends up losing states he never thought he would a la Carter in 1980, when a close race became a blowout at the end?"
This is what I predicted in June, but in September it didn't look like it would happen.
In 1980 voters desperately wanted change from dismal economic conditions, but Carter ran a campaign aimed at convincing voters that Ronald Reagan was "too radical" a break, too "scary" to vote for.
Then Reagan showed up in the first debate and said "there you go again!" He didn't LOOK scary and radical. He looked reassuring and competent. When asked about his age he said "I won't comment on my opponent's youth and inexperience." Everybody laughed and Reagan won in a laugher.
McCain's strategy has been exactly the same: paint Obama as "too dangerous" and "outside the mainstream" "elitist" etc.
Only Obama showed up in the debate and looked cool and in command of the facts, comfortable with himself and generally up to the job.
He started shooting up in the polls, and the economic crisis hit and McCain fumbled and Obama shot up more.
This election is moving dramatically away from McCain as showed by the combined daily tracker polls I cited above showing a +1% move to Obama in all four polls since yesterday.
And this was all BEFORE the Palin debate, which was won by Biden in all the polling.
So, the gap will widen.
Meanwhile McCain is desperately starting every more wild attack ads to smear Obama. 100% of his ads are now going to be negative, no positive ones at all!
But Obama will appear in the 2nd debate, just as cool and confident and in command of himself. McCain will attack him and Obama will just smile and shake his head and by election day his lead will be 10% just like Reagans' was.
This IS winding up just like 1980 because Obama has passed the "Presidentialty" threshold. And that's all voters really wanted to know.
McCain can run from Bush all he wants, but nobody is buying it. He's just another Republican like Bush and nobody wants another Republican this year.
Palin in CA is like betting on Roulette Green 00.
Kind of out there aint it. But maybe Palin is beginning her ambitions for Pres in 2012. Regan with lipstick out from the grave.
oct said...
Palin in CA is like betting on Roulette Green 00.
Kind of out there aint it. But maybe Palin is beginning her ambitions for Pres in 2012. Regan with lipstick out from the grave.
If she is on the ticket in they year of a republican meltdown won't she be damaged goods for 2012? (Not to mention her trademark looks will have faded somewhat)
"This is what I predicted in June, but in September it didn't look like it would happen."
Yeah, I remember getting ridiculed by some of the right wingers when I suggested that this race could easily end of looking like 1980, where all that the challenger has to do is come across as acceptable and not scary. I'm not sure that this is the scenario that we have right now, but it's possible. Obama's strong performance in the first debate undoubtedly helped him among hesitant voters.
nice analysis, cugel
Palin is primarily in CA to do a fundraiser. According to Politico: "Later in the day, she heads to California for a rally in the town of Carson and, more important, a fundraiser in Costa Mesa. McCain-Palin's goal, after all, is not to win California."
Cugel, I think you're thinking of the 1984 Reagan-Mondale debate when you mention the Reagan "youth and inexperience" quote. "There you go again" is Reagan-Carter, but there was only one such debate (the first debate was Anderson & Reagan, the second debate was canceled, as was the VP debate, leaving only the 3rd debate (technically the second) between Carter & Reagan.
@Nancy D.
She was fundraising today, I believe.
They knew her comments would get national attention, so why not go to where the money is?
I wonder at this point how much of the McCain/Palin appearances are stopgap measures to try to stem the GOP bleeding in the House and the Senate.
Palin was in CA the other day, wasn't she? What could possibly be the point of that other than to excite Republicans to turn out at all on Election Day (and pass some love down the ticket)? Same with McCain's visit to Iowa.
There'd certainly be a symbolic triumph in getting an electoral college delegate out of a state that has only voted for Democrats seven times in its entire history as a state. (Williams Jennings Bryan (1896, 1908), Woodrow Wilson (1912, 1916) FDR (1932, 1936) and LBJ (1964).) Of course, Omaha is not the same thing as Nebraska as a whole, but symbolic victories are symbolic victories.
if the strategy was to help the party, the tone of the ads would be different, they wouldn't go into the all-negative personal attacks on Obama
She's got a fundraiser in Burlingame (near SF) tomorrow as well.
Hopefully, no one shows up
I'm not familiar with how likely it is for states / polls to flip dramatically at this point, when the leads are as they are now nationally and in the contested states. But I think that an average ( tied ) McCain debate result on Tuesday would be the last straw. To overcome the multiple points of campaign collapse, McCain has to change the focus of the campaign at a national level; the debate presents the only opportunity for that; the final debate will be too late. I think the idea of switching to all-negative attacks will not be effective among the undecideds.
how much more interesting election would be if ALL EV were distributed as in nebraska and Maine?
(Not to mention fair)
"how much more interesting election would be if ALL EV were distributed as in nebraska and Maine?"
I think I'd like that system a lot more. I mean, it's still not entirely fair because candidates would campaign largely in districts that are within 5 points instead of states that are within 5 points, and rampant gerrymandering means there's not a whole lot of those districts. But, it's an improvement I think.
following on the idea of all EV being distributed as in NE, has anyone done an analysis on how the map would look in that case?
i'd like to see one, even if not current
No party-controlled state house would ever agree to distribute the EVs. The Reps would not want to give up any stray EVS in the Deep South, and the Dems would not want to in CA / NY. The parties like winner-take-all, regardless of how citizens feel.
adam,
still it would be a national campaign, they would have to hit pretty much all states, or at least different states every time
Plus, it would put Nate out of a job.
...or at least make it a whole, whole lot more difficult.
"Sedi said...
"This is what I predicted in June, but in September it didn't look like it would happen."
Yeah, I remember getting ridiculed by some of the right wingers when I suggested that this race could easily end of looking like 1980, where all that the challenger has to do is come across as acceptable and not scary. I'm not sure that this is the scenario that we have right now, but it's possible. Obama's strong performance in the first debate undoubtedly helped him among hesitant voters."
Mule-Humper in particular gave me endless shit about this point and called me all kinds of names and said I was a "horrible person" etc.
But, I believed it then and it looks like it's coming true now.
McCain wants "to get past the economy" as an issue and return to making Obama's "personality" the issue. McCain's advisers admit that voters trust Obama more on the economy and that's fueled his rise. McCain says that he's slipping in the polls "because life isn't fair" i.e. because the economic crisis hit just a few months before Bush hoped it would.
Bush expected all this shit to blow up AFTER the election and then he could slink out of town leaving the worst mess since the great depression for his successor to take the blame for.
But, it blew up just in time to sink McCain in the election.
NOBODY is going to "get past" the economy in the next 3 1/2 weeks! We're all terrified here and want a CHANGE!
And no matter how many times McCain calls himself a "Maverick" he isn't. Everybody knows he's just Bush warmed over.
Republicans know it secretly but LIKE it! They think McCain will do everything Bush TRIED to do but failed. Only THIS TIME it'll work.
In short they haven't given up on all Bush's policies. They just want a better administrator!
Well, that won't wash with the rest of America. WE want a dramatic change and the OPPOSITE of everything Bush wanted. We think Bush was WRONG about everything and want a complete BREAK from the Bush era.
Warmed over Bush posing as "change" won't do.
Obama said it best in the acceptance speech: "I don't want to take a 10% chance of change."
@charles
but not all states house are controlled by the party that typically wins in a presidential election.
wouldn't that be an incentive to, in fact, change?
especially in non-battleground state, that would improve the bargaining power of the states with washington, as it would be now necessary to pay more attention to them
@Nate
I've looked closely at the Twelfth and Twenty-Third Amendments and U.S. Code Title 3, Chapter 1, Section 15. The Twenty-Third clearly puts DC in the electoral process but doesn't discuss its role, if any, in the House of Representatives if the Electoral Vote is tied. Is or is not DC considered a state in the HOR one-state-one-vote process? In other words, are we looking at 50 or 51 votes under that scenario?
Come to think of it, I guess the winner would need 26 votes in either case.
Thanks.
"still it would be a national campaign, they would have to hit pretty much all states, or at least different states every time"
Well, yes, but that doesn't change as much as you think. Take a state like Louisiana or Illinois or Pennsylvania: deep blue cities, deep red rural areas. Much of the nation is like that. You'd campaign in more states, but you'd hit central California and Ohio and never visit Los Angeles or New York or Wyoming or Utah, so probably about the same percentage of voters ignored.
I just want it because it'd be more interesting.
@gg,
yes, it still 26, but it would mean that you need 25 other states and not 26, so it's still relevant.
i think it would vote. i also think it would go to court, to be decided before the vote is cast
"Mule-Humper in particular gave me endless shit about this point"
He doesn't count. He can be rational at times, but most of the time he is filled with mindless rage against Nate because he just really needs a cookie.
Don't panic -
I suspect that no state party leader would ever allow such a bill to be presented, regardless of how the state voted its EVS. I don't believe the parties see any incentive to change.
While the Dems may think that's a great idea to do in some Rep-EV state, the Reps would be equally happy to return the favor in some Dem-EV state.
So long and thanks for all the fish - time to watch Tina Fey.
@adam,
if they go to, say CA, both candidates would also hit the big markets, and ad campaigns would be state-wide anyways.
i think it would change a lot.
"McCain wants "to get past the economy" as an issue and return to making Obama's "personality" the issue."
-------
Which is, as you point out, ridiculous.
The only way to get past the economy is *through* it.
The more McCain tries to run away from the economy without addressing it, the lower he'll sink.
His whole strategy at this point is dangerously counterproductive for him.
do they stream SNL anywhere?
Okay, here's an interesting strangeness in the Twelfth: the House is to cast one vote per state for one of "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those vote for as President." Most of us have been assuming the House would split its 50 votes between McCain and Obama. But not so fast. If only one elector casts a vote for a third person, say Barr or Nader or Paul or H. Clinton or Palin (or anyone else eligible to be President for that matter), then the House would have to split its votes among THREE candidates. The permutations boggle the mind. And one doesn't have to think long to realize all the opportunities for mischief in a long process of voting and re-voting! We might end up with a President Clinton after all!
I took a look once at how 2000 and 2004 would have gone if all states distributed their EVs by Congressional district, like NE and ME do. Both years, George W. Bush would have won by larger margins under this system. The reason is that even in large blue states like Illinois, New York, and especially California, there are many CDs that vote Republican. The GOP picks up more votes from solid blue states than Democrats pick up from solid red states, so the GOP benefits.
Which is not to say, of course, that CD apportionment is unfair, only that it favors the Republicans relative to the current system (or, to put the shoe on the other foot, that the current system favors the Democrats relative to CD apportionment). What moves me in the direction of thinking nationwide CD apportionment is unfair is looking at Michigan. In 2004, Michigan cast all its fifteen electoral votes for John Kerry, because a majority of Michiganders (yes, it's a word, amazingly) voted for Kerry. But if Michigan apportioned by district, an astonishing ten of those fifteen votes would have been cast for Bush. The math for 2000 is similar. So you have a state that the Democrat won in both years casting more EVs for the Republican than for the Democrat.
Minnesota runs into much the same problem, but less extreme, casting the same number of votes for each candidate even after the statewide winner gets his two bonus EVs.
To sum up, the math of nationwide CD apportionment would be confusing and sometimes internally contradictory compared to a state-by-state system. It works better for small states, where EV-popular vote mismatches can't happen, than for large ones.
World Can't Wait is sponsoring a protest at the Hyatt Regency in Burlingame, CA, Sunday 10-noon for Palin's arrival.
@gg
the third person must have gotten at least one EV
"I suspect that no state party leader would ever allow such a bill to be presented, regardless of how the state voted its EVS. I don't believe the parties see any incentive to change."
Actually, there was an initiative like this in California pushed by (can you guess it?) the state Republicans. It got pretty forcefully rejected because it would be an enormous burden on the national Democratic party.
"David said...
Cugel, I think you're thinking of the 1984 Reagan-Mondale debate when you mention the Reagan "youth and inexperience" quote. "There you go again" is Reagan-Carter, but there was only one such debate (the first debate was Anderson & Reagan, the second debate was canceled, as was the VP debate, leaving only the 3rd debate (technically the second) between Carter & Reagan."
If you looked this up, I stand corrected. But, I thought it was 1980. By 1984 Reagan's age wasn't much of a factor, because he'd already been in office for 4 years.
The question as I remember it was "If elected you'd become the oldest President in our history. What do you say to the age question."
And that left Reagan the opening to joke "I won't comment on my opponent's youth and inexperience."
But, either way my point remains. Voters REALLY wanted to vote for Reagan in 1980. They WANTED to be reassured. They were fed up with Carter and the Democrats.
The big difference from 1980 is that Bush isn't running for a 2nd term now, and that McCain is trying to run AWAY from Bush instead of running on the Republican record.
All McCain's ads say "GOP." NONE of them mention that he's the Republican candidate. But nobody forgets, especially after Bush was back in the news again over the economic crisis.
At this point, McCain probably loses about 1 state every time Bush makes a national TV appearance.
I live 5 min from the venue that Palin spoke at today.
Here's what'a hilarious...Carson, CA is Obama territory. Just west of Carson are some staunch republican cities that Bush usually visited. And most of those residents attended.
I read in the local paper that she was here for fundraising and decided to hold a rally.
thanks brian,
suppose if the outcome grossly misrepresent the will of the people of the state it would be ferociously critisized (and probably with merit).
still would make the race interesting.
a next alternative would be distribution approximated to the number of votes within the states (plus the +2 bonus for the state winner)
this would by definition be fair, and would make almost all states competitive for at least one vote
@don't panic
Yes, the third person would need one EV. That's why I said "If only one elector casts a vote for a third person." A faithless elector is not unheard of and I can imagine a state urging one of its electors to cast such a third vote to help create another "game-changer"!
another hilarious Tina Fey impersonation of Palin just aired
CLASSIC
That SNL skit was awesome.
The guy doing Joe Biden was great, and Tina Fey needs another damn Emmy.
@gg
but if the elector cast a vote for someone else, then you'd likely have a winner at the electoral college.
you need two faithless electors, both going to third party (rather than the opposite candidate).
very unlikely.
Is there a youtube of Tina Fey Palin?
can someone describe the SNL skit?
what was made of Biden?
Just after the 2004 election, I floated an idea (just to friends) to divvy up state electoral votes not by district, but rather by percentage of the popular vote. In a way, it's a compromise between popular vote and electoral vote, and isn't muddied by district gerrymandering. You'd have to come up with reasonable cutoffs for awarding an extra EV for winning a state's popular vote, but it could work. I actually went back to 2000 and discovered that such a method would have actually awarded a handful of EVs to Nader and given the election to Gore.
It's kind of a pipe dream, but I sincerely believe it's better than what we have now.
As for McCain and Tuesday's debate: I think you'll see a very friendly, bipartisan, almost flattering performance from him -- following Hillary's primary strategy of being nice to Obama in person, then blasting him on the campaign trail.
Are there any Obama vs. McCain poll numbers for NE-2?
And if not, WHY NOT?!
;-)
Oooh, no fair! Saturday Night 'Live' isn't on until 10:30pm in Denver (12:30 Eastern)
"I live 5 min from the venue that Palin spoke at today.
Here's what'a hilarious...Carson, CA is Obama territory. Just west of Carson are some staunch republican cities that Bush usually visited. And most of those residents attended.
I read in the local paper that she was here for fundraising and decided to hold a rally."
What cities near Carson are Republican? Long Beach is heavily Dem and so is Redondo Beach (at least when I lived there). And I know you are not talking about as someone out here called it once "the People's Republic of Santa Monica". :)
I think I am in the closest Republican area to Carson, in NW OC. Even then, there were a few Hillary and Obama donors in my neighborhood.
It there an upper limit to the Obama surge?
Can we call it the Lehman Surge? Seems it also combines some Palin contraction--though the media dont seem to play her implosion up too much.
@don't panic
"I love John McCain, God love 'im. He is a great guy and a true patriot. But, literally folks, the man is a raging maniac."
"I love John McCain, I mean that. I mean, I'd take a a bullet for him."
"I love John McCain. God love 'im. If I had to be stuck on a desert island with anyone, I'd pick John McCain."
And he railed for a good minute about what a shithole Scranton is. :)
@don't panic
No. Just 1 faithless elector is needed. Let's say we're looking at O-269, M-269. Some Rovian screwball convinces a Texas elector to cast the elector's one EV for Hillary. Now we have O-269, M-268, C-1. 270 is needed for a winner, so we have no winner. And when the HOR starts casting 1-vote per state, each state has the CHOICE of casting its one vote for O, M, or C. Unlikely but certainly possible.
@GG & Don't Panic
The clear text of the 12th Amendment is that each state has one vote in the House to elect the President in the event of an EC deadlock. Based on the clear text I think it is certain that DC would not have a vote. I also think it's highly likely the judicial branch would punt the issue unless the unprincipled Republicans on the Supreme Court thought that they might be able to lend a hand to one of their "co-religionists" like they did, repeatedly, in 2000.
(This is the same court that, a few years earlier, also stuck it to Clinton by allowing a civil lawsuit by Paula Jones to continue against him during his Presidency based on their prediction it wouldn't be a distraction. All I can say from these experiences is that Supreme Court Justices make shitty political decisions.)
GG get off the Hillary thing.
"Can we call it the Lehman Surge?"
--------
no. i don't think so. it has continued past the bailout vote.
it's about more than the bailout and recent stock market and credit market collapses at this point.
it is about the fundamental structure of the economy now and who it benefits. especially as this relates to taxes.
I hope that wasn't too cold, but I have to work side by side w/ a woman who will not shut the fuck up about how pissed she is about no Hillary, etc. etc.
I'm pulling my hair out just thinking about her and it's Saturday night. ARGH
I don't understand something:
"Adding Omaha would pretty much end any thought of a 269-269 tie."
The problem is that McCain just sent some of his Michigan troops to Maine, to try to pick off 1 EV there ...
I'm no Nate Silver, but the way I see it, if McCain wins 1 EV in Maine, and Obama wins 1 EV in Nebraska, then we'd be right back at square one:
We'd have the same possibility of a tie as we do now, when we're assuming that neither candidate will pick off a stray EV from Nebraska or Maine.
"GG said...
Okay, here's an interesting strangeness in the Twelfth: the House is to cast one vote per state for one of "the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those vote for as President." Most of us have been assuming the House would split its 50 votes between McCain and Obama. But not so fast. If only one elector casts a vote for a third person, say Barr or Nader or Paul or H. Clinton or Palin (or anyone else eligible to be President for that matter), then the House would have to split its votes among THREE candidates. The permutations boggle the mind. And one doesn't have to think long to realize all the opportunities for mischief in a long process of voting and re-voting! We might end up with a President Clinton after all!"
You're mis-interpreting the constitution here.
All that means is that the Representatives from each state must choose one of the three top vote getters from the election.
At the time the Constitution was written there were no organized political parties as such, so the framers anticipated people just running for office and there might well be three or four independent candidates with a substantial vote count. They probably thought that the Congress would be deciding things rather often since no candidate would get the majority of electoral votes.
They didn't mind that because of the Federalist's antipathy to popular democracy. It was an elitist provision to curb "too much democracy."
But, Clinton couldn't be one of the three persons with the "highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President."
She isn't on the ballot in any state, so unless she received a LOT of write in votes she wouldn't be one of the top 3.
Some third party candidate, probably either Barr or Nader would be the 3rd top vote getter.
So theoretically Ralph Nader could wind up as President! Or Barr! But not Hillary.
LOL!
If you want something REALLY strange from the 12th Amendment consider this part: "The electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves."
So, the Representatives of Illinois could NOT vote for Obama and a Vice Presidential candidate from Illinois!
If a party ran a slate with both Pres. & VP from the same state, then in a tie election the House member from their state COULDN'T vote for both the President and VP candidates on that ticket!
They'd have to choose one of the other "top 3" candidates for VP.
Rather a strange idea. It's never happened in U.S. History as far as I know, but it COULD happen.
"Can we call it the Lehman Surge?"
I'm convinced we are seeing an anti-Palin surge. Yes, there is a upper limit, no matter what kind of nonsense she says.
maybe the next legislation will finally make DC a state
First, shush about SNL. Us mountain time zoners want to enjoy the experience.
Second, I can't forsee a tie at this point, but it would still be fun, court challenges and all. I'm pretty sure that DC doesn't have a vote because it doesn't have a representative, but there would be no better way than that to make the national popular vote relevant. Because, right now, it's worthless.
Third, anyone care to help on drafting a parliamentary constitution?
@stepper
Clear text of the XII, yes. But also consider the XXIII. I can see the Supremes arguing that the XXIII gives DC one vote in the HOR since the XXIII grants DC electors and does not prohibit it from participating in the HOR vote. As you note, the Supremes have a history of finding all kinds of things in "clear text"!
Loved the part where Tina as Palin says 'And for all you guys playing the take a drink game I just want to say, Maverick."
so was the SNL skit as as effective as the previous ones or is it getting tired?
This is the best yet!
Nate, admit you haven't done your simulations including the probabilities that the 1 EV of ME goes to McCain or that the 1 of NE goes to Obama! Does it increase or decrease the prob of a tie?
Get rid of the EC: Obama leads 51-47, with 2 other. Seems pretty reasonable to me!
Obama wins the House vote in case of a tie under any reasonable assumption. Go through it, using likely results from the 2008 elections.
From Politico:
Branding his opponent as “erratic in a crisis,” Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is preempting plans by Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) to portray him as having sinister connections to controversial Chicagoans.
Obama officials call it political jujitsu – turning the attacks back on the attacker.
No, by "the list of those voted for as President" I'm pretty sure the Twelfth Amendment means electoral votes, not popular votes. As far as I know there's no law limiting electors to the candidates on their state's ballot. I'm not a constitutional lawyer, but I think the electors can literally vote for anyone they want, down to and including Nate Silver.
@don't panic:
Yeah, it was really good. They really hammed up the Sarah Palin stereotype.
@Cugel
Do not pass go, do not collect two hundred dollars.
All it takes is one faithless elector to make anyone valid in the house vote; this happened as recently as last election, when someone from Minnesota voted for John Edwards for both positions! So anyone could easily be up there on that list. Barr, Nader, H. Clinton, anyone who fits the qualifications for president.
Electoral vote, not popular. Remember, popular vote is meaningless nationwide, and used to be meaningless at the state level. Democracy is funny like that.
At that clause in the 12th amendment only applies to ELECTORS, not members of the house. This was a slight problem with the Bush/Cheney ticket in 2000, as the VP had to change his voter registration back to Wyoming from Texas.
Cugel
In 2000 three voters in Texas challenged the electors of their state casting their votes for both Bush, Governor of Texas, and Cheney, who lived in Dallas and headed Halliburton. But Cheney was able to circumvent the issue by re-registering and getting a driver's license in Montana. The lawsuit was thrown out.
We have an entrenched Republioan and neo-con Federal judiciary, as well as a Supreme Court which has 4 members who currently "speak in tongues" and handle snakes while channelling the obscure intent of the Founders in 1789, and 3 slightly liberal justices who are even older than McCain. Which is why this election is so important to posterity.
A 60-member filibuster-proof Senate is also quite important for this reason and to get important legislation through.
The Republican Senator I most want to go down is Mitch McConnell. But that's probably asking for a little too much.
@Brian
You're pretty much right. Very few states actually require the electors vote for the state wide winner; and only one (Michigan? Please correct me on this) can change the vote of a faithless elector.
Whoops - Forrest is correct -- Wyoming was the phony place of residence of Cheney. His current residence is a tunnel under the Rocky Mountains. Where he is running the country.
@cugel
ANY PERSON QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT CAN BE ONE OF THE THREE ON THE HOR PRESIDENT SLATE. NOTHING PROHIBITS IT and neither party affiliation or being on a ballot anywhere are among the qualifications. All it takes is for that third person to be among the top ELECTORAL VOTE getters. O-269, M-268, C-1 is allowed under the Constitution. Of course Barr, Nader, Paul, etc. could get the 1 EV, but I think you're assuming the EV would be garned by a state's vote. I'm basing my scenario on a faithless elector. Faithless electors can do whatever they want, and across the decades, they have.
The district may be in play, but it doesn't matter.
I can't see Obama winning Omaha and at the same time only picking up 269 electoral votes in the rest of the country.
So what are the polls saying about Omaha's electoral vote????? That's pretty important information that is missing from the post. Is it close, McCain lead, or Obama lead???????????
Electors HAVE voted for whomever they wanted, or sometimes seem to have just screwed up. In 2004, a Minnesota Elector cast a Presidential vote for John Edwards (and the VP vote also for Edwards, leading to the thought it was a mistake). See 270towin.com and select the 2004 map. That's why Kerry had 251 instead of 252 electoral votes. Same thing happened with Dukakis/Bentsen in 1988 with a West Virginia elector (yes, West Virginia was one of 9 states/DC to vote Democratic, just 20 years ago!
In 2000, one of the DC electors did not cast a vote for Gore. To protest what she called D.C.'s "colonial status", Elector Barbara Lett-Simmons cast a blank ballot instead of voting for Gore.
Look, the bottom line is we need a blow out for a couple reasons. First, to negate all the election fraud. While the Dems do it pretty well, the Republicans have made a science out of it and have the judicial system behind them. Second, there may be a faithless elector out there -- someone who really wanted Hillary, who could screw up a theoretical 269-269 tie not by voting for her, but BY VOTING FOR McCAIN.
So, no matter how far ahead Obama may seem to be IT'S NOT ENOUGH! The Obama campaign knows this and will try to get as many votes (electoral and popular) as possible.
To keep it up Obama needs money. When the money raising numbers come out for September I suspect we are going to be awestruck. I estimate $100,000,000 by Obama. And I did my part by maxing out. If you want Obama to win, give until it hurts. (I will also be paying a lot more in taxes, but accept that for the sake of my daughter and a better America. Biden says I'm being patriotic and I happen to agree with him.)
@ forrest j. bowlick
"I'm pretty sure that DC doesn't have a vote because it doesn't have a representative."
The XXIII Amendment gives DC as many electoral votes as a state with the fewest EV. At the moment, that means DC has 3 EV.
In other words, the XXIII gives DC quasi-state status in Presidential elections. Whether the XXIII IMPLIES one vote for DC in the HOR (if no candidate exceeds 269 EV) is an open question.
ok stepper, i might give a little bit more after your spiel.
of course even if you maxed out for obama, you can still donate to the party. think about them judges....;o)
@bjfan82
The problem is that Nebraska rarely gets polled, and when it does it isn't broken down into districts. So there isn't really a good way to guage what it is, except by looking at how the campaigns are treating it.
i agree with gg on the Dc status.
as i said it think it implies it should get one, and i am sure it will go to court if the vote says tie. unfortunately, i am not sure the courts would agree with me
Leaked internal Polls.
Can someone get some of those on NE-2? Presumable O has been polling the place.
Oh and the character assassinations will backfire. McCain always executes poorly.
@ mike,
just pick up the phone and start calling a bunch of 1-402- numbers
Besides the Obama surge is working in the US.
Now McCain can't counter the Obama surge. Can he?
Here is the perl script for the Omaha phone dialer. Any volunteers to call these random numbers:
for (0..100) {
print "1-402-".ph().ph().ph().'-'.ph().ph().ph().ph()."\n";
}
sub ph { return int rand 10 }
If a party ran a slate with both Pres. & VP from the same state, then in a tie election the House member from their state COULDN'T vote for both the President and VP candidates on that ticket!
Cugel,
That couldn't happen.
The president and vp can't be from the same state. Each candidate had to pick a vp NOT from their home state.
@dont' panic
Why don't you jump right on that and let us know how it goes.
I'm also maxed out on Obama.
But I sent Franken some money today, even though I'm in CA.
@stepper
We're in agreement here, and I see your point. If it's 269-269 and McCain can dig 1 EV from Obama, McCain would do it and win.
But I'm proposing something far more Rovian. Let's suppose Obama gets and holds all his 269 EV. And let's say McCain has tried and failed to flip one of Obama's EVs to himself. What options are left to McCain? The Hillary Option! McCain gets one of his electors to cast an electoral vote for Hillary. Result? 269 Obama, 268 McCain, 1 Hillary. Obama doesn't win. Vote proceeds to the HOR. The XII Amendment says the HOR casts one vote per state for the TOP THREE ELECTORAL VOTE GETTERS. And in my Rovian scenario, those top three would be Obama, McCain, Hillary. Then wheeling and dealing breaks out. It would be attractive to McCain because he would have nothing to lose, and best of all it would be the Maverick's ultimate GAME CHANGER! And best of all from McCain's point of view, he needs only one of his electors to pull it off; no Obama electors required.
I don't agree with that, Joey. A Pres. and VP can be from the same state. The "prohibition" against it is a misreading of the same constitutional provision Cugel cites.
@GG
I should've clarified; I meant that I don't think DC would have a vote because it doesn't have a VOTING representative in the House. How could someone not of the body vote in the body? That would be too much of a leap for the supreme court. Even an liberal supreme court. Which we certainly don't have.
Ahh... John McCain dissing David Letterman is the gift that keeps on giving.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZsO7dZ__iw
At this time in 2004, Bush was leading Kerry 296-238.
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2004/Pres/Maps/Oct04.html
Current Projection: Obama 338 McCain 185 Ties 15
That's all.
Sorry Obama supporters...
But Tina Fey's Sarah Palin is so side splittingly hilarious that I can't bear to have it end in four weeks! So I'm putting country first by donating $2000 to the RNC and heading up to Presque Isle, Caribou and Houlton to steal that stray Maine electoral vote. We're going to need all the laughter we can get in the next four years and Sarah's just the gal to provide it. Besides, McCain can't be as old and beaten up as he looks...can he?
This article from Sept. 9 says that Republicans have a 15,000 voter registration advantage in the district of 600,000 people.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080909/ap_on_el_pr/nebraska_split_vote
@forrest j. bowlick
Yes, in case no candidate gets 270 EV, whether or not DC would get one vote in the subsequent HOR vote is at best an open question. But in giving DC 3EV, the Constitution has opened the door.... After all, the DC "reps" will be in the House to see the District's votes counted and the XXII says the House IMMEDIATELY starts voting if no candidate has won an absolute majority of the EV.
I wouldn't be surprised if Ron Paul gets some Evs.
everything changed today.
No longer will we take this shit.
Obama is going down.
We will reveal him for the reprobate that he is.
He will be revealed to be the socialist that he is.
He will be revealed to be a man who stands in the company of racists.
He will be revealed to be a man who stands in the company of unrepentant terrorists.
Today is the day that he will begin to go down.
Jesus this is funny
JACK BE NONSENSE
what made you crawl out of your troll cave this late at night ?
bad dreams ???
DNFTT
If Obama goes down then who will lead?
McCrapp-my-pants-down-by-12-in-the-polls.
Do the Rasmussen cross tabs show any geographic distribution in the most recent Nebraska poll? I don't have access.
@ sniperct
Other than NE-02 and ME-02 (wow do those look alike!), winner of the popular vote in a state gets all its EV. I don't see Paul or anyone besides Obama and McCain wining the popular vote in each of the states. If Paul or Barr or Nader or anyone else gets electoral votes, those votes will have to be the votes of faithless electors.
jack-be-fuckwit, people are not buying your shit this year. Go to bed.
I love it when Troll Meat comes to the table.
@Jack-Be-Numb-nuts,
Are you going to do some early voting and cast your vote for Obama this year? You betcha we'd like your support.
Obama is a racist. His wife is a racist.
Obama is a socialist an a facist.
Obama is friends with a unrepentant domestic terrorist.
Obama is going down fast.
Obama wants aborted babies to die in a waste shute.
He is an evil man that will destroy this country if allowed
StarTribune Minnesota Poll
O 55
M 37
http://www.startribune.com/politics/state/30470234.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr
Assuming an EV tie, won't there be public outcry if the HOR doesn't vote for the candidate who got the popular majority?
jack must be self-parodying at this point.
Oh and also: Cubs lose! Cubs lose! Cubs lose!
Nice MN poll. McCain is toast.
And I think jack o'lantern's head just exploded.
How many of you would go to a church for twenty years with a bullshit pastor spouting racist garbage while you sat there. Lets get a grip now.
Dodgers sweep the Cubs.
Nate, you should change your electoral map to reflect Maine and Nebraska's split districts. It'd be cool to see how comparatively blue and red ME-1 and 2 are, as well as the difference between Omaha and the rest of Nebraska. Also, I tell everyone about this site because of how awesome it is.
@ Jack-be-nubile
How's do you like this map?
Jack,
Why don't you follow your brother-in-idiocy Mule Rider out the door?
No one needs to see your stupid, twisted talking points.
How many of you would pal around with a unrepentant domestic terrorist and think it was ok?
ZIP
thanks for the heads up on the MN STrib POTUS poll
those #'s are remarkable
break out the bubbly, this is shaping up to be a TIDAL WAVE clear across the USA
g'nite, JACK...
Yes, Dodgers sweep the Cubs!
How many of you would raise taxes on business so that they would have to layoff more people.
How many of you would create a socialized medicine system that would allow the government to decide whether you would get heart surgery today or six months from now.
JACK
let's see, most od the rest of the world considers Bush & Cheney & Rummie to be terrorists...
bet you wish you could pal around with those losers...
@Jacky-be-numbskull
Are you McCain's evil dark side of racism and hate?
Maybe this this the way McCain blows off steam after getting his ass kicked in the polls, losing to the Obama surge.
Bush and Cheney are not running you dipshit.
@GG
I mean faithless electors, particularly in states like Montana and Wyoming, and even Nevada.
This is about the freedom of America.
We don't want the country taken over by a bunch of leftists.
We want our freedom and we will take it back.
We believe in liberty not government.
Mac looked today on TV like he was about to explode...
I anticipate a meltdown in public any day now.
Johnie does not like to lose - and he is on course to lose BIG
Cindy probably will vote for Obama just for payback to his monstrous temper & terrible treatment of his trophy wife/meal ticket...
Jacky--
I bet more than half of the country votes for Obama, because voting for McCain is like voting for 4 more years of failed policies.
We believe in liberty not government.
Liar.
Have you noticed it's Palin out on the stump all weekend? Why? Because McCain doesn't work weekends. With 30 days to go until election day, he took the weekend off at his home in Arizona.
Doesn't seem like McCain really wants to win this thing.
@ joey
"Assuming an EV tie, won't there be public outcry if the HOR doesn't vote for the candidate who got the popular majority?"
Maybe, but it wouldn't change the outcome. Besides, Gore won the popular vote in 2000. There was public outcry then, but of course the electoral outcome was the outcome.
Also, the infighting will be in each state's delegation, not in the HOR as a whole. Red states will vote for McCain until it's over. Country First in the House means My State First.
Jack, why do you randomly post crap? What is the point of it? Are you looking to change minds? Are you looking to annoy? Do you not get enough attention? Do you have a painful butt boil that makes you irritable? What is it?
Oh and finally, after 20 long years of Dodger suckery in October, my team has returned to its rightful place in the series for the NL pennant.
Here is an interesting quote form the MN poll story. Obviously this pollster doesn't believe in weighting by party ID.
Forty-two percent of respondents identified themselves as Democrats in the latest poll, up from 34 percent a month ago. In the same period, the percentage of Minnesotans calling themselves Republicans has dropped from 31 percent to 26 percent.
Larry Hugick, chairman of Princeton Survey Research Associates International, the Star Tribune's polling firm, has studied party identification shifts in presidential years and found that it moves in concert with the results of the candidate horse race. In a study that he and an associate conducted during the 2004 presidential race, they found that 18 percent of registered voters changed their self-described party affiliation between September and October 2004.
This election should be about big ideas and freedom, not counting EV's.
When they come to your door and tell you that you can't do something anymore, you will know.
Obama is the facist that will bring us to the end.
"We want our freedom and we will take it back.
We believe in liberty not government."
Coming from you that's hysterical.
Jacky--
Your brand is in the shitter. The small govt thing is dead as doorknobs these days. Pull your head out of the sand if you can and read the Wall Street Journal or all the papers and books Palin reads. The Repubs messed up America. Time to change it up dude.
Is it bad that I heard about the Cubs loss here first?
facist
Is that someone who really, really likes faces?
@ Forrest
I heard about it here first too. I'm a bit sad, though I was pretty much rooting for both teams.
When you put business, healthcare and speech in the hands of the government our country is dead.
Liberty means the freedom to fail or succeed. It doesn't mean standing in a line for a piece of cheese.
Anyone today can live a good life without the sting of government intervention.
Obama wants to punish success and innovation. He will be the end to us all.
Maybe, but it wouldn't change the outcome. Besides, Gore won the popular vote in 2000. There was public outcry then, but of course the electoral outcome was the outcome.
What does that have to do with the question I posed?
The EV wasn't tied in 2000.
I was talking about the HOR vote if it is.
CINCY
actually, Mac is is Sedona AZ 'cramming' for the next POTUS debate on Tuesday - unless Johnie decides that with the Cubs losing he MUST suspend his campaign again...
furthermore, after a busy coupleof hours 'cramming' at a luxury Sedona resort today, the press report said his 10 [ten] vehicle motorcade pulled into a McDonalds on the return to the exclusive McCain 'compound' or estate.
John blocked off the entire parking lot & caused a traffic jam just so he could have a flunky run inside for bags of food & drinks including reportedly a Happy Meal [probably for our cranky ol' codger]...
geez, the guy is trying to look bad even in AZ - which I suspect will start polling closer real soon for Obama as the GOPer gets nastier & his #'s slide lower...
All right, new rule.
Don't feed the trolls.
wtf is up with MN polling this year? it's all over the place, both for sen and pres...
Jacky--You are not free but a slave to dead ideas.
Raise your hand if you want the government to tell you how much money you can make.
Raise your hand if you want the government to tell you which doctor you can see.
Raise your hand if you want the government to tell you which media you can listen to or watch.
Raise your hand to the Man. Zeig Obama. Zeig Obama.
Minnesota Poll
Would be great but I don't believe it for a second. Obama up? Definantly. Up comfortably? Sure. Up 18? No way. Outlier.
Send Seltzer into MN. Clean up the place and get some good polling numbers.
I think it's finally happened...I think we broke Jack-be-wacky.
A troll is a man that is forces to succumb to the forces of a controlling federal government.
We will come back.
We will seek liberty.
We will seek freedom.
We will seek the free market.
We will seek a better life for our families.
We will seek to be free to worship as we seek.
We will seek to have a free press without a screen to our voice.
We will seek to destroy the voice of hate.
We will seek to allow middle America to have a voice.
ZIP
that poll commentary on the internals is interesting, but basically is a confirmation of the flux in self-identified generic party ID as opposed to actual Party registration.
Party reg changes slowly or remains relatively stable over time according to CW & historical trends - but that is a bone of contention for GOTV this year per Nate & Sean & others.
Generic party ID #'s change during the cycle as the UNDs & INDs start taking sides [or switching sides] in a 2-horse race.
Look at the massive swings or bounces over the last month during the conventions & now. That is reflected in this STrib poll as well as others, including R2000 tracker.
I am hoping that it remains relatively stable for 4 more weeks, but I also assume there will be another regression toward the historical mean as usual...
"Obama is a socialist an a facist."
Is that like being gay and a heterosexual?
Not a student of political ideology are we Jack?
The Obama Surge
Obama +18 in MN! Definitely seems like an outlier, but even if it wasy overpolled Obama's support, he's still up comfortably.
This is the same polling sample that had Franken +10, so I'm inclined to believe that his number is also significantly inflated.
"We will come back.
We will seek liberty.
We will seek freedom.
We will seek the free market.
We will seek a better life for our families.
We will seek to be free to worship as we seek.
We will seek to have a free press without a screen to our voice.
We will seek to destroy the voice of hate.
We will seek to allow middle America to have a voice."
Hey, if you guys sought all that in the past eight years, maybe you guys wouldn't be losing, huh?
Jacky is actually a bot with a poorly written list of conflicting babble (kind of like Palin's speech patterns).
I think jack's gone a bit bugnuts.
Voting for Obama is a vote for intolerance.
Voting for Obama is a vote for partisan hackery.
A vote for Obama is a vote for the Machine positics of Chicago.
Acorn is the group that is pushing for corruption of the voting system, producing fraud on a daily basis. The dems tried to give them even more money.
You know that if you make us mad enough we will finally say enough. We will turn out in numbers you have never seen before. We will save our country from Socialism and tyranny.
I miss our old JACK [not]
wasn't he the troll always so UPBEAT for the GOPer team no matter what ?
didn't our JACK keep spouting Bush/Kerry predictions as of that date - or was that his missing evil twin, Cracker Jack Black aka Kung Fu Panda
where is Cracker Jack hiding these days ???
Jack is reminding me of several of the 'conservative' comment posters on Time's Swampland blog (particularly one called 'obamish'). I tend to skip over those comments there, too.
positics
All McCain has is negatics!
wut?
jackbenimble - shut the hell up with that Karl Rove swiftboat BS. We've had it with that kind of nonsense. It's stupid. We're voting for the smart guy this time.
Obama '08.
Post a Comment