Quantcast FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: 10/5/08 - 10/12/08

10.11.2008

Did McCain Just Walk Into a Trap?

So much for slow news days.

John Lewis's comments about the McCain campaign "playing with fire" are likely to dominate the news cycle for the next 24-48 hours, including the morning panel shows.

The conventional wisdom holds that, whenever the discussion turns to race, this tends to be detrimental to Obama, who for the most part has been scrupulously trying to avoid invoking racial themes into the campaign, at least through official channels. The previous time an issue like this came up, it coincided with a period in which Obama's lead in the polls was eroding.

This situation is liable to be a bit different, however.

Part of this is because Lewis is no ordinary surrogate. In fact, so far as I can tell, he is not really a surrogate at all, holding no official position with the Obama campaign. Moreover, Lewis is no Jesse Jackson, someone whom many Americans instinctively recoil from. On the contrary, Lewis is someone who McCain praised as one of the three wisest people in his life at Rick Warren's Saddleback Forum.

But also, take a look at the trailing paragraph in McCain's strongly-worded statement to the press today:
“I call on Senator Obama to immediately and personally repudiate these outrageous and divisive comments that are so clearly designed to shut down debate 24 days before the election. Our country must return to the important debate about the path forward for America.”
McCain is calling on Obama to repudiate Lewis's comments -- which of course is exactly what Obama should (and probably will) do. By calling on Obama to repudiate Lewis, however, McCain allows Obama to be the adult in the room. We have a pretty good idea of what Obama is liable to say:
"John Lewis is someone whom Senator McCain and I both admire greatly. But rhetoric like this is inappropriate and uncalled for, and I repudiate and reject his remarks. As Senator McCain says, this campaign should be about which candidate can best lead America forward in these difficult times, and there is simply no need to inject the racial politics of the past into a discussion about what is best for our country today. We look forward to a vigorous and civil discussion about these issues with Senator McCain over the final three weeks of the campaign."
Where is John McCain left once Obama does this? Obama gets to have a minor Sista Souljah moment, and also gets to concede McCain's argument that the campaign should be about the issues. So what happens the next time that the McCain campaign invokes Bill Ayers -- or Jeremiah Wright? McCain is not living up to his campaign's own standards -- which Obama has "generously" agreed to.

UPDATE: In the time that I was preparing this post, Obama spokesman Bill Burton put out a statement to Ben Smith at Politico:
Senator Obama does not believe that John McCain or his policy criticism is in any way comparable to George Wallace or his segregationist policies.

But John Lewis was right to condemn some of the hateful rhetoric that John McCain himself personally rebuked just last night, as well as the baseless and profoundly irresponsible charges from his own running mate that the Democratic nominee for President of the United States ‘pals around with terrorists.’
As Barack Obama has said himself, the last thing we need from either party is the kind of angry, divisive rhetoric that tears us apart at a time of crisis when we desperately need to come together. That is the kind of campaign Senator Obama will continue to run in the weeks ahead.
I do not quite agree with Smith's characterization that "Obama backs Lewis statement", as there is a bit more nuance in here. But clearly Burton was ceding less ground than I would have expected/recommended. Keep in mind, however, that the Obama campaign very frequently pulls a good cop/bad cop routine between its press shop and the candidate himself. So I would not be surprised if Obama finds an opportunity to field a question about Lewis at a forthcoming presser, and is somewhat more magnanimous in his remarks.

UPDATE #2: I don't know where people got the idea that *I* am disagreeing with Lewis. I am not -- I think Lewis is mostly right, although I think the invocation of George Wallace is a bit much. The whole point of the "trap", however, is that by ostensibly rejecting and repudiating Lewis -- by holding him to a higher standard -- Obama can in fact reject and repudiate the tactics of the McCain campaign, which is not living up to that standard.

There's More...

Today's Polls, 10/11

The political industry's day of rest is Saturday, not Sunday, when the morning talk shows can make news, and campaigns try and jockey to lead the news cycle in the week ahead. As such, it tends to be the slowest day of the week for polling, and today is no exception:



There are really only two items of any significance here. Firstly, Obama continues to hold or slightly improve his position in the national tracking polls. But secondly, McCain got a strong result in Ohio, where the University of Cincinnati's poll for an Ohio newspaper consortium has John McCain 2 points ahead in the Buckeye State. Bonus for McCain: UC's polls have a strong track record. Mitigating factors: about three-fifths of the interviews in the poll were conducted before the debate, which seems to have boosted Obama's standing slightly, and he has improved his position modestly from the couple of polls that UC conducted in September, which had McCain ahead by 4 and 6 points respectively.

Overall, these results appear to roughly cancel out, and Obama's chance of winning the electoral college is 90.9 percent, the same as it was yesterday.

There's More...

Road to 270: Texas

Today we continue our Road to 270 series with the Lone Star State, Texas.

NOT A STATE TO MESS WITH, Texas has been the Republican answer to California – a huge state with many electoral votes that starts out as the foundation of the red march to 270. Despite gigantic grassroots effort in Texas on behalf of Obama since early 2007, McCain is only likely to lose Texas in a massive wave. Even as the numbers turn heavily in Obama's favor, Texas is still safe McCain territory. Democrats have ambitious plans to return Texas to its near century-long Democratic tradition, but they probably won't begin to be realized for several cycles.

Key Demographics



Note: Factors colored in red can generally be thought to help McCain. Factors in blue can generally be thought to help Obama. Factors in purple have ambiguous effects. Except where otherwise apparent, the numbers next to each variable represent the proportion out of each 100 residents in each state who fall into that category. Fundraising numbers reflect dollars raised in the 2008 campaign cycle per eligible voter in each state. Figures for seniors and youth voters are proportions of all residents aged 18+, rather than all residents of any age. The figure for education reflects the average number of years of completed schooling for all adults aged 25+. The figure for same-sex households reflects the number of same-sex partner households as a proportion of all households in the state. The liberal-conservative index is scaled from 0 (conservative) to 100 (liberal), based on a Likert score of voter self-identification in 2004 exit polls. The turnout rates reflect eligible voters only. Unemployment rates are current as of June 2008.

What McCain Has Going For Him

Like Obama’s advantages in California, John McCain’s Texas advantages comprise a lengthy list. To start, the state ranks 2d most conservative on the Likert scale, and the once century-long Democratic bastion split 44-32 in R-to-D partisan identification in 2004. It’s a low education state, high percentage of white evangelicals, and McCain’s fundraising numbers are nearly as robust here as in California. A higher proportion of male voters also aids the Republican. Within the state, Republicans have benefited from Tom DeLay's redistricting after the 2000 census, even as the Supreme Court overturned the drawn borders of TX-23, ending in Ciro Rodriguez' special election upset win over incumbent Henry Bonilla on December 12, 2006.

What Obama Has Going For Him

Texas has lots of young voters (4th highest percentage), and not many elderly voters (5th lowest percentage), both of which favor Obama. As Texas is a majority-minority state, Obama has some structural help, though Hispanic voters obviously don’t break in the same high percentages that African-American voters do. Texas Hispanic voters are the 3d highest percentage in America. Texas is another state benefiting from the late prima-caucus, as the once awful Democratic Texas voter file has had lots of effort put into its refinement.

What To Watch For

There’s more drama in the Noriega-Cornyn Senate race, though not by much at this point, with Cornyn still polling clearly ahead. Big Bad John looks like he’ll be re-elected. Big Bad John. (What to watch for? That is a must-watch, no matter your political persuasion.) Noriega is a netroots favorite, and he's a credible candidate in the Lone Star State. If you're looking for an election-night shocker, this one might be a race to keep an eye on.

The other drama is whether #5 Texas can beat #1 Oklahoma in today's big college football game. OU leads 28-27 late in the third in a nailbiter... which we could watch if we weren't posting this from a neighborhood in Enon, Ohio covering some canvassers.

There's More...

10.10.2008

Does McCain Have Cooties?

This is pretty interesting:
[Norm] Coleman told reporters that he would not be appearing at a planned rally with McCain this afternoon. Could it be McCain's sliding polling numbers in Minnesota? His attacks on Obama? Coleman said he needs the time to wo
rk on suspending his own negative ads.

"Today," he said, "people need hope and a more positive campaign is a start."
There are at least three groups of Republicans that might have an interest in distancing themselves from John McCain. Firstly, purple-state moderates like Coleman and Gordon Smith who don't like the campaign's tone. Secondly, the anti-bailout economic populists in the House who might be looking ahead to 2010 and 2012. And thirdly, true conservatives who never trusted McCain that much to begin with.

Far more so than Obama, McCain is dependent on the goodwill of fellow Republicans. With McCain having opted for public financing, RNC funds are an important part of his advertising budget. Because he's way behind Obama on McCain-branded field offices and ground operatives, he is depending on assistance from state and local party organizations. Republican enthusiasm lags behind that of Democrats, and so volunteer resources are scarcer; conservative activists will need to decide if they're going to make phone calls to support McCain or to help save their local Republican Congressman.

The further that McCain falls in the polls, the worse these conflicts become. And it won't help when the campaign is putting out statements like this one (McCain "blew up" the bailout?) and this one (it's Obama's fault that some very small minority of McCain supporters have taken to making violent statements?), which won't pass the media's smell test and reek of stress, sleep deprivation, and low morale in Crystal City.

There's More...

Today's Polls, 10/10

With 25 days to go until the election, Barack Obama is presently at his all-time highs in four of the six national tracking polls (Research 2000, Battleground, Hotline and Zogby) and is just one point off his high in Gallup. He has emerged with clear leads in both Florida and Ohio, where there are several polls out today. He is blowing McCain out in most polls of Pennsylvania and Michigan, and is making states like West Virgina and Georgia competitive.



There's just nothing in there for McCain to hang his hat on. Even a pollster like Strategic Vision, which has generally had a Republican lean this cycle, now has Florida and Ohio going against them (Florida in a big way). Well, OK, maybe they'll hold on to Indiana, although both campaigns' internals likely have the state closer than Rasmussen does.

McCain is getting some criticism for campaigning in Iowa, and for sending Sarah Palin out to West Virginia, but the truth is that their electoral hand is so poor right now that it doesn't much matter in which states they're deciding to bide their time. Remember, any world in which McCain has a chance to win on Election Day is a world that looks very different from this one -- some significant event will have to have occurred to fundamentally change the momentum of the race. We don't know which states might be affected disproportionately by such an event, and so a lot of states are conceivably worth attacking or defending, any of which could potentially become more important in the face of unknown unknowns.

There's More...

On the Road: Dueling Rallies, Ohio

On a day when the Dow plunged another 678 points, we had the opportunity to cross paths with another Barack Obama rally and another Sarah Palin rally here in west-central Ohio. Obama did five rallies here in two days: Dayton, Cincinnati, Portsmouth, Chillicothe, and Columbus, while Palin did events in Wilmington (home of the DHL plant closing that David Plouffe promised to highlight in local radio ads) and Cleveland. The events were a study in contrasts.

The Lectern - Obama Rally; Dayton, Ohio - BrettMarty.com


Barack Obama spoke to a crowd of approximately 8,500 in Dayton's Fifth Third (Eighth?) Field for 40 minutes, and immediately launched into a detailed discussion of the economy. Titled the "American Jobs Tour Rally," Obama managed the subtle stagecraft of physically morphing from a suit-coated politician to a coatless, sleeves-rolled-up problem-solver.

Tiny Obama - Obama Rally; Dayton, Ohio - BrettMarty.com

Palin's rally featured the more impressive entrance, with giant video screens showing the crowd the slowly turning campaign bus as it approached the cavernous inside venue. Finally, the fog machines hit high blast, the huge blue curtain parted, and the bus drove right inside the hall. As "Eye of the Tiger" blasted over the loudspeakers, Palin bounded on stage to a full-throated roar. It was some pretty sweet stagecraft, (even if had Obama tried it he'd have been ridiculed for behaving as a "celebrity").



Palin's comments were entirely general. There were few specifics on the economy besides freezing spending and a pledge to balance the budget. Despite brief allusions to economic worries, there was no discussion of how America finds itself in this mess. To do so, she explicitly argued, was to dwell on the past rather than look to the future.

She spoke for longer than her brief Carson City rally we saw September 13 -- just under 30 minutes -- and her crowd was larger and louder here. She spent about 10% of the time talking about Bill Ayers. "Ambition explains launching your political career in the living room of an unrepentant terrorist," Palin said, punctuated by four or five loud shouts of "Terrorist!' from the crowd.

Obama's rally featured the chant, "Obama! Obama!" Palin's crowd chanted "Nobama!" twice. With brio. It struck me that the big chant in Carson City was "Drill Baby Drill!" but here when that chant came up it was soft, half-hearted, and uncoordinated. "Nobama!" had the juice. Not even "Sarah!" could trump "Nobama!"

Props - Palin Rally; Wilmington, Ohio - BrettMarty.com

The language that the two candidates used on yet another rough economic day showed contrast. For Obama's part, threaded through an extensive discussion of economic policy were repeated phrases: "I have confidence," "I believe in you," "we can do this," "we're in this together," and "together, we cannot fail." On the other hand, Palin's comments were directed at Obama -- she was in full hockey agitator mode -- "terrorist," "judgment," "ambition." As for DHL shutting down 8,000 jobs in Wilmington, "we're gonna do something about it." Obama is afraid of mavericks. And Obama is a very dangerous guy who can't be trusted. Big disconnect from the day's events. While most of the 10,500 or so people cheered loudly, I noticed a number of people who stood with arms folded as the attacks unrolled.

Palin Power - Palin Rally; Wilmington, Ohio - BrettMarty.com

The coup de grace was her closing statement, a direct assertion that Obama was a coward.
So you know, Ohio, from now until Election Day, you're gonna hear our opponents go on and on about how they'll, quote, fight for you. But since my running mate won't say this on his own behalf I will say it for him. And that is, in this campaign there is only one man who has every really fought for you. The only man who has ever really fought for you and the only man with courage.

Palin 2012 - Palin Rally; Wilmington, Ohio - BrettMarty.com

Contrast with Obama's closing message:
Together, we cannot fail. Not now. Not when we have a crisis to solve and an economy to save. Not when there are so many Americans without jobs and without homes. Not when there are families who can’t afford to see a doctor, or send their child to college, or pay their bills at the end of the month. Not when there is a generation that is counting on us to give them the same opportunities and the same chances that we had for ourselves.

We can do this. Americans have done this before. Some of us had grandparents or parents who said maybe I can’t go to college but my child can; maybe I can’t have my own business but my child can. I may have to rent, but maybe my children will have a home they can call their own. I may not have a lot of money but maybe my child will run for Senate. I might live in a small village but maybe someday my son can be president of the United States of America.

Now it falls to us. Together, we cannot fail.

Boy - Obama Rally; Dayton, Ohio - BrettMarty.com

Obama spent almost his whole speech talking about the economy. Palin showed she was capable of talking specifics, but only when breaking down the exact whens and wheres of Obama meeting Ayers, and who said what when, on what interview. Very, very detailed. It was jarring -- the absence of detailed economic discussion. Most people think we're heading for another depression. I think it works well on people already sold on voting Republican but not as well on undecided voters or independents.

There was good news. We'd heard reports that the media was becoming the target of angry crowds at McCain-Palin events, and while that might or might not be true for others, we can't report anything but helpfulness by the McCain-Palin staff nor can we report feeling uncomfortable in the crowd. Most everyone was friendly and happy to let Brett take their pictures, and we had a privileged political day.

Secret Service - Obama Rally; Dayton, Ohio - BrettMarty.com

[UPDATE] So, Brett's site suffered a DDOS attack, and is now offline, with BlueHost refusing to ever host Brett again. We're re-configuring, so bear with us.

There's More...

An Invitation To Michael Barone

Michael Barone, Fox News pundit and author of the Almanac of American Politics, wrote a piece yesterday titled "The Race Isn't Necessarily Over For Barack Obama and John McCain." I was fascinated to read his central hypothesis -- that Obama's ground game = Howard Dean's Iowa caucus ground game. Seriously, that's what he's pinning his hopes on.

After citing with approval the same Karl Rove contention about undecided voters that Nate dismantled yesterday, Barone embraces hope:
A disciplined approach, certainly. But how effective are all those volunteers? Are they as effective as those stocking-capped Perfect Stormers of the Howard Dean campaign in Iowa in January 2004? You saw those orange stocking caps swarming all over Des Moines, but they didn't end up producing many caucus votes.
I read Barone's piece yesterday and had an epiphany. I recalled our conversation with Nevada's Republican State Party Executive Director, who in so many words argued that this is what they expected from Nevada Democratic turnout. A bunch of kids organizing other kids who ultimately wouldn't turn out in a non-caucus election. They really do think it's Dean's Iowa 2004 ground campaign.

Despite tens of thousands of "Neighborhood Team Leaders," and an entire organizing outreach tool actually named "Neighbor to Neighbor," Barone apparently fervently hopes Obama has no peer-to-peer efforts:
The most successful recent turnout drive was that of the Bush-Cheney '04 campaign, which relied on peer-to-peer volunteers, local people who made connections with neighbors with whom they had something in common (fellow members of a particular church, fellow accountants, nearby neighbors). The Obama campaign, in contrast, seems to be depending on youthful volunteers who seem unlikely to have such connections.
Wow. They. Are. So. F#$%ed.

They look at the Ohio numbers from the first part of early voting -- and assumed that Obama's campaign would have focused on voting between September 30 and October 6, when October 6 was the registration deadline. Early "absentee" voting continues every day from now to the election in Ohio. It's only after October 6 -- when no new registrants may be added, that the focus switches to early voting. That seems kind of logically obvious -- effort spent herding people to the polls that week (with a full month to push early voting afterward) would have been effort not spent on registration while there was still time left to get every last possible new voter. But to Barone, trumpeting Sean Oxendine, this is evidence it's just kids in stocking caps. Holy out of touch, Batman!

For Barone, it's the kids and the blacks who are "susceptible" to -- gasp -- organizing:
... there are surely more voters today who are persuadable. And there are surely a lot of marginally involved young and black Obama supporters susceptible to organization efforts—people who would not vote if not contacted but who will if urged and helped to do so.
Yes, Mike, it's not the evangelical churchgoers in 2004 who were vulnerable to just standing around one day and then suddenly, before they knew it, found themselves organized. (Note: If you are a parent of a kid or a black, you may want to sit down with them and have a heart-to-heart before it is too late.)

Barone continues:
We simply don't know. There will be other metrics in the weeks ahead on which to base judgments. But I think we'll have to wait until the actual election results start coming in to make a judgment on the effectiveness of these tactics. Which was the case in 2004. Journalists then provided good accounts of the easy-to-cover Democratic organizational efforts in black neighborhoods and university towns. They provided very little on the harder-to-cover Bush-Cheney '04 organizational story. My working hypothesis is that peer-to-peer is a lot more productive than young, stocking-capped volunteers.
Barone is right in two respects. One, peer-to-peer is a lot more productive than young, stocking-capped volunteers. And two, he "simply doesn't know."

So, an invitation to Barone. Mike, come out on the road with us. You'll have to ride in a relatively cramped backseat, but we'll make room. We go into all these offices. Not as in, "we simply don't know." As in, you can walk inside and see for yourself whether it's just kids driving this effort, or whether there's a single stocking cap. Peer-to-peer on a mass scale is what we've directly seen with our own eyes and what we've been chronicling for a month.

By the way, it wasn't kids who just tied up Washoe County, Nevada. It was an organization the likes of which we haven't seen in American politics, ever.

Put that in your Almanac.

There's More...

Guest Column: Will Bin Laden Strike Again?

Rany Jazayerli, my colleague at Baseball Prospectus who wrote for us in August about the resignation of Barack Obama's national coordinator for Muslim American affairs, has a guest feature today contemplating Osama bin Laden's potential to influence the 2008 elections. I hope you'll take the time to jump below the fold and read his piece.

by Rany Jazayerli

If it’s October, that means it’s the month of surprises, and I’m not talking about the Tampa Bay Rays making the playoffs. (Besides, that wouldn’t be much of a surprise if you trusted Nate’s baseball projections in the spring.)

No, this is the month where dramatic late-breaking news can tip an election. In fact, given the sizable lead that Barack Obama has now opened up – roughly six points in the national polls, with a favorable electoral map – and the crystallizing of opinions among the electorate, it may be that only dramatic late-breaking news can tip this election.

Historically, a six-point lead with four weeks to go is almost impregnable barring unforeseen circumstances. Given that, it’s possible that John McCain is just waiting for the perfect time to drop a bomb on the election process. (Maybe Tucker Bounds is hiding the “kill whitey” tape in a secure vault somewhere.) But realistically, if McCain had any bullets left in his gun, he would have shot them by now. He’s already emptied his nominate-a-woman-for-VP clip and his suspend-the-campaign-for-the-sake-of-the-economy clip, not to mention an entire stockade’s worth of POW ammo. (And now he’s passed on his emergency stash of Reverend Wright and William Ayres cartridges to Lieutenant Palin.) In all of these instances, McCain’s approach to his presidential rival has been of the “ready, fire, aim” variety. Holding on to some incriminating evidence until the final weeks of the campaign requires a level of discipline that McCain doesn’t seem to have.

If there is to be a true October Surprise – a pre-meditated attempt to use unexpected news to alter the course of the election in the 11th hour – it’s unlikely to come from the McCain campaign. Meanwhile, the Obama campaign has its prevent defense on the field right now. The only surprise they’d welcome at this point would be a sudden change in the laws that moved up the election to tomorrow.

That leaves just one obvious person unaccounted for who has both the motivation to alter the course of the election and the means to do so at the last moment: Osama bin Laden.

We know bin Laden would like to influence the election, because he’s done it before. On October 29, 2004 – four days before America went to the polls – Al-Jazeera broadcast excerpts of a video of bin Laden in which he attacked and openly mocked the Bush administration, and vowed to strike again.

Bin Laden did not overtly support John Kerry, at one point saying, “Your security is not in the hands of Kerry or Bush or al-Qaida. Your security is in your own hands and each state which does not harm our security will remain safe.” But most of his comments were directed at the sitting president, such as, “It never occurred to us that the Commander-in-Chief of the country would leave 50,000 citizens in the two towers to face those horrors alone because he thought listening to a child discussing her goats was more important.”

The predominant reaction, then, was to assume that bin Laden was rooting for a Kerry victory. Not surprisingly, following the release of his video, the needle moved a point or two – towards Bush. Voters certainly had every reason to give bin Laden the ink-stained finger, and bin Laden’s re-appearance on their TV screens was a not-so-subtle reminder of Bush’s most reassuring trait as president: his uncompromising stance towards terrorism (notwithstanding his ineptitude at implementing a strategy to combat it).

Bush won the popular vote by 2.5%, and won Ohio – whose electoral votes would have given Kerry the presidency – by only 2.1%. Correlation is not causation, but it is at least arguable that the release of the bin Laden video altered the outcome of the election. Presented with a video in which the embodiment of evil and our sworn enemy openly mocked our leader, Americans did what we did after 9/11: we closed ranks around that leader, and voted him to a second term.

Which is exactly what bin Laden wanted.

The immediate reaction of most Americans was predictable, and bin Laden used that predictability to his advantage. There is no doubt that he timed the release of the video in order to influence the election, and any appearance by bin Laden, by placing the issue of terrorism and national security in the front of voters’ minds, was likely to give a boost to the incumbent. If bin Laden truly wanted Kerry to win the election, his best move would have been no move at all. (There are two constituencies who can best help their preferred candidate by publicly supporting his opponent: terrorists and Hollywood celebrities.)

While bin Laden is many things, he is not hopelessly unintelligent. He knew that his video would help Bush’s bid for re-election, even if – or precisely because – the immediate reaction from voters (and far too many pundits) was that his intentions were the exact opposite. Somehow, we as a nation took the statements of the world’s most heinous and duplicitous man at face value.

In Ron Suskind’s book “The One Percent Doctrine”, published in 2006, he noted that the CIA concluded that “bin Laden’s message was clearly designed to assist the President’s reelection.” The fact that so many people initially thought otherwise reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of what it was that bin Laden was trying to accomplish on 9/11.

I make no claims that I can comprehend the mind of a terrorist, but as a Muslim I think I have a handle on bin Laden’s twisted view of Islamic eschatology. Bin Laden wasn’t simply trying to hurt America on 9/11: he was trying to start World War III. He neither expected nor hoped that after ramming planes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and maybe the Capitol, that Al-Qaeda could slink off into some caves along the Pakistan/Afghanistan border until Americans forgot all about 9/11, and then they could strike again.

When bin Laden declared war on the United States, it was in the hope that the United States would declare war in return – not just on him, but on the entire Muslim world. He wanted war, the bigger and more protracted the better. He wanted the Clash of Civilizations. He wanted, in a very literal sense, The End of Days. He didn’t have the firepower or resources to trigger the apocalypse himself, so he baited someone who did – the United States of America.

I can’t stress this point enough: bin Laden and his followers don’t fear war because they don’t fear death – they welcome it. They believe, without reservation, that death brings martyrdom and eternal salvation. Until the very moment that the planes hit the towers, the hijackers on 9/11 were certain they had a one-way ticket to paradise. (The moment after the planes hit the towers is a different story.)

That he might get killed after 9/11 was a far lesser concern to bin Laden than the possibility that his murderous attack might not provoke a suitable response. And in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, when world opinion – including Muslim world opinion – was overwhelmingly in America’s corner, and when our military forces initially targeted only Al-Qaeda and their Taliban enablers in Afghanistan, he might have thought he miscalculated.

And then came the drumbeat to war with Iraq, opening up a new front against a country that had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11. I can only imagine bin Laden rubbing his hands together with glee upon the news that the United States had declared war on Iraq, telling his men, “You see? Our plan is working.”

So when it came to the 2004 election, bin Laden was neither pro-Bush nor pro-Kerry. He was pro-war. And whichever candidate was most likely to sustain, or even escalate, that war was his man. That candidate was clearly George W. Bush, which meant it was time to turn on the cameras and burn a DVD.

This time around, we have one candidate who advocates a timetable to withdraw our troops from Iraq and divert those resources to Afghanistan in order to root out the people who actually attacked us seven years ago – bin Laden and his band of terrorists. And then we have a candidate who talks about maintaining U.S. forces in Iraq for 100 years if necessary, and sings songs in public about pre-emptively bombing Iran, which would set yet another gear turning in bin Laden’s scheme to bring about global war. Once again it appears that bin Laden would prefer the Republican candidate, and once again it appears that since any appearance by bin Laden is likely to tip voters towards favoring the decorated Vietnam War veteran, bin Laden’s best move is to show up with another October Surprise.

The McCain campaign has already attempted to label Obama as the preferred choice of Muslim terrorists everywhere. Back in April, McCain seized on favorable comments about Obama by a member of Hamas, stating, “If Senator Obama is favored by Hamas I think people can make judgments accordingly.” There’s no doubt the McCain campaign will pounce if bin Laden pops up with similar remarks. (It would hardly be a surprise if Hamas truly favors Obama, given that the Muslim world – and the rest of the world, for that matter – overwhelmingly favors him.)

With McCain lagging in the polls, bin Laden might even try a Hail Mary – with Sarah Palin on the ballot, I’d imagine that he’ll throw in some misogynistic comments about how a woman’s place is inside the home and that a nation led by a woman is sure to be cursed by God. (Which would be particularly rich if he goes that route, given that he’s probably holed up somewhere in Pakistan, where they’ve already had a female chief executive.) And then there’s the worst-case scenario: while Obama’s lead is substantial enough that he probably could weather a bin Laden appearance, the real game-changer would be if – God forbid – bin Laden is able to launch another terrorist attack on U.S. soil.

I hope I’m wrong, and that bin Laden stays quiet for the next month. I hope that the reason why no one can find bin Laden – not George Bush, not the US military, not even Morgan Spurlock – is because he’s dead. But if he’s not, then we can expect to see his ugly mug on TV in the next few weeks, and we can expect at least a few voters to be swayed by his appearance. Please, don’t be one of them.

There's More...

Debate May Have Helped Obama

I don't usually try and prognosticate in which direction the tracking polls are liable to move, but it looks to me like the debate may have been a pretty significant help for Barack Obama.

The Zogby-Reuters poll is already out. From reading Zogby's write-up, it sounds like Obama must have had about a 9 point lead in Thursday's interviewing and, oh, a 5-6 point lead in Wednesday's interviewing. This compared with a 2-point lead over the Sunday-Tuesday window, before the debate occurred. (Zogby's party ID weightings are screwy, but we'll discuss that at another time; the poll should be fine for inferring trendlines).

Research 2000 had Obama winning Wednesday's daily sample by 12 points, as compared with 9 on Monday and 8 on Tuesday.

Or take a look at the most recent Rasmussen polling. They put five polls out tonight: Obama by 3 in Florida, Obama by 1 in North Carolina, Obama by 16 in Michigan, Obama by 8 in New Jersey, and McCain by 7 in Indiana. From among that set of polling, the Indiana result is poor for Obama, and the New Jersey result is a little below expectations, but the North Carolina and Florida numbers are pretty good and the Michigan number is very good. Obama's two worst polls from that group -- Indiana and New Jersey -- were conducted on Tuesday, principally before the debate. The other three, which were stronger for him, were conducted on Wednesday, after the debate.

So, I don't know. Take this with a grain of salt. But there are some hints that Obama may be on track to post some of his strongest numbers yet as we head into the weekend.

There's More...

10.09.2008

Ayers Attacks Piquing Curiosity, But Perhaps Little Else

Bill Ayers' Wikipedia entry has been accessed between 49,500 and 96,000 times over each of the past five days, as the McCain campaign has sought to stress the linkages between Barack Obama and the former Weather Underground frontman. This is a high figure; Jeremiah Wright, at his peak, was getting about 38,500 hits per day; Obama and McCain themselves are generally in the high five figures or very low six figures. The Obama campaign, for its part, got "Keating Five" up to 84,800 hits on Monday, although those numbers have since leveled off.

It is less clear, however, whether these attacks are having any tangible effects on perceptions of the candidates. Three of the daily tracking polls -- Rasmussen, Hotline, and Research 2000 -- chart the candidates' favorability scores on a daily basis. Let's compare the candidates' ratings on 10/3 -- before the Ayers attacks began -- with those from yesterday, 10/8. (Why yesterday rather than today? Because we don't want to conflate the Ayers impact with that of the presidential debate, which began to be reflected in today's figures).

First, Barack Obama:
Pollster             Favorable      Unfavorable
Rasmussen 10/3 57 42
Rasmussen 10/8 56 (-1) 42 (n/c)

Pollster Favorable Unfavorable
Research 2K 10/3 59 32
Research 2K 10/8 57 (-2) 33 (+1)

Pollster Favorable Unfavorable
Hotline 10/3 58 36
Hotline 10/8 56 (-2) 39 (+3)

Pollster Favorable Unfavorable
Average 10/3 58.0 36.7
Average 10/8 56.3 (-1.7) 38.0 (+1.3)
Between the three pollsters, Obama's favorables decreased by an average of 1.7 points over this window, while his unfavorables increased by 1.3 points. These numbers suggest pehraps some incremental gains for McCain, but are well within the margins of error of the respective polls (the poll with the largest sample size -- Rasmussen -- showed the least effect). By comparison, when the Jeremiah Wright story first broke on March 13, Barack Obama's favorables decreased by about 5 points within the span of a week, and his unfavorables increased by the same margin.

Here is what happened to McCain's own ratings over the same window:
Pollster             Favorable   Unfavorable
Rasmussen 10/3 52 45
Rasmussen 10/8 52 (n/c) 46 (+1)

Pollster Favorable Unfavorable
Research 2K 10/3 41 45
Research 2K 10/8 44 (+3) 49 (+4)

Pollster Favorable Unfavorable
Hotline 10/3 53 40
Hotline 10/8 53 (n/c) 41 (+1)

Pollster Favorable Unfavorable
Average 10/3 48.7 43.3
Average 10/8 49.7 (+1.0) 45.3 (+2.0)
McCain's unfavorables increased slightly over this window, by an average of 2 points, although only the Research 2000 result is outside the margin of error. McCain's favorables also increased by an average of 1 point.

What we also don't know is which types of voters, if any, were swayed by this stuff. When comparing the 10/8 and 10/3 releases of the various tracking polls, Obama lost a net of 5 points in the Hotline poll over this window, and a net of 1 point in Research 2000 and Rasmussen, but gained a net of 4 points in Gallup and a net of 1 point in the Battleground poll, producing an ambiguous overall trend.

If the McCain campaign wants to make any traction here, it will probably need to press the attack continuously, as it has little tangible news value and as interest in these things tends to fade rather quickly.

Obama's best strategy may simply be to appear before a national audience as frequently as possible, as voters have always almost reacted favorably to Obama when he has had such opportunities. Obama's favorables ticked upward in all three trackers in today's release, suggesting that his strong performance in Tuesday night's debate may cancel out or exceed any traction that McCain had been able to make on Ayers. This may also be the impetus behind Obama's decision today to make a 30-minute, prime time ad buy in the week before the election, as candidates have few opportunities to reach a mass audience once the final debate has come and gone. If it so desired, the Obama campaign could probably also drive a decent amount of attention to the Keating Five, as the traffic metrics on the story essentially matched that of Ayers for the 48 hours or so that Chicago was pushing it.

There's More...

Teaser

Obama rally, Palin rally... coming soon.

Seven months ago today this site Nate created went live, with 80 visits. Yesterday we reached 693,216... almost as many newly and updatedly registered Hoosiers. Glancing at the daily circulation figures for US newspapers, it looks like we're at or about the top ten and rising with a bullet. Good work, Nate. And thanks everybody for coming to visit. We hope you'll come for the polls and stay for the analysis and original content long after the election ends.

Sharp Shooters - BrettMarty.com

There's More...

Why You Don't Bluff

There's been some discussion about whether John McCain's announcement last week that he was pulling out of Michigan was some kind of stunt. Well, Rasmussen has the first polling out of the state since that announcement, and it gives Barack Obama a 16 point lead. This is a state that, as recently as a month ago, looked like it might be the most important swing state in the nation.

Voters really, really don't like it when you blow off their state. That's why Hillary Clinton romped to such huge margins in West Virginia and Kentucky in the Democratic primaries, where Obama essentially refused to campaign. It's why Obama won by more than expected in Wisconsin and South Carolina, which Clinton pulled out of early. It's why Rudy Giuliani's decision to ignore every state that didn't begin with an 'F', end with an 'a', and have 'lorid' in the middle was a catastrophic failure.

So even if McCain were to want to re-engage Michigan now, he'd be facing a much steeper hill to climb. In Rasmussen's internals, independents have gone from favoring McCain by 12 points on September 21 to favoring Obama by 11 now. Nor is McCain getting any benefit of the doubt from Democrats, who now prefer Obama 95-3. If you act like you don't care about somebody's vote, you aren't going to get it.

There's More...

Today's Polls, 10/9

The idea of Barack Obama winning North Carolina or perhaps Indiana, I think we have gotten accustomed to. But Obama winning ... West Virginia, a state where he got barely a quarter of the vote in the Democratic primary?

That's what American Research Group says; in fact, it gives Obama a rather large, 8-point lead in the Mountaineer State. I'd have to say that I'm very, very skeptical of this one until I see it confirmed by another polling agency; this is exactly the sort of quirky result that ARG is (in)famous for.

Nevertheless, if Obama has a double-digit lead in Pennsylvania -- and all of the polls seem to think that he does -- that means he's had to have made at least some progress in the "Pennsyltucky" region in the interior of the state. And if he's made progress in Pennsyltucky, that probably means he's made progress in West Virginia. West Virginia -- like Pennsylvania -- is also a place where the Democrats retain a substantial edge in party identification, and perhaps the economy has really brought Democrats home. Indeed, for the past week or so, just about every poll taken in a Kerry state has shown Obama with a double-digit lead, with the minor exception of Minnesota, where the polling has been erratic.

In any event, there might be some merit in Obama paying a visit to West Virginia -- not because it's quite moved to the point where it's a swing state but because I think the symbolism of all of it would get him a lot of earned media.

Here are the rest of the numbers:



Obama slightly improved his position in the tracking polls today -- incorporating one full day of interviewing after the Nashville debate -- although most of that is the Diageo/Hotline poll having snapped back to Obama +6 after showing him ahead by just 1 yesterday. (You should continue to give top priority the Gallup and Rasmussen tracking polls as their large sample sizes make them less prone to this sort of result). We'll want to wait until the weekend before we can more fully evaluate the effects of the debate.

There's More...

On the Road: New Albany, Indiana

A month ago at the convention in St. Paul, I spoke with Jennifer Ping, the Republican Vice-Chair of the Marion County Central Committee. I was asking her what Republicans were doing on the ground in Indiana. The story I’d heard, I told her, was that Obama had a huge ground game there but McCain and the Republicans did not. Was that true? I asked.

After all, Democrats registered the overwhelming majority of the 706,038 newly registered and info-updated Indianans Hoosiers in 2008.

Lauren at Columbus - BrettMarty.com


Jennifer told me that they were working hard, and that they still got three “touches” on their voters each year. “Touch” is a field term for voter contact, and as naughty as it sounds, it’s the way campaigns and parties maintain their voter files throughout the year. It’s very difficult for parties to maintain voter files – literally the most valuable property any state party or national party owns – without regular contact. It’s why Democrats have recently put an emphasis on a long-term 50-state program, because these things can’t be built overnight. Getting tired of losing national elections inspires that kind of strategy revision.

In New Albany, right across the Ohio River from Louisville, we saw an effort that included weeknight canvassers and phone bankers, just the customary grinding voter contact game these Obama organizers have perfected.

Another thing Jennifer told me was that the Democrats did not, contrary to their claims, have an office in Columbus, Indiana, that it was “just a desk.” Well, after we stopped in New Albany, we zipped up to the Obama Columbus office and found it both open and busy. Jonathan Swain, Barack Obama’s Communications Director, noted that it was one of 43 field offices open around the state, with the potential for a couple more to be added in the final weeks. In all 92 Indiana counties, Swain said, “Barack Obama always intended to compete and compete hard.”



Obama moved into high gear in the Hoosier State in mid-June, only a few weeks after the May 6 primary, and the ability to have a late primary allowed Obama to essentially continue operating at full bore right from the getgo. With unemployment in Indiana at its highest rate since 1987 and average wages down $4,000 since Bush took office in 2000, Swain said, Indianans Hoosiers are hungry for change. [Note: Swain didn't say "Indianans," I did. Sorry everybody.]

Still, Swain acknowledges it's an uphill fight. "History was not on our side" when the campaign decided to work a large campaign here. When the polls were a little tighter, many criticized the Obama effort, arguing that Indiana couldn't possibly go blue, and that working the ground here is a waste of resources. Instead, we have a race that, in Dan Rather-speak, is as tight as a tick. Recent polls have showed the race within the margin of error, and the Obama campaign is confident that in a coin flip race -- a better ground game can make the difference.

Still, Democrats have to be considered the underdog here. Indiana hasn't gone blue since 1964 in LBJ's landslide year, and Republicans won by roughly 510,000 votes in 2004. Still, if we apply our 80-20 split on the self-selecting new Obama registrants (80% Obama registrants, 20% McCain) and a 75% turnout rate (newly registered voters vote in higher rates than regularly registered voters), then Obama just added approximately 318,000 votes in Indiana. Now the challenge is to get about 100,000 existingly-registered Bush voters to switch to Obama, approximately 4% of the roughly 2.5 million Indiana voters from 2004.

We'll be back in Indiana before the end, we suspect, as this could be one of Election night's great dramatic stories. Locals in Lake County predicted a long night, especially as Republicans have resisted early voting centers in Gary and Hammond, Democratic strongholds and the 5th and 6th biggest Indiana cities.

My smashed laptop in tow (and really, what a great debate hosting effort by Belmont University, once again, it was awesome to have five different people flatly refuse us access to even a restroom after we'd had to sit for hours behind a 14-car pileup on I-65), we're already at Barack Obama's Dayton, Ohio rally, and we're headed toward the Palin rally in Wilmington later this afternoon.

Eucher State - Brett Marty

There's More...

Senate Projections, 10/9

Democrats continue to make gains in senate races around the country, and now rate as having roughly a 1-in-4 chance of emerging with a 60-seat working majority.



The most substantial movement this week is in Georgia, where several polls now show a tight race between Saxby Chambliss and Jim Martin. Martin remains relatively underfunded, but his economic populist message is a good fit for his state, his advertising has been sharp, and Chambliss did not do himself any favors by voting for the bailout. Still, Chambliss remains narrowly ahead.

Kay Hagan, meanwhile, has continued to improve her position in North Carolina, which we now rate as Lean Democrat. About the only good news for the Republicans in Alaska, where Rasmussen now shows Ted Stevens with a 1-point lead, though Ted Stevens' imminent trial could change all of that.

I have also made a couple of changes to the regression model. Firstly, we are replacing the partisan ID variable with a variable indicating Obama's current standing in our presidential projections. Evidently, there are some coattails/synergies with Obama's ground game in states like North Carolina. And secondly, I have introduced a variable for the number of Southern Baptists -- our "scientific" way to demarcate the South -- as the economy seems to be playing differently there than in other regions of the country. Both variables are highly statistically significant.

There's More...

Uncommitteds and Persuadables in Historical Perspective

In an article in today's Wall Street Journal, Karl Rove asserts the following:
What about swing voters? There are probably more undecided and persuadable voters open to switching their choice than in any election since 1968.
Is it true that there are an unusually high number of swing voters this year? Not really, although it may be slightly higher than average. Let's go to the video tape ... err... the Gallup Polling archive.

What I've done here is simply to take the number of unaccounted-for voters in the Gallup survey closest to October 1st of the election year in question. By "unaccounted for" (or "unaccounted") I mean voters that Gallup had not assigned to any particular candidate. This will include your true uncommitteds, as well as refusals and don't-knows, and voters committed to minor party candidates that Gallup did not mention by name.



In the Gallup tracking poll that straddled October 1st, 8 percent of voters were unaccounted for. This figure is significantly higher than 2004, an unusually partisan election in which just 2 percent of voters were unaccounted for. But, it was no higher than 2000 or 1976, and lower than in 1988. On average, since 1936, 6.8 percent of voters were unaccounted for in the Gallup poll as of October 1st, as compared this year's 8 percent; the difference is not statistically significant. If we look only at results since 1960 -- Gallup's polling was a little sketchy in its early years -- the average number of unaccounteds is 6.4 percent. So this year's figure is probably toward the higher end of the spectrum, but well within the normal range.

The number of persuadable voters -- and this is a broader universe, since it includes not only uncommitted voters, but also those who are nominally committed but who could potentially change their minds -- is a little tougher to get a handle on. But the Pew Research Center has some useful data. Since 1992, they have included in their standard battery a question asking whether voters had decided against one or another of the major party candidates. For instance, as of Pew's most recent survey from late last month, 42 percent of voters said they had decided against Senator McCain, and 37 percent said they'd decided against Senator Obama. This leaves 21 percent of voters who are theoretically open to either major party candidate. We can compare these to the Pew numbers released in Early October 1992, Late September 1996, Early October 2000, and Early October 2004.



This year's numbers are right in line with past elections, again with the mild exception of 2004, when an unusually high fraction of the electorate had ruled out either George Bush or John Kerry. And remember, more voters have decided against McCain than Obama. The candidates to exceed the 42 percent of voters who have thus far said "no how, no way, no McCain" were George Bush, Sr. in 1992 (46 percent), Bob Dole in 1996 (44 percent), and John Kerry in 2004 (45 percent), all of whom lost their elections.

There's More...

10.08.2008

21-2

I'm not sure that the McCain campaign has a winning campaign hand to play on the economy. But consider this. Between the three debates thus far, the Obama-Biden ticket has used the phrase "middle class" 21 times**. McCain-Palin have used it twice. This according to the New York Times.

Date             Obama/Biden   McCain/Palin
September 26th 3 0
October 2nd (VP) 12 2
October 7th 6 0
==========================================
Total 21 2
The National Review guys have been on this for a while, but this would be a different election (okay, maybe not that different, but a little different) if McCain were proposing to cut taxes for the middle class by more than Barack Obama. Come to think of it actually, is it too late? I can certainly think of less likely last-minute stunts than some sort of massive, Filene's Basement tax cut.

p.s. The other term conspicuously absent from last night's debate? "Maverick".


** sometimes "middle-class" -- with a dash -- in the transcript.

There's More...

Today's Polls, 10/8

I'm short on time today, so let's keep this on point: John McCain is in deep trouble. In spite of some incremental gains that McCain has made in some of the national tracking polls, the set of state polling that follows is so strong for Obama that he continues to hit record marks in all three of our projection metrics. We are now projecting Obama to win the election 90.5 percent of the time, with an average of 346.8 electoral votes, and a 5.4-point margin in the national popular vote.



There simply isn't any good news in here for John McCain (all right, he's kicking butt in Oklahoma). The only swing state poll that he leads is the SurveyUSA result in North Carolina, but even there, Obama has bounced back from a 20-point deficit in a SuvreyUSA poll taken shortly after the Republican Convention.

Moreover, Obama's position in the electoral vote remains even stronger than his position in the popular vote. We project him to win all of John Kerry's states by at least 6.9 points (New Hampshire remains the weakest link). We also project him to win Iowa by 12.5 points, New Mexico by 7.7, Virginia by 7.3 and Colorado by 6.9. Getting this race back to a tie might not be sufficient for John McCain; he might need to pull ahead by 1 or even 2 points nationally to mitigate Obama's edge in the battleground states.

There's More...

What is Obama's Ceiling?

This post is going to seem slightly less relevant now that Gallup has come in showing an 11-point lead for Obama. But the other five daily tracking polls (yes, there are now that many trackers) all showed movement toward John McCain.

Between the Gallup result and Obama's very strong state polling, I am inclined to think that this particular ebb in the tracking polls is mostly statistical noise. That notwithstanding, it's worth considering Chris Bowers' point at Open Left. What, realistically, is Obama's ceiling in this election?

The better a candidate's standing in the polls, the harder it ought to be pick up additional support. In part, this is simply because the more voters that you have in your column, the fewer there are available to convert. But this is still a highly partisan country, we tend to have close elections, and things certainly aren't going to be any easier for a black candidate.

If Obama is ahead by something like 7-8 points ahead nationally, that means that he has persuaded just about all of the persuadables, and he's left looking to covert people like those in Ben Smith's anecdote.
An Obama supporter, who canvassed for the candidate in the working-class, white Philadelphia neighborhood of Fishtown recently, sends over an account that, in various forms, I've heard a lot in recent weeks.

"What's crazy is this," he writes. "I was blown away by the outright racism, but these folks are f***ing undecided. They would call him a n----r and mention how they don't know what to do because of the economy."
If those sorts of people are the undecideds -- and when Obama is winning Pennsylvania by 12 points or something, that's probably what we're looking at -- then Obama really is scraping the bottom of the barrel. Further gains are going to be difficult to come by, which means that his polls are more likely to go down than to continue going up. (Indeed, our model assumes that the race will tighten some).

Then again, when six out of ten Americans thinks we're headed for a depression, perhaps the ordinary rules go out the window.

There's More...

Post-Debate Thoughts, or Lack Thereof

I apologize if I sound like a broken record. But once again, Obama won the debate according to essentially every objective metric. And recall that, even if the debate were a tie, this would not have helped John McCain; he needed a clear win tonight. Instead, he's continued to dig himself into a deeper electoral hole.

The sense I had tonight was that McCain was overcoached -- that he was trying too hard. I don't think that he made any significant tactical errors. But he came across as nervous and awkward. And he is longer really fighting on a level playing field. In order to win this election, McCain needed to keep the Republican brand at arm's-length. He had largely managed to do that until the Lehman Brothers collapse scared the Hell out of Main Street and reminded everyone of the failures of the status quo. McCain needed to empathize on the economy; his "fundamentals" comment made that very difficult. He needed to find some way to position himself in opposition to Senator Obama on the bailout, but he had boxed himself in with his gambit about suspending his campaign. McCain lost tonight, but the reasons for his failure stem from long before this evening.

There's More...

10.07.2008

BrettMarty.com

Brett Marty once drove his old Buick from California to Ushuaia, Argentina. That’s kind of badass. He has a documentary film that might get into Sundance this winter. And he’s been capturing some amazing images as we traverse the country chronicling the Obama and McCain ground games in battleground states for FiveThirtyEight’s On the Road series.

Today his site – www.brettmarty.com – went live, and we’re proud to draw your attention to it. You’ve undoubtedly seen his work over the past three weeks, and I’ve watched as he labors over getting just the right shot. He’s a real professional.

Proceeds from sale of his work will help fund this original reporting journey. We jumped out on the road and decided to worry about the funding later, trusting that a good idea must be seized and acted upon. If you like Brett’s work, check out his page and you’ll find purchasing information on the site. Thanks, my friends.

Hoover Dam - Brett Marty.com

There's More...

Nashville Debate Liveblog #3

10:03 PM [Sean] We'll have a bit more on the debate later. Also an announcement about our trip involving Brett. Nate on Colbert tonight wasn't the only news of the day.

9:57 PM [Sean] By the way, a special shout out for an absolutely horrible experience on the campus of Belmont University. I'm not sure I've ever been to a less welcoming place. We hated this campus and the staff here so much that we left to watch the debate at a pizza joint. I don't like to regret things, but it would be hard to overstate how terrible a day this has been, and how crappy every interaction we had in Tennessee was. It was a terrible decision to leave Indiana and come down here. That had to be said for the record.

9:34 PM. [Nate] Strong close by McCain at least, echoing his underrated convention speech.

9:33 PM [Sean] On "what don't you know and how will you learn it?" the women diverged from the men in their dial response. The women LOVED Obama's answer. Nearly a perfect score. Men merely liked it. Men are liking McCain's answer more than women are. But the men are liking both guys' answers about the same.

9:31 PM. [Nate] Well, Sean, since you broke the seal, I guess I'll just say that I think this was a clear win for Obama -- much clearer than Round 1 -- and that I expect the polls and focus groups will reflect it. Again, it's all about tone and body language ... if you read a transcript of the debate, it might be a tie.

9:29 PM [Sean] The dials love Barack Obama. I'll be surprised if he didn't win the focus groups.

9:26 PM: [Nate] McCain's winning the Terry vote! But seriously, I thought McCain's shaking hands with that guy was effective.

Belmont University - BrettMarty.com


9:25 PM: [Nate] Good off-the-cuff answer from Obama on a relatively difficult question on Russia.

9:16 PM: [Sean] This is the weirdest thing, where each one of these guys is begging Tom Brokaw for permission to break the rules. I don't think it makes either one of them look good. And the dials are not liking McCain.

9:16 PM. [Nate] Damn, would love to see how the dial tests played over those last five minutes. It's tough going cold turkey like this.

9:08 PM. [Nate] The phrase "cool hand at the tiller" appears only 2 times in Google. (Or at least it did before now).

9:06 PM [Sean] On the actual topic of the debate -- two things. Obama's "there are some things I don't understand" pivot was effective. And well-received on the dials. That was definitely a pre-planned line. Another thing, McCain looks weird puttering around in the background on some of these wide shots, my friends. Hey, General Petraeus! They must think that every mention of Petraeus moves a point or two in the polls.

9:05 PM. [Nate] 24 minutes left for a McCain game-changer.

There's More...

Nashville Debate Liveblog #2

9:03 PM [Sean] No, for not mentioning my name I'm going to beat you to death with your own shoe. Big difference from impaling. Hope you all enjoyed fivethirtyeight while it lasted, my friends, Nate was warned.

8:59 PM [Nate] No tongue juts. And you're going to impale me with my own shoe. But we'll talk about that later. I did mention "chorizo", though.

8:56 PM [Sean] By the way, Nate, did Colbert ask you about the tongue juts?

Belmont University - BrettMarty.com

8:54 PM [Sean] I don't think people -- at a gut level -- want to hear that whiny voice for four years. I didn't want to hear Gore's slowly-explaining voice either. It sounds like he's annoyed that he has to be explaining all this obvious stuff. It grates.

8:54 PM. [Nate] ...though i thought that was a strong response on health care.

8:53 PM. [Nate] I think his more serious problem is that he's playing into the grumpy old man caricature.

8:51 PM. [Nate] I think his more serious problem is that he's playing into the grumpy old man caricature.

8:50 PM [Sean] McCain is averaging about three "my friends" per answer. I can see the "my friends my friends my friends my friends..." YouTube mashup already.

8:42 PM [Nate] Yeah, that was a Debate 101 type of mistake.

8:41 PM [Sean] Obama shouldn't have asked permission whether he could reply on taxes, he should have just done it.

8:37 PM [Nate]. Obama's health care plan has a mandate? That's news to Hillary Clinton.

Debate #2, Belmont University - BrettMarty.com

There's More...

Nashville Debate Liveblog #1

8:34 PM [Sean] That last answer from Obama about service -- sorry, Nate, this time I'm the one with the focus group response on the screen -- had the CNN dials on the roof.

8:29 PM. [Nate] That was a very clear contrast on that "priorities" question a moment ago, by the way. One of Obama's better debate moments, whereas I don't get why McCain seemed a bit flummoxed by the question.

8:27 PM. [Nate] Oh no! A question from ... the -INTERNET-.

NObama Tourists - BrettMarty.com

8:22 PM. [Sean] Hello my friends. Sorry to be joining you late my friends. We have had... a day. Many things, including the general destruction of my laptop, have gone down. But we're gamely here in Nashville.

8:19 PM. [Nate] I think Obama is connecting a little better so far, but most of that is on body language and tone rather than substance.

8:17 PM. [Nate] "Cronyism" is the new "maverick". Drink up, folks!

8:12 PM. [Nate] McCain has been sort of unintentionally patronizing of the questioners at a couple of points tonight. "I'll bet you'd never even heard of [Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac]", etc.

8:08 PM. [Nate] I thought that was a pretty decent start for McCain, but he needs to quit wandering around the stage so much.

8:00 PM. [Nate] And I've promised myself not to look at the dial-testing groups tonight until it's over.

7:53 PM. [Nate] The pundit consensus -- of which I'd tend to partake -- is that McCain needs to be steady, empathetic, and stick mostly to positive messaging tonight, but also to draw real contrasts with Obama. It's not an easy task to balance those things, and so while the format might favor him, he'd seem to have the higher degree of difficulty tonight.

7:48 PM. [Nate] I'm coming to you from New York, but we'll keep things real by having the thread in central time tonight. Sean, who is in Nashville, should be joining us momentarily.

Belmont University - BrettMarty.com

There's More...

Tonight

In what might be the second worst kept secret of all time, I will be on the Colbert Report tonight.

We will also, of course, be liveblogging the debate.

There's More...

What State Do You Want to See Polled?

Nevada or Missouri?

Both states have been a little underpolled relative to some of the other battlegrounds, and Tom Jensen at Public Policy Polling is asking his readers to decide for him where they go into the field next.

Also, as a bonus, here are the new polls that have already come out since we posted our update an hour ago. These polls are not yet included in our averages; I'm listing them as a courtesy so that people stop e-mailing me about them. But certainly some more good results for Obama here.

There's More...

Today's Polls, 10/7

As the political world's focus shifts to the second presidential debate in Nashville, Barack Obama continues to expand his lead upon John McCain in all of our projection metrics, and now rates as almost a 9:1 favorte to win the election in November.

Both state and national polls are contributing to this result. Obama remains at his strongest-ever levels in the Rasmussen and Gallup tracking polls, leading McCain by 8 and 9 points, respectively. Although some of the other tracking polls -- like Diageo/Hotline and the brand new Reuters/Zogby poll -- show tighter race the Gallup and Rasmussen polls have by far the largest sample sizes, and so tend to get the most emphasis in the model.

Obama also gets a monster number from SurveyUSA in Pennsylvania, which has him leading by 15 points, up from a 6-point lead two weeks ago. SurveyUSA polls can be a bit volatile, but with that said, we now have multiple polls (Quinnipiac, Morning Call, West Chester/NPR) suggesting that Obama has a double-digit lead in Pennsylvania. We also show Pennsylvania moving back ahead of Michigan, projecting an 8.7-point win for Obama there as opposed to 8.4 points in the Wolverine State. The good news for McCain is that Pennsylvania is one of those states with absolutely no form of early voting, so while he's got a lot of ground to make up, he wouldn't be penalized for doing so late.

The set of CNN polling also contains good news for Obama, though CNN polls -- which have had a Democratic lean this cycle -- usually do. New Hampshire is another place where Obama's numbers have improved recently; when coupled with his newfound strength in Pennsylvania, our model now assigns Obama a 69 percent chance to hold onto all of John Kerry's blue states from 2004.

McCain needs a game changer. Or two. Or three. Tonight's debate, which features McCain's preferred town hall format, might be his best remaining opportunity.

Polling follows.

There's More...

Today's Polls, 10/6

Are John McCain's negative attacks succeeding in eating into some of Barack Obama's support? They certainly aren't yet. In fact, Barack Obama has had perhaps his strongest individual polling day of the year:



You can read these numbers as well as I can. Obama leads by 6 in North Carolina? 12 in Virginia? 7 in Florida? 3 in Missouri? Obviously, I am cherrypicking some of the more pro-Obama results here ... but the point is, there are a lot of favorable results these days for Barack Obama.

The larger Obama's margin in the popular vote becomes (and over the course of the past several weeks, he's been gaining a full a point on McCain roughly every three days) the less the relative positioning of the states matters. For John McCain to get back into this race, he is going to need some dramatic events to occur, and we don't know in which types of states such events might have a differential impact; something like an outbreak of hostilities in the Middle East could make a very different electoral footprint than new revelations about Barack Obama and William Ayers.

For that reason, the proper strategy is probably now to play a fairly large map; Obama in particular wants to keep as many doors open as possible if and when something bad happens to his campaign.

For the time being, however, John McCain is facing third and long -- and appears that he's about to get sacked.

There's More...

10.06.2008

On the Road: Bloomington, Indiana

“The bus roared through Indiana cornfields that night; the moon illuminated the ghostly gathered husks; it was almost Halloween. I made the acquaintance of a girl and we necked all the way to Indianapolis. She was nearsighted.”

– Jack Kerouac, “On the Road”

One Day Voter Registration - BrettMarty.com

Today was the final day of voter registration in Indiana, and we'll have the final numbers for you after the official tally comes in, but here in Bloomington we learned from Obama student GOTV coordinator Jim Snaza that nearly 11,000 Indiana University students have registered to vote since August 15. Approximately 1,000 came in just today (pictured).

I asked Jim and fellow IU SFBO (Students for Barack Obama) coordinator Neville Batiwalla how they'd gone about registering students, and they described an evolving process, built on the campaign's learning from lower-than-hoped-for student registration numbers in the Texas and Ohio primaries. Jim, a senior who joked that he was failing all his classes for all the time he spent on the campaign, personally registered 798 students, and hoped he'd win a statewide contest to win an Obama-autographed basketball. Glumly, he reported that his 25 today had been bested by his roommate's 100, and he worried he wouldn't wind up meeting Obama. Here's hoping that whoever wins the contest, Obama stops to shake Jim's hand too.

Like Alex Max in Durango, and presumably all over the country, high school freshmen are leading the way to register high school kids as well as phone bank or canvass nearly every day. We spoke to Colin Diersing, a freshman at Bloomington South, about his involvement. He'd come in one day during the primary to help do data entry. As with every volunteer who comes to an Obama office, he was asked which time and date he could return.

Soon, an organizer asked him if he'd like to try phone calls. As is near universal, his first few calls had him a little nervous, and Colin spent ten minutes or so getting his call script comfortably into his personal voice. Then he was off to the races. At his high school, a few students got together to start the Obama group, and then each person brought two friends, and so forth, until the student group had a dedicated staff of 10-25 who regularly call and knock. Often they hit near 2000 dials in a night, the same as one of the three McCain Las Vegas, NV offices in its entirety.



As was the case in Lafayette and Lake County, there are no McCain offices to visit.

On the whole, the massive voter registration drive and the routinely packed field offices lead us to believe Obama has a strong chance to pull an upset here in the Hoosier State. A war with David Letterman is not going over well in this state, as McCain's internal Indiana pollsters would be forced to confess. We'll be back in the state for Obama's visit to Indianapolis after a brief drop down to Belmont University for tomorrow night's debate.

Tomorrow there are two other significant announcements, one involving Nate and one involving Brett and our trip. We look forward to sharing another liveblog from the road, at approximately mile 6000.

Landscape - BrettMarty.com

There's More...

What's Different About This Map?



We're now going to break out the projected result in Maine and Nebraska's congressional districts explicitly for you, as both states award one vote to the winner of each CD.

The simulation has always been doing this behind the scenes, but given the extra attention these states have gotten from the campaigns, we have made the procedure more robust. Specifically, we are now using our regression analysis to allocate the vote within each state according to our standard litany of demographic variables and political metrics. (Before, we had simply been using the 2004 vote). I do NOT intend to use polls from these districts, mostly because there aren't very many of them, and where we have them they are subject to very small sample sizes (a 600-person poll of Nebraska means only about 200 voters in each CD).

Here's what the situation in Nebraska looks like:



NE-2, which essentially overlaps the city of Omaha, is Obama's best opportunity to pick up an electoral vote in Nebraska. Our model estimates that it will run about 12 points more favorable for Obama than the state as a whole. Right now, Nebraska probably isn't quite tight enough for it to matter, although there may be a fudge factor if Obama has a turnout operation there and McCain doesn't. Nebraska's 1st Congressional District, covering the college town of Lincoln and the Eastern portion of the state, is also theoretically winnable for Obama. He'll get crushed, meanwhile, in Western Nebraska. If John McCain has a nervous breakdown and replaces himself on the ticket with Jack Abramoff, Obama might win 537 electoral votes -- with Western Nebraska being the holdout.

Meanwhile, in Maine...



There's not as big a discrepancy here. ME-2, which stretches from Bangor into Maine's northwoods, is the inferior district for Obama, but probably shouldn't run more than about 2-3 points behind his statewide totals. Obama dominated McCain in fundraising in both ME-1 and ME-2, and while ME-2 does present some demographic challenges for him -- there are some of Ed Muskie's "Cannocks" up that way -- it also has a higher percentage of young voters than ME-1, which should help Obama somewhat.

Lastly, some bad news ... the polling thread won't be ready until LATE tonight.

There's More...

Road to 270: California

Today we continue our Road to 270 series with the Golden State, California.

COASTALLY URBAN AND MAVERICKILY LIBERAL, California is one of only four majority-minority states (TX, HI, NM) in the nation. It’s a guaranteed 55 electoral votes for Barack Obama, as it has been for every Democrat since 1992. It has the smallest percentage of rural voters in America. Ironically, it's a state both candidates have visited far out of proportion to the closeness of the race, because both sides need wealthy donors who populate the state. Over ten percent of the Five hundred Thirty Eight electoral votes in play in a presidential election are represented by California.

Key Demographics



Note: Factors colored in red can generally be thought to help McCain. Factors in blue can generally be thought to help Obama. Factors in purple have ambiguous effects. Except where otherwise apparent, the numbers next to each variable represent the proportion out of each 100 residents in each state who fall into that category. Fundraising numbers reflect dollars raised in the 2008 campaign cycle per eligible voter in each state. Figures for seniors and youth voters are proportions of all residents aged 18+, rather than all residents of any age. The figure for education reflects the average number of years of completed schooling for all adults aged 25+. The figure for same-sex households reflects the number of same-sex partner households as a proportion of all households in the state. The liberal-conservative index is scaled from 0 (conservative) to 100 (liberal), based on a Likert score of voter self-identification in 2004 exit polls. The turnout rates reflect eligible voters only. Unemployment rates are current as of June 2008.

What McCain Has Going For Him

No doubt about it, California's 55 EVs are going to hurt. California alone is 20% of the total needed to win the presidency. John McCain does have a few factors that shade in his direction. Despite being home to numerous universities, California is on the low end of the education level scale. It also has a relatively high ratio of male voters, and McCain’s fundraising here is strong. Relatively apathetic voter turnout counts for some dampening of the youth turnout, but that's about the extent of the good demographic and political data that favors the Republican.

What Obama Has Going For Him

With a Starbucks:Walmart ratio that high (2d biggest ratio), Barack Obama is on safe ground. In addition, sociological factors favor the Democrat, given that the state has the fifth highest same-sex household percentage to go along with low gun ownership rates and low reporting of “American ancestry.” Unlike Alaska with the highest, California has the 3d lowest military veteran percentage. Though African-American population puts it in the median, California’s Hispanic population is 2d highest nationwide, and it’s got the 6th highest percentage of voters 18-29 along with the 7th lowest percentage of voters over 65.

What To Watch For

Though Hillary Clinton's campaign argued that because Barack Obama didn't win this "big state" in the primary, he wouldn't be able to win it in the general election, there's really nothing to hold your breath about at the presidential level. The highly accurate Field Poll put Obama up 16 points in mid-September, and that was before the recent financial crisis that caused his numbers to spike upward nationwide. California's gubernatorial race isn't until 2010, and neither Senate seat is up for grabs this year, so to the extent it exists all the drama is in the House. Democrats are putting the most resources into flipping California's 4th CD -- a large district stretching across the northeast sector of the state -- where the incumbent Republican John Doolittle is retiring under the weight of his corruption and federal investigations. For that open seat, Democrat Charlie Brown is running against Republican Tom McClintock, who lives hundreds of miles away in Thousand Oaks, CA.

There's More...