Containing Palin's impact is key (0.00 / 0)

 The best thing to do about Palin is ensure that the public is aware that behind the pretty face lurks a vicious wingnut far, far out of the American mainstream.

 She's polling well now -- Americans like pretty faces.

 If the Democrats can pull off that pretty face and reveal the monster within, then Obama should settle back into safer territory.

 The jury remains out on whether the Democrats are even aware they need to do something like this.

  McCain made a calculation that the extra energy generated for his base by picking Palin would more than offset any losses of moderates and independents. He can pull this off only if he keeps the real Palin out of the view of moderate voters. If the Democrats don't step up and counteract this, Obama will lose.

   

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

---

by: Master Jack @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 18:33:39 PM UTC

But imagine that Palin actually was (0.00 / 0)

what they claim. That she'd actually opposed the Bridge to Nowhere, that she hadn't driven her town into $20 million of debt, that she hadn't boasted about earmarks McCain opposed, didn't belong to a church that invited the Jews for Jesus to speak, that she hadn't already lied in Troopergate. Even that she's actually sold that plane on eBay!

Imagine, further, that she'd been governor for three full years, too!

That's still just an adequate resume, right? I mean, it's good but not earth-shattering. A non-lying governor of a small population state who did fairly well over the past three years.

Is that all McCain needed to beat Obama? To pick this 'upgraded Palin' as VP? Then the Republicans would win ina walk? Is that how brittle the Obama lead is, the Obama campaign is, and our democracy is, that a better-Palin-as-VP would win this thing easily?

I don't buy it. I don't wanna be a Pollyanna, but what advantages do McCain/Palin have over Obama/Biden that Bush/Cheney didn't have over Kerry/Edwards? And what disadvantages do they have now, relative to B/C?

---

by: Joel @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 18:49:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

See my post below (4.00 / 1)

 You're assuming voters are rational. They're not.

 It sucks. It doesn't speak well of humanity. But that's the world we live in.

 Palin made an emotional impact on the ticket. Her resume is irrelevant -- she's pretty, she's new, and she's not a dumb bimbo.

  Our task is to keep that emotional impact limited strictly to the wingnut world.  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

---

by: Master Jack @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 18:57:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I know. But what I'm saying is, (0.00 / 0)

it's not so hard to imagine a Republican governor who made the same emotional impact, and was exactly like Palin, without the scandals and lies. And if such a governor existed, we would simply lose? We'd have no chance?

I think we sometimes get caught up in the triumph or despair of the day and forget how elections are actually won. I know I do. Palin's emotional impact in initial polling is almost as positive as Cheney's was. But what's her long-term impact in Ohio? In Florida? I'd love to know. Get some attack-dog Jews in Florida to mock the 'Jews for Jesus' thing. At this point, I'm frankly more worried about the down-ticket races in Alaska than anything else.

---

by: Joel @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:09:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Perhaps (0.00 / 0)

 McCain didn't immediately shoot up 15 points after Palin's speech, so in that sense I guess her impact remains very containable. Maybe voters aren't AS fickle as we think.

 But the Democrats can't just sit on their hands and lay off her. The Troopergate thing is a golden opportunity to wipe off the sheen. A Dem media blitz with the simple message, "If she has nothing to hide, she has nothing to fear" -- throwing a right-wing talking point right back at them -- would go a long way towards naking Palin a polarizing figure. And we'd be getting the long end of the pole.

 But no. No messaging, no media blitz, no nothing. Just the audacity of hope that the Alaska legislature will simply do the right thing within the rule of law. A strategy that has just worked so well with the Democrats in Congress.

 That's why we lose.  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

---

by: Master Jack @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:19:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agree (4.00 / 1)

She isn't going to move most women, certainly not pro-choice ones, and that includes a fair number of Republican women.  She ixcited the base, but their base is much smaller than ours.  And younger people aren't the demographics she does well with.

Obama doesn't need to counter Palin.  he needs to keep hitting the economic issues and the failures of the GOP to regulate properly.  The fact that McCain is calling for less regulation even as the Feds take over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac shows how out of touch he is.

Sarah Palin is a distraction.  They have to keep her under wraps until she learns enough to sound coherent on any national issue.  Obama should keep hitting the economic issues plus the need to address energy and global warming. He wins if enough of the public trusts him more on the economy--it's that simple.  He's going to pull it out in the Midwest plus a few more mountain states.  He just needs to keep hammering and do a good job in the debates, plus ace the GOTV.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

---

by: Mimikatz @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:27:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The color of Obama's skin (4.00 / 1)

what advantages do McCain/Palin have over Obama/Biden that Bush/Cheney didn't have over Kerry/Edwards?

A year ago, the idea of an AA nominee for President was laughable.

Now we're discussing if he can hold on to his lead in the polls and win the election.

But any white liberal self-congratulation that we've got this far has to be tempered by the utter disaster that would be a McCain-Palin administration.  These are two scary people.

---

by: Taylor @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:14:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, the color of Obama's skin (0.00 / 0)

is probably a net disadvantage, but not an overwhelming one given the fundraising and turnout benefits and the villification Kerry was subjected to despite being white.

I do think we can't be complacent--the explanations for defeat write themselves. "The first black presidential candidate on a major party, he's 47 and his name is Barack Hussein Obama, against a beloved maverick war-hero? We had no chance!"

But look at Kerry/Edwards vs. Bush/Cheney. War preznit. Excited the base as much as Palin. Completely compliant media, instead of just hugely compliant media. Overwhelming right-wing message control. Republicans ruled Ohio. The money disparity heavily favored Rs. The R ground game was huge, the D was poor; the reverse is true, this time ... so far. The 'Kerry is a Frenchie/elite/extremist liberal/war villain traitor and Edwards a faggoty faggy fag' stuff was not quite as powerful as 'Obama is an uppity Negro/Muslim/extreme liberal/terrorist-loving traitor and Biden is long-winded' but they don't need brown skin to turn a politician into a scary Other. Helps, of course, but they manage without. The Bush presidency is now acknowledged to be a disaster. The economy is in tatters. The Republican stagecrafting is, shall we say, developing certain hiccups.

I believe we're clearly in better shape in most ways than 2004, and we barely lost them. McCain/Palin? I dunno. I'm just not feeling it.

---

by: Joel @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:28:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Limits to media compliance (4.00 / 1)

I think that there are figures in the trad med who want to see Obama succeed, or at least don't want to see him trashed by the likes of Sarah Palin.  Brian Williams reading Joe Klein's blog post on the lies of Sarah Palin on the air is an example.  I think there are limits to the level of trashing McCain will gete away with, plus the fact that they went so heavily after the media for doing their job isn't going to intimidate them.  

The media heads still want McCain, but think Obama is going to get a fair shake in the debates, for example, with Jim Lehrer, Tom Brokaw and Bob Schieffer as moderators.  

And have people really thought through how having Gwen Ifill moderate the VP debate is going to affect Sarah Palin and the dynamic between her and Biden?  I think it is going to make a much bigger difference than people ever thought before she was picked.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

---

by: Mimikatz @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:34:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

VP debate (0.00 / 0)

I was just telling  my husband this morning that it is interesting that Gwen Ifill is hosting the VP debate.  I think it will help shift the mood towards an even playing field.  

And it's at my alma mater - Washington U. in St. Louis, exciting stuff!

---

by: sisterfish @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 21:02:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

My alma mater too (0.00 / 0)

WU has a grand tradition of hosting these debates, actually.

---

by: ThomasPaine @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 21:13:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oh, I'm not so sure (4.00 / 2)

The Palin obsession on the left concerns me. For once the corporate media are on the case; is she has a big skeleton, or if one of the scandals turns out to be serious, it'll will get out there. It seems to me that the left as a whole would be better off following Obama's (and Hillary's) lead and focusing like a laser on McCain's out-of touchness and his fealty to the rich and richer.

Two weeks ago, with the uproar over McCain's not knowing how many houses he had, a negative frame seemed to be starting to take hold; now it's completely obscured by all the anti-Palin stuff, which might not even be effective if Palin continues to exceed expectations. I know that some people think it's bad for McCain that Palin is getting so much attention; I disagree; it's preventing Obama from getting a clear clear shot at McCain.

Plus, with the feeding frenzy including all a non-trivial amount of classist, sexist anti-Palin hits, there's a danger that we turn Palin into a folk hero that has appeal beyond just the GOP base.

I say: hit Palin to the extent that it strengthens the anti-McCain critique; otherwise, focus directly on McCain.

---

by: david mizner @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:23:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Maybe someone should (0.00 / 0)

ask McCain if he knows how many houses Palin owns.

---

by: Joel @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:31:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Three, right? (4.00 / 1)

11 total.

Incidentally, Obama today did a pretty good job of tying them together:

John McCain has said that change is coming!

Now think about this coming from the party that's been in charge for 8 years, they've been running the show! Been up in the White House, John McCain brags, '90% of the time I have voted with George Bush. He and I we we're right there' and suddenly he's the change agent!

He says I'm going to tell those lobbyists that their days in Washington are over. Who's he gonna tell? Is he gonna tell his campaign chairman who's one of the biggest corporate lobbyists in Washington? Is he going to tell all the folks who are running his campaign who are the biggest corporate lobbyist in Washington? Who is it that he's going to tell that change is coming?

I mean come on!  They must think you're stupid!

I mean, maybe what they're saying is 'watch out George Bush' you know except for economic policies, and tax policies, and energy policies, and health care policies, and education policies, and Karl Rove style of politics - except for all that, we're really going to bring change to Washington! We're gonna shake things up! What are these guys talking about? Do you think we haven't been paying attention over the past 8 years?

...I know the governor of Alaska has been, you know, saying she is change. And that is great. She is a skillful politician. But when you been taking all these earmarks when it is convenient and then suddenly you are the champion anti-earmark person. That is not change, come on. I mean, words mean something. You can't just make stuff up. You can't just make stuff up. We have a choice to make and the choice is clear

http://www.dailykos.com/story/...

---

by: david mizner @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:34:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You're kidding. She really owns (0.00 / 0)

three homes?

And that is a good response.

I think more, though, we're just gonna see people thinking, '72-year-old man picks some 44-year-old I never heard of?'

Danger/Stranger 08!

---

by: Joel @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:49:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Palin obsession... (0.00 / 0)

 It's more reactive than anything. The media has been obsessing over her -- for better and worse -- but the coverage of her has considerably softened in tone (but not in volume) since McCain threw his temper tantrum on CNN. And because the media has made her a central figure, there is a NEED for pushback on the left. I'd love for the story to be about McCain again, but honestly, that'll happen when the media wants it to be. And until that happens, we can't let her skate.

 That said, it IS true that the juvenile family-related attacks don't help the cause. It is extremely relevant to ask why so many fundie families are so dysfunctional, and the Palin situation offers an excellent jumping-off point for that discussion -- BUT this is not the right time or context in which to have that discussion, it is true. We have an election to win first.

 

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

---

by: Master Jack @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:41:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't think the media is more compliant. (0.00 / 0)

CNN has a guy up there interviewing the trooper ex-husband, ABC had a hard-hitting piece yesterday and other outlets have crews swarming all over Alaska.  It isn't flattering and their desire for scoops is going to make them do their jobs.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

---

by: Mimikatz @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:37:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

how am I feeling about this? (0.00 / 0)

Neurotically anxious.  

---

by: Castine @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 18:35:03 PM UTC

Jerome and Party ID (0.00 / 0)

I'm curious your thoughts on Jerome's assertion that polling should be recalculated using the 2004 party ID exit polling numbers for weighting.  He seems pretty hard set that the party turn out will be even to +2% Dems.  Your thoughts Chris?

---

by: yitbos96bb @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 18:35:36 PM UTC

I don't listen (4.00 / 1)

To assumptions about numbers. I look at the numbers, and see the results.

---

by: Chris Bowers @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 18:55:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Which is to say (4.00 / 2)

That anyone who is stating that "the final results will be X" and then demanding that scientific experiments to measure current public opinion should be rearranged to order to fit the X conclusion, ins't engaging in a scientific appraisal of public opinion. All they are doing is claiming they are right, and dismissing even the possibility of actual evidence otherwise. It's Soviet science.

I did that in 2004. I'm not doing it this time around.  

---

by: Chris Bowers @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 18:58:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Societ science, Republican science... (0.00 / 0)

 ...either term works.  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

---

by: Master Jack @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:01:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Societ science, Republican science... (0.00 / 0)

 ...either term works.  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

---

by: Master Jack @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:01:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

How am I feeling? (0.00 / 0)

That it shouldn't be this close. That this election shouldn't even be close at all. Yet it is. All the talk about re-alignment and map changing if Obama was the nominee was totally wrong. That I can't believe this is a "personality" election instead of an issues election when there are so many real issues. That I can't believe the meteoric rise of Palin. That I can't believe McCain got more viewers than Obama! That I can't believe that Obamas great exception speech is totally forgotten, it is like it never happened.

So yeah, that is what I am "feeling"  

---

by: alarabi @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 18:39:48 PM UTC

Emotion beats reason every time (0.00 / 0)

 The Democrats run logical, rational campaigns that focus on issues -- a department in which the Democrats regularly clean the Republicans' clocks.

 The Republicans run campaigns based on personality cults and identity politics, trying to scare people.

 The reason this election is close is that (a) national conditions are bad enough that voters are willing to consider a change in leadership, but (b) things are not that bad (quite) that identity politics and fearmongering have stopped working altogether.

  In the end, every society gets the government it deserves. If Americans are stupid enough to vote for John McCain, then it's hard to feel too bad for those who lose their jobs, their homes, and their children in wars.

  May every American get exactly what he votes for.

 

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

---

by: Master Jack @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 18:51:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Map Changing (4.00 / 2)

Obama is competitive in Nevada, North Dakota, Montana, Virginia, Indiana, Colorado, North Carolina and, until Palin, Alaska. That looks like map changing potential to me. We need to keep in mind that Obama just needs to win a small set of this expanded swing state lineup to win, whereas McCain needs to win virtually all of them to have a chance. We also need to keep in mind that these conventions will be a distant memory by the time we reach the first debate.

And more than anything, we need to remember that right now the polls are fairly useless. The tracking polls have been swinging wildly, and mostly pollsters have been smart enough to postpone state polling. Hopefully, we will have some solid post-convention state polls next week that can give us a clearer picture of this race. And I mean REALLY post-convention - not some poll that has the-thirds of the sample from before the Palin speech or only two-thirds from after the McCain speech. How about a full sample from three days AFTER the end of the convention? Wouldn't that be better than all of this hair-splitting?

And none of us has any idea how the recent events have influenced Florida or Ohio or Virginia or Colorado, not to mention the other half dozen or so key swing states.  

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra

---

by: LandStander @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:06:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Florida (0.00 / 0)

 I have confidence that public revelations of Palin's support of Pat Buchanan and her ties to anti-Semitic churches will cost her ticket considerably in Florida.

 I have far less confidence that the Democrats will work in any way to make sure this becomes widely known.  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

---

by: Master Jack @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:12:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

They are sending (0.00 / 0)

Hillary, Janet Napolitano, Kathleen Sibelius and one other prominent woman to Florida next week.  They are going to get it known.  Don't be so pessimistic.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

---

by: Mimikatz @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:39:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Jewish voters (0.00 / 0)

The Palin pick gives a strong argument to those trying to sway still on-the-fence Jewish voters.

To Jewish pro-Israel voters, Biden is greatly preferable as VP to Palin. There are some I know who were planning to vote McCain, who are now at least persuadable.

I agree that going after her in ways that can be perceived as sexist, or "elitist" will backfire. Still ringing in the back of my mind is the memory of Giuliana at the GOP conventions saying something like would people be criticizing her for running for VP with 5 kids if she were a man????

---

by: coral @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 21:20:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

All v. interesting, and I love (4.00 / 1)

following them, but national polls mean roughly as much now as they ever did. They're a fascinating if limited gauge of the national mood, the overall 'success' of various initiatives ... but there is no national election.

Tracking polls of Ohio, Nevada, Colorado, Florida, New Hampshire, and Virginia would be far more valuable.

What's really changed in the last few weeks? Obama chose a VP who says "I'm steady, and older white guys like me." And McCain chose a VP who says, 'I really will appoint Supreme Court Justices with the Christianists in mind."

Those are both valuable, but neither changes the race. When does early voting start in Ohio? How that goes is far more important.

And curious that McCain's going with a 'base' strategy, and Obama isn't. Given the respective sizes of the bases, that's backwards. I really, really, wish Obama were going the base-energizing things, too. He's smart enough to know he needn't, but a boy can dream.

---

by: Joel @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 18:41:09 PM UTC

Ohio (0.00 / 0)

Seriously - what is the news on same day, early voting in Ohio? From what I understand Ohio will allow new voters to register and vote on the same day, weeks before Election Day. I know Republicans were challenging this, but I haven't heard anything since.

But like you said - that law is far more important to the final outcome than any number of speeches.  

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra

---

by: LandStander @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:10:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Two things to look at in coming polls (0.00 / 0)

1) Who is viewed as an agent of change? McCain's viewership numbers show that Obama has not disqualified him yet. With the Maverick brand still intact (an Obama failure) McCain is attempting to steal the change theme. If McCain's change numbers go up we're going to be in trouble with independents.

2) GOP enthusiasm numbers. Is the Palin effect real or will it fade? Will it be enough to tip the current toss-up Red States to McCain?

Self-refuting Christine O'Donnell is proof monkeys are still evolving into humans

---

by: Steve in Sacto @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 18:42:51 PM UTC

There's no doubt to me at least (0.00 / 0)

that the Republican enthusiasm is real and here to stay. With the fundies, that is.

---

by: Matt H @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:26:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

But they are no more than 25-27% of the electorate. (0.00 / 0)

And look at all the new people the Dems have registered.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

---

by: Mimikatz @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:42:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Absolutely (0.00 / 0)

That's why it wasn't enough for McCain to just get a woman or just get a fundie or just get a reformer. He needed all 3, which is a tough thing to come by!

He got the woman, he got the fundie, and they're trying to fake the reformer part.

I doubt it will work, given what we now know about Palin, but that was the thinking I imagine.

---

by: Matt H @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 23:41:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

there is no weekend effect (4.00 / 1)

Rasmussen looked at all their numbers and there is no effect.

Besides, I recall that it is used to be said that Obama did worse on the weekends.  If the rumored effect is now the opposite, that's a pretty good suggestion that it has no basis in reality.

New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.

---

by: Hopeful in NJ @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:00:03 PM UTC

link (4.00 / 1)

http://www.rasmussenreports.co...


New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.

---

by: Hopeful in NJ @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:10:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I feel damn good! (0.00 / 0)

I was worried that the Palin speech might put it away for McCain, and it hasn't even come close that kind of impact, so I'm very, very happy!

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

---

by: lord_mike @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:00:10 PM UTC

Put it away for McCain... are you kidding? (0.00 / 0)

Given the dynamics of this race, the favorable political climate for Dems and the Obama ground game, there is no way in a hell one speech, however wonderful it is, could put this election away for McCain.

---

by: jcpok @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:05:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sure, it could.. (0.00 / 0)

...any country that voted for Bush twice can be easily fooled again...

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

---

by: lord_mike @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:26:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why assume that Rasmussen and Gallup are wrong? (0.00 / 0)

I understand their numbers have consistently been worse for Obama than other polling firms.  But why do you assume that the other firms are more accurate?

---

by: ThomasPaine @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:01:25 PM UTC

I think it's because (0.00 / 0)

they are outnumbered by the non-tracking national polls.

---

by: Matt H @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:28:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And more consistent with the state polls n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Matt H @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:35:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I don't (0.00 / 0)

The truth is always in between. The overall average is what matters.

The lower polls aren't more right. The higher polls aren't more right. I'm putting the truth in the middle.  

---

by: Chris Bowers @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:33:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Of course (0.00 / 0)

one set or the other could be more right but since we don't know, it's safer to go down the middle.  

---

by: Matt H @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 23:46:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Palin is a distraction (4.00 / 2)

Don't entertain comparisons between Obama and Palin.    Obama is running against McCain (who has no more executive experience that Obama has).  

The Obama campaign needs to keep focused on McCain and the economy.   Once again, "Its the economy stupid".    Challenge McCain to explain what he will do, regarding the economy, that differs from the failed Bush policy.  

Remember, the fundamental position of the Republicans is that the economy is doing fine and virtually every middle class American knows better.    

---

by: richgreer @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:06:23 PM UTC

Let me get this straight (4.00 / 1)

Gallup was Obama +1 for Thursday, McCain +2 on Friday. Read that again. Obama lead the after the Palin speech and McCain lead by a mighty 2% the night after 40 million people watched his speech. 2%! And some of you are worried? The reason a bounce is called a bounce is because things eventually come back down. Taken with the fact that Rasmussen has McCain leading on neither day I am very bullish. This is not 2004 when Bush got a huge bounce meaning Kerry had to do well in the first debate just to make it competititve again. Yes, its closer than many thought and hoped but when McCain drones on in the debates about how risky Obama is all Barack has to do is point out that it would be much riskier to continue on this same path. He then should have the enthusiasm and organization to carry him to victory of election day.

---

by: conspiracy @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:10:32 PM UTC

Wise words my friend (0.00 / 0)

---

by: distantshore @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:21:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sorry to disappoint you Senator McCain! (0.00 / 0)

---

by: conspiracy @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:23:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well (0.00 / 0)

In technical polling terms, neither Obama nor McCain enjoyed a convention "bounce." What they got were "spikes."

Spikes are sudden, short-lasting blips whereas bounces are more long-lasting.

More generally, this latest news in and of itself isn't concerning. What's concerning is that the race is (still) this close.

---

by: david mizner @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:27:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well as a matter of comparison (0.00 / 0)

The Obama "spikes" in Gallup according to Haggai were, following Michelle +8, after Hillary +9, after Bill & Biden +7, following Obama (tempered by the Palin announcement) +4. I say again why worry when after the Palin speech Obama still leads and the McCain speech only musters +2?

---

by: conspiracy @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:36:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well, to answer that.. (0.00 / 0)

My own analysis shows a 12 point swing to McCain after Palin's speech. I still have Wednesday (poll released Thursday) as a very good day for Obama, and the only reason McCain isn't leading already.

---

by: cjbreisch @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:39:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Which only goes to show the folly of trying to work it out (0.00 / 0)

McCain was always likely to get a bounce. It would have been almost unique for that not to happen. However big it is it will recede. For the moment Obama still leads. So what if McCain edges ahead for a couple days.

---

by: conspiracy @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:51:36 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think these numbers are great for Obama (0.00 / 0)

I fully expected McCain to be up by 2-4 pts right now in the tracking polls.  He is in the middle of his bounce right now and it looks like that bounce will only increase by 2-3 points over the next few days.  That will put him ahead for 3 or 4 days, but then the bounce will fade.  Then we are back to tracking which puts Obama ahead by 1-2 pts and state polling that makes it almost impossible for McCain to win

Why is there so much worry and so little confidence on this site?

I understand that we have to work hard.  I also understand that confidence connotes strength. Our attitudes are, to a certain extent, a reflection of our candidate.   If there is one quality Americans look for in their President, it's strength.  Let's work hard, be proactive and be strong for Obama.  Let's not act like a bunch of worrying ninnies which only serves to turn voters off from Obama.  

---

by: jcpok @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:13:31 PM UTC

the ceiling is low (0.00 / 0)

word.

this is where he is when all conditions are most favorable to him. he's just had several days of unrebutted nightly tv coverage. his psychopathic VP has yet to take a single question from the media (who are getting mighty pissed off at this notion that she does not have to answer any questions). and unemployment and foreclosure numbers are not done falling through the floor. nothing is going to get better for McCain. he's going to look like an old crazy cripple (no offense to Aw/DA, just making a point here) in the debates. if Palin is finally forced to take some questions her image can only go down hill. and freddie and fannie are getting a big bailout (which dems should scream about until the preferred shares are made worthless (not that im expecting that from Wall St sycophant Schumer)) which indicates that future performance for the mortgage market is bleak (if the future were brighter freddie/fannie could ride this out and a bailout would not be necessary).

I also don't buy that these numbers are accurate. I don't think the pollsters have a good grasp on how to weight this election give how crazy the identity politics are and also unprecedented youth turnout and the rising position of cell phones as primary phone. I also wonder if McCain had worse numbers in internal polls which prompted him to go with a high-risk-reward VP pick. why risk the campaign if it was just a 2 point race?

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

---

by: Will @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:16:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think the worry stems from the possibility (0.00 / 0)

that we'll wind up close to tied rather than Obama up by, say, 5.

That doesn't mean it's going to happen and even if it doesn't, that wouldn't mean Obama would lose. I just think that until fairly recently Obama held a fairly consistent lead of 3-5 points and it looked like we might be able to get it back going into the debates.

---

by: Matt H @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:32:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

How am I feeling? (4.00 / 1)

I'm feeling these polls are exactly where they were predicted to be. McCain got a decent bounce out of his convention (which will be fully reflected tomorrow and Monday), but nothing that's game changing, or even merits a mild hysteria that some are expressing.

If we go into the home stretch with a tie or a margin-of-error lead for either candidate I think this election is ours to loose, even if the party ID is shrinking (which I doubt is true but for the sake of argument I'll go with it). With a 5%-8% advantage in party ID combined with the type of registration numbers and GOTV effort that's becoming apparent, I'm not gonna lose much sleep over these numbers.

So yeah, I wasn't euphoric about Obama's bounce and I'm not depressed over McCain's bounce. So far nothing refutes the notion that this is still Obama's election to lose.

---

by: distantshore @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:19:57 PM UTC

My analysis of Gallup is simlar (0.00 / 0)

I would be moderately surprised if McCain is not at least tied tomorrow.

I haven't yet done an attempt at Rasmussen. Actually, that's not strictly true. I started it but haven't made much progress.

However, I tend to think that the edge Gallup and Rasmussen give to McCain is a bad thing for Obama.  Why?  I think they're more likely to be accurate. Zogby has trended very similar to Gallup/Rasmussen or possibly even farther right, and look at his Presidential poll history. Scary accurate.

---

by: cjbreisch @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 19:36:24 PM UTC

Zogby was correct in 1996 I believe (0.00 / 0)

The only poll to nail it. But he was way out in 2000 and 2004. His track record this year is to be the outlier at every step of the way.  

---

by: conspiracy @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:01:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why more accurate? (0.00 / 0)

Earlier, I asked Chris why he thinks Rasmussen and Gallup are LESS accurate.  He didn't reply yet.  But now I ask you why you think they are MORE accurate than others.

---

by: ThomasPaine @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:02:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's also worth noting (0.00 / 0)

It's also worth noting that Republican convention bounces tend to be smaller and shorter than Democratic ones, so by middle of next week, I would expect Obama to be maybe 1-2 pts better than he was going into the conventions. If that's not the case, then it's time to worry.  Now, we're still in bounce territory.

Also, with the conventions rammed right up against each other, analyzing the bounces becomes very very hard.

---

by: cjbreisch @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:22:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Is this how Republicans feel... (4.00 / 1)

every time Obama gives a speech? Seriously, I'm nervous too, cause we're Democrats, but I think we're all overinflating the importance of Palin at the moment. Yes, she did very, very well. But the expectations were set so unbelievably low that as long as she spoke in complete sentences, the press was going to be floored.

But at the end of the day, the same thing that was true about the Biden pick is true about Palin-people don't vote for vice-president, they vote for president. In as much as she energizes the base, those were people who were going to vote for McCain anyway, now they'll just make sure too, and there's no way the McCain campaign can catch up to Obama's field operation in the next 7 weeks.

She's given one speech. What do Republicans say about people who are only able to give speeches? They're going to hide her for the next two weeks, which will likely have an effect on their poll numbers, as the chorus gets louder to get her in an interview. And then there's the debate (and the interview she finally gives). The expectations will still be moderately low (though hiding for two weeks to study should certainly raise them), but you can't quip your way out of a policy question about the Russia-Georgian relations.

The only place i'm concerned about, at the moment, is Colorado, which has a surprising concentration of wingnuts who will mobilize for McCain now. But I'll say it again, whatever help she offers in Colorado, I think she's bad bad bad news in Florida, and wearing an Israeli flag lapel pin doesn't work on retired, New York Jews...

---

by: KimmerDC @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:03:57 PM UTC

Slipping party identification numbers (0.00 / 0)

This is the only thing that concerns me: Chris' observation that the Democratic party-identification ebb is dropping significantly.  I'm hopefully skeptical of this claim.  

---

by: ThomasPaine @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:13:55 PM UTC

Same thing happened in 2004 and 2006 (4.00 / 1)

The trend towards the end was Repubs coming home. Obviously 2006 being better than 2004 with the lead holding for the mid-terms. This year they are coming back from an even bigger deficit. If the turnout difference is less than 5% more Democratic I would be shocked.

---

by: conspiracy @ Sat Sep 06, 2008 at 20:36:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I Wish It Were Not the Case (0.00 / 0)

but the economy seems to be on our side; it is disintegrating rapidly in terms of employment, and this has to hurt McCain. The Freddie-Fannie bailout reinforces this. And Palin can only go down from here.  So, I'm not bothered.

But I do think it will be a big mistake to treat Palin with kid gloves.  Attack her record, her hypocrisy, her ignorance of big issues, her kooky ideas.

---

by: bob h @ Sun Sep 07, 2008 at 11:16:26 AM UTC