Obama's Lead Growing: Tracking Poll Average for Wednesday

by: tremayne

Wed Sep 17, 2008 at 14:28

The 4 daily tracking polls have been moving in Barack Obama's direction in recent days and today the average is: Obama 46.75, McCain 44.75, a 2-point lead for the Democrat.

Obama is nearly back to where he was Sept. 6 when the average showed him leading McCain by 3 points. Obama appears to trail in swing state polling as Chris points out below because some of those polls are afflicted by age. Other forecasters electoral projections are also afflicted by inclusion of Zogby internet polls, which might be worse than old polling.

By my accounting, the last remnants of the McCain-Palin bounce faded away last weekend. Polling conducted Sept. 15 onward should show a more positive picture for Obama at least until something happens to change the current direction of the race. There's a rumor, which I'm starting right here, that McCain will dump Palin and replace her with Jim Cramer from CNBC's Mad Money. Sounds about right.

Full numbers are inside.

This is a Boring Ad and I Like It. Am I Wrong?

by: tremayne

Wed Sep 17, 2008 at 12:46

This ad is actually airing, not just online. Two-minute ads are very expensive to run. This tells me: 1) Obama's is having a good September. This good? We'll see; 2) The campaign believes this moment, when financial nerves are frayed, is one where reassuring voters you've got a plan may actually win the election and justify the expense.

The ad is not flashy but it's anti-flashiness actually draws your eyes to the screen because how often are voters just talked to in a reasonable fashion?

Maybe it's just boring and I'm too willing an audience for it. What's your take?

The Economy is Taking Over The Campaigns

by: btchakir

Wed Sep 17, 2008 at 09:28

In comparing the two candidates’ positions, Obama has a slight edge in terms of credibility: his economic plan was not created by the lobbyists and former Republican congress folk (like Phil Gramm) who got us into this mess in the first place. To hear McCain say that he is going to set up a Commission, like the 9/11 Commission that was virtually ignored by the current administration, is a confirmstion that he will talk big but do nothing. At least Obama has posted a fairly detailed economic plan that would change the government’s overall approach significantly.

The best thing the political discussion on the economy has done is that it has removed the ongoing fluff about Sarah Palin from the Main Stream Media. That, in a way, is a blessed relief. Since she is not going to be interviewed directly by the press and will continue in highly controlled and scripted appearances, it is better to have the media looking away from her. There is nothing there and so many important things – like the economy – need to be on the active agenda.

As we get closer to the Presidential debates, having real issues to discuss will elevate the campaigns (and Reuters/Zogby has just put out the latest poll that has once again pulled Obama ahead  – it looks like folks don’t think the “fundamentals of the economy are strong.”)

Let’s watch closely where we go from here. There are 48 days left.

Under The LobsterScope

Obama Drops Compliments, Talks Confidently On Economy

by: Chris Bowers

Tue Sep 16, 2008 at 19:30

Obama didn’t preface this bit by saying how much he honors John McCain’s service to America:

This is what happens when you see seven years of incomes falling for the average worker while Wall Street is booming, and declare – as Senator McCain did earlier this year – that we’ve made great progress economically under George Bush. That is how you can reach the conclusion – as late as yesterday – that the fundamentals of the economy are strong.

Obama didn’t start qualify this graph with a paean to McCain’s time as a POW:

Make no mistake: my opponent is running for four more years of policies that will throw the economy further out of balance. His outrage at Wall Street would be more convincing if he wasn’t offering them more tax cuts. His call for fiscal responsibility would be believable if he wasn’t for more tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, and more of a trillion dollar war in Iraq paid for with deficit spending and borrowing from foreign creditors like China.

When Obama attacked McCain on leadership, thereby hitting right at the heart of McCain’s argument to be President, he didn’t preface the attack with an homage to McCain’s military record:

Just today, Senator McCain offered up the oldest Washington stunt in the book – you pass the buck to a commission to study the problem. But here’s the thing – this isn’t 9/11. We know how we got into this mess. What we need now is leadership that gets us out. I’ll provide it, John McCain won’t, and that’s the choice for the American people in this election.

None of these attacks would have been improved by telling people about McCain’s time as a POW before landing the attacks. The absence of such compliments to McCain is refreshing, and conveys a real confidence from Obama. Back when Obama was prefacing all of his attacks on Obama with a statement on how much he deeply respects John McCain’s service to America, frankly it made what he said afterward sound like he was walking on eggshells. Honestly, apart from repeating McCain’s message, and apart from irritating many of his own supporters, paying tribute to John McCain before attacking him just made the criticisms that followed sound weak and wimpy. These attacks, by contrast, sound confident, on message, and sharp.

This might actually be a general tendency among Democrats. While most national Democrats seem to act like they are walking on eggshells whenever they talk about foreign policy or social values, they have historically always seemed more confident when discussing the economy. It really seems to me that most leading Democrats are convinced they are only the majority party when it comes to economic policy, but not when it comes to social values or foreign policy. Even if they are centrists, they all just seem so much more confident–even brash–when the focus in on economic issues.

I like Democrats when they talk like this. Makes me proud. Wish I would see this side of them more often.  

Obama Continues to Hammer on Economic Issues (Video & Full text of Speech)

by: NCDemAmy

Tue Sep 16, 2008 at 14:27

Dishing out some good old fashioned populist indignation, Obama called for “an end to the broken system in Washington.”

McCain’s Economic Philosophy has Failed for 8 Years

Obama: America is Prosperous when All Americans Can Prosper

FULL TEXT OF REMARKS AS PREPARED FOR DELIVERY: CONFRONTING AN ECONOMIC CRISIS

Opening the Day: More Financial Turmoil

by: Matt Stoller

Tue Sep 16, 2008 at 10:17

• The markets are collapsing here, and in London shares are dropping to a three year low.  This looks a bit problematic, but I feel like this financial ‘meltdown’ talk is silly.  I mean yeah it’s going to screw up a lot of financial flows but who is this structure helping anyway?  Elites are freaking out but is that really because they are concerned about you and me and the billions of others around the world?  I don’t think so.

  I mean, this was predicted years ago by many many people.  I could see it and I’m just a random guy with a computer.  Greed and selfishness only works to a point, then it consumes itself.  That should be obvious; so why wouldn’t we expect the system to collapse?  The real question is what replaces it, not how to prevent it from falling apart.  That question has been answered at this point, it’s done or dying.

• Continuing on my populist kick, I saw the movie Battle in Seattle last night put on by Steve Clemons of the Washington Note and Lori Wallach of Public Citizen.  Great film, really well done.

• Al Giordano and Bill Conroy report that Sarah Palin had a tanning bed installed in the Governor’s mansion.  It was a used tanning bed.  Nice job of sleuthing.

• In the Kos tracking poll, Obama is up 4.  This statement from Matthew Down makes sense to me: “The only things that are going to change the equation of the election are the four debates,” Mr. Dowd said, referring to the three presidential debates and one vice presidential debate. “That’s it.”

  That and the macro environment, of course.  Like a financial meltdown.

• This is a good piece from Brad Delong on how McCain will tax your health benefits.  

• Charlie Rangel continues to slide around ethical boundaries.  Rangel should really retire, he’s 78, he’s obviously not able to distinguish between the public interest and his personal life anymore.  I like Rangel but his time is past.

• Better Democrat Alan Grayson is leading his opponent Rick Keller by 4 points.

• Obama is not fundraising for other Democrats and making coordination somewhat tough.  He does have a Presidential contest to win, of course.

• “It is important Texans follow the rules. Stock up on food, water and ammo for an event like this.” – Texas Rep. John Culberson (R), offering his Houston-area constituents advice for preparing for Hurricane Ike during a weekend MSNBC appearance.

• The public opposes giving the President more power by large margins.

• Sam Graves is amusingly attacking Kay Barnes with the same crap he did earlier this year.

  Less than two months before voters weigh in on the toughest challenge of his political career, Rep. Sam Graves (R-Mo.) is escalating his cultural war with former Kansas City Mayor Kay Barnes (D), accusing her of pushing “a homosexual agenda” and shopping a mid-1970s magazine article in which Barnes, a former sexuality consultant, encouraged masturbation.

  Remember this?

  Lovely.

What are you reading?

John McCain Has a Bridge To Sell You

by: Daniel De Groot

Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 21:01

Great quip from Obama linking McCain to the hucksters who used to try to sell tourists the Brooklin Bridge (possibly apocryphal).  Thanks to Mark Matson in Quick Hits and NcDemAmy for the youtube.

Linking McCain’s lies to a well known cultural motif like bridge selling is a good way to make the subject of McCain’s lies become a self-perpetuating narrative.  

Update:  TPM weighs in with another witty linkage (though perhaps less universal):  “A Bridge Too Far”

Disguising Disagreements in Strategy-Talk

by: Matt Stoller

Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 16:52

I’ve maintained for quite some time that Obama is not a progressive and isn’t interested in pushing progressive policy, which is shocking to most Democrats.  Perhaps my sentiment was excessively provocative, but behind that statement is a belief that there are strong ideological disagreements between partisan activists and Democratic leaders about where the country needs to go.  There are no forums for respected ideological debate within the Democratic Party, and there are strong tendencies to equate ‘grassroots’ with progressive to avoid discussing differences openly and frankly.

And so we’re in a situation where activists can’t even hear what Democratic leaders say and Democratic leaders can’t believe that activists might have useful ideas to contribute.  There are flashpoints like FISA, Roberts, the Military Commissions Act, Lieberman, etc.  I guess what I’m saying is that we disagree with Democratic leaders about big important stuff and that comes out in the way we conceive of politics and strategy, and it’s easier to bitterly argue about the magical way to beat John McCain than acknowledge that we disagree with Obama and the whole Democratic political class about lots of important stuff and acknowledge that our role in this political campaign is relatively minor and best suited to following the Obama campaign’s lead on things like voter registration while providing a strong sense of outside criticism.

I don’t for instance think there’s a war on terror, for starters, something Obama said he believes in on Bill O’Reilly.  We can acknowledge that Obama thinks about the world in a really fucked up way or we can bury our disagreements in cliches like ‘hold him accountable when he gets elected’ or ‘he needs to attack McCain by doing xyzd’.

He doesn’t, he’s running his campaign on the issues, which is the way he conceives of political power.  To people like Obama and most Democratic leaders, name calling and character attacks against Republicans are losing strategies because they are immoral strategies.

I don’t agree with them.  You probably don’t agree with them.  That doesn’t make him wrong, it makes him part of a different ideological group.  It’s time to start listening and spelling out these disagreements.

Friend votes for character, not policies. How do I convince him?

by: rickd24

Mon Sep 15, 2008 at 12:24

I do not vote for policies.  No one implements their campaign promises, neither those you fear, nor those you cannot wait for to arrive.

I vote for character; I see little of it w/ BO and a lot of it w/ JM.

How do I answer something like that?  He sees little character in Obama?  I think it’s because of Rev Wright, he’s brought that issue up several times.

I’d rather not do it the Rove way, by mentioning McCain’s adultery, flip-flops, ambition, lobbyists, etc.  And I don’t want to screw up our friendship, it is only 1 vote.  And the rest of his family will be voting for Obama to more than offset his vote.  But I can’t stand to think that my friend is voting against his own best interests like so many Americans continue to do because of personality, not issues.  He’s very smart, very well informed (although he does get too much information from the right wing noise machine).  I feel like if I can’t convince him, there isn’t much hope of convincing many other intelligent voters in this country either.

Any suggestions?  Or should we just agree to disagree and move on?  

So Many Topics, So Little Time

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sun Sep 14, 2008 at 17:27

Well, it stops here!  Err… would you believe it slows down briefly to gawk at a roadside attraction?  Well, never mind.  Here’s an emergency catch-up potpouri, designed, if nothing more, to relieve some feelings of guilt I’m dealing with none too successfully.  First up, John Dean’s observations on Sarah Palin’s lack of qualifications from a Constitutional perspective.  Oh, she’s not forbidden to be President, Dean says, but…

Obama/Biden Are On Message and Are Going Negative

by: Matt Stoller

Sun Sep 14, 2008 at 14:53

What’s odd about these conversations is that they don’t acknowledge that Obama is doing just that.  I blogged earlier about the attack ads Obama ran against McCain, all on economic themes.  Why ignore them?  Why assume he’s not making criticisms when he is?

How anti-Palin feminists throw election to McCain

by: fairleft

Sun Sep 14, 2008 at 02:33

Well, let’s have Katha Pollitt of The Nation magazine (which fronts its page today with ‘Sarah and the polar bears‘ (gee, the environmentalists can’t help making it ‘all about Sarah’ either!) help you there. This ‘important feminist’ (her heretofore mucho Obamaism taking a backseat for however long) just can’t help herself, in her latest column — Lipstick on a Wingnut (a way to talk about or to right-wing Christians that ain’t) — she has to keep up the attacks on Palin, and she’s willing to make them anti-feminist, whatever will make sure we all know that the Palins of this world will never usurp the culturally ‘liberal’ feminist leadership. Here’s the anti-feminist rant parts of just the first paragraph:

the supremely under-qualified Sarah Palin

She talks incessantly about being a mother of five

[She] uses her newborn, Trig, who has Down syndrome, as a campaign prop.

If you wonder how she’ll handle all those kids and the Veep job too, you’re a super-sexist.

Palin . . . went back to work when Trig was three days old

her five-months-pregnant 17-year-old, Bristol

Okay, and in sum: even if it were strategically not dumb-assed to help keep the focus ‘Palin 24/7’, that’s a non-rational, insinuating, anti-feminist, and non-issues-focused first paragraph.

But back to my main amazement: Will the (ostensibly all establishment Democrat) ‘leaders’ of the feminist ‘community’ ever get off Sarah Palin ass? Well, nope, I don’t think so, not even if it fatally hurts Obama’s chances of winning in November. Why? Well, besides pressing their most cherished ‘culturally correct’ buttons, Palin is a challenge to feminist officialdom’s authority:

Obama Strategy: Wait for McCain-Palin to Implode?

by: tremayne

Sat Sep 13, 2008 at 13:32

Yesterday was supposed to be “the first day of the rest of the campaign” according to the Obama team and the point at which they started to fire back, according to reports I read. So I was a bit disappointed when the day ended and the only “hitting back” were two rather uninspired ads. One ad is just Obama talking into the camera about as uncharismatically as Obama is capable of and saying the other side is talking about change but he means it. Nothing else in the ad, not even a symbolic item or two in the background. The other ad at least mocks McCain as being out of touch and unable to use a computer but I'm not sure how many votes this moves. In fact some lower information voters may not use a computer either and probably don't like to think of themselves as “out of touch.”

So either the campaign is just organically careful and unwilling to take chances at this point or they have a stealthy double-reverse psychology type of plan. While I fear the former, I'm hoping it's the latter and it goes something like this (follow along).

McCain's Lies–A Great Viral Video From Brave New Films

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sat Sep 13, 2008 at 10:44

View it. Pass it on.

Run Center, Run Right

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sat Sep 13, 2008 at 09:00

At the time, I felt there were three things worth noting:

(1) Some shifts away from majority positions to rightwing minority positions were presented as shifts “to the center”.  Most notably, even most Republican voters now see “free trade” as more bad than good.

(2) We were told that this was a “political necessity.”

(3) We were told that this “always happens.”

(1) and (2) were particularly dubious when Obama backed away from his criticism of NAFTA, given how crucial Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan are to winning the White House, and how hated NAFTA is among the very blue collar voters that Obama needs in order to beat McCain there.  But #3, at least, seemed plausible to those who don’t recall the elections of 1968 and 1980.  Even those who do recall those elections are likely to insist that they, too, followed the standard pattern of running away from the center in the primaries, and towards it in the general election.  And now, at least, I’m not inclined to argue with them, because now we clearly have a counter-example on our hands: John McCain ran center in the primaries, and now is running right.
 

Craig Ferguson: "If you don't vote, you're a moron"

by: Living Liberally

Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 16:14

For nearly two weeks now, I’ve been suffering from a newly-minted malady called Palin-paralysis–a nasty tv-transmitted virus I caught after watching Sarah Palin’s divisive and derisive acceptance speech. You know, that salute to “small town values” that lionized plucky, scrappy hockey moms and demonized yucky, crappy community organizers.

The primary symptoms are nausea, a perpetually clenched jaw, and a half-baked Alaska-induced brain freeze; can’t get out of bed, can’t blog, can’t even blog in bed. The surreal spectacle of the Palin pick, the depth of cynicism and carelessness that it demonstrated, and the embrace of this ludicrous choice for veep by so many folks is truly appalling. As Matt Damon told the AP:

McCain: Self-Inflicted Damage on The View?

by: tremayne

Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 14:46

Some recent polling suggests Barack Obama is weak (still) with older white women. I'm not sure, but I would guess that demographic is a pretty big part of the audience for “The View” which is where John McCain was this morning.

Watch these video clips and tell me what you think. Here's a summary of how this appearance may really hurt him:

1. Joy Behar said to his face that his recent ads about Obama were lies

2. Barbara Walters pointed out that he himself uses “lipstick on a pig” and that Obama's reference was not about Palin.

3. McCain said Roe vs. Wade was a bad decision to booing from the audience.

4. Whoopi Goldberg said that appointing strict constitutionalists, the GOP mantra, would return her to slavery.

5. Barbara Walters kept pressing McCain on just what Sarah Palin was supposed to be coming to Washington to reform and suggested it was he who needed reforming.

6. They forced McCain to talk about separation of church and state and how a Palin administration, if it came to that, might not see a need for much separation.

UPDATE 7. They told him that Palin did accept earmarks and he responded with the whopper “not as Governor she didn't.”

There was some feel-good stuff about kids and such after Cindy McCain came out and I'm sure I'm viewing this through blue-tinted glasses, but I've got to think this was a voting net loser for McCain. Palin may be more of a draw than McCain for their ticket but it was clear from McCain's own mouth he won't have her on that show to face their firing squad (he said it's about the top of the ticket).

Your take?

My Frustrating Ignorance On The Campaign

by: Chris Bowers

Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 13:31

Why is McCain performing well, relative to where the general election was in June? In the extended entry, I explore some possibilities, and offer a path toward figuring out which is correct.

OMG! McCain doesn't know how to use a computer!

by: fairleft

Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 11:43

Doesn’t Know How to Use a Computer

and

Can’t Send an E-mail

Only after drawing attention to itself with these inane, nerdy, bogus attacks — see latest yahoo headline, ‘Obama mocks McCain as computer illiterate in ad‘ — does the Obama ad go on to rationality and attack McCain for supporting more tax breaks for the rich (and so on).

Much of the ad is fine, but it begins so stupidly, and that’s what people will remember and what the media will focus on. Back to the drawing board, Obama team. Try checking out McCain’s positions on Social Security, off-shoring jobs, and NAFTA and its babies. (No, it’s not about Sarah Palin.)

Opening the Day: Plouffe: "Today is the first day of the rest of the campaign."

by: Matt Stoller

Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 10:21

• SNL alumni and Anchorman writer Adam McKay writes ‘We’re gonna lose this thing’ and blames the press.

• Jake Tapper thinks this is the ‘fourth’ time Obama has taken off the glovers.  Mike Allen at the Politico also reports on the story, as does Adam Nagourney of the New York Times.

• Lieberman will probably join McCain’s cabinet and let the Republicans pick up another seat.

• Josh Marshall unwittingly points out why Obama can’t run well against McCain-Palin.

  A further point. It’s true that Obama and Biden both favor Georgia’s accession into NATO — a very bad policy position, as I’ve argued before. However, I do not think that their positions and McCain’s positions are equal. The best analogy I can point to is the nominal agreement on Iraq policy (embodied in the Iraq Liberation Act) between the Clinton administration and the most radical neocons in the late 1990s. Nominally, they shared a policy. In practice, however, it was one group that was completely nuts and gung-ho in favor of a reckless idea and another that was sort of dabbling in and passively favoring the same policy. Not that that is saying much in the latter’s favor. But there’s a big difference.

  Inspiration!

• Biden’s going to release 10 years of tax records, and pressure Palin to do the same.

• Here’s a great profile of the CBC caucus staff.

• The Senate gang on energy grows to 20.  Can’t we pass a DC anti-gang ordinance?

• The Washington Post has a long story out on Cindy McCain’s addiction.

• The McCain campaign is sending out fake absentee ballot cards.

• Norm Coleman screwed up, and it’ll cost him about a million dollars.

• The DCCC expanded their Red to Blue program.

What are you reading?  And man, hasn’t Iraq just come to dominate this Presidential election?  I mean I know we’re in a war but seriously all I hear about from McCain and Obama is Iraq Iraq Iraq.

Knock it off.  Let’s make this race trivial.

Opening the Day: Plouffe: "Today is the first day of the rest of the campaign."

by: Matt Stoller

Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 10:12

• SNL alumni and Anchorman writer Adam McKay writes ‘We’re gonna lose this thing’ and blames the press.

• Jake Tapper thinks this is the ‘fourth’ time Obama has taken off the glovers.  Mike Allen at the Politico also reports on the story, as does Adam Nagourney of the New York Times.

• Lieberman will probably join McCain’s cabinet and let the Republicans pick up another seat.

• Josh Marshall unwittingly points out why Obama can’t run well against McCain-Palin.

  A further point. It’s true that Obama and Biden both favor Georgia’s accession into NATO — a very bad policy position, as I’ve argued before. However, I do not think that their positions and McCain’s positions are equal. The best analogy I can point to is the nominal agreement on Iraq policy (embodied in the Iraq Liberation Act) between the Clinton administration and the most radical neocons in the late 1990s. Nominally, they shared a policy. In practice, however, it was one group that was completely nuts and gung-ho in favor of a reckless idea and another that was sort of dabbling in and passively favoring the same policy. Not that that is saying much in the latter’s favor. But there’s a big difference.

  Inspiration!

• Biden’s going to release 10 years of tax records, and pressure Palin to do the same.

• Here’s a great profile of the CBC caucus staff.

• The Senate gang on energy grows to 20.  Can’t we pass a DC anti-gang ordinance?

• The Washington Post has a long story out on Cindy McCain’s addiction.

• The McCain campaign is sending out fake absentee ballot cards.

• Norm Coleman screwed up, and it’ll cost him about a million dollars.

• The DCCC expanded their Red to Blue program.

What are you reading?  And man, hasn’t Iraq just come to dominate this Presidential election?  I mean I know we’re in a war but seriously all I hear about from McCain and Obama is Iraq Iraq Iraq.

Knock it off.  Let’s make this race trivial.

HEY OBAMA CAMPAIGN!

by: tremayne

Fri Sep 12, 2008 at 00:41

I know most people have seen this video but if you know somebody in the Obama campaign or somebody close to somebody important in the Obama campaign, please send them the link to this video and see if they can't edit something shorter and air it:

Sarah Palin said two things which can be pegs for an attack ad of this kind:

1. War with Russia could happen over the Georgia conflict

2. Soldiers going to Iraq are fighting the people who killed thousands of Americans on Sept. 11.

The Obama camp needs to launch a fresh, timely attack that will make the McCain campaign splutter. This is it.

Improved Tracking Poll Average: Now with More Orange

by: tremayne

Thu Sep 11, 2008 at 17:35

Today is the first day our 3-poll average goes to 4 with the addition of Research 2000 for DKos (which shows Obama +three two). The other three are: Rasmussen, Gallup, Diageo/Hotline.

Each of these organization uses 3-day rolling average with the numbers released the next day. Here are the latest averages and the averages of recent days:

Sept. 11: Obama 45.75, McCain 46.75

Sept. 10: Obama 45.3, McCain 46.7

Sept. 9:  Obama 45.3, McCain 47.3

Sept. 8:  Obama 45.0, McCain 47.0

So the tracking polls say, collectively, that McCain has a 1-point lead in polling done over the last 3 days. It appears that McCain's lead is doing a slow fade with the tracking poll margin going from McCain +2, +2, +1.3 and now +1.

If polling done today, Sept. 11, follows this trend we may see a literal tie in the tracking poll average tomorrow or the next day.

A Sad Descent into political Chaos?

by: villagernyc

Thu Sep 11, 2008 at 11:06

On Wednesday, September 10, 2008, New York City saw puffy clouds, cool breezes and sunshine that gently bathed the city’s tall buildings in crisp golden sunlight. The bike path along the Hudson was filled with cyclists and joggers while on the streets, tourists made their way to places like Times Square or the ferry out to the Statue of Liberty.

Outside towers near Wall Street, office workers took smoking breaks enjoying the hints of autumn while others lunched on benches tossing an occasional crumb to pigeons while traffic whizzed by on the West Side Highway. From an observation deck of an individual life in the city, the island of Manhattan was enjoying a beautiful day.

Still, there is no doubt, countless New Yorkers have been engrossed by the ongoing nonsense gripping the current contest for the land’s most important political office a horse race that has recently been punctuated by references to dogs, swine and lipstick.

But with that captivation has come an increasing sense of worry and frustration, as many New Yorkers watch and listen to a political contest that has in many minds descended into a chaotic diversion and not a debate over party ideology, values and solutions.

Here it is, the second week of September and despite a Congressional Budget Office report saying the United States deficit is projected to rise to $407 billion, along with a continued rash of failing financial institutions, the nightmare of misled war in Iraq, a mere treading of water in the land of the Taliban, Afghanistan, despite the fact that 50 million un-insured, a disappearing middle class, the headlines are filled with talk of pitbulls, swine and lipstick, as if some sort of Animal Farm like fever had stolen the meat from the potato’s of reality that politics is meant to address.

Even on this day before the anniversary of what is arguably the city’s greatest tragedy, a crime of death, destruction and horror, a memory that still blips loudly on the radar screens of so many New Yorkers and Americans everywhere, text messages were being sent and phone calls made among political junkies who call themselves Democrat as they worried aloud that the party values they support were facing increasingly tremendous obstacles come November.

For many, some who call themselves transplants, those who originally come from places far away from the so called sophistication, the bustle and hustle, those who ran away to New York to exist in tolerance and acceptance, an added sense of urgency was setting in as polls showed increasing numbers for the party they held responsible for exploiting pain and tragedy for political gain.

They wondered why, in an election year where the baggage of the past administration would logically derail or simply, perhaps even dramatically sink any remnant of hope for Republicans maintaining control of the executive branch, the Democrats were still failing in their attempts to make victory, perhaps more appropriate, change, a “sure thing” in November

Since the days of September 11, 2001, New York City has moved on. Sure, the memories are still there, the pain, the hurt and the anger, but regardless, the busy lot that New Yorkers are, dictates staying on their toes, and that includes following politics.

In one phone call, a CEO of a small marketing firm downtown said that whomever devised the coronation of Sarah Palin as a running mate for the 25 year veteran of Congress was “simply genius.”

He went on to say that they, the Republican strategists, long ago mastered how to get into the psyche of America’s heartland.

Just what is that psyche?

In a chapter tilted Persecuted, Powerless and blind from his book “What’s the matter with Kansas”, author Thomas Frank asserts that in what he calls ‘red land’ “both workers and their bosses are supposed to be united in disgust with those affected college boys at the next table, prattling on about French cheese and villas in Tuscany and the big ideas for running things that they read in books.

According to the transplant marketing exec in Manhattan, the people described in that book are his family, his family’s friends among others outside his current universe are the ones who see the antithesis of those college boys in Sarah Palin and John McCain.

“David Axelrod just got his head handed to him on a silver platter,” he yelled into his phone.

Not that the marketing exec is happy about that. Rather, he says, the Democrats, i.e. Obama and his team must rise up, perhaps take a humble pill, and somehow figure out how to “inspire” the reportedly “more than half” of the nation’s voters. He, his running mate and his surrogates must figure out a way to re-inject the hope that a better America is somehow attainable through the political process, a poisoned process that they can overcome, if they maintain their sincere message of opportunity for all.

To be fair, the marketing man on the phone was a Hillary supporter during the primary and as of just a few weeks ago, made no denials of his reluctance to grudgingly support the Obama-Biden ticket. But, with the new Alaska superstar stealing the thunder from everyone else in the campaign, he says he realized that his frustration was geared more towards the American people, and perhaps the media for not highlighting the crucial differences in the candidates and what it is they intend to do, or not do, once in power.

Plain and simple, how can Democrats spell out to the people that voting for the Republican candidate would most likely do little to change their lives from the current state it is in now?

Still, during the chat, he said some members of his own mostly politically moderate working class family had been energized by Palin simply because they can identify with her.

“They really don’t care about her stand on issues, it’s about a person that’s like them, not some fancy pants elite politician like Obama,” he said.

At that moment in the conversation, thinking back in political time to the Democratic Primaries, one can’t help but recall the moment that Senator Hillary Clinton seemed to wake up and embrace the populism espoused by the now “disgraced” John Edwards. It was at that point Clinton appeared to whip her campaign out of an entitled, arrogant state of being and began to aggressively market herself as someone who passionately embraced the populist issues of all the people in a manner that was purely political, but somehow sincere. In the waning days of her campaign, Clinton was able to work that political formula, while guzzling whiskey shots and beer all the way to several victories, but alas, to little to late.

For some reason, despite fact the Senator was indeed a Clinton, people began to believe, that this candidate would wake up every morning and fight for their interests. They saw someone who would seek to bridge the glaring economic inequity that had helped further foster the class divides of the states. Perhaps, they even began to believe that she was sincere.

It is imperative that the Obama campaign figure out its way in doing basically the same, perhaps not a carbon copy repeat of the Clinton awakening but certainly not the sad tit for tat insult show that the campaign has engaged in along with the Republicans. Otherwise, millions of Americans will continue on their quest to choose a candidate they can relate to.

Meanwhile, in New York City, the anniversary of that day that shook modern America to its very foundation, tested its resolve and for a brief shining moment, unified a nation so tightly, will come and go just like every other day.

Dukakis, Clinton, Kerry and Obama

by: tremayne

Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 20:48

Earlier today Matt proposed that when it comes to message control the Obama campaign has some things in common with the Dukakis campaign of 20 years ago. Many readers found the comparison bothersome. Some were a little peaved. Others were even irked.

Since the comparison was entirely about strategy and not how they were separated at birth or something I'm not sure what all the fuss is about and I don't buy, and never have, that pointing out possible strategic errors when the most important 8 weeks of the campaign have yet to play out is some sort of political treason.

But I digress because that's not the point of this post. While many of us agree that “more offense, less defense” is a good idea there are times when responding is necessary and useful. But it's how you respond that can make all the difference. In terms of the evolution of campaign messaging it looks like this:

1988, Dukakis: Stay above it all, launch earnest, belated responses

1992, Clinton: Respond fast and, at times, aggressively

2004, Kerry: Wait and see if media goes with a story, respond if necessary

2008, Obama: Respond, laugh it off, mock opponents

I know I have skipped Gore but that's only because I don't recall what the Gore campaign did when, for example, he was accused of being a serial liar. Someone add that in comments. 

I want to expand on Clinton and Kerry in the extended entry but here is a teaser on how I think you respond to the more outrageous attacks:

A response can sometimes be an effective attack as well. Follow along.

The Chicago Way

by: soulsken

Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 18:45

Dukakis/Obama Mashup

by: Matt Stoller

Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 17:03

The usual caveats apply, lots of time to win this thing, etc, but this mashup is worth watching.

Update:  Look, get mad at Obama, he’s the one running a campaign that is entirely bent on weak reaction.  Here’s Joe Biden.

John McCain is my friend,” said the loquacious Blue Hen. “I admire John McCain. I know of no man or woman I have ever met that has more personal courage than John McCain. We have been friends for over 33 years. We have traveled together. When John was Navy liaison he staffed me for three or four years everywhere I traveled in the world.”

Biden’s the one campaigning for McCain, not me.  Incidentally, I do enjoy the character attack that I want McCain to win because then I will be able to look at more pictures of my crush, Sarah Palin.  That’s a new one.

I guess I should be clear that the reason I’m putting this up is because I want to point out that Obama is running the playbook of the Dukakis campaign.  The incredible anger in the comments basically confirms that the criticism is on point.

Update:  Patrick Ruffini at the Next Right makes some really good points about the contours of an attack and response driven campaign.  I don’t agree with Ruffini most of the time, but he seems on point here.

No Reason to Panic, but Here's Why People are Worried

by: Mike Lux

Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 14:29

How a Real Progressive Presidential Candidate Would Have Stepped on McCain's Message

by: Matt Stoller

Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 13:13

The only control you have in politics is over your own actions.  There are no certainties, moving to the right or the left or the middle or responding in a certain way won’t necessarily work in terms of winning an election.  I’ve maintained for a year or so that Obama isn’t progressive and we shouldn’t pretend otherwise.  When he says that he respects John McCain and his VP pick says John McCain is the bravest man he’s ever known and his advisor Tom Daschle says McCain would be a pretty good President, this is what his values are.

Gallup: Palin Initially Picked Up South, Gained Nothing In West

by: Paul Rosenberg

Wed Sep 10, 2008 at 12:42

And over the two-week period, from Aug 18-24 to Sept 1-7, McCain actually lost ground in the two most contested regions: down 2% in the West and down a whopping 7% in the Midwest:

Of course, this doesn’t tell us what’s happening this week on a regional basis.  But it does tell us that the media’s narrative (and their own internal perception) of a national shift toward the GOP over this time period was without foundation, and–if Gallup is right–actually false.  And this perceived shift has clearly helped the GOP, as their heightened level of lying is not seen for what it is–or at least began as: a sign of desperation.

UPDATED: Raw Numbers On Flip