Obama versus McCain (versus the rest)

[stevew]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

My 2c (with hindsight) is that this race was always closer than people thought. It was just that the GOP was such a damaged brand that people who were planning to vote for McCain told pollsters that they were undecided. Palin made it OK to admit that you were voting for the GOP--which you were really planning to do all along.

yep

There's way too much at stake(either side can make this argument) to just altogether sit this election out. The Fundie block wasn't going to abandon McCain, I just think they wanted him to at least see where they were coming from. He throws them a pro-life bone, and suddenly everyone's on board.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Arles

I agree with both you guys. This thing is going to go down to the wire and the main issues are
A. If people feel that McCain has a good enough handle on the economy/energy/health care. If they do, many may vote for him.
B. If people feel comfortable enough with Obama as the commander in chief to handle foreign policy and that he won't kill their pocketbooks with taxes.

Whomever can answer their question above the best in the final 8 weeks will probably win. All this other stuff is just food for political junkies.

I agree up to the point where you mention issues. The swing voters that will decide this election don't know enough about issues. It will be all about likability.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I suspect someone may have mentioned this but the thread is a little hard to search for every post so ... which one of the websites out there has a good chart to show polls vs actual results by state? What I'm looking for is something like "Gore eventually carried Michigan by 5 points but was up by X points in the polls on date Y". I have a general inclination of how they match up in my head but no idea about specific states (or whether my broad brush expectations even hold up).

RealClearPolitics has at least swing state polls for the whole 2004 election cycle. Finding them can be tricky, though. I think "battleground 2004" will get them.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Somewhat unlikely source for praise in this thread but I'll definitely take it
Thanks.

eh, youre still an idiot

[JPhillips]

If Obama never gets around to flailing McCain over his plan to tax health benefits he deserves to lose.

[Vegas Vic]

There is no way to actually prove this, but I'll bet if Obama had chosen Clinton as his running mate, McCain would have chosen some yawner like Romney or Pawlenty. Obama would be up by double digits right now, and the election would essentially be over with.

Joe Biden might not turn out to be the genius VP pick that everyone was initially raving about. Heck, Palin got almost as many votes running for mayor as Biden got in the presidential primaries.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

There is no way to actually prove this, but I'll bet if Obama had chosen Clinton as his running mate, McCain would have chosen some yawner like Romney or Pawlenty. Obama would be up by double digits right now, and the election would essentially be over with.

Joe Biden might not turn out to be the genius VP pick that everyone was initially raving about. Heck, Palin got almost as many votes running for mayor as Biden got in the presidential primaries.

+1

Clinton would have been a game-changing pick, esp. since the Dems had first pick. If McCain had gone with Romney or Pawlenty, no one would care, on either side.

[SFL Cat]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I can play this game too.

John McCain's chief foreign policy advisor is Randy Scheunemann

Randy Scheunemann had close ties and was a major promoter of Ahmed Chalabi

Ahmed Chalabi was/is an Iranian spy

John McCain = Iranian Spy

Close but no cigar....no links!

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

There is no way to actually prove this, but I'll bet if Obama had chosen Clinton as his running mate, McCain would have chosen some yawner like Romney or Pawlenty. Obama would be up by double digits right now, and the election would essentially be over with.

Joe Biden might not turn out to be the genius VP pick that everyone was initially raving about. Heck, Palin got almost as many votes running for mayor as Biden got in the presidential primaries.

Clinton would have been a much better political pick, but IMO a much worse governing pick. Can you imagine the chaos in the White House with the Clintons as second bananas? McCain made a great political pick, but someone who doesn't even have opinions on most of the issues facing the country.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

Close but no cigar....no links!

It's cute when you play with the big boy toys.

[Big Fo]

Did Hillary Clinton want to be Vice President?

[Buccaneer]

I wish there was an easy way selectively read posts in a thread, besides skimming. There are only 5 people, to me, that are worth reading here (from various points along the political spectrum) but I have to sort through the garbage to find them.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Can you imagine the chaos in the White House with the Clintons as second bananas?

Wouldn't have been second bananas for long I'd wager.
(since the VP assumes the top slot upon the death of a sitting President)

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

Joe Biden might not turn out to be the genius VP pick that everyone was initially raving about. Heck, Palin got almost as many votes running for mayor as Biden got in the presidential primaries.

I wonder if molson still thinks this was obviously a joke?

Biden 2008: 76,165 (all after he had dropped out)
Palin 1996: 616
Palin 1999: 909

[molson]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I wonder if molson still thinks this was obviously a joke?

Biden 1988: 76,165 (all after he had dropped out)
Palin 1996: 616
Palin 1999: 909

Yes, it's obviously a joke.

But if you want to be super-anal technical, weren't Biden's votes for the Democratic nomination?

But it's obviously a joke. The point is that Democrats didn't think Biden was worth shit when he tried to run for president.

I can't believe that someone would make that comment, and then people actually run to find the numbers. For the love of god.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by molson

Yes, it's obviously a joke.

But if you want to be super-anal technical, weren't Biden's votes for the Democratic nomination?

But it's obviously a joke. The point is that Democrats didn't think Biden was worth shit when he tried to run for president.

It's so obviously a joke that some conservatives still seem to believe it.

[Jas_lov]

State Polls by Rasmussen taken on September 7th:

Obama +2 in PA
McCain +7 in OH
Tied in FL
McCain +2 in VA
Obama +3 in CO

Rasmussen Reports™: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by molson

Yes, it's obviously a joke.

Obviously? Heck, I just figured it was a miscue & he meant governor instead of mayor. (a quick check shows Palin receiving 114,697 votes for governor in 2006).

[molson]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

It's so obviously a joke that some conservatives still seem to believe it.

They're stupid too

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Obviously? Heck, I just figured it was a miscue & he meant governor instead of mayor. (a quick check shows Palin receiving 114,697 votes for governor in 2006).

Yeah, I have to agree that the person that originated this talking point flubbed and inserted Mayor for Governor.

[molson]

Whether it's a joke or a miscue, there's absolutely zero relevant connection or meaning that can be made from comparing votes to one state's election for governor/mayor and another state's presidential primary.

It's a silly comment that makes a point.

Like when someone calls Bush a chimp - I don't run to find proof that he's actually a human being.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by molson

Whether it's a joke or a miscue, there's absolutely zero relevant connection or meaning that can be made from comparing votes to one state's election for governor/mayor and another state's presidential primary.

It's a silly comment that makes a point.

Like when someone calls Bush a chimp - I don't run to find proof that he's actually a human being.

Man, are you really bad at analogies.

[Vegas Vic]

My statement was in error.

Palin got almost as many votes for mayor as Joe Biden got before dropping out of the 2008 Democratic presidential primary. Joe Biden got 2,328 votes in Iowa and then dropped out.

[SFL Cat]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

It's cute when you play with the big boy toys.

Y'know, I think you secretly have the hots for me.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

My statement was in error.

Palin got almost as many votes for mayor as Joe Biden got before dropping out of the 2008 Democratic presidential primary. Joe Biden got 2,328 votes in Iowa and then dropped out.

I'd question your definition of close, but I don't think it's a worthwhile point no matter what.

[molson]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Man, are you really bad at analogies.

I definitely am.

But it's very difficult to express how silly I think it is that people are trading numbers back and forth over something so silly. It's just a lame attempt in people's desperate attempts to feel right about something. I don't know if the writer meant "governor", but that would also be lame humor - OF COURSE the winner of an important statewide election is going to get more votes than the loser in a party state primary. What's the point?

But if it makes you feel better, Biden actually received 0 votes for president.

[Vegas Vic]

Admittedly, it was a weak attempt at humor on my part. Let's not rip out our hair plugs over the situation.

[SFL Cat]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

There is no way to actually prove this, but I'll bet if Obama had chosen Clinton as his running mate, McCain would have chosen some yawner like Romney or Pawlenty. Obama would be up by double digits right now, and the election would essentially be over with.

Joe Biden might not turn out to be the genius VP pick that everyone was initially raving about. Heck, Palin got almost as many votes running for mayor as Biden got in the presidential primaries.

I don't think there can be much doubt about this. Especially when all the media talking heads were lamenting this after Palin's speech. If he had picked Clinton, all the Dems would be swooning over their party unification love-fest. After winning the election, the only thing Obama would have to do is make sure he took Hillary with him on all trips he took by plane. Too bad for the party the two apparently can't stand to be in the same room together for more than five minutes.

I'm guessing Obama's handlers felt he had to pick someone like Biden to help with the male white vote. Plus they made a big deal about Biden's experience to counter the charges that Obama had none. I think they are kicking themselves right about now.

[Vegas Vic]

I just saw this on CNN.com from Ed Rollins, and it sums it up pretty well:

Ten days ago, Sen. Joe Biden was the most brilliant vice presidential pick imaginable. He was going to add the experience and foreign policy credential that Sen. Barack Obama's thin resume was missing.

The so-called expert commentators were arguing that blue-collar Joe was going to guarantee Pennsylvania (because he was born in Scranton) and other states and get Catholic voters because he is a pro-choice Catholic.

I guess they forgot that Joe didn't do so well with Iowa Catholics (23 percent of the population) when he campaigned there for more than a year in the Democratic caucus race. But then getting less than 1 percent of the vote and coming in fifth place showed he didn't do real well with any voter group in Iowa. Nor did he do well anywhere else, other than Delaware.

[SFL Cat]

Interesting development at MSNBC

MSNBC Drops Olbermann, Matthews as News Anchors

[panerd]

Don't have time to find quotes but I find it funny that today the race would have been "over" in the minds of the Republican talking heads in this thread had Obama picked Hilary. I am sure SFL Cat, MizzouBball, JonMiddleGA, etc. were saying that when Obama was getting ready to pick is running mate.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Barrack Hussein Obama says "my Muslim faith" when discussing religion. I'm sure it's nothing, we all accidentally say that every once in a while.

Yay. Another quality Dutch post, full of insight and non-trolly at all

SI

[SFL Cat]

Actually, I've never thought Obama would pick Hillary. As I said, its obvious they don't like each other, and I'm not sure the campaign could accomodate two egos that massive. However, I've never thought Biden was the slam dunk everyone was saying it was.

You can't deny that if Obama and Hillary had been able to bury the axe, the Palin selection by McCain (and I think there is a good chance he doesn't even select her) wouldn't have generated the kind of buzz it did.

[Vegas Vic]

I just took a look at this “fivethirtyeight.com” that some posters here are fond of citing. I hadn’t looked at it before, and I assumed that it was some scientific, non-partisan polling site. I found out that it’s essentially a left-wing blog, with a big ad for MoveOn.org at the top of the home page, and another ad for “The Progressive Book Club” on the left sidebar. Virtually all of the topics are built around spinning the polling news of the day into some advantage for Obama, regardless of whether it is good or bad news.

If you guys want an proven winner with objective analysis of the popular vote and electoral college, RealClearPolitics.com blew away every other site for accuracy in the 2004 election. They nailed the popular vote down to less than 1%, and they only missed one state in their electoral college projection (barely missing Wisconsin, where they had Bush winning by 0.9%, and Kerry actually won by 0.4%). The other sites, like electoral-vote.com were all over the dial. Zogby’s final projection had Kerry winning over 300 electoral votes.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by panerd

Don't have time to find quotes but I find it funny that today the race would have been "over" in the minds of the Republican talking heads in this thread had Obama picked Hilary. I am sure SFL Cat, MizzouBball, JonMiddleGA, etc. were saying that when Obama was getting ready to pick is running mate.

Actually, if you look around you might just find a post from me that says that. Or you might not. Given the length of this thread I don't know if I actually said it here since I didn't believe it was much of a realistic possibility but I certainly told my wife that was a real danger several times.

If Obama picks Hillary then Palin is likely off the board, having been neutralized for the skirt vote at least (just because she may not hit that target successfully in hindsight doesn't mean that isn't what McCain was hoping for at the time).

That would have left McCain to either go with someone who doesn't energize his campaign the way this choice apparently has and didn't add any more than Hillary added to Obama or to go off the board & pick someone like Lieberman who would have maybe picked up some tweeners but would have further damaged him with the party base.

Then again, I wasn't sweating it too much if Obama did or didn't since if he picks Hillary his life expectancy is about 10 days after taking office, meaning she's President and we've already established that I really didn't care whether McCain or Clinton took office since even Congress knows we can't pay for most of her wacky schemes and McCain is just another RINO.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Looks like the first domino has fallen in the media bias backlash. Olbermann and Matthews have been booted from the host seat, though they will still stay on as analysts.

MSNBC Takes Incendiary Hosts From Anchor Seat - NYTimes.com

Incidents like this just hammer away at the myth of the "liberal media". In the end, everything is still run by corporations which are, on the whole, conservative.

So, you can have an admittedly right leaning outlet and it's ok because they admit it. However, the other sides that aspire to remain neutral- they get hammered for being leftist despite being kept in check by their corporate paycheck writers.

SI

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Incidents like this just hammer away at the myth of the "liberal media". In the end, everything is still run by corporations which are, on the whole, conservative.

So, you can have an admittedly right leaning outlet and it's ok because they admit it. However, the other sides that aspire to remain neutral- they get hammered for being leftist despite being kept in check by their corporate paycheck writers.

SI

If FoxNews had Sean Hannity as an anchor, you would have a valid comparison. He is there for entertainment purposes on a talk show. I do agree that Fox should get an adequate foil for Hannity. Alan Colmes is a lightweight marshmallow. They need to get somebody like Bob Beckel or James Carville opposite Hannity.

I would hardly consider the two main FoxNews anchors, Shepard Smith and Britt Hume to be right-wing anchors. MSNBC’s anchors Matthews and Olbermann weren’t even making an effort to conceal the fact that they are in the tank for Obama.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

MSNBC’s anchors Matthews and Olbermann weren’t even making an effort to conceal the fact that they are in the tank for Obama.

And Olberman was taking shots at his own people on air (which I suspect had as much to do with their removal as anything else). Granted, I also suspect that it might not have been entirely accidental that some of that ended up on the air in order to force the issue.

[EagleFan]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Incidents like this just hammer away at the myth of the "liberal media". In the end, everything is still run by corporations which are, on the whole, conservative.

So, you can have an admittedly right leaning outlet and it's ok because they admit it. However, the other sides that aspire to remain neutral- they get hammered for being leftist despite being kept in check by their corporate paycheck writers.

SI

I suspect that you never looked up the word neutral?

[Jas_lov]

Olbermann was beyond ridiculous. He wasn't even trying to remain neutral, especially with his snide little comments during the RNC. Matthews was better but still gets a tingly feeling in his groin whenever Obama speaks. Tim Russert is probably rolling in his grave. MSNBC is trying to be the liberal alternative to Fox News with the Olbermann-Maddow tag team in primetime.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

I just took a look at this “fivethirtyeight.com” that some posters here are fond of citing. I hadn’t looked at it before, and I assumed that it was some scientific, non-partisan polling site. I found out that it’s essentially a left-wing blog, with a big ad for MoveOn.org at the top of the home page, and another ad for “The Progressive Book Club” on the left sidebar. Virtually all of the topics are built around spinning the polling news of the day into some advantage for Obama, regardless of whether it is good or bad news.

If you guys want an proven winner with objective analysis of the popular vote and electoral college, RealClearPolitics.com blew away every other site for accuracy in the 2004 election. They nailed the popular vote down to less than 1%, and they only missed one state in their electoral college projection (barely missing Wisconsin, where they had Bush winning by 0.9%, and Kerry actually won by 0.4%). The other sites, like electoral-vote.com were all over the dial. Zogby’s final projection had Kerry winning over 300 electoral votes.

538 is entirely different from RCP. RCP is a poll aggregater and averager. They do a very good job, but there numbers reflect the race as it stands. RCP's numbers at any time before the last couple of weeks aren't necessarily predictive at all.

538 tries to predict what the final numbers will be based on where things stand and historical trends. They may or may not be accurate, but they aren't trying to be RCP. 538 is fascinating for me because it's run by Baseball Prospectus guys and there's a lot of discussion on how to use the statistics we have to predict future performance. They're new, but their Democratic primary performance was very good.

Whatever spin they may or may not give the days polls doesn't matter for the algorithms. The calculations only change after community discussions. Right now the numbers are way off, but that's due largely to a mechanism that penalizes short term gains compared to long term trends. If McCain's number stay up the numbers will be much more favorable to him by the end of the week.

You're way off in thinking this is merely partisan spin. I've learned a lot of good information about polling there. Things like the Shy Tory Factor, the built in party benefits of different polling outfits, difficulties with likely voter models, etc. If you're a numbers guy, it's a great place to learn more about polling.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

Interesting development at MSNBC

MSNBC Drops Olbermann, Matthews as News Anchors

This was more about ratings (MSNBC was dead last for the conventions) than ideology. And while Hume is right-wing, he's more fair minded when he's an anchor and less so when a commentator (plays both roles on Fox). Their main anchors are Sheppard Smith and Chris Wallace and both of them are miles ahead of Olbermann and Matthews on coverage. Ironically enough, Brian Williams is also very good for NBC.

In the end, I'm not sure it matters. People flock to Fox News because it's the only channel where a conservative won't get brow beaten for 50 minutes on most shows. You'd think one of the other network/cable networks would pick up on this and maybe try to take some of that pie. The fact that they don't seems to indicate it's more than just corporate capitalism at work.

[BrianD]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

(barely missing Wisconsin, where they had Bush winning by 0.9%, and Kerry actually won by 0.4%).

Take away the allegedly rampant voter fraud in Milwaukee and they might have been right.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Arles

This was more about ratings (MSNBC was dead last for the conventions) than ideology. And while Hume is right-wing, he's more fair minded when he's an anchor and less so when a commentator (plays both roles on Fox). Their main anchors are Sheppard Smith and Chris Wallace and both of them are miles ahead of Olbermann and Matthews on coverage. Ironically enough, Brian Williams is also very good for NBC.

In the end, I'm not sure it matters. People flock to Fox News because it's the only channel where a conservative won't get brow beaten for 50 minutes on most shows. You'd think one of the other network/cable networks would pick up on this and maybe try to take some of that pie. The fact that they don't seems to indicate it's more than just corporate capitalism at work.

MSNBC tried to be Fox light and they couldn't get ratings suggesting that the Fox audience isn't going to go elsewhere. Glenn Beck also gets really crappy ratings. Conservatives are happy with Fox and aren't looking for another alternative.

[SirFozzie]

"I think God's will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas pipeline built. So pray for that ... I can do my job there in developing my natural resources. But all of that doesn't do any good if the people of Alaska's heart is not good with God."

....... DaddyTorgo just sent me that quote. Yeah, I know, I'm not the target audience but.. to say that a $30 billion gas pipeline may not work right if Alaskan's heart have doubts with God? What. The. Fuck?

[DaddyTorgo]

foz - the israel quote was better

[DaddyTorgo]

oh and the best part about the quote foz just posted. it was in a cnn.com story refuting a statement by her campaign spokesman that she doesn't mix her religion with her politics.

heh

[SirFozzie]

Pastor: GOP may be downplaying Palin's religious beliefs - CNN.com

[DaddyTorgo]

thanks fozzaloo - that's your new silly nickname btw

[SirFozzie]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

thanks fozzaloo - that's your new silly nickname btw

...........

You know.. I'm stuck on the phone at work.. so I can't follow up with the obvious next line.

So.. ahem.. could someone KEEL DADDYTORGO NOW for me? Thanks. I'll owe ya one.