Ah, so things have calmed down a bit after a blizzard-like release of national polls. Low and behold, McCain does hold a modest and probable lead after a flurry of surveys over the weekend.
That's nice and all, but what do we watch for from here:
1) How much of that is convention bounce and how much is a post-Palin bump?
We won't know for sure for a while, but it seems probable that it's more the latter than the former. If movement among independents and among women has any durability then things get ugly for Obama. Fast.
2) Polls that utilize a likely voter screen.
Now that we're past the Labor Day turn at which more Americans traditionally tune in to the election, polls of "likely voters" rather than the less useful universe of "registered voters" are preferred. The screens pollsters use to determine that difference are the subject of great debate among political geeks, but "likely voters" is still the more accurate option.
Indeed, all fourteen polls comprising the final RealClearPolitics average of 2004 surveyed "likely voters." The only potential caveat on this is Gallup's daily tracking poll. Given Gallup's generally strong record in Presidential races and the mammoth size of their sample (2500 - 3000 registered voters), they're still worth watching.
3) What are the true battleground states?
In one sense the candidates' respective schedules really tell all, but for all the talk of post-partisanship and new politics turning the electoral map upside down, we seem headed toward another scenario where a dozen states or so are the real decision makers.
Regrettably, while national pollsters went nuts over the weekend, post-convention state polls are just beginning to trickle out - meaning it may be a week or two before we can tell for sure what's going on in some much-watched locales. And by then the debates will be upon us.
For now, here's a summary based on the multitude of tea leaves this bloggers has been sifting through (including good resources here and here):
The Perennials: Ohio. Duh. Game on here, until Election Day. Period.
And Nevada. An under-watched contest, but every federal election year since 2000 seems to feature some political brawl for a federal office in the land of Sin City. Why should this year be any different?
Obama pick-up opportunities: New Mexico and Iowa look like very good bets to flip. That's little surprise perhaps given that they were two of the closest contests in 2004 and among the last states to be declared for a candidate on Election Night. A good argument can be made for McCain cutting bait in the Hawkeye State right now given other options worthy of attention.
Purple state watch: Virginia and Colorado have been trending Democratic in recent years, in part because of demographic shifts. Team Obama likes their hopes for good reason in these states. Colorado might be a better bet to flip from 2004 than Virginia. McCain has to defend both vigorously...especially if Iowa and/or New Mexico look like lost causes.
Swing states trending red: Florida and Missouri were battlegrounds until late in 2004. Then turned into five and seven-point wins for Bush respectively. Short of a major shift in the race in the next sixty days, these look like states where Team Obama pulls up stakes about two weeks out from Election Day to concentrate on greener pastures.
[UPDATE: I forget New Hampshire in the original post. As a Bush supporter in 2000 and a Romney backer in 2008 I must have blocked it out of my memory, it is inserted below now.]
Maverick central: New Hampshire. The state has drifted left in recent years, particularly in 2006. Yet, never underestimate the bizarre attraction of the Granite State independents to McCain.
Consider this nightmare scenario: All else being equal from 2004, Obama grabs Colorado, Iowa, and New Mexico. McCain lands New Hampshire. Electoral college result: Tie, 269 each.
Scary. And more than a little possible.
The Midwest pick-up opportunities: the McCain campaign is pushing very, very hard in Michigan and will likely do so in Wisconsin too, until it can be proven that Sarah Palin isn't helping the ticket significantly in the Badger State. The latter was virtually a 50/50 state in 2004, the former is fertile ground given Obama's absence during the primaries, the specific appeal of the McCain/Palin ticket across large swaths of the Wolverine state, and a local controversy that isn't helping Obama one bit.
The Backbreaker: Team McCain is making a very aggressive and expensive effort in Pennsylvania. Despite its historic Democratic roots, the state only went for Kerry 51% - 49% in 2004. Obama's famous "bitter" fumble and resulting primary performance offers McCain hope, as does Palin's appeal to middle Americans. More so than any other state with serious competition, a flip here from blue to red virtually destroys Obama's electoral college hopes.
The Dreamers: Obama's camp has spent a lot of time talking up their hopes in Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, Georgia, and North Carolina. It's only a matter of time before they abandon serious hopes (meaning: no more TV) in these states. Indeed, it has already started.
Likewise, McCain's people have mused about Washington and Oregon. Not going to happen. If they do come into play then this election is already over...because that means McCain/Palin is crushing Obama/Biden in other key battlegrounds.
Final note for consideration: remember these state-by-state races almost become like races for Governor or the Senate, complete with local twists and turn - including ads that may glide a bit below the national radar screen.
Example, the ad below is running in Ohio and Michigan. It'll could have devastating impact with people who are genuinely undecided and who have yet to find a comfort zone with Obama. It's not the kind of ad that makes people say, "I'm voting for McCain!" But it sure lays the groundwork for that aforementioned voter profile to say, "Um, no way I'm voting for that Obama guy."
UPDATE: link and some formatting fixed.
Posted by Eric Earling at September 09, 2008 07:39 PM | Email ThisHis supporters, his surrogates, his running mate, his press cheerleaders are all off saying anything in hopes of getting press and damaging the other ticket. bHo himself is playing defense (badly) to his running mates opponent. His bitter bride has all but disappeared from public appearances (although she is doing private fund-raisers).
It's absolutely delicious that a guy who can't seem to manage the heat of a campaign imagines he can lead a country. Maybe he should get some dialog going! LMAO!
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on September 9, 2008 09:02 PM(Beside gender)
Posted by: Silkworm on September 9, 2008 09:11 PMPresident Palin 2012
Posted by: Silkworm on September 9, 2008 09:14 PMShhh! Don't give away Palin's failings! :)
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on September 9, 2008 09:24 PMI wouldn't be surprised to see some significant movement in polls coming out in some states in the next week or so. But, I am always very, very hesitant to read too much into one poll, no matter how reliable the pollster.
Posted by: Eric Earling on September 9, 2008 09:40 PMThe media, like the rest of the liberal world, can't comprehend what is happening. The conservative, traditional worldview they thought they had thoroughly invalidated is rearing its ugly head and they can't understand, much less control, it.The times, they are a changin, but not in the way the left envisioned. The rules are changing as we speak. Because the liberal elites have consistently shown they are incapable of adjusting their world-views to include conservatives, I predict this will be the death of them. I'm smiling.
ME TOO! Because all the lies of liberalism have been exposed.
Paul who?
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on September 9, 2008 10:50 PMWell well that should bode well for women voters in the US.
Posted by: gs on September 9, 2008 11:14 PMThey are only finally realizing that America has been saying for monthes, Drill Here, Drill Now, Lower Prices.
And now a barrel of oil is looking at $100
Start Drilling and Watch the price fall.
Posted by: gs on September 9, 2008 11:43 PM"I wouldn't even call it a Palin movement, I'd call it a sleeping giant that has been awakened," Baron, 56, said at a rally here Tuesday. She described its members as a silent majority of women in Middle America who "are raising our families, who work if we have to, but love our country and our families first."
"And until now, we haven't had anyone to identify with," Baron said, adding that traditional feminist groups such as the National Organization for Women do "not represent me."
Posted by: John Bailo on September 9, 2008 11:59 PMAs far as the lipstick comment, if he did mean it as a slam he committed yet another gaffe instead. He's talking pigs and "nittaly lions" while she referenced pit bulls.
Posted by: Rick D. on September 10, 2008 05:56 AM1. I don't know Double-E. I am by no means a fan of polls and, short of stories about fundraising totals, writing about polls is the most lazy form of journalism around.
But the fact that the latest SurveyUSA poll has McCain within five percentage points of Obama in Washington state, 49 percent - 45 percent is surprising.
Posted by: Don Ward on September 9, 2008 08:32 PM
2. Don/Eric, if the Survey USA polls are right, McCain/Palin are enjoying a big surge all around. Here in NC, the latest Survey USA poll has McCain/Palin up by 20! That's a 16 point swing from their poll a month ago.
Posted by: Bill H on September 9, 2008 08:46 PM
3. Don't forget about Obama's recent "Nittaly Lion" gaffe in York, PA last week. That probably won't help his cause in PA.
Posted by: AP on September 9, 2008 08:46 PM
4. bHo has lost control of his campaign.
His supporters, his surrogates, his running mate, his press cheerleaders are all off saying anything in hopes of getting press and damaging the other ticket. bHo himself is playing defense (badly) to his running mates opponent. His bitter bride has all but disappeared from public appearances (although she is doing private fund-raisers).
It's absolutely delicious that a guy who can't seem to manage the heat of a campaign imagines he can lead a country. Maybe he should get some dialog going! LMAO!
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on September 9, 2008 09:02 PM
5. Nittaly Lion?? oh boy.
Posted by: Michele on September 9, 2008 09:04 PM
6. Do you know the difference between Dick Cheney and Sarah Palin?
(Beside gender)
Posted by: Silkworm on September 9, 2008 09:11 PM
7. Answer: Palin doesn't shoot lawyers!
President Palin 2012
Posted by: Silkworm on September 9, 2008 09:14 PM
8. I noticed Michelle hasn't been seen since Denver.
Posted by: Crusader on September 9, 2008 09:21 PM
9. Silkworm,
Shhh! Don't give away Palin's failings! :)
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on September 9, 2008 09:24 PM
10. No wonder he wants a teleprompter....haha "nittaly lions". Remind me again which one of these two candidates is 72 years old...
Posted by: Rick D. on September 9, 2008 09:28 PM
11. Don & Bill H -
I wouldn't be surprised to see some significant movement in polls coming out in some states in the next week or so. But, I am always very, very hesitant to read too much into one poll, no matter how reliable the pollster.
Posted by: Eric Earling on September 9, 2008 09:40 PM
12. I wonder how Pauls announcement will change the polls?
Posted by: Lysander on September 9, 2008 09:50 PM
13. Liberal Meltdown
The media, like the rest of the liberal world, can't comprehend what is happening. The conservative, traditional worldview they thought they had thoroughly invalidated is rearing its ugly head and they can't understand, much less control, it.
The times, they are a changin, but not in the way the left envisioned. The rules are changing as we speak. Because the liberal elites have consistently shown they are incapable of adjusting their world-views to include conservatives, I predict this will be the death of them. I'm smiling.
ME TOO! Because all the lies of liberalism have been exposed.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on September 9, 2008 10:03 PM
14. Did he finish off PA with the "Nittaly Lions" comment? After accusing them of clinging to their guns and religion, he insults Penn State fans everywhere....(I'm sure he was "just tired". For the 89th time)
Posted by: Michele on September 9, 2008 10:25 PM
15. I wonder how Pauls announcement will change the polls?
Paul who?
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on September 9, 2008 10:50 PM
16. After the past eight years of the Bush Administration, I'll vote for Obama no matter what. I honestly don't see where John McCain is any better than George W., so why gamble? I think what's going to happen is that when we walk into that booth, we're going to have to decide between the Republican, the Democrat or one of the Third Party cadidates. I'll just force myself to remember the past eight years and vote for Barack. Besides, I really like him.
Posted by: Abel P. Ochoa on September 9, 2008 10:56 PM
17. So I guess acording to Obama, if you wear lipstick, you are still a PIG.
Well well that should bode well for women voters in the US.
Posted by: gs on September 9, 2008 11:14 PM
18. It's not just the Presidential race that's swinging to the GOP... The Congressional races nationwide have swung decisively to the favor of the GOP. The Slavery Party is on the rope, and their lead candidate, the empty suit Obama, can't do anything about it.
Posted by: Shanghai Dan on September 9, 2008 11:20 PM
19. Gee, Abel, you've provided the perfect definition of the Obamaton. Well done.
Posted by: Hinton on September 9, 2008 11:30 PM
20. With the 9% do nothing Pelossi Congress, it's not surprising that the landscape is shifting towards the GOP.
They are only finally realizing that America has been saying for monthes, Drill Here, Drill Now, Lower Prices.
And now a barrel of oil is looking at $100
Start Drilling and Watch the price fall.
Posted by: gs on September 9, 2008 11:43 PM
21. Palin Energizing Women From All Walks of Life
"I wouldn't even call it a Palin movement, I'd call it a sleeping giant that has been awakened," Baron, 56, said at a rally here Tuesday. She described its members as a silent majority of women in Middle America who "are raising our families, who work if we have to, but love our country and our families first."
"And until now, we haven't had anyone to identify with," Baron said, adding that traditional feminist groups such as the National Organization for Women do "not represent me."
Posted by: John Bailo on September 9, 2008 11:59 PM
22. #21: wow. They've been out there all along, and Hillary wasn't doin' it for them (although the PUMAS love her). Not surprising. There are a lot of Sarah Palins out there. The problem with NOW, is that you couldn't be their idea of "the new woman" unless you also possessed leftwing mindset. Otherwise, the movement didn't want you. Governor Palin represents real women. she doesn't talk down to them like they were all 5 years old like Hillary does.
Posted by: Michele on September 10, 2008 12:38 AM
23. Damn. SHouldn't this be "game over", Obama's friendship with a terrorist? How can he possibly win if enough people know about this?
Posted by: Crusader on September 10, 2008 01:24 AM
24. That Obama/Ayers ad is very effective, but I hope it's leading to a more comprehensive one near the end of the campaign that features all of Obama's friends from Ayers, Wright, Rezko, etc. for the coup de gras. Any doubt already building in the minds of voter's by then would be solidified right before election and either they won't vote at all, vote 3rd party, or vote McCain/Palin instead.
Anyone here remember Alaska's democrat Senator running for President this year?
Mike Gravel ring a bell?
Alaska's other presidential wannabee defended Sarah Palin's action in "troopergate"!
Anyone else see this at weeklystandard.com yesterday?
* * *
Quote of the Day
Former Democratic presidential candidate and senator from Alaska Mike Gravel on the Troopergate scandal:
"Troopergate" is going to come out in [Palin's] favor when they really get down for the details of it. This trooper should have been fired ... if the unions didn't want to step up to the plate. ...
This is a guy that shouldn't be wearing a badge, not when he threatens people's lives. ...
Did they have to wait 'til he killed somebody before they got rid of him?
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on September 10, 2008 07:18 AMLet's remember the record of the Bush administration, shall we? This will be the version unaltered by the left.
Bush entered office in 2001 during the Clinton recession, not too long after the tech bubble and associated markets had been devastated. 8 months later he responded aggressively to the terrorists behind 9/11, after 8 years of Clinton "do nothing" policies against terrorism. He crushed the Taliban, freeing Afghanistan. Next, after years of Saddam's refusal to honor the conditions of the Gulf War ceasefire, and repeated acts in violation of United Nations resolutions, Bush and the majority of Congressional Republicans and Democrats acted on the intelligence the whole world believed accurate, and fearing Saddamm still had and/or was developing WMD, Bush acted to remove Saddam from power in Iraq. That action freed 25 million Iraqis after decades under the oppression of Saddam and his family.
After Iraq became insurgent central, the war on terror was executed in Iraq, instead of on the streets of America. While keeping America safe since that horrific day in 2001, thousands of Al Quada terrorists have been killed or captured, and Al Quada has been thwarted in attempt to repeat its carnage of that day. And while active WMD programs were not found to be in existence in Iraq, something we could not validate while Saddam was refusing to let weapons inspectors do their jobs, and despite efforts through other intelligence services to determine what happened to hundreds of thousands of gallons of poisonous gases, Iraq has become a democratic nation and is beginning today to take over control of its own nation, as well as form a counter to Iran's terrorist state. And it's doing it despite efforts by the left, and Barack Obama, to surrender Iraq to terrorists.
Domestically, despite a Congress on a spending spree, including virtually every Democrat and too many Republicans, Bush got tax cuts passed, and compromised on other legislation and reforms, while attempting to work across the aisle, despite rabid attacks from the left, both from Congressional Democrats and the national media. And again, despite Democrat efforts to lose the war on terror, Bush ignored the polls and pressed on in the fight, despite daily distortion and suppression by the left and the media of what was happening in Iraq, and while watching his national approval rating suffer the consequences of the left's writing of history.
Entering into 2007, the left and its media allies ratcheted up their typical talking down of the economy, the war, and anything else they could think of in preparation of the upcoming election. Many Americans have believed the dire news and it has become a self-fulfilling prophecy to many, and no doubt a factor in the daily bad economic news. Again, an issue that has sprung up in an election year, as this one always does.
With the recent selection of Sarah Palin as McCain's running mate, any American paying attention should now understand just how biased the media is, and every American should question what they've been told, and how they've been told it by the TV networks and local and national newspapers. Because if the media will attack a mother of 5 who has achieved so much success, simply because she is a conservative, can anyone claim to be surprised when the media has been distorting the truth to varying degrees forever?
Bush's greatest error was completely out of his control. He defeated Al Gore by a margin too close for the left to accept in 2000, and has incurred the left's wrath and hatred ever since. And for a majority of Americans who pay little attention to politics, there has been no escaping the daily attacks on Bush and his administration, as it is attacked with distortion, lies, AND criticized for not acting the way the left would like it to act in this world.
As for Obama, anyone who wishes to vote for him certainly has that right. It is the opinion of many, though, that a vote for Obama is a vote for Socialism, ignorant foreign policy judgment, and for a man virtually unable to make decisions and go on the record.
Oh, BTW, France should have turned on their super-collider this morning and we're still here. Hopefully all those mini-black holes closed themselves and mankind is safe a while longer.
Posted by: Reality on September 10, 2008 07:44 AMWhere is the nearest US port? Where do the pipelines go?
So, how many of us don't know of friends who have either been from Alaska or had friends move there?
In summary, it seems we have a special affiliation with Alaskans that could translate to votes. Add the close gubernatorial and you get Washington in play, irregardless of national.
Posted by: swatter on September 10, 2008 07:48 AM...and with a Democratic majority in the House, I wonder which one they'd pick...at least we know that Republicans would easily take back a majority in Congress in 2010.
Posted by: blindman on September 10, 2008 08:24 PMCadie, maybe it's because women noticed that Hillary received 18 million primary votes and nearly beat Obama, but was not picked for VP. It's not like Hillary is some fringe candidate that can be easily dismissed. When Obama picked another "typical" choice for VP, his claim to being an agent of change was destroyed.
So when McCain does something wholly unexpected and picks a woman who actually has executive experience and is a true reformer who ran corrupt people out of her own party. Women took notice. McCain is disliked by Republicans because he doesn't always toe the party line. Palin fits that mold as well. If change is your thing, they are more likely to bring it to Washington than Obama and Biden.
Posted by: blindman on September 10, 2008 09:17 PMHAHAHAAHAHA, you actually think Washington will go for McCain/Palin? Don't count on it. This state is so far gone down the liberal shithole that it's barely worth trying to save it.
I love how everybody seems to think that things can actually get better by electing Democrats in this state. News flash, Democrats have run this state with a minuscule opposition for many, many years.
If you think the schools are bad, the roads are bad, the economy stinks, the social programs are bad, or whatever. 100% blame lays at the feet of the liberal Democrats who have been in charge.
Voting Democrat in Washington has taken on the appearance of self-flagellation.
Posted by: blindman on September 10, 2008 09:24 PM