SirNitram wrote:The media outfits project a 'horserace'. They always do. It's in their economic interest to make this not a blowout.
Or they're being conservative because they don't want to be accused of bias in Obama's favor. Or because they're still jumpy from 2000--NPR has no economic stake in the outcome and they're already accused of being too liberal, and they still show a lower total for him than the indie sites.
I suspect it's a combination of all three. Certainly you could plausibly argue that each network has its own motives; Fox News, for instance, would call Vermont a toss-up state if they thought they could get away with it, because the whole network exists to cheerlead for the GOP.
Oh, indeed. I think decades of being hammered with 'YOU UNAMERICAN LIBERAL MEDIA PEOPLE!' will affect people, and of course, even if it's not in the network's best interests, the people that do the reporting get a nice, cushy job.
Someone compiled something interesting from the WaPo's 'Political Landscape 2008'.
Obama +13.8%: Battleground state (PA)
Obama +10.4%: Battleground state (NH)
Obama +10.0%: Battleground state (NJ)
Obama +9.5%: Battleground state (IA)
Obama +9.0%: Battleground state (OR)
Obama +8.2%: Battleground state (MN)
Obama +8.2%: Battleground state (MI)
Obama +8.8%: Battleground state (WI)
Obama +7.3%: Battleground state (NM)
McCain +6.8%: Leaning Republican (GA)
Obama +5.1%: Battleground state (VA)
Obama +4.0%: Battleground state (CO)
McCain +3.8%: Leaning Republican (IN)
Obama +3.5%: Battleground state (OH)
Obama +3.1%: Battleground state (FL)
Obama +3.0%: Battleground state (NV)
McCain +2.2%: Leaning Republican (WV)
A state in Obama's favor by 13.8%, is a 'Battleground State' for the POTUS election. A state in McCain's favor by 2.2%, is 'Leaning Republican'. Bias much?
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
"There is no "taboo" on using nuclear weapons." -Julhelm
What is Project Zohar? "On a serious note (well not really) I did sometimes jump in and rate nBSG episodes a '5' before the episode even aired or I saw it."- RogueIce explaining that episode ratings on SDN tv show threads are bunk
In Fox-world, of course it is. Same way a knight can get all his limbs hacked off and still call the fight a draw.
When ballots have fairly and constitutionally decided, there can be no successful appeal back to bullets.
—Abraham Lincoln
People pray so that God won't crush them like bugs.
—Dr. Gregory House
Oil an emergency?! It's about time, Brigadier, that the leaders of this planet of yours realised that to remain dependent upon a mineral slime simply doesn't make sense.
—The Doctor "Terror Of The Zygons" (1975)
1) The Zogby poll is actually pretty damn decent. The poll which deserves to be ignored is the Zogby/New Media or Zogby/Something Falutin Something poll. John Zogby as an actual straight up pollster is fine and certainly far better than trying to get meaning out of an ARG poll. That said the other "Zogby" poll is actually an internet based poll that has problems with getting an actual representative sample and thus is methodologically unsound. Reinforcing the first point however is that his traditional phone call polling is decent if unspectacular and should be watched along with every other tracker as a long term indicator of motion.
2) Every day which goes by with Obama holding above 50% in the one-off and tracker polls is one day closer to Mccain's defeat. The strcutural advantages in the electoral college that Obama holds means that even a 5-6 point national collpase would STILL only give McCain a 50/50 chance at winning. There are simply so many combinations of states that get Obama over the magic number and right now a large number of them are, in the state by state polling, showign him with leads of 7-8 points or more. In other words if right now all the national trackers shifted to show a dead heat and the state polling followed suit then Obama would still hold a projected electoral college lead.
3) Early voting means that McCain has an even higher hurdle to climb. With the number and importance of states offering no requirement early voting there is a huge advantage to being ahead now just as there is a huge advantage to having a pwoerful ground game. Every voter that Obama's team gets to the polls now if one more voter they can get to the polls on election day and don't doubt that Obama has the far superior ground game in place. Hell he's had the best ground game for well over a year now and that team spent the entire primary season refining their efforts. For all the positive votes that Obama is gaining NOW then McCain will not only have to catch up and equal Obama nationally AND a the state level he will ALSO have to then exceed Obama in all the state with early voting.
4) The final presidential debate almost never changes anyone's mind and yet it will also be the last chance for McCain to seriosuly change the narrative. With his recent comments about needing to know the context of a state party chair indicating that Obama and Bin Laden are similair because they have terrorist pals he's also lost any hope of reclaiming the moral high ground this week. He needs at least a few upticks in favorability before any of his negatives have a shot at hitting home and, not to belabor the point more than it needs to be, he is running out of time.
SDNet World Nation: Wilkonia
Armourer of the WARWOLVES
ASVS Vet's Association (Class of 2000)
Former C.S. Strowbridge Gold Ego Award Winner MEMBER of the Anti-PETA Anti-Facist LEAGUE
"I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of god. I have seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves, and goodness. "
-Kingdom of Heaven
538.com has Obama at a 94.9 percent chance of winning. Holy crap, America might actually elect the lesser of two evils for once.
I can never love you because I'm just thirty squirrels in a mansuit."
"Ah, good ol' Popeye. Punching ghosts until they explode."[/b]-Internet Webguy
"It was cut because an Army Ordnance panel determined that a weapon that kills an enemy soldier 10 times before he hits the ground was a waste of resources, so they scaled it back to only kill him 3 times."-Anon, on the cancellation of the Army's multi-kill vehicle.
By the polls it isn't looking too good for McCain but after John "I served in Vietnam" Kerry lost in 2004 I tend to take polls with a grain of salt. The real problem is McCain is just telling people why they shouldn't vote for Obama that isn't good enough with the panic over the economy if he really wants to win he needs to give reason's to vote for him. Obama just needs to shut his mouth and not make another foot in mouth comment like the bitter clinging to guns and religion remarks he made during the Primaries.
swift death to evil
ninja>>>pirates>>>zombies the natural order
Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but what's the big deal with early voting? All it does is make voting more convenient for people (especially in areas with coordinated early voting campaigns) and increase voter turnout. Is that such a huge thing?
chr335 wrote:Obama just needs to shut his mouth and not make another foot in mouth comment like the bitter clinging to guns and religion remarks he made during the Primaries.
He hasn't said anything like that in months. And in any case, the Republicans haven't been getting the mileage they'd like from the remark anyway; not only has the attack along those lines been as incompetent as every other move made by Team Gimp, the ugliness of the anti-Obama rhetoric at McCain rallies has helped to drive his numbers further down than even the financial crisis is causing.
Kerry lost because he ran an incompetent campaign —marked by his allowing himself to be slandered for a whole month without uttering a peep of protest. By contrast, Team Obama have had a ready-response counterattack squad in action since the primaries while he has managed to stay on-message, wielding that as his chief weapon to hammer McCain's bankrupt platform.
When ballots have fairly and constitutionally decided, there can be no successful appeal back to bullets.
—Abraham Lincoln
People pray so that God won't crush them like bugs.
—Dr. Gregory House
Oil an emergency?! It's about time, Brigadier, that the leaders of this planet of yours realised that to remain dependent upon a mineral slime simply doesn't make sense.
—The Doctor "Terror Of The Zygons" (1975)
chr335 wrote:Obama just needs to shut his mouth and not make another foot in mouth comment like the bitter clinging to guns and religion remarks he made during the Primaries.
He hasn't said anything like that in months. And in any case, the Republicans haven't been getting the mileage they'd like from the remark anyway; not only has the attack along those lines been as incompetent as every other move made by Team Gimp, the ugliness of the anti-Obama rhetoric at McCain rallies has helped to drive his numbers further down than even the financial crisis is causing.
Kerry lost because he ran an incompetent campaign —marked by his allowing himself to be slandered for a whole month without uttering a peep of protest. By contrast, Team Obama have had a ready-response counterattack squad in action since the primaries while he has managed to stay on-message, wielding that as his chief weapon to hammer McCain's bankrupt platform.
Well he still has three weeks to mess up better to be safe then sorry as this is the Democrats election to win.
swift death to evil
ninja>>>pirates>>>zombies the natural order
sketerpot wrote:Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but what's the big deal with early voting? All it does is make voting more convenient for people (especially in areas with coordinated early voting campaigns) and increase voter turnout. Is that such a huge thing?
(I just cast my vote for Obama today.)
People are worried that McCain might pull out something vote-changing on Obama, or Obama eats a puppy or something. Since early votes would already be in, that means they're less votes Obama would lose in such a situation.
Your head is humming and it won't go, in case you don't know, the piper's calling you to join him
Actually, for some of us, living in secularized, socially liberal countries, there are very few American politicians that don't look like one form of evil or another.
Of course, in Soviet Sweden, Obama would be right-wing.
If at first you don't succeed, maybe failure is your style
Economic Left/Right: 0.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.03
Thus Aristotle laid it down that a heavy object falls faster then a light one does.
The important thing about this idea is not that he was wrong, but that it never occurred to Aristotle to check it.
haard wrote:Actually, for some of us, living in secularized, socially liberal countries, there are very few American politicians that don't look like one form of evil or another.
Of course, in Soviet Sweden, Obama would be right-wing.
Obama's popularity numbers across Europe are through the roof. There's a difference between being the "lesser of two evils" and being imperfect. Obama is the latter. If you want to see a "lesser of evils" competition, please refer to the Republican primary race.
Damien Sorresso
"Ever see what them computa bitchez do to numbas? It ain't natural. Numbas ain't supposed to be code, they supposed to quantify shit."
- The Onion
While I consider Barack Obama right-wing, even as a guy from a country who usually votes centre-right (in other words, I'm not coming from the view that anyone to the right of the Soviet Union is a right winger), I certainly wouldn't view him as the lesser of two evils.
On the other notion, the idea that the Republicans have an "October Surprise" up their sleeve. They do not. The nearest they got is this Ayers shit that may be enough to incite rabid right wingers who were already going to vote McCain to foam at the mouth but I doubt it is doing little to influence the undecided. The majority of people who are moved by the Ayers insinuations were likely already "converted" (of course, their minds were made up long before the primaries ended) by Ann Coulter saying "Barack HUSSEIN Obama" a lot.
haard wrote:Actually, for some of us, living in secularized, socially liberal countries, there are very few American politicians that don't look like one form of evil or another.
Of course, in Soviet Sweden, Obama would be right-wing.
Obama's popularity numbers across Europe are through the roof. There's a difference between being the "lesser of two evils" and being imperfect. Obama is the latter. If you want to see a "lesser of evils" competition, please refer to the Republican primary race.
Oh, I know he is popular over here - but I would claim that he would not be anywhere near as popular if he ran for president/prime minister in Europe. His popularity is inflated by people's intense (and, really, often more kneejerk than informed) dislike for the alternative. Obama is very popular in Sweden, but I think anyone would have a very hard time getting elected on his policies.
If at first you don't succeed, maybe failure is your style
Economic Left/Right: 0.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.03
Thus Aristotle laid it down that a heavy object falls faster then a light one does.
The important thing about this idea is not that he was wrong, but that it never occurred to Aristotle to check it.
Ghetto edit: Oh, and I happen to think Obama is the best choice for the US. I hope the US will move in a better direction if/when he gets elected. And I hope, that in another four or eight years, an even better candidate will be mainstream enough to be elected.
If at first you don't succeed, maybe failure is your style
Economic Left/Right: 0.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.03
Thus Aristotle laid it down that a heavy object falls faster then a light one does.
The important thing about this idea is not that he was wrong, but that it never occurred to Aristotle to check it.
haard wrote:Actually, for some of us, living in secularized, socially liberal countries, there are very few American politicians that don't look like one form of evil or another.
Of course, in Soviet Sweden, Obama would be right-wing.
Obama's popularity numbers across Europe are through the roof. There's a difference between being the "lesser of two evils" and being imperfect. Obama is the latter. If you want to see a "lesser of evils" competition, please refer to the Republican primary race.
Oh, I know he is popular over here - but I would claim that he would not be anywhere near as popular if he ran for president/prime minister in Europe. His popularity is inflated by people's intense (and, really, often more kneejerk than informed) dislike for the alternative. Obama is very popular in Sweden, but I think anyone would have a very hard time getting elected on his policies.
Indeed. In my experience most Europeans know shit about Obamas political views. They know that McCain is Bush and they know that Obama is not Bush. Therefore Obama = good and McCain = bad. Well, maybe that´s a bit over the top but it kind of nails it.
chr335 wrote:By the polls it isn't looking too good for McCain but after John "I served in Vietnam" Kerry lost in 2004 I tend to take polls with a grain of salt.
The polls showed John Kerry behind from late August on. There are reasons not to celebrate early just because the polls are good, but 2004 isn't one of them. You might be thinking about the exit polls which showed a Kerry win before the actual count showed otherwise, but those aren't the same kind of polls as what we're looking at now.
The real problem is McCain is just telling people why they shouldn't vote for Obama that isn't good enough with the panic over the economy if he really wants to win he needs to give reason's to vote for him. Obama just needs to shut his mouth and not make another foot in mouth comment like the bitter clinging to guns and religion remarks he made during the Primaries.
Ask Thomas Dewey about what happens when you clam up and try to coast with a big lead.
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963 X-Ray Blues
RedImperator wrote:Ask Thomas Dewey about what happens when you clam up and try to coast with a big lead.
That's a fair point, but not quite the one I think chr355 was trying to make. At this point, the best thing Obama could do would be to ignore McCain altogether, focus on his policies and emphasize them (perhaps by announcing a Cabinet, or using that half-hour slot of time he bought on the networks the week before the election to list his economic proposals in-depth), and prepare to make the transition to President-elect. He shouldn't clam up, but he should project the feeling that he's confident and collected and prepared to assume all responsibilities as soon as he places his hand on the Bible.
Incidentally, I was only eleven when Bush was first 'elected', so does the President-elect have a good deal of influence on national politics or priorities before inauguration? In other words, Bush couldn't pull a dick move and begin bombing Iran on January 19th or anything of the sort, right?
RedImperator wrote:Ask Thomas Dewey about what happens when you clam up and try to coast with a big lead.
That's a fair point, but not quite the one I think chr355 was trying to make. At this point, the best thing Obama could do would be to ignore McCain altogether, focus on his policies and emphasize them (perhaps by announcing a Cabinet, or using that half-hour slot of time he bought on the networks the week before the election to list his economic proposals in-depth), and prepare to make the transition to President-elect. He shouldn't clam up, but he should project the feeling that he's confident and collected and prepared to assume all responsibilities as soon as he places his hand on the Bible.
No. When you're up 10 points in mid-October, you don't take a victory lap. You step on his neck. Or as James Carville put it, if your opponent is drowning, throw him an anvil. You can still look presidential in the process, and I think you're right-on with what he should do with that half-hour later this month, but ignoring McCain for three weeks would be a catastrophically bad idea. You run the risk of committing a gaffe in the process, but that's politics.
Incidentally, I was only eleven when Bush was first 'elected', so does the President-elect have a good deal of influence on national politics or priorities before inauguration? In other words, Bush couldn't pull a dick move and begin bombing Iran on January 19th or anything of the sort, right?
Legally, the president retains all his powers right up until 11:59 AM on inauguration day, but his influence will be near zero. In this scenario, I think it's an open question if the military would obey the order.
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963 X-Ray Blues
chr335 wrote:By the polls it isn't looking too good for McCain but after John "I served in Vietnam" Kerry lost in 2004 I tend to take polls with a grain of salt.
The polls showed John Kerry behind from late August on. There are reasons not to celebrate early just because the polls are good, but 2004 isn't one of them. You might be thinking about the exit polls which showed a Kerry win before the actual count showed otherwise, but those aren't the same kind of polls as what we're looking at now.
The real problem is McCain is just telling people why they shouldn't vote for Obama that isn't good enough with the panic over the economy if he really wants to win he needs to give reason's to vote for him. Obama just needs to shut his mouth and not make another foot in mouth comment like the bitter clinging to guns and religion remarks he made during the Primaries.
Ask Thomas Dewey about what happens when you clam up and try to coast with a big lead.
By keeping his mouth shut I meant making any foolish commits describing certain voter groups stick to the campaign talking points. There is no need to stomp on McCain he is too busy stabbing himself to really do any campaigning though I heard his speech in North Carolina was good.
swift death to evil
ninja>>>pirates>>>zombies the natural order
Obama still needs to run interference on any McCain slander because, as was pointed it, it was really Kerry's lack of response to said slander that did him in.
Your head is humming and it won't go, in case you don't know, the piper's calling you to join him
Qwerty 42 wrote:Obama still needs to run interference on any McCain slander because, as was pointed it, it was really Kerry's lack of response to said slander that did him in.
pointed out*
Your head is humming and it won't go, in case you don't know, the piper's calling you to join him
Your head is humming and it won't go, in case you don't know, the piper's calling you to join him
