Diageo/Hotline down to a six point lead despite opening his advantage on the economy
Gallup opens up a 10 point Obama lead while others close, hard to tell which (if any) is the leading indicator--seven point lead among likely voters based on 2004 patterns, 10 point lead based on current intentions
GWU/Battleground remains flat, no polling Friday or Saturday night, when McCain gained but does include Sunday night calls, knocks off a good day for Obama, so really pretty confusing
R2K drops back a point to a 12 point lead, nothing interesting
Rasmussen down 1 for Obama again today
Reuters/CSPAN/Zogby's internals moving around too much for comfort on a day to day basis
If Zogby has Obama winning 83-11 among liberals, McCain winning 72-17 with conservatives, but Obama taking moderates 59-35, it seems curious that Obama has just under 48% of the vote, even with 8.5% undecided, more than other polls. There can't be a lot of moderates in that number, yet rather a lot of people consider themselves moderate, certainly more than do liberal right now. The fact that Battleground does not include Friday and Saturday night polling but does include Sunday is inconclusive.
Hotline has an interesting tidbit, suggesting Obama has a 51-38 lead among likely voters in ten battleground states: CO, MI, NH, NM, NV, FL, OH, PA, VA, WI. If there really are 11% undecided in those states, several Bush 2004 states that are being credited to Obama today are still very much in play. If Obama can solidify some of his support, though, and Wednesday night's debate is key to that, he could go a long way to putting this away. The only time a lead this large with three weeks to go was overcome was in 1980, when the Iran hostage crisis was in the news every day eroding the shallow support Jimmy Carter had going in to the homestretch. Notably, though, painting Reagan as a dangerous warmonger did not work.
ABC/Washington Post Poll Bucks Trackers, Shows Expanding Obama Lead
While most of the daily trackers are closing up some, a new national poll from ABC and the Washington Post shows Obama with a ten point lead among likely voters (likely voter polls typically have a smaller lead than registered voters in this cycle). Most notably, McCain is losing ground on personal issues, where he had claimed the high ground for months. This survey shows that McCain has not been successful anywhere other than his own base, which was going to vote for him anyway (and please don't think they were going to stay home rather than vote against this particular opponent, you're smarter than that) with painting Obama as "risky" while Obama's own claim that McCain is "erratic" has been all too well backed up. Obama is winning voters who say the economy is the biggest issue (over half of respondents, in line with other surveys) by nearly a 2-to-1 majority, 62-33, a slightly larger number than in most other polls. McCain's efforts to paint Obama as "too liberal" are not working, according to respondents. 37% responded that he was, while 42% say McCain is "too conservative." The "risky" label also appears not to be working. McCain continues to command a double digit lead among Catholics, a key demographic, while perhaps most notably of all, Obama wins by 54-40 (or fight?) on the question of "stronger leader," which cuts away at a major McCain campaign point. The poll was conducted over the period of Oct 8-11, so is only one day behind the daily trackers. The story in the Washington Post does point out that a double-digit lead is not impossible to overcome even with only three weeks left in the campaign, and suggests though that Wednesday night's debate will indeed be crucial for turning the tide.
Can't Throw Someone Under The Bus If He's Already There, 2012 GOP Candidates Dept.
Sometimes you have to go overseas for this stuff, but the Independent in the UK has a story about two of the Republican candidates for President, both of whom figure to contest for the nomination in 2012, Mitt Romney and Tommy Thompson, excoriating the disorganization of the McCain campaign. Obviously, what's significant here is that rather than supporting the candidate, two people who lost this year and are keenly interested in trying again see that opportunity arising in four years rather than eight and figure that there's no harm in jumping ship while blasting a few holes in the hull. It also notes one of the weirdest invocations ever, at a McCain rally over the weekend--did you know Hindu was the name of a god? No, neither did I. Read it here if you like: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/republican-leaders-break-ranks--with-mccain-959301.html
McCain Says He's Winning, And Who's To Say He Isn't?
Well, sort of. At a rally in Virginia yesterday, he told a crowd "we've got them just where we want them." By his own admission six points down, and going negative again, in that speech telling the crowd that Sen. Obama is "conspiring with Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid to raise taxes, increase spending, take away your right to secret ballot in labor elections (huh?) and concede defeat in Iraq. But they forgot to let you decide." Surely if you start by talking about the polling, you're acknowledging that the people are in fact deciding something? He's avoiding Ayers, Rezko, and Hussein, but perhaps smartly linking Obama with Pelosi and Reid (though I'm not sure most Americans could tell you who Harry Reid is--in fact, sometimes I'm not sure most Senate Democrats could) and predicting all sorts of darkness that will fall if this bad, bad man (who he called "decent" two days ago) wins the Presidency. I think it could be a good vote-gaining measure among paranoid, easily frightened white people, but it doesn't go far to erase the "erratic" label at a time when more and more Republicans are moving to distance themselves from the campaign.
McCain To Retool His Campaign Even Without An Economic Plan? Or Just Kidding About Not Having A New Economic Plan?
What McCain needs is to re-re-re-craft his message without making it look like a desperate stunt; unfortunately, the public is so used to desperate stunts from the McCain campaign that when he comes out with a new campaign message that it could be an uphill battle if Axelrod, Plouffe, & Co. parry it effectively. I don't particularly believe that they won't retool the economic message, as it's done so incredibly poorly up til now. It's safe to assume the new campaign, will presumably be a combination of Obama's economic platform with a continuation of the crypto-racist innuendo against the candidate himself while at the same time claiming the ethical high ground for talking down those two comments at rallies over the weekend. Nate Silver at www.fivethirtyeight.com says virtually the same thing, so obviously I think he's right. Anyone notice how McCain's wife and running mate kind of faded into the background over the weekend? I think he got the message that war heroes don't hide beneath skirts. Unless they're on a secret mission in disguise, of course. The New York Times finds "signs of internal confusion" in the mixed message on the economic plan.
Now It's Getting Serious
I understand that the National Basketball Association is laying off 9% of its workforce because season ticket sales are down so much. I'm only half-joking with the headline. These things are bought by businesses, whether they're Lehman Brothers (RIP) or a local realtor's office. We can all walk down our own Main Streets and see empty storefronts, but that's a little simplistic. I'm not sure this isn't far more significant; the business world is simply not spending money, and the ripple effect hurts a lot more--and takes a lot longer to be assimilated--than the initial blow.
When The Washington Times Is Afraid You're Too Far To The Right, You've Got Issues
It's just a Sarah Palin story, and it's not really that she's too far to the right, but rather yet another ethics issue. It is significant because it comes from one of the most important right-wing newspapers in the country, the Rev. Sun-Myung Moon's Washington Times, and it's about abuses of taxpayer money for religious reasons. The story at http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/11/as-governor-palin-at-times-bonds-church-and-sta-1/ suggests that at times as mayor and governor, Palin has knowingly and wilfully stepped far over the church/state line, including (and this may be what gets the Times' goat) charging taxpayers for trips to speak at least 10 times at strictly religious eventsThe paper quotes one Baptist leader as saying "Politicians are entitled to freely exercise their religion while in office, but ethically if not legally that part of her trip ought to not be charged to taxpayers," The paper may have been in a bit of a bind between its evangelical and ideological forces, but came down on the side of law, ethics, and morality. For those of us to whom this sort of thing matters there's no question as to whether faith can exist without ethics.
John McCain Hearts ACORN
Well ,at least he attended their events and supported their efforts before he was more interested in the votes from a wholly different constituency. Here for a snippet.. .http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/Acorn_pushes_back_hugs_McCain.html?showall while the group's chief organizer says in reponse to the piece and accompanying photo of the Senator at an ACORN sponsored gathering in 2006, “It has deeply saddened us to see Senator McCain abandon his historic support for ACORN and our efforts to support the goals of low-income Americans. We are sure that the extremists he is trying to get into a froth will be even more excited to learn that John McCain stood shoulder to shoulder with ACORN, at an ACORN co-sponsored event, to promote immigration reform. " Just saying.
OK, not my best work, but it'll have to do til tomorrow. Stay tuned, same bat-time, same bat-channel!
John
Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day
The American people from bitter experience have a rightful fear that great business units might be used to dominate our industrial life and by illegal and unethical practices destroy equality of opportunity. (Campaign speech, 1928)
No comments:
Post a Comment