Tracking The Tracking Polls

October 24 Daily Tracking Poll Update, You Knew It Would Come To This Edition

2008-10-24T13:34:00.000-07:00

Well, seems like the trend is certainly towards stasis, or even a slight tilt back towards Sen. Obama. CBS poll has a 13 point Obama lead, probably too high. Markets cough up a bigger hairball pre-open than my cat did at roughly the same time, but making valiant attempts to rally. More Republicans endorse Obama, including Scott (not the General, he was a Democrat) McClellan (people really get annoyed when they find out they've been lying for years), GOP former governors Arne Carlson of Minnesota and William Weld of Massachusetts, and several of Barry Goldwater's grandchildren--back story there is that while Sen. McCain claims the late Sen. Goldwater as a hero of his, the families have a bit of the Hatfields and McCoys about them, and Goldwater spokesgranddaughter hints at unsavory facts she'd rather not disclose. Even a McCain advisor, Charles Fried, votes for Obama after asking his name be removed from list of advisors, noting choice of Sarah Palin as a prime reason. One GOP spokesman launches an immediate attack against Sen. Obama for "visiting grandma." Of course, if one is not born of human parents, the idea of family is a shade foreign. Looks like a saint compared with the young female McCain supporter who claimed to be mugged and sexually assaulted by a big scary black man because of her McCain bumper sticker; she has now confessed to making it all up. McCain's strategy of the day is to blast the Bush Administration as if he were now playing to the left of Obama; Bush administration doesn't take it lying down and anonymously blasts McCain campaign for disorder and poor communication. A new SurveyUSA poll now shows Elwyn Tinklenberg ahead of future ex-Rep. Michele Bachmann by three; more below so I can say Elwyn Tinklenberg a few more times. Nouriel Roubini looking towards panic selling and a possible shutdown of the equity markets, but he's an old spoilsport anyway. Who has of course been the only one who's nailed this from the get-go, leaving aside my monthly fund commentaries from the second half of 2007 (ahem), but we'll do more on the economy over the weekend. As long as I'm patting myself on the back, nice to see everyone else beginning to talk about how Gov. Palin's 2012 Presidential run began a week or so ago, which may explain the New York Times report that her makeup artist was the campaign's highest-paid employee the last two weeks. I'm not saying a word.

Most importantly of all, though, whether you're Republican, Democrat, or Independent, Senator Obama's grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, could use all our prayers. "Without going through the details too much, she's gravely ill. We weren't sure and I'm still not sure whether she makes it to Election Day," Obama told ABC's "Good Morning America" in an interview broadcast Friday. She's got mine.

ABC/WaPo holds to 11 point lead with no signs of real motion, McCain's age cited as bigger negative factor than Obama's race
Diageo/Hotline opens up to a seven point Obama lead; nearly tied among male voters
Gallup moves slightly Obamawards, separate poll shows Jewish voters not buying the Arab terrorist spiel, supporting Obama nearly 3-1
GWU/Battleground still three, but they seem to have changed yesterday's lead to four after the fact, so go figure. Honestly, I'm pretty sick of these guys, but at least it's not IBD/TIPP.
R2K widens back to 12, had narrowed to 7 five days ago, still concerned it leans a little too far left, but 10 point lead among independents seems about right (see Zogby if you dare)
Rasmussen holds flat with yesterday at 7, only a three point McCain lead among men, while Obama leads with white women by 3
Reuters/CSPAN/Zogby closes by nearly two points, but still a 10 point Obama lead, with a 26 point lead with independents and a lead among Roman Catholics, how the lead is only 10 is amusing math

Gallup has a few interesting items beyond their regular poll. Enthusiasm seems high, with a poll showing both Obama and McCain being among the most popular candidates this late in an election since they started keeping track. Favorables for both are probably a bit too high, though, so take it as you will. Probably more importantly, McCain had been making a pointed play for the Jewish vote, if there is such a monolith, by demonizing Obama as a radical Muslim who is anti-Israel and close to terrorists. In June, Obama led McCain by 62-31 among Jewish voters according to their own poll; as Obama has become much better known over the last few months, he has put paid to those rumors and expanded that lead to 74-22, with a five point spike in October alone. Oddly, according to this survey, older Jewish voters actually prefer Obama by a larger margin (74-19) than younger (67-29). This may speak to a modest and gradual erosion of the traditional identification of Jews with the Democratic party over the last twenty-five years or so, although the same percentage of the 18-34s in the survey consider themselves conservative as those 55 and up. Ultimately, this survey shows Jewish voters likely to vote for the Obama/Biden ticket about in line with Democratic candidates in prior elections.

Quick State Of The States
Lots of state data today, so let's move right in. Rasmussen has a Georgia poll, showing a five point McCain lead, down from nine earlier in the month. It's going to be a tough row to hoe, with 70% of white voters supporting McCain. Needless to say, Georgia is not 75% Republican. Early voting and African-American turnout will be the key here; remember 29% of Georgians are black. InsiderAdvantage actually has Obama up one in the state, with even less of the white vote, so they must be trying to extrapolate a greatly expanded African-American vote. There's also a Minnesota poll, but we can stick a fork in that one with a 15 point Obama lead. In North Carolina Rasmussen has McCain taking a two point lead again, after a three point lead early in the week and tie in their survey a week ago. Interestingly, for what it's worth, which isn't a lot, both Intrade and Rasmussen Markets have Obama as about a 2-1 favorite to take the state, which seems a little optimistic for the Democratic side for me. Montana State University at Billings has a home state poll surprisingly showing Obama ahead by 4 points in the Big Sky State, but with a large undecided component; hard to imagine that one turns blue, though with popular Democratic Governor and Senators, anything's possible. I'll just cherrypick a few more here, ignoring the states where one candidate or another is up in the 20s: the Miami Herald has a seven point Obama lead in Florida; of course, Sen. McCain is campaigning heavily in the state, and that's one I'm still uncertain of myself. SUSA has polls in Indiana showing a four point Obama lead, probably makes more sense than yesterday's Big Ten poll showing a ten point margin. In Kansas, SUSA has McCain up 10, which is no surprise, and a 12 point Obama lead in Pennsylvania, in line with other polls but much broader than the Obama campaign's internal polls, which I still think were "leaked" to make sure the base didn't go home to bed two weeks early. National Journal has a 13 point Obama edge in Wisconsin, in line with Big Ten's 12 point lead, and 10 in PA as well, also in line with everyone else. Oh, that's probably enough for now.

CBS/NY Times Poll Opens Further, Now 13 Points
A new CBS/New York Times poll shows Obama with a 52-39 lead, the same 13 points that their re-examination of respondents they first interviewed before the debates turned up. This is actually one point tighter than their prior poll a week ago, and shows a narrower Obama lead among independents. Only five percent say they're still undecided, and this would be a difficult gap to make up, in the absence of the proverbial October (or November) surprise, which does not include a Tampa Bay win in the World Series. Obama still holds a six point lead among independents, though at 45-39, there's still a significant undecided component to this segment. The usual criteria apply--62% say they feel personally comfortable with Obama, compared with only 47% for McCain; indeed 49% say they feel "uneasy" with the Arizonan, compared with only 34% for Obama, which argues that the McCain campaign strategy of demonizing the Democrat is falling on deaf ears. On the question of quality of campaign, a trend we've been seeing for weeks opens up even further--now 64% say McCain is spending more time attacking than explaining, up from 53% a month ago; only 22% say the same of Obama. While it's often been shown that negative campaigning works, the difference between the two is so great that it appears to have made people sit up and take notice. As usual, Obama is seen as the far better candidate on economic issues, and holds a vast advantage on the question of temperament, with 75% saying he has the temperament and personality to be president, while only 50% say McCain has. The two are about even on Iraq, but Obama holds another significant advantage on health care, with 69% of respondents having confidence in his ability to handle health care compared wtih only 41% for McCain. Finally, on net favorables, Obama is at +21 (52-31), while McCain is now solidly negative at -7 (39-46). John McCain has done a mind-boggling job of taking a sterling reputation (whether deserved or not is another question entirely), throwing it in the muck and stomping repeatedly; unfortunately for him, that reputation was his own.

The Palin Effect seems to hold here too, by the way, with net unfavorables at -9 compared with +23 for Joe Biden, even if he does open his mouth and let out a whopper from time to time, that's viewed as "Joe being Joe" while she's increasingly seen as clueless, mendacious, and now, with the wardrobe issue, venal. Obama has a nine point lead among men in this survey, which seems a little high to me right now. He's also got a ten point lead with white working class voters in this survey, another demographic widely viewed as a potential problem. At the same time, he only has 78% of self- described Hillary Clinton primary voters, but we're getting into a smallish sample of a sample at this point. McCain's most recent point, that he needs to be elected as a counterpoint to a massive Democratic majority in Congress, seems not to be well accepted by respondents, with a small margin agreeing. I'd point out that this strategy implies that McCain has thrown the RNCC under a bus, presumably a different bus from the one the RNCC is in the process of throwing him under simultaneously. Troublingly, though, over 30% of respondents say they know someone not voting for Obama because of his race. I don't want to go overboard with my suggestion that an Obama victory will cause a massive re-assessment of Americans' attitudes towards race; no vote is ever unanimous. I'm also concerned because while the base party ID difference is about in line with many polls, there's a weighted number also that dramatically overweights Democrats. Depending on where the weighted number is used, and the poll is unclear about that, the results could overemphasize the scope of Obama's support. This poll also may not weight by age, which would be curious.

Randy Bachman Clearly More Popular Than Michele
I'm delighted to point out that the BTO riff I stumbled upon yesterday generated significant positive comment. Reader Evan (how's that sound?) quite rightly pointed out that the future ex-Congresswoman "wasn't Lookin' Out For #1," and that "at the rate things are going she'll be ready to Roll On Down The Highway after Election Day." Another notes that the music teacher at the prep school that she and a couple members of the awesomely legendary band attended told them they wouldn't go far. Personally, I'd figured this had gone far enough, but now I'm prepared to Let It Ride, being the Free Wheelin' kind of guy I am. Question is, will Rep. Bachmann be willing (or, for that matter, even able) to Take It Like A Man on November 5? You know who will Take It Like A Man? Elwyn Tinklenberg.

How Low Can You Go?
OK, time for everyone to get a little sick to their respective stomachs. Are you ready? Then let's begin. So how long did you think it would be before some underevolved creep found a way to trash Obama for leaving the campaign to spend a couple days with his gravely ill grandmother? If your over/under was about an hour, then today's Homunculus Of The Day (TM) is just for you: future ex-GOP strategist Brad Blakeman, when asked about the $150,000 expenditure on Gov. Palin's wardrobe during a recession, immediately changed the subject, though I'm not sure if he's blaming Obama or his grandmother: "taking a 767 campaign plane to go visit Grandma. Forget about the energy that is wasted, what about the hundreds of thousands of dollars to take a private trip when this guy should be humping his bags on a commercial plane or taking a smaller plane. Taking a 767 of campaign money from people who could least afford it is more of an outrage in my opinion." MSNBC anchor David Schuster, who could not restrain his disgusted laughter, responded "That is one of the most valiant tries I have ever seen in this entire debate about Sarah Palin's clothing allowance."

Fox News EVP Suggests McCain Campaign Is Over If Girl Assaulted By Scary Black Man Is Making Story Up; Girl Assaulted By Scary Black Man Admits To Making Story Up
Yet, it gets even worse than this. Remember the horrible story yesterday about a young female McCain volunteer in Pittsburgh who was mugged and horribly beaten by a black man who took exception to her McCain bumper sticker after she had taken money from an ATM, even going to the curious extreme of cutting a backwards "B" in her right cheek? Well, the backwardness of the letter might have been a bit of a giveaway, because apparently nobody told her that a mirror image comes out in reverse. Today, the Pittsburgh Police Department, reported by KDKA, has announced that the young volunteer made up her story and that the woman, Ashley Todd (I wonder if Senator McCain will tell supporters to send emails to show their support for Ashley The Race-Baiter?), had taken a polygraph test and confessed to making up the story. The backwards B, the fact that there are actually video cameras at ATMs and the one she claimed to have taken money from had no record of her, and she changed her story as to whether or not she was sexually assaulted. Read all about it at http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08298/922564-100.stm?cmpid=news.xml and http://kdka.com/local/attack.McCain.Bloomfield.2.847628.html. Fox News Executive Vice President John Moody commented on his blog that ""this incident could become a watershed event in the 11 days before the election. If Ms. Todd's allegations are proven accurate, some voters may revisit their support for Senator Obama, not because they are racists (with due respect to Rep. John Murtha), but because they suddenly feel they do not know enough about the Democratic nominee. If the incident turns out to be a hoax, Senator McCain's quest for the presidency is over, forever linked to race-baiting." We won't mention that it was Matt Drudge's top story for a while, shall we? Nah. I wonder if Mr. Moody still believes the campaign is over. Check out the blog now before the ever-honorable Fox pulls it: http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/23/jmoody_1023/

McCain Says Using Campaign Funds For Clothing Is....Bad?
In 1993, when there was a $200 Clinton haircut to be up in arms about, a certain Arizona Senator said "the use of campaign funds for items which most American swould consider to be strictly personal reasons, in my view, erodes public confidence and erodes it significantly." He specifically mentions clothing as one of the items that his proposed amendment to the Congressional Spending Limit And Election Reform Act Of 1993. Perhaps the difference is that this is a presidential election, and his amendment was only for congressional elections? Feh. You can find it on a bunch o' progressive web sites, with LOLZ galore, or in the Congressional Record. Srsly.

Meow!
There's just so much more, but there's way too much here. So for a quick look at the backbiting, name-calling, and brickbat-throwing going on between the McCain campaign and Bush administration, look here: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14891.html. A few choice quotes:
“If you really want to see what ‘going negative’ is in politics, just watch the back-stabbing and blame game that we’re starting to see,” said Mark McKinnon, the ad man who left the campaign after McCain wrapped up the GOP primary. “And there’s one common theme: Everyone who wasn’t part of the campaign could have done better.”

“The cake is baked,” agreed a former McCain strategist. “We’re entering the finger-pointing and positioning-for-history part of the campaign. It’s every man for himself now.”

A House Republican leadership aide in an e-mail was no more complimentary: “The staff has been remarkably undisciplined, too eager to point fingers, unable to craft any coherent long-term strategy. The handling of Palin (not her performances, but her rollout and availability) has been nothing short of political malpractice."

Oh, and the New York Times endorsed Senator Obama.

See you tomorrow! Elwyn Tinklenberg.

John

October 23 Daily Polling Update, Scottish Enlightenment Socialist Wealth-Spreading Edition

2008-10-23T13:30:00.000-07:00

We're going to start with the Quote Of The Day today:

It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.

The particular firebrand who is responsible for this bit of anti-American theorizing? No less than Adam Smith, on whose thought it is not too much of a leap to suggest modern capitalism was based and without whom it never would have existed in its current form (see John McCain quote at bottom). If the Republican platform is now to repudiate Adam Smith, it's difficult to see that there's any economic philosophy at all behind it. Of course, being from the Windy City, Sen. Obama is the one with ties in to the Chicago School (which, incidentally, is not known for producing communists). I went to the Reagan Library (named for the former President, who greatly increased the Earned Income Tax Credit) on a recent trip to California and took a few pictures. The GOP seems to have gone to the gravesite, spat out the word "socialist," and hawked a loogie.

Now, on to our show, which is a little different today because there was so much poll data in yesterday's, and some philosophical issues to go over here. It's definitely safe to say the tightening in the polls was zomg just so last week lol.

Let's make it clear I am not speaking about the campaign or the race, but the wheels seem to be falling off John McCain himself. Couple McCain gaffes at a rally in Pennsylvania show a tired, confused candidate saying he couldn't "agree more" with negative comments made about the people of the area, tripping over words to correct and then re-correct himself. Campaign ugly factor steps way up, with McCain mailing piece with the word "terrrorists" on front and a large picture of Obama inside. Gov. Palin agrees to release of medical records, leaving Sen. McCain as the only one who has not. McCain/Palin interview shows a team with zero chemistry. Palin's Paris Hilton-like clothing budget won't leave the news cycle, may end up getting more play than Troopergate; seems like just another bit of common or garden hypocrisy to me, watch for pictures of her juxtaposed with Time Magazine shot of Obama on phone with feet on table showing holes in soles of shoes. NRCC cuts off Michele "Joe McCarthy was a wuss" Bachmann's funding as Elwyn Tinklenberg (Elwyn Tinklenberg) raises a million dollars since her investigation comment and the DNCC matches. Obama camp intentionally accidentally leaks an internal poll of PA showing themselves with only a two point lead, not the double digit margin of independent pollsters(pollster.com, whose methodology I think is a bit simplistic, calls it 15, fivethirtyeight.com mathgeeks it out to just under 10); I'd call that a move to scare supporters out of complacency rather than incompetence. Obama off to Hawaii to be with his ailing grandmother; it will be very interesting to see if the GOP launches a new line of attack while he's at her bedside. Would be a poor choice in a campaign full of them.

ABC/WaPo opens to an 11 point Obama lead, but more wobbliness rather than any hard info
Diageo/Hotline flat but with fewer undecideds, unrealistically wide gender gap (Obama +17 with women, McCain +8 with men--could be the only way Palin is helping? Nah.), net favorables actually higher for McCain than Obama, which completes the argument for one really weird day in the small sample polling
Gallup tightens up but for no apparent reason, though they suggest there will be no influx of new voters
GWU/Battleground squeaks open another point for Obama, to three, but by taking one point off him and two off McCain--are more people undecided now than two weeks ago? Hardly.
Rasmussen, who I have come to trust more than the others, despite a slight GOP bias, opens up to a seven point Obama lead, the largest in nearly two weeks
R2K hangs steady at 10, you could dry your clothes on this trendline
Zogby now 11.9, I was actually only joking a few days ago when I said it was gaining 2.7 points a day from now til Nov 4, you know

John Zogby has a commentary, but it's nothing new, suggesting that Obama is connecting, but McCain is not. McCain is getting "lost in issues that are not in people's minds." There are "some issues that just overwhelm, and McCain has been particularly weak on the economy. He misstated the problem, confused his position, acted in a frantic way, and then looked like he wanted to run away from it. Meanwhile, Obama has been cool and confident, which worked for FDR in 1932 and worked for Ronald Reagan in 1980." I still don't like the way his poll is set up, but any time one of the pollsters decides to come out and say exactly what I"ve been saying all along, I feel duty bound to present it to you. Zogby then goes on to defend his sample, pointing out high numbers of college-educated respondents, Hispanics, young people, and "more Republicans in our sample than anyone else." Well, it's possible he's right about all that, and it's also possible he's bragging about getting the demographics all wrong. A 29% edge among independents tells me something's screwy.

A few state polls, but more of the same. Mason-Dixon has a slight McCain shift in Florida, where the Senator now leads by a point. In Nevada, CNN/Time has Obama up by 5, and four in North Carolina, while a poll for local TV station WSOC shows Obama +2 in the Tar Heel State. CNN also has an Ohio poll with Obama +4; maybe I'm just twice bitten thrice shy, but I can't get that state out of the McCain column in my head. In an interesting split, CNN has Virginia with Obama +10 and Mason-Dixon just a two point lead, but that's a five point swing from his last McCain +3, and he tends to lag a bit, especially when a Republican is leading. A couple polls in Wisconsin explain why the RNC took their money out of the state, both with double digit Obama leads.

Big Ten and Quinnipiac, neither of whom I particularly like, have a bunch o' state polls this morning, pretty much massively favoring Obama. Big Ten has polls in eight states, all of which hold significant Obama leads. We're not too surprised to hear about a 29 point lead in Illinois, but raise our eyebrows at 10 in Indiana, 13 in Iowa, 19 in Minnesota, and 12 in Ohio. In fact our eyebrows are raised into a highly skeptical sort of shape. However, they also did a national poll showing a 9 point Obama lead, which is not out of line. Quinnipiac has a five point Obama lead in Florida, down from eight on October 1, a similar 14 point lead in Ohio, up from eight, and 13 in Pennsylvania, similar to the 15 point lead last time round. Quinnipiac finds that Obama is doing surprisingly well among white evangelicals in PA and OH, and winning Roman Catholics in those states. It's funny; the race has really changed from one based on age, which no longer applies, to one where religion may be the best predictor. If Obama wins Roman Catholics, this will not be a close race at all.

NBC Interview Truly Disconcerting, But I Wasn't Wearing Those Really Cool French Sunglasses WIth The Rose-Colored Lenses I Got In LA
I watched the McCain/Palin interview with Brian Williams, who I found reasonably deferential to the Senator. I had some serious issues with what I saw. First, it really looked like there was absolutely no chemistry between the two; Palin seemed like she wanted to be in charge of the process and McCain didn't seem terribly happy with that. Gov. Palin interrupted her boss several times in her usual forceful tone while he was speaking more softly; it really felt as though she were hijacking the campaign bus. Without turning this into a transcript of the interview and just keeping it my personal observations, it seems to me that one of the conservatives who has thrown John McCain under the bus is Sarah Palin, and one of the mainstream Republicans who believes Sarah Palin has brought down the McCain candidacy is John McCain. Gosh, this will be interesting if they win.

We've Said It Before: If It's A Single-Issue Campaign, Get The Damn Issue Right
The McCain campaign has moved on. The current meme of the week is "Socialism." It's not really working for a variety of reasons: first, Obama's plan is not socialism, especially in light of the financial rescue plan that is not too far away from the state seizing the means of production; second, most people sort of liked the New Deal, though this doesn't go remotely as far (and many others spent the next 50 years screaming "socialism" about it); finally, when a campaign is about a single issue, you'd better be sure that your criticism of your opponent doesn't marginalize the issue, or you'll marginalize yourself. Starting with "fundamentally strong," moving on to "turn the page on the economy," and now ridiculing Obama's tax plan when your own contradicts not Karl Marx but Adam Goddam Smith, may not be the best way to approach the issue.

Bachmann Affair Turning Into Overdrive While Elwyn Tinklenberg Is Taking Care Of Business; DNCC Says "You Ain't Seen Nothin' Yet"
This is a lot more important than one crackpot Congressman, and I think the Republican Party is doing exactly the right thing here. It has been reported that the NRCC has cut off ad spending for Michele Bachmann in light of her comment to Chris Matthews that Congress needs to be investigated for anti-American sentiment. Now, this is not the first time that she's done something loopy; trust me, I use the word "crackpot" advisedly. Remember, she

--attached herself to an uncomfortable President Bush after the State of the Union like a crazed teenybopper trying to tear out a bit of her idol's hair and wouldn't let go til she kissed him on the lips, --later mused to an interviewer on what kind of frozen custard the President of the United States orders, --was photographed hiding behind a lamppost spying on a gay rights rally (the stories say bushes, but trust me, I'm looking at the picture, it's a lamppost. Problem with that is that lampposts are really really narrow and provide unsatisfactory cover for anyone much wider than, say, Victoria Beckham), --explained that Iran would be partitioning Iraq to create the "Iraq State of Islam, something like that" in the "western, northern portion," which she then retracted either because she was exposing classified information or just making everything up --had photos of her taken vacuuming in heels to show that--well, frankly, I don't have a damned clue what she was showing there, --called a news conference to--wait for it--denounce the use of fluorescent light bulbs because they contain mercury and introduced a bill to halt a program designed to phase out the use of old-fashioned, inefficient incandescent bulbs, causing great ridicule even among GOP colleagues.

If you dare, you can read her blog posts at townhall.com but bring a barf bag, whichever party you belong to. Emesis is non-partisan.

So her opponent, Elwyn Tinklenberg (you know, I still enjoy saying that) has raised over a million dollars since this flap began, and the DNCC has now stated that they'd be matching it. Tinklenberg has been running new ads in the greater Saint Cloud megalopolis, positive ones focusing on his achievement, which apparently do not involve anything you'd need to look up in the DSM-IV.

Trying To Avoid A Permanent Republican Minority
The GOP is quite right in distancing itself from Bachmann; there are far too many Michele Bachmanns in senior and indeed elected positions in the party, and with a vastly unpopular president, an election it believes it will lose, and the prospects of massive Democratic majorities in House and Senate for a time when it is likely one or more Supreme Court seats will become open, the last thing it needs is to be viewed by the American public as a home for whackjobs and extremists. Kind of funny that I'm excoriating Rep. Bachmann for wanting to investigate thought crime and recommending a purge, but I think it's what the GOP must do if it does not want to marginalize itself for quite a long time. On the other hand, if it does not do this, and becomes the party of the Bachmanns and Robin Hayeseseses and Sarah Palins, a different sort of realignment is not out of the question looking down the road within the next decade or so.

PS. Elwyn Tinklenberg.

We'll let John McCain have the Second Quote Of The Day; McCain's comments to a brain-dead college student at a rally at Michigan State University in 2000.

Audience member: "Why is it that someone like my father who goes to school for 13 years gets penalized in a huge tax bracket because he's a doctor."

McCain: "I think it's to some degree because we feel obviously that wealthy people can afford more."

Audience member: "Are we getting closer and closer to, like, socialism?"

McCain: "Here's what I really believe: That when you reach a certain level of comfort, there's nothing wrong with paying somewhat more."

Here, with comment, is Jon Stewart's take on it: http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=189119&title=mccain-says-the-s-word

OK, that's it. You've had enough. Give me the keys, I'm calling a taxi.

John

October 22 Daily Polling Update, How To Mine Data For Fun And Profit Edition

2008-10-22T16:07:00.000-07:00

Well if you're John Zogby, and I'm glad you're not, you're pretty much calling the race today. Other polls more reasonable, and I would suggest that Zogby going from 2.7 to 9.6 in three days says more about him than McCain or Obama. Republicans pull out of more states, mainly ones John Kerry took in 2004, plus Colorado, implying the campaign is in hard-core defensive mode. More financial scandal bubbling around Gov. Palin, both expense fiddling (illegal) and massive clothing expenditures by the RNC for her and her family so they won't look so much like they come from the meth capital of Alaska (probably legal but mindbogglingly stupid during a recession). Sen. Biden causes a big foofaraw and it's not even about one of the actually stupid things he says; public seems to mistake him for Manny Ramirez and says "that's just Joe being Joe." It's also not too much of a stretch to assume any new president will be challenged some time in his first half year in office; name one that wasn't. Obama looks like the professor he probably would be in an alternate universe where there was more of a Bradley Effect, looking all too presidential chairing a panel on the economy with Paul Volcker, who led the country through the last recession this serious, among others and a variety of Democratic governors (collect 'em all!). More companies announce layoffs with bad earnings. NBC Poll i significant not because of a 10 point margin or even that it shows Palin is the biggest drag on McCain, but rather because it's another piece of evidence that Obama is winning the center. If that's true, and that's still a big if, it's time to call the interior decorators. Headline refers to AP poll, which is just ridiculous, but keeps it close to sell newspapers.

In really important news, I'm going against the grain (and the 1969 Mets/2008 Rays comparisons I've made myself--apply for details) and pick the Phillies to win the World Series. Unless they lose. Oh, and if I offended any Red Sox fans the other day with my comment about Manny and Jason Bay, my humblest apologies. No Red Sox were harmed during the making of this note.

ABC/WaPo steady at nine yesterday
Diageo/Hotline flat on absolutely no news, and let's keep it that way
Gallup closes a bit, but it's still the same range, not breaking out either way
GWU/Battleground widens by a point, but a two point Obama lead is really only marginally less rational than one
Rasmussen opens to a six point Obama lead, but it's been in a four to six range for a while, state polls showing 9 point McCain lead in WV, 11 in SC.
R2K takes a point off McCain, lead now 10, nothing much to say, seems about in keeping
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby has managed to go from a 2.7% lead two days ago to 5.4% yesterday to 7.9% today to 9.6% today; still on track for a 40+ point win .Puh-leeze.

Fox Poll Makes Sense, AP Poll Visibly Trumped-Up
In non-dailies, Fox has a new poll with a 49-40 Obama lead, up from 46-39 two weeks ago. All the usual things apply, as far as issues of change, economy. 35% say Colin Powell's endorsement makes them more likely to vote for Obama, while Fox managed to find 25% who said it would make them less likely; as there wasn't an approval poll on Powell anywhere in the country that had him anywhere near a 25% disapproval, that's odd. There's an AP/GfK poll out also that you may hear about, but it's weird. 10 point lead among registered voters but only one among likelies? Issues questions dramatically favor Obama, but when they take 27% of the total survey off to create their "likely voters," the lead evaporates. Internals show that they take younger voters down to well below the 2004 levels, when it's much more likely to be well above. There are others. It's about the worst poll I've seen in terms of data mining, and I look at IBD/TIPP every day. Fuggedaboutit.

They Call It Pew Because It Stinks For McCain
But seriously folks, it's actually a little unrealistic, I think. The Pew Research Center does have a new poll out showing a 14 point Obama lead, 53-39 among likely voters. I don't really remember seeing McCain under 40%, and this is actually up seven points from their poll a week ago, which argues for outliers somewhere. Pew is, however, a nationally known and well-respected service, and you'll hear about it in the news. On the issues, though, about what you'd expect, Obama wins on the economy by 21 points, 53-32. They're noting a widespread loss in confidence in McCain, with many more voters having doubts about his judgment--41% say he has poor judgment, while 20% say so about Obama. Here's one big difference between this poll and others--McCain is generally viewed with more enthusiasm by his base in most polls, while in this one McCain voters actually find their own candidate less inspiring, while 71% find Obama inspiring; he wins on all the usual character questions as well, which can't be a surprise. Looking at what I can find on internals, I do see this poll includes cellphone users and a 19 point Obama lead among independents. Also, McCain has lost support among white men and evangelicals--we see polls that go both ways on those demographics, and I don't know that we can trust either. That being said, this poll actually probably underrepresents younger voters, who are Obama's strongest constituency, and overrepresents seniors. I don't understand the party ID weighting, though--while I'm good with 37% Democrats and 31% GOP, Independents are only 28%, leaving 4% who wouldn't say. It's not reasonable to expect, but that whole 4% could be in the Obama camp, and skew the party weighting as a result. I'm just playing devil's advocate on it because I don't think 14 is quite right and we should find reasons to understand it. Here, you try it: http://people-press.org/report/462/obamas-lead-widens

NBC Poll: ZOMG! Palinmania Is Like, Soooooo Last Month, Obama Cements The Center
New NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll out last night, showing the mandatory (but still I feel slightly overstated) 10 point Obama lead, 52-42, up from 49-43 two weeks ago; there is, however, evidence that last week's tightening of the numbers in favor of Sen. McCain is over, at least for the last couple days. This poll shows what we've been seeing mounting evidence for: Barack Obama is winning the center. A 12 point lead for Barack Obama among independent voters is about in line with what we see elsewhere, but it's significant that he retains a 12 point lead among suburban voters, a four point lead with white women, and perhaps most importantly of all, a six point edge, 50-44, among Roman Catholics. Democratic pollster Peter Hart, who conducted the poll along with Republican counterpart Neil Newhouse, suggests that what we're seeing is people's general high comfort level with "who is Barack Obama." I think that all the other polls we've seen in the last week say the exact same thing, which also implies that the McCain attack strategy may have difficulty gaining traction even if it moves into an entirely more vicious stretch run.

On the issues, it's also all about comfort. Obama has a 39 point edge on health care, 21 on the economy, 21 on the mortgage and housing crises, 17 on dealing with the Wall Street crisis, 14 on taxes, and 12 on energy. McCain has a 20 point edge on who would be more likely to catch bin Laden (remember, he's the one with the double secret plan to do it, but we'll only hear it if he's elected) and a five point edge on handling Iraq, a slim 4 point edge on strong leadership qualities. Obama has a 30 point advantage in "offering hope and optimism," 20 points on improving America's standing in the world, and perhaps most importantly of all, a gigantic 20 point edge on having the right temperament to be president. Enthusiasm is also a big issue, though I believe that last week's McCain bump was more about the red getting redder than people falling of the fence into his camp; 52% of Obama voters say they're excited to vote for Obama, while 26% of McCain voters say they're excited about him. 48% say they have confidence in Obama as Commander-In-Chief, compared with 50% for McCain (incidentally, this I've found to be a very good guide as to whether the poll has a party lean); a month ago it was 42-53. 56% say they are confident that Obama would do a good job as president, while only 44% say that of McCain. Where this poll may actually show a GOP lean is that 55% say Obama shares their background and values, compared with 57% who say that about McCain; in other polls, Obama usually wins by a long shot, largely because McCain's score is not nearly as high as this.

The single biggest negative for McCain, and again I would say this is in line with other surveys, but a bit more explicit, is Sarah Palin. 55% now say she is not qualified to serve as president, and her net favorables have turned negative, which we don't see much of in polls without a Democratic house advantage. It's a fairly significant -9 in this survey too, down from +20 when she was chosen. So what we see here is voters liking Barack Obama more as they get to know him, and Sarah Palin less as they get to know her. When they get to know her expense account I rather think old-style Republicans will like her even less.
Ecclesiastico-Political Side Note, RC Division
The question of whether the abortion issue, promoted (with dubious legality if you want to remain tax-free) by the RC church, now sits as one important issue among many is an interesting one. I'd note a few items; first, that issues of social justice and anti-war sentiment are no stranger to the church, though during the papacy of John Paul II, parish priests were largely instructed to talk about abortion at quite literally every opportunity (and if you want to see a real wedding buzz-kill, watch some inarticulate local cleric frothing at the mouth about the baby killers in between vows), and some bishops stepped way over the line by making pronouncements that you were committing a mortal sin by voting for a pro-choice candidate. There is much less of this talk today, though it still exists. I'd point out two things there: first, we're in a recession and people need to know who's going to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, etc, which actually gets a lot more play in the bible. Additionally, there's a new sheriff in town since the 2004 election, and Benedict XVI may have, in my opinion, a much more nuanced view of the world than his rather more black-and-white predecessor, while still being no less staunchly anti-abortion. If you're going to make something a make-or-break issue during a recession and financial crisis, most people are more likely to make it about how they're going to get by this winter.

You don't hear as much about the abortion issue this year, and there's a simple reason for it. When you're in a recession and you try to fight a one-issue campaign on an issue that isn't the recession, you lose. We'll see if you can win with a no-issue campaign.

You Heard It Here First Dept.
We've been talking for a while about how this recession would be about jobs, and really no amount of money injected into keeping banks solvent would prevent companies feeling the pinch from laying off significant percentages of their work force. Also that it would be likely to happen very soon, along with September quarter earnings, as I believed the general tone of earnings would be bad and companies often soften the blow to investors by doing something happy like firing thousands of people. Well, that's what's happening here. Merck added itself to the pile today as the recession seems bad enough that people are even not refilling prescriptions (see, here's an example of how not having good insurance, much less no insurance at all, can, umm, well, kill you, so lets' think about that when we discuss health care coverage for all Americans, and especially all children.) The company announced it would lay off over 7,000 people, of which over 3,000 would be in the US. I'd be surprised if we didn't see unemployment move up to the 9% area by the time this is done, possibly even 10. (I don't count.)

~~Pit Bull~~ Spiro Agnew With Lipstick (Bought By The RNC)
So here's one reason for the NBC poll showing the good governor of what is the largest state in America (if you don't count forty-eight others) being a bigger drag on John McCain than George Bush. Apparently one of the ways you can tell which are the pro-America parts of the country is that they allow expense fraud and tax evasion, but it doesn't get in to the New York Post if it's a) the Republican running mate and b) true. According to the AP, Gov. Palin charged Alaska not just for staying at home, but for her children's travel (including one trip to see their father in a snowmobile race), though the $21,000 cost of this is dwarfed by the $150,000 the RNC spent at Saks and Neiman-Marcus to clothe the backwoods family in something that didn't involve bearskin. Curious choice during a recession. And the irony just drips, coming on the day when the New York Post had to retract its item claiming that Michelle Obama ordered expensive room service items at the Waldorf-Astoria (as if that were a news story, but the Post retracted it when presented with proof Mrs. Obama was not in fact at the Waldorf that night). Additionally, travel expenses for children on your business are not tax deductible, so there may be a little IRS issue looming. Frankly, she's looking more like a common political grafter ever day, and the question now becomes whether she's more likely to serve in the big house than the White House. Here, enjoy, and don't look yourself in the mirror if you're still supporting her: http://www.newsweek.com/id/165012

John Edwards, eat your heart out Dept: They've spent close to $5,000 on hairstyling for the Governor, making your measly $400 haircut look like a buzz cut from Angelo the barber across from the fire house downtown who takes bets on the Jets game if he knows you long enough. Obama campaign saying nothing so far about the clothing allowance, nor should they: enough Republicans are up in arms about it that they'll continue to be spitting mad through Election Day. Pat Nixon and her good Republican cloth coat are spinning in the grave.

Lying For The Lord (Or At Least For A Fifth Generation Cassette Version)
OK, this pro-America, anti-America, pro-God, anti-God crap has to stop, or you'll start hearing phrases like "Godless communists" again, plus it puts millions of decent, sincere believers in an awfully awkward position. The Homunculus Of The Day (TM), Rep. Robin Hayes of suddenly swing state North Carolina has admitted that his bizarre speech to a local crowd when he said that "liberals hate real Americans that work and accomplish and achieve and believe in God" was in fact his own bizarre speech. After making these comments (and I think that about 99.432% of you reading this would fall into the anti-American slacker failure atheist category, so enjoy it now because you're all going to h-e-double hockeysticks), Rep. Hayes chose how seriously he took his comments by using both the Third (Second if your'e Roman Catholic or Lutheran, but we can talk about that another time) and Ninth Commandment as a rolling paper and swearing he never said those things. Unfortunately for the Congressman, who has been around since the Witch of Endor was just a misunderstood high school girl wearing black and considering her first tattoo, reporters put stuff on tape these days (Congressman, if you don't believe me, ask Sen. McCain about that whole not knowing much about the economy thing and YouTube), especially when it's a reporter for a TV station where stuff tends to get, well, broadcast to the whole damn world.

OK, til tomorrow...

John

October 21 Daily Polling Update, London Calling Edition

2008-10-21T14:11:00.000-07:00

Tons of data today, so this is going to be more of a grown-up edition. Sorry about that, greater amusement content tomorrow, promise. National polls definitely in at least a holding pattern; tightening trend of the last week seems to be over with a couple days of modest gains for Obama. Lots of state polls yesterday/today, mostly good for Obama, though not exclusively. CBS/NY Times poll re-interviewing respondents from before the first debate shows a larger Obama margin, usual issues issues. Obama cancelling events Thursday and Friday to visit his gravely ill grandmother in Hawaii; amoral cretins on both sides talk exclusively about the political fallout, as if his grandmother were being selfish choosing this week to be dying. Incidentally, he's showing what, if anything, "heartland values" actually means. Both parties seem pleased by Chairman Bernanke's statement that further stimulus is needed and moreover, might even work; markets thrilled just to hear there is in fact someone at the helm. Matt Drudge (excuse the expression and brb while I go wash my hands) finds a poll that is only Obama +2; unfortunately for McCain it's a survey of children on the Nickelodeon cable network. FEC investigating whether street money was paid in candy bars. McCain is going to stop crowing about not talking about the Rev. Wright (as if) and start talking about the Rev. Wright--does this mean they have to stop calling Obama Muslim? Virginia polls moving significantly in Obama's direction; who knew half the state would be insulted by being called Communist and not the "real Virginia?" Other than Virginians, that is. The New Republic now suggesting connection between Powell Doctrine and Powell endorsement of Obama--not like (ahem) you didn't read that here two days ago...

ABC/WaPo posts really late in the day, so we'll just be a day behind with this one because I don't want to send this out in the evening
Diageo/Hotline continues to wobble, because I think it's put together a little wobbly
Gallup widens slightly in both likely voter scenarios, lead tracks economic viewpoint
GWU/Battleground is now a one point Obama lead, which is truly bizarre but this one can bounce 5 points in a day due to small daily samples and 5 day tracking, which argues people are probably taking them too seriously--watch for a similar swing back by the weekend
Rasmussen stays flat, though Obama now ahead of McCain by a six point margin on leadership, significant in a GOP leaning poll
R2K stays flat, no surprises
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby has managed to go from a 2.7% lead two days ago to 5.4% yesterday to 7.9% today; at this rate Obama will win by approximately 50 points

Just a quick note now that there are eight of these things. I tend to like Rasmussen the best, despite a 1-2 point GOP lean (so at least I'm not going with my personal preference, or all you'd ever hear about is R2K). He's got the best track record of the dailies and publishes decent info, though not detailed internals. Zogby, Battleground, and TIPP are worthless, which you can see in retrospect from how jumpy they are, which implies design flaws, which I strongly believe abound. I'm not even going to talk about IBD/TIPP because I have too much respect for you. R2K seems above-average, though with a similar or greater Democratic lean to Rasmussen's towards the Republicans. Gallup and Hotline are mediocre and should not be used to settle bets.

There's actually a bit of information in Zogby today worth mentioning because it speaks to a larger point I've avoided discussing, so when i've picked myself up and sat back down on the chair I fell off, I'll give it to you. A great many states are engaging in early voting this year, to avoid inconvenience on Election Day, provide a more orderly process and at least partially because it's a lot less embarrassing than having Castro offer to send Cuban election monitors to ensure free elections every four years. I mention this because it appears to be largely groups that claimed to be disenfranchised in 2000 and 2004, primarily minorities, that are taking advantage of early voting this year. Zogby shows a 21 point Obama lead among people who have already voted in the first few days of early voting. This shows at the very least that an awful lot of minority voters and voters in heavily Democratic districts in general feel their votes were stolen, whether they were or not, and are doing what they can to redress a real or perceived injustice. The system may just be stronger than the folk trying to game it after all.

CBS Re-Interviews Respondents From Before The First Debate; Apparently They Prefer Being Talked To Over Being Harangued. Who Knew?
CBS went back and re-interviewed 476 likely voters they'd surveyed before the first debate to see how their views had changed after three and a half debates and a bitter campaign. They had. In short, people feel they now know and trust Barack Obama, while they were surprised and a little distressed by John McCain, which is a gigantic swing from early in the cycle. Before the first debate, these voters favored Barack Obama 48-43; today, that has expanded to 54-41. Obama has held on to nearly all his original voters (98%), while McCain has had a little more difficulty--while 88% sounds like a lot, it means that 12% of his support has eroded in under a month. Undecided voters have mostly fallen off the fence, with Obama taking 52% of the, 36% going for McCain, and 12% undecided. Independents go to Obama by 50-43, more or less in line with what seems to be the nation as a whole at present; however, that's a significant shift from a month ago, when they actually favored McCain/Palin by a 46-40 margin. Overall favorables of Obama have improved significantly during the campaign and through the debates in particular, while these debate-watchers have actually lowered their opinion of McCain significantly; Obama now has a +20 net favorable, while McCain is at -9 (53/33 vs 36/45). Obama wins on the issues, with slightly more people thinking McCain will raise their taxes than Obama, and the Democrat wins on the economy and crisis management, meaning that Obama's explanations are working better than McCain's attacks, which is the big takeaway from this survey. Obama's performance in the debates, the perception by an overwhelming margin that he is running a more positive campaign, and the idea that he spends more time explaining his positions while McCain spends more time just attacking his opponent all contributed to this striking shift in opinion. Oh, and people like Biden and don't much care for Palin. Big whoop.
State Of The States, And A Lot Of 'Em
So what do we see in the states? Rasmussen has a bunch of battleground state polls, which are almost all good for the Democrat: Colorado +5, Missouri +5 (though Suffolk, historically not nearly as accurate as Rasmussen, has McCain +1), North Carolina +3 (PPP has it Obama +7--a serious Obama victory in NC and this race could not possibly be more over, but there's going to be a stomach-churning load of variability in states like these), Ohio McCain +2 (but again Suffolk somehow makes it Obama +9, so I'd trust Rasmussen) and a full 10 point Obama lead in Virginia, which would be another sign that you can spend the evening watching The West Wing on DVD instead. North Carolina is interesting because McCain is slightly more highly regarded than Obama, but the Democrat wins on the economy and the question of "bringing real change to Washington," crucially important in this 1976-like year. Missouri works out pretty similarly, though the favorables are the same for the two. SUSA also has a few state polls out, showing a tighter-than-expected six point Obama lead in Minnesota, six in Virginia, and eight in Wisconsin. SUSA, remember, was the most accurate pollster in 2004 and did, I believe, a better job than anyone else predicting primaries this year. PPP, typically with a Democratic lean, has a two point Obama lead in Indiana. I think as things stand now, it p robably turns McCain's way, but a blue Indiana will be a blue day for the Republicans in general. Note that an awful lot of this note is talking about Obama leads in states that should have been Republican layups. Something weird is going to have to happen for a GOP win here, but weird things happen.....

Got a few others also. Democratic pollster GQR, which bent over backwards to put together a McCain leaning focus group of independents after last week's debate, has a survey in Georgia which is either dead wrong or explains why Gov. Palin began her 2012 presidential run last week. With, to be sure, a far too high undecided component, it's just a two point McCain lead, 46-44. If this works out this way, it'll be because of a reverse Bradley (which we are considering calling the yeldarB from henceforth) in a state with 29% African-American population and an awful lot of white folk who, in Sen. McCain's phrase are "angry and hurting" but may not want their neighbors to know they're voting for the black guy. You're now seeing rallies in the south with white people wearing Confederate flags and Obama t-shirts. This also means our ideas of what racism means need dramatic adjustment. All of us. Really.

And finally, Grove Insight, who I've never heard of (but which means nothing), has a 13 point Obama margin in Oregon, which is an interesting state in that it's both deep blue and deep red at the same time. The daily Morning Call poll in Pennsylvania has a 12 point Obama lead in the Keystone State, pretty static, while Susquehanna makes it eight. A couple other notes from the Morning Call web site include a profile of Rays' manager (and Hazelton PA native) Joe Maddon and news that a multiple vehicle accident on Route 22 is backing up traffic for miles around Exit 145, so if that's how you get to work, and I'm pretty sure that's how everyone on this list gets to work, you're pretty much hosed today, so stay home. Research 2000 has a 7 point Obama margin in New Hampshire; the lead has expanded since both Obama and Palin were there within a day of each other last week. The differences were striking, Obama talking about the economy, jobs, and how the Granite State taught him not to take anything for granted. The Gov seemed to talk about moose. Well, she did go on about how much NH was like Alaska. I'm pretty sure moose entered into it.
Minnesota Does Not Heart McCarthyism
So after Rep. Michele Bachmann's weirdly unhinged rant on Hardball last week calling for an investigation of anti-American sentiment (thought police?) in Congress, her opponent, the still curiously named Elwyn Tinklenberg (and I'm mostly just writing this so I can say "Elwyn Tinklenberg" a few more times. Elwyn Tinklenberg.) raised over $600,000 in a week, roughly ten times his average fundraising, and the race is now close. Elwyn Tinklenberg is using the money to go on a TV ad blitz in the greater Saint Cloud area (less expensive than NYC, incidentally). Nice ad, pointing out he's an ex-pastor, former Mayor of Blaine, MN, where he built a sports complex without throwing the city's economy into massive debt (ahem), and built roads and light rail as the State Transportation Commissioner. And never accused anyone of thought crimes, which was even unconstitutional in the USSR. It's a highly GOP district, but oh my, they're embarrassed. You betcha. Elwyn Tinklenberg. Elwyn Tinklenberg.

Hasn't Anyone Told Her What The VP Does, YET?
OK, so we know Gov. Palin asked what the heck the VP does before she was tapped as McCain's running mate. And she seemed to think that the VP was the CEO of the Senate in the debate. But you'd really think someone might have clued her in by now. APparently not. In an interview with KUSA in Colorado, Palin responds to the following question:
Q: Brandon Garcia wants to know, "What does the Vice President do?" PALIN: That’s something that Piper would ask me! ... [T]hey’re in charge of the U.S. Senate so if they want to they can really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom.

So the VP defines policy for the Senate and helps grade-schoolers. If you don't believe it, and honest to God you shouldn't, watch it here: http://www.9news.com/video/default.aspx?aid=63586
London Calling, And It's Obama's Line That's Ringing
Boris Johnson, the always-amusing Tory mayor of London, has a piece in the Telegraph today http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/10/21/do2101.xml explaining why, even in conservative-ish overseas eyes, Barack Obama is a sensible choice for President. Perhaps able to look at the candidates without the partisanship of an American voter, Johnson not only gets serious for a moment and notes that Obama "visibly incarnates both change and hope," which we knew, is "highly intelligent" with "an air of courtesy and sincerity" and, in a swipelet of the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, "has no difficulty in orally extemporising a series of grammatical English sentences, each containing a main verb," which is totally irrelevant to my point, but fun to mention. Most importantly, he notes a difference in gravitas between Obama and McCain, and that he could not find a single scrap of evidence that Obama is anything like any of the bad bad bad bad bad things the McCain campaign has tried to pin on him, calling it no more than guilt by association. He also notes the racial angle, and how the election of Obama could actually mark the end of race-based politics, which "will have re-established Americas' claim to be the last, best hope of Earth." A truly moving piece.

And the headline of the piece by the Conservative ex-MP/columnist/editor of The Spectator/current Mayor of London in the most resolutely Tory paper in Britain? "Barack Obama: Why I believe he should be the next President."

OK, tons of data, as promised, some of it contradictory, some of it full of puffery, some of it actually meaningful. On balance, a good day for Obama, and we'll see if it holds over the next few as he steps back to go to Hawaii and the McCain people do as they promise and plumb new depths of scabrousness.

A demain,

John

October 20 Daily Polling Update, The More The Merrier Edition

2008-10-20T17:17:00.000-07:00

Well, it's looking a little clearer all the time we're in a trading range for the meanwhile. We won't do anything so vulgar as calculate an average, but it appears that the tightening of the numbers has stabilized for a few days. GOP been trying to make a mighty oak out of a small ACORN, but the first person actually arrested for voter fraud is...a Republican consultant. Speaking of Republican consultants, Freddie Mac appears to have spent a few million on some three years ago to scuttle new regulation, some of whom are now senior figures in the McCain campaign. McCain campaign wants all Obama donations investigated, as AP and Bloomberg report the McCain campaign solicited donations from the Russian government. Sarah Palin continues her campaign for the Vice Presidency in 2008 2012 by denouncing her own campaign's robocalls and underlining additional differences between herself and John McCain, who appears not to notice the shiv sticking out of his back. Watch for Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee turning against Palin and the robocalls by lunchtime. Over 300,000 people have voted early in North Carolina; 60% of those voting in person are Democrats. Obama campaign warning against complacency as volunteers in many states fail to turn up, presumably because they believe the race is over. It aint.

Barack Obama campaigning today in Tampa (congrats, Rays, the 1969 Mets of 2008) at the (excuse the expression) Yankees' Spring Training facility, now called....Steinbrenner Field. May be the first time a Democratic candidate has ever campaigned at an arena named after a man convicted for illegal campaign contributions to the GOP. Maybe not.

ABC/WaPo is now a daily tracker, and a nine point lead on day one
Diageo/Hotline closes to a five point Obama lead, claims McCain has a 9% advantage among white voters, seems high, 67% saying economy biggest issue
Gallup widens to nine among likely voters, noting Palin's SNL appearance and one day of effect of Powell endorsement
GWU/Battleground stays flat but may not have any Powell effect because it takes the weekends off
IBD/TIPP is now in the chart also, but it stinks so I won't talk about it
Rasmussen giveth and taketh away but sayeth nothing of note
R2K whacks a point off McCain, now an eight point lead
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby doubles its Obama lead today to 5.4% and still just makes no damn sense to me

Rasmussen surveyed voters just before the Powell endorsement of Obama which showed the General was viewed favorably by 80% of the population, in line with other polls; Powell may in fact be the most highly regarded public figure in America. I would guess that the preponderance of the unfavorables are on the left as well, and his approval on the right would be even more stratospheric. In a separate poll, Rasmussen has Obama up by 10 points in Virginia. We'll have more on this tomorrow, along with results from Rasmussen on Colorado, North Carolina, Florida, and Missouri.

CNN has a new national poll out showing that their prior eight point lead has contracted to five in two weeks (six including third-party candidates); this makes perfect sense to me and is in line with the contraction in the trackers. CNN suggests that the poll shows McCain's support has firmed a little because voters may be less inclined to believe he will follow George Bush's economic program. Issues results are about what you'd think, Obama wins the economy, 53-38, and on "helps the middle class," by 63-32.

ABC News/WaPo Poll Now A Daily Tracker, So We'll Start Here
ABC and the Washington Post have a poll out today, their first daily tracking poll, which we will be adding to our tables, giving Obama a nine point lead, 53-44. As usual, over half say the economy is the biggest issue, and Obama wins those voters by a 55-39 margin. The temperament issue seems to cancel out experience, with Obama winning on "able to handle a major crisis," by 49-45, and Obama wins on taxes by 10 points, 52-42. This is a four-day rolling survey, including cell-phone users. I wish I had more internals, things such as party ID etc, but I'll see if I can find them and figure out what it all means later.

On the issue and character questions, the poll suggests what we all already knew--a significant majority (60-37) say the Bill Ayers issue is annoying. A smaller plurality (49-40) are not concerned about ACORN's voter registration efforts, showing that the GOP has done a reasonably good job demonizing the organization (notwithstanding the fact that Sen. McCain himself used to support them). Want more evidence that Palinmania has been replaced by Palin fatigue? In this poll, 52% said that the choice of the Governor as McCain's running mate made them less confident in his judgment, compared with only 38% who said it made them more confident. Just after the choice in early September, the numbers were almost exactly the opposite, 50-39 saying they were more confident in his judgment. What a difference a month and a half makes. On the other hand, when asked the same question about selection of Joe Biden as the Democratic running mate, 56% said it made them more confident in Barack Obama's judgment, with 31% saying it made them less so; probably safe to assume the negative is nearly all partisan.

Looking on the bright side, Obama wins 62-30 on "more optimistic," which is a word that probably has deeper meaning in an election than the dictionary definition. Ronald Reagan was also viewed as being significantly more optimistic than Jimmy Carter, because he had a vision of an America that transcended the difficult present moment. Whether one agrees with Reagan's positions or not is irrelevant; voters responded at the time to that deeper optimism, and that aspect of Sen. Obama's message also seems to be resonating. Independent voters see the optimism nearly the same way, giving the vote to Obama by 57-31 and better suited temperamentally for the presidency than McCain by 52-36.

Racists Suggest Powell Endorsement Is About Race
Pat Buchanan--surprise, surprise--is the first to go the third-rate human being route and claim Colin Powell's endorsement of Obama is because of race. Anyone who's shocked Pat Buchanan is a third-rate human being please call me, because I have some Lehman Brothers stock you might like to pay a hundred bucks a share for. Rush Limbaugh does the same, but "third rate human being" would be several steps up for the amoral, mendacious, drug-addled megalomaniacal demagogue, so we'll skip him. And yes, before you ask, I am looking down my nose at him. I only wish my nose were longer.
Lack Of Candidates' Health Records Raised In NY Times; Biden Agrees To Limited Release, No Response from McCain Or Palin Yet
There's a feature story in the New York Times today (by Lawrence Altman, a columnist who has written on the health of presidential candidates since 1980 and is an MD himself; this isn't a quick hatchet job on anyone) regarding the lack of public health records of three of the four candidates. (Sen. Obama released a letter from physician giving him a "clean bill of health" and has released test results from physicals in 2001, 2004, and 2007) seems to have an impact; Sen. Biden's will be released for inspection by his travelling press corps. While Biden had released a similar doctor's note, the documentation did not say whether he had been scanned for possible recurrence of the aneurysms he has had treated in the past. Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin have not yet commented on their own as some army physicians suggest McCain's melanoma may have been more later stage than claimed. A Palin spokesman had previously said that the Governor would refuse all requests for records or interviews on her health. I'm usually on the side of privacy, as any of you who have ever tried to get me to tell them something might remember. I think, though, that when we are electing a President and Vice President part of the calculus should be one's assessment of those candidates' physical ability to serve their terms out. While Obama's release of his records is commendable, and Biden is falling into line, I should note that none of the four have acceded to the Times' request for interviews on the subject, and the McCain campaign in fact refused to allow the Times to ask a question during the one brief health-related conference call it held several months ago. Story is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/20/us/politics/20health.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

NFL Notes
Well, I have trouble paying attention to football before the World Series is over, and it's not always easy afterwards. However, we have a bit of a political football being tossed around now, which, public-minded sort that I am, I figured I'd bring to your attention. Pittsburgh Steelers owner Dan Rooney, universally beloved in and around his hometown, is campaigning for Obama in Pennsylvania and Ohio with OH Governor Ted Strickland and Steelworkers Union President Leo Gerard. On the other hand, and if there are any Miami fans out there, raise your flippers, Dolphins' owner Wayne Huizenga, universally loathed in Miami, Wall Street, and pretty much everywhere else, says he'll sell the team if Obama wins. Huizenga is so detested in football-crazy Florida that the prospect of new Dolphins management could be what puts Obama over the top for keeps in the Sunshine State.

A Bad Day For GOP Consultants Who Would Prefer Not To Go To Jail
Hoo boy. So what have we got? As mentioned above, the first person arrested for voter registration fraud is in fact not connected with ACORN but instead a Republican operative, Marc Jacoby, who fraudulently registered himself in California so that his firm would be allowed to register voters and collect petition signatures in the state. Apparently his firm, YPM (Young Political Majors, believe it or not) duped people into registering as Republicans by telling them they had to do it in order to sign a petition to toughen penalties against child molesters, managing to trivialize several issues at once. The firm is also under investigation in Florida and Massachusetts, and was the defendant in a lawsuit in Arizona. He might have been better off filling out registration forms for Mickey Mouse. From the LA Times: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-fraud20-2008oct20,0,3842357.story

Further Freddie, Fannie Follies
Once again, the McCain campaign seems to be considerably deeper involved themselves in an ugly issue than the other side. While castigating Barack Obama for supposed connections to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, people now aligned with the McCain campaign were allegedly taking loads of cash to scuttle reform of the agencies. The AP reports at http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/T/THE_INFLUENCE_GAME_HOUSING?SITE=WWL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT that the GSO "secretly paid a Republican consulting firm $2 million to kill legislation that would have regulated and trimmed the mortgage finance giant and its sister Fannie Mae, three years before the government took control to prevent their collapse." This legislation, incidentally, was introduced by Nebraska GOP Senator Chuck Hagel, who has also been an outspoken critic from the right on the war in Iraq and has not endorsed John McCain's candidacy. This is more striking because it turns out that the CEO of the lobbying firm, Doug Goodyear, was hired by the McCain campaign to manage the GOP convention this year. McCain campaign manager Rick Davis and his firm have also taken over $2 million from Fannie and Freddie since 2000. McCain has called the collapse of Fannie and Freddie one of the "real catalysts, really the match that lit the fire" of the global credit crisis. Well, frankly, given the amount of money that passed around here, and his involvement in the last huge financial scandal in the U.S., the senator should know.

OK, too long. That's because I've used a lot of tomorrow's information waiting for the ABC numbers. If they're really coming out at 5pm every day, they're always going to be a day behind. See you tomorrow, same Bat-time, same Bat-channel!

John

October 19 Daily Polling Update, Actual Honest To Goodness Endorsement That Matters For Once Edition

2008-10-19T13:27:00.000-07:00

Colin Powell is going to vote for Obama, look for this to carry a little weight particularly in the military-heavy states of FL, VA, and NC. Gov. Palin goes on Saturday Night Live and doesn't particularly seem to enjoy it, but I say it's because she's uncomfortable with an ensemble cast rather than being the center of attention. Polls in their trading range, narrower than a week ago, which I have thought all along reflects a higher degree of enthusiasm among the GOP base for McCain rather than people in the middle falling his way. Watch the Obama team employ the Powell Doctrine of "overwhelming force" (after diplomacy is exhausted) with the vast amounts of money it has raised since the conventions and lead a charge in battleground states. Campaign claims to have raised $150 million in September alone, with an average donation of "under $100." If he's spending $5 million in West Virginia in the next two weeks, imagine what goes into Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia. NBC/Mason-Dixon polls show a double digit Obama lead in Wisconsin, where the RNC has stopped advertising (though the McCain campaign has not), a virtual tie in Ohio, and only a six point lead in West Virginia. Many polls showing Obama ahead among seniors seeing Medicare and Social Security at risk. GOP Senator, Susan Collins of Maine demands McCain campaign stop scurrilous robo-calls, which ironically appear to be generated by the firm the Bush campaign used to slime McCain in 2000, owned by longtime associate and below-market landlord of Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman, who also demands all negative advertising end, especially Al Franken's.

Note to Red Sox fans: if the Sawx win the pennant tonight, you are hereby ordered to cease and desist blithering, blathering, and/or bluthering about the Manny trade. In fact, even if they lose, they're a better team with Jason Bay in left, so deal with it.

Diageo/Hotline tightens by another point, but by taking a few votes away from Obama; McCain can't get past 41% in this one
Gallup bucks trend, shows gains for Obama, expanded likely voters model shows erosion for McCain and gains for Obama. Hmm.
GWU/Battleground is out for a Sunday drive
Rasmussen adds back the Obama point it lost yesterday, in a holding pattern, adds to Democratic weighting, now really doesn't look too much like a GOP poll at all, but that might be to add complacency to the Democratic ranks, given that it is a GOP poll at all...
R2K stays at a seven point Obama lead, with three very consistent single days
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby down to 2.7, and lead among independents cut from 16 to 8 overnight. You don't move eight points without something major happening, and nothing happened. Really nothing happened. Srsly.

And this is all why it's not over. Yet. I'm not being all panicky and stuff, but we're writing about public opinion polling here, not one's personal political instincts. Why, you ask, or would if I weren't being all rhetorical and stuff? OK. And again, I'm not saying McCain's going to win, I'm just saying, trying to gain an understanding of what may not be in the numbers I publish every day, that the proverbial fat lady is still just warming up in her dressing room.

1) Reversion to the mean. Stuff tightens naturally. Just does. Welcome to the world of the normal distribution. You want to go outside the bell curve, play the stock market (that's another argument entirely, but one I'm happy to have with anyone).

2) Many people vote for the person, not the issues, and when they get to the voting booth, more Americans are going to identify more with the old white guy than the inspirational black one. I'd hasten to add this is not cross-burning, but equally hastily say it's there all the same. A serious recession could negate this one (see below).

3) A little less panic. Although we're in a recession--get used to it, it's been here a while and it's gonna be here a while and the NBER will confirm that when they have a moment but right now they're texting their BFFs about the great sales at the mall they wish they had the money to go to--oil prices have dropped dramatically in the last couple weeks, which is most notable at the pumps where people can begin to afford a tank of gas without having to sell the car to pay for it. Now, I'd say this has more to do with the markets in general, slower consumption because of the aforementioned recession, and the collapse of a lot of speculators, but it's also curious timing, and timing that was called by more than a few sources several months ago to happen right before the election, giving a bump to the Republican candidate. Could be a lot of reasons. More than one at a time. The world gets complicated that way, you know. Really.
Powell's Endorsement Of Obama Might Move A Needle Or Two, A Little. Maybe.
Well, the biggest news today was not unexpected, but still will likely make quite an impact. As we'd discussed yesterday, Gen. Colin Powell, former Secretary of State and moderate but firm Republican, today announced on Meet The Press that he will be voting for Barack Obama. Powell gave a lengthy and thoughtful explanation as to how he came to his decision, which he reached with some regret as McCain is a longtime friend and someone he respects and admires. Before talking about his choice, he enumerated several issues the incoming president will face, notably the re-allocation of the military to better serve American interests and a crisis in education. Powell gave several reasons for his decision, most notably what he called a "narrowing" of the Republican party which makes him personally uncomfortable and feeling as though he's now no longer aligned with the GOP, the fact that McCain has not shown leadership and in fact seemed somewhat befuddled by the economic crisis, the tone of the McCain campaign, especially as it has descended into fear-mongering particularly with the recent robo-call campaign which has to be heard to be believed, and that he has been impressed with how Sen. Obama has grown over the course of the last two years, that he has shown an intellectual curiosity and willingness to expand, and that he has surrounded himself with knowledgeable people who can provide the strength in areas in which he is not expert. When asked by sometime McCain BFF Tom Brokaw about Obama's insistence on a timeline for Iraq withdrawal and how that ran counter to Powell's own statements on the ideal strategy, the General pointed out that the Bush Administration is at present working out a time line of its own with the Iraqi government so it was rapidly becoming a non-issue.

In a clear break with the Administration he served, Powell stated "I firmly believe that at this point in America's history, we need a president that will not just continue, even with a new face and with the changes and with some maverick aspects, who will not just continue basically the policies that we have been following in recent years." Powell also made clear his extreme disappointment with the choice of Sarah Palin as the Vice Presidential candidate, stating flat out that he does not "think she is ready to be President,which is the job of the vice president. So that raised some question in my mind as to the judgment Sen. McCain made." Presciently, I believe, Powell stated "I think we need a transformational figure. I think we need a president who is a generational change and that's why I'm supporting Barack Obama, not out of any lack of respect or admiration for Sen. John McCain."

It seemed to me that the decision was indeed arrived at with regret, that he would have liked to endorse McCain but found it impossible under the circumstances. As far as the wave of Republicans endorsing the Democrat in the last couple weeks, we all seem to forget that you can't agree with a candidate on everything, and that anyone who claims he does is probably incapable of independent thought (heck, there's even evidence that the husband of the Republican VP candidate disagrees with the Republican Party on the issue of Alaska statehood.). Three important states in particular have extremely high populations of active and retired military personnel: Florida, North Carolina, and Virginia. While we noted yesterday that only 12% of people in a Rasmussen poll said Powell's endorsement would influence them, let me remind the assembled semi-multitudes that 12% is rather a lot of people, especially at a time when considerably fewer than 12% are likely to be in the "undecided" column. It's not a stretch to suggest that Powell remains the most admired man in America, and I would say rightly so. It might be amusing to see who attacks him as anti-American.

Not Ready For Prime Time Governor
So she goes on SNL, which shows better humor than I'm still prepared to give her credit for (I'd note that when she gets laffs, it's usually at the expense of someone else); let's assume the reason she went was that she was, ummm, just following orders. But peoples of the left and the right, all y'all take a chill pill. It wasn't horrible, it wasn't great. And it's over. I smirked a bit, but other than the topicality mostly what I learned was that SNL still isn't funny any more. I smirked at the moose shooting bit in the Weekend Update rap, but honestly, this show should have hung it up decades ago and just came back every four years. Also, the next TV show, person, animal, vegetable, or mineral who inflicts Coldplay on me is going to get a 10 1/2 D foot up his, her or its tuchas. Perhaps this performance should be looked at more as an audition for her next job than anything else, presumably as a Fox News personality between, oh, November 5 and the start of the 2012 campaign season in April 2009. She had time to rehearse because there was this national security briefing for the candidates at the White House. Why not? See below.
Not Ready For Crunch Time Either, If You Ask The Current Administration
So there was this briefing at the White House for the candidates as the White House is looking to line up support for the negotiations with the Iraqi government to begin to cede control of military operations (file under timeline for withdrawal). The candidates and their running mates were invited to take part--let's count them, One...Two...Three...ummm... Hmmm. Curious. Someone wasn't at the table. The administration tries to pitch it half-heartedly that the other three are senators and on military oversight committees and the one not invited was only a governor. However, they had already said that the invitations were a courtesy to the next president, whoever that might be. Two other important senators got briefed, so there are 95 other senators who didn't get called to come to the tea party. Herewith an exchange that covers it, with embarrassed spokesman Sean McCormack:

Q: You called Senator Biden, you called McCain. Did you also call Governor Palin? McCORMACK: No. If you hadn’t noticed, she’s a governor. Not a senator or a congressman. Q: She’s a vice presidential candidate. McCORMACK: Right. Q: She also has extensive foreign affairs experience. (LAUGHTER) McCORMACK: Right. I explained to you the reasoning behind the phone call. Q: Maybe if this has to do with Russia, you would have called her.

Of course, that exchange is on the rabidly socialistic communist C-SPAN, so take it for what it's worth. And take it from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdC2HbRlxz0 Here's the story, from the AP: http://www.examiner.com/a-1643166~Palin_omitted_from_White_House_Iraq_troop_briefing.html?cid=rss-Politics

OK. That's enough. Go have lunch.

John

October 18 Daily Polling Update, Lucky Thirteen Edition

2008-10-18T16:01:00.000-07:00

Well, we're bouncing around a bit, but converging at the same time. Some up, some down, but all the reputable ones seem to head into this 5-7 point Obama lead. Got a couple eyebrow-raising newspaper endorsements, probably meaningless, but at least my left eyebrow is still up. At least one Minnesota Republican Congresswoman is barking mad. McCain tells the St. Petersburg Times he wishes he'd picked their governor as his running mate, sort of. Well, mostly. Colin Powell is on Meet The Press tomorrow, speculation abounds as to whether or not he'll endorse or remain above the fray. An indicator that has picked the winner of every election since 1860 picks a winner today in 13 simple questions, and I'm going to make you figure it out for yourself, unless you already have. Oh, and here's my tip on the stock market: put down Graham and Dodd and pick up Freud and Jung. If you plump for Dr. Phil instead, you deserve whatever you get.

Diageo/Hotline closes up the 2 it opened yesterday, 8 point lead, and they're pretty lazy about giving you any info on weekends
Gallup expanded likely voter poll closes up by a couple, mainly adding support for McCain while not drawing off Obama's, while registered voter poll expands, just showing the higher the turnout, the better for Obama
GWU/Battleground sleeps in on Saturday and Sunday
Rasmussen adds back the Obama point it lost yesterday, in a holding pattern
R2K I've always thought was way too Democrat-weighted, but now closes to a more reasonable 7 point lead; I could never get used to 12
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby narrows a bit but John Zogby is still trying to hit that six-run homer to erase a five run deficit...

Rasmussen on a slow day has a quick poll on the Colin Powell question that's on the lips of everyone in Washington and the press and pretty much nobody else. Anyway, it's a slow news day, the kind of day that Republicans release their tax records (again), so here you go. 42% think Powell is likely to go against his party (which, come to think of it, went against him rather nastily when he was Secretary of State, though he's far too good a soldier and a man for that to matter, I think) and endorse Barack Obama. So that gets the headlines, but 35% say he'll endorse McCain. Powell is still admired by a vast majority of the public, both Republican and Democrat, so I can see how his endorsement could matter at least a little bit. The important figure here is that only 12% say it's likely to influence their vote, so I'll end this point here, except to say that there probably aren't 12% of voters that are undecided, so I'm damned if I know what that could mean.

Is That Frost On Hell's Windshield?
There were two significant newspaper endorsements of Barack Obama yesterday that are worth mentioning, even in a newspaperless age. The Los Angeles Times, which was (though really isn't any more) a staunch Republican paper for decades, made its first endorsement of any presidential candidate since 1972 (with an endorsement of Nixon, which apparently embarrassed them out of endorsing for thirty-six years), and its first endorsement of a Democrat ever, when it picked Obama yesterday. At the same time, the still-staunchly-Republican Chicago Tribune, the newspaper of Lincoln, founded on free trade and abolitionism by one of the founders of the Republican Party itself, also endorsed its first Democratic presidential candidate in its history. The Tribune, which notes that it has "watched him, worked with him and argued with him" as he rose through Chicago politics to the Democratic presidential nomination, and notes an atmosphere of ineptitude and corruption in the GOP today (their words) states (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-chicago-tribune-endorsement,0,1371034.story)

We have tremendous confidence in his intellectual rigor, his moral compass and his ability to make sound, thoughtful, careful decisions. He is ready.

On the subject of a running mate, the paper says that McCain, turning his own words around, "put his campaign before country." Saying that Obama would likely govern as a "pragmatic centrist," (with which I wholeheartedly agree and applaud, for what it's worth) and noting a economic team of free traders (Chicago School, naturally!), the paper closes by saying that it is "proud to add Barack Obama's name to Lincoln's in the list of people the Tribune has endorsed for president of the United States."

The Los Angeles Times http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-endorse19-2008oct19%2C0%2C5198206.story also surprises by its endorsement of Obama, which it notes comes despite a McCain economic plan more in line with Times editorial policy. The editorial notes, however, that in its view McCain "has been disturbingly unfocused in his response to the current financial situation, rushing to "suspend" his campaign and take action (although just what action never became clear). Having little to contribute, he instead chose to exploit the crisis". At the same time, it echoes the Tribune's view of Obama as a centrist, saying that although certainly a Democrat and coming more from the left than the right (though one would be hard pressed to call him any sort of leftist without sounding like an arrant moron) he is "a constitutional scholar, he has articulated a respect for the rule of law and the limited power of the executive that make him the best hope of restoring balance and process to the Justice Department." While not "sanguine" about all of Obama's economic policies, the Times has found him to be pragmatic and willing to look to a variety of sources for knowledge and expertise including Wall Street itself. Ultimately, though, the Times says that it is Obama's temperament, his "maturity," that makes him ultimately more presidential than his opponent, who it notes has been from time to time "irresponsible" and ultimately "nearly unrecognizable" as the John McCain who built a reputation in Washington for standing up for what he believes.

The Washington Post (which had in my opinion spent the first part of this campaign with a distinctly pro-McCain slant), El Diario/La Prensa (the largest Spanish-language paper in New York, and one which carries a lot of weight in the Latino community) and the consistently Republican Denver Post also endorsed Obama yesterday. May or may not mean much (and I think El Diario does mean something, even if Obama was already on track to win two-thirds of the Latino vote), but there it is.

I spent an awful lot of time talking about this because the endorsements are an extraordinary sign of Obama's ability to impress those on the other side of the aisle, if they are willing to shut up a moment and look and listen. We can add the Tribune and Times to the list of notable Republican endorsements of Sen. Obama.

We Know, Senator, We Just Weren't Sure You Did
So. More newspapers. You'd think they weren't irrelevant in the 21st century or something, but an interesting thing happened in the St. Petersburg Times today. No, no, wasn't about Peter the Great (and jokes about his being a schoolmate of John McCain's are probably superfluous at this point, unless they're REALLY funny, which they're almost exclusively not). Was about, ummm, uhhh, a running mate, especially as it related to his chances in Florida, where his current running mate has been leading a series of rallies stopping just short of a rousing chorus of the Horst Wessel Song. While McCain claims no regrets about choosing Palin, he also states that he would almost certainly be winning Florida had he chosen Charlie Crist as his VP. "Charlie, because he's so popular, he probably would have made a significant difference,'' McCain said in an interview with the St. Petersburg Times and Bay News 9. dThe rest of the story was about Joe The Plumber, with the Arizona Senator completely destroying the man's life after the revelations that he's 1) not registered to vote, 2) not actually a licensed plumber and 3) lying about the business he claimed to be buying by telling 300 million Americans to send him an email. Better expand your mail capacity, there, Joe. Oh here, you don't want to read it, the rest of it's the usual blather, but I'm a good guy so you can find it at http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/elections/article860402.ece .

The Envelope Please
I'm burying this near the end to see if anyone actually reads this far. So there's this model, developed in the early 1980s by Allan Lichtman of American University and Russian academic Volodia Kellis-Borok, they call the "13 Keys to the White House," which has accurately predicted the popular vote winner of every presidential election from 1860-1980, and then prospectively from 1984-2004. It's a series of 13 true/falst questions (which you can play along with at home); if five or fewer are "false," the incumbent party's candidate wins. There are a few judgment calls, so there's room for a bit of a fudge factor in it, but I think actually this one is clear even if you bend over backwards to answer them as carefully as possible. I'm not going to tell you who wins, but someone does. Here's a piece Lichtman himself wrote in 2004 explaining the test, along with the questions. Let me know how many falses you come up with: http://www.forecastingprinciples.com/Political/commentary-lichtman.html

A Thorazine Martini With A Twist And An Autographed Photo Of Joe The Witch Hunter For The Really Quite Insane Congresswoman Torquemada From Minnesota, Please
OK, there may actually be one major elected official in America even more comically unsuited for public office than Sarah Palin, or you can view it as a chilling foreshadowing. Or both. Minnesota future ex-Rep. Michelle Bachmann (who has already trashed McCain as being the pick of the media, and called global warming "voodoo, nonsense, hokum, a hoax") went off the deepest of ends yesterday saying on a national cable broadcast that Sen. Obama "may have anti-American views" and in fact called for an "exposé" of the views of members of Congress. Yes, you got that right. A member of Congress just called for a Spanish Inquisition, a revived HUAC to purge what she considers anti-American elements in the United States Congress. Starting with the possible future President, apparently, who she says she is "very concerned he may have anti-American views." She also singled out Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Reid for "far-leftist views." When asked to name another congressman she would call anti-American, she named, well, nobody.

The most curious thing of all, other than the fact that the good Congresswoman forgot her lithium this morning, was that prior to this round of interviews, she was best known for greeting President Bush on the floor of Congress after the 2007 State of the Union Message by putting her hand on his shoulder and not letting go til she got a kiss, has been trying to paint her Democratic opponent as more of a Bushite than she (if she kissed him, what must her opponent have done?), and indeed a week or so ago said, "If the presidency would somehow go to Barack Obama, I would welcome him to the 6th District as well," she said after a debate. "As a matter of fact, I would put my hand on his shoulder and give him a kiss if he wanted to." Sen. Obama could not be reached for comment as he found it necessary to run to the nearest public convenience to vomit after reading the quote.

This came as a tremendous boon for her opponent, the curiously named Elwyn Tinklenberg, who overcame that impediment to generate a huge fundraising day in the aftermath of Rep. Bachmann's unhinged and, dare one say it, seditious accusations. An online petition to censure Bachmann has now received 18,000 signatures (remember, this is Saint Cloud, MN, not New York--18,000 is not insignificant if they're local). Five days ago, Bachmann was ahead by only four in the polls. Over/under, anyone?

OK, I've got better things to do on a beautiful Saturday afternoon, except that I mostly went out and did them on a beautiful Saturday morning. See you tomorrow!

John

Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day
When there is a lack of honor in government, the morals of the whole people are poisoned. (Quoted in New York Times, 1964)

October 17 Daily Polling Update, Dean Martin Celebrity Roast Edition

2008-10-17T04:53:00.000-07:00

Well, still a little early to get debate feedback in the polls, but there's none so far. Probably worth noting too that viewership was on the light side. Still random noise, with a little continuing tightening of the race, despite every single survey out there reporting a substantial Obama victory and polls in key battleground states opening up leads for the Democrat even while his lead in national polls perhaps closes a little. Remember that the poll aggregation models, like realclearpolitics.com or pollster.com or even fivethirtyeight.com are essentially lagging indicators, so take them with a cup of trendline. Both candidates gave funny and gracious speeches at the Al Smith dinner last night. McCain back on Letterman last night, disarmingly admits "I screwed up" and gets grilled a bit more than he was entirely comfortable with, but not, as some have suggested, savaged. Colin Powell, once considered a potential McCain running mate, now possibly endorsing Obama as soon as his appearance on Meet The Press this Sunday, according to GOP sources quoted by politico.com. McCain appears to have vetted his plumber about as well as he did his running mate. Gov. Palin continues to channel Goebbels as reports of people getting assaulted at her rallies for supporting the other guy (and, distressingly one reporter who was just interviewing people supporting the other guy) begin to hit the press; candidate herself noticeably but unsurprisingly silent. Sorry, I try to be non-partisan, but I don't like Nazi tactics, and when peaceful dissenters start to get beaten up and the assaulters are not restrained if not actively egged on, there's nothing else to call it.

Diageo/Hotline opens up 2 for Obama to a ten point advantage, his largest lead ever in this one, while others close up, seems to be the battleground states we mentioned yesterday
Gallup flat with likely voters in both categories, I still think the one that does not follow prior trends is more appropriate this year
GWU/Battleground was Obama +13 on Tuesday, down to +4 today, despite a resounding debate win. Even with the pollster being in the tank for the GOP since 1964, this is ridiculous.
Rasmussen flat with yesterday, while state polls show a significant Obama lead in Republican Missouri but a tie in Ohio
R2K adds a point to McCain off a poor showing in yesterday's survey, but does not take votes away from Obama
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby narrows a bit despite widening his lead among independents to 19. Means there are too many Republicans or 25% of Democrats are voting for Ralph Nader. This is also a one-day sample with a huge margin of error (+/- 5). Knew I should never have put this one or Battleground in.

Rasmussen, while retaining just a narrow lead, also has what seems to be awfully good numbers for today, and their debate tracking should lead to gains in their survey for Obama over the next few days. It's a little closer than the other polls, which doesn't surprise me given that Scott Rasmussen is a Republican pollster (and may now get even more play on Fox News since Frank Luntz couldn't rig a focus group to say McCain won the debate), but still a 14 point Obama advantage, 47-33. Importantly, only 60% of Republicans thought he won the debate. I'm not sure how 1% of anyone could have thought that, other than turning it off after the first half hours--which I'd have scored in McCain's favor--or not watching at all and lying to the pollster. 51% thought Obama explained his posittions more clearly, while 33% thought McCain did. Again, I don't really remember a lot of places that McCain explained his positions in the debate; not that he doesn't have a clear platform, because he does, but it's hard to suggest objectively he spent a lot of time talking about it Wednesday night.

State Of The States
Rasmussen has a couple key state polls out today, at least one of which should be encouraging to the McCain camp. On the Obama side, they've got a Missouri poll out showing the Democrat with a six point lead, 52-46. If this isn't an outlier, it's very serious news for the GOP, which had counted on Missouri. If you're superstitious, you might note that the voters in the Show-Me State have picked the winner every election since Rome was a Republic other than a razor-thin victory for Adlai Stevenson in 1956, which I'll leave to you to decipher. It's hard to figure this one, as 22% approve of the economic rescue plan, while 52% disapprove, but both men voted for it, and McCain's trying to take credit for its passage may actually hurt him in some places. The candidates' net favorables are the same, and I think this one is tough to call.

Rasmussen also has the race tied in Ohio; I've been a skeptic on Obama-centric Ohio polls, but that's just me. The issue of the state GOP working to get potentially 200,000 new registrations (which would mostly go Democratic) invalidated took another twist today, when the Supreme Court invalidated a lower court ruling which would have made it nearly impossible for the new registrations to be declared valid. Make your own comedy bit out of the Ohio GOP taking voter fraud to the courts, it's too easy for me. I'll throw you a bone: if there hadn't been a conservative majority on the Court, the challenge might have been allowed, but was essentially invalidated on an issue of standing to bring suit under the 2002 Help America Vote Act. Restricting standing has been a centerpiece of conservative legal policy and philosophy.

A few other Rasmussen state polls are about what I'd have expected, though maybe a little greater in degree for Obama: up 13 in Oregon, which some had thought was up for grabs, but as he has a 23 point advantage among unaffiliated voters according to this survey, you can probably stick a fork in this one. Do you really need to know about a 20 point lead in NY and 17 in my own lovely and talented Nutmeg State? I didn't think so. 28 in Massachusetts? Right. Big whoop.

And The Counties
There's an interesting story on politico.com (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14657.html) pointing to Obama leads in key counties in important swing states, including PA's suburban Bucks County, where their own survey shows a 47-41 Obama lead, VA's suburban DC historically staunchly Republican Prince William County, which is currently 50-42 Obama, as well as a 16 point 53-37 Obama lead in MO's St. Louis County (which is suburban and does not include the city of St. Louis itself), and Franklin County, OH, which is a close 45-40 Obama advantage despite the fact that John Kerry won this county by nine points in 2004. There are many young independent voters in these areas, and Obama's lead in the 30-44 age group in these counties is far more significant than the overall total. The issue according to the pollster, InsiderAdvantage, is that, as we see with the other polls we track, Obama is having great success picking up independent voters. I'm not sure how well you can extrapolate this nationwide, because the overall idea of looking at swing states, then key counties, then independent voters, then aged 30-44 may be just a little too granular really to care that much about.

Al Smith Dinner A Welcome, Funny, Gracious Relief
Last night's Al Smith Memorial Dinner benefitting Catholic Charities was the usual politico star-studded event you've come to know and love. Both McCain and Obama gave funny speeches and sounded a note of respect and admiration for each other (though when youv'e got a Cardinal Archbishop sitting between you, perhaps you need to make nice. McCain showed he knows how to play the expectations game: his final comment was a long spiel about how Obama's speech was going to be the funniest thing you've ever heard, so please expect nothing less. Obama managed to poke gentle fun at himself, his opponent, and others in the room as well, though I think the best line of the night came when doing a little "who is Barack Obama?" explanation, talking about his name: "Barack comes from my father and is Swahili for "that one," while my middle name came from someone who obviously didn't think I'd run for president;" later on when doing a bit about his deep dark secrets he sprung it on the crowd that unbeknownst to anyone, his middle name is actually "Steve"). Oh, and his shot across Giuliani's bow pointing out the ex-Mayor's crossdressing performance at a prior event and tying it in with his candidacy for the Republican nomination fight was followed with a look over to McCain and a "Tough primary, John." McCain seemed to love it. Seriously, though, it'd be nice if every voter were required to watch the two interacting at this event. Nobody would get the $@$% kicked out of him at someone's rallies any more. I've done neither of them justice, so watch them here. Obama's: http://wcbstv.com/video/?id=118841@wcbs.dayport.com
McCain: http://wcbstv.com/video/?id=118836@wcbs.dayport.com
For the whole program: http://www.c-span.org/search.aspx?For=al smith dinner

Re-Allocation Of Resources Gives The Lie To The Polls
The Republican National Committee is apparently pulling advertising from Wisconsin, while Barack Obama is going on a "red state tour" of VA, NC, and FL in the next week and the DNC is running ads in KY and VA. McCain should have Kentucky locked up, and I'm not going to put NC in Obama's bag just yet, even though the collapse of Wachovia Bank will likely cause tremendous economic turmoil in the state. That being said, the GOP is back on its haunches playing defense, and there's a real dichotomy here between polls that are tightening and the party itself which is acting like it's trying to save whatever there is to be saved, while potential 2012 candidates (notably Romney and, ahem, Crist) are running away from the campaign and Palin's pet monkey Bill Kristol is pitching her as the savior of the party. In point of fact, a McCain loss in 2008 and Palin candidacy in 2012 would spell the end of the Republican Party as we know it, though personally by that point I think she's more likely to be under indictment than anointment.
And Now A Word From Our Sponsor
Amusingly enough, given the modest foofaraw over the free cellphone tower Verizon built on Sen. McCain's Arizona ranch, while he sits on the Commerce Committee and his campaign manager is a Verizon lobbyist, Gov. Palin's speech today in Noblesville, IN is at the.....drum roll please...Verizon Wireless Music Center. Can't make this stuff up.

Joe The Liar
Well, I know I said I'd never mention Joe The Pl***er, but there are mitigating circumstances. Not that he isn't registered to vote, though that's true. Not even that he's interested in lower taxes because the state of Ohio has a property lien on him for unpaid back state taxes, though that's also true. In fact, the mitigating circumstances are that, in fact, he appears not to be a plumber at all. Yet he's trying to buy a plumbing business that nets over a quarter of a million dollars a year, you say. Well, while he told Sen. Obama he'd been a plumber for fifteen years, it turns out the neither the State of Ohio nor the Plumbers, Steamfitters and Service Mechanics Union can find him. In fact, he has no license in the state of Ohio, where he registered as an apprentice in October 2003 but apparently never completed the training. Oh, and the whole premise is also rather a taradiddle; the business is nowhere near a $250K a year endeavor. According to the Union's business manager, it's a two-man shop that's "not a thriving business." Just to throw him one bone, his name does in fact appear to be Joe. And Gordon Liddy's boys who broke into the Watergate only called themselves plumbers.

Did the GOP get played, or play and get caught? Read for yourself: http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081016/NEWS09/810160418

This also leaves Josephine the Plumber from the old Comet commercials as the only Jo The Plumber that matters. Read here: http://www.vanityfair.com/online/politics/2008/10/hey-mccain-what-about-josephine-the-plumber.html or view here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TI_C8HB00VQ

Joe The Senator gets the Quote right: "Let me put it this way: I don't know -- the neighborhood I grew up, even the neighborhood I live in now, which is a really nice neighborhood, I don't know many plumbers who are making $250,000 a year and worried about it. We're kind of worried about Joe the fireman, Joe the policeman, Joe the real plumber with a license."

OK, I'm off to whatever it is I'm off to. See you tomorrow--and we'll know if the debate had any impact soon!

John
Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day
Blessed are the young, for they shall inherit the national debt. (Speech, 1936)

October 16 Daily Polling Update, Third Time The Charm Edition

2008-10-16T04:40:00.000-07:00

Overall, all surveys regardless of pollster bias show a clear Obama win, though I think that he still has a distance to go to seal the deal with voters who may, for whatever reason, sincere or less so, change their minds behind the curtains of the voting booth. McCain comes out of the starting box strong, but can't hold it and essentially throws all women under the bus with his dismissive remarks about women's health on an abortion question, showing that the idea of a female running mate to appeal to women was perhaps not entirely sincere from the outset. Instant polls show a huge win in the debate for Sen. Obama. Respondents showed as usual a negative response to the attacks on unimportant issues and admired Obama's unflappability under attack. McCain's temperament the issue as much as the issues, if not more. Voters ultimately admitting the Republican candidate may be past his sell-by date. Obama under attack still looking for all the world like the long-lost member of Rat Pack, having a martini at a table in the corner listening to a tight little jazz combo and waiting for Joey Bishop and Peter Lawford to turn up. Oh, and there are the usual national polls too, but we'll give them short shrift today. Hands up, any of you who can actually define "shrift" and use it in a sentence without being preceded by "short." And I could not possibly care less about Joe The Plumber, unless he's willing to come out on a Sunday and not hit me up for double time.

Today's polls show a slight erosion of Obama's lead on a national level, while non-daily trackers continue to show expanding leads, including a Pew poll opening up a point for Obama to 49-42, as do specific battleground state polls, most notably CO, FL, NM, PA, and VA, where a CNN poll has a nine point Obama lead.

Diageo/Hotline holds an eight point Obama lead, but points out significant advantages in battleground states
Gallup closes up by a point
GWU/Battleground gives up three of the five points it gave Obama yesterday, to a seven point advantage, only 41% call the economy the biggest issue, probably low and certainly works against Obama, whose net favorables are +25 compared with +8 for McCain
Rasmussen closes four points, to tightest in weeks
R2K flat at an 11 point Obama lead
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby widens slightly for Obama, thanks mostly to a 14 point lead among independents--this figure bounces around way too much for comfort

Battleground, despite its general Republican leanings (remember the company was founded by long time GOP pollster Lance Tarrance) and some bizarre survey design quirks, has some interesting things to tell us today, perhaps because of these curiosities. While Obama is only up seven in this poll, we can put some of that down to the fact that only 41% of respondents suggest the economy is the biggest issue facing the country (most polls have that in the 50-65% range), and that's where he consistently scores the best. However, his net favorables are far higher than McCain's, at +25 vs +8, and a similar advantage obtains for the running mates. Additionally, there has been a distinct recent trend which, combined with other information we've seen lately, should be heartening for the Democrat. While part of the McCain campaign's thrust has been to make Obama look like an unknown quantity, that's also provided him an opening to explain to the American people (or not) who he is. As a result, a month ago, the question "thinking a bout what you have heard recently about Barack Obama, are you more or less likely to vote for him" has moved from 47-37 against in the spring to 52-42 in favor. Conversely, while just after the GOP convention McCain was running a slight positive there (48-44), it's now a significant negative at 38-55. And note that this was before last night's debate. 56% said that McCain is running a more negative campaign, compared with only 19% for Obama. Obama ekes out a slight win on "strong leader," a 10 point margin on "shares your values" and "will keep American prosperous," 18 on "fights for people like me," 19 on "will improve the economy," and 20 on "will unite the country" and "will create jobs" and fully 30 points on "will bring change to Washington" and health care. And remember, this is a poll with a consistent relative GOP bias.

The Real Reverse Bradley?
I'm just tossing this out as a possiblity, but could we see the reverse of the Bradley Effect (whether it exists or not) by white people in states where racism is more overt saying they're NOT going to vote for Obama but actually voting their pocketbooks and ethics when they get behind the curtains? There's no poll out there that suggests anything other than that if people are voting on the economy, and over half are, its nothing but an Obama sweep. You'll be able to hear the gears grinding together in the heads of millions...

Instant Polls Show One Surge Is Working
Instant polls after the debate showed the clearest edge to Obama of all three debates. CNN has it 58-31 for Obama, with the illinois senator winning not just on the overall economy and health care, as one would expect, but with a significant advantage on taxes as well. Additionally, 80% of respondents said McCain spent more time on the attack, compared with only 7% saying Obama did. In a year with a "throw the bums out" mentality, it may be significant that 54% said McCain seemed more like a typical politician than Obama, compared with only 35% saying the opposite. Obama won by a large margin in a couple key intangible areas too--by 23% on the question of "stronger leader," a significant change from the beginning of the campaign when McCain was regularly winning polls on the subject by a similar margin, and an unsurprising but still huge 48% on likability. On the oh-so-important washed-up radical issue, 51% said what's-his-name didn't matter at all, while 23% said it mattered a great deal.

CBS' poll of uncommitted voters had even more striking top line results, but was set up a little differently, asking its issues questions about each candidate in a vacuum rather than head-to-head, making direct comparisons between the two tricky. Bottom line, an Obama victory by 53-22, with 25% calling it a tie. Obama's margin of victory has actually increased for each of the three debates, which I believe reflects voters' increasing comfort with a candidate who was not nearly as well recognized as his opponent. Both candidates' scores improved on most of the issues questions, which probably reflects increasing knowledge of both. 68% thought Obama would make the right decisions on health care, while only 20% thought Mc Cain would. On taxes, Obama has a little work to do, with 64% thinking that he would raise theirs; on the other hand, 50% thought McCain would, so the gap is not as large as it might appear. Obama won a significant victory on the economy, with 65% thinking he would make the right decisions, compared with 54% before the debate. McCain also gained in this score, from 38% to 48%, but still lags significantly. Perhaps differently from CNN, more voters thought McCain would handle a crisis better, with 82% trusting him to do so, compared with 63% for Obama. I find this a little curious as McCain's temperament and hot-headedness were consistently remarked on by voters as turning them off. Overall 46% of respondents said their opinion of Obama improved while just 10% said it got worse; 30% said their image of McCain did, though 26% said it declined. Most of the uncommitted voters in this survey, though, remain uncommitted, which could be troubling for the Democratic challenger, although he did make significant inroads, with 30% now saying they would commit to him, compared with 14% for McCain.

Importantly here, 30% of respondents were Republican, but only 22% gave McCain the win. So even if not a single democrat in the poll (just barely possible) said he won, and not a single independent did (utterly impossible), then over a quarter of Republicans could not bring themselves to say that their candidate won. Given that there would have to be some independents who prefer McCain, the number of Republicans dissatisfied with their candidate's performance would probably be well north of 30%.

Survey USA has a poll among independents in California, showing a 55-29 Obama advantage, but it could have been 99-1 McCain and the state would still be blue.

Focus groups also roundly gave the win to Obama, including those on MSNBC and even Fox News, which amusingly refused to say by what margin. Democracy Corps, a Democratic polling organization, also ran focus groups, with undecided voters largely leaning towards McCain (a 20 point net favorable for McCain, compared with 0 for Obama). By a 50%-25% margin, though, they said Obama won, and many of these voters shifted their preference, with Obama holding a 42-20 lead. Voters were turned off by, as we would expect, McCain's "harsh tone, dismissive body language, and many interruptions." Temperament was also once again raised as an issue, with many respondents "shocked at how easily he seemed to lose his composure." Amazingly, Obama's net favorables went from flat (42 positive, 42 negative) to +50 (72% positive, 22% negative) after the debate. This kind of warm feeling can dissipate fairly quickly, though, especially among voters who have not truly made up their minds and may walk into the voting booth that way. Obama needs to seal the deal with these voters in the next few days in order to prevent last minute nerves, whether on racial or other grounds.

This Debate Was Over Before It Started, Double Bind Dept.
Look, Obama won this debate five days ago when he challenged McCain to mention Bill Ayers to his face. Talk about a double-bind. Either McCain says nothing and looks like a coward, or he attacks on Ayers, which a majority of the country thinks is a non-issue. So he attacks, and attacks badly, and the momentum he built up at the beginning of the debate is gone. McCain may have won some points with the idea that if Obama wanted to run against Bush, he should have run four years ago, but he let Obama have the opening to point out that he is running against the Bush economic record because McCain's is indistinguishable. Had McCain been able to parry that, some aspects of the debate may have turned out differently but he didn't, and it didn't. According to one poll, 80% of people thought McCain did next to nothing but attack. And many of the attacks only allowed Obama to respond in a cool and reasoned manner. And when he explained who he associates with, that on the economy he associates with Warren Buffett and Paul Volcker, and on foreign policy with Richard Lugar and General Jim Jones, former NATO Supreme Commander, he did exactly what (and I hate to admit this) Chris Matthews said he needed to do, attack from a position of defense. Obama also turned the Ayers point around by pointing out (you read it here first) that the association between the two related to the Annenberg Challenge Grant, thereby allowing him to work Ronald Reagan's name in on his side. We've talked before about how Obama is channeling The Great Communicator (TM) in his campaign, and McCain gave him the hall pass here. On the issue of the vicious personal attacks ("traitor," "kill him") all McCain could do was defend his base, because to repudiate it would have been to repudiate his own running mate, who Obama had brought in by pointing out she said nothing when rally attendees screamed that sort of thing. Then, when given the opportunity to attack Gov. Palin, Obama passed, making himself look above the fray and taking away her ability to defend herself against his dastardly attack on every talk show in the country this morning.

McCain also managed to prove that the pick of a female running mate really wasn't about getting women's votes when he managed to throw the entire gender under the proverbial bus on a question on with many women agree with him. By suggesting in a dismissive manner that women's health was a blind used by the extreme pro-abortion clique, he managed to insult every woman whose health has ever suffered during a pregnancy. Obama, however, discussed abortion like a constitutional law scholar, which of course he actually is, that it comes down to the idea of a constitutional right to privacy, which of course the far right denies. (For the record, if anyone thinks I'm being partisan on this, I swear to you that you can not tell what my personal stance is on abortion from what I'm writing here, even from this disclaimer. You really can't. And I'm not going to tell you either. Unless you ask nicely and bring dessert. Then maybe.) He was also fuzzy on his own health care plan, and it looks like survey respondents' feelings about the senator on the health care issue are responding accordingly.

This is the only time you will ever see the words "Joe The Plumber" in this note. It didn't work. It was annoying when either candidate said it, when McCain mentioned him quite literally 22 times and Obama said "hey, I can talk to you too, Joe." And Joe Sixpack does his own plumbing because he can't afford Joe The Plumber, so when McCain smarmily said "Guess what, Joe, you're rich!" he inadvertently voiced what an awful lot of people who can't afford to call him (and many who can) are thinking. [Thanks for the train of thought, Ken!]

As I write this, McCain is at a rally (ooh, check it out, I'm live blogging!) in Pennsylvania saying once again he is proud of everyone who attends his rallies. That'd be a little chilling in light of the "kill him" comments if it weren't sad and pathetic. He's telling the Joe the Plumber story now, so I'm switching to cartoons.

If You Don't LIve Near Me, You May Not Care. Chris Shays Might.
Survey USA has a poll out this morning showing that Democratic challenger Jim Himes has a 48-45 lead over 10 term incumbent Chris Shays in the 4th Congressional District in CT. This, my home district, has a history of sending liberally-minded Republicans to Congress, and it's been 40 years since we elected a Democrat. Shays is widely (and, I believe correctly) viewed as having been this in 1987 when he first went to Washington after the untimely death of Stew McKinney (who succeeded Lowell Weicker, so we know what a maverick actually is around here), but has been increasingly associated with Bush administration policies over the last four years. Himes is from Greenwich, has a banking background, is very presentable, and has been running an exclusively positive campaign until the last week or so when an ad surfaced showing Shays repeating over and over McCain's line about the economy being fundamentally strong, and that "nobody can deny that." For better or worse, within a few days of that ad running, Himes pulls out into a narrow lead. Make of it what you will. McCain's going to lose Fairfield County by double digits, which isn't helping. Hell, he'll probably lose Greenwich.

The Governor Goes to ~~Wash Ore~~ New Hampshire
Can't close without one ridiculous moment, so here it is. At a rally in New Hampshire, as she was waxing lyrical about the beauty of the scenery and comparing the Granite State to Alaska (where's New Hampshire's oil? There are tax-free liquor stores, though.) She then talked about Dover, where she was, and "other parts of this great Northwest." Applause did not ensue. She also talked about how Red Sox (down 3-1) fans know how to turn an underdog into a victor. Perhaps that line worked, as she used it to good effect last week in Tampa talking to them about Rays fans; Tampa Bay is currently beating Boston 3-1 in the ALCS. One of them is going to turn an underdog into a loser. Humble and lovable Shoeshine Boy was not available for comment. Sweet Polly Purebred, reached via cellphone, pleaded, "Oh where, oh were, has my Underdog gone?" Reports that Sen. McCain was, with the assistance of Riff Raff and Simon Bar Sinister (to whom he bears a striking resemblance), attempting to purloin the Super Energy Pill were unsubstantiated at press time.

OK, that's quite enough. See you tomorrow with polling data that's too early to reflect much of the debate!

John

Underdog Quote Of The Day
Not plane, nor bird, nor even frog, It's just little old me [crashing sound], Underdog.

October 15 Daily Polling Update, Pull Rabbit (A) Out Of Hat (B) Edition

2008-10-15T16:18:00.000-07:00

Polls aren't that big a deal the day of the debate, and they don't make a whole lot of sense today anyway. So, in one of those "no atheists in foxholes" moments, in a recession we're all Keynesians. And the most conservative administration in US history is full of socialists. Yet McCain and Palin rally attendees scream "socialist" when Barack Obama's name is mentioned. Just amusing because Sen. McCain not only made the same vote on the rescue plan in his first roll call vote since April but has made claims to have driven the process. The public's increasing support for Obama, such as it is, seems much more to be a response to the scurrility of the McCain campaign than anything else at this point. McCain forced to mention Ayers tonight, but a story that the head of McCain's transition team had worked as a lobbyist for Saddam Hussein could be a bigger issue. Wait and see what rabbits he pulls out of his hat tonight; one last shot at the Hail Mary pass, perhaps a one-term pledge or bipartisan cabinet, according to George Stephanopolous. I think it's the double secret plan to catch bin Laden that he refused to share with the Bush administration. Or perhaps he found Judge Crater.

Diageo/Hotline opens up a point for Obama, whose support among Republicans is double McCain's among Democrats (12-6, so lets' not get excited), 62% call economy most important issue, Obama leads by 18 among them.
Gallup closes up by two points, but newer voters remain more enthusiastic about Obama
GWU/Battleground closes back up by the five points it opened yesterday, suggesting the 13 point lead was an outlier
R2K stays where it is, big whoop
Rasmussen flat for fourth day running, Obama sounding more presidential to a majority of voters, but a majority of voters for each candidate can still be swayed
Reuters/CSPAN/Zogby closes by two and a half points, independent lead drops from 21 to 8 in two days. Look up "outlier" in the dictionary, tell me why I should even keep it in here

The subtext in the Rasmussen numbers is that according to their poll, support for either candidate is a little shaky; both men need to solidify their vote in the next fhree weeks. When you look at voters who say they are certain who they'll vote for, the numbers drop to a slim 42-40 margin for Obama. Given that this margin was seven points a week ago, I would say one of those is a bit of an outlier, because there's very little reason for either candidate's solid support to have changed that much in a week. It may also change again after tonight's debate. Half the voters in Rasmussen, fewer than other polls, cite the economy as the most important issue, and other polls show that McCain's new, more Obama-like, economic plan is viewed at least as much as politics as policy. I think an awful lot is riding on tonight.

GOP-leaning Rasmussen also notes that Sen. Biden's net favorables are considerably higher than Gov. Palin's, +15 vs +6. Palin does poorly among women, but quite well among men (which says all you need to know), but also suggests that support may be wide but it'd be shallow.

CBS News Poll Shows Highest Obama Lead Yet
A CBS News/NY Times poll released last night shows a 14 point lead for Sen. Obama, 53-39, up from a three point advantage a week earlier. The word "outlier" does keep popping up in this note, doesn't it. That being said, the poll does show a 18 point lead among independents, more or less in line with other polls, but up from a 10 point McCain lead a week ago, which just seems odd. The key here is how solid that support is, and I don't think there's really any way of telling just yet. However, it's clear again and again that McCain's negative campaigning has been turning off independent voters, with 21% of all voters in the last few weeks saying their opinion of Sen. McCain has changed for the worse. Part of the problem is that he began with a reputation of being above the fray, however undeserved it might have been, and the last few weeks in particular have changed a significant number of people's minds about that. 61% of people surveyed thought McCain spent more time attacking Obama than talking about what he would do as president, while only 27% said the same about Obama. On personality and temperament, Obama's tactic of staying cool and under-responding to attacks seems to be working; now 69% say he has the personality and temperament to be president compared with only 53% for McCain. Obama's lead on the economy has also grown since the last poll a week earlier as well, even on taxes. Strikingly, more people in this survey say McCain is more likely to raise their taxes than Obama. This survey also shows a distinct lead for Obama among both men and women, while some others still have men going for McCain. Most importantly perhaps of all, in this poll 63% of voters casting their first presidential ballot are voting for Obama. The weighting in this poll seems a bit heavier than most on independents, at 38% Democrat, 30% Republican, 31% Independent, but the eight point Democratic advantage is about in line with most. I do wonder, though, how those independents differ from the ones who just a week ago came up with results 28 points more favorable to McCain.

SUSA Reports Early Voting Is A Landslide, But It's Just Early Voting
There's an interesting piece at www.fivethirtyeight.com about polling from the highly reputable Survey USA on people who have taken advantage of early voting in a handful of states, showing huge Obama advantages. I'm not sure what conclusions you can draw from this, if any. It's possible that it's a sign that the Obama campaign has motivated new voters, minority voters, and more casual followers of the process, which would translate to surprisingly large margins; it's also possible that people who felt they may have been shut out of the process in 2000 and 2004 simply felt there was a better chance they wouldn't be told the machine wasn't working in their district if they got their vote recorded in October. The GOP in particular in many states is challenging hundreds of thousands of new registrations as part of a coordinated strategy; the problem with it being a coordinated strategy is that it in and of itself makes the case that it's not necessarily an honest effort in response to actual abuses instead of a campaign to eliminate votes from people more likely to vote for the other guy. SUSA has Obama up by five in Ohio, but up by 18 among people who have already voted; that lead is seven in New Mexico, but 23 among those who have already voted. Other SUSA state polls show a 15 point lead in PA, 16 in WA, 17 in OR, and a 14 point McCain lead in South Carolina. Oh, surprise surprise, he's up by 33 in New York.
Law Of Unintended Consequences The Reason For Inciting To Riot? Pfft.
Some whackjob sends an envelope of white powder to an Obama campaign office in Philadelphia, and McCain loses a few more votes in PA. More official GOP offices are forced to take down signs and web sites calling Obama a terrorist or worse, and calling for him to be tortured, or worse (Sacramento County's GOP web site called to "Waterboard Barack Obama." Roger Simon at politco.com thinks that the fact that nobody seems to be manning the bridge is the reason why the McCain campaign has become so ugly, particularly at Sarah Palin appearances. I don't think it's quite so unintentional. See for yourself: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14555.html
More Talk About The (Non-) Bradley Effect
There have been many credible reports, both academic and popular, that the Bradley Effect no longer exists, and that may be. What concerns me is the sputtering of independent and undecided voters, who seem to me to be looking for a reason to support McCain. With each reason (for them) not to support him, they move to the Obama camp, and with a few days of nothing new, some seem to drift back to McCain. I think if there is such an effect, it's time to modify it in that way. It's no longer about polling error introduced by lying survey respondents, but has moved into a new, more overt phase where it's not a polling "effect" at all, but a deeper look into many Americans' deep-seated attitudes towards issues of race. In that sense, I hope that's what it is, because it's too important to be considered just another part of sampling error. I think this election is going to be so rife with survey design error to begin with that you'd expect the significant shifts in some polls that we see on a daily basis, particularly among undecided or unaffiliated voters. It's easy to make disingenuous arguments in both directions; I want to see the results of this election and how things break over the last couple weeks in the polls before I feel comfortable saying for sure. We know that African-American voters are supporting Obama by roughly a 95-5 margin, but what we don't know is whether a black candidate can galvanize black voters to turn out in signficantly greater numbers than usual. It's also safe to say that a substantial number of white people do not want a black president; we'll know how many in three weeks. Here's a story that was just sent to me; though I have some problems with it, mostly that it doesn't take into account all the other ways that polls could have more error than usual introduced (cellphone only, more young voters, more African-Americans, more first-time voters) , but it sets out the negative case decently: http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenumbers/
The View From The Corner, John Hussein McCain Division
Speaking of the debate, right now Obama has a bit of an upper hand, counter-intuitively because he's forced McCain to keep talking about Bill Ayers. By calling McCain out on his unwillingness to mention the name to his face at a time when the American people are making it clear that they find it a non-issue, painting McCain into a corner where he either looks like a coward or wastes time. Look for multiple uses of the phrase "my friends." As mentioned above, it's been reported that William Timmons, the head of the McCain presidential transition team, not only worked as a lobbyist for Saddam Hussein , but "the two lobbyists who Timmons worked closely with over a five year period on the lobbying campaign either pleaded guilty to or were convicted of charges that they had acted as unregistered agents of Saddam Hussein's government." Emphasis on Senator Obama's middle name may drop off.

Obama Campaign Makes A Mistake, Film At Eleven
There just haven't been a lot of these to talk about. But today the Obama campaign shows it can blunder too, if in fact it was a mistake, faxing the campaign's debate talking points to reporters. If anyone's looking for surprises or scandal, though, they'll have to look elsewhere; they're actually very similar to the public memo the campaign issued this morning and a lot of what we've heard before. We'll see, though, if there's anything the McCain people can use in it. Of course, it also might have been intentional, just like the timing of the www.keatingeconomics.com web site a day before last week's debate and the challenge to talk about Bill Ayers to Obama's face when the public is sick of hearing about it.

We'll talk about the recession tomorrow. It's kind of a big deal, but I'd rather wait for after the debate. Remember, though: Jobs, jobs, jobs.

John

The well's about run dry, so we're going to have to recycle Herbert Hoover Quotes Of The Day for the next few weeks, so we'll go with the essential first:
Let me remind you that credit is the lifeblood of business, the lifeblood of prices and jobs. (Speech, 1932)

October 14 Daily Polling Roundup, These Go To Eleven Edition

2008-10-15T16:09:00.000-07:00

The slight McCain momentum of the last few days seems to be coming to a halt, and at least two polls show a reversal, though they're the two I'd consider most unreliable. Closing in on the final debate, John McCain's last true hope to turn the tide--the one time a lead this large was turned around this late in the campaign was in 1980, when Reagan and Carter had their only debate a week before the election. McCain will kiss and make up with David Letterman, while legendary North Carolina basketball coach Dean Smith has endorsed Barack Obama. Don't laugh at that one. Whether that will require Duke coach Mike Krzyzewski to back McCain uncertain at press time. Despite Gov. Palin's curiously Orwellian statement that she has been exonerated when in fact the report only said she broke no laws in the firing of the state Public Safety Commissioner, Troopergate seems to be expanding as further ethics complaints are filed, the question of who paid for the family house I mentioned the other day begins to get national attention, and the Anchorage Daily News, which really doesn't have a lot else to talk about, is all over the story. Markets are flying, but for gosh sakes, there's a recession going on, earnings are going to disappoint, and there will will will will will be loads of restructuring announcements with layoffs. Those tend not to make markets rise. Trust me on that. Please.

Diageo/Hotline flat, but McCain losing advantage among white women, so it's hard to tell where he's gaining, as it's not white men
Gallup stays flattish, a little extra support for McCain, but new voters cancel it out
GWU/Battleground opens by five points on the same day firm founder Lance Tarrance denies there ever was a Bradley Effect. We say "bushwa." Or something.
R2K drops back a point to an 11 point lead, still nothing interesting
Rasmussen flat for third day running, but voters like Obama's tax hike on top incomes by 47-31 majority
Reuters/CSPAN/Zogby opens up to six, but it's still too damn choppy

Gallup is being a little frustrating, publishing three different numbers, in an effort to avoid making an actual call. All the other polls we follow have moved from surveys of registered voters to "likely voters." Gallup is sort of doing that, but publishing two different likely voters numbers next to the registered voters, one based on current intentions and 2004 voting patterns, and one just based on current intentions. I think that this year's election is so different from recent contests that I'm not sure how much value there is in what happened four years ago, between the recession, a vastly unpopular incumbent, and massive voter registration drives particularly among young people. I haven't quite decided how to deal with it, so you'll just get them all for now, and I'd say pay more attention to the second (trend-free) likely voter number. Incidentally, likely voter surveys tend to be tighter than polls of registered voters. What's interesting here is that today shows a one-point bump for McCain among voters who did in fact vote in 2004, but a flat line for voters who did not, showing a distinct influence in the polling of newly registered voters, which has been a key Obama campaign goal from the outset, and who are probably underrepresented in all polling data.

Let's keep talking Gallup, since we haven't done that for a while. They've also got an issues-based poll out, showing a clear Obama win on the economy (and I hope this borrowed graphic, courtesy Gallup, works). Around the time of the Republican convention the gap on the economy closed up, but has been consistently widening ever since. This is consistent with every other poll with the exception of Hotline, which still shows it fairly close. I can't find another one that does, though, and I'm looking.

McCain still wins on terrorism, but Obama has pulled into a virtual tie on Iraq, and has significant leads on the issues of healthcare policy, energy, and taxes.

GQR has a national poll out showing Obama up by 50-40, without leaners it's 49-39. Somehow they actually manage to find 3% for Bob Barr and 2% for Ralph Nader; don't ask me how. But when they forced people to choose between one or the other, it came out 51-42 Obama. As usual, Obama has the highest favorables in this poll as well, Gov. Palin the lowest. Obama wins on all character-based questions and all issues except national security, which is the same low-teens advantage for McCain as in pretty much all the surveys we see.

Unlike some other polls, I think this one has a healthy dose of realism in the self-identification. We've seen a few lately , most notably I believe Zogby and a new poll from, of all people, Investors Business Daily (which I will not be including here if they don't provide internals) which play down identification as "moderate" in favor of pushing people to "liberal" or "conservative." I think more people in general would call themselves moderates if they weren't bullied to do something else, and the fact that this poll breaks down 18% liberal, 38% moderate, 40% conservative, may have a healthy dose of realism to it. That being said, this poll may undercount black voters (11%, about in line with 2004) and younger voters, so there could be a hidden advantage to Obama in there. Perhaps most importantly of all, this poll comprises respondents who voted for George W. Bush over John Kerry by a three-point margin in 2004, similar to the actual election itself. That a three point 2004 edge to the Republican can translate to a 10 point lead to the Democrat four years later signals a major shift in attitude and dissatisfaction with the way things are going in America, and may be important for Obama.
Pollster For Bradley's Opponent Says "No Bradley Effect Ever;" We Say, "Oh, Per-leeze."
The Battleground poll is still on probation with me,and a five point change in a day, especially at a time when nobody else is moving much, is why. It is amusing though, that longtime Republican pollster Lance Tarrance, who founded the firm that does the poll (he's no longer associated with it), who was George Deukmejian's pollster when he defeated Tom Bradley in their 1982 race for the California governor's office, denied there ever was a Bradley effect on the same day the black candidate expands his lead by five points. Well, of course Tarrance would say that--who would want to admit his candidate got the job because of the racism of the voters? Plus, if you're a Republican pollster (and Tarrance was a senior McCain advisor at one point) you want to find ways to spin an element of surprise into your candidate's potential stirring comeback. Anyway, his credibility is minimal, and it all makes me want to go back and look at his polls for Barry Goldwater. It's supposed to be here, but for some reason the link isn't working. Hmm. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/10/the_bradley_effect_selective_m.html

In 97% White Maine, They Think There Is One
This from the Bangor Daily News, quoting several political science professors in the state, one of whom says he assumes that 5% of people who say race isn't a factor are lying. Now, that does not necessarily mean that you take five points off the African-American's score and add to the white guy's--a lot of people will have told the pollster that race isn't a factor along with their intention to vote for the white candidate already. You know I'm not yet convinced it's gone away, but this story actually gives me hope that I'm right in that it's become more upfront, or at least is included in polling data already. Just saying... http://bangornews.com/detail/91068.html

State Of The States
There are a bunch of state polls out, generally favoring Obama, though Survey USA, in recent years the best pollster on a state-by-state basis, has one in Georgia that seems to reflect reality more than Democratic hope, with McCain holding an 8 point edge. Crowds for early voting in predominantly African-American areas are still overwhelming, according to press and eye-witness reports, though. In other state reporting, Rasmussen has a tie in North Carolina, and Obama up by five in Florida, two in Ohio, three in Virginia and three in Missouri; while FL and OH are always battlegrounds, MO should be safe GOP territory and it would be a very bad sign for Sen. McCain if that state opened up for the Democrat. I'm just not convinced that any of them will. The Fargo Forum (insert "oh yah, you betcha" comment here) actually has Obama with a two point lead in North Dakota, of all places. Seems unlikely. Marist has a couple surveys out showing Obama up by four in Ohio and 12 in PA. Quinnipiac has polls in four more or less battleground states suggesting those particular battles are over, but we knew most of this already: Colorado 52-43, Michigan 54-38, Minnesota 51-40, Wisconsin 54-37.

There Will ~~Too~~ ~~Not~~ Too Be A New McCain Economic Plan
Well, there is a new McCain economic plan after all after saying on Sunday there would be, and Monday there wouldn't. OK. A girl can change her mind. A little belatedly, he's going after the Reagan mantle and pushing more tax cuts. However, as they're basically going to be capital gains and dividends, they'll once again mainly help the upper income brackets, who (unless they work on Wall Street, where even there they are vastly outnumbered by clerical and support staff) are not the ones being laid off. This recession is now about jobs. Cutting investment taxes is inane under those circumstances. They may also change their minds again, get a copy of Obama's plan, cross out the word "Obama" and write "McCain" in crayon on top.

Irrational Exuberance In A Bear Market
As I'd said yesterday, the concern I have with the markets' flying is that earnings are likely to come in soft (if S&P 500 earnings aren't down 25%, I'd be surprised) and that we're heading in to earnings season right now. When a company disappoints and restructures, it will often announce that restructuring at the same time as the disappointing earnings to soften the blow to investors. This morning Pepsico disappointed (by only about 10%) and announced it was cutting 3,300 jobs. if anyone thinks that's the last of these announcements instead of one of the first, I'll set up an offshore betting account. Additionally, Domino's Pizza missed this morning, with US sales down 6.1% and higher food costs hurting margins. Buy stocks if you want to because the sky isn't falling this week, but don't buy them because we're not in recession. We are.
If You Have No Enemies, Scapegoat Your Friends
So at an appearance in Richmond yesterday, complete with signs equating Obama with Islamist terror, a whackjob preacher saying God wants a McCain landslide, former Senator George "Macaca" Allen. Sarah Palin was doing her usual thing in front of a huge crowd, but apparently the sound system wasn't doing its. So naturally a group of people in the back started shouting "louder, louder!" People in the front, which must have been the deaf folks' section, having spent the last few weeks being incited to riot, started chanting "Sarah! Sarah!" as if "Louder!" was some kind of liberal ay-rab terrorist insult. The gov, clearly loving this so much she didn't stop to find out what the hell was going on, immediately chided her supporters, saying "I hope those protesters have the courage and honor to give veterans thanks for their right to protest" (you figure it out, I'm tired) Then the First Dude (TM) earned his keep by whispering in her ear "they just can't hear you back there. That's it." The sound system was not so faulty as not to catch his stage whisper. Aside from the fact that that's just really really really embarrassing to be caught live, it's also really really really distressing because it shows just how ready she is to foment ill feelings towards anyone she thinks might possibly differ from the crowd. We can all think of other examples where scapegoating was a major part of movement-building. Tthis is the person for whom that shriveled homunculus Bill Kristol is throwing John McCain under the bus in order to start pushing her 2012 presidential run.

Right. That's enough. You're cut off.

John

Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day:
The [people] are disgusted with seeking for power by destructive criticism, demagoguery, specious promises, and sham. (Statement to New York Tribune, 1920)

October 13 Daily Polling Update, Tune-Up Edition

2008-10-15T16:03:00.000-07:00

Polls close up a bit more, except Gallup, yet at the same time, more prominent Republicans are moving to distance themselves from John McCain as far and quickly as possible. Economic news being pitched as salvation when it's anything but, of course, may be helping McCain. W\hen the earnings reports and layoff notices come in, it may only appear a three-day respite from the recession everyone would rather believe is not happening. I'd watch for this, because a substantial number of corporate earnings reports for the September quarter will be out before the election, and restructuring plans are quite often announced alongside poor results. This would not be good for McCain. Seeing the kind of noise from Zogby that I expected all along, with Obama leads among men and independents closing far more than they would in a single day in a well-designed trial. There's an interesting trend here: when the McCain campaign doesn't do anything stupid or overtly racist, the polls close up. When they do, Obama's lead expands. I would suggest the Bradley effect has turned into something more overt--when a small percentage of people aren't disgusted by the white guy's campaign, they move their vote to him because they're not ashamed that day. Tomorrow's another matter.

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)

October 12 Daily Polling Update, Micheal Ray Richardson Edition

2008-10-13T04:19:00.000-07:00

Another day, another set of reasons Sen. McCain curses President Eisenhower for signing Alaska into statehood, but I'm still not calling this one, so keep your seatbelts fastened and shorts untwisted because this race is far from over (whether it would be were Barack Obama white, or even a black guy named Barry O'...ummm...Bama is another matter entirely, and you damn well know it). There's perceptible poll movement towards McCain, but at the same time more and more Republican office-holders are shying away from campaigning with the candidate; the governor of Florida goes to the happiest place on earth instead, which is not a McCain campaign event. There will be a lot of embarrassed Republican politicians if McCain wins. McCain himself appears to have second doubts as to the extent he wants to incite supporters to violence and gets roundly booed for suggesting Obama is a decent guy. Christopher Buckley endorses Obama and suggests his father would not have been appalled. Obama and Biden are really boring and just give speeches, but break 50% on Pollster.com for the first time. There's still a longish way to go, though, and I have to say I still see the issue of race as a major factor in the campaign, especially as the McCain campaign is now trying to explain (and not necessarily incorrectly) the benefits of a split legislative/executive--I'd just say look to, oh, 2003 for the answer to that. That being said, I can't say I've ever heard it used as a reason not to vote for the other guy before. I've got the weekly tables, but this is so long already I'm going to send them under separate cover.

Diageo/Hotline drops a point off Obama, adds it to McCain, still an eight point lead, presumably typical statistical noise, a point too high yesterday, a point too low today, another day older and deeper in debt...
Gallup closes up two, to a seven-point margin, the tightest it's been in a week
GWU/Battleground sleeps in on Sundays
R2K opens up a further point for Obama, 53-40, more of the same, just a little more of it
Rasmussen looks like Hotline, down 1 for Obama today after being up 2 yesterday, further opens up party weighting, now 39.3% Democrat, 33.0% Republican
Reuters/CSPAN/Zogby has Obama moving outside the margin of error for the first time, independent voters leading the way

It looks like the movements of the last couple days have been pretty modest, either random statistical white noise or a slight reaction to things like the ugliness of the McCain campaign pushing people towards Obama and the potential change in tactic moving a few back. We'll know if something's changing if McCain takes a conciliatory tack at this Wednesday night's debate; it already looks like he's going to propose a new economic plan that sounds more like Obama's. Obama will probably point out that because of talks with a dictator, the US has just taken North Korea off the terrorism watch list and the North Koreans say they're going to start dismantling their nuclear facilities. That being said, today's movement is slightly away from Obama, with three of the polls moving tighter and two others opening up a bit. Go figure.

Hate to do it, but I'm going to talk about Zogby for a moment, because the 21 point Obama lead among independent voters is so big. Still feels like a bit of an outlier (though see Hotline below), although the Zogby lead for Obama is the smallest of any of the pollsters, I think that's because the poll is virtually unweighted by party ID. Zogby has a history of going against the grain, mostly, I think, for the sake of going against the grain, that maverick. People in general were leaning Democratic this year anyway, and the economy is only amplifying that tendency. Suggesting it's not true for the purpose of your poll is baffling. This poll, however, is following Rasmussen's lead in separating between "investors" and "non-investors." With investors, however they define it, McCain has a 49-44 lead, while non-investors Obama is up 53-38. One wonders, if 40% down in the markets is not enough to suggest to investors that something's wrong, just how accomplished these investors are.

Hotline confirms what I had written about yesterday, that opinions on the second debate seem to be solidifyng several days afterwards, rather than in the immediate aftermath. Their poll suggests that of the 71% of their polling sample who watched the debate, 53% believe Obama won, compared with just 14% for McCain, a far larger margin than the first debate. Honestly, I'm a little surprised than this, but the expectations game may be in play here--the town meeting type format of this debate was supposed to favor McCain, who has in the past performed extremely well in this sort of setting, while Obama can come off as a bit stiff. Instead, leaving the content of the debate aside and thinking only about style, McCain seemed on edge, and Obama calm and engaging. This poll also gives Obama a very large lead among independents, 16%, not as extreme as Zogby, but still a huge number--and as Hotline is now weighting less Democratic than Rasmussen (41 D 37 R 18 I), those independent votes, although probably themselves underweighted, are more important than ever.
The Really Important Stuff From Rasmussen
A separate Rasmussen poll states that 36% of voters surveyed believe the Boston Red Sox will beat the devil out of the Tampa Bay Rays and then win the World Series, and chose Albert Pujols for NL MVP and Boston's Dustin Pedroia in the AL. I'd probably go with Chase Utley in the NL myself, but Pedroia could be one of those sentimental favorite picks, though with the Sawx it's hard to pick Pedroia over Kevin Youkilis. However as only 21% in the poll chose Cliff Lee as AL Cy Young winner, 79% of respondents are mentally defective. Party ID weighting must be unfavorable to Tribe fans. The same voters also pick Johan Santana for NL Cy Young over Brandon Webb or Tim Lincecum. It's as true in baseball as politics that most people are only able to retain either the first or the last piece of data they receive.
Come Back Micheal Ray, All Is Forgiven, Pundit And Politician Dept.
Back in the 1980s, New York Knick Micheal Ray Richardson, when asked about the team's collapse, famously responded "The ship be sinking." Better still, when asked how far it could sink, he responded "sky's the limit." Yesterday, Indiana Rep. Mark Souder, representing a conservative district, wondered if McCain would win "seven states" and how the resulting tidal wave would hurt his own re-election chances (minimally, I'd guess). Writer Christopher Buckley, who has written speeches for McCain and this year wrote a supportive op-ed in the New York Times endorses Obama, saying for the first time in his life he is pulling the Democratic lever, and wonders in print if his father might not have been terribly upset about it (http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2008-10-10/the-conservative-case-for-obama ), as former National Review publisher and current McCain donor Wick Allison discovers that he is impressed by Barack Obama, saying "Nobody can read Obama’s books (which, it is worth noting, he wrote himself) or listen to him speak without realizing that this is a thoughtful, pragmatic, and prudent man. It gives me comfort just to think that after eight years of George W. Bush we will have a president who has actually read the Federalist Papers." Allison concludes that, because it now stands for big government and rampant interventionism and empire building, "as a cause, conservatism may be dead. But as a stance, as a way of making judgments in a complex and difficult world, I believe it is very much alive in the instincts and predispositions of a liberal named Barack Obama." I've just quoted half of it, but here's the rest: http://www.dmagazine.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?nm=Core+Pages&type=gen&mod=Core+Pages&tier=3&gid=B33A5C6E2CF04C9596A3EF81822D9F8E

Oh, and Florida Governor Charlie Crist is pulling a Norm Coleman. Crist, who was talked about as a potential running mate, though I didn't really see that happening, is declining to campaign with McCain to mind the state's economy instead. ''When I have time to help, I'll try to do that,'' Crist said last week, after he flew around the state with McCain running mate Sarah Palin. Saturday, he skipped a McCain football rally and instead went to Disney World. Do the math.
A Note Of Decency?
It appears that the tone of the discourse may be concerning Sen. McCain. At McCain and Palin's rallies in the last week or two, supporters have made some fairly incendiary statements which the candidates have not gainsaid, and the crowds have been stoked to near fever pitch. Friday, on one occasion a man at a rally told McCain that she was afraid to raise a child in an Obama presidency (and think for a moment about the deeper subtext of that, in a "cats and dogs living together" sense, willya?) and the Senator stopped her and called his opponent "a decent person and a person you do not have to be scared of." At another, a woman called the son of an American and Kenyan an Arab, and again McCain stopped her and called Obama a decent man with whom he had some disagreements. Unfortunately, the crowds responded by booing. Yesterday, in Philadelphia, Sen. Obama thanked McCain publicly for both his service to the country and for his statements. The undertones of the McCain campaign have been getting uglier and uglier, and if Sen. McCain, who's always been a bit of a moral cipher (I have an issue with his having switched from the Episcopal Church to attending Baptist services at the exact moment he made his first run for president, in 2000) is personally appalled, that's entirely reasonable. If he's afraid that a deranged supporter will attempt some violence on his opponent, frankly, that's also reasonable considering how far this has been allowed to go. If he's afraid that he'd go down in history as the man who lit the fuse for that act, he's right. It would also be the end of the Republican Party as we know it.
Another other other McCain Economic Plan On The Way?
Hard quite to keep count, but see above. Because the mortgage buy-up plan was met with joy by the Socialist Workers' Party (I'm making that up, may just have been the CPUSA) and with howls of horror and disgust by ideological conservatives (other than those in foreclosure), Politico (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14493.html) reports that there will be a new McCain economic plan released some time this week, including (where have we heard this before) middle class tax cuts. My guess is that he uses the phrase middle class as often in the next debate as he said "my friends" (which is typically what he says when he's about to say something unfriendly) in the last one. He forgot to say "middle class" at all in the last one, so he's got some catching up to do. McCain advisors could not give specifics because, well, they didn't know, as over 30 plans had been presented to McCain and he hadn't chosen one yet. Senator, that's how you chose your running mate....

The City That Booed Santa Claus Meets Sarah Palin
Well, Philadelphia Flyers owner Ed Snider, a major Republican donor, turned the Governor into, well, a political hockey puck (Don Rickles reference accidental but emphasized all the same) by inviting her to drop the ceremonial first puck (say WHAT?) at the Flyers' opener last night. Gov. Palin, who had said to Fox News that she would ~~hide behind~~ provide cover for herself by bringing her seven year old daughter Piper and dressing her in a Flyers jersey, saying at the time, "How dare they boo Piper!" Well, Philadelphia fans booed Mike Schmidt. They booed Santa Claus. Governor, you're not Mike Schmidt or Santa Claus. The Flyers played music louder and louder on the PA, but Philadelphia fans are more resilient than that, as those of us who have the mixed fortune of being Mets fans know all too well. The NY Rangers have a couple players from Alaska, who try and make themselves scarce when the subject of their governor comes up. But they at least must be used to being booed in Philly. And they don't bring little girls to hide behind. Craven, I say.

In CT, We Know From Free Houses For Governors
I try not to comment on rumor, and you won't hear it from me again until there's something more substantial but I'm mentioning this because there's a pretty good chance you'll hear more of this one very soon. Questions have arisen about the Palins' house (the one she gets the per diems to stay in). It's a perfectly reasonable house on a lake, not outrageous by any means in size for a large family. Todd Palin seems to be saying that he built it with the help of some contractor friends on nights, weekends, grade school half days, etc. Reporters have been asking questions about WHICH contractor friends he was referring to that volunteered their time, materials, workmen, as some of them may also have been the contractor friends that helped then Mayor Palin run Wasilla into debt by building the famed $12.5 million sports complex far from the center of town. The Village Voice, no friend to the GOP, claims to have a list of contractors on the sports complex and finds a tangled web (is there any other kind of web, srsly?) of connections and donations to the Palins, from campaign contributions to sponsorship of the First Gentleman's snowmobiling team. Coincidentally, as Mayor. Palin blocked an effort to mandate public filing of building permits. In local news, former Connecticut Governor John Rowland is out of jail. If there's anything to this, it's a bigger deal than Troopergate, because it's just good old fashioned graft.

I'm pretty sure I've run out of things to say until the debate, so there may just be a couple numbers and a muttered "y'all be cool" tomorrow!

John

Herbert Hoover Quote of the Day (TM):
I have... instituted systematic, voluntary measures of cooperation with the business institutions and with State and municipal authorities to make certain that fundamental businesses of the country shall continue as usual, that wages and therefore consuming power shall not be reduced, and that a special effort shall be made to expand construction work in order to assist in equalizing other deficits in employment... I am convinced that through these measures we have reestablished confidence. (State of the Union Message, December 3, 1929; the voluntary measures may not have worked too well.)

October 11 Daily Polling Update, Sleep On It A Few Nights Edition

2008-10-13T04:14:00.000-07:00

Not a lot of news out of the tracking polls today, other than the fact that just as with the first debate, and a few others in history, more and more people are deciding that Barack Obama outperformed John McCain Tuesday night. Troopergate comes up with something, but my guess is that not enough people will care to make it matter, and the biggest news of the day probably comes out of Minnesota where embattled GOP Senate incumbent Norm Coleman pulls negative ads and publicly declines an invitation to attend a McCain rally on the grounds that he needs to....work on pulling his negative ads instead. This could possibly be the start of the GOP stampede to the McCain Exit Door (TM). RealClearPolitics shows an Obama advantage of 6.6%, and an advantage in net favorables of 11.3 (Obama +20.3, McCain +8.8). Two major national polls are out, and I don't like the design of either one. Grumble grumble grumble.

Diageo/Hotline now breaks out likely vs registered voters, Obama touches 50% among likelies for first time, also largest lead since inception of poll
Gallup adds a point for McCain, still a nine point advantage, only 6% undecided
GWU/Battleground takes weekends off. Happy caturday.
R2K remains flat at 12 (yawn)
Rasmussen opens back up to 52-45, debate offsets negative McCain campaign gains, Hagen opens up a couple points on Dole in NC Senate race
Reuters/CSPAN/Zogby closes up by four-tenths of a point (slow news day), coming out of undecideds, retains nine point lead among independents

Gallup Has Something interesting To Say; Film At Eleven
Gallup's poll has a couple interesting tidbits in an otherwise fairly quiet time for the trackers, as the last week of polling has really not moved the needle much--it looks like the Ayers etc advertising from McCain/Palin may have helped them out by a point or two, but the debate stopped that flow and indeed reversed it. Rather to my surprise, Gallup today says that among their survey respondents, 56% said Obama did better at the second debate, compared with only 23% for McCain. We saw something similar in the last debate, where the margin opened up significantly several days after the debate itself. Ronald Reagan saw something similar in his "there you go again" moment; once the meme sank in to the public consciousness, his performance in that particular debate was considered to be much stronger than it was just a day or two later. Information on Lincoln/Douglas was not immediately available at press time.

Gallup also has a poll on why McCain voters prefer McCain; the top two reasons now are not based on any particular issue, experience and a general agreement with his values or views; national security has dropped by nearly half compared with a similar poll a month earlier, at the same time as McCain slips back farther behind in the national polling--when security was considered a bigger issue, he was only behind by four points. Now with it a much smaller reason for voting for him, the lead is nine. For the Obama poll, the numbers are rock solid, though a few more opt for "want change/fresh approach" as the economic crisis deepens. This suggests to me that Obama's positions and character are actually fairly well understood by the public, so a negative advertising campaign telling people they don't really know what they feel pretty strongly they do may not be as effective as those responsible for it might have hoped.

Newsweek Poll Shows Obama Blowout, But Internals Show 78% Of Pollsters Use Recreational Drugs
A few new national polls in the last several days, all showing, as you'd expect, a varying degree of Obama leads. Fox, not including leaners, has Obama up 46-39, while Newsweek makes it 52-41 and SRBI 50-44. What's significant is that more polls all the time, when including leaners at least, are putting Obama at or over 50% and staying there. Newsweek points to what it calls "a historic boiling over of dissatisfaction with the status quo." Newsweek shows Obama actually taking a bigger lead among men (54-40) than women (50-41, about what we've seen with other polls for several weeks). Equally importantly, he leads McCain among voters 65 and older in this poll by a six point margin. Just when I was wondering if the internals here overly favored Obama, I'm thrown into an even more confused state by reading that in this poll, Independents are still favoring McCain by a two point margin, which actually is a better showing for the Republican than in their September poll. So I think the internals swing both ways--the Democrat over Republican edge is probably too high, at 39-27, but so are the McCain-leaning independents at 31%. Racially, I think they've got it wrong too, with 81% white and 17% non-white; that's not what this election is going to look like, unless they're calling everyone who isn't African-American "white." This poll also underweights younger voters dramatically, with only 12% in the 18-34 range--I believe that over 20% of voters in this election will be 18-29, and they support Obama by over a 60-40 majority. So the internals of this poll are, frankly, bizarre, and it should probably be ignored. But so we can finally put this idiocy to rest, because it never was a problem, isn't a problem, and never was going to be a problem, Hillary Clinton supporters back Obama by an 88-7 margin. OK? Read: http://www.newsweek.com/id/163339

Fox Asks Funny Questions, But Still Comes Up With Six Point Obama Lead
Fox shows very different trends, a 6 point lead, but 16 among women up from only 4 a month ago. Huh? Fox shows a two point Obama lead among independents, down from five two weeks ago. Obama/Biden has a clear advantage on all the issue-based questions, and their "gut-check" question, "If you had to make the toughest decision of your life, which candidate would you go to for advice?" shows a dead heat. Far more McCain supporters (28%) say their vote is a vote against Obama, compared with only 17% who say their Obama vote is a vote against McCain. I'll leave it up to you to figure out why. Interestingly, though, of the 40% of white voters who say race is a factor, they also claim to be split fairly evenly between the two candidates, suggesting that either a lot of whites are going to vote for Obama because he's black, there's a Bradley effect in play and they really won't, or this is just a messed up question. I go for the latter. The debates must be helping Obama among Fox survey respondents, because a month ago, this interesting but highly subjective question came out McCain 50, Obama 34, suggesting that the exposure has given Americans a lot of comfort with the very question John McCain is trying to ask and answer, "Who is Barack Obama?"

Party weigthing in this poll is probably more reasonable than Newsweek, 41 D, 34 R, 22 I. The seven point lead seems to be more in line with most surveys. However, only 11% of voters surveyed are black; while this would be in line with historic black voting patterns (12.8% of the population, underrepresented in voting), it's hard to believe that african-american voters will not turn out in larger numbers than usual on Nov 4. I do find many of these questions curiously worded, let us say, in a "just how scary a guy is the scary guy?" manner, like the Bill Ayers question with a suggestion Obama associated with a terrorist, not a guy who committed violent crimes nearly 40 years ago, while the one about McCain and the Keating Five goes out of its way to point out that McCain was cleared of all charges (but not that he was chided for poor judgment or that he took illegal contributions in the form of vacations). See for yourself if you care to: http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/101008_foxpoll.pdf
Declaration of Independents?
Anyone remember when Barack Obama was sweeping to massive victories in the primaries in states that allowed independent voters to vote in primaries? Just saying. Well, more than just saying--one thing the Clinton campaign failed to account for, among so many things they failed to account for, was the tremendous crossover appeal Obama enjoyed, and part of the wave that began and ended the race for the nomination on Super Tuesday was just that appeal to a broader base of voters than the Democratic hard-core. Even in the polls that weight the most heavily Democratic, it's not close to a majority--I don't know of one of these polls that has as much as 40% Democrats in it. It would appear to me that similarly to how Hillary Clinton was stunned to get whomped by independents, the McCain campaign is in a similar state, notwithstanding that the "maverick" brand has been consistently sullied by months of appeals to the far right and next to nothing that would make voters who fall somewhere in between Republican and Democrat but identify with neither comfortable. By the way, a maverick is by definition a loner, not a leader.

Troopergate Semi-Serious But Not Desperate
The Branchflower report found that Gov. Palin abused her power (by pressuring for the firing of a trooper) but not illegally (she can fire the Public Safety Commissioner whenever she wants). Also, and interestingly, that the state Attorney General's office failed to comply with the investigator's requests for information in the form of emails. For many, the bigger issue will be the consistent pattern of lies that led to this point; it certainly seems this is the problem the Alaska State Legislature has, that they've been played by a master. Ultimately I don't think the American people will care much about this, though the process, that she told a variety of conflicting stories about what happened and still hasn't really stopped changing her story, may be what people take away from this about her: that she was prepared to continue to lie until she found one that was acceptable or the clock ran down. The issue of stonewalling by the Attorney General's office may come back as well. If you have nothing better to do (but save a tree and read it online, willya?) http://download2.legis.state.ak.us/DOWNLOAD.pdf
Rats Deserting Sinking Ship--Or Is It The Ships That Are Deserting...?
We posted a note the other day on how the Minnesota Senate race between incumbent Republican Norm Coleman and challenger Al Franken had closed into a dead heat, with at least one major poll actually giving Franken a statistically significant lead (I'd still be inclined to call it an outlier). Yesterday, it was reported that Coleman had said "thanks but no thanks" to ~~the Bridge to~~ appearing at a rally with John McCain in Minnesota. After one of the ugliest campaigns in Minnesota history (and yes, I realize ugly for Minnesota is like a tea party in Chicago or Philly), Coleman has decided he's had enough and says "today people need hope and a more positive campaign is a start." And, in fact, Coleman has stated he will now pull all his negative ads. OK, here's what's interesting. First, Coleman is embroiled in a controversy as to whether or not he took expensive suits (yes, clothes, this is Minnesota, remember) from a supporter. Second, there's a word in Coleman's statement that has appeared several bajillionty-umpteen times in a certain Democratic presidential candidate's campaign. Third, he's running a negative campaign and losing, so it's time to get sick of negativity (a week or so after the McCain camp announces it will go all negative, all the time). Fourth, he may actually be sick of it.

His excuse for not appearing with McCain was perhaps the most telling thing of all, both in its lameness and how incredibly pointed it is in context: that he needed to the time to work on pulling his negative ads. Find the story here: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/10/10/as_mccain_goes_negative_a_gop.html#more

Palin Uses The Lines, But Obama Channels The Gipper
I've said, to overwhelmingly different responses, since the primary season that what Obama had tapped into so beautifully was the feeling of hope and positivity that Ronald Reagan was able to engender in the hearts of Americans. No matter if one believed in his ideas or not, just in terms of message it was crafted and expressed masterfully. While Sarah Palin has tried a typically McCain-esque scattershot approach to wearing the mantle, throwing out Reagan lines out of context and hoping it reminded people of The Great Communicator, Obama has tapped something deeper inside people who really want someone with a message they can admire. People like him; they may respect McCain, but amiability is not high on his list of qualities. We're finally beginning to see the press pick up on this, and it could be significant. F'rinstance, http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/10/10/the_new_old_gipper/

Sox take a squeaker at the Rays' house; Phils school the Dodgers. Cats and dogs living together. Stay tuned!

John

Herbert Hoover Quote of the Day is back and badder than ever!
Every expansion of government in business means that government in order to protect itself from the political consequences of its errors and wrongs is driven irresistibly without peace to greater and greater control of the nation's press and platform. Free speech does not live many hours after free industry and free commerce die. (Campaign speech, 1928)

October 10 Daily Polling Update, Scatter Grenade Edition

2008-10-13T04:08:00.000-07:00

It looks as though the slight closing in polls we saw with the amplification of the 100% negative message strategy from the McCain camp (high school drug use? per-leeze.) is being negated by post-debate reaction, but we need at least one more day of polling to see for sure. At the same time, Rasmussen has some state polling a little more favorable to Sen. McCain, which we'll have a look at down below somewhere. The Obama campaign has bought half an hour of TV time on October 26 (Fox may balk because it's during the World Series; we can assume that Sen. Obama either has inside knowledge that the Series won't get to a Game Six or that this is the revenge of a disgruntled White Sox and/or Cubs fan.) General Petraeus acknowledges that "you do have to talk to enemies." Oh, and the Annenbergs seem not to be terrorists after all. Who knew?

So, with no bias other than alphabetical, we see:

Diageo/Hotline adds a point for Obama, back to 48-41, Obama voters rallying behind their candidate
Gallup has Obama losing a point, and McCain doing better in the Thursday night polling
GWU/Battleground seems to be 51-43, but the web site isn't updating. I really hate this poll.
R2K opens up to 12 again, a point each way.
Rasmussen stays flat at a five point Obama margin--remember, other than Zogby, this is the least Democratic-weighted poll.
Reuters/CSpan/Zogby at 4.2 up from 3.6--in its bizarre way, this could actually matter, because the poll seems not to be party weighted at all.

In the Rasmussen poll, 66% of respondents now believe the US economy is in recession; just 6% say it's getting better while 78% say it's getting worse. Note to six percent: your prescriptions are due for refill. The race as clearly broken down now between voters who think the economy is the biggest issue and those who think there is another one--in Rasmussen, which I believe underweights Democrats, Obama leads 65-31 among voters who put the economy as the biggest issue, while McCain is up by a similar 60-36 margin among other voters. Rasmussen makes the important point that Obama is leading in all of the states John Kerry won in 2004; I would be surprised if he lost any of those. Of the states George W. Bush won, ten are in play right now, McCain is behind in four and five are considered toss-ups.

Diageo's poll on whether voters "enthusiastically support" their candidate has some interesting implications. The smear campaign and poor debate showing from McCain does not move the bar with Republican voters, but Democratic voters are noticeably more enthusiastic on Obama. As the McCain campaign continues its scattershot approach to running a campaign, with a new accusation, proposal, or policy several times a day, people who are not in the McCain camp may, according to the data, find the strategy somewhere between confusing and distasteful

Looking at some state polling, there is a potential glint of optimism for the McCain camp coming from Rasmussen, which shows traditionally Republican North Carolina a toss-up (other recent polls had shown it turning Democratic for the first time since 1976, and Kay Hagan remains up in her challenge against incumbent Sen. Elizabeth Dole) and a seven point GOP lead in Indiana. On the other hand, Obama has a seven-point lead in Minnesota. On the other hand, Strategic Vision has a Florida poll showing Obama opening up an eight point lead, compared with three at Rasmussen. In North Carolina, Civitas has a survey showing a five point Obama lead, pointing to the efficacy of the massive advertising blitz in the state.

AP Survey On Voter Registration Striking
The AP has done some digging into new voter registrations and has discovered that new registrations where party ID is declared favor Democrats by a 4-to-1 margin. Historically new registrants have, oddly, turned out in elections in relatively low numbers, but the galvanization and polarization of the electorate this year may reverse that trend, at least once. As of Oct 1, according to the survey, registered Democrats have grown by 5% while Republican registrations have actually declined by 2%. In states that record the race of registrants, African-Americans have registered at nearly twice the rate of whites. Finally in the eight battleground states where voters register by party, Democrats have gained approximately 1,000,000 voters in the last four years, while the GOP has lost 125,000. In Florida, since the beginning of this year, 360,000 people have registered as Democrats, compared with just over 253,000 independents and over 190,000 Republicans. What's important here is that many of the polling agencies use the prior election's turnout as a guide to designing their surveys. If party registration has changed that much in the last four years--and it is a fairly fluid thing, shifting in both directions over time--there could be undersampling of potential Obama supporters. It's an AP story, so it can be found in dozens of papers, but here's the link the AP site directed me to: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/N/NEW_VOTERS?SITE=NEYOR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

You Don't Need A Weatherman...Srsly Dewd, You Really Really Don't.
So now the lead federal prosecutor of the Weather Underground has weighed in on the idiocy in a letter to the New York Times , which you can find at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/opinion/l10ayers.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink and you probably should. Anyway, in it, the former prosecutor, William Ibershof, says that he is
"amazed and outraged that Senator Barack Obama is being linked to William Ayers’s terrorist activities 40 years ago when Mr. Obama was, as he has noted, just a child.
Although I dearly wanted to obtain convictions against all the Weathermen, including Bill Ayers, I am very pleased to learn that he has become a responsible citizen. Because Senator Obama recently served on a board of a charitable organization with Mr. Ayers cannot possibly link the senator to acts perpetrated by Mr. Ayers so many years ago."
I mean, honestly. You can insult people without insulting the intelligence of the entire American public. Oh, and Sterling Morrison, former guitarist with the Velvet Underground said "Anyone who needs Bob Dylan to tell him which way the wind is blowing is a serious mental defective." Issue closed.

Yesterday In ~~Nuremb~~ Wisconsin (With Video, You'd Better Watch It Whichever Party You Support)
At a rally in Wisconsin yesterday, a McCain supporter unleashed a bizarre rant blasting the "socialists taking over our country" (apparently including President Bush, Chairman Bernanke, and Secretary Paulson, none of whom consider themselves men of the left, if the truth be told) and called Obama and Speaker Pelosi "hooligans" (which seems a bit contradictory--either you're a latte-drinking, arugula-eating elitist or a tire-iron wielding gangsta-rap blasting thug, but not both--kind of like being a Muslim with a radical Christian pastor...). While the candidate isn't responsible for the screw-loose beliefs of his tinfoil-helmet-wearing supporters (unless he is), what I find troubling is that Sen. McCain, who started dealing with the whackjob with good humor, then agreed with the man as the crowd chanted "USA USA." Yes, agreed. This goes well beyond the bounds of the political discourse any of us are used to, but as I've hinted at before, is not without precedent in the 20th century. It's just that we once fought a war against people like that. Check it out for yourself, courtesy of the interwebs, YouTube, TPM, and Fox News, just so nobody thinks some liberal media outlet edited it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNYCo4wyNRA

It's Only The Quote Of The Day Because I Said It Yesterday And The Day Before Dept.
All of the things they said about Barack Obama on the TV, at their rallies, and now on YouTube...John McCain could not bring himself to look Barack Obama in the eye and say the same things to him...In my neighborhood, when you've got something to say to a guy, you look him in the eye and you say it to him." --Joe Biden

Not being married (yes, girls! he's single!) I wouldn't have known this for sure, but apparently you don't send your wife.

Second Quote Of The Day, Veterinary Dept.
"In this [the economy] context, the McCain-Paln attempt to get Americans to focus on Obama's Chicago associations seems surreal--or, as a British politician once said about criticism he was receiving, 'like being savaged by dead sheep.''-- George Will

Just to be pedantic, that was Labour Chancellor Denis Healey's comment on being criticized by mild-mannered Geoffrey Howe. Sheep jokes have a glorious history in British politics--Winston Churchill once referred to his successor (and predecessor) as Prime Minster, Clement Attlee, as "a sheep in sheep's clothing."

Til the next one,

John

Rather than Hoover, this popped up as my email signature, from his predecessor, and it seems as though today is as good or better than any other to stick with it (candidates note):

There is only one form of political strategy in which I have any confidence, and that is to try to do the right thing.
--Calvin Coolidge

October 9 Daily Polling Update, Billionaire Nixonian/Reaganite Terrorist Sympathizer Edition

2008-10-13T04:05:00.000-07:00

At a campaign stop yesterday in Indiana, Barack Obama asked the crowd if they were better off than they were not four years, but four weeks ago. Sen. Obama himself certainly is. Four weeks ago, he was down in the polls; today he's up on average mid-single digits, even in polls where we have problems with methodology (you can borrow my stats texts if you don't believe me, they're non-partisan, promise.)

Diageo/Hotline: Proves yesterday was an outlier, back to a six point Obama lead.
Gallup: Steady as she goes, still up 11.
R2K: Flat at +11
Rasmussen: Closes a point for McCain, no new information, though.

OK, OK, I give up. There are two new tracking polls, and I'll add them to the list for now at least, despite serious doubts as to methodology, though I might take them right back off again. I've been watching the GWU/Battleground poll for a little while, and it still makes me scratch my head a bit, but it's there and people treat it as if it were serious, so I suppose I will too. And I hate to take much of anything with Zogby's name on it seriously, but because it's being paid for by Reuters and C-Span, again, people will think it deserves a seat at the grown-up table, so here we are. Plus, they release numbers early in the morning, so I don't have to keep hitting Safari's "refresh" button the way I do with Hotline until they finally get around to it. Battleground I like even less, it seems to be stratified between people who identify themselves as conservative and liberal with very few "moderate," which goes against the grain. It also overweights women, I believe, at 54/46--yet, with most polls showing women preferring Obama by a high single digit margin, the race is curiously close. Voting by age is according to 2004 numbers, which as we've discussed often, is probably a hideously bad idea in 2008, particularly for 18-29s. Given all that, I'll include the numbers in the chart, but I'm not going to talk about them unless there's some change in the way they do things, and even then I may change my mind again and take it out. They also don't release on weekends, so if something important happens today, don't expect it to show up until the following Monday. It's really pretty useless. I think I'm going to regret this.

So let's talk about Zogby a bit. It's a slim margin for Obama, four points, but a consistent one, in which he leads McCain in all age groups except 70+, which, if true, would be very bad news, as is the fact that Zogby has them tied among families with at least one member in the military (see IAVA ratings on veterans' issues below for a possible explanation why). My issues with Zogby are exactly what they were yesterday; that the poll seems to weight Republican and Democratic party ID equally, which is at best poor trial design and at worst idiotic. However, the two point opening up today after one day of post-debate polling may be even more striking in a poll that overweights GOP voters so heavily; this is borne out by the survey result that Obama moved from a nine to a 13 point advantage among independents; on a three-day rolling number, we would expect that to increase over the next few days if, as polls show, Obama won the debate so significantly among independent and undecided voters. If it doesn't, he didn't.
Oops, She Did It Again, Senior Citizen Dept.
John McCain has made it clear that he would go after certain aspects of various entitlement programs, including Social Security and Medicare, where massive reimbursement cuts over $1.2 trillion would pay for the $5,000 family tax credit (while your current employer-paid benefits will be taxed and withheld, like your FICA. If you receive benefits from your employer, your withholding will go up. No extrapolating here; it's in the plan.). This is in McCain's own platform, it's not opinion. Sen. McCain said last night in debate he will cut Social Security benefits as well, saying "we will not be able to provide the same benefit for present dayworkers that retirees receive today." Again, it's a quote from the debate. I'm not talking about what's right or wrong in my opinion, just what McCain has said or is in print as his campaign platform and economic policy. Gov. Palin, however, said at a rally yesterday that John McCain would "protect entitlement programs that Americans depend on particularly social security, and will keep America's promise to senior citizens." OK, here's the opinion part, and it's nonpartisan. I don't know that I've ever seen this disorganized a campaign, even from Democrats who have raised disorganization to an art form. One is reminded of Will Rogers' comment "I'm not a member of an organized political party, I'm a Democrat." Except now it's the other guys.

Guess Who Must Be A Terrorist Sympathizer, Billionaire Nixonian Department
I've tried not to talk about the Bill Ayers crap; if any of you believe Barack Obama helped bomb the White House when he was eight years old, there's a Thorazine malted waiting for you at the nearest drug store soda fountain. But let's talk for just 30 seconds about the board Obama and Ayers served on together: it was to administer the funds awarded by the Annenberg Challenge; yes, that would be media billionaire (and Nixon's Ambassador to the Court at St. James's) Walter Annenberg; the check to fund the project was personally handed to the group by Annenberg's daughter Wallis. Senator, do you mean to suggest--or rather, have your running mate suggest-- that the Annenbergs support terrorism? Pretty high-powered board that approved the grant to Ayers and his board of respected Chicago educators, including Walter Annenberg himself. When Ayers' group won the Annenberg Challenge Grant, he worked on the proposal with, among other people, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley. Is Mayor Daley a terrorist sympathizer?

Considering hate groups, McCain himself has far more troubling connections than a man who was a violent student radical in 1968-72 and has not been so much as accused of a crime committed in the last 36 years and, until a black man from Chicago ran for President, was considered a rehabilitated criminal and respected education reformer. (See, I'm not running for anything or being paid by anyone for this, damn it all, so I can say that.) And as ever, McCain's connections to fringe organizations and fraudsters are on film, in papers, and quotes from Republican colleagues. And lord knows, all over the Internet. Gotta love multiple sources. I should be used to hypocrisy by now, but this one makes me throw up in my mouth a little.

Dude, Where's My Aricept?
Does McCain think Petraeus is really Chairman of the Joint Chiefs? Or that he has already begun his new assignment as commander of CentCom? Or, most worrying, that the people he spoke to at a campaign rally yesterday are in fact his "fellow prisoners?" There's misspeaking and sounding a little dumb, like Obama suggesting he might be a Martian, being green behind the ears, or Palin saying the campaign was "at the halfway point" yesterday, which are pretty meaningless, but there are also some worrying misstatements of fact, "fellow prisoners" in particular.

Let's You And My Wife Fight
Cindy McCain is now doing her husband's dirty work, talking about how chilled she was to hear about Obama voting down funding the troops, although her husband also voted no on the bill, Obama because the first bill had no timetable for withdrawal, McCain because the later iteration had a timetable for withdrawal. Ultimately, though, they both voted no at one point on the same gosh-darn bill. Must have made for an awkward dinner table conversation one night chez McCain the day he voted down funding for her son in the military. Personally I think her suggestion that Sen. Obama change shoes with her is impractical. He's a lot taller than she is, and they'd certainly give him blisters on the basketball court. Plus the rhinestones aren't really his look. Is it a little odd that McCain is sending women out to do the poo-flinging? No potential First Lady has ever in the history of presidential campaigning has done something like this. Doesn't it begin to kind of look like a war hero is hiding behind his wife's and running mate's respective skirts? If you think it doesn't, find me another example of a candidate's wife making this kind of attack during a campaign. Go back a couple centuries if you want to. I'll be here.

Pop Quiz: Who Do Vets' Organizations Support?
It's also curious that McCain, whose own service record is, we believe, beyond reporach, received a grade of D on veterans' legislation from the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans Association (IAVA), noting six failures to vote for expanded veterans' benefits. Votevets.org is also targetting him for his no votes on veterans benefits. IAVA give Obama and Biden a B. Many other senators get A's. IAVA pointed out that McCain missed more votes on veterans' benefits than Tim Johnson, who missed most of this year because of a cerebral hemorrhage. IAVA does not endorse candidates or make contributions to any candidate.

The Senate, With Jokes
Rasmussen has a new poll from Minnesota, showing Al Franken opening up a 6 point lead over incumbent Norm Coleman. Neither man is terribly popular in their home state, and it's been an ugly campaign. I'd be more inclined to look at it as an outlier except that independent Dean Barkley has gained to 17%, which I had thought possible when I wrote about this race a couple weeks ago. Barkley has good name recognition in the state, and had hoped that by running a clean campaign could let the two major party candidates club each other to death. If he's really approaching 20% with four weeks to go, this could be a horse race--remember, this is the state that sent Jesse Ventura to the governor's mansion. Of course, you'd think they'd have learned their lesson.

We'll look for more debate findlngs to seep into the polling tomorrow; I'd think for the most part we'll see a bit of a drop off in undecideds, with Republicans who don't much care for McCain convincing themselves that he won and falling into his camp; the question will be whether unaffiliated voters will act as the post-debate polls suggested they would and tend to Obama or not. Saturday's numbers will be the first with three days of post-debate info.

See you tomorrow!

John

Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day
What this country needs is a great poem. John Brown’s Body was a step in the right direction. But it’s too long to do what I mean. You can’t thrill people in 300 pages... The limit is about 300 words. Kipling’s “Recessional” really did something to England when it was published. It helped them through a bad time. Let me know if you find any great poems lying around.

October 8 Daily Polling Update, Who IS That Guy? Edition

2008-10-13T03:57:00.000-07:00

With a few days of the renewed negative (and, frankly scurrilous, as it took about half an hour after the announcement of all negative all the time for the emphasis to devolve into race-baiting, violence-mongering and perhaps three days to suggesting direct links to terorrists; if you don't believe it,find the New York Times editiorial) campaign from the McCain camp, the polls have shown a point or two of slippage, aided by some frankly bizarre changes in party ID weighting on the part of Diageo/Hotline. Gallup goes the other way from the pack, actually adding two points for Obama, and opening to an 11-point lead, their largest in the campaign. R2K has closed up a point, taking one off Obama, and adding more undecided, which argues for statistical white noise. Rasmussen closes up a couple also, taking a point off Obama and adding one for McCain despite their state polling showing leads opening up for Obama in several battleground states. New state polls from Rasmussen in Wisconsin (Obama 54, McCain 44) and Pennsylvania (Obama 54 McCain 41) are in line with recent state trends.

Diageo has taken a sharp drop since the firm unaccountably closed up their Party ID weightings to a two point Democratic edge; if normally GOP-friendly Rasmussen is slowly widening its self-identification lead (to six this week) as congressional races widen, to do the opposite implies either you really feel you're on to something the rest of the country is missing or you're just trying to be an outlier. Diageo's change in weighting shows in their topical questions, where, in the only poll I've seen, Obama and McCain are tied on the economy. In "preparedness to lead," Obama has dropped three points since the weightings changed as well. If Diageo has a good reason for their change in weighting , they should explain it, otherwise it's probably questionable scientifically.

It's Alright Ma, It's Only Zogby
Speaking of just trying to be an outlier, there's a new Zogby poll which was brought to our attention, with the excellent question as to whether or not it implies a tightening of the race, showing just a two point Obama lead. First of all, we tend to discount the importance of Zogby polls whomever they support (how's that 311-213 John Kerry victory working out for you?) by, oh, roughly 100%. Well, they didn't give internals (and in fact, being Zogby, I wouldn't be prepared to put money on the idea that there are internals), but they did give the margins of victory for Democrats, Republicans and Independents, who favor Obama by nine points in this survey. Making a few basic assumptions in line with averages for other polls and taking that 11 point independent lead, the only way one could come to a two point Obama edge is to weight Republicans and Democrats exactly equally. If any of you really feel that's an accurate assessment of the national mood here in 1974--um, 2008, once again, tell me why, and a big scoop of strawberry shortcake ice cream is all yours.
Debate Polling Shows--To My Surprise--A Substantial Obama Victory. I Was Bored.
In the polling, CBS put Obama first, Undecided second, and McCain third; incumbent President William Howard Taft managed to finish third in a whole election in 1912, so I wouldn't be so concerned about coming in eight points behind "none of the above." The poll was of undecided voters, a third of them were also undecided as to who won the debate, and the debate only made 27% of them decide who to vote for (Obama 15, McCain 12). This argues that there are still a great many undecided voters to be fought for, and that Sen. Obama needs to find a way to convince them not to take what many will ultimately consider the safe option. The bright spot for Obama there is that 42% of those uncommitted voters said their opinion of Obama changed for the better, while only 13% changed for the worse, while Sen. McCain's image improved by a much smaller margin, 32 up vs 16 down. The results of the CNN poll were more striking, with Obama winning by a 54-30 margin.

Senator, Independent Voters Suggest That Guy Kicked Your Narrow Ass Back To The Land Without A MLK Holiday
Subjectively, though, this was a weird little debatelet, wasn't it? Sen. McCain appeared to forget the names of two people who asked him questions (were they, wholly coincidentally, the only two African-Americans to ask one? Oh, and did you know his opponent is, umm, black?), spoke patronizingly to one of those two (you may not want to suggest in the current economic environment to a homeowner, or anyone who reads the newspaper, that they've never heard of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac), and left Gov. Palin's Joe Sixpack and shout-out in the dust by referring, for what seems to be the first time in debate history, to his opponent as "that guy." I had thought that aside from the bizarreness it was a tie score, feeling that Obama hadn't ever really wanted to go in for the kill, but rather remain above it all. Survey respondents at the time and just after agreed with the latter part but disagreed with me on the tie score thing, once again citing Sen. McCain's attitude and demeanor. I find when McCain is trying not to blow his stack he goes into a really strange sort of Jack Nicholson impression (more The Shining than Easy Rider in my opinion); but one friend got it exactly right when she sent me an instant message during the debate suggesting McCain's voice sounded the way I did when my jaws were wired shut for two weeks after radical facial surgery in 2001. That's about right, really--though once again, Independent and undecided survey respondents gave Obama a signficant edge in polls taken during and just afterwards.
Begins With A C
Many have noted that the terrorist meme was notably missing from McCain's own debate talking points; remind me what it is you call someone who won't attack you to your face but has someone else do it behind your back? Someone should read Sen. McCain his hero Theodore Roosevelt's "Man In The Arena" snippet; I know it pretty well by heart and I can tell you that it says little about sitting back and farming out your dirty work to another person, male or female.

Palin Around With Terrorists?
I wasn't going to go in this direction, but I'm still disgusted by what I saw yesterday at the Palin rally in Nuremb--uh, Clearwater yesterday (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDMt7nBPFeY ) . I find it a little odd that Sarah Palin--who David Brooks, that flaming leftist, just called a "fatal cancer to the Republican party" --is suggesting over and over again that Sen. Obama is "pallin' around with terrorists" given her own connections with the avowedly America-hating Alaska Independence Party, but it gets worse. Let's talk about terrorists and how to know who is one. The first time most of America heard of Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda was most likely in 1998 after the terrorist organization bombed our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that August and took credit for the blasts. Those of you who were alive ten years ago will doubtless remember that it was the main news topic for several weeks. Yet, in an interview John McCain gave in September1998, a month after the bombings, at least one Senator was unconvinced. The interview was in Mother Jones, but was remarkably balanced and in some areas even grudgingly admiring of Sen. McCain. You can see it here: http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/1998/11/vest.html or just read this bit. I wasn't going to do this, but the arrant hypocrisy of equating a presidential candidate with terrorists makes one wonder if the campaign doing the name calling knows what a terrorist is. The part after is interesting too, as the Senator equates the fight against terrorism with Vietnam.

Vest: You not only have had combat experience in Vietnam, but you were also a prisoner of war. When you look at terrorism right now, with people like Osama bin Laden,do you have any reservations about watching strikes like that? McCain: You could say, Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that's depicted? Most of us have never heard of him before. And where there is a parallel with Vietnam is: What's plan B? What do we do next? We sent our troops into Vietnam to protect the bases. Lyndon Johnson said, Only to protect the bases. Next thing you know....Well, we've declared to the terrorists that we're going to strike them wherever they live. That's fine. But what's next? That's where there might be some comparison.

In case you're still undecided, let me fill you in. Yes, Senator, he really is the bad guy that's depicted.

Mortgage Reform: Against It Before You're For It, Or Sarah Palin Is Accidentally Setting Policy
Interesting concept, and very appealing to the left, from Sen. McCain last night, about buying up bad mortgages and giving homeowners new ones at different values. Aside from the fact that this free-market deregulator has just called for government setting housing values (isn't that called a planned economy?), which is an idea so hideously bad any homeowner on this list should be doing a passable imitation of the subject of a famous Edvard Munch painting upon hearing it. Aside from the fact that that will cost approximately $300 billion more than the $850 billion the newly earmark-happy TARP could end up costing, it's also actually a more interventionist version of what Sarah Palin didn't really know wasn't McCain policy at the VP debate last week. The next morning the McCain campaign was in damage control mode, saying that resetting mortgage valuation was most assuredly not part of McCain policy. That was Friday. Four days later, the Senator himself comes up with a proposal far more radical, and in some ways inimical to free markets and private property itself. Now that the candidate himself has proposed this (and how do you set values of prices without consulting with buyers anyway?), it's no wonder the right is going absolutely bats over the surprise announcement. Unless, of course, Gov. Palin was in fact forming policy on the fly at the debate, and her embarrassing misstatement (and it's probably fair to call something an embarrassing misstatement when it is in fact the absolute opposite of your campaign's position) sounded so good to someone that five days later it's in the platform. Maybe that's the McCain Doctrine Tom Brokaw couldn't get him to articulate. His hero Ronald Reagan would be less than thrilled; come on, admit it, you are, too. We'll have more right wing response when their conniption fits stop, some time around the 2016 election. How peeved are they? Think Kay Bailey Hutchi\son when she heard Sarah Palin got the VP nod...

Incidentally, the Secret Service is now investigating the possible death threat against Obama at the Palin rally, after it appeared in the Washington Post ( http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/10/06/in_fla_palin_goes_for_the_roug.html).

OK, OK, I'll probably be a little less disgusted tomorrow. Well, probably not, but there are likely to be more jokes anyway.

John

Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day
When there is a lack of honor in government, the morals of the whole people are poisoned.

October 7 Daily Polling Update, Righteous Indignation Edition

2008-10-13T03:51:00.000-07:00

Towards the bottom of the page I make a few comments a shade less good-natured and even-keeled than usual, but only because never in my personal experience of American political life have I seen things at mainstream campaign events such as have evolved over the course of the last few days. Just saying. If you've got a problem with it, say something you can back up and I'll listen carefully and thoughtfully and may even find a way to agree with you; if you can't do that, shut the hell up. Back to our regularly scheduled programming.

Seated comfortably? Then let's begin. It still feels mostly random, though the too-variable single day numbers in R2K have been closing up some the last couple days. Overall, for the three-day average, McCain picks up a point in R2K, Rasmussen remains flat. Diageo/Hotline narrows significantly, by four points to a two point lead, though I have reasons for thinking this an outlier based on one extreme day of polling yesterday, particularly the tally that on the question of who would better handle the economy, 42% vote for each candidate, which is significantly different from all the other national polls, even more Republican-leaning Rasmussen, which has a general poll showing Democrats with a 13-point advantage on economic issues (even among investors, the Democrats have a five point edge, which expands to 33 points among those who classify themselves as non-investors). The last time McCain had as much as 44% in Diageo was September 25, and you have to go four days earlier than that to find a day when Obama had as little as 46%. Gallup, on the other hand, shows Obama's lead widening to nine points, tying an all-time high. As far as the trends go, three polls are right in line with what they have been doing for the last two weeks (a fifth, which I have not been tracking due to concerns about the internals, actually opened up from a three to a six point lead today). A separate Gallup poll shows 82% of respondents saying it is a bad time to find a job; a year ago, that number was 56%. This is unlikely to be good news for the party currently in the White House--most notably, Republican pessimism about jobs grew from 57% in May of this year to 74% today. Either Diageo is, for the first time in the campaign, ahead of the curve, or it's an outlier. We'll see over the next few days.

If there are some variables in the near term, there's the debate tonight, featuring questions from undecided voters in a town meeting-style environment, and voter reaction to the Obama camp's first attempt at a stinging blow against McCain, the www.keatingeconomics.com web site. The McCain campaign has stepped up its guilt by association attacks on Obama, and it remains to be seen how much success Obama will have with his responses, that everywhere there's someone questionable in Obama's past there's someone or something considerably worse on the other side (befriending Wiliam Ayres when the two were teaching at the same school two decades after Ayers' 60s radical activities vs. the Palin's coziness with a secessionist movement that makes no secret its hatred of the United States, Jeremiah Wright vs Robert Muthee and John Hagee, Tony Rezko vs Charles Keating). My guess would be that the negative attacks from Sen. McCain will resonate at first, and then lose credibility--if he was going to engage in this particular sort of scurrility, he might have waited two or three more weeks.

Non-Daily Polls Showing Similar Trends
There are a variety of other national polls that have come out in the last couple days, which I'll mention here and then probably pick up again in a week or so to gauge debate reaction in surveys other than the daily trackers. Results now range from Obama +3, generally just within the margin of error, from CBS/NY Times and polling service GQR, to +6 from NBC and +8 from CNN. We'll revisit in a week, post-debate and tactical advertising shifts. Have a nice clean chart and everything!

State of The States
There's a lot of state polling out there the last day or two, most of it favorable to Obama. Rasmussen has new polls in Colorado (Obama +6), Florida (Obama +7), Missouri (Obama +3), Ohio (McCain +1), and Virginia (Obama +2, actually down a point from a week ago). Virginia shows a significant margin for McCain among white voters, 59-38, as well as a ten point advantage among men, compared with a 13 point lead for Obama among women, which may be the biggest state gender difference I've seen. SurveyUSA has polls in New Hampshire, which was considered a toss-up as recently as a week or two ago, showing a 13 point Obama lead, and a surprising 10 point lead in Virginia, confirmed by a 12 point edge in a Suffolk poll. Rasmussen's poll may be more appropriately weighted, and is rather larger, so their +2 may be closer than double digits. ABC/Washington Post has an Ohio poll with a surprising six-point advantage for Obama, but as I haven't found internals, I want to be careful with it as Rasmussen shows a one-point McCain lead; while Rasmussen tends to underweight Democrats, Ohio is at heart a fairly conservative state, with the exception of the solidly Democratic (and heavily African-American) Cleveland area. Finally, the Albuquerque Journal has a five-point Obama lead in New Mexico, which I do believe, particularly given solidly pro-Democratic trends in the Latino community.

Early Voting In Georgia Intense, Likely To Favor Obama In A Solid Republican State, Unless it's Really Really Realllllllly Intense
R2K has a state poll in Georgia, showing McCain with a seven point lead, but early voting has started and anecdotal reports have incredibly long lines particularly in african-american districts. Blacks make up fully 29% of the electorate in Georgia, and black voter registration is up considerably from 2004. It's also safe to assume that turnout will be significantly higher among black voters as well, though the white vote in Georgia may be split as widely as 75-25 for McCain, which speaks for itself. However, if african-americans can represent 32% of the vote in the state, which would entail a much higher turnout than in the past, to be sure, McCain's seven point lead would be a tie. I don't expect Obama to win Georgia but the mere fact that we're talking about it is significant.

Is It Really Worth It, Senator? Do You Really Need To Be President THAT Badly?
OK, now I'm just kind of angry. And a little frightened for America, for the first--and I hope last-- time in my life. As Gov. Palin in particular accuses Sen. Obama of hating America and our armed forces, responses among the hard-core base are troubling. At a recent rally in Florida, one attendee started screaming "Treason!" and another shouted "Sit down, boy!" at an African-American sound man working at the event. At another event, as Palin was inventing new charges against Obama (and if any of you can find any truth in them, I'll buy you an ice cream soda), one man shouted out "Kill him!" Neither candidate on the ticket says a word in response to this kind of violent, hateful--and in fact, more literally treasonous--agitation from their supporters. This note is particularly for the Republican readers--tell me, how comfortable are you with a candidate who allows incitement to assassination at campaign rallies to pass without a calming word, indeed steps up the rhetoric in response? Secondly, where else in history have you heard this sort of thing? It may turn a lot of rational undecided voters off; frankly, I hope to God it does. And if it came from the other side, I'd say the same damn thing, so don't even think about thinking about coming back to me with that. You know me better.

Nobody Cares, But I Promised
The tax geeks have done their work, and they agree: it's clear why the Palins released their tax records on a Friday afternoon. Links here to a couple other analyses, suggesting the Governor and her Dude (TM) may owe the IRS tens of thousands in back taxes for underreporting income. If nothing else, if any of you actually use H&R Block (and why anyone with a solid six figure income would is beyond me unless you need to score populist brownie points) should go buy a copy of TurboTax instead next year. http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2008/10/tax-profs-agree.html

OK, I can feel this petering out rapidly, so on to the debate. It's going to get ugly, radical traitor-wise. Will the American people buy tenuous connections to ex-radicals and blatant, clearly documented untruths about support of the armed forces? Will they choose to remember the last time greed fueled by elimination of regulation (thanks, Sen. Gramm) nearly brought down the US financial system? Both? Neither? Don't touch that dial!

Oh, and Chuck Hagel's wife just endorsed Obama, Chris Buckley seems to be doing the same, and Peggy Noonan suggested that McCain and Palin's problem is that "they're not big enough for the moment." Well, who needs real conservatives when you've got, um, uh, well...

And again,

John

October 6 Daily Polling Update, Attach Your Mud Flaps Edition

2008-10-13T03:47:00.000-07:00

Here we go again. However, we had a sort of a debate Thursday night, and today's results include three full days of polling afterwards, and again/still nothing is happening. R2K flat (though the Sunday daily Obama margin is a bit lower than the Friday or Saturday, single day results have such a large margin of error that you really don't want to get involved there). Rasmussen adds a point to Obama, with a 52-44 lead being the largest he has yet enjoyed. Gallup opens up by a point, with McCain losing one, to a 50-42 margin, tied for the largest lead he has enjoyed. Gallup suggests in its own commentary on today's results is that neither the economic rescue package nor the Vice Presidential debate did anything to change people's minds. Other polls would argue with the first statement, suggesting that the banking crisis has driven more votes into the Obama camp, though all are essentially in agreement on the debate.

Additionally, the Obama campaign fires its hardest shot of the campaign, with the launch of a web site pulling together parallels between the S&L crisis of the late 1980s and today's financial disaster movie (discussion and link below). I don't think it's coincidental that it's released a day before the debate; the goal is to try and put McCain off his game, and the campaign is responding angrily. My guess would be it doesn't make much of a difference, but the Obama campaign is (as it has done from day one of the primary season, which explains how he won the nomination in the first place) playing three steps ahead of the game, and understands that not losing support will shortly become at least as important as gaining new adherents--in the zero-sum game of a head-to-head election, there comes a point where keeping your opponent from getting a vote out of the undecided column is an awfully big deal. If the six to 12 point lead in the poll is accurate, even keeping undecideds undecided is a winning tactic.

Rasmussen widens its Democratic Party ID advantage slightly, to a full six points from 5.6. Importantly in Rasmussen's poll, for the first time Obama is leading among male voters--this is either an outlier or a sign that the McCain campaign needs an iron lung. Rasmussen points out that this is the largest lead any candidate has enjoyed not just in this campaign but bigger than any margin in the 2004 race as well. I wouldn't put much store by it now, as it could be an outlier, but it's significant in that Rasmussen has historically been less Democratically-weighted than the other polls, as far as we can tell, and because in general men tend more to the GOP than women. We've all been talking about Obama's performance among white women; if he wins among men, he can lose among red, green and polkadot people and still move down the road to 1600 in January. Oh, and Rasmussen does the same mini-analysis I did yesterday about undecided voters, only without the little graphic with the cool arrows and stuff. Take that!

Diageo has a couple final (hooray!) points on the VP debate, showing that generally people thought both candidates did well (Biden's performance was viewed favorably by 77%, while Palin's was by 61%), and that Biden won the debate by a 47-28 margin, which is a shade higher than other polls we've noted. Ultimately, though, the debate here too shows very little impact on the actual election, so we can forget about it now. Srsly.

Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?" "To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time." "The dog did nothing in the night-time." "That was the curious incident," remarked Sherlock Holmes. --Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, "Silver Blaze"

All polls have fallen into a narrow band, a point here, a point there, but with no significant movement in trends. Unless we consider the fact that this petrification to be a serious trend in and of itself. This would be especially true a couple weeks from now, after the debates and as the campaign moves into the last lap, but is still worth noting now. It would argue that if Sen. McCain's renewed emphasis on negative advertising (per the campaign itself) and the next two debates do nothing to begin to shift the momentum, nothing will. Tomorrow night's Town Hall-style meeting, a format in which the conventional wisdom is that McCain excels and Obama is relatively weak, is in my mind the key to any potential turn in the GOP's fortunes.

Gallup has a poll of voters in the 18-29 year age group, showing an expectedly significant preference for the Obama/Biden ticket over McCain/Palin, by a 61-32 margin, with 7% undecided. Survey participants gave Obama a lead in all nine of the questions on personal qualities, from a sixty point advantage in "understanding the problems of young people" to a ten point lead in "is a strong and decisive leader." They categorically rejected the idea that McCain is "too old to be president," by a 22 point margin, but do suggest that Sarah Palin is unqualified, by a similar majority. Interestingly, only 30% of these young voters felt the economy was the most important issue facing the nation, compared with a total closer to 50% in other polls, yet still give Obama a very large edge in the overall voting. Finally, nearly 80% of these young voters feel this could be the most important election in the last 50 years, though what they base their historical perspective is an open question, as is whether this poll portends a significantly higher turnout among under-30 voters than in past elections. Remember that 18-29 year old voters only comprised 17% of the electorate in the 2004 election; if they really do support Obama by nearly a 2-1 margin and actually do comprise north of 20% of the voting population, Obama's support in the polls, which mostly weight by age according to 2004 turnout, could be understated by a couple points.

One We Missed And Why It Matters
I hate to look back when there's too much info being thrown at us every day, but there's one VP Debate (arrgh) poll that came out on Saturday that's worthy of note: an Ipsos/McClatchy survey that suggested voters really liked Sarah Palin but really preferred to vote for Joe Biden. In a survey of undecided voters immediately after the debate , 52% said they would vote Obama/Biden. Before the debate, McCain/Palin was leading among those same voters by a 56/44 margin. Despite the fact that Palin was "liked" by nearly two-thirds of the voters surveyed, found "believable" by 53%, and (wait for it) would do a better job of bringing change to Washington by an extraordinary 58-42 margin, they also felt by an eight point margin that Biden had won the debate and their overall preference moved significantly from McCain to Obama after the debate compared with before. Ultimately, while I usually shout myself hoarse telling people that running mates don't matter, in this case a running mate of a candidate with a lot of questions regarding his judgment and fitness for the presidency had an opportunity to persuade voters that the nation would be in capable hands, and she failed. Outpacing low expectations only cuts it among cable commentators parsing a debate; the world stage demands a higher level of performance, and this survey would suggest the American voter has a feeling for this. Catch it here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/53475.html

LA Times Boldly Goes Where No Media Outlet Has Gone Before, And It Could Get Ugly
The LA Times this morning has a piece out John McCain's military record. While nobody is seriously questioning what happened after he bailed out over Hanoi, spending five and a half years in a North Vietnamese prison, the Times piece looks into the four crashes he'd been involved with before that time. I don't see how it matters whether you can prove or not that he was a terrible pilot (and it is hard to see how anyone who wasn't the son and grandson of Admirals would have got to the point where he could dump his fifth plane and get captured--the story points out that losing a single plane today is enough to get you grounded, much less four), or even if he was the beneficiary of nepotism or coverups of the record in the mid-1960s. The only thing that might be of any interest is the cherry picking the candidate may have done in releasing 19 pages of his 636 page military record, reminiscent of his (and Sen. Biden's) medical records as well as the veracity of the stories of the crashes as he reported them in his autobiography. Don't get me wrong; I'll always stand up for a Constitutional right to privacy, but there's also a right to be nervous about what's being hidden. Go ahead, read on: http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-aviator6-2008oct06,0,5446252.story?track=ntothtml .

Please Stop Saying Obama Isn't Fighting Back Just Because You'd Do Differently--You're Not Running For President, And This Might Not Work
In the midst of the worst banking crisis since the Depression, the Obama campaign has been holding back on responding to the McCain campaign's "guilt by association" jibes, most notably by Gov. Palin at an appearance on Saturday. I'd mentioned yesterday that guilt by association was a risky tack for the GOP as McCain's own record isn't entirely clean. Leaving aside the connection we mentioned yesterday to the World Anti-Communist League, McCain's role as a member of the Keating Five in the S&L crisis in the late 1980s. As the only Republican in the group, you can certainly make a case for McCain's bipartisanship out of it, but still. In any event, the Obama campaign has launched www.keatingeconomics.com to remind people of the role McCain played nearly 20 years ago when abuses to the banking system nearly led to a collapse. It's a bold move on the Obama campaign's part, and wholly consistent with the "don't shoot til you see the whites of their eyes" strategy they've used since day one of the primaries. The site is loaded with press reports from the last few weeks drawing parallels between the current crisis and the S&L debacle, and a documentary film is on the home page. It's a bold move, but if it backfires, it backfires big with people who liked Obama because he was visibly taking the high road. Not as big as the LA Times story, but still.

McCain Filing Complaint On Obama Donations, Obama Campaign Points Out $1.2 Million In Returned McCain Donations, Blah Blah Blah
The RNC has demanded an audit of all donations to the Obama campaign because some small donations, including from foreign donors, added up to more than the $2.300 limit, including $33,000 it had already returned from two Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. In response, the Obama campaign noted that McCain has had to return more than $1.2 million in questionable donations, including $50,000 raised by one Jordanian donor and more from a 'bundler' of their own. Additionally, conservative legal advocacy group Judicial Watch filed a complaint against--yes--McCain several months ago asking the FEC to investigate whether a fundraiser held by McCain in London for Americans abroad was held at a venue paid for by a British citizen. Ultimately this is about trying to blunt the Obama campaign's success in raising money privately and not accepting public funds; as McCain did accept government financing for his campaign, he's much more strictly limited in what he can spend, so the only way to stem that tide is to have his opponent's fundraising declared illegal. Hard to imagine there isn't a lot of money that maybe shouldn't be there on both sides, and it seems like a pretty modest issue. Early impact seems to be a modest upsurge in small donations to the Obama campaign.
Breaking Investing News (It's Still October 2007, Right?)
Thestreet.com publishes a piece entitled "Value Investing Is Broken." No duh. And if the popular press is just getting to this, the doo doo is only getting deeper, because that's been true for quite some time now. Relative measures of worth (such as nearly all stock valuation criteria) have been on the shelf for, oh, a year or so. A recession combined with a credit crunch combined with hedge fund deleveraging and redemptions lead to something of a technical mess. Please don't tell me you're buying stocks because they look cheap. I'll say it one more time: nothing is cheap when valuation is meaningless.

Oh, and don't forget old editions, because you clearly have nothing better to do, are posted at http://trackingpolls.blogspot.com . Collect them all!

John

Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day
You will expect me to discuss the late election. Well, as nearly as I can learn, we did not have enough votes on our side.

October 5 Daily Polling Update, Graphic Content Edition

2008-10-13T03:43:00.000-07:00

Right, lots of charts, relatively few words today. We have two days of post-debate polling in the daily trackers, which as you recall are three-day rolling averages, and as yet there's no particular impact from the VP debates, other than the fact that the momentum for Obama didn't grow today, which is inconclusive, particularly as the most GOP-friendly poll is the only one with even a slight uptick for the Democrat. So Rasmussen loses a point for McCain (who has been at 44 or 45 for the last ten days in their poll, which should be the area of concern, rather than the raw number), while in Gallup McCain gains one (having lost one yesterday, so back to pre-debate levels) and R2K and Diageo remain flat. Gallup does notice a slight decline in undecideds, principally in McCain's favor, after dire economic news shifting voters to Obama on Thursday and Friday. Tomorrow will be the first day with a full three days of post-debate polling, just in time for Tuesday night's presidential grudge match.

According to Rasmussen's data, 45% of voters are firm in their vote for Obama, and 38% for McCain. 13% say they may change their mind, and 4% either totally undecided or voting for a minor candidate. Using Rasmussen's weightings, which are the least favorable to the Democrats, McCain would need to win well over 70% of those 17% in play in order to move ahead. As at least half of the leaners at present are leaning towards Obama, he will have to make a significant move to get Obama leaners to become McCain voters. Let's go to the video tape, using overly simple arithmetic:

New Ohio, Minnesota Polls Either Outliers Or This Race Is Over (I'd Bet The Former)
There are a couple state polls worthy of notice, but probably worthy of dismissal as well, both favorable to Obama. The Columbus Dispatch has a poll in Ohio giving Obama a seven point lead, 49-42; either it's an outlier or it reflects the fact that Ohio is a state that would significantly be affected by a recession and that for a change, 10% more people identify themselves as Democrats than Republicans. That being said, this is out of line with other recent polls in the Buckeye State and reflects a huge lead in the heavily urban Northeast of the state, including Cleveland where there was concern about voter fraud in 2004. Remember, though, that Ohio has early voting, which has already begun, and may either take some of the pressure off the Nov 4 voting process or supply thousands of additional votes to invalidate. That being said, Ohio has a Democratic governor and Secretary of State this year, which could make a significant difference in terms of attempts to invalidate urban votes. Also, a Star-Tribune poll in Minnesota would appear to contradict a trend tightening that race (and SUSA's statistical dead heat noted yesterday), showing Obama with a 17 point lead; the S-T's last poll on September 11 showed the race a tie. Hard to figure, really, probably an outlier.

Some Images May Be Too Graphic
And now, a new feature, so we dont' have to look at the words: graphs of the four major daily tracking polls since I started doing this a few weeks ago. I'll probably put this in every Sunday, just because the news cycle is slower, unless people choose to release their tax records. The trendlines tell us, I think, a lot more than noodling about any individual number could. The consistency of the leads in each of the polls is what the McCain campaign should be concerned about, and why it is reallocating resources and going to essentially 100% (from what seems like no more than 94%) negative campaigning from henceforth.

Obama Counterpunches Before McCain Punches
It appears that the McCain campaign has been a little slow on its feet for some time, and is also telegraphing its pitches, like a pitcher who moves his arm a certain way before every curveball. Having announced that they were going to go strictly negative from this weekend on, the Obama campaign had time to take that announcement and put out a hard-hitting ad calling McCain "erratic" and "bad for the country" before the McCain tactic (or was it a strategy?) kicked in, so there is now the situation where there is an ad calling McCain erratic airing before angry McCain spots verging on the scurrilous in their criticism of the Democrat. The pump is primed, the attack may carry less weight. Additionally, as some people's criticism of Obama is that he has been too cool, if such a thing exists, he's able to take charge of the narrative by pointing out the opposite of calmness in his opponent.

Obama's still wearing gloves, but he's got brass knuckles on underneath them.

Your Friends Are Worse Than My Friends
While Gov. Palin is dredging up a connection between Sen. Obama and former 60s domestic terrorist Wililam Ayers (notwithstanding the fact that Obama was eight years old when Ayers was involved with terror activity), the AP, which has shown a generally Republican tilt through the campaign, has excoriated her for an attack which was "unsubstantiated and carried a racially tinged subtext that John McCain himself may come to regret." This is dangerous because if you are counting on the persistence of a Bradley effect, you don't want the idea that they may in fact be racists in people's minds when they go to the polls; you want them to be deeply closeted, latent racists, not worried about whether they're blatant ones. On the other side, Paul Begala on Meet The Press in response to the Ayers criticism noted McCain's board membership of a right wing group affiliated with the World Anti-Communist League, which ADL has called "a gathering place, the forum, the point of contact for extremist racists and anti-Semites." Nobody outside of the extreme fringe left is calling John McCain an extremist racist or anti-Semite, which I'm as sure as I can be he is not, anti MLK-holiday vote aside, but particularly with his Keating Five past in the last great banking crisis the McCain campaign needs to be exceedingly careful about guilt by association issues.

OK, so that's a lot of pictures (one of which probably doesn't make a lot of sense) and stuff, so we'll close here because it's a weekend and there are leaves to rake. One even got in to my apartment.

See you tomorrow! Oh, and don't old notes are at http://trackingpolls.blogspot.com . Impress your friends! Confound your enemies! Collect 'em all!

John

Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day
The President is not only the leader of a party, he is the President of the whole people. He must interpret the conscience of America. He must guide his conduct by the idealism of our people.

October 4 Daily Polling Roundup, All Your Base Are Belong To Us Edition

2008-10-13T03:37:00.000-07:00

First day of post-VP debate results are trickling in to the national trackers, and as expected, you can't really tell anything from them. R2K moves up a point for Obama, Rasmussen a point for McCain, Diageo takes a point off McCain, and Gallup gives the Democrat another point as well. Tomorrow, with another day of what I expect will be not a lot of movement from the VP debate, we'll have graphs. The excitement never stops, I tell you.

Not a whole lot of detail either, though Diageo tends to do very short releases on weekends, as I assume the pollsters have been busy consuming the sponsor's products since Friday night. Rasmussen in its release makes a point I mentioned yesterday, that the stability of the results as we're now exactly one month from Election Day begins to make it a seriously uphill slog for the McCain campaign. By no means impossible, I hasten to add, and the news from Thursday that the campaign was pulling out of Michigan to devote resources elsewhere dovetails with the news that it would be focusing nearly all its advertising spend on negative ads. While it's not easy at this point to recall any positive ads the campaign has run, I would expect things to get even uglier in the next few weeks, and I'd be vigilant for subtle racially motivated messages. I should think this would particularly be a concern in sensitive southern states like Virginia and North Carolina which are suddenly in play. If we start seeing ads such as the ones that ultimately cost Harold Ford his House seat in Tennessee, remember just to be disgusted, not stunned.

I'm still having issues with some of R2K's results--can women really be preferring Obama by 26 points? Independents by 12? If so, there are 49 other states the McCain campaign should consider closing down, but I don't buy it. One figure that has been dead steady in their internals has been the Latino vote, at 67-21 Obama. Given what we've been hearing from states like New Mexico, this is a possibility, and if so, a serious one for the GOP, which had been counting on inroads in the Hispanic community.

Some state polls have been released in the last day or two, generally but not exclusively favorable to Obama, and a VP debate poll from generally reliable SUSA in Ohio that calls it a draw, though gives Biden a significant win on understanding the facts and issues and cites Palin as a highly polarizing figure, energizing both her base and the opposition so providing rather less of a net benefit than many had first assumed. Curious sort of draw, but there you have it. SUSA also has a statistical dead heat in Minnesota which, if not an outlier, is reason for some concern for the Obama camp, though McCain has been outspending there by a 2 or 3 to 1 margin recently; the Obama camp can also redirect some resources and pick up their slack there, and it will be interesting to see how things evolve over the next few weeks. Polls in CO, NH, PA, NV, and WA were all good news to the Obama campaign; I'm still not sure how much attention to pay to the daily Morning Call tracker in Pennsylvania, which has been pushing Obama up a point nearly every day since it started and now shows him up 10, but the site is great if you wake up on a crisp fall Saturday morning and want to find a tag sale in the greater Allentown area.

Les Jeux Sont Faits
Rasmussen has their own alternative to intrade, which points to a 68% chance of an Obama victory (considerably lower than the fivethirtyeight.com aggregation of 84%, but it also moves much more slowly and is more subject to the vagaries of people who like to bet on political campaigns). These have always trailed poll aggregators, and it will be interesting to see how or if they converge by the time Election Day stumbles along.

Party Favors
R2K does show stability in one place, as it appears that Sarah Palin's net unfavorables have stalled out; remember, her numbers have always been lower than anywhere else on Democratic-weighed R2K's poll. Biden's have, however, climbed over the same period; I would think that after the debate they would both move up somewhat, as Gov. Palin's base, however upset they may be with her (see below) takes comfort that despite the staggering number of inaccuracies in her responses, she by no means embarrassed herself (as long as you don't count inaccuracy and mendacity embarrassing). In all polls, though, however weighted, Sen. Obama has a signficant net favorables advantage over Sen. McCain, whether that's the nearly 30 point edge in R2K or six points in Rasmussen or anywhere in between.

Wait, Did You Say The Base Was UNhappy with Palin?
Yup, and for actual reasons and stuff. Here's why, and I'm not making this up, promise. Ask a hard-line ideological conservative if you disagree.

1) In the Couric interview she stated she believes in a constitutional right to privacy. The far right does not--Robert Bork was whacked on his Supreme Court nomination in the 80s because of this. They believe rights must be enumerated in the constitution, not implied.
2) She said she does believe in benefits for same-sex couples. The far right does not.
3) She misstated McCain's position on homeowner protections. They're totally freaking out about this big time. See: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/10/palin-misstates.html

Friday Afternoon Is A Busy News Time, Right?
Gov. Palin's tax records have been released, a few days earlier than planned--late Friday afternoon. I do stats and polling and baseball and music and stuff--the tax nuts will go to town on this; I'll report if there's anything to report. Many are wondering about the taxability of the travel per diems she took for working at home; a Palin spokesman claims it's not taxable income. One former IRS Commissioner thinks while the state can reimburse however it pleases, it's the federal government's decision to decide what is taxable income rather than the wage-earner's. He also questioned whether envelopes are being pushed on business deductions for First Dude Todd's fishing and snowmobiling, considering the very modest income those provide, which seems like a fairly minor issue. Still, one wonders why it was dumped out after the close of business on a Friday. We're still waiting for full medical records from McCain (elderly dude with four separate incidences of melanoma) and Biden (brain aneurysm many years ago).

OK, it's a beautiful early autumn day, and I'm going back outside now. Don't stay in and stare at the screen all day; go play with your friends.

John
Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day
I am willing to pledge myself that if the time should ever come that the voluntary agencies of the country together with the local and state governments are unable to find resources with which to prevent hunger and suffering ... I will ask the aid of every resource of the Federal Government.

October 3 Daily Polling Update, Antietam Edition

2008-10-03T14:32:00.001-07:00

Right. It's over. And as I suggested, it's meaningless. She didn't answer any questions, which is just as well as she got things wrong when she did (I'd be willing to bet the title to my apartment that wikipedia has never had so many hits in a day on General George McClellan as in the last 24 hours--hint: The Peninsula Campaign was not in Afghanistan, and amusingly enough, he wanted to sit down and negotiate with the Confederacy); he was dull but didn't go off the deep end, which is good because he can get pretty weird when he does. Instant polls said he won, by rather a larger margin than I'd thought. She made it pretty clear there will be no more interviews. We're done, let's move on to the grown-up table.

Let's also remember that there will be no response to the VP debate in the tracking polls until at least tomorrow. So Rasmussen stays flat at 51-44, R2K remained flat at 51-40 (I think), Gallup moves up two points for Obama to 49-42, more in line with where it had been before the last few days, suggesting the recent tightening they'd shown was more likely to be noise than anything else. Voters continue to believe (quite rightly, I should expect) that the economy is the most important issue facing the nation at present, and voters who do tend to prefer Sen. Obama. Diageo widened to 48-42, which is only amazing because I was beginning to think they'd fallen in love with the number forty-seven.

A few interesting gleanings, but very few. Rasmussen reports that only 10% of survey respondents think the country is moving in the right direction. Favorables have flattened out. In a separate poll, 34% of respondents said the VP debate was very important to their vote. I'd like to meet their pharmacist. Gallup also has a poll suggesting independent women voters were nearly evenly split, with 45% for Obama and 41% for McCain; women with minor children, college educated women, and all income brackets showed a preference for the Democrat; women who attend religious services weekly preferred McCain, but those who attended semi-regularly preferred Obama. This was quite a large study of over 26,000 women, with a sampling error of 1%. Perhaps.

In the Diageo poll, Obama maintains his lead in economic, energy and health care issues, while McCain continues to lead on national security. Yawn. And the more yawns we get as these polls begin to mean something, the more it will look like we actually know what's happening. First time I've even been able to hint at that.

Mandatory VP Stuff. He Won. Srsly, Dewd.
OK, so we do have a couple instant post-debate polls, which we'll share and move on, though honestly I'd rather be writing about the funny stuff instead. A CBS News poll of uncommitted voters showed that 46% thought Sen. Biden won the debate, while 21% thought Gov. Palin did, and a curious 33% thought it was a tie. Stylistically they were so different I have trouble seeing how it was a draw, but what the hey. A slight majority of respondents felt their opinion of each candidate had improved (55% for Palin, 53% for Biden), while relatively few said their opinion got worse (14% for Palin, but only 5% for Biden). Palin's rating on knowledgeability improved from 43% to 66% (which does not apparently mean she can answer two-thirds of any question asked), but again Biden's grew more, to 98%, the kind of number you just don't see in these surveys (except for the next question). When aske about preparedness to be president, 55% now said Palin was prepared, compared with 39%, while 97% felt Biden was, up from an already stratospheric 81%.

Debate watchers who thought Biden won used words like "experienced," "knowledgeable," and " articulate," while noting his sincerity and compassion. Palin supporters, tellingly, called her "outspoken." "determined," and "on the ball," which is interesting as none of those things necessarily imply one knows what one is talking about, just that those opinions are expressed forcefully.

In a CNN poll, Biden won by a 51-36% margin, though Palin was seen as more likable by a similar margin. This speaks well for the American people, if anything, being able to separate who they'd like to hang out with from how they feel should be in charge of the country. Both candidates were thought to have exceeded expectations, Palin by a much greater margin, which should not surprise, as I believe expectations were too low for her in the first place. Biden was seen as being better at expressing his views, by a 52-36 margin, which I would think reflects the fact that Sen. Biden generally answered the questions, while Gov. Palin for the most part did not. The question of who is qualified was much more significant in the CNN poll, with 87% saying Biden was qualified, compared with 42% for Palin.

So What Happened?
Well, about what I said. He didn't go for the kill, or go off the deep end. She got folksy, used the word "maverick" umpty-nineteen times, and phrases like "darn tootin'" and "shout-out" that are probably inappropriate in this setting. She also kept trying to channel Ronald Reagan ("city on a hill," "there you go again," and a couple other times) without, in my opinion, coming remotely close to pulling it off. Reagan was able to be folksy, inspiring, and presidential at the same time, and the American public was enthralled. Gov. Palin can only do folksy. She also thinks that certain expressions and phrases originated with Reagan; he knew who he was quoting. Governor, you're no Ronald Reagan. Come to think of it, if anyone in this campaign is, it's Barack Obama.

Gov. Palin tried to turn her unwillingness to answer questions into a positive, which appeared to clang loudly as it dropped from a height onto a metal floor. Saying you won't answer other questions from the mainstream media but instead will talk straight to the people isn't a great strategery; the last guy who did that was Jimmy Carter; how's that working out? Attacking the media never works, especially as you're doing it through the very media you're attacking. Telling the right you support any rights at all for same-sex couples takes some guts, even if you don't support enough of them, but like admitting the existence of a constitutional right to privacy yesterday, I expect she'll pull back on it later and revert to a policy of silence, as she did with the whole newspaper thing (c'mon guys, think she really hasn't been briefed on international affairs out of the NY Times and WaPo? She just couldn't admit it to the extreme right who makes a fetish out of not reading the only newspapers that provide actual information on the world scene. Feh.).

The McClellan/McKiernan thing is more amusing than anything else, but if you're going to get a general's name wrong, at least use the name of a winner. Dwight David Hickenlooper is pissed about this.

Take A Michigander At This
Are the Republicans really conceding Michigan? They claim to be closing up shop, pulling advertising. This was supposed to be a competitive state for the GOP, and leaving now implies that the campaign knows that the economy is changing the playing field dramatically, and at the worst possible time for them. Stay tuned, especially to Michigan stations.

Clinch Mountain Hearts Barack
81 year old bluegrass legend Ralph Stanley has recorded a radio spot running in his home ground of Southwest Virginia, where he still holds god-like status, as he does in the adjacent areas of North Carolina, Tennessee and Kentucky. They may not care much for politicians down there, but the Stanley Brothers are another matter entirely. I also, elitist northeasterner that I am, hadn't realized that anyone had pronounced it "Virginny" since Stephen Foster's day. If you're an Obama voter, it's worth 30 seconds of your time at http://e1.video.blip.tv/1040005601740/Tpmtv-ObamaRadioAdRalphStanley827.mp3 . If you're not, you'd probably rather pretend this didn't happen. Nobody's a bigger deal in that part of the world than Ralph.

Bismarck Said Laws And Sausage For A Reason Dept.
Speaking of funny stuff, the House is, as I write,four minutes away from passing the new, pork-laden version of the rescue bill. As I had suggested, those who voted against can now go back to their campaigns and bloviate about the principled stand they took before a better (money for their district) bill was created, which, while still not perfect, was acceptable and it's time to put country first blah blah blah. Thank you, thank you.

Is there a ballgame on yet? Go Rays!

John

Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day (Pinch Hitter Edition)
Herbert Hoover is taking a day off. We have a quote today from General McClellan's opponent in the 1864 presidential election, a fellow named Lincoln, and particularly apposite considering last night's gaffelet:
"If General McClellan does not want to use the army, I would like to borrow it for a time."

October 2 Daily Polling Update, Uh, Guys, It's Only The Running Mates Edition

2008-10-02T10:28:00.000-07:00

So, as we sit on top of the Vice Presidential debate (and after extensive soul-searching, I find I must say that if you have anything better, as good, or only modestly worse to do tonight instead, go do it), the numbers jiggle a little bit. R2K moves up to 51-40, taking a point of support away from McCain (though frankly sometimes I wonder how he has any votes at all in that poll). Rasmussen also has opened up to the largest lead Obama has yet enjoyed in that survey, 51-44. Diageo remains at 47-42, making me wonder if someone there fell asleep a week ago and set their poll into an endless loop. Obama's lead grows to five points in Gallup, up from four yesterday, down from six the day before, which probably tells you all you need to know about the accuracy of daily polling. Just looking for people to color between the lines at this point, even slightly less than five weeks away from Election Day.

Rasmussen has new data which I think shows the reason for the solid Obama performance; among voters who rate the economy the most important issue, he leads in Rasmussen by a 63-32 score. McCain leads by an even greater margin, 74-24, among those who believe national security is the greatest concern. As of now, though, 50% of voters cited the economy, while only 19% named security as their prime concern in the latest Rasmussen polling. The score on the economy is especially interesting given Rasmussen's GOP tilt in party weighting.

Perhaps more importantly, Rasmussen has a poll out this morning showing Obama with a three-point lead in traditionally red red red North Carolina. Between the economy and what some are (inexactly) calling a "reverse Bradley effect," but really just mean potentially strong African-American turnout in states with a high percentage of black residents (25% in NC vs 12.8% nationally), I'm not stunned to see this, though I don't know if it will hold. It's also worth noting, as few are, that much of NC's recent economic growth has been due to the increasing prominence of Charlotte as a regional, and now a national, banking center. This growth is primarily on the back of two firms, the former NationsBank (now Bank of America, but originally North Carolina National Bank) and, ominously, Wachovia. The collapse of the latter may put thousands of jobs at risk in the state, which could have the effect of moving more votes toward the candidate better viewed as economically sound.

Diageo has favorability ratings that I'm a lot more comfortable with than R2K's for the running mates, with Biden at +15 and Palin +5. Biden's favorables have moved up five points in the last week; his answers to the Supreme Court questions asked by Katie Couric, while perhaps a little on the academic side, may have helped; don't we sort of want someone who understands the issues, even when they're really really really hard ones?

Does Gallup Have A Weight Problem?
It occurred to me last night as I had a little bit of downtime in an otherwise crazed day of running around the city on an afternoon far more humid than October should have a right to be that while Gallup's internals for last week showed a huge edge, as expected, among younger voters, with small pluralities for all other age groups, 30-49 and 50-64 for Obama, and 65+ for McCain, that should have come out to greater than a 48-44 edge, so why didn't it? Well, there's one more bit of weighting we've never really discussed, weighting by age. Many pollsters will use age group weightings based on the last presidential election and extrapolate to the current one. If you use those weightings from 2004, I believe you actually come out with about 49% for Obama, which would jibe with Gallup's numbers, given that these tallies are for the Sep 22-28 timeframe. Here's the potential problem. In 2004, only 17% of presidential voters were under 30. In 2008, given the Obama campaign's massive voter registration drives, it's safe to assume that figure will be markedly higher. As Gallup showed 18-29 year old voters in last week's numbers supporting Obama by a massive 59%-38% margin, there may be a measurable undercounting of Obama support in Gallup's polling.

The Quinnipiac polls I referenced yesterday are getting an awful lot of play in the news today (yes, you heard it here first!), which actually makes me a little nervous, because I'm guessing there was significant sample error and Q's track record is modest at best.

Was Diana Ross On The Supreme Court?
The rumored Katie Couric question to the two running mates about Supreme Court decisions is now readily available and it's not quite as bad for Gov. Palin as some had been suggesting, except where it's worse (just not as funny). It still shows her as being essentially ignorant of the Court and its history, even where it has a direct impact on her current job as governor of Alaska. The issue here is that this is a person who, if she has to step into the Presidency, will be responsible for naming Supreme Court justices, so the public should probably not give any candidate for high office a pass on this. When the two were asked about Roe v. Wade, Sen. Biden was able to explain the decision and its ramifications in some detail, bringing in the idea that the Liberty Clause of the 14th Amendment guarantees a right to privacy despite not being specifically enumerated and how he has argued that point with some conservative scholars who disagree (you may recall this was the rock on which the good ship Robert Bork foundered twenty-odd years ago), Palin painted with a broad brush (paraphrasing, but using her words, "it's bad because i believe in a culture of life and states should decide because I'm a Federalist"--ok, notwithstanding the fact that the original Federalists stood for a large, powerful central government and few states' rights, not the opposite, Roe does not say that all the power of the abortion decision rests with the federal government or, heaven forfend, the woman. Also, if you're running for Vice President, your understanding of Federalism should go back past Ronald Reagan's "New Federalism" of the 1980s.).

When asked to describe not just any other Supreme Court case, but one with which the candidates disagreed, Biden talked about the court reversing part of the Violence Against Women act which he authored, the concept that a battered woman should be able to sue her abuser in federal court, which the Supreme Court shot down on the grounds that there is no federal jurisdiction. Palin reverted to generalities and was unable to name another court case, though she did state that she believed in a right to privacy, which may surprise some of her backers on the right. Ma'am in 2008, you're on safe ground saying you disagree with Plessy v. Ferguson. Dred Scott v. Sandford? OK, how about Exxon v. Baker, which reduced by 80% the award to victims of the Exxon Valdez oil spill, those victims being (drum roll please) 32,000 Alaska natives, landowners, and commercial fishermen. Oh, and this case was decided in late June, only three months ago. OK, maybe she actually did worse than people thought, not better, but it was in more meaningful ways, not the obvious ones that make for snide humor.

If you want to see it, try here.... http://www.cbs.com/thunder/player/thunder.php?pid=kmbZJiBysEZaxIgmdRiNHdo6IMUVVQB6 .

Applesauce with that Pork, Senator?
Well, The Bill (TM) passed the Senate by a significant margin, 75-24. Why? 1) Senators have six year terms, so are not in perpetual campaign mode. 2) Extra spending was tacked on to make it acceptable to (wait for this, Reaganites) Republicans who, suitably if modestly bribed, fell into line. 3) Senators have six year terms, so are not in perpetual campaign mode.

House Arrest
So what happens now in the game of hide-and-seek the House has been playing? Easy. They vote for the bill after they voted against it, telling their constituencies, who they've made oppose the bill by misrepresenting it as a bailout for hedge fund managers and investment bankers, that they voted down that bad, bad, BAD piece of legislation but after their principled stand, were able to vote for a significantly (ahem) revised bill, gagging all the way but prepared to do what's best for the good of the country. Yep. Excuse me, after typing that, before I finish the note all of a sudden I need another shower.

One--But Only One--Word On The Only Real Importance Of Tonight
OK, I'll say this and this alone about the debate, because I don't think it's really a comedy show, or that it will be as ridiculous and one-sided as a lot of people suggest. Ultimately the question comes down to whether the American public has dropped the idea of holding candidates for top office to a higher standard of knowledge, temperament, and integrity than themselves. If the people want to feel good about themselves, they can vote for someone no more qualified than they. Agree or disagree with his policies or temperament, it's hard to make the case that John McCain has not had sufficient background to be President. The foreign policy presidential debate showed many doubting Americans that Barack Obama has the same. Of Joe Biden there is also no doubt. Tonight may be Sarah Palin's last chance to step up. Responding to questions with an actual answer would be a good start.

Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day, and we'll go wtih one that Gov. Palin could have used in her acceptance speech instead of the words of the appalling fascist, racist, anti-semite Westbrook Pegler,
I, with other Americans, have perhaps unduly resented the stream of criticism of American life... more particularly have I resented the sneers at Main Street. For I have known that in the cottages that lay behind the street rested the strength of our national character.

October 1 Daily Polling Update, Generalissimo Edition

2008-10-02T09:26:00.000-07:00

This is a little different today, as I'm going to be running around NYC all afternoon and won't be around by the time Gallup and Diageo wake up, stretch, and have a few cups of coffee, regular and a bagel with a schmear, so you're getting R2K and Rasmussen, and I'll shoot something out tonight if the other two have anything important to say (update: honest to gosh, they didn't). A bunch of state polling info that's worth discussing anyway, so that will fill up space instead.

Not a lot of movement today, as we're all in a sort of a holding pattern in advance of the Vice Presidential debate tomorrow (which is more likely than not to have minimal impact on the presidential polling), a resolution to the financial crisis. R2K remains flat at a +10 for Obama, though the daily is a bit lower than it has been the last couple days--as the single day components of their three day running tally have a margin of error of just over 5%, it's hardly worth reporting them, though they seem to get overplayed on dailykos.com. Whatever. Rasmusssen holds on to a six point Obama lead, this time at 51-45, rather than 50-44. Rasmussen also has data showing that Obama is more trusted on the economy, by a similar margin, 51-42, but this is the first time that either candidate in their poll has opened up as much as a nine point lead on the subject and the first time either candidate has broken 50% on the question. On the question of favorability, for the first time in Rasmussen, McCain's Very Unfavorable percentage has nipped the Very Favorable, while Obama's Very Favorables are 12 points higher than his Very Unfavorables. While both are viewed favorably by over 50% of survey respondents, this would tend to confirm Diageo's polling yesterday showing that Obama voters tend to be considerably more enthusiastic about their candidate than McCain voters are about theirs. Perhaps the VP debate can help McCain in that regard, as Gov. Palin's slipping favorability seems to have had an impact there (though not necessarily on their actual vote).

I've mentioned before that this race breaks down by age more than any other way. Some surveys show that among 65+ voters, McCain would win by mid-teens (though the R2K internal of 60+ voters only shows an eight point lead, another questionable data point), and among voters under 45, a similar tally for Obama. Given that Obama's stated positions are more likely in tune with older Americans' greatest concerns, particularly health care, than McCain's, one wonders if non-issue-based concerns come more (or for younger voters, less) into play. It's not a Bradley effect if you tell the pollster no, though.

Quinnipiac Battleground State Polls Highly Favorable To Obama, But Something Doesn't Sit Right
That being said, Quinnipiac has polls out this morning showing an eight point lead for Obama in Florida, a state whose population skews older at least in the southern half of the state, eight in Ohio, and fifteen in Pennsylvania. I find these numbers a little high. Other interesting Q poll findings, that only 10% in Florida say they have not yet made up their minds, 15% in Ohio, and 16% in Pennsylvania. Obama's net favorables in those states are also quite high, significantly above McCain's in each state. The economy is by far the biggest issue in these three state polls, and Obama is consistently seen by survey respondents as being better able to handle the crisis, and his response to the immediate panic of the last week or so is also viewed considerably more favorably. If I had more time today, I'd put it in a table, but I don't, so I ain't. The one issue I have is that they appear not to have released internals, so I can't talk about party or age weighting, which makes me particularly nervous in this campaign, and I find Obama's consistent significant leads among independent voters suspect. However, you can see the release showing all the results in a confusing, difficult to read format at http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1284.xml?ReleaseID=1218&What=&strArea=;&strTime=0

At the same time, SUSA, which has historically been much more accurate, has a poll released yesterday showing McCain ahead by one in Ohio. Interestingly, this poll shows no age discrepancy. I may have to think a while about what that might mean, other than that it might be an outlier or that the conventional wisdom may be (horrors!) simplistic. SUSA also has small McCain leads, but Obama rapidly closing gaps, in Indiana and, perhaps surprisingly, Georgia, where a reverse Bradley may be in play.

Call It A Bailout Just ONE More Time...
The financial rescue package (and I will personally deliver a painful noogie to anyone I hear calling it a "baliout" again, as that seems to be what got us into this mess in the first place is going to come back in the next few days, and here's how I see it playing out. Many of the honorable members, having put themselves on the record (and taken a quick wander through the halls of demagoguery) by voting no, providing themselves a talking point for November, will now vote yes to a very modestly tweaked version of the same bill. Senators, being inherently less buffoonlike, will just vote on the damn thing. I'm reasonably sure that when the men who created our system put it all together, part of the checks and balances approach of a bicameral legislature was not to ensure that the lower house was full of petty, vindictive, venal people looking out only for their next campaign, but it's rather worked out that way. Meanwhile, they continue to fiddle while Rome panics, and we could be one more major bank failure away from 1931.

Investors, Please Fasten Seatbelts
As far as the equity markets go, we're going to see massive hedge fund redemptions, especially as we're entering a new quarter today, so redemption requests probably thundered in yesterday, and while that money has to go somewhere, it's not necessarily back into stocks. Markets flew yesterday both on (with apologies to our feline friends) a dead cat bounce and rumors that a new plan will scrap "mark-to-market" rule. Youv'e got to mark your illiquid positions to SOMETHING, though, and the financial institutions "Trust us!" option is not what I'd consider more appealing.

Return Of The Cash-And-Carry Economy?
Whether an assistance plan passes or not, I would not be at all surprised to see the consumer credit boom come to a crashing halt, which could have the effect of reducing personal expenditures for years to come. Rather an old-fashioned concept, living within one's means, and presumably good for the long haul, but the obvious impact would be a secular slowdown in economic expansion as people stop spending money they don't actually have.

Both Sides Of The Street
In line with Sen. McCain's consistently saying that it's not the time to lay blame for the failure of the rescue plan but it's Sen. Obama's fault, the GOP yesterday managed to release two TV spots, one blaming Obama for the failure of this important piece of legislation, another blaming him for the passage of this horrendous piece of legislation. Admittedly, one was a party ad and the other was out of the McCain campaign, but we'll let it stand in place of a bizarre quote of the day (even the snippet from Couric/Palin where she seems to have said that she reads every newspaper on the planet as long as someone puts it in front of her--the editorial staff of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung will be thrilled).

Jokes You Just Don't Make Dept.
There is a series of short video clips of an interview with staff at the Des Moines Register, in which Sen. McCain makes his appearance at the first presidential debate look downright cheery (does he have a problem with being asked questions by women?). However, there's one offhand comment that someone might choose to take the ball and run with. I think it's a joke, but he doesn't actually smile or pause or anything. When talking about the bill and how it wasn't perfect, but it was still something, he goes on to start talking about what it would look like if he could have written it, and says, "If I were a dictator, which is something I've always aspired to be, I would write it very--a little bit differently..." OK, I really do believe you're joking, Senator, but there's a time and a place, a time and a place. A presidential campaign during wartime may not be one of them.

You can find it at http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=videonetwork&maven_playerId=immersiveplayer&maven_referralPlaylistId=b959b1ca832e44b7543c0c1d3b9b6ef23903c7fc&maven_referralObject=873527229 then click on the choice for Economic Bill Failure on the right if you don't believe me. Or if you do. About a minute and a half in. It's a poor choice.

On which note, I'm off!

John

Well we may not have all our data, but we do have our Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day:
I’m the only person of distinction who’s ever had a depression named for him.

September 30 Daily Polling Update, Huwt Feewings Edition

2008-10-02T09:16:00.000-07:00

Well, about what you'd expect, the most clearly overweighted polls do their thing, but do it in lockstep, despite their opposite weightings. A ten point lead in R2K now, whacking a point off McCain, and six in Rasmussen, with Sen. Obama reaching 51% in each. Three full days of post-debate responses now, and they continue to open up, which is good news for the Democrat. Unfortunately, I'm at a point now where I'm discounting R2K more than Rasmussen, so please just watch the trends, not the raw numbers, and for serious numerical analysis, I can't recommend better than www.fivethirtyeight.com . 51% is, however, the highest overall figure Obama has posted in Rasmussen, and a six point lead was only bested once, for a day in mid-June, so I would suggest that the trendlines do mean something; I'll do a graph or something cool later in the week. Gallup closes up a bit on each side, to what looks like a six point margin from eight, which bucks the trend, as Diageo/Hotline opens up a point by taking a little off McCain's score to a six point margin.

Diageo polls daily as to the degree of enthusiasm for each candidate, and there has been a steady upswing in enthusiasm among Democrats, nearly 90% of whom are voting for Obama, while Republican enthusiasm (with roughly the same support for McCain) is only at 50%; independents had been at 50% but dropped off to 46. To be more specific, high-enthusiasm voters are far more likely to be Obama supporters than McCain, by a 62-38 margin. Stories of luke-warm support from the Republican base for McCain had been circulating for months, some thought that had been stemmed by the announcement of Sarah Palin as his running mate. However, criticism of Palin from the right has been steadily growing, and may be turning up in these enthusiasm figures. It will be very interesting to revisit this a few days after the VP debate Thursday night to see if her performance, for better or worse, was able to change the degree of excitement McCain/Palin voters show for their ticket.

Rasmussen/Fox News published state polls in Colorado (Obama +1), Florida (tie), Ohio (McCain +1), Pennsylvania (Obama +8), and Virginia (Obama+3). What is significant to me here is that 1) this is Rasmussen, which underweights Democrats and 2) all five of these polls show a 3-5 point shift in Obama's favor over the last few weeks. Pennsylvania surprises me perhaps the least, as it tends to close strongly for the Democrat and is a union state. That being said, there's one significant difference this year from other presidential contests--perhaps because of the racial issue, this is less a right vs left battle than generational one--if only people under 50 were allowed to vote, it would be an Obama landslide; if only over 50, a McCain landslide. To me this argues that the generations that grew up after the civil rights struggles of the 1960s are much better adjusted to the idea of a black president and could well blunt a potential Bradley effect (assuming there still is one, and I've been shown some very persuasive work in the last week suggesting there may not be--thanks, Ken!). As long as I'm talking about it, there are some other state polls out in the last 24 hours--the usually very accurate SUSA has Florida a McCain +1, PPP (ehh) has North Carolina Obama +2, SUSA has New Jersey Obama +10 (and I'm surprised it's not more than that), the daily Morning Call tracker in PA is up to Obama +7.

Rasmussen also has a poll showing consumer confidence rising after yesterday's stock market cataclysm, which to my mind just shows how divorced from objective reality non-investors are on economic issues; if people are confident, it's because issues have not hit their pocketbooks YET. But what happens today has ramifications for next week, month, and year; if nothing happens, and the credit markets remain seized up, I say to those people who think this has nothing to do with them, good luck with that 2009 car loan, or mortgage refi, or credit card, or loan to modernize your gas station or store. Insitutitions being afraid to lend for extended periods greatly magnifies the effect of negative economic trends. So if you want to look back, don't look back to the market yesterday, look back to 1931. Enjoy.

Sometimes The Coin Lands On Its Side
The big news is, of course, the failure of the financial rescue bill yesterday. This one shouldn't have been a coin flip at all, but Speaker Pelosi managed to clutch defeat from the jaws of victory by doing the one thing she could do to give the GOP representatives political cover for voting no at the last minute, giving a petty, snide speech which allowed them to run and hide. Well, as long as they don't mind looking like total wussies, that is. Double edged sword, though: they then showed their political instincts are no better than hers by gloating about it, showing in a press conference in Minority Leader Boehner's office that their feelings are easily hurt--uh, I mean, admitting to the nation that their switcheroo---which according to Boehner cost exactly--yes, exactly-- the 12 votes it would have taken to turn defeat into victory, and not a single one more or less, for those of you who dont' believe in coincidence--on the vote was a political ploy on their part. Guys, you won a sneaky victory--when you then tell the world how you sneaked into it, the sneaky part goes away, and you just look no better than anyone else. We knew this already in a more subtle sense. Oh, roughly a minute before the bill went down in defeat, a Republican Congressman from Texas whose name I didn't catch stood up and asked the acting speaker what it would take for a motion to reconsider, if by some chance there were a way to get him to reconsider (pronounced $$$) his vote.

I think we're seeing the candidates' personalities reflected in their responses to the failure of the bill. I only bring this up because it was raised by so many survey respondents when polled on the debate. Sen. Obama yesterday called for Democrats and Republicans to work together, Sen. McCain blamed the failure on Obama who, last I looked, 1) was not a member of the House of Representatives, 2) only attended the meeting last week after Sen. McCain invited himself in and by all accounts, largely Republican ones, disrupted the proceedings, and 3) did not pretend to suspend his campaign while actively campaigning, and 4) did not immediately go to the House party leader's office to strategize (or, Senator McCain, was that a tactical move? As a military man, honest to gosh, it's a surprise that you're the one who mistook the difference).

Yet, despite all that, there will be a bill later in the week that will pass. It may include some special things that certain Republican congressmen want; if those seem like pork, it will be even more embarrassing for Sen. McCain, who took credit in the press for the bill's passage yesterday morning before it went down and he blamed his opponent. And he wasn't even only speaking to a voter.

I do wonder, though, if Intrade or one of those organizations will take bets on the next Speaker of the House. Shouldn't be long after the new Congress convenes in January.

Quote of the Day must come from Barney Frank at the Democratic Press Conference, where he said of the supposed 12 lost GOP votes:
I don’t believe they had the votes and I think they are covering up the embarrassment of not having the votes. But think about this: somebody hurt my feelings so I will punish the country. I mean that’s hardly plausible. And there were twelve Republicans who were ready to stand up for the economic interest of America but not if anybody insulted them. I’ll make an offer: Give me those twelve people’s names and I will go talk uncharacteristically nicely to them and tell them what wonderful people they are, and maybe they’ll now think about the country.”

Anyway, I've ranted about the bill failure elsewhere , and I'll get around to posting that on http://trackingpolls.blogspot.com if anyone would like a look. Catch you tomorrow, and Go Twins!

Best,

John
Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day
In the larger view the major forces of the depression now lie outside of the United States, and our recuperation has been retarded by the unwarranted degree of fear and apprehension created by these outside forces

Daily Polling Update, Sample Error Edition

2008-09-29T17:51:00.000-07:00

Ah, OK. So we've got another day of post-debate vote, and the left-leaning Research 2000 poll adds two points to Obama's margin, and the right-leaning Rasmussen closes it up by a point, Diageo remains flat day to day, which means that more people remain undecided than before the debate despite continuing improvements in net favorables for Obama vis-a-vis McCain (go on, say "huh?", I did) and Gallup remains flat at 50-42, arguing that opinions on the debate may have been formed earlier than most would have expected.

I'm sorry, there are reasons i'd really like to believe the R2K poll, as you all know who I'm voting for, but today's curious internal is that according to R2K, Obama gets 62% of the vote in the Northeast compared with 29% for McCain. The Northeast includes Pennsylvania, a large state which is running very tight. DC isn't exactly going to make up for that. If you want us to take your poll seriously, at least don't give the appearance of being quite so in the tank. An Obama net favorable of +29 compared with 0 for McCain beggars the imagination as well. C'mon, dewds, srsly.

Rasmussen continues to show a slight uptick in favorability ratings for both candidates, with Obama a few points ahead on favorables, but not releasing a net number, so it doesn't mean a whole heck of a lot. They also show that the two candidates are in a dead heat among white women, a constituency that I would argue it would be impossible for McCain to win the election without. Obama now also, according to Rasmussen, has slightly more support among Republicans than McCain does with Democrats, but not enough either way to move the needle--if anything is important, it's just that for most of the year the pattern had been reversed. If there's anything I take away here, it's just that Sen. Obama is being viewed somewhat more positively by people who may not have been quite sure how they viewed him. Now, remember that that does not necessarily translate into a vote, but it's more likely to become one than a negative, anyway.

Diageo's debate poll shows, in addition to a significant Obama "victory", by 41%-24%, with 27% calling it a draw, both candidates scored over 50% when asked about the quality of their performance, though with a significant difference: Obama rated excellent by 23% and good by 44% more, for a total of 67% vs 30% negative, while McCain was rated excellent by 10% with 44% good, for 54% vs 44% negative. In sum, the result of the debate is about consistent with what weve' seen elsewhere, with 43% saying it made them more likely to vote for Obama, 33% for McCain, and 23% didn't know or couldn't say. Which, incidentally, probably means nothing, especialy as this is the only one of the polls where McCain is closing the gap on Obama on the issue of who is better equipped to handle the economy.

SOS Or No
The economic rescue plan continues to generate controversy in inverse relation to how well it's understood by those making the biggest noise about it. Gallup has a survey out today showing that the public is unhappy with the conduct of Washington in handling the plan. Yet, I'd still be willing to venture that most of this opinion falls on partisan ground. The only leader with more approval than disapproval in the study is, however, Sen. Obama, and that only by a three point margin. President Bush comes in for the worst drubbing, probably because he's seen as powerless, dilatory, and vacuous in his statements on the situation. Democrats are a bit more kind to Obama than Republicans are to McCain, though members of each party naturally think their candidate has handled the crisis brilliantly and the other has been little more than a buffoon. Independents generally disapprove of both candidates' handling of the situation by a wide margin. Honestly, i'm not sure how much sense that makes; first, neither candidate is in a position to put on the mask and cape and fly in to save the day singlehandedly. However, the response on the part of each couldn't have been more different, and if independent voters reject both by roughly a 2:1 margin, either it's a different third of independents that approve of each or they're going to be a lot harder to please than anyone thought. I'm writing this at about 12:30pm, before the vote, though as Gallup releases its presidential tracking poll at 1:00pm and Diageo/Hotline whenever they damn well please, we'll certainly have had a vote in Congress on the rescue plan by the time this series of nuggets reaches your virtual desk.

Source: Gallup

Anyone who doesn't have a good handle on the bill and is interested in not being part of the 97% of the populace that doesn't have a clue what the bill's about, Henry Blodget has a pretty good summary at http://www.clusterstock.com/2008/9/analyzing-the-bailout-what-s-in-it-anyway- . As I write this, House Minority Leader Boehner has given rather a stirring little appeal in favor of the bill. He was against it before he was for it, but still.

Trust Department
Rasmussen has an interesting poll relating to voter trust after the debate, in which Sen. Obama is now trusted more than Sen. McCain on ten major issues, though usually by quite a small margin. If this survey is accurate, though, the fact that voters trust Obama more on such issues as Iraq, Immigration, Trade, Taxes, Social Security, Healthcare, and Abortion could be significant, and very bad news for the McCain campaign, particularly given the fact that it's a Rasmussen poll. They do caution,and I would agree, that trust issues are volatile; and with two debates left, I certainly would not want to suggest that these numbers will hold through November. It's pretty clear that they're losing on narrative (remember Peggy Noonan's hot mic comments a month or so ago?), but if they're going to lose on the issues as well, there's not a lot left to campaign on. In a separate survey, a small majority thought Obama won the debate, in line with Rasmussen's typical less-Democratic weighting than other pollsters in this election cycle.

But Wait, There's More!
Turns out there's more Couric-Palin footage CBS hasn't aired yet. One hears it's not more flattering to the governor than what has already been shown. One will see, as the network asked questions to both candidates to air in conjunction with the Vice Presidential debate on Thursday. As a result, no Bizarre Quote Of The Day but there may be several from both running mates later in the week. Darn that CBS, ruining the comic relief.

Vote is going on now, and it looks sure to fail. Question in my mind was whether Speaker Pelosi gets the 100 or so Republican votes she was hoping for, and is able to live with Democrats who feel they'll lose their seats if they vote yes. That's now impossible, the GOP vote against is a major rebellion against Boehner if his pleas to vote yea were sincere, which we'll presumably find out later. Note to Sen. McCain: If you want to see what putting Country Above Politics actually means, ask the Republicans who voted yes. They've got guts.

A demain, les copains!

John
Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day Wages have increased, the cost of living has decreased. The job of every man and woman has been made more secure. We have in this short period decreased the fear of poverty, the fear of unemployment, the fear of old age; and these fears that are the greatest calamities of human kind. (Campaign speech, 1928)

Daily Polling Rundown, Keep A Lid On It Edition

2008-09-28T11:33:00.000-07:00

There's a surprising amount to say on a day when I thought I'd be hard pressed to say anything at all, but it probably cuts back on what there is to discuss the next few days; lots of info from the pollsters today and some of it is even important.

OK, OK, the numbers continue to favor Barack Obama as the first debate recedes into whatever it's receding into, and it seems like I'm saying "it's too soon" to something every day, but it has appeared that in these three-day rolling tracking polls, you don't really see the impact of a significant event until day two. So while today's results generally show the continuation of the trend towards Sen. Obama, probably safer to wait until tomorrow or even Tuesday to get some early comfort as to the public response to the first debate. I say "early comfort" because feeling about the winner of a presidential debate has sometimes in the past taken weeks to resolve. That being said, three of the four daily tracking polls now show Obama with 50% of the vote, while McCain runs between 42-44%; the gap remains the same in Diageo/Hotline and Rasmussen, but grew by a point in Research 2000 and fully three points in Gallup (the largest and, at least to me, the least comprehensible of the four). So, on with the show:

Not a lot of movement in internals, where we have internals, though a slow shift in independent and unaffiliated voters continues in the R2K poll, where Obama now leads 48-42 among independents and 48-40 among the elusive "other" category. The R2K poll does include Barr and Nader, but seems to be pushing a little too hard to force responses out of subjects, as only 1% are considered undecided. There's such a thing as including leaners, but this seems a little extreme. The weighting in R2K is also apparent in the net favorables, where Obama is at +27 and McCain only +1. Sorry, that probably shouldn't make sense, even to the Obama partisan. Of the 39% that consider themselves independent or "other/refused," one wonders exactly where on the political spectrum they were recruited, particularly as that segment gives 4% of the vote to Ralph Nader, which argues that there might be too much of this sample that comes from significantly left of Obama.

Rasmussen has readjusted its weightings again, but only from a 5.5% Democratic advantage to 5.6%, so there shouldn't be much to discuss, or much of a shift in the results themselves as a result of the weighting shift. Diageo is a little baffling, not because of the five point difference between the two candidates, exactly the same as yesterday, but because it would appear that each candidate has lost a point, and I'm not sure if anything legitimately would have caused people to drop away from a candidate and into the undecided column, so I'm going to assume it's sample error and see if the total is back where it was later in the week.

Gallup had a couple significant findings, most notably that Sen. Obama has opened up an eight point lead, two of which comes off McCain's score after the debate, which would tie in with their poll showing Obama as the debate winner by a 46-34 margin. I'd probably be closer to the 20% that didn't pick a winner, but between expectations being exceeded by Obama in the foreign policy debate and some unpleasant personal actions by McCain, I can see why more people moved the way they did. 30% of respondents said they had a more favorable view of Obama after the debate, while just 21% said they did of McCain; the negatives were equally striking, as 12% said they had a more negative view of Obama afterwards, compared with the same 21% of McCain. This was considerably magnified in a question regarding whether respondents had more or less confidence in each candidate's ability to deal with the economy, where Obama had a net posltive of eight points, while McCain's favorability on the economy dropped by 14% (23% saying they had more confidence in his ability and 37% less). And there's your victory, particularly among independents.

For the next couple debates, Sen. McCain is going to have to keep his obvious contempt for his opponent in check. This is not personal opinion: in-debate tracking showed that people's feelings about McCain dived every time he told Sen. Obama "you don't understand" on one issue or another. If there's anything at all i'm prepared to take out of this, it's that the nation is not buying the "country before politics" meme that Sen. McCain has been repeating non-stop for months; as he has only stepped up his politicking while saying it, the American public may not be so easily gulled.

The McCain campaign's tactical flip-flopping (oh, that word) continues unabated, even after the "will I or won't I" stunt fades: the senator was on This Week this morning denying any responsibility for the House Republicans holding up the financial plan until and during the time he swooped down and injected himself uninvited into the proceedings; as he had not attended a roll call vote in the Senate since April, I might suggest the business of the nation continued unabated without him. I remain convinced that there should have--and would have--been a deal on Thursday otherwise, as the Senate Republicans were generally onboard with a modified plan including the restrictions and checks on Treasury power that both parties (and the American public) wanted. Instead, we have a public that believes that there is a plan being forced down their throats that will cost them money and give the Treasury unlimited power--a Rasmussen poll shows 50% of the public are against the plan, though if 5% of them could actually tell me what the plan comprises, I'd be stunned.

He Said, She Didn't Said (Again)
Gov. Palin seemed to approve Sen. Obama's support for strikes inside Pakistan against terrorists if necessary. "If that's what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should," Palin said, when asked. Seems fairly straightforward and, truly, sensible. It's that last adjective that can't be allowed to stand. On This Week this morning, Sen. McCain, ummm, retracted his running mate's statement, apparently on the grounds that it's scary and unfair to ask the Vice Presidential candidate questions she hasn't been fed in advance. I quote the GOP Presidential candidate directly: "In all due respect, people going around and… sticking a microphone while conversations are being held, and then all of a sudden that's—that's a person's position… This is a free country, but I don't think most Americans think that that's a definitve policy statement made by Governor Palin." In point of fact, sir, with all due respect, many of us do actually think that the answer to a question on policy is not entirely unlike a policy statement.

Jerry Springer For President?
The Times of London--a not disreputable rag, despite its ownership--reports that the McCain/Palin campaign may try to shift the narrative by having the Bristol Palin (and I know I promised myself I'd never mention the name) wedding before the election. See http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4837644.ece if you don't believe me, and honest to gosh there's no conceivable reason you should. That being said--are you seated comfortably?-- “It would be fantastic,” said a McCain insider. “You would have every TV camera there. The entire country would be watching. It would shut down the race for a week.” Shut down the race for a week. Yes, shut down the race for a week. Hands up who doesn't believe they're out of touch. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

Rumors that catering of the reception with Old Milwaukee and pork rinds are unsubstantiated at press time but a virtual certainty all the same.

Quote of the Day
Hendrik Hertzberg in The New Yorker on the Palin/Couric interview: The whole thing reads like something rendered from the Finnish by Google Translate.

It looks like there's a deal in Congress. Oh, ye of little faith.

And, last but not least, the Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day (TM):
The ancient bitter opposition to improved methods on the ancient theory that it more than temporarily deprives men of employment... has no place in the gospel of American progress. (Campaign speech, 1928)

September 27, Daily Polling Update, Mississippi Mud Edition

2008-09-27T21:52:00.000-07:00

Let's bear in mind that yesterday's polling was done before the debate, but even so it would appear that, to a degree, John McCain's "will he or won't he" maneuvers were viewed at least moderately skeptically by a public all too willing to view politicians all too skeptically. R2K moves up a point for Obama, as, perhaps more importantly, does Rasmussen, to the greatest advantage he has held yet in that poll. Diageo narrows from a 7 to 5 point lead with no other information. Gallup, however, which had been tied as recently as Thursday, has now opened up to a five point lead. The only thing I can take away from this is what we already knew: that it's too early to pay too much attention to the dailies, and even the trends sometimes don't make a whole lot of sense. Either because nobody felt like bothering because the whole game would change in the aftermath of last night's debate or because it was Saturday and employees of the polling firms are all big time college football fans, there's next to nothing in terms of internals released today, so the heck with the lot of them.

We're beginning to get to crunch time, though, as the first state-level tracking poll, in Pennsylvania from the morningcall.com http://www.mcall.com/news/nationworld/state/all-a1_5poll.6604193sep26,0,1738520.story has begun to come in. It's a little too early to bother other than to say that Obama has a four point lead, and that the site is great for Allentown/Bethlehem birth and tag sale notices.

Two Guys Walk Into An Auditorium In Mississippi
The debate itself was generally judged to be a modest Obama victory (personally, taking out expectations, I'd call it "tie goes to the runner" , but that may translate into greater Obama gains, as 1) it was questioned as to whether he would be able to hold his own in the foreign policy debate, 2) he seemed cool and collected, looking his opponent and the viewing audience in the eye while McCain seemed tetchy, occasionally smarmy and contemptuous, according to commentators and instant polling results and 3) Obama was able to score the two biggest shots of the evening (Spain and "you were wrong") despite taking far fewer of them. That being said, as the debates move into domestic policy, more viewed as Obama's home field, McCain has the opportunity to be viewed as the winner just by hanging in. The bracelet exchange (not that they traded jewelry or anything) seems to be generating a lot of day-after comment as well, mainly in Obama's favor; I found it a stirring moment on both sides, but Obama's response carried more weight, especially with parents. Other than a few digs, I found it informative but relatively uninspiring. That being said, I think that's what Obama wanted, and McCain didn't. Also, the level of discourse in general on both sides probably reached a level last night which will be impossible to attain for Sarah Palin in the VP debate, assuming she is still on the ticket by the end of the week (and if she's going, it's going to happen before the debate).

Post debate surveys were as follows:

Obama McCain CNN 51 38 including a 21 point lead on the economy, 25 on "more intelligent," and 27 on "expressed views more clearly," while McCain "spent more time attacking his opponent" by 60-23. Perhaps more importantly, Obama scored a 12 point lead on "was more sincere," a full 35 points head on "was more likable," and biggest of all, beat McCain by 49-43 on "seemed to be the better leader."
CBS 39 24 Poll of uncommitted voters, no surprise 37% thought it a draw. 46% said their view of Obama improved, while 32% said the same of McCain. 66% said Obama would make right decisions on the economy, while 42% said McCain would. Respondents noted McCain as being "angry and bad-tempered" and "didn't control himself well under pressure" while Obama won style points for poise.

Here, There, And Everywhere
Personally, I felt that McCain's moves seemed more erratic than heroic, and let's not discount the Letterman effect--it's not, as his campaign said, a function of feeling it inappropriate to go on a comedy show during a crisis, as in fact McCain more or less announced his candidacy on the same show, implying that that was a moment of comedy? Even those who agree with his policies can not but accept that the McCain campaign once again is showing itself to be consistent only in its inconsistency. Historically, and particularly when we are looking for a break with the last eight years, the American public likes its presidents to be, well, Presidential, and if that includes a touch of the stolid, well, so be it. McCain's a gambler, both in life and politics, but there may be a point at which we would prefer our leaders not roll dice. The next few days will give us some real feeling, for the first time.

I'm going to do something I've been threatening to do almost since day one and hit send before it gets twice as long as I intended. See you tomorrow!

Best,

John

Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day (miss it yesterday? I did)
Words without action are the assassins of idealism. (NY Times, 29 April 1920)

September 26, Daily Polling Update, Deal Or No Deal Edition

2008-09-27T21:47:00.000-07:00

Well, this is interesting, though I don't think anyone should either take or lose heart from it. A fairly significant day of gains for Sen. Obama, though it's hard to say when the Thursday part of the three-day polling was done, and whether it reflects the White House meeting and what passes for its aftermath. I would argue that it's not just Sen. McCain that's taking a gamble here--with the Senate GOP on board to make some kind of deal to avert cataclysm (and make no mistake, this hits Main Street in moments if nothing happens and could be hitting already had Jamie Dimon of J.P. Morgan not stepped up to buy WaMu assets last night, which coincidentally also will now allow me to take money from an ATM in LA without paying a $2 fee, for which alone I approve of the transaction), the Republicans in the House are staging their own last stand. The risk they're taking is that this could be like when Newt Gingrich shut down the government over the budget and discovered to his great surprise that while people love complaining about it, they also rather like having it around. I wonder if the world financial system is in an analogous position.

My gut feeling, such as it is: there will be a debate tonight (and I'm not counting the prospect of Barack Obama debating a cardboard cutout of John McCain, or McCain saying "Well, I'm just too busy in Washington, so I'll send my running mate to deputize, as that's the role of the Vice President"), there will be some kind of deal in the next few days, and the public will eventually be educated as to what it involves--well, duh, of course people will be against it if they think that it's a $700 billion payout to make Morgan Stanley's bonus pool. On the bailout, polls show that a majority of Americans want legislation, but not bills that reward investment bankers. Problem is, there is no proposal out there that rewards investment bankers, but certain people, particularly Congressmen, are scaring the public by claiming that was the purpose of the Paulson plan. That being said, anyone who thinks that hasn't read the plan (as had not McCain as of a couple days ago, by his own admission), and anyone in Congress who is trying to make people believe that's what it's about is beneath contempt.

With that, on to the numbers, provisional as I believe them to be.

And I'm confused. The Democratic leaning R2K poll takes a point off Obama from yesterday, while the under-Democratic-weighted Rasmussen opens the lead up from 3 to 5 (remember, it was 2 on Wednesday and tied on Tuesday). 39% of respondents in the R2K poll do not identify themselves as either Republican or Democrat (30% independent, and 9% refuse to say, implying that whatever they are, they're embarrassed of it, which really doesn't narrow things down much). In Rasmussen, only 27.5% of voters are considered Unaffiliated. Given that Rasmussen reports that now Obama has as strong a showing with Democrats as McCain does with Republicans, one might argue that Obama is not doing as well with independent voters as he might hope. However, on the bright side for the Democrats, one major complaint voiced by disgruntled Hillary Clinton supporters is that Obama would lose a lot of Democrats; this seemed like little more than sour grapes at the time, and now seems like sour grapes that may have numbers to disprove it. The difference is, in fact, in the polling--Rasmussen has Obama up by 5 among unaffiliateds while R2K only has him leading by three. Diageo has Obama moving up a point and McCain down one, to 49-42, with Obama's lead on the economy increasing. Gallup's numbers, at 48-45, reverse yesterday's baffling tie scoreMcCain's gambit on the bailout gains in importance to the future of his campaign by the minute.

There's a very interesting story at www.fivethirtyeight.com about Ann Selzer's polling. She's had a great record, and while she doesn't poll cellphone-only users (which takes his estimate of the hidden advantage to Obama down to 2.3%, closer to my own 1.5-2.0% idea), she has what seems like an excellent handle on youth and minority voting. Check it out at http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/ann-selzer-on-youth-minority-turnout.html
or if not, here's a quick rundown. Her polls generally show much more favorable numbers for Obama than the others, and she is taking a gamble, weighting young and minority voters much higher than other polling organizations. For example, while other groups have their knickers in a twist over Michigan, she's got Obama up 13. It's a significant gamble and staking of her credibility on the idea that, for example, significantly more than 17% of the electorate will be 18-29, as it was in 2004, which is most other pollsters' starting point. This makes sense to me, as the Obama campaign seems to have galvanized younger voters in a way that John Kerry never did. Nate Silver points out that this makes sense, as youth voter turnout in the Democratic primaries was up 52% over 2004, and that pollsters may double-undercount, as they'll take the 17% number and then factor in younger voters propensity to turn out in lower numbers than others. The difference could be significant. Worth keeping on the chalkboard somewhere, though we're unlikely to know how prominent an issue it will be until November.

Morning Updates, While We Wait For Gallup And Diageo To Do Whatever It Is They Do Dept.
11:00AM. Harry Reid, showing the toughness he reportedly had as a Las Vegas mob prosecutor but appears to have left in Nevada when he went to the Senate, is, as I write this, stating firmly that a deal will get done, that the addition of Presidential politics has been harmful to the process of the bailout, calling out McCain to let the country know where he actually stands on the issue. Reid is saying flat out that House Republicans did not even want to attend meetings, particularly since McCain rode into town. Dodd is now speaking, and sounding a lot tougher than Reid, so forget half of what I just said. He's annoyed, but makes it clear that there are many Republicans that are willing to work things out, that there will be no excessive executive compensation, that taxpayers will potentially be able to benefit, that there will be accountability, and that the Democratic leadership will work with any Republicans who "are interested in working on it." Oh, he's pissed. This is definitely a shutdown moment for the Republicans in the House, and it could go either way for them, for the markets, and for the country.

11:15 update. This just in, House Republicans are coming back to the table at 1130AM--this won't reach you until after that, as Gallup doesn't release numbers until 1 or so, and Diageo whenever they feel like it, but as I write this at 11:15, Boehner has finally let his troops march. Speaker Pelosi wants 80-100 Republicans for political cover, and she doesn't have that right now.

11:30 update. McCain will attend debate. Duh. One can only assume he read the polls, which showed overwhelming popular support for the idea of keeping it going (see yesterday's note for examples of bigger crises than this that didn't stop debates) He was for it before he was against it before he was for it.

1:00pm update: Reps. Boehner and Blount are telling America that they're holding out for a bill that doesn't hurt Main Street. Gee, sounds like what Reid and Dodd said a couple hours ago. Oh, what's different is that Boehner is saying that the White House was ganging up on him. Poor guy. At least he's being snotty to the press.

Dr. Strangelove Quote Of The Day, from Gov. Palin's interview with hard-hitting investigative journalist Katie Couric, who totally appears to have made her hard-hitting investigative journalist bones by trying to pin the Governor to answer to a question, any question, this time on the old "creepy dude next door" issue, particularly relevant as Gov. Palin appears at another point to have questioned the diplomatic acumen of Henry Kissinger: "it's very important when you consider even national security issues with Russia as Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where-- where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border. It is-- from Alaska that we send those out to make sure that an eye is being kept on this very powerful nation, Russia, because they are right there." Calling Slim Pickens...

September 25, Daily Polling Roundup, Suspended Animation Edition

2008-09-27T21:44:00.000-07:00

Well, we're moving left, right, and center today, despite the fact that the semi-comprehensible McCain strategic moves from yesterday really won't be included in today's numbers. Diageo and Democrat-leaning R2K remain steady with yesterday's tally, Republican-leaning Rasmussen adds a point for Obama, and who-on-earth-knows-what-they're-doing Gallup now has the race, of all things, tied. Go figure. Waiting for the Letterman effect to kick in, as well as the debate, and yes there is going to be one because 1) Obama quite rightly didn't take McCain's demand seriously (and you wouldn't either if you were in a deathmatch and scented fear and disarray from your opponent) and 2) there will--repeat will--be a bailout, probably before Senator McCain can tear himself away from all the non-Letterman interviews and find the train to Washington (hint, Senator: it's the same one Sen. Biden takes every Monday morning.) Honest to gosh, it doesn't matter if the bailout stinks, 1930 would stink more, and there are your choices. You decide. No, srsly. Do. Please. Also, did anyone else think Sen. McCain looked, umm, unwell, yesterday?

So what have we got here? A whole bunch of not a whole bunch. Maybe it's interesting that Rasmussen, with the least Democratic party ID weighting, continues to show Obama inching ahead. Maybe it's not. I find it curious that their poll has both candidates viewed favorably by over 50% of the electorate (Obama by 56%, McCain by 55%), but if I were to list everything I find curious in these polls every day, this note, which is already probably longer than it should be, would just get ridiculous. Rasmussen has its own Intrade-type thing, which now shows a 58% chance of an Obama victory. I'm inherently skeptical of unregulated markets (can't imagine why), and would do my best to ignore all this, I think the rapidly shifting probabilities at http://www.fivethirtyeight.com do a better job of tracking the trends in how voter attitudes are changing so far ahead of the actual election.

Diageo continues to show an increasing number of respondents saying the economy is the most important issue (58% now, up two points from yesterday); I think we need to have a chat with the other 42. Also, Obama leads by an increasing number in this poll when asked who would do a better job of handling the economy, though the lead is still just seven points, at 45-38. They also show an increasing number agreeing that government needs to take a larger role in oversight of financial markets, even if people in general are buying politicians' (on both sides) pseudo-populist claims that this is a terrible deal for Americans. Populism wins votes in 2008, so everyone's a populist. Get over yourselves, and fast.

In general, it seems (looking at some other polls that aren't dailies as well) that Republican-leaning polls have positive early returns for McCain's comments yesterday, while others track in the other direction. We'll see how that plays out over the next few days. If I'm McCain, I probably want to cancel the debate: first, though it's supposed to be about foreign policy, where I'm supposedly strong, I really don't have a lot of credentials in the area, which may become apparent in a debate and second, everyone's just going to ask about the economy anyway, where I've gone out of my way in the past to say I have no credentials, however much I try to create a new context for those remarks now. Also, if I can push the debate back a week, that coincides with the Vice Presidential debate, which I can then "postpone" permanently because I have a pretty good idea by this point how my running mate will show when asked questions alongside someone who's made a career of answering them. Problem is, some people might get wise to this. Yeah, some people.

On the state side, Rasmussen has a poll in North Carolina (see yesterday's note regarding a potential Reverse Bradley Effect), showing Obama with a two point lead in the normally solid red state, a three point lead in Pennsylvania, and McCain ahead mid-single digits in Florida and Ohio. A couple other Pennsylvania polls showed varying results for Obama, with Strategic Vision (typically with a few point GOP lean) having him just up one point, but CNN (with a couple point Democratic lean) up eight. Mason-Dixon confirms Rasmussen in Virginia, up three. Colorado looks decent for Obama in three polls released yesterday, with leads of three to nine points. Other states are about as expected, and we dont need to spend a lot of time talking about McCain's 21 point lead in Alabama or Obama's 41 point advantage in Hawaii, do we? Nah, didn't think so.

Palin's Eisenhower Moment
Gov. Palin's interview with Katie Couric is probably worth seeing, but it's really not my place here to discuss it. However, there was one moment that I found incredibly telling, and drew a parallel in my mind to 1960. When asked over and over again by an increasingly exasperated (if you can believe that, and I couldn't) Couric to name one area in which Sen. McCain has been in favor of regulation in 26 years in Washington, the governor finally got all spunky and said that she'd get back to Ms. Couric on it. Did anyone else think of Eisenhower in 1960 being asked to name a single policy initiative that Nixon had been responsible for and replying, "If you give me a week, I might think of one?" May have done more damage to Tricky Dick's campaign than televised five o'clock shadow and Joe Kennedy's money in Illinois combined. She's not going to be compared to Eisenhower that often, so if you're a fan, take it when you can.

OK, Exhale
You know, I realize I sound partisan up there, and honestly I work very hard not to be, but if there's one service a "behind the numbers" sort of note can provide, it's to cut through the layers of confusion, sample design error, and just outright bulls--t that all surveys, and particularly those with politicians involved, can pile up on a bizarrely unsuspecting populace. I say this because I find it very diffcult to see the ostensible suspension of the McCain campaign (and in what way are you suspending the campaign if you're spending the entire time of the suspension being interviewed and giving speeches?) and insistence that the debate not go on as planned just plain dishonest. I was going to say "disingenuous," but that wont' cover it. Reagan and Carter debated in 1980 when hostages were being held in Iran, Bush and Gore debated in 2000 in the aftermath of the bombing of the USS Cole, there was a presidential campaign in 1932 in the depths of the Depression, so why do you need to suspend a campaign because some other people are working out a plan to save the financial system from collapse? Seriously, if you buy that, you deserve what you get. Media, even outlets such as the not-typically-flaming-left-wing Wall Street Journal, are choking on it. The dirty but quite large secret here is that the Journal, better than most, knows that while markets like tax cuts, what they like most of all is stability, and that is the one thing that the McCain/Palin campaign is not giving them.
Anyway, apologies for a bit more of what appears to be rant than usual, but if I can't call "bulls--t" when I see it, and explain why and how, this is probably a waste of time. I'll call it on the other side one day too, I promise, it's just that he keeps doing annoying things like acting calm, collected, and what used to be called Presidential, darn him.

Tune in again tomorrow for another exciting episode, and as always, thanks for the kind words and referrals to friends, neighbors, enemies, etc. and perhaps most of all for keeping the unkind words to yourselves, fragile male ego being what it is and all.

John

And now, the moment you've all been waiting for, the Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day (TM):
Wisdom oft times consists of knowing what to do next.

September 24, Daily Polling Roundup, Red-Eye Edition

2008-09-27T21:29:00.000-07:00

More jockeying for position ahead of the debates, though as we saw yesterday, there is fairly significant evidence that presidential debates don't typically move the needle that much. Oh, every so often you get Richard Nixon looking like the face on a wanted poster next to matinee idol JFK, or Gerald Ford saying there is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe, but it's the exception rather than the rule. We do have a shift of a point in Obama's favor in Rasmussen, which is interesting; whether it reflects the modest shift in party ID weighting I'm not able to say, but I'd guess that moving it from +5.1% Democratic to +5.5% isn't going to give you much
other than a different sort of rounding error. R2K moves the other way, and I'd say the same thing, at least so far. There's really no identifiable reason for it, so I'm not going to try and make one up. It's still all mostly noise, so if you want to look at the table and skip the next three paragraphs til you get to the bit about Gallup's polling on Palin and white women, I wouldn't blame you in the least. Honest to gosh, I might have done the same, and I wrote the damn thing.

If there's one clear place where support for Obama seems to have a direct correlation, it's in concern about the economy. Despite the bailout, Rasmussen's polls show a steady though modest increase in respondents' concern and feeling that the economy is the biggest issue facing the nation; this seems to show up in improved results for Barack Obama. Rasmussen also reports favorables for the Vice Presidential choices today. I'm going to mention them and move the hell out. We've noted the party weighting in Rasmussen is perhaps a few points less Democratic than we feel it ought to be in 2008, and nowhere perhaps is the difference between Rasmussen and R2K's weightings (and one would assume, questioning style and overall survey design) more apparent than in the net favorables for the VP candidates. In Rasmussen, Palin is a +12, Biden +8. The undecideds are low, which suggests that people were forced to make a decision (there were only 3% undecided about Palin--polarizing candidate though she surely is, it's still September, guys)--this is also true in the Presidential poll, where there are only 4% undecided. I know they include leaners, but they're pushing too hard.

In R2K, the movement was all within independent voters, and voters between 30-59. Independents make up 30% of the survey, and picked up 2 points in McCain's direction. You can either see that as utterly momentous or complete random noise; I tend to the latter in the absence of further information, especially given that McCain's net favorables in this poll did not change at +1 (compared with much higher results in Rasmussen) and Obama's dropped by 2 points from +21 to +19. I've talked myself blue in the face about how I feel there's design error in both these polls, so I don't think I can face it again. To sum though, the poll where the net favorables massively favor Obama just moved one point in McCain's favor, while the one where the favorables seem to be even just moved a point in Obama's favor. Go figure.

Diageo moves a point towards Obama; in sum, "it's the economy, stupid." They polled regarding Sarah Palin's preparedness, and the numbers, if they represent a trend, may have the Republicans putting Mitt Romney back on speed dial. Gallup is flat a 47-44, and there's not a whole heck of a lot to say about that, is there?

Gallup does have a much more interesting poll out today asking whether the Palin choice has helped McCain among white women, and their poll suggests there has been minimal change. I like this result, mostly because it's what Iv'e been saying all along. Their data shows that McCain had a 9 point lead among white women before the Democratic convention in August, which expanded to 11 points during the height of Palinmania, but which has now settled at an all time low of a 2 point advantage, the biggest difference being that undecideds have moved towards Obama as more is discovered about who the GOP running mate is. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the biggest gains for the Palin/McCain (oops) campaign are among non-college-educated white woman aged 30-49. If they think it's because Sarah Palin is like them, they should consider paying more attention to someone who isn't Sean Hannity. When I say Sarah Palin is a polarizing figure, that doesn't just mean she solidifies the base on the right.

Back to what i swore I wouldn't talk much about any more, but now feel forced to, Party ID. I have two good reasons for this; three if you consider that I'm probably still a little groggy from being on a plane overnight as one of them. First, Gallup yesterday released a poll showing that in their large sample, 49% of respondents identified as Democrats, while 39% did as Republicans. This 10 point difference is in fact higher than even the 9.1% difference in the R2K poll. This 10 point advantage had shrunk to 5 after the Republican Convention, but with the bloom off the rose and petals flying around everywhere getting into awkward difficult-to-reach places, the number is back to a steady state situation.

The final reason I mention it is that party ID seemed to be the one thing the McCain campaign hadn't complained about yet. Well, strike that one off the list. Bill McInturff, McCain's own pollster held a conference call (first red flag, remember the conference call we discussed yesterday and how it didnt' exactly HELP matters much) to suggest that the latest ABC News/WaPo poll overcounted Democrats. ABC addresses the issue at some length at http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenumbers/. Looks like they were using a number of about +7 which is where McInturff himself had suggested the election was likely to turn out, not that I'm suggesting that just because a McCain staffer said something one day that it obtains the next (that's what YouTube is for, guys). McInturff, who should have known a lot better himself, and should have known that ABC's pollsters would know better, was focusing on one not terribly relevant way of looking at voters which favored Democrats more and which would have been more pro-Obama had it actually been the methodology ABC used in deriving their results. ABC includes on their page their breakdown through the polling season; the McCain campaign has never discussed their own internals--surely it's easier to have a discussion about two divergent points of view if the other guy tells you what his point of view is rather than just that yours is kind of sucky? Dewd, whateverrrrrr...

OK, I'm going to work on adding graphical material here now that I'm on my home system, such as it is, and cutting back some things that need cutting back. If I have to learn a new email program to do this, you owe me. Have no fear, though--the Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day will not perish from the earth.

Groggily,

John

And now...the Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day (TM):
It is a paradox that every dictator has climbed to power on the ladder of free speech. Immediately on attaining power each dictator has suppressed all free speech except his own.

September 23, Daily Polling Rundown, Leaving On A Jet Plane Edition

2008-09-27T21:27:00.000-07:00

Oh, nothing really. R2K remains dead flat, just the most random of movements in individual sectors too minor to mention, other than net favorables, where Obama gained a couple and McCain lost a couple, but if one candidate is really +21 and the other is +1, then the race isn't this close, so skip it. Rasmussen has moved from a statistical tie to an absolute one, but again, big whoop, we're in a holding pattern until the debate or further bizarre comments. Gallup has another point move back into the undecided column, as Obama moves down from 48 to 47 with no increase in McCain's numbers. Could just be rounding. Obama has slipped three points in Gallup since he reached 50% on Saturday, but McCain hasn't gained over that time. I don't want to put too much faith in any single number, but I am curious as to why and/or how Obama has lost a point in each of the last three days. They don't discuss internals on a daily basis, so there's no way of figuring it out.

Diageo/Hotline Obama 47 McCain 43 (47-42)
Gallup Obama 47 McCain 44 (48-44)
R2K Obama 49 McCain 43 (49-43)
Rasmussen Obama 48-McCain 48 (48-47)

Diageo has a fractional increase for McCain with no decrease for Obama, pointing out that the economy continues to rise as the most significant issue in survey respondents' minds and that Obama's view of the origin of the financial crisis resonates more than McCain's. I've been on Wall Street for 20 years and I'm not sure I understand what McCain is saying, so I can see how it might not resonate. Srsly, though, could be in part an articulateness issue, if not The Vision Thing. At the same time, Diageo's polling on who would do a better job handling the economy has now moved into a virtual dead heat, so I'm probably spending too much time talkinga bout Diageo. Feh.

Rasmussen has some state polling out showing Obama still up 8 in Minnesota and the Senate race between incumbent Norm Coleman and intermittently comic Al Franken in a dead heat. Coleman isn't terribly popular in his state, and the campaign has become increasingly bitter. I've seen other commentary suggesting that Dean Barkley, the third party candidate with strong name recognition in the state (he served the remainder of the late Paul Wellstone's term after he was killed in a plane crash in 2002) was polling in double digits because Minnesotans were fed up with the level of discourse. Not so sure about that, but Rasmussen tends to discount third parties, so I'd take it with a shaker of salt. Could Franken get an SNL bump from Tina Fey's Sarah Palin shtick? After all he's good enough, he's smart enough and doggone it, people like him!

More state polling trending modestly Obama's way, particularly in Virginia and, surprisingly, North Carolina. If there's a kind of reverse Bradley Effect in the south, and African-American voters can come out in numbers proportionate to (or even greater than) white voters, some southern states with particularly high numbers of black residents such as North Carolina (21.7% black compared with 12.8% nationwide) could possibly be in play. McCain is worried; the GOP has allocated additional resources to what is ordinarily considered one of the reddest of the red--other than Jimmy Carter in 1976, NC has gone Republican since 1964. McCain continues to poll strong in PA and OH, though The Keystone State has a recent history of closing strong for the Democrat. It's also down to 21 electoral votes, the fewest it's had since James Madison won his first term. Well, I thought it was interesting.

Speaking of bizarre comments, I can't really post a Surrogate Quote Of The Day because it was a 45 minute conference call senior McCain staffers had to bitch out the press for doing what looks like quoting their candidate. Unfortunately, as reported on politico.com and a whole bunch of other places, the examples they tried to give of really really really bad things Obama and his people and his people's people have done were riddled with easily verifiable errors. After writing that, certain members of the fourth estate were treated to scathing private communications from the selfsame staffers, which they immediately made public. Duh. If you have an ear for comedy, the whole call is posted at http://blip.tv/file/1284017/ . If you have an ear for how NOT to manipulate the press, same site. Jeez. Maybe attacking Russia (viz. yesterday's note) was a better idea after all--they might catch them on a weeklong Stoli bender. If you'd just like to read Ben Smith's take at politico, and it's worth a look, here 'tis: http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=8B938576-18FE-70B2-A85A7409BC2461BC .

I've said before that we're in a holding pattern for the debates, and I'm sure people think that polls may move significantly after Friday night, but there's an interesting survey out of the University of Wisconsin ( http://election08data.blogspot.com/2008/09/debate-effects.html ) suggesting that in the last 20 years, the impact has been no more than a few points. That being said, sometimes a few points can change the outcome of an election, so I wouldn't entirely discount the impact of a three point swing. I would suggest that what matters about the first debate is that, because it's the foreign policy debate, it will be Obama's chance to show that he can speak and act like a Commander In Chief. McCain will need to be very careful not looking like a petulant old guy if Obama is successful in this effort. If he's unsuccessful, McCain could gain significantly. It's all in Obama's hands this time round.

Some highly regarded conservative commentators still seem to be slowly inching away from the McCain reservation, though I'm sure if it turns out not to be a train wreck, they'll have inched right back again. No worries; it's what partisan commentators on all sides do. Just wash your hands after reading them and check for your cufflinks after shaking hands. Oh, and if you have them to dinner, I'd urge against the good silver.

Right. Fingers, paws, and fins crossed, I'm heading home from a month in LA tonight, which means nothing to any of us except that this email will be better formatted once I'm off my hotel's internet connection. Til tomorrow, then, and thanks for the kind words,

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. (1928)

September 22, Daily Polling Rundown, Bailing Out The Bailout Edition

2008-09-27T21:26:00.000-07:00

It feels as though Obama's bump last week was due largely to the growing economic crisis. As public perception over the weekend was that the administration had moved to stave off disaster, some voters, whether they approved of the moves or not, may have shifted slightly in McCain's direction. With gathering resentment over what is being viewed as a taxpayer financing of bankers' greed (a viewpoint with which I only concur in small part) and renewed declines in the equity markets on Monday morning, it remains to be seen if there is a shift back in the other direction as today's surveys begin to be reflected in tomorrow's numbers. I would think that if they do, we won't really see it until Wednesday or Thursday. There is, however, one significant move today--at a time when other polls are settling in with a slight erosion to Obama's recent gains, Diageo/Hotline comes in with a full two point bump in his direction, which also argues against my suspicion that the bailout, however unpopular with sections of the electorate and the commentariat it might be, has made people more comfortable that we're not heading towards utter financial cataclysm. There's no change in the Diageo polling on the economy, 55% on Sunday felt it the most important issue, up from 53% on Friday. That being said, they continue to confuse me with a closing of the gap in perceptions of which candidate is better equipped to handle the economy--if McCain is gaining there, surely he shouldn't be losing in the overall poll, unless their survey thinks Obama is better equipped to handle everything else, which would be significant indeed. Dont' know much about the methodology of this one, but it seems awfully inconsistent.

Additionally, Obama seems to score additional points when the McCain campaign is recorded saying something mindbogglingly stupid or transparently mendacious; they managed to avoid that particular Scylla and Charybdis over the weekend (or at least nobody watches the news on weekends during football season), and McCain's numbers climb slightly as a result. I'm still not discounting the Bradley Effect, whatever Nate Silver says. Finally, I would suggest that pretty much everything this week is noise until the first debate Friday night. Next Sunday's note might be an interesting one.

So here are the numbers, and not a whole lot of further commentary on a slowish news cycle, other than a two point Obamaward bump in Diageo/Hotline which I can't begin to explain so I won't bother trying unless we see a lot more of it:

Diageo/Hotline Obama 47 McCain 42(45-44)
Gallup Obama 48 McCain 44 (49-45)
R2K Obama 49 McCain 43 (49--42)
Rasmussen Obama 48-McCain 47 (48-47)

Some interesting state polling has been filtering through lately--PPP and Rasmussen both have the race in North Carolina having narrowed to being too close to call. Barring voter fraud, there are some states in the South where a possible reverse Bradley Effect might obtain, assuming the Obama campaign's voter registration efforts are as successful as their supporters claim. Obama's getting a crowd estimated locally in the area of 25,000 in Charlotte really doesn't surprise that much; he has been drawing huge crowds in any big city. If anything, people in the major media centers are surprised that Charlotte is a big city, and that's their damn problem. It is, and it's also a big city that largely grew into one on the back of the banking industry. If NC is truly in play, this would be bad news indeed for McCain, though the fact that he has begun to reallocate resources into the state implies that it is a threat his campaign is taking very seriously indeed.

R2K and The Miami Herald have McCain with razor-thin margins in Florida, while ARG has Minnesota having closed from being safely Obama to within the margin of error, even at a time when Al Franken has dramatically closed the gap on the incumbent Norm Coleman (with a third party candidate with excellent local name recognition in double digits) in the senatorial race. ARG also has, on the other side, Virginia as only a 2 point lead for McCain; he appears to have got a huge post-convention bump in the commonwealth, which has equally quickly dissipated--in fact, PPP and SUSA published polls last week showing Obama in front from 2 to 4 points. With so many key states in a state of such flux, it's probably safe to consider things in a holding pattern circling over Andrews AFB until after the debate.

Whither The Paleo-Conservatives?
While a lot of talk is tossed around about how McCain has solidified his conservative base with his running mate choice, how his military positions are also appealing to the right, what we're really seeing there is an appeal to the New Right, the neo-conservatives on foreign policy and Evangelicals on social issues. Although I don't know how relevant they are any more, I'm intrigued by the number of old-fashioned Reagan conservatives who are moving off the reservation. This weekend's commentary by George Will on ABC's This Week were particularly striking:

"I suppose the McCain campaign's hope is that when there's a big crisis, people will go for age and experience. The question is, who in this crisis looked more presidential, calm and un-flustered? It wasn't John McCain who, as usual, substituting vehemence for coherence, said 'let's fire somebody.' And picked one of the most experienced and conservative people in the administration, Chris Cox, and for no apparent reason... It was un-presidential behavior by a presidential candidate....John McCain showed his personality this week and made some of us fearful."

Again, I'm just not sure how relevant to a generation of no-expense-spared-if-its-for-our-cause self-proclaimed "conservatives" people like George Will are, but it's striking to see this sort of statement on national television from a commentator as well respected and consistently intellectually honest, whether one agrees with his opinions or not.

Back tomorrow with the packing up and heading back east edition, darn it all.

John

Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day (TM):
We in America today are nearer to the final triumph over poverty than ever before in the history of any land. (1928)

September 21, Daily Polling Rundown, Blaming The Even Older Dude Edition

2008-09-27T21:24:00.000-07:00

This is my first daily update that includes polling done on a Saturday, so I'm not sure if the fact that the news cycle is slower makes the polls a little softer; I hope not, given that they're three-day running totals. A fractional dropoff in R2K, a one point move towards McCain in Gallup, stability in Diageo and Rasmussen. All in all, nothing that looks more than random noise right now, but let's see what happens over the course of a few days.

So away we go....

Diageo/Hotline Obama 45 McCain 44 (45-44)
Gallup Obama 49 McCain 45 (50-44)
R2K Obama 49 McCain 42 (50-42)
Rasmussen Obama 48 McCain 47 (48-47)

Gallup has the most significant move, which is pretty insignificant. Their daily consumer confidence numbers have also moved less negative by a point, though that must means it goes from 81% negative to 80%, and the positives drop from 5% to 4% at the same time. R2K looks like Obama loses the point in various demographics he gained yesterday, which means absolutely nothing unless he continues to slip; just quite literally a couple people checking one box instead of another. What I'd watch for is how direct the correlation is between bad news on the economy and gains for Obama vs stability and gains for McCain. There probably is some sort of correlation, and in fact more than there should be, which would raise the specter of the Bradley Effect--my personal opinion is that it continues to exist, but can be overridden by disasters in the financial markets and overall economy. An AP/Yahoo News poll shows some alarming--though hardly surprising--racial attitudes among white voters, and suggest a 6 point "racial cost" to Obama in the polls. I want to believe this is nonsense, but if I think about it, I suppose there's more to it than I wish there were (that story can be found at http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-obama-race ). This poll shows a much lower figure of support for Obama among non-Hispanic Whites than Gallup, roughly 70% vs 77%.

Also, if a day goes by without someone from the McCain campaign saying something breathtakingly idiotic, does that increase his polling? It would appear to.

Rasmussen, which has a much smaller weighting in favor of Democratic ID than R2K, although interestingly MORE independents, remains flat day to day. Rasmussen has also announced changes in weighting which tilt the polling slightly more Democratic:

Rasmussen Weightings Old New Change

Democratic 38.7 39.0 +0.3
Republican 33.6 33.5 -0.1
Unaffiliated 27.7 27.5 -0.2

While this is a move from +5.1% Democratic to +5.5%, it remains to be seen if this is still too conservative.

There's been some very interesting state polling in the last few days, the results of which are just coming out today. R2K for two Florida newspapers shows that race is now a tossup, with South Florida going 58% Obama. Whether this reflects unease regarding aspects of Sarah Palin's background can't be established, I would think, but her affiliation with millenarian Christian groups and the campaign of Pat Buchanan will not serve the ticket well in areas with a significant Jewish population. Only a third of voters in that poll suggested the economy was the most important issue, compared with totals closer to 50% nationwide. McCain, however, does quite well in more rural and military Northwest Florida, which comes as no surprise.

Nate Silver at www.fivethirtyeight.com has corrected his cellphone bias survey from yesterday; it turns out that one of the polling agencies that he had been led to believe included cellphone only voters yet was the most GOP-oriented of the ones in the study in fact does NOT poll people with no landline. Taking them out of the survey moves his estimate of the unreported advantage to Obama from 2.2% to 2.8%. While anyone on the Democratic side in this campaign should be cheered by those numbers, I still have trouble, despite the extremely high quality of his work (which I followed for years at baseballprospectus.com too), getting past my back of the envelope concept that it's more like a point and a half. Either way, it's a big deal in a very close race.

Blowback on the Treasury's bailout plan is louder and harder than I had expected, as voices are raised in opposition to the idea that the government may buy $700 billion in mortgages at what some consider above-market prices. The question for me comes down to whether the prices are high because it's really a bailout for mortgage speculators or they seem high because when you mark to market at a time when there's really no market, values look artificially low. If the public perception becomes that this is either more welfare for bankers or, as Paul Krugman put it, "Commissar Paulson [seizing] the means of production" the uproar from both left and right could scuttle the plan. Personally I'm not nuts about it, but I'm even less nuts about Great Depression 2: Electric Boogaloo. Besides, the overweening irony in all this is that should disaster be averted, round about year 3 of the next administration, the government could start turning massive profits on what it owns. The nature of the administration will, of course, ominously, determine how those profits are used. So right now, it only looks like the biggest piece of central planning socialism inflicted on the world since the last Five Year Plan, but there's always a chance it'll be a good buy-and-hold (remember those? the equity markets don't) investment.

I also feel a moment of vindication here. Not that i want to spend all my time picking on the elderly, but I fell off the Alan-Greenspan-Is-God bandwagon around the time of, ohhh, the Russian Debt Crisis 10 years ago. My gosh, did I get a lot of funny looks from people when I would suggest that his last term as Fed Supremo was somewhere between a mitigated and unmitigated disaster or even just that, "well, he's OK on a good day, but he's no Paul Volcker." Now, all of a sudden, he's carrying the water for everything that's going on here, and despite not changing my opinion on him one iota, I sound like the voice of moderation. He messed up badly and on a long-term basis, by putting the market cart before the economy horse for a decade, but everyone who signed on for the ride bears his fair share of the blame.

Signing off on my last overcast Sunday morning before heading back to the Nutmeg State (TM) on Tuesday night,

John

Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day
About the time we can make the ends meet, somebody moves the ends.

Daily Polling Rundown, Bailout Edition

2008-09-27T21:22:00.000-07:00

The trendline continues to show a steady, measured shift towards Barack Obama; again, I would urge people not to pay too much attention to the actual numbers, which have six-plus weeks to shift and could include fairly significant sampling error or just plain poor design, but to trends and momentum which play out over a more extended period. That being said, two of the polls have Obama at 50% of the vote, which would be enough for a win, given that Bob Barr and Ralph Nader (at least I think that's his hame) will probably siphon off 2-3% of the total vote, though most likely in states where the outcome is in no doubt. It's probably not unfair to call this the end of the worst week in John McCain's career since his release from a North Vietnamese POW camp.

Diageo/Hotline Obama 45 McCain 44 (45-44)
Gallup Obama 50 McCain 44 (49-44)
R2K Obama 50 McCain 42 (49-42)
Rasmussen Obama 48 McCain 47 (48-48)

Today's 50% in Gallup matches his record high just after the Democratic Convention. Not only has the Republican Convention bump disappeared, within two weeks Sen. Obama has managed to regain the levels he enjoyed after his own extremely well-received acceptance speech. Gallup notes that survey participants are noting more worry both about the economy and their own finances, which dovetails neatly with Obama's gains. They infer from this that Obama may be generally viewed as being better for the economy than McCain.

In R2K, it's across the board. Obama gains a point among men, women, white voters, all age groups, and perhaps most importantly, Democrats. His lead among members of his own party in this poll is now 86-10, which if true would argue that very few disgruntled Hillary supporters (who I've always assumed to be extremely few in number--I've met two and they've since changed their minds) remain off the reservation. This compares with McCain's 88-6 lead among self-identified Republicans. It's hard to see Obama losing Democrats once he's got them in the fold. Oddly, everybody's favorables drop a point or two. I would suggest that argues for nervousness about the overall financial situation and slightly less willingness to trust any politician.

Rasmussen has some new state polling suggesting a four point Obama lead in Maine and two in Indiana. My gut feeling is that those are both wrong--I think Obama should win Maine by more than that and I'd be surprised if McCain were behind in Indiana right now-- the aggregate score from www.fivethirtyeight.com has McCain up 3 or so, which seems more reasonable. The Rasmussen Consumer Index is steady, down nine points from a week ago, with fully 73% of Americans surveyed thinking the economy is getting worse, with 10% saying it's getting better. Efforts to reach that 10% failed as my cellphone does not reach the planet Neptune.

There have been a couple studies lately on the "cellphone effect" which may add even more inaccuracy to the polling process; the fact that many polls do not include cellphone-only users, estimated at 10-12% of the overall population. As these likely skew younger and often, though by no means always, poorer, probably meaning significantly pro-Obama, not including them in the polls could take away measurably from his actual tally. ABC/Washington Post had data suggesting the difference is about a point; Nate Silver at fivethirtyeight aggregates pollsters that do call cell-only users and compares them with a control group that do not and finds a difference of 2.2 points. It all comes down to how much cellphone-only people prefer Obama. I estimate that if it's 60/40, it's about 1.3 points. At 66/34, it's closer to 2. Silver points out that his findings are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level.

Which gets me to something else that bugs me. Rasmussen, which I feel is slightly biased towards the GOP in its survey design, calls today's results "statistically insignificant." There ain't no such animal. Perhaps it's just sloppy writing, but saying things like that raise a red flag for me. You test for statistical significance; if you fail, what you've got is nothing. Not "insignificant," just "unable to show significance." Someone with a whole bunch of statisticians on staff ought to know this. Srsly, dewd.

As we had expected, Palinmania (catch it now at a theater near you!) is subsiding; what we had not expected is just how quickly and precipitously it would subside, nor how much the candidate herself would assist in bringing it to an end. There is a hard core which will never admit to believing anything wrong of her or the ticket, just as there is on the other side as well. Well, that's fine--their votes were, despite a lot of speculation regarding McCain's need to shore up his credibility with the far right, never in doubt. Seriously, show of hands; who thought that what an earlier generation would have called John Birchers (and the picture of Wasilla Council Member Palin in 1995 with a copy of the--yes, they're still going!--John Birch Society newsletter on her desk is making the rounds--even if she was never a member of the organization, this shows poor judgment) were going to vote for the liberal black guy if the GOP running mate weren't sufficiently extreme? If you do, I've got this bridge to nowhere (tm) to sell you...

The McCain campaign seems to be in one of those annoying mud patches where you keep shifting from first into reverse and back again and only seem to get you stuck a little deeper in the mud (for those of you in sunny southern California, we have rain in the Northeast. The ground gets wet. Really.). Sen. Obama noted with some amusement yesterday that his fourth-term opponent is now criticizing him for being too tied in with Washington insiders. This seems a little inconsistent. Either you're too inexperienced or too entrenched. Saying someone's both is kind of like calling him a Muslim under the influence of a radical Christian pastor.

It's also instructive to look at the two candidates' responses to the week's economic upheaval. By Friday, Obama was holding a press conference, supporting the administration's efforts to prevent the next great depression, and asking for Americans to come together; McCain was excoriating Obama for lecturing us. One of these responses sounds more like what an actual real-life President would do. I don't think the subtlish effort to paint Obama as some sort of ivory tower egghead is going to work--actually, we already know that he graduated top of his class at Columbia and Harvard and was a lecturer in Constitutional Law. Doesn't seem to bother most people. Obama paints McCain as out of touch; the meme sinks in so well that McCain starts using it about Obama. This "I'm rubber, you're glue" approach of Sen. McCain could work, but it seems unlikely. You sort of need to tell the stories about the other guy before he tells them about you.

Should the McCain theme song, now that Heart has enjoined them from using "Barracuda" be "Oops, I Did It Again?" One supposes Britney herself was too young to be on the ticket.

Off to enjoy the start of my last weekend in LA before heading back to the only Congressional District in New England with a Republican representative. And thanks for all the kind words! Keep telling your friends, more than happy to add anyone to the list who cares to. To quote the great John Blutarski, "Grab yourself a beer. Don't cost nothin'."

Til the next one,

John

Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day
When there is a lack of honor in government, the morals of the whole people are poisoned.

September 19, Daily Polling Rundown, Resolution Trust Edition

2008-09-27T21:17:00.000-07:00

With apologies for length--they will get shorter, as after today I'm done complaining in detail about existing weightings until the next set of changes.

R2K Obama 49 McCain 42 (49-43)
Rasmussen McCain 48 Obama 48 (48-48)
Gallup Obama 49 McCain 44 (48-44)
Diageo/Hotline Obama 45 McCain 44 (46-42)

A little more movement in Obama's direction and into statistical significance in two polls, though I still fear that R2K overweights Democratic ID just as I'm pretty sure Rasmussen overweights to the GOP. It will be interesting to see next week how Rasmussen re-weights, having cut the advantage of Democrat over Republican from 7.6% to 5.1% for this week. It's a 9 point advantage in R2K's poll, with more independents as well. I'm cool with the higher proportion of independents if I have to be, but I'd probably be more comfortable with a party ID number somewhere between the two. The trends are as they've been all week, the occasional one point move in Obama's direction in many of the demographic categories, most notably female voters, where he has a large lead in R2K. Nothing you'd pay attention to on a one-day basis, but give me a couple hundred data points and you begin to get something that looks like a pattern.

I also have a lot of difficulty figuring out the Diageo numbers today, showing a one point swing away from Obama and a two point swing towards McCain, while at the same time showing nearly half the respondents saying the economy is the most important issue, up ten full points in a week, and Obama holding a ten point lead among voters rating that issue most important. Something just doesn't seem right with the other 53% and this poll doesn't release internals, so we haven't a clue what the composition of the sample looks like, but that 53% is only about 160 people, which makes it awfully easy to introduce potentially significant sampling error in an opinion-based survey. Just a couple tinfoil helmets and your results are sunk for three days.

R2K continues, by virtue of its party weighting, to show extremely low net favorables for the McCain/Palin ticket, with Palin's now a -5 and McCain dead even, while Obama is +22 and Biden +16. Intuitively that would seem skewed even if we didn't have party ID numbers. Ethnically, R2K may overweight minorities, though that likely shows up in the Democrat/GOP weighting, with 13% African-American and 13% Latino in the sample. IF the Obama campaign's voter registration drives, particularly in urban areas, are as phenomenally successful as they have been claimed to be, and if the people they register show up to vote, the tallies on Election Day may certainly be more diverse than in the past, but I have trouble believing those figures will be reached. While pretty much everyone getting this note knows who I support in the election, I'm just not comfortable with aspects of the R2K survey design, as much as I'd like to be. That being said, on the other side, if Rasmussen is right and the race is tied after a week where the McCain/Palin (or Palin/McCain, depending on which of the candidates you ask) campaign has piled up an stunning string of blunders, missteps, gaffes, and just plain scratch-your-head-and-say-what-the-hell weirdnesses, I'd be just as surprised. And I've got things I don't like about Gallup and Diageo also. So there.

It will be interesting to see how the public likes each candidate's response to this week's financial crisis, and particularly how they respond to Sen. McCain reversing a couple decades' worth of well-publicized record against regulation of markets. I think the essential irony of the fact that Phil Gramm, one of the prime movers in the repeal of financial regulation late in the last century, is his chief financial advisor, is probably not going to register with most people, who wont' remember who he is or ever knew what Glass-Steagall was. What will register is quotes from the candidate, many of them from just a few months ago, talking about his general opposition to regulation.

That being said, Gallup has a poll out showing the public divided on the wisdom of the (to my mind absolutely incontrovertibly but sadly necessary) AIG bailout--interestingly, both Republicans and Democrats favor it, while Independents are strongly against-- and Rasmussen notes that nearly 50% of their survey sample fears the government will move too aggressively in preventing financial armageddon, which to my mind just shows how financially illiterate the public is. Personally, while I'm not crazy about this particular application of Your Tax Dollars At Work, it's like the government is creating a mess to avoid a cataclysm, and I'll take that trade. I'm not sure how good it is soundbite-wise for a candidate who was one of the Keating Five to have the Resolution Trust Corporation revived a month and a half before the election. If it were I, I'd really like them to call it something else.

There are other areas, though, such as the bans on short selling, that seem more like panic, overreaching, and cheap opportunistic populism. While there was some reason to look at short selling, and particularly to enforce existing laws regarding preventing naked shorting of stocks, the obvious question is really along the lines of "Uh, guys, if it's always been illegal, and some of the financial companies were brought to the brink of insolvency because shorting of shares set off solvency triggers, why the hell weren't you enforcing the damn law in the first place?"

If we were to ask how much of all of this is a result of deregulation and truly frighteningly lax administration of the rules that remained, we may have our answer as to why such a radical and potentially random jolt had to be administered here now.

Bizarre Quote Of The Day, courtesy of the Jacques Cousteau of the campaign, John McCain (and if anyone can find something stupid Obama or Biden says, please send it to me and I'll be happy to post--they're making this feature look really partisan by sounding intelligent):
And by the way, on that oil rig — and I’m sure you’ve probably heard this story — you look down, and there’s fish everywhere! There’s fish everywhere! Yeah, the fish love to be around those rigs. So not only can it be helpful for energy, it can be helpful for some pretty good meals as well.

Screen Crawl
On Bloomberg TV : "Fed Historian Meltzer Calls Paulson Action 'Social Democracy At Its Worst." OK, I have a couple bones to pick with that statement. First, "Social," yeah, OK, you're on the brink of a planned economy there. Next, I'm not sure I'd say "worst," because while there may be a fair bit of overreaction and politics in it, things were pretty dire and a shock to the system had to be administered. Finally, I'm damn sure it's not democracy.

As always, if you like this, tell your friends; if you don't, keep your big mouth shut.

Til next time,

John

Weekend web trawling recommendation: http://www.livingroomcandidate.org/commercials . Presidential campaign commercials going back to 1952. They wrote songs back then, though i think a more sophisticated consultant might have urged the Stevenson campaign not to push the absent-minded professor angle so hard in the jingles. The I Like Ike song, though, gets stuck in one's head.

Herbert Hoover Quote Of The Day:
Blessed are the young, for they shall inherit the national debt. (1936)

September 18, Daily Polls Remain Amorphous, Despite Slow Obamaward Shift

2008-09-27T21:15:00.001-07:00

More modest movement in the vaguest Obama direction, though the polls party ID weighting is beginning to become more apparent. As mused on yesterday, ex-economic spokesperson Carly Fiorina appears to have been disappeared. She should be getting used to that by now. The data consistently shows that the economy is rated the most important issue by roughly half the electorate, despite the fact that what may well be a majority of Americans do not feel the last few weeks' financial crises have affected them. That being said, Rasmussen reports in another poll that consumer confidence is falling off the proverbial table. I would think that whichever candidate is able to persuade the public that he is the one who can be trusted to lead the country through this time of uncertainty will win the election.

R2K Obama 49 McCain 43 (48-44)
Rasmussen McCain 48 Obama 48 (48-47)
Gallup Obama 48 McCain 44 (47-45)
Diageo/Hotline Obama 46 McCain 42 (45-42)

Gallup points out this is the first statistically significant lead for Obama in two weeks. 1) Just. 2) Seven weeks to go, MAYBE a 20 point lead would do it. Maybe. Not four. Diageo shows that in five days the percentage of people thinking the economy is the biggest concern has grown from 36% to 44%.

I'd note that R2K includes Bob Barr and Ralph Nader, who each poll about 2%. I don't know if that's more than they'll get in real life, but I think it's probably better statistics to have them in there. As they're good enough to publish their internals, let's tear them apart a bit. They have Obama polling 85% among Democrats, compared with McCain's 90% GOP vote, which is close to where he needs to be to win. They're in a dead heat among independents in this poll as well. By ethnicity, Obama leads among Latinos in this poll 67-26, which is also getting to what he needs to win. I think this poll may overrepresent Democrats, just as I believe Rasmussen's latest weighting may overweight identificaition as Republicans. McCain's net favorables in this one are flat, while Obama is +21, Biden +18 and Palin -4; despite an across the board shift downwards in favorables for the GOP ticket in the last week, either this disparity is markedly overstated or the race isn't even close. I don't buy it. Not yet, anyway.

Looking at a few other polls, there's a Quinnipiac poll out with Obama 49, McCain 45, with both candidates gaining, taking 5 points out of undecideds. It leaves Barr and Nader out, with a generic "someone else" option, which I think is unfair. It shows a nine point lead for McCain among white voters, compared with the R2K lead of 17. The favorables are a little odd as well, with everyone being markedly positive, Obama +23, McCain +20, Biden +17,and Palin +10. This poll seems strangely partisan in both directions, somehow. I also don't buy it.

A CBS-NY TImes poll shows Obama up 48-43. Obama leads among women, including a 2% lead with white women, up 21 points from their week-earlier poll. While I'm trying to look for trends rather than at the raw data so long before the election, intuitively one or both of those data points can't be right. I seem to be saying that an awful lot lately, which implies what we already knew: this election has more variables, more uncertainties in it than any that I can remember, and it's probably even less possible to poll accurately.

SUSA has Obama up 52-44 in New Mexico, driven by a 69-28 lead among Latino voters. If true--and their state polling was the most accurate in 2004--that's a data point worth hanging on to.

Well, he's backed away from his own positions so fast this week he looks like a junkie fleeing a burning meth lab, so we'll give John McCain his own Surrogate Bon Mot Du Jour.
"The chairman of the S.E.C. serves at the appointment of the president and in my view, has betrayed the public’s trust...If I were president today, I would fire him." He hasn't won yet, so they haven't given him the Presidential Owner's Manual, but the President can't actually fire the head of an independent regulatory commission. Checks. Balances. Balances. Checks. FDR tried it once and got slapped down by the Supreme Court.

Hey, if you like this, tell your friends. I'm actually adding a couple names a day here, while those of you who know me have been far too polite to ask me to remove you. If you don't like it, tell me. Just remember my fragile male ego.

Best,

John

Herbert Hoover Quote of the Day (TM):
Let me remind you that credit is the lifeblood of business, the lifeblood of prices and jobs.

September 17, Today's National Polls

2008-09-27T21:13:00.000-07:00

I know, I know, it's still too early to care, but let's keep an eye out for incipient trends, not the raw data. Stability seems to be the rule of the day, though any reaction to yesterday's curious comments from a couple highly placed McCain people (and not, to be sure, the candidate himself) regarding business acumen and Thomas Edison-like abilities would not yet be incorporated into the data. That being said, I think the last time anyone paid the slightest damn bit of attention to Carly Fiorina was when HPQ was my favorite short idea.

Today's data, with yesterday in parentheses:

Gallup Obama 47 McCain 45 (46-45)
Diageo/Hotline Obama 45 McCain 42 (46-42)
Rasmussen McCain 48 Obama 47 (48-47)
R2K Obama 48 McCain 44 (48-44)

McCain gained 3 points on "who handles the economy better" in Diageo/Hotline today, though still down 44-39--will be interesting to see how those numbers change over the next few days in light of both candidates' positioning vis-a-vis the continuing meltdown in the financial sector and the fact that with the AIG bailout, it's finally hit Main Street. Rasmussen also shows McCain ahead on the economy 47-45. I'm not quite sure how to interpret that at a time when the laws of the universe no longer apply in the economic arena and Rasmussen also reports that non-investors' confidence is actually climbing, implying that a substantial portion of the electorate isn't paying a lot of attention because it hasn't hurt their pocketbooks this week. They think.

Some bizarre socio-economic data from Rasmussen. McCain leads handily among Walmart shoppers, Obama even more handily among those who don't. (Disclaimer: I refuse to shop there, but that's because of Abu Ghraib-like conditions in their pet departments). That being said, Obama leads among voters with incomes lower than $40,000. This makes very little sense to me, as the two data points seem to be contradictory. Among white voters, he only leads among those making below $20,000 I would wonder if that last figure reflects a lot of young people not quite in the job market, as the lead is only four points. If it's much broader than that, and he's actually made a breakthrough among poor white people, his campaign has a lot to be optimistic about. That being said, it's too early and too small a sample to have genuine significance.

The AIG bailout is a little worrisome on several levels, but absolutely necessary, as all other options were exhausted first, including trying to get NY State to do it and cajoling, coercing, and downright begging a group of banks to toss the company $75 billion to tide them over til payday.

Stupid Future Ex-Surrogates Department
It's all McCain today, between the economic advisor giving him credit for inventing the (Canadian) Blackberry and the wife of Sir Evelyn de Rothschild calling Obama elitist. Oh yes, and so Carly Fiorina says neither John McCain nor Sarah Palin could run a large company. Then several hours later, with a gun to her head, she says Barack Obama couldn't either. Given her record of nearly scuttling one of the greatest business success stories in American history through her own appallingly poor strategic vision, one might well think few know more than she about being unable to run a large company (hey, whatever happened to Lucent? Oh yeah, it started to go south a few months after she left, didn't it...) . In March of this year, Warren Buffett, whose batting average is ohhh, just a shade higher, said of Obama and Hillary Clinton, "I'd put either of them in charge of a business." (CNBC, March 3).

OK, I'm going to follow my own advice and go get some sun now.

John

No one can rightly deny the fundamental correctness of our economic system. --- Herbert Hoover, 1928

September 16 Daily polling, crash du jour, and stuff

2008-09-27T21:06:00.000-07:00

Due to semi-popular demand, rather than repeat and contradict myself on a daily basis to a bunch of people who for some unknowable reason want my opinion on these things, I may make this a semi-regular note, so I might have to start writing in complete sentences. I'm combining some mailing lists I've talked to about this stuff here, so if any of you don't give a crap, let me know and I'll take you off the list and see if I can sign you up for an online gift subscription to Garfield Classics instead--I understand on the best of authority that that wacky kittycat STILL hates Mondays!

As usual, don't expect serious analysis; there are plenty of guys out there who do it better than I do, so I'll stick to raw data and marginal witticisms. Second day in a row of slight shift to Obama in all four polls, which may mean something because it's all of them, but It's still all well within the sampling error (which I believe is generally underestimated, making it even harder to decipher, but don't have my fourth semester stats text on Experiment Design with me at the Chateau to prove it!). Here they are, with yesterday's in parentheses:

Rasmussen McCain 48 Obama 47 (49-47)
R2K Obama 48 McCain 44 (47-44)
Diageo Hotline Obama 46 McCain 42 (44-43)
Gallup McCain 47 Obama 46 (47-45)

As always, forget the pinch and take with a whole damn shaker of salt. Palin's net favorables are fading fairly dramatically (though still well in positive territory, where I expect they'll stay), but all that means is that she'll probably become a non-issue and like every other presidential election ever, it will be a race between the two Actual Candidates. If Dan Quayle didn't hurt George HW Bush, Sarah Palin isn't likely much to hurt the old dude, though watch out for the nickname "Slick Sally" being bandied about corners of the press--if that turns into a meme, could be trouble.

Today's political hot potato will be the bailout or not of AIG; having picked up the tab for BSC and then refused to do the same for LEH, it's a sticky situation (if a potato can simultaneously be both hot and sticky--if you know, please keep it to yourself). AIG is much more of a Main Street issue, as opposed to the strictly Wall Street nature of the former two. If AIG shatters, everyone gets hit by flying glass. Paulson/Bernanke found out just how far their ability to persuade, cajole, and coerce goes when they asked the banks to pony up $75BB to tide AIG over for a bit and the banks told the administration and Fed to go piss up the proverbial rope. Fasten your seatbelts, it's gonna be a bumpy ride.

Now go out and get some sun; you spend too much time indoors.