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...
No comments:
Post a Comment