2008 General Election Discussion Thread

[lostfan]

There is always this too. Just because she gives a 101 answer, doesn't mean she doesn't know it on a 401 level. You risk alienating a lot more people the more detail you get into. Its the same reason Obama stayed vague for the first year of his campaign, and ran for President after two years in Congress instead of 6. The less that other party has to pick apart of your record, the better.

Yeah, I started to say something similar to this a few posts back. It sounds like she's being really careful and keeping everything as basic as possible. That works fine for the right-leaning types who like her and all, but eventually she's going to have to get into more detail, and people will start noticing. Obama at least would give little flashes of knowledge early in his campaign before he rolled himself out completely, I don't think I've ever heard Palin say anything substantive yet besides her very basic stump speeches.

[HuskyCaucasian]

North Carolina: Toss Up State? WOW!

 

The four latest polls out of North Carolina show McCain +1, a tie, a tie and Obama +2.

[longshot7]

Palin is a straight talker. (I know, that's a bad pun from the "Straight Talk Express"... but read me out).

 

What I mean by that is, and I think Rex said it best in another thread, she gives a POLI 101 answer to a POLI 401 question, she talks plainly and simple. She doesn't give the "political bulls*** answer" that you'd hear from any of the other three. What does that mean? Most Americans, it's nothing - as a matter of fact, might even be somewhat refreshing. Our darling media? It means they will lamblast every freaking answer she has on anything until the cows come home, because she's not "sophisticated". Is that good or bad? It's both, frankly.

 

I disagree as well. She gives the answers that people like my mother would give to the questions like "Explain the Russia/Georgia conflict." And while I love my mother, I certainly wouldn't vote for her for Vice-President. Unlike some people, I can see that Palin's probably a nice person - but I wouldn't want her a heartbeat away from the Presidency if she can't understand the nuances of the Russia/Georgia conflict.

 

[mr_genius]

Looks like it's tied again

 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/110668/Gallup-D...ie-46-Each.aspx

[lostfan]

Yeah I was about to post that. National polls are so damn finicky.

[Reddy]

Yeah I was about to post that. National polls are so damn finicky.

and technically, they really mean nothing.

[lostfan]

and technically, they really mean nothing.

Right. What DukeNukeEm posted in the Dem thread with all the state polls is a lot closer to what the election looks like.

[mr_genius]

Right. What DukeNukeEm posted in the Dem thread with all the state polls is a lot closer to what the election looks like.

 

I think the electoral college tally still favors Obama pretty strongly. I don't see McCain snagging Michigan or Penn.

 

But even the state by state polls seem to be fairly turbulent. I think there's still a lot of voters who could be convinced to vote either Obama or McCain.

[lostfan]

I think the electoral college tally still favors Obama pretty strongly. I don't see McCain snagging Michigan or Penn.

 

But even the state by state polls seem to be fairly turbulent. I think there's still a lot of voters who could be convinced to vote either Obama or McCain.

Yeah... what the national polls do tell us is that the election is still pretty volatile and unsettled. However, this makes me wonder though, it seems like there is about 15% of the population that changes their minds every 2 weeks just to f*** with the polls.

[Soxbadger]

Its just the sample size compared to the size of the national population.

 

Any day they can get a sampling that leans one way or the other.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Its just the sample size compared to the size of the national population.

 

Any day they can get a sampling that leans one way or the other.

Exactly. i think many of the polls are in the 2000-3000 range? 3000 people to represent 100+ million who could vote? Not good. Compare that to some polls that do 1000-1500 for a single state.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Right. What DukeNukeEm posted in the Dem thread with all the state polls is a lot closer to what the election looks like.

Correct. And if you look at the state polls, Obama is getting stronger. Many of the swing states (MI, WI, PA, OH, VA, CO) were very tight. Often within 1-3 points one way or the other. Now, he seems to be opening up a sligtly more solid lead in may of those.

 

Here's a RCP Recap of key swing states:

OH: McCain +1.2 (polls are all over the place in this states)

PA: Obama +3.7

MI: Obama +5.5 (A little bigger if you through out the ONLY poll that shows McCain with a lead there)

WI: Obama +3.8 (Obama did once hold a 10+ point lead here)

NH: Obama +1.6

VA: McCain +0.8 (polls my not reflect the HUGE surge Democratic voter registration in this state)

FL: McCain +2.1 (McCain has held a 2-4 point lead here most of the campaign)

CO: Obama +5.4

NM: Obama +6.0 (Obama has held a solid lead here)

NV: McCain +1.7 (This race has been close for a while)

MN: Obama +2.8

NC: McCain +3.2 (Once recent poll has McCain +17. If you throw that out, it's Obama +0.2)

 

 

 

This RCP state rundown doesn't include the variable of near ties of VA and NC.

 

So, my "slightly" biased opinion is that Obama is a better striking position to run away with the election in an electoral landslide than McCain is in to just simply win by one electoral vote.

Edited September 25, 2008 by Athomeboy_2000

[Balta1701]

Exactly. i think many of the polls are in the 2000-3000 range? 3000 people to represent 100+ million who could vote? Not good. Compare that to some polls that do 1000-1500 for a single state.

Statistically speaking...if you have an unbiased sample set...a poll of 1000 or so adults will vary by no more than 3% to either side by random chance. Adding an extra 1000 respondents only tends to cut that by a point.

 

The real issues wind up being getting a representative sample set and having the poll done right. An unbiased sample can be extremely hard to come by, given that simply using the phone introduces a bias (I, for example, can't be polled, because I'm never home until 9:30 at night).

 

The other fun thing with these tracking polls is that if you smooth them out over more than 3 days, say 5-10, then these ups and down, aside from the convention bumps, disappear. We go from talking about how the tracking poll went from showing a 4 point lead to saying it was tied 2 days later to back to saying it's a 4 point lead 3 days later because of wandering within the margin of error by random chance.

[BigSqwert]

For the undecideds: http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008.html

[Balta1701]

Yeah... what the national polls do tell us is that the election is still pretty volatile and unsettled. However, this makes me wonder though, it seems like there is about 15% of the population that changes their minds every 2 weeks just to f*** with the polls.

So, FWIW, all 4 tracking polls out there had good Obama samples yesterday. Which either says that a few people weren't thrilled with McCain's stunt or that you can't take anything from one day's polling so wait until after the debates.

[Rex Kickass]

Things that are not a good sign for McCain/Palin - losing the faith of National Review is kind of a big one.

 

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDZiM...WMyYTUxZDkwNTE=

 

If at one time women were considered heretical for swimming upstream against feminist orthodoxy, they now face condemnation for swimming downstream — away from Sarah Palin.

 

To express reservations about her qualifications to be vice president — and possibly president — is to risk being labeled anti-woman.

 

Or, as I am guilty of charging her early critics, supporting only a certain kind of woman.

 

Some of the passionately feminist critics of Palin who attacked her personally deserved some of the backlash they received. But circumstances have changed since Palin was introduced as just a hockey mom with lipstick — what a difference a financial crisis makes — and a more complicated picture has emerged.

 

As we’ve seen and heard more from John McCain’s running mate, it is increasingly clear that Palin is a problem. Quick study or not, she doesn’t know enough about economics and foreign policy to make Americans comfortable with a President Palin should conditions warrant her promotion.

 

Yes, she recently met and turned several heads of state as the United Nations General Assembly convened in New York. She was gracious, charming and disarming. Men swooned. Pakistan’s president wanted to hug her. (Perhaps Osama bin Laden is dying to meet her?)

 

And, yes, she has common sense, something we value. And she’s had executive experience as a mayor and a governor, though of relatively small constituencies (about 6,000 and 680,000, respectively).

 

Finally, Palin’s narrative is fun, inspiring and all-American in that frontier way we seem to admire. When Palin first emerged as John McCain’s running mate, I confess I was delighted. She was the antithesis and nemesis of the hirsute, Birkenstock-wearing sisterhood — a refreshing feminist of a different order who personified the modern successful working mother.

 

Palin didn’t make a mess cracking the glass ceiling. She simply glided through it.

 

It was fun while it lasted.

 

Palin’s recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League.

 

No one hates saying that more than I do. Like so many women, I’ve been pulling for Palin, wishing her the best, hoping she will perform brilliantly. I’ve also noticed that I watch her interviews with the held breath of an anxious parent, my finger poised over the mute button in case it gets too painful. Unfortunately, it often does. My cringe reflex is exhausted.

 

Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there’s not much content there. Here’s but one example of many from her interview with Hannity: “Well, there is a danger in allowing some obsessive partisanship to get into the issue that we’re talking about today. And that’s something that John McCain, too, his track record, proving that he can work both sides of the aisle, he can surpass the partisanship that must be surpassed to deal with an issue like this.”

 

When Couric pointed to polls showing that the financial crisis had boosted Obama’s numbers, Palin blustered wordily: “I’m not looking at poll numbers. What I think Americans at the end of the day are going to be able to go back and look at track records and see who’s more apt to be talking about solutions and wishing for and hoping for solutions for some opportunity to change, and who’s actually done it?”

 

If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself.

 

If Palin were a man, we’d all be guffawing, just as we do every time Joe Biden tickles the back of his throat with his toes. But because she’s a woman — and the first ever on a Republican presidential ticket — we are reluctant to say what is painfully true.

 

What to do?

 

McCain can’t repudiate his choice for running mate. He not only risks the wrath of the GOP’s unforgiving base, but he invites others to second-guess his executive decision-making ability. Barack Obama faces the same problem with Biden.

 

Only Palin can save McCain, her party, and the country she loves. She can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first.

 

Do it for your country.

[whitesoxfan101]

For the undecideds: http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008.html

 

I did that, and my result was 61 percent McCain and 61 percent Obama.

 

Figures.

[Steve9347]

For the undecideds: http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008.html

85% Obama

39% McCain

 

They couldn't be more different.

[Heads22]

I have 94% Obama, 89% Nader.

 

If only I could vote for Ideal Theoretical Candidate. I like him the most.

[BigSqwert]

I have 94% Obama, 89% Nader.

 

If only I could vote for Ideal Theoretical Candidate. I like him the most.

 

I'll be running in 2012. I'll need your support.

[Heads22]

I'll be running in 2012. I'll need your support.

 

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

 

 

[BigSqwert]

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

 

 

www.BigSqwert2012.com should be up and running soon. You'll have an option to become a "Super Sqwerter" if you sign up an additional 5 volunteers.

[bmags]

I'll be running in 2012. I'll need your support.

 

95% OBAMA, 23% MCCAIN. ONLY 2% STEPHEN COLBERT, WHICH IS ODD SINCE I'D VOTE FOR HIM. MORE OF A LEADERSHIP VOTE, HOWEVER.

[Reddy]

Anybody post this yet?

 

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/...mmentator-says/

 

GOP commentator calls for Palin to step down... hilarious.

 

Between this past week's events, McCain declaring debate victory, Palin's interviews, and now this - that campaigns having a great time of things.

[Steve9347]

www.BigSqwert2012.com should be up and running soon. You'll have an option to become a "Super Sqwerter" if you sign up an additional 5 volunteers.

I'm already a super squirter.