Look at Sunday's Presidential Tracking poll by Scott Rasmussen (LINK: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll ].
Post bounce, according to Rasmussen, its an absolute tie; even with leaners included, the race is 48-48. More interesting still, Sarah Palin is - for the moment - more popular than either Obama or McCain.
JBG
Link to Print Version: http://jaygaskill.com/InsurgentRepublicansPostRacialDemocrats.htm
The insurgency is dead in Iraq but it is alive in the Republican Party. The name of the insurgent-in-chief is Sarah Palin.
Alaska governor Palin’s masterful speech was viewed by 40 million – that was more than Obama’s audience. She is (according to the Rasmussen poll) now viewed favorably by 58% of voters. [Dick Morris has reported a lower number, but I'm going with Rasmussen's one hour old report here.] We don’t yet have the television ratings for McCain’s more tepid speech last night, but --
“The Rasmussen Reports Daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows the beginning of John McCain’s convention bounce and the race is essentially back where it was before Barack Obama’s bounce. Obama now attracts 46% of the vote while McCain earns 45%. When "leaners" are included, it’s Obama 48%, McCain 46%”
In David Brooks’ latest column in the New York Times, “A Glimpse of the New”, Sarah Palin is identified as the leading edge of an insurgency within the Republican Party.
“There wasn’t even any tired, old Reagan nostalgia. Instead, her language resonated more of supermarket aisle than the megachurch pulpit. More than the men on the tickets, she embodies the spirit of the moment: impatient, fed up, tough-minded, but ironical. Even in attack, she projected the cheerfulness of someone confident about the future. In those 40 minutes, the forces of reform Republicanism took control, at least for a time. Republicans started talking about Palin, Bobby Jindal and a brighter future for their party.”
And McCain, the old rebel, is not far behind:
“He did note that he has fought to change the Republican Party during its period of decay. And he diagnosed that decay Thursday night (to the tepid applause of the faithful). And this passion for change, combined with his proven and evident integrity, led to the crescendo of raw energy that marked this convention’s conclusion. His policies are still not quite there yet, but McCain has the heart of an insurgent.”
Link to the Brooks’ piece: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/05/opinion/05brooks.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Just as Obama is the face and voice of post-racial politics, McCain-Palin are the vanguard of a post-country club GOP.
Stay tuned – this promises to be a very interesting ride…
JBG
Wednesday, September 3, 2008 For a good account of the affair, go to this CNN/Time account: http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1838553,00.html?cnn=yes
and watch this BBC video clip:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7597218.stm
I believe that anyone who watched this speech, as I just did - with an open mind, will come away with at least four impressions: (1) Sarah Palin articulately and authentically personifies a populist version of republicanism, the very antithesis of the “country club elitist” stereotype; (2) If her populist “values & common sense” conservatism ever takes root in the GOP, something like the Reagan revolution will surely follow; (3) Senator McCain has made an astute choice in a running mate; (4) Governor Palin will someday be a formidable candidate for POTUS. The polling industry is never quite spot on. Why is this? Part of the error factor is statistical. After all, no opinion sample is quite large enough, quite representative enough and no set of answers is quite honest enough. The industry standard fudge factor is a 3% margin of error – either way – which is why the presidential race has been in a statistical tie in recent weeks, even when Obama seemed slightly ahead for most of the period. This term refers to a phenomenon well known by both candidates’ internal pollsters. Tom Bradley was a democrat’s dream candidate for California governor: He had been an LADP police Lieutenant who became a lawyer and served five terms as the LA mayor. He was a moderate. He was a handsome guy, in a “good cop” central casting sense. And he was black. He was nominated and ran for the California governorship twice -- 1982 and 1986. He ahead in the polls in 1982 against republican George Deukmejian and expected to win. But Bradley lost, in spite of the polls. He ran and lost again to Governor Deukmejian in 1986. Pollsters are convinced that Bradley’s measured popularity was exaggerated because many of the white voters shaded their answers so as not to appear racist, hence the “Bradley Effect.” Will the Bradley Effect apply to Senator Obama, the “post racial” candidate? Frankly, no one knows. My own opinion is that the Bradley Effect is still real, but that it has been weakened by declining racism and Obama’s “Tiger Woods” persona -- after all, we’re no longer in the 80’s. But I still estimate the 2008 Bradley Effect about 2%, This is not because we are still a rabidly racist country, but because there is a second factor operating. Note that the country as a whole is considerably center/right of the post FDR leftists who now run the democratic party. Because the liberal-left dominates the culture, many voters feel that it is not “cool” to admit to “being uncomfortable” with Barack Obama’s left wing associations and positions, lest one be shunned as a racist. We Americans still don’t level with the pollsters. Even exit polls aren’t perfect. Those who talk to pollsters after just having voted are more likely to be partisans. The non partisans are less inclined to talk. Recall President Bush’s win against John Kerry where network pollsters were misled during the voting to expect a democratic win. The overriding problem is that a significant block of voters can and do make their final decision, especially in a close race, at the last possible minute. This is particularly true when a voter is leaning to a candidate nominated by his or her same party, but harbors misgivings. Polls show that roughly the same number of voters in each party are firmly behind their nominee. This means that a significant number of voters in each party are up for grabs. Right now it appears that about 40% of the voters are essentially committed to Obama and 40% to McCain, plus or minus 2%. Yes, this is a crude estimate, but it means that the election will be decided by about 20% of the voters, roughly half of whom will make up their minds in the last few days, many even on the last hours, and some only in the privacy of the polling booth at the last minute. Knowing that the Finish Line Effect is real, can we identify the factors that will tend to “turn” the undecided voters toward the end? The problem is captured in two questions: Put another way: Which candidate benefits (or loses) more by the drip, drip, drip of personal revelations about his or her character, biography, accomplishments and positions? This boils down to the impact of hidden negatives and hidden positives in which a pattern of revelation begins to favor one candidate over the other along a timeline leading to the pre-election weekend. The operatives of both campaigns tend to secretly agree that the “revelation” trend will favor McCain, whose dramatic personal history is a character parable and whose long tenure mitigates against last minute negative revelations. But Obama’s remarkably candid autobiography presents an interesting dilemma, because it was so well written, and because he is so well liked on a personal level. Will he benefit from a “likeability Teflon” factor that protected someone like Ronald Reagan from scandal? I think that the Illinois senator is probably insulated from traditional scandal, but not from the impact of those actions, positions and associations that position him well to the left of the mainstream. Ideologically, Obama’s history is a “target rich” environment. Stating this another way, how do a candidate’s capabilities and character match up with a perceived “crisis” trend? For example, the more voters know about McCain and Obama, the more the McCain is trusted in a major international crisis. Will we be trending into an international crisis in mid October? Does the sun rise? I suspect that the election may be decided on voters’ trust and confidence in the candidate’s competence. The question of perceived competence can be decisive, especially when a voter’s “things are bad” assessment mutates into “things are scary.” Depending on the level of voter anxiety, trust may trump hopeful idealism. Bill Clinton did his best work when he was forced to deal with a Republican Congress. Reagan was a more popular president when people knew that a Democratic Congress could hold him in check. In my opinion, Obama would run better if the Republicans controlled the congress and McCain will run stronger (especially at the finish line) because the Democratic Party controls both Senate and House.
OBAMA VS. MCCAIN – THE FINISH LINE FACTOR
(2) If the candidates are very close (within a couple of points of each other) in the last week of October, Obama will almost certainly lose.
(3) Even if Obama is ahead by only 4 points going into the last few days of the election, Obama will lose unless somehow he is gaining momentum at that point.
As Published On
→The Human Conspiracy Blog: http://www.jaygaskill.com/blog3
→The Policy Think Site: http://www.jaygaskill.com
All contents, unless otherwise indicated are
Copyright © 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 by Jay B. Gaskill
Permission to publish, distribute or print all or part of this article (except for personal use) is needed. [Permission for use in group discussions is almost always routinely given.]
Please contact Jay B. Gaskill, attorney at law, via e mail at law@jaygaskill.com
Print Version http://jaygaskill.com/FiveLessons.htm
THE FIVE IRAQ WAR LESSONS (SO FAR)
The Powell Doctrine Meets The Real world
Since I posted this piece in 2007, General David Petraeus (http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=23&Itemid=16 ) has essentially rescued the administration from failure in Iraq, a prospect that, in May of 2007, I described as a “jury is out” situation. Reasonable observers now find it difficult to deny that Iraq is a different country than the “thugocracy” ruled by Saddam Hussein of recent memory and that it is behaving very much like the sovereign, quasi-democratic country (with all the attendant warts) that was a signal motivating object of the whole exercise in the beginning. It is now crystal clear that this democratic experiment in the Middle East will probably survive unless we abandon it.
My assertion that “Saddam lied and his people died” has been amply corroborated by subsequent information, for example his own private statements to an interpreter during his trial.
Link: http://www.fbi.gov/page2/jan08/piro012808.html .
Think for a minute about the Powell Doctrine – Don’t get into a war unless you have overwhelming force – the resources needed to win decisively plus a margin for error – and always have a clear strategy to get out when the time comes.
This is a general officer’s utopian dream for all “wars of choice”. It is brilliant wisdom, but the kind that rarely applies in the real world. All too often, wars are thrust upon us.
Imagine coming to FDR after the destruction of the Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor, and discussing a strategy for getting out of Japan after an unconditional surrender. The atomic bomb was a science fiction fantasy; the US was in the grip of a deep economic depression; and the navy had to be rebuilt, virtually from scratch, while Hitler and Tojo moved decisively to conquer the world.
A Bush Bungle?
Was the Iraq effort bungled? That depends on the answer to three questions:
[You will need to read the entire piece for this part.]
And the Five Lessons?
1. When you fly something under the radar it always surfaces at an awkward time.
For More --- Go to this link: http://jaygaskill.com/FiveLessons.htm
JBG
TUESDAY
Rasmussen now shows a strong Obama gain, now leading McCain by 5%. Go to http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Sunday….
BAD NEWS FOR BARACK
1. Governor Sarah Palin has re-energized the GOP base like no other move McCain could have taken.
This is one of the Democrats’ worst fears because Obama is increasing looking like a more inspirational version of Dukakis, who looked good to them at convention time but hollow by Halloween.
2. The Obama Bounce is gone, according to Rasmussen.
Pull quote:
“Sunday, August 31, 2008
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday—the day before the Republican National Convention is scheduled to begin—shows Barack Obama ahead of John McCain by three percentage points both with and without leaners. That’s exactly the same edge Obama enjoyed a week ago on the eve of the Democratic National Convention.”
3. McCain, using the public spirited instincts one associates with a good president, has quickly moved to put Hurricane Gustav ahead of his other priorities.
With any other candidate, this would look like showboating, but with Governor Palin at his side and given McCain’s legacy of integrity, he looks (for now at least) more and more like a president in waiting and Senator Obama looks more and more like a rock star with an intense fan base, but lagging in “leader appeal”.
4. If McCain emerges from the nominating convention with a greater bounce than Obama did, the dynamics of the contest will be altered in his favor for several weeks.
Yes, anything can still happen, including a McCain slump. And at this point, McCain is still slightly behind. To recover momentum, Obama needs to engage and, if possible, preempt.
But what we are seeing here, ironically, is an energy gap. At 71, McCain outworked his republican opponents, carrying his own luggage and taking his message to hundreds of town meetings. At 72, McCain is very sharp and quick on his feet and seems to have inexhaustible energy. Obama needs to work much harder in order to overcome the growing impression that he isn’t quite up to the task of running the country in a time of crisis.
Is this more like “Truman vs. Dewey”, “JFK vs. Nixon” or “Reagan vs. Carter”? Or is it “none of the above”?
I suspect that we are witnessing an entirely new game.
Stay tuned.
JBG
Updated 8-30
OBAMA’S BOUNCE – ANEMIC or ROBUST? Updated
Senator Obama’s post convention bounce so far is only 3-4% according to Scott Rasmussen’s daily tracking poll released today (46/43) measured from an earlier tie, or a 4% bounce when the self-described “leaners” are included. [See the update above.]
Rasmussen: “Obama’s four-point lead reported on Friday morning is based on polling data collected Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday nights. Virtually all of the interviews were completed before Obama’s acceptance speech and it is impossible to tell what will happen next. Normally, the bounce would continue for a few days. But, this year, with McCain’s VP announcement and the Republican convention happening so quickly, we are in uncharted territory.”
Link to Rassmussen: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/ .
I prefer the Rasmussen numbers because they tend not to exaggerate swings in opinion and have, in recent history, been better at predicting actual electoral behavior. But I note that Gallop has Obama ahead 49/41, an 8 point bounce from the pre-convention 45/45 tie. Link to Gallup. http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx
Zogby is another excellent poll, but as of noon Pacific, had released no “bounce” numbers. Go to http://www.zogby.com/ .
Recall that John Kerry’s post convention bounce in 2002 was reportedly only 4% (50/44) from an earlier small lead. Senator Kerry’s bounce was described as “anemic” at the time.
The Obama’s acceptance speech was watched by 12-14 million more than the 26 million viewers who watched Hillary’s speech, which was several million more than those who watched Kerry’s speech in 2002. Note that the convention audience at its peak still represented a fraction of total viewership. Gone are the days when a single event can rivet the entire nation’s attention. On the other hand, televised events have a vital afterlife on YouTube which is a second and interesting battleground where both candidates are presently represented by clips, adds and hit pieces.
Enter The Sarah Palin Factor
It is too early to assess the impact of McCain’s Friday choice of Alaska Governor, Sarah Palin, a mother of five with strong anti-corruption credentials whose relevant experience level is at least comparable to Obama’s (because hers is executive), while her name recognition is low at the moment.
Will she attract the disgruntled women voters who intended to support Hillary? Though more conservative than Mrs. Clinton, Governor Palin is attractive, young (44) and an effective speaker. Governor Palin by all accounts is a tough competitor, not to be underestimated. As she becomes better known to the voters, I am certain that she will prove an asset to the McCain ticket, because her real role is not running against Senator Biden, just adding more luster to the McCain vs. Obama contest. More on Palin at these links:http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/sarah_palin_unknown_nationally_popular_in_alaska and http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/5974684.html and http://gov.state.ak.us/bio.php .
Key democrats were nervous and unsettled about Obama’s candidacy going into the convention. Coming out, they are still nervous and at least “concerned”. It may be dawning on the movers and shakers of the democratic party that their candidate is not running against George Bush. This is something that candidate McCain can be expected to make increasingly evident.
What to watch: If within two days following the end of the Republican Convention, Senator Obama’s bounce is gone, you can assume that key democrats will have gone from “unsettled” or “concerned” to actually worried.
The GOP convention is Monday through Thursday, September 1-4, unless the incoming, New Orleans aimed hurricane causes a delay….
The election is November 4.
