Analysis and discussion of elections and opinion polls in Australia
Presidential election minus 19 weeks
Introducing another round of comments action in the endless US presidential election campaign. Participants are encouraged to try their luck in the IRC room:
Author: William Bowe
William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.
View all posts by William Bowe
2,113 comments on “Presidential election minus 19 weeks”
Obama Leads McCain by 15 Points as Voters Reject Republicans.
June 25 (Bloomberg) — Democrat Barack Obama has opened a 15-point lead in the presidential race, and most of the political trends — voter enthusiasm, views of President George W. Bush, the Republicans, the economy and the direction of the country — point to even greater trouble for rival John McCain.
This bit is highly significant from the same article.
McCain is struggling with traditional Republican base voters. Fifty-one percent of those who identify themselves as members of the religious right say they aren’t enthusiastic about voting for McCain. That could hurt him in the South, the only region where McCain has a bare lead over Obama.
It will be interesting to see the colour change in the Votemasters map when he updates it tonight about 10.30pm. A lot more blue states I suspect. Looks like my enthusiasm has not been misplaced, although still away to go yet. http://www.electoral-vote.com
New Mexico senate Tom Udall Democrat 58% Steve Pearce Republican 30%
Blow out in a swing state. Colorado too. http://www.electoral-vote.com
I think Udall, Warner and Jeanne Sheanne(New Hampshire) are all specials to win extra senate seats for the Democrats this November.
I meant to say both Udalls LOL, the one in New Mexico, and the one in Colorado.
Why would a whole lot of states change colour on EV? The only poll that shows Obama winning where previously he wasn’t is the SUSA poll in Indiana. I’m not sold on EV anyways… all he’s doing really is collating state-wide polls. Any outlier poll just throws the model out. He doesn’t seem to be doing anything really innovative with the numbers.
That is a shockingly badly-conducted poll in Arizona. The headline figures are:
McCain 38
Obama 28
Undecided 34
Any poll that has an undecided figure of 34% is really REALLY poorly-done.
That said, it’s clear that Obama currently has a clear lead over McCain both nationally and in they key swing states (Arizona is not a key swing state). The fact that on RCP Averages, McCain is now behind Obama in Indiana and Virginia (2 states that haven’t voted Democrat since 1964), as well as being behind in every Kerry state, shows that he needs to start turning things around soon or he may be in for an extremely tough campaign this fall…
209 Swing Lowe He’s still not a certainty. Like Howard he’ll have to fight a reargard action.
Democrats have plenty of money, advertising is cheap in Arizona compared to other states and BINGO!
It’s not a good sign for McCain that he has to spend money in states that should be safe Republican territory!
Chris B @ 211,
If McCain is forced to fight a rearguard action in Arizona in October, this election will already be O-V-E-R by then, with Obama winning in a clear landslide.
At this stage, I am not convinced that things will get that bad for McCain – I expect him to get some bounce after he announces his VP choice and another bounce after the Convention in early September (which occurs after the Democrats’ Convention).
So, as long as he holds his own in the debates in October, I don’t see McCain losing to Obama in a landslide in November.
Of course, the issue of whether McCain can win in November is another question entirely…
Chris,
Check the methodology. The only reason his past performance is excellent is because the polls for that year accurately predicted the final result. For the 2004 presidential election, he used
* Just use the most recent poll (original algorithm)
* Average the past 3 days worth of nonpartisan polls
* A mathematical model of how undecided voters break
The most accurate (staggeringly enough) was the second one, and that’s the process he now uses (except elevated to a 7 day average).
Now subtract all the “safe” states, in which polls showed a candidate ahead by 5% or more in the leadup to the 2004 election, and that really leaves the states that he was “predicting” as Washington, Colorado, New Mexico, Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Virginia and Florida. Two of those states he called “too close to call” so only made predictions in 8 of those states, one of which he got wrong (Iowa). Of the other seven, Washington, Ohio, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire all showed fairly steady polling in favour of one candidate in the leadup to the election (which ended up being right). His method really only made predictions in 4 states, 3 of which were right.
As I said, he’s not doing anything innovative with the numbers, just collating the statewide polls.
The media in Arizona HATE McCain which doesn’t help him.
And I note that Billary is electoral poison according to that Arizona poll. She will cost Obi 5% of the vote. At least we don’t have to put up with all that silly “Make Billary VP coz it’ll help you win” guff anymore. 😉
In today’s Cronkite-Eight poll, the following results were found:
Putting Sen. Hillary Clinton on the ticket as his vice-presidential running mate could cost Sen. Barack Obama about 5 percentage points in Arizona, according to a new statewide Cronkite/Eight Poll conducted among registered voters June 20-21, 2008. When asked whether they would vote for Sen. John McCain or Obama, 38 percent said they would vote for McCain and 28 percent said they would vote for Obama 34 percent were undecided. When asked whether they would vote for McCain or an Obama/Clinton ticket, 47 percent said they would support McCain and 32 percent said they would choose the Obama/Clinton ticket 21 percent were undecided.
Swing Lowe
[So, as long as he holds his own in the debates in October, I don’t see McCain losing to Obama in a landslide in November.]
That’s an awfully big “If”. I don’t know how much the debates count, as Bush managed to lose all his without much downside, but I think McBush is going to be SLAUGHTERED in the debates. The cleaners will be in to mop up the blood. He speaks very poorly, can’t hold a train of thought, has a very poor grasp of issues and has flip-flopped on every issue so often he will have trouble remembering what his current position is.
Chris B @ 210,
Whilst Electoral Vote has a decent record in previous elections, it’s hard to go past Real Clear Politics – in 2004, they only got one state wrong – Wisconscin (projected to go to Bush, instead went to Kerry). In 2006, they projected every close race correctly (margins were slightly off, but the winners were correct).
So I have to say I prefer the RCP average as a more accurate estimate of electoral college votes – there seems to be more method in their madness than Electoral Vote (or Fivethirtyeight for that matter).
Sorry… right at the end there, where I said “Washington, Ohio, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire all showed fairly steady polling…”, I meant Virginia, not NH.
HarryH at 196, yes, Oliphant one of the best and he’s been at it for a long time. No Paddy come lately this man. He’s seen more bullshit in his day than a cattle yard auctioneer and you’ll notice in the link, he’s been awarded the National Sep Political Cartoonist’s award 7 times.
Heavy medalling for a cartoonist!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Oliphant
—————–
codger, rooly excellent clip at 189, commend it to all. Caught it in print at the time but the “son et lumiere” sure packs a wallop. Maybe it’s simply an oversight that this “footage” didn’t play on American MSM.
They must have all been out to lunch at the same time, I guess, and just missed it. Coulda happened to any broadcasting corporation.
215 Al Regardless it’s still not bad and not far out at the end, which is what we want.
Diogenes @ 217,
That very well may be the case – in which case there will be a landslide.
But your example of Bush is very pertinent. In 2000, Bush clearly lost the 3rd (I think) Town Hall-style debate on the issues. However, what most people took out from that debate was Al Gore’s constant sighing to Bush’s answers – it led to the impression not only that he considered himself intellectually superior to Bush (no dispute here 🙂 ) but more importantly, that he was arrogant and condescending.
This debate took place at a time when Gore had the momentum in the polls and a “win” in that particular debate was projected to give him an easy ride to the White House. Instead, he fell in the polls and was only able to catch up to Bush by election day due to revelations in the final week of the campaign that Bush had been caught drink-driving in his younger years.
What this episode shows is that whilst Gore was clearly the better debater compared to Bush, the way he handled his intellectual advantage came across as arrogant to middle America – which is a major risk for Obama in the October debates this year.
So – whilst we all expect Obama to easily win the debates this year – remember that not only will McCain prepare extensively for them, but that even if Obama is better on the issues on the day, he can still “lose” purely on tone…
SL,
Expect to win the debates? Given, Obama has reneged on his town meeting debate agreement with McCain, makes you wonder.
Obama seems strong in a controlled environment where he can use his undoubted oratory skills coupled with a teleprompter. However, he does not perform as well “on the fly”. It also explains his refusal to do one on on interviews with experienced journalists who will drive through he bunting of his rhetoric to seek answers to real questions about his policies.
I was unaware there was ever an agreement with McCain GG. Wasn’t McCain pushing for ten, and Obama said he would only do one? The whole idea always reminds me of Town Hall (the website that is).
Al,
It might have been a none core promise like the election funding one.
Personally I think Obama should do all ten.
He should fight for them to be scheduled as close together and late in the day as possible.
I think by about half way through a tired and grumpy McCain should self destruct nicely.
dogb – I disagree. Why give McCain the free publicity? He only wants these debates cos he can’t afford to campaign on his own and wants Obama’s platform. He’s been offered 5 debates, if he doesn’t want them, fine.
Pancho – Perhaps. I do think Obama should pressure the old man mercilessly (without appearing to do so).
I’m just thinking one debate per day for ten days plus travel time. Imagine doing that when you’re 72 years old – I think the poor old guy would just come unravelled – live, on national television.
Pancho,
McCain can legitimately run the “empty chair” trick for the “empty rhetoric” Obama if he tries that on. Obama says he wants to give politics back to the people. Yet, won’t meet them to explain how this is going to be done.
Why won’t Obama debate John McCain. What’s his hidden agenda? Glass jaw?
Perhaps he can use the internet to show how up close and personal a POTUS he would be.
222 Swing Lowe
I think that’s an excellent point. Obama will win the debates easily if you were voting on who was the best debater but perception is the key. I’ve read people say that Bush II actually won the debates in terms of getting peolpe to vote for him because no-one expected him to come across as well as he did. He was likeable, had a good turn of phrase, feisty and easy to relate to. He even made a few good points.
Obama will be expected to win the debates easily. So the only advantage he will get is if McCain self-destructs. Which I think is almost certain.
GG -I can’t really believe BHO’s afraid of McCain.
It’s debatable but IMO he held his own against Hillary and she’s an order of magnitude better than McCain.
GG
I agree. If Obama can survive 20 debates with Hillary, who is an excellent debater, he can easily clean up on McCain who is deplorable.
And remember, with Hill he didn’t have the advantage of the better message. They were essentially debating from the same side of the room.
Maybe Obama is just being kind- not wanting to utterly decimate and humiliate McCain in public, which is the guaranteed outcome.
You know, the new politics thing.
Jen,
That would be a very risky strategy indeed. The key to implementing this mythical ‘new politics’ would surely have to be actually winning the election.
There are two sides to debates/debate talk – the politics on the one hand, and the tactics on the other.
First, why would anyone need more than 5 to get a grasp of the policy and politics? This will be Obama’s response. He is also running an energetic 50 state campaign over several months. He’ll be face to face with a heap more people than gramps, so shirking/hiding won’t really cut it as an arguement.
This will lead people to look at the tactics. Why does McCain want 10 debates? Why not 5? Why not 20? Why should Obama acquiese to McCains preferred demand?
A couple of things could happen – McCain will harp and whinge, be called on it and seem old, or will realise how far behind he is and take whatever he can get. Beggars shouldn’t be choosers if they don’t want to get wiped out in a reverse Reagan election.
From the Obama campaign’s point of view, asides not wanting to cede their popularity and give the old boy free publicity on their stage, they would be know how much McCain wants and needs these debates. Hence, tactically, it’s a non-starter.
DG,
Jen would contend you have to do it nicely, or not at all.
I just think there is a lot of Obama wishful thinking going on around the debate . The reasons he won’t debate are all about not wanting to “scare the horses”.
Ronald Reagan reportedly slept for most of his term in office. Yet he is regarded very fondly within the USA as one of the better Presidents. So the ageist meme of the Obamaphiles does not hold up to scrutiny or is of little importance.
Perhaps Obama is concerned that he’ll be seen as being too twitchy to elect. I am not convinced that mainstream America wants to change too much of their lifestyle. Obama could appear as a bit scary seeing as ‘change” is a big part of his mantra.
I agree with Pancho on this … Obama is attracting thousands of people to his events in every state whilst McCain is battling to fill a room, why should Obama give him that exposure.
Yesterday PB’s were talking about the situation in Zimbabwe – so have look at
and sign the petition “calling for an emergency summit of Southern African countries to broker a legitimate government in Zimbabwe — and end the campaign of terror that Robert Mugabe has unleashed.”
Avaaz will place be placing ads with this message in South African newspapers this week.
I agree with Swing Lowe’s point.
Arrogance is Obama’s only enemy from here til November. I don’t mean arrogance of thought, against Republicans that is a good thing. Fight them hard on ideas. i mean arrogance in demeanour.
Be forceful Barack….but learn to lower your chin a bit in the debates…it’s not a good look.
EC 220
Thx for the reply. I’m not a devourer of political toons but do enjoy them mostly. I find that when i admire a toon i glance at the author. I seem to glance at the word Oliphant a lot.
cheers.
In respect to the debates, it is clearly a smart tactical move by the McCain camp – 10 debates means 10 nights of free national advertising for the McCain campaign (as well as the Obama campaign, but they could probably afford to pay for this anyway) during the most crucial part of the general election campaign.
However, IMHO, I think Obama should take McCain up on the offer. If Obama is as good a debater/public speaker as we all think he is, he should easily win the majority of these debates – and thus, guarantee a win in November. The fact of the matter is that if Obama can’t beat McCain on average over the 10 debates, he probably isn’t the most qualified person to be POTUS. After all, weren’t we all complaining last year that Howard should have engaged in more debates with Rudd???
On Zimbabwe, this piece argues that military force is the only option.
But they need a casus belli for that. Genocide perhaps.
While reading a few of the replies, i came across this:
“To go back to a speech in 2006 that got rave reviews btw and use it today tells me a couple of things it tells me that Obama is making inroads with the young evangelicals and that people like Dobson is losing their influence with this group. This is one of the reasons why Obama connects with the young. Be it liberals college students or evangelicals they are HUNGRY for something different. They want to be more active and Obama has effectively tapped into that so its a concern for people like Dobson. ”
As much as this election is about the issues, it is mostly about generational change. The young from all spectrums of thought seem to be saying that they are sick of the way things are done by the “Baby Boomer” generation.
Obama is the figurehead, and recipient, of this mood.
The Clintons suffered from it. The Republicans are suffering from it. Religious Leaders are suffering from it.
This is a changing of the guard. The ousting of the ideology and methods of “Baby Boomers” and the rising of “Generation X and Y”, for want of better terms.
Life is all about cycles…not least of all in politics.
237 GG
….So the ageist meme of the Obamaphiles does not hold up to scrutiny or is of little importance.
Really GG. His Grandfather died of a heart attack at 61. His Father died of an unspecified illness at 70. He has several well documented health issues.
Seriously, you could make the point he’s already living on borrowed time. He could keel over any time. If the US decides to elect him they better make damn sure he picks a good VP.
dogb
McCain’s resemblence to a cadaver is not coincidental. Mortality statistics based on his age, family and medical history indicate that he’d be an awfully good chance not to see out his term. One healthy mum at 94 doesn’t cut it. He is more likely to follow the male members of his family.
Diogenes.
I’d say the chances of him seeing out a full term would be considerably lower than the chance of him dying before November.
I’m not wishing it on the guy but you can’t ignore it.
Diogenes-
Re: Zimbabwe.
It’s time the UN stopped with the strong words and went in there to oust Mugabe.
Just for interest sake I went to one of those sites that predict your date of death and entered McCain’s info as accurately as I could.
It told me he’s been dead since 18th of March 1998.
(Of course it also told me my dad is dead and he still jogs every day.)
Jen
That would create a dangerous precedent. We only hear about Mugabe so much because of the British interests there. He’s hardly the only thuggish dictator in the world. If you argue that he should be ousted militarily, why doesn’t the same logic apply to all the other dictators?
You can’t selectively apply foreign policy like that, unless they’ve got large oil reserves when it obviously is the right thing to do. 😉
Thanks Grace.
Done, and passed on to others.
dogb
I worked out he has a 5% chance of dying before the election in November and about a 30% chance of dying in office. The numbers are rough but very significant.
Obama Leads McCain by 15 Points as Voters Reject Republicans.
June 25 (Bloomberg) — Democrat Barack Obama has opened a 15-point lead in the presidential race, and most of the political trends — voter enthusiasm, views of President George W. Bush, the Republicans, the economy and the direction of the country — point to even greater trouble for rival John McCain.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=agCTbSDJ83rc&refer=home
Obviously the seal issue hasn’t kicked in yet.
This bit is highly significant from the same article.
McCain is struggling with traditional Republican base voters. Fifty-one percent of those who identify themselves as members of the religious right say they aren’t enthusiastic about voting for McCain. That could hurt him in the South, the only region where McCain has a bare lead over Obama.
lots more..
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=agCTbSDJ83rc&refer=home
It will be interesting to see the colour change in the Votemasters map when he updates it tonight about 10.30pm. A lot more blue states I suspect. Looks like my enthusiasm has not been misplaced, although still away to go yet. http://www.electoral-vote.com
New Mexico senate Tom Udall Democrat 58% Steve Pearce Republican 30%
Blow out in a swing state. Colorado too.
http://www.electoral-vote.com
I think Udall, Warner and Jeanne Sheanne(New Hampshire) are all specials to win extra senate seats for the Democrats this November.
I meant to say both Udalls LOL, the one in New Mexico, and the one in Colorado.
Why would a whole lot of states change colour on EV? The only poll that shows Obama winning where previously he wasn’t is the SUSA poll in Indiana. I’m not sold on EV anyways… all he’s doing really is collating state-wide polls. Any outlier poll just throws the model out. He doesn’t seem to be doing anything really innovative with the numbers.
WOW!
John McCain isn’t certain to win his home state of Arizona?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/24/20353/3917/612/541451
Progressive @ 208,
That is a shockingly badly-conducted poll in Arizona. The headline figures are:
McCain 38
Obama 28
Undecided 34
Any poll that has an undecided figure of 34% is really REALLY poorly-done.
That said, it’s clear that Obama currently has a clear lead over McCain both nationally and in they key swing states (Arizona is not a key swing state). The fact that on RCP Averages, McCain is now behind Obama in Indiana and Virginia (2 states that haven’t voted Democrat since 1964), as well as being behind in every Kerry state, shows that he needs to start turning things around soon or he may be in for an extremely tough campaign this fall…
Btw, the link for the Arizona poll is:
http://www.azpbs.org/horizon/poll/2008/6-24-08.htm
207 Al Check his past performance, its excellent.
209 Swing Lowe He’s still not a certainty. Like Howard he’ll have to fight a reargard action.
Democrats have plenty of money, advertising is cheap in Arizona compared to other states and BINGO!
It’s not a good sign for McCain that he has to spend money in states that should be safe Republican territory!
Chris B @ 211,
If McCain is forced to fight a rearguard action in Arizona in October, this election will already be O-V-E-R by then, with Obama winning in a clear landslide.
At this stage, I am not convinced that things will get that bad for McCain – I expect him to get some bounce after he announces his VP choice and another bounce after the Convention in early September (which occurs after the Democrats’ Convention).
So, as long as he holds his own in the debates in October, I don’t see McCain losing to Obama in a landslide in November.
Of course, the issue of whether McCain can win in November is another question entirely…
Chris,
Check the methodology. The only reason his past performance is excellent is because the polls for that year accurately predicted the final result. For the 2004 presidential election, he used
The most accurate (staggeringly enough) was the second one, and that’s the process he now uses (except elevated to a 7 day average).
Now subtract all the “safe” states, in which polls showed a candidate ahead by 5% or more in the leadup to the 2004 election, and that really leaves the states that he was “predicting” as Washington, Colorado, New Mexico, Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Virginia and Florida. Two of those states he called “too close to call” so only made predictions in 8 of those states, one of which he got wrong (Iowa). Of the other seven, Washington, Ohio, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire all showed fairly steady polling in favour of one candidate in the leadup to the election (which ended up being right). His method really only made predictions in 4 states, 3 of which were right.
As I said, he’s not doing anything innovative with the numbers, just collating the statewide polls.
The media in Arizona HATE McCain which doesn’t help him.
And I note that Billary is electoral poison according to that Arizona poll. She will cost Obi 5% of the vote. At least we don’t have to put up with all that silly “Make Billary VP coz it’ll help you win” guff anymore. 😉
In today’s Cronkite-Eight poll, the following results were found:
Putting Sen. Hillary Clinton on the ticket as his vice-presidential running mate could cost Sen. Barack Obama about 5 percentage points in Arizona, according to a new statewide Cronkite/Eight Poll conducted among registered voters June 20-21, 2008. When asked whether they would vote for Sen. John McCain or Obama, 38 percent said they would vote for McCain and 28 percent said they would vote for Obama 34 percent were undecided. When asked whether they would vote for McCain or an Obama/Clinton ticket, 47 percent said they would support McCain and 32 percent said they would choose the Obama/Clinton ticket 21 percent were undecided.
Swing Lowe
[So, as long as he holds his own in the debates in October, I don’t see McCain losing to Obama in a landslide in November.]
That’s an awfully big “If”. I don’t know how much the debates count, as Bush managed to lose all his without much downside, but I think McBush is going to be SLAUGHTERED in the debates. The cleaners will be in to mop up the blood. He speaks very poorly, can’t hold a train of thought, has a very poor grasp of issues and has flip-flopped on every issue so often he will have trouble remembering what his current position is.
Chris B @ 210,
Whilst Electoral Vote has a decent record in previous elections, it’s hard to go past Real Clear Politics – in 2004, they only got one state wrong – Wisconscin (projected to go to Bush, instead went to Kerry). In 2006, they projected every close race correctly (margins were slightly off, but the winners were correct).
So I have to say I prefer the RCP average as a more accurate estimate of electoral college votes – there seems to be more method in their madness than Electoral Vote (or Fivethirtyeight for that matter).
Sorry… right at the end there, where I said “Washington, Ohio, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire all showed fairly steady polling…”, I meant Virginia, not NH.
HarryH at 196, yes, Oliphant one of the best and he’s been at it for a long time. No Paddy come lately this man. He’s seen more bullshit in his day than a cattle yard auctioneer and you’ll notice in the link, he’s been awarded the National Sep Political Cartoonist’s award 7 times.
Heavy medalling for a cartoonist!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Oliphant
—————–
codger, rooly excellent clip at 189, commend it to all. Caught it in print at the time but the “son et lumiere” sure packs a wallop. Maybe it’s simply an oversight that this “footage” didn’t play on American MSM.
They must have all been out to lunch at the same time, I guess, and just missed it. Coulda happened to any broadcasting corporation.
215 Al Regardless it’s still not bad and not far out at the end, which is what we want.
Diogenes @ 217,
That very well may be the case – in which case there will be a landslide.
But your example of Bush is very pertinent. In 2000, Bush clearly lost the 3rd (I think) Town Hall-style debate on the issues. However, what most people took out from that debate was Al Gore’s constant sighing to Bush’s answers – it led to the impression not only that he considered himself intellectually superior to Bush (no dispute here 🙂 ) but more importantly, that he was arrogant and condescending.
This debate took place at a time when Gore had the momentum in the polls and a “win” in that particular debate was projected to give him an easy ride to the White House. Instead, he fell in the polls and was only able to catch up to Bush by election day due to revelations in the final week of the campaign that Bush had been caught drink-driving in his younger years.
What this episode shows is that whilst Gore was clearly the better debater compared to Bush, the way he handled his intellectual advantage came across as arrogant to middle America – which is a major risk for Obama in the October debates this year.
So – whilst we all expect Obama to easily win the debates this year – remember that not only will McCain prepare extensively for them, but that even if Obama is better on the issues on the day, he can still “lose” purely on tone…
SL,
Expect to win the debates? Given, Obama has reneged on his town meeting debate agreement with McCain, makes you wonder.
Obama seems strong in a controlled environment where he can use his undoubted oratory skills coupled with a teleprompter. However, he does not perform as well “on the fly”. It also explains his refusal to do one on on interviews with experienced journalists who will drive through he bunting of his rhetoric to seek answers to real questions about his policies.
I was unaware there was ever an agreement with McCain GG. Wasn’t McCain pushing for ten, and Obama said he would only do one? The whole idea always reminds me of Town Hall (the website that is).
Al,
It might have been a none core promise like the election funding one.
Personally I think Obama should do all ten.
He should fight for them to be scheduled as close together and late in the day as possible.
I think by about half way through a tired and grumpy McCain should self destruct nicely.
dogb – I disagree. Why give McCain the free publicity? He only wants these debates cos he can’t afford to campaign on his own and wants Obama’s platform. He’s been offered 5 debates, if he doesn’t want them, fine.
Pancho – Perhaps. I do think Obama should pressure the old man mercilessly (without appearing to do so).
I’m just thinking one debate per day for ten days plus travel time. Imagine doing that when you’re 72 years old – I think the poor old guy would just come unravelled – live, on national television.
Pancho,
McCain can legitimately run the “empty chair” trick for the “empty rhetoric” Obama if he tries that on. Obama says he wants to give politics back to the people. Yet, won’t meet them to explain how this is going to be done.
Why won’t Obama debate John McCain. What’s his hidden agenda? Glass jaw?
Perhaps he can use the internet to show how up close and personal a POTUS he would be.
222 Swing Lowe
I think that’s an excellent point. Obama will win the debates easily if you were voting on who was the best debater but perception is the key. I’ve read people say that Bush II actually won the debates in terms of getting peolpe to vote for him because no-one expected him to come across as well as he did. He was likeable, had a good turn of phrase, feisty and easy to relate to. He even made a few good points.
Obama will be expected to win the debates easily. So the only advantage he will get is if McCain self-destructs. Which I think is almost certain.
GG -I can’t really believe BHO’s afraid of McCain.
It’s debatable but IMO he held his own against Hillary and she’s an order of magnitude better than McCain.
GG
I agree. If Obama can survive 20 debates with Hillary, who is an excellent debater, he can easily clean up on McCain who is deplorable.
And remember, with Hill he didn’t have the advantage of the better message. They were essentially debating from the same side of the room.
Maybe Obama is just being kind- not wanting to utterly decimate and humiliate McCain in public, which is the guaranteed outcome.
You know, the new politics thing.
Jen,
That would be a very risky strategy indeed. The key to implementing this mythical ‘new politics’ would surely have to be actually winning the election.
There are two sides to debates/debate talk – the politics on the one hand, and the tactics on the other.
First, why would anyone need more than 5 to get a grasp of the policy and politics? This will be Obama’s response. He is also running an energetic 50 state campaign over several months. He’ll be face to face with a heap more people than gramps, so shirking/hiding won’t really cut it as an arguement.
This will lead people to look at the tactics. Why does McCain want 10 debates? Why not 5? Why not 20? Why should Obama acquiese to McCains preferred demand?
A couple of things could happen – McCain will harp and whinge, be called on it and seem old, or will realise how far behind he is and take whatever he can get. Beggars shouldn’t be choosers if they don’t want to get wiped out in a reverse Reagan election.
From the Obama campaign’s point of view, asides not wanting to cede their popularity and give the old boy free publicity on their stage, they would be know how much McCain wants and needs these debates. Hence, tactically, it’s a non-starter.
DG,
Jen would contend you have to do it nicely, or not at all.
I just think there is a lot of Obama wishful thinking going on around the debate . The reasons he won’t debate are all about not wanting to “scare the horses”.
Ronald Reagan reportedly slept for most of his term in office. Yet he is regarded very fondly within the USA as one of the better Presidents. So the ageist meme of the Obamaphiles does not hold up to scrutiny or is of little importance.
Perhaps Obama is concerned that he’ll be seen as being too twitchy to elect. I am not convinced that mainstream America wants to change too much of their lifestyle. Obama could appear as a bit scary seeing as ‘change” is a big part of his mantra.
I agree with Pancho on this … Obama is attracting thousands of people to his events in every state whilst McCain is battling to fill a room, why should Obama give him that exposure.
Yesterday PB’s were talking about the situation in Zimbabwe – so have look at
http://www.avaaz.org/en/save_zimbabwe/98.php?cl_tf_sign=1
and sign the petition “calling for an emergency summit of Southern African countries to broker a legitimate government in Zimbabwe — and end the campaign of terror that Robert Mugabe has unleashed.”
Avaaz will place be placing ads with this message in South African newspapers this week.
I agree with Swing Lowe’s point.
Arrogance is Obama’s only enemy from here til November. I don’t mean arrogance of thought, against Republicans that is a good thing. Fight them hard on ideas. i mean arrogance in demeanour.
Be forceful Barack….but learn to lower your chin a bit in the debates…it’s not a good look.
EC 220
Thx for the reply. I’m not a devourer of political toons but do enjoy them mostly. I find that when i admire a toon i glance at the author. I seem to glance at the word Oliphant a lot.
cheers.
In respect to the debates, it is clearly a smart tactical move by the McCain camp – 10 debates means 10 nights of free national advertising for the McCain campaign (as well as the Obama campaign, but they could probably afford to pay for this anyway) during the most crucial part of the general election campaign.
However, IMHO, I think Obama should take McCain up on the offer. If Obama is as good a debater/public speaker as we all think he is, he should easily win the majority of these debates – and thus, guarantee a win in November. The fact of the matter is that if Obama can’t beat McCain on average over the 10 debates, he probably isn’t the most qualified person to be POTUS. After all, weren’t we all complaining last year that Howard should have engaged in more debates with Rudd???
On Zimbabwe, this piece argues that military force is the only option.
But they need a casus belli for that. Genocide perhaps.
Military force might be the only option left for Zimbabwe
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23916754-32682,00.html
237 GG
I was reading this article about evangelicals:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-schaeffer/dr-dobson-has-just-handed_b_108989.html
While reading a few of the replies, i came across this:
“To go back to a speech in 2006 that got rave reviews btw and use it today tells me a couple of things it tells me that Obama is making inroads with the young evangelicals and that people like Dobson is losing their influence with this group. This is one of the reasons why Obama connects with the young. Be it liberals college students or evangelicals they are HUNGRY for something different. They want to be more active and Obama has effectively tapped into that so its a concern for people like Dobson. ”
As much as this election is about the issues, it is mostly about generational change. The young from all spectrums of thought seem to be saying that they are sick of the way things are done by the “Baby Boomer” generation.
Obama is the figurehead, and recipient, of this mood.
The Clintons suffered from it. The Republicans are suffering from it. Religious Leaders are suffering from it.
This is a changing of the guard. The ousting of the ideology and methods of “Baby Boomers” and the rising of “Generation X and Y”, for want of better terms.
Life is all about cycles…not least of all in politics.
237 GG
….So the ageist meme of the Obamaphiles does not hold up to scrutiny or is of little importance.
Really GG. His Grandfather died of a heart attack at 61. His Father died of an unspecified illness at 70. He has several well documented health issues.
Seriously, you could make the point he’s already living on borrowed time. He could keel over any time. If the US decides to elect him they better make damn sure he picks a good VP.
dogb
McCain’s resemblence to a cadaver is not coincidental. Mortality statistics based on his age, family and medical history indicate that he’d be an awfully good chance not to see out his term. One healthy mum at 94 doesn’t cut it. He is more likely to follow the male members of his family.
Diogenes.
I’d say the chances of him seeing out a full term would be considerably lower than the chance of him dying before November.
I’m not wishing it on the guy but you can’t ignore it.
Diogenes-
Re: Zimbabwe.
It’s time the UN stopped with the strong words and went in there to oust Mugabe.
Just for interest sake I went to one of those sites that predict your date of death and entered McCain’s info as accurately as I could.
It told me he’s been dead since 18th of March 1998.
(Of course it also told me my dad is dead and he still jogs every day.)
Jen
That would create a dangerous precedent. We only hear about Mugabe so much because of the British interests there. He’s hardly the only thuggish dictator in the world. If you argue that he should be ousted militarily, why doesn’t the same logic apply to all the other dictators?
You can’t selectively apply foreign policy like that, unless they’ve got large oil reserves when it obviously is the right thing to do. 😉
Thanks Grace.
Done, and passed on to others.
dogb
I worked out he has a 5% chance of dying before the election in November and about a 30% chance of dying in office. The numbers are rough but very significant.