Presidential election minus 17 weeks

A new home for another fortnight or so’s worth of top quality US election repartee. I’m only one minor irritation away from pulling the plug on these threads, so please try not to annoy me (annoy each other by all means, but not me).

UPDATE (9/7/2008): After careful reflection, I have decided this will be the final US election thread. It will close for business in a week’s time, at which point American politics will be declared off-topic across the site. Many thanks for your co-operation.

UPDATE: (10/7/2008): New US site open for business. Thanks to Catrina for getting this off the ground.

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.

304 comments on “Presidential election minus 17 weeks”

Comments Page 1 of 7
1 2 … 7

  1. Early post as no one said when kids are born that you sign up for an all nite taxi service as well A Supreme court question for Obama supporters re Obama’s attitude to consevative Judges appointment Three weeks ago in the Exxon Valdez case the ‘right’ judges plus 1 voted against environment & four Exxon and reduced Exxons damages cost (originally 5 billion awarded in 1996 , then on Exxons appeal was reduced to 2.5 billion in 2006 ) now on Exxons further apeal to 500 million And Obama did not even critisise the ‘right’ judges decision wrongly favouring Exxon in this Supreme court case In the last week the ‘right’ judges voted 5 to 4 opposing a gun ban , and Obama agreed publicly with the ‘right’ judges position A day later , the ‘right’ judges voted 4 to 5 (lost) , the ‘right’ judges wantng to execute a rape offender in a non murder case , and again Obama agreed publicly with those ‘right’ judges position So in all 3 cases Obama has gone with the ‘right’ judges , and against the ‘left’ judges , and against ‘left’ politcal stances After the ilegal wiretapping imunity given to Telcos ‘supported’ in the last 2 weeks , and now these 3 Supreme Court decisions with Obama supporting the ‘right’ judges stance in all 3 as well , I do not see these policy stanses as pre election pragmetism by Obama at all , and I do not see these ‘right’ stances as meaning ‘left’ judges will be necessarily apointed by him either Now its one thing to jest about guillotining Jen or indeed suggest guillotining Catrina over mocking the Amigos over the plane wrong airport fiasco , but surely serious guillotining of Obama by some of his supporters here should occur over th above 4 issues , and instead consider moving to an ambivalent position regarding the election result

  3. According to recent polls Obama has made huge inroads in red states. The articles I read in 10 red states he is ahead in half and very close in the rest.

  5. Obama has set a new fundraising record of 55 million dollars. At the same time the 3 levels of the Democratic team according to what I have just read, raked in almost 200 million in 1 month.

  6. Correction in 13 months. An increase of 26% whereas the Repugs dropped 16%. The previous record for a single month was 43 million by John Kerry. With 4 months to go this should be easily smashed again.

  7. Obama puts paid staff into South Carolina. This is the first time the Democrats have put paid staff in this strong red state. This is a brilliant tactical move as far as I am concerned. It will put the fear of god into the Repugs and divert hard earned rescources from other areas.

  9. Ronnie, [guillotining of Obama by some of his supporters here] – yes, it will be the fourth great contribution by the French to the American revolution.

    1. during the revolutionary against the Poms
    2. The statue of liberty
    3. The French Fries
    4. Now, the guillotining of Obama

    btw; you are a good person, keeping Sweetie Catrina company during her 4am one woman yapping.

  10. The youth vote is up about 500% in three counties according to Michael Moores site. Up from around 6.6 thousand to over 40 thousand. I wonder, says he out loud if the black registration is up as well. Could only spell doom for the Repugs.

  12. He actually quotes his scources on his site. So it should not be taken witha grain of salt. Here it is: Martin, Indian River, St. Lucie counties elections offices.

  14. Another wild ride on Wall Street last night, with the two biggest mortgage holders, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, getting walloped, as it’s revealed just how much capital they need to raise to stay liquid. Ugly, basically.

    Just remember, as the US markets retreat into bear territory and the wider economy limps into recession, that Ben Bernanke assured them that, only last August, that the sub-prime kerfuffle, was contained, and not likely to cause any serious problems or bleed into the real economy.

    If you’d ever made a public professional statement so wrong, how would you cope with it?

  15. G’day all!
    I’ve taken a break lately from the U.S Political debate, I see it’s as crazy as ever in here LOL
    Kirribilli: mate, how are you?
    As to the serious stuff: I suspect the only Republican Southern state Obama has a chance of winning is Virginia, due to demographic/population changes in the North of the state, which advantage the Democrats.

  19. If Obama is putting paid staff into South Carolina, it’s a complete waste of money. There’s no way Obama is going to win in South Carolina – it’s still far too conservative. Obama has a shot in NC, but that’s got a far higher “ex-Northern” population and has 3 huge college towns.

    What’s more is that there are no interesting Senate/Congressional races in SC – meaning that there are going to be limited opportunities for Obama coattaills in SC.

    As for Obama needing to win one of Colorado, Ohio or Virginia – I suspect that’s right. I also suspect that one of these states will fall to Obama in November, given his current leads in all of those states (particularly in Ohio and Colorado). This links in with the first point – Obama should be spending money on consolidating his current leads in these 3 states instead of deadset Red states like South Carolina. After all, it doesn’t make a difference in the electoral college if you lose South Carolina by 2 points or 20 points in November…

  21. 14
    Kirribilli Removals Says:
    July 8th, 2008 at 8:56 am
    Another wild ride on Wall Street….

    …
    Yes, KR. There seems to be no doubt now that real domestic demand in the US has been slowing dramatically, and having maintained a statistical flatline for a few months, will continue to decelerate. As external demand also continues to abate, the US economy as a whole will almost certainly stay on a contractionary path through the rest of this year and into 2009.

    The conjunction of cyclical factors – falling employment, real incomes, asset prices, real final demand – with systemic ones – fractured capital markets, a huge external deficit and a fiscally-crippled federal government, a commitment to unaffordable wars – has launched the US economy into a prolonged and probably very severe contraction.

    The thing that is most striking is that it was all completely avoidable. This is the outcome of institutional failure, pure and simple.

  22. Swing Lowe,

    While I agree that Obama is very very unlikely to win in Southe Carolina, putting money into that state is not just a zero sume equation – it could be useful for many reasons.

    First, Obama running throughout the South confuses Republican strategy while not necessarily detracting from his central midwestern strategy. If we are working on the assumption that the Obama campaign alone (not counting union or interest money) will have between 300 and 400 million to spend in 4 months, spending some of this in Southern states will not harm his ability to spend like a drunken sailor in others. Time and money in SC does not mean no time and money in Ohio or Virginia. Further, it diverts Republican focus – they are operating with far less resources – reinforces the 50 state democratic theme, and builds organisations possibly useful in future elections.

    Second, the Childers win in the recent special election came out of the blue to an extent, and indicates that the Dems can win in the South. While no SC seats are on their 38 top hit list, there is no reason to abandon the state at this stage. Down ticket morale and having some support for prospective Congressional staff, who organise independently of the Presidential campaign while reinforcing it, are useful in themselves. In the same way that Virginia has slowly become a place that is now competitative for the Dems, other Southern states might be in the future with a longer term view. And again, Obama’s resource advantage does not mean that other states miss out by playing a little in SC.

  23. Looks like the reall issue of the election (The economy) is about to become centre stage for both candidates. I suspect that who provides the most convincing case on this issue will go on to victory is November.

    As this quote from NYT says,” Both candidates plan to spend this week focusing almost entirely on the economy. But both face political problems with the issue.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/07/us/politics/07memo.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin

  24. Pancho,

    A couple of points. First, I never said spending money on SC means no spending in CO or VA. I said (and I’ll say again) spending money on SC means LESS spending in CO or VA (and other more winnable states such as NC). Obama should be focusing on states that he actually has a chance of winning in November – at the moment, Intrade is saying that Obama has as much chance of winning SC as he does of winning Kansas – a state that almost everyone agrees will go to McCain this November (unless Obama picks Sebelius).

    Second, I don’t agree with “if Obama spends money somewhere, so does McCain”. If I was the McCain camp, I wouldn’t spend a dime in SC – I’d let Obama spend his money and I’d concentrate on playing defence in states like VA and CO (as well as perhaps going on offense in MI and NH). McCain (and presumably Obama) knows that Obama could outspend McCain 20-1 in SC and still lose – it’s too conservative and too red to vote for a Chicago-based liberal in a presidential election.

    In regards to SC congressional races – there are 4 Republican house seats (and 2 Dems) and 1 Republican senator up for election this year. In all the GOP house seats, there are incumbents running, meaning the potential for MS-01 upset occurring is low. Sen. Graham is also unlikely to face much of a threat in the Senate either. As such, I don’t believe that Obama spending money in SC is going to have any significant (as in, forcing a seat to switch hands) impact in the congressional races either….

  25. GG

    I think most voters know the POTUS can’t change an economic tsunami. The voters will probably settle for believing that the candidate cares about the pain they’re going through. McCain has a tough sell on that with a multimillionaire inheritance wife and policies the same as Bush II who got them there. Obama clearly doesn’t connect with the small town voters who think he’s an elitist who looks down on them.

  26. SL – that’s all fair, but I don’t accept that ‘spending money on SC means LESS spending in CO or VA’.

    3-400 million to spend gives Obama an amount which historically dwarfs anything any candidate has had in previous elections. The GOP is claiming that “For Obama to set up a $2 million operation in S.C. would be a bad business decision,” not a bad tactical decision. 2 out of 400 is nothing – it is accepted that Obama has an almost bottomless barrel, and this still leaves him with three times the amount of cash McCain will have. There is no way that the likes of Plouffe would allow spending in SC which would compromise spending in VA.

  27. When you think about it, Hillary must be so pi$$ed off at the moment.

    If there was one thing Bill could point to as POTUS, it was turning around a huge deficit and getting the country up and running after Reagan/Bush I. She would have the perfect speech for the economy; Bill and I have rescued America before from disastrous Repug economic management and we’ll do it again.

    And the little guys actually believe she cares about them.

  29. Pancho

    I read that Kerry still had $15M unspent in the bank at the end of his campaign. But he was trying to lose.

  30. I would say a lot of the planning going into the Dems 50 state strategy with all this Obama money isn’t just about this election.

    As others have said, all he really needs is to win Ohio,Colorado or Virginia and the other states he almost def will win.

    But by organizing operations in all states they also have their eye on all important elections in 2010 . Re-districting occurs in 2010 after the 2010 census. Gubernatorial elections in 2010 will have a big say on how this re-districting occurs.

    If the Dems have good organization and run the right candidates they can compete. The groundwork is being done now with the massive amounts of money Obama’s candidacy has raised.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/07/gop-looks-to-redistrict-i_n_110632.html

  32. Ok. That’s enough visitors. I’ll come back a fraction earlier than I said. But only put a bit on at a time. I have been working feverishly 🙂

    19 Swing Lowe says .” If Obama is putting paid staff into South Carolina, it’s a complete waste of money. There’s no way Obama is going to win in South Carolina – it’s still far too conservative”.

    Chris suggests: to show you that South Carolina is well within striking distance, here is a link to the Votemaster http://www.electoral-vote.com it has turned from bright red to pink which is only 9%. Here is a link to the demographics of the African American vote. http://216.55.182.132/FairData/Historical/map.asp?command=scope&map=0 The African American’s vote over 90% for Democrat. If North Carolina is a potential winner then so is South Carolina. Here is a link to the Demographics of the Latino vote, although South Carolinas Latinos aren’t many as in Texas. The Latino vote is running at 60% as seen on my link. http://nmindependent.mypublicsquare.com/view/swinging-for-latino Advertising in most southern states is dirt cheap. At the rate Obama is raking in the money he will soon break the 100 million barrier in one month. That is more than the Repugs are allowed to spend in the whole campaign. A little bit in South Carolina won’t go astray, to help create panic in the Repugs camp. If I were the Repugs and saw the Votemaster map, I would be very, very worried.

    24 Swing Lowe Very interesting point, what if in not spending money in South Carolina and Georgia he loses them and wins the ones you suggest? Plus a couple of other states. In doing so, loses the election. Oh the irony.

  34. http://www.smh.com.au/news/us-election/obamas-convention-spectacular/2008/07/08/1215282809600.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

    The article basically outlines the delivery of Obama’s speech is going to do at the convention.

    What is interesting is at the bottom where it says that the announcement of the convention speech is designed to take oxygen out of the Republic campaign NOW.

    The thought of Obama speaking publicly distracts people from McCain’s campaign? Amazing if true.

  35. Chris B @ 32,

    If Obama wins VA, CO and NC, there is no conceivable way he could lose the election – and if he did, he wouldn’t be disappointed about losing SC and GA, he would be disappointed about losing (presumably) MI, OH and NH (and maybe PA).

    Of course, I find it extremely unlikely that Obama would lose Michigan and New Hampshire and still win Virginia, Colorado and North Carolina.

    Second, “If North Carolina is a potential winner then so is South Carolina.” – What rubbish! On Electoral Vote, Obama is down by 2 in NC but down by 9 in SC. On Fivethirtyeight, Obama is given a 28% chance of winning in NC but only a 10% chance of winning in SC (he has the same chance of winning Kansas). Finally, on Intrade, he as a 14% chance of winning SC, but a 25% chance of winning NC.

    As I said before, NC has more going for it than SC (much more). It’s got more “transplanted” Yankees and it has 3 huge college towns. SC has lots of military bases (not good), is historically known as being the most conservative state in the union (although UT may be challenging that now) and has no significant urban areas to speak of (unlike NC, which has Durham, Greensboro, Raleigh and Charlotte). So whilst Obama has a shot of winning in NC (although it’s still fairly low there), he has even less of a shot of winning in SC – in fact, I am willing to predict that Obama has no chance of winning South Carolina unless John McCain has his own ‘Macaca’ moment (and even then it would still be doubtful…)

  36. EsJ @ 18: You could well be right. And Fivethirtyeight in its poll analysis ranks him as a 65% chance of winning Colorado. With the post-Convention bounce to come, and the GOP’s tried-and-true ‘too liberal, too extreme’ campaign strategy likely to cut little slack there (for whatever reason, mountain state/SW Dems and inds like their Dems liberal), I’d firmly back him to win it. Or to put it another way (that should keep everyone unhappy): Obama has about as much chance of winning Colorado as he does of losing Florida.

    SL @ 24: The only rational McC response is (if his finances are as everyone says) to put in a token effort there, without actually spending any money. Provided he doesn’t get a ‘McCain doesn’t care about SC’ backlash going, he should still win it.

    But that doesn’t make O’s ’50 states’ strategy (which of course is really a ’35 to 40 states’ strategy) wrong. By forcing McCain to jump to defend a bunch of states that he wouldn’t want to think about (e.g. North Dakota, Alaska) O stretches McC personally as well as financially (can’t afford to spend much time there, but can’t afford to be snubbing the voters). It helps create a narrative that O is controlling the campaign, and all McC can do is try to parry each move. Bob Dole had an ‘inevitable loser’ tarnish from early in the 1996 campaign– you can argue this brush doesn’t persuade many voters to change sides, but it does depress fundraising and turnout for your side.

    With Iowa near enough to in the bag as a crossover, McC should know he can’t just play defence with the other 279 Bush EC votes. New Mexico is looking increasingly bad for him, which would have him down to 274. Way too close to the line. New Hampshire is his best bet demographically for a pick-up but probably too small (4 votes) to hold the dam by itself. He has to go hard after some big wins: like Wisconsin (currently 538-rated a 13% win chance for him), Pennsylvania (21%), Michigan (35%). The current numbers aren’t encouraging– but perhaps the bigger problem is that McCain isn’t a ‘rust belt’ friendly candidate. He’s long, strong and proud against the protectionism that plays well there. Nor can he play the ‘working class hero’ line.

    How will McCain’s campaign try to market him as the candidate of the rust belt? That will be one of the big challenges of trying to manufacture a win from a pretty tough position.

  37. [He’s long, strong and proud against the protectionism that plays well there. Nor can he play the ‘working class hero’ line.]

    Well, given Jen’s article @ 31 it doesn’t look like they’re interested in playing the protectionist line. More likely, they’ll push the market mantra and i guess hope that the ‘market will fix it’ concept will be bought. To be honest, i’d be fascinated to see if it works – it would be interesting test of the pervasiveness of neo-liberal economics.

  38. Larest from CBet:
    OBAMA, Barack………….1.48
    MCCAIN, John……………3.10

    Tues July 8:
    http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/tonyauth;_ylt=AvVnu5QMZ1sVrgGIhtUnXjIV2r8F

    Tues July 8:
    http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/doonesbury;_ylt=Al2.j9tQ7ZmExGQiFi5zziDb.sgF

    Tues July 8:
    http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/ettahulme;_ylt=A0WTUfLl9XJIolcA_B5S_b4F
    ———————-
    Fivethityeight give Obi three fifths of five eighths of SFA chance (10% actually) of winning SC. Tend to agree.

  39. McCain can partially solve his rust-belt woes by picking either Romney or Huckabee as his VP. Romney’s father was Governor of Michigan and a state he won comfortably in the primaries. He may have some influence in nearby states (although that’s probably unlikely). Romney may also help in New Hampshire – although that may also be fairly minimal.

    With respect to Huckabee, his economic theory is base populism in its strongest form – his economic views are closer to John Edwards than John McCain. That will (hopefully for McCain) play well in the rust belt as well as in the south – although this in itself will create difficulties for McCain, as he would be effectively repudiating his long-held economic views if he chooses to endorse Huckabee’s economic policies.

  40. I know a lady in North Carolina who’s working for Obama, she thinks they have a chance of winning the state if they get a high turnout of blacks and young people, especially new voters!
    GG is right, the economy will be a main issue!

  41. Has anyone thought that part of the Obama campaign tactics of playing hard in places like the Carolinas,Georgia and even Colorado(which Obama WILL win) is about keeping Romney off the McCain ticket?

    Romney brings money,someone who can cover for McCains deplorable economic cred,locks up potential troublesome Conservatives and importantly brings a chance(albeit slim) at competing in Michigan and maybe neighbouring states.

    But by picking Romney,McCain would deeply harm himself with evangelicals, who despise his Mormonism.

    Hence Obama’s push for evangelicals consideration and pushes into evangelical heartlands like S Carolina,Georgia,Colorado, Nevada.

    To keep Romney off the ticket.

    With the amount of money Obama has he can control agendas all the way to Nov. Everything he does with that money is not all about winning a particular State.

    Although in the end, if things go right, he “could” landslide into a lot of unheard of States.

  42. Diogenes @ 25,

    Roosevelt came from an enormously rich family and seemed to do alright with the average punter. Rudds’ another example here in Australia. So the personal wealth bit doesn’t necessarily flow through to uncaring insensitive outlooks by particular politicians.

    I agree that the electorate has a choice between market driven solutions of the Republicans wth a dose of tax cuts, and the social interventionist policies of the Democrats.

    The state of the economy and the person with the most appealing/credible plan for the future will decide this election.

  43. Interesting hypothesis Harry. Perhaps the Dems feel that if the Republican ticket has two people on it who hate each other more than the extremes of the Republican party despise their opposite, there will be (more) unity on the Right.

    Given the way that McCain’s finances appear to be structured – with huge amounts of money in the RNC and travelling through third parties with less stringent donations requirements – having moneybags on board, even with the Mormonism, would seem a pretty astute move.

  44. 35 Swing Lowe I think everything within 10% is on the cards. Only time will tell.

    There is a multi million dollar advertising campaign, put together by the Latino community going to air, in a drive to get Latino’s to register. This is a direct result of the nasty campaign run last year. As a direct result the Latinos have a very high interest in the outcome of this election. No trouble guessing who they will be voting for.

    Obamas campaign shifting to the mile high stadium (I wonder if you can join the mile high club). Just couldn’t resist that one. For a good picture of the stadium click on my link provided. Instead of orange balloons, imagine thousands of blue and white balloons.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/08/us/politics/08convention.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

    Money has won it in the past for the Repugs. So it’s time for money to start talking for the Democrats.

  45. Sorry if thats confusing that’s 3 seperate articles.

    23 Greensborough Growler says:” I suspect that who provides the most convincing case on this issue will go on to victory is November”.

    Chris says: I couldn’t agree with you more. Maybe Obama’s advertising campaign will drive the economy. It’s a joke Joyce 🙂

  46. Romney on the ticket would be great. The Obama campaign could save money (not that they need to) simply by circulating Romney’s attack ads against McCain from the primary race.
    Also, a McCain / Romney ticket would attract the nickname “Flip and Flop.”

    Harry,
    I’m not convinced that Romney could cover the economic holes in McCain’s campaign. Granted, he is percieved as stronger than McCain on the economy, but he’s a terrible communicator and I think it would be easy to poke holes in him.
    Do you really think that Obama would be that keen to keep Romney off the ticket? As you yourself said, evangelicals don’t really like Romney.

    If McCain wants to energise the base, he’d be better off with Gomer Pyle (aka Huckabee).

  48. Harry H & Pancho,

    There is no doubt a VP with economic grunt will enhance McCain’s ticket. Romney could be a good choice. The other one is Bloomberg.

  49. GG

    I agree McCain has to get help on economic cred. It is by far the No.1 issue. McCain is a dud candidate for that very reason. For all Romneys faults(and there are many)Romney is McCains best bet for competing in Nov. Rob Portman(from Ohio) is another choice but he is too tied to Bush.

    But whatever the Repugs do their base is now incredibly split. So split that a lot no longer call themselves Republican. They are somewhere down between 29% to 34% in identification. Dems are in the low 40’s.

    Bloomberg is a big NO WAY for VP. Skeletons galore apparently. Apart from ideology as well.

  50. 47 Optimist Whatever McCain does, Obama can do better with his billionaire friends through MoveOn.org. With the likes of Warren Buffet the richest man in the world. George Sorros and maybe Bill Gates. The first two give to Bill Gates foundation, so I suspect (guess) his politics is the same.

Comments are closed.

Comments Page 1 of 7
1 2 … 7