Good afternoon,
I just wanted to get active again with my blog, and I wanted to find out if anyone out there is interested in helping me to learn what is going on in Alaska with Organizing For America. I am pretty sure there are things happening...
I am eager to get involved here again continuing all the great work that we accomplished together.
What's going on where you are?
Please leave me a comment, or send me an email to get.at.jonathan@gmail.com.
Talk to you soon!
Jonathan
The question of the moment is where do we go from here? As Alaskans? As a nation? As my.barackobam.com participants?
For my part, I have updated my profile, dropped some groups, maintained some groups, and altered E-mail settings on some groups. Would like to continue to build alliances among Alaskans and others for a more healthy, just, peaceful, and sustainable planet, peoples, and all our relations.
We've built some invaluable alliances here and it will be interesting to see if this site remains active and influential in the future for building upon the movement of change and mutual support begun here.
What does everyone think about the best ways to move ahead from here? In Alaska and elsewhere?
Watch this and think if this man could talk to foreign leaders or make rational cool headed decisions. This is so scary. He could blow up and not work with anyone he did not like. OMG he even shoved a woman in the hallway and has called his wife the c word in public!
You have watched how hateful and condescending he has been towards Barack and even the media now. He is out and out lying and will do anything to win.We need this out there viral and let people see the REAL McCain.......not the kind of PRESIDENT we need in this time of crisis!
Watch the video and send it to friends: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAyK-enrF1g
LuAnn
http://www.adn.com/troopergate/
This link with take you the the Anchorage Daily News Coverage of "Troopergate", the investigation into whether or not Gov. Palin abused her powers when she fired Walt Monegan, Public Safety Commissioner in Alaska.
Many Alaskans weren't that concerned about the investigation. It seemed odd that Monegan was fired seemingly out of the blue, but Governors make changes to staff, especially those appointed by a predecessor. There was a huge outcry in support of Monegan seemed to fade away - especially when his replacement appointed by Palin had to resign after two weeks because of sexual harassment charges filed against him while Chief of Police in Kenai, AK. Talk shifted from Monegan to questions about how could Palin's staff have missed such a glaring red flag. People I talked to thought that it was inappropriate of Palin to use her position to carry on a family feud but there didn't seem to be clear consensus about whether or not she had abused her power. The investigation undertaken by the legislature seemed like a good idea. Palin promised transparency, here you go.
Following the surprise announcement of Palin as McCain's running mate, Troopergate went from a bipartisan investigation with Palin promising to cooperate, into an all out attempt on the part of Alaska Republican Legislators, the Alaska Attorney General (who also serves as Gov. Palin's pleasure) and the McCain campaign to stone wall, if not block it entirely.
This about face on Palin's part and lack of cooperation by the Alaska Attorney General is a clear indication of what happens when an unknown Governor hits the big leagues and has to play ball with the big boys. I am incredulous whenever I hear her portray herself as one of the everyday, ordinary Americans with so much at stake in this election. She certainly has a lot at stake but it's her own political career. When she and McCain are defeated and she has to come home and go back to being a Govenor from a small state, I think people here will remember the stretched truths and misrepresentations of what has happened during her tenure.
We should know more in the next two days about troopergate. In the big picture, maybe it doesn't really matter if a VP candidate has this type of problem. But it is clearly within the big picture that Palin and McCain have tried to derail the investigation making her admiration of VP Cheney even more of a concern. That McCain has allowed this to happen shows that he is after all one of Washington's establishment and certainly no maverick, and is further evidence of his eratic, unpredicatble behaviour by choosing Palin as a running mate in the first place.
If Palin gets VP talk about anti American! She is stirring up hate wherever she goes. We have to say Enough!
This is not acceptable!
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/10/07/palins_unamerican/index.html
We don't not need hate and partisanship stirred up. Palin is stirring it and McCain is letting her run free with whatever she wants to say. This country needs to work together to get us out of this mess we are in. Barack is the only one who has the intelligence, knowledge, temperament and vision for that great future.Let's all help Barack and make sure all the slurs and hate stops!
Enough!
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- America's youngest voters are mindful of history and the impact on their own lives as they prepare to cast ballots on Nov. 4. Among 18- to 29-year-old registered voters surveyed for a USA Today/MTV/Gallup poll, 61% support the Obama-Biden ticket, versus 32% who prefer the McCain-Palin ticket, with Obama's voters being far more likely to be certain about their vote than McCain's.
Obama's strong appeal to younger voters is apparent in that he outperforms McCain by double digits on every single character dimension tested in the poll of more than 900 18-29 year olds nationwide, conducted by Gallup for USA Today and MTV Sept. 18-28, 2008. The 47-year-old Obama swamps 72-year-old McCain, 71% to 12%, on understanding the "problems of people your age" and even wins on what is a McCain strength among the broader electorate, being a "strong and decisive leader," 46% to 36%.
While only a minority (37%) of young adults have qualms about McCain's age, a majority (55%) do have concerns about his running mate Sarah Palin's qualifications to step in as president if necessary. In contrast, a majority are satisfied with both Obama's experience and running mate Joe Biden's qualifications. (The poll was conducted before the Oct. 2 vice presidential debate.)
Obama also beats McCain on several lighter dimensions tested in the poll. A majority of 18- to 29-year-olds would choose Obama over McCain as a teacher, boss, drinking buddy, or advisor. McCain's only appeal on this level with young adults appears to be his personal life story as young adults are more likely to be interested in reading McCain's private diary than Obama's. While such items may seem trivial, basic likeability can be a key indicator of a presidential candidate's ability to win votes.
When asked in an open-ended fashion to name the single most important issue affecting their vote for president this year, 18- to 29-year-old registered voters most often cite the economy (30%), followed by the war in Iraq (13%), healthcare (5%), energy and gas prices (4%), and international issues (4%). These issues are, in a broad sense, little different from those listed by all voters, regardless of age. Asked which candidate they think would do a better job on their top-priority issue, 58% say Obama versus 27% who say McCain, again echoing their basic candidate choice.
On the Outcome
The poll results make it clear that young Americans perceive that the outcome of the election really does matter, both to the country and to their own lives. Nearly-two thirds (64%) of 18- to 29-year-olds surveyed say they have already given the election a lot of thought. Nearly half (44%) consider this election to be the most important of the last 50 years, and another 37% consider it more important than other elections.
When asked about the consequences of the two possible election outcomes, 84% say an Obama victory would have a great deal (47%) or moderate amount (37%) of impact on their lives and 72% say the same about McCain (36% great deal, 36% moderate amount).
Going a step further, the survey asked those who said an Obama or McCain victory would impact them "a great deal" or "not at all" to explain in their own words why they feel that way. In Obama's case, nearly one in four (24%) volunteered that good or positive changes would take place, while in McCain's case, the most common responses were negative or pertained to the War in Iraq.
Asked in a separate question how a McCain administration might compare to the Bush administration, 55% said they would view a McCain victory as "four more years of the Bush administration" versus 37% who said they would view it as "real change from the Bush administration."
The two tickets this year also carry the distinction of the first major party black nominee in U.S. history, and only the second major party female vice presidential nominee. In the eyes of young voters, victory for the Obama-Biden ticket would be much more of an historical event than victory for the McCain-Palin ticket. A majority (53%) agree that if Barack Obama is elected president, it would be one of the most important advances in racial equality over the past 100 years. By contrast, only one-third (32%) agree that if Sarah Palin becomes vice president, it will be one of the most important advances in gender equality in the past 100 years.
Bottom Line
A majority of 18- to 29-year-olds are registered to vote in this election and have given it a lot of thought. They prefer Barack Obama, both as an alternative to John McCain, but also as the candidate who is the most likely to understand their problems and to bring positive change to their own lives. Casting a ballot for Obama also carries the excitement of making history. Nearly 8 in 10 consider this election to be more important than other elections, if not the most important in the past 50 years. What remains to be seen is how many of this highly sought-after demographic will in fact turn out and vote on Election Day, and thus help to determine the winner.
Survey Methods
Results are based on telephone interviews conducted September 18-28, 2008, with 903 U.S. adults between the ages of 18 and 29, 633 respondents of whom were randomly selected from a national sample of landline and cellular telephone numbers, and 270 respondents of whom had participated in earlier national Gallup polls and agreed to be re-interviewed for a future poll. For results based on the total sample, which is weighted for demographic information to be representative of 18- to 29-year-olds nationwide, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points. For results based on the sample of 742 registered voters, the maximum margin of sampling error is ±5 percentage points.
In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.
>Note. This 3 day running average goes back to the start of Sarah Palin's "heels on, gloves off" campaign. While it appeals to the 18% of the electorate that constitute her die-hard base, it appears to be turning off the independents. This is the first time any candidate has gotten a 51% posting on the Gallup Daily Tracking Poll.
PRINCETON, NJ -- The latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking poll shows registered voters preferring Barack Obama to John McCain for president by 51% to 42%.
The nine percentage point lead in Oct. 4-6 tracking matches Obama's highest to date for the campaign, and the highest for either candidate. Obama led McCain by 49% to 40% near the tail end of his international trip in late July. (To view the complete trend since March 7, 2008, click here.)
Obama has now held a statistically significant lead since Sept. 24-26 polling and has not trailed McCain since Sept. 13-15, roughly coinciding with the intensification of the financial crisis.
McCain has an opportunity to try to reverse Obama's momentum at tonight's town hall style debate in Nashville. -- Jeff Jones
These are facts about McCain, his family, his life and all the mistruths that he likes to brag about. Please take the time to watch these and you may be shocked.People everywhere have the right to know these things about John McCain.He is no maverick. He would be a disaster as President. He is strictly out for John McCain and has proven he will say or do anything to get elected.Please help Barack and share these facts. McCain’s campaign is getting nastier.
Thanks, LuAnn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06zsn5BuL3Y
http://www.politicalbase.com/profile/jnail/blog/&blogId=4588
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/make_believe_maverick_the_real_john_mccain/page/1
I got a sample of it over the last couple of days of watching Fox.
My first peek came on Fox and Friends with anti-Obama hatchetman Stanley Kurtz, from a right-wing opnion-factory named The Ethics and Public Policy Center. Kurtz was given several minutes of free air time to paint a picture of Barack Obama and William Ayers' relationship implying two things: that they were frequently in the same room together, along with scores of other people, and that Barack Obama "funneled" (Kurtz's term) money to one of Ayers' project. Obama was, in fact, on a board that recieved grants and Ayers' project was one of the grant recipients. That is what Kurtz meant by 'funneling' money. Kurtz is obviously confused. "Funneling Money" is what happens when Right-Wing millionaires want to discredit Barack Obama and they make a donation to a 501 (c)(3) called...oh, I don't know, say...The Ethics and Public Policy Center so a slack-jawed bottom-feeder like Stanley Kurtz can provide 'unbiased' information to its viewers. Anyway...By the end of the piece, if one was an uncritical viewer of Fox and Friends, one would certainly have the impression that the so-called "Main Stream Media" was trying to 'cover up' something.
Comes now Sean Hannity. A special entitled "Obama and Friends: A History of Radicalism" was launched today. In this so-called documentary, Hannity spends several minutes created dark sounds about Saul Alinsky, a widely read and much beloved community organizer of the 1950s and 1960s. By the end of the Alinsky discussion, he is characterized as a communist who launched the 'community organizing' movement as a means to manipulate well-meaning people; whatever that means. And Fox News certainly knows something about manipulation. Hannity then draws a line connecting a horrible patch-up inlcuding grainy newsreels of radical islamists leading to Barack Obama and an extreme subculture of Chicago.The racist subtext is undeniable, inspersing images of Jerimiah Wright and Malcolm X and other black nationalists and Barack Obama, they are saying in essence--this guy is black, folks and so are these radicals.
Then Fox has also dredged up one of the police officers wounded by the Weather Underground when Barack Obama was all of 8 years old and we can expect to see his recollections of pain to be used by Fox to attack Obama.
Expect the worst kind of McCarthyesque attacks and distortions that have EVER been seen in an American election over the next 30 days. The decision by the RNC-Fox-McCain camp is a political scorched earth policy. If they can't win this election, they will so poison the well of American Opinion so as to make it ungovernable.
> note, we can all be grateful that McCain's 'private accounts/private management' scheme for Social Security was not in place before this latest tanking on Wall Street. Point THIS out to McCain-leaning Seniors when you have an opportunity to do so....
John Neffinger
Hello? If McCain Had His Way, That'd Be Our Social Security Money Wall Street is Losing
What do we democrats have to say about the mess on Wall Street?
And to further confuse the issue, McCain is also saying something about reform, and taking on "fat cats," and accusing Obama of being just as cozy with these Wall Streeters as anyone else. The upshot so far is that slightly more voters trust John McCain to handle the economy than trust Barack Obama.
But as it turned out, we Americans were not about to let our elected representatives turn over our social security taxes to Wall Street financiers to gamble with if it meant losing the guaranteed income that has allowed millions upon millions of American seniors to live out their sunset years with at least a basic measure of dignity.
But while ordinary Americans spoke out, John McCain stood with Bush (hugged him awkwardly in public, even), against the American people. In fact, just six months ago, McCain again let slip his fondness for privatization.
I have been scratching my head why this has not been talked about more, especially since Obama has been having trouble winning votes among seniors. There may well be some good reason I'm missing why it hasn't been a top argument thus far.
But if we had let Bush and McCain privatize social security, some of those people would be losing a lot more. And a lot of other people with less retirement savings would be hurting even more, because they depend on social security to cover basic needs.
This is something Americans understand: social security is secure, and the stock market is anything but. There are few more personal or dramatic ways to illustrate McCain's terrible judgment than to imagine the nightmare scenario so many Americans would face if McCain and Bush had gotten their way on this -- or if McCain were to get his way as President.
The following from military.com
Military Donations Favoring Obama
WASHINGTON - U.S. Soldiers have donated more presidential campaign money to Democrat Barack Obama than to Republican John McCain, a reversal of previous White House campaigns in which military donations tended to favor Republicans, a nonpartisan group reported Aug. 14.
Troops serving abroad have given nearly six times as much money to Obama's presidential campaign as they have to McCain's, the Center for Responsive Politics said.
The results also are striking because they favored Obama, who has never served in the military. McCain meanwhile, is a decorated war veteran who spent nearly five years as a prisoner of war in Vietnam. The Arizona senator graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy and had a 22-year career as a naval aviator.
Obama has opposed the war in Iraq and says he would withdraw combat troops within 16 months. McCain has been a steadfast supporter of the war, saying he would withdraw the troops only when conditions on the ground warrant it.
"Obama will work tirelessly to uphold this nation's sacred trust with its veterans, to ensure they are not forgotten after they return home and he will provide our troops with the leadership they deserve, as well as the support they and their families need," Obama spokesman Nick Shapiro said.
McCain's campaign played down the significance of the donations.
"John McCain has been endorsed by more retired admirals and generals than Barack Obama has military donors," McCain spokesman Michael Goldfarb said in a statement.
"We feel confident that many U.S. troops stationed overseas will support John McCain in the election this fall, but we suspect most are too busy doing the important work of defending this country than to make political contributions," Goldfarb said.
The report tracked donations of $200 or more. It found that 859 members of the military donated a total of $335,536 to Obama. McCain received $280,513 from 558 military donors.
Among Soldiers serving overseas at the time of their donations, 134 gave a total of $60,642 to Obama while 26 gave a total of $10,665 to McCain. That was less than the amount received by Republican Ron Paul, who collected $45,512 from 99 Soldiers serving abroad, the report said.
(Herman Hesse's Siddhartha, A Jungian Fantasy at the Berkshire Theatre Festival, Jill Michael and Joe Jung)
Sometimes politics has the uncanny effect of mirroring the national psyche even when nobody intended to do that. This is perfectly illustrated by the rousing effect that Gov. Sarah Palin had on the Republican convention in Minneapolis this week. On the surface, she outdoes former Vice President Dan Quayle as an unlikely choice, given her negligent parochial expertise in the complex affairs of governing. Her state of Alaska has less than 700,000 residents, which reduces the job of governor to the scale of running one-tenth of New York City. By comparison, Rudy Giuliani is a towering international figure. Palin's pluck has been admired, and her forthrightness, but her real appeal goes deeper.
* Small town values - a nostalgic return to simpler times disguises a denial of America ' s global role, a return to petty, small-minded parochialism.
* Ignorance of world affairs - a repudiation of the need to repair America's image abroad.
* Family values - a code for walling out anybody who makes a claim for social justice. Such strangers, being outside the family, don't need to be needed.
* Rigid stands on guns and abortion - a scornful repudiation that these issues can be negotiated with those who disagree. *Patriotism - the usual fallback in a failed war.
* "Reform" - an italicized term, since in addition to cleaning out corruption and excessive spending, one also throws out anyone who doesn't fit your ideology.
Palin reinforces the overall message of the reactionary right, which has been in play since 1980, that social justice is liberal-radical, that minorities and immigrants, being different from "us" pure American types, can be ignored, that progressivism takes too much effort and globalism is a foreign threat. The radical right marches under the banners of "I'm all right, Jack," and "Why change? Everything's OK as it is." The irony, of course, is that Gov. Palin is a woman and a reactionary at the same time. She can add mom to apple pie on her resume, while blithely reversing forty years of feminist progress. The irony is superficial; there are millions of women who stand on the side of conservatism, however obviously they are voting against their own good. The Republicans have won multiple national elections by raising shadow issues based on fear, rejection, hostility to change, and narrow-mindedness.
Obama's call for higher ideals in politics can't be seen in a vacuum. The shadow is real; it was bound to respond. Not just conservatives possess a shadow - we all do. So what comes next is a contest between the two forces of progress and inertia. Will the shadow win again, or has its furtive appeal become exhausted? No one can predict. The best thing about Gov. Palin is that she brought this conflict to light, which makes the upcoming debate honest. It would be a shame to elect another Reagan, whose smiling persona was a stalking horse for the reactionary forces that have brought us to the demoralized state we are in. We deserve to see what we are getting, without disguise.
Quit your whining, Democrats. If Obama loses this election, it won't be because he didn't fight back.
Tim Fernholz | September 11, 2008 |
There's a picture being sent around e-mail lists and posted on blogs that many a Democrat ought to bear in mind -- and no, it's not another anonymous smear. It's a picture of an assertive Sen. Barack Obama with a LOL-style caption promising, "I GOT THIS!"
Of course, few political observers are quite that confident. In light of Sen. John McCain's post-convention bounce in the polls and the media obsession with Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin, Democrats are starting to panic prematurely. Now they're armchair-quarterbacking Obama's campaign: He should attack! He should attack creatively! Why isn't he more populist/more personal/more disciplined? Obama-supporting friends outside of the realm of political journalism are now asking me to allay their fears.
This is what I tell them: Quit the hand-wringing, Democrats, and don't believe the hype. Barack Obama is a lot of things, but he isn't John Kerry and he's not Al Gore. Obama's campaign has been the most disciplined and aggressive Democratic effort of the last eight years. If he loses, it won't be because he didn't hit back.
Even the Prospect staff is not immune to the paranoia about a return to 2004; each poll jump sends my colleague Adam Serwer into inspired anxiety. Just yesterday, founding co-editor Bob Kuttner wrote that Obama's campaign isn't doing enough to go after McCain on issues. As an example, he cited the government takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, suggesting that Obama base a major policy speech or advertisement around explaining that these entities, wrongly privatized, were at the root of the unnecessary sub-prime mortgage crisis and that this crisis exemplifies why conservatism is a failed ideology and liberalism a better one. All true, as far as the economic analysis goes. But a campaign commercial? It took an entire article -- a good one at that -- for Kuttner to explain that in these pages.
Instead, Obama is making a simple case, one that he has been making for a while now: John McCain is George W. Bush. Each of his recent ads reflects this message. And look at his stump speeches and the remarks of his running mate, Joe Biden. Obama has carefully cultivated his campaign themes of change and reform since 2007, with specific examples of what that change would be, while forcefully demonstrating that John McCain represents more of the same. If Obama switched tactics now, no doubt the same folks criticizing him for his lack of reaction would criticize him for his lack of message discipline.
At the Republican National Convention, McCain adopted Obama's rhetoric and has promised that he and Palin would be the true agents of change, though he declines to specify exactly which Bush-era policies he would change. Ironically, a common castigation of Obama is that he isn't setting the narrative of the race -- that the debate isn't on his terms. But it should be clear by now that this isn't true: The race is about change and who can bring it to Washington. Obama's campaign is betting that its message will be the one that resonates with voters, and McCain's will be seen for what it is: pure rhetoric. Maybe that's a bad bet, but nonetheless Obama's story has set the frame, and McCain is the one who's had to work within it. Obama should not get nasty because that undermines the entire narrative of his candidacy.
The McCain campaign's stream of personal attacks against Obama, and its emphasis that Palin has been victimized by the media, has the day-to-day news cycle focused on foolish back-and-forths instead of the issues. Make no mistake: This is part of the McCain team's strategy. Rick Davis, a senior McCain aide, explicitly said that they don't want the election to be about the issues; they want it to be about personality. It's a cynical ploy, but it's one that Democrats see working against Obama's message. Liberals and reporters alike recognize that low-information voters are likely to hear accusations louder than rebuttals, or simply assume that both candidates are slinging the same kind of mud.
Obama has responded, however, with vigor, straightforwardly denouncing the attacks and turning the conversation back to the issues important to Americans. Following yesterday's laughably false accusation from the McCain campaign that Obama called Palin a "pig," he accused McCain of not taking the issues -- or the country -- seriously, and his spokespeople turned the charge around on McCain. When McCain falsely accused Obama of supporting sex-ed for kindergarteners, Obama's campaign rightly questioned McCain's honor. When they mocked his work as a community organizer, he laughed off the accusation and asked who, exactly, the Republicans were working for. When Sarah Palin attacked the Constitution, he said in no uncertain terms that she was attacking the fabric of this country. Each time the McCain campaign comes out with a negative, misleading advertisement, Obama publicly sets the record straight, often within hours. Remember how long it took John Kerry to respond to the Swift Boat accusations? And Obama does more than simply correct the lies -- he calls out McCain for his dirty tactics.
Is it enough? Liberal blogger Steve Benen observes that only thing Obama hasn't done so far is fight fire with fire and use the same dishonest tactics as McCain. For instance, Benen suggests, they could argue that McCain wants to cut U.S. military aid to Israel, since that aid is an earmark and McCain claims he wants to eliminate them. Of course, Obama knows that McCain doesn't actually want to cut aid to Israel. But McCain also knew that Obama doesn't want to give sex tips to kindergarteners. Others argue that Obama needs to attack McCain's character. The Obama campaign has gone so far as to call McCain and Palin liars and flip-floppers and to call their attacks dishonorable -- which they are. But some Democrats would have Obama mount a character attack against McCain for abandoning his first wife and family, for instance.
Obama won't do that, though, because his message is change, and because he has more integrity than McCain does. This is not "naïve" and "idiotic," as Terence Samuel at The Root calls Obama's response to the "lipstick affair" -- it is part of a larger strategy. Obama has shown as well as anyone that he is a rough-and-tumble politician who doesn't shy from a fight. But his campaign has made central his commitment to changing the way we do politics. That doesn't mean he's a wimp, but it does mean he can't buy into the Bush-Rove politics that McCain now espouses. Obama remembers, to recall the old adage, it's not worth wrestling a pig: You get dirty, and the pig likes it.
Samuel argues that Obama needs to get down in the mud, but doesn't offer even a single example of an attack that would work -- one that would tar McCain's reputation without sullying Obama's. This is a great example of my favorite kind of liberal armchair-quarterbacking: "We need to hit back harder … but not by saying something I can't print here." As Samuel waxes rhapsodic over Palin insulting Obama, he forgets that just two weeks ago John Kerry and Joe Biden were going after McCain at the convention. This is part of the problem. Even liberal journalists who should know better spend more time giving nonsensical advice to the Obama campaign rather than looking at McCain's shortcomings.
It's not that it's wrong to criticize a campaign, or that some criticisms don't ring true. The Obama campaign and its surrogates need to stop saying that McCain is such a great man before they tear him apart. (Joe Biden, for one, has already gotten the message.) They could be doing a better job sending out rapid responders on the state level, but it's clear they're not in a bubble. They understand the concerns of their supporters. Still, they are on the offensive -- that sex-education smear by McCain was actually a response to an Obama attack ad that ran that morning. The Obama campaign, day-in and day-out, is extraordinarily disciplined about delivering its message.
Obama is essentially tied in the polls with McCain, even as the Republican senator experiences his convention bounce. These numbers will change with events, especially with the debates, and as the sheen wears off Palin. (A reminder: She has been known nationally for less than two weeks.) Obama has invested in a much larger field operation than McCain. The press seems to be developing a spine, if these comments criticizing the media's "outrageous" cowering before the McCain campaign from conventional wisdom apparatchik Mark Halperin are any indication.
But it certainly doesn't help to have Democrats wringing their hands and complaining about problems Obama doesn't have. Enthusiasm is the big indicator in an election that will ride on turnout, and Democrats have every reason to be enthusiastic.
Howard Wolfson, Hillary Clinton's spokesperson during the primary campaign, has made this point on his new blog. During the primary race, many counted Obama out, didn't understand his campaign's strategy, didn't think he could keep himself in the race. Clinton adopted Obama's change rhetoric and attacked him the same way McCain has -- on experience and for his eloquence. But Obama and his team hewed to their strategy and pulled out the win. The senator from Illinois is known as a closer, and there is plenty of time left. Keep the faith.
I am not sure if you got to see Barack on the Letterman show last night but he was fantastic.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hf6qd8b65s
I just posted this video on the DIGG site and really would appreciate you going there and digging it.
I took a swipe at McCain and how his VP pick was strictly a political move and how Barack vetted Joe and made "HIS OWN DECISION".
If we can get enough Diggs on it it will possibly be in the top 10 of the day and everyone will see it.
It would be super exposure for Barack as he commented on the stupid "lipstick on a pig" controversy and made some other great comments on several things. He showed both Humor and also made some great POLITICAL points!
Please take a minute, watch the video and PLEASE go to DIGG.com and digg it. The Republicans have been burrying some of our good stories on the DIGG site so PLEASE help!
A pollster whose mathematical model has correctly predicted every winner of the White House popular vote since 1988 is banking on a decisive victory for Democrat Barack Obama in November.
Emory University political scientist Alan Abramowitz said Wednesday that according to his "time for change" model, Obama would secure 54.3 percent of the popular vote against 45.7 percent for Republican John McCain.
That margin would virtually guarantee a crushing victory for the Democrat in the state-by-state electoral college that actually selects the next president, Abramowitz said.
He said unknown variables, such as the nation's bitter partisan divide and resistance to Obama's African-American race among some white voters, may result in a slightly smaller popular vote margin for the Democratic nominee.
But, "the combination of an unpopular Republican incumbent in the White House, a weak economy and a second-term election make a Democratic victory in November all but certain," he writes in the October issue of the journal "PS: Political Science and Politics."
"The good news for Democrats is that 2008, unlike 2004, is a time-for-change election -- one in which the president's party has controlled the White House for two or more terms," Abramowitz said.
His model evaluated Republican President George W. Bush's dismal approval ratings, the change in economic output in the second quarter of the election year, and above all an anti-incumbency mood against the White House party.
"Regardless of the popularity of the president or the state of the economy, it is simply much more difficult for the president's party to retain its hold on the White House," the pollster said.
Abramowitz said his model had correctly forecast the popular vote winner within two percentage points or less in every presidential election since 1988.
That includes the 2000 election, when Democrat Al Gore carried the popular vote. But Bush came ahead in the electoral college after his Supreme Court-mandated win in Florida.
And the model faces a complication this year with the wild-card presence of two third-party candidates, independent Ralph Nader and Libertarian Bob Barr, on the ballot for the November 4 election.
Copyright © 2008 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AFP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of Agence France Presse.
