Post Palin

I get to be the one that delivers the news to the 8% of Americans (of which the blog readers here appear to be high in margin) who think Palin got an F last night that, well, you don't represent the American majority viewpoint. Surprise.

That's the early result from the SUSA poll out today:
"What grade do you give her on the speech? An A, B, C, D, or an F?"

60 percent, including Joe Biden, gave it an A.


Overall, for being an asset and reflecting well on McCain, Palin comes off about the same as Biden does for Obama. A wash yea, but a huge bump for Palin:

24 hours ago, independent voters nationwide were split on whether Palin was an asset or a liability to McCain's campaign. Today, by a 2:1 margin, independents say Palin is an asset. Overnight, the percentage calling the Alaska governor an asset to the campaign climbed 13 points; the percentage calling her a liability fell 17 points. The numbers are similar among moderates, who 24 hours ago viewed Palin as a liability by an 11 point margin; today, Palin is seen as an asset by an 18 point margin.

I expected that much. What's more disturbing though, is questions 7 & 8 in the SUSA poll.

If you were placing a bet today, would you bet that Barack Obama will be elected president? Or, John McCain will be elected president?

I've not seen a single one of these that favor McCain, but this does, by a slim 48-45 margin.  

And this is just insane:

Is the media rooting for Barack Obama? Rooting for John McCain? Or trying its best to be fair to both?

Barack Obama  54
John McCain    8
Being Fair    35
Not Sure       4
The media has been busy digging a grave for us this past week, by following up on the vicious personal smears that have been pushed by prominent liberal blogs into the mainstream. Not only did they mostly backfire by not being true, but they confirmed the popular opinion that the media favors Obama. It's become conventional wisdom. This presents two huge problems.

First, McCain can basically wield whatever attacks he'd like, and not have to worry about the critique of the media. They are not seen as objective judges in the matter.

Second, the only way that the media can change this public opinion is to go overboard the other way, by attacking Barack Obama with multiple feeding frenzies.

HCDI (which now has the Barack Obama live evaluation) basically confirms the SUSA findings that Palin reached deep into Republicans and also into Independents- "Among the independents who watched her speech, respondents who report that they will “probably” or “definitely” vote for McCain increased by 10% across both genders..."

Also, notice that the CBS poll is out, and it follows exactly what I talked about in the previous post, highlighting what Palin means for the Republicans.

Yes, CBS showed movement from a 48-40 Obama lead to a 42-42 tie in a matter of days after Palin became the VP. Why? Because Republicans, especially many white Christians, who were sitting out the election are not going to vote, now are off the bench and on the field for McCain-Palin.

Those party ID numbers don't come out of a hat, they are self-selected at the beginning of the poll by asking whether people are going to vote or not.

Look at the shift that happened (and this was prior to the speech):

                 CBS Now       CBS Last Week
Democrats        35            35
Republicans      31            26
Independent      34            38
And look, if we pull out a 4% spread on election day, I'll be very pleasantly surprised. It's much more likely that we are going to see the same result as in '04 and '06, a tie or 2% lead. That's it.

Tags: Sarah Palin, White House 2008 (all tags)

Comments

185 Comments

I'll wait for gallup and rasmussen

I disagree with David Plouffe and Axelrod as to the importance of daily tracking polls; given how closely people are following this election, I sense that the daily tracking polls are a good gauge as to how voters are reacting to what seems like an overbearing amoung of coverage of the election.

SurveyUSA lost all credibility in my opinion with their VP polls; if Obama had listened to them, John Edwards would be VP right now.

The CBS poll is concerning but let's wait for Rasmussen and gallup.

by Blazers Edge 2008-09-04 03:55PM | 0 recs
Re: I'll wait for gallup and rasmussen

No one poll is better than the poll of polls, that's for sure. But this single poll is very useful for showing what I thought the Palin poll meant, and we'll be able to know soon enough if other pollsters find what CBS did-- a re-energized Republican base. All indications point there. At this point, I wouldn't take any national poll seriously until I weighted it to a 1-2% Dem ID lead over Republican.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 03:59PM | 0 recs
Re: I'll wait for gallup and rasmussen

Who on earth thought that the GOP would not turn out? Seriously? Palin has given them a reason to volunteer now. The problem is that the far right makes up a far less than in 2004. '

There really is no way that Obama can lose unless he collapses among democrats and independent.

Unlike McCain, he has room to grow and Obama is either ahead among independents or tied.

One of McCain's advisers said that if they win Hillary voters, they win the election, if not they lose.

by sweet potato pie 2008-09-04 04:03PM | 0 recs
Re: I'll wait for gallup and rasmussen

The problem is that the far right makes up a far less than in 2004. '

Well, that wouldn't actually be a problem, but what is problematic is that this assumption has no actual electoral validity to rely upon other than the prior to now projections that showed self-selection of voters implying that's the case. But, not surprisingly with Palin, that's changing rather quickly.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 04:08PM | 0 recs
Re: I'll wait for gallup and rasmussen

This entire diary by you is based on polling data.  And you also make several assumptions not provided in that data.

by bruh3 2008-09-04 04:11PM | 0 recs
get the order right

Actually, I made the assumptions in the previous post that I linked to above. This post was showing how the polling that was done confirmed the assumptions.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 04:15PM | 0 recs
Re: get the order right

Here's one of my problems with your assumptions- the e are others but let's stick with one. McCain even with the massaged numbers never goes above 45. In some rare occasions he does, but in most polls he does not. Are you honestly arguing that someone who can't go above 45 percent in the national polls on average has a better shot than someone who ranges from tied to 51 percent?

by bruh3 2008-09-04 04:21PM | 0 recs
Re: get the order right

Please remember that it is electoral votes that count, not the popular vote, which is what these polls are tracking. As we have seen, it is entirely possible to win the popular vote and lose the presidency.  Basically, the vote of someone in a large undecided state (OH, MI, PA) is worth lots more than the vote of someone in a large decided state (CA, TX).  Obama could win by a huge, huge margin in CA and it wouldn't change the number of electoral votes he got.  Similarly, McCain could take 100% of the popular vote in Texas, and it wouldn't increase his electoral votes by a single one.

Do we have any recent polls on Palin's effect on the swing states, particularly the heavily blue-collar ones? That's what I want to see.

by SuGeAtARC 2008-09-04 05:51PM | 0 recs
Re: get the order right

Popular vote isn't a magic number. It's derived from people living in 'states.' If you look at the state data right now Obama has the advantage. This may change, but telling me that Obama doesn't have a good chance in the middle of the GOP marketing week is bizzre. Especially when Jerome uses national data to do it that you are now claiming isn't the best thing to use. And of course no one has Palin data. Here's my observation- let;'s talk in 2 weeks after the convetion or better yet after the first debate. My guess is we will be in the same plce were were recently- Obama slightly ahead.  By the way, least I forget- the reason why Obama has the advantage can e found at the various polling sites- he has several avenues to victory and mccain has to hit a perfect storm. He's losing badly right now in swing states or used be swing states like NM and IA and WI, and he's playing defensive in states like ND and VA. No VP nominee will change this. You over estimate the role of the VP in the process.  The one thing I will agree with Jerome on is that the blogs re too focused on the wrong person- Palin isn't the presidential nominee- mccain is.

by bruh3 2008-09-04 06:08PM | 0 recs
Re: get the order right

Way to completely ignore what my post actually said so you could continue your charming tirade against Jerome.

I will repeat: Do we have any polls that show what effect, if any, the Palin pick is having in the blue-collar swing states? What is going on in MI, OH, PA? How about FL, how are they reacting?

by SuGeAtARC 2008-09-04 06:22PM | 0 recs
For state polling

I always use www.fivethirtyeight.com.  Since the Dem convention Obama has improved a lot in the swing states.

by GFORD 2008-09-04 06:31PM | 0 recs
Re: For state polling

Yeah- I find it hard to believe htis person would be posting here not knowing about sites like that.

by bruh3 2008-09-04 06:38PM | 0 recs
Re: For state polling

I find it hard to believe you haven't been banned. Jerome must have the patience of a saint -- I'd have booted you long ago.

by SuGeAtARC 2008-09-04 08:04PM | 0 recs
Re: get the order right

if you don't think i responded to youthen you don't understand my response. so let me repeat- who gives a shit bout what you are sking because ultimately palin isn't the presidential nominee.

by bruh3 2008-09-04 06:38PM | 0 recs
Re: I'll wait for gallup and rasmussen

McCain-Palin does not have to win all Hillary voters or even a plurality of them, he just needs to pick up the white working class women (no college) that voted for Hillary in Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. This group makes up about 20% of ALL Hillary voters.  If McCain picks up this group, with the newly re-activated Christian conservative base and McCain wins two out three of these swing industrial states and he's President. It's simple math.

P.S. Colorado, Nevada, and Montana are now firmly in the Sarah camp

by oliver777 2008-09-04 04:12PM | 0 recs
The Sky is Falling?

The RCP poll of polls has shown nothing but a bounce... for Obama.

Yes, you are correct, that bloggers erroneously  dismissed Palin a prima facie, when in reality, she energizes the base.

But McCain is entitled to his pick and that cannot be avoided.

The question is: historically, how far have energizing VP picks ultimately gotten a candidate?

by iohs2008 2008-09-04 04:11PM | 0 recs
Re: I'll wait for gallup and rasmussen

I disagree. Tracking polls show statistical noise of the low info voter who swings with the wind.   If this was an election by national popular vote then yes, I would say tracking polls are important but they aren't.

I disagree with Jerome about the state of this race.  I think Obama will win comfortable by say 290 electoral votes. The fundamentals have yet to change.

by sweet potato pie 2008-09-04 04:00PM | 0 recs
The next few days will be key

Picking one poll to send a message while ignoring all others is what Matt Drudge does to spin the news. It hasn't worked yet this election cycle, because as you point out, the fundamentals knock on wood have not changed.

by iohs2008 2008-09-04 04:14PM | 0 recs
Re: The next few days will be key
Palin has the potential to change those fundamentals. She can do that by firing up the conservative base and getting it to the polls, but she can also do it by locking down the far-right wing of the party and freeing McCain to move back towards center. The next few days are going to be key: Does Palin get identified as the inexperienced, mendacious, and scandal-ridden candidate that she is? Or does the "Hail Sarah" work and McCain has suddenly created options where, before September, it looked as if he had backed himself into a corner? Jerome is pointing to this one poll as an indication that we have cause to be worried. It's the only point of relevant data we have. But it's also only one point of data.
by Justin Alexander 2008-09-04 09:01PM | 0 recs
Re: I'll wait for gallup and rasmussen

Hey I actually scored her a B last night , who needs surveyusa lol...

by lori 2008-09-04 04:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Great story on Dkos... the poll is BOGUS:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9/4/1 8282/86066/911/586933

In the Aug 29-31 poll, where Obama came out 50-42, the ratio of weighted Republicans surveyed to weighted Democrats surveyed was 30.8% (R) to 41.4% (D).

In the Sep 1-3 poll, where he and McCain tied at 42, the same ratio is 31.1% to 34.8%.

If you increase the percentage of Republicans in your poll by 5% of the total, guess what? Odds are that close to 5% more of all of your respondents will favor the Republican candidate!

For the record, Rasmussen uses +5.7% in favor of Dems in his surveys, and Gallup uses +9% in favor of Dems.

by Bob Beard 2008-09-04 03:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Ah, did you even read the post to understand why this happened?

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 04:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

I ready your post, but I've never heard of that big a swing in Party ID over the course of one week. That's usually something that takes months or even longer to develop.

I have a very, very hard time believing that Palin's pick alone swung that many independents over to the Republican side. It does not make sense. There hasn't even been enough time for her speech, no matter how effective, to sink in.

by Covin 2008-09-04 04:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

As do I.

The CBS poll was run from Monday to Wednesday.  I'll admit that I had a hard time deciding on how her speech would come across to the average person last night (and this is speaking as a "middle America" native).  But I saw literally nothing prior to last night that would have moved people toward McCain or her.

So I think the theory that the party ID swing is actual is wholly unproven and unevidenced, at best.

by jonweasel 2008-09-04 05:19PM | 0 recs
Did you ever consider...

...that the reason for the partisan ID shift in the poll was not actual partisan ID shift but that more Republicans were home watching the RNC than Democrats?  And they were ready to answer the phone.

Come on, Jerome. You're better than this. You know damn well that party ID doesn't shift that fast.

The Christian conservative base is the part of the GOP coalition that NEVER LEFT the party. It was the non-Christianists that went into Independent status.

Party ID is like religion. It changes, but very slowly.

by elrod 2008-09-04 05:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Did you ever consider...

He's got a damned good point, Jerome.  Add in the fact that only the CBS poll shows this kind of movement over that time period, and I have to say you have an uphill battle supporting your theory.

The GOP's going to get a bounce, and I fully expect the McCain campaign to be leading the race post-convention.  But let's not get carried away with apocalyptic interpretations of single suspect polls...

by jonweasel 2008-09-04 05:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

SUSA Jerome? SUSA?!?

Okay, you are vindicated. You were right when you said Obama is the "weakest nominee in decades".

LOL

by John in Chicago 2008-09-04 03:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Thanks.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 04:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

How does the media being seen to pile on Palin and/or Palin giving a good speech reflect on Obama's strength as a nominee?  

by bosdcla14 2008-09-04 04:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

It doesn't. Sorry, I forgot the snark tag...

by John in Chicago 2008-09-05 07:17AM | 0 recs
This is really good news...

in that it is the same news I kept hearing throughout the primaries about how Sen. Clinton was going to romp.  I may well be wrong, it has happened occasionally in the past, but when I watch this presidential election I am reminded of 96 and Sen. McCain looks a lot like Sen. Dole.

by tonedevil 2008-09-04 04:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Jerome, once people find out that Palin's speech last night was either lies or half-truths, they will be disgusted.

I am currently working on my boss - a republican who is a moderate, but has never voted democrat.  ever.  

I hope to change his mind by the GE, even though it doesn't matter in MA, it is my pet project :)

by colebiancardi 2008-09-04 04:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Good luck.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 04:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

I would not be surprised if Jerome is secretly rooting for McCain just so he can say "told ya so"

Did anyone seriously not expect the polls to bounce up and down?  In the end Palin will fade away and it will come down to Barack and John, people will realize that "Change" has substance and "reform" is nothing but lip service.

by neko608 2008-09-04 04:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

I know, all of a sudden McCain starts to get a convention bounce and it becomes "The sky is falling!"

It's important to work, but I'm not going to get faint over a daily poll.  The public's reaction to her speech is not going to matter in the long term, because nobody knows what kind of campaigner she is yet.  She may be a great one, or she may just irritate everyone she meets.  We really don't know yet.

Maybe this sticks, maybe this doesn't.

by auronrenouille 2008-09-04 04:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

"Change" has substance and "reform" is nothing but lip service.

Keep that one to yourself, thanks.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 04:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

oh this is riduculous, The McCain Campaign wants to work the refs and the blogs into not vetting her, and she is going to get away with it?

if the GOP with this ticket win, they America deserves the 4 years they give us.

what LIES? there was 1 diary about Trig not being Sarah's, and if anyone bothered to read the comments no one believed it.

The McCain campaign WANTS to talk about Bristol they are playing victims here to get support, no screw that

if they win, then this country deserves everything they do to it.

by TruthMatters 2008-09-04 04:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Stop panicking.

People who follow the tracking polls have manic depression.

We knew Obama was going to take a hit this week.

What the public knows about Sarah Palin is that she's got a teen daighter who was pregnant, and the media hounded her over that. Plus, she gave a great speech. That's it.

The other stuff that WE all know about and is just starting to his the MSM ha snot penetrated yet. The bloom will come off the rose eventually. Just like it came off Obama. She and McCain will come back down to Earth.

Just be patient and do not panic. This is nt a static race. And,importantly, LOOK AT McCAIN'S NUMBERS!They have never gone about 50%. Ever. And that "bet" question is idiotic. Who do they SUPPORT for President is what I want to know. I bet McCain is still at no more than 46%.

He's got a ceiling.

Obama's number fluctuate. They will go up and harden closer to the election.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Thank you for saying this. Jerome acts like McCain has been over 50 all along.

I'm having a hard time believing that McCain can win this given he has yet to break 45%. Last time I checked, 45% wasn't great.  McCain is known, he has a big fat R by his name and in my opinion if he was that great of a candidate as people keep claiming, he should be beating Obama. He's not.

Call me optimistic but unless Obama completely falls flat at the debates, I just don't see McCain winning.

by sweet potato pie 2008-09-04 04:08PM | 0 recs
This reminds me of the PA primary,

We saw wildly fluctuating polls over teh last two weeks before that primary. One day Obama was down 4. Another he was down 10.

But, what was really going on was Hillary;s numbers kept fluctuating up and down while Obama's stayed relatively stable at about 42-44%.

This is what I am seeing with McCain's numbers.

Maybe his speech will break him out of the 45% range he's been stuck in over the past several months. But, as of right now, all the Palin thing did was put doubts in the minds of a bunch of low information voters who are inclined to vote Democrat this year and want to feel confident that Obama is not some space alien.

They keep getting whipsawed on him. He just has to keep on doing what he's doing and focusing on the economy and act presidential, and with poise.

The more he does that, the more comfortable people will get with him.

My prediction -- Obama will be back in the lead by about 3-4 point two weeks from now.

Michael Dukakis had a FANTASTIC convention in 1988. Highlighted by that terrific speech Ann Richards gave that is still a legend. He was up 17 points after the DNC that year.

He lost.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:14PM | 0 recs
Re: This reminds me of the PA primary,

I though Ann Richards gave the "Poor George" speech at the 1992 convention. Am I wrong?

by 2maddogs 2008-09-04 04:45PM | 0 recs
Re: This reminds me of the PA primary,

Dukakis lost because he went back to Mass and acted like he had won already.

by sweet potato pie 2008-09-04 04:49PM | 0 recs
Re: This reminds me of the PA primary,

And in a Democratic year, Obama is mostly below 50% and tied with McCain and this is good?

And your illustration of Obama's stability at 42% to 44% is really comforting.  Last time I noticed, unless you have a strong Indie run like with Perot, those kind of numbers are the losers.

Nope, weak candidate - the polls should be at a comfortable Democratic margin particularly this year.

by anya109 2008-09-05 06:02AM | 0 recs
Re: This reminds me of the PA primary,

McCain is the one with stable numbers that don't get over 46%.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-06 06:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

McCain's numbers even with these massaged numbers never seem to go above 45. How many polls have there been, and how many times has he been above 45?

by bruh3 2008-09-04 04:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Much of that is true, but Jerome does have a point. It concerns me that so many Americans feel the media has been biased in favor of McCain, when nothing could be further from the truth.

If the networks are getting similar data in their marketing research, we could have a real problem the last few months of the election. Imagine a media even less willing to criticize McCain than it was earlier this summer.

That could spell big problems for the Obama campaign.

by Covin 2008-09-04 04:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

They are biased for Obama. This election has turned into Good vs Evil now. The press senses it. They see that the only way the GOP can win is by exploiting the absolute WORST aspects of the American psyche, and I think they are recoiling at that, and are resisting it. FINALLY.

They WANT to be neutral, but cannot let this shit pass.

So, I don't much care. The Press is on Obama's side for the RIGHT reasons. And, even though the public says its biased, they still are influenced by what the press says.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

No, I completely disagree. In giving McCain a free pass on virtually all of his flip-flops, all of his gaffes, the media has shown whose side they're truly on in this election. The last few days have been the best for us in the media since I can remember. Certainly the best in the last eight years.

We don't want the media to turn on Obama. That is an advantage for McCain that we can't afford.

by Covin 2008-09-04 04:55PM | 0 recs
They won't.

The McCain campaign has finally burned their bridges to the media this week. They declared war on the media. Joe Freakin Klein sounds like a member of Daily Kos now.

Electing Obama is extremely important for this country. It will destroy the only thing the GOP has in its arsenal. It will shatter the conservative movement. They know that. That's why they have bee staging this crazy Nuremberg rally this week. They are desperate.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 05:35PM | 0 recs
Godwin's Law

-- has been invoked.

by SuGeAtARC 2008-09-04 05:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Jerome

I just got home a half ahour ago. Heard about the CBS poll, and foound out about it's partisan breakdown. Why haven't you?

by bruh3 2008-09-04 04:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

bruh, you just got here to the thread, why didn't you actually read the post to understand what happened?

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 04:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

You aren't first site I read jerome.

by bruh3 2008-09-04 04:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

by the way- as a seasoned operative, you know that this is the middle of the GOP convention. You know all of this, and yet you ignore it.

by bruh3 2008-09-04 04:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

I thought  Palin did well but in the end people don't vote for VP.  The conventions are important but the debates are key.  The debates killed Jerry Ford and Al Gore and they won it for Reagan in 1980 who was losing until the debate.  

This is an issues driven year and while Palen won't hurt, this speech felt like it was out of 2004.  People desparately want change and the Rs can't credibly provide it.  They can pretend all they want that Al Gore has been President the last 8 yrs but the fact is the public knows it has been Bush.

The Dems need to ignore the Palin distraction of this week and stay on message which is McCa!n=Bush.  If we do, we will win.
 

by jmnyc 2008-09-04 04:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Forgot to add that the community organizer crap is going to come back to bite them.  People run who PTAs, block associations, neighborhood watches, etc. are community organizers.  Also, as has been pointed out on DailyKos, Jesus was a community organizer.  This is  a huge opening and I hope we exploit it.

by jmnyc 2008-09-04 04:12PM | 0 recs
The Catholic church angle will kill them.

Hammer home that community organizing and good works are a major component of the Catholic faith and Church and that Palin's comments are an insult to the Millions of Catholics out there who volunteer in their communities.

If Bill Donohue wasn't just a rightwing tool he'd be making this point.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

P.S. Keep pounding opn Palin. Do not let up. Ignore the fucking media and the so-called "backlash."

The Republicans never let up, even in the face of steep criticism. You have to keep pushing this stuff and pushing this stuff because it has not penetrated yet!

And, just because the public thinks the media wants Obama to win, doesn't mean they ignore what the media says or are not influenced by it.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

and also how are they grading the speech?

if you asked me she got a B+ she delivered it very nicely, that doesn't change the fact that it only appealed to the base,

how people graded her speech means nothing, as you said, even Biden gave it an A

by TruthMatters 2008-09-04 04:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Also, where the fuck is Hillary, Jerome? She hasn't done jack shit to push back on this.

HILLARY should be Obama's number one surrogate attacking Palin. But she's AWOL.

Pretty much confirming everyone's suspicions about her motives.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Are you sure because HRC has done more to help BO that any losing primary candidate in my lifetime.  But i guess that is not enough for people like you.  DUDE, it is the GOP convention and the general rule is the other side sits on the side lines until it is over.

Get a grip.  Anne Oakley will be back.  By the way do you think calling a 60 year old women anne oakley is maybe a little come on just a little sexist???

david

by giusd 2008-09-04 04:14PM | 0 recs
She's AWOL this week.

This is the week Obama needed her the most. All she did was reinforce the sexism" meme the GOP was pushing.

Which, (along with the Obama campaign's capitulation on that issue) ins ONE of the main reasons why the public thinks Palin was treated so unfairly.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:17PM | 0 recs
Re: She's AWOL this week.

BO and his supporters need to take some responsibility and stop blaming HRC all the time.  It gets old. If BO wanted her to do this he should have put her on the ticket, period.

HRC is not running for pres but his supporters will never grow tried of smearing HRC all the fing time.  

david

by giusd 2008-09-04 04:52PM | 0 recs
Let it go.

The Annie Oakley line was totally legitimate and not the least bit sexist. I suppose he could have said like "dead eye dick" or something.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Pfft.  Dean did more to help kerry IN THE FIRST WEEK after he dropped out than Clinton has done to help Obama to this point.

She needs to be out there....and she is not.

by lojasmo 2008-09-04 04:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin
She and Chuck Schumer are going to be in Florida next week campaigning for Obama, at the same time as Palin is supposed to be there. Should be interesting.
Of course, eastern Florida is facing what is currently a Cat 4 hurricane coming across the ocean, so things could change.
I think the media is doing a pretty good job investigating her, and now Palin has pissed them off. Pissed off corporate media types that McCain used to call his "base".
Have no fear.
by skohayes 2008-09-04 04:17PM | 0 recs
Hope she doesn't cal him her "opponent"

Like the last time.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Well, if she was the VP, LOL.... anyway, I'm not a part of her defense crew.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 04:18PM | 0 recs
Mitt Romney's not McCain's VP.

Giuliani isn't McCain's VP. But they have been busting their humps for McCain -- even though Romney's already planning a 2012 run.

Hillary is just proving to us why we were right to reject her in the first place.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Mitt Romney's not McCain's VP.

OK Mr Rove your concern is noted.

Where is Obama?

Didn't we nominate him to do some work?

Or was he thinking Hillary was going to do it all for him?

Will it be Hillary's fault when he has a crisis in office?

Seems you think this is a training wheels nominee.

by dtaylor2 2008-09-04 04:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Mitt Romney's not McCain's VP.

"your concern is noted"

Pot, meet kettle.

by blueAZ 2008-09-04 08:11PM | 0 recs
Since when?

is this a recent development?

by Al Rodgers 2008-09-04 04:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

IMHO it was a poor decission for the left to go after Palin so hard and try to suggest she wasnt up to it.  Because it sets the bar really low and they when she comes out with a very solid speach then she beats the expectations game.

Just my opinion.  And while i am on this we (liberals) did the same thing to Reagan in 1980 and then he beat Carter in the debate it was over. Liberals need to be careful with libertarian republicans.

david

by giusd 2008-09-04 04:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Keep hammering her. To stop now is suicidal.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

That didn't work with Reagan....
That didn't work with Bush....

Win on issues or lose.

by dtaylor2 2008-09-04 04:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

HAHAHA!  Hillary, please save us from that meanie, Palin!

by ChitownDenny 2008-09-04 05:04PM | 0 recs
Are you for McCain?

I know you rooted for McCain in 2000.  Will you do so this year?

by jasmine 2008-09-04 04:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Are you for McCain?

I rooted for McCain to beat Bush in 2000, didn't you?

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 04:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Are you for McCain?

That's a great non-answer.

by blueAZ 2008-09-04 08:13PM | 0 recs
Jerome has a CRUSH on Sarah

That's okay.

I've seen it before.

by Al Rodgers 2008-09-04 04:14PM | 0 recs
Jerome is merely expressing

a contrary opinion; he's not cheering for McCain.  However, I disagree with him on this one.  We'll see what the tracking polls show tomorrow when the results come in from the Palin speech.

What do the results from that live HCDI focus group show for Obama?

by Blazers Edge 2008-09-04 04:15PM | 0 recs
Th trackking polls will show a tied race...

...or McCain slightly ahead tomorrow, is my guess.

I'd only start to worry, though, if McCain was suddenly hitting 50%. That would mean he's changing the minds of committed Obama voters and not just pushing people back into the undecided category.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

So much for a Palin retreat... wishing thinking for some.

by stefystef 2008-09-04 04:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Palin is their '12 nominee no matter what-- McCain wins (he won't) -- he serves 1 term.  McCain loses, she's it and forces Obama to dump Biden (to Sec of State) and put Sebelius or Blanche Lincoln, etc. on the ticket.  

However, I suspect Palin is a dead end for them because I do not get the sense she's a very NICE person, and- sorry, Reagan was nice outside of politics.

by Bob Beard 2008-09-04 04:18PM | 0 recs
Obama would crush her in '12

With 4 years of good governance and experience under his belt, he'd kick her ass. All the "doubts" about him would be gone.

I predict she doesn't even run in 2012 for that very reason, Let Romney or Rudy bee the sacrificial lamb, and she can run against Biden or Hillary [Or Warner] in 2016. She's young enough.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

As someone who hated and hates reagan with a passion I give you he was a nice man and kind hearted outside of politics.

Bush Jr on the other hand is not.

by dtaylor2 2008-09-04 04:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Where do you see that Reagan was nice and kind hearted?  He was genial, that is not the same thing.

by anya109 2008-09-05 06:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

No Reagan was a disaster for the country.  But as an individual he was a functional emotional being.

Bush Jr not so much.

by dtaylor2 2008-09-05 08:06AM | 0 recs
Okay, so now what?

Yes, Palin wound up being a better pick than initially expected. But Obama can't prevent McCain from choosing his running mate. Everyone gets their convention. the question is: what is the appropriate strategy now?

by iohs2008 2008-09-04 04:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Okay, so now what?

Actually, I don't even think she was "better than expected."  She was supposed to be an appealing speaker; that was one think the media harped on in the beginning.  Then all of the dirt came out, and suddenly she was on shakier ground.  With expectations low, she showed that she still knew how to deliver a speech, and the reaction is that she became a tour de force overnight.  Whatever.  

I feel as though I've been able to choreograph this race since Obama chose Biden.  McCain would choose a woman VP... an arch conservative to shore up the base (that would have happened no matter what)... he/she would "galvanize" social conservatives.  

Fortunately, I think I know how this drama will end...

by wilder 2008-09-04 05:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

I didn't see it posted yet, so pardon if this is already here.

The CBS poll is shit.  Look over at Daily Kos - they actually gave the Repugs more weight in the latest poll....hence the change.

by MtnFrost 2008-09-04 04:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Why don't you take the time to read the post, to learn why it happened. Its all right above and in the links.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 04:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Didn't the CBS poll take place over the same period as the polls that showed Obama with a 5+ lead?

by wilder 2008-09-04 05:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

"you don't represent the American majority viewpoint"

the only problem w/ the above statement is that, when you look at the crosstabs of this poll, the poll itself clearly does not represent the viewpoint of a representative sample of Americans.
The 60% you reference is based on a sample of 40% GOP and only 29% Dem. (as it is based only on those who heard the speech - a sample which skews towards the GOP).  Furthermore, the fact that significant numbers of non-GOP in the sample gave Palin an "A" on the speech will not translate into support of her in Nov. (for example, the 38% of blacks who gave her an "A").

by silver spring 2008-09-04 04:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Well, you have 57% of Independents saying "A" which I think pretty much closes your case.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 04:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

if you were to extrapolate the numbers based on proportional percentage of party ID, the "A" option would have approx. 53% support in my guestimate (back of napkin) .... not bad on the surface; however, the bottom line, IMO is I don't think the "grade" in this poll necessarily equates to support.  I heard the speech too and would give her a B+ on it, but would under no circumstances vote GOP.

by silver spring 2008-09-04 04:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Correct, or Obama and Biden would be voting for her.  

:)

by nextgen 2008-09-04 04:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Yep, you hit it. I really liked her speech in the sense of I admired her delivery and laughed at her punch lines.  So I'd give her an A. I think she's a fine public speaker. But I'm not voting for a ticket with a creationist on it. Just not going to happen.

by SuGeAtARC 2008-09-04 06:02PM | 0 recs
SUSA Poll is skewed

If you were placing a bet today, would you bet that Barack Obama will be elected president? Or, John McCain will be elected president?

I've not seen a single one of these that favor McCain, but this does, by a slim 48-45 margin.  

Of course, silly.

This poll has a party break down of 36%(R), 33%(D), 26%(I).

by Al Rodgers 2008-09-04 04:22PM | 0 recs
try again... this time with a calculator

It does?  Really, did you actually do that math?

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 04:24PM | 0 recs
What's wrong with you?


► Do like being pantz in public??

by Al Rodgers 2008-09-04 04:34PM | 0 recs
Re: What's wrong with you?

actually, the 60% "A" grade is based on 40% GOP, 29% Dem.

by silver spring 2008-09-04 04:45PM | 0 recs
I've given up on a polite reasonable response

Jerome is competing with Rudy on how sarcastic and condescending he can be.

by dtox 2008-09-04 04:55PM | 0 recs
Re: What's wrong with you?

Thanks, but keep your pants on. We are referring to different polls in the post.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 07:34PM | 0 recs
What were the top line numbers, Jerome?

I notice you didn't post those. ONly the "bet" numbers.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:34PM | 0 recs
In Jerome's defense, the viewership

of that speech was probably more Republican than the  electorate normally is.

by Geekesque 2008-09-04 05:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

"pushed by prominent liberal blogs into the mainstream"

Would this be Kos?  I haven't seen a front-pager on Kos push any of the heavy tabloid stuff on Palin.

Are you referring to another blog or is this just the big "I hate everyone who doesn't support Hillary" bias just bubbling up to the surface again.

by PaulDem 2008-09-04 04:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Andrew Sullivan pimped out the diaries to the reporters.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 04:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Huh?  Andrew Sullivan writes for a prominent liberal blog?  Come on.

If that is the best you can do, may I humbly suggest you come up with some evidence to back up that statement or issue a correction.

by PaulDem 2008-09-04 05:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

McCain gets a convention bump and the world is aflame?   Geez.  What did you expect?  This is America.  You thought that suddenly the country became reasonable?  McCain will get a bounce, the evangelicals will piss themselves, the slog is on, the debates will come, the love affair will be over, the Dems win in a landslide and will come very close to a filibuster proof Senate.  not a poll out there or any trend that sufggests anything otherwise.  I mean good god these evangelicals and the base sure as hell turned out in the primaries.  And the numbers of Dem voters were, at times, triple the Republicans.  Turnout among Dems was insane and, again, that was when the Republican base WAS turning out.  I suppose it's possible Dems don't turn out in the same numbers in the General but I just don't see that happening absent an asteroid hitting the Earth.  Calm down.  Relax.  Keep hammering the hell out of the Republicans.  A little poll fluctuation doesn't mean much.  And it's ok that 35% or so of America are just flat dumb.  

by scytherius 2008-09-04 04:31PM | 0 recs
Now obviously my humble opinion doesn't

count much. I was one of those fools who found Ms. Palin's speech to be hackneyed and callow.

But obviously the knowledgeable Mr. Joe is more tune with the political affairs and state of the country and the World. If he found Palin to be an attractive choice, and is willing to choose her for this country's VP, then so be it. Mr. Joe voted for GWBush because he felt that he can have a beer with Bush Jr., so why not put him in charge of the most powerful position in the World. In a democracy, voters deserve the leaders they choose. So it is all up to Mr. Joe. We'll do our job as much as we can to convince him otherwise, but it is the majority Mr. Joe's choice that will prevail not the darn 8%.

Saying that I agree with you that it is disconcerting that McCain/Palin is running close to Obama/Biden. But I always thought (again the stupid me) that this will be a classic Rovian election where one who turns out their base better will win. McCain has been able to unite his base behind him by choosing the social conservative Palin, thus it was a master stroke. Obama, it seems  still has some work to do to get every Democrat behind him.

by louisprandtl 2008-09-04 04:32PM | 0 recs
So my mother has this theory

that Palin is just a stalking-horse to rally the base, and then McCain's real choice will be announced later.

At first I didn't think much of that-it would be very risky for such a maneuver-but who knows?

How is this scenario: McCain envisions that he can only win with Palin, however after the election she will voluntarily step down, and he chooses Lieberman or Ridge. That would explain why there was such a lack of vetting, and why she comes across as someone who never contemplated the VP slot, or anything near it. Perhaps they have "an agreement". What does she get out of it? National exposure, and a new fan base.

Not saying I buy into it, but it is a scenario...

by Zach in Phoenix 2008-09-04 04:55PM | 0 recs
The theory is interesting but that would be lot

of drama on Reality TV..:)

by louisprandtl 2008-09-04 05:29PM | 0 recs
In most polls that I've seen, about 10%
more Americans identify themselves as Democrats than Republicans. You're right in your assertion that polls show that Obama is getting ~85% support of Democrats and McCain has similar support from Republicans. If Independents are evenly split then there is no reason why Obama should not be at least 10 points in the polls. Actually most post convention polls gave him a lead of 5-8 points. However, if they are still running neck-to-neck after the Republican convention, then there are three reasons:
  1. A significant swing of independents and some Democrats in favor of McCain.
  2. Obama's support amongst Democrats and independents needs some more work.
  3. McCain's support amongst Republicans went from ~85% to ~100%, which is not plausible following historical trends.
by louisprandtl 2008-09-04 04:59PM | 0 recs
I completely agree with you. I want to emphasize

your last paragraph. It is going to come down to turning out the base ultimately in a close election.  Classic Rove strategy is to maximize the base turnout and depress your opponents support turnout to win such an election. Obviously I don't expect Obama to do the latter, being the gentleman that he is, but I sure do hope , that his campaign focuses on the base turnout effort as much as possible.

by louisprandtl 2008-09-04 05:27PM | 0 recs
Actually barring the recent CBS poll, most polls
that I have seen, give Democratic identification about 10 points more than Republicans amongst registered voters.
Check the last Pew Research Poll and the detailed report on party identification which shows the trendlines from 1992-2008.
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/933/a-closer -look-at-the-parties-in-2008
by louisprandtl 2008-09-04 05:58PM | 0 recs
Well that's what I'm trying to get at..where is

the support soft? We need to find what it is and take corrective measures. I think it is the strong base turnout that would get Obama to White House but then I'm not a polling expert nor a political expert.

by louisprandtl 2008-09-04 06:07PM | 0 recs
ok..let me look at it more and understand..

Jerome also seems to think that independents moved some to the Republican column from the CBS poll. I still think consolidation of the Democratic base and a strong base turnout would completely overturn any McCain advantage amongst independents.

by louisprandtl 2008-09-04 06:19PM | 0 recs
Re: ok..let me look at it more and understand..

Some, but the real movement is from republicans that were not going to vote, whom now are.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 07:39PM | 0 recs
Definitely consolidation of the Republican vote,

by bringing some of the doubting social conservatives back into McCain fold was caused by Palin effect. However, I happen to think Obama's support amongst a small section of Democrats is a little bit soft. These Democrats remain to be converted to enthusiastic supporters so that they would be willing to come out en masse to vote for the top ticket.

by louisprandtl 2008-09-04 10:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Those same polls

a) that's daily polls

b) that only happened in the last week

c) his numbers shot up from 45-46 to mccain 39-43 to 47-51 for Obama.

finally there is the common sense factor. people don't change their believes so quickly.

by bruh3 2008-09-04 06:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

I think there are shoes to drop with Palin still.

But, after decades of seeing how easily the American people are led by their noses to the poisoned troughs...

I hope they crash and burn spectacularly.

by bird52 2008-09-04 04:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

In three weeks, the polls will be right back to where they were 2 weeks ago.

I'm surprised at you Jerome.  You seem to be just as susceptible to seeing too much in a single data point, as someone who has never been in this business before.

Your lack of context, with your rather surface level analysis of this poll, is quite sad.  

You know, it doesn't surprise me that you worked for Jerry Springer.  It really doesn't.  

by Stipes 2008-09-04 04:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Markos made me take the gig, blame him.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 04:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

I'm surprised at you Jerome.  You seem to be just as susceptible to seeing too much in a single data point, as someone who has never been in this business before.

You're surprised, honestly?  Have you been here throughout the whole race?

by BishopRook 2008-09-04 04:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Well, Jerome wrote a big fucking book on politics!

Christ almighty, I'm just a fucking engineer, and I feel as if Jerome doesn't really understand this stuff.  I'm stunned.  Just stunned.

Either he's being disingenuous, or he really doesn't understand this subject.

I hope that he's being disingenuous...that's a lot better than the alternative.

by Stipes 2008-09-04 05:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Either he's being disingenuous, or he really doesn't understand this subject.

I think Jerome has a pretty good handle on the subject . . .

by blueAZ 2008-09-04 08:19PM | 0 recs
Jerome the CNN poll before and after

Obama's speech showed a tie but other polls showed that Obama got a bounce.

The CBS poll was done the exact dates as the Gallup and Rasmussen tracking polls as well as the Dem Corp poll.  They all were done Sept 1-3.

Only the CBS poll shows that it is tied while the other polls shows that Obama has a 5-7 point lead.

I expect Obama's lead to decrease for the GOP will get a bounce out of their convention.

But the reason why it's called a "bounce" because things "bounce" up and down.

I just can't concerned about one poll when 3 other polls show no concern for now.

I think that Palin energized her base but she also energized the Dem base as well.

Again this is about the ground game and Obama has by far the way better one so far.  There is NO indication at this point that the GOP is building theirs.

by puma 2008-09-04 04:35PM | 0 recs
the answer is ATTACK

Attack now!! I want to see the first negative ads attacking McCain's credibility and character. Obama has distanced himself from the one person who was ready and qualified to do this Ge. Wesley Clark. So it has to be people like Jim Webb and John Kerry. Attack Sarah Palin and cut her down. Where are those woman surrogates for Obama who were so vocal in the primaries? Finally Biden has to step up to his role. Sarah Palin is a pitbull, make no mistake she fights dirty and she relishes the fights. Biden has to do more than just show his glorious teeth in broad smile? where is his acerbic wit? He has to live up to his role or this thing will go south in a heartbeat.

by tarheel74 2008-09-04 04:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

sorry I just don't believe her speech won over independents.

I will watch the polls of the next few days and see, but she came off as a Republican, she gave a great partisan Republican speech. it was a good speech.

but it had no substance, and having to bet on who will win means nothing remember during the primaries, all the Hillary voters voting for her who believed Obama would win.

same thing here.

by TruthMatters 2008-09-04 04:36PM | 0 recs
Re: I can't believe

Republicans voted Lieberman back into the Senate.

by wilder 2008-09-04 05:25PM | 0 recs
Re: I can't believe

It was 2004, the GOP hadn't had a chance to prove its incompetence, and the war was still popular to an extent. Oh, and Kerry was an awful candidate.

by elrod 2008-09-04 05:34PM | 0 recs
I have to disagree

One should note that McCain is unable to break 43% in most polls.  Where the race is close, it is because Obama's numbers go down.  The reason for that is because he is unable to pull away from Bush.  If McCain was successfully able to sell himself as not Bush, he would run away with this election.  He won't and he can't.  
Obama has not sold himself yet with the country, but McCain is much farther away from doing so.  An adequate performance in the debates will be sufficient to win this election, IMO.  

My feeling is that Palin is going to be a huge negative at the end, although she will give McCain a short term bump.  She will be a big reason for why independent, pro-nat'l security social moderates/liberals defect from the Repub ticket.  

Straight up, I can't stand her or her hypocritical theocratic agenda.  I was ready to puke after her speech yesterday.  I donated $100 to Obama/Biden, and felt even more thrilled after Obama admitted today that the surge was successful.  

by ClintoniteNoLonger4McCain 2008-09-04 05:55PM | 0 recs
Debates

I think many voters went from undecided to lean Obama after Obama's speech.  I think after the Repub convention, they will be back to undecided.  These are people are just habitually undecided, they may agree with every argument you make, but still remain undecided.  Neither McCain nor Obama engender any strong positive or negative feelings among those in the middle.  McCain is probably seen more negatively because of Bush (whom the middle dislikes.)

My guess is that given the negative feeling toward Bush and the Repubs, if Obama is adequate (doesn't have to be great), he will win this election.  It is kinda similar to 1980 with Reagan.  He needed to keep reassuring them.  

And Dems would be smart to not waste time engaging Palin, except to hook her to McCain (and maybe user her as a fundraising tool, I tell you I'll keep donating to prevent that Nazi from getting in the WH).  VPs rarely make a difference, consider 1988.  

by ClintoniteNoLonger4McCain 2008-09-04 06:10PM | 0 recs
I agree with you

McCain could win this, but my feeling is that he won't.  It likely will take Obama to come off as not ready for him to lose.  I think even with Palin energizing evangelicals (and I think that is overrated, those evangelicals "energized" by Palin would have likely voted anyway), this year looks more like 2006 than 2004.  

McCain has to do one of two things to win, either show that Obama is unqualified or show that he is substantially different than Bush.  If he is unable to do either, I think he likely loses.  For most true undecideds at the end, all things being equal, they will cast a vote for change.

by ClintoniteNoLonger4McCain 2008-09-04 06:42PM | 0 recs
Re: or Obama flubs the debates

It is possible, but I have a hard time seeing Obama flubbing all three debates.  My feeling is that Obama should simply recycle stump speeches rather than try to give thoughtful answers to the questions.  Basically know down pat your policy proposals, and otherwise you go McCain=Bush.  Obama needs to explain two things IMO, that McCain=Bush, and how his policies are better than Bush's policies.

A more risky strategy is to try to get under McCain's skin with snide attacks and get him to explode.  But if you succeed in getting McCain's volcano temper out, you might walk away with the election.

by ClintoniteNoLonger4McCain 2008-09-04 06:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Surprise, surprise, Jerome writes another pessimistic post.  At worst the race is tied.  At best Obama is up in the high single digits.  We're in a very good position to win.  When I see consistent polling showing Obama behind I'll start sharing your pessimism.  Until then, I'm getting on the phones and knocking on doors.

So Palin fired up the GOP base?  Well it's firing up me and many like me as well.

by NMMatt 2008-09-04 04:37PM | 0 recs
Jerome always remember its about state polls

Not general election polls.

Now if Obama starts dipping in all of the state polls than I will get concerned.

by puma 2008-09-04 04:40PM | 0 recs
If Obama comes out of this tied with McCain...

...it's over. Obama wins. Obama wins because the last haymaker that McCain could land on him was this convention, and that;s over. They will run attack ads on Wright, etc. but that stuff is old news now.

They already blew their wad on Ayers.

McCain is actually in serious danger of becoming swamped by Palin-mania in the GOP.

They like her a hell of a lot better than him! That's not how its supposed to go for a ticket.

Se's overshadowing him and I think the Obama campaign may start to exploit that and needle McCain on that.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 04:42PM | 0 recs
The take-away

is that she rallies parts of the conservative base, and you see that movement in the polls, combined with the usual bump that a convention gets.

That's different from your point of last night, which is that she had a tremendous speech, and was the future of the Republican party. Someone then commented "She's their Reagan" of 2012 or something to that effect.

I just don't see it. Yes, she rallies part of the conservative base. Yes, that brings that base back into the fold, and gives them a reason to vote FOR, and not just AGAINST.

For awhile it looked like some Republicans might stay home, I still think we are in an election where the base of both parties shows up strong, and the indy's trend strongly Democrat. That would be a repeat of 2006. And if polls fluctuate, well then they have been fluctuating in a fairly close range for a long time now, and I think we will have to wait until after the debates to know where things truly stand.

In the end, I think Palin's real impact is not so much on the general, but in mostly sunbelt states where working class cultural conservatives make up a large part of a large Republican base...i.e., the sunbelt states. While previously Dems may have hoped for an end to their political drought in these states, after Palin's nomination, they will probably be limited in their achievements.

She didn't stop Obama, she stopped the potential of his coattails, in specific states.

by Zach in Phoenix 2008-09-04 04:48PM | 0 recs
Say I'm

I'm in denial but 36R/33D party ID poll is hard for me to digest.  

Yes, I know Survey USA does a GREAT job with State polls.  

by nextgen 2008-09-04 04:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Jerome, that's not exactly how the party ID weighting thing works.

The fact that this poll has a far higher Republican tilt in the party ID is reason to put less stock in it, not more.  It's not a representative sampling of the country.

As always, fivethirtyeight:

And pollster.com:

...are much more reality-based.  But please, continue the predictions of doom.  They're always good for a lark in the evening.

by BishopRook 2008-09-04 04:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Well, Jerome.... I have to agree with you... I've got a very sinking feeling, too...  I don't know how it will play out in the end, but, it seems that the Republicans will steal one again.... and we are going to have to pray, pray, pray for John McCain's good health... 'cos that fascist woman scares the hell out of me!

Damn... I so wanted affordable health care, too...

by LordMike 2008-09-04 04:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

A democrat worrying is like drops of water in an ocean. Now if you were confident that would be unique

by bruh3 2008-09-04 05:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Thank you... for the record, I should meniton, that I've had this sinking feeling many times before... mid august (when the polls were tanking), during the Rev. Wright stuff...  So, my worrydar is very sensitive...

by LordMike 2008-09-04 05:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Well my problem with this diary are three fold a) it produces panic but offers no solutions (one of which would be to suggest you volunteer or donate or talk to friends who are the fence) b) its pretendin wea ren't in the middle of GOP PR week and c) I have a hard time believing jerome doesn't realize tht McCain hasn't consistently cracked the 45 mark in average polling but Obama consistently polls the upper 40s. This doesn't mean its a cake walk. It's just what I would expect to see of real assessment versus glooma nd doom. Real assessment includes the good, the bad and the ugly, and not just the bad and ugly.

by bruh3 2008-09-04 05:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

haha, good one.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 07:39PM | 0 recs
Jerome you're still a hack

You were a hack during the primaries and now you're a step away from being a Rethug concern troll.

I seriously wonder if you're a PUMA in disguise.  Go vote for the hockey mom if you love her so much.  Oy vey.

by Beerman 2008-09-04 05:05PM | 0 recs
Criticize him, critique his posting

all you can, but IMHO insulting Jerome is rather unfortunate.

by louisprandtl 2008-09-04 06:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Lets not be shitting our pants just yet.

by tired of dynasties 2008-09-04 05:05PM | 0 recs
the media thing

"Not only did they mostly backfire by not being true..."

Which ones turned out not to be true again?  

The Trig thing, for sure -- although that did flush out the Bristol story, which presumably they would have tried to keep under wraps for the next 60 days, which they probably should not be allowed to do if they are running a holier-than-thou culture wars campaign, sorry.  

I think the Enquirer was chasing an affair story but even if anyone is following it, I don't think that counts as a liberal blog or "the media".  

Unless I am missing something, pretty much everything else I have read has turned out to be true or at least colorably true -- troopergate, AIP, the lies about the Ketchikan bridge, Ted Stevens and earmarks...  And I would love to know more about the book-ban-defying librarian, but I haven't seen anything yet.  

I understand (per Steve Schmidt) that some reporters have been asking the McCain campaign all kinds of things off the record, but that's not the same as publishing lies.  What are the false accusations that have made it to the public, which have "mostly backfired by not being true"...?

by snowback 2008-09-04 05:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

The media has been busy digging a grave for us this past week, by following up on the vicious personal smears that have been pushed by prominent liberal blogs into the mainstream. Not only did they mostly backfire by not being true, but they confirmed the popular opinion that the media favors Obama. It's become conventional wisdom. This presents two huge problems.

This is Steve Schmidt's whole strategy and now you're giving it legitimacy on a progressive blog.  Good grief!

The mainstream press asked what McCain's vetting team should have figured out...

* Who is she?

  • What is her background?
  • What is her foreign policy experience (Johnny Mac's whole argument!)
  • What decisions did she make as commander of the Alaska National Guard (since the McCain camp offered that as her bona fides)

Howard Kurtz writes about how he's never seen a campaign go after the media so forcefully - to work the refs. (The War with the Press)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2008/09/03/AR2008090300711. html

...And you agree with Steve Schmidt and the GOP "Blame the media" tactic?  

The right has been planting stories in the foreign media for years.  If progressive blogs do it now that's not a sin.  That's progress.

by JoeBagadonuts 2008-09-04 05:10PM | 0 recs
Palin energized the base

The "celebrity" ad stomped on our "overseas trip" bounce.

Shit happens. At this point, I trust the Obama team to incorporate the new info and adjust.

by Neef 2008-09-04 05:14PM | 0 recs
No. Obama screwed that up.

He should have visited Iraq, Afghanistan and Israel and then come home right after the Maliki timetable thing.

The Speech in Berlin was stupid.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 05:37PM | 0 recs
Who the hell knows

how they would have spun it if he had cut his trip off abruptly.

Stop underestimating the GOP. They play hardball.

by Neef 2008-09-04 06:07PM | 0 recs
Re: No. Obama screwed that up.

I totally agree with you on that point. It was an amazing over reach.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 07:41PM | 0 recs
Re: No. Obama screwed that up.

I guess you must have been sleeping when the Republicans were criticizing Obama for never having been to Europe, even though he chairs the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee on Europe.

Then he went to Europe and they criticized him for that.

Like his visit with the troops in Germany, they had attacks ready whether he did it or not.  They will always have attacks ready for everything we do.  So the only logical course of action is to not make our decisions based on their potential attacks.

Please, please don't be drawn into the right-wing bizarro world where an American politician being able to draw a six-digit friendly crowd in a European city is a bad thing.

by BishopRook 2008-09-05 05:28AM | 0 recs
Need to be realitistic

Jerome is right.  If we deny the fact then it will be in our peril and the nation's.  

Thus I hope everybody wakes up and work doubly hard and donate and knock on doors,  talk to friends and relatives and convince them and tell them the truth.

Correct the lies the GOP puts forth.

by jasmine 2008-09-04 05:17PM | 0 recs
Need to be realitistic

Jerome is right.  If we deny the fact then it will be in our peril and the nation's.  

Thus I hope everybody wakes up and work doubly hard and donate and knock on doors,  talk to friends and relatives and convince them and tell them the truth.

Correct the lies the GOP puts forth.

by jasmine 2008-09-04 05:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Need to be realitistic

They are getting a bounce. No big deal.

by Hesiod Theogeny 2008-09-04 05:37PM | 0 recs
Not a very significant poll

First, the party ID of the SUSA poll was 36R-33D. This confirms that the only people home to pick up the phone were Republicans. Same thing happened for Democrats at the DNC.  Not even 2004 was party ID that way.

More importantly, the question was: what do you grade the speech?

Well, I hated it, but I wasn't the target audience. It was supposed to rally the base and sell herself to Independents. I thought it was an A+ speech for the base and a C for Independents - mostly because it was empty of substance and snide in tone. As a result, I give it a B. Her delivery was solid and charming at times. That's why Independents wouldn't go lower than a C.

What really hurt her was the lack of a video bio, which would have softened her image a lot. Thank Rudi Giuliani for that.

Ignore polls that show massive party ID movement during the convention. People don't become Republicans or Democrats because of the convention. They rally to their party's nominee at the convention.

by elrod 2008-09-04 05:39PM | 0 recs
Dear Everyone

While I personally disagree with the ultimate analysis (a tie or 2%) victory, Jerome is providing an excellent cautionary message for us.

Palin was a splash of cold water in the face; this thing isn't in the bag or anywhere near it.

After my son goes to bed tonight, I'm heading to barackobama.com and looking for volunteer opportunities. This will be my first time doing anything like that. I suggest that others do the same.

by bobestes 2008-09-04 05:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Dear Everyone

I find your post and those of others like yo insulting. do you seriously think anyone thought this was going to be a cakewalk? There is a difference however between predicting that it will require our sweat and predicting our funeral. Jerome has been predicign the latter for quite some time.

by bruh3 2008-09-04 05:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Dear Everyone

Gee whiz, don't be so sensitive. Just trying to urge others to get involved.

by bobestes 2008-09-04 06:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Dear Everyone

so you basically have no response to the points I was making about the diffence of what say Jerome is doing versus his other front pagers who do wild and crazy things like suggest people donate money?

by bruh3 2008-09-04 06:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Dear Everyone

Oh, I agree with you.

The point I was trying to make is to take Jerome's predictions of doom as motivation. Sorry if I wasn't as eloquent about that as you would have liked.

by bobestes 2008-09-04 06:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Dear Everyone

Oh bs, its people like you who have been shouting how it'd be a blow out every post I've made says its going to be a nail biter.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 07:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Jerome,

As with all your political analyses cough gas tax rebate cough I take this one with a large grain of salt. But instead of quibbling with the relative weights of self-identified Republicans and Democrats in a particular poll, I will instead agree with you that the media bias poll was disheartening to say the least.

John McCain has been the media darling this entire time, he stated that Iran was training al Qaeda and has on multiple occasions stated that he didn't say something that he clearly did. And the media has downplayed each of these gaffes everytime. Obama is being held to a higher standard and a double standard that will come into play as McCain goes into nuclear mode these next 2 months. We need to have pushback on the narrative that the media loves Obama and hates McCain. The media hating McCain! It is ludicrous to even think about. But in the minds of Americans, Obama is the "liberal media's" pick for President.

McCain and Palin are both shameless liars. Palin has shone herself to be both confident and stupid. These are traits that make powerful Presidential tickets. Obama needs to start the pushback. NOW.

by wengler 2008-09-04 05:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Right, and cough you'll remember who won Indiana, and cough who flipped his position on drilling...

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 07:44PM | 0 recs
Now for something completely different

Sarah Palin delivered bromides and nasty personal attacks on both Obama and anyone who actually lives a better life because of community organizers like nurses, priests and preachers, advocates for the disabled and poor, etc.  Some people saw that. But a desperate republican base and couch potato voters were enthralled by the snappy young mom defending the old war hero. So at least being a Republican was made less of a shameful fact to some temporarily. The poll reflected some of that, but mostly they reflect the images of the males on the stage, especially the handsome young man who got into trouble with the girl. Even the die-hard Republicans aged 35 to 55 still think it sucks they are stuck with McCain.  The poll reflects reaction to a floor show called Glory Days. When the bottom lines comes to McCain, they are still stuck and they know it. Who could vote for even four more years of this Republican disaster scene called America?

by Jeter 2008-09-04 05:50PM | 0 recs
You're right and you're wrong

You're right that many liberal bloggers seem to be in a race to convince themselves that Palin is death  for the ticket.  And these numbers certainly are not good.  But:

1.Check out Intrade.  The numbers have hardly moved.  Obama still has almost a 20% lead in terms of the odds of him winning.  These people are putting their money on the line, not just speculating or answering polls.  And the reason  they haven't changed their mind is:

2.This bump will pass.  I'll say it right now - 2 weeks from day, an identical poll will not have John McCain leading in likelihood of winning.  I'll be the first to say I'm wrong if it doesn't turn out that way.  And the other numbers you mention will stabilize also.  As will the good numbers that came out - perhaps you've seen the first ever poll to show the Obama ticket as being better "experienced" for the Presidency than the McCain ticket.  That also is likely temporary.  So we should chill out.

3.Most of the anecdotal data suggests that moderate women are not being swayed by this and many are even offended.  Some polls cited by Markos show that as well.  My suspicion is that this pick winds up being a wash in terms of attracting independents and moderate women.

I don't think McCain made this pick specifically to attract those voters, and I don't think he will get more of them because of it.  I think he did it for two reasons - excite the base and get back his maverickness.  That first reason is working, but given the disparity in party ID, I don't think that will be enough.  The maverickiness is an intangible, but I have to say all the evidence suggests that few see it as a "maverick" move.  And at this point, McCain has started to piss off the media, and I don't think they'll start calling him a maverick again when he keeps proposing the same crap as Bush.

That said, this was IMO one of the best picks McCain could have made given some crappy options.  I think KBH would have been better, but I understand he wanted his maverickness back and she wouldn't have done that.  Actually, I think Olympia Snowe would have been best - gained far more votes than she would have cost, but she wasn't an option any more than Ridge or Liebermann - McCain might not have made it out of the convention as the nominee if he chose her.

The fact that it was one of their best options does not mean that dems are in trouble.  Quite frankly, there is only one thing that can sink Obama (other than an act of terrorism or a major scandal), and that is the perception that he and the dems are "politicians as usual" just like the repubs.  Congress is constantly reinforcing that perception and Obama will be fighting to avoid it all the way to November.  And personally, I don't think he IS all that different that your average democratic politician, other than the obvious difference of his race and his impressive ability to avoid getting dragged into the muck thus far.  If he loses, it will not be Palin or McCain to blame, it will be the Democrats, including Obama himself, not being willing to truly take risks to differentiate themselves in the eyes of the 99% of Americans who follow politics only once every four years.

by edparrot 2008-09-04 05:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Are you for McCain?

^16% undecided

by Fistjab 2008-09-04 06:10PM | 0 recs
Palin is not a game-changer

Despite initial fears or impressions, Sarah Palin is not proving to be a game changer for the Republicans:

Female Clinton Supporters In Focus Groups See Talent, Mudslinging In Palin's Speech
(http://www.wvwvaf.org/2008/9/4/female-cl inton-supporters-in-focus-groups-see-tal ent-mudslinging-in-palin-s-speech)

# While some unmarried women moved toward the Republican ticket, an equal number moved against them. There was little change among married women.

# Most women said an overly harsh "sarcasm" pervaded her speech.

# On a scale of 0 to 100, Palin improved her favorability scale roughly 10 points among both married and unmarried women.

# Palin's recitation of her experience and accomplishment failed to answer, particularly for unmarried women, whether she was ready to be vice president.

If Palin didn't attract Hillary supporters with her speech last night, just whom did she attract?

by JD Lasica 2008-09-04 06:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Palin is not a game-changer

Hillary supporters.  She also happens to repel them in equal numbers.

by Jordache 2008-09-05 12:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Yeah, its like you have never seen a convention bump before Jerome. And this doesn't even necessarily count as a bump yet. You are also strangely enamored by the "power" of Sarah Palin when I feel strongly she is a wildcard unknown with far more downside to her party than upside. There are certainly aspects to your doom and gloom analysis that bear close scrutiny. But you have overblown one poll into a blue print for liberal paranoia. We will win this election with 300+ electoral votes.

by wasder 2008-09-04 06:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

I also bet that once McCain has finished speaking this evening Jerome will be breathing a little easier. What a dud he is at a podium. And what a crock to be talking about bringing change.

by wasder 2008-09-04 06:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

He was terrible, as expected.

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-09-04 07:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

Intrade shares are moving at a snail's pace.I have no idea what's up with that. Even without post-convention polling I expected McCain shares to skyrocket. Even Obama has a slight blip up.

by RandyMI 2008-09-04 06:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Post Palin

As other people are pointing out, asking "does Palin hurt or help John McCain?" is the wrong question: the answer you'll get is whatever the CW is.  You have to ask people what their individual reactions were: there are focus groups that other people have already posted that deal with that question.  Again and again, you get the same answer - she makes more independents vote for John McCain, as you said, and more independents flee from him, which you omitted.  In other words, it's a polarizing pick.

You're starting from a conclusion and throwing out all logic and all information that doesn't support it.

by Jordache 2008-09-04 07:06PM | 0 recs
Seriously...

...has there ever been a worse spokesman for the Democratic brand than Jerome?

Possibly Joe Lieberman. But that's it.

God, every little thing spells disaster. I'm sick of it. There is a difference between being complacent and NOT FUCKING CHEWING OUR NAILS ABOUT EVERY SINGLE POLL, JEROME.

by epenthesis 2008-09-04 10:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Seriously...
there does seem to be a bit of schadenfreude and "I told you so" every time Obama slips or takes a hit.
by mikeinsf 2008-09-04 10:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Seriously...

He just plain doesn't like him.  Which is fine, but I can do without the elaborate packaging.

by Jordache 2008-09-05 12:35AM | 0 recs
I largely agree...

I think we are going to see largely the same result we had 4 years ago...

Obama doing marginally better than Kerry...picking up Iowa and New Mexico...

Leaving Obama short... McCain 274 to 264 for Obama...

I hope I am more wrong than I have ever been in my life!

by SaveElmer 2008-09-05 06:55AM | 0 recs
Rasmussesn 46-45 or 48-46 Obama

Rasmussen poll is tightening.

Here is the poll of four 2004 Kerry Voters in my family:

One Strongly leaning towards Obama
One is still Undecided
One is Strongly leaning towards McCain
One is Leaning towards McCain just today

by Avistan 2008-09-05 08:02AM | 0 recs
I miss Jerome.

Whatever happened to the author of Crashing the Gate? This new Jerome seems obsessed with Democratic defeat and enamored with Republican strategy. It makes me sad.

by not Brit 2008-09-05 09:01AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads