|
It was supposed to be economics that was McCain's weak suit. Lest anyone think the whatchya ma Iraqi gaffe was an isolated event, we now have him blurting out embargoed foreign policy information, in this case the fact that the French are about to send additional troops to Afghanistan.
I'm actually surprised it's not closer, but, hey, there's more than a week left. But looks like there's plenty of room for improvement by Obama:
Buoyed by a big shift among college-educated voters, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama is gaining on New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, who now leads 51 - 40 percent among Ohio likely Democratic primary voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.
This compares to a 55 - 34 percent Clinton lead in a February 14 likely voter poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University. College-educated voters back Sen. Obama 58 - 33 percent, compared to a 46 - 41 percent Clinton lead with these voters February 14.
I don't think this has been diarized yet. From Susan Page, of USA Today
(February 12, 2008) — WASHINGTON — Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama has edged ahead of Hillary Rodham Clinton for the first time in a nationwide USA Today/Gallup Poll, which also shows Republican John McCain struggling to energize a dispirited GOP.
A different poll shows Clinton still ahead of Obama, however.
The surveys were released on the eve of primaries today in Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia. In both polls, McCain is running statistically even in a head-to-head contest against Clinton and slightly behind Obama.
In the USA Today poll, Obama bests Clinton 47 to 44 percent among Democrats and independents who lean Democratic.
Popular vote:
Bush 50,456,002 Gore 50,999,897
Total = 101,455,899
Bush 51,082,954 Kerry 47,487,934
Total = 98,570,888 (so far)
What happened to all the record-breaking registration? Turnout is down is absolute terms and way down relative to increased registration.
Even with additional votes trickling in and absentee ballots, etc., I don't see it equalling 2000.
RNC spokeswoman Christine Iverson said information is being closely held to keep the GOP strategy from reaching Democrats. The policy is so strictly enforced that GOP volunteers contacted in Ohio, Kentucky, Florida and Washington, D.C., refused to talk to a reporter even about nonstrategic matters such as the feelings behind their activism.[...]
Of course, this is the kind of thing you do in poker when you're holding a shit hand. Still, if being successful in keeping things secret is a source of confidence for them, I think we owe it to ourselves to puncture it. I'm getting my Googling fingers ready, and I'd be interested in finding out what anybody else knows or finds.
Bottom line: It's FL again, but this time FL is our redemption instead of our downfall. PA and OH are in the bag, and FL is the trump card that cancels out any Rovian last-ditch onside kick/squeeze bunt in IA, WI, and NM. So, I was particularly lifted up by the latest FL poll from Research 2000 reported in the Sun-Sentinel, and even more by the obligatory voter interviews. Maybe we should show William Gibson some appreciation: wgibson@sun-sentinel.com
More than 86,000 people have now voted early and almost 22,000 have sent in mail ballots in Clark County--the combined number is 107,866. Democrats have about 2,300-voter lead when the totals are combined. The actual numbers when mail and early voting are combined:
Democrats -- 47,713 (44 percent)
Republicans -- 45,444 (42 percent)
Independents -- 14,709 (14 percent)
Republicans are voting five percent above their registration in Clark County and Democrats are voting at their proportional numbers. That almost surely means that the Democrats will have to significantly widen this lead or it is unlikely that John Kerry will have a large enough advantage in Clark County to win the state.
I know nothing about NV politics beyond what I read here. Is there anything more that can be done? Ideas?
"The candidates are still in a statistical dead heat, with Kerry making incremental gains in a steady drip-drip-drip that has eroded the president's lead," said pollster John Zogby. Bush had a four-point lead three days ago.
The number of likely voters who believe Bush deserves to be re-elected dropped from 47 percent to 45 percent over the last four days, with the number of voters who believe it is time for someone new climbing from 48 percent to 51 percent.
All of this from ABC's Noted Now
SUSKIND ARTICLE: "According to notes provided to me, and according to several guests at the lunch who agreed to speak about what they heard ... Bush kept coming back to the thing most on his mind: his second term. 'I'm going to come out strong after my swearing in,' Bush said, 'with fundamental tax reform, tort reform, privatizing of Social Security.'"
The Kerry campaign is confident that it is winning Pennsylvania and Michigan by comfortable margins and pulling slightly ahead in Florida, a must-win state for Bush. The Kerry campaign's polling shows Bush leading in Iowa and West Virginia, and running about even in Wisconsin.
Kerry, however, has largely failed to erode the president's strong support among rural voters, especially in the upper Midwest, and among the devoutly religious, according to [Stan] Greenberg. Democrats credit Bush's support among the religious and rural for small, but significant, leads in Iowa, which Gore won in 2000, and West Virginia, as well as stronger-than-expected numbers in Wisconsin and Minnesota.
By my reckoning, giving Bush IA and WI and assuming that otherwise the 2000 electoral pattern holds, that gives Kerry 290 and Bush 248. That would mean that Kerry could actually lose Ohio and still win 270-268. Sound reasonable?
Josh Marshall, Chris Suellentrop and Kevin Drum all make similar points about how devastating this is potentially for Bush's credibility in general and his standing as Dear Leader of the War on Terra.
I agree with Suellentrop: "Bush's Bin Laden goof will give Kerry his best opportunity to score a post-debate knockout." Why isn't this happening? How can we make it happen? Any ideas?
The campaign seems to have just discovered this obvious line of attack. From the WaPo:
Polls show the race remains close, but Kerry's aides believe they have found a winning line of attack -- that Bush stubbornly refuses to face reality about the bad choices he has made at home and abroad and is distorting the consequences. At each stop, the senator has begun saying Bush is in a "state of denial."
I have to think this Rolling Stone article is going to have some media types and Kerry campaign people pissed off, because I think he's probably relating some things that the respondents didn't think were on the record. However, I thought it was a great insight to some of our favorite media whores. All our suspicions confirmed...
Other reporters were just as dismissive. Kerry had gotten a series of impassioned standing ovations during his speech. But when Elisabeth Bumiller described the event in the New York Times, she said, referring to a moment when Kerry spoke an entire paragraph in flawless Spanish, "Kerry's audience . . . listened in startled silence, then broke out into cheers and applause when he made his way through [the paragraph]."
What I've come up with is:
Let's get down to it: Bush is going to spend the remaining days of the campaign trying to paint John Kerry as a liberal who is out of touch. How original - Just like dear ole Dad!
What do you think the strategy is here? Building on the the debates? Why have him on every show? Very unusual--I'm willing to believe it's a masterstroke, but can't figure out the thinking. I suppose he might be coming out in full attack dog mode. Dunno....
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Guest lineup for the Sunday TV news shows:
ABC's "This Week" - Sen. John Edwards, Democratic vice presidential nominee; Bush-Cheney campaign manager Ken Mehlman; Joe Lockhart, senior adviser to Kerry-Edwards campaign; entertainer Sean "P. Diddy" Combs.
---
CBS' "Face the Nation" - Edwards; Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie.
---
NBC's "Meet the Press" - Edwards; Colorado Attorney General and Democratic senatorial candidate Ken Salazar and his Republican opponent, Pete Coors.
---
CNN's "Late Edition" - Edwards; Sens. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., and Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va.; Bush-Cheney campaign chairman Marc Racicot; Liz Cheney, Vice President Dick Cheney's daughter.
There are clear signs that the press is highly conflicted and trying to find a way to call Bush's bullshit. However, their hands are tied by the
"canons of journalistic objectivity". The general public, thick as they are, no longer think Bush is particularly honest (can you believe that was ever his calling card?), but unless he is exposed as the shameless bullshitter he is, he stands a chance of snowing just enough people to make the election too close for comfort (NB: I think we prevail in any case, but I want him crushed).
If Bush can be cornered on just one issue, then I'm convinced his whole lying house of cards will come crashing down. The time to do it is the next debate. The person to do it is Bob Shieffer, the debate moderator (along with Kerry, of course). And the topic to do it on is health care, which will likely be a big theme.
I try to develop this argument at greater length in the exteneded copy, but if you agree with me, please help by contacting Shieffer and laying out the urgency of holding Bush accountable. Letters to the media aren't my forte, but I think there is a strong case to be made and that Shieffer is a journalist of high integrity who can be prevailed upon to do the right thing. If someone has his contact info, it would be great if you would post it, along with anything you send to Shieffer.
© Kos Media, LLC
Site content may be used for any purpose without
explicit permission unless otherwise specified.
"Kos" and "Daily Kos" are registered trademarks of Kos Media, LLC
Privacy Policy
Powered by Scoop.
