home

The Late Campaign

Everything has been late in this general election. The Democratic nominee was not decided until June. The Democratic vice presidential nominee was not publically announced until August 23. The Democratic Convention does not start until August 25, the latest date in recent history. The Republican vice presidential nominee will not be named until August 29 at the earliest. And the Republicans will hold the latest convention in memory, which will begin ON Labor Day, the traditional kickoff of the Fall campaign.

After the end of the GOP Convention, only 3 weeks will pass before the first Presidential debate on September 26. That is likely to be the most important event of the general election campaign. Only 6 days later, the VP debate will be held on October 2. Just 5 days later comes the second Presidential debate on October 7. And the final Presidential debate comes 8 days after that, on October 15. After that just 20 days remain until the election.

Bottom line, this notion that "it's early" is simply wrong. Folks who say that are thinking in terms of previous electoral calendars. The fierce urgency of now is upon us already in this election.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< Sunday Afternoon Open Thread | CNN Poll: No Biden Bounce >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    All eyes on Virginia, Ohio, and Colorado this year (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by andgarden on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 06:35:58 PM EST
    And up till now, the trend is worrying.

    Not only will they not admit that Clinton (none / 0) (#42)
    by Vico on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:54:30 PM EST
    would have been a stronger candidate, they will blame Clinton for his loss.

    However, I still expect him to win, narrowly, and I'm voting for him.

    Parent

    Not Ohio (none / 0) (#60)
    by SueBonnetSue on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:14:48 PM EST
    This year it's Colorado, Nevada, and Virginia.  Or that's how it's looking right now.  Obama will carry PA, and McCain will take Ohio and Florida.  I suspect McCain will also pick up Nevada and probably Virginia too.  Colorado?  I don't know.  Colorado and Virginia will be the Florida of 2000 and Ohio of 2004.  

    Sigh...........we should have one this easily, and we could have............if only...............

    Parent

    Why wouldn't Congress continue to cave? (none / 0) (#61)
    by SueBonnetSue on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:16:37 PM EST
    I know that I am being pessimistic, but I just don't see this Congress doing much of anything.  On the big things, they will continue to cave.  :(  

    Parent
    it's not early (5.00 / 0) (#5)
    by pixelpusher on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 06:39:04 PM EST
    It's not early.  This campaign has been going on for 2 years.  It's late, and everyone's tired.  I still predict we are going to see a surprisingly low general election voter turnout for "the most important election of our lifetimes" - people just sick of the long campaign, not thrilled with either candidate, and deciding to let it slide.   I'm not saying it will be the lowest turnout in history, but it's going to be nowhere near the 2004 turnout.


    I worry about this too (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by esmense on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 06:53:33 PM EST
    This is exactly what happened in '72 and sunk McGovern -- record breaking participation in the primaries turned into a 20+ year low in voter turnout in the general. Thanks to divisions in the Democratic party and a general dislike of both candidates.

    I don't worry about the women who voted in the primary for Hillary voting for McCain. I worry about the women who didn't vote in the primary but might have voted for Hillary in the general not bothering to vote at all.

    McCain is going to get the white male vote -- like every other Republican over the last 30 years. The Democrats need a very ENERGIZED turnout from women to be competitive.

    Parent

    Then, it's not just late (5.00 / 7) (#12)
    by Cream City on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 06:58:28 PM EST
    It may be too late.

    This summer was squandered by the guy who kept demanding that the contender get out so he could get going.

    And he spent almost three weeks overseas and on vacation.

    It may be too late.

    Parent

    and my fear is (none / 0) (#53)
    by weltec2 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 09:25:03 PM EST
    that if Obama bombs out, the hate Hillary crowd is going to blame Hillary for his loss for the next four years. There will be no end of it until it kills HIllary's chance to run in 2012.

    Parent
    I see the opposite happening (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by Valhalla on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 07:35:15 AM EST
    It's already happening.  The hate Hillary crowd has lost much of their credibility -- every poll shows less faith in the MSM than the last.  There's a whole cottage industry of not-netrootz online communities popping up.  How many grandiose predictions did the 'creative' class insist on for months only to turn out to be laughingly wrong?  (Obama will raise half a billion by Nov, raise $100 mil in June, bring Republican cross-voters in droves, it will be a landslide in Nov?).  The fall of John Edwards proved just how bad they are at vetting candidates -- geometric proof to be completed in November.

    Eighteen million people didn't listen to any of the cr*p during the primaries, before buyer's remorse set in, and before many folks realized what was happening with gaming caucuses and the like.

    It's not just Obama who peaked too soon, but his supporters.  I hope they remember the apex well, because by November, and certainly by 4 years from now, it will all be just a bad memory of a dark time for most of us.  So I don't really care if they blame her, it only hastens the decline and reveals their ridiculousness to a greater audience.

    Parent

    energy (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by pixelpusher on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:07:16 PM EST
    I just don't see the Obama campaign being able to keep up that kind of excitement level.  The Biden announcement was a royal flop and the Denver convention is probably going to provide not much more than a dead cat bounce.  Then what?  Some more debates -- which Obama has never quite nailed -- and then we're hard up on election day.  That's not a formula for the sort of rising excitement that gathers in the undecideds.  That's a formula for stagnant polls where nobody really pulls ahead; and tons of people will be making up their minds at the last moment.

    This is the price you pay for having a candidate who's mostly biography and oratory, and little substance.  You can only keep up the feverish excitement level for so long.  This campaign hasn't done anything new since February.  The only reason that hasn't become apparent is because McCain's campaign is fairly incompetent as well.

    Another thing I'd like to point out is that the Edwards crash-and-burn doesn't exactly help people feel excited about voting for Democrats either.

    Parent

    Obama needs to define (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Grace on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:46:10 PM EST
    "Hope and Change."

    At this stage of the game, we need some details.  You can't run on platitudes anymore.  You need to show some real substance.  

    He also needs to show that he can take a stance and actually do what he says -- not like what he did with campaign finance and FISA.  That may be the hardest thing for him to overcome:  Reconciling what he says with what he does.

    "Change we can believe in" -- what the heck is that?    

    Parent

    Bush never ran (none / 0) (#55)
    by weltec2 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 09:48:22 PM EST
    on substance. Reagan never ran on substance. Obama didn't win the primary on substance. All three won because they have great posture, congenial smiles, and authoritative voices. They all spoke in vague but catchy generalities that people could remember. That is all that is necessary.

    Hillary spoke about issues. The Democratic leadership... the leadership, mind you, became bored or frightened (I'm not really sure) but they chose Mr. Vague but Catchy Generalities.

    It boggles my mind. Perhaps Nancy and the others were afraid Hillary would go after them and expose their complicity with the Whitehouse.

    In any case, the general public has regularly preferred vague jingles and slogans to substance.

    Parent

    Bush ran as a conservative (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by SueBonnetSue on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:25:10 PM EST
    And all that goes with it, tax cuts, pro life, pro religion, pro military, patriotic, pro 2nd amendment, smaller government, etc.   He didn't live up to that, made government bigger, and that's what has pissed off so many conservatives/republicans.  He's not a true conservative.  

    Is Obama running as true liberal?  Or something else?  No one knows.  The 'hope' thing has worn off and now people want to know who they're voting for.  What does he believe?  

    Everyone knows that McCain stands for.  No one knows what Obama stands for, other than increased taxes, and that is not a winner position.  People will not vote to increase their own taxes.  Well, most people won't.  There are some people who will vote against their own self interests.  But not many.  

    Obama needs to tell us what he stands for before he can expect people to turn out to vote for him.  

    Parent

    It's interesting too (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by weltec2 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:06:53 PM EST
    because Reagan had been Governor of my State of California and he had all but ruined us. He had shut down mental hospital programs plus social programs for the poor and disadvantaged. The evidence was all there. But when he ran for president, neither he nor the press discussed any of that. He just promised to be a good ultra-patriotic pro-life Republican better than that guy Carter.

    We had suffered the worst winter in 40 years. Carter was blamed for the suffering that caused. He was blamed for the oil crisis. He was blamed for the Iran hostage crisis (although admittedly he was largely to blame for that because of his ill-informed support of the Shah).

    Parent

    NO (none / 0) (#58)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 09:57:13 PM EST
    reaga did run on substance. He ran on national security, missle shield anyone? He ran on tax cuts. He ran against Carter. The only thing that Obama can seem to muster is running against Bush.

    Parent
    SDI was initiated (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by weltec2 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:45:28 PM EST
    in 1983, not 1980 when he was running for the 81 election. But you're right. When Reagan ran against Carter, he ran on lower taxes, less government regulation of businesses, and a strong defense. In other words, he promised to be a good Republican. All I'm saying is that there was not much real substance to his speeches. There was a lot more posing and vague promises.

    Parent
    "running against Bush" (none / 0) (#93)
    by sj on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 10:33:30 AM EST
    ... not even that (sigh).

    Parent
    women (none / 0) (#15)
    by pixelpusher on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:08:20 PM EST
    That is, I meant to say, especially WOMEN don't feel excited about voting Democrat when Edwards is added on to Clinton and everything else.

    Parent
    Could be... (none / 0) (#7)
    by oldpro on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 06:40:49 PM EST
    Personally (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by dissenter on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 06:40:57 PM EST
    I just want it over so I can resume watching the news again. I wonder how many people feel like I do. I've gotten to the point where I hit the mute button on the remote as soon as the station goes to commercials. I am sooooo sick of the political ads and that is all that is on my TV right now.

    And the phone calls.....Ahhh. I get six calls a day from political organizations wanting money, volunteers, answers to survey questions, etc.

    Tornado touches down near Denver (5.00 / 8) (#13)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:03:14 PM EST
    Hmmm, that must be the PUMA's arriving ;-) and I thought they were going by motor home... ;-).

    But seriously, I hope everyone stays safe.

    A big ole High 5 to T-In-Snow :) (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:12:08 PM EST
    NOW that was funny....wonder what the weather will be like on Thursday....

    Parent
    This shouldn't be funny, but I was on the (5.00 / 3) (#18)
    by Teresa on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:12:43 PM EST
    phone with my mom and we saw that. I said, it would be awful if that was Thursday night, and she said "you're forgetting, he can just stop it". I laughed so hard. (She's voting for Obama so don't anybody get too mad.)

    Parent
    All of this is true, but (5.00 / 0) (#16)
    by kempis on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:09:06 PM EST
    is it true that most people simply don't pay close attention until the conventions roll around? I know that the Clinton-Obama primary battle was an exception, capturing the interest of a record number of people, but the Obama-McCain general election has thus far seemed..."over there" to a lot of people.

    I'll be curious to see how the polls look after the conventions.

    Obama is a bore (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Prabhata on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:01:15 PM EST
    Hillary brought excitement, but the Obama supporters believed it was Obama.  Wrong!

    Parent
    conventions (none / 0) (#19)
    by pixelpusher on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:13:00 PM EST
    I think conventions are awfully overrated as decision-shapers for the average voter.  They really do seem like sideshows.

    In the end Obama's best hope is that the coal miners in West Virginia listen to their union heads who bluntly tell them, "Look, he's the Democrat; vote for him."

    Parent

    No one watches conventions (none / 0) (#64)
    by SueBonnetSue on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:28:41 PM EST
    Other than political junkies like us who already know who they will vote for.  Surely Obama doesn't think that millions of young people will be watching!  They won't.  Most of them are still enjoying their last beach week of the summer.  

    Obama won't carry WVA, or Kentucky.  Not enough coal miners who can identify with elite snobs who went to Harvard, live in mansion, and argue about which rich guy is richer.  

    Parent

    Does it all come down to demographics? (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by lilburro on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:42:10 PM EST
    What worries me is that the 3 am ad Hillary aired was said to be one of the things that gave her such a strong showing in Texas.  It isn't as though McCain couldn't produce one of those.

    And as far as Virginia/Ohio goes, there is plenty of material for the McCain campaign to use to suggest that Obama doesn't care for those in Appalachia.  

    On top of the grassroots organizing that Team Obama is supposedly proficient at, there has to be a good strategy.  Where is it?

    I lived on the Va/Tn border for a long time. (none / 0) (#24)
    by Teresa on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:46:15 PM EST
    Those parts of Virginia are nothing like the northern part. I'll be very surprised if Obama wins in Va. He will need huge turnout in his areas. The people I know from the rest of the state won't be too happy that he ignores the rest of Appalachia.

    Parent
    Meh (none / 0) (#47)
    by cawaltz on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:58:25 PM EST
    I still live at the border of Virginia, WVa, TN and NC. I wish the new coalition lots of luck. I'm betting the NRA is gonna have a blast.

    Parent
    True (none / 0) (#65)
    by SueBonnetSue on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:31:41 PM EST
    Obama's base in Virginia is inner city Richmond, Northern Virginia, and Tidewater.  The rest of the state is VERY red.  

    I too live in Virginia, and I will be very surprised if Obama carries Virginia.  Republicans have a much better ground game this year, very high tech.   Or so I hear.  

    Parent

    Texas is the instructive case (none / 0) (#25)
    by andgarden on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:48:16 PM EST
    Obama should have been able to win there given the demographics.

    Parent
    He is bad at getting (none / 0) (#30)
    by lilburro on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:55:11 PM EST
    undecideds.  That's what lost him Texas, no?

    His grassroots supporters were energized for the primaries, and he still lost quite a bit in the late spring.  They weren't able to solve his undecideds problem.  So what will?

    Parent

    I'm in Ohio (none / 0) (#62)
    by sallywally on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:23:35 PM EST
    and no sign of Obama supporters in our neighborhood.

    Parent
    wow (5.00 / 4) (#44)
    by dissenter on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:56:17 PM EST
    I'm speechless. That doesn't happen often

    Here's the debate schedule (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by wasabi on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:58:17 PM EST
    The debate schedule...

    First presidential debate
    Friday, September 26
    The University of Mississippi, Oxford, Miss.
    Jim Lehrer
    Executive Editor and Anchor, The NewsHour, PBS

    Vice presidential debate
    Thursday, October 2
    Washington University in St. Louis, Mo.
    Gwen Ifill
    Senior Correspondent, The NewsHour, and Moderator and Managing Editor, Washington Week, PBS

    Second presidential debate (town meeting)
    Tuesday, October 7
    Belmont University, Nashville, Tenn.
    Tom Brokaw
    Special Correspondent, NBC News

    Third presidential debate
    Wednesday, October 15
    Hofstra University, Hempstead, N.Y.
    Bob Schieffer
    CBS News Chief Washington Correspondent, and Host, Face the Nation

    The first presidential debate will focus on domestic policy; the third presidential debate will focus on foreign policy.

    The second presidential (town meeting format) debate will include any issues raised by members of that audience, and the vice presidential debate will include domestic and foreign policy.

    Debates hosted by only Obama favorable (none / 0) (#66)
    by SueBonnetSue on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:33:13 PM EST
    folks.  Interesting.  That should help him, they'll be sure he gets the questions that favor him.  

    Parent
    Are we (5.00 / 5) (#48)
    by americanincanada on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:59:00 PM EST
    watching the same campaign?

    Wait I thought it was already a lock for Obama (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by davnee on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 09:10:58 PM EST
    Nay, a landslide! /snark

    Two questions (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by OisforOpportunist on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 09:35:07 PM EST
    I have two questions for BTD or anyone else who knows the answer and is interested in replying:

    1. Since we know that the DNC was in the tank for Obama during the primaries, is it possible that they had made their decision for Obama long before and that they scheduled the Convention so that Obama's speech would coincide with the 45th anniversary of Martin Luther King's historic "I Have a Dream" speech in Washington? How far back did they have to decide on those dates and would it fit the timeline for Obama'sdecision to run?

    2. Can anyone research and compute the number of superdelegates who went against their own state's vote ( a la Kennedy and Kerry in Mass) and how do Hillary and Obama compare.

    Thanks

    No, Catori. We tell truths here (5.00 / 2) (#74)
    by Cream City on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:51:37 PM EST
    and Clinton has not released her delegates.

    Please do not continue to waste bandwidth here with your untruths that require yet more comments to correct the record.  Jeesh.  You have been told.

    Parent

    What? (none / 0) (#76)
    by waldenpond on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:55:12 PM EST
    That wasn't an answer to question number 2.  The person could use RCP... it has links to all of the states and then one would have to go back and find out how their state or their district voted to determine if the SD went against the wishes of their constituents.

    Also, there is nothing on the net that Clinton has released her delegates and it should be huge news if there were true.  I have checked several actual news sites... nothing. There is only some unclear piece by CNN (Obama nooz all day every day).

    Parent

    Don't you just love (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by weltec2 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:06:15 AM EST
    reliable sources?

    "speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the details"

    Parent

    AP is the outfit that got the (5.00 / 2) (#86)
    by Valhalla on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 07:42:44 AM EST
    story on Clinton conceding entirely wrong on the last day of the primaries.

    I think they carried (although did not originate) the story that Clinton was refusing to put her name into nomination -- unfortunately for them, there was that vid of Clinton saying exactly the opposite at the time.

    And even if the report is correct, then Catori better brush up on his/her verb tenses.  'Has released' means already happened.

    Parent

    "is expected" (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Valhalla on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 07:44:22 AM EST
    Can anyone tell me the number of times we saw Clinton "is expected" to do whatever, and it turned out to actually be true, in the past year or so?

    Anyone?

    Parent

    Widely Reported This AM on CNN and MSNBC (none / 0) (#91)
    by daring grace on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 10:21:57 AM EST
    If it wasn't accurate with this much media play I'd certainly expect an official Clinton spokesperson to refute it by now.

    Parent
    I love the objectivity (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by tree on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:56:44 AM EST
    Looking at the overall trend of polls, McCain has never broken 45%.  That's a ceiling for him thus far.  On the other hand, Obama has reached 50%.  So his current poll rating is a floor - with 5 or 6 points to grow.

    Despite the fact that McCain has indeed  broken 45% within the last two months (49% in a USA Today/Gallup poll in late July) you've decided that 45% is his ceiling. You've also decided that 50%, because it was reached once, is reachable again and 45% for Obama is a floor, even though he's been below that on several polls in the last two months. Now, its possible that dumb luck will prevail and you will be correct in this prediction. But there is nothing in the numbers that leads one to such a prediction. Its pure wishful thinking.

    Wow. Gives cherrypicking a whole new (5.00 / 1) (#90)
    by Valhalla on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 08:01:05 AM EST
    meaning.

    McCain has tied the race more times than Obama's broken 50%.  In fact, he's probably been ahead (a few Ras polls, Zogby, Quinnepac) more times than Obama's broken 50.

    But you know, just keep thinking that way.  Spread it around as far and wide as you can.  Because complacency has never lost the Democrats an election.  Nope, never.

    Yeah (4.83 / 6) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 06:32:32 PM EST
    I keep hearing from Obama supporters not to be concerned about the polls because "it's early". Well, it's not. Whatever, I don't care at this point. Barring an implosion from McCain, it looks like Obama isn't going to win in Nov. Biden does nothing to change that equation and was picked from a position of weakness instead of strength.

    What Ga6thDem said....and FTR all the (5.00 / 4) (#4)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 06:36:39 PM EST
    obama hope and change b.s. went down the drain.  My "hope" is that the SD's "change" their minds :)

    Parent
    Yup. In fact, (none / 0) (#2)
    by oldpro on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 06:35:30 PM EST
    it's an all-mailin vote here in Washington State...Oregon, too...and many states have loosened up their absentee voting, so we'll get ballots a coupole of before the final presidential debate!

    Same for military/out of country voters whose ballots are mailed early enough to be returned in time for election day deadlines.

    Usually about 3 weeks...or more...for early mailed ballots.

    Some states, I've heard, have something called 'early voting' but I haven't looked that up to learn the details yet.

    My understanding (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 06:46:47 PM EST
    is that King County is delaying all mail-in voting until 2009 because they couldn't get equipment certified in time.

    (For those of you not familiar, King County includes Seattle and all local suburbs thereof...)

    Parent

    Stand corrected.... (none / 0) (#10)
    by oldpro on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 06:51:32 PM EST
    I'd forgotten that some counties didn't opt in to all-mail or had just spent the money on other systems in a rush to change OR just can't quite manage to get their act together...

    Thanks.

    Parent

    Hooboy (none / 0) (#6)
    by oldpro on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 06:39:37 PM EST
    a couple of DAYS before the final presidential debate (we'll receive our ballots).

    Parent
    How clever of them :- (none / 0) (#59)
    by weltec2 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:01:03 PM EST
    organize everything so that no one has time to think and consider the issues.

    Oh well, who needs to think about it anyway. We're gut people... think with our gut.

    ...as Bush would say.

    Parent

    Virginia republicans (none / 0) (#67)
    by SueBonnetSue on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:34:58 PM EST
    Are really pushing early voting and absentee voting.  VERY big push by republicans to get their voters to the polls early.  

    Parent
    Short as in what? (none / 0) (#27)
    by koshembos on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:49:49 PM EST
    The election in way more democratic countries such as UK and Israel are announced about 2-3 months before they take place and the campaign lasts about 10 weeks. They don't have caucuses and DNC that breaks its own rules. They also have a really free press and not the bunch of clownish moronic Republicans we have.

    I wouldn't like to predict the November election results. Things can change. I am uncomfortable about the debates. Obama is not fast on his feet and may lose to the mummy against him. Biden will be excellent in his debate, his awkward selection notwithstanding.

    More democratic? (none / 0) (#37)
    by DFLer on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:17:43 PM EST
    And they also don't hve the population and large geographic area of the US...it's not that easy is such a huge country.

    UK @61 mil
    Israel @2 mil

    California alone 36 mil

    etc. etc.

    Parent

    they also have (none / 0) (#45)
    by americanincanada on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:57:15 PM EST
    an entirely different system than we do. I speak from personal experience as Canada is the same. Elections happen fast here, can be called anytime, and are over quickly. But they also use a parlimentary (sp?) system.

    Parent
    I wouldn't be so sure about Biden (none / 0) (#69)
    by SueBonnetSue on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:41:29 PM EST
    I wouldn't trust him to not say something really off the wall during his debate.  But VP's don't really matter anyway.  As long as Biden doesn't say something stupid, or racist, he won't hurt Obama.  But he won't help either.  

    There's a reason that Biden didn't get far in his runs for President.  He's not appealing to voters.  I guess that's obvious, isn't it!  :)  

    Parent

    I guess we have the answer as to whether (none / 0) (#28)
    by Teresa on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:53:39 PM EST
    some Clinton supporters thought she would be VP.

    I don't think this poll (none / 0) (#32)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:02:18 PM EST
    is truly post-Biden.  I don't think people pay much attention over weekends. They have other things to do.  CNN apparently took their past poll during a bounce and now the bounce is correcting.

    Polls next week will be more accurate.

    Parent

    Tend to agree (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by Valhalla on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 07:48:20 AM EST
    Monday/Tuesday polls are probably the real word on Biden.

    These very poor numbers for Obama are what Biden was meant to stop -- the bleeding.

    Parent

    The downside of political correctness (none / 0) (#29)
    by Edgar08 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 07:53:42 PM EST
    Is the fantastic joke I must not allow myself to share with the TL community.

    In place of that joke I will provide lyrics from the Rosemary Clooney rendition of the song from Alice in Wonderland, as I remember it was played at the end of virtually every late night larry king RADIO program back in the 80s.


    I'm late, I'm late for a very important date
    No time to say "Hello", "Goodbye"
    I'm late, I'm late, I'm late, I'm late
    And when I wave, I lose the time I save
    My fuzzy ears and whiskers
    Took me too much time to shave

    I run and then I hop, hop, hop
    I wish that I could fly
    There's danger if I dare to stop
    And here's the reason why
    You see, I'm overdue, I'm in a rabbit stew
    Can't even say "Goodbye", "Hello"
    I'm late, I'm late, I'm late

    Good morning Mister Chatterbox
    I'd love to stop and chatter
    But in six and seven-eighth minutes
    I must meet with the Mad Hatter
    The mad, mad, mad, Mad Hatter
    We must chat about a very important matter

    I'm late, I'm late for a very important date
    No time to say "Hello", "Goodbye"
    I'm late, I'm late, I'm late, I'm late
    And when I wave, I lose the time I save
    My fuzzy ears and whiskers
    Took me too much time to shave

    I run and then I hop, hop, hop
    I wish that I could fly
    There's danger if I dare to stop
    And here's the reason why
    You see, I'm overdue, I'm in a rabbit stew
    Can't even say "Goodbye", "Hello"
    I'm late, I'm late, I'm late..........



    One of my all-time (none / 0) (#82)
    by oldpro on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:29:07 AM EST
    favorites!

    I sang along as I read it, although I already know all the words...used to sing it practically every time I left the house!

    Parent

    Well, I'll say it again (none / 0) (#33)
    by Dadler on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:06:47 PM EST
    Since the equipment we vote on is almost entirely useless, and the software not even owned by the government or reviewable by the government, since we've ceded control of our elections to PRIVATE COMPANIES, any belief in a secure and legitimate result is wishful.

    Blackboxvoting.org is urging all tech qualified folks to apply for temporary election tech positions.  I urge that, as well.  As long as citizens don't control elections, no elections can really be considered legitimate.  Unreal that private corps run the election show, but our apathy has gotten us here.

    You can thank DiFi (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by weltec2 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:21:15 PM EST
    and Chuck Schumer for voting with the Repugs last year to make sure that this problem exists and that there is not necessary paper trail. Why? DiFi said it would cause chaos that close to an election. <mordant laugh> As if we didn't have chaos enough already.

    Parent
    About those tech positions (none / 0) (#35)
    by Dadler on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:13:33 PM EST
    From an email blackbox sent out:

    HOW TO FIND TEMPORARY ELECTION TECH POSITIONS:

    In a presidential election year, voting machine vendors will hire and train thousands of technicians staffed around the country. For example, anywhere that Election Systems & Software has a machine, they are under contract to provide an on-site support tech. Hart Intercivic, Premier (Diebold), and Sequoia also use Election Day support technicians.

    Temporary election tech support jobs have been spotted on hotjobs.com, rollouts.com, and local tech temp firms like (in 2006) DecisionOne. The tech services firm may be a subcontractor for the big four voting machine companies. Sometimes you'll find the positions advertised by your local county.

    Sites like Rollouts.com have you register in their E-tech database. They search for techs based on skill set and area. There isn't much in the way of a skill set needed for the election projects.

    QUIETLY APPLY FOR THE JOBS

    Anyone with tech skills interested in safeguarding the November election is encouraged to register at technical recruiting sites and apply for any election-related projects.

    CONSIDER ASKING FOR TIME OFF ON YOUR FULL TIME JOB TO DO THIS.  This November, there may be no better way to watch the behind-the-scenes process than to be a stagehand, so to speak.

    It is not the vendor, and not the government, that has the right to elections information, it is the PUBLIC. Citizens have inalienable rights to sovereignty over the government they created and pay for. These rights cannot be honored without mechanisms to see all information related to elections, and ultimately, to have control processes that honor citizen sovereignty.

    That said, it ain't gonna happen this November. Therefore it is entirely appropriate, patriotic, and important, for citizens to apply for temporary positions as voting machine technicians to provide inside public oversight for the process.

    There will be nondisclosure agreements, which are not appropriate at all for public elections, but it's a reality now that vendors are trespassing on citizen right to know. There may be issues that arise which the public clearly has a right to know. When that happens, a decision must be made.

    YOU WON'T BE THE FIRST

    We have already been in communications with other patriotic volunteers who have successfully obtained these positions in the past, and are doing this for November.

    THERE ARE ALWAYS WAYS TO DEAL WITH IMPORTANT ISSUES IF THEY ENDANGER THE PUBLIC GOOD. You, the People, are needed on the inside of the elections industry this November.


    Parent

    Let's see how these numbers settle post-convention (none / 0) (#34)
    by davnee on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:08:59 PM EST
    I think after the convention we'll know better the effect of not picking HRC.  I don't think a poll out this quick can really gauge that.  Besides some disappointed supporters are likely to settle down after a few days of pique (of course many more probably won't).  I will say this, if Obama doesn't get out at least 5 points ahead of McCain after the convention then I think he's toast.

    Disappointed supporters (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by Prabhata on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:16:49 PM EST
    As long as the Obama camp sees us, Hillary supporters who don't vote for Obama, as disappointed, the dynamics won't change.  I've never not supported a Democratic ticket.  It's not that I'm disappointed, it's that Obama is not a candidate I can support.  He is a very unaccomplished state legislator (worked very little in the US Senate), who has demonstrated a capacity to alienate old Democratic voters.  I will never vote for Obama, but that doesn't mean that all voters are like me.  It may be anecdotal, but a sister who is not politically minded, called me specifically to know if I was predicting an Obama win.  She doesn't like the man from her gut, and wants McCain to win.  Obama turns women off.  It's him.

    Parent
    Vegan yoga instructor (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by sarahfdavis on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:22:48 PM EST
    in my building is voting for McCain.
    Even she can't believe it.

    Parent
    Preaching to the choir here (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by davnee on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:45:56 PM EST
    My guess is that many, many others feel like us, but surely not everyone.  Some will come home to the Obama ticket.  Question for Obama is how many?  He better hope like heck it's a large number.  What I can't figure out is why he isn't trying everything he can to increase it.  His seeming disinterest in courting members of his own natural constituency is the great mystery to me in this election.

    Parent
    He's too busy (5.00 / 4) (#49)
    by cawaltz on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 09:00:57 PM EST
    pandering to the right and hoping for them to crossover. Politically tone deaf is the new way to define our party and its leaders, including the nominee himself.

    Parent
    Thing is, the notObamas numbers (none / 0) (#89)
    by Valhalla on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 07:54:43 AM EST
    have been stable or somewhat up from June.  And in general, higher numbers of people have been paying attention earlier this year than 2004.

    What about the convention will change people's minds? The 25 mind-numbing speeches a night?  The Invesco field extravaganza?  The pep rallies have not been very effective in creating an permanent increase in polls for Obama since Feb.  Who will be watching who hasn't already made up their minds, during the last week of August, the day before the last long weekend of the summer?

    I don't see much of anything that can cause a big reversal of the slide.  Biden may be able to stop the bleeding.  Then Obama supporters have to just hope that the Republicans won't be able to muster an extra point or two to win in Nov.

    Parent

    Cut it with calling it "pique" (5.00 / 3) (#75)
    by Cream City on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 11:54:25 PM EST
    which just continues to demean Dems who decided on their candidate based on issues and are not hearing those addressed, or are hearing worse on those issues, from the remaining candidate.

    That is not pique.  That is exercising their rights and their brains.  Respect it.

    Parent

    I Respect It (none / 0) (#92)
    by daring grace on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 10:29:14 AM EST
    when Clinton supporters (or others for that matter) won't be voting for Obama because of disagreement over issues, or disapproval of his campaign's tactics etc.

    At the same time, I'm contemptuous of anyone who tries to tell me they backed Senator Clinton on the issues and are now voting for McCain. THAT, to me, reeks of pique.

    Parent

    More significant might be (none / 0) (#68)
    by SueBonnetSue on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:38:29 PM EST
    the polls after McCain announces his VP and after their convention.  If republicans get a big bounce, they could continue to ride that wave, right up the election.  

    I really think McCain will get a bigger bounce from his VP choice, than Obama did with Biden.  Biden is just a boring choice that makes no one happy.  

    Parent

    White men. (none / 0) (#80)
    by oldpro on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 01:24:55 AM EST
    Biden should gain the ticket a few votes of white men who want to vote Democratic this year, lean Democratic, but aren't there yet.

    And that is a demographic in which he also needs help.  White men.  They are either with McCain or holding out.

    So, if Obama loses...blame them.

    Or him.

    Parent

    OK, I'm watching Fox, not too good (none / 0) (#40)
    by waldenpond on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 08:48:58 PM EST
    Kristen Powers (Dem) is on.  She was just asked (as everyone on Fox is)

    Q: name 3 accomplishments of Obama.
    KP:He had good judgment on the war.
    Q: did he have good judgment by staying in Wright's church?
    KP: no, but.... he's smart.
    Q: OK he's got judgment, he doesn't he's smart, name 3 accomplishments of Obama.
    KP: his time in the State Legis, that wasn't a do nothing job... Bush...   (crap, she actually tried to deflect with friggin' Bush)   {a semi-bitter back and forth between Repubs and Dems ensues}

    It is NOT early.  The people out trying to talk up Obama have got to do better than this.  There doesn't appear any way to spin this.

    In all fairness (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 09:52:36 PM EST
    Kristen Powers was hired as Democratic consultant on Faux, because she isn't all that sharp.  My own observation is they've made a good hire.

    That said...

    Parent

    Ok, then can you name three accomplishments (none / 0) (#70)
    by SueBonnetSue on Sun Aug 24, 2008 at 10:43:09 PM EST
    Of Obama?  I readily admit that I can't.  

    Parent
    he should win (none / 0) (#83)
    by Salo on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 02:10:33 AM EST
    but he's a candidate who makes it kinda tough on himself.