No distractions, just the facts, ma'am

Just now, coming off both party conventions, we are awash in the stuff and noise that may be a distraction from the issues themselves and from predictive factors.

Sarah Palin may have been a last-minute, desperate pick when McCain's lust for Lieberman collided with Karl Rove's veto and his insistence on Romney. Ridge had apparently been ruled out because of his pro-choice stance, Bobby Jindal had taken himself out, and apparently Charlie Christ's last minute engagement wasn't enough to dispel rumors that he is gay. So they were left with Palin and Pawlenty. Pawlenty would have been the safe choice; Palin was bold but risky. But the Republican marketing team is first rate.

Palin gave the convention the sizzle that was missing. Now it looks like they've revamped the whole campaign strategy around her appeal: maverick, reformer, ultra-conservative on social issues. The right wing is ecstatic. But it doesn't do much for moderates and independents, I'm thinking.

However, we should not let ourselves be distracted by all this. McCain's speech last night showed he has no real platform to run on except vague promises of reform -- meaning he's running against George Bush without naming him. Did he mention Bush by name during that whole long boring speech? They're trying to refurbish his tarnished maverick image with Sarah's fresh maverick image.

Obama and Biden should ignore Palen and stick to pointing out how McCain embraced Bush, when he was trying to get the nomination, only to run away from him now. The fact is that McCain himself has bragged that he voted with Bush 90% of the time. So how is he the maverick he's now trying to become? It's a little like that wonderful book title by Quentin Crisp, "How to Become a Virgin."

But forget all that. Here's the real simple answer. Professor Alan Abramowitz of Emory University, an authority on election history, has developed a forecasting model that correctly predicted the popular vote within two percentage points in every presidential election since 1988. He looks at only 3 factors: (1) The presidential approval rating in the final Gallup Poll in June (not good); (2) the change in real gross domestic product during the second quarter of the election year (bad); and (3) whether the president’s party has controlled the White House for only one term or longer (two = bad).

Using this model, he predicts an Obama win by 54.3% to 45.7%. Remember, this is popular vote, but with that margin it would be extremely unlikely not to translate to an electoral win.

Ralph