Investigative reporting by the Associated Press has revealed serious questions about Governor Sarah Palin's vaunted 1,715 mile pipeline to bring natural gas from Alaska to the lower 48 states. She has touted this as her signature accomplishment, using it to claim expertise on energy independence.
Not so, it now seems. There is real question that the TransCanada Corp. that won the contract will ever be able to get it built, due to financing and regulatory difficulties, despite what begins to seem like a sweetheart deal. Rather than making the bidding attractive to the global energy giants that actually own the rights to the gas, as even Dick Cheney had advised her, Palin created a process that favored a few local pipeline companies. In the end, five bids were submitted. Four were ruled out as not meeting the bidding requirements, leaving TransCanada Corporation as the only viable bidder.
In addition, AP raises questions about improper, insider links with this company. The leader of Palin's project team had worked previously for a subsidiary of TransCanada, a connection that would have violated Palin's own regulatory ethical guidelines. A former TransCanada executive served as an outside consultant to advise on the adequacy of their plan. And Palin herself had a phone conversation a few months prior to the deadline with both the President and CEO of TransCanada, reportedly "to clarify the bidding process."
Even more problematic are questions of whether TransCanada can get financing to build the project, even with the $500 million supplement quaranteed by the Alaska government. "Most definitely TransCanada got a sweetheart deal this time," said Republican Sen. Bert Stedman, who voted against the TransCanada license. "Where else could you get a $500 million reimbursement when you don't even have the financing to build the pipeline?"
This is the maverick that will transform the way Washington does business??
Ralph
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Odds and ends
Nov. 4 is just 10 days away. Still time for disaster to strike or for the election to be stolen by intimidation of voters or dirty tricks in the machines. But as each day brings us closer to the actual election without a game-changing event, these seem less likely to be decisive.
Here are some miscellaneous items that bolster my hope for a transforming victory for Obama and the politics of hope and change.
1. Charles Fried, Ronald Reagan's Solicitor General, Harvard Law professor, and respected conservative thinker, has asked that his name be removed from several McCain campaign-related committees on which he serves. Although he expressed enthusiastic support for McCain last January, he now says that he has already voted for Obama-Biden by absentee ballot. In his letter to the General Counsel to the McCain-Palin campaign, he said that chief among the reasons for his decision "is the choice of Sarah Palin at a time of deep national crisis."
2. Fried joins other prominent Republicans endorsing Obama, the latest being former Governor of Massachusetts William Weld.
3. Conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer is not joining. In a strong rebuke to these "ship-jumpers," he wrote, "I shall have no part of this motley crew. I will go down with the McCain ship. I'd rather lose an election than lose my bearings."
Note: "I will go down with the McCain ship."
4. Obama's support among white voters is now the highest of any Democratic candidate since Jimmy Carter in 1976. At 44%, he evens tops Bill Clinton's 43% in 1996. Admit it, Hillary, Yes He Can. In this New York Times/CBS poll, he leads among all voters 52-37%, among men 52-39%, women 52-36%. He is ahead in all age groupings, as well as in voters with incomes both above $50,000 and below that level. The only demographic group where McCain is significantly ahead has to do with religion. McCain leads among white protestants and especially white evangelicals, while Obama leads among Catholics.
5. Several news sources are reporting on the tension between McCain and Palin, especially evident in their joint ABC interview. She is increasingly speaking out and going her own way in her rally speeches. It's said that she is no longer listening to her "handlers," and that she's hardly speaking to those travelling with her from the campaign. I'm guessing that the reality of defeat is sinking in, and she's beginning to look to her political future. Alas, that may not be so shiney. A poll shows that she is now only 3rd choice among Republicans for 2012. At 20% she is trailing both Romney at 35% and Huckabee at 26%.
6. Leaks from the campaign speak about the infighting that is going on over the blame game. A lot of this seems related to the choice of Palin, who now seems to be a net drain on the McCain ticket as more people view her unfavorably than favorably. Just as McCain's picking her took "experience" and "putting country first" off the table, now Shoppergate seems to be destroying the "hockey mom" image. Even some insiders are speaking of the campaign in the past tense.
7. In contrast, as Obama's polls continue to creep up toward solid double digits, attention is turning to speculating about an Obama chief of staff and cabinet positions.
8. And my final hopeful indicator is the formidable ground game, get-out-the-vote organization that Obama has organized. Just here in Georgia, there are over 3000 volunteers working on GOTV, and because the race is getting close here they're sending in 100 more volunteers from out of state.
Ralph
Here are some miscellaneous items that bolster my hope for a transforming victory for Obama and the politics of hope and change.
1. Charles Fried, Ronald Reagan's Solicitor General, Harvard Law professor, and respected conservative thinker, has asked that his name be removed from several McCain campaign-related committees on which he serves. Although he expressed enthusiastic support for McCain last January, he now says that he has already voted for Obama-Biden by absentee ballot. In his letter to the General Counsel to the McCain-Palin campaign, he said that chief among the reasons for his decision "is the choice of Sarah Palin at a time of deep national crisis."
2. Fried joins other prominent Republicans endorsing Obama, the latest being former Governor of Massachusetts William Weld.
3. Conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer is not joining. In a strong rebuke to these "ship-jumpers," he wrote, "I shall have no part of this motley crew. I will go down with the McCain ship. I'd rather lose an election than lose my bearings."
Note: "I will go down with the McCain ship."
4. Obama's support among white voters is now the highest of any Democratic candidate since Jimmy Carter in 1976. At 44%, he evens tops Bill Clinton's 43% in 1996. Admit it, Hillary, Yes He Can. In this New York Times/CBS poll, he leads among all voters 52-37%, among men 52-39%, women 52-36%. He is ahead in all age groupings, as well as in voters with incomes both above $50,000 and below that level. The only demographic group where McCain is significantly ahead has to do with religion. McCain leads among white protestants and especially white evangelicals, while Obama leads among Catholics.
5. Several news sources are reporting on the tension between McCain and Palin, especially evident in their joint ABC interview. She is increasingly speaking out and going her own way in her rally speeches. It's said that she is no longer listening to her "handlers," and that she's hardly speaking to those travelling with her from the campaign. I'm guessing that the reality of defeat is sinking in, and she's beginning to look to her political future. Alas, that may not be so shiney. A poll shows that she is now only 3rd choice among Republicans for 2012. At 20% she is trailing both Romney at 35% and Huckabee at 26%.
6. Leaks from the campaign speak about the infighting that is going on over the blame game. A lot of this seems related to the choice of Palin, who now seems to be a net drain on the McCain ticket as more people view her unfavorably than favorably. Just as McCain's picking her took "experience" and "putting country first" off the table, now Shoppergate seems to be destroying the "hockey mom" image. Even some insiders are speaking of the campaign in the past tense.
7. In contrast, as Obama's polls continue to creep up toward solid double digits, attention is turning to speculating about an Obama chief of staff and cabinet positions.
8. And my final hopeful indicator is the formidable ground game, get-out-the-vote organization that Obama has organized. Just here in Georgia, there are over 3000 volunteers working on GOTV, and because the race is getting close here they're sending in 100 more volunteers from out of state.
Ralph
Early Voting Comfortable for African Americans?
The early voting trends are pretty astounding in some states, NC and Georgia in particular.
Although Republicans usually vote early more than Democrats, that has been reversed this election.
In NC, Democrats have nearly a 2 - 1 edge in the first 1 million votes cast. African Americans, who make us 21% of the electorate, account for 28% of those who voted early in NC. In Georgia, 35% of the nearly 1 million early votes cast have been by African Americans, although in last election they made up only 25% of the total.
Early voting is particularly attractive, I believe, to poor and working class people because it gives them flexibility. It's attractive to African-Americans because they don't have to go to the 'official' voting place, where they are questioned and harassed, but can go to community centers in their neighborhoods, where they are helped by friends.
Although Republicans usually vote early more than Democrats, that has been reversed this election.
In NC, Democrats have nearly a 2 - 1 edge in the first 1 million votes cast. African Americans, who make us 21% of the electorate, account for 28% of those who voted early in NC. In Georgia, 35% of the nearly 1 million early votes cast have been by African Americans, although in last election they made up only 25% of the total.
Early voting is particularly attractive, I believe, to poor and working class people because it gives them flexibility. It's attractive to African-Americans because they don't have to go to the 'official' voting place, where they are questioned and harassed, but can go to community centers in their neighborhoods, where they are helped by friends.
Friday, October 24, 2008
The sky Could fall . . . but probably won't
Richard and I sort of naturally fall into the good cop/bad cop -- or optimist/pessimist -- dynamic. He keeps us grounded and worried, I cheerlead for what's possible, maybe probable, and somewhat cautiously actually believe will happen.
To repeat what I wrote in a comment to his post, I think that the voters he's worried about are already reflected in the polls, explaining why Obama is not leading by at least 20% -- which he probably would if he were white and running in the midst of the worst economic crisis of our generation, in the middle of a war opposed by 60+%, against an incumbant party in deep disarray, with a discredited incumbant president, and with a jaw-dropping 85% of Americans who say the country is heading in the wrong direction.
In addition, McCain's campaign has been a disaster of incoherence, erratic shifts, and gaffes. His Karl Rove type negativity is backfiring (sure it stirs the base, but he's got those votes anyway), and his choice of Palin has excited many but turned off even more. He tries to run away from Bush (but it's hard to do when he's on tape as bragging that he supported him 90% of the time). And that's also a double-edge sword. The lower his support drops, the more his Bush-bashing is also bashing his base who still support Bush. They have nowhere else to go, but they might stay home.
Now in the home stretch, it's probably too late to introduce anything new; only a national disaster or a real, as opposed to a fake, Obama scandal would have much effect. At this date, it comes down to money for final TV ads and the get-out-the-vote (GOTV) ground plan -- and Obama has him way over-matched in both.
One other factor: of course, polls can change, but the trend is still toward Obama just 11 days before the election. The two strange ones that got some notice this week with Obama leading by only 1% have been explained by Nate Silver. One of them wildly oversampled evangelical voters and the other extremely distorted the 18-24 age voters. It had them going for McCain 74-22. Now, with all other polls showing that age group going for Obama by margins of 25-35 points, this is just not believable. Nate calculated the statistical odds of that 74/22 for McCain being a true reflection as 55 billion to 1.
Even with those two 1% polls averaged in, however, this weeks tracking polls average out at 7.4% lead for Obama, with 5 of the 15 polls giving him a double digit lead. And the statewide electoral votes tell an even bigger story. He's now leading in Indiana, and the latest poll in Georgia has Obama leading by 1% -- within margin of error, of course, but it's the trend. GA wasn't even considered a battleground state until about a week ago.
But don't worry, Richard. I do still worry. About surprises. About stealing elections in key, close states. And about Obama's safety.
Ralph
To repeat what I wrote in a comment to his post, I think that the voters he's worried about are already reflected in the polls, explaining why Obama is not leading by at least 20% -- which he probably would if he were white and running in the midst of the worst economic crisis of our generation, in the middle of a war opposed by 60+%, against an incumbant party in deep disarray, with a discredited incumbant president, and with a jaw-dropping 85% of Americans who say the country is heading in the wrong direction.
In addition, McCain's campaign has been a disaster of incoherence, erratic shifts, and gaffes. His Karl Rove type negativity is backfiring (sure it stirs the base, but he's got those votes anyway), and his choice of Palin has excited many but turned off even more. He tries to run away from Bush (but it's hard to do when he's on tape as bragging that he supported him 90% of the time). And that's also a double-edge sword. The lower his support drops, the more his Bush-bashing is also bashing his base who still support Bush. They have nowhere else to go, but they might stay home.
Now in the home stretch, it's probably too late to introduce anything new; only a national disaster or a real, as opposed to a fake, Obama scandal would have much effect. At this date, it comes down to money for final TV ads and the get-out-the-vote (GOTV) ground plan -- and Obama has him way over-matched in both.
One other factor: of course, polls can change, but the trend is still toward Obama just 11 days before the election. The two strange ones that got some notice this week with Obama leading by only 1% have been explained by Nate Silver. One of them wildly oversampled evangelical voters and the other extremely distorted the 18-24 age voters. It had them going for McCain 74-22. Now, with all other polls showing that age group going for Obama by margins of 25-35 points, this is just not believable. Nate calculated the statistical odds of that 74/22 for McCain being a true reflection as 55 billion to 1.
Even with those two 1% polls averaged in, however, this weeks tracking polls average out at 7.4% lead for Obama, with 5 of the 15 polls giving him a double digit lead. And the statewide electoral votes tell an even bigger story. He's now leading in Indiana, and the latest poll in Georgia has Obama leading by 1% -- within margin of error, of course, but it's the trend. GA wasn't even considered a battleground state until about a week ago.
But don't worry, Richard. I do still worry. About surprises. About stealing elections in key, close states. And about Obama's safety.
Ralph
Let Me Play Chicken Little - Obama is Falling?
Although everything points to an Obama landslide, there are some things giving me pause.
Recently McCain signs have been sprouting up in North Carolina like mushrooms - they're all over the place.
The statewide radio programs, even the moderate ones, are full of people worried about Obama's "terrorist buddies"(note the plural). I have heard an unending stream of outrage, locally and on national stations, about Obama's 'spread the wealth' comment; many people can't see past the notion of taxes. One radio dj tried to talk to a man about, So, you'll really give up plans to grow your business because of an increased 3% in your tax rate? The caller insisted he would, and refused to listen to any reasoned argument about the overall economic program offered by Obama and how that would help him. All he could see/hear was that his taxes were going up - to help people who were too lazy to work. It's apparent this man is being reached by the McCain ad referencing 'welfare'.
A man on a call in show on C-span said he thought people, his friends, were going to go into the booth and vote for McCain out of fear because McCain and Palin have sown enough uncertainty about Obama's character that, in unsettled times, they'll go for the known quantity and vote for McCain out of fear of the unknown.
On another show a man said he was voting McCain because of abortion and gay marriage. "It doesn't matter if the economy is a mess. You need to get yourself right with God first," he explained, "then the rest will fall into line."
In 2004 Bush won Ohio because he pulled double digit votes from the conservative African-American community who supported him primarily because of his stand against gay marriage - so let's not underestimate the level of prejudice on that issue.
A poll referenced on NPR showed that , when asked if they'd prefer a Democratic president who could work with a Democratic Congress to get things done, or a Republican president who could function as a check to a Democratic congress, 20% more people said they'd prefer a Republican. 20% more people preferred gridlock, to the real possibility of change.
This reminded me of many of the women I worked with who were abused. Many people are afraid of change. When it comes right down to it, they'd rather stick with the known abuser, than risk giving someone new a chance. McCain is the' known abuser'.
I think many of the undecided voters are planning to vote for McCain but don't want to admit it publicly, because they know in their hearts it's a stupid decision. I was on a plane flying to Greece the night Ronald Reagan was elected. When they announced the result literally the entire plane erupted in cheers. People stood up in their seats.
Then 80% of the people, who'd just been cheering sat down and began to murmur, "But I didn't vote for him."
I think the same thing will happen with McCain.
The difference this time, I hope, is that Obama, coming out of a community organizer background, can actually mobilize enough supporters to get out hsi vote to insure a victory.
But I wouldn't be surprised if the election turned out much closer than people anticipate. And in a close election, anything can happen.
Recently McCain signs have been sprouting up in North Carolina like mushrooms - they're all over the place.
The statewide radio programs, even the moderate ones, are full of people worried about Obama's "terrorist buddies"(note the plural). I have heard an unending stream of outrage, locally and on national stations, about Obama's 'spread the wealth' comment; many people can't see past the notion of taxes. One radio dj tried to talk to a man about, So, you'll really give up plans to grow your business because of an increased 3% in your tax rate? The caller insisted he would, and refused to listen to any reasoned argument about the overall economic program offered by Obama and how that would help him. All he could see/hear was that his taxes were going up - to help people who were too lazy to work. It's apparent this man is being reached by the McCain ad referencing 'welfare'.
A man on a call in show on C-span said he thought people, his friends, were going to go into the booth and vote for McCain out of fear because McCain and Palin have sown enough uncertainty about Obama's character that, in unsettled times, they'll go for the known quantity and vote for McCain out of fear of the unknown.
On another show a man said he was voting McCain because of abortion and gay marriage. "It doesn't matter if the economy is a mess. You need to get yourself right with God first," he explained, "then the rest will fall into line."
In 2004 Bush won Ohio because he pulled double digit votes from the conservative African-American community who supported him primarily because of his stand against gay marriage - so let's not underestimate the level of prejudice on that issue.
A poll referenced on NPR showed that , when asked if they'd prefer a Democratic president who could work with a Democratic Congress to get things done, or a Republican president who could function as a check to a Democratic congress, 20% more people said they'd prefer a Republican. 20% more people preferred gridlock, to the real possibility of change.
This reminded me of many of the women I worked with who were abused. Many people are afraid of change. When it comes right down to it, they'd rather stick with the known abuser, than risk giving someone new a chance. McCain is the' known abuser'.
I think many of the undecided voters are planning to vote for McCain but don't want to admit it publicly, because they know in their hearts it's a stupid decision. I was on a plane flying to Greece the night Ronald Reagan was elected. When they announced the result literally the entire plane erupted in cheers. People stood up in their seats.
Then 80% of the people, who'd just been cheering sat down and began to murmur, "But I didn't vote for him."
I think the same thing will happen with McCain.
The difference this time, I hope, is that Obama, coming out of a community organizer background, can actually mobilize enough supporters to get out hsi vote to insure a victory.
But I wouldn't be surprised if the election turned out much closer than people anticipate. And in a close election, anything can happen.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
McCain conceding defeat?
The McCain campaign is planning an election night party in a hotel ballroom, but McCain will not be speaking there. Instead, he plans to address a small group of supporters and select reporters on the hotel lawn, and it will be piped into the ballroom.
Aides said the arrangement was the result of space limitations and that McCain might drop by the election watch party at some other point. What? they couldn't find a bigger place?
That sounds to me like someone who's anticipating defeat.
Ralph
Barry Goldwater for Obama
Let's see, early on we had Susan Eisenhower, Ike's granddaughter, endorsing Obama. Over the weekend, Colin Powell and Ken Adelman, both of whom served in Republican administrations at high levels, came out for him. Add in several former Republican Congressmen and conservative pundits Christopher Brinkley, Francis Fukuyama, and Andrew Sullivan (with hints from David Brooks).
Now Barry Goldwater's granddaughter has written a piece saying that she and her siblings and cousins are supporting Obama.
Now Barry Goldwater's granddaughter has written a piece saying that she and her siblings and cousins are supporting Obama.
We believe strongly in what our grandfather stood for: honesty, integrity, and personal freedom, free from political maneuvering and fear tactics. . . . Our generation of Goldwaters expects government to provide for constitutional protections. We reject the constant intrusion into our personal lives, along with other crucial policy issues of the McCain/Palin ticket.
My grandfather (Paka) would never suggest denying a woman's right to choose. My grandmother co-founded Planned Parenthood in Arizona in the 1930's, a cause my grandfather supported. I'm not sure about how he would feel about marriage rights based on same-sex orientation. I think he would feel that love and respect for ones privacy is what matters most and not the intolerance and poor judgment displayed by McCain over the years. [Note from Ralph: Before he died, Goldwater expressed his love and support for his gay grandson and took a stand for gay rights, though marriage itself was not on the agenda at the time.]
. . . the Republican brand has been tarnished in a shameless effort to gain votes and appeal to the lowest emotion, fear. Nothing about McCain, except for maybe a uniform, compares to the same ideology of what Goldwater stood for as a politician. . .
Nothing about the Republican ticket offers the hope America needs to regain it's standing in the world, that's why we're going to support Barack Obama. I think that Obama has shown his ability and integrity. After the last eight years, there's a lot of clean up do. Roll up your sleeves, Senators Obama and Biden, and we Goldwaters will roll ours up with you.I well remember Barry Goldwater's race against Lyndon Johnson in 1964. "Mr. Conservative," as he was called, was the arch-enemy of the liberal-progressive agenda. But his granddaughter is absolutely right. He would have denounced the Republican tactics and John McCain's campaign in a minute. As much as we disagreed with him on issues, he would be a breath of fresh air in today's fetid miasma that Karl Rove and his acolytes have wrought; and he would not stoop to rescue John McCain from the cesspool in which his bartered soul is languishing in defeat.
Ralph
Something different
With polls looking better every day for Obama (+12 and +14 in Ohio in 2 new ones today), and with the news media still salivating about Sarah's shopping spree, I thought I'd put up something less political than thought-provoking about Life Choices. It's been around a while, but I just ran across it again.
A boat docked in a tiny Mexican village; an American tourist complimented a Mexican fisherman on the quality of his fish and asked how long it took him to catch them.
"Not very long," answer the Mexican. "But then, why didn't you stay out longer and catch more?" asked the man. The Mexican explained that his small catch was sufficient to meet his needs and those of his family.
The American asked, "But what do you do with the rest of your time?" "I sleep late, fish a little, play with my children, and take a siesta with my wife. In the evenings I go into the village to see my friends, have a few drinks, play the guitar, and sing a few songs. I have a full life."
The American interrupted. "I have an MBA from Harvard and I can help you!" "You should start by fishing longer each day. You can then sell the extra fish you catch. With the extra revenue, you can buy a bigger boat. With the extra money the bigger boat will bring, you can buy a second one and a third one and so on until you have an entire fleet of trawlers."
"Instead of selling your fish to a middle man, you can negotiate directly with the processing plants and maybe even open your own plant. You can then leave this little village and move to Mexico City, Los Angeles, or even New York City. From there you can direct your huge enterprise."
"How long would that take?" asked the Mexican. "Twenty, perhaps twenty-five years," replied the businessman.
"And after that?"
"Afterwards? That's when it get really interesting,"answered the American, laughing. "When your business gets really big, you can start selling stocks and make millions."
"Millions? Really? And after that?"
"After that you'll be able to retire, live in a tiny village near the coast, sleep late, play with your children, catch a few fish, take a siesta, and spend your evening drinking and enjoying your friends."
Ralph
A boat docked in a tiny Mexican village; an American tourist complimented a Mexican fisherman on the quality of his fish and asked how long it took him to catch them.
"Not very long," answer the Mexican. "But then, why didn't you stay out longer and catch more?" asked the man. The Mexican explained that his small catch was sufficient to meet his needs and those of his family.
The American asked, "But what do you do with the rest of your time?" "I sleep late, fish a little, play with my children, and take a siesta with my wife. In the evenings I go into the village to see my friends, have a few drinks, play the guitar, and sing a few songs. I have a full life."
The American interrupted. "I have an MBA from Harvard and I can help you!" "You should start by fishing longer each day. You can then sell the extra fish you catch. With the extra revenue, you can buy a bigger boat. With the extra money the bigger boat will bring, you can buy a second one and a third one and so on until you have an entire fleet of trawlers."
"Instead of selling your fish to a middle man, you can negotiate directly with the processing plants and maybe even open your own plant. You can then leave this little village and move to Mexico City, Los Angeles, or even New York City. From there you can direct your huge enterprise."
"How long would that take?" asked the Mexican. "Twenty, perhaps twenty-five years," replied the businessman.
"And after that?"
"Afterwards? That's when it get really interesting,"answered the American, laughing. "When your business gets really big, you can start selling stocks and make millions."
"Millions? Really? And after that?"
"After that you'll be able to retire, live in a tiny village near the coast, sleep late, play with your children, catch a few fish, take a siesta, and spend your evening drinking and enjoying your friends."
Ralph
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Winning
I had already written a piece this morning about Sarah's shopping spree, and then I saw Richard had beat me to it. So I'm going to lift my moratorium on poll-watching and bring us up to date. Last week, I got worried about the tightening of the polls and backed off my cheerleading about landslides. But that trend seems to be reversing, and all the news seems bad for McCain.
It doesn't help when big Repubican names start embracing your opponent, when both senators from Maine publicly call on you to stop the robo calls in their state, when your opponent has way more money for the final month, when all signs say there will be no last minute calvary riding to the rescue in the form of Swiftboat ads because even the rightwing nuts don't want to throw away their money on a lost cause, and when your candidate(s) are making such gaffes and misstatements, like McCain saying to a Western PA rally:
OK. So, the polls. RealClearPolitics's average of 12 recent national polls gives Obama a 7.6% edge, with 4 of those polls giving him double digits, including the highly respected Pew Research group at 14%. In addition the Ipsos/McClatchey poll now shows Obama leading by 8% on taxes and on family values, which had been McCain's issues.
As for electoral votes: RCP counts them this way:
Obama 259 (solid), 27 (leaning), 286 (total).
McCain 137 (solid), 23 (leaning), 160 (total).
Toss-up 92.
Toss up states: FL 27, OH 20, NC 15, IN 11, MO 11, NV 5, ND 3.
Leaning to Obama: VA 13, CO 9, NM 5.
Leaning to McCain: GA 15, WV 5, MT 3.
Imagine: Georgia, Montana, and North Dakota are in play.
Could McCain possibly win? Yes, but only if he takes ALL his solid AND leaning states, plus ALL of the toss up states (Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Indiana, Missouri, Nevada, North Dakota) PLUS Virginia AND either Colorado or New Mexico.
And how can Obama win? All he has to do is take his solid states plus 11 more EVs from his leaning states. Just Virginia would do it (he's leading by 6%), or both Colorado (leading by 7%) and New Mexico (up by 5%) without Virginia. Let me make this even starker:
Obama can lose ALL of the toss up states (FL, OH, NC, IN, MO, NV, and NC) and lose Virginia as well -- and still win the election ! ! ! !
Looks pretty good to me.
Ralph
It doesn't help when big Repubican names start embracing your opponent, when both senators from Maine publicly call on you to stop the robo calls in their state, when your opponent has way more money for the final month, when all signs say there will be no last minute calvary riding to the rescue in the form of Swiftboat ads because even the rightwing nuts don't want to throw away their money on a lost cause, and when your candidate(s) are making such gaffes and misstatements, like McCain saying to a Western PA rally:
"I think you may have noticed that Senator Obama's supporters have been saying some pretty nasty things about western Pennsylvania lately. [boos from the crowd]. "You know," he continued, "I couldn't agree with them more." [stunned silence].Makes him sound befuddled, doesn't it? Or like Palin declaring, once again, that as VP she would be "in charge" of the Senate -- completely misunderstanding the Constitutional role of the vice president, which is only to preside over the senate and vote in case of a tie. She thinks she would have (or could take) constitutional power to make deals and control committees, apparently. Even VP Cheney didn't go that far.
OK. So, the polls. RealClearPolitics's average of 12 recent national polls gives Obama a 7.6% edge, with 4 of those polls giving him double digits, including the highly respected Pew Research group at 14%. In addition the Ipsos/McClatchey poll now shows Obama leading by 8% on taxes and on family values, which had been McCain's issues.
As for electoral votes: RCP counts them this way:
Obama 259 (solid), 27 (leaning), 286 (total).
McCain 137 (solid), 23 (leaning), 160 (total).
Toss-up 92.
Toss up states: FL 27, OH 20, NC 15, IN 11, MO 11, NV 5, ND 3.
Leaning to Obama: VA 13, CO 9, NM 5.
Leaning to McCain: GA 15, WV 5, MT 3.
Imagine: Georgia, Montana, and North Dakota are in play.
Could McCain possibly win? Yes, but only if he takes ALL his solid AND leaning states, plus ALL of the toss up states (Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Indiana, Missouri, Nevada, North Dakota) PLUS Virginia AND either Colorado or New Mexico.
And how can Obama win? All he has to do is take his solid states plus 11 more EVs from his leaning states. Just Virginia would do it (he's leading by 6%), or both Colorado (leading by 7%) and New Mexico (up by 5%) without Virginia. Let me make this even starker:
Obama can lose ALL of the toss up states (FL, OH, NC, IN, MO, NV, and NC) and lose Virginia as well -- and still win the election ! ! ! !
Looks pretty good to me.
Ralph
$150,000 to Outfit a Populist? This is Hypocrisy, not Fashion.
Politico.com is reporting that while Wall Street crashed Palin, this champion of the little guy, spent $150,000 on clothing in 4 weeks, or as much as the average American makes in 4 years.
For $150,000 I could have put both of my children through 4 years of college. And provided them with spending money for those 8 years.
I could have paid my health care for 30 years.
$150,000 is as much money as the average American - the Joe Six Pack - makes in 4 years.
I thought it was outrageous when Edwards spent $400 for a haircut - the same amount of money, by the way that Palin spends on 1 pair(of her 7) of her designer glasses.
But $150,000, at some of the most 'elitest' clothing stores in the US - Nieman Marcus($75,000), Saks Fifth Avenue($50,000).
Come on. This isn't about fashion. It's about hypocrisy at the highest level.
If Palin, and the Republican national Committee, want to outfit the Gov extravagantly, that's their choice. But don't pretend to be a populist, a champion of the little guy, a spokesperson for Joe Six Pack and Joe the Plumber.
For Palin, being in politics is like being a kid in a candy shop - she gets to fly first class, stay at exclusive hotels, spend oodles of dollars on designer clothes...and make somebody else pay for it.
And this is the person we're supposed to trust is capable of making wise financial decisions should she ascend to the Presidency?
For $150,000 I could have put both of my children through 4 years of college. And provided them with spending money for those 8 years.
I could have paid my health care for 30 years.
$150,000 is as much money as the average American - the Joe Six Pack - makes in 4 years.
I thought it was outrageous when Edwards spent $400 for a haircut - the same amount of money, by the way that Palin spends on 1 pair(of her 7) of her designer glasses.
But $150,000, at some of the most 'elitest' clothing stores in the US - Nieman Marcus($75,000), Saks Fifth Avenue($50,000).
Come on. This isn't about fashion. It's about hypocrisy at the highest level.
If Palin, and the Republican national Committee, want to outfit the Gov extravagantly, that's their choice. But don't pretend to be a populist, a champion of the little guy, a spokesperson for Joe Six Pack and Joe the Plumber.
For Palin, being in politics is like being a kid in a candy shop - she gets to fly first class, stay at exclusive hotels, spend oodles of dollars on designer clothes...and make somebody else pay for it.
And this is the person we're supposed to trust is capable of making wise financial decisions should she ascend to the Presidency?
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Can't Somebody, Anybody, Stop Palin?
So now Salon.com has a piece focusing on Palin 'going rogue' on McCain. We covered this aspect of her personality back on October 4. It was apparent then that Palin had her own agenda, and, as seems to always be the case with her, it was about acquiring power for herself. Dan Quayle was once considered the most unprepared and intellectually inferior person ever nominated for VP - until Palin. She has set the bar so low only a tapeworm could slide under it. She lets herself be humiliated on SNL and smiles vacantly, she questions McCain's positions, she tells a classroom of kids that the VP is in charge of the Senate, she charges the state of Alaska tens of thousands of dollars for her kids to stay in luxury hotels in NYC, and pull raffle tickets at dog races, she can see Russia, but can't name a newspaper she reads or a Supreme Court decision - I could go on and on. I live in NC - not the most progressive state in the US. Like most people, my uninformed notion of Alaska, prior to Palin, was of a semi-outlaw territory of smart individualists who were savvy and tough. Now? No one I know can conceive of how someone like Palin could be elected anywhere, to any office. The reputation of Alaska has taken such a hit because of her dishonesty and lack of intelligence it will take decades to recover. Which is a shame.
Can't somebody wrap her in an anorak, strap her to a dog sled, and send her off to the frigid white country of the north where she can inflict no more damage by her public ignorance?
Can't somebody wrap her in an anorak, strap her to a dog sled, and send her off to the frigid white country of the north where she can inflict no more damage by her public ignorance?
The "Obama Effect"
It's time to stop worrying about "The Bradley Effect," where white people, for fear of being thought racist, tell pollsters they plan to vote for the black candidate, but then vote for the white candidate, resulting in suprise election loss by the black candidate.
First, I think the racist effect is already evident in polls being much closer than would be expected, given all the dimensions of this contest: a horrible economy going into recession, a vastly unpopular incumbant president of the opposite party, and a vastly unpopular war grossly mishandled by the incumbant.
Now suppose Obama were white -- and otherwise had his same life story and his same skills and qualifications and was pitted against John McCain and Sarah Palin. His poll numbers would be off the charts. I'm suggesting that we're already seeing the effect of racism in this race. And it must be large, because it is also partially offset by the increased black vote for him.
Second, I think there is going to be a "reverse Bradley effect," or perhaps we should call it "The Obama Effect." I predict that there will be an unsuspected number of Republicans who will tell pollsters that they're voting for McCain, but who -- once inside the voting booth -- will vote for Obama.
Many, many moderate (and not so moderate) Republicans agree with Colin Powell's reasons for supporting Obama. Take Ken Adelman, a life long conservative Republican who campaigned for Barry Goldwater, worked for Nixon and Rumsfield, was a friend of Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz, and who still considers himself a bona-fide hawk and others call a neo-con.
He has annouced that, much to his own amazement, he is going to vote for Obama, even though he agrees with McCain on most of the issues -- and his reasons are based on considering the "temperament and judgment" of both candidates. Very similar to what Powell reasoned.
If these two high profile people have said it openly, how many more Republicans who have been tepidly supporting McCain will privately switch their votes?
Let's hope millions do. And then we can talk about the Obama Effect instead of the Bradley Effect. But the tightening of poll numbers still worries me, as do the frantic efforts by the Republicans to interfere with voters' access and right to vote. That's why I've just volunteered to help out on election day with the Obama Voter Protection Project.
Ralph
First, I think the racist effect is already evident in polls being much closer than would be expected, given all the dimensions of this contest: a horrible economy going into recession, a vastly unpopular incumbant president of the opposite party, and a vastly unpopular war grossly mishandled by the incumbant.
Now suppose Obama were white -- and otherwise had his same life story and his same skills and qualifications and was pitted against John McCain and Sarah Palin. His poll numbers would be off the charts. I'm suggesting that we're already seeing the effect of racism in this race. And it must be large, because it is also partially offset by the increased black vote for him.
Second, I think there is going to be a "reverse Bradley effect," or perhaps we should call it "The Obama Effect." I predict that there will be an unsuspected number of Republicans who will tell pollsters that they're voting for McCain, but who -- once inside the voting booth -- will vote for Obama.
Many, many moderate (and not so moderate) Republicans agree with Colin Powell's reasons for supporting Obama. Take Ken Adelman, a life long conservative Republican who campaigned for Barry Goldwater, worked for Nixon and Rumsfield, was a friend of Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz, and who still considers himself a bona-fide hawk and others call a neo-con.
He has annouced that, much to his own amazement, he is going to vote for Obama, even though he agrees with McCain on most of the issues -- and his reasons are based on considering the "temperament and judgment" of both candidates. Very similar to what Powell reasoned.
If these two high profile people have said it openly, how many more Republicans who have been tepidly supporting McCain will privately switch their votes?
Let's hope millions do. And then we can talk about the Obama Effect instead of the Bradley Effect. But the tightening of poll numbers still worries me, as do the frantic efforts by the Republicans to interfere with voters' access and right to vote. That's why I've just volunteered to help out on election day with the Obama Voter Protection Project.
Ralph
Monday, October 20, 2008
Pity Poor McCain
It's sad, you know? John McCain really really doesn't want to run a negative campaign, but Obama is making him do it.
First, we had this: "If Senator Obama had taken my suggestion to have a series of town hall meetings, we could have discussed the issues. But he refused." So, nothing to be done, I guess, but try to smear him with Ayers and ACORN, and call him a socialist too.
Now his campaign manager is saying that they will probably have to bring back the Jeremiah Wright rants, because John Lewis hurt his feelings so bad when he said that he and Sarah were stirring up racial hatred at their rallies -- and it sort of reminded Lewis of the way George Wallace used to do it, you know? Man, that really hurt. So nothing to do but drag out ole Jeremiah.
I don't know. I'm not sure I want a president who can't take responsibility for his own actions but claims "the devil made me do it." What if he decides that Iran is forcing him to nuke them, because, duh, they won't destroy all the centrifuges in their nuclear power plants before he'll talk to them. By golly, that is an affront to all civilized people (including those that have lots of nuclear power plants . . . and nuclear bombs, too). So, sadly, McCain couldn't let that insult go. He'd just be forced to go ahead and nuke 'em. You betcha !!
Now, folks, I respectfully request that nobody show this blog to the good Senator. I'm afraid it might hurt his feelings and force him to . . . what? I don't know. Maybe come tear down my Obama-Biden yard sign.
Ralph
First, we had this: "If Senator Obama had taken my suggestion to have a series of town hall meetings, we could have discussed the issues. But he refused." So, nothing to be done, I guess, but try to smear him with Ayers and ACORN, and call him a socialist too.
Now his campaign manager is saying that they will probably have to bring back the Jeremiah Wright rants, because John Lewis hurt his feelings so bad when he said that he and Sarah were stirring up racial hatred at their rallies -- and it sort of reminded Lewis of the way George Wallace used to do it, you know? Man, that really hurt. So nothing to do but drag out ole Jeremiah.
I don't know. I'm not sure I want a president who can't take responsibility for his own actions but claims "the devil made me do it." What if he decides that Iran is forcing him to nuke them, because, duh, they won't destroy all the centrifuges in their nuclear power plants before he'll talk to them. By golly, that is an affront to all civilized people (including those that have lots of nuclear power plants . . . and nuclear bombs, too). So, sadly, McCain couldn't let that insult go. He'd just be forced to go ahead and nuke 'em. You betcha !!
Now, folks, I respectfully request that nobody show this blog to the good Senator. I'm afraid it might hurt his feelings and force him to . . . what? I don't know. Maybe come tear down my Obama-Biden yard sign.
Ralph
"Socialist, socialist, get out of here!"
Campaigning in NC yesterday, Barak Obama entered a barbecue joint where an after-church crowd, mostly older white people, were eating lunch. A middle-aged woman began yelling from the other end of the restaurant, “Socialist, socialist, socialist -– get out of here!"
This latest "shouting point" is not a grass roots thing; it was prompted by none other than John McCain himself, who first raised the "redistribution of wealth" charge in the third debate -- actually part of his Joe the Plumber stunt. And then he used the word "socialism" himself on the stump on Saturday.
McCain's campaign has nothing positive to run on anymore, and most of the negatives they've trotted out aren't really working either; because at most they are firing up his base. It's true that the polls are tightening, as Obama has always said they would; but we aren't seeing any major swings yet.
So what about this? First of all, it's a long stretch to equate a progressive income tax policy, meant to decrease the gap between the haves and have-nots, with socialism. And secondly, when these people shout "Socialist!," what they really fear is totalitarianism. But that's beside my point here.
The income gap between the top and the bottom of the economic scale has become the widest it has been since the early days of the 20th century, along with an erosion of the "middle class." Is that not also "redistribution of wealth?" I guess it feels different to those who think it's ok if it is the result of laws that favor corporations, that give tax loopholes to the wealthiest, and that tax inherited wealth less than hard-earned income from labor. And then there's the little matter of using "taxpayer's money" to bail out Wall Street. Isn't that "redistribution of wealth?"
It's ok then to take it from the poor and middle class and give it to the wealthy, but not ok to ask for more from the wealthy to help those who are struggling to survive, to obtain health care, to send their kids to college.
It gets reduced to that soundbite "Socialist" so you don't have to think about what it really means. It has become an autonomous scare word. But we're going to hear it more often, and not in the way this woman yelled it at Obama. On one of the talk shows yesterday, someone put it this way: George Bush came into office as a "Social Conservative," and he's leaving as a "Conservative Socialist" -- a reference to the partial "nationalization" of some banks.
For me, I'll stick with Obama's plan to provide support for the lower class, enhance opportunities for the middle class, and ride herd on the runaway greed of the minority at the top. And I don't care if you call it socialism, because the word doesn't scare me.
And I don't believe it's going to be the game-changer for McCain either. Just like all his other stunts that haven't worked. I'll take one Colin Powell endorsement over a thousand people shouting "socialist!" any day.
Ralph
This latest "shouting point" is not a grass roots thing; it was prompted by none other than John McCain himself, who first raised the "redistribution of wealth" charge in the third debate -- actually part of his Joe the Plumber stunt. And then he used the word "socialism" himself on the stump on Saturday.
McCain's campaign has nothing positive to run on anymore, and most of the negatives they've trotted out aren't really working either; because at most they are firing up his base. It's true that the polls are tightening, as Obama has always said they would; but we aren't seeing any major swings yet.
So what about this? First of all, it's a long stretch to equate a progressive income tax policy, meant to decrease the gap between the haves and have-nots, with socialism. And secondly, when these people shout "Socialist!," what they really fear is totalitarianism. But that's beside my point here.
The income gap between the top and the bottom of the economic scale has become the widest it has been since the early days of the 20th century, along with an erosion of the "middle class." Is that not also "redistribution of wealth?" I guess it feels different to those who think it's ok if it is the result of laws that favor corporations, that give tax loopholes to the wealthiest, and that tax inherited wealth less than hard-earned income from labor. And then there's the little matter of using "taxpayer's money" to bail out Wall Street. Isn't that "redistribution of wealth?"
It's ok then to take it from the poor and middle class and give it to the wealthy, but not ok to ask for more from the wealthy to help those who are struggling to survive, to obtain health care, to send their kids to college.
It gets reduced to that soundbite "Socialist" so you don't have to think about what it really means. It has become an autonomous scare word. But we're going to hear it more often, and not in the way this woman yelled it at Obama. On one of the talk shows yesterday, someone put it this way: George Bush came into office as a "Social Conservative," and he's leaving as a "Conservative Socialist" -- a reference to the partial "nationalization" of some banks.
For me, I'll stick with Obama's plan to provide support for the lower class, enhance opportunities for the middle class, and ride herd on the runaway greed of the minority at the top. And I don't care if you call it socialism, because the word doesn't scare me.
And I don't believe it's going to be the game-changer for McCain either. Just like all his other stunts that haven't worked. I'll take one Colin Powell endorsement over a thousand people shouting "socialist!" any day.
Ralph
The Fake Race Card
It's pretty despicable, albeit predictable, to see intellectual troglodytes like Limbaugh and Buchanan play the race card in trying to dismiss Colin Powell's decision to back Obama.
Despicable because they are essentially calling Powell a liar. They are saying all the carefully enunciated reasons why he said he was supporting Obama are falsehoods put out there simply to hide the fact Powell wants to support an African-American.
This is a smear on Powell's character, intellectual prowess, and his decades of service to this country, where he has consistently presented his positions in an articulate and reasoned fashion.
But now all of a sudden his words are meaningless? Now all of a sudden Powell is as simplistic and thoughtless as David Duke?
Funny, I don't hear the right wing wackos criticizing all the racists who are supporting McPalin because it's the 'white' ticket. I haven't heard one word of outrage from Limbaugh or Buchanan about the disgraceful, openly racist man in Ohio who hung a figure of Obama in effigy in his front lawn.
I haven't heard them come forward and say they are liars, and they're voting for McPalin because they want to vote for white candidates.
Powell has never played the race card in his life.
Unlike the people who accuse him of playing the race card.
There's a type of haikulike poem, known as jiji senryu, which is essentially about politics. Here's one for the morning.
his vote
is based on race
scream the racists
Despicable because they are essentially calling Powell a liar. They are saying all the carefully enunciated reasons why he said he was supporting Obama are falsehoods put out there simply to hide the fact Powell wants to support an African-American.
This is a smear on Powell's character, intellectual prowess, and his decades of service to this country, where he has consistently presented his positions in an articulate and reasoned fashion.
But now all of a sudden his words are meaningless? Now all of a sudden Powell is as simplistic and thoughtless as David Duke?
Funny, I don't hear the right wing wackos criticizing all the racists who are supporting McPalin because it's the 'white' ticket. I haven't heard one word of outrage from Limbaugh or Buchanan about the disgraceful, openly racist man in Ohio who hung a figure of Obama in effigy in his front lawn.
I haven't heard them come forward and say they are liars, and they're voting for McPalin because they want to vote for white candidates.
Powell has never played the race card in his life.
Unlike the people who accuse him of playing the race card.
There's a type of haikulike poem, known as jiji senryu, which is essentially about politics. Here's one for the morning.
his vote
is based on race
scream the racists
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Last Chance Survey
A research team from the Psychology Department at New York University, headed by Professor Yaacov Trope and supported by the National Science Foundation, is investigating the cognitive causes of voting behavior, political preferences, and candidate evaluations throughout the course of the 2008 U.S. Presidential election. This stage of the study focuses on the information people use to inform evaluations during the last few weeks before the election. They seek respondents of all political leanings from all over the country (and from the rest of the world) to complete a 15-minute questionnaire, the responses to which will be completely anonymous..."
Here is the link to the survey: http://www.psychsurveys.org/brietruesdell/2008elections
We were chosen as one of the national blogs to participate in this survey, so even if you haven't posted, please take the survey.
But don't post a response to it. Thanks.
Here is the link to the survey: http://www.psychsurveys.org/
We were chosen as one of the national blogs to participate in this survey, so even if you haven't posted, please take the survey.
But don't post a response to it. Thanks.
Powell for Obama !
Colin Powell just made his endorsement of Barak Obama official on Meet the Press.
More later.
Ralph
More later.
Ralph
SNL Humiliates Palin - And She Doesn't Get It
Saturday Night Live took the opportunity of Palin's visit to the show last night to offer a stinging indictment of her lack of intelligence, and she didn't seem to realize it. Palin stood there with a vacant smile on her face while first Tina Fey mocked her small-minded prejudices, unwillingness to talk to the press, and vacant beauty pageant lack of intelligence. Then Alec Baldwin ran her down(while pretending to think she was Tiny Fey) and, in his most cutting lines, pretended to think she was 'hot'. Sarah didn't see the pretense. The mocking comments about her looks were the only time she seemed genuinely pleased. The rest of the time, she didn't even seem to understand the words they were speaking.
Later, during a Weekend Update segment, Palin was ridiculed by Amy Poehler who did a rap that savaged Palin for everything from her comment that she could see Russia, to her moose hunting. Palin sat there smiling, bouncing in her seat, dancing along as if they were complimenting her and not pointing out, to her face, why they think she's an idiot.
Palin chose to go on SNL. Nobody forced her. Certainly, the McCain campaign is familiar with the show, and their stinging satire of Palin. Yet no one questioned the wisdom of having her appear on the show.
What did Palin expect was going to happen? The entire cast would suddenly realize Palin was actually a brilliant observer of the contemporary political scene?
This was one of the more humiliating moments for the McCain campaign. I have never in my life seen a VP candidate destroy a presidential campaign so completely. But let's give credit where credit is due. John 'The Maverick' McCain denied his own instincts to pick Lieberman and let his advisors talk him into picking Palin.
That's all we need to know about McCain's inability to make the sound judgments necessary in a presidential candidate.
Palin makes Quayle look like he was ready for a Macarthur Genius Foundation Grant.
Later, during a Weekend Update segment, Palin was ridiculed by Amy Poehler who did a rap that savaged Palin for everything from her comment that she could see Russia, to her moose hunting. Palin sat there smiling, bouncing in her seat, dancing along as if they were complimenting her and not pointing out, to her face, why they think she's an idiot.
Palin chose to go on SNL. Nobody forced her. Certainly, the McCain campaign is familiar with the show, and their stinging satire of Palin. Yet no one questioned the wisdom of having her appear on the show.
What did Palin expect was going to happen? The entire cast would suddenly realize Palin was actually a brilliant observer of the contemporary political scene?
This was one of the more humiliating moments for the McCain campaign. I have never in my life seen a VP candidate destroy a presidential campaign so completely. But let's give credit where credit is due. John 'The Maverick' McCain denied his own instincts to pick Lieberman and let his advisors talk him into picking Palin.
That's all we need to know about McCain's inability to make the sound judgments necessary in a presidential candidate.
Palin makes Quayle look like he was ready for a Macarthur Genius Foundation Grant.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
