Of Floors and Ceilings

[Gustaf]

I'm sorry but a lot of this sounds more like wishful thinking than anything else to me.

1. Obama is on the news all the time. If we assume he benefits from exposure that's a positive for him. You just stipulate that the more we see of the race the better it will be for Obama but I suspect that stems from bias on your behalf.

2. Firstly, money is overrated, imo. McCain didn't need it to sweep the primary while Obama, despite an enormous money advantage, has not yet locked up his nomination. Secondly, Obama v Clinton is getting all the attention. Not so strange that McCain is not getting much money at this stage.

3. This kind of analysis is bogus in 99% of all cases. Sure, then why does McCain do better against Obama when likely voters are polled? Do you have any actual data to back up your contention that Obama voters will have higher turnout? In fact, how much data do you have to back up the assumption that Obama will do that much better among the highly educated? The one recent poll on the issue that I saw showed a gap but not an enormous one (the difference was more between Obama and Clinton than between McCain and Obama).

4. See 3. WIthout any data to back it up it's just wishful thinking.

5. Again, see 3. The idea that the map will just play out in a way that benefits Obama heavily seems unfounded. If anything, the opposite seems true. Obama does well primarily in safe Democrati states and safe Republican states in the West and Northeast. It is historically very unusual for a map to heavily favour one candidate in a structural sense.

Overall, most of this could be argued the opposite way if you were a McCain hack. Because most of your analysis really boils down to saying "Obama is so much better than McCain that in the end everyone will vote for him" And I can't say that I'm convinced by that.