This Election Is (Probably) Over

[Lincoln Republican]

Maybe Obama and the Democtrats can get Dan Rather to do well, you know, dare I say it, oh, I shouldn't, but, well, a made up story about McCain, you know, well, ah, um, like he did with, well, oh, er, President Bush in 2004.

Perhaps the Democrats could hire Rather to be Chief of the Obama Truth Squad.  There's a man who doesn't hesitate to fight dirty, which is what some in this thread indicate Obama and the Democrats are going to have to do.  

[ChrisFromNJ]

Maybe Obama and the Democtrats can get Dan Rather to do well, you know, dare I say it, oh, I shouldn't, but, well, a made up story about McCain, you know, well, ah, um, like he did with, well, oh, er, President Bush in 2004.

Perhaps the Democrats could hire Rather to be Chief of the Obama Truth Squad.  There's a man who doesn't hesitate to fight dirty, which is what some in this thread indicate Obama and the Democrats are going to have to do.  

Sounds like a good idea.

How about Bill O'reilly to head the McCain Truth Squad?

[Sam Spade]

You know, if a candidate loses, the next day, people here will be arguing the guy who lost couldn't have won, for reasons XY and Z.  It's a natural instinct, and it's wrong.  At this current moment, either McCain or Obama could win.  John Kerry could've won in 2004, and the Democrats' recent spate of "Bush couldn't be beat in 2004" are a way of emotionally distancing themselves from the pain of having such an important race slip through their fingers.

With the possible exception of Bob Dole, every major party candidate in the last 20 years could have won, and so could have Perot if he had played his cards right.

You could be right about that.

He is right -

Of course, if McCain wins, next year many, many people will be saying that there was no way that a near freshman African-American Senator named Barack Hussein Obama could have defeated a POW war hero and maverick Senator of 20 years.

They will?  Considering the present environment?  Maybe.

Especially considering the present environment, dont'cha think?

History is sometimes interesting that way - most people have the idea now that Bush 41 was simply a shoo-in because Reagan.  Rather, Dukakis should have had a slight edge generically.

So since Bush is unpopular McCain is Dukakis in this scenario? I wouldn't go so far as to say McCain has a slight edge generically, but he certainly does have a huge edge by conventional biographical/resume measurements, and with a McCain win people will understandably see this as decisive. O/c, that doesn't mean they would be right (look at Kerry).

McCain is Dukakis in this scenario?  I don't think so.  That was just an example to show how opinions of elections change over time.

[Meeker]

I heard from friends who watched it that Obama did extremely well.

[Eraserhead]

Oh jeez. This is just a little silly.

[J. J.]

JSojourner, I disagree, but I will say this.

1.  Those people who expected Obama to vastly outperform McCain in debates are likely to be disappointed.

2.  The "rock star" packaging of Obama is a big mistake and it's been a mistake that he has made.  He needed to connect with the average voter, and, for the most part, he hasn't.

3.  Those Obama supporters who expected Obama to win because he is articulate and intelligent, should wake up and smell the coffee at this report.  Obama is not a "poor child made good."  Him mother had a Ph D, his stepfather an oil company executive, and his grandmother was vice president of a bank.  He was raised upper middle class.  No matter how you look at it, his pre-Senate accomplishments were not atypical of someone from that background and McCain's personal story is more compelling.

Good point, graduated bottom 1% of his class, lost 5 planes, cheated on his wife, was involved in the Keating 5 scandal. And was an absolute nobody with a father and grandfather as the first 4 star son-father pair. That is quite compelling.

Try the Silver Star, Legion of Merit with cluster, Distinguished Air Medal, Bronze Star with three cluster, for 5 1/2 years as a POW, plus his prior combat service.  Add to that an impressive legislative record.

Obama, community organizer, taught at a law school, but not full time.  Two terms in the State Senate.  And how much of Obama's academic rise was due to affirmative action?  And how good was he as an academic?  In twelve years, he never published anything.  http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/us/politics/30law.html?pagewanted=1&adxnnlx=1217423182-NgLKdjCP%20fBiCrDDFVAqNw
That is unusual, and telling.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Obama has 264 EVs and only needs one >6 EV tossup state, and the election is over?

[Sbane]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But it might make a difference in a close election. I agree with you that issues will ultimately decide this election but Obama will lose a few points because of the bradley/islamophobia affect. Of course considering the current political climate Obama should be up by more than a few points. We cannot discount Mccain either, he is probably the best candidate for this year.

[Sbane]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I was really thinking of 2004. We could have stopped the Iraq war then but nope the gays were comin!!!!!!

[Keystone Phil]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I was really thinking of 2004. We could have stopped the Iraq war then but nope the gays were comin!!!!!!

Maybe you were missed my point. The American electorate is full of asses...until...uh...the Dems win.

[Keystone Phil]

Obama has 264 EVs and only needs one >6 EV tossup state, and the election is over?

LOL!

[Sbane]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I was really thinking of 2004. We could have stopped the Iraq war then but nope the gays were comin!!!!!!

Maybe you were missed my point. The American electorate is full of asses...until...uh...the Dems win.

No, they are still asses. What irks me is how they fall for things like this muslim thing, or how Mccain lost big in SC because of the black baby thing.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Obama has 264 EVs and only needs one >6 EV tossup state, and the election is over?

LOL!

Are you seriously saying McCain is a shoo-in? Because that's what disagreeing with the above post is saying.

[Keystone Phil]

Obama has 264 EVs and only needs one >6 EV tossup state, and the election is over?

LOL!

Are you seriously saying McCain is a shoo-in? Because that's what disagreeing with the above post is saying.

I'm not seriously saying he's a shoo-in. I never said he was. Disagreeing with the above post is disagreeing with your assinine belief that Indiana is a toss up and North Dakota is only slightly leaning to McCain.

And, for whatever reason, Delaware isn't strongly Democratic. I guess that's you being "fair."

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

JSojourner, I disagree, but I will say this.

1.  Those people who expected Obama to vastly outperform McCain in debates are likely to be disappointed.

2.  The "rock star" packaging of Obama is a big mistake and it's been a mistake that he has made.  He needed to connect with the average voter, and, for the most part, he hasn't.

3.  Those Obama supporters who expected Obama to win because he is articulate and intelligent, should wake up and smell the coffee at this report.  Obama is not a "poor child made good."  Him mother had a Ph D, his stepfather an oil company executive, and his grandmother was vice president of a bank.  He was raised upper middle class.  No matter how you look at it, his pre-Senate accomplishments were not atypical of someone from that background and McCain's personal story is more compelling.

Good point, graduated bottom 1% of his class, lost 5 planes, cheated on his wife, was involved in the Keating 5 scandal. And was an absolute nobody with a father and grandfather as the first 4 star son-father pair. That is quite compelling.

Try the Silver Star, Legion of Merit with cluster, Distinguished Air Medal, Bronze Star with three cluster, for 5 1/2 years as a POW, plus his prior combat service.  Add to that an impressive legislative record.

Obama, community organizer, taught at a law school, but not full time.  Two terms in the State Senate.  And how much of Obama's academic rise was due to affirmative action?  And how good was he as an academic?  In twelve years, he never published anything.  http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/us/politics/30law.html?pagewanted=1&adxnnlx=1217423182-NgLKdjCP%20fBiCrDDFVAqNw
That is unusual, and telling.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Obama has 264 EVs and only needs one >6 EV tossup state, and the election is over?

LOL!

Are you seriously saying McCain is a shoo-in? Because that's what disagreeing with the above post is saying.

I'm not seriously saying he's a shoo-in. I never said he was. Disagreeing with the above post is disagreeing with your assinine belief that Indiana is a toss up and North Dakota is only slightly leaning to McCain.

And, for whatever reason, Delaware isn't strongly Democratic. I guess that's you being "fair."

You know where the map comes from, right?

I disagree with Indiana too, but put it as strong McCain and the map isn't much better than him.

[Keystone Phil]

You know where the map comes from, right?

A complete toolbox?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

You know where the map comes from, right?

A complete toolbox?

https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/index.php

And all evidence points to that North Dakota will closer than 2000/04. Do I think Obama will win it? No. But expecting a McCain blowout comparable to Bush's is just as naive.

[Keystone Phil]

You know where the map comes from, right?

A complete toolbox?

https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/index.php

And all evidence points to that North Dakota will closer than 2000/04. Do I think Obama will win it? No. But expecting a McCain blowout comparable to Bush's is just as naive.

Oh wow! The state poll averages for three months before an election sure does shut me up! I'm sure the map will look just like that a few days before November 4th!

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

You know where the map comes from, right?

A complete toolbox?

https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/index.php

And all evidence points to that North Dakota will closer than 2000/04. Do I think Obama will win it? No. But expecting a McCain blowout comparable to Bush's is just as naive.

Oh wow! The state poll averages for three months before an election sure does shut me up! I'm sure the map will look just like that a few days before November 4th!

OK, now do honestly believe McCain will win ND by as big as Bush did?

[Keystone Phil]

You know where the map comes from, right?

A complete toolbox?

https://uselectionatlas.org/POLLS/index.php

And all evidence points to that North Dakota will closer than 2000/04. Do I think Obama will win it? No. But expecting a McCain blowout comparable to Bush's is just as naive.

Oh wow! The state poll averages for three months before an election sure does shut me up! I'm sure the map will look just like that a few days before November 4th!

OK, now do honestly believe McCain will win ND by as big as Bush did?

Who cares? McCain might only win by twelve to fourteen points instead of twenty-something! The horror!

[Person Man]

I'm just going to throw my $.02 in here. Regardless of what happens on 11.4.08, what are we going to do about it? Probably nothing, but we'll see.

[HardRCafé]

What defeated McCain in the 2000 Primary, Gore in the 2000 general, Cleland in the 2002 Senate race and Kerry in the 2004 general is now at work against us.

Not this **** again.  Cleland lost because he didn't take Chambliss seriously until the home stretch.  He won with 49% the first time assumed the seat was his for life.  Not too smart.

[opebo]

Yes the masses are indeed asses. I would not be surprised if Obama lost either because too many people thought he was muslim. And people were wondering why I was so "panicky" on that other bullsh**t thread about Obama's Indonesian past.

And this will be a good way to tick off people even more if liberals begin saying Obama lost because people think he's a Muslim or he's black. Perhaps he loses because Americans feel he is too inexperienced, or they don't want taxes going up on capital gains, income, social security, etc..

At the end of the day, the US is still a center-right country, and far leftists like Obama have a hard time winning.

Yes, Obama might lose some votes because he's black or because he's perceived as a Muslim, but that is a small, small minority.

No, he'll lose far more votes due to being black than to any other reason.

[Brittain33]

But I don't think you're really hearing me.  I am not saying the event did Obama in.  I am saying the whole GOP operation (as exhibited at Saddleback, and later at the VFW), will do Obama in.  There is no defeating it, unless (and believe me -- I hope I am missing something) Obama figures something out.

Ok.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I do think this is a problem, and it is one reason I didn't support Obama in the primaries. I didn't think he had the experience to do this. I also agree with you, it is important.

That said, I do not live in fear this year of what the Republicans might say or do as I should have in 2000 and did in 2004. Yes, they can attack. Yes, they own the low ground in appealing to people's baser instincts on certain issues. I am not as concerned for a few reasons. One of them is that John McCain is not the best leader for this machine. He's not a good attack dog; he's only proven himself good at letting surrogates attack, which isn't a bad skill, but it isn't everything. More importantly, unlike George W. Bush, he doesn't inspire many people. I hear you saying that he has found the ability to do so--perhaps I'm misreading or simply insisting on saying what I want to think you said--but I don't think he will ever be loved or cheered like Bush. He can enjoy some grudging respect, and that has value. It doesn't fill stadiums in West Chester, Ohio or The Villages in Florida with five-digit crowds, and it doesn't get volunteers dragging their friends to the polls.

Similarly, Obama can fight both offense and defense in the battle for votes. I don't mean offense in the way you might, in the sense of attacking McCain. He inspires voters and gets them excited. Gore and Kerry, bless their hearts, never did that. They were always on the defensive. At best, they gave Democrats reasons to support them, but they never seduced voters or inspired crowds. I wouldn't write that off. It helped Bush win in 2004.

Finally, I think we are seeing Obama take the gloves off. He is responding right away to attacks, which is something Kerry and Gore never did. I hear you saying that he may not do it in the right voice. I think we're going to have to see what he does at the convention, how he can take it to McCain and attack him. I think it is crucial he define McCain negatively there. He's going to have to do it in his own voice, though, to be convincing. He's going to do it more in sadness than in anger, which always worked for Bush.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I think you're right on this, but...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

...not here. For the simple reason that it's not 00, 02, or 04. People talk about the Mommy Party and the Daddy Party for the Dems and the Republicans. We went through a period of time when we wanted leadership that kicked ass and took names, and didn't get all gay with facts and logic and that crap. I feel that America is sick of it. Yes, we want a strong leader, one who pushes back against attacks and is confident in himself. I don't think that people are voting for the bigger bully any more. I also think that focusing on tactics can obscure how much the fundamentals supported the Republicans in those races. Cleland was running as a Democrat in Georgia in 2002, against Bush's coattails, in a state that was trending hard right for a long time. We were wiped out up and down the ticket in that state. The Cleland=bin Laden comparison was shameful, but the fact of the ad, or its outcome, did not determine the election. Voters just weren't buying what Cleland was selling.

This year, they absolutely are. Obama just has to close the sale. The Republicans have limited ability to stop him, just as the Democrats had limited ability to stop people from lovin' W in 2004 for keeping us safe and kicking butt for America.