Obama might be starting to see a bounce from the convention. It's not a 15-point lead, but not too bad...

That said, I've come to see the speech tonight as almost a no-win situation for him. If it's great, the Republicans will mock it as more messianism--and the press will echo that, because it's what they do. If it's lousy, it could demoralize Democrats.

Stepping back from this, and thinking about 2004, I'm wondering if the days of the true convention bounce are over because, one, there are simply fewer undecideds than there used to be, and two, the conventions themselves are lower-profile with networks showing just one hour a night, and even more-interested people like me generally choosing to watch baseball (or whatever) rather than televised politicking. If it's Obama or Cole Hamels at 10.15 tonight, I'm probably sticking with Cole.

TenuredVulture wrote:Dear Democrats:

I think it's mean the way you keep calling John McCain a Republican, and then remind people that George Bush is a Republican too.

Sincerely,

LAExile

If only that were true. No, the Democrats don't want to call John McCain and George Bush Republicans saying that's why they have a lot in common. They want Republican votes. So while they'll slam Republican ideals, calling them Republican ideals would lose them votes. Obama is big on saying he's going to bring everyone together and reach across the aisle, so the Democrats have to depict Bush and McCain as far right rogues. You will never hear a Democrat call McCain's economic plan a "typical Republican economic plan."

McCain and Bush agree on many issues because they're Republicans. The Dems don't want people to think that.

ptk, I have a problem with people who are friends of John McCain slamming his character when we know that after the election they'll be having dinner again. Slam McCain's record. There's plenty there. Slam his idea for the future. There's plenty there. They're doing both of those things and they should. I totally understand you don't want another Republican in there. There are a lot of reasons not to vote for McCain based on who he is and what he'd do.

Of course McCain's biggest vulnerability, his unpopular guest worker program, is the best way to slam him. If the Democrats ran a spot "amnesty amnesty amnesty" they'd win a lot of votes. The problem is that the Democrats like most of McCain's immigration plan. So instead they have to say he's abandoned it. If I agreed with flip flopping, winning this election would be a lot easier. If McCain flip flopped on global warming, stem cell research, torture and immigration he'd get the Republicans who don't like him to vote for him. But he refuses to flip flop.

I'm fine that you don't want him to be President, but all the people who liked McCain, but wouldn't vote for him, a year ago are now pretending they don't like him any more.

dajafi wrote:That said, I've come to see the speech tonight as almost a no-win situation for him. If it's great, the Republicans will mock it as more messianism--and the press will echo that, because it's what they do. If it's lousy, it could demoralize Democrats.

Wait until Obama mops the floor with McCain in the debates but (1) the media will have to pretend both candidates did well and (2) the Republicans will do their best, and succeed somewhat, to negate this advantage by lowering expectations for McCain.

I have to give the Republicans credit - they consistently go after Democrats' perceived strengths and try to turn them into weaknesses - and succeed a shocking amount of the time.

I'm sure the speech I'll see and hear tonight will not resemble the one covered in tomorrow's paper.

dajafi wrote:Obama might be starting to see a bounce from the convention. It's not a 15-point lead, but not too bad...

That said, I've come to see the speech tonight as almost a no-win situation for him. If it's great, the Republicans will mock it as more messianism--and the press will echo that, because it's what they do. If it's lousy, it could demoralize Democrats.

Stepping back from this, and thinking about 2004, I'm wondering if the days of the true convention bounce are over because, one, there are simply fewer undecideds than there used to be, and two, the conventions themselves are lower-profile with networks showing just one hour a night, and even more-interested people like me generally choosing to watch baseball (or whatever) rather than televised politicking. If it's Obama or Cole Hamels at 10.15 tonight, I'm probably sticking with Cole.

The whole concept of the convention is fairly pointless now and antiquated. The bounce doesn't matter all that much. McCain will get a bounce after the GOP convention. And then 2 weeks later, the polls will all normalize again. And we'll likely be right back where we are now, unless Obama or Biden do something really dumb in that time span

Laexile wrote:I'm fine that you don't want him to be President, but all the people who liked McCain, but wouldn't vote for him, a year ago are now pretending they don't like him any more.

A lot of people liked who McCain seemed to be or pretended to be circa 2000. They genuinely don't like what he's become, and I doubt you'll see much kissing up from them to McCain after the election, regardless of the outcome.

McCain has pissed away more political goodwill in the past four years or so than many political figures ever have in the first place.

Laexile wrote:If McCain flip flopped on global warming, stem cell research, torture and immigration he'd get the Republicans who don't like him to vote for him. But he refuses to flip flop.

Narrator: John McCain, The Original Maverick®

dajafi wrote:Obama might be starting to see a bounce from the convention. It's not a 15-point lead, but not too bad...

That said, I've come to see the speech tonight as almost a no-win situation for him. If it's great, the Republicans will mock it as more messianism--and the press will echo that, because it's what they do. If it's lousy, it could demoralize Democrats.

Stepping back from this, and thinking about 2004, I'm wondering if the days of the true convention bounce are over because, one, there are simply fewer undecideds than there used to be, and two, the conventions themselves are lower-profile with networks showing just one hour a night, and even more-interested people like me generally choosing to watch baseball (or whatever) rather than televised politicking. If it's Obama or Cole Hamels at 10.15 tonight, I'm probably sticking with Cole.

Must have had one hell of a day of polling yesterday. +1 to +6, and it's a rolling three day average. It looks like a decent sample for McCain fell out, but still.

As for the conventions, I've watched Michelle Obama's speech and Bill's speech, and that will probably be it. I will be watching the Phils and college football tonight. I can't imagine I'll watch all that much of the GOP convention next week either.

FTN wrote:The whole concept of the convention is fairly pointless now and antiquated. The bounce doesn't matter all that much. McCain will get a bounce after the GOP convention. And then 2 weeks later, the polls will all normalize again. And we'll likely be right back where we are now, unless Obama or Biden do something really dumb in that time span

You might be right. I'm not sure yet. The convention bounce hugely helped Bush41 in '88, Clinton in '92 and (I'm pretty sure) Gore in '00. It had no impact at all in 1996 or 2004.

I have trouble believing McCain will get a bounce next week, simply because the Republican brand is in such bad shape. McCain vs. Obama is running something like 12 percent ahead of "generic Republican" vs. "generic Democrat." So how does it help McCain to be surrounded on TV with 20,000 Republicans? The one thing you could have argued a couple months ago was that he could "bring Republicans home," as the Democrats have tried to do (evidently with some success) with their recalcitrant voters this week. But McCain already has accomplished that, according to the polls.

More broadly, one could ask what the Republicans are going to talk about next week beyond all the ways that Barack Obama is awful and that McCain is great. The extent of variety probably will be a few shots at Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic-run congress. Policy "thinking" like this isn't very likely to win many votes.

dajafi wrote:More broadly, one could ask what the Republicans are going to talk about next week beyond all the ways that Barack Obama is awful and that McCain is great. The extent of variety probably will be a few shots at Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic-run congress. Policy "thinking" like this isn't very likely to win many votes.

Why would they need to talk about anything else?

Putin accuses U.S. of orchestrating Georgian war

Putin told CNN his defense officials had told him it was done to benefit a presidential candidate -- Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama are competing to succeed George W. Bush -- although he presented no evidence to back it up.

Putin the Kid

Laexile wrote:I'm fine that you don't want him to be President, but all the people who liked McCain, but wouldn't vote for him, a year ago are now pretending they don't like him any more.

Well, I wished we lived in a more consistent reality where people stuck to the moral high road. But that's just not reality. People want the person they support to win. A lot is at stake. A lot. People all have skeletons in their closests. McCain no matter how much you spin him one way or antoher, how many Dems may have dug him at one time or some instances or when it served them as a contrast to Bush -- let's not try to make McCain out to be some super man of the people. Some humble play-fair paragon of virtue. He's wealthy, powerful Republican, who's persona on Lettermen and elsewhere put him slightly at a distance from the old-skool Bush family -- but he's no "great guy trying to do the people's work", some maverick Republican beloved for years by Dems that ahve suddenly now all turned on him with a viciousness.

It's the election season. This is how it roles. And both sides sling mud. Republicans like Dems have factions with hot spots. Former and future friends have to line up with their pary. When is the last time I heard a Republican say something genuine about concern for poor people? And suggesting any policy to benefit the poor folks. If a big corp wants to open a toxic factory in a poor 'hood, the Rep rep will 99% of the time advocate to makeit happen. That's how it is. Dems do it too, but at least say other stuff in their rhetoric.

McCain may well win. Obama like Kerry isn't not seen as folksy -- he doesn't have the Hilary-ites and he doesn't have the white Rush Limbaugh followers and our antiquated electoral system hurst Obama more than McCain...

You just takin too much of this personally. Don't be so surprised or indignant. Support your man as you do because of who you think he is and how he will conduct himself. You don't appear to be a big Bush fan, and I know it ruffles your feathers when McCain you seem to genuinely respect is being compared as just another Bush, he's not, but he's not far enough different to matter to any Dem, friend or foe.

Here's some additional updated polling information...

From Rasmussen Reports:

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows hints of a modest convention bounce building for Barack Obama. The Democrat gained a point from yesterday and now attracts 45% of the vote nationwide while John McCain earns 44%. When "leaners" are included, it’s Obama 47% and McCain 47%

More detail here - Rasmussen

BuddyGroom wrote:

Laexile wrote:I'm fine that you don't want him to be President, but all the people who liked McCain, but wouldn't vote for him, a year ago are now pretending they don't like him any more.

A lot of people liked who McCain seemed to be or pretended to be circa 2000. They genuinely don't like what he's become, and I doubt you'll see much kissing up from them to McCain after the election, regardless of the outcome.

McCain has pissed away more political goodwill in the past four years or so than many political figures ever have in the first place.

A lot of people liked who they imagined John McCain to be in 2000, not who he was. John McCain may be elected President. You get there by accumulating goodwill, not pissing it away.

In 1983 he opposed US involvement in Lebanon. In 1994 he opposed US involvement in Somalia. Yet he favored military action in the Gulf War. When he ran for President in 2000 his resume was littered with seemingly inconsistent votes. I'm betting that the people that decry him for Keating 5 today, eight years ago thought he was courageous for owning up to his mistake in that scandal. In 1980 his marriage broke apart. He's admitted to "behaving badly," which is probably code for cheating. In 2008 it's a reason to attack his character. In 2000 it wasn't.

In 2005 it was the gang of 14. In 2007 he took two very unpopular stances on the surge and immigration. No other major Republican candidate came out in favor of the surge. He's the same man. You're just seeing the truth.

ptk, your advice is sound. Since I don't accept it, I'm clearly not made for politics. I don't think I want to lose my surprise or disgust. I certainly will be armed with both in Minneapolis. There are a lot of reasons to not vote for Barack Obama. I won't just shrug when the Republicans try to invent some.

T-Paw getting the Drudge buzz.

Do it, old man.

Would be a good pick.

but because of LaExile, I'm making it my mission over the next 2 months to convince people not to vote for McCain

FTN wrote:Would be a good pick.

but because of LaExile, I'm making it my mission over the next 2 months to convince people not to vote for McCain

Woo hoo!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4KIvRTg6KQ&e[/youtube]

LAEx, you produce this one?

Actually probably not a terrible idea, though I'm not sure it's the best allocation of resources ever.

dajafi wrote:Stepping back from this, and thinking about 2004, I'm wondering if the days of the true convention bounce are over because, one, there are simply fewer undecideds than there used to be, and two, the conventions themselves are lower-profile with networks showing just one hour a night, and even more-interested people like me generally choosing to watch baseball (or whatever) rather than televised politicking.

Had no sense of it at the time of course, being a punkass kid, but I am sooooo glad I watched a lot of the TV coverage of the 68 Dem convention (at a relative's summer house, with low-intensity parental supervision).

Everyone seems to think it's going to be Mitt. I don't get it.

Additionally, the guy yelling on a megaphone "9/11 was an inside job" behind the MSNBC set is really annoying.