VoxOrion wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:and well, who knows?

One thing I predict based on a lot of the data you and others have presented: The loser's supporters will demand some kind of serious reengineering of the pre-polling processes. If it's Obama that loses despite some polls showing him up before election day, it'll become a 'national discussion' and almost certainly follow the patter of the last two elections: lots of carrying on about stolen elections.

Monkeyboy wrote:Thanks, guys. I usually read 538, but haven't gotten there yet today. I'm not sure how I missed the articles.

So it sounds like nobody really knows and, as expected, different polls are dealing with it in radically different ways. Maybe they're right when taken all together, cancelling out all the noise.

TenuredVulture wrote:Another confounding factor are late deciders, who are deciding later and later. Complicating matters further, however, are early voters, as more and more states make it possible to cast a vote weeks before election. I think Virginians can cast votes now. Arkansas starts early voting two weeks before the election.

jerseyhoya wrote:

Warszawa wrote:By this weekend will there be anybody left who will really consider voting for McCain?

Why not?

Mountainphan wrote:

seke2 wrote:That's a really good point dajafi. The overriding "theme" for McCain's campaign basically seems to have been "Obama sucks, we're the alternative" ... which isn't necessarily a bad strategy, but Brooks is absolutely right that it's essentially lead to a failure for McCain to explain why we should be voting FOR him. He hasn't made it clear who he is and based on his campaign decisions that seem to be very politically motivated (like selecting Sarah Palin), that may be because he's whoever he needs to be on any particular day for political purposes and doesn't really have a fundamental ideology, like Reagan did.

This is a solid point. However this also, in my opinion, applies to Obama. It is not at all clear what he stands for and I think this is intentional since his resume is so thin. Hence the broad but shallow themes of "change", "hope" and so on.

For those who are concerned about Palin's inexperience, this same question applies to Obama. The only difference is he's the one running for President.

McCain's far from perfect, but I trust him more on most issues (energy policy, foreign relations, etc.) than his opponent.

The Red Tornado wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:Another confounding factor are late deciders, who are deciding later and later. Complicating matters further, however, are early voters, as more and more states make it possible to cast a vote weeks before election. I think Virginians can cast votes now. Arkansas starts early voting two weeks before the election.

I dont get undecided voters, are they ignorant or wishy washy?

The Red Tornado wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:Another confounding factor are late deciders, who are deciding later and later. Complicating matters further, however, are early voters, as more and more states make it possible to cast a vote weeks before election. I think Virginians can cast votes now. Arkansas starts early voting two weeks before the election.

I dont get undecided voters, are they ignorant or wishy washy?

Mountainphan wrote:This is a solid point. However this also, in my opinion, applies to Obama. It is not at all clear what he stands for and I think this is intentional since his resume is so thin. Hence the broad but shallow themes of "change", "hope" and so on.

Mountainphan wrote:For those who are concerned about Palin's inexperience, this same question applies to Obama. The only difference is he's the one running for President.

Mountainphan wrote:McCain's far from perfect, but I trust him more on most issues (energy policy, foreign relations, etc.) than his opponent.

phdave wrote:

VoxOrion wrote:I'm saying yapping and debating are McCain's thing. One has to pretend not to know anything about the man to think he doesn't want an opportunity to carry on.

From The San Francisco Chronicle, February 28, 2000:

With new polls showing his campaign dead in the water among California Republicans, Arizona Sen. John McCain has pulled out of a long-scheduled debate with Texas Gov. George Bush, set for Thursday in Los Angeles.

McCain campaign officials tried desperately yesterday to put the best face on their withdrawal, even as a new Field Poll showed Bush far ahead among likely Republican voters in the winner-take-all race for the state's 162 GOP delegates.

Top campaign officials attributed McCain's decision to Bush's earlier reluctance to appear at the debate.

``We had agreed to do this debate a long time ago, and Gov. Bush said he wasn't going to do it,'' McCain spokesman Howard Opinsky said yesterday. ``We aren't going to hold our schedule together forever.''
...
As recently as Thursday, when he was in California, McCain was talking about his plans to debate Bush; even last night, McCain's own Web site listed his California debate- watching parties. The CNN-Los Angeles Times debate was the only scheduled head-to-head meeting of the two candidates in California before the primary, a week from tomorrow.

McCain's campaign said the candidate confirmed to CNN on Thursday that he would not appear. But until yesterday afternoon, when rumors swirled about the pullout, McCain -- who has touted his ``straight talk'' politics -- gave no public indication that he intended to duck the nationally televised showdown.

The bait and switch on the debate left the Arizona senator -- whose favorite campaign line is ``I'll always tell you the truth'' -- wide open to blistering criticism from his rivals.

``Clearly, this is more double-talk from the McCain campaign,'' said Alixe Mattingly, a spokeswoman for Bush. ``Pulling out of this debate at the last minute is an indication that they're pulling out of California, where McCain's antagonistic message clearly isn't working.''

The decision to avoid debating Bush clearly upset some of McCain's top advisers.

``It's definitely a mistake, but hopefully, the people of California feel strongly enough about the McCain reform agenda . . . to overlook a staff error and come out and vote for John McCain,'' said Schnur, a longtime California political operative. ``John McCain is completely committed to California; unfortunately, our staff's position on this debate sends just the opposite message.''

link

jerseyhoya wrote:

VoxOrion wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:and well, who knows?

One thing I predict based on a lot of the data you and others have presented: The loser's supporters will demand some kind of serious reengineering of the pre-polling processes. If it's Obama that loses despite some polls showing him up before election day, it'll become a 'national discussion' and almost certainly follow the patter of the last two elections: lots of carrying on about stolen elections.

If Obama loses and he was ahead in even one poll shortly before election day, heaven help us for all the America is racist crap we're going to have to sit through.

VoxOrion wrote:Unless McCain is preparing to quit running for president soon, I think the context is pretty relevant.

Warszawa wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:

Warszawa wrote:By this weekend will there be anybody left who will really consider voting for McCain?

Why not?

So, McCain says the economy is sound fundamentally, then the economy is in crisis in the space of a few days....oh wait but by tuesday he still hadn't even read the 3 page Paulson Plan. He then says he is suspending his campaign, although he hasn't, lies to David Letterman to do an interview with someone else, then arrives in DC just in time to oversee the collapse of the bailout plan. All this while trying to postpone the first presidential debate (severely casting doubt on either his ability to multi-task or his ability to face Obama on the issues) Brilliant! Meanwhile his running mate really believes she has foreign policy experience because her state is next to Russia, still wants to fight terrorists in their homeland, and doesn't know why McCain is considered a maverick?LOLOLOL

Houshphandzadeh wrote:So are we having us a debate tonight?

Camp Holdout wrote:

Houshphandzadeh wrote:So are we having us a debate tonight?

yeah. someone should make a gamethread in here.

Houshphandzadeh wrote:So are we having us a debate tonight?