WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com
Trends and Tremors
McCain crazed, Obama cool. The issue that will decide this election. Obama started it with his panic comment that I covered yesterday, and I promise you, if today's headlines are any indication, it's going to be a flood.
While McCain panicked this week, blaming different groups of people (often falsely) for the economic crisis and offering a new ridiculous solution every day, Obama rose above the storm and waited for everyone to calm down, telling voters that he understood their pain but that we needed more information to make an informed decision on the economy.
After huddling with his top advisers, he decided to tentatively back the Bush administration's bailouts, adding that it was key not to place the burden on taxpayers. The markets loved the bailouts and rose sharply, and Obama looked like a genius.
This is a rare moment where voters are getting a true glimpse of both candidates' leadership styles, and an even rarer moment in that this glimpse might actually decide the election. When the markets are in shock and everyone's panicking, no one wants to hear McCain's "the fundamentals are strong" optimism or his barrage of plans, because it's essentially selling a band-aid of lies to put over everyone's uncertainty. But no one wants a debbie downer either.
Obama's coolness fits the bill. He's reassuring you, to paraphrase Mad Men, that everything you're doing is okay. That it's okay to be worried, but that we shouldn't panic and lose sight of the realities of the situation.
This is exactly what Obama's been missing since the RNC (it was change/hope): a reason for voters to pick him that's bigger than the issues. Panic vs. Calm. Obama's team can now sell the fear of a McCain panic in the White House against the reassuring calm of Obama. And that's a winning message.
This, that and The Other
Oh man. Yesterday I talked about race re-entering the election as an issue over McCain's Raines ad. I hoped it would basically go away, but today AP/Yahoo released its race poll. The results are not so good for Obama. Essentially, his race could cost him 6 or more points on Election Day.
Now, I don't want to harp on race. Obviously I think it's ridiculous that any candidate should have to run at a multi-point disadvantage from day one. Especially in such an important race, you'd have to think that, I don't know, the economy would trump race. As a student, I can tell you that racism is all but nonexistent on college campuses. I really believe that my generation is more or less colorblind, and that race issues will disappear altogether in the next 20 years. Am I too confident? Maybe, but that's not something to debate right now.
This touches on a bigger issue. Obama is still having trouble relating to on the fence voters. Obama has always said that he knows he's a tough sell for Americans, but voters in key swing states are still having trouble relating to him, because of Republican attempts to paint him as exotic.
Hopefully, what I noted above will help these voters get over their fear of the Other, knowing what an irresponsible choice McCain would be. However, Obama still has work to do to remind voters in Ohio and Pennsylvania that he's an American and a Christian just like them. I think he'll be able to do it, especially if he can paint McCain as a reactionary, but just in case, let's see those margins go to 4 or 5 percent in national polling instead of just 2 or 3.
Joltin' Joe
How about that Joe Biden? As I talked about yesterday, he may be the most underrated VP candidate ever. Now that Palinmania has faded, he's getting the mainstream attention he deserves for doing some great work connecting to swing state voters. I also think Bidenism's - "that's not change, that's more of the same", "literally", "I mean this", I'm not kidding, etc. - could be the next big internet meme (now that the LHC has been temporarily shut down, anyways).
Secure My Social Life!
I may not be correctly interpreting the phrase social security correctly above, but it's back in the headlines given the economic crisis. Today, Obama linked McCain's social security plan to the economic crisis:
"He wants to run health care like they've been running Wall Street. Well, senator, I know some folks on Main Street who aren't going to think that's such a good idea."Like health care, social security is such a tired issue that it probably isn't going to be a huge issue all by itself, it'll likely becoming tangled up in discussions of the economy as a whole. Expect it to be out of the headlines in time for the first debate. Speaking of which...
Observation One is Inherency (A. The Bush Administration)
The debates are almost upon us. Who's the pressure on? The MSM says Obama, but I don't know. Clearly, he has a lot to accomplish: connect with voters, establish himself as a leader, etc. But as has been the theme of this post, McCain will have to prove that he isn't going to panic in the White House, and that he is, in fact, willing to be a maverick. If Obama can rattle McCain at all in a debate, something that may be more likely given the new open format, I think he'll win (the debate) easily.
Also, the talk of high expectations going into debates has always bugged me, even if it's true. So voters, you're saying that if the guy who you think will do the worst does better than you originally thought, but still not as good as the other guy who you thought would do well...you value the worse guy's performance more? Yeah, that's not convoluted.
Today's Top Headline
McCain feeds America a junk food diet with Palin choice
Seattle Post Intelligencer
Stay healthy, America. Vote Obama-Biden.
Karen Kolling · 860 weeks ago
I think you misread the poll. It said the difference could be greater than 2.5. I'm not worried about this. We don't even know if those yahoos are going to vote. Or if they'd vote for a ticket with a woman on it. Or if this is already factored into the regular polls.
Gabe 25p · 860 weeks ago
You're right, the AP article says 6 or more points. The post has been fixed. Thanks.
I'm not that worried about it either. As 538 points out (I didn't see it until after I finalized the post), it was a survey of all voters, not screened for likely voters, and the more educated are more likely to vote and less likely to decide on race. Nate makes a few other good points about it here:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/on-race-ba...
And I'm with you that we shouldn't worry. This should already be reflected in the polls, and as 538 points out, there's no evidence of a Bradley effect. So I think the polling we're seeing is accurate. It's just sad that he could be as many as 10 points up if people weren't still so prejudiced.
Chad_Nielson 57p · 860 weeks ago
Vicki 51p · 860 weeks ago
tmess2 70p · 860 weeks ago
Karen Anne · 860 weeks ago
Why? I don't understand why publicizing racism does anything beneficial?
Russell G. · 860 weeks ago
You're swallowing biased Ron Fournier's (of the AP) spin on the Yahoo/AP racism study big time. One cannot and should not draw the conclusions Fournier is (in a clear example of trying to stir up "the race issue" just as his preferred candidate is floundering in the national discussion of the economy).
Al Giordano of "The Field" shreds his assertions using the data from the study itself: http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/ap&rsqu...
He is also organizing an effort to have the AP fire Fournier (which should have been done long ago), since the AP has rapidly lost MUCH of it's credibility as a supposedly impartial source (a source, by the way, for hundreds of medium and small newspapers and other media outlets who can't afford their own news divisions).