WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com
Saturday Rasmussen Tracking Poll: McCain 48, Obama 45, same as yesterday.
Hotline: McCain 45, Obama 44. (Yesterday: Obama 45, McCain 44).
Daily Kos: Tied at 47. (Yesterday, Obama 47, McCain 46).
Gallup: McCain 47, Obama 45 (Yesterday, 48-45).
Four poll average: McCain 46.7, Obama 45.2 (yesterday McCain 46.5, Obama 45.5).
Here's the overall trend:
Logging you in...
del.icio.us
SLCScott 74p · 894 weeks ago
DocJess 71p · 894 weeks ago
But I'm just one girl. Although there are hundreds of thousands like me, will it be enough?
I know there are a lot of low-information voters. I know that the MSM cannot be trusted to tell the truth, and that really bothers me. How is it that the McCain campaign can lie outright, and are barely called on it? How is it that there is such a double standard for how Miss Sarah is treated? If ANYONE else didn't know the Bush doctrine, or had lied about the bridge to nowhere funding, or her "visit" to Iraq (a border stop only) -- the press would have been all over it. But for some reason, they just ignore it.
"They" say that the press leans left -- but I have yet to see it -- even Keith and Chris will be banned from the debates and other events since they are "too biased".
I just don't get it....all I have is "most people are morons"....and that won't be enough.
Karen Anne · 894 weeks ago
I've been thinking about posting something here about the elitist/anti-intellectualism stuff and asking what people think of it. It does seem that there is a segment of voters who view education with distain. I’m sure most of us grew up in households where our parents sacrificed to get us educations, and we worked like dogs to get good grades, etc. So I wanted to ask, why the difference in values. I am interested in where people think this comes from, and is there a way we can fix it. Because this is part of the reason Repugs win elections, it looks like.
Gabe Stein · 894 weeks ago
This is a big issue for me as well, and I think it's directly related to polarization. The problem is that good policymakers aren't always good campaigners, and the GOP has seized on this by making elections about personality rather than policy. They've framed the question in terms of 'who will serve your immediate interests best' rather than 'who will serve the country the best.' This has everything to do with the deliberate polarization the GOP has been working so hard to establish. They've made the debate such a high-stakes, "us versus them," "good versus evil" clash that people think that unless their type of person wins, they lose. This actually works against intellectuals and policymakers, because the truth is that policymaking isn't us versus them. Good policymaking is specifically about respecting other people's views and making compromises. But our campaigning system is about NEVER COMPROMISING YOUR VIEWS and NEVER GIVING IN and NEVER SHOWING ANY DOUBT. It's absurd. Good thinkers are willing to change their mind when new evidence presents itself. Only ideologues (see: Bush) refuse to admit mistakes, refuse to see new evidence. Kerry SHOULD have flip-flopped because when evidence was originally presented for the Iraq war, it was false! He did the right thing by being a skeptic and saying 'wait a minute, something's weird here.' His 'for it before against it' soundbyte was bad, he should have just said "hell yes I changed my mind," but the point is that he was right to flip flop. The problem is that while that works in the senate, it doesn't work on the campaign trail if one candidate decides to play dirty, and that's what's happening.
Now, I think that can change. Obama was doing a good job framing the debate more towards the 'who will serve America' rather than 'who will serve you.' Sure, he's touting populist economics, but he was also talking about a nationwide movement and bringing back unity and that WWII sensibility. He's gotten a bit off message, but clearly Americans responded positively to that kind of nostalgia for the good old days when we agreed. The problem is that the last eight years have really gotten away from it, to the point that we don't even expect campaigns to be about issues anymore. It's foreign to us. As a result, attack ads work. Hyper-polarization works. McCain's tactics work. But eventually, they won't, and I think we're starting to see that with Obama. If he wins, expect a ton of analysis about why a positive campaign worked, and that will lead to a future of positive campaigning.
Gabe Stein · 894 weeks ago
SLCScott 74p · 894 weeks ago
I think American elections have a long history of having elections swung by the "oppressed majority." When things are going bad for a whole community, it's time to change the government, right? If your community is part of a minority, you'll likely feel oppressed. But if you're part of the majority in your community, then if that community is not doing well you're likely to feel REALLY oppressed. Think about blacks in South Africa under apartheid, for example.
It's pretty easy to exploit this feeling by pointing at groups that are in the minority but seem to have some power and saying that they are to blame. Highly-educated people are a particularly tempting target, because most people who have power have quite a bit of education. Hollywood is another good target. Now that most people aren't in unions, you even see it used against union leaders. Us Democrats are not immune from this kind of tactic either--you see it whenever one of us criticizes CEO's in a generic way. But in recent times, at least, it's been the Republicans who have done a lot more of this.
But there's something interesting going on this time around.
More and more voters are highly educated. In 2004 exit polls, 42% of voters said they had at least a bachelor's degree, and 74% had at least some college. Since some voters are under 23, it seems we were awfully close to reaching the point where 50% of voters either had a bachelor's degree or were intending to get one. And a higher and higher proportion of people seek higher education as time goes on.
So we're on the verge of having college-educated people make up the majority of voters.
What happens then?
Exactly what happened to homeowners. Once upon a time, it was possible to build a political movement around the "working class," meaning those who did not own homes. Nowadays, insulting homeowners is political suicide, because most voters own homes.
So the education thing is ALMOST played out. The Republicans are giving it one more try, but I think this is their last chance to make it work in a national election. The demographics are turning against them that way.
OK; enough pop-sociology from me for the day. :D
Gabe Stein · 894 weeks ago
Moreover, Obama's attacks are starting to take hold now that he's back on the economic message, which appeals to the fiscal independents and conservatives more than Palin. Being a bit more forceful will help in the short term, but there's a reason the Obama camp isn't panicking: they were doing just fine playing above the fray until the convention bounce. The attacks will help a little, especially because they're way more honorable and, I don't know, actually grounded in truth.
And in reply to DocJess, McCain's truth stretching is a story starting to bubble up big time in the mainstream press. It's going to be a huge story next week after the View appearance and the Obama camp will no doubt seize on it and use it as a continuation of their 'out of touch' message. Expect to see a commercial next week along the lines of "So out of touch, he has to lie about his record and Obama to stay competitive." They've got a billion articles now to back up the claims of truth distortion. I also expect to see that line "Would rather lose his dignity than the election" all over the place in commercials and releases. So don't worry, McCain will be held accountable. Will everyone see this stuff? No. But even most low-info voters will.
Gabe Stein · 894 weeks ago
Sound like Bush #2 to anyone else?
tmess2 70p · 894 weeks ago
DocJess 71p · 894 weeks ago
Karen -- the issue of education and elitism is an interesting one. And Scott, I haven't seen your numbers, but they seem reasonable to me.
But I do believe that many people disdain "smart" -- they don't care so much about education (someone has to graduate last in his/her class, and even THAT person can get a degree from, say, a third rate medical school).
I read a few years ago that there were more kids than dogs in Salt Lake City, and more dogs than kids in Seattle -- it was a USA Today article and the point had to do with the rise of "red" America being more about large families and less education, and "bluer" families having fewer children, more education, and higher median incomes.
OF COURSE there is a higher percentage of educated people who vote -- it goes with the demographics -- they make more money, they are more interested in the world around them, they believe they can make a difference, and that what they say and do MATTERS.
If as a society we valued "smart" we would pay lower salaries to actors and sports figures than we did to science researchers and teachers. We would put an "Academic Bowl" in prime time, and ignore those shows where people sing and dance (I forget the names, but I know those shows are popular). We wouldn't make fun of the brainiacs in school, nor the chess club members, nor the math people -- somehow "society" reveres football over academic programs.
Sorry, I'm having a bad day -- tomorrow is Sunday, which means "Sunday with the Senators" -- and THAT makes me happy....I'll have my mojo back by then. Until then, please know that I read the comments here (all of them) and I know that the DCW community is rife with smart, thoughtful, insightful people, and that brings me peace and joy. THANK YOU all!
Mr_Soapbox · 894 weeks ago
I can only describe Gov. Palin as more akin to George Bush with ovaries...or perhaps the "Baby Doc" of Alaska. (Take your pick.)
cire · 894 weeks ago
Wayne D. PA · 894 weeks ago
tmess2 70p · 894 weeks ago
SLCScott 74p · 894 weeks ago
"Or are the [Democrats] still a little sensitive about looking too aggressive against the first woman candidate for VP?"
And at least in the next few minutes, no one corrected him.