Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Pick a President (Updated)

If it's Monday, it's time for our latest take on the electoral map.

Scroll down for our new map -- we won't ruin the surprise -- and remember that you can make your own picks on what the electoral map will look like on Nov. 4. If you nail the final results, a $500 Best Buy gift card and the unending adulation of Fixistas everywhere are yours.

And, while we -- and many other reporters -- have spilled much ink about the red states like Virginia and Colorado that Barack Obama is hoping to flip, there's been less attention paid to the handful of states that Sen. John Kerry (Mass.) carried in 2004 that John McCain thinks he can take this time around.

A look at the national map turns up three blue states where McCain is competitive: Michigan, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania.

In New Hampshire, the average of polls -- helpfully gathered by the folks at pollster.com -- shows an absolute dead heat with both McCain and Obama at 46.2 percent. AMAZING.

Pennsylvania's average puts Obama at 48 percent and McCain at 45 percent; in Michigan, the poll average gives Obama a four point edge -- 48 percent to 44 percent.

With such close contests in these three states, each candidate is looking to exploit any and every advantage at their disposal in hopes of winding up on top on Nov. 4.

And, if new polling conducted from Sept. 18 to Sept. 22 for Allstate/National Journal by FD is to be believed, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden is a stronger surrogate for Obama in these three states than Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is for McCain.

Biden's favorable numbers in each of the three states are stronger than Palin's in the surveys. The difference is most noticeable in Michigan where 43 percent of voters had a favorable impression of Biden as compared to 22 percent who felt unfavorably. Palin's margin is less strong in the Wolverine State; 44 percent of those tested felt favorably about her while 33 percent felt unfavorably.

Those results were echoed in New Hampshire where Biden's favorable rating outstripped his unfavorable rating by 17 points and in Pennsylvania where Biden had a 25 point favorable bulge. Palin's favorables were seven points higher than her unfavorable in New Hampshire and 17 points higher in Pennsylvania.

Neither Biden nor Palin will decide this race -- no matter how much press they get in the runup to and aftermath of Thursday night's vice presidential debate in St. Louis. But, in states as close as New Hampshire, Michigan and Pennsylvania promise to be, every little bit counts, and Biden may wind up doing just enough to put his candidate over the top in one or several of these battlegrounds.

As for our new electoral map, we have Obama at 273 electoral votes to 265 for McCain. The one change from our last map is Nevada and its five electoral votes which we are moving from Obama to McCain. There hasn't been much (if any) reliable polling released in the state in the last month or so but McCain's campaign feels optimistic about the state, and Nevada has shown a tendency to favor Republicans at the presidential level in recent elections.

How Nevada goes may well indicate how the country goes. Since 1912, the state has voted for the man who has won the presidency every time except 1976 when it went for Gerald Ford. (That factoid comes courtesy of the absolutely invaluable Almanac of American Politics.)

Agree or disagree with our map? The comments section awaits.

<p><strong>><a href='http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008/pick-your-president/'>2008 Election Contest: Pick Your President</a></strong> - Predict the winner of the 2008 presidential election and enter to win a $500 prize.</p>

By Chris Cillizza  |  September 29, 2008; 6:48 AM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008 , FixCam  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: SNL: Variations on a Palin Theme
Next: Freedom's Watch Starts Spending

Comments

My prediction as of a week or so ago was even closer, Chris:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008/pick-your-president/4425/

Nevada will be crucial, as will Michigan, Colorado, and possibly Florida and New Hampshire, I think.

As much as one hopes it is not a factor, I personally wonder how much of game changer Obama's race will be. I personally support him and think he is the best candidate overall for his leadership and consistency of policy, as well as his genuine vision for middle class Americans. McCain has flip-flopped so much in recent weeks, it is hard to know what he believes... one has to wonder if McCain even knows what he believes today.

Anyway... may the best candidate win, and win for the best reasons.

Peace,

John Olsen
Abington, PA

Posted by: peacemover | October 1, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

BroadwayJoe may be right that we could be looking at a blowout victory for Obama on the electoral map. But some factors must be included which can be hard to pin down:

(1) Voter suppression, which went on in both previous national elections, will be used in this one to skew the results in favor of one side (guess which one?);

(2) Electronic voter fraud also went on in both previous elections and will be more widespread than ever in this election now that states are federally mandated to use these machines (guess which party owns the companies which build and operate electronic voting machines?);

(3) Racism: since some people are lying to pollsters to conceal their own bigotry, any lead in the polls enjoyed by Obama must be reduced by the amount hidden bigotry creates the illusion of a false advantage;

(4) George Bush, Jr., has shown himself to be the imperial grand wizard of Dividers, even if he has been a poor Decider, and has succeeded in heightening the divisions in America - a deeply divided land will find it difficult to hand anyone a landslide victory;

(5) The conservative Corporate Media has long enjoyed a love-affair with McCain and will be reluctant to turn its back on that increasingly embarrassing and embattled media darling, John McCain - Obama will feel the bias of the media running against him right up until Election Day;

(6) The X Factor, the wild card that either Rove and Gingrich, or plain old-fashioned luck, will inevitably introduce into the narrative woven around this election - whatever form X takes, it will be eagerly seized on by both sides, but one might fumble the opportunity while the other finesses it to its advantage.

Expect this race, therefore, to tighten up considerably in the last few weeks. In spite of the fact that every ounce of logic weighs in that this election would in a rational universe be a landslide win for Obama. This due to the unfortunate fact that we do not inhabit a rational universe. Here on Earth we live in the ultimate Spin Zone.

Posted by: laufeyson | October 1, 2008 9:18 AM | Report abuse

I still have a hard time believing that this is the same John McCain who I (even as a DEM) would have voted for when he ran last time. It is a shame for an American Hero to stoop as low as he has. I now mute the TV every time he comes on because I know he will be lying about something.

Posted by: Randy2008 | September 30, 2008 8:55 AM | Report abuse

I still have a hard time believing that this is the same John McCain who I (even as a DEM) would have voted for when he ran last time. It is a shame for an American Hero to stoop as low as he has. I now mute the TV every time he comes on because I know he will be lying about something.

Posted by: Randy2008 | September 30, 2008 8:53 AM | Report abuse

I think I tend to agree with Chris's current assessment of electoral votes. I am slightly amazed though the election still seems to close given the following:

1) Economic issues seem of primary importance to most people, Bush-Cheney-Republican policies are largely responsible for the financial crisis, McCain has acknowledged he knows little about economics.

2) McCain's performance has recently been a fiasco, with his attempted grandstanding about the bailout bill, culminating on trying to win credit for a bill which did not pass.

3) Worse then Al Gore's frequent tactless sighs in his first debate with George W. Bush. McCain was often self-righteous, condescending and rude toward Barack in their first debate. This clearly offened a majority of independents and moderates. McCain came across to them as unpresidential and not bipartisan.

4) The widespread perception Sarah Palin is unqualifed for high national office.

5) McCain seems likely, as many people have observed, to get our country into at least another two wars, as well as reviving an unnecessary cold war with Russia.

Barack should be leading in the polls by at least 10-12 points. McCain is as close as he is because of racism among many of McCain's voters, Bill Clinton's continued efforts to undermine Barack and the ability, also shown in 2000, 2002 and 2004 elections, for Republicans to dupe millions of people with their propaganda.

Posted by: Aprogressiveindependent | September 30, 2008 12:48 AM | Report abuse

Your electoral map showing O at 273 is pretty conservative. It assumes O loses VA, OH, NC, and FL. It could turn out that way but O is currently ahead in VA and NC polls.

These strong polls and the dramatic upward trending for O are despite Wm. J. Clinton's resumption of his narcissistic "Say-No-to-O" TV tour which this weekend took him to Tom Brokaw.

Per usual, Bitter Bill continued to campaign AGAINST O and gush over O's opponent. And he made a point of refusing to publicly express any support whatsoever for O.

In the Sunday NY Post (nypost.com), Nick Gillespie, in one of the most brilliant articles of the year, provided an indepth psychological analysis of WJC and his antics. Read it if you have time.

Nick's take was that since there is no rational justification for WJC's opposing the nominee of his own party, the answer must lie in psychology. Nick was serious. He even engaged a licensed psychiatrist to diagnose Bitter Bill's clinically observable psychosis (as a prelude to an intervention -- no, not by "that woman, Miss Lewinsky").

Regrettably Nick's article never got to "Strange Case of Hillary C." but he may be saving that frightening case file for a follow-up article.

What did Bitter Bill accomplish by his anti-O show? Nothing. O is surging in the national and electoral polls. Palin's resorting to asking Katie Couric for a "lifeline" and permission to "ask a friend" when frustrated by a question. And Bitter Bill is now reduced to the object of jokes and derision from pundits (Maureen Dowd) and comedians (Chris Rock, Saturday Night Live) around the country. On second thought, Bitter Bill did achieve one thing, unintentionally. He absolutely assured the free world there will be no HRC 2012, 2016, 2024, and 2028. Thanks, Bitter B, I guess.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | September 29, 2008 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Sarah Palin Endorses Hamas


How can it be that some people still pretend that Sarah Palin is suited for high office? This country has never seen someone so comprehensively unprepared for the vice presidency; Dan Quayle was Metternich by comparison. I've watched Sarah Palin's interview with Katie Couric three times, and my astonishment does not diminish. Her nonsensical answer about Russia has deservedly been highlighted, but let me focus on another question, this one concerning the export of democracy. Couric asked, "What happens if the goal of democracy doesn't produce the desired outcome? In Gaza, the U.S. pushed hard for elections and Hamas won."

Palin's answer, in full, was this: "Yeah, well especially in that region, though, we have to protect those who do seek democracy and support those who seek protections for the people who live there. What we're seeing in the last couple of days here in New York is a President of Iran, Ahmadinejad, who would come on our soil and express such disdain for one of our closest allies and friends, Israel ... and we're hearing the evil that he speaks and if hearing him doesn't allow Americans to commit more solidly to protecting the friends and allies that we need, especially there in the Mideast, then nothing will."

The issue here is not that Palin didn't know the answer. There are many possible answers to this question, some of which are right and some of which are wrong. The issue here is that she didn't know the question. Because she was apparently ignorant of the subject, she endorsed Hamas' victory, and, in essence, called for the U.S. to "protect" Islamists who seek to use democratic elections to lever themselves into power. And, of course, Ahmadinejad came to power in a more-or-less democratic election. Palin's answer was truly remarkable. A person who could be President of the United States has shown herself to be completely ignorant of one of the most vexing and important foreign policy questions of the day. Freshman congressmen know how to answer this question. Here's one possible Republican response:

"Yes, Katie, it's true that if you push for democracy, sometimes you get an outcome that you don't want. This happened in Gaza with Hamas, and I think the Bush Administration was as surprised as everyone else. So the lesson here is that you have be careful when you try to export democracy. But I still believe that, over the long-term, democracy is the best antidote to terrorism that we have. What we have to do, though, is know when to push, and know when not to push. And every day, we have to do the hard work of advocating for press freedom, and the rule of law, and for all those things that build a civil society."

See? Not that hard. Unless you don't:

a) Know what happened in Gaza;
b) Know where Gaza is;
c) Know who rules Gaza today;
d) Care.

I want to wait and see Palin on Thursday night in her debate with Joe Biden; perhaps her performance in the Couric interview was abnormally bad. But I have a terrible feeling that John McCain has placed this country - and, of lesser importance, his campaign - in an untenable position.

Posted by: popasmoke | September 29, 2008 5:56 PM | Report abuse

I mostly agree with Chris Cillizza’s map, except I think that Michigan should be purple. Having lived in Southeastern Michigan between 1984 and 1997, I can say that it is one of the most segregated areas of the country. I have not noticed much change in this situation after recent visits of friends and relatives. I know of no other area where the self imposed segregation is so high. Many people there, both White and Black harbor an underlying animosity toward each other. Although the economy matters and should matter the most in a hard hit area like Southeastern Michigan, the racial tension in the Detroit suburbs--especially after the screw-up by the former mayor of Detroit is going to play a role.

The other areas of the country that are up-for-grabs are not as nearly dysfunctional as Southeastern Michigan, so Chris’s map seems plausible. That being said, my sense is that race matters more than most of us want to admit. While Obama can transcend the race factor, he doesn’t have much latitude. If Obama attacks McCain or Palin too much, then he is an ‘angry black man’. If Obama is too unemotional, then people view him as an aloof detached elitist. This election is very much up for grabs. One minor slip by Obama or one major victory by McCain can send the election the one way or the other.

Posted by: mnunlee | September 29, 2008 5:12 PM | Report abuse

"The trends are certainly favoring Obama at the moment.

Do you remember how two weeks ago Dems were flabbergasted at the strength of McCain in the polls?

In 36 days a lot can change."

Yup, it was really irritating to live up to the stereotype of being mousey and weak and squeamish.

But here's the thing.

McCain's lead was the product of the RNC bounce. We see it every four years. It happens with both parties. They always decay. McCain's bounce couldn't even withstand the next major news event.

Furthermore, as we get closer and closer to election day, opinions become harder to change. The polls are a lot less volatile today than they were a month ago.

When Obama won the nomination back in June, I was saying that every day that McCain kept the race close was a victory for him. He was clearly the underdog and keeping it close would be a good thing for him and a bad thing for Obama.

But now we are beginning to close this thing out and McCain has kept it close, but is losing ground. At some point he is actually going to have to start coming back.

Now every day that McCain doesn't make up ground is a victory for Obama. Expectations are starting to matter less and less and McCain will have to come up with check marks next to his name.

And the fact that there are so many early and absentees being cast that, for many people, the decision is already cast in stone.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 29, 2008 3:40 PM | Report abuse

King of zouk both Republicans and Democrats encourage home ownership. Although a laudable goal—home ownership is not for everyone. But that is not the main point. Many people that took on sub-prime loans could afford mortgages--it just that a few markets became over heated (Miami and Southern California to name two). Many people were aggressively being sold refinancing and secondary mortgages on over inflated prices. The problems with the over-heated markets, the loans were not properly securitized; plus some people were being highly speculative.

As far as pricing derivatives, there has to be an assessment of risk, which is an exercise in probability. It is actually quite simple, run a computer program utilizing a Monte Carlo simulation and see what the boundary conditions are. As you mentioned, since the value of the underlying security is difficult to price, it causes the pricing of the derivatives to be all but impossible to price exactly. Then some very smart people figured that by spreading the risk, the problem goes away. Then some not so bright people (and these guys make millions per year!) did not spread the risk among different type of investment, they spread the risk among the same type of investments. Spreading the risk too thin violates the principle of diversified holding. The collapse of a single highly speculative segment of the market, caused the entire market to collapse

A little bit of regulatory oversight would have solved the problem--spread the risk among different investment classes and limit exposure--but there was a strong anti-regulatory sentiment in place.

Posted by: mnunlee | September 29, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

"This is looking to be more and more like a blowout."

The trends are certainly favoring Obama at the moment.

Do you remember how two weeks ago Dems were flabbergasted at the strength of McCain in the polls?

In 36 days a lot can change.

Posted by: bsimon1 | September 29, 2008 3:13 PM | Report abuse

No running out the clock, we are working day and night. My wife has not been home in days. She has over 2000 new voters she signed up herself. I got three in Wallgreens last night myself. I will actually be taking them to the polls on election day then bring them back to work. Nothing left to chance. Meantime Mccain doesn't even have an office in south Florida I am aware of. He is really throwing his campaign completely to the wind just like he plays craps.


==========
Obama is up by 8 in Iowa, 5 in Va, etc. etc. He just can't run out the clock (too much time left), but he is in good shape.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | September 29, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: popasmoke | September 29, 2008 3:12 PM | Report abuse

"drindl - it is good to see you post on topics you actually have some understanding - clowns, idiocy and psychotic behavior."

Why thank you. But all of us here understand you, I'm quite sure.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Don't try to talk to zouk. He's simply a rightwing propagandist who can't understand reason.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

so drindl - are the personality switches now occuring every other minute?

that must be frightening for you. Must be the death rays from the black helos.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | September 29, 2008 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Mccain had two podiums with him and spent most of the time at his house in Virginia and at the hotel practicing for the debate. Reporters said it was funny watching his aids running in and out with the podiums. Mccain is such a fraud. Now his troops instead of being willing to march over a cliff if he asked them has said they don't listen to John Mccain the supposed leader of his party. Looks like John Mccain over played his hand on this one and now has egg on his face.


=========
The Dow has plunged 600 points over the fear that the bailout won't pass and everything will go down in flames. Yet John McCain is 'not sure' he'll vote. He hasn't voted since April 9. Not once.

WASHINGTON — Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama plans to return to the Senate this week so he can vote for the Wall Street bailout package.

The Illinois senator is expected to support the plan, but hasn't committed yet since he's still examining the details. The $700 billion compromise legislation is up for a vote Monday in the House, with the Senate vote expected as early as Wednesday.

A spokesman for John McCain said the Republican nominee plans to be in Washington and hopes he'll be able to vote, depending on the schedule.'

Of course he had plenty of time to rush to DC last week --grandstanding while at the same time nothing absolutely nothig -- but now, when the rubber hits the road, eh -- he's busy.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: popasmoke | September 29, 2008 3:06 PM | Report abuse

"drindl - it is good to see you post on topics you actually have some understanding - clowns, idiocy and psychotic behavior."

Why thank you. But all of us here understand you, I'm quite sure.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2008 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Don't try to talk to zouk. He's simply a rightwing propagandist who can't understand reason.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2008 2:58 PM | Report abuse

Realclearpolitics.com has McCain's lead in Florida down to 0.8. Ohio is still at 1.2. The national lead is up to 4.6% which includes +8 on the Gallup Poll.
Fivethirtyeight.com has Obama with an 80% chance of winning.

This is looking to be more and more like a blowout.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 29, 2008 2:55 PM | Report abuse

mnunlee - I appreciate your exposition on financial instruments. Indeed, there are problems with financial derivatives. but the problems began with social engineering by congress insisting on granting loans to undeserving payers. In fact, those derivatives can be priced and are every day. It is the underlying securites that can't be priced, because no one knows how low the real estate market will fall before the equity pledged firms up again.

for example, suppose I've got a condo in Miami that has an appraisal of 200K on it. but the loan is for 180K or more and it is on the market now for 160 with no takers. would 140 do it or should I wait a few years while it is vacant or even better, let the liberals in congress pay for me to get out.

but this discusssion is entirely too complex for most voters and especially Liberals. for them you simply need state:

Bush bad, taxes good.

Chant rinse repeat.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | September 29, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

I would like to address king of zouk comments. While king of zouk appears to be knowledgeable about Fanny and Freddie, he appears to have little or no knowledge about the current financial crisis. First, for clarity, people should know an Alt-A loan is a sub-prime or jumbo mortgage. Fannie and Freddie by charter primarily buy prime or conforming loans, in other words, loans where buyers have sufficient collateral and incomes to secure and pay for a mortgage. Fannie and Freddie hold only a few of the subprime and Alt-A loans that have been blamed for so much of the credit crisis. Fannie Mae only holds about 11% of its $3 trillion mortgage loan portfolio in Alt-A mortgages. Since only 3% of the Alt-A loans secured by Fannie Mae are in default, Fannie Mae’s problems would account for less than one-hundredth (1/100)% of the $700 billion bailout (besides Fannie was already bailed-out earlier--under another package). Fannie and Freddie stopped backing Alt-A mortgages earlier this year, so Fannie and Freddie have only a little to do with the crisis. If we are to have debate we should be debating factually.

While Fannie and Freddie have had problems; their problems are inconsequential to the problems caused by credit default swaps (CDS). CDS, also known as derivatives, are highly risky financial instruments when used inappropriately. Warren Buffet has cautioned people for many years against CDS. The problem is not that CDS are bad ideas, the problem is that credit default swaps are unregulated private contracts. Unfortunately these private contracts are so integral to the operation of financial markets, they can cause market collapse.

A credit default swap is like an insurance policy. Companies like AIG (and many others that are in serious trouble) wrote these ‘policies’ to protect banks against bad debts--in particular against bad debts caused by sub-prime mortgages. As the sub-prime mortgages defaulted, the people that issued the CDS are required to pay--except the parties issuing the CDS are unable to pay. This inability to pay further exacerbates the liquidity problem

CDS (derivatives) are highly risky since no one knows for sure how to price the risk of these instruments. The popular thinking in financial markets was that by aggregating diverse packages of debt, the risk of CDS would be minimized. The issuers thought that the cash flow from the premiums collected from the CDS would pay for any claims. Except in the case of sub-prime loans, the types of debt were not diverse. They were the same type of debt. The parties that guaranteed the bad debts did not set aside sufficient cash to deal with all of the defaults. When it was discovered that housing prices were seriously inflated and people with sub-prime mortgages either defaulted or walked-away from negative equity positions, the banks that issued the sub-prime mortgages began requesting the parties that issued the CDS to pay for the defaults. Since the parties guarantying the CDS do not have sufficient cash the banks that depended upon the CDS to protect them are hurting.

Fannie and Freddie have nothing to do with the CDS problem. When real-estate values collapsed so much because of the recent bubble assisted by sub-prime loans, this caused a liquidity crises. It was the general liquidity crisis that caused the problems with Fannie and Freddie, not the other way around.

Posted by: mnunlee | September 29, 2008 2:29 PM | Report abuse

"the Obama campaign is sending those letters to news outlets, not the NRA. they are threatening them becuase they don't care for the truth being broadcast."

That's a distinction, not a difference.

Posted by: bondjedi | September 29, 2008 2:26 PM | Report abuse

drindl - it is good to see you post on topics you actually have some understanding - clowns, idiocy and psychotic behavior.

you carney folk should stay away from economics and policy. that stuff you paste from kos and Huff is all lies you know.

I am curious why you chose to not use your real name all the time there was no registration? Were your thoughts so loony that even you did not wish to be associated with them?

I got news for you, thunder thighs, your thoughts are still loony and you probably shouldn't let anyone know or they will take away your computer priveledges again.

now shouldn't you be getting back to group. It's after 2.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | September 29, 2008 2:23 PM | Report abuse

I am pretty sure that all the wheel-chair bound vets who loved to watch FDR all through the 20s on TV, will stand up and cheer when Biden takes the stage.

then they will exercise their patriotic duty and vote,...... no I mean pay taxes.

no question biden will win - he is so clean and articulate.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | September 29, 2008 2:13 PM | Report abuse

You're hilarious, zouk. A clown in every sense of the word.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

I LOVE the fact that Nevada got moved to McCain not based on polling or level of organization, but because McCain's campaign is optimistic - fabulous! That's the kind of incisive political analysis I've come to know and love from the media.

I understand that if you click your ruby slippers together and whisper 'There's No Place Like Home', you automatically win the Kansas election.

Posted by: travelerkaty | September 29, 2008 2:00 PM | Report abuse

The Dow has plunged 600 points over the fear that the bailout won't pass and everything will go down in flames. Yet John McCain is 'not sure' he'll vote. He hasn't voted since April 9. Not once.

WASHINGTON — Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama plans to return to the Senate this week so he can vote for the Wall Street bailout package.

The Illinois senator is expected to support the plan, but hasn't committed yet since he's still examining the details. The $700 billion compromise legislation is up for a vote Monday in the House, with the Senate vote expected as early as Wednesday.

A spokesman for John McCain said the Republican nominee plans to be in Washington and hopes he'll be able to vote, depending on the schedule.'

Of course he had plenty of time to rush to DC last week --grandstanding while at the same time nothing absolutely nothig -- but now, when the rubber hits the road, eh -- he's busy.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2008 1:57 PM | Report abuse

drindl - shouldn't you be loading up the van for tonight's gig? you know if you don't arrive early, you don't get dinner. but maybe you can pick up the peanuts off the floor during intermission.

and remember when you lift the bass drum to use your legs, not your back.

and keep sending those writing samples out. you can't get a rejection every single time, can you?

Posted by: king_of_zouk | September 29, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

"Only one problem, - Biden. no VP candidate in history has had this much ineffective babbling and gaffes."

I dunno. Palin might have topped Biden's lifetime count in that single Couric interview?

Or was that just one long, 15 minute gaffe?

Posted by: DDAWD | September 29, 2008 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Want four more years of the same horrific disasters we've seen for the last 8?

Go ahead - reward failure - Vote R!

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2008 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Nice try bj.

the Obama campaign is sending those letters to news outlets, not the NRA. they are threatening them becuase they don't care for the truth being broadcast.

Just like Obama didn't like the truth about his tax vote being released. He voted to raise taxes down to $42K, just like Mccain said. Obama lied.

but the gullible Libs will vote for him anyway - they think that only evil rich people will suffer under the dumb, dumber and dumbest regime.

Ask who caused the financial meltdown and if you are honest, you will understand it was liberal activism with the participation of the Dem congress.

Ask who has been running things for the last two years and if you are honest, you will reply - Pelosi and Reid, the worst set of leaders in congressional history - supported by the poll results of 9% approval.

when did the economic downturn begin in earnest - just about two years ago - the same time Pelosi took over.

simple cause and effect.

More cause and effect to consider:

Elect Obama and get higher taxes - everyone.

elect Obama and get weak foreign policy.

elect Obama and get more government that reacts with Katrina like response to every issue.

Go ahead - reward failure - Vote D!

Posted by: king_of_zouk | September 29, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

Hahaha, zouk -- your can sit here all day, as I'm sure you will, since you clearly have nothing better to do-- and you can lie and spin and slime democrats all you want, but you have no credibility whatsoever.

You are, as everyone recognizes, the official village idiot.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2008 1:36 PM | Report abuse

"They have gone to desperate and outrageous lengths to try to silence your NRA by bullying media outlets with threats of lawsuits if they run NRA-PVF's ads. "

You're killing us, Zouk. The NRA is crying because someone is bullying it? Nice. The NRA has been bullying/cajoling/lobbying/bribing lawmakers for generations, and now we get to hear it squirm - reason #1,457 to vote for Obama.

Posted by: bondjedi | September 29, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Obama just drew a +7 for Penn. That brings his average to 4.8 If this holds, then Virginia becomes a must win for McCain. If Obama can take VA, then that's 34 of Bush's votes. McCain will have to take NH as well as Wisconsin and Minnesota. (and not lose Florida or Ohio)

This is just getting harder and harder for McCain.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 29, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

No vice-presidential nominee in modern history has been this inaccessible to the media,

- drindl

the anonymous ignorant coward now has a name, same name as before.

Only one problem, - Biden. no VP candidate in history has had this much ineffective babbling and gaffes. but how would anyone know? his press coverage consists of a single teenager writing a book report.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | September 29, 2008 1:28 PM | Report abuse

Chris, I respectfully say that your map is quite conservative. However, that isn't bad from the Dems point of view. Obama should be running his race under the premis that he is behind in states like VA, NV, OH, NC, and FL.

I am most interested in Indiana. McCain stubbornly refuses to place time/money/staff into that state. Obama hasn't. One creditable blog has moved Indiana into the toss-up category. Since KY and IN report first on Election Night, we should have a good idea as to what is coming like by 6:30pm/7:00pm Eastern. If Obama loses KY by less then 10% points and either wins IN or loses by under 5, it will be a very good night for him. If they are both McCain blowouts, McCain could be on his way to victory.

I am an Obama supporter, but I don't mind McCain. However I am begining to be terrified of Palin, she is awful.

Posted by: jmr1601 | September 29, 2008 1:19 PM | Report abuse

Obama is up by 8 in Iowa, 5 in Va, etc. etc. He just can't run out the clock (too much time left), but he is in good shape.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html

Posted by: koolkat_1960 | September 29, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse


Obama knew Mccain was going to tell the old story and was ready to get him with it and it worked. Mccain got trapped.
Second your story about the soldiers father is just not true. With maybe a few thousand families who would love Obama to wear their bracelets why would Obama wear it if the family asked him not to? Some things make no since and people like you keep repeating them. Time to check your email, you may have some new propaganda from Mccain you can repeat.


--------
Barack Obama played the "me too" game during the Friday debates on September 26 after Senator John McCain mentioned that he was wearing a bracelet with the name of Cpl. Matthew Stanley, a resident of New Hampshire and a soldier that lost his life in Iraq in 2006. Obama said that he too had a bracelet. After fumbling and straining to remember the name, he revealed that his had the name of Sergeant Ryan David Jopek of Merrill, Wisconsin.

Shockingly, however, Madison resident Brian Jopek, the father of Ryan Jopek, the young soldier who tragically lost his life to a roadside bomb in 2006, recently said on a Wisconsin Public Radio show that his family had asked Barack Obama to stop wearing the bracelet with his son's name on it. Yet Obama continues to do so despite the wishes of the family.

Never above exploitation - Barack Obama

Posted by: king_of_zouk | September 29, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: popasmoke | September 29, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse

The Obama camp has been threatening television and radio stations to keep them from airing anti-Obama ads.


The latest target is the NRA and stations in Pennsylvania.


Earlier this week, the National Rifle Association's Political Victory Fund released a series of radio and television spots to educate gun owners and sportsmen about Barack Obama's longstanding anti-gun record. In response to the NRA-PVF ads, a clearly panicked Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) are doing everything they can to hide Obama's real record by mounting a coordinated assault on the First Amendment.


They have gone to desperate and outrageous lengths to try to silence your NRA by bullying media outlets with threats of lawsuits if they run NRA-PVF's ads.


The Obama camp is particularly angry with an NRA ad entitled "Hunter" which lays out Obama's record on gun control.

Liberal Fascists at it again.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | September 29, 2008 1:16 PM | Report abuse

Conservatives bailing on Palin...

"MSNBC's Joe Scarborough says Palin "just seems out of her league." National Review Editor Rich Lowry called her performance "dreadful." Dallas Morning News columnist Rod Dreher described the interview as a "train wreck." Conservative columnist Kathleen Parker urged Palin to quit the race, saying: "If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself."

The interview is drawing extraordinary attention because of the McCain campaign's calculated decision to shield Palin from reporters. No vice-presidential nominee in modern history has been this inaccessible to the media, reinforcing the perception that she can't hit major-league pitching. When the networks balked at recording Palin's photo ops with foreign leaders at the U.N. last week unless journalists were allowed in -- and a CNN producer was granted access for all of 29 seconds -- the no-press dictum degenerated into farce."

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2008 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Reply:

REMEMBER SPIRO AGNEW?

Am I the only one who sees what is going on here with Palin? We all know she has no qualifications and she was just picked as window dressing and as a stooge to say what ever they put in her mouth. No candidate in their right mind would really want her on their ticket. This is what I think will happen and may already be secretly in the plan.

If Mccain manages to get elected, they will get rid of Palin as soon as they can, using all of the scandal surrounding her as the reason. There is already information of drug use by her son and both daughters and Enquirer has eluded to something coming out about Palin and her husband are regular drug users. Once rid of her, Mcain then will put in Lieberman like he wanted to all along and that is how it will play out. What do you think, make sense?

=========
elections over gang,
instead of going to St. Louis to prepare for debate, Palin is meeting up with McCain and her family (at one of his homes-the ranch) in Arizona to "recuse" or "rescue" herself from the campaign. She's not on the ranch to practice debating-don't be suprised if she shows up and Lieberman is in the fridge making himself a sandwich.

Posted by: gq_online | September 29, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: popasmoke | September 29, 2008 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Obama lead stretches to almost 20 points on intrade. The public is not buying Mccains BS.

Posted by: popasmoke | September 29, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Barack Obama played the "me too" game during the Friday debates on September 26 after Senator John McCain mentioned that he was wearing a bracelet with the name of Cpl. Matthew Stanley, a resident of New Hampshire and a soldier that lost his life in Iraq in 2006. Obama said that he too had a bracelet. After fumbling and straining to remember the name, he revealed that his had the name of Sergeant Ryan David Jopek of Merrill, Wisconsin.

Shockingly, however, Madison resident Brian Jopek, the father of Ryan Jopek, the young soldier who tragically lost his life to a roadside bomb in 2006, recently said on a Wisconsin Public Radio show that his family had asked Barack Obama to stop wearing the bracelet with his son's name on it. Yet Obama continues to do so despite the wishes of the family.

Never above exploitation - Barack Obama

Posted by: king_of_zouk | September 29, 2008 1:05 PM | Report abuse

"and, yes, even the Arizonan’s dexterity with nuance. "

LOL... I see your particular form of Orwellian through-the looking-glass alternate reality has not changed, zouk--uhh, 'alvin.'

And that you still don't have a job. Perhaps it's to do with your schizophrenia?

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

elections over gang,
instead of going to St. Louis to prepare for debate, Palin is meeting up with McCain and her family (at one of his homes-the ranch) in Arizona to "recuse" or "rescue" herself from the campaign. She's not on the ranch to practice debating-don't be suprised if she shows up and Lieberman is in the fridge making himself a sandwich.

Posted by: gq_online | September 29, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

Obama seemed occasionally awed at the depth of McCain’s experience, the strengths of his arguments, and, yes, even the Arizonan’s dexterity with nuance. Why else would the Illinoisan say so many times that Sen. McCain is right when he said this, or John has a point when he says that?

I doubt it was because Obama dislikes confrontation or was too reluctant to go after his opponent, as we will no doubt be told by his cheering section among the talking heads. Might it be that he is too intelligent a man not to know that the talking points he used through the primaries to attract voters on the left flank of his party cannot withstand scrutiny?

Even when Obama’s analysis of a situation proved correct, such as his observation the Chinese presence in South America and Africa is noticeable, as is America’s diminished presence, he offered to remedy. His answer to every problem is to blame every thing he does not like on Bush’s decision to invade Iraq.


alvin

Posted by: king_of_zouk | September 29, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

"There hasn't been much (if any) reliable polling released in the state in the last month or so but McCain's campaign feels optimistic about the state,"

Oh, so they say so and you just take their word for it, CC?

How very professional.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2008 12:45 PM | Report abuse

Add Virginia and Nevada to the Obama column. An string of bad economic news and more desperate and reckless 'game changers' from McCain will increase the public's disgust with Republicans.

Posted by: thebobbob | September 29, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

scrivener50 wrote, "Have a nice day, 'Office Mancuso.'"

Thanks Scrivener. If you pass Timothy Leary on your way out of the solar system, please give him my regards.

Posted by: officermancuso | September 29, 2008 12:44 PM | Report abuse

John McCain, like George Bush, insisted on forcing deregulation of the banks on the country. They and their friends in the republican party have profited obscenely driving millions of families into debt and foreclosure.
Hiding behind false patriotism, he, like
Bush, will bear most of blame for America's financial downfall.
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
After 26 years in power so is John McCain corrupted.

Posted by: seemstome | September 29, 2008 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Beginning in 2004, their portfolios of subprime and Alt-A loans and securities began to grow. Fannie and Freddie became their largest buyers between 2004 and 2007, with total GSE exposure eventually exceeding $1 trillion. In doing so, they stimulated the growth of the subpar mortgage market and magnified the costs of its eventual collapse.

When irregularities continued to surface, McCain and others warned of the coming mortgage crisis. In 2005, McCain spoke in favor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 from the floor of the Senate: "For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac…." McCain pointed to a $10.6 billion accounting scandal at Fannie Mae where their quarterly reports of profit growth were "illusions deliberately and systematically created" by the company's senior management. McCain called for reform.

A recent Glenn Beck article chronicles the repeated calls for reform by President Bush and his administration since 2001. They not only warned of the systemic consequences of a Fannie and Freddie failure but suggested thoughtful plans to reduce the risk. His warnings went unheeded and his attempts to reform were blocked by Democratic legislative maneuvering.

What was our champion of change and hope doing about the problem? Nothing! Records from the Federal Election Commission reveal a possible reason for Obama’s silence. In his three complete years in the Senate, he’s the second largest recipient of Freddie-and--Fannie-connected campaign contributions. It took Sen. Christopher Dodd, chairman of the Senate banking committee, eleven years to receive $165,400 in contributions from GSE PACs and individuals. Obama received $126,349 in just three years.

WorldNetDaily’s Jerome R. Corsi reported on Obama advisors with strong Fannie Mae connections. James Johnson, earning millions as Fannie Mae CEO from 1991 to 1998, was appointed to head Obama's vice presidential selection committee until alleged questionable real estate loans from Countrywide Financial forced him to step down. Obama housing advisor, Franklin Raines, earned $90 million as Fannie Mae CEO from 1999 to 2004.

Free market capitalism didn’t create this crisis. The Democrats’ "progressive" social policies helped stifle free market checks and limit appropriate regulatory oversight. The same politicians who today decry the lack of intervention to stop past abuses were the ones who blocked the legislative efforts that might have stopped them. While McCain is leading, Obama’s watching. Barack’s a great talker, but he’s remained inactive when he should have been part of the solution.

Paulson


workhorse or showhorse - the choice is clear.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | September 29, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

Don't waste your time, this is the only polling site worth looking at.


http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

Posted by: popasmoke | September 29, 2008 12:23 PM | Report abuse

I think anyone would agree that rich republicans outnumber rich democrats.
It only follows that they took the lions share of the loot in the latest Ponzi scheme.
Republicans in congress wrote and introduced bills removing banking deregulation in place since the last depression.
Republicans are the party more closely linked to big oil, corporate ceo greed, crooked lobbyists and iraq war corruption.
Some of the people can be fooled all the time.
They're called poor republicans.

Posted by: seemstome | September 29, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

What Obama did wrong: George W. Bush is not running for re-election. The gratuitous Bush-bashing has gotten old -- and it makes Obama sound like a college student at a political rally. Maybe it works with the moveon.org crowd, but most voters are looking for a leader for the next four to eight years. And it takes no leadership to kick someone with an approval rate higher only than that of Congress.

Also, Afghanistan is not the "central front" in the war on terror. As McCain countered, "If we fail in Iraq, it encourages al-Qaida."

What McCain did right: McCain understands that "maybe to Sen. Obama" $18 billion in annual earmark spending is "not a lot of money," but earmarks are corrupting. McCain noted his opposition to earmarks had earned him the nickname of "the Sheriff."

Most important, McCain did not come across as bellicose, especially when he recalled his opposition to Ronald Reagan's push to keep U.S. troops in Lebanon in 1983. When McCain warned Obama about not brandishing a gun unless he is willing to pull the trigger -- in reference to getting too tough with Pakistan -- McCain showed himself to be the adult in the room.

Saunders

Posted by: king_of_zouk | September 29, 2008 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Pick a President?

Simply put...OBAMA. No need for inaccurate polls and more inaccurate electoral picks.

Posted by: AJ2008 | September 29, 2008 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Virginia, Ohio, Florida, and Nevada ALL going McCain? I don't know about that. Seems like there's enough diversity for Obama to take at least one of them.

Posted by: DDAWD | September 29, 2008 12:06 PM | Report abuse

TO: "Officermancuso" at 11:43 a.m.

Thank you for calling attention to my post about the erosion of civil liberties in America and extra-judicial "targeting" of American citizens with draconian government programs and silent radiation weaponry.

If you really want to study the subject, don't explore "outer space"...

...just Google "directed energy weapon", "gang stalking" and "members.nowpublic.com/scrivener"

And remember, a wise sage once said, "As you do to the least of my brothers, you do undo me."

Have a nice day, "Office Mancuso."

Posted by: scrivener50 | September 29, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Seems to me the racists are starting to come out of the closet bro.
White middle class and soon to be poor whites have more in common with Blacks and Hispanics than they have in common with the rich elites.
Every election cycle we vote against our common interests because of race.
Every election cycle the rich tighten the collar around our necks.
Swallow your prejudice.
Break free.

Posted by: seemstome | September 29, 2008 11:58 AM | Report abuse

gmeierhoff writes
"After stating his premise - that Biden's favorable numbers in each of the three states are stronger than Palin's, and that the difference is most noticeable in Michigan - he supports it by stating that 43 percent of voters in Michigan had a favorable impression of Biden while 44 percent of Michigan voters had a favorable impression of Palin.

What gives?"

Yo, g, The Fix is not comparing raw favorable ratings, he is comparing the gap of favorable vs. unfavorable. Biden has 43 for, 22 against for a net favorable of 21. Palin has 44 for, 33 against, for a net favorable of 11. Clearly 22 beats 11, which was the point The Fix was making. Whether or not that is more relevant than the raw favorables is up for discussion.

Posted by: bsimon1 | September 29, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

I think your map is spot on CC. with one exception - NH. add those 4EV to McCain and what happens - tie. the result of this will be President Obama with VP Palin - pricelsss.

I think the debate was basically a wash. Obama continued with his empty rhetoric and shallow promises bolstered with lies about his record. McCain clearly is more experienced but the sentiment seems to be "shrug".

I am resigned to the fact that this is an uphill slog for Rs this year. the bright side is that if indeed the Libs do win all three branches of congress, the victory (there's a word you don't hear in Lib circles)will be short lived. the Lib desire to socialize the country will go over with a dull thud. After two years of dumb, dumber and dumbest running things, the Rs will retake congress.

It is preposterous that Barney fig and Upchuck Schumer along with Dodd, who got us into his mess, can be entrusted to fix it. most amusing is that all of a sudden the Libs think bush is the man. Watch as they try to erase their fingerprints from the scene of the crime in time for reelection.

Posted by: king_of_zouk | September 29, 2008 11:53 AM | Report abuse

What is totally amazing to me as I read the comments from the liberals here is the utter ignornace of which party is truly responsible for the current mess we are in.

It is no different than the FACT that 99.9% of all Democrats never heard of the Iraq Liberation Act nor its call to over-throw Saddam and install a democratic government. Of course when they hear about it they all swear it is part of the war mongering Republicans quest for oil and revenge on behalf of Bush's dad.

If of course they ever bothered to ever get their information from someone other than the liberal rags that pollute their brains with mind numbing drivel like "CHANGE"; they would quickly realize it was signed by Clinton in 1998.

Regarding our current financial mess; all the FACTS available show how the Republicans identified the financial crisis almost 4 years ago, offered legislation (S.190) to provide oversight to the lenders involved in subprime loans, got shot down by the "give a bro a mortgage" folks. of course, just more proof again that you should never waste your time trying to confuse a liberal with mere facts.

A two second look at the financial markets since liberals took over control of congress is clear evidence they do not have a clue when it comes to economics. Even a look at gas prices states the same result.

What they don't understand is that socialism does not work in a capitalist society. None the less, they keep shoving it down our throats while crying racism, sexism, poorism, classism, or this ism or that. Then true to form; when their plan tanks they refuse to take responsibility - you know - kind of the same mentality of "hey; I got pregnant so instead of me taking responsibility I will just kill the kid.

Nauseatingly simpistic in their approach to everything.

Posted by: Bcamp55 | September 29, 2008 11:49 AM | Report abuse

scrivener50 wrote:

"These weapons emit silent and potentially deadly radiation of various forms, and 'targets' of this weaponry may not even know they've been 'dosed.'

"COULD THE FINANCIAL CRISIS BE THE FIRST SHOT IN A WAR ON DEMOCRACY?

"AND DID GOV'T 'TARGETING' OF AMERICANS HELP CAUSE THE MORTGAGE MELTDOWN?"
======================================

It's good to see that Americans are still at the forefront in the exploration of outer space.

Posted by: officermancuso | September 29, 2008 11:43 AM | Report abuse

Now, I'll be the first to admit that we have a long way to go. But, McCain is in trouble right now.

First, he's lost significant ground nationally. The public perception is that Republicans are primarily responsible for the financial crisis. 85% of Americans think that the country is on the wrong track, and the majority of people think that the first debate was either an Obama win or a draw. All of this is just the most recent bad news for the McCain campaign.

Second, McCain is defending way more ground (in terms of electoral votes) than Obama.

Three states have all but flipped from R to D for '08 (CO, NM, IA), representing 21 EVs. McCain is not even close to flipping a blue state to red with as much certainty as those three are headed to the Dems. If everything else stays the same as 2004, McCain loses.

Additionally, there are still 166 EVs that should be considered completely up for grabs, though MI's 17 EVs are steadily slipping away from McCain. Of those 166, McCain is defending 102 to Obama's 64.

Obama is not trailing in any state that Kerry won in 2004, and only one contest (NH) has McCain within 2%. McCain, however, is trailing in one (VA) and in seriously close (less than 2% average) contests in four others (OH, FL, NC, NV).

I don't see any way that McCain can win with more than 273-285 EVs. Obama, however, is in position to win with anywhere from 273-350 EVs.

Posted by: cam8 | September 29, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

It will sure be nice when this country is again led by grown ups. ............
http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/09/29/america-should-be-led-by-grown-ups/

Posted by: glclark4750 | September 29, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

I'm confused about whether the following is just more pro-Obama media spin or an innocent mistakeby Mr. Cillizza:

"Biden's favorable numbers in each of the three states are stronger than Palin's in the surveys. The difference is most noticeable in Michigan where 43 percent of voters had a favorable impression of Biden as compared to 22 percent who felt unfavorably. Palin's margin is less strong in the Wolverine State; 44 percent of those tested felt favorably about her while 33 percent felt unfavorably."

After stating his premise - that Biden's favorable numbers in each of the three states are stronger than Palin's, and that the difference is most noticeable in Michigan - he supports it by stating that 43 percent of voters in Michigan had a favorable impression of Biden while 44 percent of Michigan voters had a favorable impression of Palin.

What gives?

I'm a Biden supporter, but Palin's 44 percent favorable is and always will be more than Biden's 43 favorable.

And even if it's some kind of typo and it was Biden who got the 44 favorable instead of Palin, if a 1 pcercent difference in Michigan is the "most notable" statistic Cillizza can cite, I'd hardly say we've got a strong favorable showing here by Biden.

Biden was born in Pennsylvania and is the senator from Delaware. He should pull significantly greater favorables in those states and if he doesn't, there's something terribly wrong.

With respect to the above quote, however, a much more interesting statistic is the Michigan unfavorables - 22 percent for Biden versus 33 percent for Palin.

The focus should obviously be on Palin's unfavorables, i.e., the electorate may not love Biden, but they definitely don't like Palin. It would be interesting to know why exactly that is!

Posted by: gmeierhoff | September 29, 2008 11:39 AM | Report abuse

What is totally amazing to me is that with all the FACTS available showing how the Republicans identified the financial crisis almost 4 years ago, offered legislation to provide oversight to the lenders involved in subprime loans, got shot down by the "give a bro a mortgage" folks........that the lemmings on the left still think the democrats can run this country.

A two second look at the financial markets since they took over control of congress is clear evidence they do not have a clue when it comes to economics. Even a look at gas prices states the same result.

What they don't understand is that socialism does not work in a capitalist society. None the less, they keep shoving it down our throats with the threat of racism, sexism, this ism or that. Then when their plan tanks they refuse to take responsibility - you know kind of the same mentality of "hey; I got pregnant so instead of me taking responsibility I will just kill the kid.

Posted by: Bcamp55 | September 29, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

test comments

Posted by: blogger421 | September 29, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

As an American, I am appalled at the media treatment of Sarah Palin. As a woman, I am astounded how women can be marginalized and frankly "thrown under the bus" like Hillary Clinton was by her own party. Stop this now!

Posted by: patricialeonard88 | September 29, 2008 11:22 AM | Report abuse

Incredible that the WaPo electoral map has Obama ahead by 8 EVs while RealClearPolitics has him ahead by 64. And you don't mention my state of North Carolina, another red state where Obama is steadily coming from behind. Biased much?

Posted by: bamccampbell | September 29, 2008 11:17 AM | Report abuse

Incredible that the WaPo electoral map has Obama ahead by 8 EVs while RealClearPolitics has him ahead by 64. And you don't mention my state of North Carolina, another red state where Obama is steadily coming from behind. Biased much?

Posted by: bamccampbell | September 29, 2008 11:16 AM | Report abuse

McCain's surprising support from Drug Addicts and College Dropouts:

http://megasizzle.com/annoying/surprising-mccain-support-from-college-dropouts-and-drug-addicts/

Posted by: slappywhyte | September 29, 2008 11:15 AM | Report abuse

Well here is the typical main stream media deciding who will be the next president.You don't get a chance to vote third party because they don't want you to.70% of the people think the war should end.67% are against the bailout the only dems or repubs that are paying any attention to the people are those up for reelection.Time to vote third party and throw all the slime ball democrats and republicans out before they destroy this great country.

Posted by: gary2547poh | September 29, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

Anyone excited for the debate this Thursday?

I believe that in this week's debate, Sarah Palin's true colors would show: her lack of ability and knowledge to support the United States as Vice President. Her interview with Kathy Couric clearly proves it. I do respect the fact that she is a woman running for office, but what matters is whether or not she is suitable for the position. George W. Bush (our Republican President, a.k.a. the party Sarah Palin belongs to in this election) said: "Americans will look closely at the judgment, the experience, and the policies of candidates..." in the Republican National Convention on September 2nd. If Sarah Palin doesn't come strong on very important issues like foreign policy, how can we expect her to be a good Vice President?

I learned a lot about Sarah Palin at www.dailysource.org/Palin.

Posted by: thepurpleocean | September 29, 2008 11:04 AM | Report abuse

P is for Pick a President. P is for President Palin

The Sarah Palin ABC's - from Allegations to Zealot.
an overview, one 72-year-old heartbeat away.

http://www.PisforPresidentPalin.com/

Posted by: Jane17 | September 29, 2008 11:03 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Cillizza, as the author of writing such as this, I'm wondering, does somebody really pay you money for what you do? What do you have on the publishers of the Washington Post that requires that they publish something like the following?
"The one change from our last map is Nevada and its five electoral votes which we are moving from Obama to McCain. There hasn't been much (if any) reliable polling released in the state in the last month or so but McCain's campaign feels optimistic about the state, and Nevada has shown a tendency to favor Republicans at the presidential level in recent elections."

Posted by: MikeKelly45 | September 29, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

Palin is popular because she is a horrificly interesting train wreck, NOT because people want to see her run this country.

Posted by: hbfrancis | September 29, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

I went canvassing door to door this weekend for the first time in my life.
I was directed by an organized campaign to uncommitted and independent voters homes only.
I was surprised that many people still had not seemed very tuned in. That is shocking for someone who is reading incessantly about his stuff.

Anyway, of the Undecided and Independant registered voters that I saw in my 36 households, Obama had a vast clear majority in this blue collar Northern Virginia neighborhood.

Many had seen the debates. I think it is about the economy. People just doubt that McCain will run against everything that he has stood for and his own lifelong party.

Posted by: mtobias1 | September 29, 2008 10:49 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: soonerthought | September 29, 2008 10:45 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: soonerthought | September 29, 2008 10:41 AM | Report abuse

The Debate Was Awsome. Ive watched it twice. But I dont see how it would of changed anyones mind. You can watch the latest debate and all the debates at watchdebate.com Cant wait till the VP debate. I know It will be better.

Posted by: pastor123 | September 29, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse

Out of the 2 presidential candidates and the 2 vice-presidential candidates, Sarah Palin is the most popular. In fact, here's the order of popularity.

1. Palin
2. Obama
3. McCain
4. Biden

--------------------

Hate to break it to you, but Palin is plummeting in the popularity contest.
Latest polls have her down 10 points.
Obama's numbers are way up.

Reality.

Posted by: wpost4112 | September 29, 2008 10:30 AM | Report abuse

Your map is very conservative, Mr. Cillizza, sir. After his befuddlement in the face of the recent financial crisis and his running mate being exposed, McCain's challenge now is not to get 270+ electoral votes - it will be keeping Obama from getting 300.

You would have to be a stupid donkey not to anticipate the drubbing that is coming.

Posted by: Oand37thStreet | September 29, 2008 10:29 AM | Report abuse

I think this map is bit conservative; at this stage, Obama is the favourite in Virginia, and I think he'll win a few additional states.

Posted by: scurley1 | September 29, 2008 10:19 AM | Report abuse


Fareed Zakaria is hilarious!

He says Sarah Palin should drop out of the presidential race (it's in today's Washington Post).

Out of the 2 presidential candidates and the 2 vice-presidential candidates, Sarah Palin is the most popular. In fact, here's the order of popularity.

1. Palin
2. Obama
3. McCain
4. Biden

So, many of you may wonder why Fareed Zakaria wants Palin to drop out.

Here's the reason...

This is 1976.

Obama = Jimmy Carter.

After the next 4 years of failure, Sarah "The Gipper" Palin will become president in 2012.

There is nothing that liberals can do to stop this scenario.

Their only hope is to trash Palin as much as possible and hope that she will be driven out. But it won't happen.


Posted by: JPVanderbilt | September 29, 2008 10:18 AM | Report abuse

I think it's a stretch to call MI, NH, and PA "blue states". They went for Kerry in 2004, but they were swing states in that election, just like they are now. According to the RealClearPolitics average, Obama's current poll numbers beat Kerry's final results in those 3 states.

Obama isn't just trying to pick up 2004 swing states. He's competitive or winning in Virginia, North Carolina, and Colorado, all of which were safe Bush states in 2004. He's changing the electoral map; McCain is fighting to defend the Bush states and maybe eke out a win in a 2004 swing state. Advantage: Obama.

Posted by: Blarg | September 29, 2008 10:15 AM | Report abuse

I think this map is bit conservative; at this stage, Obama is the favourite in Virginia, and I think he'll win a few additional states.

Posted by: scurley1 | September 29, 2008 10:14 AM | Report abuse

I think it's a stretch to call MI, NH, and PA "blue states". They went for Kerry in 2004, but they were swing states in that election, just like they are now. According to the RealClearPolitics average, Obama's current poll numbers beat Kerry's final results in those 3 states.

Obama isn't just trying to pick up 2004 swing states. He's competitive or winning in Virginia, North Carolina, and Colorado, all of which were safe Bush states in 2004. He's changing the electoral map; McCain is fighting to defend the Bush states and maybe eke out a win in a 2004 swing state. Advantage: Obama.

Posted by: Blarg | September 29, 2008 10:13 AM | Report abuse

Oh please stop this silly coffee grounds readings of the opinion polls. This nonsense keeps media types in business and puts garbage into voters' heads.

The only polls that count are the exit polls. Mark my words: all these "independent" voters will get cold feet before entering the voting booth and will vote for McCain en masse. The "Ugly American" is just ain't ready yet for a colored President.

Posted by: VMR1 | September 29, 2008 10:09 AM | Report abuse

IS THIS THE "OCTOBER SURPRISE"?

This was posted in the headlines section of Democracy Now! on 9/22:

Army Unit to Deploy in October for Domestic Operations

*** Beginning in October, the Army plans to station an active unit inside the United States for the first time to serve as an on-call federal response in times of emergency. The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent thirty-five of the last sixty months in Iraq, but now the unit is training for domestic operations. The unit will soon be under the day-to-day control of US Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command. The Army Times reports this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to Northern Command. The paper says the Army unit may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control. The soldiers are learning to use so-called nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals and crowds.

***
The last sentence appears to be a reference to "directed energy (read: RADIATION) weapons" that are being widely deployed among the military, intelligence, and law enforcement agencies. These weapons emit silent and potentially deadly radiation of various forms, and "targets" of this weaponry may not even know they've been "dosed."

COULD THE FINANCIAL CRISIS BE THE FIRST SHOT IN A WAR ON DEMOCRACY?

AND DID GOV'T "TARGETING" OF AMERICANS HELP CAUSE THE MORTGAGE MELTDOWN?

For more: see http://members.nowpublic.com/scrivener OR members.nowpublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener50 | September 29, 2008 10:05 AM | Report abuse

McCain is going to win.


.

Posted by: 37thandOStreet | September 29, 2008 10:00 AM | Report abuse

IS THIS THE "OCTOBER SURPRISE"?

This was posted in the headlines section of Democracy Now! on 9/22:

Army Unit to Deploy in October for Domestic Operations

*** Beginning in October, the Army plans to station an active unit inside the United States for the first time to serve as an on-call federal response in times of emergency. The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent thirty-five of the last sixty months in Iraq, but now the unit is training for domestic operations. The unit will soon be under the day-to-day control of US Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command. The Army Times reports this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to Northern Command. The paper says the Army unit may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control. The soldiers are learning to use so-called nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals and crowds.

***
The last sentence appears to be a reference to "directed energy (read: RADIATION) weapons" that are being widely deployed among the military, intelligence, and law enforcement agencies. These weapons emit silent and potentially deadly radiation of various forms, and "targets" of this weaponry may not even know they've been "dosed."

COULD THE FINANCIAL CRISIS BE THE FIRST SHOT IN A WAR ON DEMOCRACY?

AND DID GOV'T "TARGETING" OF AMERICANS HELP CAUSE THE MORTGAGE MELTDOWN?

For more: see http://members.nowpublic.com/scrivener OR members.nowpublic.com/scrivener

Posted by: scrivener50 | September 29, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

The latest Michigan polls show Obama ahead by 10 and 13 points.

Posted by: dbloss | September 29, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

There is potential for Obama to arrive with historic numbers of voters for this historic election. Features of the race make polling worthless. It won't be until the final week if Obama voters decide to vote but the factors are lined up for them to be willing to vote. If that occurs, Obama will probaby carry 44 states. Did I win that Best Buy gift certificate yet?

Posted by: CaptainTC | September 29, 2008 9:52 AM | Report abuse

Nate Silver of 538.com's favorite pollster (who gets it right the most) is Ann Selzer of Des Moines. She says the Obama vote is consistently being undercounted by 3%. This is due to the cell phone only effect, but also because younger voters more often screen their calls and don't pick up on 800/888 numbers (I know I don't).
Additionally, the 'get out the vote' doesn't show as the list of likely voters doesn't get updated a lot and the Obama machine is working this furiously (I live in S. California and personally know 4 people who went to Nevada this weekend to register voters).
Obama's internals and my gut says a mini-landslide -- 320-365 for Obama. Worst case scenario is Obama by under 300, but unless the Repubs orchestrate a terrorist attack (don't laugh), he's got it.
But brace yourselves Dems... it's gonna get ugly the rest of the way. There's nothing more dangerous than a trapped animal -- and that's the Repubs.

Posted by: kiernanje | September 29, 2008 9:22 AM | Report abuse

dyinglikeflies-you forget, though, that Clinton was consistently ahead in the polls before the PA primary. Her win there was never a surprise. Obama's been consistently ahead in the polls for the general (I've seen anything from a 4 to a 9-point split).

I also agree with living_in_paradise-I think this map is really conservative with its guesses. One, I think Obama will win Virginia (Real Clear Politics has him leading by a few points in their average of all the polls). I also think Ohio will ultimately go for Obama, because of the economic crisis. I wouldn't count out North Carolina, Florida or Nevada flipping to blue, either.

Posted by: ASinMoCo | September 29, 2008 9:15 AM | Report abuse

dyinglikeflies-you forget, though, that Clinton was consistently ahead in the polls before the PA primary. Her win there was never a surprise. Obama's been consistently ahead in the polls for the general (I've seen anything from a 4 to a 9-point split).

I also agree with living_in_paradise-I think this map is really conservative with its guesses. One, I think Obama will win Virginia (Real Clear Politics has him leading by a few points in their average of all the polls). I also think Ohio will ultimately go for Obama, because of the economic crisis. I wouldn't count out North Carolina, Florida or Nevada flipping to blue, either.

Posted by: ASinMoCo | September 29, 2008 9:14 AM | Report abuse

McCain Wins Independence Endorsement
By Special to the Sun | September 22, 2008

The New York State Independence Party is venturing into major party presidential politics for the first time to endorse Senator McCain.

The move might seem odd given that the party in 2004 endorsed consumer advocate Ralph Nader, a candidate best known for his left-wing politics. The organization's state chairman, Frank MacKay, said the state party felt that Mr. McCain, a Republican, was not beholden to partisan interests and therefore justified the nod. "It's not that we endorsed a major party candidate, it's that for the first time one of the major parties ran an independent," Mr. MacKay said in an interview yesterday. "He's a maverick and somebody who has driven his party crazy. The special interest groups in his party certainly didn't want him — I'm amazed he got through."


Posted by: thecannula | September 29, 2008 9:08 AM | Report abuse

JD and Alan,
that is

mark_in_austin@operamail.com

Posted by: mark_in_austin | September 29, 2008 8:43 AM | Report abuse

JD and Alan,
that is

mark_in_austin@operamail.com

Posted by: mark_in_austin | September 29, 2008 8:41 AM | Report abuse

I live in Austin, TX. I can safely predict that BHO will carry Austin and that McC will carry TX. If BHO wins 45% in TX it will probably mean that the TX Ds have come 2/3 of the way back to parity in the state.

BradCPA, any thoughts?
------------------------
JD, how do you see VA?
-----------------------
Alan, how do you see Montana?

JD and Alan in Missoula, pls contact me at
mark_in_austin.operamail.com

Posted by: mark_in_austin | September 29, 2008 8:33 AM | Report abuse

I like the Pen. theory,
obama was great at caucaus states,
but behind the curtain,
people we leery,
experience?
liberal?
abortion,
he seems to do more opponent bashing
then any democrat ever,
he is a democrat running as a republican,
a real ''' say anything for a vote '''
politician,
doesnt play well in the upper midwest.

Posted by: USA3 | September 29, 2008 8:17 AM | Report abuse

Bottom line- this race is a toss-up at this point. Nobody knows which will prevail or be a factor at all, the Axelrod "cell phone/motivated new enrolee" thesis, or the "Bradley effect" regarding how pollsters are getting their responses. Nobody really knows who is ahead at all. Remember, Clinton beat Obama in Pa. despite the polls, and despite being outspent by Obama 4 to 1 there.

Posted by: dyinglikeflies1 | September 29, 2008 8:09 AM | Report abuse

Thursday is do or die'
hold your breath'
this should break it wide
open,
either way'

Posted by: USA3 | September 29, 2008 8:09 AM | Report abuse

I absolutely agree with Chris - I think Obama will win those states and maybe pick up VA and NV as a bonus.

And don't forget that even if Obama loses NH, the score will be 269-269 - which should mean an Obama victory, unless something dramatic happens to the Democrats in the House.

Posted by: ambolt | September 29, 2008 8:02 AM | Report abuse

I think this map is overly conservative. Either Obama will continue to surge, and pick up a few of the bubble states, like NV, OH, FL, and VA (which will put him comfortably over 300), or McCain will turn the tide a bit and pull out a squeaker (perhaps by winning NH plus something else, or by picking up a big state like CO, MI, or PA).

This map seems to represent the Obama firewall, and if Obama's counting on the firewall come election day, it means McCain will have seized the momentum (and with it, probably the election). But I think it's more likely that Obama will win by 50 or 60 electoral votes.

Posted by: living_in_paradise | September 29, 2008 8:01 AM | Report abuse

Virginia man, Obama was running less then a point behind before the debate and the rasmussen poll indicates a bump, which would make sense given the insta polls on the debate and the recent tone of the debates. I don't think the Obama lead is too big, but he does seem to be the Virginia frontrunner at the moment.

Posted by: theamazingjex | September 29, 2008 7:30 AM | Report abuse

Virginia, man, Obama was running less then a point behind before the debate and the rasmussen poll indicates a bump, which would make sense given the insta polls on the debate and the recent tone of the debates. I don't think the Obama lead is too big, but he does seem to be the Virginia frontrunner at the moment.

Posted by: theamazingjex | September 29, 2008 7:30 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company