In the end it’s all about the GOTV efforts Posted by: McQ
on Monday, October 20, 2008
After all the rhetoric has died away, after all the charges and counter-charges have been leveled, after each respective camp withdraws to its election eve poll watching venues, it's all about Getting Out The Vote (GOTV) efforts.
And if you're a fan of the Republican candidate, you can't be very happy about that particular fact. Unlike 2000 and 2004 when Karl Rove organized surprisingly effective GOTV efforts, it appears the Democrats have learned and improved upon the Rove model.
That's not to say they're not uneasy about the final effort, they are. Democrats are concerned somewhat with the "Bradley effect" on election day when it is assumed that some percentage of Democratic voters, in the privacy of the voting booth, will refuse to pull the lever for a black man. Although they've attempted to play this down, it will be a factor.
They're also nervous about the fact that Obama, even with the help of economic bad news at a perfect time politically for he and the Democrats, still hasn't put this thing away, or so the polls indicate. In fact, after the initial bump it provided, the polls have again tightened up to the point that some are within the margin of error.
Yet there is also a small but growing group of Democrats who are talking "landslide". And the politically inept Nancy Pelosi is gloating about the "100 percent" certainty that Obama will be elected. "Landslide" and stupid statements like Pelosi's are excellent vote suppression tools because they may create a aura of inevitability that will keep complacent and lazy votes - who would make the effort in a tight and competitive race - home, feeling their vote is unnecessary in the promised landslide.
So when you hear Joe Biden expressing all these concerns on the campaign trail, he's not just blowing smoke, they're all legitimate concerns which keep politicians up at night.
On the plus side for Democrats, they have an excellent GOTV system in place. It has had almost two years of existence to build its efficiency and focus its effort. "Early voting", allowed in many states, is one of its efforts, and everything I've been reading says the early voting turnout is at historic highs.
Another plus for Democrats, at least in my opinion, is passion. There's a passion for winning that has been built since 2004 that I haven't seen in many years. True, it is emotion, not reason, which is driving much of the popular support for Obama. But frankly, that's precisely what Democrats want. They want the emotional side to dictate the vote. They want to passion for change they've nurtured with their narrative to drive people to the polls. The fact that they're going to elect the most inexperienced and unprepared candidate in the history of the Republic must be overcome with an emotional appeal to race, or change, or hope, or "out with Bush" or, well, pick your poison.
Whatever it is they want to harness it, nurture it and get that passion to the voting booth.
Last but not least - money. The Obama campaign is wallowing in it. 150 million in September. How heavy a GOTV effort will that buy in battleground states in comparison to the McCain campaign? Much heavier.
When all is said and done, the party that most effectively turns out the vote is, of course, the party which will win. Unfortunately as I see it now, the Rovian effort is about to be eclipsed by the Obama effort. I don't like it, but that's the way I see it.
Both campaigns are all about emotion. They are marketing efforts, designed to sell a product. Humans, in general, make decisions more from the gut than the head, and use the head to rationalize the decisions they make. That’s why it appears that conservatives and liberals are literally speaking different languages, and often see the same event (like a debate) differently. That’s also why people develop personal rivalries or animosities in net discussions — it’s emotion and imagination about the "other."
Otherwise, I think your analysis is right, though Obama’s recent support is soft, and he remains an unlikely candidate (name, race, lack of experience). Unfortunately for McCain he’s looked a bit unsteady in his campaign (reminds me of Kerry and Gore more than "W"), and his choice of Palin, while inspiring the base, makes it harder for them to make the experience issue stick. And, of course, it’s the money. I think public financing of elections is doomed, and that’s fine with me.
ABC News’ Matthew Jaffe Reports: Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., on Sunday guaranteed that if elected, Sen. Barack Obama., D-Ill., will be tested by an international crisis within his first six months in power and he will need supporters to stand by him as he makes tough, and possibly unpopular, decisions. “Mark my words,” the Democratic vice presidential nominee warned at the second of his two Seattle fundraisers Sunday. “It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy. The world is looking. We’re about to elect a brilliant 47-year-old senator president of the United States of America. Remember I said it standing here if you don’t remember anything else I said. Watch, we’re gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy.” “I can give you at least four or five scenarios from where it might originate,” Biden said to Emerald City supporters, mentioning the Middle East and Russia as possibilities. “And he’s gonna need help. And the kind of help he’s gonna need is, he’s gonna need you - not financially to help him - we’re gonna need you to use your influence, your influence within the community, to stand with him. Because it’s not gonna be apparent initially, it’s not gonna be apparent that we’re right.”
Sure Barry. I’ll stand by you......the same way you and your supporters stood by Pres. Bush.
Both campaigns are all about emotion. They are marketing efforts, designed to sell a product. Humans, in general, make decisions more from the gut than the head, and use the head to rationalize the decisions they make. That’s why it appears that conservatives and liberals are literally speaking different languages, and often see the same event (like a debate) differently.
Nope. We see things differently because with the left, it is 80% emotion, while those on the right actually tend to think things through, and it is only about 30% emotion.
Another plus for Democrats, at least in my opinion, is passion. ...
Cancel out this,
"Landslide" and stupid statements like Pelosi’s are excellent vote suppression tools because they may create a aura of inevitability that will keep complacent and lazy votes - who would make the effort in a tight and competitive race - home, feeling their vote is unnecessary in the promised landslide.
If not whole, but at least in part?
It’s that much discussed "voter enthusiasm".
Couldn’t, say your average Virginia Republican with better things to do on election day, decide that with Obama leading by 8-10 points (if it holds of course, but work with me) in the polls in Virginia, decide that the "inevitability" of Obama carrying Virginia might cause this average Republican to decide to play a round of golf rather than standing in line at a polling place voting for a McCain that he/she doesn’t like anyway?
Versus, say your average Virginia Democrat who’s been yearning to see a Dem in the office for the last eight years, standing enthusiastically in line to be a part of an Obamolution.
I believe that there will be a significant amount of the youth vote that might stay home or go play a round of frisbee golf if he/she feels that the race is already over. But enough to make a difference? I doubt it.
Democrats are concerned somewhat with the "Bradley effect" on election day when it is assumed that some percentage of Democratic voters, in the privacy of the voting booth, will refuse to pull the lever for a black man.
I think this will be somewhat unfair. There are those who probably don’t like Obama for reasons other than he’s black. But fear the appearance of looking racist.
This is part of the ’its a done deal’ I mentioned earlier.
The Democrats have been rigging events to capitalize on either outcome. By convincing much of the public that its in the bag for Obama, they will have a large portion of the public easily convinced Obama lost by some kind of funny business. They will contest the election on every front.
Its to make the claims of voter suppression or whatever an easy sell. If they’re lucky, they may get a riot or two. Its a scorched earth politics.
It is not unfair at all. It is a phenomenon which specifically addresses the point I made. And it has been documented to happen. So it is a phenomenon with which the Dems have to concern themselves.
The fact that there may be other reasons Democrat voters may not vote for Obama has nothing to do with the Bradley effect.
