McCain’s Long Shot Posted by: Dale Franks
on Thursday, October 30, 2008
Some of the McCain people are cautiously optimistic about how the race will go. I think it's possible for McCain to win, but not probable.
really, to beleive McCain is going to somehow pull this out, you have to beleive that all the polling, irrespective of who conducts it, is basically flawed. That kind of faith...stretches credulity. It might be justifiable if the polls were split half and half on who was ahead. But, at this point, no one has McCain leading. SO predicting a McCain victory Tuesday is a leap of faith.
True, Obama has trouble closing the deal. He consistently underperformed the polls during the primaries. But he's so far ahead on the polls in some of the swing states, that he has a margin for victory that gets him to 270, even with the underperformance. Having said that, the polls during the primaries really missed Hillary's strength in New Hampshire and Pennsylvania, where he got drubbed.
The other problem Obama has is that young voters, and first-time voters tend not to vote, no matter what their intentions may be. So, it's possible that the polling overstates his actual strength, due to oversampling democrats and first-time voters. But, even Gallup's "traditional" likely voter poll shows Obama ahead by 4%. Of course, that's a nationwide poll, so its usefulness is limited.
So, for McCain to win, in opposition to what the polls are saying, Obama has to underperform by more than 5% across the board, due to the Bradley effect, and the oversampling of Democrats and new voters. That's possible, but in a year where all the trends are running against the Republicans, I wouldn't bet a significant sum of money on it.
The other thing—something we won't really know until Nov 4th, because all the polling will stop, and won't catch it, is which way the last weekend break of the undecideds go. It usually breaks significantly towards a candidate. If that break goes to McCain, then at the very least, we'll have a very long night on Tuesday.
First, If Obama takes all the states that Kerry took in 2004, plus IA, NM, and CO, it's over. So, the East Coast states will probably tell us who won really early if Obama is going to win.
States to watch:
VA: If it goes for Obama, it's over, unless... PA: Might switch Republican if Western PA turnout is high enough. NC: Even with a PA/VA switch, NC puts Obama over the top, assuming that IA, NM, and CO are already lost. FL: An Obama win there shuts McCain down. OH: An Obama win there shuts McCain down. MO: If VA and PA switch, and McCain holds OH and FL, then MO becomes the key swing state. NV: If VA and PA switch, and OH, FL, and MO go to McCain, then who wins NV wins. CO: Even if McCain takes all the 2004 Red states, except for IA and NM, then whoever wins CO wins. NV: If McCain keeps all the 2004 red states except IA and NM, winning in NV results in a bare 274 electoral vote victory. Losing there results in a 269-269 electoral college tie.
IA and NM are essentially blue states this year, and a McCain win in either one will be very surprising. McCain, therefore, has to run the table on all of the remaining 2004 red states to eke out a victory, or get a PA/VA or PA/NC switch for a few votes extra.
If he does, it'll be an unexpected upset bigger than Dewey v. Truman.
Imho, some of the polls put McCain in reach of the Bradley effect.
I prefer the Shy Tory Factor that pollsters used to explain their failure to foresee a Conservative win in the 1992 UK election. The Conservatives trailed Labour by 1% in the polls but won by 7.6% at the ballot box.
I’m predicting a big Shy Republican Factor this year. It may not be enough to defeat the Messiah, but it will make it a much closer race than expected.
Here’s a little insider info on Florida - While I’m only in the top portion of the state and generally only the Tampa area, McCain signs and bumper stickers out perform Obama 2 to 1, easy.
Even in my neighborhood, where there wasn’t a SINGLE political sign in 2004, it’s almost a 3 to 1 ratio McCain to Obama.
Now, that’s only in my neck of the woods. Miami is more densely populated and is highly Democrat. BUT, we have a rather stupid amendment - #2 is to define marriage as a man and woman. Now, it doesn’t appear right now to have enough support to pass, BUT it has majority: around 54% the last time I checked.
Now, if 54% of the populace is going to vote against those icky gays, I can’t see them also voting for Obama. I don’t think anyone really expects (or expected) this to pass, but rather a good carrot to lure out people who would nominally support McCain or the Republicans in general.
Wish I could find the report, but the early voting stats aren’t too good for the Dems either as the blocs they’re after and require (young adults, minorities, etc) don’t appear to be showing up in droves.
My prediction is that Obama will win the EC handily but by a very slim margin of the popular vote. If this comes true, I won’t be too dispirited as that means the hundreds of millions he poured into propaganda wasn’t as effective as we feared. If enough people still maintain that little s socialism isn’t a good thing, we can pull back from the brink next time.
If Obama wins both by a landslide, however, I’m not sure the republic will be able to recover. Not because Obama himself will damage us, but the fact that the majority of Americans prefer that kind of government and are willing to give up my rights to support it.
Last hope - I think there might be a lot of conservatives who, despite their differences with McCain, might just say ’F*** it’ and hit the polls. I’m one of them, so I assume there are more like me out there. Against Hillary! I would have not voted for him, but against Obama?
Pretty good analysis, and more or less how I see it. However, whether it’s the Bradley effect, or PUMAs, or what have you, I think that there is a distinct possibility that this year will provide us with some surprises. I wouldn’t be surprised with a McCain narrow win or an Obama landslide, nor would I be surprised if an ostensibly red/blue state or two were to flip on election night, throwing the pundits into a tizzy.
I’ll be watching the east. Should McCain lose FL and VA, I’ll turn off the TV and go read a book. If not, well, I’ll be watching the midwest returns with great interest.
In our area, the local media has been talking about how a majority of the ’man on the street’ won’t talk about who they are voting for. Being that in our state of 120 counties, only our county(also being the largest city in the state) will vote for Obama, I find this to be a good sign for McCain.
I’ll take huxley’s "shy tory" theory and rename it the "paranoid of being anti-Obama" vote.
In areas and neighborhoods where voters are expected to be for Obama, they’re are going to be, by my theory, many who are paranoid about giving the wrong answer to pollsters.
I live in an extremely liberal community where I was once publicly accused of being the equivalent of a Southern segregationist for opposing "gay marriage." In fact, it was a candidate for local office who leveled the accusation (we’ve since reconciled and become friendly, if not friends, without either of us changing our views).
There is always a sense around here that if you don’t go the "right way" that you’re a fascist of some sort.
I speak my mind, always have, but I know that most people around here who disagree with the Leftward consensus keep it buttoned.
In the internet/google age, when someone has your telephone number, they essentially have all of you. Most people now understand that. So, those who live and work and participate in social networks in certain communities where being against Obama could cost them in a variety of ways, they’ll just give the "right answer" when they are called.
I posit that it comes out to about 4-5% of the electorate. And I would lay the immediate cause of it to the overboard "in your face" and "direct action" accusatory attitude of the Obama movement.
Both slavery and segregation were maintained in many respects by the failure to take note of them as morally repugnant. Most Americans simply glanced past them. They were just seen as the way things were.
That same kind of thing is happening right now before our eyes with respect to Obama’s racialist background. Americans should re-confront it this weekend.
My understanding is that Obama’s "leaked internals" show a 2 point Obama advantage for PA, and his considerable effort in that state suggests those a likely internals . . .
In other words, PA is likely a tie at this point. If you add in Obama’s typical weak closing, McCain could easily win PA.
McCain wins a narrow and tiny victory. And I stay home on Wed to avoid the "social unrest" that’s sure to follow
Even if America votes in Obamarx, I think the GOP holds just enough to avoid a total disaster, with Franken and Murtha losses thrown in for good consolation prizes
Robb Allen - If Obama wins both by a landslide, however, I’m not sure the republic will be able to recover. Not because Obama himself will damage us, but the fact that the majority of Americans prefer that kind of government and are willing to give up my rights to support it.
I absolutely agree. I would even go further: whether The Annointed One wins or loses this time, we’re living on borrowed time. McCain really isn’t that much different from The Annointed Oneon economic issues. Both of them are promising all sorts of government goodies because it’s what people seem to expect. Gone are the days of people wanting the government to just leave them alone. Whether it’s money for college, retirement, medical care, dealing with disasters, or even keeping people from being "offensive", a large number (majority?) of Americans think that the government can, should, and MUST "do something" without stopping to think about who pays for it and what it means for liberty when Uncle Sam becomes Nanny Sam.
McPhillips, you’ve just been promoted right past Bithead as the slowest fish in the barrel.
In the internet/google age, when someone has your telephone number, they essentially have all of you. Most people now understand that. So, those who live and work and participate in social networks in certain communities where being against Obama could cost them in a variety of ways, they’ll just give the "right answer" when they are called.
I heard the same crackpot idea from a crackpot guest host on the Laura Ingraham show this morning. According to you, people are lying to pollsters because they fear some kind of retribution for not giving the “right answer”. Forget the fact that polling organizations never release specific information about who they poll, forget the fact that if anyone actually feared an anonymous phone conversation, they could simply hang up the phone from the get go, forget that any given McCain/Palin rally typically draws half or less the amount of supporters than an Obama rally. No, no… it’s that the polls are wrong because people fear pollsters so they’re compelled to lie instead of simply hanging up the phone. Yeah, yeah… that’s the ticket. Hell, McCain can’t even get Joe the Plumber to show up to his rallies. And as JTP seeks to extend his fifteen minutes of fame, and good for him for doing so, it looks like JTP sees the writing on the wall and he’s having second thoughts about hitching his wagon to that nova.
Tell me, McPhillips, when you get a headache, is it phantom pain? Of course that would have to assume that you ever had a brain to begin with.
In Martin’s delusions, he just can’t fathom the thought that not just a plurality but a majority of Americans could actually support what he believes to be a terrorist sympathizing Marxist America hater like Obama. That’s why he has to grasp onto ridiculous fantasies about fascist pollsters who would destroy someone for giving the “wrong answer”.
You guys have been shoveling that Wright/Ayers BS for months now. And as I told you then, as I’m telling you now… nobody cares. Nobody who wasn’t already looking for an excuse to dislike Obama was going to give two figs about some distant guilt-by-association horse manure.
Simple truth is: Obama has outplayed you. He’s outplayed McCain and the republicans. He’s raised more money and has campaigned better. And Obama wins 51-48 with 311 EV’s.
According to you, people are lying to pollsters because they fear some kind of retribution for not giving the “right answer”. Forget the fact that polling organizations never release specific information about who they poll,
That’s not the point I made, Mutt.
It doesn’t have anything to do with what polling organizations do or do not do.
It has to do with some people who receive calls not accepting them at face value and reacting in the "best way" they know how — i.e., giving the "right answer". I specifically describe them as "paranoid," though perhaps justly so on their own terms.
And it’s simply a theory, actually a variant of the so-called Bradley Effect that is bandied constantly in the media. I posed it as a variant of huxley’s "Shy Tory" theory, which is of course itself a Bradley-like theory. And I theorized that it would amount to about 4-5% of the electorate.
Now, Mutt, if you can’t go to a premise honestly, don’t try to go to it at all.
The rest of your comment sounds like the rambling of some self-abusing Olbermann fan. You were better off with the mask on, as transparent as that was.
PM - For whatever reasons people do lie to pollsters. Given the polarized state of the country and the penalties, as Joe the Plumber discovered, for being on the "wrong" side of an issue, I’m sure some people lie to pollsters from fear of being outed.
That information is supposed to be protected, as you say, but so was Joe the Plumber’s private information which was nonetheless illegally rifled out of various databases. I wouldn’t blame people at all for this concern when talking to pollsters.
Furthermore, like it or not, the Obama campaign is one of the dirtiest presidential campaigns since JFK—from the strong-arming, deceptive tactics in the primary caucuses, to the ACORN voting frauds, to the the intentional no-verification acceptance of any credit card number that doesn’t bounce so who knows how many millions of dollars of Obama’s donations are illegal.
