Has the pendulum swung back to Obama?
September 18th, 2008
Can McCain-Palin win back the initiative again?
The latest polls in the White House race show that there’s been a sharp swing-back to Obama and he now has leads in almost all of them for the first time since McCain turned the election on its head with his choice of V-P.
Within the past hour the CBC/New York Times poll had McCain’s 43% to Obama’s 49%.
Earlier we had:-
Gallup: Obama 47%, McCain 45%
Diageo/Hotline: Obama 45%, McCain 42%
Research 2000: Obama 48%, McCain 44%
Rasmussen Reports: McCain 48%, Obama 47%
As I have been suggesting for the past couple of weeks we needed to wait until the impact of the back to back party conventions had shaken itself out.
In the betting there’s been a sharp move back to the Democratic party.
Latest live prices.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
The reason Obams going to win the election, ultimately, is the same reason David Camerons going to win the election when its eventually called. The party in power at the same time as the economic sh*t hits the fan, nearly always gets a hiding. What John Major did in 1992 was very exceptional, because usually when the voters are feeling miserable, its the government thats presiding over the mess that gets it in the neck.
Its not surprising that as things begin to spiral out of control Obama in the US and Cameron here see their ratings improve. Its a tough position for McCain because I don’t believe he would have made half the mess that Bush has made, but he’s guilty by association I’m afraid, just as any new leader the Labour Party decide to put in will be as well.
How do you estimate the racism premium in these polls?
It looks like it has, but the debates are crucial still.
We’ve all said that for a while.
If Obama has a ten point lead then he can’t realitically lose that in the debates, any less than that and he still can’t afford to be comfortably beaten.
I can’t wait!
And, a most of these are rolling tracking polls so the data is spread over a few days, the last days polling must really have been in Obama’s favour
Whooh,I’m first! Many things are happening:Virginia is ‘too close to call’,one of the trilogy of NM?IA?CO will not play ball,so across all ‘reptable’ boards,it is a true ‘toss’up’,with the prospect of another ‘into the following day/month (delete to taste)-I am sure events will soon end this deadlock PS I felt very happy when Bill Clinton won in 92-a a large part of me thinks very generation deserves to see a Democrat successfully elected-so GO-BAMA!
I think that McCain’s dumbest decision will be seen in retrospect to have been the Palin pick. Inevitably having such an old man at the top of the ticket was going to lead to massive scrutiny of the number 2 - and Palin is not coming out of that very well.
McCain decision to choose a woman was brilliant - trouble is he got the wrong women who was not properly vetted.
I was only fourth
(boo!Hiss! :lol:)
Now that the VP/convention season has worked itself out, the race is more or less exactly where it was before: McCain has a small chance, where by all rights he should have no chance at all.
McCain played his Joker wih Palin and it captured the news cycle for far longer than Obama would have been comfortable about. Put once the lip gloss had worn off and the questions about her suitability - and McCain’s judgment - began swirling, it was back tobeing Obama’s to lose. McCain has played the last 48 hours badly and I think ther ewill be a decisive swing back to Obama in the next three days from which McCain will never recover.
By mid-November, I suspect we will all be asking how we thought there could ever have been any other outcome than an Obama win.
(Sorry Ave It!)
5. Mike. I was hugely impressed with Palin when McCain first presented her as his VP choice, when she made her opening stump speech. I assumed and expected that she would have much more depth than she appears to have. You are probably right as usual. The VP debate will be crucial for her and McCain.
Anyone want to buy a 16/1 antepost voucher bet on President Palin 2012? Deserves to go to a good home and all reasonable offers accepted.
OT golf.
Ryder cup
Europe win 2.05 looks worth a sniff.
It looks like the identification bump that that the Republicans got post Palin is receding now, looking at the weightings of a few polls in the last few days. The Rasmussen one is the most Republican friendly and it will be interesting to see if they pick this up as well (although their system means that they always lag behind those who don’t impose that number). One factor that will help greater Democrat ID is the focus on the economy.
Those of you who predicted a Howard Brown on a Black Horse… Page 6 of tomorrow’s Sun.
Web page link to follow (when I build the page)
Kaletsky: “If this fails, it will take down all Britain’s banks”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/anatole_kaletsky/article4776149.ece
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/money/article1703766.ece
Doomed. We’re all doomed.
**dusts off Dad’s Army DVDs**
One should note how right 538.com was on the topic. They had the theoretical effect of two convention bounces overlapping mapped out before the conventions and the pattern is pretty much holding up (although the McCain bump seems to recede a bit earlier than expected).
I think what we are also experiencing is the 24-hours new cycle running hot. We have the fundamentals which are rather favorable for the Democrats this election year, and then we have events temporarily distorting the results. The Palin effect seems to be replaced by the Wall St. collapse effect now.
Structurally, I think this race is Obama +2 or Obama +3 at this point. If the financial crisis is actually perceived by the media to be big enough to deserve their attention for a couple of more weeks, this could well expand. McCain looks very uncomfortable addressing economic issues and Palin is perhaps the least helpful pick he could have made in this regard. If the economy is the last “game changer” event, he has major problems.
Alternatively, the media could find something new to obsess about - say a new terrorist attack somewhere or a Bin Laden video immediately before the elections (although that did not lead to tectonic shifts even in 2004). Or the inevitable ad campaign featuring Rev. Wrights “god damn America” two weeks before election date will completely surprise two thirds of the electorate who were brain dead earlier this year, inducing them to make a fear ridden cross in the GOP column.
It is unlikely that Obama will ever have a big enough lead to look at unfolding events without nail biting.
On the other hand, it does seem Palin had a more short term effect and is quite turning the race upside down.
In a word , “Yes”.
The ‘Palid’effect is wearing off & as the economy continues to tank, Obama is going to look ever stronger - Republican laissez-faire, lite-touch & Voodoo trickle-downs should be the focus of the Democrat attack. I just wish I’d bought into Obama as the money went to McCain - guess that’s why I don’t work in the City… oh, hang on…
#15 Do you mean Palin *isn’t* quite turning the race upside down, rather than is?
Brown rebukes Cabinet with call to renew attack on Cameron
“The Tories have passed the 50 per cent mark for the first time since Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister in 1988, according to an Ipsos MORI poll last night. It put the Tories on 52 per cent, Labour on 24 per cent and the Liberal Democrats on 12 per cent.
But Mr Brown will be boosted from a ComRes poll of 125 Labour councillors for today’s Local Government Chronicle showing that 61 per cent believe he can lead the party to election victory. Some 27 per cent believe Labour will lose under him while 12 per cent are undecided. If Mr Brown is ousted, Mr Miliband and the Health Secretary, Alan Johnson, (both on 23 per cent) are favoured as his successor.”
And no wonder that some Cabinet Ministers were in despair at the strategy presented to them at yesterday’s meeting.
“Mr Brown told Labour’s national executive committee on Tuesday: “What we see is that their [the Tories'] brand may be new, their PR expensive and their rhetoric modelled on Labour’s, but when you look at their actual policy plans they are very similar to the old Conservatives of the past. They may be spending a lot of money on advertising but behind the PR lies a nightmare scenario of cutting public services to give 3,000 of the richest people in the country tax cuts.”
The Prime Minister added: “Over the coming long 18-month haul we will move from this being a referendum on us to people making a real choice between us and the Conservatives – real progressive values and the right answers for the future versus old Conservative attitudes masked by PR and branding.”
18. The last paragraph sounds like Brown is planning to carry on right to the bitter end no matter what happens.
http://tinyurl.com/435y8s
“This is now the official Labour Party position on Gordon Brown. Fingers trembling over triggers, the electoral firing squad awaits the order to shoot Labour into opposition for a decade, and the likes of Northern Ireland secretary Shaun Woodward go on Newsnight begging colleagues not to cause trouble.” Mathew Norman Independent.
So cool, it looks like Obama will get his shot to replay the Carter administration. Without getting into the Bush-Nixon comparisions, we’ve got a sinking economy, increasing inflation and gas prices trending upward and upward.
God bless him but who really want to be a one-term Democratic president who got slapped around by circumstances way beyond his control?
22 - kevin
So a large part of American capitalism is tanking and the Bush administration is nationalising finance houses like something out of the Hugo Chavez’ playbook.
That’s what happens when the greedy and the crazy take over the Sanitorium and the administration smiles and applauds. Whoever takes over from the idiot boy will have a bunch of his mess to clear up. Before the last election I said that I hoped Kerry lost because the next four years would be thigh high with Bush’s crepe and Kerry would have to clean up the vomit. I wouldn’t wish that on anyone.
Now the 2009 President will have to deal with eight years of the diarrhoeaic Bush administration. There’s plenty to clean up; does the west need a cancerous old guy with signs of dimentia and a stupid lying sidekick or a somebody else?
Because of its strange version of democracy the US always gets the president it deserves. Work it out for yourselves. The sad old guy or somebody else….
Malcolm
Malcolm
23 malc19ken … does the west need a cancerous old guy with signs of dimentia and a stupid lying sidekick or somebody else?
love it, love it, love it!
Who’s going to rescue RBS when it becomes the next inevitable no1 target?
24-Come off it!! Obama isn’t that old!
I didn’t watch Nick Clegg’s speech. I can’t see him without instinctively shouting “Oh F— Off!” at the TV and running out of the room.
I disagree with those who criticise lefties for sending their chidlers to expensive private schools. Within any existing system, you have to live by the rules which exist, rather than the rules you would prefer to exist. Any parent, faced with poorly-resourced and badly-run state schools, would want the best for their children if they can afford it. The point is to build a society in which all schools are improved on an equal basis, so the same advantages can become available to everyone. In the meantime, I do not regard it as “hypocrisy” any more than it is hypocrisy for the Conservative Party to contest elections in the Scottish parliament (having opposed the existence of such a parliament).
25. Prince William?
27
Clegg is not a natural speaker. His delivery is poor, jokes bad, timing bad, and as for the content. Oh dear! Gordo is even worse. Cameron is in a league of his own by comparison.
Someone mentioned the Major ‘92 scenario. I think that is prescient, it shows that incumbents can win against the economic cycle in unique circumstances. Those circumstances have to be that the opposing side are seen as totally lacking credibility and out of touch. The US Presidency is slightly different in that it is a highly personality driven contest but McCain was always going to be on the back foot. To be fair he isn’t making a bad fist of it, and I would be surprised if Obama broke 300 ECV’s but the backdrop was always particularly favourable for the Democrats this year.
If you think McCain is poor when economic issues are raised,wait till you see him explain his Social Security policy.
Which is essentially to hand personal pensions over to those on Wall street he’s branding as corrupt.
Those who think Florida is off the table may be assuming that theres no pensioners down there.
32-But haven’t heard much from Obama on this issue either.
In any case the mood seems to have switched to Obama over the last few days. Only time will tell if it is noise or real. My guess is we will settle to the pre-convention leads he was having of +1,+2. Debates will probably not change anyhting unless there is a major gaffe.
Although McCain has his weak states, it does seem that Obama has a few of his own where he should have wrapped up and closed by now. He seems incapable of building a clear lead (although he has been consistently in the lead): PA, MI, MN, WI, NH, and even now OR. Come the day he will probably hold on to all or most of these, but the loss of any of these, except perhaps NH, could be critical and not outside the bounds of reason.
Also, there may be a surprise win for either candidate. Iowa (now seemingly safely Obama) was a surprise win for GWB in 2004. Likewise he almost won OR in 2000 and that too would have been a win from nowhere.
This will worry McCain - Indiana has not been won by the Democrats since 1964, but this local poll has Obama ahead by 3% at 47:44
http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080917/NEWS0502/80917076/-1/ARCHIVE
34. a few more state polls like that and the answer to this thread is yes
An interesting example of comfort taking…
From Labourhome:
“The only real consolation is that 24% seems to be a Labour hardcore for the moment and might ensure that we don’t fall below 100-150 seats in any disaster.”
35-So it’s all over for the Reps then-don’t be absurd.McCain was dead in the water at one point in seeking the nomination & came through with flying colours.A large part of the economic problem is down to those greedy bastards on Wall Street.
wondered when milburn would pop up
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7622324.stm
I’m currently a seller of John McCain. I think, however, Mr Smithson is being a bit harsh on him for his choice of Sarah Palin. John McCain had to make a gamble, because otherwise he was drifting to defeat. It may very well be that his choice of Sarah Palin will ultimately fail, but no one can deny that it has had an electrifying effect on the contest, and for a while, it looked like a stroke of genius.
I spotted this page a few weeks ago:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3bf5c59a-5666-11dd-8686-000077b07658.html
I continue to subscribe to its logic. If John McCain wins this election, either he will have pulled off one of the great political victories or Barack Obama will have participated in one of the most spectacular self-destructions. Neither is impossible, but neither is likely. Choosing Sarah Palin was one of John McCain’s best attempts to defy the political currents that are dragging him back so strongly.
37 In an environment when Bush and the Republicans actively blocked regulation by giving proposals “the one finger salute”, as a former Republican Congressman put it:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8780c35e-7e91-11dd-b1af-000077b07658.html
Neither McCain nor Palin has any economic understanding to bring to the current problems - and drag along their party’s regulation-free reputation as a dead weight with the voters.
Mary Riddell’s column in the Telegraph is quite remarkable, so many little details:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/09/18/do1801.xml
“those close to [Gordon Brown are calling the finished oration “extraordinary” ”
“Boundary reorganisation (and unpopularity) means there is not a cat in hell’s chance that Labour will beat the SNP in Brown’s next-door seat” - boundary reorganisations - is that it?
“Abroad, Brown is treated as “a hero and global heavyweight”, according to Jamie Drummond, executive director of the lobbying organisation, One. At home, this description would strike critics as a rare excuse for helpless mirth.” - could some of our overseas posters comment on this description of Gordon Brown?
40-& the “empty suit” has economic credence then.BHO has never run an ice cream parlour let alone anything else worthwhile.Do me a favour!!!
41, pity those foreigners don’t get votes, eh?:p
He may be popular abroad. If George W Bush appeared on Red Nose day and generously donated (on behalf of the US taxpayer) double the entire target for the night, I imagine he’d be more popular here.
Gonna be a big rally on the mkts today. Massive bear squeeze a coming.
Meanwhile, in the Independent, Steve Richards is far too kind to Nick Clegg:
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/steve-richards/steve-richards-nick-clegg-has-mastered-the-tactics-but-not-the-detail-934129.html
Nick Clegg in some respects resembles Gordon Brown, in that he is addicted to tactics but has no clear strategy. Is he equidistant between Labour and Conservative? Is he seeking to take the Lib Dems to the left to replace Labour or to the right to benefit from the rise in Conservative popularity? After 9 months of his leadership, I haven’t a clue what direction the Lib Dems are heading in - in fact, they seem becalmed. In seeking to appeal to both sides simultaneously, I expect that he will appeal to neither.
The Telegraph’s report on the Mori poll ends with a real sting for one Labour rebel:
“Eric Joyce, a parliamentary aide to John Hutton, has repeatedly made it clear he wants an improvement in Labour’s performance, but one friend claimed last night “he has no backbone so is unlikely to do anything.” ”
With friends like that…
Yay - Prescott on Today. He hasn’t drawn breath (nor ended a sentence) yet! It’s Vintage JP…
30
What looked so stupid was Clegg strutting up and down the stage pretending to be giving his speech without notes,which was reported as such on the radio and then last night the BBC showed the hidden autocue.
48, well, not that well hidden obviously.
I wonder if he thinks he’ll get into government on 12%. He wouldn’t under PR:p
Undead have risen.
http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2008/09/labour-party-term-campaign
John Prescott, Alastair Campbell, Richard Caborn and Glenys Kinnock call for the party and its supporters to get off the back foot and join a new Campaign for a Labour Fourth Term
19. That’s it, that’s Brown’s big plan? Their in a massive muddle, with the economy tanking and the labour party at each others throats, and his tactic is to attack the tories? As was mentioned yesterday, when you lose credibility with the public you also lose their collective ears, something the tories learnt over long years of opposition. Now the tories have gained some credibility and are seen as an alternative, whereas labour are seen as useless. Them slagging off the tories will be as ineffective in the future as it has been over the past few months.
50. Once your on the backfoot you can’t make yourself get on the front. This reminds me of the last ashes tour, england were poor, but every match we heard how hard they’d trained and how much they wanted to win the next match. They lost 5-0 and were awful.
New thread - Would they have been on 12% with Vince?
51, I agree it won’t work very well, but Labour have got to attack the Conservatives to some degree or other. Likewise, the Conservatives will attack Labour.
Lib Dem leader Nick Cleggover, however, is being a fool by splitting his tiny media time (cut short even more than usual by the world banking sector imploding) attacking both sides, especially when Labour are deeply unpopular and the Tories look like they could get a landslide.
For the Lib Dems, media coverage may be their limiting factor, so they’ve got to work hard to expand it where possible, and not waste it when they’ve got it.
Mind you, the £30 stat will haunt Clegg for a long time now.
19. So Brown believes a poll of a small number of the party faithful vs a much larger sample of the people who will decide his fate (the public).
I propose a new pb.com law - “When you disbelieve the polls in a general manner & pick your own, you have already lost”.
This is one of those spectactular game-changing “events” that are unforeseeable, and yes, will likely hand the election to Obama for the reasons GIN states at 1. It has nothing to do with the Palin pick, though - right after Mike put up his “has he blown it with the Palin pick” the polls ran away for McCain. There is simply no question that she is an asset and changed the polling tremendously for McCain at both national and state levels.
Nate, the Dem analyst who runs fivethirtyeight.com wrote recently that “even a Palinophobe like me” had to admit that the polling stated she was a very savvy pick politically.
Prior to yesterday’s Gallup and CNN state polls, the day had been good for McCain. He gained a point in the Hotline tracker and was steady in Ras and Kos meaning the prior day’s polling had been better than the night before. The ARG state polls were terrific for him. However Gallup is the gold standard (Ras is silver) and no McCainiac can dismiss the big jump to Obama.
If the banking system collapses, the party in power will lose around the world. I think that’s a given. Not even Palin magic can change that. However, looking for consolation as a Republican now facing defeat, I will say that this may be the Democrats “1992″ victory; the winner will get tagged with the blame for years of financial misery which may set up a Palin victory in 2012 and for years to come.
Meanwhile, as the great Jack W would say, I am relieved that UK politics is suddenly getting interesting again so I need not focus on the US out of default. And anyway, I’m a little more focussed on the possible collapse of our banking system - protecting our family savings, splitting it between banks etc. All quite scary stuff and does tend to take the mind off foreign elections altogether, which is just as well if you support the GOP right now.
56. Palin was an asset for a few days until people realised how useless she really is. Big mistake my McCain in my opinion.
Have you seen the drop in Palins favourable ratings over the last week?
Like a stone, since they let her on TV.
I suppose the LD’s would have to believe in ’small government’ with only 8 MP’s left after the next GE.