All Posts Tagged With: "Barack Obama"

You’ve gotta check out this comprehensive post by Chris at the Outside Report.

Chris is one of my favorite bloggers, and in this post he lays out a state by state comparison of the 2004 results and the current polling data. Take a look. Then add the Outside Report to your rss readers, favorites lists, and blogrolls.

by Chris of The Outside Report

Note: As promised, here is the post Chris wrote on why Obama will win.

Come January 2009, America will usher in a new era and break some very old barriers by electing its first African-American President. Barack H. Obama will be sworn in as our 44th President of the United States and will become an international symbol for decades to come.

So why will Obama win? First and most obviously is the political environment we live in. As I pointed out, no candidate or party similiarly situated to McCain and the Republicans has ever won. Back in 2006, I had predicted (from looking at history) that it would be virtually impossible for McCain and the Republicans to keep the White House or make any gains in Congress.

Every time in American history there has been an unpopular President in the middle (or end) of an unpopular war, his party has lost more Congressional seats and lost the White House. It happened to Wilson and the Democrats in 1920, it happened to Truman and the Democrats in 1952, Johnson and the Democrats in 1968, it happened to Ford and the Republicans in 1976, and inevitably it will happen to Bush and the Republicans in 2008. McCain would have to defy every rule of politics and American history to secure a victory.

Second, Obama’s ability to raise money will also have a major impact. Not only will he have $200 million from labor unions, but he’ll have the ability to raise a quarter of a billion dollars himself. While right now, the prospect of McCain getting $85 million should give him a huge cash advantage, as the election comes closer, more and more of Obama’s supporters will reach deeper and deeper in their pockets with Obama having the potential to organize and run ads in every state. He’ll sweep McCain off the news as he already has.

But what about him outspending Hillary 3 to 1 after March but still losing Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania? True, but you have to remember that Obama started down 20-30 plus points in all three states. His money helped him close the gap in all the states where he competed. Those states were as favorable to Hillary demographically as Alabama and Louisiana should be to McCain in 2008. Now imagine Obama having to run and spend millions to lose Oklahoma to McCain by only 10% instead of the 30% that doomed Kerry and Gore?

Another worrisome sign for McCain is his polling. On average, McCain rarely in his year and a half running for President topped or come near 50% of the vote. Whereas Obama has reached 50% of the vote in many polls during the primary and now after the primary, McCain almost never got there. McCain also experienced almost no bounce after locking up his nomination for President despite the Democratic bickering. That’s a sign that there is a ceiling for how much support McCain can get in a national election.

Ultimately, if Obama can change the political demographics in a state favorable to his opponent by 10-20% then defeating McCain in “swing” areas such as Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Iowa, Colorado, and Virginia shouldn’t be too hard since McCain is already behind in all these places. Obama’s money means organizational muscle and in close races that can make the difference.

And on that note, the electoral college right now favors Obama more than it even favored Kerry or Gore at this point in the campaign. Not only is McCain already behind in the “swing” midwestern states, but he’s losing neighboring states such as New Mexico, Colorado, and is in a tight race with Obama in Nevada. While Obama has virtually locked up much needed Democratic states from 2004 (with the notable exceptions of Michigan and Pennsylvania), it appears McCain is going to have to fight for North Dakota, Colorado, Virginia, North Carolina, Nevada, Alaska, and even Georgia.

Obama was able to move the goal chain in virtually impossible states due to his enormous money advantage but how is McCain suppose to move the goal chains in the states he’ll need to win? How does McCain go on offense when he lacks a coherent message and the media in the tank for Barack? How does he turn around his 10-15% deficit in Minnesota, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, and 5-10% deficits in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Iowa?

But what about Dukakis who was 10% ahead of Bush in 1988? Well first Bush had a popular President he could hitch his star to and second Bush was able to outspend Dukakis and flood the airwaves with Willy Horton etc. McCain and the RNC (despite all that money) won’t be able to flood the airwaves in a similiar fashion. If anyone will be flooding the airwaves, it’ll be the Labor Unions and Obama.

But what about working class whites? Obama doesn’t have to “win” working class whites to win the White House. In fact, no Democrat ever wins whites in general (not even Clinton or Carter or Kennedy in 1960). Obama only has to do as well with the white working class Americans as Kerry did and make up the rest among White independents (which he already has) and minorities (which he already has).

Further, once the Labor Unions (who will likely serve as the negative wing of the Party) start running ads highlighting McCain’s 30 year opposition to the minimum wage, his support of the Bush tax cuts, and his record of supporting “big business” those working class whites will pause and think hard. They may never bring themselves to voting for an African-American, but this type of ad campaign can depress them into not voting for McCain either.

But about Reverend Wright and William Ayers etc? Those things have already been dealt with and have already come out. If Obama has to thank Hillary for one thing its bringing all the bad out now rather than later. But even during the height of the Wright stuff, Obama’s polling was strong and he was tied with McCain. To me this shows a man with great political durability.

Obama has taken a serious punch but would McCain be able to take such a political punch? He certainly didn’t in 2000. Rev. Wright/William Ayers were played over and over again and in some ways it was worse than the Swiftboat vets on Kerry. Kerry couldn’t recover from the Swiftboat vets but Obama has recovered from his own Swiftboating.

No one has laid a hand on McCain but Obama has had to fight off Bush, the Clintons, the Republican establishment, and old time Dem polls and he still has the highest approvals of any politician in the country right now. That’s a durability that has not broken and in fact Obama is more popular now than he was prior to Rev. Wright-gate.

But what about Hispanics and women? Obama’s support among Hispanics (because of his support of driver’s licenses for illegals) has been stronger than even Kerry’s was in 2004 and Obama has opened up a massive gender gap against McCain.

On the issues, McCain has not separated with Bush on the core issues of the campaign and that’s Iraq and the economy. McCain hasn’t demonstrated how he plans on being all that different than Bush on the economy. The war is getting better? Yeup, but the war has been better for over a year now, but that’s only solidified people’s desires to leave Iraq.

What about the debates though? McCain will wipe the floor with Obama! Likely not. All the expectations will be on McCain but when Obama does better than expected (a la John F. Kennedy in 1960) momentum will shift even stronger to Obama. People will expect McCain to beat Obama just as they expected Bush to beat the waffling Kerry and Gore to beat Bush in 2000. Those debates closed Kerry’s gap with Bush and that is what made it a close election in the first place. Further, the debate impact will be mitigated because both sides will likely meet several times over the course of the next few months so any gaffes or stature gap won’t exist come October.

But shouldn’t Obama be doing even better now than he is? Absolutely not. Look at this way, how in the world can a man with only 2 years federal experience with a funny sounding Muslim name be beating a decorated war veteran who was a reformer? The question isn’t “but why isn’t Obama beating McCain by more” but rather “how in the world can McCain be losing to this guy?” John McCain has been a rockstar for the past 15 years and he’s losing to someone with virtually no “experience.” Literally, Democrats could’ve selected 5 or 10 other guys who’d be far more “electable” but instead sent out the junior league rockstar rookie. That says a lot about bad the Republican brand is and also how strong Democrats are right now. McCain is running against too many headwinds to win.

Today Senator Obama released his first general election campaign commercial, which is focused largely on his personal narrative and themes of pride in family and country. The ad is running nationwide, including our most conservative states. Although I was once a spirited critic of the 50 state strategy, I think the Dean plan is working. We’re forcing the GOP to spend money defensively when they’ll have a harder time raising it than we will.

It’s easy to forget how dynamic our states really are in presidential elections. Think blue is always blue or red is always red? Do a little exploring in the pre-1992 races at 270 to Win.

Obama’s embrace of the 50 state strategy should benefit many red-to-blue House races, and facilitate up to 6 pickups in the Senate. More than that, he’s challenging him to be the candidate most associated with patriotism. The best defense is a ferocious offense.

Despite the strength of McCain’s personal story and his service, Obama can win a battle talking about Patriotism because he is a much more effective communicator, and frankly, because of the stunningly brilliant David Axelrod’s superior packaging of his message.

Michelle also seems to be winning her own patriotism battle, but several remain in her war. She reportedly did well on The View (if I watched it, I wouldn’t tell you savage critics), and she’s shown disarming humility and grace. I was surprised Laura Bush spoke out for Michelle Obama, a move the notoriously vindictive Cindy McCain likely didn’t take very well. There are rumors of bad blood between Laura Bush and Cindy McCain, which makes sense given the brutality of Bush v. McCain in 2000. Today Cindy McCain flew off to Vietnam to do charity work for her organization that helps children with deformities smile. Can anyone think of a first lady’s charity that is better politics then helping little deformed children smile? (Note: I’m trying to be less vindictive, negative and reactionary, which is why I wont speculate on how many children have been deformed by fetal alcohol syndrome or drunk driving wrecks facilitated by her beer distributorship)

Finally, speaking of patriotism, this is the most patriotic goddamn thing I’ve ever seen:

Recently CNN ran an article on the McCain and Obama tax plans. The article relies on data from The Tax Policy Center, where you can find more in depth analysis on these plans. Our blog has many fans of simple charts, and the chart associated with the article was particularly helpful, and is reproduced below.

Source:The Tax Policy Center

I don’t find any data on McCain’s plan very relevant because his plan is a political impossibility with a Democratic Congress. He might as well say he’s eliminating taxes and the IRS, and giving every American eleventy bajillion dollars. Any plan of McCain’s is at once a fairytale.

This chart refutes the myth that Obama intends to dramatically raise taxes on middle class Americans. Yes, if you make more than 600K, your taxes will go up dramatically. It’s more important to look at the bottom end of Obama’s chart. Anyone making under 112K will pay less in taxes under President Obama. If only everyone would vote with their pocketbook!

It is widely known that Barack Obama does not accept contributions from lobbyists or federal PACs. He also doesn’t accept funds from individuals registered as foreign agents under FARA. The DNC is now following his lead, and even returning $100,000 it received from lobbyists. Although I am a partisan Democrat, and I frequently give to progressive candidates, I am registered both as a lobbyist and as a federal agent, and therefore, I’m unable to donate to Barack Obama or the DNC. However, I support the Obama policy, and not just because it gives me a good excuse to keep money in my checking account.

As a brief aside, many people don’t realize how little you have to do to be required to register as a lobbyist or as a foreign agent. Two one minute phone calls to a Hill staffer on behalf of a client can require registration as a lobbyist. Any work at all in support of a foreign government, even one Google search, requires registration. Obama’s rules aren’t targeted necessarily at guy’s like me, but I’m still covered. Disclosure reports don’t really distinguish between those merely required to register by the letter of the law, and the high powered lobbyists Obama likely intended to cover. We are demonized collectively, each branded with scarlet Ls.

Former Ambassador Tom Korologos recently wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal titled “In Defense of Lobbyists.” Ambassador Korologos is one of the most respected lobbyists in Washington, but I felt his editorial missed a key point. No one is saying lobbyists should be banished from Washington, or silenced from “petitioning the government for redress.” The Obama campaign is simply refusing to accept lobbyist money. A lobbyist can still, through skill, honesty and hard work, be a valuable mouthpiece for clients and a valuable source of information for Members of Congress. Senator Obama merely wants to keep these roles separate from any semblance of a quid pro quo exchange of money for influence.

Lobbyists supporting Obama are not wholly deprived of an opportunity to play a small part in America’s civic religion. We can still do almost everything else average Americans can do to help. We can still phone bank, canvass, write letters to the editor, poll watch, help other voters get to the polls, knock on doors, etc. And we should. Obama’s lobbyist donation gambit has been a big success. He sacrificed relatively small pools of money, but distinguished himself from Clinton and McCain. More importantly, Obama is convincing the public that that government can be reclaimed from corporate interests and restored to the service of the people.