ELECTION DAY 2008:........... Barack Obama, the next President of the United States of America

0820_bigmap.PNG
[h3]
[/h3][h3]Today's Polls, 8/20[/h3]
By any and all polling-based metrics, the race for the White House is extremely tight. However, we present three slightly different projections of the November outcome, and they each tell a slightly different story:

2782126457_9009bb7512_o.png


Our popular vote projection shows a literal tie, with each of Barack Obama and John McCain projected to earn 48.5 percent of the vote, and third-party candidates receiving a collective 3 percent.

Things get confusing, however, when looking at the electoral college. We project Obama to earn slightly more electoral votes on average. However, we also project John McCain to win the election slightly more often. What accounts for the discrepancy? Obama's wins tend to be larger, and McCain's tend to be smaller. If Obama wins this election by between 7 or 10 points, there are very few high-EV states that he won't be able to put into play; even something like Texas is probably winnable. If McCain were to win by that margin, on the other hand, he would still almost certainly lose New York, he would almost certainly lose Illinois, and he would almost certainly lose California. Those states represent 107 electoral votes that are essentially off-limits to McCain, even on his very best days.

But when the election is close -- and this is the case that we really care about -- McCain has appeared to develop a slight advantage in the electoral math. There are several states on our map that are colored light pink, meaning that they tip very slightly to the Republicans; these include Colorado, Ohio, Virginia, Florida, Montana and Nevada, in each of which Obama has better than a 25 percent chance of winning, but less than a 50 percent chance. There are a fairly large number of scenarios, then, where Obama comes tantalizingly close to a victory, but loses several different battleground states by mere points or fractions thereof. This dynamic is fairly fluid, however, and if Obama were able to get a toehold somewhere like Colorado or Virginia, it could quickly reverse itself.

Does all of this mean that you should short Obama in the futures markets, which still show him as roughly a 60:40 favorite?

Not necessarily. Our model accounts for the topline results of the polls in as comprehensive a way as is possible, but it does not account for nonpolling factors such as turnout and ground game, macroeconomic conditions, or the probability of certain future events (like the conventions) tending to favor one or another candidate. The Obama campaign, I think, has good reasons not to panic; the facts and figures that we hear about their ground game in off-record conversations never fail to impress, and the campaign has a keen sense of how to play out the rest of the political calendar, in contrast to recent weeks where they had let McCain dictate the narrative. But the McCain campaign, just as surely, has reason to be pleased. Their candidate was never going to win a blowout election, but they are setting themselves up well to win a close one.

Finally, here are the state polling results, which we'll simply present today as a data dump.

2782127283_0548518dda_o.png
 
Obama's Vice President

DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION

Interest in the Democratic Convention will be far higher than four years ago, according to a Pew survey out today. Fully 59% of the American public reports interest in the Democratic convention, compared with 48% reporting interest in the Republican convention. From the Boston/New York conventions of 2004, reported interest in the Dem convention in 2008 has flipped from -10 to +11. Interestingly, this switch is entirely due to enthusiasm on the Democratic side, since interest in the Republican convention is fractionally higher than last time also. American interest for the Democratic convention is also higher now than in 1992.

Independents and a base enthusiasm edge are providing the difference. While 59% and 48% represent the percentage of all Americans interested in each convention, there is both an enthusiasm gap among the bases (79% of Dems compared with 70% of Reps) as well as a gap in enthusiasm among independents, who are more interested in the Democratic convention by 12 points.

Another key finding in Pew's survey, Clinton supporters are highly interested in her convention speech. What she says and how she handles the moment should have a significant impact on some of her supporters who have been slow to support Obama. As the findings show, her supporters still care more about what she has to say than what the party's nominee does.
 
Originally Posted by weezyfeezy

The Ayers situation is about to BLOW UP after the conventions...
Hopefully. This brings out some serious character questions about Mr. Obama
 
Originally Posted by weezyfeezy

The Ayers situation is about to BLOW UP after the conventions...

Word. In my opinion the election will be won depending on who McCain chooses for a veep.
 
Originally Posted by Fede DPT

Originally Posted by weezyfeezy

The Ayers situation is about to BLOW UP after the conventions...

Word. In my opinion the election will be won depending on who McCain chooses for a veep.

Mark Halperin says two sources "who know" say McCain ispicking Romney. This is a pick that has long made sense demographically. If two of the four the toughest battlegrounds include Colorado and Michigan, Romney's Michiganroots and his strength in Western states with high LDS concentrations make him a demographically smart pick.
 
Originally Posted by TBONE95860

Originally Posted by Fede DPT

Originally Posted by weezyfeezy

The Ayers situation is about to BLOW UP after the conventions...

Word. In my opinion the election will be won depending on who McCain chooses for a veep.

Mark Halperin says two sources "who know" say McCain is picking Romney. This is a pick that has long made sense demographically. If two of the four the toughest battlegrounds include Colorado and Michigan, Romney's Michigan roots and his strength in Western states with high LDS concentrations make him a demographically smart pick.

I would of liked Huckabee, but for the sake of the election Romney was my choice. There was NO WAY we would of won picking a pro-choice veep.
 
[font=ARIAL,VERDANA,HELVETICA][size=+7]
capt.4aef4f4235a7424a8d0f69bdc9e60613.obama_veepstakes_biden_ny107.jpg

IT'S BIDEN

[/size][/font]
TEXTMESSAGE FINALLY COMES: 'Barack has chosen Senator Joe Biden to be our VP nominee'...

AP: Biden speaks -- and speaks -- his own mind...



Was he the best choice? I guess we'll never know. From among the five or so candidates who seemed plausible in the endgame, I think Hillary gives you the best chance of occupying the White House in 2009. But maybe she doesn't give you the best chance of governing effectively, maintaining a majority in the Congress in 2011, or getting re-elected in 2013. Maybe the Obama campaign had some oppo on her, and that's why she (allegedly) wasn't vetted. But I would hope that Chicago at least took her seriously.

Evan Bayh? I still think he got a raw deal from the left. But he wasn't going to generate much enthusiasm from the base, wasn't going to generate much enthusiasm from the press, and from what I'd heard, is not all that well liked in Washington circles. One wonders whether Steve Clemons' reporting is correct, that Bayh was at one point the leading choice, and that the Obama campaign had second thoughts.

Tim Kaine? Never quite understood what made him Veep material, but he'll be an effective surrogate for Obama and certainly raised his national profile. The fact that the Obama campaign may have made a late push to get Mark Warner into the game was a tip-off that he wasn't likely to be picked.

Kathleen Sebelius? I found her a persuasive choice personally. I have no idea how she'd have gone over to the other 304 million Americans. She would have required a careful and deliberate roll-out process, and with the choice apparently having been made fairly late in the day, that had probably become impossible.

Was Brain Schweitzer considered seriously? Was Wesley Clark? Bill Richardson? Were they interested in the position? Were they vetted and disqualified? We have no way to know, so we'll just have to take a pass.

At the end of the day, Joe Biden is that one choice that is in fact fairly safe but nevertheless feels fairly bold. I'd expect Democrats to wake up tomorrow morning feeling pretty good about him.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
 
Will there be some kind of a backlash against Barack Obama for his not picking Hillary Rodham Clinton for his ticket?

Rasmussenhas some instant feedback on Barack Obama's selection of Joe Biden. As their write-up notes, there appears to be a gender gap in the initial responseto his selection. And it's the reverse gender gap than you'll usually see when a Democratic candidate makes news: men like the pick better than women.


2791123623_2950cc30c1_o.png


What's interesting is that the gender gap is different between the several formulations of the question that Rasmussen employed. There is a big differencein the question of whether Biden was "the right pick" -- apparently seeming to indicate that, for many women, any pick other than Hillary was notgoing to be the right pick. But there isn't very much difference in favorability scores for Biden, nor upon the prospective impact upon one's vote. Sothe message that women seem to be sending is that: (1) yeah, we're kind of ticked; but, (2) it's nothing personal against Biden, and (3) we'llprobably get over it.

The McCain campaign, however, isn't going to make it any easier on them, having announced a commercial, to debut at literally any moment now (it's 3 AM onthe East Coast -- get it?), called "Passed Over":

"She won millions of votes. But isn't on his ticket. Why?" an announcer says in the 30-second spot.

The answer? "For speaking the truth."

The ad, which has not yet been released, then ticks off a litany of criticism Clinton used against Obama in the prolonged primary, according to a transcript sent to reporters.

"You never hear the specifics," Clinton says.

"On the Rezko scandal," the voice says.

"We still don't have a lot of answers about Senator Obama," Clinton says in footage from the primaries.

"Senator Obama's campaign has become increasingly negative," Clinton says in another scene.

The announcer closes by saying "The truth hurt. And Obama didn't like it."

This ought to be a lot of fun. And frankly, I have no idea what to expect. I could seethe ad being very effective. But it also tosses a big softball to Hillary Clinton, who will speak to a nationalaudience on Tuesday. The risk to the Republicans can be summarized in five words: "Shame on You, John McCain". A finger-wagging, how-dare-you momentby either of the Clintons at the convention -- but especially Hillary -- could be both effective and therapeutic, especially when coupled with a reminder thatMcCain voted against measures like SCHIP.
 
The latest wave of state-by-state polling, market data and national trends have pushed the Rasmussen Reports' Electoral Collegeprojections as close as our daily Presidential Tracking Poll.

The latest numbers from the Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator show Obama leading in states with 193 Electoral College votes and McCain ahead in states with 183 Electoral Collegevotes. Previously, Obama had enjoyed a 210-165 advantage.

Currently, states with 135 Electoral College votes are leaning slightly in one way or the other, and three states with a total of 27votes -- Colorado, Nevada and Virginia -- are pure toss-ups.

State-by-state rankings are summarized in the following table…




The biggest changes came in Ohio, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Colorado and Oregon.

Ohio-with 20 Electoral College votes--moved from Toss-up to Leans Republican following the second straight Rasmussen Reports telephone survey thatshowed McCain with a modest lead over Obama.

North Carolina-with 15 Electoral College votes-moved from Leans Republican to Likely Republican. This change was based on the latestRasmussen Reports polling and changes in the RasmussenMarkets.com data.

Wisconsin-with 10 Electoral College votes-moved from Likely Democratic to Leans Democratic. That move was prompted by the latest RasmussenReports polling which shows McCain closing to within four percentage points of Obama.

Colorado-with 9 Electoral College votes--moved from Leans Democratic to Toss-Up, based primarily upon the latest Rasmussen Reports poll inwhich McCain holds a statistically insignificant two-point lead over Obama.

Oregon-with 7 Electoral College votes-moved from Likely Democratic to Leans Democratic. While the latest Rasmussen Reports polling shows Obama witha 10-point lead, the average of other polls and a national trends adjustment places the state in the leaner category.

South Dakota-with 3 Electoral College votes--shifted from Leans Republican to Likely Republican based upon Rasmussen Markets data and anational trends adjustment.

Other states had more minor changes: Connecticut from Safely Democratic to Likely Democratic, Louisiana from Likely Republican to Safely Republican, Maine from Safely Democratic to Likely Democratic, and Tennessee from Likely Republican to Safely Republican.
 
[h2]General Election: McCain vs. Obama[/h2]http://[h3]Polling Data[/h3]
RCP Average08/18 - 08/26--46.544.7Obama +1.8
Gallup Tracking08/24 - 08/262724 RV4544Obama +1
Rasmussen Tracking08/24 - 08/263000 LV4647McCain +1
CNN08/23 - 08/24909 RV4747Tie
USA Today/Gallup08/21 - 08/23765 LV4845Obama +3
Hotline/FD08/18 - 08/241022 RV4440Obama +4
ABC News/Wash Post08/19 - 08/22LV4945Obama +4
[th=""] Poll [/th] [th=""] Date [/th] [th=""] Sample [/th] [th=""] Obama (D) [/th] [th=""] McCain (R) [/th] [th=""] Spread [/th]
 
TBONE who do you think the vp will be?

this morning on morning joe they ruled out romney, ridge, and pawlenty. unless they are pulling an okie doke, that leaves only leiberman, who theconservatives would have a fit over and sarah palin who has only 1 year experience as governor.
 
They goin hard about Palin...



Talking about how she'll steal the thunder Obama would've had by picking Hillary...


I can't see it. And if he picked Leiberman, conservative commentaries would grill him hard.
 
Back
Top Bottom