tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3423725371920868922.post5254717465545951234..comments2024-03-27T13:28:18.163-04:00Comments on Balter's Blog: Liberals freak out!Michael Balterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08311614050647338141noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3423725371920868922.post-30282672337759902982008-08-23T03:27:00.000-04:002008-08-23T03:27:00.000-04:00Picking Kathleen Sebelius would have been seen as ...<I>Picking Kathleen Sebelius would have been seen as a huge insult to Hillary supporters</I><BR/><BR/>I think those who have said "no woman but Hillary" are sick people, who have turned feminism on its head, but I agree that many would have seen it that way, making Sebelius a problematic choice. But more important is that she's unknown and light on experience (but at least she wouldn't have cost a Senate seat).<BR/><BR/>I'm looking forward to Biden smiling as he destroys McCain on foreign policy.<BR/><BR/>It's late here ... nighty nite, bro. :-)jqbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07510836914645398165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3423725371920868922.post-38430982264530021102008-08-23T03:12:00.000-04:002008-08-23T03:12:00.000-04:00Republican side(or should I say "Rethuglican"?)is ...<I>Republican side(or should I say "Rethuglican"?)is doing everything it can to paint Obama as a flip-flopping lightweight.</I><BR/><BR/>And yet, he isn't ... he's been very consistent in his positions ... e.g., his his responses to the gun and death penalty SCOTUS decisions match what he wrote in his books. OTOH, McCain has flip-flopped on virtually every issue, including offshore drilling, which he flipped on, after opposing it his entire career, just when Bush lifted the moratorium (and the oil industry gave McCain a ton of money). See http://www.bi30.org/wordpress/flipflopper.htm for a lot more. Again, the American people need to be educated about the real John McCain. It would be nice if pro-Obama bloggers (hey bro!) could put a laser focus on that from now until the election (and then immediately switch to holding Obama's feet to the fire).jqbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07510836914645398165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3423725371920868922.post-6828348735837855382008-08-23T03:08:00.000-04:002008-08-23T03:08:00.000-04:00I agree that Biden is the best choice among the bu...I agree that Biden is the best choice among the bunch. Picking Kathleen Sebelius would have been seen as a huge insult to Hillary supporters, although she would have been an interesting choice too. And I pray every night that McCain picks Romney.Michael Balterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08311614050647338141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3423725371920868922.post-88257979074308208412008-08-23T02:58:00.000-04:002008-08-23T02:58:00.000-04:00Hmm, when I look at realpolitics.com's Electoral C...<I>Hmm, when I look at realpolitics.com's Electoral College count at this link it shows Obama 50 points ahead.</I><BR/><BR/>It says "Obama 228, McCain 174, Toss Ups 136 | No Toss Ups: Obama 264, McCain 274". You can't just ignore those toss-ups when they go so heavily to McCain. But those small leads are very fragile for McCain, and can be wiped out by Obama's great ground game, which is far advanced over McCain. And McCain has closed the gap by lying and misrepresenting, but there's a limit to that and he may have peaked. The Obama campaign has done a great job on the houses gaffe and the media has been forced to pick it up. And the McCain campaign coming back with this (paraphrasing) "he didn't even have a house when he was a POW" crap even has his media "base" reacting that he's overusing and tarnishing his POW/war hero brand, and Obama couldn't ask for a better gift than that. I'm still quite optimistic about Obama, but my main point was that the large advantage that he had, both at the national level and in the EC count, has been sharply reduced.<BR/><BR/><I>Not a slam dunk, of course.</I><BR/><BR/>We certainly agree on that. :-)<BR/><BR/>-- little bro (Jim Balter)<BR/><BR/>P.S. Many arguments can be made both ways, but I think Biden was a good VP choice -- certainly better than Bayh or Kaine (and the word is that HRC wasn't even vetted).<BR/><BR/>P.P.S. If McCain picks Romney, the number of their combined houses will be an even larger number. To his great credit, Joe Biden has not used his position to make himself rich, and I think they should hammer and hammer McCain-Romney on their economic distance from the American people.jqbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07510836914645398165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3423725371920868922.post-68716225969382196112008-08-22T21:47:00.000-04:002008-08-22T21:47:00.000-04:00I'm hoping he gets in, for the sake of the rest of...I'm hoping he gets in, for the sake of the rest of the world. Of course it may not make much difference if he does get in but sure as anything McCain will be more of the same.terrythttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17327062321100035888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3423725371920868922.post-42293698191604093872008-08-22T14:40:00.000-04:002008-08-22T14:40:00.000-04:00At this point, it looks like the Republican side(o...At this point, it looks like the Republican side(or should I say "Rethuglican"?)is doing everything it can to paint Obama as a flip-flopping lightweight. And yet. . . .Obama is not, himself, going to wave a magic wand and "change everything". He is going to be a catalyst for change, as the editorial in "The Nation" suggested. If he gets elected. I don't know how close the election of Roosevelt was, but the election of Kennedy was pretty close. Both of them acted as "catalysts" for some pretty necessary changes in this country. I am backing Obama precisely for this reason. And I think a lot of other people are, too.<BR/>Anne GAnne Gilberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03045500116098233731noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3423725371920868922.post-40696710717704115602008-08-21T10:16:00.000-04:002008-08-21T10:16:00.000-04:00I would also recommend dday's post at Digby's join...I would also recommend <I>dday</I>'s post at <I>Digby</I>'s joint.<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2008/08/obamas-big-bet-power-of-ground-game-by.html" REL="nofollow">Obama's Big Bet - The Power Of The Ground Game</A>. I'm not inclined to rule this out as an influence on the outcome, and I'm not sure the polls can project a measure of this effect.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04637644376752164192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3423725371920868922.post-66239590427597325672008-08-21T10:10:00.000-04:002008-08-21T10:10:00.000-04:00I've been following the polls at FiveThirtyEight.O...I've been following the polls at <A HREF="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/" REL="nofollow">FiveThirtyEight</A>.<BR/><BR/>On the popular vote it's a dead heat. However, FiveThirtyEight does show Obama ahead (272.3 to 265.7) in electoral votes. It's not as broad a spread as one might like. I found the analysis offered in this post <A HREF="http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/todays-polls-820.html" REL="nofollow">Today's Polls, 8/20</A> interesting.<BR/><BR/>I think it could be very tight to the wire come November.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04637644376752164192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3423725371920868922.post-57627565944731236642008-08-20T14:25:00.000-04:002008-08-20T14:25:00.000-04:00Hmm, when I look at realpolitics.com's Electoral C...Hmm, when I look at realpolitics.com's Electoral College count at this link it shows Obama 50 points ahead. Not a slam dunk, of course.<BR/><BR/>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=5Michael Balterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08311614050647338141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3423725371920868922.post-64570840451935401862008-08-20T14:13:00.000-04:002008-08-20T14:13:00.000-04:00Oops, that realpolitics.com map shows McCain ahead...Oops, that realpolitics.com map shows <I>McCain</I> ahead at 274. I don't think that can be taken seriously, but it does undercut the claim that Obama is "way ahead" in the EC count, which simply isn't so at this date. From Sam Wang:<BR/><BR/>"Using only the most recent available poll, assigning every state to its more likely winner gives total EV counts of Obama 264, McCain 261, tie 13. This is the mode of the distribution ... However, that’s not quite right....The meta-analysis, which is probabilistic and therefore takes into account the uncertainty of polls, gives a current median outcome of Obama 280 EV (95% CI 251 to 320 EV), McCain 258 EV, Meta-Margin 0.94%. So it appears that the more likely winner today, by a hair, is unchanged. However, a change could happen soon."jqbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07510836914645398165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3423725371920868922.post-84518613396591335902008-08-20T14:02:00.000-04:002008-08-20T14:02:00.000-04:00And from http://electoral-vote.com/"While voters c...And from http://electoral-vote.com/<BR/><BR/>"<BR/>While voters constantly complain about negative ads, campaigns use them because they work. A new <A HREF="http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-poll20-2008aug20,0,5506138.story" REL="nofollow">LA Times National Poll</A> shows that a month of ads attacking Obama as a lightweight unready to lead have erased his lead nationally. The two are in a statistical tie. Obama's advantage in the <A HREF="http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/ec_graph-2008.html" REL="nofollow">electoral college</A> has also vanished.<BR/>"<BR/><BR/>And <A HREF="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10" REL="nofollow">realpolitics.com</A> shows Obama at 274 to McCain's 264, not "way ahead".<BR/><BR/>Those are the facts, which are quite separate from <A HREF="http://gothamist.com/2007/08/16/rebecca_curtis.php" REL="nofollow">short-story writer Rebecca Curtis's</A> fiction about the Bradley Effect (it did <I>not</I> occur in NH) and her PUMAish pushing of Hillary Clinton for VP. The one thing she got right is "John McCain may be temperamental, erratic, and suffering from early-onset dementia, but he's nonetheless viewed as moderate." As Frank Rich said, McCain is <A HREF="http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/17/opinion/17rich.html" REL="nofollow">The Candidate We Still Don’t Know</A>, and concluded "As everyone says, polls are meaningless in the summers of election years. Especially this year, when there’s one candidate whose real story has yet to be fully told." But this underscores the importance of the Obama campaign -- and all of us -- educating the American people about the real John McCain (because you can bet that "the press", John McCain's "base", won't do it).jqbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07510836914645398165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3423725371920868922.post-39093584832975982922008-08-20T05:33:00.000-04:002008-08-20T05:33:00.000-04:00P.S. Another good poll analysis site is Sam Wang's...P.S. Another good poll analysis site is Sam Wang's http://election.princeton.edu, which shows a slip of 40 EVs in the 95% confidence estimator during August. However, Dr. Wang notes (in http://election.princeton.edu/2008/08/18/battleground-state-spending-a-meta-analytic-view):<BR/><BR/>"Last week the fact that my jerseyvotes calculation (as previously defined) identified non-battleground states seemed like an error. But it gave the expected results for a race that is less close - and evidently that’s what the Obama strategists are expecting, despite Obama’s recent slippage to near-parity. In summary, the Obama campaign’s spending makes sense if they believe that the recent decline in their candidate’s fortunes is transient, and the advantage they enjoyed in July will return in the fall. To put it another way, they are acting as if they have enough eggs to put into multiple baskets."jqbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07510836914645398165noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3423725371920868922.post-52249899799686766162008-08-20T05:17:00.000-04:002008-08-20T05:17:00.000-04:00Oh brother ... Rebecca Curtis is one person, not "...Oh brother ... Rebecca Curtis is one person, not "liberals" or "some liberals", and her thesis doesn't get much support in the comments on her article. I see no evidence that her article "sums up" anything, or that there is anything identifiable as "the kind of panic", or that it's "spreading among some Obama supporters" (unless "some" refers solely to Ms. Curtis), or that her argument "seems to have many Obama supporters freaked out" (although it does seem to have <I>you</I> freaked out). As for "the fluctuating presidential election polls", that's not a very accurate characterization -- a visit to fivethirtyeight.com shows a steady drop in Obama's national numbers since mid-June. Yes, he's ahead week after week in the EC tally, but not consistently if that means his lead hasn't changed. It's no time for panic or for Curtis's bogus arguments for Hillary as VP, but there is reason to be concerned and not to rest on any assumption that Obama has this thing tied up.<BR/><BR/>"His shifting positions on nearly every issue of the day"<BR/><BR/>Let's not panic and repeat the Republican's bogus talking points and dishonest characterizations -- almost all of their claims of shifts of position, from campaign financing on, are false (although he did renege on his promise to filibuster the FISA bill).jqbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07510836914645398165noreply@blogger.com