More Breathing

Jonathan Martin reports on the latest Quinnipiac poll:

Florida: Obama 47, McCain 45
Ohio: Obama 50, McCain 43
Pennsylvania: Obama 52, McCain 42

And to quote myself, just because I’m lazy:

Building on Jonathan Martin’s point that McCain can relinquish hope for PA if he can’t hold on to Ohio, it’s worth noting that if McCain can’t win either, there’s almost no chance he can win at all. That is, assuming the current state of electoral math from the non-partisan RealClearPolitics, McCain needs every “toss-up” to break his way (FL, NC, MO, IN, ND, and NV all go to McCain), and at least PA and OH to win — both of which are leaning blue. If he only wins PA or OH, he needs to add at least VA and NM. If McCain pulls neither OH nor PA, he simply cannot win.

Sort of, I guess

Jonathan Martin reports on candid conversation on Straight Talk Air with Rick Davis, McCain campaign manager and most venal human being on the face of the earth.

“No one thought we could win a nomination, we won a nomination,” Davis said, standing in the aisle, his tie loosened for the long flight from New Hampshire to south Florida. “No one thought we could be competitive with Barack Obama, and we’ve been competitive with Barack Obama. You know, no one thought a Republican could win in this environment and we got a shot at it.”

Maybe so, but the thing I’ll add is that while McCain was at one point counted out of the Republican primary, it’s not exactly like he was duking it out in a particularly strong field. There was Rudy “9/11″ Giuliani, Fred “Droopy Dog” Thompson, Mitt “Almost Universally Reviled” Romney, and Mike “Endearing but I still believe in the Fair Tax and Creation” Huckabee. Coming back to win in a primary where the winner takes all the delegates against this lackluster crowd is hardly basis to believe McCain will be able to pull off the same stunt against Obama.

Breathe, With Graphics

I’ve encountered some sporadic worrying among Obama supporters, but everyone needs to take a deep breath:

This is from FiveThirtyEight, polls in yellow include cell phone users. This graph below shows polling trends between Obama, Kerry, and Gore.

Lastly, there’s been some worry that all of the undecideds will split for McCain. This is from tonight’s CBS poll:

Relax.

Posted in Politics. Tags: , , . 2 Comments »

Maureen Dowd: Irritating

I’m not sure whether Maureen Dowd’s popularity reflects something about her readers or her own cunning. Probably both, but this tripe is growing tired.

In the end, “The Bullet,” or “Sarge,” as McCain calls his replacement campaign manager Steve Schmidt, was the one who did the shackling, turning the vibrant and respected McCain into a shell of his former self.

Give me a break. Does anyone really believe this crap anymore? I mean, look, it was easy for John McCain to bring the straight talk when he was a Senator, and for the most part, had absolutely no personal responsibility. The press played along, enamored with McCain’s candor, and McCain grew popular as an iconoclast. It was, as Dowd dubs — with little apparent recognition of what the word means — McCain’s “brand.” But iconoclasts can’t make serious runs at the presidency and McCain had to change his tune. He’s a politician, it’s what politicians do. Much of the media were deluded into thinking McCain was not a politician, and I think somewhat reasonably, had some trouble coming to terms with the fact that they were duped. But two days before the election we’re still talking about how the real John McCain has been kidnapped? McCain hired Schmidt and has final say on all decisions; he’s doing what he thinks would be necessary to win. Get over it.

More Non-Real Endoresments

Ken Duberstein, former Reagan Cheif-of-Staff endorses Obama:

In defense of John McCain, Duberstein is from Brooklyn, which is not real.

Spreading the Wealth

Matt Yglesias links to this Gallup poll on “Spreading the Wealth.” As you can imagine, the concept has been, and remains today, a fairly popular notion:

Matt attributes the recent shift to McCain’s “‘educating’ Republican partisans that the pro-inequality view is the right one,” and surmises that McCain’s anti-socialist demagoguery is a net win for Obama because it raises an issue in which Democrats steal the show 58 – 37%. I’m not so sure — and the reflexive sphincter tightening any time I hear this phrase on the news suggests to me it’s not quite so cut and dry. From the same survey.

Now, the survey only lists party ID, not candidate preference (which would be far more illuminating), but this corroborates an implied assumption of the historical chart: for a majority of Americans to believe income distribution is unfair, at least some of these folks need to Republicans. Of those 30 percent of Republicans who would support more progressive income distribution, certainly some will vote for Obama (as it’s likely a number of racist Democrats will vote for McCain), but I really doubt that awareness of this issue will prompt a massive exodus from the Republican party.  Rather, as Dean Baker would argue, the socialism harangue is simply culture war rhetoric. My sense is that Obama’s tax plans were well clear enough, and the “spreading the wealth around” quote — however popular a sentiment it might represent — provides another way for McCain to rope in Racist Dems and Independents who might interpret McCain’s charges of “taxing some to give money to those who don’t pay tax at all” as some incarnation of reparations. All in all, I don’t think it will do much damage, but I think it’s tough to make the case it’s a net-win for Obama.

Race Debates

There’s been a bit of back and forth today between former Atlantic colleagues Ross Douthat (conservative) and Matt Yglesias (progressive) over the role race has played in the election. Ross begins by arguing that there’s been far too much over-analyzation of McCain’s attacks, to which Yglesias replies that irrespective of whether or not the attacks have been racist, the Republican has a long history of dog-whistling these sorts of issues and that if Obama loses it will likely be because of racism, if not because of McCain’s attacks. Ross then retorts with this:

Consider, for a moment, that here we are, five days away from the election, and a Republican nominee for President has run a campaign against an African-American opponent that has barely touched any of the traditional racially-charged domestic-policy issues.[...]

[...]Now there are various reasons why none of these issues have played a role in the campaign:  Attacking on some of these fronts would have required flip-flops on McCain’s part; attacking on others (crime, especially) would have reaped vastly diminished returns compared to GOP campaigns of yore; etc. But it’s also the case that the Obama campaign (and its surrogates and allies) have done a masterful job of boxing the GOP in on race-related fronts, playing off the media’s biases, McCain’s sense of honor, and the Republican Party’s unpleasant history to create a climate of hair-trigger sensitivity around terrains and topic that usually hurt Democratic candidates. (Emphasis added)

I’m not entirely sure I’m willing to grant McCain the point for not “touch[ing]…traditional racially-charged domestic-policy issues,” in no small part because of the ludicrous ACORN/Community Reinvestment ACT tomfollery, but also because McCain’s messaging both on the air and on the trail has tried relentlessly to paint Obama as “other“. Now, I’ll concede that “other” doesn’t necessarily mean “black” (as opposed to Muslim, terrorist, etc.), but make a distinction risks seriously splitting hairs. What’s more, John McCain’s failure to condemn — with one exception — the ugliness, and at times, overt racism at his rallies, hasn’t really helped his cause.

Anyway, the problem for John McCain is that while not all Republicans are racist, it’s a tough denial that a) racists don’t comprise a wing of the Republican party and that b) racism hasn’t figured prominently in the GOP’s past. In light of this, it seems pretty unfair for Ross to make the argument that the “Obama campaign…have done a masterful job of boxing the GOP in on race-related fronts.” Rather, the GOP has done a masterful job of boxing itself in on race related fronts. Had it not been for Willie Horton and the GOP’s history of overt racism, there would be no reason to fear recrimination for saturating the air waves with Jeremiah Wright god-daming America. Pinning this one on the Democrats is pretty weak; you reap what you sow.

Insurance Inequality

While Doug Holtz-Eakin, John McCain’s flack economic adviser already pointed out the inferiority of the individual insurance market earlier this week, this piece by Robert Pear in the New York Times helps illuminate one way in which they’re bad for women:

This provides a perfect lens through which to examine the dogmatic myopia of conservative governing principles. As acturials referenced in the article note, health care is more expensive for women — especially those of child bearing age  — so therefore, the wealth is not spread around, and women pay more in the individual market. But as a Maine insurance superintendent argues, this approach is shortsighted:

Mila Kofman, the insurance superintendent in Maine, said: “There’s a strong public policy reason to prohibit gender-based rates. Only women can bear children. There’s an expense to that. But having babies benefits communities and society as a whole. Women should not have to bear the entire expense.”

This is precisely right; humans don’t exist in a vacuum. Certain “spreading” of resources works to enhance everyone’s outcomes.

Jews Will Be Mad at Me

Katy, who has a blog you all should check out, has a post up getting into the obvious hypocrisy of the McCain campaign’s demagoguery of this Rashid Khalidi nonsense. Anyway, as Katy notes, the connection between Obama and Khalidi — a leading Palestinian scholar — is pretty flimsy, but what’s more, John McCain has actually supported Khalidi in the past.

During the 1990s, while he served as chairman of the International Republican Institute (IRI), McCain distributed several grants to the Palestinian research center co-founded by Khalidi, including one worth half a million dollars.

A 1998 tax filing for the McCain-led group shows a $448,873 grant to Khalidi’s Center for Palestine Research and Studies for work in the West Bank. (See grant number 5180, “West Bank: CPRS” on page 14 of this PDF.)

The relationship extends back as far as 1993, when John McCain joined IRI as chairman in January. Foreign Affairs noted in September of that year that IRI had helped fund several extensive studies in Palestine run by Khalidi’s group, including over 30 public opinion polls and a study of “sociopolitical attitudes.”

Of course, not that this bothers John McCain, who has now decided his only chance of winning lies with the racist/xenophobia vote. Classy. Anyway, I was sort of struck by something else in Katy’s post:

I’m Jewish, have family in Israel, and for some reason feel pretty confident that despite the McCain camp’s attempts to undermine Obama, he’s not going to be take office and suddenly bomb the shit out of Gaza.

I too am Jewish — though I have no family in Israel — but it’s worth pointing out that this “We are all Israelis” force in American politics is extremely unhealthy. Israeal is a powerful strategic ally, and it’s certainly in the interest of the United States to continue to support Israel but it shouldn’t be accepted as incontrovertible fact that Israel is a) part of the United States and b) always right. I understand that these assumptions are often taken as matter of fact, and hence, politiatins exploit or pander to them as necessary, but a responsible foreign policy doesn’t place Israel’s interests even or above our own. What’s more, it would be helpful to acknowledge the mere possibility that Israel’s policies are not always the most constructive (they have neoconservatives of their own).

More Distortions

Wow, I finish one post on a disgusting McCain ad, and here comes another:

First of all, as has been widely noted, Barack Obama’s tax plan would provide Joe the Plumber with a tax cut. Second, the use of “seniors” and “hard working families” are arbitrary and misleading distinctions meant to scare those demographic groups into thinking they’ll be the victim of government pillaging. Categories like “people who wipe themselves” and “Star Wars fans” are equally illuminating. Finally, this notion that people who “don’t pay taxes” would be benefiting from those who do is simply wrong. Though it’s true a number of Americans don’t pay income taxes, they still pay payroll taxes and sales taxes, which are regressive in nature.

Of course, John McCain knows all of this — he just doesn’t care. It’s getting very tiresome to point out the extent to which John McCain is willing to distort his agenda to appeal to people who won’t actually benefit from his policies. I’ll be looking forward to this election’s end.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.