Victory!

In 2004, while speaking on John Kerry’s behalf, former president William Jefferson Clinton said the following:

Now one of Clinton’s laws of politics is this: if one candidate’s trying to scare you, and the other one’s trying to get you to think. If one candidate’s appealing to your fears, and the other one’s appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person that wants you to think and hope.

Well, last night the politics of hope beat out the politics of fear. In the electoral vote, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois won 364 to 163, carrying red and blue states alike. Obama also won 53% to 46% in the popular vote. Now, that might not seem like much of a victory, but compared to past presidential elections, that’s actually a fairly large margin.

Barack Obama spoke about what he would do for America. Creating green jobs. Creating a universal health care system. Repairing the economy. Lowering taxes on the middle and upper classes. Re-uniting with the world. He spoke to our hopes.

On the other hand, John McCain and some of his supporters spent too much time appealing to people’s feats. Muslim. Associates with terrorists. Association with a crazy black preacher. Will raise your taxes. Will turn America into a socialist nation. Too far to the left.

These claims about Obama being a radical leftist are laughable. Yes, his voting record is far to the left. But, he is also a pragmatist. Listen to him speak. Read his plans. Get a sense of the man, and you will see that he is no revolutionary. He is a pragmatist in the mold of FDR.

But, anyway, now it is November 5. Our next president will be Barack Obama. The Supreme Court will be conserative. The Congress Democratic, but the Republicans will be able to filibuster.  These are all facts. Now, it is time to move on into our future. Certainly, there are some crazies out there who will refuse to listen to voices of reason. And there are those who lack the open-mindedness to work with those across the aisle. But for the rest of us, it is time to work together in creating the America of the future.

Howard Dean’s 50-State Strategy

Well, no matter what party your affiliated with, you’ve got to admit that Howard Dean’s 50-state strategy combined with the momentum for change in this country has made this election more interesting and exciting than most.

In 2004, President Bush won Georgia by 17, Indiana by 21, Montana by 20, North Carolina by 12. Arizona by 11, Virginia by 8, and the list goes on. The point is Bush won by large amounts in all of the above red states. But now, all of the above states are contested. Whereas Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania used to dominate election coverage, now they’ve been joined by a whole host of other states.

What this election has done is throw a long list of states – some of which haven’t been contested for decades – into the swing state mix.

It’s exciting if nothing else, and also goes to show that perhaps Howard Dean’s 50-state strategy has had an effect. The strategy was built on making every state competitive for Democrats, rather than simply conceding certain red states to the Republicans year-after-year. Over the past several years, the Democrats have built up their ground game in a number of states once considered unwinnable, and it seems to have helped.

The key difference in the electoral map from 2004 to 2008 is that very few states are blowouts for the GOP now. Yes, there’s still Idaho and Wyoming, where McCain is up by tremendous amounts. But most other red states have tightened at the very least. Even states that McCain will almost definitely carry (South Carolina and South Dakota come to mind) are closer than usual. Yes, master artist Howard Dean has done it. He has turned red into purple.

How the Electoral Map Looks as America Heads to the Voting Booth

To start with, I really ought to be asleep. But, at the same time, I realized that I have an obligation to post one final look at the polls before the election begins. My blog has covered the election, particularly the electoral map polling, for months, and I will cover the electoral map until there is a declared victor.

So, as we head into Election Day, Barack Obama obviously holds a big lead, but how safe is it?

According to Real Clear Politics, Obama

• leads by 7.6 and 7.3 percentage points respectively in Pennsylvania and New Mexico, two states that are really important to an Obama victory.
• Obama leads by 5.5 and 6.2 percentage points respectively in Colorado and Nevada, two states that could clinch the election for Obama.
• Obama leads by 4.3 and 3.2 percentage points respectively in Virginia and Ohio, two states that could turn a tight victory into a solid victory for Obama, and two states that McCain needs.
• Obama leads by 1.8 percentage points in Florida, a state that had been trending Republican.
• He is trailing by less than 2 percent in Indiana, Missouri, and North Carolina. if he can win a few of these states, then that would equal a landslide for the Democrat from Illinois and would signal a dramatic moment in this country’s political history.
• And he is down by less than 5 percent in Montana, North Dakota (according to Yahoo’s Political Dashboard), and Arizona. Wins in these states would give Obama a mandate.

Meanwhile, John McCain in order to win:

• Needs to hold on in Arizona, Indiana, and North Carolina.
• Needs to pull off the upset in Ohio and Florida.
• Needs to win two out of three involving Virginia, Nevada, and Colorado OR 
• Needs to win Pennsylvania.
• Ought to hold on to small but traditionally Republican states like Montana and North Dakota.

The polls though are often wrong, which will keep us all on the edge of our seats as we head into the 2008 Presidential Election.

Obama’s In Control

John McCain was desperate last night. Like a football offense looking for a hole in the defense, he switched from tactic to tactic, looking for a hole.

The senator from Arizona made a lot of cheap attacks. He brought up Bill Ayers and ACORN. But, Senator Obama stood his ground. He explained his connections to these groups clearly, and helped make them non-issues.

Senator McCain attacked on taxes, trying to tie Senator Obama to the decades-long belief that Democrats will always increase taxes on the middle-class. But Obama stood his ground, repeating over and over again that he would actually be cutting taxes for 95% of the population. Factually, that 95% has been disputed; I read today that the number might actually be 81%. However, the one undeniable truth is that Senator Barack Obama would be lowering taxes for the vast majority of Americans.

Senator McCain also attacked Obama for running the most negative ads in history. He was misleadingly trying to suggest that Obama was running the most negative campaign. Here’s the truth: Obama may be running the greatest number of negative ads in history (he’s also probably running the most positive ads in history), but in terms of perecentage of ads that are negative, McCain is running one of the most negative campaigns in recent history. Even a lot of Republicans agree on this point.

The attacks went on and on. Notably, Senator McCain tried to attack Obama’s health care plan by asking Obama how much he would be fining those who chose not to get health care. Obama said zero. McCain ended up looking awfully dumb. Poor McCain. If only he had payed more attention to the Obama-Clinton debates, then he would have known that the main difference between Clinton and Obama’s health care plans is that Obama’s wouldn’t impose fines whereas Clinton’s would. Oh well, McCain’s loss. Obama’s gain.

Overall though, Senator Obama appeared unruffled by all of McCain’s attacks. He looked presidential. By that I mean he was calm in the face of tough opposition. He spoke with reason even when his opponent didn’t. He stayed strong in the face of cheap shots and actual lies, always keeping his voice steady and his points on target. And he managed to make a few poignant lines and attacks of his own. It was an incredible night for Obama. I’m going to say it, and CNN polls confirm it: Obama flat-out won this debate, and in so doing, he probably just clinched the election.

As I thought about the debate later, I realized I am really comfortable with having Obama as my president. I’d want him to be the one facing Putin. I’d want him to be the one tackling our greatest issues. Last night, he showed his intelligence, even temperament, and strength. He showed me why he should be our 44th president.

On the other hand, McCain looked angry. And pathetic with his pandering. Could he mention that plumber anymore? And his ideas were confused. For example, he kept criticizing Obama’s spending plans, and yet McCain offered no clear vision as to how he would cut spending and balance the budget.     

And two other debate notes:

• My compliments to Bob Schieffer for asking excellent, probing questions throughout the debate. 
• Where was Senator McCain’s flag lapel? Obama was wearing one, but I didn’t see one on the Republican. Now, personally I don’t think the lapel is a big deal. But, if indeed McCain wasn’t wearing one and it gets no press, then I think the double standard is a big deal.

Campaign Strategy

Question: Why is John McCain still spending so much time and effort trying to win Pennsylvania? Ohio and Florida are far more important to his campaign. And he has virtually no chance in Pennsylvania anyway, where he’s down by approximately 13 points.

OK, well that’s enoiugh politics for one day.

Goodnight. I love you, America! No saracasm intended.

A Helpful Study Aid for the 2008 Election

Here is a chart I made to help describe this upcoming election. If it helps you see what’s going on more clearly, then great. If not, feel free to ignore it.

It’s essentially just a chart of battleground states though, with a middle point showing where the big 270 electoral vote barrier is.

BATTLEGROUND STATES (10% Difference or Less)	Obama	McCain	Lead
Iowa	51.3	41.8	+ 9.5
Oregon	49.8	40.8	+ 9
New Jersey	50.4	41.8	+ 8.6
Washington	49.8	41.8	+ 8
Wisconsin	50.3	42.8	+ 7.5
New Mexico	49.8	42.5	+ 7.3
Michigan	49.1	42.1	+ 7
Virginia	49.9	45.1	+ 4.8
270 VOTE BARRIER:     OBAMA WINS UNLESS HE LOSES ALL THE BELOW STATES AND ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE STATES
Ohio	48.9	44.9	+ 4
Colorado	49.3	45.3	+ 4
Florida	48.3	45.3	+ 3
Nevada	49.6	46.6	+ 3
North Carolina	48.2	47.6	+ .6
Missouri	47.8	47.5	+ .3
Indiana	46.0	48.5	+ 2.5
West Virginia	42.3	48.0	+ 5.7
Georgia	43.5	51.5	+ 8

CHART NOTES

States in Blue represent states Kerry carried in 2004.

States in Red represent states Bush carried in 2004.

Percentages in Blue represent Obama leads according to the most recent RCP polls presented on Yahoo’s Political Dashboard.

Percentages in Red represent McCain leads according to the most recent RCP polls presented on Yahoo’s Political Dashboard.

Obama Rides High in Recent Polling

Obama is looking great in the polls. His leads in Nevada, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and New Hampshire has grown over the past week. And he has recently taken the lead in North Carolina, Florida, and Missouri. All the while, he’s been holding onto significant leads in Colorado and Iowa.

Just take a look at some recent headlines.

• New Poll Shows Obama Widening Lead Over McCain in Virginia (WSLS News Channel 10 Roanoke)
• CNN/Time: Obama Makes Gains in NC, OH, WI, IN, NH
• Poll: Obama Holds Slim Lead Over McCain in Florida (The Miami Herald)
• Obama Leads McCain by 15 Points in Pennsylvania (WJAC 6 Johnstown)
• Obama leads in Ohio, Wisconsin Polls, is tied with McCain in Indiana (Akron Beacon Journal)

In other words, Obama is looking awfully good.

THE CHANGES FROM 2004 TO 2008: WHAT BUSH STATES OBAMA HOPES TO WIN

And here’s a list of what Bush states Democrats might be able to turn blue this year.

Pretty Sure Democratic Pick-Ups: Iowa, New Mexico

Probable Democratic Pick-Ups: Virginia, Ohio, Colorado

Possible Democratic Pick-Uos: Florida, Missouri, Indiana, North Carolina

Political Fun

Post of the Day

I found this post on CNN.com under an article titled “McCain: Palin, the next Clinton.” It’s by a user named “Randy,” a self-described Republican who will be voting Democrat this year.

“This is utter BS. Sarah Palin in the league of Reagan and Clinton? They (Reagan and Clinton) had fought bitter primaries and ended up at the top of the ticket. Palin was a last minute impulse option by the aging and frankly quite indecisive senator McCain. I am a Republican but I’m disgusted with the direction of the country’s foreign policy of unilateralism, endless wars, bad financial decisions, risky choices (in wars and selection of the vice presidential candidate) etc. This is sure harbinger of dark days ahead were McCain to get elected. With friends like this who needs enemies. I am putting my country first and voting Democrat this time.”

I put this up on the website, just to demonstate that putting your country first doesn’t belong exclusively to John McCain and his supporters. Randy offers an awfully persuasive reason why it would be in our country’s best interests to elect Obama.

Funny Quote of the Day:

And here’s a rather hysterical quote from conservative commentator Kathleen Parker. According to CNN’s Cafferty File, Parker would like to root for Palin as a fellow female conservative, but has become rather disenchanted with Palin, after watching Palin’s various stumbles and bad answers these past few weeks. According to Parker, ”If B.S. were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself.” Wow. Enough said, huh?

Electoral Vote Update: Obama En Route to Big Victory

Before I go through the particulars of how things are shaping up in the electoral vote count, I would just like to thank Susan for her comment on one of my earlier posts. Susan spoke about how we ought to change the system so that the election is decided by the national popular vote, and not the electoral vote. And I agree with her.

However, at least in this 2008 election, and probably for the next several decades of elections, we wil be using the electoral vote system, so here it comes. The latest on the race between Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama.

Right now, things are looking strong for Senator Obama. He is leading by almost five points nationally when you average out all the polls. And if the election were held today, he would win with about 300 electoral votes, 30 more than necessary.

At this point, it looks highly likely that he will be able to swing Colorado (currently a 6% Obama lead), New Mexico (6% Obama lead), and Iowa (9% Obama lead) into the Democratic column. That’s 21 electoral votes right there that Bush got in 2004 that Obama will not be getting in 2008.

In addiiton, Obama might be able to swing Virginia (approx. 2% Obama lead) and North Carolina (.3% Obama lead) into the Democratic column. That would be another 28 electoral votes right there going from Bush to Obama.

Now currently, McCain is slated to receive about 240 electoral votes. But that’s assuming he wins Ohio and Florida, which are both tightly contested states. In both states, McCain leads by less than 2%, and without them, he has no chance. And in terms of Pennsylvania, Obama leads by a fairly safe-looking 5%.

So, as we head into October, it’s clear who is in the lead. Yes, the young African-American senator from Illinois is the frontrunner. Now the question is, with just several more weeks to go, can he hold the lead.

An Error in Judgment

I’ll admit it. I didn’t catch all of this Friday’s presidential debate. I watched the first hour or so, but then it got too boring for me. Both candidates were saying the same exact things as they’ve been saying for the past few months. Yes, there were a few good lines and moments, but for the most part, it put me to sleep. And my god, you’d think all politicans were deaf or something, since neither candidate ever really answered the questions they were asked.

But there was one part that stuck out in my memory after the debate was over. And that was an exchange between the two candidates over Iraq. Barack Obama hammered away at John McCain for supporting the War in Iraq, trying to show that McCain lacked judgment. McCain responded with the following comments:

 The next president of the United States is not going to have to address the issue as to whether we went into Iraq or not. The next president of the United States is going to have to decide how we leave, when we leave, and what we leave behind. That’s the decision of the next president of the United States.

And on a literal level, he’s right. We will not be deciding whether or not to go into Iraq, because, well, we’re already in Iraq. But, he is dead wrong to dismiss what Obama was saying. Because, after all what a candidate felt and continues to feel about our decision to go into Iraq tells us a great deal about how he will approach North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, and any other “threats” to America.

By continuing to stand by the war in Iraq, McCain is allying himself with a foreign policy that puts military over diplomacy, a policy that doesn’t shy away from unilateralism, a policy that stresses America’s right to intervene when we feel necessary. A policy that refuses to bend to the will of the world.

Ever since 9/11, President Bush has run this country’s foreign policy on what I call the strength doctrine. Essentially, this means that according to Bush and his compatriots, the best way of protecting America is through looking tough. This is the Bush foreign policy, that McCain is allying himself with. Obama, on the other hand, seems to be emphasizing the importance of diplomacy. Yes, we must be strong, but we also must talk to the world, and respect other countries, and remember that the War on Terrorism is far more than just a military struggle.

So, John McCain’s comments are wrong. His opinions on whether or not we should be in Iraq right now are highly relevant. They tell us a great deal about what a McCain administration would like. And, in my view, they remind us just how important it is that we elect Obama as our president.

 By continuing to support our invasion of Iraq, McCain is allying himself with this foreign polict

Battle of the Ads

A “Terrible” Obama Ad

As I was perusing the AOL news headlines this morning, I came across an article titled “Biden Calls Ad Mocking McCain ‘Terrible.’ The article discusses how Democratic VP Candidate Joe Biden reacted to a Democratic advertisement that took a few shots at Republican John McCain and his struggles with technology, Biden said it was “terrible.” And first of all, let me just say that I think Biden is right. The ad was rife with cheap shots.

And not only were they cheap shots, but also quite likely, were ineffective cheap shots. According to the AOL story, which was reported by the Associated Press and filed earlier today, the ad read as follows:

He admits he still doesn’t know how to use a computer, can’t send an e-mail, still doesn’t understand the economy, and favors $200 billion in new tax cuts for corporations, but almost nothing for the middle class“

The ad does have good substantive points, which I’ve put in bold. The problem is the cheap attacks above it take away from the overall message, which is a good one and a fair one.

MEDIA-WATCH: Biden’s Comments and the McCain Campaign

The AP article also quoted Joe Biden, as he tried to turn the attention away from Obama’s advertisement:

“Having now reviewed the ad, it is even more clear to me that given the disgraceful tenor of Sen. McCain’s ads and their persistent falsehoods, his campaign is in no position to criticize, especially when they continue to distort Barack’s votes on an issue as personal as keeping kids safe from sexual predators,” Biden said.

And then, the writer explained what Biden was referring to.

Biden was referring to a McCain ad that said Obama supported sex education for kindergartners, based on a bill he voted for as an Illinois state senator. Obama’s campaign said the ad was a “shameful” distortion of his record because the bill’s language meant young children would have been taught about sexual predators and concepts such as “good touch and bad touch.”

Now, if you’re curious as to why cheap shots and slimy negative advertising are so effective, just read this paragraph. The writer acts as if there is a legitimate question as to whether of not Obama supported comprehensive sex education for kindergartners. He presents both arguments as if they have equal merit. In an effort to be balanced, the article neglects the truth. And the truth is that the McCain kindergarten ad was a shameful distortion of Obama’s record. That’s a fact, not just something the Obama campaign said.