PoliGAF Interim Thread of 2008 Early Voting (THE FINAL COUNTDOWN: T MINUS 2 DAYS)

Status
Not open for further replies.
agrajag said:
McCain: "If I'm elected I'm not gonna spend $750 billion bailing out stock traders and brokers..."

WAT? He's just flat out lying then? Did the guy who suspended his campaign to get this bill passed really just say that?

Yeah he's been doing that the last week or two, it's a really weird thing he's been saying.
 
kkaabboomm said:
by popular, pent up demand:

THE 538 PACMAN GIF
aug31-nov1.gif


from Aug31 through Nov1

dear John McCain/Drudge/EVERYONE: OMG LOOK AT THE TIGHTENING
this is the election, from conventions through (just about) election day. look at it, bask in it, share it far and wide, and remember, obamaigotthis.gif
making sure other people besides the late-night crowd see this.
Iksenpets said:
If you could do the electoral map, that would be awesome! :D
this one isn't nearly as data-complete, it's missing a lot of maps from inside september, but the general flow of things is still visible
usaSep5-Nov1.gif
 
Plinko said:
Out. of. their. damn. minds.

350? I don't see it happening. 300 is highly possible, but I think 350 is pushing it. Obama is going to need Ohio and/or Florida to hit that, and I'd put money down on him winning neither.

You should do exactly that, then, via Intrade. The market there has McCain at 30% for Florida, 20% for Ohio. You could triple and quintuple your money, if you're right.

For the record, I think Obama will win both, mainly through his superior ground game.
 
Tamanon said:
Yeah he's been doing that the last week or two, it's a really weird thing he's been saying.
Well, he also said he's going to do a complete spending freeze as well as buy all troubled mortgages everywhere. I'm assuming it's a short term memory thing.
 
Gruco said:
Well, he also said he's going to do a complete spending freeze as well as buy all troubled mortgages everywhere. I'm assuming it's a short term memory thing.

Eh that one's just cognitive dissonance. It's possible, since the buying up of mortgages is already in place in the bailout, just not being exercised. So that spending is already "accounted" for. His whole campaign is based around messages that constantly run counter to each other, it's weird.
 
On a personal note last night during SNL was the closest I've come to feeling sympathy for the man. I don't since he's run a nasty campaign and picked a fool as his VP but it was still a moment to note how far he had changed from the affable McCain that the media fell in love with to the asshole that emerged on the campaign trail.
 
Atomic said:
SNL was great...but it felt like he was taking part in mocking Palin?
Is that really a good idea in the last few days?

Eh, in two more days, that whole relationship is going to explode as blame starts being tossed. McCain is going to get thrown under the bus with a fucking passion by the GOP stalwarts. You'll hear the arguments that they picked someone who was too centrist, and not a true conservative.:lol
 
Cloudy said:
Why the hell did Cheney endorse McCain? Didn't he know he was making an last minute ad for Obama? :lol

Cheney and Bush both hate McCain. I wouldn't put it past Dick to toss his endorsement off as a giant fuck you, now that it's clear McCain is going to lose.
 
Cloudy said:
Why the hell did Cheney endorse McCain? Didn't he know he was making an last minute ad for Obama? :lol
You can ask a lot of questions like this about McCain's campaign down to his vp choice.
 
Gruco said:
Yeah, but we do have the whole nuclear proliferation thing to worry about now, which remains troubling.

Yeah. I wasn't trying to downplay any of the current conflicts or dangers. There are millions of people in Congo, Sudan, Kashmir, and elsewhere who would punch me in the face for lecturing them on how safe and stable the world is.

But compared to the brinksmanship of the Cold War and the chaotic violence following the third world independence movements it's a much less scary world to live in.

If the government reacts smartly and sanely to potential threats and doesn't demagogue them, we should get to a point where Americans don't worry evil foreigners sold to them as comic book villains. You know, how we spent the 90's.

I think 9/11 masked the fundamental trends in US politics for about six years, in more than one way.
 
Stoney Mason said:
On a personal note last night during SNL was the closest I've come to feeling sympathy for the man. I don't since he's run a nasty campaign and picked a fool as his VP but it was still a moment to note how far he had changed from the affable McCain that the media fell in love with to the asshole that emerged on the campaign trail.
The only time I've felt sorry for McCain was during the second debate when he was being asked a question and he had to write down the stuff on his pad in order to remember it all.

:(
 
Atomic said:
SNL was great...but it felt like he was taking part in mocking Palin?
Is that really a good idea in the last few days?
It's SNL save for the fact that it justified stereotypes about palin no one takes it seriously
 
I don't think the base will be so willing to throw Palin under the bus alongside him though. From their side the scorn will largely focus on John and she'll be painted as the victim of malpractice on the part of her "handlers".
 
Tamanon said:
Eh, in two more days, that whole relationship is going to explode as blame starts being tossed. McCain is going to get thrown under the bus with a fucking passion by the GOP stalwarts. You'll hear the arguments that they picked someone who was too centrist, and not a true conservative.:lol


That's true I guess.
Is this going to hurt the chances of a moderate republican being chosen again?
Maybe the Palin disaster will actually teach them the opposite? Meh.
 
So, about the "Bradley Effect"

What was the differential between Tom Bradley & his opponent in the last polls before the '82 election? What was the MoE of these polls?

I've heard & read about "double digit leads", but was that true in final polling?
 
typhonsentra said:
I don't think the base will be so willing to throw Palin under the bus alongside him though. From their side the scorn will largely focus on John and she'll be painted as the victim of malpractice on the part of her "handlers".

Right, that's what we're saying. Palin will be heralded, McCain will be destroyed by the GOP.
 
typhonsentra said:
I don't think the base will be so willing to throw Palin under the bus alongside him though. From their side the scorn will largely focus on John and she'll be painted as the victim of malpractice on the part of her "handlers".

Oh yes. I didn't mean Palin. McCain is the one who will be painted as the ultimate failure. Sadly this always occurs with whoever loses the race but McCain will especially be painted as some sort of phony Republican while Palin is the heart and soul of the party despite whatever exit polling and general polling will say about her.
 
MaddenNFL64 said:
So, about the "Bradley Effect"

What was the differential between Tom Bradley & his opponent in the last polls before the '82 election? What was the MoE of these polls?

I've heard & read about "double digit leads", but was that true in final polling?
The polls were closing down in the final week of that election, and was within the margin of error on election day. There was no Bradley effect.
 
Stoney Mason said:
Oh yes. I didn't mean Palin. McCain is the one who will be painted as the ultimate failure. Sadly this always occurs with whoever loses the race but McCain will especially be painted as some sort of phony Republican while Palin is the heart and soul of the party despite whatever exit polling and general polling will say about her.

But a lot of Repubs are already throwing Palin under the bus though. You know, the non-crazy-fundy ones.
 
agrajag said:
But a lot of Repubs are already throwing Palin under the buss though. You know, the non-crazy-fundy ones.

Those people have no pull in the party and never did (or at least haven't since the early 70's). They only think they do.

EDIT: And the funny thing is those people are only against her because the plan backfired and she started to cost them votes. Most of them would have gone alone with the program if things had turned out better.
 
Hey, I just started seeing the Rev. Wright "Hate he could believe in" ads. Character assasination goes to the next step! Whee!
 
That's where my thoughts were. Nate Silver has said any "Effect" is minimal today, now that crime, affirmative action, and welfare aren't the wedge issues they were back then, and I agree. BUT I also think those issues had little to do with Bradley's loss in '82. Just reading on it, 3rd parties & bad late campaigning screwed him more than anything.
 
From the Baltimore Sun:
Karl Rove, the Republican strategist behind President Bush's victories in 2000 and 2004, gives Obama 311 electoral votes to McCain's 157, with 70 electoral votes in the tossup category.

The tossups are all in states that Bush carried the last time, including Florida, Missouri and North Carolina. McCain trails in six other states Bush won in 2004: Virginia, Ohio, Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada.

If McCain carries every tossup state plus Virginia and Ohio, which one of his top aides calls the toughest battleground for the Republican, he would still be 10 electoral votes short of 270. That would require him to pick up either Pennsylvania, where he has never led in the general election, or two other Bush states where he is behind.

For McCain to move that many states in a short period of time, strategists said, would likely take an unexpected event of major proportions. The only time in recent history that a late change in voter sentiment put the trailing candidate into the White House was in 1980, when the lone debate between President Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan, a week before the election, vaulted Reagan into office.

"It looks like we're going to come up short," said Scott Reed, a McCain supporter who managed Bob Dole's 1996 presidential campaign.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/politics/bal-te.election02nov02,0,7724450.story
 
Stoney Mason said:
Those people have no pull in the party and never did (or at least haven't since the early 70's). They only think they do.

The wingnut true believers are already calling for the heads of Parker, Frum, Noonan, and Will, among others - and these are mostly staunch conservatives, who are still voting for McCain anyway. I find it hilarious, especially when in the next breath they accuse Obama of Stalinist tactics.
 
Dax01 said:
Bob Dole's campaign?:lol
I think the first line is more pertinent. Rove is pretty astute when it comes to the number. As much as I dislike him, he does know his political demographics.
 
hc2 said:
I think the first line is more pertinent. Rove is pretty astute when it comes to the number. As much as I dislike him, he does know his political demographics.

Rove is generally pretty good with his projections and numbers. People like to bring up 2006 and the "his math stuff" but you almost always have to discount what people say late in a campaign when they are losing. Democrat or Republican. They have to lie to keep hope alive. There is no other choice.
 
For anyone interested in learning about grounded conservative reactions to the current situations, thenextright.com is an excellent site. It's probably the most honest, genuine, non-crazy conservative web site I've ever seen. True believers, but also well aware of their actual problems. I definitely plan on following this for a while. Here's a good post on the "victim of own success" issue. I wonder how much of a response I'd get if I started highlighting and asking them how they plan on addressing some of the other problems.

http://www.thenextright.com/sean-oxendine/the-price-of-victory
 
Why has MSNBC been using the Mason-Dixon poll in their broadcasts lately? Do they have an agreement with them or are they just using them because they have the battlegrounds so close and that makes for better TV?
 
By the way, does anything think this election would be different if instead of crazy angry grandma McCain, we got the candidate who:
  • Was responsible for campaign finance reform
  • Stood up to Bush on tax cuts
  • Pushed for comprehensive immigrant reform
  • Brought the first carbon cap bill to the senate floor
  • Is BFF with independent democrat Joe Lieberman
Of course the base would abandon him entirely, but the dynamics of the election would be awesome.
 
Gruco said:
By the way, does anything think this election would be different if instead of crazy angry grandma McCain, we got the candidate who:
  • Was responsible for campaign finance reform
  • Stood up to Bush on tax cuts
  • Pushed for comprehensive immigrant reform
  • Brought the first carbon cap bill to the senate floor
  • Is BFF with independent democrat Joe Lieberman
Of course the base would abandon him entirely, but the dynamics of the election would be awesome.

It would have been awesome if we got that candidate. What was his name again?
 
Gruco: I actually started reading The Next Right a couple days ago, since I've been giddy at the prospect of navel-gazing and recriminations from the right after this election.

They're saner than the Malkin wing of the party, but they're still pretty delusional.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom