McCain challenges nonsense about Obama

John McCain deserves praise for his statements making it very clear that Obama is an honorable man and candidate. "He's a decent family man citizen...he's a person you do not have to be scared...." said McCain to a crowd that clearly wanted a speech with more red baiting and red meat.

Although the McCain campaign has crossed the line many times using guilt-by-association to try to to paint Obama as a supporter of terror and other nonsense, but it's great to see John McCain taking the microphone away from a lady as she said "Obama is an Arab" and pointing out to his supporters that Obama poses no threat to the stability of the country.

Spirited politics has a long history in the USA, but as the Obama lead grows and frustration mounts all Americans should be very concerned about the tone of the anti-Obama rhetoric, which at it's extreme is supporting violence.

A sure way to betray the proud ideals of American freedom is to threaten to silence opposing ideas with violence. I'm very glad to see John McCain backing away from supporters who don't seem to understand that.

Palin Troopergate verdict is in: Abuse of Power.

The "TrooperGate" scandal that has plagued Sarah Palin for the past months now has an official judgement and that is that Palin abused her power but did not break any laws.

Here's the report from Alaska's website

I haven't read it yet but CNN quotes the investigation committee which unanimously approved the report, saying Palin abused power but did not break laws.

Although Palin partisans will suggest this was a political move, it now appears very clear that Palin engaged in seriously questionable activities in this case.
This is especially ironic as Palin has led the charge to suggest that Obama's associations with others bring his character into question. Palin more than any candidate in recent history has tried to make character rather than issues the focus of her campaign. It will be interesting to see if she keeps tossing stones from within a glass house.

Ed Rollins, Republican Guru: It's over, It's Obama

On CNN tonight Ed Rollins said it's over and Obama has won. He suggested that the tidal wave of bad economic news means McCain no longer has much if any chance at winning, and the issue is whether the Republicans will lose so many seats their influence in congress is demolished.

Rollins is one of the master modern political strategists and a key architect of the Reagan rise to power. He's also much less of a spinner when he'd being a pundit on the many political shows that talk to him.

Debate 2: No Winner is Big Win for Obama

Tonight's debate reviewed much of the same ground in the same way, with little new information from either candidate. The town hall format didn't seem to change the talking points all that much from campaign speeches.

Without anything like a knockout, let alone a likely "win", McCain remains in serious trouble because he's losing in many of the close states and needs to make major campaign progress within weeks to have even a shot at winning the big prize.

I'd predict most undecided debate viewers will give the debate, narrowly, to Obama. CNN results will be in soon.

If tonight's performance is any indication of the final month of the campaign we are looking at an Obama win.

Smears and Swiftboats

Frankly I've been amazed at how little dirty smear campaigning there has been in the campaign so far, but it looks like that may be about to change as new ads and FOX news are really harping on a fairly insignificant connection between Obama and Chicago radical William Ayers. Ayers is now a professor but in the 1960s he and his current wife were founding member of the violent "Weather Underground". They served prison time for terror activities.

The New York Times has an excellent summary of the situation.

The challenge to a clear thinker in cases like this is fairly simple and involves a few key questions, none of which have to do with whether somebody met somebody, had coffee with them, talked with them, etc.

Guilt by association is often an effective tactic but it's not a legitimate reason to be concerned, and it appears that's all there is to this story.

Relevant questions and answers:

Did Obama support Ayers' activities? No, Obama was 8 years old.

Does he support Ayers' past activities now? No, nothing in Obama's record or statements or activites suggests he does, and he has stated he does not.

Has Ayers had anything that could be a significant influence on Obama's thinking? Clearly not in terms of Ayers past activities. Probably somewhat influential in terms of Ayers educational reform activities, which appear to be of a strictly non-violent nature.

The idea that a virtuous person must immediately disassociate himself from any objectionable people and ignore everything they do or say is preposterous. On the contrary, virtue and wisdom *require* these types of interactions.

Obama's very liberal voting record is legitimate territory for intelligent debate. Obama's minor association with Ayers....is not.

Nielsen: 70,000,000 Watched Palin - Biden Debate

70 million people watched the VP Debate last night between Biden and Palin, I think making that debate the most watched event of the current election. Only about 50 million watched Obama and McCain in their first matchup and I have a hunch the next two will be about the same.

Nielsen Story at Yahoo

Palin v. Biden Debate won't change minds

The Palin Biden debate ends pretty much as a tie, with Sarah Palin surprisingly holding her own against a far more experienced politician. Palin's answers seemed well rehearsed, and it appeared her strategy was to have several good rehearsed answers and several good bridges to those topics. When Palin was spontaneous she seemed "off", but when rehearsed she'll be seen as spot on by her supporters.

CNN's trend meter indicated good marks for both, though it seemed to me Biden was pulling better with the Ohio undecided women who they measured moment to moment.

Overall affect on polls? I'm guessing not much. Palin will appeal to those who like her but this won't change many votes.

Palin v. Biden: The Debate

Tonight's Vice Presidential Debate promises to be one of the most if not the most interesting event of the entire Presidential Campaign. Even with expectations for a Palin "knockout" near zero, Palin may sink the Republican ship without a solid performance tonight. The media is clearly angry at the McCain campaign's unprecedented protection and management of Palin media interactions but much of that media concern will prove justified in the eyes of many Americans if Palin can't hold her own in this format.

I almost - but not quite - feel bad for suggesting Gwen Ifill should have offered to step aside because conservatives are making so much foolishness out of what will almost certainly be an objective and unbiased approach by Ifill. That said it's absurd to suggest that she has no stake in the outcome. She does and the Jan 20 publication date proves this. As usual the criticisms by each side are in part correct and the defenses are generally weak.

Gwen Ifill's Debate Dilemma

PBS's VP Debate moderator Gwen Ifill's upcoming book about the rise of African American politics in the "Age of Obama" is raising some eyebrows as she'll be moderating the debate between Sarah Palin and Joe Biden tommorrow night.

As Brit Hume correctly noted today there is little reason to think she won't be objective but it is of some concern that the book, set to release on *inauguration day* means that Ifill has a significant financial stake in the outcome of the election (ie her perspective if Obama wins is far, far more valuable than if he loses).

With journalistic objectivity pretty much in a death spiral already, I think PBS should be getting *out* of the game of partisan journalism rather than finding themselves squarely in the eye of that storm.

Given that Gwen just broke her ankle she's got a great excuse to pass her debate duties along to another and she probably should do that. Unless the McCain campaign had been briefed about her book when they agreed to have Ifill moderate the debate it's not reasonable for her to claim this should be of no concern at this time, especially given the publication date which clearly presages the outcome of the election. Ifill is involved in predicting and profiting from the outcome of this election and therefore should offer to excuse herself from the debate.

FYI Ms. Ifill - McCain will tell you to go ahead anyway, so why not take the high road here?

Obama's lead increasing.

When even Fox election pundit Dick Morris is predicting an Obama win McCain shoud know he's got trouble, and McCain has .... big trouble both in the polls and strategically.

First, the polls from RealClearPolitics:

RCP Average	09/21 - 09/29	--	48.1	43.0	Obama +5.1
Gallup Tracking	09/27 - 09/29	2729 RV	49	43	Obama +6
Rasmussen Tracking	09/27 - 09/29	3000 LV	51	45	Obama +6
Hotline/FD Tracking	09/27 - 09/29	901 RV	47	41	Obama +6
GW/Battleground Tracking	09/24 - 09/29	800 LV	48	46	Obama +2
CBS News/NY Times	09/21 - 09/24	LV	48	43	Obama +5
FOX News	09/22 - 09/23	900 RV	45	39	Obama +6
Marist	09/22 - 09/23	689 LV	49	44	Obama +5

Perhaps as importantly, Obama's lead it protected by several factors as we move into the final month of the campaign for the White House:

* Economy problems will help Obama. Even if these are resolved it'll be hard for McCain to take much credit for the solutions and dodge blame for the problems which most are pinning mostly on GW Bush and the Republicans.

* Sarah Palin will wind up hurting McCain. Even many conservatives are alarmed by Palin's challenges facing media scrutiny and what appears to be a clear history of not concerning herself with global issues. Expectations are very low for Thursday's debate with Joe Biden which may work to Palin's advantage, but unless the Palin perceptions change dramatically she appears to be a liability on McCain right now with the very voters she needed to secure - moderate women.

* Ohio's registration rules were just changed to allow same day registration which is likely to help Obama because first time and young voters are more likely to be Obama supporters.

* Obama dodged the potential bullets of the first debate and came out as the clear winner among undecided voters even in that mostly foreign policy forum. The next debates feature stronger Obama territory so McCain needs a knockout punch to shift opinion dramatically.

Palin, Pakistan, and Philly Cheesesteaks

Sara Palin deserves a lot of the media criticism she's getting, both for being largely inaccessible to the media and also for her apparent lifetime lack of interest in the complexity and nuance of international politics - a skill that is important for anybody in top office who will be negotiating with world leaders.

HOWEVER

The media "analysis" of Sara Palin's recent comments to a young Democratic party hack while in a Philly Cheesesteak line are nonsensical, bordering on the drooling stupidity we've come to know as .. TV Journalism.

Palin suggested that the US should pursue terrorists across the Pakistan border if necessary, a policy embraced by Obama but rejected by McCain. It's not clear to me how this is even a gaffe, let alone something indicating she's not qualified to be President. Clearly a President and VP can disagree on some policy issues, and more importantly this "gotcha" approach to journalism leaves key issues undiscussed in favor of mostly irrelevant sound bites. CNN today interviewed the fellow who asked the question - a Democratic party activist - who appeared to seize this Cheesesteak opportunity to make Palin look inconsistent with McCain and then I think lied that he had that agenda.

What is wrong with the media? Bias is not the key problem here, rather *superficiality*.

Do Polls Matter?

Contrary to common belief, polls actually offer a reasonable window into outcomes and generally are the best way to understand election trends. For example a national CNN poll in October of 2000 showed Bush with a slight lead over Gore and he wound up winning. This is not a great example because Gore did narrowly win the popular vote, but the point is that the CNN poll showed Gore and Bush about equal in October and they were about equal in the final vote.

Almost all the latest national polls show Obama with a lead of about 4-5%, though I don't think the debate's effect on things - if any - is reflected in any of them. I'm in the camp that believes this is now Obama's election to lose. Obama is ahead by enough and the debate seemed even enough that it will be difficult for McCain to gain more than few points barring the kind of events that now appear unlikely. Although the Palin / Biden VP debate is very anxiously anticipated I doubt that Palin is going to score any points for McCain, and the final two debates with Obama are likely to go the same way as the first - where the candidates appeal mostly to their own constituencies with McCain appearing to lose some points for his "angry" attitude, which I think helps explain why most non committed voters thought Obama won last night.

Electoral College Adventures - what if 269 to 269?

If you've played around with the RealClearPolitics Electoral map you'll know there are several scenarios where Obama and McCain might split the electoral vote right down the middle with 269 votes each. What you might NOT know is how this tie is broken. Yes, it's a congressional vote but not simply one vote per congressman which would almost certainly give an Electoral tie to Obama since the Democrats are unlikely to lose control of Congress. But wait... in this electoral tie scenario my understanding is that each *state* gets ONE vote per state congressional delegation and each Senator gets one vote. Making this even more unpredictable is the fact that it's not entirely clear if the old or incoming congress would vote though I think I read it would be the new congress as it's first act in office.

I haven't found a source yet that looks at all the current state congressional delegations to see if how they'd likely split in an electoral tie. Let's hope that piece of trivia remains ... largely irrelevant.

Debate polls

CNN's phone poll of about 500 showed Obama as the strong debate winner among those who watched, but John King at CNN noted that since more Democrats tend to watch debates this poll does not give us a good enough picture of things. We'll want to know how each candidate fared within their own parties and more importantly how noncommitted voters viewed this debate. Ultimately the candidates need to change minds, not reinforce existing votes from already supportive constituencies.

Fox's text poll, now underway on TV, is a shamelessly foolish excercise in biased polling that will offer little insight into anything. Fox viewers are not representative of national averages, and since only Fox viewers can participate in that poll (other folks won't see the contact number) it's probably going to show a huge McCain bias. The text aspect is also a distortion which will pull in FOX's younger viewers. Unlike CNN's phone poll which reasonably is a measure of *all* those who viewed the debate, FOX is a measure of how FOX viewers viewed the debate.

82 percent McCain in the FOX poll. Fair? balanced?. More like extremely biased. I can't believe people think this is journalism.

Debate 1: A Tie?

It's going to be very interesting to see the reactions to the first Presidential debate though based on CNN's fascinating and somewhat distracting "Audience Reaction" trend lines it looks like this debate won't change many minds.

Most Republicans will be comforted by McCain's responses and most Democrats by Obamas. Independents - potentially a very significant group of undecided voters - did not seem to show a strong preference unless I missed something, though at the end of the debate it really appeared that Obama scored well and McCain poorly - perhaps because Obama seemed more positive and less distracted as things wound up and the audience seemed to react most positively to positive messages.

Fannie Mae Reform Bill Fact Check - McCain was NOT an original sponsor...

Reports that John McCain was at the forefront of legislation that would have prevented the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac appear to be greatly exaggerated, though it took more than a little sleuthing to figure this out.

McCain shows as one of three cosponsors of the legislation spearheaded by Chuck Hagel. A quick read of it does not suggest to me that the authors saw a pending catastrophe, but even if they did it was very odd to find that John McCain's name did NOT appear on the legislation when it was introduced. In fact he cosponsored this a full 16 months *after* it was introduced for reasons I don't have time to figure out, but given the time frame it would appear this was done more for political affect than anything else.

Here's the official record:

S.190
Title: A bill to address the regulation of secondary mortgage market enterprises, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Sen Hagel, Chuck [NE] (introduced 1/26/2005) Cosponsors (3)
Latest Major Action: 7/28/2005 Senate committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.

---

COSPONSORS(3), ALPHABETICAL [followed by Cosponsors withdrawn]: (Sort: by date)

Sen Dole, Elizabeth [NC] - 1/26/2005
Sen McCain, John [AZ] - 5/25/2006
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH] - 1/26/2005

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SN00190:@@@P

More from the news: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/sep/17/mccains-warning-fannie-and-freddie/

Obama to McCain: See You Friday Dude!

It's too early to say but it looks to me like the McCain campaign suspension play is backfiring in part due to Obama's response to McCain which is clear and is "see ya Friday, dude"...

This was a bold play by McCain but since he waited until the last minute he's on *very* thin ice arguing that he's got no place attending the most anticipated presidential debate in history. His proposal to delay the Palin Biden debate - a duel that is almost as interesting to the public as the McCain Obama debate - will only add to the speculation that this is a political rather than bipartisan presidential play.

Suggesting that McCain will debate Obama if congress enacts a plan by Friday seems unlikely to do more than complicate and confuse the many issues at hand and offer the Democrats a type of dysfunctional control over McCain's plans.

If Obama is sitting on the stage Friday without McCain it is unlikely to bode well for McCain unless Obama makes the mistake of saying something outrageous which is unlikely. In fact the imagery of John McCain wandering around D.C. trying to broker a deal with a congress that is mostly hostile to his candidacy would not appear to paint a pretty campaign picture.

McCain to Obama: Suspend Campaign - Let's Work Together

John McCain has temporarily suspended his campaign and will return to Washington to campaign for the fiscal reform package aka "The Bailout", which he feels is of critical importance.

This is a remarkable move that is very consistent with the kind of bipartisan political cooperation both McCain and Obama talk so much about. However it's also something of a curve ball thrown to Obama, who must either look like a "follower" by joining McCain or look opportunistic if he refuses.

Clearly politics played something of a role here because McCain could have called Obama and had them issue a joint announcement *update: McCain said he called Obama before his announcement to inform him of the decision*.

So what should Obama do? Both strategically and realistically he should counter-propose to McCain a high level meeting with the Bush folks and the economic advisors of both campaigns (one of which will take over this mess) . Together a bipartisan bill should be crafted that addresses the crisis immediately.

Google "In Quotes" project lets you track down the truth

Google Labs has a great new project that searches the internet for quotes by Obama and McCain on any topic you enter, allowing you to compare what the candidates *reportedly* said about any topic.

The tool will need to be used with some caution as it is not clear if this will screen out misquotes, though presumably In Quotes won't search through highly partisan websites and will stick to responsible journalistic outlets to decide what the candidates said.

Eventually this will extend to all political races, giving reporters and voters a great resource in the fight for ... truth in politics...

It's the Economy, and we are ALL stupid.

On the one hand, it is mistaken to suggest that the pending economic disasters are the fault of people or parties more than the collective fault of our hopelessly inefficient and politicized, lobbied, and manipulated regulatory systems combined with serious flaws in our capitalist infrastructure.

That said, it's very hard to escape the fact that the Bush administration will be seen - probably with justification - as the party most asleep at the wheel as the American economy was teetering on the brink of collapse. This is likely to play far better for Obama the McCain, and unless the McCain party line can find a way to distance itself from the huge failures of current US economic policy Obama's lead is likely to become insurmountable. McCain will have to find a way to acknowledge that the current economic situation is totally unsustainable but not the fault of the Bush administration. This will be a tough row to hoe.

I'm by no means suggesting that Obama and fellow Democrats should not shoulder some of the blame for the current crisis. Although they have been ranting against the current economic approaches of the Bush administration it appears pretty clear that the Democrats - like the Republicans - failed to see looming catastrophe until it was too late. More importantly Democrats failed to intervene years ago when the seeds of the current catastrophe were planted. In fact a key Obama advisor was the CEO of Fannie Mae until 2004. If Obama keeps him on board (or lets him go as he shoud) I'd say both of them have some explainin' to do.

I'm very unclear about why this crisis was not at least the subject of a lot more speculation, because it has been obvious for at least two years that the real estate bubble would burst, dropping trillions in equity from balance sheets.

The polls are starting to show a shift to Obama based on the dire economic news, and it seems likely this shift will continue. The importance of the debates on Friday is likely looming large for many undecided voters desparate to know who can return prosperity to a flagging US economy.