How Obama Blew It

HOW OBAMA BLEW IT
PAYS PRICE IN POLLS FOR BUNGLED ATTACKS ON SARAH

By Kirsten Powers, The New York Post (Yeah, it’s somewhat right wing, but the Truth is a majority of One.)

[b]
"YESTERDAY’S Gallup poll had John McCain ahead of Barack Obama by an astonishing 10 points among likely voters. A Washington Post poll had that lead at only two points, but clearly showed a McCain surge - especially among women. This wasn’t what Democrats were expecting when they left Denver - yet they have nobody to blame but themselves.

Obama’s toughest challenge has always been to connect with working-class swing voters. So attacking the poster child for small-town values, Sarah Palin, was a bad strategy.

No, Obama didn’t engage in the mass sneering at Palin - but he did fall into the trap of disrespecting her. When McCain chose her, the Obama campaign’s first response was to ridicule the size of her town. Then the candidate himself began referring to her as a “former mayor” when she is in fact a sitting governor.

When she retaliated (justifiably) by mocking his stint as a organizer, the Obama camp was clearly rattled. Obama himself actually began arguing about the importance of community organizing. His supporters amplified this cry - claiming Palin’s attack was a racist slur and passing around e-mails titled “Jesus was a community organizer, Pontius Pilate was a governor.”

Meanwhile, the rest of the country was probably wondering what being a community organizer has to do with being president.

Lured by the McCain camp, Obama supporters engaged in an argument about who had more overall experience - the top of the Democratic ticket or the bottom of the GOP ticket. This diminished Obama.

Meanwhile, the media lit up in all their cultural-elite splendor.

Alaska? they sneered. It has the population of Las Vegas! Funny how the coastal elite only sneers at red states with small populations. Howard Dean hailed from a blue state with almost the same population as Alaska and was a national phenomenon and front-runner for the presidency. Joe Biden’s Delaware has a similarly small population - but no mocking was forthcoming there.

Evangelicals will never vote for a woman who works! they declared. This from people who’ve likely never met an evangelical in their lives. They could barely contain themselves when they found out Gov. Palin’s daughter was pregnant, so sure were they that evangelicals would hang her from the highest tree. When evangelical leaders expressed support, there was a palpable disappointment that Palin or her daughter wasn’t branded with a scarlet letter.

They claimed that the Palin announcement was some desperate pick that came out of nowhere. Had they been doing their jobs, or even perusing The Weekly Standard or right-wing blogs, they’d have known that she was on the list.

Since they didn’t know anything about her, they started making things up. Anything that fit the caricature of a right-wing hypocrite was thrown up with, seemingly, no fact-checking.

They said she opposes contraception, when she said in a campaign debate that she is pro-contraception. They said she cut funding for pregnant teens, when she provided a massive funding hike.

They accused her of cutting funding for mentally disabled children, when she raised it 175 percent over the former administration. She was said to have been a member of the wacky Alaska Independence Party; The New York Times had to run a retraction.

Like Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, Palin has been deemed one of the GOP’s rising stars. Since it’s national reporters job to cover American politics, their ignorance of about her is distressing.

Most Americans think that the media are cheerleading for Obama, so they’ll punish him for the reporters’ and editors’ sins.

So now he is weighted down with more baggage as he works to convince an important voting bloc that he and his party don’t hold them in contempt.

The clock is ticking."[/b]

nypost.com/seven/09092008/po … 128132.htm

“Jesus was a community organizer, Pontius Pilate was a governor.” Priceless

Intertrade still has Obama ahead by a significant margin, and the electoral map still heavily favors Obama. So there is no blowing it here.

Don’t guess you have a link for that. I can’t find it.

“There are five new national polls out in the last 24 hours, and four of them show Sen. John McCain opening a lead over Sen. Barack Obama, while the fifth shows the race tied.”

usnews.com/usnews/politics/b … 080909.htm

And lots of other good news besides, especially in the independent ranks.

It is hard to find things you don’t look for . . .

realclearpolitics.com/epolls … vs_mccain/

Provides all the information in one nice little package.

You’ll note in the article you posted, those are public opinion polls, which are utterly meaningless in a presidential election.

Now the snide cheap shot. You’re acting like someone with a low self-image. I still don’t know wtf Intertrade is.

In any case, the momentum is with McCain and the support (and money) he’s garnering isn’t 2 inches deep like Obama’s. Palin has changed the whole picture and is the catalyst for this momentum for the reasons given in the OP. She’s bringing in a lot of white males like me, and fundies, but the real swing is with women. The map shows Ohio and Florida as tossups but they’re leaning toward McCain at 1.3 & 3.1 % respectively. If he gets them he gets the election. (I can’t believe they have Georgia as “leaning” toward McCain.)

No cheap shots, just the truth. If you had bothered to look, you would know what Intrade is. Since you don’t know what it is, it follows that you didn’t search for it. That’s fine. But don’t play all high-and-mighty, nor fake offense.

And I’d have found it if you’d spelled it right.

Of course it’s not necessary for me to state that no apology is necessary since I’m sure none will be forthcoming.

And Intrade has McCain ahead anyway.

Jeeeez.

Apologies for the misspelling. I still found it with the incorrect spelling with no difficulties. But what can you do?

I just checked Intrade, and Obama’s down for the first time.

I think the siginificance of this is inflated, though. The republicans are still on a bounce, and Palin has done what, one interview? Maybe it’s denial, but I don’t think her popularity will last through October.

The only reason Palin is looking good is that her actual policies positions are being kept a not-so-well-kept secret. One interview with ABC is all that is on the horizon, and want to bet that the RNC will retain full editing rights before it allows the interview to be aired? There is a lot of hot air right now. Wait for the debates. I suspect that the so-called Palin surge will evaporate in every quarter but the religious right and the Betty Crocker club members…

palin is gonna turn biden into lazio…

and obama’s stuttttter will be hilarious against mccain

-Imp

Obama/Biden 217 = 157 Solid, 60 Leaning

McCain/Palin 216 = 172 Solid, 44 Leaning

Toss Up 105

This for a poll 2 months out. And note the recent trend on your own chart.

Tough, tough. Though, you have to figure that the campaigns have been fairly underexposed for the past few days. The 11th was a cease fire (and one badly needed by the Obama campaign). Plus, Palin’s causing a bounce, but it’s mostly buzz. It’s like the unveiling of the umpteenth incarnation of the iPod: it’s big news, and Apple’s stock goes up, but when they hit the market it tanks. Similarly when (if?) Palin actually starts answering questions, I think that the McCain team’s stocks will fall back to pre-bounce levels.

Not to mention that most polls are taken by calling people on land lines who voted last year. Most people who are voting for Obama probably haven’t voted for a while, and many only have cell phones. Polls should be taken with a truckload of salt.

but dead people’s votes count too!

-Imp

Obama’s on the rise in Intrade, and McCain is falling. Also, though McCain is still up in the individual market, in the market by political party, the Democrats are ahead by a sliver. Fascinating!

What has Palin said about the Obama camp negatively? It might, as everyone suggests seriously backfire on Obama. there seems to be a cycle of negative attacks in politics and the first person to kinda ignore it and let it slide somtimes gets huge approval over it; the reagan(SP) election for example.

His comments towards Palin are directed at what exactly? how is Obama going to diffrentiate the fundamentalism that he’s sprouted/been heavily envolved with (religiously) in the past from Palin’s fundamentalism?

being ‘pro-choice’ goes a lot further with americans than the type of religious figure Obama has been heavily implicated with. thats a problem, no?