I saw a lot of my extended family over the Easter holiday. We are all rabidly conservative, so naturally we discussed the 2008 elections in great detail.
Everyone else, being conservatives of the [obliviously] optimistic sort, was jubilant about the Wright controversy, was certain that it had badly damaged Obama’s prospects both for the Democratic nomination and the general election, and felt that McCain was at least a mild favorite to win the election in November. I snickered and said that in three to six weeks, nobody would even remember who Jeremiah Wright was, while Iraq would be going to hell in a handbasket, Israel and Iran would probably be fighting over Lebanon again, and America would be duking it out with Iran in Iraq (with both sides using their typical proxies).
I also emphatically disagreed with the conventional wisdom, that white tribalism will reassert itself in McCain’s favor as the Democrats increasingly fracture over their nomination fight.
Pew, NBC/WSJ, Rasmussen and Gallup all show, if anything, a mild tilt towards Obama since l’affaire Wright began. Once again Clinton is embarrassingly unlikely to win the nomination.
People need to understand how worthless and ephemeral these political “controversies” are. It’s like pushing on a string. They drive down the candidate’s approvals for a few days. But if the same outlets keep pounding on that story, a reaction sets in. People start wondering if the news organizations are pursuing their own agenda; and in any case, they get bored with the story. But if the news organizations back off, the candidate’s approvals rebound very quickly.
Meanwhile, the death toll in Iraq is mounting. 35% of Iraq’s crude exports (half a million barrels per day) have been shut down in the near term thanks to one bomb at a Basra refinery. That was why oil rallied so hard the other day.
The American public is watching - and that’s not a good thing for John McCain right now.
But I have also believed that the Republicans will need at least one terrible defeat before they realize what betraying scumbags their leadership is. Until then they will happily imbibe the “Reaganesque optimism” kool-aid, until both feet are over the cliff.
Speaking of Barack Hussein, he was on CNBC yesterday. After my Obama translator filtered Obama’s diarrhea of “well, you know,” “I think,” “Look, I’m not an ideologue,” “What you have is,” and other noise, it sounded like he was aiming for a capital gains rate of 21-26 percent. Whatever the rate is, it’s going to be significantly higher than today’s 15, which means that, assuming we get to September and Obama will be leading by as much as I think he will, there’s going to be a big selloff of US equities as people realize gains under the current rate rather than the future one.
By that time, the Beijing Olympics will be winding down, and the Chinese will slam on the brakes at the same time as the US political business cycle winds down (and on very unfavorable terms for capital).
Spring and summer look passable at the moment, for US equities. Autumn looks chilly.
I’m in the same camp as your “overly optimistic” relatives. Blue collar America will be paying close attention to the inevitable TV ads starring The Reverend. How about a split screen duet featuring him and Michelle? Talk about fingernails on a blackboard!
But you do have to love BHO’s recent statement that he would have quit the church if Wright weren’t retiring. Now that took some real courage!
BHO’s appeal to many was that he was “beyond” race - we could get a black president and not have to do any penance. Now, HE needs The Conversation, because he has been forced into it by Wright - but a whole lot of white America doesn’t want to have that little talk. Plenty of union types who would have found Hillary acceptable will not vote for BHO - Mac will be good enough for them.
I have to agree, the bloom is off the rose for Sen. Obama.
He peaked too early for his own good. Even the media is cooling down realizing he is not a Savior after all, just a smooth talker, cooked in Cook County.
Issues that conflict with the image a candidate tries to project, are the ones that stick. A typical white person, to borrow Obama’s phrase, will now have second and third thoughts about him.
He still has a great unused weapon, the ability to clobber McCain in any debate they have.
Hillary not conceding gracefully, finding sabotage more cathartic, is influencing the Democrat’s chances.
With the way things have been going, the only thing safe to predict is the that something unpredictable will happen.
Not to rag on you guys, both of whom I have a lot of respect for, but this has to be at least the third iteration of triumphalist conservatives — ok, non-Obamamaniacs — proclaiming, “Aha! With this latest gaffe/ leak/ news cycle/ whatever, surely now the sheen has worn off! White America liked the first date but will ditch him any day now.”
Yea right … it’s been what, a week, and the poll impact is *zero*.
The shrillary sabotage is only further depreciating the Clintons’ long-term influence over the Democratic Party. It’s not doing Obama any damage. GOP rank and file *have* to respect him for destroying the Clinton apparatus…
Heh. Gallup’s latest poll has Obama ahead 50-42. The widest margin in the entire campaign. Just a confirmation of the other polls.
Clinton’s people are idiots. So are the Republicans who allow themselves to be told what to think, that Obama is “finished” every two weeks.
This small ball cr@p is hurting Clinton.
2000, presidential candidate Albert Gore ahead in the polls.
2004, presidential candidate John Kerry ahead in the polls.
2008, presidential candidate Barack Obama ahead in the polls.
Intertemporally?
Sure, there were isolated moments in all those races when the Democrat was ahead in the polls.
But over all points in time, Bush led in 2000; Bush led in 2004; and Obama led in 2008.
As in finance, in politics you can cherry pick the data to paint whatever picture you want in the very short term. But over long periods of time, there is only one data set, and that data set does not lie.
Basically what you are saying is “polls schmolls.” Ok, fine; if you want to discount every conceivable measurement for the state of the race that’s entirely your prerogative.
But the “conventional wisdom” among a lot of pollsters and observers is that a negative news cycle (a series of negative headlines for the candidate you are talking about) has a TEMPORARY negative effect on the candidate. But unless new, significantly different and unflattering information on that candidate comes to light, news outlets can’t keep flogging the same story because it loses all saliency with the public.
I can’t count the number of news cycles — the “let Iran have nukes but attack Pakistan” so-called gaffe, the plagiarism BS, Tony Rezko, Jeremiah Wright, and now the latest, his supposed “mentoring” by a member of the US Communist Party ……. so many times, non-liberals have prematurely crowed over Obama’s demise, only to be proven utterly wrong, and -yet!- make the same mistake over and over again.
Sad.
You’re very right, we consciously or not choose which data to include and how we interpret it, to demonstrate what we believe. It even happens in the sciences.
I have no idea whether Obama will become president, and it’s not yet even 100% guaranteed he will be the Democrat candidate.
An associate actively campaigning for Obama, in San Francisco, and in contact with others all over the country, tells me there is very heightened concern the party could actually blow this election.
I still feel Obama has peaked in popularity, and too soon, but that’s just an opinion.
As I always stress, a different dynamic and many unusual factors in play in this election, though human nature hasn’t changed all that much.
I wonder what the betting odds are.
M
http://www.intrade.com
Barack Obama to be Democratic Presidential Nominee in 2008 79.9
Hillary Clinton to be the Democratic Presidential Nominee in 2008 18.7
PRESIDENT.DEM2008
Democratic Party Candidate to Win 2008 Presidential Election M Trade 59.2 59.5 59.3 69603 +0.2
PRESIDENT.REP2008
Republican Party Candidate to Win 2008 Presidential Election M Trade 39.0 40.9 40.1 67086 -0.4