NEWSWEEK: Why McCain Won ?

[palintology]

The conventional wisdom, which I share, is that Barack Obama will win this election, perhaps by a healthy margin. But Democrats are nervous wrecks; they're having nightmares that defeat will be snatched from the jaws of victory. To add to their misery (and guard against complacency), here's how that horror film could play out:

In the end, the problem was the LIVs. That's short for "low-information voters,"

the three fifths of the electorate that shows up once every four years to vote for president but mostly hates politics. These are the 75 million folks who didn't vote in the primaries. They don't read newsmagazines or newspapers, don't watch any cable news and don't cast their ballots early. Their allegiance to a candidate is as easily shed as a T shirt. Several million moved to Obama through September and October; they'd heard he handled himself well in the debates. Then, in the last week, the LIVs swung back to the default choice: John McCain. Some had good reasons other than the color of Obama's skin to desert him; many more did not. In October, a study by the Associated Press estimated that Obama's race would cost him 6 percent. The percentage was smaller, but still enough to give the presidency to McCain.

...

http://www.newsweek.com/id/165657/output/print


Please, all of you ... bring at least 5 friends to vote ... and give the GOP the RAPTURE they deserve !!!

[BayouBengal07]

1. I got depressed just reading that

LIVs and racism - a toxic mix of stupidity.

[nc4bo]

2. You got depressed and my supper feels like it's on the rebound....sigh. nt

[Beregond2]

3. I saw him talking about this on TV, sneering condescendingly about those

who don't pay any attention to politics until the "World Series is over." Give me a break. Anyone that apathetic isn't going to vote at all. To have not absorbed what has been going on during this campaign season, one would have to have been in a coma. When even a 106 year old cloistered nun in Rome has her mind made up, I find it impossible to believe 3/5 of the electorate don't. They are just trying to keep the suspense going, as we predicted they would.

[liberal N proud]

4. I have been doing my part to inform people and getting them excited to vote

I have been engaging about a dozen people for the last 4 years. Making them informed, feeding them information and getting them excited about this election.

Before we even know who the candidates were, I have been relentlessly talking to a specific group of people, some I work with, some I am related to and some I just have acquaintance with. These people have all become quite engaged and are well informed. And they are excited to vote on Nov. 4th.

If we all had a target group of people who we raised above the ranks of uninformed we would do as get them to the polls and possibly get them involved enough they might volunteer for a campaign. Then taking them to the polls we would be assured we knew where they were when they voted.

[iceman66]

5. Scary article.

He may have a point about New Hampshire. Obama leads in the polls, but McCain is polling more strongly than Bush did in 2004, and Kerry only won the state by one point!

[abumbyanyothername]

9. Compilation fraud in NH in 2004.

Kerry won the exit polls by miles.

[iceman66]

12. Any reason that won't happen this time?

New Hampshire is possibly the only Kerry state that is actually polling tighter this time around, and could make the difference in a close election.

[abumbyanyothername]

14. Unable to find any changes

Same governor (D). Same Secretary of State (D). Not sure about the same machines, but they were spotlighted for using Diebold machines in 2004.

[iceman66]

17. Well that's certainly troubling!

I think there were also some suspicious results from the NH primary this year.

[abumbyanyothername]

20. Check out this thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=7616819&mesg_id=7616819

[Kukesa]

25. Scary as hell. Now I won't be able to sleep tonight. n/t

[GrizzlyMan]

6. This will be MSM narrative from here on out

They have grown bored talking about Obama winning so they will attempt to change the narrative of the campaign by playing Devil's advocate.

I know Alter is a Dem leaner which proves my point even further. There will be A LOT of discussion about tightening polls and "how can McCain win" this week. They all want to be the No. 1 most watched network on election night so the higher the level of suspense, the better the ratings.

[crossroads]

13. Good points...

[palintology]

7. Just the thought of another four years with a lame-duck President from the start ...

... and Todd Palin in the White house finishing off McCain for his wife.

The country would be in big shit.

[RichGirl]

8. I've never seen so much attention given to an election as this.

Those low-information voters at least know that Obama is a celebrity and they like celebrities!

The turnout will be huge and lines long. As an election worker I know that if people don't update their registration they don't vote. Had to disqualify many during the primaries and they were people who were interested.

If all this is true, then Bush should have won by a landslide.

[shanti]

29. they like celebrities, and they like WINNERS!

nobody wants to align themself with a loser, and mclame is definitely a la-hooser!

[doc03]

10. I read that this morning too and don't think it is entirely

impossible. I was sure we would win in 2000 and absolutely positive in 2004 only to let down. I'm still nervous about this, it seems we always get screwed somehow.

[jrockford]

11. Me too

I was sure in 2000 and then even more sure in 2004.

[Blondiegrrl]

19. I don't get it. Why were so many people sure we would win in 2004?

Obviously, we *should* have won, simply because Bush has been one of the worst presidents in U.S. history ... but Kerry was really struggling in the polls, and in fact, in the few weeks leading up to the election, he was trailing Bush. Based on the polls, I figured we'd probably lose but I was hoping for a miracle.

In 2008, however, Obama is leading McCain by a decent margin, and has maintained a lead save for the brief interlude in early September, around the GOP convention and Failin' Palin's introduction to the Lower 48. Then people came to their senses again and drifted back to Obama. The 2008 election bears very little resemblance to the 2004 election.

[Jennicut]

21. 2008 is nothing like 2004 or even 2000

[fujiyama]

26. The only reason I convinced myself

was because I spent too much time here.

The simple fact is that Kerry wasn't anywhere near as strong in the polls. Anyone But Bush (ABB!) was the mantra. Excitement was tepid at best. In fact looking back where we were four years ago, Kerry barely held a lead if not was behind in some of the states Obama has a double digit lead in now. I had forgotten, but comparing today's numbers with four years ago is completely different. Now, I liked Kerry, but it's hard to argue that many others were simply voting AGAINST Bush in that election, not really FOR Kerry.

This doesn't mean we are guaranteed to win this. There are a lot of ignorant people out there - those that are buying into the smears. And we need to keep vigilant against the voter intimidation, disenfranchisement and caging - as well as allegations of vote switching on electronic voting systems.

But we are in much better shape than the last two elections. I've been a nervous wreck about this election, but I simply see McCain and I see a candidate that has pretty much given up. Sure, he talks about winning a squeaker, but he's a mess. And I think Palin has proven herself completely unfit for the job.

[Blondiegrrl]

30. Thanks for explaining that.

Yes, I'm a nervous wreck too. But I also feel cautiously optimistic. More optimistic, in fact, than I've felt in a long time.

*crosses fingers*

[rockymountaindem]

27. Exactly

In my heart I hoped we'd win in '04, but in my head I knew we had a 5% chance at best.

[regnaD kciN]

36. I thought we had about a 50-50 chance on Election Day in 2004...

The polls had swung back and forth over the previous few weeks, with each candidate getting and then losing a narrow lead. Oftentimes, it came down to whether you believed Gallup or Rasmussen that day.

Coming down to Election Day, I thought we had a decent chance of winning, but it was still a toss-up, based on who was winning a series of "too close to call" states. That was why the now-notorious leaked exit polls that afternoon were such a morale-booster, as they indicated that Kerry was winning in most of those crucial states, and enough to give him the 270 EV he needed. Of course, they turned out to be wrong (or did they? :tinfoilhat: ), but, while I don't know of anyone else who thought we only had "a 5% chance at best," I doubt any of us thought we had a clear lead anytime in the last couple of months of the 2004 campaign...at least, none as clear as what we've been seeing on a day-in, day-out basis this time around.

[iceman66]

16. It is truly astounding the number of people who

continue to vote Republican, against their own interest, no matter how bad the Republicans have fucked things up.

That, coupled with Diebold, is enough to make anyone nervous.

Still, Obama is polling much better than Kerry or Gore, and the McCain campaign is horribly incompetent, and running out of time to pull a 'game changer'. Thus, victory becomes a little more likely with each passing day.

[Kukesa]

18. ". . . vote Republican, against their own interest . . . "

How true. I drove past a ramshackle trailer park today and the place was full of McPalin yard signs. I just don't get it.

[Wednesdays]

28. Two words: FOX News

Beware that you don't watch more than a half hour at a time, or else you'll start wanting a McPalin sign in your yard, too! :scared:

[high density]

15. Did anybody write an article like this for Kerry in '04?

Alter is stating the obvious "what ifs."

[BrklynLiberal]

22. After reading the comments here, I cannot bring myself to read the article...

x(

[FatDave]

23. This time....

Our guy is the one people want to have a beer with. Or a cigarette.

[Vektor]

24. Extreme "worst case scenario" article, that is highly unlikely. Also, lots of false logic.

Obama is doing better than merely "flirting" with several of these key swing states.

He is 7 - 9 points ahead in New Hampshire, depending which polls you're looking at, and 6.5+ ahead in Colorado and Virginia. New Hampshire is SOLID Obama, and he's doing at lot better than "flirting" with Colorado. He has very healthy leads in New Mexico, (+8.4) and Pennsylvania (+11.2).

He's ahead anywhere from 1-3 points in Florida, Nevada, North Carolina, Missouri, and Indiana. McCain will not will all of those states. The article is written from the most pessimistic and unlikely angle one can possibly muster.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/#data

It's absolute puckey to believe that independents are going to break in huge numbers for McCain. His campaign is a joke, and nobody but the most frothing, mouth-breathing rabid right wing of the Republican party are big on Palin, and would risk a Palin presidency. I have a sneaking suspicion that indy's will come out for Obama in big numbers. We'll just have to wait and see.

Most importantly, lets' consider the "6 points that he will lose because of race..."

While that's a generous estimate (generous for Republicans) let's not forget the African American population who are mobilized, (and other people of color) and voting (not just "staying home" if they are in the 18-24 age group) but VOTING - all ages. They are showing up in record numbers for early voting, and are registering to vote like never before. I seriously doubt that they are going to stay home this time. Those who haven't been able to take advantage of early voting will show up on election day.

This election cycle is VERY, VERY different from past elections, and the energy surrounding it is something entirely new.

Perhaps many African Americans have never felt like their voices were being heard, or their votes being counted. Maybe they watched year after year, election after election as"old white guys" fought for the presidency, and thought "what do they have in common with me?"

I am not speculating here. I live and work in a very culturally diverse area, and I talk to my colleagues quite a bit about this election. I have heard many people of color say they are "getting out there" for the first time and are voting for the first time, because they feel like the political landscape is finally opening up to include more people, from different walks of life, and they want to be a part of it - they want to cast their vote. Many already have, and it wasn't for McPasty.

So, while I realize that it's a Republican's wet dream that racists and Reluctant Floridian Jews are going to be the demographic that decides this election, that is bullshit. There are far more more people in this country who will show up and cast a vote for Barack Obama because they CAN identify with him than there are those who will not vote for him because he is black.

Think about it.


Inspired by Barack Obama, African Americans, and other people of color are realizing that one of their own may very well become President, and that their vote is important - that they can help make it happen. They are the OTHER side of the "percentage point difference that race is going to make."

Sure, some bigoted a-holes might refuse to vote for Obama simply because of his dreamy mocha skin, (their loss!) but MILLIONS will vote of him BECAUSE OF IT. (And because he is an awesome leader, with an amazing platform, and high hopes for this country.)

Please DUer's...don't let a miserable pessimistic article get you down. While I never advocate getting TOO confident, this article is way too one sided, way too unlikely.

[Avalux]

31. Alter was thinking (writing) out loud - he's nervous too.

He's got a very good point and reminds all of us we need to VOTE and makes sure everyone we know VOTES.

[onefreespiritedchick]

32. My, reading this article, make me even more nervous and downright depressed

However, I do believe it is a wake up call and gloomy reminder of 2000 and 2004. As we can't take nothing for granted, the polls - just nothing period .

[regnaD kciN]

33. Duplicate Post

[JetCityLiberal]

34. Non 'printer' Newsweek link, a better Headline look

http://www.newsweek.com/id/165657


Paul

[regnaD kciN]

35. The flaw in this premise...

In October, a study by the Associated Press estimated that Obama's race would cost him 6 percent. The percentage was smaller, but still enough to give the presidency to McCain.

Hey, let's not give Obama a break! Let's make it the whole ball of wax, and stipulate that there's a full 6 percent loss on Election Day at the polls. (Which is, in itself, questionable -- the study indicated that Obama was losing 6% overall in the polls because of race, not that he would suddenly have 3% of the electorate "flip" in the voting booth, costing him a total 6% due to that factor alone -- but let's grant it for the sake of argument).

So, what do we wind up with?

According to RCP (the most Republican-leaning of such sites I know), that would still leave Obama up by 1.8% overall. More to the point, it would also put him up by 4.8% in PA, 3.3% in NH, 1% in VA, and with razor-thin leads in CO and OH. In other words, even Newsweek's worst-case scenario would likely result in an Obama win. Switch to Pollster.com's averages, and it becomes a 2.2% margin overall.

In other words, if "the percentage is smaller," even Newsweek's uber-Bradley effect wouldn't change the outcome of the race. It doesn't mean that we should slack off, or fail to give 110% over the next ten days, but neither should we fail to recognize this for what it is -- a blatant scare-tactic designed to keep excitement up on the grounds that "it's going to be close!" Face it, if Obama was currently up by 25%, the media would give a ready hearing to someone who would predicate that the Bradley effect would actually result in a swing of 30%, and so on. It's called "moving the goalposts," and we certainly have become familiar with that behavior this year, haven't we?