What are your pre-emptive reasons for Obama's loss?

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by Tex

We are 11 days before the election. Eleven days before the election in 2000 was October 27th, which your own link shows:

Bush: 52%
Gore: 39%

I don't know why you insist on being such an ass when it comes to defending Obama, but you sure do excel at it.

Foul-mouthed Tex.

Admittedly, an incarnation I had yet to see.

Keep those scriptures off the ground, hermano.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Did somebody else link this interesting article?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/us...prod=permalink

It seems some peoople say McCain still has a shot. The reasons are electoral college and blue state lop-sidedness overstating Obama's lead in the contest that counts, Obama's rough treatment of Joe the Plumber (seriously), Biden's gaffe predicting foreign policy nghtmare to occur early in Obama's presidency, Obama oversaturation and sense of entitlement (NPR had an extended piece on this risk), and yes, racism in rust belt and Appalacian states, including voters lying to pollsters about how they will vote.

I was surprised to read McCain's guy say that McCain is in a comparable place as Gore was a week before the election in 2000. Is that right?

Sure, he technically still has a shot. That is true in every single election until the votes are cast. In order to win, McCain almost has to take Pennsylvania. If he loses Pennsylvania, he needs to win all of the following states:

Florida
Virginia
North Carolina
New Mexico/Colorado (he would need one, and if he only gets New Mexico, it is a tie)
Indiana
Ohio
Missouri
North Dakota
Montana
Nevada
Georgia
Mississippi
West Virginia

If he wins Pennsylvania, he can win if he also gets Ohio and still lose the following states from the list above:

New Mexico
Colorado
Nevada
Missouri

That is a bit of a cushion, but it isn't much. If he wins Missouri, he can lose Virginia, and vice-versa. Still, there aren't many scenarios that look good for him right now.

He is currently losing in the following states (according to the most recent polls):

Florida (Miami Herald Poll: -7; Qunnipaic poll: -5)
Indiana (Survey USA: -4; Big 10: -9.5)
Montana (-4.2)
North Carolina (-2)
Ohio (Big 10: -11.5; Quinnipaic: -14)
Penn (Big 10: -10.4; Morning Call: -10; National Journal: -10; Quinnipaic: -13; Survey USA: -12)
Florida (-2.2)
Missouri (-1.6)
Virginia (-7)
New Mexico (-7)
Colorado (-5)
Nevada (-3)
North Dakota (-3)
New Hampshire (-5)

Good luck with that.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

I disagree. They seem to be turning out heavily already in early voting. Whether you like Obama or not, you have to acknowledge that his ground game is one of the best to have ever been assembled. I think the ground game gets the 18-24 crowd to vote. Heck- most of the ground game is built with 18-24 year olds.

we'll see. Early voting is not a good indication because it's going to be the most passionate who vote early, and they can be any age. But I hope you're right that the younger crowd is going to show up this time because the Libertarians are heavily dependent on them as well.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by BlueK

we'll see. Early voting is not a good indication because it's going to be the most passionate who vote early, and they can be any age. But I hope you're right that the younger crowd is going to show up this time because the Libertarians are heavily dependent on them as well.

I don't think it is the most passionate. To the contrary, I think the Obama ground game is focusing on those people who express an interest in voting for Obama, but not a lot of passion, which would indicate they may not vote on election day unless they are led to the polls by a campaign helper. It is much easier to get them to vote early so the campaign can focus on other people on election day.

[il Padrino Ute]

Crying racism would be the coward's way to explain a loss, so I'm going to go with that. His "I don't look like the Presidents on the currency" comment has already shown that he'll go down that road.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Crying racism would be the coward's way to explain a loss, so I'm going to go with that. His "I don't look like the Presidents on the currency" comment has already shown that he'll go down that road.

You and Arch are unbelieveable. Truly.

We're not saying that everyone who votes against Obama is a racist. But we're saying that if his race is causing him to lose three rust belt states and three in the Appalachians, then that cost him the election.

You can deny it all you want, but that doesn't make it false.

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

You and Arch are unbelieveable. Truly.

We're not saying that everyone who votes against Obama is a racist. But we're saying that if his race is causing him to lose three rust belt states and three in the Appalachians, then that cost him the election.

You can deny it all you want, but that doesn't make it false.

NOW you're starting to argue like me.

Best. Post. Ever.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

NOW you're starting to argue like me.

Best. Post. Ever.

oh dear goodness this can't be good.

[YOhio]

I'd be interested in seeing how many first time voters are participating with race as their primary motivation.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by YOhio

I'd be interested in seeing how many first time voters are participating with race as their primary motivation.

lots and they're all black.