Bell Curve The Law Talking Guy Raised by Republicans U.S. West
Well, he's kind of had it in for me ever since I accidentally ran over his dog. Actually, replace "accidentally" with "repeatedly," and replace "dog" with "son."

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Town Haul

The snap polls are all showing a big win for Obama. It's not so important that Obama "won." What's important is that no headlines tomorrow will say that McCain did well in the debate, or that McCain "won." McCain needs a game-changer to win this election. Tonight was not it. He looked like an angry old man who didn't really want to be there. And he so clearly hated Barack Obama, who - by contrast - looked like the calm, smart, young, energetic face of the future. 27 days to go.

NPR had a fascinating report on the newly registered voters since the Spring primaries, most in the last few weeks. Statistics on the Democratic effort are amazing. About 4 million new voters in battleground states, with Dems leading 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 in number of registrants. In North Carolina, where McCain didn't even try, new Democratic voters outnumber new Republican voters 6 to 1. That, my friends (to use the McCain line) is another real reason why Obama is leading in the polls today. They poll likely voters and registered voters. That sample is now more heavily skewing toward Obama. What that doesn't tell you is if the newly-registered voters will actually go out and vote. Many of them are what they call "sporadic voters" who are hard to count on. So those poll numbers may be softer than they appear.


Bob said...

Isn't a sporadic voter someone who's voted before, but doesn't usually? Does this mean the "newly registered" are transplants from other states, where they voted sporadically?

Dr. Strangelove said...

I thought I heard McCain trot out a brand new plan to help homeowners: he would have the federal government buy up hundreds of thousands of troubled mortgages from banks and other lenders, then renegotiate those loans with homeowners in terms based on the current, reduced value of the homes--presumably making payments easier and forgiving the extent to which these homeowners are "upside-down" on their mortgages. Did anyone else hear this? It seems like a fascinating proposal. I kept wondering what the catch was. Other than the price tag, which is large but need not be unreasonable.

Absorbing losses of $50,000 on half a million homes would be $25 billion. On the other hand, absorbing losses of $200,000 on 2 million homes would be $400 billion. So it's all about the scale.

Bert Q. Slushbrow, Sr. said...

One thing that struck me was when they did the interviews with "undecided" voters in Columbus, Ohio.

From the dial graph at the bottom my impression was that people were responding most favorably to Obama. From comments afterwards most of the crowd felt that Obama had won the debate. However when asked, "If you had to vote now..." most of them immediately picked McCain. In the VP debate one woman (also in Columbus) who identified herself as an undecided, registered democrat said that she was most impressed with Palin and would now support McCain/Palin. So, regarding these CNN "undecided" voter panels... methinks something is rotten in Denmark (no offense RBR).

Raised By Republicans said...

Yeah, I don't believe their "undecided voters" either. The "undecided voters" actually in the debate hall included several older white males and several black people. If they are undecided they are the only undecideds in their demographic in the country.

RE: McCain's new plan for mortgages. It will be seen, if it is seen at all, as "McCain response to the crisis version 3.1." He has a new response to this every few days. It doesn't help. What people want is steady hand on the economic tiller, not someone who is going to cycle through plans until he finds one that gives him a couple of points of boost in the polls.

The Law Talking Guy said...

McCain's plan isn't "new." The Treasury already has that authority under the current bailout plan. It just has to exercise it.

As for sporadic voters, Bob, many drop off the rolls by moving around or forget they ever registered. So they re-register. That's why I meant. New voters, unless they are young, are people who are so "sporadic" they may only have ever contemplated voting before in their adult lives, and are thus not reliable sources of votes either.

USwest said...

For the record, it took McCain until nearly the end of the debate to refer to Obama by his name. The "that one" comment didn't play well and I understand that the campaign may use that to bang McCain over the head with.

I don't think the relying on Vietnam was very effective for McCain. And I think he was weakest on health care. That plan of his is pure theft and I am glad Obama hit home hard on that. Obama's plan is by far better for everyone. My boyfriend, a good civil servant, just got hit with an $80K hospital bill of which he only has to pay $100. That is the type of health care that government employees get and it isn't expensive for the employee, either.

I noticed, watching the little meter, that when it came to drilling, the men were favorable, the women not. I am not sure if more scientific polling has been done on that.

About the meter: they only do that on CNN with like 12 people, right? So it isn't really a very good sample.

I agree with RBR. If black voters are "undecided" they need their heads examined.

Elvis said...

Okay US West...the drilling thing, then asking about polling...there are about 20 jokes in there, but that is charity, I'll leave it alone.

The dial test(meter) on MSNBC, was conducted with 100 folks in Philly, PA...and when McCain said he wanted to take 300 billion and use it to buy back home loans gone upside down, all three colors retreated rapidly, especially the republicans. And based on the right wing sites, they now think Obama can take on terrorists better than McCain! that is huge.

USwest said...

Thanks for leaving the Drilling alone.