The AP has come out with a preposterous item claiming that the race between Obama and McCain has "tightened." This would seem to be a set-up for a "close" election after all, and one, therefore, that John McCain could "win"--as Michael Collins notes below.
Michael's point is not at all far-fetched, considering not just the Bush Republicans' amazing record of anomalous "wins" throughout this decade, but Big John's statement just today that he can guarantee a victory next week.
Well, such a victory would be.... remarkable. Here, at the bottom, is Salon's piece on the prediction by veteran analyst Charlie Cook of the National Journal. Cook foresees an "Obama Grand Slam" on Election Day.
Now, let us not forget that other sages from Inside The Beltway said the same four years ago. I recall distinctly Sidney Blumenthal's pre-E-Day think-piece laying out the reasons why George W. Bush was going to lose to Kerry. (Afterward, there never was a peep from Sid about the unexpectedness--and inexplicability--of that outcome.)
But Obama's way more popular than Kerry, and McPalin's way less popular than Bush (who wasn't very popular at all, even in the GOP), and the economy is tanking so egregiously that no-one could or would say otherwise.
Thus a startling turnabout this time will raise a lot more eyebrows, and raise them a lot higher, than in 2004.
And yet there are plenty of dim bulbs and true believers out there who will swallow anything; and not a few of them are working for the media.
So this is not a time for any rational American to be complacent.
MCM
From Michael Collins:
Sen. John McCain refused to answer questions from NBC's Tom Brokaw on "Meet the Press" Sunday morning about national polls that show the GOP candidate far behind his Democratic opponent on every major issue but the war in Iraq.
An accurate outcome is essential in 2008. It's all about an election outcome that's consistent with the votes cast. That's a starting point to restore popular control of the government. Despite growing leads and consistent polling, there are elements of the media trying to create the notion of a tightening race and a "too close to call election." Why?
Setup for a Stolen Election? AP Poll "Tightens" Race to a Point - 44% - 43%
John Zogby put it more succinctly than I, "The AP poll is not only an outlier, it's just preposterous!"
There are too many votes to hide in order to steal this one but where there's a will, there's a way. It's vital to have truly honest and provable elections in order to address the pressing cancers of every citizen.
McCain on Polls: 'I don't agree' with them
David Edwards and Andrew McLemore
Published: Sunday October 26, 2008
Do most polls show McCain slipping farther behind Obama? Yes. Does McCain believe them?
Not so much.
Not so much.
Sen. John McCain refused to answer questions from NBC's Tom Brokaw on "Meet the Press" Sunday morning about national polls that show the GOP candidate far behind his Democratic opponent on every major issue but the war in Iraq.
In one poll shown by Brokaw, Sen. Barack Obama has a 39-point lead on the issue of health care. But McCain said it would be a waste of his time to talk about polls with which he doesn't agree.
"We have polls showing us three or four points behind," McCain said. "I'm sure we don't want to spend the morning arguing about polls that are accurate or inaccurate."
The Republican candidate told Brokaw that he can "guarantee" victory come election night in what he claims will be a tight race that will keep Americans "up late."
McCain referred to a Zogby poll that places Obama in a less commanding, 5-point lead and said Americans "just figured out" that Obama's platform isn't what they want.
"We have polls showing us three or four points behind," McCain said. "I'm sure we don't want to spend the morning arguing about polls that are accurate or inaccurate."
The Republican candidate told Brokaw that he can "guarantee" victory come election night in what he claims will be a tight race that will keep Americans "up late."
McCain referred to a Zogby poll that places Obama in a less commanding, 5-point lead and said Americans "just figured out" that Obama's platform isn't what they want.
"He wants to spread the wealth around and every time there's a poll, there's a different tax plan," McCain said. "He wants to raise taxes, in a time of economic difficulties. The last time a president of the United States did that was a guy name Herbert Hoover."
But a pollster explained why he thinks polls that continue to show a close presidential should be treated with skepticism in an article on Salon.com.
"Leave it to the Republicans to doubt the polls, to pin their hopes on the possibility that all these different survey firms have got it wrong," wrote pollster Paul Maslin. "From my perspective, barring some unforeseen circumstance in the next 11 days, all that remains to be seen is the margin of victory, and whether, as these polls seem to be hinting, we're headed for a landslide."
By Alex Koppelman
Saturday, Oct. 25, 2008 10:54 EDT
Charlie Cook: Obama Grand Slam
Charlie Cook, analyst and National Journal columnist, is saying what superstitious, once-bitten-twice-shy Democrats are privately thinking but won't dare utter:
By every metric, Barack Obama's presidential campaign appears headed for the upper deck. Polls (both national and state-by-state), organization, money, and momentum are all running strongly in Obama's favor. At this point, one wonders whether Obama's winning margin could be greater than Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton's 5.6-point win over President George H.W. Bush in 1992, more than Bush's 7.7-point win over Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis in 1988, or more than Clinton's 8.5-point win over Sen. Bob Dole in 1996. Even higher on the landslide roster is California Gov. Ronald Reagan's 9.7-point victory over President Carter in 1980 and Gen. Dwight Eisenhower's 10.9-point win over Adlai Stevenson in 1952.
Certainly, the 2008 presidential contest could reverse direction and result in victory for John McCain. But at this point, he would have to be the beneficiary of something quite dramatic for that to happen.
As this campaign has shifted from a surprise-around-every-corner situation to one more akin to watching concrete set, many observers have begun playing "What if?" If McCain had picked someone other than Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate, would he now be higher in the polls? If the senator from Arizona had waged this battle more as John McCain 1.0, the 2000-vintage candidate who was more of a maverick and less of a partisan than the 2008 version, could he have succeeded because he was less tied to his Republican Party and less joined at the hip with President Bush?
These are interesting questions, but they avoid one unmistakable fact: This is a toxic political environment for Republicans. That's why they will probably lose at least seven seats in the Senate and at least 20 in the House.
Here's another way to look at the magnitude of a possible grand-slam win: If Obama gets to 54 percent -- roughly an 8-point margin, consistent with Obama's current RealClearPolitics poll-of-poll lead now -- it will be the highest share of the national popular vote received by a non-incumbent president since 1952.
