I forgot about that, since it didn't matter to me. I guess if he'd picked Sarah as VP, it would've been ok.jim wrote:Mormon, right? Would they accept that?KyCardinalFan wrote:I think Romney would've done better in an election about the economy. However, when the candidates were selected during the primaries I'm sure most voting then thought this would be about national security and Iraq.jim wrote:Incumbant president most unpopular in the history of polling with an unpopular war and an economy in the tank. McCain was the best shot.BW23 wrote:You don't really believe that.jim wrote:I agree Mary.Mary1966 wrote:Who will they say it should have been? Romney? None of the other Republican candidates IMO could have done better than McCain.Richie Allen wrote:I said just yesterday that I'd give the right wing (Fox/Limbaugh.Hannity, etc...) a week before they jump on the "I told you all along it shouldn't have been McCain..."BW23 wrote:Ah, Fred. What could have been.....sighyoung wrote:A palliative: http://griffinroomblog.blogspot.com/200 ... chair.htmlBW23 wrote:That darn GOP.
Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin
- KyCardinalFan
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 5522
- Joined: May 31 06, 3:16 pm
- Location: Western Kentucky
Re: Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin
- clement
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 6022
- Joined: April 20 06, 10:26 pm
Re: Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin
I think McCain is gonna win Missouri, so I think the streak ends this year.KyCardinalFan wrote:So will Missouri keep it's reputation of voting for nearly every president?
Since there is no early voting in MO, Obama should have held off those massive rallies in STL and KC until this past week. Then he would have probably taken the state.
- KyCardinalFan
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 5522
- Joined: May 31 06, 3:16 pm
- Location: Western Kentucky
Re: Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin
That's what I'm thinking.UK wrote:It'll be close, but I think MO is going red while Obama wins the election.KyCardinalFan wrote:So will Missouri keep it's reputation of voting for nearly every president?
- BW23
- Hall Of Famer
- Posts: 13026
- Joined: July 7 06, 11:08 pm
Re: Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin
Okay. I misunderstood. I thought you meant, looking at what McCain has done since getting the nominee, that no other candidate could have done better. I know you really don't think that.jim wrote:Incumbant president most unpopular in the history of polling with an unpopular war and an economy in the tank. McCain was the best shot.BW23 wrote:You don't really believe that.jim wrote:I agree Mary.Mary1966 wrote:Who will they say it should have been? Romney? None of the other Republican candidates IMO could have done better than McCain.Richie Allen wrote:I said just yesterday that I'd give the right wing (Fox/Limbaugh.Hannity, etc...) a week before they jump on the "I told you all along it shouldn't have been McCain..."BW23 wrote:Ah, Fred. What could have been.....sighyoung wrote:A palliative: http://griffinroomblog.blogspot.com/200 ... chair.htmlBW23 wrote:That darn GOP.
- UK
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 4273
- Joined: December 10 06, 6:41 pm
- Location: Baseball Purgatory.
Re: Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin
It wouldn't have mattered IMO, it was worth trying to lock up FL, PA, and OH moreso than MO. There's a such a huge ground game difference between Obama and McCain in MO and all battleground states that it's more about ideals with the center of MO to offset campaigning in Springfield, MO.clement wrote:I think McCain is gonna win Missouri, so I think the streak ends this year.KyCardinalFan wrote:So will Missouri keep it's reputation of voting for nearly every president?
Since there is no early voting in MO, Obama should have held off those massive rallies in STL and KC until this past week. Then he would have probably taken the state.
- cpebbles
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 8838
- Joined: August 30 07, 12:28 pm
Re: Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin
As I said earlier, Romney wouldn't have taken such a hit from the economy falling apart, but Romney also wouldn't have been keeping the race close until a few months ago. The Republican nominee's big problem at this point is that he and George Bush both have an R after their names. McCain had the maverick shtick to fall back on, so he started out at an advantage over the other candidates.
- docellis
- America's Most Beloved Twitter Joke Thief
- Posts: 24838
- Joined: April 18 06, 6:54 pm
Re: Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin
I wonder how he'd be doing right now if he had picked anyone but Palin.
- KyCardinalFan
- Perennial All-Star
- Posts: 5522
- Joined: May 31 06, 3:16 pm
- Location: Western Kentucky
Re: Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin
I don't know, but I didn't want your question to get lost. Someone may know.planet pujolsian wrote:What happens to the Obama campaign's surplus $?
- docellis
- America's Most Beloved Twitter Joke Thief
- Posts: 24838
- Joined: April 18 06, 6:54 pm
Re: Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin
I don't know how accurate this is
http://ask.metafilter.com/80372/What-ha ... paign-ends
It depends entirely on the candidate. Sometimes they keep the money for their next campaign. Sometimes they give it to other candidates. It doesn't generally go to the party general fund.
A lot of times candidates go into debt. For instance, in 2004 Howard Dean ended his campaign $400,000 in debt despite raising more money than anyone else ever had.
In a lot of cases like this, this debt is paid off by the nominee. Hillary Clinton did this for Tom Vilsack when he dropped out earlier this year.
John Kerry on the other hand, got into trouble for having millions of dollars left over in his bank account after 2004. It will be interesting to see what Ron Paul does with all the money he has raised online if he is unable to win the republican primary contest.
I suspect if that is the case, his supporters will call for an independent run at the White House.
http://ask.metafilter.com/80372/What-ha ... paign-ends
-
- All-Star
- Posts: 2542
- Joined: April 18 06, 2:57 pm
Re: Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin
You can put your faith in polls generated by companies looking to earn a buck. Put your faith in polls with metrics having a 7-8 point lead in democrats just showing up at the polls, when history suggests that the spread has never been more than 4, and often ends up just about even for presidential elections. I'll look at more than the polls, considering the only one that matters is tomorrow.PujolJunkie wrote:I've already outlined the fact that Real Clear Politics' averages were completely, around 95%, spot on in 2004. It got 2 states wrong. One that was never polled, Hawaii, and Wisconsin. Two. Go look now. It's gonna end up that way or very close. Obama 300> EV and McCain will lose Pennsylvania. It's just not gonna happen.BenNX74205 wrote:I don't know about "percentage bluer" or "bluer than the nation." I don't really know what that means, and I didn't know it counted in an election.PujolJunkie wrote:I wouldn't be so positive of that.BenNX74205 wrote:Obama will not win Pennsylvania by 6 points. Put it on the board.PujolJunkie wrote:A Hayes Research poll just came out giving McCain just a 3 point lead in Alaska. Definitely an outlier, but funny to look at none the less.
EDIT: by the way, the supposed Pennsylvania tightening? It tightened to a 6 or 7 point Obama lead. Moderate Republicans came home to roost for McCain and he gained independents. It's still bluer than the nation by 3 or 4%.
It was 5% bluer than the rest of the Nation when Kerry won it. 6 isn't a stretch.
What I do know is that Gore won PA by 3.5% in 2000 and Kerry won PA by 2.5%. Pennsylvania is trending red, and the Democratic Voting Machine isn't geared up for this election.
What is so different between Ohio and Pennsylvania that OH is dead even and PA is a big Obama win? I'm telling you guys, these polls don't look like they're adding up to me. Yeah I could be wrong, and it's not like I'm pulling for McCain here. But I think a lot of people are going to be surprised how close this election is going to be.
If it was within the MoE%, you'd have a point. But PA is a 4 to 8 point win for Obama.
Maybe the polls will be right. Personally, I have a hard time believing Obama will win by 200 EVs. We'll see tomorrow night. Obama is not Jed Bartlet. The real world is not "The West Wing." Democratic presidential candidates don't win this type of victory, and the ones that do have extenuating circumstances on their side, or run a campaign atypical of the "standard liberal democrat."
I've given my reasons why the polls may not be right this time around. Look at history. Look at where the candidates are gearing up right before the election. But all I hear in response is "you're wrong the polls are always right." I think the pollsters are polling the America they want to see this time around, and their results are reinforcing their own beliefs. What is Obama doing visiting Iowa? What is McCain doing in Maine? If you go by the polls, they're both campaigning in states that are long since won by Obama. That doesn't make any sense. What McCain and Obama are doing does not line up with the polling data. Either both campaigns are run by complete idiots, or the polling data is wrong.
I await another set of pretty graphs and charts.