Important Update on Sarah Palin

Check out the People Magazine article...

Meanwhile, the attacks on her have begun...go here for a pretty good response.

Alaskan Earthquake

On March 27, 1964, the most powerful earthquake in modern North American history hit 75 miles east of Anchorage Alaska.

Today, August 29, 2008, a second Alaskan event hit the 2008 Presidential campaign: Governor Sarah Palin was announced as John McCain's VP pick. Is that street Barack Obama's presidential hopes?

Ok, perhaps a cheap analogy, but the biggest thing this unexpected bombshell announcement did is send the mainstream media scrounging for background information on Governor Palin, as opposed to continuous fawning praise for Obama's rock concert and acceptance speech last night. Obama's speech is now ancient history. Palin in the media's new hot property.

Wow. Just Wow. Who knew the "old man" had it in him to gamble like this.

It's certain that the media and Democrat pundits will try to paint this as a desperate move to reach out to disgruntled Hillary supporters. But this is much more. This is a way to keep the more moderate McCain as the standard bearer for the party while energizing the base that elected George Bush in the last two elections.

Everyone, Republican hierarchy included, was surprised by this move. The media were stunned and the Democrats were so speechless that their initial response was unseemly and bitter. It was quickly replaced as it became clear that this was not consistent with the theme of "hope and change."

What was the initial Obama campaign response? You won't believe it.

“Today, John McCain put the former mayor of a town of 9,000 with zero foreign policy experience a heartbeat away from the presidency. Governor Palin shares John McCain’s commitment to overturning Roe v. Wade, the agenda of Big Oil and continuing George Bush’s failed economic policies — that’s not the change we need, it’s just more of the same,” said Bill Burton, Obama Campaign Spokesman.

AS the Brits say, "bad form, old chap." A second "kinder and gentler" response was posted an hour or so later, and survives on the Obama website, but the damage had been done. Several pro-Hillary websites have been working and hoping that Hillary would get on the Dem ticket. When she was passed over for longtime Senator Joe Biden, they vowed to back McCain or perhaps stay home in November. Now, under the banner of PUMA (Party Unity My A**), they are strongly behind the McCain ticket, having a "filly" in the race. To quote one of the websites with the most "web hits", "Uppity Woman":

You blew it Barky. Iron our shirts.

(Barky is a term many Obama opponents use because of his clipped diction when he is in "attack mode")

What kind of impact will this have on the race? Isn't this a risky choice for McCain?

Yes, it is. I encourage you to read some articles on Governor Palin here, here, here, here, and here. Be patient with that last one...they crashed the Alaska website today! She will bring some controversy to the dance, so to speak. But she also brings some fire into the campaign. McCain seems unconcerned that she will carry some of the attention for a while. He's been there quite a lot. It shows that he cares about uniting his base; it's uncertain from the polling data if Obama's choice of Biden did much for the Democrats. It also shows that he is willing to take risks. He had drawn the race to even in the last few weeks; some polls even showed him with a slight lead.

Obama had withdrawn some advertising from some key states right before the convention, essentially conceding those states. This will also allow McCain to concentrate more on the states he feels he needs to either secure, or turn from blue to red, in order to be elected. But it does something else.

With conservatives, some of whom had grumbled about McCain's nomination, talking about staying home, they are suddenly enervated about the selection of a pro-life, hunting, fishing, and oil drilling Governor Palin. She is also young enough to have a bright future in the Republican party, after McCain's 2nd term...or even after only his first, should he choose to only serve one term. Wouldn't a race between Vice President Palin and Hillary Clinton be delicious?

Finally, it's also the kind of choice that will open some wallets for the ticket. This will have a short term benefit since McCain will not be able to spend any more of his donated money once the Republican convention is over, since he has chosen to accept public financing for his campaign. But what is MOST important for McCain is that all those volunteers who helped elect Bush but were going to "sit this one out" now will get behind this ticket.

And studies have shown that volunteers are much more effective than paid workers.

McCain's military leadership may have shown through here. One of the ways you get to be a top officer is by recognizing leadership skills in others and promoting them. We will see if the former Navy aviator has picked a rising star or gambled it all on a not-ready-for-prime-time governor...

I'm betting the former POW knows what he is doing...

Coach

A relay to Remember

Well, it sure was a thrill for this "coach" to see the incredible determination and grit of the USA's 400 Free Relay last night in Beijing. It may be hard for people to imagine just what a big boost this was for the sport in this country. What? Coach, are you nuts, the USA has dominated this sport for decades!

True, there were years there where if we didn't sweep an event, we were slacking. You didn't see any "third world" countries represented in the Olympics (I doubt if Zimbabwe, for instance, even HAD any Olympic size pools until the last 20 years. Now they have one of the most dominating female swimmers in the world -- Kirsty Coventry. Coventry did her college swimming at Auburn University) Today, the US sometimes has a difficult time getting a swimmer onto the medal platform, as happened last night in the 100 breastroke, where the defending Olympic champion was shut out.

There has been plenty of speculation about the "decline" of US swimming, but most of the difference is the rise of the rest of the world and the welcome proliferation of facilities and experienced coaching. Others speculate that American swimmers are less likely to be willing to sacrifice "a life" to the incredible conditioning and mental focus required to be successful at the world level. In many countries, success in sports is a way for a family to rise above poverty. In the US, there are so many distractions that become road blocks to winning at an Olympic games. Add the fierce attention of the US media and the pressure on US athletes will quickly separate the champions from the also-rans.

But there was something about Sunday night's US freestyle relay that was written as if for a Hollywood movie. There, on the blocks, leading off, was Michael Phelps. Phelps has been touted by the television suits as the next Mark Spitz (and well on the way to living up to that moniker). The US had dominated this event for years until the hometown Aussies took it from them in Sydney in 2000 and the US team had taken a bitter pill in a bronze medal at Athens in 2004. Relay anchorman Jason Lezak had felt the disappointment of the silver medal race in Sydney and had been on that bronze medal Athens team, as had Phelps, and Lezak stated after the race that he had determined that he was NOT going through that again.

The French were the favorites going into the finals. Former 100 meter freestyle world record holder Alain Bernard had shot his mouth off about the race stating, "we are going to smash the Americans. That is what we have come here for." Don't count "le poulet" before it hatches, Alain.

As Bernard took off to complete the French triumph, Lezak seemed too far behind to catch the 6'5" Frenchman. Bernard, called Le Cheval(the Horse) by his countrymen, seemed to throw a shoe in the last 25 meters as the 32 year-old Lezak cast his walker and cane aside as he caught Bernard at the wall by 8/100s of a second.

What was Lezak thinking down the stretch? The years of frustration? The agony of the silver at Sydney and the bronze at Athens?

"I'm not going to lie," Lezak said. "When I flipped at the 50 and I still saw how far ahead he was, and he was the world-record holder 'til about two minutes before that, when Sullivan led off with the world record, I thought, it really crossed my mind for a split second, there's no way.

"Then I changed. I said, you know what, that's ridiculous. This is the Olympics. I'm here for these guys. I'm here for the United States of America. It's more than -- I don't care how bad it hurts, or whatever, I'm just going to go out there and hit it.

"Honestly, in like 5 seconds, I was thinking all these things -- you know, just got like a super charge and took it from there. It was unreal."

Yea, old man. This Perrier's for you!

Coach

The dog days of August

Hi gang! I hope summer is going well for those who enjoy reading this blog. I recently finished my summer adult ed classes so I hope to be more up to date with the blog!

A quick look at the state of the presidential election...

Things have tightened up quite a bit since mid-July. Most polls have the race between a slight Obama lead and a tie. One USA Today poll of likely voters had McCain ahead but for now, we will consider that an outlier since no one else seems to have any results close to it. An outlier is when your polling data somehow falls outside of the statistical margin of error. Weird things can happen with polling, since all it is is an estimate of where public opinion stands at any point in time with a specific population.

But there is little doubt that the comfortable lead Obama once had nationally is gone an it is looking like the close contests we have had in this decade. So where does it stand right now?

On a state by state basis, Obama still looks to be ahead. This is to be expected because this is the peak of the 16 year presidential election cycle that has held true for most of the past century. The only break in that cycle was the special circumstance that led FDR to win 4 elections, followed by Truman's victory. 16 years ago...Bill Clinton...16 years earlier...Jimmy Carter...16 years previous...JFK.It's not perfect, but it certainly fits in well with the rise of the independent voter as party loyalties continue to decline.

After GW Bush benefited from the mid-cycle Republican peak in 2000, it would naturally turn to the Democrats to benefit. This is mainly resulting from the tendency of "independents" to favor one party for 8 years, and then vote differently because it's now "time for the other party to see what it can do." Independents are different kinds of voters than party loyalists; they vote based on what the candidate will most do for "me." After 8 years of Bush and the Republicans, independents would naturally turn to the Democrats to see what they will do for "them." They began this process by electing a Democratic congress in 2006. That has, however, led to a congress with the lowest national approval polling numbers ever.

With the strong national awareness of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as the nation's first woman Speaker of the House, much of the unhappiness about the Congress' latest term might be laid at their feet. Will the 16 year cycle bail them out? Perhaps. But Pelosi and her Democratic party-run Congress are in big trouble with the American people.

Remember how in past posts, I have talked about watching what politicians do more than what they say? When the Democrats rammed through an adjournment for their 5 week summer break last Friday, they succeeded by only one vote and with howls from the Republican House members who wanted a vote on an energy bill that included a removal of the Congressional ban on offshore drilling for US oil companies. Pelosi's answer was that she was "trying to save the planet" but Americans are a basically fair people and they don't like the idea of preventing congressmen from at least debating and then voting on an oil drilling bill when gasoline is at $4 a gallon.

After the adjournment, the Republican house members took to the floor to speak out against these strong-arm tactics, as the Speaker's office mandated the cutoff of CSPAN cameras and the microphones and lights were turned off. This was a major publicity coup for the demoralized Republican members of the house who believe that they have been handed a popular issue that cuts across party lines: gas prices.

What has happened since then? The Republicans continue to show up there every day in the House and speak, even though the mikes and cameras remain off. It's great theater for the large crowds of American vacationers who had expected nothing but empty chambers in the nation's Capitol. What good does this do them?

1) It builds their image of "the party looking out for YOU", and presents the Democrats as the party out playing golf, raising money, and riding in limos, and trying to hype a poorly selling book that has been getting more than it's fair share of spoofing here and here.. It doesn't matter if that is true or not, it plays well. The lack of media coverage is less of a problem in the day of the "new media". Cell phone movies of Republicans calling for congress to come back in session and vote on the drilling bill have been shown on Fox News Channel, web sites, and will continue for the summer. Expect to have those emailed to you all summer.

2) The Republicans must be seeing polling data showing it has hit a chord with the nation, or they would have stopped after the weekend. They are energized as they see the Speaker has put her party in a difficult bind. The longer gas prices stay high, the greater the effect this could have in polling data and in fund raising for a party that has been getting told "NO" by a lot of the donors who helped Bush win re-election. They may not like McCain that much but they would LOVE to return Pelosi to Minority leader. This is still unlikely...but if trends stay strong for a while, it's not unthinkable.

3)The Democrats won their "landslide" congressional victory in 2006 with a number of 53-47 wins. Not many "independents" will have to switch their votes in order for the House up for grabs once again. This would be the Democrats worst nightmare.

Add to that the challenge facing Obama lately, and you can see why the Democrats are getting more nervous every day as we approach the time for the party convention in Denver. Obama is heading to Hawaii for some R & R, but in reality, this is the perfect time to do this as Americans start to tune out politics for a short while and focus on the Summer Olympics in Beijing. Both candidates have bought $5-6 million in advertising in the games. Watch what each choose to show in this prime visibility offering. If they stay with the same theme...or, more importantly, take a different direction, that will be significant.

Obama has much to be worried about of late. Remember that it is a 51 state election, and some very important states are either falling out of his reach or suddenly in play. For example, check out these latest polls from Massachusetts, Oregon, Florida, and Wisconsin(which should be an Obama runaway), just for a few. He is accusing McCain of being in the pocket of Big Oil, but actual campaign contributions paint a very different picture of just who is getting money from "Big Oil." MoveOn.org is planning a number of ads attacking Republicans on the oil issue but even top Obama supporters are concerned that they may backfire on the presumptive nominee.

And Hillary Clinton is waiting in the wings. He is NOT the nominee yet. If just 120 odd superdelegates decide to either switch or abstain on the first ballot, then all bets are off because most committed delegates are free to vote their conscience after the first ballot. Hillary is quietly letting them know that she is still there and can BEAT McCain. She is being very demure about perhaps wanting her name placed in nomination. And Obama has shown his overconfidence by doing what I said he would do someday: argued that all the delegates from Florida and Michigan to have their full representation. She's has to be THRILLED at that...it makes the number needed to cause a second ballot even smaller. Bad move, Barack...fair, but you are up against the Clintons.

And what did Bill mean the other day, when asked about supporting Obama for the nomination that he was "I think everybody's got a right to run for President who qualifies under the Constitution." For the man who wanted to be sure everyone agreed on what the definition of "'is' is", this is a curious statement. Many bloggers are digging into Obama's past wondering why they have been unable to find his birth certificate. Some suspect it's just an "embarrassing" name change, (Indonesian stepfather Lolo Soetolo?) but some question if he was born in the USA. Personally, I think this is garbage, but on the other hand, it's just the kind of thing the Clintons have been known to release as we get close to a big decision in order to "muddy the waters." If a major news outlet deals with this kind of story right before Denver...well, think about "cui bono"...who benefits.

To be sure, with the 16 year presidential cycle at his back, he is still the favorite, even though I would personally not bet on him at this point (Dukakis was ahead of GHW Bush by 13 at this point). A certain amount of "Obama fatigue" is setting in as it seems obvious to many Americans that the press favors him. People are starting to speculate about his short resume...and finding it wanting. He needs to stop making off-hand stumbles like this, this, this, and the symbol at the start of this blogpost.

Meanwhile, Old Tortoise McCain gets the right kind of "regular guy" visibility that are making Joe Six-Pack think about voting Republican for the first time in his life.

McCain survived the Hanoi Hilton...he can certainly take on Barack Obama.

It's the end of civilization as we know it...

Yes, for once, this is not about politics.

This needs no real comment. Just get out your magnifying glass and read the title of the articles. Sigh.

What I said earlier...

If you doubted my contention about the public polls not fully reflective of Obama's real standing in the presidential horse race, the public polls are being forced to be "more accurate. Rasmussen and Newsweek in particular are reflecting this today.

Obama's latest Hail Mary is an attempt to be JFK with a speech in Berlin.

Europeans cannot vote in our elections.

For those who like my other blog, Lincoln's Ghost, an unvarnished politically biased blog, I have some new cartoons up. I expect to put editorial cartoons reflecting my views on the issues up on a weekly basis.

Coach

You only change positions when you are in trouble

Obama is in trouble; he knows it, McCain knows it, why doesn't the media know it?

As Victor Davis Hanson points out in a recent article, Obama has created more flip-flops than a Hawaiian footwear manufacturer over the last few weeks. It has resulted in some bitter unhappiness in some of the liberal blogosphere that only a few weeks ago was ready to wash his feet with the hairs of their head. Critical photoshop pieces like above have sprung up on those websites.

Let's think this through. If he were truly ahead across the nation, like we are being told, would he change his position? If he were winning Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, etc. like polls reported in the news say, would he need to change his message? If McCain was running behind him, would McCain or Obama be more likely to completely change his position and run more to "the middle"? If Obama was likely to be the next president if the election were held today, would he be casting aside his positions on Iraq, oil drilling, NAFTA, military force, Iran, gun rights, taxes, immigration, faith-based programs, public campaign financing, the FISA wiretaps, North Korea, Cuba, Afghanistan, the Palestinians and Israel? Will he soon be wearing a ten-gallon hat and attending NASCAR races?

Why is he doing this?

Because he is LOSING the election. When you are losing, as I have said a nauseatingly large number of times on this blog, you change your position to reflect where the voters are, hoping that will change your numbers in states where you must win. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. What it counts on is a) voters don't know it's a change and like your position and will support your candidacy now, or b) voters feel better about you now and will NOW support you based on your NEW stance. If your old stance was fine with the voters, and you felt where you stood would eventually result in your election, YOU CHANGE LITTLE TO NOTHING. And as master strategist Karl Rove notes in this excellent analysis, people WILL notice you have changed your views.

McCain has done his own changing, but nothing like Obama has. He has emphasized oil drilling and gone silent on his opposition to drilling in (the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve) He may end up supporting drilling in ANWR if it ever comes up for a vote again. But it is unlikely that he will ever volunteer to bring up his support for a ban on drilling there because the public is for it in increasing numbers as $4 a gallon gas bites hard on the public wallet. McCain is actually finding that the public is coming more in line with his views: on Iraq and the success of the surge, taxes, oil drilling, and other key election issues. That's why Obama has to keep hitting the only issue that will always put McCain on the defensive: his party's leader is George W. Bush. And this is why McCain will always take opportunities to highlight his differences with the unpopular president and indicate how those stances remain unchanged...unlike the stances of his opponent, Obama.

What about all that money Obama has raised? What about it? If money were the decider, Romney would be running against Howard Dean's attempt at a second term! Money, as I have said, can hurt if you lack it, or hurt if you overuse it and turn voters off with overkill. I have just spent a few days in Pennsylvania. Obama's ads are constant here...watching in the hotel lobby, I noticed the local custodial help watch 5 secs of it and walk away to keep changing the linen. They already know what he represents. Or are they wondering...?

Here's a little secret...VERY SELDOM DO VOTERS CHANGE THEIR MINDS ONCE THEY HAVE DECIDED THEY LIKE OR DISLIKE A CANDIDATE. This is bad news for Obama in those midwestern battleground states. These are the ones where Hillary, the candidate that the media told us should drop out because she couldn't win, defeated him time and time again; sometimes in massive margins. Other than his home state of Illinois, he couldn't win late midwestern battleground state primaries. Do you think that was because people loved Hillary and didn't believe the delegate totals that showed she had almost no chance of winning, or because they wanted to cast a vote AGAINST OBAMA. Many of those longtime Democrats in those states didn't like having a candidate as the leader of their party who listened to a preacher who shouted, in their view, hateful sermons about America. They dislike Bush, but the also were very uncomfortable with Obama as the party standard-bearer. Where do they go now?

Obama may have to let the dust settle in those states and hope that his NEW positions play better there. That's why Obama is taking his pot full of money and going to red states like Montana and North Dakota. What chance does he have there? None. But then things aren't moving his way in Ohio or Michigan either. You have the money, try showing up in Red State Land and see if the polls move. If they do, you can tout how you are doing well in a strong red state and perhaps that will move people in your direction in other states in a bandwagon fashion. It can't hurt, and it may help. But this is not the strategy of a person who is on a roll. If you are strong, you keep pounding your message in those big midwestern battleground states. You need them to win, and you don't want your opponent to make any progress there. And why waste money in small red states that don't have many electoral voters.

I know I risk sounding like a broken record here, especially if the dynamic doesn't change in the next several months. And if Obama wins a huge landslide, as his cheering section in the media would have us believe, then I doubt if anyone except a handful of friends and family will ever log onto this blog again. (as if that wasn't most of the audience for this blog to begin with!)

But I don't think I'm wrong. To be honest, do any of us ever think we are? If we do, then we change. Could that be what is happening to Candidate Obama? ;)

Coach

I'm not dead yet...

Fans of Monty Python will recognize this quote from their scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. A small village is trying to get through the latest run of the Black Death and as the cart goes through the lanes, a local asks the man running the body cart if he can put someone on who is "not dead yet, but will be soon." Even though the person in question avers that he is "feeling much better" and begins to sing, the cart man helps his friend out by clubbing the old man and putting him on the cart because, after all the cart won't be back for several days.

Our national media is trying to portray the Republican Party as "dead man walking" and Senator Obama simply passing the time until he becomes President Obama. These are the same know-it-alls who were selling tickets to Hillary Clinton's inauguration in December. Their track record is not so good.

Where does the race stand today?

I told you to keep your eyes on where the candidates go. I also have talked before about watching what they say, and if it represents a change from their past positions. To a great extent, candidates must appeal to their party's base in a primary and to the great middle in the general election.

McCain was a bit unorthodox. He did NOT go after his party base in the primary. He largely was trying to appeal to independents and disgruntled Democrats and got enough cross-over votes to win the nomination in a relatively unexpectedly easy finish to the campaign.

Obama had to go a much more traditional route and had a much tougher go of it. Let's face it, it's harder to defeat the Clintons than it is to defeat Mitt Romney. Especially when you have Mike Huckabee running interference for you down south!

Now Obama is in the position of having to "modify" some of his stances. His attempts to morph his Iraq stance is the most obvious one. Fortunately, his legions of admirers will permit him to make these verbal changes if it helps him win the White House. It is earning him criticism even from staunch supporters like the editorial board of the New York Times.

Will it hurt his chances to win?

Those last Democratic primaries continue to haunt the Obama campaign. Can he win back the blue-collar Democrat voters in the Midwest? Some data suggests many of those votes were not for Hillary but more against Obama. How many fit this category? We don't know. But that will be key in November.

Polling data continues to suggest that the Midwest will be the deciding region, once again, in November. Keep an eye on Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

Where are the candidates traveling? Recently, Obama has been in Missouri, Ohio, Colorado, North Dakota, Montana, and then back to DC. These are Red States. If he cannot make good progress in the polls there, after the convention, he will go back to the battleground states of Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota.

He has to try to take some of these smaller Red states if he is going to offset potential losses in Ohio and Florida. The problem is, it takes a LOT of those tiny Red states to offset the electoral votes lost if you have to concede Florida and Ohio.

He'd better keep his eye on Pennsylvania...that would make it near impossible.

McCain has been reestablishing his "conservative" bona fides in Red and "purple" states like Nevada, Ohio, and Indiana, but then he does some strange things. He goes to California (not a chance) Pennsylvania (should worry Obama) and then this strange little episode in Mexico. That is a pure play for the Latino vote, and after the hard feelings from the campaign with Hillary (who dominated the Latino vote) Obama should worry about that. Obama's response was to have a fundraiser in Miami. Not quite the same demographic, Barack. Most of those former Cubans are hard-core Republicans who still hate Fidel.

Keep an eye on these guys. Remember, the media created polls are worthless. The campaign polls are very good, and probably tell each other the same things. It is also driving their visits. If the visits result in better polling in that state, they will go back there over and over. Until the results stop improving; then they will go somewhere else. At the end of the campaign, it may simply be the result of "well if we don't win this state, it's over." That why John Kerry spent almost all of the month of October in Ohio, and outspent Bush 3-1 there. It didn't work.

Which brings up the subject of money. Is it the difference maker? Can be. It can also backfire. Obama outspent Hillary in Pennsylvania 3-1. She beat him solidly when polls showed him with a slight lead. Many feel that if he had put more of that money towards "walking around money" in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh's heavily black inner city boroughs that he could have made it much closer. He chose not to. Big mistake.

He also heavily outspent her in West Virginia and lost by 40 points. In that state, there is reason to believe that the overkill from too many media buys made the loss worse. So money is not the cure for negative voter attitudes, but it can kill a campaign if you don't have enough. Consider campaign money to be like oxygen: you need it to stay alive but you don't want to hyperventilate!

I will be traveling next week, a little history vacation in preparation for my summer adult education courses on both Benjamin Franklin and the US Civil War. I am looking forward to revisiting Gettysburg, Philadelphia, and Mount Vernon. And I will be seeing Williamsburg and the Antietam battlefield for the first time. I will try to post at some point.

Have some great summer fun and a belated happy Fourth of July!

On that note, I strongly encourage you to read Victor Davis Hanson's latest post on what makes America so incredible. You who read this little blog know how much I treasure Professor Hanson's thoughts. This one is a real keeper.

Coach

Food for thought

After my post on polls the Quinnapiac company came out with several polls showing Obama leading in places that he lost badly in the primaries. I was rather doubtful of the accuracy of the polls, but was wary about my possible prejudice based on my investment of my authorship of a recent blog post on this subject.

I looked back in some archives and came up with this interesting brief but instructive information.

ABC/Washington Post polls:

June 2004: Bush 42, Kerry 48

June 2008: McCain 42, Obama 48

Anyone wanna take a guess on who had lower favorability ratings in June of those years, Bush or McCain? I rest my case. Keep your eyes on the candidates and their reactions.

Coach

How do you get to 270?

The challenge for Barack Obama this election is very simple: How do you take away enough "red" states from the Republicans (and hold onto the same "blue" states) to get 270 electoral votes and win the election. It's not likely to end up with that different a result from the last two elections.

The polling this year has made this kind of planning even more difficult. You have to realize that there are two kind of polls these days. You have the media made polls that are usually a combination of a newspaper and a TV network: NBC/WSJ, CNN/USA Today, etc. Those are usually made to have something to write about. The media companies will order a poll of a certain size (bigger is more expensive) and there is not a lot of pressure for accuracy until the weeks previous to the election.

You also have the advertisement poll: polling organizations run polls so that later they can brag that they "got it right...or 'righter' than everyone else." This is the kind reported in the press as "a new Gallup poll says", etc. Polling organizations like Survey USA, Zogby international, Rasmussen Reports, etc. constantly poll. "National" polls are worthless. Why?

It's important that you understand this fact: There is NO SUCH THING AS A NATIONAL ELECTION IN THE USA. What we will have this fall are regional and state elections. What about the presidential election? It's a 51 state election. 51? Yes, the Electoral College is the method we use to choose our presidents. And the District of Columbia, not a state, gets 3 electoral votes as designated in the Twenty-Third Amendment to the US Constitution.

So...the ONLY polls that mean ANYTHING are state polls. Here is where the SECOND type of polling comes into play. Internal polls. One of the activities that costs the MOST amount of money in a presidential campaign is internal polling. These are polls that are done by the campaigns themselves. They are highly accurate with the kind of data that can be gathered using modern methodology. They are also highly confidential. Campaigns use them to make the important decisions regarding what issues to pound home...and which ones to avoid or remain silent on.

Notice that McCain pounds home national security, gasoline issues, taxes, and judges. Obama began loudly proclaiming his opposition to Iraq but has now backed off that and addressed Iran much more lately. McCain can't be heard saying much of anything about abortion. Obama gave a "sermon" in a church on Father's Day about black males becoming more responsible about parenting. All of these talks are not made out of chance, but in response to focus groups and polling data in the states that are key to each candidate. It's also targeted at groups that are most needed by the candidate. Obama's message about black male responsibility will play well with the blue-collar vote he so badly needs. McCain's comments on judges, security, oil, and taxes may bring the conservative Republicans, who he has real problems with, to grudgingly go to the polls in November and hold their noses and pull the lever for him.

Most importantly, you can tell what the internal polling data is telling the candidates by watching WHERE THEY GO TO CAMPAIGN. Obama,for instance, has spent a LOT of time in the usually blue state of Michigan. McCain is also plying the midwest. The dirty little secret is that Obama knows he is in big trouble in the Motor City state. One of the interesting little stories recently has been the resolution of the Michigan delegation to the convention. Obama has played up the fact that he "obeyed the rules" and even took his name off the ballot for the Michigan Primary in the wake of the DNC's disciplinary action against the Democratic party there for it's early primary (a violation of the Democratic National Committee's edict on primary timing).

The fact is that he was relieved at the ruling because he was going to lose badly there. He took his name off the ballot because it allowed him to let Hillary win there without it being a "loss" for him. When he lost Florida badly, it proved the wisdom of that strategy. It also explains the howls from the Hillary camp during the rules committee fight at the end of May over the DNC decision to allocate some of Michigan's reduced delegation to Obama even though he had removed his name from the ballot there. That's when the Hillary people knew the fix was final, and their fate was sealed.

Now, he is in big trouble with Michiganders. You can tell by the number of times he has been there in just the last few weeks. He needs those Hillary supporters to come in line before the convention, otherwise, many of them will work for McCain. It's too late. The horse is out of the barn.

As if to show that his tin ear is at least as good as George W. Bush's, he then gets the endorsement of global warming prize-winner Al Gore in DETROIT of all places. How do you think that went over with the blue-collar community in Michigan as they ponder the mental and federal assault on the industry that produces "greenhouse gases" for the nation? What were his people thinking? This is the same tin ear that unites a labor union with a well-known anti-war organization to attack war hero McCain as a warmonger. This is supposed to win over the "pry it from my cold dead hands" bunch? Are you kidding me?

He's also in trouble in Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania. Remember that he generally underperforms his polling data by about 6-10%. He was supposed to win New Hampshire, California, and was almost tied in Pennsylvania. He narrowly lost NH, but was solidly defeated in California and Pennsylvania. The fact is, if it were not for the caucus system in the Democratic primary system, Hillary would have won the nomination easily. Obama's people out-hustled the hustling Clintons. But caucus organization will not help them in the general election. In fact, most of the caucus states he won were states that the Obama people know they have little chance of defeating McCain in this fall.

His problems in Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Florida is why you see his advisors trying to convince big donors that they have another way to get 270 electoral votes without some key battleground states.

This is probably whistling past the graveyard.

The fact of the matter is that Obama, as the most liberal senator in the US Senate, who has made it a campaign mantra to "bring us together", is going to have a hard time finding a winning electoral strategy. He is up against an opponent who can point to dozens of pieces of major legislation that he has crafted with Democrats in the Senate. It's less about race than it is about class.

The biggest giveaway that the Democrat Party is very uneasy about what the top of the ticket may do to the rest of the Democrat Party candidates is the complaints about the faults in the Democrat primary system from the Democrat Senate Majority leader: Harry Reid.

Reid is from a battleground state: Nevada. He knows that Obama causes unique problems, along with his historic diversity benefit, and he is worried about massive defections to the Republican from the neighboring state of Arizona. His complaints about a "flawed system" the other day were another clue that the DNC's internal polling suggests serious problems from the Obama candidacy. Why complain about the system unless you don't like the result!?!

The above examples of the "tin ear" also reveal a certain arrogance about the Obama campaign. In my years as a competitive swimmer, the coaches used to have little sayings on big cards posted on the bulletin board in the locker room. One I have never forgotten was "He can't beat you with his press clippings."

Words to the wise...you can bet John McCain knows that one...