« The Experience to Pander | Main | Success! » Everybody Loves McCain19 Mar 2008 09:08 am
I think it's hard not to look at John McCain's surge to a 67 percent favorable rating and conclude that Democrats are paying a pretty steep price for the never-ending nature of the Obama-Clinton race. It's just impossible for attacks on McCain to gain any real traction without McCain having an official opponent who can press those attacks. Comments (62)
...and here we go again. I seriously don't know why we trust polls, except that we always have. I don't recall Gallup or any other pollster taking any kind of oath to the Constitution. they take buttloads of money, I'm sure, but that generally doesn't equate to trustable honesty. let's face it--there were very few conservatives who were McCain supporters, until he magically became the candidate after the others were found to have insurmountable flaws. there are supposedly Democrats and independents who "like" him, much in the same way they "liked" Colin Powell...I mean, he's a **war hero** and a **maverick**. I dunno. I can just too easily see this winding up with McCain winning by 50.1% because of the polls and the corporate media's obeisance, especially if Obama-Clinton stay in until the convention. you know, "it's just a divided country". grrrr.... 
I'm beginning to wonder after his recent fundamental misunderstanding of Iraq (al Queda-Sunni-Shia/Iraq-Iran), whether the long days of an exhausting campaign will begin to frazzle his old brain and it will show in interviews, speeches and debates. If the American people start thinking what,exactly, is this guy's specialty and why does he keep confusing things, then those numbers will either go down or they will reflect how many of us feel about a beloved but doddering relative.
it's hard to believe that matthew doesn't understand that it's only the middle of march, but there you have it.
Amazing how little that Hillary number moves. After six months of hardcore campaigning, she's dropped her unfavorability by only a couple of points, if anything.
Doesn't it speak more to the fact that Hillary and Obama are running roughly even with (and usually a little bit ahead of) McCain even with his favorability numbers so unusually? That is, when the nominee is settled and McCain does have a real fight on his hands and those numbers start coming down, as is bound to happen, isn't he destined to lose in a landslide? I don't see how this is good news for McCain at all.
Jared:
Obama has passed his test and has set out a vision for America that must not be denied, or should not be denied. Now it is up to Party leaders to be Leaders and end this divisive quest for power of the Clintons and bring unity to the Democratic Party and possibly a greater union to this country. If we really love America we must come together, our problems are too great. Due to the divisions Camp Clinton initiated into the political society at this time, Obama had to address Race, which turned out to be a good thing and hopefully will begin to heal the division instituted by the Clintons. Obama has shown through this contoversy that he is a true leader. Obama wants a force for good, for groping and solving our problems which effect us today and have not really been addressed or solved. We have to do something new for the old ways have not worked. He has shown by his willingness not to go negative, not to get angry, not to be critical, that he indeed, represents something new and a leader for our times who can work with both Democrats and Republicans.
Barack Obama is asking America to put anger aside, to heal, to walk over that bridge in reconcilliation. That is why he, uniquely, can work with Republicans while being a Democrat. America we must demand better of our leaders, politicians and media if we are to survive the herculean problems facing us today. We cannot continue to let the forces of separatism tear us apart, the stakes are way too high. We can demand better and we can do better. It is in us to overcome if we do not let these forces continue to fan the flames of hatred and fear. It is time for Party Leaders to step in and end Hillary's destructive quest to gain the White House. that She cannot win and only further tears apart not just the Democratic Party apart but also the United States in this quest for power. If she was running for office in a more unifying and ethical way, then I would say more power to her, but she is not. She has run amuck and against Democratic core principles and seems more Republican like than Democratic. As for the Iraq war, Hillary Clinton has no credibility. She can do all the speeches on Iraq that she chooses but no one really believes her. She represents the past ways of doing things which are negative and impediments to the qualities of goodwill and unity which we are trying to implement in a more holistic society.
Angellight, thank you for reminding me that it's a mistake on any liberal/progressive blog these days to enter into a discussion about any aspect of the presidential election because you run the risk of encountering lengthy posts of fearsome ridiculousness like yours. Jared, precisely: my point about it only being march. most people have favorable opinions about mccain because he's been described favorably for decades now: why is that a surprise? and yet, it's not like that favorability is translating into likelihood to vote for him: it's entirely a lucky break for mccain that huckabee existed or, favorables or not, he wouldn't even be the nominee....
McCain is toast, he need to be reminded what his current positions are in order to articulate them at this point.
my point about it only being march. True, but what are we doing now to bring down McCain's numbers? If those numbers hang where they are through August, we're going to have a major problem on our hands.
Same as it ever was. If it's HRC vs McCain in the General, it will be an excruciating, stupid, drawn out contest, and either could win, although I'd slightly favor HRC. If it's Obama vs McCain, odds are much better for Obama. I would bet that people like the idea of voting for McCain more than they will like actually doing it when the moment of truth comes. That said, although I don't think the dems are paying quite a 'steep' price yet, it can't help to have this death match between BO and HRC go on and on. HRC's campaign was ill concieved from the beginning and she ought to face the music sooner rather than later.
When Obama is the nominee he's not going to attack McCain personally either. He's going to beat him like Sheldon Whitehouse beat Lincoln Chafee in Rhode Island, by tying the man to the party. Exit polls showed Lincoln Chafee had high favorables and low negatives and still lost. Chafee lost because his opponent spent time explaining how government works and it doesn't work by being likable. Governing isn't about likeability. McCain's policies are unpopular. People can like McCain and vote for Obama.
In the middle of the Wright mess, Obama still has personal ratings almost as good as McCain while Clinton comes in much lower than either. Why are we supposed to believe she can convince the superdelegates she is more electable than Barack again?
Not your intellectually best moment, Matt. I think if you supported Clinton you would be more inclined to see that a favorable\unfavorable poll like this is meaningless 6 months ago, especially before McCain has been put through the wringer. Also, count me in as someone who is supporting Obama but is one of those 67% who has a favorable opinion of McCain. I don't want him to be President, but that doesn't mean I can't admire some things about him, particularly his time as a POW.
Remarks that John McCain is "stupid" remind me of the Bill Maher show on HBO. Maher's shtick for years has been that George Bush is "stupid." When Maher makes this comment and rolls his eyes, the liberal audience whistles and claps like Pavlov's dogs. Maher's writers don't even have to create funny gags. As a lifelong Democrat, I am becoming increasingly fed up with educated Starbucks liberals and their snobby elitism. Perhaps I'll vote for McCain even though my New Deal parents will spin in their graves.
Remarks that John McCain is "stupid" remind me of the Bill Maher show on HBO. Maher's shtick for years has been that George Bush is "stupid." When Maher makes this comment and rolls his eyes, the liberal audience whistles and claps like Pavlov's dogs. Maher's writers don't even have to create funny gags. As a lifelong Democrat, I am becoming increasingly fed up with educated Starbucks liberals and their snobby elitism. Perhaps I'll vote for McCain even though my New Deal parents will spin in their graves.
Remarks that John McCain is "stupid" remind me of the Bill Maher show on HBO. Maher's shtick for years has been that George Bush is "stupid." When Maher makes this comment and rolls his eyes, the liberal audience whistles and claps like Pavlov's dogs. Maher's writers don't even have to create funny gags. As a lifelong Democrat, I am becoming increasingly fed up with educated Starbucks liberals and their snobby elitism. Perhaps I'll vote for McCain even though my New Deal parents will spin in their graves.
I really don't want a 70 year old neo-con empire builder who will continue the bush policies....McCain is a disaster waiting to happen.
Remarks that John McCain is "stupid" remind me of the Bill Maher show on HBO. Maher's shtick for years has been that George Bush is "stupid." When Maher makes this comment and rolls his eyes, the liberal audience whistles and claps like Pavlov's dogs. Maher's writers don't even have to create funny gags. As a lifelong Democrat, I am becoming increasingly fed up with educated Starbucks liberals and their snobby elitism. Perhaps I'll vote for McCain even though my New Deal parents will spin in their graves.
Remarks that John McCain is "stupid" remind me of the Bill Maher show on HBO. Maher's shtick for years has been that George Bush is "stupid." When Maher makes this comment and rolls his eyes, the liberal audience whistles and claps like Pavlov's dogs. Maher's writers don't even have to create funny gags. As a lifelong Democrat, I am becoming increasingly fed up with educated Starbucks liberals and their snobby elitism. Perhaps I'll vote for McCain even though my New Deal parents will spin in their graves.
Remarks that John McCain is "stupid" remind me of the Bill Maher show on HBO. Maher's shtick for years has been that George Bush is "stupid." When Maher makes this comment and rolls his eyes, the liberal audience whistles and claps like Pavlov's dogs. Maher's writers don't even have to create funny gags. As a lifelong Democrat, I am becoming increasingly fed up with educated Starbucks liberals and their snobby elitism. Perhaps I'll vote for McCain even though my New Deal parents will spin in their graves.
It's just impossible for attacks on McCain to gain any real traction without McCain having an official opponent who can press those attacks. Those making the attacks will be savaged by the press. They have a narrative, and they're sticking to it. Reality will simply be cut to fit the narrative. Remarks that John McCain is "stupid" remind me of the Bill Maher show on HBO. Maher's shtick for years has been that George Bush is "stupid." The only airtight defense against libel is the truth of the assertion.
graniteman, your comment was silly enough the first time: we didn't need it thrice. ntr Fausto Carmona: i don't even particularly thing favorables for mccain in august are all that important: it's what happens after labor day. that said, there is any easy solution: both clinton and obama should spend at least as much time criticizing mccain as each other. clinton got things off to the right start the other day along those lines when she criticized both mccain and obama on iraq. and then, 527s could weigh in. which is to say, i'm not complacent about this: certainly it would be useful to crit mccain on a regular basis and at least drive up his unfavorables (exactly what, after all, the right wing is busy trying to do to obama: mccain doesn't have to lift a finger). but this is at least (i could have missed a reference) the second time in which matthew has moaned that if only that terrible clinton would get out of the race, obama could train his sights on mccain with devastating ads (that was part of matthew's first version) which would determine the election right now. it's really a silly fixation, well below matthew's level of intelligence and perception, so i can only assume it's on account of his youth.
graniteman, so, you don't like it when people say that. Your point? You feel sorry for McCain being called stupid because he's an ignoramus, and you'll vote for him out of sympathy/spite? Perhaps you could give me some evidence that McCain is intellectually capable of understanding the issues he will face as president, because he just showed us that he isn't. I, for one, consider such ignorance -- and inability to realize it -- as a moral failing. I'm not really sure you want to defend that sort of thing.
Sorry for the triple posting. Blame the Atlantic server.
Who cares - it's March! There's plenty of time for Clinton or Obama to take on McCain later.
Tyro, John McCain knows more about the issues we face than you appreciate. Islamic fascism is a serious problem within the Muslim world and a willingness to negotiate unconditionally, think Obama, will not eliminate that threat. Global climate change is a serious challenge and McCain proposes to cap US emissions, just like his Democratic rivals. McCain, a scarred veteran of Viet Nam, knows that torture of prisoners is immoral and unproductive. McCain knows that capital is hypermobile in today's global economy and that populist efforts to tax "big corporations" more heavily, think Edwards, could lead to job losses and economic stagnation even in a large economy such as the U.S. (Note that the EU nations are cutting their corporate tax rates because they recognize this reality.) I could go on, but I have to get back to work.
It seems to me his rise is almost all driven by Republicans getting behind him at 87%. I'm sure when he wasn't the nominee his percentage wasn't that high.
John McCain knows more about the issues we face than you appreciate His public statements indicate to us that this is not true. You might like him for his "attitude", but he shows every indication of being either uninterested or uninformed. The proof is in the pudding: McCain doesn't have any idea what he's talking about, and that was in evidence, yesterday.
The point is: a) McCain's favorables are higher than ever (largely due to conservatives coalescing around him for the first time ever). You can say all you want about it being 8 months out, but now's the time John Kerry started crashing about 4 years ago. The fact that McCain is rising is cause for concer. and b) the extended Democratic primary is a really bad thing for Democrats. Keep in mind that in terms of the intense part of the primary race starting on the Iowa election, we are not halfway through the primary. We still have even longer to go.
There's plenty of time. He has nowhere to go but down.
I don't have an unfavorable view of John McCain. I'm sure he's a nice guy compared to Bush. But I think he'd be a disaster for the country. Hopefully that's how the 67% view it.
I am disappointed by the democratic party and their vicious attacks. But.. if they come out of this okay, the media really won't have much else to dish out against them. I think they'll have to ask McCain more Qs. The republican party got lucky. They chose early. Nice head start for them. But yeah... why isn't McCain out there explaining his poor spiritual advisers? Or any of the statements he made about Jerusalem for that matter?.. I think we need a more neutral source for NEWS. Especially when it's something important.
In other poll news, "Democrat Barack Obama's big national lead over Hillary Clinton has all but evaporated in the U.S. presidential race".
The pigs are beginning to squeal already.
As a lifelong Democrat, I am becoming increasingly fed up with educated Starbucks liberals and their snobby elitism. Perhaps I'll vote for McCain even though my New Deal parents will spin in their graves. Oh yeah, nothing worse than an educated liberal. Much better to be ignorant like you, and not realize that your candidate doesn't know what he's talking about even in his supposed area of expertise: foreign policy. Shia? Sunni? What's the diff?! They're all AY-RABBS, right? Terrorists! Yes, many parents probably would be appalled to know that the generation they raised is full of people who think voting is about half-baked, irrelevent personal resentments, that it's a 'consumer' activity without any responsibility to get even minimally informed. McCain's platform is VERY VERY different from either of the Democrats'. Five minutes on the internet would make that clear to you. Forget I mentioned it. Starbucks!!
McCain's ratings will change when the spotlight turns back to him. He's old and will not look good next to either Democrat. That said, I think the decision by the democrats to let this nomination 'battle' continue after it became clear that Clinton could only win by dragging Obama down and claiming that he's not 'electable' was monumentally stupid. By the time one or the other of them gets to turn towards McCain, he or she will already have been defined in negative terms by the protracted 'battle'. Clinton by having gone negative and revealing herself to be unprincipled; Obama because of the cumulative effects of her attacks. And it'll be harder than it had to be to define McCain when the democrats doing the defining have already been defined negatively by their own party and/or own actions.
"McCain's ratings will change when the spotlight turns back to him. He's old and will not look good next to either Democrat." What's wrong with being old? We'll all be old someday, if we're lucky. More to the point, how do you think these attacks from the Left on McCain for being old will resonate with the wealthiest and most politically active demographic -- old people?
Good evening, I am frustrated that Gov. Crist has been in office for 2 years and is mentioned daily as a leading VP candidate, while Gov. Palin (Gov. for 2 years as well) is dismissed for not being experienced enough. Is it sexism or ignorance? Gov. Sarah Palin is respected by social and fiscal Conservatives, reformers and indy's. The battle ground is shifting to the mid-west and Gov. Palin has the profile and geography to appeal to those voters. Palin has more executive experience than both Clinton and Obama, and Palin practices straight-talk, which will fit well with McCain. Her two years in the Governors office brings a long list of reforms in government and a 180 degree change in how politics is practiced in Alaska.
I don't think anybody needs to say anything about McCain's age. I'm just saying that when he shows up in debates against either Obama or Clinton he's not going to come off well. I base that from what I've seen so far. Maybe he'll learn to project some kind of wise paterfamilias aura that will overcome the way he projects now (which is undynamic and comes off to me as being a bit slow). What the democrats will have to work to heighten is the angle about his temper. And I expect them to find ways to bring that to the voters attention. The combination of age (unspoken) and temper (definitely alluded to one way or another) will be weaknesses for McCain. And he's very vulnerable on the economy. So maybe the democrats can get away with greatly increasing their own difficulties in the GE.
Why do people persist in believing that presidential elections are like footraces -- that somehow this morning's poll readings reflect ground gained that has to be made up? I've lived through lots of presidential elections with outlandishly off-base Spring and summer poll findings -- Dukakis' 17-point lead is the most often cited, but we also had Carter '76 with a 33-point lead over Ford or Reagan (somehow "reduced" to 2 by Election Day), Carter leading Reagan by plenty in Spring '80, Bush double-digits ahead of Clinton in Spring '92. It's all bushwah. You want to know how the election will turn out, concentate on circumstance. The circumstance is, the war is still extremely unpopular, and the economy is cratering. Anyone wants to bet the incumbent party in that scenario, I'll right now put up money I can ill-afford to lose.
I am not worried about the general. With an awful recession looming and YouTube keeping the "I don't economics" flag flying, Obama can pull it out.
shock mouse, your history isn't quite right: i just checked gallup as a proxy (because it was the easiest to put my hands on). kerry favorable on 12/1/04: 61 kerry favorable on 3/25/04: 53 (so far, so good, however) kerry favorable on 6/23/04 through 8/1/04: 58, 56, 56, 57 so it's not that kerry's favorable began a descent on mid-march that carried through. kerry lost the election after labor day. insofar as you want to watch a trendline, it's the unfavorables that might have prefigured his defeat: they rose from 23 on 2/1/04 to a fairly consistent 35-37 from 3/25 through 8/1/04.
I blogged about this today at: http://swimmingfreestyle.typepad.com Excerpt:
Obama's ratings have just begun to feel the wrath of the Wright debacle. They will continue to fall for a period of time, depending on if anything new comes to light. Meanwhile, Senator McCain is out looking presidential, meeting with world leaders and allies, while Clinton and Obama go to war with one another. Not good news if you're a Democratic supporter. But whether you're a Republican, Democrat, or Indy (like myself), those are the facts.
publius, apparently you are confused as to the meaning of "facts." a prediction, for example (obama's ratings...will continue to fall) is not a fact. an opinion (Senator McCain is out looking presidential) is not a fact. a hyperbole (clinton and obama go to war with another) is not a fact.
Howard, This is a fact though: "Democrat Barack Obama's big national lead over Hillary Clinton has all but evaporated in the U.S. presidential race". An excerpt: The poll showed Obama had only a statistically insignificant lead of 47 percent to 44 percent over Clinton, down sharply from a 14 point edge he held over her in February when he was riding the tide of 10 straight victories. Another excerpt: McCain leads 46 percent to 40 percent in a hypothetical matchup against Obama in the November presidential election, according to the poll.
Obama's going to shoot back up after this flak, which will be shortlived. Mark my words. It is a smokescreen only. On the other hand, Americans do not want McCain's policies, including 100 more years in Iraq.
Obama's going to shoot back up after this flak, which will be shortlived. Mark my words. It is a smokescreen only. On the other hand, Americans do not want McCain's policies, including 100 more years in Iraq.
the Reuters/Zogby poll Zogby. Never mind.
Fred, notice that i didn't take publius to task for his comment about obama's ratings feeling the wrath of the Wright debacle: whether i'd phrase it that way (it's not more a "debacle" than john hagee is a "debacle" for mccain), i don't quibble that it's a fact. i have said for weeks now that obama's low negatives are a temporary artifact, and that those who think that obama is teh most perfectest candidate ever and wonder why that awful clinton won't get out of his way are being silly. i have no clue which of the two will run a better race against mccain: it is still march, as i noted all the way above. i do think that clinton is perfectly within the bounds of rationality to think that she will, and that therefore she should stay in the race....
I think it's hard not to look at John McCain's surge to a 67 percent favorable rating and conclude that Democrats are paying a pretty steep price for the never-ending nature of the Obama-Clinton race. I don't conclude that at all. We're still 8 months from the general election and these favorability numbers are going to change continuously over that time. People are thinking about the Democratic primary right now, that's affecting Clinton and Obama. By November this will all be a forgotten memory. If you want a reality check, here's an example of favorability numbers 9 months before an election: The former mayor is the only candidate to capture a favorable rating above 50 percent, and he does so by receiving top marks among several demographic groups, including men, women, independents, Born-Again Christians, military households and gun owners. That was Rudy Giuliani. Sitting at 55% favorability in May 2007.
I think something is going to happen to McCain between now and the convention. I can't believe the Republican bigwigs really want him as their candidate.
Reguardless of who wins the presidential race, the fact of the matter is we as Americans need to come together as a people and address our own problems. we are far to dependant on oil, and don't produce enough cars marketable in other contries, we either don't see or choose to ignore that global warming is a reality and needs to be addressed as well as an economy that is fragile. The technology exists to become a world leading country again, what we need is a leader/s who'll realize the truth and take action. Personally, I'm for obama.
Amen Howard. Full disclosure, I prefer Clinton. That being said I would prefer that Obama had wrapped this contest up by now to the current impasse. So it comes down to the supers and that contest in connections, horse trading and spin is still way up in the air. It will depend a lot on how the fallout from this Wright business settles (if it does) and how they perform in the contests that remain. I can definitly see Obama winning or even a Clinton win though in terms of sheer math it seems less likely. I personally remain greatly longing for a joint ticket. Hillary/Obama if I had my druthers though Obama/Hillary would please me mightily as well.
It's clear that Hillary, McCain, the GOP and pundits will continue to spin the remarks made by Reverend Jeremiah Wright to paint Obama as unknowingly supporting a racist pastor for 20 years... Obama already mentioned in his speech about the racial divide that he knew that Wright was preaching racist spiel and that he respectfully disagreed with it, and that there was more to Wright than the clips circulating on YouTube and the Internet. He citied Wright as being a former Marine who spoke at numerous colleges and inspired Obama to find his Christian faith, so Obama didn't support Wright because he was a racist pastor, but because he helped Obama discover his faith. But Obama's pastor's comments have NOTHING to do with this campaign because Wright is not the one running for president, Obama hasn't picked him for VP, nor has Obama once uttered a statement that could remotely be considered racist. Obama has been keeping his campaign focused on the issues affecting ALL Americans and running a postitive and honest campaign. He has released his earmarks and tax returns, as well as documented every single of his policy ideas on his website. He has also written two books... what have Hillary and McCain done that makes them worthier than Obama to be President? Hillary was a former first lady and a US Senator, McCain a war hero... neither of them has said that they would fight for ALL Americans; Hillary has just played Dr. Jeckell/Mr. Hyde and McCain has just continued to preach his 100 year war in Iraq and invading other countries... It's clear that if Obama doesn't win the Democratic nomination and then the general election, that our nation and the world will continue to hurt for years to come. We need to come together and forget about the Reverend Wrights and Geraldine Ferraros who continue to preach about the past... we need to move into the future with change and a new vision for America, and with President Barack Hussein Obama.
I'm still waiting for the minute when the Republicans discover that: 1) Hillary is a member of the "The Family" cult. 2) Hillary is shacking up with a woman who is either a Mossad "swallow" or a Saudi intelligence "swallow" or maybe even an Al Qaeda "swallow". Love to see how her numbers poll then. Compared to Obama's Reverend Wright, Hillary has HUGE vulnerabilities, even if neither of them prove to be true. Vetted? Oh, yeah, right - tell me again.
Obama and Clinton both are not good president canidates they will screw every thing up for the middle class people because they have money and obama has been under his preacher for 20 something odd years and the preacher is sayin GD the White man and GD America Obama will be influenced byt that and not in a positive way so i say vote Mccain he would be the better of the three but if it was left up to me I would have Ron Paul or Huckabee for President because they have the well being of America in mind we need to worry about our country first before any other countries we are in debt and the US's economic well being is at risk!! SO VOTE MCCAIN!!!
"we need to worry about our country first before any other countries we are in debt and the US's economic well being is at risk!! SO VOTE MCCAIN!!!" This has to be why McCain is being elevated - people who are completely incapable of logic. 1) McCain knows nothing about economics. He even admits this. 2) McCain is going to start a war with Iran in which we will achieve $200/barrel oil in the middle of a US recession. 3) China will dump the dollar in retaliation for the war on Iran. The US economy will collapse completely if the Asian nations stop supporting the dollar. Yet this character thinks McCain should be elected so we can save the US economy! This is why this country is doomed - people like that. I'm beginning to really think that despite McCain's almost incredible lack of qualifications to be elected President that he will in fact be elected President even over Obama. He will PROVE that Bush was no fluke - that this country is terminally disfunctional. Posts like the above demonstrate that no matter how bad things get, they can always get worse.
Clinton needs to go. Now.
Comments closed April 02, 2008. |
Search
Subscribe to this blog by Email Books by Matthew Yglesias
Recent Comments
Recent Posts
Weekly Archives
Categories
|
Copyright © 2008 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
| 
Heads in the Sand
that, and the media's refusal to treat him as anything less than a Sainted Maverick War Hero
Posted by cleek | March 19, 2008 9:25 AM