Don't fret my Elephant friends...

The Donkeyman knows about a place where you can always find some lovin. It is important to point out, however, that despite Mel-Anon's strong desire, Daviess County did not win the title for strongest support of McCain (Kosciousko won). The DC maintained its' silver spot, but gave away a golden opportunity by giving away 7 points from '04.

E-Day...

So, at long last election day has arrived. It seems like only ten years ago that we got started on this campaign, and now the day for casting the final ballots has arrived. I hope to be able to follow the results and news as the day progresses, but given my workload today, I probably won't be able to put much thought into it until this evening.

Some of the things I'll be watching:

1. Can Obama tilt North Carolina or Indiana? Even more intriguing is the thought of North Dakota, Montana,

2. Will all of the early votes (63% of 2004 total votes) in Georgia put the state in play? Will all of these new votes translate into an upset in the Senate race, potentially pushing Chambliss out the door?

3. Will Virginia really break for Obama by more than four points?

4. How many voter fraud accusations will be made?

5. The biggest bellwether will likely be Ohio, which very recent polls seem to be showing a tightening race. McCain's ground game has ratcheted up in Ohio over the past week, so this could significantly effect the race.

6. Ballot initiatives. A Californian hate amendment, abortions being outlawed in South Dakota, etc.

7. Will Steve Kagen hold off John Gard in Wisconsin's 8th? This may not be of national import, but I did some door knocking up that way this past weekend, so I'm interested to see how it turns out.

8. How many times will I check election coverage at work today? O/U at 23.

9. How many EV's will Obama end up winning? O/U 340.

10. How many Senate seats will the Dems control (including Leiberman) after today? O/U 57.

11. How many House Seats will the Dems control after today? O/U 260

I think I would take the over on #8 and #11. #9 is really tearing me up, as one minute I'm thinking the early votes and organization will drop a sick total for Barack, like 385. The next minute, I get worried about the reliance on young voters and other constituencies who have historically high flake rates. Oh hell, I'll take the over and look like a fool when he doesn't break 300... As to number #10, I'm going with the push at 57, as I just not convinced Chambliss will lose, and Kentucky has been re-GOP-ified recently.

McCain the attack dog..

It looks like McCain is going to be the attack dog for the final few weeks. What a way to secure a legacy for a guy who seven years ago was fairly widely respected...

Coast to Coast...

Obama is bringing the most. Well, almost coast to coast anyway. According to Pollster (and others), the race in North Dakota is entering toss up status and Montana has moved from Safe to Leans Republican. Needless to say if Obama wins either of these states, McCain will lose. I am honestly shocked that a Donkey could carry an (almost) linked chain of states from coast to coast. Of course, this will stay almost because Idaho ain't likely to change and that 44 mile strip of land will likely stay deep red. Also of note with regard to electoral math is that Obama is starting to hit 400 electoral votes with more and more regularity. 400 is a number not seen by a Dem since '64, with the closest being Clinton's 1996 election with 379.

North Dakota...

North Dakota is now being considered by some to be a toss up. This is incrediably bad news for McCain, as Bush topped Kerry in ND by nearly a two to one margin. This election may end up being closer than I think, but I'm thinking Obama may pull over 350 ev's. Given that as a possible target, without a huge sea change, I don't see McCain doing more than making this interesting.

I need to start reviewing the Senate, as it has been estimated that after the election the Dems will hold around 57-59 seats (including the independent and the Joe party with the Dems). I'm wondering if a couple of the lean GOP races might be tiltable. If the Dems end up with a filibuster proof majority, clear control of the House and the Presidency... they better bring the governance. I know, I know, not sexy, but very necessary.

Live blogging the debate...

"Bailout, when I believe it's rescue." McCain just before going off on the "I rode my horse back to Washington and showed them motherf'ers how to maverick up on this here rescue package.

I am also anxious to see if Brokaw keeps scolding the candidates for taking too long on the follow up discussion minute.

This is my first live blogging experiment, so I think I'll just use the comment thread.

A blue Indiana...

A blue Indiana is something I honestly didn't believe was possible without Bayh on the ticket. According to a lot of recent polling and trend data, however,Indiana is in play. Most camps/sites/experts till place Indiana in the Leans Republican column, which makes sense given the systematic and institutional nature of supporting the GOP presidential candidate in the state. However, the news on the ground is telling more and more stories like this one about Lafayette from the 538ers.

It seems to me that the McCain camp took for granted that Indiana was died in the wool red and in doing so never created the campaign structure that is needed towards the end of a race to close the deal with fence voters. Obama has an impressive campaign organization on the ground, and given the 29 days remaining may just be able to make Indiana interesting. It is an impressive feat in and of itself to even be talking about putting the Hoosier state in play, given it broke 1.5M to 950K in '04. To win, Obama will need to increase the Kerry splits in Lake, Marion and Monroe counties, as well as significantly eat into the huge Bush numbers in the seven donut counties around Indy. Those seven counties broke at above 63% in 2004. If Obama can carry Lake at close to 70%, Monroe and Marion at 65% and bring the donuts down to 53-55% he just might have a shot. Under any circumstance, I'm definatley excited about this race, and if nothing else I can watch to see if Daviess County can overtake Kosciusko for the most Republican in the state*.


I actually have trouble believing there are actually 2,500 people who voted for Kerry in Daviess County.

Chipper Jones and John McCain...

are both punks.

Chipper for not playing due to a sore shoulder, while trying to ride out a 12 point lead for the NL batting crown over Pujols. Of course, we will see if Chipper comes back after Pujols catches him with the his continued fire run towards Chipper.


McCain for just being a jackass. I can't get over the lunacy that is the McCain economic plan. To catch you up --- Earmarks are evil, I hate earmarks and will make those who try to pass them famous, ergo I will give tax cuts to rich folks and this will make the world a much better place. And this is all related to the economic crisis..., but how, John?

Also, both Obama and McCain (honestly, much more so McCain) are driving me nuts with the poor little innocent Georgia bit. Come the hell on boys, Georgia ain't your innocent little sister here. Sure, Russia took advantage of Georgia, but Saakashvili kind of went looking for it.

Right Wing Orthodox...

Say what he will about the need to change Washington and how "greed" is causing the problems on Wall Street, McCain hasn't in the past and doesn't seem interested now in breaking with the right wing orthodoxy, who hold that derregulation is the answer to pretty well any economic question. Despite their resistance to government regulation, they don't seem to mind a government bailout now and again. Something like socializing the costs, while privatizing the profits.

But his record on the issue, and the views of those he has always cited as his most influential advisers, suggest that he has never departed in any major way from his party’s embrace of deregulation and relying more on market forces than on the government to exert discipline.

While Mr. McCain has cited the need for additional oversight when it comes to specific situations, like the mortgage problems behind the current shocks on Wall Street, he has consistently characterized himself as fundamentally a deregulator and he has no history prior to the presidential campaign of advocating steps to tighten standards on investment firms.

He has often taken his lead on financial issues from two outspoken advocates of free market approaches, former Senator Phil Gramm and Alan Greenspan, the former Federal Reserve chairman. Individuals associated with Merrill Lynch, which sold itself to Bank of America in the market upheaval of the past weekend, have given his presidential campaign nearly $300,000, making them Mr. McCain’s largest contributor, collectively.

History of supporting deregulation; takes advice from a key architect of the mortgage bubble (Greenspan); significant campaign donations from a failing financial firm; now that my friends is obviously setting the table for some REAL CHANGE.

Lies, Lies, Lies...

Krugman on the tenor of the GOP's lie infested campaign.

You're only telling lies, lies, lies...

Breaking us down with your lies, lies, lies...




Politics may not be pretty, but it doesn't have to be this baseless. Don't drink the Kool-Aid...

Flip flopper!!!

Mel-anon provides a solid, with his cogent point on the lunacy of "bridgegate," and how this really isn't a key issue. I cannot, however, to pliantly paraphrase the mythical George Washington, let a lie stand when it should go the way of the ole cherry tree.

The idea that Palin has always opposed the "bridge to nowhere" project is quite simply not true.



Feel free to dig into the record more if you wish, but please don't let yourself get persuaded that earmarks are somehow in the top ten issues for this election. Also, please point out the flaw in this argument when your pals make it -- you know that it isn't true.

McCain, Palin and the GOP

It has been a melancholic month or so here at the Donkey, but you really need to get over to Mel-Anon's site for his coverage on the Palin VP choice. The titles of the posts are alone worth dropping by... Junogate, genius! Perhaps the best post of the group on this topic is the analysis of shotgun weddings, which is an area of expertise for anyone from Montgomery Indiana.

What this means, of course, is that the kids born to these teenage mothers have to live with the fact that they were meant to be punishment for their parents' indiscretion. That seems like an awful lot to hang on a kid, since most people tend to resent their punishment. I'm not a psychologist, but I can't see how that's a positive situation.

I know that Obama has stated that the family is off limits, but this isn't about the daughter's actions, it is a much larger snapshot of the lunacy of the right wing moralists. By taking certain "moral" stances to be imperatives and uncompromisable, these folks flippantly ignore solutions to some of societies ills, such as unplanned pregnancies. It seems pretty obvious to me that offering safe sex education could signifcantly reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies, but of course if that succeeded the moralists may be forced to admit that their Victorian ideals are a bit dated...

It also seems obvious to me that McCain's choice is a rather lame sop to the social conservatives, who just couldn't get on board with a guy who had somewhat accurately posited that they were "agents of intolerance." To think that in 2000 I would have likely voted for McCain vs. Gore. I guess this shows how the will to power can drastically change a person's views.

What is rich?

In today's NYT, Krugman asks the question of what is rich and what is middle class? Of course, the cynics answer is "rich = those who make more than me, middle class = what I make," but this is a serious question that doesn't seem to get much play. There are tons of factors that could be weighed in making a determination couched on a numerical cusp, but at the end of the day, it is more of a "feel" than a number. Krugman highlights just how each of the two candidates for president "feel" on this, by going back to the way each answered the question of "at what income do you move from middle class to rich?," posed by Rick Warren.

Mr. Obama answered the question seriously, defining middle class as meaning an income below $150,000. Mr. McCain, at first, made it into a joke, saying “how about $5 million?” Then he declared that it didn’t matter because he wouldn’t raise anyone’s taxes. That wasn’t just an evasion, it was a falsehood: Mr. McCain’s health care plan, by limiting the deductibility of employer-paid insurance premiums, would effectively raise taxes on a number of people.

I really do have to pick up the book "Richistan" by Robert Frank mentioned in this op-ed, as I've seen it cited quite often recently.

And down the backstretch we come...

The 2008 election is moving down the backstretch and into turn three, with Obama maintaining a 2-3 point average lead in the polls. This number, often quoted, seems a little silly to me, considering the fact that we award electoral votes on a state by state all or nothing (at least mostly) basis. The more significant number is 264, which according to pollster.com is the current electoral votes from states in which Obama has a quantifiable lead. This means that Obama would only need six additional e-votes to take the prize, which given the resource depth of the campaign should be doable. I personally think Colorado is going to be a bellwether state...

This portion of the campaign tends to really bore me, given the disproportionate amount of media coverage of the VP "race." The NYT offers an example of this type of coverage in a piece related to both candidates potential VP selections. I admit to some armchair punditry on the issue (I'm feeling Bayh and Pawlenty), but am amazed that the media covers claptrap from pundits on the issue, as if it were news...

Some Republicans said that Mr. McCain could still choose Mr. Ridge and get around the problem with social conservatives by assuring them that the vice-presidential candidate would support the position of the presidential candidate and the party, no matter his personal views.

Such a formulation would be unlikely to satisfy Rush Limbaugh, the conservative radio talk show host and longtime McCain nemesis, who on Tuesday sounded a siren for his listeners. “If he picks a pro-choice running mate, it’s not going to be pretty,” Mr. Limbaugh warned, adding that Mr. McCain would have “effectively destroyed the Republican Party and pushed the conservative movement into the bleachers.”

I have to question the intelligence (not the first time) of Mr. Limbaugh on this issue. Is it really possible to "destroy" the Republican Party by nominating a somewhat pro-choice candidate as VP? Or, is it more likely that the GOP could begin it's migration into the 21st century of acceptance of the rights of others not to be coerced into the action deemed appropriate by those in power.... Well, maybe that logic would destroy the GOP.

The Muddy Middle...

I'm going to pile on with Ken at Mel-Anon regarding the consistently relevant and enlightening analysis by Greenwald at Salon. I don't know if my comrade Mel-Anon would agree that electing Obama is critically important to making America a better place, but my feelings on this issue are encapsulated in solid form by Mr. Greenwald:

There is no question, at least to me, that having Obama beat McCain is vitally important. But so, too, is the way that victory is achieved and what Obama advocates and espouses along the way. Feeding distortions against someone like Wesley Clark in order to please Joe Klein and his fact-free media friends, or legalizing warrantless eavesdropping and protecting joint Bush/telecom lawbreaking, or basing his campaign on demonizing MoveOn.org and 1960s anti-war hippies, is quite harmful in many long-lasting ways. Electing Barack Obama is a very important political priority but it isn't the only one there is, and his election is less likely, not more likely, the more homage he pays to these these tired, status-quo-perpetuating Beltway pieties.

I try to be a political realist* and I understand the need to win the election before you can bring about change, but some of the more recent pandering by the Obama camp to the middle is disappointing to me ideologically, as well as confusing to me with regard to these moves electoral soundness. I'm not sure how backpedalling on every major issue is going to help get you elected, because the Obama campaign had it right from the beginning -- America wants change... but not a lump of cold remanufactured beltway bullshit change.

All that said, McCain is still a very scary candidate. His hawkishness combined with his temper don't seem to me to be the best way to avoid more armed conflict in the Middle East (i.e. Iran). Additionally, his lack of any serious economic policy (other than give the business world more tax breaks) is troublesome. McCain's disdain for universal health care is also a major problem and his new method of repackaging himself as a "green" candidate are laughable, given his desire to go headlong into perpetuating our oil addiction by adding supply instead of working towards alternatives.

* A term that is completely legitimate, but unfortunately has been overrun with muddled middlers.

Obama and McCain in the polls...

It appears that Obama is opening a bit of room between himself and McCain in national polls. It is, of course, incredibly early in the process - but I believe this if Obama can get an initial 8 point advantage or so, he can really force the McCain camp to push money out the door at a rate much quicker than they would like at this stage in the process. I know that Obama has taken a significant amount of heat for opting out of the public financing, but that additional cash will surely be helpful in keeping McCain's feet to the fire.

Of particular note on the state by state polling, is that Obama seems to be leading and/or improving in many battleground states such as, Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Michigan and Florida. he is even close in Indiana currently, which I will admit is based on far to few polls to hold much water, but still -- Indiana? That has to be considered fairly bad news for the McCain camp.