#76 Some New Numbers

The new poll numbers are appearing. Right now on average Obama is ahead in states with 313 electoral votes. There are, of course, reasons why those totals can change, with unacknowledged racial bias being the primary one. There's no way we can determine the extent unless folk actually say so, as they've done in Pennsylvania and Ohio recently. McCain is listed as having 135 electoral votes.

Other items--such as an October surprise (international or national crisis in addition to the financial crisis, Cindy McCain personally contributing her fortune to eliminate the credit crisis, and stuff we can't even begin to imagine)--could change the polls quickly, so I'm not assuming anything. But if the election were held right now, we likely would have a new party in the White House.

According to these most recent polls, Ohio is still a tossup (in the polls I've seen, Obama is ahead more often than behind), but even Florida gives Obama a 5 point lead. Nonetheless, right now at least, I expect Florida and Ohio to go Republican.

Obama's ahead in New Hampshire (10 points), West Virginia(by 8 points!?), Nevada (4 points so I haven't even included NV in Obama's total), Colorado (more than 5 points), Minnesota (6 points), Wisconsin (more than 8 points), Virginia (more than 8 points! -- can that be?), Pennsylvania (14 points -- that's Biden's work), and Florida (5 points).

I've already put New Mexico (only 4+ points ahead) and Iowa (13 points ahead) into the Democratic columns.

I'll keep looking but not yet every day.

-- triton --

#71 Not-So-Latent Local Racism

Yesterday we put up several Democratic candidate signs in our front yard. This morning all but one were still up. The Obama-Biden sign was missing. So I drove around our neighborhood and saw that, during the night, all Obama signs had been removed in the six square block area--from Blaine to Hayes, from Sixth to Third. The other Democratic candidate signs, for local and statewide offices, were still standing in the light rain that fell this morning.

I can reach only one conclusion: some not-so-latent racists were busy in the dark. It's annoying of course, and violates our freedom of speech.

But it also reinforces my concern that the polls this year may be particularly inaccurate. If racists do their dirty work in the dark, might they also be concealing their true vote preferences?

On September 27, Sam Wang published online a discussion of a large-scale empirical study by Harvard political scientist Dan Hopkins. Wang cites Hopkins' findings that, since the mid-1990s, the Bradley effect [named after former Los Angeles mayor Tom Bradley] has disappeared. The "Bradley effect" occurred when a non-white candidate falls short of the result projected by opinion polls on Election Day when he/she runs against a white candidate.

Wang explains: "Tom Bradley, a black man, lost the 1982 governor’s race despite the fact that in opinion polls taken before the election he led George Deukmejian, a white man. Sometimes it is also called the Wilder effect, after Gov. Doug Wilder of Virginia, who had a comfortable lead by nearly 10 percentage points in his 1990 campaign, but only won by a whisker."

Hopkins' study indicates that "Polls did show a significant Bradley/Wilder effect through the early 1990s, which includes the period when Bradley and Wilder were running for office. However, Hopkins notes that the effect then went away in races from 1996 onward. To quote the study: 'Before 1996, the median gap for black candidates was 3.1 percentage points, while for subsequent years it was -0.3 percentage points.' "

Of course, people can change their minds at the last moment about whom they wish to vote for. Still, I'm concerned by the possibility of people masking their intentions when they take part in this year's polls. And many people choose not to participate in the polls at all. Hence, I don't know how applicable to this year's election Hopkins' study truly is, and specifically how accurate the polls will turn out to be. Our neighborhood's disappearing Obama signs give additional cause to raise that question.

-- triton --

# 66 Good News and Bad News: Read This Post

Actually, this post should be numbered 666. That is, at least, the way I'm feeling right now.

Here's the bad news:

John McCain has a really good chance of being our next president, and Sarah Palin our next vice president.

How can that be? By all the ideals that the citizens of this country claim to live by; by all that we individually view as sacred, and by our moral and ethical standards; by the use of our minds that can reason and analyze and synthesize; by all that is meaningful in our lives, especially our children and our grandchildren and our friends and our colleagues: by all of these, John McCain should be fifteen, twenty, twenty-five points behind Barack Obama in the polls.

1) The bush administration has deregulated so many parts of our economy that the entire economy is in a shambles, leading the German president to say, bluntly, that the United States will no longer be viewed as the world's financial leader. This is the Republicans' doing.

2) The bush administration has mired us down in a war that we probably had no legitimate reason for beginning in the first place. This is the Republicans' doing.

3) The bush administration, as a result of (2) above, has failed in its pledge to capture those responsible for the September 11 attacks. This is the Republicans' doing.

4) The bush administration, even as a johnny-come-lately to environmental concerns (if we believe they really care at all), has lost all credibility and hence the ability to get global agreement to attack global warming. This is the Republicans' doing.

(5) John McCain has admitted during the campaign that he didn't know much about economics. But one of the most serious problems (of many) that we currently face is the real possibility of a devastating depression in this country, putting millions more people out of work, out of homes, out of everything, and causing unimaginably horrible ripples through the economies of every other nation.

(6) John McCain, in a successful attempt to appeal to the faaaaaaaaaaaar right base of the Republican party, selected unknown and unqualified Sarah Palin to be his vice presidential running mate. If the McCain-Palin ticket wins this election, she will be a heartbeat away from becoming president, a horribly alarming prospect since then-president McCain has had cancer four times, is still psychologically suffering from his war experiences (even his Republican handlers fear his impetuosity and his temper), and looks, sounds, and thinks like a person much older than his 72 years.

(7) John McCain's temper and impetuous nature are precisely the qualities we must not have in a president, the person with his finger on the trigger to our nuclear and conventional weapons.

(8) John McCain flew into the middle of bailout negotiations in D.C. to find a way out of the current 780 billion dollar mess, and negotiations flew into a rage, at least temporarily failing.

(9) John McCain, unprepared to face Barack Obama in a debate on Foreign Policy--for God's sake, that's supposed to be McCain's forte!--so far has backed out, using the ruse of trying to settle our economic dilemma (see #5 above).

(10) Barack Obama needs to be waaaaaay ahead in the polls going into election day if he is to have a chance to win. The bottom line is, Right Now, more people than we could ever believe will deny him their vote because he's black. It is so prevalent now that people are actually saying it to pollsters. The pollsters are further concerned that "Undecided" is becoming a code word for "notablackperson." I am disgusted with racism.

I could go on and on and what good would that do. I see no other reason than racism for the closeness of the current election. It is very depressing.

And now here's the good news.

Right now, this evening as I write this post; right now, as the news is filled with the failure of the Republicans to help construct a solution to the country's, possibly soon to be the world's, economic disasters; right now, with the polls showing just about a dead heat between the two major candidates; right now, there is no good news.

Except perhaps for this courageous statement from Paul Begala, on Anderson Cooper's "A C 360" this evening. I'm surprised his comment wasn't blipped. I'll be surprised if tomorrow it isn't all over the press here and abroad. But perhaps his saying it will somehow awaken our reason, our sense of fairness, our sense of righteous indignation that some people, some of our own countrypeople, view race as more important than ability. Tonight, Paul Begala said that the current president of the United States is "a high-functioning moron."

And no one disagreed. God bless America for its freedom of speech. And that IS good news.

-- triton --

#62 Latent, "Deep-Seated," Racism Among Democrats

I've been gone for awhile, watching the ocean and the S&P. What the Dow Jones Utilities average predicted a few months ago actually happened: DJU broke below its 474 support level (and is now about 40 points lower still), allegedly a signal that the Industrials would fall significantly within a couple of months. Last week that happened. Technically, a lot of damage has been done to DJI and S&P, and the lows of last Wednesday will be tested. Perhaps they'll hold. Otherwise, we're in for further declines, new lows established, with more testing of those lows to follow. So don't feel too good yet about the apparent upward momentum of the last two trading days.

Don't feel good about the title of this post either. How's that for a smooth segue. Unfortunately, I feel disgusted by the results shown by the most recent AP/Yahoo poll conducted through Stanford University. I'm including the salient parts below, but the basic point is that "one-third of white Democrats have negative feelings toward blacks," and enough of them may vote for John McCain, or may just not vote at all, to tip the election to McCain.

We saw it surface earlier, in the Democratic primary in Pennsylvania, when something like fourteen percent of the exit interviewees indicated that they weren't ready for an African-American to be president.

And I go back even further, to Doug Wilder's campaign for governor of Virginia more than a decade ago. He was ahead in the polls by double figures right up to the election, and won by one-half of one percent. That result was attributed to latent racism. The AP/Yahoo/Stanford poll signals to me that Obama may need to be ahead in the polls by ten points or more really to have a chance to win on November 4.

I am not amused.

-- triton --

Here's the article:

By RON FOURNIER and TREVOR TOMPSON, Associated Press Writers
WASHINGTON (AP) — Deep-seated racial misgivings could cost Barack Obama the White House if the election is close, according to an AP-Yahoo News poll that found one-third of white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks — many calling them "lazy," "violent," responsible for their own troubles.

The poll, conducted with Stanford University, suggests that the percentage of voters who may turn away from Obama because of his race could easily be larger than the final difference between the candidates in 2004 — about two and one-half percentage points....

Obama faces this: 40 percent of all white Americans hold at least a partly negative view toward blacks, and that includes many Democrats and independents.

More than a third of all white Democrats and independents — voters Obama can't win the White House without — agreed with at least one negative adjective about blacks, according to the survey, and they are significantly less likely to vote for Obama than those who don't have such views....

"There are a lot fewer bigots than there were 50 years ago, but that doesn't mean there's only a few bigots," said Stanford political scientist Paul Sniderman who helped analyze the exhaustive survey. The pollsters set out to determine why Obama is locked in a close race with McCain even as the political landscape seems to favor Democrats. President Bush's unpopularity, the Iraq war and a national sense of economic hard times cut against GOP candidates, as does that fact that Democratic voters outnumber Republicans.

The findings suggest that Obama's problem is close to home — among his fellow Democrats, particularly non-Hispanic white voters. Just seven in 10 people who call themselves Democrats support Obama, compared to the 85 percent of self-identified Republicans who back McCain.
The survey also focused on the racial attitudes of independent voters because they are likely to decide the election.

Lots of Republicans harbor prejudices, too, but the survey found they weren't voting against Obama because of his race. Most Republicans wouldn't vote for any Democrat for president — white, black or brown.

Not all whites are prejudiced. Indeed, more whites say good things about blacks than say bad things, the poll shows. And many whites who see blacks in a negative light are still willing or even eager to vote for Obama.

On the other side of the racial question, the Illinois Democrat is drawing almost unanimous support from blacks, the poll shows, though that probably wouldn't be enough to counter the negative effect of some whites' views.

Race is not the biggest factor driving Democrats and independents away from Obama. Doubts about his competency loom even larger, the poll indicates. More than a quarter of all Democrats expressed doubt that Obama can bring about the change they want, and they are likely to vote against him because of that.

Three in 10 of those Democrats who don't trust Obama's change-making credentials say they plan to vote for McCain.

Still, the effects of whites' racial views are apparent in the polling. Statistical models derived from the poll suggest that Obama's support would be as much as 6 percentage points higher if there were no white racial prejudice....

"We still don't like black people," said John Clouse, 57, reflecting the sentiments of his pals gathered at a coffee shop in Somerset, Ohio.

Given a choice of several positive and negative adjectives that might describe blacks, 20 percent of all whites said the word "violent" strongly applied. Among other words, 22 percent agreed with "boastful," 29 percent "complaining," 13 percent "lazy" and 11 percent "irresponsible."...

Among white Democrats, one third cited a negative adjective and, of those, 58 percent said they planned to back Obama.

The poll sought to measure latent prejudices among whites by asking about factors contributing to the state of black America. One finding: More than a quarter of white Democrats agree that "if blacks would only try harder, they could be just as well off as whites."

Those who agreed with that statement were much less likely to back Obama than those who didn't.

Among white independents, racial stereotyping is not uncommon. For example, while about 20 percent of independent voters called blacks "intelligent" or "smart," more than one third latched on the adjective "complaining" and 24 percent said blacks were "violent." Nearly four in 10 white independents agreed that blacks would be better off if they "try harder."...

Just 59 percent of [Hillary Clinton's] white Democratic supporters said they wanted Obama to be president. Nearly 17 percent of Clinton's white backers plan to vote for McCain. Among white Democrats, Clinton supporters were nearly twice as likely as Obama backers to say at least one negative adjective described blacks well, a finding that suggests many of her supporters in the primaries — particularly whites with high school education or less — were motivated in part by racial attitudes.

The survey of 2,227 adults was conducted Aug. 27 to Sept. 5. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2.1 percentage points.

#29 It's the Math, Stupid. And the Charisma. And the Impulsiveness.

No, I'm not really calling anyone stupid. I'm just playing on James Carville's 1992 "It's the Economy, Stupid" line. And yes it is still the economy, but it's also the math. And Obama's advisors may be forgetting that ever so briefly right now.

The most recent VP rumors are that Obama's advisors are vetting retired military folk. Fine. But if they choose a retired military man (yes, I said "man"), he needs to be able to carry some specific state(s) that the Democrats need to carry to win the 270 electoral votes. Say, did I mention Jim Webb of Virginia recently? What's that? Only every other post? Oh. Okay.

Wes Clark has been mentioned. I really liked Clark four years ago, but his campaign never really got off the ground. Something about lack of charisma. Man, but the Democrats have a lot of folk without charisma. Luckily, so do the Republicans. Folk like, oh, John McCain.

Here's an article I read online:
“McCain’s speech, his “Kermit the Frog” green backdrop, even his physical appearance were fodder for scores of worried e-mails and phone calls Tuesday and Wednesday between Republican donors, operatives and lobbyists."...“'They were appalled at the environment the candidate was standing in and his performance,' said [one Republican] strategist. 'It’s a serious problem — the contrast is so clear that it’s demoralizing. And it deflated our balloon last night. When the guys on Fox are trash-talking, you know it’s bad.'”

Last evening on CNN I saw McCain delivering a prepared speech to I-don't-know-or-care-whom. He was standing behind the lectern, and began the speech looking to his right. As if on cue, he turned to the center of his audience, then as if on cue turned to the audience on his left, then back to the center, and finally back to his right. He repeated this pattern during his speech. It almost seemed as if he had a little ear microphone and someone quietly directing him: "Face right, now turn straight ahead, now to the left, now turn back to the center, now to your right."

About five seconds in each direction. Just enough to make him look like a robot. It was not charismatic.

But wait, there's more.

Another article, this one on May 29, from Michael Scherer of TIME:
"Back in Washington, the anxiety level of Republicans is rising. 'The McCain camp is now acting without much rhyme or reason,' says a prominent consultant. 'And it all goes to the top.' Another Republican campaign strategist, in a thinly veiled reference to McCain, says, 'Somebody is behaving impulsively is the point.'"

While McCain's forces try to raise the spectre of inexperience about Obama, McCain seems to have neither the charisma nor the disposition for a long-haul run for the presidency and, so far at least, Obama does. All is fluid, however, and I don't yet know what role the Evil Karl Rove will play, if any, in the McCain campaign. If the Evil Karl Rove gets involved, the center will not hold, and mere anarchy is loosed upon the world. In other words, as Yeats titled it, the Second Coming is at hand. And it ain't a good second coming.

The Evil Karl Rove and Racism:
Not that the Evil Karl Rove is a racist, no, these are separate topics, but I couldn't resist the alliteration. Also, the juxtaposition of the two words is precisely the kind of damnation that the Evil Karl Rove used in 2000 against McCain in the primaries and in 2004 against Kerry in the election: innuendoes and word associations. I am concerned that the Evil Karl Rove may play a bigger role in this election than we want to see. I don't want to see the Evil Karl Rove at all. The man's an evil genius. I lay much of the blame for our suffering from dubya's poor policies with the Evil Karl Rove, just for getting him elected twice.

Separate from the Evil Karl Rove's possible entry into Republican campaign strategizing, I'm very concerned that racism may play a bigger role in this election than we yet think--quiet, underlying, implied racism. Racism may be the silent beast throughout this campaign, occasionally raising its ugliness as it did in the exit polls in Pennsylvania.

And we may not know til the votes are in. Even November's election-day exit-polls may not elicit the honesty of Pennsylvania (ugly honesty though it was), and so, until the votes are counted, we may not have a sense of the extent to which voters cast their ballots not for a candidate but against the race of one-half of one of the candidates.

As Jim Webb--still my favorite personal choice for VP, and former military man himself--said a short while ago (and I'm paraphrasing): "Why do people refer to Barack Obama as being the first African-American possibly to become president? If he's elected, why not refer to him as the fourteenth Scots-Irish to become president?"

That puts a person's race and the presidential race in their proper perspective. Thank you Senator.

-- triton --