Pressure is on Obama

Since we have hacked to death why McCain lost the election, both in class and in our blogs, I thought I would turn my closing thoughts to the future. Obama has promised the world to America: change, hope, better health care, a fixed economy, better relations with foreign nations, and a better more united country. Add to that the fact that he is the first African American president and that there are thousands of people waiting for him to screw up to turn others to their prejudices, and one can see that a lot rides on Obama's performance, more so than any other president in recent history. The reputation of his party, and to some extent (sadly) his entire race, rests on his performance. If he fails to deliver, America can turn on him in an instant and revoke the hope and trust it has put into a new party. Obama will not be able to blame an obstinate opposing Congress, and since the US has begun to look the the President as the conductor for our legislative process, real progress will have to be made or he is going to get the blame. On the other hand, if he succeeds we may have a more united country than we have seen in a long time, and Democrats will likely hold power for elections to come.

So, sorry Obama, but the pressure is on you.

Final Thoughts

McCain should have never campaigned in PA. The state was possible to win in a Republican year, bu this was not it. The numbers he needed would never be able to win and Obama won rather easily. This was what I had stated from the beginning. The tens of millions that he spent trying to win blue states instead of securing red states, ultimetly cost him the race. He spent 10 million in Michigan before leaving the state, and around 20 million trying to win PA, out of the 150 million he spent on TV ads. 

Sarah Palin was a bad choice, and destroyed his chance with independents (something I also mentioned, before the Katie Couric interview). 

However, the main factor McCain lost was PartyID has swung to the Democratic favor in the last 4 years (5pts), and the economy meltdown. 

Obama Wins PA and General Election

And so Barak Obama has secured both the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as well as the general election for president of the united states. Both of which were done in total landslide fashion. The final numbers still won't be known for several hours still, yet there is no doubt in anyone's mind. Both the concession speech of John McCain and the acceptance speech of Obama were witnesses by thousands in person and millions around the globe. The implications of this election will be felt for years to come and I join with John McCain in wishing Barak Obama Godspeed in his future office and wish him the best.

This American Life

Followers of the radio show This American Life found a pleasant surprise last week, as it was entirely devoted to McCain's desperation and Obama's chances in PA. They highlighted a group called "Democrats for McCain", a group made up entirely of Hillary supporters who were supporting McCain for his experience. When asked why they would vote for a candidate so far from their core beliefs (Hillary is pro choice, pro union, as opposed to McCain), they spoke of being alienated by the DNC.

These volunteers campaigned heavily for Hillary during the primaries, and spoke of 'scandal' at the convention, from the ripping of their signs by fellow Democrats, to the dubious splitting of delegates from Michigan, which they considered undemocratic and alien from the Democratic party most had followed all their lives. This alienation is what they spoke of as their reason for supporting McCain.

The shows other segments profiled one part of the campaign - race. Union workers and Obama volunteers both spoke of their expeiences with prejudice and how some people's minds will never change, and how bigotry can remain so prevalent in the 21st century.

Episodes of This American Life are free to stream online.
This American Life 367: Ground Game

Is the election really close?

If you have listened to the news lately (especially Fox News, the Weekly Standard, or Drudge), you would think the election is at least somewhat close. 

The answer is not really. Obama is smashing McCain in the electoral college, and leading in virtually all the battleground states. Unbiased pollsters and blogs show clear leads for Obama. Currently fivethirtyeight.com, give McCain a whopping 2.7% win rate. 

I writing this as Fox, claims breaking news, that Drudge (a place that admits it is wrong 20% of the time), claims that Zogby leaked their 1 day poll and McCain was +1. If you know much about statistics, this means absolute crap. Polls are conducted by doing three day surveys each of about 300 people, to avoid special cause of day to day variation. However, each day by itself, is not statistically enough sample information to accurately predict a population, for that you need all three days. Therefore, this poll means nothing, yet the hype is going to be crazy tomorrow if Matt Drudge is right. 

So why, does the media want a close election? Of course, it is ratings. If the election is a "horse race" people are more likely to tune into their daily coverage, and even better given them something to watch on election night. This is a money business, and the closer they can make the better for them.

However, does the media saying the election is close, or McCain is getting destroyed really change the perceptions of the electorate. This is something I have long wondered about. Obama, claims that will help him as it will give more people to worry and GOTV, but I am not so convinced. I think it gives an opportunity for more independents to reconsider McCain, because it the more 'popular' thing to do. Well I look and see if the election closes...

As for PA... as much as the media has hyped it...Obama is looking to easily win it.

Bradley in PA?

More and more this election we continue to hear worries about the so-called Bradley effect: that some voters will lie in the polls and say that they are voting for Obama, but then will turn around and vote against him based on his race once they are in the privacy of the voting booth.

Pennsylvania has not been exempt from this concern, and in fact has been characterized as "Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Alabama in between", referring to the high incidence of racism in the Deep South. The two groups considered highest at risk are blue collar Democrats, who tend to be very culturally conservative, and rural white Republicans, which mostly make up the "Alabama" portion of Pennsylvania. (Though, personally, if this region is characterized as being like Alabama, I am not sure why the residents would feel the need to lie to the polls in the first place.)

But how much credence is there really to this theory? Anyone who is too ashamed of their prejudices before the elections is still going to be too ashamed after as the same consequences still exist, so there is essentially no way to measure this effect unless one has the ability to read minds. Even if records were kept to see how many people voted differently than they polled, there is still no way to prove why they changed their mind.

So we can't prove or disprove the Bradley effect, but what effects could the Bradley effect be having on this election? Most obviously, all of this speculation continues to make race a continuing issue in this election - a topic most carefully avoided by the candidates themselves. Those who are going to vote prejudice are going to vote prejudice - they are not going to forget, even if race was not in the foreground. However, the constant discussion of race may serve to motivate those opposed to it and may serve as a point of relation with Obama for others. Racism us certainly a sensitive topic, with many as violently opposed to it as those who fall under its shadow, and is a difficult matter to discuss without offending. In the end I don't think the speculation on the Bradley effect will affect the polls much, except perhaps with a slight advantage to Obama. (This is not saying the effect itself won;t affect polls, but as we've already discussed that is not possible to measure under current methods.)

But what about after the election? Will this speculation color our view of this election? If John McCain wins, will everyone call race as the cause? If so, we could be in a very dangerous situation. Racists are one of the few and one of the largest factions in the United States (as many believe that non-whites do not deserve the same rights as whites), and it has already torn this country apart and led it into our only civil war. Could a McCain win revive these passions, and bring to the surface the conflict that has been buried so long? Could we see a re-emergence of race riots? This is very worst case scenario, but still a frightening possibility. At the very least, accusations of race as the decisive factor in the next election will only serve to hurt the legitimacy of McCain's presidency and the whole concept of a government based on the equality of its people.

McCain back in trouble in PA

Today's New York Times cover story focused on Pennsylvania being a highly contested state as the McCain campaign is hoping for an upset in this key state. this seems highly unlikely however as all polls listed on realclearpolitics.com show Obama leading by anywhere from 7-14% points. It seems that his likelihood of winning at all depends on him winning the electoral vote, yet losing the popular vote.

Republicans imply Obama will bring the next Holocaust

Recently a Pro-McCain email was sent out to Pennsylvania Jews suggesting a vote for Obama could bring about another Holocaust. It was sent by the state Republican Party's "Victory 2008" committee. In the email it said: “Jewish Americans cannot afford to make the wrong decision on Tuesday, November 4th, 2008. Many of our ancestors ignored the warning signs in the 1930s and 1940s and made a tragic mistake. Let's not make a similar one this year.”

This kind of tactic seems a bit out of line. The Obama campaign has asked McCain to disavow the letter. It will be interesting to see how he handles it. Apparently the individuals whom this went to seem to be divided in the appropriateness and issues with it.