- Home
- About Us
- Contributors
- Departments
- Topics
- Back Issues
- Weekly Archives
- AmSpecBlog
- Subscribe
- Newsletter
- Advertise
- Donate
- Contact Us
- Daily Digest
- Templeton Essays
Political Hay
The Bitter End?
TAMPA -- The time left for the presidential race to take final shape has diminished from months to weeks to days, now to hours. Those who say the stars will align before tomorrow for the non-socialist, non-pacifist candidate in the race sound increasingly Pollyannaish and out of touch.
American politics is ever full of surprises. So the old fighter jock might still pull it out. Stranger things have happened. But it would take a while to think of one. Supporters of the conservative (relatively) alternative in this campaign are beginning to look a little desperate waving their frayed copies of the "Dewey Beats Truman" headline and nattering on about the "Bradley effect."
McCain is well behind in the national polls and trailing in a number of states W won in '04. He's even two to four points behind in red Florida (Florida!), without which state and its 27 electoral votes McCain has about as much chance of winning the presidency as I have of hitting a Scot Kazmir fastball (I'm 66 and wear trifocals). McCain boosters and campaign officials insist the business is "within the margin of error" in Florida. But ever since the economy tanked Obama has been on the up side of that margin in almost every poll in a state where McCain led by 10 points in the summer.
The other frail reed McCain supporters cling to is the hope that the polls are just wrong. Their case goes in this wise: When designing their samples, pollsters may be giving undue weight to the large numbers of new voters the Democrats have succeeded in registering, an undetermined but quite possibly large fraction of whom won't show up to vote tomorrow.
OK, there may be something to this. It's a more difficult business these days designing poll samples than it has been in the simpler past. And if the sample doesn't represent the universe being measured, the poll is worthless. There's been quite a variation in numbers arrived at in many of the polls taken during this race. Unfortunately for the McCain side, the variation has been mostly in how big Obama's lead is.
Pollsters have been gloriously wrong in the past. I can clearly remember the morning of Election Day 1980 when the pompous Walter Cronkite in his stentorian tones, and David Brinkley in his more down-to-earth and pleasing Carolina phrasings, told us the election was "too close to call." Of course it wasn't close at all. The Old Cowpoke beat Jimmy Bob that day by a hair under 10 points. It was a rout and the pollsters as well as the pundits missed it. Could they be this outrageously wrong again?
McCain boosters also point out that historically presidential elections get closer at the end, elephantine leads shrinking to more seemly proportions. This is true. But there's a world of tightening to be done in a lot of places for McCain to have a chance.
It is written that the race is not always to the swift nor the battle to the strong. But that remains the smartest way to bet.
So it appears that, barring a miracle, America is safe from the dreaded third Bush term Barack Obama and his surrogates keep threatening us with if we don't vote for him. What we're in fact in danger of is something like a second Carter administration. (Remember malaise, double digit inflation and interest rates, Americans in prison in Iran, a shrunken and emasculated military, Andrew Young America's voice in the UN?) If this happens, I can predict that before Obama is in office a year America will be suffering from the most acute collective case of buyers' remorse in its history.
SO HOW DID we come to this peculiar point? Always before the Democrats have helped a fairly inept, un-energized, and sometimes aimless Republican Party by coughing up some liberal hair-ball of a candidate who not only whooped up leftist policies most Americans don't fancy, but who was also a downright peculiar character.
Michael Dukakis, aka Zorba the Clerk, tried to claim competence as his qualification. But voters sported him for a hopeless, lefty nerd and George the First succeeded the Gipper. Then recall Al Gore, who some of his own supporters described as "a man-like creature." Then there was the even more off-plumb, French-appearing Jean-François Kennedy Heinz Fonda Kerry. So how come Obama, essentially out of the same mold, is going into the final days with a solid lead?
The nearest answer to hand is that he's slick where the others were clumsy. I won't make the mistake others have made of describing Obama as eloquent, or even articulate. Both of these words imply substance. But he's certainly glib. And that's taken him a long way. Plus he looks good in a suit.
Obama has crooned all the right notes while running an effective but dishonest campaign. He's claimed to be a reformer who will bring a new day to Washington. But for the total of his political career to this point he's been nothing of the sort. He oozed up out of Chicago politics, perhaps the most corrupt and in-need-of-reform politics in the nation, where he got along and went along, causing his dodgy sponsors no inconvenience.
Obama claims to be the post-partisan healer who will produce the political ecumenism he claims Americans yearn for. Yet In Illinois and in Washington he's voted the straight liberal Democratic line and has never cooperated with Republicans on anything. He claims to be the post-racial candidate who will eliminate the racial divide, yet he's been a consistent supporter of the racist policy of affirmative action and has spent decades in the pews of the church of an anti-white bigot (20 years is 1,040 Sundays on which not to hear what the Rev. Wright was saying).
Comments
Leave a Comment
- The Right of Conscience in the Age of Obama
- Barney and Friends
- The Podhoretz Method
Are you in a mob?
The Democrats say Obamacare opponents are a mob. Are they right?
Participating in this survey will subscribe you to the American Spectator email newsletter. You may unsubscribe at any time.
Robert| 11.3.08 @ 6:39AM
We got the Manchurian candidate! The best one money can buy! Thank you George Soros! Your two prior attempts to buy an election for oafs Gore and Kerry failed. You have learned that simply sending cash to the Dems doesn't do the trick.
Now, you got smart. You bought hedge funds to bring down the economy right after the Republican Convention. That's what's called timing the market! Of course, you had help. Over years, your cohorts in the Party set up the perfect storm with little tempests like the Community Reinvestment Act and ACORN.
They all came together now with the timing only a master con artist could muster. You found a boy who embodies all: slickness, white guilt, empty promises, and sold him to the clueless with the media you also purchased. It will all come out but...not until your candidate sits in the Oval Office and controls the Justice Department and courts - the only remaining recourse to overturn the coup.
Folks, get ready. It's 1939 redux and we're voting for the folks who wrote the script!
Agent Orange Peel| 11.3.08 @ 7:19AM
"So the old fighter jock might still pull it out. Stranger things have happened. But it would take a while to think of one."
If the "old fighter jock" pulls it out, the national headlines will be:
"Greatest upset since the Red Sea parted and Old Man Moses, the 80 year old, defeated much younger Pharaoh"
Tom Paine| 11.3.08 @ 9:36AM
Maybe they sound so out of touch because Democrats are not socialists or pacifists?
Just a thought.
Unless you really want somehow to make the argument that 75 million Americans are so dumb they've been tricked into socialism and only YOU and a few insurgents roused to action at a Palin rally are smart enough to know the truth.
It must be great to be so wise, but how do you take being surrounded by so many idiots?
Doctor Right| 11.3.08 @ 10:08AM
Oh, the Libs are out in full force, today, aren't they?
One thing the Dems can be counted on for is over-reaching. They run stealth candidacies becaus they know they could never win with their true intentions on election day.
They may be in store for a shock come Wednesday morning...Then again, they might not. These things happen every few years...It helps to shake things up, and purify the base.
If elected, Obama, like Carter before him, will be a one-term President. Real Americans (yes, "Obama-Rules"..."Real" Americans, not the ilk who support Obama) will have had enough of Obama's socialist nonsense by 2010. Like 1994, look for huge Republican gains in the House and Senate, followed by President Palin in 2012.
Yes, payback is a bitch...And if Obama is elected, it's coming, Libs...Count on it. Only next time, it (hopefully) won't be someone as pleasant and agreeable to Lib-sensibilities as George W. Bush has been.
Here's to the coming storm!
Andy| 11.3.08 @ 10:09AM
The worst president, so far, is Jimmy Carter. If Obama wins he will surpass Jimmy Carter in failure. The Nobel Peace Prize is a worthless piece of garbage.
Conrad Bibby| 11.3.08 @ 10:25AM
Apart from his low approval ratings, what's the basis for the claim that GWB was the worst president? He's had a lot of successes. Even Iraq is a strategic success.
Bruce Springsteen Fan| 11.3.08 @ 10:26AM
Here is a message from Bruce Springsteen, a liberal anti-American musician.
"Hello Philly,
"I am glad to be here today for this voter registration drive and for Barack Obama, the next President of the United States.
"I've spent 35 years writing about America, its people, and the meaning of the American Promise. The Promise that was handed down to us, right here in this city from our founding fathers, with one instruction: Do your best to make these things real. Opportunity, equality, social and economic justice, a fair shake for all of our citizens, the American idea, as a positive influence, around the world for a more just and peaceful existence.
"I've spent most of my creative life measuring the distance between that American promise and American reality. For many Americans, who are today losing their jobs, their homes, seeing their retirement funds disappear, who have no healthcare, or who have been abandoned in our inner cities. The distance between that promise and that reality has never been greater or more painful.
"I believe Senator Obama has taken the measure of that distance in his own life and in his work. I believe he understands, in his heart, the cost of that distance, in blood and suffering, in the lives of everyday Americans. I believe as president, he would work to restore that promise to so many of our fellow citizens who have justifiably lost faith in its meaning. After the disastrous administration of the past 8 years, we need someone to lead us in an American reclamation project. In my job, I travel the world, and occasionally play big stadiums, just like Senator Obama. I've continued to find, wherever I go, America remains a repository of people's hopes, possibilities, and desires, and that despite the terrible erosion to our standing around the world, accomplished by our recent administration, we remain, for many, a house of dreams. One thousand George Bushes and one thousand Dick Cheneys will never be able to tear that house down.
"They will, however, be leaving office, dropping the national tragedies of Katrina, Iraq, and our financial crisis in our laps. Our sacred house of dreams has been abused, looted, and left in a terrible state of disrepair. It needs care; it needs saving, it needs defending against those who would sell it down the river for power or a quick buck. It needs strong arms, hearts, and minds. It needs someone with Senator Obama's understanding, temperateness, deliberativeness, maturity, compassion, toughness, and faith, to help us rebuild our house once again. But most importantly, it needs us. You and me. To build that house with the generosity that is at the heart of the American spirit. A house that is truer and big enough to contain the hopes and dreams of all of our fellow citizens. That is where our future lies. We will rise or fall as a people by our ability to accomplish this task. Now I don't know about you, but I want that dream back, I want my America back, I want my country back.
"So now is the time to stand with Barack Obama and Joe Biden, roll up our sleeves, and come on up for the rising."
Howard| 11.3.08 @ 10:37AM
Boy I wish that I was Tom Paine or Obama Rules. Because if anything Obama does turns out okay, it is due to the genius of Obama and his ideas, people, etc. And if anything goes wrong two things will happen; the Mainstream Media will gloss it over, or, in a worse case scenario, blame it on the imbecile George Bush. Paine Rules!!
Conrad Bibby| 11.3.08 @ 11:37AM
I said "strategic success." As a result of the war, Iraq is now an ally of the U.S., not an enemy. We've eliminated a hostile regime bent on creating all sorts of mischief in the Middle East.
You can claim the war wasn't worth it, but it hard to say we aren't better off strategically as a result of the war.
As for the WOT, it may be misnamed, but it's not just a war of ideas. As a result of GWB's policies, we are waging WAR against Islamic terrorist organizations. Previously, we had been treating it as a matter for law-enforcement. The policy has been extremely successful to date: no further attacks in the U.S., AQ and others have been driven underground, bin Laden no longer enjoys the support/prestige he had seven years ago.
(BTW, we're not "invading any and all 'terrorist' countries," so that's a bit of a straw man, no?)
In addition to GWB's successes in the GWOT and Iraq, he's done a lot of great things in Africa, launched a missile defense system, modernized and restructured practically the entire federal gov't to deal with terrorism, enacted bankruptcy reform, class action reform, and several other major pieces of reform legislation (NCLB, Medicare rx benefit). He lowered taxes, stuck his thumb in the eye of the pantywaists at the United Nations, and avoided any personal scandal.
He also did all that in an incredibly hostile political and media environment.
He has certainly been a far more consequential president than Clinton or GHWB, to take just his two most recent predecessors.
Granted, he made a lot of mistakes, and there were a number of things he set out but FAILED to do (like immigration reform and social security reform). However, he still had an awful lot of accomplishments for someone being written off as the "worst president ever."
Which gets back to my original question: What is the reasonable historical case for calling W the worst president ever? Are people saying that just confusing their own immediate partisan impulses for the judgment of history?
Conrad Bibby| 11.3.08 @ 11:52AM
In reply to Obama Rules' questions:
1. Iraq: We should continue the policy of staying there until the Iraqis no longer need us to keep the country from backsliding into chaos. The determination of when that point is reached shouldn't be colored by partisan politics.
2. Re energy independence: (a) Drill, baby, drill. (b) build nukes. (c) build refineries. (d) expand the electrical power infrastructure so that we have the ability to power electic cars if and when they become commercially viable. (d) end ethanol subsidies (e) forget about carbon caps and other forms of enviro craziness designed to limit exploitation of our energy resources.
Conrad Bibby| 11.3.08 @ 12:13PM
"Really? So, Martin Luther King's efforts of equality and him winning the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964 is just "garbage," too?
No rights for Negroes, that sorta thing? "
Wow, really nice piece of demagoguery there. No wonder you're an Obama fan!
For the record, MLK's greatness was in no way dependent on his receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. It stands on its own merits.
The so-called peace prize stopped standing for anything worthwhile no later than the year they gave it to Arafat.
Giving it to Gore just completed the process by which the prize became a joke. What does global warming have to do with peace?
All Gore really did was create a power point presentation rife with misinformation and help create an environment where scientists can't debate the issue forthrightly for fear of being likened to Holocaust deniers. Well, that and get rich by investing in the same "green" industries that stand to benefit from the climate alarmism he's peddling. Thanks a bunch, Al.
Fred| 11.3.08 @ 12:27PM
Hmmmm, If the "old fighter jock" pulls it out, the national headlines will be more along the lines of:
"Racist Republicans guilty of perverting the People's Will, Utopia denied, cities nationwide burn."
We're all in for a rocky ride no matter how things go.
..
Doctor Right| 11.3.08 @ 12:32PM
Yes, Iraq has been a phnenomenal success, "Obama Rules". The problem is that you're not bright enough to understand why. Let me educate you:
George W. Bush and his War Cabinet used Iraq to create a frontline in a war that traditionally has had no frontline - the war on Islamic terror.
By creating a frontline in Iraq, he invited all the loonies in Al Qaeda, etc, to come to Iraq, be concentarted in one place, and be systematically slaughtered by Uncle Sam's brave men and women.
In addition, we have created a valuable democratic ally in a very undemocratic part of the world, with access to lots and lots of oil!!!
And, as the "coup de grace", even after we leave Iraq, we will have permanent bases with which to launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran! As Napoleon Dynamite would say "Frickin' sweet!"
However, this brilliant plan will probably all be screwed-up if President B. Hussein Obama and the Democrats get their hands on the military; they just can't help it, failure ins in their DNA.
Does that help, "Obama Rules"???
Conrad Bibby| 11.3.08 @ 12:34PM
O.R. : McCain never said "we might have to be in Iraq for 100 years." He said he wouldn't mind if the U.S. remained in Iraq that long if the country were at peace and our presence there was helping to keep groups like AQ from recruiting and training in the Middle East.
On nuclear power, I don't believe McCain was advocating that the gov't foot the cost of the 45 plants. The new plants should be financed and built through private investment. The gov't contribution should be in the form of eliminating the legal, political, and environmental barriers that have stifled the industry over the last 30 years or so.
Gringo_Malo| 11.3.08 @ 1:30PM
Um, two minor points. First, most polls are conducted by telephone, and most white people don't let pollsters waste their time at the end of a working day. At least, nobody I know does. That could account for a disparity between the polls and the election.
Second, we had our first socialist, if not communist, government in 1933. It did irreparable damage, and seems to have no immunizing effects. God save us from the Obammunists!
Howard| 11.3.08 @ 2:16PM
OK Obama Rules. Enough is enough. Time to finish your meat loaf, leave Mom's basement and go get a job.
Agent Orange Peel| 11.3.08 @ 2:16PM
Obama Rules in reply to your questions:
1. Iraq, and how to move on from here in the war against terrorirsm?
re: Pray!
2. achieve energy independence?
re: Pray!
Tripp| 11.3.08 @ 6:50PM
Unfortunately stupid voters can't grasp the intricacies of international diplomacy theory and see the true danger behind the "religion of peace". The only good arguement against invading Iraq was the irrationality and bellicosity of Muslims in the Arab world- too late to focus on that, I'm afraid, and so the only clear option I can think of is assasinating the Ayatollah Khameni or forcing a coup in Tehran otherwise. Hopefully the people of Iran will vote them out soon, but I have become increasingly doubtful of their own angst against radical Islam. My guess? Obama gets elected, Iran tries to nuke Israel, and we are at the mercy of Biden and Brezynski in a new fangled strategy committee precariously missing reasonable folks like Robert McNamara and full of appeasers like Adlai Stevenson.
Greylion| 11.3.08 @ 9:41PM
Mr Pain,
Dealing with all the idiots that surround you begins one idiot at a time - tag - your it
Tom Paine| 11.3.08 @ 10:18PM
Tripp --
These scenarios you spin out are rather odd.
Iran will try to nuke Israel? Maybe. Iran is dangerous and they do support terrorism. However, they are a rational actor and would not risk annihilation, which is what they would face if they even prepared to attack Israel.
The scare tactics are transparent and silly. Every presidential election brings the same paranoid chorus from conservatives. Whoever runs as a Democrat is the most liberal, risky, crazy, communistic lover of child rapists and abortionists ever to crawl out of hell and plague the earth. Each worse than the last.
I think you'll find the Republican party moving away from this kind of things when they start crunching the numbers and finding McCain would have WON the election if he had run as a moderate Republican. Had he chosen Olympia Snow as his running mate he'd have demolished Obama and you all'd be having a heck of barbacue right now -- or whatever it is you do when you celebrate.
As things are, however, I, Tom Paine, am going to open up a bottle of chablis and eat some arugula and radishes. Then I'm going to dabble in some satanism and call some of my friends to see about unionizing a local Outback Steakhouse.
Ms. Know| 11.14.08 @ 11:17AM
The left-wing illuminati have had the media on their side, which was a big plus, so I applaud the GOP for their strength, and never giving up.