After months of media adulation, world attention and surging poll numbers, Obama has hit a speed bump.
A new ad from the Obama campaign ridicules John McCain for not using the Internet, perhaps not realizing that McCain's war injuries leave him unable to use a keyboard. This ad comes on the heels of Obama's "lipstick on a pig" controversy, which is still fueling late night talk shows. The lipstick controversy came on the heels of another Obama gaffe, when he artlessly referred to "my Muslim faith."
The Obama gaffes are piling up, and we're not even counting his VP pick, Biden, who himself is racking up an impressive number of "oops" moments. Poor Obama definitely had a bad week.
The media-anointed Messiah, the man the world would like to elect president, has gone from playing offense to playing defense. And he's not playing well.
Obama is a charismatic, compelling figure. His appeal is undeniable, as long as he is presented in a multi-million dollar staged setting with teleprompters and a prepared speech. Take him out of this element however, and the contrast is as shocking as seeing Ms. America sans make-up on a bad hair day. Complete with morning breath.
Nowhere is the contrast greater than this video clip of Obama in a townhall meeting. His words are confusing, his body language defensive. His coat is off and his sleeves are rolled up, in what appears to be an attempt to be as one with the working man. It doesn't work. Instead, Obama looks rumpled, frayed and clueless.
He apologizes for his lack of coherence by explaining that he had a late night, which doesn't bode well for any future 3AM moments.
After months of media adulation, world attention and surging poll numbers, Obama has hit a speed bump on the road to assuming his rightful place as America's president. That speed bump is Sarah Palin. In the blink of an eye, the novelty of Obama's race has given way to the novelty of Sarah's gender. Point, counterpoint.
With Sarah Palin on the scene, the Obama camp loses a valuable asset, the race card. Charges of racism for those stupid enough not to vote for Obama can now be credibly countered with the sexism card. Obama is finding out that life isn't fair and that what goes around, comes around.
Obama is now playing defense. Instead of blessing the great unwashed with his pearls of wisdom, he finds himself reacting instead of acting. He has turned from the agent of change to the agent of the perpetual whine.
John McCain has stolen his slogan. Everyone knows Obama owns the "change" mantra and it's just not fair for McCain to co-opt it. And besides, Sarah Palin is lying and McCain is so stupid he can't use the internet.
The attacks from Obama are not playing well in Peoria. In fact, the backlash is hurting Obama and throwing Democrats into a frenzy as more women, independents and Democrats switch their allegiance to McCain. Oh, the fickleness of it all.
What has become increasingly clear is that Obama seems incapable of embracing change. His political playbook was written 20 years ago and Obama is sticking to it. He doesn't realize that the game has changed. The media is, gasp, under fire for being so blatantly in Obama's corner. The polls in battleground states are starting to lean towards McCain and the presidential tracking polls have McCain ahead by 3. Palinmania has replaced Obamamania. This wasn't supposed to happen.
In politics, perception is reality and Obama's reality is changing.
The first major decision presidential nominee Barack Obama made was to pick Joe Biden as his running mate. To millions of Americans, this signaled politics as usual, not the change Obama was promising.
The policies Obama supports, now that he has been forced to give specifics, are clearly the timeworn Democrat positions: higher taxes, more government, abortion on demand, and promising (money) cures for yet to be manufactured crises. This is Obama's platform. The only change is the messenger. And the messenger is off his game.
Millions of Americans know something the experts, pollsters and pundits don't yet know. The evidence of their own eyes tells them what legions of experts refuse to acknowledge. Obama has lost his mojo. That's both the perception and the reality.
NancyVideo@aol.com
http://www.RightBias.com
Read more articles by Nancy Morgan
He had "Mojo?"
When would that be?
He has no message, is utterly vague on actual plans to affect anything, no real experience, constantly makes Ad-Hominem attacks at his opponents and claims he didn't, hides his background, lies about it, and by his own inept commentary continually alienates group after group that might have voted for him, misrepresents positions…
That's "Mojo?"
Happy I don't have any myself. It sounds painful, like a Colonoscopy…
Comment by Last Angry Man | September 14, 2008
Obama does have experience. He ran a government housing project into the ground with his hand-picked cronies. They fleeced the system, dribbled a little to Barry and bought him off and the rest is history. Why does the "elite" media not question any of this experience? Oh yeah, they are in the tank.
Comment by hvance | September 14, 2008
You got it right with the Biden/Palin comparison. There was so much talk of Romney, Rudy and other losers in the primaries as a VP pick. Obama picked a loser in Biden, but McCain went the other way and picked a winner stealing the thunder from the DNC. So who does the following quote fit better, McCain/Palin or Obama/Biden?
"Winning is not a sometime thing; it's an all time thing. You don't win once in a while, you don't do things right once in a while, you do them right all the time. Winning is habit. Unfortunately, so is losing."
Vince Lombardi
Comment by Ivan Ivanovich | September 15, 2008
Tell me again which candidate has lost his Mojo. From where I am sitting, Mr. "The fundamentals of the economy are strong," isn't looking so great. Nor is Mrs. "I will answer your question about my specific foreign policy skills by not giving you any specifics."
Comment by Dr Kilovolt | September 18, 2008
Battleground States Real Clear Politics polls as of today:
Florida RCP Average 09/05 - 09/16 – 49.4 44.4 McCain +5.0
Virginia RCP Average 09/07 - 09/14 – 47.6 46.2 McCain +1.4
Indiana RCP Average 08/16 - 09/14 – 48.8 43.8 McCain +5.0
Missouri RCP Average 08/13 - 09/11 – 50.3 43.7 McCain +6.6
Colorado RCP Average 09/07 - 09/14 – 47.3 46.7 Obama +0.6
North Carolina RCP Average 09/06 - 09/14 – 51.2 42.2 McCain +9.0
Ohio RCP Average 09/05 - 09/14 – 47.3 45.4 McCain +1.9
Pennsylvania RCP Average 09/05 - 09/14 – 47.3 45.7 Obama +1.6
See http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/battleground.html in case the chart I copied and pasted doesn’t post readably.
Electoral map as of today: Obama/Biden 212 [157 Solid 55 Leaning] McCain/Palin 216 [157 Solid 59 Leaning]
Two months ago Obama was solidly in the lead in all these categories.
This is why wishes are not the same things as analysis.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 18, 2008
I might point out that all those numbers predate this week's collapse and McCain's seeming incomprehension of it. It will be interesting to see next week's numbers.
Comment by Dr Kilovolt | September 18, 2008
On August 6, when Obama had a commanding lead in the polls, I laid out 10 reasons why his candidacy would crash and burn. http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2008/08/06/why-obama-lost-the-2008-election/
Six weeks later, the polls show McCain not just gaining on Obama, but surpassing him. That’s “analysis” tested by facts.
Offering an ad hoc opinion about one event is just a bunch of hot air, and simply an example of partisan rhetoric.
This is why the Left always chains they were “cheated” when they lose an election. If reality doesn’t match their wishes, then it’s obviously a conspiracy to deny them victory.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 18, 2008
The Dow is up 435 points today (as of 3:40 eastern), recovering most of yesterday's loss. This is wy you need more than a 1 day timeframe to analyze a historical event — particularly when Obama refuses to say whether he approves of the AIG bailout, the Democrats in charge of Congress say they don't know what to do (Harry Reid comment), and the House and Senate plan to adjourn in 2 weeks without doing anything. This should provide some interesting factoids for McCain to use when the Obamacrats say they know what to do about the economy.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 18, 2008
Your optimism is plucky, Dr. Jackson.
Personally, I take refuge in numbers like these:
Approve Disapprove No Opinion
9/11: 52 35 13 +17
9/12: 51 37 12 +14
9/13: 49 40 11 +9
9/14: 47 42 11 +5
9/15: 47 43 10 +4
9/16: 45 44 11 +1
9/17: 44 45 11 -1
9/18: 42 46 11 -4
Those are Sarah Palins numbers from the daily DailyKos Research 2000 polling. In eight days, as America has gotten to know her, her overall approval rating has dropped 21 points, from +17 to -4:
http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/17/195514/801/936/602155
Indeed, other poll numbers show trends back in Obamas direction:
http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/08-us-pres-ge-mvo.php
I am not deluded into thinking this is going to be a cakewalk for anyone, but numbers like yours don't scare me in light of recent events.
Comment by Dr Kilovolt | September 18, 2008
My optimism is not an opinion. It's an analysis that has thought attached to it, not simply a series of wishes and web site references.
I don't take "refuge" in it. I analyze the world to draw reasonably accurate conclusions from it (good or bad — the facts lead to the conclusions), not just focus only on the conclusions I'd like to see and work backwards from that. Prior to August 6 I was not arguing that Obama would lose. In fact, I thought he waould be almost impossible to beat and stated so in my writings.
But as conditions changed (real conditions and real changes), my analysis changed. That's why I can make a statement 6 weeks ago that still has legs today, instead of simply reacting to the news of the hour and pretending it's a profound analysis.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 18, 2008
By the way, it takes guts (or the dazed after affects of a strong head injury) to quote "Daily Kos Research polling" as credible source and say it with a straight face.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 18, 2008
PEJ
DO YOU REALLY THINK THE DAILY KOS READERS REALLY TAKE IT SERIOUSLY? IF THEY DO WE DEFINITELY NEED AN OVERHAUL OF OUR EDUCATION SYSTEM. THESE PEOPLE CANNOT POSSIBLY BE PRO-AMERICA, THEY HAVE TO BE ANARCHISTS.
Comment by hvance | September 18, 2008
Kos's cash is just as good as anyone else's when commissioning a poll. It's not like a bunch of raving liberals are pushpolling to get his results. And his daily polling has exposed trends that simply cannot be seen in weekly numbers.
We've been watching things over the long run, too. Sure, McCain got a bigger convention boost than anyone expected because of the Spiro Palin pick, but it appears increasingly likely that it will come back to bite him.
Comment by Dr Kilovolt | September 18, 2008
Nazis have cash and can commission polls too, so exactly what does that mean?
Polls have assumptions that affect who's polled, in what percentage, and how questions are constructed (opened ended, which option first, push polling, etc.). This is why different polls on the same question get different results.
To insinuate that all polls are somehow the same from a credability standpoint is just silly. If you really believe what you say, then limit all your future poll citations to the Washington Times, Fox News and the WSJ. If you maintain that these three would see different trends than Kos, CNN and the NYTimes, then you've just negated your original assertion.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 18, 2008
How much of the antipathy that some Americans have towards Senator Obama is because his father was a Muslim from Kenya and his name rhymes with
you-know-what?
Comment by Suzanne Gentling | September 18, 2008
Save it Suzanne. You've been exposed as an empty suit by your refusal to address any issues in “Gunning for Palin”. No one cares what your vacuous opinions are. This is a website dedicated to political debate, not platitudes disguised as analysis.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 18, 2008
If Barry is an empty suit, then Suzanne is an empty dress. Case closed.
Comment by hvance | September 18, 2008
hvance: Well put
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 18, 2008
Dr. Jackson, did you really just encourage a guy who demonstrated his "intellectual conservative" cred with a one-liner attack on Obama and another poster, and previously attacked the patriotism of DailyKos participants in ALL CAPS?
Leave it to a conservative to gratuitously mention Nazis.
Regarding the source of the Daily Kos polls, in your fervent disregard you may not have noticed that they are not being conducted by "Daily Kos Research", but rather by Research 2000.
http://research2000.us/
From their web page: "Our Polls can be seen on CNN’S “Inside Politics” and are also mentioned frequently in the National Journal’s “Political Hotline”, The Washington Post, The New York Times, The Christian Science Monitor, and The Wall Street Journal. Visit our In the News Page to see some online examples of this."
What was that you said about WSJ polls?
Comment by Dr Kilovolt | September 18, 2008
dr. k.,
perhaps lower case would have lessened the sting but not the truth.
Comment by hvance | September 18, 2008
To insinuate that all polls have equal credibility is just plain silly.
To ignore how a poll is constructed (who is polled, in what percentage, active voter vs. adults), betrays an incredible lack of ignorance about polling.
To say that Kos' cash is “as good as anyone” invites a question about other groups’ cash.
None of these issues were addressed in your response. Why is it that the Left is only capable of making grossly generalized statements, and rarely if ever addresses a specific objection to their theories?
Why am I even asking this question when we all know the answer. There's a great difference between political debate and political rhetoric.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 19, 2008
I understand it's a more difficult conversation to actually understand something about a subject rather than just offer a personal opinion about it, but for those of you actually interested in the subject, here's a practical example of why it matters who is conducting a poll, how that poll is actually conducted, and how those results are "interpreted". [It's why I use Real Clear Politics to balance out these problems]
Rasmussen Vs Daily Kos/Research 2000 tracking polls
Rasmussen has McCain ahead by 3%
Research 2000 has Obama ahead by 2%
Why do they differ? The difference is not statistically significant, but it is interesting.
The reason is that the internals don't explain the difference
Rasmussen reports says "McCain is supported by 90% of Republicans and has a six-point edge among unaffiliated voters. Eighty-two percent (82%) of Democrats say they’ll vote for Obama.
DailyKos says that McCain is supported by 91% of Republicans and has a five point edge among independents and Obama is supported by 83% of Democrats.
Given the limited information from Rasmussen reports, my best guess is that the internals explain less than 1% of the difference and the rest is due to different estimates of the numbers of Republicans, Democrats and Independents [who were surveyed].
To me this is interesting news, because Rasmussen uses a three month average for this number, while research2000 uses the same recent data as for the presidential preferences.
Thus there is rather less than no evidence of a recent increase in Republican affiliation.
http://rjwaldmann.blogspot.com/2008/09/rasmussen-vs-daily-kosresearch-2000.html
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 19, 2008
hvance, I have seen liberals excoriated here as raving lunatics for all caps postings with similar tone and content…damn that liberal arts education of mine that taught me to decry a double standard when I see one.
Comment by Dr Kilovolt | September 19, 2008
Dr. K.
To my point in Comment 22: You can rightly point to the ALL CAPS issue that I've made fun of in the past (where hvance admitted it was overkill — something the Left who use excessive capitalization never do), but you can't address the substance of what I've challenged you on polling data.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 19, 2008
Your citation explaining the differences is very interesting, but I don't see where it addresses Palin's stunning daily fall in approval rating in the Research 2000 numbers since her introduction. But I have no doubt you will enlighten me.
Incidentally, Palin's slide continued again yesterday:
http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/9/19/75025/6051/56/603035
Comment by Dr Kilovolt | September 19, 2008
If you can't recognize why a poll of registered voters vs "adults", one that overrepresents one party at the expense of another, that uses a rolling average vs. a daily snapshot, has varying sample sizes, etc., makes a difference, and if your analysis is based only on a day or two worth of polls vs. a longer time frame, then I can understand your confusion.
Again, I thought this comment section was for intelligent debate, not just partisan rhetoric and uninformed opinions.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 19, 2008
dr. k.,
The excoriation of liberals is usually merited. What you fail to realize, thanks to your liberal arts education, is not necessarily the tone of my comments, but the accuracy of my analysis. daily kos is a joke among clear thinking adults.
Comment by hvance | September 19, 2008
How are those polls working out for you this week, Phillip?
Comment by Dr Kilovolt | September 24, 2008
Hey Millivolt
The polls are showing 18% undecided. Translation: That's 18% that don't want to admit that they would never vote for a black commie.
Call me if you need me, I'll be in the 57th state.
Comment by Ivan Ivanovich | September 24, 2008
Ivan: Dr. K still hasn't figured out the difference between a poll of registered voters, vs. likely voters, vs. adults, and has no idea why it matters in what percentage each constituent group is overrepresented or under-represented.
See comments 1, 5 and 6 in http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2008/09/19/those-who-forget-the-past/#comments.
It’s boring and tiresome to have an adult conversation with someone who knows nothing about the subject he purports to discuss, and therefore can’t address any substantive challenges to his statements.
It's a waste of time to treat a partisan seriously who only wants to share his feelings-based opinions.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 24, 2008
Doesn't take a Ph.D. to see that McCain's campaign is imploding, Dr. J.
A "black commie," Ivan? Is that how you demonstrate your "intellectual conservativism?"
Comment by Dr Kilovolt | September 24, 2008
Yes, Doc. That's how I do it. I was tempted to use the common word most white people will be thinking about when they mark their ballot on Nov. 4th, but we all know that the First Amendment does not apply to words starting with N.
Some voters will even be thinking they should vote for Obama because of his skin color, but the image of Rev. Wright will be bouncing around in their heads.
Perhaps they will remember the words of your candidate:
“A steady attack on the white race . . . served as the ballast that could prevent the ideas of personal and communal responsibility from tipping into an ocean of despair.” Barack Obama, Dreams From My Father
Then they will recall that it was Obama who injected race into this election and say to themselves "Oh crap, I'll go for the war hero".
Do you really think that "intellectual" means that we should ignore certain salient attributes?
Comment by Ivan Ivanovich | September 25, 2008
Dr.K.
This isn't the Huffington Post. People come here to debate issues, not share emotions.
You are completely incapable of offering anything other than your feelings and opinion, aren't you? Most people would be embarrassed by having their lack of substance repeatedly pointed out.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 25, 2008
Dr. Jackson, you are completely incapable of admitting you are wrong or that circumstances have changed, aren't you? Have you read the news for the last week or two since this little thread began, and watched both McCain and Palin (when we are permitted to see the delicate flower) stumble and bumble through crisis after crisis with several 180 degree turns in position and no clear message, all the while tanking in the polls (even in some of the states you were counting on)?
Do you honestly believe that McCain's plan to suspend his campaign and parachute into Washington for a photo-op just as negotiations on the bailout package (having gone just fine without him) are wrapping up, is intended to rescue anything other than his campaign, this from the guy who admits he knows nothing about economics?
From where I am sitting, my "opinion," as you call it, is as reasoned or more so than yours, and certainly more so than the ultimate righty reactionary, Mr. Ivan.
Wait, I forgot:
opinion + Ph.D. = "analysis"
Please forgive me and my lack of post-graduate education. Obviously you must have a firmer grasp on events than my BFA and I am capable of, and anyone who has the audacity to differ with you is clearly ignorant and stupid. How silly of me to think that my feeble intellect could possibly comprehend what is really going in politics or anything else, with a perspicacity such as yours!
Since anyone with your keen insight must have discerned it by now, please enlighten us, Dr. Jackson: what is McCain's secret plan to convince the electorate that his flailing over the past few days is presidential, while Obama's calm, collected, reasoning demeanor in the face of the same events (except for the tanking poll numbers, through which he remained calm and collected a couple of weeks ago) is not? What is McCain's October surprise?
Comment by Dr Kilovolt | September 25, 2008
I don't argue with idiots who only have opinions to offer, and won't address the substantive objections to their opinions.
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 25, 2008
After watching the back and forth between PEJ & dr. k., I can only conclude that dr. k's opinion is only exceeded by his lack of depth in understanding the subject. PEJ has whittled him down to obama-like understanding.
Comment by hvance | September 25, 2008
But Phil, it's so much fun responding to people like Dr. K. I enjoy his left wing reactionary comments. They reveal just how vapid the opposition has become.
Comment by Ivan Ivanovich | September 25, 2008
Ivan: Maybe I'm just getting old (and getting ready to be out of pocket for a week or two), but I find my level of tolerance for abject stupidity to and partisanship disguised as analytical thought to be near zero. There’s just so much looney liberalism I can take before the insanity becomes repetitious and insulting to actual thought.
I can’t think of a single self-identified liberal who’s commented over the last couple of years who did more than share his feelings about an issue, rather than engage in a real debate. Repeating one’s original opinion, contrary to Dr. K’s belief, is not analysis. The only people who’ve actually addressed substantive issues are people like yonkel who describe themselves as moderates.
Where agreement is not possible, at least there’s clarity. But there’s no value in just listening to someone’s emotional or partisan opinions, particularly when they cannot, or will not, address any substantive objections that are raised. The kooks on the Far Right aren’t much better, but at least they make an attempt to explain why they’ve arrived at their conclusions rather than just endlessly repeat their opinions.
Take care, Phil
Comment by Phillip Ellis Jackson | September 25, 2008