Today's installment of campaign-related news items that won't necessarily generate a post of their own, but may be of interest to political observers:
* A new national Fox News poll shows President Obama leading Mitt Romney by five, 48% to 43%, among likely voters. In a strange twist, Obama's lead is only four points among registered voters (usually, the president's advantage is smaller among likely voters).
* The Obama campaign is poised to make a "huge" ad buy in Florida, as former President Bill Clinton stumps for Obama in the Sunshine State.
* Facing criticisms from Democrats about her message, Elizabeth Warren's Senate campaign in Massachusetts unveiled a new ad this morning.
* In Michigan, a new EPIC-MRA poll shows Obama's lead over Romney growing to 10 points, as Republicans and their allies quietly give up on the state.
* The same poll shows incumbent Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D) leading former Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R) by 11 in this year's Senate race, 49% to 38%.
* Though Republicans earlier in the year hoped New Mexico would be competitive, a new PPP poll shows Obama leading Romney in the state by double digits, 53% to 42%.
* The same poll shows Rep. Martin Heinrich (D) leading former Rep. Heather Wilson (R) in the U.S. Senate race, 50% to 41%.
* In the state of Washington, former Rep. Jay Inslee (D) continues to lead state Attorney General Rob McKenna in this year's gubernatorial race, but only by five points, 49% to 44% (thanks to reader T.K. for the tip).
* The same poll shows Obama leading Romney in Washington by 16 points, 54% to 38%.
* And in Montana, PPP shows Sen. Jon Tester (D) with a narrow lead over Rep. Denny Rehberg (R), 45% to 43%. Also of interest: Romney only leads Obama in Montana by five. (Trivia tidbit: Clinton narrowly won Montana in 1992.)
Leave a Comment:
Finally a post with good news. Thanks Steve. my blood pressure could use a break.
I wasn't that fond of Bill Clinton as President, but I love his campaigning for Obama.
My fantasy is that after Florida, he pays visits to the congressional districts of Eric Cantor, John Boehner and Paul Ryan, to stump for their opponents.
Let's see how much red he can turn blue.
What a great idea!!!!! Maybe the President and Michelle could join him! It would be fantastic to get rid of Boehner, Cantor, and Ryan - and Mitch McConnell too!
Go USA!
I have to say (even without reading any of the commentary about it, I've seen none), I was caught a little bit off-guard by Elizabeth Warren's DNC speech.
Don't get me wrong, I LOVE her, and I think voters do relate strongly to her advocacy on their behalf in the face of the corruption of the financial industry.
I think she just had the wrong tone for the DNC speech. Came off as overly angry and negative.
Of course, that raises all my red flags, since US culture has such a misogynist bias against women who don't look like Stepford 2nd Wife fantasies, and there's that awful and idiotic stereotype about humorless and angry feminists (that one's right up there with the "angry black man" stereotype).
So far be it from me to criticize ANY speaker for justifiable righteous anger and bitterness. That is so often very much earned and justified. (I'll even defend Alanis Morrisette!)
But her speech just didn't connect for me, didn't do real well, and I can't point to anything except that the anger and negativity just seemed over the top. I wasn't expecting it.
But some of the most effective speeches at the convention harnessed righteous anger and were over the top. John Kerry comes to mind. Wonderful speech. I loved every minute of it. Better than Biden, who is starting to be over-used as some kind of go-to "Emoter in Chief." (and I LIKE Biden, which is why it bugs me)
Maybe Warren was just having an off day. It happens. No way she should be behind the incompetent nudie poser Scott Brown. I want her to succeed. Maybe she just needs to more finely-tune her oratorical ear.
Warren just does not connect with people outside of Cambridge. In the western part of the state she does not connect the way that Brown does. Brown talks like them, looks like them and is a real MA guy. Warren comes off as a nagging shrew.
I will gladly take Ms Warren's speech angry-sounding or not, over the pap and outright bull$h-t by the GOP ladies of hypocrisy, claiming to support women as long as they are not required to vote against the party line.
I was watching MSNBC at lunch and they had a clip of Rmoney speaking .
He had 6 or 7 women behind him - no men . I guess those are the 6 or 7 voting for him.
Pitiful when you have to stage it like that
One senate race that could really use some national democrat help is the Kerry Fischer race in Nebraska. i know that this seat has been pretty much written off by the national media, but with help i think Kerry could retain Ben Nelson's seat for the democrats.
Fischer is coasting in this race right now, and won't answer any questions just giving tea party rote responses to everything and is a blank slate for her donors (been getting tons of cash from outside the state). Kerry is a former Gov and Sen from Nebraska who has some great ideas to shake up business as usual in the senate, and if he could get a bit of help i'm sure he could take the lead in this race due to his extensive experience in politics and the good he did for this state during his time as governor. There is a debate on Oct 1st for these two (Neb public television debate iirc), and if Kerry can perform as well as he did in the last one and get some outside help, we can keep a Dem in the Senate from Nebraska.
i can hope anyway...
a very interesting set of polling numbers from the other day that i'm pretty sure steve hasn't discussed...
Focusing on 11 states from Virginia and North Carolina to Texas and Oklahoma, the polling project canvassed 8,690 people in households with incomes under $55,000 a year -- just above the U.S. median.
Non-Hispanic whites in this bracket have skewed Republican for more than three decades, and they prefer the GOP nominee to Obama by 46 percent to 29 percent. Strategists in both parties figure that Romney must garner more than 60 percent of the white vote overall.
35 percent of voters overall, and the same proportion of lower- and middle-income white Bible Belt voters, say they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who is Mormon.
Among low- and middle-income white Bible Belt voters, 21 percent in the Reuters/Ipsos polling data said they are uncertain they will vote in the presidential election. That's not much more than the 17 percent of other respondents who were uncertain. But in a group that leans Republican, it could be enough to hurt Romney.
The data also shows that 38 percent of these voters said they would be less likely to vote for a candidate who is "very wealthy" than one who isn't. This is well above the 20 percent who said they would be less likely to vote for an African-American.
whole thing [including the impact of rmoney's welfare lie]
http://news.yahoo.com/southern-whites-troubled-romneys-wealth-religion-050312040.html
Elizabeth Warren went out there to "tell it like it is." She did just that. Remember that she's talking primarily to the voters of Massachusetts. They're better educated than the average U. S. citizen, they're politically savvy, and they know when someone isn't being genuine.
Her focus for decades has been on fighting Wall Street and the big financial institutions, so that consumers can have a fair shake in the marketplace. If she's not going to talk about those things, she becomes just another generic candidate.
I'm confident that when it's all over, the people of Massachusetts will live up to their reputation as intelligent and independent voters--and send her to the U. S. Senate.
I hope so, mpguy. I mean, there's a reason so-called "career" politicians often succeed while less campaign-tested, "real" people sometimes stumble, misspeak, or accidentally step in the rhetorical equivalent of dog pooh, repeatedly.
I half-expect I'd have the same difficulty, if I were running for office. I have some experience speaking extemporaneously, both when I can speak frankly and say whatever I want (teaching), and when I have to pinch a quarter between my cheeks and watch every word lest I give offense (corporate consultant).
But the kind of close media/citizen journalist scrutiny of candidates can exaggerate and over-analyze every misstep or intemperately-chosen word, blowing a lot of things out of proportion, but also rightfully illuminating certain aspects that help us evaluate the character of those we must elect.
I expect I'd be a bit more like Biden, with foot-in-mouth disease. Maybe that's why I like him. I think he's a smart guy, but like multi-tasking, sometimes it is hard to think and talk at the same time.
Even if Rachel Maddow makes it look so easy.
Warren was a professor, and thinking out loud is what professors often do (except for Professor Yellow-Note, but let's not talk about him). Strike-thrus, reversals, devil's advocate trials, all of those kinds of things are allowed.
It's only speaking in the Public Commons that is so unforgiving and literalist.
Maybe Cherokee Princess Warren is getting stressed out about not being miles ahead of Scottie by now. Maybe part of the reason is that people see her as a liar, fraudster and racist, and she doesn't like being called out. In the Native press, she's being called out, on legitimate grounds. See my links, below, and this:
http://indiancountrynews.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13217&Itemid=33
It's hard being a Plastic White Indian Wannabe these days, when Native people are on watch.
I think we're going to see more polls that show "likely voters" going for Obama in larger numbers than "registered voters" as time goes on, even though it's normally the opposite.
Why? Because there are plenty of Republicans who hate Obama, but fear a Romney Presidency as much as we do. So sure, I'm a registered voter, I hate me that Obama, I'm a Romney man. Oh, but I'm not a likely voter, so I guess I can't answer that question, heh, so sorry.
How can we trust "Cherokee Princess" Warren to stand up for Mass., when she won't stand up for her own people?? H*ll. she won't even meet with them!!
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/09/04/elizabeth-warren-facing-criticism-at-democratic-national-convention-from-american-indian-delegates-132692
The lies and hypocrisy seem to be catching up with her.
And in case you wonder what Native people think about her (which you should), there's this:
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCxyY_UhaB5BkFG-hQrNdF-g?feature=watch
Ah, how nice. A little early afternoon bigotry for everyone's consumption. Go away, troll.
Very amusing. A Racist calls a truth-teller a troll. First, read the links. Then, read this:
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/ict_sbc/elizabeth-warren-and-the-politics-of-spiritual-genocide
Name-calling is the easy way to avoid the truth--a tactic they perfected at the Fox Fascist Propaganda Channel. You've learned their lesson well. Now go back there and see what a good student you are.
Talk about proojection. One of the Republicans' favorite strategies: accuse the other side of doing what you do, or being what you are.
You have evidence that I'm a racist? Present it. Or stay off the site.
Saying Native people are bigots or trolls, when you can read the truth and see they are not, is racist.
Explainer-in-Chief Bill Clinton needs to go up to Massachusetts and set the record straight on Scott Brown, like he did on Romney/Ryan.
Also she needs to do some debate prep to understand how to win the audience, not the judges, otherwise she will cream Brown on the facts yet "lose" the debate.
She deserves to win this on the merits, but voters--even Massachusetts liberal voters--need to be able to connect with her on a human level.
Let's hope that Massachusetts's voters see through the daily campaign nonsense. People always gripe about there not being anyone in politics who "looks out for the little guy."
Well, here's someone who does. She's real and wears her heart on her sleeve when it comes to working for middle class people and values.
As I said above, I hope the folks in the Bay State are as smart as I think they are (or, at least, as I want them to be). If they are, she'll be elected.
If they aren't, and they send Brown back to the Senate, they deserve to have someone there who represents corporate interests and who will make life more difficult for the middle and working classes.
"Looks out for the little guy"?? H*ll, she won't even talk to the little guy!! Again, and try reading it this time, and notice, these were delegates to the convention:
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/09/04/elizabeth-warren-facing-criticism-at-democratic-national-convention-from-american-indian-delegates-132692
One of the smallest officially recognized racial minorities in Amerikkka, and Princess Warren blows them off. You call that a woman of the people?? ROTFLOL!!
Steve, What's the status on voting machine tampering potential for this election? Is Diebold still a major/dominant player? Are watchdog groups on this? Voter suppression is big, yes, but I'm recalling reports of people claiming they voted for one person and the machine changed their vote.
Would you please do a recap?
I'm concerned about the machines too. There were some states in the south with some pretty significant variances between exit polls and results. Then, of course, some reports like above. What DO we know about vote security coming into this election?
Let's send Rachel Maddow to Egypt ..... she needs to be Lara Logan-ed.
Muslim Brotherhood: Stick your fingers in the dyke !!
Stop talking about your mother like that, daugherofadyke.