Breaking: Obama Going Up on the Air in New Swing States

According to Mark Halperin's The Page, Barack Obama's campaign manager David Plouffe just announced on a conference call that they are going up with television ads in the final days in key and newly minted swing states such as North Dakota, Georgia, and John Sidney McCain III's adopted state of Arizona.

It's great to be expanding the field so much this close to the election. Barack Obama has several paths to victory, which is a welcome relief that Democrats won't have to bank on one certain state for once.

John Sidney McCain III: Out of Money

To paraphrase a certain former Secretary of Defense: "You go through the last two weeks of the election with the ad buys you have, not the ones you might want."

Who would have thought the Republican nominee for President would be flat broke going into the homestretch of the Presidential campaign? But, according to the Associated Press, John Sidney McCain III is just that.

The AP is reporting that according to his campaign's pre-general election report (which runs until October 15th) that after his outstanding debts McCain only has around $24 million left in the bank. Furthermore, through their rather conservative projections they estimate that as of this writing that number is now closer to $12 million (no word on Obama's current cash on hand take yet, but it's expected to be exponentially higher). No wonder he's trimming and even drastically cutting ad buys across the board in states he must win. The decision to take public financing, even his former aides such as Bob Shrum admit, ruined John Kerry's chances in 2004 (their decision to take public financing made them unable to counter the Swift Boat attacks); and they seem to have put a real damper of John Sidney McCain's chances as well.

Keep in mind that McCain is still relying heavily on RNC ad money to keep him visible on the air, but he still is in a tough situation financially speaking, as those ads are not subject to the same discounts from TV stations as candidate ads are. Also, look for the RNC to divert money to key Senate and House races in the coming days.

No wonder McCain's top aides are already quite literally updating their resumes.

Make sure Barack Obama and Senate Democrats have the funds they need to make it through election day.

Note to Republicans: Minnesota Isn't Poachable

It seems that every couple years Republicans make a big play late for Minnesota. While the state is much different than the state that voted for the Democratic nominee in 1980, 1984, and 1988, despite anemic nationwide results in those years; the state still has a slight, but significant Democratic lean. George Bush made a big play for the state in both 2000 and 2004, but lost the state by 2 (he was aided by a Nader candidacy that drained 5% off of Gore's total) and 4 points respectively.

In 2006, when vulnerable Democratic Senator Mark Dayton announced his retirement, Republicans were drooling at what they thought would be an easy pickup with the allegedly up and coming Republican Congressman Mark Kennedy. However, the DSCC and Amy Klobuchar went on the air early and defined the race; and she won the race by 20 points and won all but eight of Minnesota's counties.

But going into 2008, Republicans held out hope for the Gopher State, and even decided to hold their convention and the Twin Cities. But as history has shown, Minnesota is quickly becoming a less expensive version of New Jersey for Republicans. As recently as Thursday, McCain’s advisors were citing Minnesota as one of the states they were hoping to poach since Michigan is no longer an option.

Polling has been all over the map in the state, but the heralded Star-Tribune poll (good rule of thumb: When polls are divergent, trust the pollster who polls the state in question with regularity) was released over the weekend showing both Barack Obama and Al Franken opening up significant leads of double digits for both candidates.

Obama leads McCain 55-37% (up from 45-45% early in September in this poll), and Franken has opened up a 43-34% lead (with the independent in the race polling at 18%), a 13 point swing from the last poll that had Brooklyn born Norm Coleman up by four points. Despite McCain vastly outspending Obama in the state, Obama has been able to open up the lead mainly on the back of economic concerns, whereas Franken’s lead in this poll is mainly attributed (by the proprietors of this poll) to attrition of the ad war currently going on in the state (the Minnesota Senate race is the nastiest and the most personal race in the country at the moment). One thing to watch in that Senate race is the number of the independent candidate, Dean Barkley, who is currently polling at 18% and is climbing. If that trend continues, who will he take votes from and if he collapses (as many independents do as election day approaches) who will his votes flow to?

While these poll numbers look good (though this poll has been accused as having a slight Democratic lean), don’t be complacent and help Barack Obama and Al Franken keep Minnesota blue.

Rocky Mountain Blue

One good thing about election day getting closer is the glut of polls being released, particular on the state level. One such example is Colorado and the news in very good. In the Centennial State Barack Obama and Mark Udall are pulling away from John Sidney McCain III and Bob “Oil Man” Schaffer.

Three polls in the last week have come out of Colorado all of which show an Obama lead ranging from 4% to 10%. While the truth is likely somewhere in between (the PPP poll that has Obama up 7% sounds about right), the fact is that Obama is starting to open up a narrow, but substantial leads in the crucial state. Two polls were also released in the Senate race (an open seat being vacated by perpetually vulnerable Wayne Allard) between Congressman Mark Udall and former Congressman and "Oil Man" Bob Schaffer. Both polls show Udall with a comfortable lead of 48-40%. Colorado has been tight all year. Polls have mostly shown Udall with a 2-4% lead and have indicated that the Presidential race is more or less a dead heat. The Centennial State is typically Republican in national elections.  John Kerry is the only Democratic Presidential nominee to exceed 45.3% of the vote there since 1964. However, Colorado has trended blue the last couple cycles with Democrats taking over the Governorship, a Senate seat and a seat in Congress.  It was also the site of the Democratic Convention last month.

Colorado and its nine electoral votes is key to this Presidential election and completely necessary to the Democrats’ chances of attaining a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. As of right now, an Obama win in Colorado would put John McCain in an extremely tough position in the electoral college. McCain would not only have to sweep the remaining swing states that Bush won in 2004 (Nevada, Missouri, Indiana, North Carolina, Ohio, Virginia, and Florida), but he would also need to win either Michigan or Pennsylvania (or at least one of the much less likely Wisconsin and Minnesota duo) just to have a chance to get to 270 electoral votes.

Help turn Colorado blue by helping Barack Obama and Mark Udall!

National Polling Update: Static, Static, Static!

Now that the most condensed two weeks of Presidential campaign action have passed, I think it’s worth revisiting, briefly, the state of the race.

* Obama did get a bounce from his convention. However, it was obviously shortened and truncated by the Palin announcement on Friday and the GOP convention the following week, which made some uninformed “journalists” write nonsense stories.

* McCain did get a bounce, and a good one (there is an inherent advantage to having your convention last, as both 2000 and 2004 show). There’s no denying that, but…it has receded the last few days.

* In fact, as I have stated numerous times, that race seems…well, static. McCain’s national numbers have come back to earth and are basically were they were before Senator Obama picked Joe Biden. The Rasmussen and Gallup tracks are basically where they were at three weeks ago, and the new Diageo/Hotline and R2K/Kos tracks have the race reverting back to a four point Obama advantage, and the trendline in all four polls has shown a three or four point swing to Obama in the last few days.

* While it’s too soon to tell what the impending economic crisis will mean to the campaign, Obama has shown strength in poll samples the last couple nights. But most importantly, in the Hotline tracking poll, Obama has gone from a two point advantage on the issue of the economy last Friday to an eleven point advantage today. He also now enjoys a 57-33% lead on the question of which candidate “better understands people like you?” Also in the Hotline poll is the nugget that Obama has opened up a twelve point lead on energy, up from just four a few days ago.

* Palin’s favorable rating has collapsed: Last week, Hotline’s fav/unfav rating for her was a robust 48-24%, now it’s merely a 47-36%. Whereas the R2K/Kos poll has her rating down to 45-44%, a net swing of 13% since Friday.

* John Sidney McCain III’s has too: His ridiculous and discredited attacks have brought his favorability rating from 56-43% on Friday to today’s 49-45%. Whereas Obama’s has stayed stable from a 57-41% to 54-37%. John McCain’s strengths have always relied on his character and personal “integrity;” and once that is gone, he’s just another generic Republican candidate.

Since state polling often lags behind (mostly due to the low volume of it compared to national polls) it’s still hard to tell how they have been affected. But there is some anecdotal evidence (such as Virginia going back into a tie or a small Obama lead) that Obama has bounced back in many swing states. But let there be no question, the race is where it was, and where it’s always been. A tight race but one whose fundamental dynamics and state favors Barack Obama.

AP to Neutrality and Logic: Drop Dead

The Associated Press has been a disgrace to journalism lately under the direction of their DC bureau chief Ron Fournier, who just last year was in serious talks with John McCain’s campaign as a paid advisor; and they are at it again.

Yesterday, the AP released another on a long line of many hit pieces on Senator Obama. This one proclaims that despite for all of Obama’s talk about expanding the electoral map, he is quickly adopting the “Win Ohio” strategy that John Kerry’s ill-fated campaign adopted in 2004. Their “evidence” for this is that Obama in his post-convention tour visited such traditional battlegrounds such as Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. Quite obviously, this is proof that he has given up on all other states his campaign has targeted.

Let’s look at (and refute) some of the more dubious claims on the piece:

"Despite early optimism, Obama's strategists are mapping out an electoral plan similar to Democrat John Kerry's from 2004…. But don't look for the Democratic presidential nominee in, say, undeniably GOP Idaho.”

This is probably true…I do not expect to see Obama make a play in Idaho, however no one serious ever claimed he would. This is a state that George Bush (only Wyoming and Utah were more favorable to the GOP in 2004) won by nearly forty points. In other news, John Sidney McCain III isn't making a play in Vermont. Gasp!

"Obama has long looked for a way to win the White House without the 20 electoral votes of Ohio, the prototypical swing state. His top aides, including his campaign manager, once said they could lose the state and still win the election by picking off states that typically support Republicans. No more."

Really now? While Obama is still, as he always has, focusing a great deal of attention on Ohio, it is hardly his “be all and end all” of his electoral strategy. Let’s just consider this for a moment:

Michigan and New Hampshire are the only two Kerry states that McCain is even in striking distance, and in both states Obama is polling narrowly, but consistently, ahead of McCain. The Kerry states puts him at 252 electoral votes, and he now has a double digit lead in Iowa and a high single digit lead in New Mexico which would bring him to 264 electoral votes. Now Obama is not guaranteed to win the aforementioned four states, but he is clearly favored. 538’s regression model (not to mention essentially every poll) has him winning Michigan and New Hampshire by 3-4%; as well as Iowa and New Mexico by 7-9%. If these numbers hold, Obama is already at 264 electoral votes.

So where does that leave John Sidney McCain III? He would have to win states where he has a slight, though unclear polling advantages such as Missouri, North Carolina, Indiana, Florida, Montana, and North Dakota; all of which except the last two possess enough electoral votes to put Obama over 270, should he win.

Of course, there are also states like Ohio, Virginia, and Colorado where the race is essentially a deadheat (though 538’s regression gives Obama a very slight advantage in all three); that Obama can rely on to win. Even Nevada which, again, is a basic dead heat (though 538’s regression gives a very slight advantage for McCain as of this writing) would bring it in a 269-269 tie (Even if Obama loses all of the other states that I mentioned), which would probably result in his victory. While this area is murky and without a lot of precedent, most analysis confirms that Obama would likely prevail in a 269-269 tie, due to the Democratic advantage in Congress (See all of 538's regressions based on historical data and polling models here).

Needless to say, Senator Obama has plenty of electoral scenarios that don’t go through the Buckeye State. Maybe they should write a story on how Michigan is essentially a must-win for McCain (unless he wants to roll the dice and hope he runs the table among the other swing states).

Maybe the AP will consider being thoughtful and fair for once. But I'm not holding my breath.

The State of the Race and Dispelling Media Myths

With the Democratic National Convention set to kick off in Denver, polls are being released galore to provide a baseline before the most condensed and eventful two weeks in recent political history commences. One poll that caught my attention today was the Washington Post/ABC News poll that was conducted late last week, it provides many details on a host of questions and shows that much of the media narrative is non-sense.

Let’s first get down to the pure brass tacks of the poll, which I consider one of the more reputable ones out there, mainly because they’re more transparent about their methodology and release detailed information broken down by demographic.

Obama leads McCain 48-42% in a four way contest (With Nader and Barr) among likely voters, which is basically where the race has been, sans some minor ebbs in both directions, for months. Despite the much talked about negative (and allegedly, effective) attacks by John Sidney McCain III, Obama still sports a 62-34% favorable rating (McCain’s is a robust 59-37% as well). In comparison, at this point in 2004, John Kerry’s favorable rating was only in the +10% range and never did exceed a 55% favorable rating…while Obama, after a much more bruising primary, is flirting with 2:1 territory and one that is extraordinary stable.

Let’s talk about some other myths that this poll puts to rest:

Obama isn’t connecting on the economy

He leads McCain on the economy by a 50-39% margin.

McCain is killing Obama on the drilling issue!

Obama leads 49-42% on Energy issues.

Additionally, Obama is keeping McCain’s advantage among terrorism to a mere 52-38% margin, is tied with him with Iraq and taxes; and sports a double digit lead in social issues.

Here’s another myth:

Obama is underperforming the usual Democratic strength among whites, women, and Hispanics.

While John Kerry lost whites by a 41-58% margin (From 1992-2004, the Democratic nominee ranged from 39-42% of the white vote), Obama only trails McCain 49-43% among whites; and that’s with a decent amount of undecideds and at least a fraction of those will break for Obama. Obama leads among women 55-37% over performing John Kerry, Al Gore, and Bill Clinton’s margin among females, sometimes by significant margins.

Of course, married women are a real weakness for Obama, right? All those angry Hillary supporters will harm his candidacy fatally, no? He leads 48-44, a group that voted for Bush by 11 points four years ago.

Well then, naturally whites making less than 50K are a weakness for Obama? Well he leads by a 49-40% margin, where Kerry lost this group by 7 points.
As for Hispanics, he overperforms Kerry by a significant margin as well, leading 61-27% among the group that Kerry only got 57% with. A particular strong showing against a Southwestern Senator from a border state, who is a moderate on immigration.

Obama has even made significant strides among traditionally Republican voters. While George Bush won White Evangelicals by a 78-21% margin, Obama has cut the GOP advantage to a 65-27% margin; a near twenty point swing. He is also polling double what John Kerry did among self-described Republicans. While he still faces insurmountable deficits among those groups, in a close election those are significant number of votes gained.

While I know the storyline of working class white Americans and other groups that Obama underperformed with in the primary not supporting a black candidate is intriguing, it just isn’t based in the data.

While, it is still a tight race, it is a static one and one that still favors Senator Obama. This race has potential to be fluid soon though, with two conventions in the next ten days. But for now, the media coverage is fundamentally not honest. No wonder, since the media is in the tank for John Sidney McCain III. And why wouldn’t they be? He cooks BBQ for them at his retirement estate in Sedona, AZ.

But let’s be honest about the state of the race.

Then There Were Three?

The New York Times is reporting, what most of us have deducted over the past couple weeks, that Senator Obama's decision on a Vice President is imminent and has "virtually decided," whom the pick will be. They also report that the decision likely to come as early as Wednesday morning and that the list has been narrowed down to three: Senators Evan Bayh and Joe Biden as well as Governor Tim Kaine.

This is not particularly news, other than the fact that names like Kathleen Sebelius and Sam Nunn seems to have taken a backseat to the aforementioned trio. So before all of our cell phones buzz Wednesday morning (or whenever the announcement is sent via text message to all us political junkies), I wanted to briefly talk about these three choices and their potential upsides and drawbacks (especially those not talked about by the media).

Evan Bayh.

The Good: Photogenic, Experienced in multiple offices, well liked by the conservative wing of the party; yet palatable to most of the party, puts Indiana even more in play (the Hoosier State has been a fixation of the Obama campaign), strong and early supporter of Hillary Clinton. Geography: Could put the upper Midwest in the bag for Obama

The Not-so-good: Likely forfeits a Senate seat, has a reputation for being bland, and picking him would look extremely safe and political in nature.

A few questions: Is picking a son of a legendary U.S. Senator the best way to present your message of change? Is he a better candidate on paper than in practice? Is geographical balance still important? If so, how will an all Midwest ticket play?

Bottom-line: Bayh is the "safest" pick for Obama, yet still very attractive. The imagery of a young running mate would make a great photo-op. I still ultimately don't think Obama risks a Senate seat (nor do I think Bayh is Obama's top choice for the job) and the charges of being too safe in his selection.

Joe Biden.

The Good: Well-liked, a great debater and attack dog, strong foreign policy credentials, has a moderate profile, and is somewhat well-known and nationally vetted. Could help with Catholics and could put his birth state of Pennsylvania in the bank.

Not-so-good: His Mouth, Delaware is already safely in the Democratic column, questions about health, his position on Iraq.

A few questions: Can Obama claim to be an agent of change while putting a thirty-six year Senator on the ticket? He's 65 years old and had two brain aneurysms over twenty years ago. Could the Biden-Iraq partition plan be a liability? Does he make Obama seem small by comparison a la Lloyd Bentsen? Would picking him be a subtle signal that Obama is not over-sensitive to racial remarks?

Bottom Line: Biden, while he could contradict Obama's message of change, makes perfect sense as a running mate. During the primaries he was a happy warrior against Rudy Giulani and other Republicans. Yes, his mouth is problematic, but could make things lively and would bring even more energy to the ticket. Could be the compromise candidate for Obama between head (Bayh) and heart (Kaine).

Tim Kaine.

The Good: Fits perfectly with Obama's message, Governor of key swing state (Virginia), Helps with Catholics and religious voters, energetic, and has perfect chemistry with Obama. Would provide a great photo-op.

The Not-so-good: Vulnerable to accusations of inexperience, forfeits Governorship to a Republican for 12 months, not a favorite among women's groups and labor, while popular he is no Mark Warner.

Questions: Is Denver going to be too Virginia centric with Mark Warner keynoting? Kaine's electoral win in Virginia was based more in Richmond/No. Va. rather than Warner's rural strategy and does he help that much in VA in light of that? Was he too accessible the last month? I can't imagine all those leaks and interviews made Team Chicago too happy...

The Bottom Line: He is clearly, politics aside, Obama's preferred governing partner (they share a similar history, Kaine was an early backer of his, and their message is largely the same). But in light of the events in Eastern Europe and some slight poll tightening will Obama pick a more tested running mate like Biden or Bayh?

Biden and Kaine seem more likely right now than Bayh (though myself and Stephen Moody are looking for good recipe books just in case...) or a dark horse. I don't know who he picks, but I definitely feel it is either Biden or Kaine. But I'll be impatiently waiting by my phone in the meantime...

But remember as William Goldman said, "No one knows anything," and I think we all remember this (though in retrospect it might not have been the worst idea in the world):

The Race Is Static

Despite all of talk about how Obama's trip abroad or John McCain's non-sensical "celebrity" ads were either expanding or contracting Obama's advantage, all data on a national level suggests that the race has remained static the past few weeks with Senator Obama continuing a lead in the mid-to-high single digits.

Last week three non-tracking national polls were released by Time, AP-Ipsos, and CBS...and what did they show? Well if you were listening to the media (those people who are supposed very pro-Obama, if you listen to Senator Dole..err McCain), you'd think Obama was in some sort of free fall. But that's simply not the case as these polls showed leads of five, six, and six points respectively. Of course, that's the same basic range of five to eight points that the junior Senator from Illinois has enjoyed in most polls in the past two or three months. That consistent advantage is one that neither George Bush or John Kerry ever enjoyed in 2004 for any real length of time, and should not be discounted. With few outlying exceptions, Obama has polled in the 46-49% range, while Senator McCain has lingered in the 39-43% range in most polls since the Spring.

While neither Obama's trip nor McCain's ads seem to have made a lasting impression in the polls, we must wait to see if they've sowed seeds of doubt (or reassurance) among independents and undecideds come the Fall. But for now, the race is essentially in a state of static. As Dan Balz wrote in the Washington Post this weekend:

Amid a profusion of polls and a war of words and television commercials, the underlying dynamics of the election appear little changed in the two months since the primaries ended. Democrat Obama still faces reservations among voters about his background and readiness. Republican McCain still faces questions about whether he has a governing vision that represents a clear break from the policies of President Bush.

Note: Yes, I am aware of Bill's wonderful Electoral Projection that has Florida moving from undecided to Lean McCain, but I find that not too surprising and most, if not all, observers have considered to be slight-lean McCain for a long while; though I certainly think the race in the Sunshine State is very tight especially considering McCain got a head start there. I would advise everyone not to get too excited or agitated with a poll that shows either candidate moving their numbers a slight bit in either direction.

Electoral Projection

** Check the front page for the latest Electoral Projection **

We like Dave Leip's formula for allocating a state for one candidate or another.  We've designated states to a candidate only if they are leading in the last three consecutive polls. Otherwise, a state remains a tossup.  I've made one exception for Colorado because Obama has led in six of the last seven polls.  Yesterday's Quinnipiac poll puts McCain up by two. One poll well within the margin of error isn't enough to convince me to make any changes.  We will be updating the electoral college map at the end of each week through the election cycle.

We're nearing the end of July, and an average of national polls over the last few weeks shows Obama leading McCain by four or five points.  There will be a lot of eyes watching polls next week to read into whether or not Obama's foreign tour had an impact.

With 101 days left until E-day, I thought it would be interesting to look back at where polls were in July 2004.  Kerry led throughout June and July, and then the swiftboating began. There are clear differences between 2004 and 2008 (poor economy, no incumbent, etc.), so we won't reach too far in drawing conclusions.  Regardless, these numbers should serve as a reminder of how quickly presidential races can change.  In other words, this is no time to be resting on our laurels.

Group	Date	Bush	Kerry	Nader/Camejo	Spread
Marist (573 LV)	7/30-8/2	47%	47%	1%	TIE
CBS News (991RV)	7/31-8/1	43%	48%	3%	Kerry +5
CNN/Gallup/USAT (LV)	7/30-8/1	51%	45%	2%	Bush +6
ABC News/WP (LV)	7/30-8/1	47%	49%	2%	Kerry +2
ARG (776 RV)	7/30-8/1	45%	49%	2%	Kerry +4
Newsweek (1010 RV)	7/29-7/30	42%	49%	3%	Kerry +7

  Source:  Real Clear Politics 2004 Presidential Poll Averages

Taking a look at past electoral and popular vote margins puts something else into perspective.  A five or six point popular vote margin, as small as it may seem, will probably translate into at least 320 electoral votes.  

	Popular Vote Margin	Electoral Vote Margin
2004	2.46%	35
2000*	-0.54%	5
1996	8.51%	220
1992	5.56%	202
1988	7.72%	315
1984	18.21%	512
1980	9.74%	440
1976	2.06%	57