Sunday, September 14, 2008

Obama's "New" Message: McCain is Bush III... Yawn

According to Michael Goodwin, in today's New York Daily News, Barack Obama is about to hit John McCain HARD, showing the country how he is just like Bush. News flash to Team Barry, the man at left is not running for President. Also, isn't this what you've been doing for three months?

I've been away from the blogging for a few days, my apologies to those who checked in looking for new posts. Aside from some personal reasons to take a break, I could not, for the life of me, find anything new Obama had to say lately. It seemed all Palin, all the time. Obama is just not breaking into the news cycle. Ever since his standard Lib-Dem convention speech, he seems to have vanished from the news cycle.

Looking around for clues, I found this article at the Detroit Free Press asserting that both candidates are avoiding hot button issues. It then gives a run down on their stand on various issues. Here is the money quote:

Obama, on the other hand, generally follows the standard liberal line. But he does so in a carefully modulated way that shows -- or attempts to -- his respect for opinions different than his.

Obama is a liberal who tries to be nice when he talks about the issues. Even though he claims to want a debate on the issues, I think he senses he is on the losing side of most arguments about guns, late term abortions, affirmative action, and taxes. The one issue where opinion polls seem to favor his position is "universal health care." But even though the polls seem to favor his approach, it starts to unravel when the actual cost of imposing the taxes, regulation and restrictions necessary are really understood by the voters.

Back to Goodwin's article:

The decision to stick with a mostly-nasty approach should finally end the myth that the Obama campaign is a flawless machine. It had an extraordinarily appealing candidate, a message of change to an unhappy nation and made brilliant tactical decisions that defeated the Clintons.

I see Obama pulling a Romney. Obama had a lot of time as the front runner to really define himself with more details than just "hope and change," but like Romney he chose to go negative rather than use his lead to give his brand name a specific identity. He has ceded that task to his opponent. His meteoric drop amongst the odds-makers to be the next President is the result.

Post-script: A quick note about the "horse race" aspect of the election. Over at they have an electoral map with no toss up states. It is instructive to see that if polls are to be believed, Obama would lose the popular vote but still be elected President were the election to be held today. Although I don't really believe that, it is instructive to see that the electoral map has shifted very little from 2000 or 2004. It will come down to Ohio, Colorado, Michigan or some other swing state, in all likelihood. The bad news is that McCain is probably going to be outspent. The good news is that Obama seems to have wasted a good deal of cash on a "50 state" strategy, when in fact less than 10 states are really going to matter.



Road Dawg said...

Well put! Missed you of late.

Dean said...

"Obama had a lot of time as the front runner to really define himself with more details than just "hope and change,"

But if there is nothing by which to further define yourself....

K T Cat said...

I think some of those state polls are a little stale. The map has been moving in McCain's favor for quite some time.

I think McCain still has a few weapons he hasn't deployed yet - there are terrific management experience ads that could be run.

Also, Palin is drawing monster crowds while Biden is speaking in front of small ones. It's a 2 on 1 game now. I feel pretty good about it.

B-Daddy said...

I agree about the staleness of the polls, although there have been some updates over the weekend, and agree that McCain has changed the map and can continue to do so. But, I predict that in the final analysis it still will be a relatively close electoral map with only a few states holding the balance. This is different from the 70s, 80s and 90s where a difference of 5 points in popular vote could still result in an electoral college landslide.