Bounce
"Now here's the bounce," MSNBC's First Read guys have written this morning. "A few recent national polls -- which have shown Obama leading McCain by single digits after he essentially wrapped up the Democratic nomination -- have led some in the media to ask: Where's the bounce? Well, here it is. Obama is now leading in three of the biggest battleground states, according to a new Quinnipiac survey.
"In Florida, it's Obama 47% vs. McCain 43%. In Ohio, it's Obama's 48% against McCain's 42%. And in Pennsylvania, it's Obama 52% and McCain 40%. For the McCain camp, those Pennsylvania numbers have to be particularly frustrating. And if Obama's getting a bounce like this in Florida now, imagine what happens after a few days of bad off-shore oil drilling press in the state for McCain."
Posted by Jeffrey Wells on June 18, 2008 at 6:30 AM
comment #1
p.Vice
says ...
Considering the polls have been exceptionally off target throughout the primaries, maybe we should forget this nonsense and pull out the Magic 8-Ball to see who's really making headway.
Obama? Don't count on it.
McCain? Better not tell you now.
Posted by p.Vice
at June 18, 2008 6:48 AM
comment #2
Mgmax, le Corbeau
says ...
Bad off-shore drilling press? You mean, I have a plan for lowering gas prices press? Don't throw him in that briar patch.
I don't take much from any of this, except that assertions that anybody has an invincible lead at this point are built on sand and well within the ability of the actual candidates to alter as the campaign actually gets going. So far McCain's doing a pretty good Dole impersonation, but Obama's Mondale is pretty good too.
Posted by Mgmax, le Corbeau
at June 18, 2008 6:53 AM
comment #3
bents75
says ...
Two can play that game P-vice
McCain? - "Concentrate and ask again"
Obama? - "It is decidedly so"
And for the wild card -
Does McCain remember what day it is?
"Reply hazy, try again."
Posted by bents75
at June 18, 2008 6:55 AM
comment #4
Josh
says ...
Kerry lead Bush by the same amount 4 years ago. How did that turn out?
When americans finally hear Obamas real views hes toast.
This country doesnt want Jimmy Carter 2.
Posted by Josh
at June 18, 2008 7:59 AM
comment #5
mjn
says ...
With today's 24-hour news cycle, Carter might as well have left office in 1880 instead of 1980. He is ancient news, comparing Obama to Carter is like comparing McCain to Ford. Nobody cares about this comparison. However accurate or inaccurate.
Posted by mjn
at June 18, 2008 8:14 AM
comment #6
vansmith
says ...
by the time the new pres comes in, they'll be another major war front, it wont matter who he is..he'll be serving up shit with a smile, and we'll have to eat it...
Posted by vansmith
at June 18, 2008 8:25 AM
comment #7
alan
says ...
"Kerry lead Bush by the same amount 4 years ago. How did that turn out?"
It turned out very close, actually. Although I seriously doubt that Kerry lead Bush by exactly the same amount in the same 3 states, and I don't care enough to look it up.
Also, Kerry was a boring dud, the opposite of Obama as far as charisma and charm are concerned. This time around, the Republican candidate is the boring dud, which is just one of the many factors that will lead to his defeat.
Posted by alan
at June 18, 2008 8:49 AM
comment #8
MovieBob
says ...
NONE of this should be surprising or out of the ordinary, but this is what happens when pundits annoint a guy the second coming of JFK without checking to see if the actual voter base feels the same way. If Obama the man WAS Obama the mythic figure we keep hearing about, he'd have a bigger bump.
Obama has a small but vocal number of (consistently unreliable) potential voters who are genuinely psyched about him, the rest of his constituency are just "voting for the democrat" or "voting against the republican." Likewise, VERY few on the right are genuinely enthralled with McCain. So you're not going to see a major disparity at this point.
Posted by MovieBob
at June 18, 2008 9:24 AM
comment #9
Jay T.
says ...
McCain is like a magic 8-ball right now... ask him the same question and the answer will change every time.
Posted by Jay T.
at June 18, 2008 9:45 AM
comment #10
Mgmax, le Corbeau
says ...
"With today's 24-hour news cycle, Carter might as well have left office in 1880 instead of 1980. He is ancient news, comparing Obama to Carter is like comparing McCain to Ford. "
Is that why nobody ever brings up the Kennedys?
Posted by Mgmax, le Corbeau
at June 18, 2008 10:18 AM
comment #11
dangovich
says ...
B--but DavePolandsgut told me McCain was going to win 47 states! I'm confused.
Posted by dangovich
at June 18, 2008 10:46 AM
comment #12
mjn
says ...
Mgmax, I see you've missed my point. Yes comparing Obama to Kennedy or McCain to Reagan is irrelevant. People do not care about historical comparisons. Anything in excess of 20 years is really pushing it. Try to remember back to 1980, people were not invoking Eisenhower when coming up with a reason to vote for Reagan. The pundits may do this. But the average American voter does not care about drawing historical analogies when going to the polls.
Posted by mjn
at June 18, 2008 11:00 AM
comment #13
D.Z.
says ...
Josh: "Kerry lead Bush by the same amount 4 years ago. How did that turn out?"
It turned out that Bush stole Ohio. But anyway, Kerry was running when Bush hadn't completely looted our surplus and
could thus lie to the public with a straight face about a strong economy. McCain is not going to be as successful.
"When americans finally hear Obamas real views hes toast."
It doesn't matter what his real views are, because unlike those of McCain, they're in touch with reality.
"This country doesnt want Jimmy Carter 2."
You don't seem to get that it's Bush who's really Jimmy Carter 2.
Bob: "NONE of this should be surprising or out of the ordinary, but this is what happens when pundits annoint a guy the second coming of JFK without checking to see if the actual voter base feels the same way. If Obama the man WAS Obama the mythic figure we keep hearing about, he'd have a bigger bump."
That's kind of a lame argument, since McCain was leading Obama by a smaller margin only a little while ago.
"Obama has a small but vocal number of (consistently unreliable) potential voters"
Unreliable? We're not the ones who swing to Bush and Reagan so we can get tax breaks at the expense of the poor.
Mgmax: "Is that why nobody ever brings up the Kennedys?"
Except for John John dying in an accident and Ted getting brain surgery, sure. Oh, and Maria did a book tour here in L.A. a few months ago...
Posted by D.Z.
at June 18, 2008 1:02 PM
comment #14
mjn
says ...
When McCain brings up his 'Carter 2nd term' talking point he comes off as old (big surprise there). Carter left office almost 28 years ago, the fact this has become a major McCain/right wing talking point underlines a massive misreading of the average voter. Even if McCain was spot on with this comment there are swaths and swaths of (under 40 yrs) voters who have no idea what he is even talking about. This talking point lost its relevance when Clinton took office.
Posted by mjn
at June 18, 2008 1:20 PM
comment #15
BurmaShave
says ...
Josh please remind me what about Obama the American people, before answering these polls, didn't know? What the fuck left do you have to throw at him? It's June and your side is already reaching for He's black!/He's Muslim! Oh and I forgot, he's a Marxist. That's right, he's a secular socialist religious extremist.
Posted by BurmaShave
at June 18, 2008 2:15 PM
comment #16
James Leer
says ...
Josh: "Kerry lead Bush by the same amount 4 years ago. How did that turn out?"
Uh, no he didn't?
Posted by James Leer
at June 18, 2008 3:17 PM
comment #17
Mgmax, le Corbeau
says ...
Mjn, I didn't miss your point, I disagree with it. Oh, and I remember lots of talk about many politicians lost in the mists of history when Reagan was running-- from Barry Goldwater to FDR to Churchill.
Posted by Mgmax, le Corbeau
at June 18, 2008 4:10 PM
comment #18
mjn
says ...
Then why is it when you post you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the point that I'm trying to make?
My original post refers to the modern voter and not to the media coverage of 1980.
Posted by mjn
at June 19, 2008 6:21 AM
comment #19
jany
says ...
Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of high availability solution
Posted by jany
at April 22, 2011 7:39 AM