New Polls: More Bad News For Obama

And Ambinger's quick summary is a bit too quick. Look at those foreign policy/leadership comparative numbers too....the feistier Russia gets, the more Obama is at risk. That's why Biden's stock is up. Obama has had several months to come up with something novel on domestic policy, but he hasn't. If he doesn't wrap up those undecided Hillary voters at the convention, he has probably peaked.

You get sent in against a wounded opponent and you play to a tie. Not a particularly impressive performance.

The best historical analogy for 2008 is not 2004...I would argue...but 1980.

Despite these poll numbers, this does not suggest doom and gloom for Obama. Quite the contrary.
There are actually remarkable parallels between 1980 and 2008:

(1) In August 1980 Jimmy Carter, despite the years of successive national humiliations of the Iran Hostage Crisis and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, was still about 2 points ahead of Reagan.
**Echoes of McCain's seemingly inexplicable high numbers, despite the poison of the GOP brand in past years.**

(2) Reagan, for all his likability and the American public's distaste for Carter, was finding it hard to close the deal with the American people. Carter had been hammering him as a lightweight ex-movie actor
** McCain's "Celeb" ad.**

(3) At least Carter was a known...Reagan was an unknown.
**Obama's "thin resume" meme, as promoted by McCain's team.**

(4) The Conventions were more important than usual though.
Reagan was so worried about falling numbers, he negotiated with former President Ford to add prestige to the ticket. Ford, wisely, backed out -- seeing obvious negatives in implying Reagan's weakness.
**Will Obama - contra Reagan - be tempted by the prospect of quick poll boost to have HRC for VP?**

For the Democrats, Kennedy badly damaged Carter by dragging the contest into the convention.
** Will the Clinton's echo Kennedy's bad grace and vengfulness...and covertly damage Obama?**

(5) Reagan's debate with Anderson -- who was expected to blow away Reagan the lightweight -- showed Reagan wasn't the total airhead Carter's ads played him to be. Almost instantly, Reagan's numbers began moving. His debate against Carter clinched it.
**I am sure the Obama "lightweight" meme will disappear overnight when the vast majority of the public sees his debate performance. Not all Americans will agree with Obama, of course....but they will see that Obama is not a "dumb blonde" by any stretch. As with Reagan, the meme will vanish overnight.**

Thus, while I believe history favors Obama -- if he follows Reagan's lead -- the Clinton (Kennedy redux) Wild Card is certainly something Democrats should worry about. Conversely, of course, McCain could pull a rabbit out of his hat.

If the 1980 parallel holds true, the Conventions will be VERY important.

The current problem is that Senator Obama wants to appease as much of the Democratic Establish while running for President. Senator Obama cannot hold onto the change theme while promising to give labor unions, teacher unions, public service employees, black advocacy groups, and trial lawyers everything they want

The Advisors for Senator Obama are acting as if his win in inevitable, thus they want to hold on to all of the traditional Democratic groups.

SD,
If that were true, then why does Jesse Jackson want to cut Obama's nuts off?

His FISA vote convinced a lot of Liberals that he forgot who got him nominated and that he was just another politician who will say & do whatever it takes to win.

He is African-American, and a fairly sizable proportion of White Voters will NEVER VOTE for an African-American.