« It’s not its, is it? Oh, it is.
Obama’s Rovian Roleplaying? »



Georgia on their mind!

June 20th, 2008
By JOE WINDISH, Technology Editor


Insider Advantage has people talking Georgia this morning:

A New InsiderAdvantage / PollPosition survey conducted June 18 of registered likely voters in the November presidential contest shows Sen. John McCain leading Sen. Barack Obama by a single point in Georgia, making the race in Georgia a statistical tie. Libertarian Bob Barr, a former Republican Congressman from Georgia, received 6 percent of the vote.

The telephone survey of 408 registered likely voters is weighted for age, race, gender, and political affiliation. The survey has a margin of error of +/- 5%. It was conducted with InsiderAdvantage’s research partner Majority Opinion Research. PollPosition is InsiderAdvantage’s new branding name (look for additional information and expansion of PollPosition in the coming months).

The Results:

McCain: 44%
Obama: 43%
Barr: 6%
Undecided: 7%

Jonathan Singer:

Georgia? A state that has appeared to be one of the very few (and I do mean very few) to be trending towards the GOP? Georgia is on the map? Apparently. According to the Real Clear Politics average of recent polling out of the state, John McCain’s lead over Barack Obama is just 49.7 percent to 41.3 percent. Nate Silver gives Obama a 28 percent shot at carrying the state — not overwhelming, but certainly much higher than I would have anticipated.

So will Obama carry Georgia with the help of Bob Barr, who represented the state in Congress? At this point, it doesn’t even really matter. It would be yet another back-breaker were it the case that Obama beat McCain in Georgia, making it that much more difficult (if not impossible) for McCain to make it to the White House without those 15 electoral votes. But even more important, by making the McCain campaign play defense in a state that the GOP hasn’t had to defend during the last two presidential elections, thus spreading its resources even more thinly, Obama increases the likelihood that he is able to win overall. It almost makes you wonder why the Democrats weren’t operating under a 50-state strategy earlier…

McCain, meanwhile, is happy for it:

The McCain campaign on Thursday said they welcome Obama’s expenditure.

“We’re obviously overjoyed when Barack Obama spends money in a state that we are very, very confident that John McCain will carry in November,” McCain spokesman Jeff Sadosky said.

And Nate Silver is still not drinking the Kool Aid:

I doubt that the state is truly within the margin of error right now. But it is certainly close enough — with the known unknowns of the Barr vote and African-American turnout — to be included in Obama’s ad buy, as the candidate is doing. This may also be a reminder that you can often infer something about a campaign’s internal polling in a state before the public data catches up.

Also today Obama’s first national ad has begins running in 18 states: Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Virginia.

Joe Sudbay (DC) at AMERICAblog has the ad and notes, “Bush won fourteen of the states on that list — all except Michigan, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.”

Matthew Yglesias calls it, ahem, “a bit unsubtle.”



This entry was posted on Friday, June 20th, 2008 at 5:47 am and is filed under Democratic Party, Campaign Ads, Barack Obama, Democrats, 2008 Elections, Politics. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 2 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Matthew Yglesias's reaction to Obama's as as being 'unsubtle' floored me.
    Has he watched any political ads latelly, or ever?

    Has he seen any of the ads with the family grouped around the cadidate (family man with family values)? Even a divorced family values canddidate in NJ gathered his children for the photo ad..

    How subtle are the American flags behind McCain's speeches, or the troops in attendance for Bush appearances?

    McCains speech on offshore drilling was made in front of a cheering crownd of oilmen. How subtle was that?

    i wonder if Yglesias has been away on vacation while politics goes on in the USA.
    With outright pandering left and right, this queeziness about the lack of subtlety
    strikes me as bizarre, so bizarre as to make me wonder if any ad by Obama could pass his scrutiny without him finding some handy quibble with it. Perhaps it' would too long, too short, too serious, too light-hearted. or, if nothing else, maybe his ears could be found wanting.
    • ^
    • v
    While Georgia is pretty reliably "red" these days, don't forget it wasn't that long ago (at least to folks my age) that Jimmy Carter was the very popular governor there.

    And when you look at the big picture, it seems to me it's the Obama team using its huge money lead and fundraising ability to full advantage. For instance, look at what he did to Hillary in Pennsylvania. Despite all the breathless reporting by the punditry, the Obama campaign knew they couldn't win there. But they spent heavily, forcing Hillary to spend huge amounts to defend a state tailor-made for her candidacy. And it essentially bankrupted her campaign, for almost nothing when balanced against Obama's gains in NC.

    Now multiply that in the general to include the targets of Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Virginia, and you can see where this is going.

    The Obama team is betting that they'll be able to take at least a few red/swing states, while forcing McCain to expend scarce resources to defend them all.

    Will it work? We'll see. But I think a lot of the Republican "outcry" over Obama skipping public financing (this from many of the same people who label campaign finance reform the death of free speech) is in reality due to deep concern over this very scenario.

Trackbacks

close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

« It’s not its, is it? Oh, it is.
Obama’s Rovian Roleplaying? »

By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.