That's what we can do.  It's about the personal, face to face, person to person--who is more likely to vote for change, the guy who voted with Bush 94% of the time and the earmark champ of Alaska with the same economic policies for the next 4-8 years that have gotten us into debt hole that is as deep as China, or the team who voted against Bush with different economic policies that have actually worked to improve the economy-bring jobs that stay here (invest in roads, bridges,etc)instead of tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas, etc. etc.

get the messaging right.  Can anyone tell me how stuff like this ("I know of no man or woman I have ever met that has more personal courage than John McCain") or this ("As a Matter of Faith, Biden Says Life Begins at Conception") helps?

He always says McCain's a great guy, but that he shouldn't be running the country.  McCain's going to have problems answering this because he'll look vindictive and petty if he attacks Biden.

As for the abortion comment, the reporting of Biden's comments should have been better and provided proper context.  The biggest point he made, which does not come through in the article, is that it's not about promoting abortion rights but about NOT criminalizing abortion.  This is an extremely important distinction and one which can be made attractive to those for whom the pro-life position is very important.  Biden said he took it as a matter of faith that life begins at conception because that's what his faith demands of him.  But he also said that he supports the right to choose because the only other option is to criminalize women who have abortions.  

If Dems are going to appeal to the conservative-leaning, pro-life, working class voters of the small towns and mountain communities they're going to have to re-frame the abortion issue.  When such voters hear terms like "right to privacy" and "personal choice" they hear "licentiousness is okay" and "we're absolving people of responsibility for their actions."  The debate MUST be re-framed as "do we really want to criminalize abortion?  Do we want to arrest women who have abortions?  If life begins at conception, and full human rights attach at conception as McCain has said, then aren't women who have abortions guilty of murder?  Shouldn't we, under that argument, sentence them to life in prison for that murder?"  In other words, bring the argument to its logical conclusion.

Biden made a very important point yesterday that the focus should be on reducing the circumstances that make women choose abortions.  It should be painted as:  "The Republicans tell you they're the party of life, that they oppose abortion, but what do they do for women who feel they have no other choice but abortion?  What do they do for the teen mothers, the economically destitute women, the middle class women who know they have no insurance and can't afford to have a baby without harming the interests of the children they already have?"  Make the point that if many women are having abortions because they feel compelled to do so for lack of support, or insurance, or because of economic considerations, then the best way to handle the problem is NOT by driving it underground, but by offering viable alternatives.  Right now, the only alternative we ever hear from the Republican side is to put the baby up for adoption.  And that's a faulty choice because BOTH parents have to agree to put the child up for adoption.  If the father wants to keep the baby, then he will be able to stop an adoption  absent the most egregious circumstances and complete unwillingness by anyone in his family to take the child.  Why not ask how the Republicans can call themselves the party of life when the only alternative they promote is to give the child away or, more realistically, to get someone in the family other than the mother to raise it?

The reason why Democrats are and have been struggling in the small towns and rural communities with such issues is because they don't know how to make a proper argument which takes into account the underlying faith and attitudes of their audience.  They keep treating faith and attitudes as minor side issues when they are in fact often determinative of how these voters will vote.  The Dems should not be portraying themselves as the party of choice to these voters, they should be promoting themselves as the party of the culture of life.  

is getting ready to air a piece on Palin's church. Any news on her that's negative will negate any convention bounce they get. PLUS Biden was fired up last week and he is sure to get more vocal!

What concerns me is this: the right-wing has gotten a lot of traction in the past week or so demonizing the MSM. This is a winning argument for the Republicans. At this point, if the MSM puts front and center something really questionable in her background, Palin wins because she's just a humble hockey mom trying to defend herself and her homegrown family against the vicious East Coast set. If the media downplays obvious criticisms, Palin wins because it looks like the initial skepticism about her selection as VP nominee was overblown. Which throws into doubt any future skepticism.

McCain has been lagging in the polls until recently because he refused to resort to demagoguery. Obviously that changed at the convention. But that narrative--that it's the media and the pointy-headed elites trying to destroy this pretty little ultraconservative radical--isn't easily punctured. This is the exact same dilemma we faced with GWB. If you criticize your opponent, you're an elitist. If you don't criticize your opponent, you're weak, and you get ridiculed. That's demagoguery, pure and simple, but how do you fight back?

Right now the Democrats look like they're still trying to respond to Palin, and that plays to the Republican advantage. They need to change the current narrative about her. The debates won't do it, and neither will the ABC News interview, because her "anti-Washington" persona (i.e. her from-the-gut approach to many important issues) is part of her appeal. As it was with GWB. She can fumble her way through every answer, and the base will still love her because she beat up on Barack Obama.

No, the Dems have to attack her hard. With TV ads, with big speeches, with whatever they can get their hands on. They have to change the narrative about her. They have to peddle a new narrative: she is a dangerous, intolerant ideologue who wants to criminalize abortion and introduce fundamentalist ideology into the public sphere. More than that: she has a lot of personal and political baggage that throw serious doubts on her judgment.

You absolutely have to make the swing voters uncomfortable with the idea of having someone so extreme and dogmatic close to the Presidency. I hate to use the term "scare tactics," but if Obama can't change the current narrative about Palin, he's going to lose the election.

to tell the truth about how extreme and unqualified Palin is.  It's also not "scare tactics" that John McCain's 72 years old and has had cancer.  Also, John McCain likes to point to his mother's longevity, but his father died at age 70 and his grandfather at age 61.  The point is, there's a serious chance that Palin could become president if McCain's elected, and that's a very scary prospect.

that both Obama and McCain got a bounce from their conventions.  It is also not surprising that McCain's bounce was bigger - McCain's support on the right was soft and the Palin pick has now energized their base, especially social conservatives.

The polls to watch are those that will come out next week, after the convention bounces have subsided and we can see how all this shakes out.

But right now I think it's a good thing McCain is ahead.  Too many in our party, in the blogging community, on liberal talk radio, etc., have convinced themselves that this election is in the bag.  And now the cold, hard fact that it will not be has splashed ice cold water in their face.  

So, as Cher once said in her Oscar winning role, "Snap out of it!" Attend a phone bank, canvas door to door, contribute, and REGISTER NEW VOTERS and help turn our vote out on election day.

And one other thing - our state is growing by leaps and bounds, as are the voter rolls.  The legislature and Governor need to start thinking about extending the hours to vote on election day and/or implement an early voting program.  

Lines are way too long on election day and localities are having difficulty coming up with enough poll workers on election day.  And this is a huge problem - most localities with long lines are in Democratic performing cities and counties - so we as a party are taking most of the hit when people leave because they can't wait in line for an hour or more.      

in the blogging community who thought this race was even close to being in the bag. To the contrary, I have felt for a long time and continue to feel that this race will be VERY close, probably a late night on November 4. I hope I'm wrong, and that Obama wins easily, but I am far from counting on that.  I think that others who have just assumed Obama will win easily have made a big mistake, among other things not adequately taking into account what a big leap it will be for this country to actually elect an African American man to the White House. We've made some progress in this country on race relations, of course, but we still have a looooong way to go.

Sad but true, Lowell.  In my travels around the City of Fairfax, I actually had a discussion with a man who told me he didn't think much of McCain and thought his claim to fame was his status as a former POW but there was no way he could vote for a colored man. That gem from a man who is retired military with a star.
On a different note, my favorite checker at Giant is excited about Palin...seems there is value in having a
"real family" in the White House...she added that her  daughter at age 16 got pregnant while in high school.
Then the woman who cleans for me walked in and announced she can't vote for Obama because he is going to raise her taxes and she can't afford to pay any more taxes. Explained to her Obama was going to raise the taxes my sons pay,but not hers...The world is now at peace with her.
My former husband is a USNA grad (submarines). When Jimmy Carter won the election, I remember him going into a rage.
His thought was he should have two votes..one to vote as an educated, intelligent person and another vote to cancel out
an uneduated vote.   At the time, I thought that was a very strange idea....Now, I am not so sure...may have to break down and call him and tell him there may well have been a time in 28 years when he was right and I was wrong.

$20 MILLION deficit  wasillia during palin

HAs anyone noticed that most of these polls are done by the mainstream media? Anyone think they are objective? They bring us the talking heads AND the polls.

I haven't seen any references to the following editorial in the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

McCain is repeating, time and time again, that Obama will raise the taxes of people who are struggling to fill their gas tanks, pay their bills, etc. Nowhere have I seen this addressed so succinctly. McCain is flat-out lying. It seems to me this editorial would make a great campaign ad.

"Continuing Deception
Mr. McCain's ads on taxes are just plain false.

"THERE IS a serious debate to be had in this presidential campaign about the fundamentally different tax policies of Barack Obama and John McCain. Then there is the phony, misleading and at times outright dishonest debate that the McCain campaign has been waging -- most recently with a television ad.

The two candidates have very different positions on taxes. Mr. Obama wants to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans and cut them substantially for low- and middle-income taxpayers. He would cut taxes for more households, and by a larger amount, than Mr. McCain, who would give the greatest benefits to wealthy households and corporations.

These are disagreements rooted in divergent views about the role of tax policy: the importance of reducing inequality versus the importance of encouraging investment. Mr. Obama has the wiser and more fiscally responsible of the plans, on balance, but this is by no means a one-sided debate between evil, tycoon-hugging Republicans and good-hearted Democrats. Higher taxes do have consequences for the behavior of both individuals and corporations. Listening to the candidates debate and defend their actual plans would be a useful exercise.

Instead, the McCain campaign insists on completely misrepresenting Mr. Obama's plan. The ad opens with the Obama-as-celebrity theme -- "Celebrities don't have to worry about family budgets, but we sure do," says the female announcer. "We're paying more for food and gas, making it harder to save for college, retirement." Then she sticks it to him: "Obama's solution? Higher taxes, called 'a recipe for economic disaster.' He's ready to raise your taxes but not ready to lead."

"The facts? The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center found that the Obama plan would give households in the bottom fifth of the income distribution an average tax cut of 5.5 percent of income ($567) in 2009, while those in the middle fifth would get an average cut of 2.6 percent of income ($1,118). "Your taxes" would go up, yes -- but not if you're someone who is sweating higher gas prices. By contrast, Mr. McCain's tax plan would give those in the bottom fifth of income an average tax cut of $21 in 2009. The middle fifth would get $325 -- less than a third of the Obama cut. The wealthiest taxpayers make out terrifically.

"The country can't afford the tax cuts either man is promising, although Mr. McCain's approach is by far the more costly. We don't expect either side to admit that. But neither side should get to outright lie about its opponent's positions, either."

In election after election the GOP makes this a character fight.  While Biden tells the world how nice John McCain is and how much he admires him so he can get on to talking about issues.  

We have seen this play out in election after election as we get our disappointment served to us with a shovel.

Every message out of Biden's mouth should have been a variation on how John McCain is pathologically unfit to lead our country.

The GOP is trying to sell "maverick" as a good thing.  We should go directly at that strengh and reframe "maverick" as crazed hothead.  John McCain does not have the temperance to make thoughtful decisions on national security.  Not John McCain is a cowboy (not a working frame in this land of John Wayne, Ronald Reagan, and GWB) - but John McCain is volatile, unhinged and lacks the judgement that Americans can trust.

John McCain is foul-mouthed, war-mongering, hot-headed, unstable elitist who pushed an old woman in a wheelchair into  wall.

Make this a character fight.  And maybe for once Americans will see Democrats as having the strength to stand up to these attacks - which are a proxy for whether Americans can trust our party to stand up for them.

--morris meyer

Apparently the Bidens and Obama's are using the old strategy, because it worked so well for...

Dukakis

and

Gore

and

Kerry.

(Although the Fundamentalists favor Palin!)

State by state polling still forecasts an Obama map -- basically the Gore + Kerry map, with Colorado, Ohio, and Virginia leaning Dem to various degrees. Nevada, Montana, North Dakota, Florida, and Indiana are also still very much in play (some may be leaning Obama), and North Carolina is also close.

But here's what needs to happen -- Obama and Biden need to start calling them LIARS, loudly and often, because that is what McCain and Palin are doing everyday. They are inventing fairy tales and fantasies about their records and about the Obama/Biden policy platforms.

Me? I'm working with a few folks here in Alexandria to really organize my precinct (I'm now the ADC precinct chair for Alex101), and will be trying to up both the turnout and the performance in a middle-performance Alexandria precinct. We're going to be recruiting and assigning specific volunteers to specific streets and complexes for the duration, trying to get one volunteer per every 50 or 100 households, and trying to build trust and rapport to convince undecideds and leaners. I wish more organizing were done this way -- it requires more effort on the front end, but involves a much lesser wasting of volunteer time and resources (as opposed to just carpet bomb phone banks or haphazard canvassing). I may write up our plan this week to see what RKers think.

Virginia will be one of the closest, if not THE closest, state(s) in this election. The map will be the Webb-Allen map essentially, although probably with worse results in CDs 6 and 9 for us. The base precinct organizing is crucial. Get out and canvass, talk to your neighbors (even if they are strangers), work, work, work.  

If he stays the course as is.  The GOP (in my adult life) has been consistantly more ruthless, cunning, and savy.  They attack their opponant unrelentingly, without shame.  They savily navigate the media.  And they win more often (when dealt a bad hand) than the dems.

  If Obama plans to coast to victory, or if he is awaiting McCain's "Macaca" moment, he will find himself back in the Senate.

   

that continues over time -- contact that is continuous, and not of the 'hit-and-run', 'I want your vote, but otherwise you'll never see me again' variety.

You define the universe of voters, and then you engage them. And you tell them to their faces that they are being lied to, and you provide proof and the truth. Now, some will still buy what's being sold to them by the other side. But many people can be brought to our side with engagement and activism.

This is why Obama does so well in places like Iowa and Minnesota -- these are engaged electorates used to this kind of activism. This is what we need to turn Virginia in to.

Did I wake up to a bad dream? 4 more years of Bush? Such a bounce on two bad candidates? Aughh....

that this was never going to be easy, and that we now have a neck-and-neck race through Election Day. Time to get to work!

I just wanted to have that slight edge over McCain.

Also, it is amazing to me that after 8 years of solid failure from Bush, that McCain would have an advantage this close to November. All what they have to do is run a few ads and the nightmare of the past 8 years have gone away.

Hm. But you are right. Got to work on the streets on this one.

Colley rankings still have Obama winning

http://www.colleyrankings.com/...