Is Enthusiasm Switching From Obama to McCain?
August 3rd, 2008 at 08:53am Mark Noonan
Michael Barone thinks it might be:
…there is some evidence that the balance of enthusiasm has shifted and that young people — who seemed to turn out and vote for Obama in unusually high numbers in the primaries and caucuses — are no long so enthusiastic about him.
The first bit of evidence comes from the July 10-13 ABC/Washington Post poll. It asked registered voters if they were “certain” to vote. Only 46 percent of voters under 30 said they were — substantially lower than the 66 percent who said so in the ABC/Washington Post poll taken Feb. 28-March 2, at a time when Obama was enjoying a string of primary and caucus victories and before the sermons of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright were circulated on youtube.com on March 13. The 46 percent of young voters saying in July they were certain to vote was far lower than the 79 percent of 65 and over voters who said they were.
The second bit of evidence comes from the Gallup/USAToday poll taken July 25-27. This poll showed that when you narrowed the base of respondents down from registered voters to likely voters, John McCain was ahead 49 percent to 45 percent. That’s a vivid contrast from the contemporaneous Gallup and Rasmussen tracking polls, and it was the first national poll since May showing McCain ahead.
The declining enthusiasm of younger voters could also be related to the length of the campaign - younger people being notoriously more impatient than older people, and this campaign has dragged on for quite a long time. Meanwhile, when Obama started acting like President-elect right after wrapping up the nomination he also started acting like the campaign was a sprint rather than the most grueling of marathons. A good reason to have been wary of McCain was on the count of whether or not he - at his age - could stand up to the pounding of an exhausting Presidential campaign. Well, he has - while Obama has shown a marked lack of long-term campaign stamina. He’s got youthful energy, but his lack of experience is showing in his assumption that he’s got it in the bag.
As Barone goes on to note, gauging enthusiasm and turn out is always very difficult - you really don’t know who is going to show up until they show up. With that said, I figure there is a shift going on - of course, a shift which can swing back to Obama - in the sense that Obama is wearing out his welcome…his arrogance, self-centeredness and sheer presumptuousness starts to rub people the wrong way. We’ll see in November the final outcome of this, but my prediction still holds - Obama with a shriking advantage, and the race will go down to the wire.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats, Republicans
33 Comments
1. Charles Schwabini | August 3rd, 2008 at 10:34 am
Deleted - off topic.
2. neocon | August 3rd, 2008 at 10:49 am
I still think the enthusiasm may be with Obama, but the educated voter is definitely for McCain.
Obama would make a terrific motivational speaker, or community organizer, but he certainly is not even close to being ready to be the POTUS. Anyone who asserts the things he has:
- we can not drive our SUV’s and keep our thermostats at 72 and expect the world to say OK
- those people cling to their guns and Bibles
- keep your tires inflated and tune your car up
- I have been to 56 or 57 states with one more to go
- the surge will not stop the sectarian violence, in fact it will do the opposite
- did I mention I was black
is clearly not ready, and as the campaign progresses, we’ll see McCain continue to lead in the polls. Obama has revealed his inexperience and lack of judgement, the damage is done.
3. Mason ODoole | August 3rd, 2008 at 11:07 am
Deleted - off topic.
4. Magnum Serpentine | August 3rd, 2008 at 11:23 am
Mark,
The Convention has not started yet. I suspect that some people are thinking about Obama now, and are wondering if he is the right person to run. I would not be too surprised at all if Hillary were nominated to run for President at the convention,. Rush Limbaugh would have a cow I know.
A vote for senile, old angry McSame is a vote for a third term for incompetent george
5. neocon | August 3rd, 2008 at 12:38 pm
“I suspect that some people are thinking about Obama now, and are wondering if he is the right person to run.” - Mags
Wow. How far the messiah has fallen. If the Dems switch course and nominate Hillary, that will completely alienate the far left. I think either way, the Dems are just blowing what should have been their year by not completely vetting Obama and buying into his soaring rhetoric rather than scrutinizing his policies.
6. Eric T | August 3rd, 2008 at 1:08 pm
The 2006 election issues are not the same as the 2008 issues.
The War in Iraq, is more like a peacekeeping mission now.
The democrat congress has not done anything that was impressive. Pelosi’s district, Naming a sewage treatment plant after George Bush and taking a five week vacation, while people are struggling with high energy costs, banks failing, ect…
These guys don’t seem to take their jobs to serious, If they weren’t the majority in Congress, I could see letting stuff just keep getting worse, then trying to pass the blame on the other party. but they are the majority, the blame is on them.
7. neocon | August 3rd, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Is enthusiasm swirching? Take a look at some comments from DailyKOS re: Obama’s OCS drilling comments:
“I think his statement is pretty nuanced, I don’t think its a radical flip flop. I do think it’s disappointing.”
“If Obama would have maintained a consistent “NO to off-shore drilling” position we here would be behind him. But now we are divided and fighting among ourselves, instead of fighting against our common enemy.”
“I’m no McCain supporter, but at this point, I really have no enthusiasm anymore for Obama.”
“Obama is failing as a leader on this issue just like he did on FISA. I hope he just playing election politics and will show real strength and leadership once elected, but it seems less likely to happen that way as time goes.”
I’d say the diehards are a little disgruntled.
8. Magnum Serpentine | August 3rd, 2008 at 3:46 pm
I will say this. No matter who is running on the Democratic side, I will vote for them because I will never support a senile, old grumpy angry McSame because a Vote for McSame is a Vote for a third term for george.
I will not be staying home come election day
9. neocon | August 3rd, 2008 at 3:47 pm
And one other thing. I’d say the absence of liberal posters on this thread clearly reveals a current disenchantment with the chosen one.
10. cam | August 3rd, 2008 at 4:21 pm
The hair splitting and lack of substance with these made up issues are what is resulting in a lack of liberal bloggers on this thread. Discuss a real issue and we’ll be there.
11. neocon | August 3rd, 2008 at 4:34 pm
cam,
This is a perfect thread for you to highlight the policies of Obama’s that you like the best and that you think will strengthen our National Security, lessen our dependence on foreign oil, and revitalize the economy.
Have at it.
12. Stretchrun | August 3rd, 2008 at 4:42 pm
All this proves is negative campaigning works. We can get to McCain later. He still has not turned over his psych records, as requested by Karl Rove in South Carolina, which I think is a valid question considering his known temper and the fact he would have his finger on the nuclear button.
I want Obama to be down at least 3 by the end of September. Time and time again Democrats have watched as the young vote that turns out in the primary stays home home during the general election because they think the election is won. The stakes are high.
Even the young know if they want affordable access to secondary education they must vote Democratic.
If they want an end to our involvement in the Iraq civil war they must vote Democratic.
If they want real solutions and not gimmicks to our energy crisis they must vote Democratic.
If they want to take away some of the say in their health care from big insurance and pharmaceutical companies they must vote Democratic.
If they want programs in place to reduce the number of abortions they must vote Democratic. They can’t let it up to the sexually frigid Republicans.
If cleaning up the Republican’s mortgage crisis is important they must vote Democratic.
If as U.S citizens they want freedom to speak as they please on their phone without government listening in, they must vote Democratic.
If they want departments such as Justice, Transportation and FDA stocked with the best and brightest regardless of party they must vote Democratic.
If they don’t want a Bush third term they must vote Democratic.
13. New Conservative | August 3rd, 2008 at 4:44 pm
It’s good to see our Country’s youth as come to it’s senses. Get ready for President McCain
http://www.thenewconservatives.blogspot.com/
14. neocon | August 3rd, 2008 at 4:58 pm
“Even the young know if they want affordable access to secondary education they must vote Democratic.” - stretch
Why? What specific policy of Obamas will make this affordable? And why aren’t the current student loan programs sufficient?
“If they want an end to our involvement in the Iraq civil war they must vote Democratic.” - stretch
Please provide the source of the current civil war in Iraq.
“If they want real solutions and not gimmicks to our energy crisis they must vote Democratic.”
Please contrast the two candidates energy policies and demonstrate how Obamas is superior.
“If they want programs in place to reduce the number of abortions they must vote Democratic. They can’t let it up to the sexually frigid Republicans.” - stretch
Please post the specific policy, or policies of Obamas that will reduce the number of abortions.
“If cleaning up the Republican’s mortgage crisis is important they must vote Democratic.” - stretch
Please provide the source that specifically demonstrates how Republicans originated the mortgage crisis.
“If as U.S citizens they want freedom to speak as they please on their phone without government listening in, they must vote Democratic.” - stretch
But Obama supported the FISA bill.
Stretch, thank you fpr proving beyond any doubt, how sheep like you fall for flowery rhetoric absent any facts supporting that rhetoric.
You are a proud member of the sheep.
have a nice day
neocon
15. cam | August 3rd, 2008 at 5:30 pm
neocon,
The policy Obama has developed is substantial and would take many pages to post. I have recently read the policy on energy and defense. I find little to disagree with there. Here is a link to the two policies if you wish to read them yourself:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/defense/
16. neocon | August 3rd, 2008 at 5:40 pm
cam,
I have read them. I asked you to explain why you think they will have positive impacts?
How does not drilling domestically help lessen our dependence on foreign oil?
How does having a non-measurable timeline for bio-fuels assure the American public that that is realistic?
On foreign policy:
How would have our withdrawal from Iraq by March 2008 help achieve an overall victory in the war on terror?
Challenge the rhetoric cam.
17. hermie | August 3rd, 2008 at 9:15 pm
I don’t know how you can say Obama’s policies are substantial, when he keeps changing his mind on them.
From a rabid anti-FISA advocate to voting ‘yes’.
From anti-drilling to an acceptance of drilling.
How many liberals does he have to throw under the bus, before they get wise to the false prophet?
18. JPL | August 3rd, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Not fair, Neo, you asked cam to reason for himself.
19. cam | August 3rd, 2008 at 10:50 pm
neocon,
Unless we substantially reduce our dependence on foreign oil, we will always be relying on foreign despots for our energy needs. Drilling for oil will not even come close to changing that equation. What it may do is temporarily provide some small reduction in the price oil companies pay to get oil to the refineries. However, what that will do to change the price of fuel is questionable. After all we have 3% of the world oil reserves. Any price reduction on actual fuel costs will have the effect of lowering the demand for alternatives thereby resulting in a longer period of time which we remain dependent on foreign oil. Ultimately drilling for oil, whether it lessens our dependence on foreign oil or not it will not do what is truly needed. That is we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil to a bare minimum. So perhaps it is your question that is flawed. You assume that lessening our dependence on foreign oil is sufficient to get out of entangling alliances. That is not the case. Further, staying hooked on oil just puts us on a collision course with China. Ultimately it will be China who will likely challenge us on any moves to secure overseas oil supplies. If we stop being distracted by every two bit dictator, dumping our capital and military resources down the military industrial complex black hole with record deficit spending we’ll have something left when a real threat occurs. Further, we will be able to fund real security for our own shores, have some funding left for education - the backbone of a competitive economy and infrastructure a necessity for a vital transportation based economy.
20. Nevada Pundit | August 4th, 2008 at 12:47 am
cam,
Nobody, including McCain, is stating that the U.S. must lower dependency on foreign oil via alternative means. My big issue with the Obama plan is that it calls for investing $150 billion in research with no goal set. If someone was ponying up $150 billion for my company I would make darn sure I didn’t find and answer until about the $149 billion mark, and since no specific goal is set I wouldn’t have to do much to get their.
Sorry but to me McCain’s plan seems the wiser, invest in current know efficient alternative sources such as nuclear energy (which amazes me that we don’t already since it has proven effective in every country that uses it, uhm for once France actually makes sense), and reward companies for actually producing an alternative. If I have one complaint about McCain’s plan it is that he should not limit the prize money for the creation of batteries, instead he should award it to the company that comes up with the first technique to hit the specific criteria. Imagine the end result if company A worked on batteries, company B worked on better engines, and company C came up with something totally unthought-of before, the real end result could be something amazing.
21. Nevada Pundit | August 4th, 2008 at 12:59 am
LOL ok to make fun of and correct myself…that would be Everybody, including McCain….Ah well if I though I was perfect my name would be Obama now wouldn’t it.
22. Magnum Serpentine | August 4th, 2008 at 1:43 am
Remember,
A vote for senile, absent minded, angry old man McSame is a vote for the third term for george.
Thats just how it is. And thats why I will not stay home on Election day. If george does win a third term on November, it will not be a unanimous vote.
The Democratic party has yet to have its convention. I bet there are a lot of people second thinking this victory of Operation Chaos right now, and when the convention gets here everyone will be shocked when someone other than Obama is chosen to run against the absent minded senile old man and puppet to big wig greed oil, McSame.
23. cam | August 4th, 2008 at 2:08 am
Nevada pundit,
My problem is with the emphasis on drilling for oil. What I have been hearing is drill here, drill now.
In the 1970’s Jimmy Carter warned us that being dependent on oil would lead to exactly the kind of problems we are now experiencing. He called for a push for alternative energy. Well, no one took him seriously.
Now the problem is the same, just more severe. What I am afraid may happen is that the price of gas may go down to what was considered criminal, say 3.35/gal, a year ago but would likely lead to the same complacency seen after the 1970’s. Jimmy Carter was laughed off the stage and the following administration took the solar panels off the White House. Although solar panels on the White House are not the ultimate solution, by taking them off the White House the president was setting the tone - alternatives are not important.
Unfortunately, if the focus stays on drilling and assuming it does make a significant difference, I fear we will back in this same position again. Ultimately it will take a focused govenment program that will break the ice.
Even so, if the majority of people want drilling, then so be it. This is a democracy. The government must speak for the majority.
24. Ricorun | August 4th, 2008 at 9:10 am
Do you ever wonder why McCain never talks about how much it would cost to build 100 nuclear plants? My guess is it’s because they’re really expensive — and costs are skyrocketing. All of the proposed new nuclear projects I am aware of (Florida, Texas, Georgia, and North Carolina) plan to employ the Toshiba/Westinghouse AP-1000 design, because it’s the cheapest. The current cost estimate is about $7 billion/gigawatt (GW) capacity. Since the typical capacity per nuclear plant is 1 GW, that amounts to 100 GW and $700 billion (not including transmission lines), and would supply about 20% of current consumption — by 2050 — assuming no cost overruns (which are more the rule than the exception in the nuclear industry) and no future inflation in the cost of materials (its the skyrocketing cost of high grade steel and cement that are driving prices up).
By way of comparison, the DOE recently did an analysis of how much it would cost to provide 20% of electricity by the year 2030 with wind power. The estimated cost was a little less than $200 billion, including transmission lines. Plus wind doesn’t use any water. And about $150 billion of that would be recouped in the form of not having to pay for fuel costs.
France built their nuclear plants back when the costs were much lower than they are now. These days the only European countries that are seriously planning to seriously expand their nuclear capabilities are those who don’t have other choices in the form of wind and solar, and in some cases geothermal and waves.
The bottom line is that in order for the US to expand the fleet of nuclear power plants in the way McCain suggests, the government is going to have to subsidize a healthy portion of the bill. IMO, there are much cheaper ways to go.
25. \'08ama | August 4th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
“Enthusiasm’ may be fading in the Obama camp, but what on Earth makes you think it’s headed for the McCain camp ?
Enthusiams wont be welcomed in the Mccain camp, heck they wont even RECOGNIZE it !
This race is OVER folks. Bush’s policies for the last 8 years have solidified it. McCain’s media is just trying to make it look as close as possible as long as they can. They have a lot riding on it.
26. phnx | August 4th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
You leftist think that there is only one solution to our energy problems, and whatever it is it should not include drilling for oil on our own land.
So far you are against drillling, against nuclear, against oil shale, against clean coal technology, all of which are feasible and will reduce our dependance on foreign oil.
The alternative sources you suggest are either years from being commercially feasible (solar, hydrogen), or not suitable for many locations (wind, geothermal).
In addition Rico’s statement about the high cost of nuclear is a cannard. These projects are financed by utility companies. If they didn’t think they were economically feasible they wouldn’t be built.
The government should open the way for drilling, oil shale, clean coal and nuclear so that those can be exploited. In the sametime, there shoud be incentives for the development of alternative sources of enegy.
There is no reason why both solutions can’t be implemented at the same time. As a nation, I’m sure that we can walk and chew gum at the same time, even if you leftist have a hard time doing that.
27. neocon | August 4th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
Rico,
What does cost have to do with energy independence? Besides, phnx is dead on, that will mostly be private investor driven. However, the government could probably pay for nearly all of it if we eliminated pork, waste and incompetence, which needs to be addressed in both parties. I am disgusted by these incompetent, idiotic representatives who could not manage or think their way out of paper bag.
Currently, Nancy Pelosi leads that parade.
It shocks me that the left, aka “progressives”, are doing everything they can to keep America from progressing to energy independence, better national security, and the bridge needed to transition to alternative energies.
28. Danish Artist | August 4th, 2008 at 9:22 pm
The liberals are in full panic mode!!
The Obamassiah as going down in flames. His hugely expensive “world tour” was as a large a flop as the Monkey’s Reunion Tour!
29. Some Assembly Required | August 4th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
“So far you are against drillling, against nuclear, against oil shale, against clean coal technology, all of which are feasible and will reduce our dependance on foreign oil.”
I’m all for drilling if it’s viable and won’t end up causing some ecological disaster in the next 20 years. Nuclear power I’m for. Rico made a couple of good points about it. But If I remember correctly there is also an underground facility being constructed to house uranium rods when they run there course. The facility is massive, one of the biggest which has been undertaken. Again I’m all for it. Clean Coal, I’ve read mixed reviews on this. So I’m a little iffy with supporting it but I’m not completely against it.
Oil Shale, I see as a big waste of money and nothing more then a talking point. It has been experimented with since the 50’s. Nothing has every really come close to making it commercially viable and they few suggestions that are out there produce so much excess it would roughly cover Manhattan in 6 feet of rock daily. This is assuming of course the shale is at or close to surface level. Some of the shale is buried deep within the surface which holds yet another problem. Then theres the whole shady dealings in Colorado surrounding leases and three companies (one of which is the only one who boasts the technology required to mass produce).
I hear oil shale and all I can do is shake my head. For some reason people have it in their heads it’s like that tar sands of Alberta. They are completely different and can be verified with a simple google search for anyone who is not lazy.
I’m all for new energies and believe the transition can be made possible in about 15 years. If Anwar helps you sleep at night, drill it. Just know that by the time it comes online it will only affect the price of plastics, asphalt or any other petroleum based material. IMO.
I am disgusted by these incompetent, idiotic representatives who could not manage or think their way out of paper bag.
Neocon, I agree. So lets elect a president who surrounds himself with capable, highly intelligent people. Appoints capable people to government positions. McCain’s campaign has proven to be run by 12 year olds. I refuse to believe the American people will elect a man who endorses a ‘Obama tire gauge’ in response to a thought out energy policy. This does not even speak to the simple fact that proper tire pressure does get you extra mileage. Sure it’s only 5 or 10 cents every time you fill up. But then how many times do you fill up every week? How about a month? How about a year? 5 years? How much money are you really throwing away and not even knowing it. You know, I read recently it’s estimated that over $4 billion in penny’s are thrown away every year. Translate that into psi and you may just be able to afford one month in Iraq.
This is typical to thinking of the past. Immediate gratification. Everyone wants everything right now. We failed in the past because no politician was willing to risk their career for the better policy. The kind of policy that would sting in the short term but pay off in the long term. It’s ironic really, but they all wear lapel pins. I’m not saying Obama will either, I’m just saying he’s the first politician to come along in a while that seems to have a clear vision of where we need to be to compete in the world of tomorrow. As I’m sure you will admit, we are just scraping by as it is in the world of today.
30. Tractatus | August 4th, 2008 at 10:07 pm
the educated voter is definitely for McCain.
You disprove your own thesis.
31. neocon | August 5th, 2008 at 10:03 am
SAR,
Obama has NEVER been in a position where he was charged with staffing multiple high level departments, so your assumption that he will miraculously, and self assuredly appoint brilliant, objective people to those positions is laughable.
Secondly, if you want a President that is not afraid to take tough stances at the risk of their political career, no look no further than John McCain.
Obama is an empty suit, a fraud, a charlatan, a maleable piece of clay that the DNC is molding to obtain the power they crave. Period.
32. Some Assembly Required | August 5th, 2008 at 11:06 am
Neocon, Obama has already appointed very capable and highly intelligent people to manage his campaign. Axelrod comes to mind. He has sat down with 300 economic advisers and energy consultants to formulate policy. Judging from what he has already done / doing it is not a stretch to gather that these same people will be running high government positions.
McCain’s response to Obama’s plan was an ‘Obama tire gauge’. Come on man, if that is the best you have after sifting through a detailed energy policy you know your in trouble. You seem to ignore it, and recently everyone has come out stating Obama is infact correct. That sir is laughable.
McCain’s tough stance has eroded in the past weeks. He’s even stated 16 months is a viable time table to withdrawal from Iraq. This is a man who was against the tax cuts but then became for them to seal the nomination. Now he’s saying ‘everything should be on the table’ (which I agree with). It was a political stunt to appease his base which he really needed to do. I have no problem with a politician changing positions but you stating he will risk his career or chances to be president for the best policy is ridiculous. I’m not stating Obama will risk his career either, what I’m saying is thus far Obama has surrounded himself with the best as his campaign proved. They defeated clinton and continue to raise money at record breaking levels. Not to mention all the free press they are getting. McCain had to go negative just to be talked about.
You claim Obama is an empty suit, fraud etc. yet he seems to be right more time then not. McCain seems to be adopting his policies. The best McCain can come up with is ‘Celeb’ and an ‘Obama Tire Gauge’. I ask you, which one seems more like an empty suit with nothing to offer?
33. Danish Artist | August 5th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Let see….
Colorado governor Bill Ritter was on some talk show the other day and man did he open up a can of worms.
A question was asked to Governor Ritter why he didn’t feel he was a good choice for Obama’s VP.
His response is classic….(apparently he did not get the talking points memo) “Well, just because, I think there are a lot of things that he has to take into consideration. I’ve been governor for 18 months. My experience before that was as a district attorney. I loved being a district attorney…but I don’t think that’s what Barack Obama’s looking for in a vice president. I’ve been governor for 18 months. It’s been a great experience. But it’s just 18 months…Obama has to think about experience…levels of experience…”
Experience??? Did he say he may not have enough experience????
Well, if 18 months’ experience isn’t enough experience as governor to be the vice president. How can Barak Hussein Obama’s 143 days’ experience (number of days spent as a senator, before switching to presidential campaign mode) as senator be enough experience to be president.
BAM!!!!!!. Bill Ritter’s response tells it all: “All I can tell ya is I am a fan of Barack Obama’s. Met him in 2004 during his campaign for Senate…You meet him and discover there’s something very different about him. That’s all I’ll say.”
There is something different about him? Is that all he can comment on? Ritter couldn’t attest to Obama’s experience because he has none.
No wonder enthusiam is switching and liberals are in full panic mode. Imagine the convention, what will the speakers point out as accomplishments as a FEDERAL senator? They will point out his accomplishments as a state senator, since Obama has not distinguished his two careers on his accomplishment resume.
Thanks to Tract (i believe) who inadvertadly provided links to those little details at factcheck.org, while trying to point out McCain’s faults.