What an absolutely absurd comment. 2004 turnout percentage was 37-37. And during the GOP's supposedly horrendous year in 2006 turnout percentage was +3 Dems. So when viewed against polls showing Democrats outperforming Pubbies by 8-, 10- or even 14-points, it shows an objective observer how laughable those polls (which leads to your pretty little map) really are.
They're both campaigning in states McCain should have locked up a long time ago.
Really? Like NM? Oops. Or PA? Oops. Or NH? Oops. And why is McCain/Palin spending money in Minnesota? Oops? By the way, why was Joe Biden campaigning in Washington state earlier this week? Oops.
As for your little comment about Palin not costing Obama votes, well duh! It's about increasing the conservative turnout. The same turnout people like you were dismissing in 2004, until Kerry was hit by a tsunami on Election Day.
Exactly. This is a basic reality the snobby conservative commentariat turning up their collective know-it-all nose at Palin aren't getting either.
McCain was totally in the hole with rank & file enthusiasm, local voluntarism & GOTV machinery until he selected her. This is something that the "chattering classist" Peggy Noonans & Christopher Buckleys of this world don't seem to have the slenderest tendril of a grasp on.
To win elections, you need to gin up the meter on the rank & file in flyover country, not on the newsfloor at CNN, and that's exactly what Palin did for McCain. And it's not bloody likely that any other pol a myopic beltway hostage like Peggy Noonan would have preferred as VP - or for that matter whom I might have preferred, could have done that, either.
What an absolutely absurd comment. 2004 turnout percentage was 37-37. And during the GOP's supposedly horrendous year in 2006 turnout percentage was +3 Dems.37% + 37% = 74%. It's the remaining 26% that matters. If you look at the popular vote for the 2004 House elections, it was 49.2% to 46.6% Republican. In 2006, the popular vote for House elections was 52.0% to 46.4% Democrats. So, obviously, independents are increasingly voting Democrat.
So when viewed against polls showing Democrats outperforming Pubbies by 8-, 10- or even 14-points, it shows an objective observer how laughable those polls (which leads to your pretty little map) really are.I guess Karl Rove hasn't figured this out yet. Maybe you should give him a call.
Really? Like NM? Oops. Or PA? Oops. Or NH?I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.
And why is McCain/Palin spending money in Minnesota?Because his campaign is poorly run.
By the way, why was Joe Biden campaigning in Washington state earlier this week? Oops.Probably so when he said something stupid it wouldn't matter, but more likely it was to raise funds and to help down-ticket candidates. If you think Biden was there to shore up support because WA is in play, you're smoking crack. McCain has no chance in WA.
As for your little comment about Palin not costing Obama votes, well duh! It's about increasing the conservative turnout. The same turnout people like you were dismissing in 2004, until Kerry was hit by a tsunami on Election Day.Tsunami? Did I miss something? Bush won the popular vote by 50.7% to 48.3% and got 53% of the electoral votes. That's not a tsunami. If your impression of 2004 is so skewed, I'm even less inclined than I was before to trust your assessment of the current situation.