The Candidates
Since his conservative epiphany in 2000, Gamecock has regularly referred to Charles Krauthammer as “The Master”, so instrumental was he in said epiphany.
Is Gamecock the only member of the chattering class in America that understands the history of U.S. presidential elections since 1968? I give a pass to the under 30 crowd that obsesses over polls. I give no pass to the Beltway crowd, including “The Master.”
Before I dare school said master, some facts as the rooster sees them.
You people, this is fundamental: The American people do not elect known liberals to the office of President of the United States. Period. Democrats have lost every such election but three since 1964. Those three ran as moderates. All the others ran as liberals of varying degrees. Most of the losers led MSM push polls at various times until a week or so before the elections, at which time the media gave up the ghost to try and salvage some credibility. Obama is doing worse than most all the previous Democrat losers thanks to the alternative media that grabbed the attention of usually inattentive average voters with images and rhetoric from Obama’s hate whitey America pastor of 20 years.
Krauthammer’s latest column in the Washington Post, in its assessment of Palin’s effect on the race, not only ignores the above overarching paradigm, but also reveals a fatal genetic defect of those trapped in the Manhatten-DC-Chicago-LA-San Fran cocoon of ignorant elitism in the following:
“There are two questions we will never have to ask ourselves, ‘Who is this man?’ and ‘Can we trust this man with the presidency?’ ” — Fred Thompson on John McCain, Sept. 2 This was the most effective line of the entire Republican convention: a ringing affirmation of John McCain’s authenticity and a not-so-subtle indictment of Barack Obama’s insubstantiality. What’s left of this line of argument, however, after John McCain picks Sarah Palin for vice president? Palin is an admirable and formidable woman. She has energized the Republican base and single-handedly unified the Republican convention behind McCain. She performed spectacularly in her acceptance speech. Nonetheless, the choice of Palin remains deeply problematic. It’s clear that McCain picked her because he had decided that he needed a game-changer. But why? He’d closed the gap in the polls with Obama. True, that had more to do with Obama sagging than McCain gaining. But what’s the difference? You win either way. Obama was sagging because of missteps that reflected the fundamental weakness of his candidacy. Which suggested McCain’s strategy: Make this a referendum on Obama, surely the least experienced, least qualified, least prepared presidential nominee in living memory. Palin fatally undermines this entire line of attack. This is through no fault of her own. It is simply a function of her rookie status. The vice president’s only constitutional duty of any significance is to become president at a moment’s notice. Palin is not ready. Nor is Obama. But with Palin, the case against Obama evaporates.
Fred Thompson’s line may or not have been the most effective, but it surely was not the most effective for the reason Krauthammer assumes. I agree that McCain didn’t need Palin to beat Obama, but not for the reason Krauthammer assumes. Palin will increase the size of the landslide I already expected. I suspect the missteps Charles refers to by Obama are not the ones I would cite, and Palin is no more a “rookie” than any other member of the respective tickets. All are rookies. None have served either as President or Vice-President of the United States.
Among living non-Rookies we have Carter, Mondale, Clinton, Gore, Bush41, Quayle, Bush43 and Cheney. Does their status as non-rookies make them indistiquishable as being trustworthy with the Presidency?
Of course not.
What makes Obama, and Biden not trustworthy is their liberal views. Their missteps have been their liberal musings and policy positions. The only thing Palin is a “rookie” at, is indulging the scrutiny of and interchanges with, the cocoon of ignorance referred to above.
Charles (and those similarly situated), the President and Vice-President of the United States are chosen by voters on Election Day. You all can imagine that they do so based on what you all subject them to if that makes you feel better. You can imagine that debate gotcha moments on your world of TV is what makes the world turn. You delude yourselves.
One thing explains the 7 of 10, soon to be 8 of 11 GOP winning way from 1968-2004, soon to be 2008: Known liberals lose, whether they be “rookies” or “veterans” at indulging the PC machinations of the D.C. chattering classes or not.
I understand that to admit the truth would be to diminish the supposed self-importance of hundreds, if not thousands, of chatterers from Alexandria to Boston, so I give you all a pass. I enjoy your chattering. I chatter. I also enjoy Seinfeld re-runs, sports and Family Guy.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
Legal Editor for The Minority and HinzSight Reports
“The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” - The Chief Justice
Race 4 2008
“One man with courage makes a majority.” - Andrew Jackson
September 5th, 2008 at 11:51 pm
Once again Cockstradomas schools us all. Thanks Mike.
September 6th, 2008 at 12:17 am
Can’t say I support the Seinfeld love.
What’s with those Microsoft commercials? Is that supposed to be a response to the brutal Mac commercials? Anyway, miles off topic.
September 6th, 2008 at 12:44 am
“Anyway, miles off topic.”
–
But still asking good questions.
September 6th, 2008 at 1:16 am
you make a ton of sense Mike, but I always take your predictions with a grain of salt ever since Fred didn’t take SC like you said
he would, that one hurt me
everything about history tells me this should be a landslide, but I’ll believe it when I see it
September 6th, 2008 at 1:28 am
I didn’t predict Fred would win. I predicted Huck and McCain would not win too early before the Sc primary. Combination of a weak field, Mitt abandoned too early, Fred came too late and was lazy, and McCain had a hard core vet and dem crossover vote that won in a crowded field.
But I have never been wrong on presidential elections and that’s because its easy. Unless you have dem running as a moderate and its either post-Watergate or a Perot is in the mix, the GOP wins.
eat all the salt you want
no one bats a 1.000!
September 6th, 2008 at 2:16 am
roger that Mike, and as a relatively young person, this article gives me alot of confidence going into the election
September 6th, 2008 at 3:14 am
Gamecock sorry but I’ve been a long time reader and you’ve been wrong more often than right this cycle.
Sorry to break the news to you but unless McCain wins Ohio he literally has 0% chance of winning, and he has about 1/10 chance of winning Ohio.
You do the maths!
September 6th, 2008 at 3:17 am
Last I checked, McCain was doing pretty good in Ohio.
September 6th, 2008 at 4:42 am
I hate to give any credibility to mydd.com but I must admit this post shocked me! Tell me again how McCain can win?
(Crossposted at )
Let’s be serious for a moment.
What is John McCain’s path to victory? Does he even have one? If you look at Pollster.com’s state of the race, you’ll see that the numbers currently stand at 260 EVs for Obama, 179 for McCain, and 99 tossup. In order to win the election, a candidate must have at least 270 electoral votes. In other words, out of the 99 tossup EVs, Obama needs 10, while McCain needs 91.
It isn’t completely hopeless for John McCain, though. Let’s examine how he might win this election.
First, let’s lay down a ground rule. We’re trying to figure out how McCain can get to 270–for the sake of this exercise, presume that a tie favors Obama. It’s rather more complicated than that, but since 270 is the measuring stick consistently applied to Obama, we’ll apply it equally to McCain.
Now, there are four states that would singlehandedly win Obama the election. Those are Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, and Ohio. Thus:
STEP 1: John McCain must win Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, and Ohio.
There is also one state that would singlehandedly get Obama to 269, which would dash McCain’s chances for 270, namely Colorado. So:
STEP 2: John McCain must win Colorado.
Presuming victories in all of these states, the race would stand at 263 for McCain, 260 for Obama, with 15 up for grabs. McCain still needs to scrounge up 7 EVs–meaning he has to win either New Hampshire or Nevada, or he cannot get to 270. Therefore:
STEP 3: John McCain must win either New Hampshire or Nevada.
Let’s be generous and give McCain the larger of the two states, Nevada. He now has 268 EVs to Obama’s 260–ever so close! Any one of the remaining states will do. Finally:
STEP 4: John McCain must win one of Montana, North Dakota, or New Hampshire.
So as we can see, things aren’t hopeless for John McCain. Why, he has several paths to victory:
Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada, New Hampshire
Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada, Montana
Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Ohio, Colorado, Nevada, North Dakota
Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Ohio, Colorado, New Hampshire, Montana
Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, Ohio, Colorado, New Hampshire, North Dakota
This is obviously great news for John McCain. Especially when you compare it to Obama’s measly list of paths to victory:
Florida
North Carolina
Virginia
Ohio
Colorado, Montana
Colorado, North Dakota
Colorado, New Hampshire
Colorado, Nevada
Nevada, New Hampshire, Montana
Nevada, New Hampshire, North Dakota
Nevada, Montana, North Dakota
New Hampshire, Montana, North Dakota
…wait, what was the point I was trying to make again? You kids get off my lawn!
September 6th, 2008 at 8:24 am
Assuming Barrack wins Iowa, New Mexico, and all the other Kerry states, he’s already at 264!
Then all his needs is ONE of the following: Colorado, Ohio, Florida, Nevada, or Virginia to get to 269 (which will be the magic number).
Look I hope McCain wins ok but we need to be realistic. I’d love someone to game a McCain victory (that doesn’t include the pipe dreams Penn & Michigan btw).
September 6th, 2008 at 10:40 am
Joe, I’m sorry you have missed all of Cockstradamus’ perfect prognostications! You would be much happier.
Hey, why don’t you list all my hits and misses, and then I’ll re-produce all the columns of Cockstradamus.
That would be fun Joe. Much more fun than a baseless charge with no evidence.
September 6th, 2008 at 10:55 am
Joe
The only dem to win NC since 1968 is Jimmy Carter. Obama has no chance here. He is wasting money on ads here and in Tennessee. Obama has no chance in Florida or Ohio and won’t even win Pennsylvania or Michigan. Bitter pills.
September 6th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Gamecock, you’re a good (though prolix) writer, but a prediction of a McCain landslide is a little goofy. Pray tell, what “blue” states are crossing over, and what evidence do you have of that? If Mac wins, the map’ll look almost identical to ‘04.
September 6th, 2008 at 11:57 am
Pray tell wait till November. My evidence is the last 35 years of history including my observations as an insider in campaigns. BTW, my definition of lanslide is 11 states or less. One major peice of evidence is that Obama is not ahead by the usual double digit margin at this stage for dem losers. Dukakis led by 17 and yet only won 10 states. I also think that the Bradley effect is at work with Obama and that he is the weakest dem candidate since Dukakis and McGovern. The dems are split after the snubbing of Hillary.
David, the best evidence is me.
September 6th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
Gamecock I see you don’t refute what I actually said though.
Ok I expect Barrack to win by about 300 to 238.
Even if you have it 300 v 238 the other way all I’m asking is that you tell me how he gets to 300?
September 6th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
#16 I have told you twice. You refuse to acknowledge it. See Dukakis’s states.
September 8th, 2008 at 10:49 am
Joe
Ten Point victories are landslides. Developing poll evidence of what I have been predicting since Nov 2006.
http://race42008.com/2008/09/07/poll-alert-usa-todaygallup-general-election-poll-2/