Obama is having a big event in Springfield, Illinois this Saturday.  Perhaps his vp pick comes from that same state - and is new a Senator from NY.

After thinking that it's very unlikely, I've started to think that Hillary Clinton will be the vp candidate.

BTW, another possible pick from Illinois - Wesley Clark.

Today, Talking Points Memo takes the pulse of the campaigns and questions whether the Obama has a set message apart from 'change' similar to McCain 'I'm a strong leader.' Apart from raising the negatives of McCain and raising the possibilty of more wars and deficits- the change message follows that by changing we improve the government and the economy. McCain will not. He will continue with divisive issues and bankrupt the U.S. Obama should argue that everybody's America would improve if he is elected (now I see where the Messiah talking point originated). If you believes things can improve, then Obama is your vote.        

Lets begin with the recognition that McManchurian spent several years as a "guest" of the Communists in our last war of choice. Lets also acknowledge that he has managed to insert himself into an international incident involving a Russia headed by a former KGB agent.

Anyone want to guess how thick McCains KGB file is? Care to guess how much of it comes from direct observation?

In any international showdown involving former Soviet actors and McManchurian, the other side is going to have an extensive psychological profile him derived from direct observation.  The upshot, somebody like Putin will be able to play him like a PSP.

It sounds like some sort of wingnut conspiracy claim but it's not.

I'm not saying that he has been programmed to hand the KGB the country or the icbm codes.  I am saying that for the first time in our history foreign agents will have an extensive and direct psychological profile of a potential POTUS.  

Does anyone else find that just the slightest bit unnerving?

And to add humor to my rantings McManchurian is not the original Maverick, this is the original Maverick:

and we all know what happened to him:

 

Some of you may recall a "reservoirs of goodwill" chart that I had occasionally presented during the primaries.

This metric plots the (%favorable - %unfavorable) and the (%very favorable - % very unfavorable) metrics for the candidates over time.  I found that to be a useful barometer to gauge outcomes.

And so, here are the "reservoirs of goodwill" charts for Sen. McCain and Sen. Obama.  The forced linear fits on the two sets of data points are just that ~ forced linear fits that are meant to guide the eye (the correlation is poor..blah blah...not enough statistics...blah blah..and I would not put too much faith on them)

The source of all this data is www.rassmussen.com

A recent story tells about McCain's focused ad spending in battleground states, and Obama's broader spending pattern. McCain is focusing on battleground states, while Obama is spreading resources more broadly.

Why the mismatch in strategies? I think it makes sense in terms of optimal resource allocation. Both patterns of behavior make perfect sense, given what the campaigns may consider to be their best strategies.

[Cross-posted at election.princeton.edu]

On the horizon is perhaps the single most important election of the past thirty years. Our economy, military, infrastructure, legal structure, and foreign alliances  are all literally falling apart. The nation that created the U.N. is now seen as a larger danger than Iran, Russia, and North Korea by a majority of the world, including Europe. In a nation of laws, those laws have been broken and openly ridiculed by those who are supposed to uphold them. Our neglected infrastructure already has a body-count that will likely grow. Our military is far past the breaking point, only held together by the sheer willpower of our men and women in uniform who are carrying ever-heavier burdens. Our economic future is bleak, with no signs of recovery for at least a year or more.
Our president is willing to ignore the Constitution, lie to suit his needs, invade foreign countries without cause, and ignore those in need. In the past eight years, the top 1% has grown exponentially wealthier, while the bottom 90% have struggled to stay even.

Aside from the to and fro of Obama's VP pick.  And aside from simmering questions about cones and crosses.  There is a palpable sense of discord in the left-wing blathersphere because Obama's polling numbers seem to be tanking a bit from their stratospheric heights of yestermonth.

I look at www.fivethirtyeight.com quite regularly and even understand some of what is said there.  That site has become, I believe, the gold standard of election forecasting.  Their model has Obama maintaining a slim, although eroding, lead in the polls with overall a 56 % shot at winning.  Beyond that particular site, others have recently noted the erosion in Obama's lead.  Particularly TPM and several bloggers on this site.  However, I believe that the numbers as they look now are not only realistic, but demonstrate the best way for Obama to win in November and offer the Democrats the building blocks for long-term political ascendancy.

Crossposted from Left Toon Lane, Bilerico Project & My Left Wing


click to enlarge