Re: McCain takes lead in Rasmussen Tracking Poll, first time since June 3rd

In article <Xns9AF166F8739A5notmenothere@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, 
notme@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 says...
> Bob Rudd <bobrudd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in news:MPG.23021ad492dc4ce19897b1
> @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> > In article <91926e0b-9070-4854-a1cc-d1b140843339
> > @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, briansataiemail@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 says...
> >> > Seems that BO needs an experienced running mate who isn't 
> considered
> >> > as too much a part of "the establishment", but helps him get more 
> of
> >> > the 'white' vote
> >> 
> >> He needs not worry about the establishment perception.  But the white
> >> male vote is indeed im****tant.
> >> 
> > 
> > The white male vote is the key demographic in this election.  That's 
> > pure and simple. 
> 
> And simplistic.

It is not simplistic.  Let's try and, once, have a civil conversation.

The single, most im****tant demographic are white males of all ages, 
incomes, educations etc.  The second most im****tant are white, married 
women with children. After that are the remainder of white women, broken 
down by sub-demos in any way that the campaigns want to slice it.

Obama is going to have to count on the largest black voter turnout in 
the history of the U.S.  We're not speaking about the traditional 75-85 
percent in key states among registered voters.  We're talking 90 percent 
plus of previously registered voters, in addition to finding about 20 
percent more, unregistered blacks in key states (however his campaign 
wishes to define a key state).  Then, he has to get 90 percent of that 
20 percent to the polls.

Assuming he does all that, McCain needs, roughly, 52 percent of the 
total white vote to win in most of those states.  To be safe, maybe as 
high as 54 percent.

Given the Bradley Effect, any state that Obama is depending on white 
voters to put him over the top in, he needs to be leading by somewhere 
between 5-6 percent in the final internal poll of his campaign (no 
public polls) to be assured that he won't be "Bradleyed."  Pick your 
network and you may hear that Obama is 4 percent ahead in _____.  Yet, 
you will see significant concern among his closest staffers if they 
speak to the media.  Why?....because they know what they, likely, means 
from their internals.  Professional politicians use media polls for as 
much public advantage as they can get from free advertising but they 
only, truly, are concerned with the data they get from their internal 
polls and nothing else.

It's easy for either side to call the other racist with regards to this.  
The reality though is that everyone is just voting their own interests 
on the most personal of levels.


> 
> Ignore the black vote and non cuban hispanic vote at your peril.

It's unlikely McCain will get over 8 percent of the total black vote.   
The key for Obama is how many actual votes make up that total black 
vote.  

The non-Cuban Hispanic vote is not being ignored by anyone.  Obama's 
internals do not want to see McCain anywhere near 35 percent of those 
voters or B.O. has increasingly serious problems.  

Now, the Cuban-Hispanic vote......Obama's not going to have a good deal 
of luck with that vote and we all know where that comes into play.  Same 
with significant numbers and concentrations of Jewish voters, especially 
older ones with strong ties, on multiple levels, to Isreal.  He can go 
visit Isreal ten more times before Election Day and that demo is going 
to go with the person they know and trust, over the long term, before 
they take a chance on a guy who will do a meet and greet with the 
President of Iran.
 
> 
> Both demographics have never been as mobilized as they now are.

There really is little more, in numbers, of black voters to be mobilized 
in a great number of states.  Hispanics perhaps but the 35 percent 
threshold is a tough one for Obama to keep McCain from attaining in his 
campaign.



> 
> Simply look at the primary voter numbers. Theres a new sheriff in town, 
> and hes not a white man. The future of politics in the US is about to 
> take a turn. 
> 
> Several red states with large black populations are poised to turn blue.

> Try to comprehend this, a black man won the Alabama and Mississippi 
> primaries, with HUGE numbers of votes. A revolution is taking place, and

> you havent seen it coming as yet. Haley Barbour will never regain the 
> Governer****p in Mississippi, and the Lott seat is currently a draw, with

> many predicting his Senate seat a potential loss for the Republicans.

Barbour is not going to lose.  The Democrat for the Senate seat better 
have more than an 8 percent lead in the internals going into Election 
Day.  Should Obama do anything to cause concern or fear of him, within 
crucial electorates, he could well bring out white voters in large 
numbers in opposition to him and those on the ticket with him.

> 
> The hispanic vote could turn Colorado blue.

Would, but again, the 35 percent threshold and some other factors that 
will come into play in Colorado make that a very difficult pull for 
Obama.  Obama's got more to sweat in a couple of his states than McCain 
does in his.


> 
> >After that, the key is middle aged and older, white, 
> > predominantly married w/ children women.
> > 
> > We can analyze sub-demos a great deal (religion, ***ual orientation 
> > etc.) but the gist of it, really is the white male vote and the 
> married, 
> > middle aged white woman following behind that by about 20 yards in a 
> 100 
> > yard dash.  Obama needs, roughly 46 percent of the white male vote and

> > around 42 percent of those particular white females.  Those numbers, 
> > under 50 percent, assume he gets 90 percent of the black vote with an 
> > approximate 90 percent black voter turnout.  In other words, not 
> > "probable black voters" but almost all black voters registered.
> > 
> > Obama is trying to balance that and/or win out by a massive black 
> vote.  
> > The problem with that, is that in most states the realistic majority 
> > black registration has already been met.  It then becomes a matter of 
> > turnout.  Again, pretty much same issue.  Going from 85 percent black 
> > turnout to 92, in most states isn't even going to come close to 
> winning 
> > the state.
> 
> Cite your source. 85% of the blacks might vote Democratic, and that 
> might be going to 92% (assuming thats what you are so feebly trying to 
> state), but what you fail to comprehend is that ten times the number of 
> black voters will be voting this time, and 92% of 10X can swing many 
> states.

I'm a professional in the political business. I mean you no disrespect, 
seriously.  We deal in internal numbers that do not see the light of 
day, just like the other side does.

There are not ten times the number of black voters just waiting around 
to register and vote.  There aren't five times that many.  That's 
Obama's problem.  His campaign knows this, that's why he's aggressively 
trying to pick off white voters in what they hope are swing states.

The huge fear, and it is a nightmare, in the Obama camp is that Election 
Night rolls around and he needs to win both Dakotas, MT, CO and 3 of 4 
from OR, WA, NV or UT in order to barely squeak to 270.
> 
> The new voter registrations of blacks in Mississippi and Alabama has 
> gone through the roof. Church busses are being made available to shuttle

> voters to the polls. Blacks that have never before voted are mobilizing 
> and becoming political activists, and thats one demographic that scares 
> the **** out of white male America. This phenomena is taking place in 
> just about every major city with a significant black population. 
> 

I'm not denying that black registration is increased.  However, there 
are not total numbers sufficient from them to pull it off like that.

Hopefully, this will be a friendly, respectful discussion.
-- 
I hope we can all be good neighbors online!