Has McCain actually already LOST?(Yes he has)

[Patrick Degan]

How much organization did Huckabee have at the beginning of last year?

This actually brings up an important point that shows why Palin would be an attractive candidate in 2012: she brings the same people to the table as Huckabee but without scaring the establishment conservatives. Huckabee espoused compassionate conservatism (fundamentalist social agenda but potentially leftist economics) and apparently he actually meant it, whereas Palin is equally popular with the evangelical base but is blatantly unprincipled. She is actually kind of like a female George W. Bush circa the 2000 election in this respect, though probably she'll be without the intense establishment support (which could well be backing another Romney run).

Almost makes you wonder if the Gimp was sacrificed to give Gov. Barbie her first national exposure...

[SirNitram]

Anybody see AP's latest declaration of a dead-even race? They're claiming Obama up by 1% over McCain (44 to 43) among likely voters, although he's up 47% to 37% among everyone interviewed, and up 5 points among registered voters.

I'd be curious to see their methodology, as it suggests 13% of likely voters are either still undecided or voting a third party. Considering that most other polls show Obama at ~50%, this one stands out. The article references McCain's strong showing in the third debate, which makes me wonder just what the writer was smoking when he wrote the article.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/ ... 72448.html

Gallup's methods are almost always impeccable, and looking at the crosstabs, it looks like just a bad sample. They happen, and it's no one's fault. I say this because there's some serious deviations on the other questions. 'Right track/wrong track' is 78% wrong.. The larger consensus is closer to 90. The bigger anomaly, which might explain it, is 44% of Likely Voters in this were Evangelical/Born again.. Double what it was four years ago. You don't double your religion in size in four years.

[CmdrWilkens]

How much organization did Huckabee have at the beginning of last year?

This actually brings up an important point that shows why Palin would be an attractive candidate in 2012: she brings the same people to the table as Huckabee but without scaring the establishment conservatives. Huckabee espoused compassionate conservatism (fundamentalist social agenda but potentially leftist economics) and apparently he actually meant it, whereas Palin is equally popular with the evangelical base but is blatantly unprincipled. She is actually kind of like a female George W. Bush circa the 2000 election in this respect, though probably she'll be without the intense establishment support (which could well be backing another Romney run).

She is certainly an attractive candidate to the evangelical base but assuming McCain losses, and it certianly seems that way right now, she won't be to the moderates and fiscal conservatives. They may be an ever smaller part of an ever shrinking pie but they still are the part of the party which gives it a bit of gravitas and the "intellectual" roots for which the Christian Right has been the foot soldiers. Those folks (the Noonan, Will, Buckley, and Brooks wing of the party) can read numbers just as well as anyone else. It isn't hard for them to look back at the poll numbers and see what a crushing blow Palin was to McCain's chances. By herself without any sort of defining experience she becomes an evangelical Rudy Guilani: She has a compelling story for a big wing of the party but she has shown absolutely minimal campaign skills for a national race. Huckabee got traction because, for everything else his campaign lacked, he knew how to keep himself in the positive spotlight and to compete for every vote. He didn't have a huge financial backing (mostly due to the populist economics he espoused) but he knew how to get his favorabilitiy numbers up, his name recognition up, and keep himself in circulation without ever looking like he was clueless. Palin has shown virtually none of these skills aside from being able to keep her name in the news. Without a massive financial backing from some established group within the party she will never emerge form the shadow of McCain's defeat, the indictment of Steven's and her own ethical lapses.

[Turin]

My girlfriend recently received the letter below in the mail. She's been a registered Democrat her entire adult life (we're in our early 30s) and has never contributed to a campaign, so we're not sure how she got on the list (maybe the same way that Russian diplomat did). I thought it would prove a useful insight into the mind of the campaign. The desperation is just oozing out. (All weird grammar and silly formatting comes straight from the letter, btw.)

Dear Ms. XXXXX

I have never been one to mince words, so I'll get right to the point.

If you are at all concerned about the prospect of the Democrats gaining total control of the federal government, then your help is needed right now.

To stay competitive and ultimately win this election we must raise $10 million by October 23rd. That is an enormous challenge. And we cannot do it alone - we must have your help to meet that goal.

That is why I hope you will use the enclosed pre-paid, pre-addressed Federal Express Envelope and rush an Emergency Contribution of $5000, $1000, $500, $250, or $100 to the McCain-Palin Victory 2008 as soon as you possibly can.

Let me tell you why your support is so urgent.

The Democrats are unprecedented in the amount of money they have already raised and spent, in the number of TV ads they are running, and in the amount of unquestioning media coverage they are receiving.

And that doesn't even scratch the surface of the amount of liberal special interest spending that is being done on their behalf by organizations like MoveOn.org and the Big Labor Union AFSCME.

While there is no doubt that our Party is in for the toughest political battle we have ever faced, I know we can win. We defied greater odds before, and we are in strong position now.

Our challenge is clear. We must make this campaign about the issues. We must get the voters to break through the smokescreen of the Obama Democrats empty rhetoric and focus on the reality of their tax-and-spend domestic plans and irresponsible foreign policy.

The difference between me and our Republican candidates, and the Obama Democrats is unmistakable. If we lose the presidency we could be facing one of the most radical and extreme shifts in the direction of our nation in American history. And if Democrats also retain control of Congress, they would control the entire federal government and would be unstoppable.

As we have already witnessed, the Obama Democrats and their special interest allies are willing to say and do anything to defeat me and all our Republican candidates.

But I have absolute conviction that - with your help - we will win this pivotal election.

And we must.

Americans do not want higher taxes - the Obama Democrats do. Americans don't want to hand a victory to al Qaeda - the Obama Democrats do. Americans don't want higher gas prices - but the Obama Democrats are ignoring the problem.

We need to make sure that the voters know that this is how Senator Barack Obama and the Democrats want to change America.

And they will, if you send $5000, $1000, $500, $250 or $100 to the McCain-Palin Victory 2008 in the enclosed Federal Express Overnight Envelope. With your support we will have the resources to battle back and continue to take our message to America's voters.

The McCain-Palin Victory 2008 also includes the McCain-Palin Compliance Fund, to which the federal election laws permit you to contribute up to $2300 to help offset the McCain-Palin 2008 campaign's legal and accounting costs incurred during the campaign. This money will also be used so the campaign doesn't have to pay legal and accounting costs from the general campaign account, which means more money for "get-out-the-vote" mailers, yard signs, bumper stickers and advertising in battleground states.

I have often said that each and every one of us has a duty to serve a cause greater than our own self-interest. Our cause in this election is great. The outcome will set a course that will touch the lives of hundreds of millions of Americans. It will either set us on a path to greater freedom, prosperity and peace, or it will detour us into a wilderness of big government babysitting, strangling taxes, and a dangerously naive foreign policy.

Ms. XXXXX, please respond by October 23rd. I look forward to working with you in the days ahead as we battle to win the White House and races all across the country.

Sincerely,
<signed "John">
John McCain

P.S. Ms. XXXX, I need you to stand with me. The next 10 days are extremely critical. Whatever you can afford to send - please send it today[/i]. The only way we can defeat the Democrats bid for the White House and complete control of our government, and effectively challenge the most massive fundraising machine in campaign history is with your immediate help. Please rush your Emergency Contribution of $5000, $1000, $500, $250 or $100 to McCain-Palin Victory 2008 by placing it in the enclosed pre-paid, pre-addressed Federal Express Overnight Envelope and calling 1-800-238-5355 for a free pick up today. Thank you!

A couple items:

If we lose the presidency we could be facing one of the most radical and extreme shifts in the direction of our nation in American history. And if Democrats also retain control of Congress, they would control the entire federal government and would be unstoppable.

There's some pretty righteous fear-mongering here.

Americans do not want higher taxes - the Obama Democrats do. Americans don't want to hand a victory to al Qaeda - the Obama Democrats do. Americans don't want higher gas prices - but the Obama Democrats are ignoring the problem.

Yes, all of us dedicated Obama donors want al'Qaeda to come over here and kill us all.

The McCain-Palin Victory 2008 also includes the McCain-Palin Compliance Fund, to which the federal election laws permit you to contribute up to $2300 to help offset the McCain-Palin 2008 campaign's legal and accounting costs incurred during the campaign. This money will also be used so the campaign doesn't have to pay legal and accounting costs from the general campaign account, which means more money for "get-out-the-vote" mailers, yard signs, bumper stickers and advertising in battleground states.

What kind of asinine shit is this? This is McCain-Feingold at it's best. You're only allowed to give $2700... unless you have some way of figuring out a way to give it through some arcane legal backdoor. (There's a little footnote at the bottom of the letter that the McCain-Palin Victory 2008 is an RNC operation, for anyone interested.)

[Patrick Degan]

I dunno... That letter almost reads as if some Nigerian prince wrote it.

[Aratech]

Fear mongering? check.

Utterly atrocious grammar format that's making my eyes bleed? Check

Painting Obama as the source of all Al-Qadia evils and gas prices? Check.

Begging for cash, possibly of illegal amounts? Check.

Well, either its a right wing plea for assistance, or someone trying to scam you... though I'm not sure if there's much of a difference between those two options.

My suggestion? shred it and burn the remnants.

[CarsonPalmer]

Yeah...that seems more like a scam than an actual right wing appeal to me. It doesn't have any kind of...construction to it. I know that its fun to bash the lunatics, but they know how to write appeals, and that just smells of a scam.

[The Yosemite Bear]

Well that makes sense, I thought that the Nigerian Princes have all been employed by the people in charge of the Wall Street bail out.

[Turin]

Actually, I just checked and it's the same language from here: WaPo article on Russian ambassador

She's received three of these in the last couple weeks. And this is the associated site: McCain-Palin Victory 2008. It's not a scam, guys. Just really lame.

[Slacker]

The clear implication that "Obama Democrats" aren't Americans really deserves some media attention.

[Metatwaddle]

You know how the media keeps calling PA a tossup even when Obama has a double-digit lead? Well, someone at the New York Times called it like it is.

McCain Fights to Keep Crucial Blue State in Play
By ELISABETH BUMILLER and JEFF ZELENY
Published: October 21, 2008

MOON TOWNSHIP, Pa. — People are scratching their heads: Why is Senator John McCain here?

Senator Barack Obama has a double-digit lead in recent Pennsylvania polls. Senator John Kerry beat President Bush here in 2004. The previous three Democratic presidential candidates won, too. And this year there are 1.2 million more registered Democrats than Republicans in the state.

But in these frantic last weeks of the 2008 campaign, Mr. McCain has lavished time and money on this now deep-blue state — he made three stops here on Tuesday — as if his political life depended on it. And, from his campaign’s point of view, it does.

“We need to win Pennsylvania on Nov. 4, and with your help — with your help — we’re going to win!” Mr. McCain shouted to the crowd in his first appearance of the day, at a manufacturing plant in Bensalem, north of Philadelphia, where he said that Mr. Obama would raise their taxes and was too untested to handle an international crisis.

Mr. McCain’s strategists insisted that the state and its 21 electoral votes were within reach and crucial to what they acknowledge is an increasingly narrow path to victory. They say that their own polls show Mr. McCain only seven or eight percentage points behind Mr. Obama. (The state polls that show Mr. Obama with a double-digit lead, all conducted in recent weeks, include surveys by Marist, Quinnipiac, Rasmussen, SurveyUSA and The Allentown Morning Call.)

Mr. McCain’s strategists argue that their candidate has a dual appeal: to the pro-gun working-class voters in the western coal country, many of whom supported Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York in the Democratic primary, and to independents and moderates in the swing counties around Philadelphia.

“When we look at our numbers, we think we’re competitive here,” Mark Salter, Mr. McCain’s closest adviser, told reporters in Harrisburg on Tuesday. He added, “We would like to get as many Clinton supporters as we can.”

Another reason for Mr. McCain’s focus on Pennsylvania may be the shrinking electoral map, as Mr. Obama’s dominance leaves Mr. McCain with fewer and fewer competitive states to campaign in, and the need to avoid another embarrassing concession like Michigan, which the campaign abandoned early this month.

Conceding Pennsylvania two weeks before the election would be too much an admission of failure, said G. Terry Madonna, the director of the Center for Politics and Public Affairs at Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, where Mr. McCain appeared before a raucous rally of 7,000 people with his running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin, in September.

“I think it psychologically devastates the entire national campaign if they decide they’re going to pull up stakes and walk away,” Mr. Madonna said.

One of McCain’s senior strategists, Charles Black, said that the campaign had fared better in Pennsylvania than in any other blue state in recent months, and that Mr. McCain was a different candidate than President Bush, who waged a long and expensive battle here four years ago. “Bush came close here, but he did badly in the Philadelphia suburbs,” Mr. Black said, arguing that Mr. McCain’s old “maverick” label would have greater appeal in those suburbs, even though Mr. McCain has run a traditional Republican general election campaign.

Philadelphia is one of the only major cities in the country where Mr. McCain’s advertising campaign is anywhere near as voluminous as that of Mr. Obama’s. But even there, he lags nonetheless. On Tuesday, Mr. McCain effectively reduced his advertising campaigns in five other states — Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire and Wisconsin — in what Democrats suspected was an effort to divert resources to a more robust advertising effort here (though the savings from those moves had yet to show up in the state as of Tuesday night).

Mr. McCain’s advisers have contended that they do not expect white voters to reject Mr. Obama, of Illinois, simply because he is black. When Mike DuHaime, the campaign’s political director, was asked in a conference call with reporters on Tuesday what effect he thought race would play in Pennsylvania, he replied, “I hope there is none.”

Mr. DuHaime rejected comments made last week by a Pennsylvania Democrat, Representative John P. Murtha, who told The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, speaking of his home base, that “there is no question that Western Pennsylvania is a racist area.”

Mr. McCain referenced Mr. Murtha’s comments in his third stop of the day, at Robert Morris University here, when he said, “I think you may have noticed that Senator Obama’s supporters have been saying some pretty nasty things about Western Pennsylvania lately.” As the crowd booed, Mr. McCain became tangled up in the rest of his remarks. “And you know, I couldn’t agree with them more,” he said, to silence, and then wandered around in a verbal thicket before finally managing to say, “I could not disagree with those critics more; this is a great part of America.”

Mr. Obama, who was in Florida on Tuesday, had no immediate plans to return to Pennsylvania in coming days, perhaps the most telling sign that his strategists were comfortable with his position there. But Democratic officials in the state said they had been urging the Obama campaign to send the senator back there at least once more before Election Day to shore up support.

An aggressive ground game for Mr. Obama, meanwhile, is under way in all corners of Pennsylvania, where hundreds of campaign workers and tens of thousands of volunteers were manning 80 field offices in what Democrats described as the largest organizational effort in state history.

Senator Bob Casey, Democrat of Pennsylvania, said the voter registration edge was about twice as much as the party enjoyed in the 2004 presidential race. But even with that edge, he said, history suggested that the state would remain close until the final moment. Lyndon B. Johnson was the only Democratic presidential candidate in 50 years to capture more than 51 percent of the vote.

“I’m always cautious about Pennsylvania, but there seems to be something different about this whole effort,” Mr. Casey said in an interview on Tuesday. “The dynamic has changed dramatically, not just around the country, but in particular in Pennsylvania, because of the confluence of the economic situation.”

After spending last weekend reaching out to undecided voters on a Casey family bus tour across the state, Mr. Casey said the skepticism among older voters toward Mr. Obama had started to fall away after they saw the two candidates side by side at the debates.

“There were some people, a certain percentage of undecided voters, who had not seen them both on the same stage,” Mr. Casey said. “It definitely moved some older voters into his column.”

Still, Democratic officials in the state said they did not believe that Pennsylvania was absolutely locked up for Mr. Obama. Party leaders are not relying on polling, in case voters are not telling pollsters the truth, but rather on neighbor-to-neighbor efforts to identify supporters.

Elisabeth Bumiller reported from Moon Township, Pa., and Jeff Zeleny from Lake Worth, Fla. Jim Rutenberg contributed reporting from Washington.

I bolded the parts that I found most entertaining. There's some serious journalist snark here.

[Pulp Hero]

Mr. McCain referenced Mr. Murtha’s comments in his third stop of the day, at Robert Morris University here, when he said, “I think you may have noticed that Senator Obama’s supporters have been saying some pretty nasty things about Western Pennsylvania lately.” As the crowd booed, Mr. McCain became tangled up in the rest of his remarks. “And you know, I couldn’t agree with them more,” he said, to silence, and then wandered around in a verbal thicket before finally managing to say, “I could not disagree with those critics more; this is a great part of America.”

Lolz.

[Guardsman Bass]

Actually, I just checked and it's the same language from here: WaPo article on Russian ambassador

She's received three of these in the last couple weeks. And this is the associated site: McCain-Palin Victory 2008. It's not a scam, guys. Just really lame.

Is it some kind of Political Action Committee? I thought you could only donate $2300, and that is asking for up to $5000.

[Durandal]

A video of John McCain as a POW has been released. On the one hand, it's very harrowing and sympathetic. On the other, it shows McCain cooperating with the enemy to produce a propaganda video. He tells them who his father is and details about his mission. I'm pretty sure I don't have the stones to go through what he did, but all the other POWs there kept their mouths shut and apparently refused to cooperate. He's hardly the greatest among them.

[Turin]

Actually, I just checked and it's the same language from here: WaPo article on Russian ambassador

She's received three of these in the last couple weeks. And this is the associated site: McCain-Palin Victory 2008. It's not a scam, guys. Just really lame.

Is it some kind of Political Action Committee? I thought you could only donate $2300, and that is asking for up to $5000.

The letter is asking for would be for the General Election Legal and Accounting Compliance fund, which is apparently tracked seperately for candidates receiving public funding. There's a pretty good summary table of donation limits on Wikipedia (I'm just using it because it's easily accessible). The limits for contributions to the national committee is far higher, and it's $5000 for a PAC. The bit about the GELAC fund is lower down from the table in that article:

By refusing matching funds, these candidates are free to spend as much money as they can raise privately. In addition to primary matching funds, the federal government subsidizes the presidential nominating conventions of the major parties (the Democratic National Convention and Republican National Convention). The nominees are then offered the opportunity to accept government funds for the general election. If they accept the government funds, they agree not to raise or spend private funds or to spend more than $50,000 of their personal resources. No major party has turned down government funds for the general election since the program was launched in 1976, until Senator Barack Obama did so in 2008,[7] or for General Election Legal and Accounting Compliance Funds (GELACs), which pay for attorneys and closeout costs but are not supposed to pay for campaigning or advertising.

The money is all supposed to go for spending on legal and accounting costs -- the money spent to ensure the campaigns are following the rules. The idea being is that because campaigns that take public funding have spending limits, that it would unfair to impose costs for compliance. Apparently the FEC ruled that a small amount of the money can also be spent to defray advertising costs, as roughly 5% of the airtime in a 30-second commercial is spent on the legal disclaimer "I'm John McCain, and I approve this message."

Barack Obama isn't required to keep these costs accounted separately, because he's not taking public funding.

[irishmick79]

Anybody see the latest Quinnipiac and Big Ten polling? They're up over at 538.com. Obama +10 in IN, +11 in PA, +12 in OH, +13 in WI and IA, +19 in MN, +22 in MI, +29 in IL. Those are some ridiculous numbers for Obama. I have a feeling they're outliers but they still make me feel pretty damn good about things. Unless Obama completely gaffes in response to a new Al Queda message or something like that, he's going to win. The numbers need to start breaking hard and fast in McCain's direction right now if he will and he'll need a miracle to generate that kind of momentum that quickly. A truly epic disaster will have to strike the Obama campaign for McCain to reverse the current course.

[The Spartan]

Just saw on the front page of MSNBC.com that McSame is saying that Obama "will say anything to get elected."

Apparently, he's not being ironic.

[RedImperator]

Anybody see the latest Quinnipiac and Big Ten polling? They're up over at 538.com. Obama +10 in IN, +11 in PA, +12 in OH, +13 in WI and IA, +19 in MN, +22 in MI, +29 in IL. Those are some ridiculous numbers for Obama. I have a feeling they're outliers

You think? Nobody else has Obama anywhere near up 10 in Indiana. If he actually is, then we're looking down the barrel of a 400 EV landslide, but I'll eat my socks if that number is correct.

[General Zod]

Early voter turnout is encouraging, but "don't count chickens before they're hatched", and all.

Millions of votes in the bank
Thanks to aggressive voter registration efforts by both parties and fueled by younger voters’ enthusiasm for Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., election experts predict that a third of the electorate will already have voted by Nov. 4, up from 15 percent in 2000 and 20 percent in 2004.

The relatively recent phenomenon of early voting — often categorized as “in-person absentee voting,” as opposed to mail-in absentee balloting — presents both opportunities and challenges for candidates and voters. And it means the familiar problems of faulty machines and frustrated voters are played out over weeks instead of hours.

By getting voters to the polls early, the campaigns of Obama and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., can bank millions of votes and focus their energies on other segments of the electorate.

Obama, in particular, has made early voting a cornerstone of his strategy, holding giant “Early Vote for Change” rallies urging Democrats to show up in advance. He has also blanketed Democrats and pastors in minority communities with “vote early” e-mail messages and placed ads in the backgrounds of more than a dozen popular video games.

McCain, by contrast, is relying on his firm supporters to make it to the polls on Nov. 4, Rich Beeson, political director for the Republican National Committee, told The Associated Press. Republicans are focusing their early voting efforts on first-time and swing voters, who might be discouraged by long lines on Election Day.

Partly as a result, election officials report a disproportionally high turnout among registered Democrats in early voting so far, especially in urban centers like Atlanta, Las Vegas and Houston.

Through Monday in Las Vegas, for example, early ballots were cast by 31,875 registered Democrats and 13,371 registered Republicans, the Clark County registrar said, while in Ohio, Democratic voters outnumbered Republicans by 2-to-1 on Monday. Democratic advantages were also reported in Iowa, Nevada, North Carolina and New Mexico.

[Mr Bean]

You think? Nobody else has Obama anywhere near up 10 in Indiana. If he actually is, then we're looking down the barrel of a 400 EV landslide, but I'll eat my socks if that number is correct.

Heard and witnessed, I expect a Youtube clip of your tasty sock meal on November 5th.

I will not call the election because of deeply irrational superstitious belief which I know are simply symptoms of my lack of clear thinking and reasoning ability. But damn the more I look at it, and the crazier and wilder McCain's swings become at Obama I have to ask, why is he not up 20 points? Is it just lack of information? I know Obama's said if there was no Fox News he'd be up another three or four percentage points but I have to wonder if it's not off by about four or five on that?

Watch Fox News some-time, you'll see a "News" Network which runs in essence constant negative free campaigning on Obama, lots of "special reports" which amount to thirty minute long negative attack ads and simply ignore all of McCain's very public gaffs. Not even the good ones which they would be all over where it Obama(IE McCain saying they fucked taxes under Bush to a crowd yesterday)

So I have to wonder considering how many people watch Fox, if their distortions are not the reason this is race is not already over. To note Msnbc and CNN are not happy havens of Liberals, they still let people on their to attack Democrats and match them up with brain dead democrats so their attacks are not refuted but enforced as John Q public watches a Republican attack a Democrat who looks like an idiot.

But it's not the constant distortion scheme that Fox is running where every damn guest is a idiot or worse when they bring on a Moderate Republican to face the Neo-con so they can have an agree off while calling the Moderate a "Democratic Strategist".

Hell Huffpost covered a few months back about how they strait up brought on one of the former Bush 2004 Campaign Co-chairs and labled him a Democratic strategist to face off against Hannity. I'm starting to think the only reason 40% still believe in McCain is because they get their news from Fox and Fox alone.

[Surlethe]

If Obama wins Indiana by 1 point, let alone 10 points (!), I will join RI for a sock-eating party. There is no way the economy is bad enough to flip this state by thirteen points when it's been deep red since 1964. The fact Obama is trailing McCain by a mere 3-5% shows how poorly McCain's doing, but if Obama scrapes out a win here, he won't need it because he'll have turned all the other swing states deep blue.

[irishmick79]

If Obama wins Indiana by 1 point, let alone 10 points (!), I will join RI for a sock-eating party. There is no way the economy is bad enough to flip this state by thirteen points when it's been deep red since 1964. The fact Obama is trailing McCain by a mere 3-5% shows how poorly McCain's doing, but if Obama scrapes out a win here, he won't need it because he'll have turned all the other swing states deep blue.

That's potentially what we're looking at. An Obama victory in IN is not out of the realm of possibility, since he's pumping tons of money and resources into the state while McCain isn't, and much the northern corridor of Indiana around lake michigan is pretty much Obama's backyard thanks to its proximity to Obama's Chicago network. Obama can be within striking distance of McCain if he gets really heavy turnout in that area and doesn't get hammered in the rest of the state as badly as Kerry did. He's on pace to do that right now.

[Gil Hamilton]

If Obama wins Indiana by 1 point, let alone 10 points (!), I will join RI for a sock-eating party. There is no way the economy is bad enough to flip this state by thirteen points when it's been deep red since 1964. The fact Obama is trailing McCain by a mere 3-5% shows how poorly McCain's doing, but if Obama scrapes out a win here, he won't need it because he'll have turned all the other swing states deep blue.

Screenshotted for later exploitation. I have enough socks with big holes in them that I should throw them away, but this is a MUCH more entertaining option.

[apocolypse]

If Obama was able to take Indiana, well, I'm not sure that I'd be eating socks and all, but I'd be really really surprised.

[General Zod]

Linky

(CNN) -- Wednesday, I sat down with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger for a lengthy interview mostly about the presidential campaign.

One exchange in particular has been getting a lot of attention. It was when I asked the governor if he thought Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin was qualified to be president.

Now, a quick nod to transparency here. When we do interviews like this, due to the time constraints of television, we often edit down a portion of the interviewee's remarks.

But we try to make sure we maintain the full context of what was said, so that there is nothing misleading about a given sound bite.

There is a shortened portion of the governor's remarks about Sarah Palin circulating on the Internet and other TV outlets that leaves the impression he does not think she is qualified for the job.

Right now, I just want to show you the governor's full answer, so you can decide for yourself exactly what he meant.

Brown: Do you think she is qualified to be vice president?

Schwarzenegger: I think that she will to be qualified get there.

Brown: She will get there? What do you mean? She's not ready yet?

Schwarzenegger: She will be ready by the time she is sworn in. I think she will be ready. You get up to speed.

I know when I became governor there were a lot of things I did not know but it is not about what you know.

Because Sacramento, for instance, in 2003 had all the knowledge and has all the experience, warehouse full of experience, but there was not the will for both of the parties to work together and solve the problems.

So that's not the only answer, the experience. The answer is, do you have the will? Do you have the will to educate yourself? Do you have the will to get up to speed? Do you have the will? Are you a sponge that absorbs information very quickly? And I have read some of her stuff and she said, 'When I became governor, you know, I didn't know a lot of things but I absorbed information quickly and they could run with the state.' And that's the kind of person that she is. That is what I think she would also do if she becomes vice president.

Goddamnit. I actually thought Schwarzenegger wasn't too bad for a Republican until this.