Election Prediction Update

For those of you wanting to look smart at dinner parties when you discuss the upcoming election please read Andrew Sullivan's blog, for the rest of you, keep reading.

Here it is, short and sweet, McCain will not win. Period. To see if I write right, mark these trends.

One, Obama will get a bump in the polls once Hillary drops out. This is not a divided party. Its more like trying to pick what you want for dinner. You know which restaurant you want to eat at, just not necessarily what you want for dinner. Once Clinton drops, the party will all eat the same dish, no ones going to leave the restaurant. Hence the bump.

Second, conventional wisdom (meaning Stalins hated Main Stream Media) is that the dems are killing their chances with the prolonged primary. Nope, not this time. This particular campaign is hardening Obama and setting Hillary up for a huge run for Senate Majority Leader and a long shot for VP (either are great carrots for her). All these "damaging" revelations and "embarrassing" slip ups will be long played out by the time the general election comes around. The one thing we know is that in America, scandals are like comets. Burn bright then, poof, no one cares anymore. Obama's learning.

Third, and here's where Stalin's going to blow a gasket, the war is an issue. Politics, right now, is about "blocks." And there's a large block what just doesn't like the war, or how its being waged. "More of the same" is an automatic killer. Having a large block out there that simply wont vote for you just means you have less to work with. Rove perfected this concept. Create blocks that won't vote for your opponent no matter what and hem him in. Then attack the edges. I agree with Stalin, this block, by itself, won't change things, but it makes it much harder for McCain. And, by the way, I think this block is bigger than pinko commie liberals, and, if I'm right, that really hurts big Mac. Block Theory is also why Clinton could never win. Her "no matter what" block is just too big.

Fourth. The economy. Incumbent parties don't win Presidential Elections. You can argue all you want that this recession isn't bad, or real, or lots of things, but perception is reality, and the perception is that we're in a recession. And we also all know that the economy picks up well before the perception of the pick-up is realized. I just don't see the perception changing before the election, even if the actual recession is over by then.

Fifth. Age. Big Mac has been under the warming lights for a very long time. Nothing can change that. Oldest President Ever Elected is just going to haunt him. Again this issue by itself isn't enough to change the election, but a large component of block theory is to set the block then attack the edges. Age is perfect "edge" stuff.

Sixth. McCain cannot hold his two key blocks. Right now he's after the conservatives and the moderates and they are not complimentary blocks. Its too fine a line and a zero sum game. A move to shore up one will cost him with the other. He cannot hold the line on his two blocks with no competition. You can bet that once the dems start attacking, holding on will get even harder, forget about building.

Seventh. He hated Bush, now he loves him. Did he vote for Bush, did he call him, "dumb as a stump?" Who knows? My bet? Oh yeah baby. McCain has a famously bad temper so it's not a huge leap of faith to believe Daddy Mac said some not so nice things about W, and I totally understand McCain not voting for W. I mean, I'm a relatively calm dude, but if W pulled that election sleeze on me, I'd say mean things and not vote for him too. The problem is that with conservatives leery to support McCain, this is bad. It also wont go away. Just as Obama probably has more "friends" he'd like to forget, McCain probably has more "comments" he'd like to take back. Will they bring him down? Nope. Just as Obama's "friends" will be old news, McCain's "comments" will also loose steam. But in the interim, McCain famously cash strapped campaign will have a hard time gaining traction as these comments come to light. Again, as the block of absolute no's grows, and W's massive disapproval numbers drag McCain down, the margins are disproportionately important, and his past comments about Bush will hurt those margins.

In summary, keep these two things in mind. One, circumstance and McCain's own actions have created an inverse in the typical strategy. For McCain the margins aren't marginal, they're his life. Losing a few votes on the side isn't really marginal, its exponential. Two, remember, just getting McCain's base to stay home is a huge win for Obama. Obama doesn't necessarily have to convince voters to vote for him, he can also shoot for getting McCain's base to vote for no one. That's a much easier proposition. Worse for Big Mac? He can't run the same strategy against Obama. Obama's voters are coming. While McCain must convince the swing voters to swing his way while shoring up his base all Obama has to do is focus on the swingers (and this is where Bill Clinton comes in-HEY NOW!). Anyway, two fronts vs. one. Odds are strongly with Obama here.

McCain's only hope is that the dems just plain blow it. Normally that makes him a huge underdog, but since its the dems, its probably 50-50.

In other news, the sky is blue.

A new report "breaks" the news that blacks are jailed at a higher rate than whites for drug offenses.

Here's a quick tip to the GOP heading into election season. For all your talk about how you should "really" be the party of the African-American community, you will never, ever be trusted by the black community because of your stubborn insistence that the "War" on drugs is good for America. Why would blacks ever trust you as long as you're jailing them at global record rates for an arbitrary crime?*

African-American distrust of the GOP is one of the easiest political ties to understand.


*Yes, I know that Dems are equally guilty in ruining millions of lives for no logically consistent reason, but the GOP owns the "War" on Drugs issue in the minds of most Americans. The GOP benefits greatly from the "tough on crime" reputation, and here they get hurt by it.

Where to start?

Some quick hits to get us out of the gate.

Pope Says Gays are bad for peace. I don't know about that, haven't really seen the studies. But I do feel the need to point out that a German Pope is saying,

that a traditional family led by a husband and wife instilled values that promote peace.

Now, I don't want to point out the obvious, but I'm pretty sure Nazi Germany had a high "family rate" and they were definitely hostile to the gays, but oddly, not a lot of peace. In fact, as I review my history, lots of wars started by lots of nations with lots of families. I'm just not sure that gays are the big threat facing the world today, maybe we should focus our attention elsewhere. On a roll, he says,

Those who are hostile, even unknowingly, to the institution of the family ... make peace fragile for the entire national and international community.

He's looking at you New Hampshire and you're gay love...love. Not only are you on the forefront of determining the next "Most Powerful Person in the World*" but you're also at the forefront for the next World War! Lots of pressure on the Granite State. My protest sign? Civil Unions=Civil Wars!

Speaking of War, McCain pulled an Unknown Blogger and returned strong for 2008! How'd that happen? Latest poll has them at a tie. Clearly the fine people of NH don't read the H-Blog. If they did, they would know that we declared McCain yesterday's news way back in July 2007. Come on people pay attention, I'm prognosticating here.

In other election news, Mike Huckabee has decided that wrapping himself in the flag is soooo tacky. The Cross is much, much better. Between ads with not so subtle "God's Behind Me!" themes, and "Take a knee for me" slogans, Ol' Mike is not so much asking for the Religious Conservative Vote as begging for it. Maybe that's why he's on his knees so much. No push back from me, I'm a big fan of free speech, and talking about religion is clearly speech so I say, Keep on Truckin'. But, as a voter, I'm a bit weary of Christ as the new Flag.

Did you say Fag? Looks like gay couples get "divorced" too. And when they do, not so fun. Welcome to the club boys (and girls). My advice? RUN! You can cheat nature, but you can't cheat the statistics.

Just ask Olympic Champion Justin Gatlin who tried to run and cheat nature, but he too got caught (who knew sprinting was so gay?). Busted for doping, the Gold Medalist is out for Beijing. Again, I renew the call for The Unknown Blogger's Simple Solution For Cheating (and cure for Ricketts). It's right there folks, yours for the taking. Maybe if I could get some media attention.

Me and Ron Paul. FOX News, "Fair and Balanced" unless you annoy us is not allowing Mr. Paul to play with the other kids at the big debate. Something about polling numbers, but wait, Mr. Paul is polling better than former Belle of the Ball Fred Thompson who made the cut (sort of like the number one draft pick who's clearly a bust but teams keep bringing him in because "Hey, he was the first pick in the draft! Maybe he'll turn it around for us.") There's also a rant about the power and danger of media control and the new FCC arguments for rules allowing for more consolidation. Oh well, given how we all love and trust the media, its all good right? For the record, I think FOX caves and Mr Paul makes the list.

In other news, the Unknown Blogger promises vows to create policy that will insure that the sun will rise tomorrow. Mike Huckabee vowed a defense build-up that would produce

"a military of sorts that no one on earth would want to take us on."

Really, does he feel like that's not the case now? Who's looking to take us on? I love it when a politician creates a controversy around something I already have, then promises to give it back to me the way it was before he created the controversy. Especially when it will cost billions. If you're keeping track at home, we already have an untouchable military. Unless he's saying that it's no longer untouchable, which then seems like a direct attack on the Bush Administration.

Really quick...Hillary and Obama neck and neck. Guiliani in a free fall. Romney, up down, all around, getting dogged, and spending loads, but still the front runner.

Whew, that's the US update. I think some things are going on elsewhere, but that doesn't really matter anyway...right?

*Can't even say "Most Powerful Man in the World" anymore thanks to that woman Hillary Clinton.

Rove and GOP

Reading a recent post from Andrew Sullivan, got me athinkin' and I'm athinkin' that Mr Sullivan has it wrong. The general idea behind the post is that Rove may have set the GOP back with the tactics he used to get W the...well, W. Maybe so, at least judging by a recent Pew Research Poll, as the GOP is hemorrhaging voters (I don't see the poll as the be all end all, things could shift dramatically if Iraq swings around. I actually hope the poll signals the end of the "I'm a Dem/GOP until I die" mentality). Anyway, why is Mr Sullivan wrong?

Well, who said Rove was ever trying to create anything for the GOP? His job, his goal, his life was based on getting W into the White House and keeping him there. Yes, Bush is a Republican, but the job wasn't to get the GOP to upmost power and then slide W in, the goal was to get W elected now. Much like when the Colts win the Super Bowl. Colts GM Bill Polian's goal wasn't also to establish the AFC as the dominant power, he was only looking for Colts victory. Given that Rove would do just about anything, screw anyone over, lie, manipulate, whatever, I think it makes sense that he would do the same to get other Republican's to look the other way at W's transgressions, subvert their own political philosophies (small government anyone?), and generally accept the rod in order to create this notion of "Its good for the GOP" which really meant, "It's good for Bush." By using the concept of a permanent GOP majority to keep everyone in line, he kept W in the White House, which was his job.

Like a GM that does whatever it takes to win now, Rove did whatever it took, future be damned. That's his job and he did it well. Losing the second term for the greater good of the GOP was expressly not his job. Congressional Republicans took the bait and they were the ones who paid the price. Furthermore, if the trend continues they will be the ones who continue to pay the price. W is out, Rove is out, and they don't really care. If a Republican feels that Rove oversold, misold, or sold out, well, they shouldn't be shocked. Look at what the guy did to his "rivals," why should anyone think he'd be any different to his "allies." Bottom line, a wins a win, and he won.