"Obama Maintains Overall Swing State Advertising Lead"

McCain waited until right before the election to use his very limited advertising budget. Yet, even still Obama had more money to spend on advertising.

Nielsen just posted an updated analysis of Presidential advertising in the seven key swing states: Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia:

During the final weekend preceding the presidential election, Sen. Barack Obama ran 77% more TV ads than Sen. John McCain (5,947 vs. 3,358) in seven key swing states: Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.
McCain, however, showed a much larger percentage increase in TV advertising from the previous weekend (Friday October 24 thru Sunday, October 26) to this past weekend (Friday, October 31 thru Sunday, November 2). McCain bumped his TV ad units up by 76% overall in the seven battleground states Nielsen tracked, while Obama increased his advertising in those states by just 3% over the previous weekend.
To date, both McCain and Obama have advertised most heavily in Florida. Obama ran 24,834 ads in the state between October 6 and November 2, outpacing McCain’s 8,599 ads by almost 189%.
Between October 6 and November 2, Obama placed 135% more ad units (80,504 vs. 34,179) than McCain in Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.
(Note: this data includes national and local ads seen in these states, as well as syndicated advertising. Local cable ads are not included. Nielsen’s ad unit data shows preliminary commercial occurrences and may fluctuate from day to day, as data is updated.)

If the Investor's Business Daily survey is right, McCain will win

The IBD survey was the most accurate survey in 2004, but I am not sure that tells us much about this election. In any case, the IBD survey shows only a 2.1 percent difference between McCain and Obama and, more importantly, 8.7 percent are not sure who they will pick.

Story for reason for Ohio state government checks on "Joe the Plumber" crumbling

The Columbus Dispatch is gradually taking apart the claims for why there were checks on computer data regarding "Joe the Plumber."

State employee says she was ordered to check out Joe the Plumber
Friday, October 31, 2008 10:21 PM
BY RANDY LUDLOW
The Columbus Dispatch
Vanessa Niekamp said that when she was asked to run a child-support check on Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher on Oct. 16, she thought it routine. A supervisor told her the man had contacted the state agency about his case.

Niekamp didn't know she just had checked on "Joe the Plumber," who was elevated the night before to presidential politics prominence as Republican John McCain's example in a debate of an average American.

The senior manager would not learn about "Joe" for another week, when she said her boss informed her and directed her to write an e-mail stating her computer check was a legitimate inquiry.

The reason Niekamp said she was given for checking if there was a child-support case on Wurzelbacher does not match the reason given by the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services.

Director Helen Jones-Kelley said her agency checks people who are "thrust into the public spotlight," amid suggestions they may have come into money, to see if they owe support or are receiving undeserved public assistance.

Niekamp told The Dispatch she is unfamiliar with the practice of checking on the newly famous. "I've never done that before, I don't know of anybody in my office who does that and I don't remember anyone ever doing that," she said today.

Democrat Gov. Ted Strickland and Jones-Kelley, both supporters of Democrat Barack Obama, have denied political motives in checking on Wurzelbacher. The Toledo-area resident later endorsed McCain. State officials say any information on "Joe" is confidential and was not released. . . .

Jones-Kelley has revealed that her agency also checked to see if Wurzelbacher was receiving welfare assistance or owed unemployment compensation taxes. "Joe the Plumber" has said he is not involved in a child-support case.

About 3 p.m. on Oct. 16, Niekamp said Carrie Brown, assistant deputy director for child support, asked her to run Wurzelbacher through the computer. Citing privacy laws, Niekamp would not say what, if anything, was found on "Joe."

On Oct. 23, Niekamp said Doug Thompson, deputy director for child support, told her she had checked on "Joe the Plumber." Thompson "literally demanded" that she write an e-mail to the agency's chief privacy officer stating she checked the case for child-support purposes, she said.

Thompson told her that Jones-Kelley said Wurzelbacher might buy a plumbing business and could owe support. Thompson said he replied that he "would check him out."

Niekamp, 38, a senior child-support manager, said she never heard any discussion of politics amid what her supervisors told her about the checks on Wurzelbacher.

Worried about her $69,000-a-year job and potential criminal charges, the 15-year state employee said she went to Inspector General Thomas P. Charles on Oct. 24. She has seen employees fired, and dismissed one herself, for illegally accessing personal information in support cases. Niekamp, a registered Republican, said politics played no role in what she told investigators.

The e-mail that Niekamp said she wrote was not among records provided today to The Dispatch in response to a public-records request. Nor did the agency, as required by state law, say it withheld any records. . . .

Zogby Poll Puts McCain ahead by one percentage point

You can find a summary of Zogby's most recent poll here:

Half of Zogby's current national poll average was taken after Obama's infomercial ... and here are his preliminary findings.

No evidence that Obama benefited from the infomercial.
Obama's support dropped 1.1%, McCain's gained 0.8%.
The last day of polling had McCain winning 48% to 47%. Zogby cautions us to wait until tomorrow to see if McCain really has traction.
Pollster John Zogby: "Is McCain making a move? The three-day average holds steady, but McCain outpolled Obama today, 48% to 47%. He is beginning to cut into Obama's lead among independents, is now leading among blue collar voters, has strengthened his lead among investors and among men, and is walloping Obama among NASCAR voters. Joe the Plumber may get his license after all. "Obama's lead among women declined, and it looks like it is occurring because McCain is solidifying the support of conservative women, which is something we saw last time McCain picked up in the polls. If McCain has a good day tomorrow, we will eliminate Obama's good day three days ago, and we could really see some tightening in this rolling average. But for now, hold on."

Americans want divided government

Will this be enough to help McCain/Palin push over the top? Rasmussen Reports has this new poll:

As Election Day 2008 approaches with the prospect of a Democrat in the White House and Democratic control of the Congress, only one-third (34%) of U.S. voters think rule by one political party is better for the country.

Forty-five percent (45%) say it’s better if the White Houseand Congress are each run by a different political party, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Twenty-one percent (21%) are undecided. . . .

Michael Barone on Polling issues for this election

In today's WSJ:

It's not clear that race was the issue. Recently pollster Lance Tarrance and political consultant Sal Russo, who worked for Bradley's opponent George Deukmejian, have written (Mr. Tarrance in RealClearPolitics.com, and Mr. Russo on this page) that their polls got the election right and that public pollsters failed to take into account a successful Republican absentee voter drive. Blair Levin, a Democrat who worked for Bradley, has argued in the same vein in the New York Times. In Virginia, Douglas Wilder was running around 50% in the polls and his Republican opponent Marshall Coleman was well behind; yet Mr. Wilder won with 50.1% of the vote. . . .

And what about Barack Obama? In most of the presidential primaries, Sen. Obama received about the same percentage of the votes as he had in the most recent polls. The one notable exception was in New Hampshire, where Hillary Clinton's tearful moment seems to have changed many votes in the last days.

Yet there was a curious anomaly: In most primaries Mr. Obama tended to receive higher percentages in exit polls than he did from the voters. What accounts for this discrepancy?

While there is no definitive answer, it's worth noting that only about half of Americans approached to take the exit poll agree to do so (compared to 90% in Mexico and Russia). Thus it seems likely that Obama voters -- more enthusiastic about their candidate than Clinton voters by most measures (like strength of support in poll questions) -- were more willing to fill out the exit poll forms and drop them in the box. . . .

Democrats feel that they will have an effectively filibuster proof Senate

This quote was from the WSJ's Political Diary. One can only imagine the legislation that they will get through if this happens.

"Democratic politicians and activists are giddy over visions of a 60-seat majority in the Senate next year, but experts say they don't need quite that many to rewrite a wide range of national policies to reflect the priorities of their presidential nominee, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, if he is elected. Primarily, that's because Senate rules provide for expedited consideration of the budget bills, known as 'reconciliation' measures, that have become the favored legislative vehicles for the most ambitious spending and tax plans of recent presidents... [E]ven outside the reconciliation process, Democrats are likely to be able to attract crossover Republican votes on various domestic and foreign policy measures . . . and there is a strong possibility that a President Obama would be operating with more senators from his own party than any president since Jimmy Carter, even if Democrats do not make it to 60 seats" -- Congressional Quarterly's Jonathan Allen.

Swedes trying to interfere in the US election

Anyway, that is my take on Paul Krugman getting the Nobel prize. I particularly like this:

"Krugman is not only a scientist but also an opinion maker," economics prize committee member Tore Ellingsen said.

Why else would they mention "but also an opinion maker"? These guys know that the Nobel prize will give Krugman all sorts of publicity before the election.

So why is the Saturday Night Live Sketch making fun of Democrats removed from all the websites?

Would all copies of the sketches be removed if it was a skit on Sarah Palin? John Fund has this story:

One of the funniest and most politically searing comedy sketches in years has vanished from the Web site of NBC's Saturday Night Live. Visitor comments asking about its disappearance are also being scrubbed from the Web site. The sketch -- a harsh indictment of the housing meltdown that led to last week's bailout bill -- was clearly too much truth for someone to handle.

The seven-minute sketch featured a mock news conference of Democratic Congressional leaders on the bailout bill, during which Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank inadvertently acknowledge that it was Congress that blocked reform and effective oversight of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Then SNL comic Kristen Wiig, playing Speaker Pelosi, introduces a parade of "victims" of the housing crisis. These "real Americans" include two jobless deadbeats who bought houses with no down-payment and a preppy couple who can't flip the dozen time-share condos they bought as a speculative investment.

They were followed by actors portraying the real-life couple of Herbert and Marion Sandler. They explained how they built a mortgage company that specialized in subprime mortgages, which they sold to Wachovia Bank for $24.2 billion in 2006 -- one of the worst acquisitions by any company ever. It helped precipitate the collapse of Wachovia last week.

The Sandlers were hustled off the stage by "Speaker Pelosi" after they said they couldn't understand why they were invited to a news conference of "victims" since they had done so well out of the housing crisis.

They were followed by financier George Soros, identified as "Owner, Democratic Party." The actor portraying Mr. Soros informs the group that the $700 billion bailout package "basically belongs to me" and that he has decided to short the U.S. dollar. That will trigger a devaluation "either Tuesday or Wednesday. I haven't decided which yet. It will depend on how I feel."

The brutally wicked sketch must have caused tremors in left-wing circles. The Sandlers and Mr. Soros have all been prime financial backers of independent political groups that have secured huge influence in the Democratic Party and helped fuel the rise of Barack Obama. . . .

Thanks to a reader of this blog in the comments section I was pointed to this link here for the video.

Palin-Biden Debate posts extremely high early ratings

If one debate was going to be watched the most, I am glad that it is the one with Palin.

Thursday's highly anticipated face-off between Alaska governor Sarah Palin and Delaware senator Joe Biden may be the most-watched debate in 16 years.

Last night's event totaled a 45.0 overnight meter-market household rating, according to Nielsen Media Research.
That's 42% higher than Friday's presidential debate between top-of-the-ticket contenders John McCain and Barack Obama, which scored a collective 31.6 rating among broadcast and cable networks.

It's also a stunning 60% higher than the 2004 debate between Dick Cheney and John Edwards. In fact, the early figure surpasses any presidential debate since 1992's second bout between Bill Clinton, Ross Perot and George Bush (which received a 46.3 rating). . . .

After Gwen Ifill, worry about Brokaw as moderator?

The Meet the Press interview is here:

MS. KENNEDY: Yeah, put my name on, yeah. No, "I know you're doing this to put your name on," that kind of thing. Yeah. No, there was a--you know, we reached out, obviously, I heard from my family, and I trust their judgment a lot. And then, you know, we went around and talked to a number of colleagues, groups, people who care, women, lots of different kinds of people, and then, you know, I did get a lot of unsolicited suggestions, a lot of people nominated themselves. Not you, but others, so, you know, your name came up.
MR. BROKAW: My name came up? In a dismissive and derisive fashion, of course.
MS. KENNEDY: Yeah, right.

Brokaw is the moderator of the next presidential debate.

NASHVILLE - Tom Brokaw will moderate the presidential debate Oct. 7 at Belmont University.

The Commission on Presidential Debates announced his selection today.

Brokaw is current host of NBC's "Meet the Press" and spent 21 years as anchor and managing editor of "NBC Nightly News."

The debate will be a town hall format, allowing the invited participants to ask the candidates questions.

The Gallup organization will choose the audience participants from undecided voters in Nashville.

Pollster Zogby says presidential race will likely end in landslide

The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle has this story here:

The presidential election might be a tight race now, but one of the country’s top pollsters thinks the race will end in an electoral landslide.

John Zogby, president of Zogby International, told a group of businesspeople today that it’s up to Democratic Sen. Barack Obama to convince voters to go with him. If he’s not successful, the country will likely vote for “a comfortable old shoe”, that being Republican Sen. John McCain.

Despite the books Obama has written, Americans are still asking, “Who are you, where are you from?,” Zogby said.

Zogby spoke at the College at Brockport’s Business Briefings breakfast series at the college’s MetroCenter campus on St. Paul Street. He was promoting his new book, The Way We’ll Be: The Zogby Report of the Transformation of the American Dream.

Remember this person was an important advisor to Al Gore during 2000

Naomi Wolf advised Al Gore on how to be an Alpha male in 2000. Here are her deep insights on Sarah Palin:

I believe the Rove-Cheney cabal is using Sarah Palin as a stalking horse, an Evita figure, to put a popular, populist face on the coming police state and be the talk show hostess for the end of elections as we know them. If McCain-Palin get in, this will be the last true American election. She will be working for Halliburton, KBR, Rove and Cheney into the foreseeable future -- for a decade perhaps -- a puppet "president" for the same people who have plundered our treasure, are now holding the US economy hostage and who murdered four thousand brave young men and women in a way of choice and lies.

New Op-ed at Fox News: Plausible Deniability?

The new piece starts of this way:

The mortgage crisis has produced a massive case of political amnesia. That happens when one is trying to redirect blame for something that could cost up to $700 billion. Some who now claim that the mortgage crisis is the result of too little regulation saw things more clearly when so much wasn’t at stake.

The New York Times editorialized on Saturday that “This crisis is the result of a willful and systematic failure by the government to regulate and monitor the activities of bankers, lenders, hedge funds, insurers and other market players.” If you believe the Times or the Obama campaign, everything but government regulation is to blame for the crisis.

Yet, it is not just economists who were predicting these problems. For example, a September 30, 1999, article in the New York Times predicted exactly what has happened: . . . .

Democrats refuse to appear on stage with Palin, causing her invitation to be revoked

My belief if Palin was invited and the Democrats backed out of appearing, the Jewish group is obligated to go through with letting her appear. It is too bad that the the Council of Presidents of Major Jewish Organization gave into this pressure. See Commentary Magazine here for the discussion.

Libertarians sue to keep Republicans and Democrats off ballot in Texas

If Barr is successful, this would probably keep McCain from being able to win the election.

Libertarian presidential nominee Bob Barr’s campaign filed suit Tuesday seeking to remove Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama from the ballot in Texas, alleging that the two major candidates missed the deadline for officially filing to be on the ballot.

Who do you want in the White House?

CNN has O'Hanlon described as an independent analyst in analyzing Palin's ABC interview

I have had my disagreements with O'Hanlon before, though I think that he is a reasonable Democrat. That said, it is clear that he is a Democrat, and CNN just had him on analyzing Palin's interview with ABC. It just seems to me that he should have been described as something other than an "independent analyst."

Dems starting to worry about the November Elections

Some amazing quotes in the Financial Times:

Democratic jitters about the US presidential race have spread to Capitol Hill, where some members of Congress are worried that Barack Obama’s faltering campaign could hurt their chances of re-election.

Party leaders have been hoping to strengthen Democratic control of the House and Senate in November, but John McCain’s jump in the polls has stoked fears of a Republican resurgence. . . .

“There is a growing sense of doom among Democrats I have spoken to . . . People are going crazy, telling the campaign ‘you’ve got to do something’.” . . .

John Fund on predicting the election

John Fund has this at the WSJ's Political Diary:

Uncertainty is stalking Democratic watering holes in Washington, where diners had been counting on appointments in an Obama administration.

The latest Real Clear Politics average of published polls shows John McCain now taking the lead from Barack Obama 47% to 46%. The newest of those polls (USA Today/Gallup) shows Mr. McCain with a ten-point lead among the most likely voters -- often the most reliable measurement of the electorate that actually shows up on Election Day. Typically, only two-thirds of registered voters end up voting, and those who do vote tend to be more Republican -- one reason for Barack Obama's superhuman efforts to sign up new voters and get them to the polls.

The McCain surge following his convention is genuine. Its message for the Obama campaign is that they can't expect to win the election simply on the unpopularity of the Bush administration and the strength of their man's personal appeal. . . .

In fact, since 1968, no Republican has done worse on Election Day than he was doing in major polls taken around Labor Day. On that basis, Mr. Obama should worry that Mr. McCain has now tied him or is leading in current polls.