1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Does Palin really Matter???? [Real Clear Politics]

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by u851662, Sep 11, 2008.

  1. u851662

    u851662 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Messages:
    643
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting read....


    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/palin_doesnt_matter_numbers_do.html

    Palin Doesn't Matter, Numbers Do
    By Bob Beckel

    The Sarah Palin "boom" that has so traumatized Democrats and intimidated the press will have little if any impact on the presidential election. People don't vote for vice presidents, they vote for presidents. This race is about John McCain and Barack Obama not Annie Oakley from Wasilla, Alaska. It is also about turnout numbers and the electoral demographics in 2008 which overwhelm any impact Sarah Palin might have on the election outcome.

    First the Palin "boom". It is the product of surprise (a short lived but powerful force in politics), an emotional outlet for the GOP Right, and post convention polls. In the intense coverage of politics by the ever expanding number of outlets for political information, what is new and surprising quickly becomes over exposed resulting in a short shelf life. The freshness goes away quickly. So it will be shortly for Ms. Palin. She has had the best week in this campaign she will have and the only direction now is down.

    The large turnouts at McCain/Palin events this week are a result of an energized Right (which will vote Republican anyway) and say as much about the lack of enthusiasm on the Right for McCain before he picked Palin as it does about any shift in the electorate. As for post convention polls; they are the least predictive of the eventual outcome as any polls in a presidential election. Of course there was a "bounce" after 3 days of what amounted to an infomercial for McCain and a negative ad campaign against Obama. It will not last.

    Despite the best efforts of the McCain campaign to control press access to Palin, they can hold back the press tide only so long. It is simply too big and prolific. McCain's campaign manager Rick Davis said on Fox News Sunday they will continue to limit press access until the media shows some "deference" to Palin. Deference is for dictators and monarchs not for junior governors of sparsely populated states like Alaska who expect to be second in line to the leader of the world's oldest Democracy.

    When the press tide breaks over Palin what has been given little coverage will be widely disseminated:

    • Instead of being a reform governor who hates federal "pork" it will become common knowledge that she has lobbied for and gotten $770 million dollars in pork projects making Alaska among the top three states per capita receiving government largess.

    • Far from opposing the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere" pork project, she supported it wholeheartedly only to oppose it when the project became a political bombshell (She kept the bridge money anyway for other Alaskan boondoggles).

    • Palin is a right winger. She opposes abortion even in the case of rape, incest AND even if the health of the mother is in jeopardy. She favors shooting wolves from airplanes and has addressed her husband's Alaska Independence Movement affiliation which calls for a vote on Alaska separating from the United States.

    And this is only what we know so far. As Barack Obama rightly said stories about Palin's family should be off limits. Besides a sense of propriety, raising her family issues only gives the McCain campaign more ammunition for press bashing. There is plenty of information on Palin unrelated to her family to drive the gender gap back to the Democrats and to ignite the Democratic base.

    Now to numbers and demographics (those things that, unlike Palin, really matter in this election year). It has been widely reported that Democrats have a decided advantage over Republicans in voter self identification (from the low double digits to a 20% spread). What has received less attention is the number of newly registered voters in 2008. According to USA Today in the 28 states that register voters by party affiliation the Democrats have added 2 million new voters in 2008 while Republicans have lost 344,000.

    Among the states with the largest number of new registrants are Ohio and Pennsylvania, two hotly contested states between Obama and Clinton (yet another reason to debunk the notion that a protracted nominating season hurt Obama). Add to this the vastly superior ongoing voter registration efforts by the Obama campaign which should result in an even greater Democrat to Republican registration advantage by November 4th. Given voter self identification numbers, even if Republicans get organized there are far fewer Republicans to register in 2008.

    Demographics also favor the Democrats big time in 2008. It is generally conceded that Obama will win the youth vote by a healthy margin, and if primaries are indicators of fall turnout (historically they are) the youth vote will increase substantially over 2004. Millions of new voters have reached 18 since 2004. Some examples according to the US Census Bureau:

    • In Ohio (which John Kerry lost by only 120,000 votes in 2004), 750,000 eligible voters between 18 and 22 who could not vote in 2004 can vote in 2008.

    • In Colorado (Kerry lost by 99,000) 293,000 between 18 and 22 have become eligible to vote in 2008.

    • In New Mexico (Kerry lost by 6000 votes) 145,000 kids have reached voting age.

    • In Michigan 690,000 have become eligible.

    • In Virginia 465,000 (Kerry lost by 260,000).

    • In Florida alone over 1 million young people have reached voting age since 2004.

    Then there are black voters. According to the Census Bureau there are 24 million eligible black voters in America of which 16 million (64%) are registered. In 2004 blacks cast 14 million votes or only 56% of the eligible black population. Blacks are registering to vote at historic rates in 2008 and turnout will soar above 2004 levels. Some examples:

    • In Colorado there are 110000 eligible black voters. Only 50,000 voted in 2004.

    • In Ohio there are 860,000 eligible black voters. Only 380,000 voted in 2004. (Remember Kerry lost by only 120,000 votes).

    • In Virginia, 945,000 eligible black voters, 465,000 voted in 2004.

    • Florida; 1,750,000 eligible blacks, 770,000 voted in 2004.

    Not to get morbid but there is another statistic that is working against the Republicans. The Center for Disease Control estimates there have been, on average, 2.5 million deaths in America each year since 2005, the overwhelming number of whom were 65 years and older. Since it is generally conceded that John McCain will win the over 65 vote the actuarial tables present a problem. But you say millions have turned 65 since 2004. Correct, but among the people who were 61-64 in 2004 the vote split evenly between Kerry and Bush.

    Put it all together and the conclusions are fairly obvious. Sarah Palin may help turnout marginally on the Right but mostly in states that will vote Republican like Alaska. In battleground states, voter registration, newly eligible young voters, eligible nonvoting blacks, and even death rates all favor Obama.

    Excuse the pun but Palin's impact on the 2008 election pales in comparison to the Democrats demographic advantages. In the end all the Palin "boom" you hear today will be a whimper come Election Day.
     
  2. JayZ750

    JayZ750 Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2000
    Messages:
    25,432
    Likes Received:
    13,390
    I think the author maybe trying to make himself believe what he's writing a little bit, but the demographics discussion is a good one. Of course, the country is going to eventually start shifting to a demographic that is (1) younger, and (2) more minority heavy, but there are some key questions.

    1. When does the old to young age shift really happen? Baby boomers still pull the most weight as there are more of them than any age group, and though some of them will undoubtedly start passing away, at what rate and what eventual age? Not knowing the numbers, I had only assumed that the demographics of this country would actually start inching up (older) a little bit and then maybe in 5-10 year start going back down (younger) at a faster and faster rate.

    2. How will those baby boomers vote? 61-64 age group may have been 50/50 Kerry/Bush last time, but is there a tendency to get more conservative as you get older? I don't know.

    3. How many minorities will vote and which way? African Americans, in this election and in general, obviously sway Democratic, but what about Hispanics and other minorities? There are equally a lot more Hispanics now than 4 years ago, right? And for some reason they seem to go conservative more than you'd think.
     
  3. SamFisher

    SamFisher Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    61,853
    Likes Received:
    41,361
    The % of hispanics identifying themselves as democrats in the last decade has increased substantially (basically 60-30 - up from 55-35) due almost exclusively to Republican anti-immigrant rhetoric and policy.

    Also specifically in Florida the influence of the hardline old school anti-Castro cubans who used to dominate local politics has diminished as the former pre-Revolucion land empresarios and their scions have atrophied and the younger generation becomes more apathetic to their issues.
     
  4. rockbox

    rockbox Around before clutchcity.com

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2000
    Messages:
    22,819
    Likes Received:
    12,585
    The point of the article is good even it is missing a lot of details. This election will be won or lost based on how well energizes the young and minorities citizens to come out and vote. I don't see many significant 2004 bush supporters voting Obama and I don't that many people voting for Kerry voting for McCain. What will determine the election are the number of new voters.
     
  5. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    58,168
    Likes Received:
    48,335
    A good article and I agree with a lot of it. I do get the feeling that the Palin enthusiasm is largely due to the Right being so demoralized about McCain taht they were looking for something to get them going. As far as if Palin will become irrelevant I'm not totally sure as she has fulfilled her primary job of getting the conservative wing fired up about McCain. I am wondering regarding if her statements regarding the Bridge to nowhere will come back and haunt her. At the moment in spite of a lot of coverage contradicting her statement Palin in the McCain campaign are sticking to it seemingly using the strategy that if you say it enough then people will believe it. My guess is that they are also counting on a cynical view of the press so that people will discount news otherwise as Palin bashing by a biased media.

    The demographics argument is an interesting point and one of the strengths of Obama has been his ground game to get out voters even in small states. So while as another poster noted in another thread Obama may not have anymore rhetorical cards to play in attracting new voters he may not need to if his ground organization can get out enough people inclined to vote him already.

    As I said though in the other thread saying Obama is toast it is still too early to declare any candidate dead and I am convinced this election will be very close. So even while Obama has a demographic edge it is still crucial that he get that demographic edge to turnout and one problem with the youth vote is that in recent presidential elections its failed to turnout enough to tip the the election to the Democrat.
     
  6. JuanValdez

    JuanValdez Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    35,056
    Likes Received:
    15,230
    I think another article posted on the BBS about the Palin pick captured it best: her appointment reignited the culture war. McCain managed to catch a bit of Bush's guns, god, and gays magic from 2004. Now, we can have the country split itself into the liberal and conservative camps again, instead of thinking about the merits of the candidates, their policies, the war, or anything else. Now, it'll be about the "San Francisco values," for or against. This division provides McCain and especially Palin some hedge against media criticism; people in the conservative camp can interpret questions on Palin (especially the personal stuff!) as a personal attack on the identity of conservatives and dismiss it. It won't overcome everything, but it'll help them. I think the author underestimates the staying power of the Palin bounce.
     

Share This Page