PDA

View Full Version : Republican convention the most watched EVER



In_Ned_I_Trust
09-06-2008, 01:20 AM
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D930S7U81&show_article=1

ink
09-06-2008, 01:23 AM
Just thought I'd mention ...


McCain, Obama tied in TV audiences
Sep 5 07:39 PM US/Eastern
By DAVID BAUDER

NEW YORK (AP) - As a television draw, John McCain was every bit the equal of Barack Obama.

The GOP presidential candidate attracted roughly the same number of viewers to his convention acceptance speech Thursday as Obama did before the Democrats last week, according to Nielsen Media Research.

It marked the end of an astonishing run where more than 40 million people watched political speeches on three nights by Obama, McCain and Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin. The Republican convention was the most-watched convention on television ever, beating a standard set by the Democrats a week earlier.

Three times in two weeks, political speeches were watched by more people than the "American Idol" finale, the Academy Awards and the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics this year.

There has never been more build-up to the unveiling of a VP candidate before either. I'm sure that had a lot to do with the numbers. But full credit to the R marketing machine. No one ever doubted their ability to create a market.

gcoll
09-06-2008, 01:27 AM
Just thought I'd mention ...



There has never been more build-up to the unveiling of a VP candidate before either. I'm sure that had a lot to do with the numbers. But full credit to the R marketing machine. No one ever doubted their ability to create a market.

That's kind of a back handed compliment though.

CubsGirl
09-06-2008, 01:27 AM
I believe I also read that as a whole, the RNC drew more viewers than the DNC.

gcoll
09-06-2008, 01:29 AM
We know why they tuned in.

To see that sexy Code Pink lady do a little strip tease.

ink
09-06-2008, 01:31 AM
That's kind of a back handed compliment though.

:) It wasn't even intended as a compliment. I doubt the importance of the numbers as a reflection on the candidates. The curiosity factor was what was huge ... that and the dissatisfaction people have with the current administration. People have to want to know who's going to lead next.

The Rs are good at marketing. We know people didn't tune in for their policies. ;)

gcoll
09-06-2008, 01:38 AM
It wasn't even intended as a compliment. I doubt the importance of the numbers as a reflection on the candidates. The curiosity factor was what was huge ... that and the dissatisfaction people have with the current administration. People have to want to know who's going to lead next.

In response to your post. The Palin curiosity factor had to have something to do with it, obviously.

But Mccain drawing in the same number of viewers as Obama is interesting. I would have assumed Obama to be the bigger draw.


The Rs are good at marketing. We know people didn't tune in for their policies
I'm not even convinced they're all that good at marketing.

DenButsu
09-06-2008, 01:38 AM
I hope a lot of people watched that McCain speech.

ink
09-06-2008, 01:53 AM
I hope a lot of people watched that McCain speech.

:nod: The more people that saw that speech, the more people with questions about what he would do as president.

DenButsu
09-06-2008, 01:57 AM
I won't post anything about it, because people will get mad and call me the fashion police, but the whole thing about the "green screen" and the building that was in that photo is pretty amusing.

Rochesta
09-06-2008, 02:02 AM
This convention was a major success for the GOP. There really is no way to say that it wasn't.

*Generalization/stereotyping alert* I also like how Democrats respond to a Republican victory. They either blame the voters for not being able to 'get it' (hence Obama's "they cling to their guns or religions" comment), or they claim that its nothing 'unexpected' from the Republican party, as if to brush off their setback as 'business as usual.' That's what I seem to hear as I discuss this convention with people.

This convention was not business as usual for the GOP. This was a major victory that is similar to a major sports upset. McCain out-drawing Obama is like Appalachian State beating Michigan in week 1.

ink
09-06-2008, 02:05 AM
This convention was a major success for the GOP. There really is no way to say that it wasn't.

*Generalization/stereotyping alert* I also like how Democrats respond to a Republican victory. They either blame the voters for not being able to 'get it' (hence Obama's "they cling to their guns or religions" comment), or they claim that its nothing 'unexpected' from the Republican party, as if to brush off their setback as 'business as usual.' That's what I seem to hear as I discuss this convention with people.

This convention was not business as usual for the GOP. This was a major victory that is similar to a major sports upset. McCain out-drawing Obama is like Appalachian State beating Michigan in week 1.

Slow down there man. The convention's message was badly scrambled. So much so that they will spend as much time as possible NOT making their policies clear as they can possibly get away with. They benefited completely from the surprise Entertainment Tonight factor that they reaped from the Palin nomination. In fact, the Repubs. should be forever grateful to the STUPID bloggers who tried to dig up personal gossip about Palin. All it did was drive up ratings for the RNC.

And btw, they tied. There was no winner.


I won't post anything about it, because people will get mad and call me the fashion police, but the whole thing about the "green screen" and the building that was in that photo is pretty amusing.

Especially since the school that was featured in the photo put out a disclaimer saying they wanted nothing to do with promoting either party and weren't consulted about the use of the photo by the Repubs. Just like Heart, who also put out a cease and desist order when their son "Barracuda" was used without consent at the RNC.

brandonwarne52
09-06-2008, 02:08 AM
This convention was a major success for the GOP. There really is no way to say that it wasn't.

*Generalization/stereotyping alert* I also like how Democrats respond to a Republican victory. They either blame the voters for not being able to 'get it' (hence Obama's "they cling to their guns or religions" comment), or they claim that its nothing 'unexpected' from the Republican party, as if to brush off their setback as 'business as usual.' That's what I seem to hear as I discuss this convention with people.

This convention was not business as usual for the GOP. This was a major victory that is similar to a major sports upset. McCain out-drawing Obama is like Appalachian State beating Michigan in week 1.

:clap:

Rochesta
09-06-2008, 02:39 AM
Slow down there man. The convention's message was badly scrambled. So much so that they will spend as much time as possible NOT making their policies clear as they can possibly get away with. They benefited completely from the surprise Entertainment Tonight factor that they reaped from the Palin nomination. In fact, the Repubs. should be forever grateful to the STUPID bloggers who tried to dig up personal gossip about Palin. All it did was drive up ratings for the RNC.

And btw, they tied. There was no winner.



McCain definitely edged McCain, so there was a winner. Not a big margin, but it wasn't a tie.

There is nothing to suggest that the Palin speech was motivated by her entertainment factor, and if there were, it would be no more significant than the same phenomena in Obama's case.

I haven't heard anybody but the far left calling the message 'scrambled,' or anything to that effect. It is no more scrambled than Obama's recent comments on the surge, for example.

ink
09-06-2008, 02:47 AM
McCain definitely edged McCain, so there was a winner. Not a big margin, but it wasn't a tie.

There is nothing to suggest that the Palin speech was motivated by her entertainment factor, and if there were, it would be no more significant than the same phenomena in Obama's case.

I haven't heard anybody but the far left calling the message 'scrambled,' or anything to that effect. It is no more scrambled than Obama's recent comments on the surge, for example.

McCain edged McCain? I assume you mean Obama. From what I've heard reported it was a virtual tie.


That makes McCain's total audience nearly 41 million, compared with nearly 42 million for Obama and 40 million for Palin.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/09/06/mccains_speech_had_record_viewership/

Nothing to suggest that the Palin phenom was motivated by the ET factor? Come on.

Far left? I could post several reviews from all sides.

Here's one on Palin (and the Washington Post is hardly far left):


Judging Palin by an Eighth-Grade Standard

There is only one way to understand the rave reviews that some are giving Sarah Palin’s speech: People expected her to be a blithering fool and were shocked that she could read a decent speech prepared for her by the McCain campaign. She is being judged by much too low a standard.

I always thought she would speak reasonably well; there are plenty of tapes floating around showing she can do that. She was, after all, elected governor.

But if Palin is judged by the standard that should be applied to someone in line to be president of the United States, she didn't blow many people away -- other than Republican loyalists and the pundits she hates so much.

If, going in, you were inclined to support her, she did just fine. (That was the reaction among the delegates.) She also pulled over anyone who wanted to support her going in.

But if you think, as I do, that she needed to bowl people over to show that she really is up to the job, to brush aside the questions, well, she didn’t do that. If you were worried that she has absolutely no background in foreign policy, she did nothing to relieve those worries.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2008/09/judging_palin_by_an_eighth-gra.html?hpid=opinionsbox1



Since the Republicans have controlled the White House for the past eight years, what does Mr. McCain want to change from? And to? It really is an audacious ploy, to tell people that the country's got to correct the mistakes made by a political party when that's the very party you represent.

It's like staging a revolution against yourself.

Tom Shales, The Washington Post

In the wake of Ms. Palin's performance, there's vastly more support among conservatives for flipping the McCain-Palin ticket to Palin-McCain. Put the lipsticked pit bull at the lead of the Alaskanized GOP sled!

Jonah Goldberg,

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/viewpoints/stories/DN-gopside_0906edi.ART.State.Edition1.26b4a35.html

ink
09-06-2008, 03:28 AM
I'm not even convinced they're all that good at marketing.

The Palin choice proves they excel at marketing. I question the pick on substance, but from the very beginning I've said it was shrewd. The truly sad thing is that it IS all about ratings, and hardly about governing at all. If Palin really wanted to be known for substance, or I should say, if her party really wanted her to be known for substance, they/she would have delivered a speech that actually had facts to back up the partisan attacks.

In_Ned_I_Trust
09-06-2008, 03:52 AM
In response to your post. The Palin curiosity factor had to have something to do with it, obviously.

But Mccain drawing in the same number of viewers as Obama is interesting. I would have assumed Obama to be the bigger draw.


I'm not even convinced they're all that good at marketing.

McCain drew MORE than Obama

In_Ned_I_Trust
09-06-2008, 03:54 AM
The Palin choice proves they excel at marketing. I question the pick on substance, but from the very beginning I've said it was shrewd. The truly sad thing is that it IS all about ratings, and hardly about governing at all.

She HAS governed while Obama has not

DenButsu
09-06-2008, 03:54 AM
This convention was a major success for the GOP. There really is no way to say that it wasn't.

Here's one:

It certainly rallied the base, but it almost as certainly alienated the middle. It was extraordinarily divisive, which is not what conservative democrats and independents want to see right now. McCain's lip service to reaching across the aisle in his speech did little, ultimately, to counterbalance the uber-partisan rhetoric of the entire convention.

Here's another (building on your sports analogy):

Millions and millions of people watch any given event in the Olympics. Only a fraction are actually happy with the final outcome. Now, they may have fun watching it, they may find it entertaining, they may not even have any hard feelings. But ultimately, they had an idea of what they wanted to see, and what they saw go down in reality was quite different from that. Or in other words, having a greater viewership is good for getting the message out, good for getting exposure, good for dominating the news cycle, all of that. But it really doesn't mean that most people who watched it were actually satisfied with it. As I said above, I hope a lot of people did watch McCain's speech. I think for the people in the middle, worried about the economy and health care and jobs, it was almost completely ineffectual. I think the strongest visceral impression that most people walked away from it with was probably, "He's a really great man, he's a true hero, but I really didn't hear him say much about what he's going to do if he becomes president."

And one more:

I think the biggest "fail" of the RNC was the attempt to co-opt Obama's message. To lay a claim on "change" when McCain's voting record supports Bush 90% of the time, and Palin's social conservatism is very "Bushy" as well. To lay a claim on "peace" when the current Republican administration - and most especially McCain himself - has been the most overtly hawkish and militaristic since Nixon. Etc. It just rang false. Everything about the convention pointed to the past - to McCain's biography, to 9/11, to Reagan, and quite frankly just due to the people at the convention mostly being on the older side. "But we can do future, too!".... seemed... empty.

ink
09-06-2008, 04:07 AM
She HAS governed while McCain has not

Fixed that for ya. :)

ari1013
09-06-2008, 09:16 AM
In response to your post. The Palin curiosity factor had to have something to do with it, obviously.

But Mccain drawing in the same number of viewers as Obama is interesting. I would have assumed Obama to be the bigger draw.


I'm not even convinced they're all that good at marketing.
Well, I'm very happy about this. 42+ million watched Obama (inc PBS). 40 million watched Palin (inc PBS) and 42+ for McCain (inc PBS). We might actually have an election where people know who the big players are.

SmthBluCitrus
09-06-2008, 09:47 AM
Well, I'm very happy about this. 42+ million watched Obama (inc PBS). 40 million watched Palin (inc PBS) and 42+ for McCain (inc PBS). We might actually have an election where people know who the big players are.

Yea, I'd like to think that too. However ... here's a short story for ya.

My non-political friends all usually call me when any questions arise concerning politics. Which, since I'm immersed in this world, I suppose is understandable. But, I would at least anticipate that some of them realize who is playing for who's team. That wasn't the case yesterday.

Friend: Hey! This is so exciting!
Me: What is?
Friend: That there's both a black guy and a woman running.
Me: Oh, yea. That is kinda neat -- that no matter the outcome history will be made.
Friend: Uh, yea? But, doesn't Obama have to win?
Me: Well, I'd like to think so, yea.
Friend: Yea, but for this Palin chick to be his Vice President, Obama has to win.
Me: Um .... I think you've got that a little confused ...
Friend: (after I fully explained it) Ohhhhhhh!! Well that's stupid. Can I just vote for both of them?
Me: Not unless you write in Obama/Palin -- but I don't think it works that way.

Just a quick post-background. This guy is voting for Obama because he's black ... that's it. He has explicitly said that to me when I've pressed, and it wasn't just a sarcastic comment. He voted for Bush ... twice. First because he thought Al Gore was a liar (the internet, and "Monica-gate" -- he was convinced Bill and Al "took turns"), and the second time because "Bush got us in this mess, he should get us out."

Oh, and gcoll should appreciate this, he thinks the government was behind 9/11.

LoL -- I'm calling out my friend online. It's fun.

ari1013
09-06-2008, 10:25 AM
Yea, I'd like to think that too. However ... here's a short story for ya.

My non-political friends all usually call me when any questions arise concerning politics. Which, since I'm immersed in this world, I suppose is understandable. But, I would at least anticipate that some of them realize who is playing for who's team. That wasn't the case yesterday.

Friend: Hey! This is so exciting!
Me: What is?
Friend: That there's both a black guy and a woman running.
Me: Oh, yea. That is kinda neat -- that no matter the outcome history will be made.
Friend: Uh, yea? But, doesn't Obama have to win?
Me: Well, I'd like to think so, yea.
Friend: Yea, but for this Palin chick to be his Vice President, Obama has to win.
Me: Um .... I think you've got that a little confused ...
Friend: (after I fully explained it) Ohhhhhhh!! Well that's stupid. Can I just vote for both of them?
Me: Not unless you write in Obama/Palin -- but I don't think it works that way.

Just a quick post-background. This guy is voting for Obama because he's black ... that's it. He has explicitly said that to me when I've pressed, and it wasn't just a sarcastic comment. He voted for Bush ... twice. First because he thought Al Gore was a liar (the internet, and "Monica-gate" -- he was convinced Bill and Al "took turns"), and the second time because "Bush got us in this mess, he should get us out."

Oh, and gcoll should appreciate this, he thinks the government was behind 9/11.

LoL -- I'm calling out my friend online. It's fun.
oh well... this takes me back to the days when I was a libertarian because I got to the point where I felt that if the American people really wanted Bush to screw them over on domestic policies, who am I to say they deserve better.

Got out of that phase rather quickly, but not before starting Cornell's first libertarian newspaper.

hoosiercubsfan
09-06-2008, 11:00 AM
Here's one:

It certainly rallied the base, but it almost as certainly alienated the middle. It was extraordinarily divisive, which is not what conservative democrats and independents want to see right now. McCain's lip service to reaching across the aisle in his speech did little, ultimately, to counterbalance the uber-partisan rhetoric of the entire convention.

Only those on the left are complaining about how divisive the convention was. And as far as your opinion of what her speech did here is some polls on her favorable rating among the independents from a source that is hardly favorable to Republicans.


Among independents, 53 percent have favorable views of Palin, and about two-thirds approve of McCain's choice. However, independents are only evenly divided, as are all Americans, as to whether the surprise pick makes them more or less confident -- 44 to 37 percent -- about the decisions McCain would make as president.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26568866

ari1013
09-06-2008, 11:06 AM
Only those on the left are complaining about how divisive the convention was. And as far as your opinion of what her speech did here is some polls on her favorable rating among the independents from a source that is hardly favorable to Republicans.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26568866
So did the convention attract indies and dems over to McCain?

hoosiercubsfan
09-06-2008, 11:48 AM
So did the convention attract indies and dems over to McCain?

Nice try and switching the point of my comment. But I was referring to Den's point that it alienated the indies. The initial poll on Palin say something different other than her alienating everyone but the base. The only people that are up in arms about the convention are those that are firmly on the left to begin with. It is to early to tell who the convention drew over. But to say it alienated them before any true polling can be done is foolish.


The first polling to gauge whether McCain’s convention speech altered the race will begin to be available on Saturday.

What will not be apparent until next week, however, is the extent of the Republicans’ convention bounce, or the lay of the land following the back-to-back party conventions, the first such scheduling in half a century.


SurveyUSA’s poll found that six in 10 voters gave Palin’s speech a grade of A. In addition, 55 percent of those polled said Palin “reflects well on McCain,” while 30 percent said she reflects poorly.

By comparison, 48 percent of those polled said Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden “reflects well on Obama,” while 31 percent said he reflects poorly
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13196.html

DenButsu
09-06-2008, 12:12 PM
Nice try and switching the point of my comment. But I was referring to Den's point that it alienated the indies.

Actually, I specifically said, "conservative Democrats and independents" in extrapolating on "the middle".

Rochesta
09-06-2008, 02:19 PM
Well, I'm very happy about this. 42+ million watched Obama (inc PBS). 40 million watched Palin (inc PBS) and 42+ for McCain (inc PBS). We might actually have an election where people know who the big players are.

Best thing I've heard all day. No matter who you like, you have to be happy that people actually care about this thing.

Rochesta
09-06-2008, 05:08 PM
(and the Washington Post is hardly far left):


I lived in DC for four years, and believe me, that is debateable.

QuietWyatt
09-06-2008, 05:18 PM
McCain drew MORE than Obama

It really doesn't matter. People like myself don't own a television and receive info from the net. Ratings systems should be in correlation with internet buzz. It's great to see great ratings at both conventions, though. I hope to see the same enthusiasm in future elections.


She HAS governed while Obama has not

I like seeing McCain appeasing die-hard cons by picking a blowhard mouthpiece spewing nonsense to fire up backwoods loons.

Sarah Palin couldn't even shine Obama's shoes.

Rochesta
09-06-2008, 05:31 PM
I like seeing McCain appeasing die-hard cons by picking a blowhard mouthpiece spewing nonsense to fire up backwoods loons.


This is why you guys are going to lose another very winnable election. Nobody buys anything you guys say when you say things like this.

Cubboy
09-06-2008, 05:36 PM
Kind of shocking. It sure seemed like many more people were talking after the Dem convention. But I am in Obama country here in Chicago.

Say what you want, love 'em or hate 'em, the Republicans know how to rally their troops.

hoosiercubsfan
09-06-2008, 06:14 PM
This is why you guys are going to lose another very winnable election. Nobody buys anything you guys say when you say things like this.

That is exactly right. Just because she may not talk like them, look like them, run in the same political circles they do then my God why will anyone listen to them. This is why that "idiot" George Bush was a two term president. If he was so dumb that he beat the people of the DNC thought where their best person to lead this country what does that make them? Even more stupid? It is easy for the lib's of the board to poke fun at Palin but the real question will be does she appeal to middle America where this election is going to be won or lost. It is doing her a lot of good for the media to focus on her family. That is turning off a lot of people from their message they are trying to put across. But if they do not take Palin serious they may very well end up as you said losing this election again. Prior to her selection it was looking like a landslide to me for Obama but now it is back to being a race again.

ink
09-06-2008, 06:54 PM
This is why you guys are going to lose another very winnable election. Nobody buys anything you guys say when you say things like this.


That is exactly right. Just because she may not talk like them, look like them, run in the same political circles they do then my God why will anyone listen to them. This is why that "idiot" George Bush was a two term president. If he was so dumb that he beat the people of the DNC thought where their best person to lead this country what does that make them? Even more stupid? It is easy for the lib's of the board to poke fun at Palin but the real question will be does she appeal to middle America where this election is going to be won or lost. It is doing her a lot of good for the media to focus on her family. That is turning off a lot of people from their message they are trying to put across. But if they do not take Palin serious they may very well end up as you said losing this election again. Prior to her selection it was looking like a landslide to me for Obama but now it is back to being a race again.

100% agree.

ink
09-06-2008, 07:14 PM
I lived in DC for four years, and believe me, that is debateable.

They've shifted a lot in the last few years.

ari1013
09-06-2008, 11:59 PM
Nice try and switching the point of my comment. But I was referring to Den's point that it alienated the indies. The initial poll on Palin say something different other than her alienating everyone but the base. The only people that are up in arms about the convention are those that are firmly on the left to begin with. It is to early to tell who the convention drew over. But to say it alienated them before any true polling can be done is foolish.




http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13196.html
So did it? I'm not changing the subject. I'm asking a question. Looking at the polls, it sure looks like the base has been rallied. McCain's numbers among Republicans are now through the roof. But among indies it looks unchanged. So is it something we haven't seen yet? Or did they just not care to attract outside voters? Both sides had their fair share of antagonistic speeches and speakers, but it seems like Obama got a pretty solid bounce out of his speech. McCain got a bounce out of taking Palin, but nothing yet from the convention. Rasmussen had the race down to 2 points yesterday. Today's poll has the race at +3 Obama. Gallup has it +2 Obama, down from +4. Averaging the whole thing out, we're looking at Obama up 3, whereas before either convention it was essentially all tied up.

QuietWyatt
09-08-2008, 02:24 PM
This is why you guys are going to lose another very winnable election. Nobody buys anything you guys say when you say things like this.

I wasn't meant to take a shot at republicans or conservatives for that matter. I apologize for the misinterpretation. People will find out in due time about Sarah and her husband's past associations. I'm offended that McCain's campaign chooses to try and manipulate rural America about typical hot buttons like gun laws with no regard or concern if some teenager in South Central L.A. is ridin' around with an AK-47.

But I disagree about it being a winnable election. It's going to be close like recent elections.

hoosiercubsfan
09-08-2008, 02:40 PM
So did it? I'm not changing the subject. I'm asking a question. Looking at the polls, it sure looks like the base has been rallied. McCain's numbers among Republicans are now through the roof. But among indies it looks unchanged. So is it something we haven't seen yet? Or did they just not care to attract outside voters? Both sides had their fair share of antagonistic speeches and speakers, but it seems like Obama got a pretty solid bounce out of his speech. McCain got a bounce out of taking Palin, but nothing yet from the convention. Rasmussen had the race down to 2 points yesterday. Today's poll has the race at +3 Obama. Gallup has it +2 Obama, down from +4. Averaging the whole thing out, we're looking at Obama up 3, whereas before either convention it was essentially all tied up.


RCP Average 09/05 - 09/07 -- 48.6 45.4 McCain +3.2
CNN 09/05 - 09/07 942 RV 48 48 Tie
USA Today/Gallup 09/05 - 09/07 823 LV 54 44 McCain +10
Rasmussen Tracking 09/05 - 09/07 3000 LV 48 47 McCain +1
Hotline/FD Tracking 09/05 - 09/07 924 RV 44 44 Tie
Gallup Tracking 09/05 - 09/07 2733 RV 49 44 McCain +5
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

As i said previously at that point it was to soon to see the bump McCain got from his convention. Granted I don't think these polls really mean a thing at this point. It reminds me of a baseball game that has gone pretty much one way for the first 6 innings but the opposing team has found a way to come back and take a one run lead in the 7th. We still have the 8th and 9th to determine the outcome which to me is the final 57 or so days to go. Does that mean that this small lead will hold up? It is possible but I doubt it. The race is now more or less tied now it will be a race to see who can turn out the vote and get their message across without getting bogged down.

ari1013
09-08-2008, 02:49 PM
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

As i said previously at that point it was to soon to see the bump McCain got from his convention. Granted I don't think these polls really mean a thing at this point. It reminds me of a baseball game that has gone pretty much one way for the first 6 innings but the opposing team has found a way to come back and take a one run lead in the 7th. We still have the 8th and 9th to determine the outcome which to me is the final 57 or so days to go. Does that mean that this small lead will hold up? It is possible but I doubt it. The race is now more or less tied now it will be a race to see who can turn out the vote and get their message across without getting bogged down.
You were right. He did finally get his bump. And yes, now it's time to let the dust settle.

On a side note, looking at the crosstabs, an interesting thing is that GOP registration suddenly hit an alltime high in all of the polling. Could it simply have been that a lot of people had been claiming "independent" because they didn't want to admit to being "Republicans?"

If that's the case, then Palin really did a remarkable job of rallying the base. And so calling out for true independents took a back seat to bringing back the 2000/2004 Republicans.

hoosiercubsfan
09-08-2008, 03:19 PM
You were right. He did finally get his bump. And yes, now it's time to let the dust settle.

On a side note, looking at the crosstabs, an interesting thing is that GOP registration suddenly hit an alltime high in all of the polling. Could it simply have been that a lot of people had been claiming "independent" because they didn't want to admit to being "Republicans?"
If that's the case, then Palin really did a remarkable job of rallying the base. And so calling out for true independents took a back seat to bringing back the 2000/2004 Republicans.

That is a very interesting point. I honestly believe a lot of people that are conservative thinking feel as though the party did leave them under Bush. He grew the government more than hardly anyone in history. And the level of disgust with the party has been huge. With the picking of Palin I have said all along that it had very little to do with Hillary voters and more to bringing back the conservatives. With a seemingly true conservatives on the ticket they could possibly over look McCain's less than conservative past and vote for them anyway. Palin was McCain's hail mary he had absolutely no chance other than going for it all with the pick. It is still to be determined if it is going to be enough.