Flying Pink Unicorns

McCain's Post-Convention bounce.

A one-sentence summary: Following the conventions, white women have hugely moved towards McCain; it won't last, at least not entirely.

Well, a stopped clock is right twice a day. I liked McCain's speech and LOVED Palin's, and wrote in my last post, "I suspect the GOP will win the battle of convention bounces, and possibly by a lot. If I'm right, this race will be truly even going into the real campaign, which begins in earnest now."

I was right, if conservative. The first 3 national polls taken following the GOP convention. had McCain leading by 1, 3 and 10 points respectively! The 10-point McCain lead is hugely likely to be just a fluke. An average of polls taken since the GOP Convention has McCain up by about 2.5 points. There have been a bunch of them, so this is real. There have been 8 polls taken since Palin's (and McCain's) speech. Two of these are tied, Obama leads by a puny 1 point in one, and McCain leads in the other 5, by 1, 2, 2, 5 and 10.

At this instant in time, McCain is up around 2.5 points nationally! Oddly, the electoral college is much, much closer, and may even favor Obama, but never mind. Although possible, it is very difficult for someone to win the popular vote by more than two points and lose the election. Gore for reference won the popular vote by only .5%. If McCain wins the popular vote by 2.5 points, he'll find a way to get to 270 electoral votes and win the election.

Since Obama was up around 3.5 points in polls taken before the conventions (when not that many people were paying close attention) and McCain is up 2.5 points now, (when people are paying a lot more attention) it is crystal clear McCain got the bigger poll bounce, and not by a little. This is 100% due to Palin in my opinion. As of now she represents easily the most significant VP pick since at least 1960 (LBJ), and one of the very most significant in the history of the Republic. For the ever more Bush-like John McCain to bounce so significantly in the polls is an amazing testament to Palin's appeal. She is an absolute mega-phenomenon as of right now. But it is reasonably obvious that the effect she's had on the race won't last. At least not entirely.

Approximately 40 million people watched Obama's speech. Amazingly, 38 million watched Palin's. That says nothing of people who watched it on-line or at least paid close attention to media analysis of her speech. There was enormous curiosity about this young woman new on the political scene, and as I told you she gave a speech for the ages (on style only, but substance is overrated). Or, put another way, images are powerful things. As I said in my September 5th post, Palin's speech, "was AMAZING. I am NOT being sarcastic. Anyone who can watch that speech and not be inspired by what that remarkable lovely, and just plain remarkable woman has done, well I can't really help them. I am VERY biased AGAINST the GOP and still found her speech enormously inspiring on a certain level. She was, in fact, ELECTRIC."

I have a tendency to exaggerate, but I understated people's reaction to Palin's speech. Her speech, as of now has fundamentally changed the presidential contest. Underestimate her at your peril.

Two obvious questions arise:

A) How do I know it was solely Palin's speech that changed the dynamic of the race, and which voters were swayed; and

B) How durable is the bounce McCain received?

1) How do I know McCain's poll bounce was due to Palin's speech and which voters were swayed

Before the Conventions, Obama was up about 3.5 points. The democratic Convention began on Auugst 25th, so just check the polls taken immediately before August 25th. Scroll down.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

Since McCain is up by 2.5 points now, that represents about a 6-point swing to the GOP after both conventions. A big swing, but I don't think its historic. I'm not taking the time now to find out.

Where did this 6-point swing come from? That is to say, which voters have moved in the polls from Obama to McCain? White women.

In 2004, Bush won by 3 points, which is extremely close to McCain's current lead. In that election, white women (who constituted 41% of voters) went for Bush by a 55-44 margin, or 11 points. (Women overall went for Kerry 51-48, continuing a gender gap that has been in place in American politics for at least a generation). Non-white women went for Kerry by an absolutely staggering 75-24. Non-white women represented 12% of voters.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html

If non-white women don't represent slightly more of the electorate in 2008 than in 2004, I am a monkey's uncle. New Hispanic voters. Higher black turnout. Figure it out. If that number goes to from 12% to 13% (I'm making this up, sounds like too big a jump as I think about it), and the 75-24 holds, that would be a gain of 3/4ths of a point for Obama. One percent is probably too much. Ok, let's not get that micro.

According to Harold Meyerson of the Washington Post, who has been around the block and who I greatly respect,

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/09/AR2008090902518.html

an ABC News Poll showing McCain with a 2 point lead had white women favoring McCain by 12 points. Sounds exactly like Bush's 11 point win among white women and sounds like cause for pushing the panic button. However, before the conventions Obama was up 8 points in this group. Thus the Palin effect (you have to imagine this 20-point swing was entirely due to Palin and not McCain, but I am just guessing), was sufficient to cause a 20 point swing in 40% of voters (I'm dropping this number from 41% to constitute the increased voter participation among non-whites, and for simplicity-- the change from the 41% in 2004 is trivial, but I am making it up). 20% of 40% is an insane 8% of the overall vote!!! Thus the change in white women's voting preferences more than explains the entire shift of the race from before the conventions-- all other voting groups very slightly moved towards Obama. I am assuming this poll is consistent with the various other polls.

The poll is found here.

http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1070a1AftertheConventions.pdf

In other words, if all else stayed the same and this Mt. Everest sized Palin effect disappeared entirely, McCain's 2.5 lead becomes an Obama 5.5 point lead. Which would put him further ahead then he was before the conventions, but not radically so. But the Palin bounce disappearing entirely is a daring assumption, and one can't casually make it.

As of now (and this can and very possibly will change so hugely as to make this post completely irrelevant, with possible factors including racism, new revelations about Obama, foreign policy crises, and something no one is even thinking about), the $64,000 question in the 2008 election is how much of the Palin bounce among white women stays going forward. Usually any bounce is reduced in time. Picking numbers completely out of the air, if half of the Palin bounce stays through election day and the voting preferences of all other voting groups remain as they are today, that would give Obama a thin 1.5 point national lead, close enough that the 2008 election would be too close to call, might well come down to Ohio again, and would leave the country closely watching the election returns on election night for the third cycle in a row.

I'm actually optimistic that a lot of this bounce, perhaps even all of it, will disappear. The Myerson article linked above states that new polls have shown that "before the conventions, (white women) preferred Obama on the economy by 12 points; now, they prefer McCain by 10."

So white women prefer McCain on the economy by 10? This is obviously merely a result of their attraction to Palin, and is virtually 100% certain to fade. Especially if Obama hits McCain hard on the economy. Hillary can be very very helpful here. Hitting this issue hard can, I think, work to reduce/eliminate this bounce.

I note that Myerson added that other national polls also show a narrowing of Obama's advantage on the economy. He doesn't specify whether the narrowing was primarily among white women, but I imagine it was.

B) How durable is the bounce McCain received?

The short answer is that while I don't have a great feel for this, I find it hard to believe that all of the bounce will be maintained, and discount entirely that Obama's status among white women will worsen. I would be very surprised if at least some of this bounce among white women didn't go away. If half of it does Obama's in a narrow lead, as I said above.

People rely on gut instinct and images. Images are powerful things. Palin understands people like me. She and Johnny Mac will be fine on the economy, better than untested Obama and foreign policy Joe. A very sizable percentage of the 8% of voters who have changed preferences are "thinking" like this. Images are powerful things, but new images are softer and fleeting than long-held durable images (McCain sacrifices for country, Bush is strong on national defense, Hillary is shrill and negative, etc). This new image is likely to evaporate some on its own, but the democrats will need to work at it and work hard. And dirty. And nasty. And negative (as well as concrete and positive).

Myerson says, in words that neither Andrew nor I could improve upon, "If Obama and his strategists can't reclaim the economic issue after eight years of Republicans presiding over the first recorded recovery in American history that failed to boost family incomes, and now over a slowdown that has its roots in the GOP's mania for deregulation, they ought to find another line of work. They need to ask John McCain at every turn: What Bush economic policies do you repudiate? Where have you broken with Bush on the economy?"

The Obama campaign is in a near panic over Palin's huge effect on the race and are attacking her, including Obama personally attacking McCain's Vice. This is precisely the wrong approach.

Myerson is just hugely right. McCain must be absolutely savaged for agreeing with Bush up and down the line on economic matters. Its not enough to say, "Bush-McCain" or "third term." That doesn't pass the smell test by itself. McCain has a Maverick/Independent image, and Palin has dramatically fortified this. Instead, ads must say, "Bush cut taxes on the wealthy creating a huge deficit and a slow economic recovery that failed to lift family incomes. McCain wants to do more of the same." Over and over and over and over and over and over. And commentary on housing/mortgage issues and energy.

Surely some of those white women mentioned above are busy juggling very tight family budges and can understand that McCain despite some appearances is loudly promising more of the same failed Bush economic and regulatory policies and Obama isn't. If Obama can make the 2008 election about this issue, he wins.

These sorts of attacks can help diminish the Palin effect. Watch Oprah on this. Her show is watched by gigantic numbers of downscale and mid scale white women, and her impact on the 2008 election may be reasonably significant.

A few months ago I predicted an Obama 8 point victory. While that is still possible, and still far more likely than a McCain 8 point victory, such a relatively easy win no longer seems very likely at all. I still think Obama is 80% + to win, but I wouldn't go much further than that. Some of the Convention bounce will disappear, and pretty quickly. The debates will be hugely watched, all four of them (3 presidential and one vice presidential). Interest in Palin will likely continue to be absolutely enormous. I wouldn't be surprised if north of 60 million people watch the Vice Presidential debate. So lots and lots of things will move the polls prior to election day. And this movement is highly likely to favor Obama, as I have spelled out. How much remains to be seen.

If I absolutely positively had to call the 2008 election today, I'd predict that Obama wins by 4. But I can definitely envision McCain winning which I really couldn't in June (absent a big foreign policy shock or truly enormous revelations about Obama). McCain could now win without either of these things occurring. This is a remarkable change of affairs, and is 100% due to Palin. But having this much of your hopes pinned on an untested political rookie who is probably at her popularity high water mark is not where you'd really like your campaign to be. I'd much rather be in Obama's position than McCain's, despite McCain's current poll lead.