« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
NEWSWEEK Obama's 14 point drop with Libertarians and independents
Where did Obama and his "advisors" imagine that his flip-flop on FISA would leave him?
I stated in previous posts that this was a tipping point.
If Obama thought that there was anything in his platform appealing to libertarians and independents aside from the FISA and associated "rule of law" issues, integrity issues, he was wrong.
I'm still amazed at the blunder, I saw Bill Richardson on CNN say that there was no issue here, move along, etc.. and CNN was showing the angry posts.
Libertarians and independents aren't your Koolaid drinking true believers, the demographic carried Obama only marginally over Clinton, and now that they are gone, burnt if you will by the flip-flop, there is no issue that follows as a second tier issue that they are coming back for.
I'll say it again, just to say I told you so. This will go down as one of the greatest blunders in politics.
McCain will remind voters this fall that Obama flipped on FISA in a debate, and the results won't be pretty when that contrast is drawn in front of a non-caucus audience.
The DEMS I think don't want the Whitehouse, they want an executive that they can blame for everything in 2009.
If that vote on FISA was about making a clear case choice between Republican and Democratic choice for POTUS, and Obama couldn't deliver the support for that clear contrast, well he frankly deserved the result.
NewsWeek reporting that close in the polls and the lack of online contributions are only the beginning of fallout from alienating the precise segment that got him where he is at.
Obama is surrounded by a echo chamber of aides and yes men, the campaigning made him unresponsive to the crowds, people not people but another handshake from an already hurting hand, and... Obama divorced from sensibilities and listening to the preaching to the choir, committed a blunder taking for granted the group that decides US elections.
I guess he was not smart enough to understand the one wedge issue that he had this fall...
he blew it.
Comments (30)
Wow, you really got this thing all wrapped up already.
http://www.widgetbox.com/widget/us-election-2008-countdown
July 11, 2008 11:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dear TPM posters:
PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS.
If this post gets more than 1 rec, the original poster has a duplicate TPM account. :-)
July 12, 2008 12:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
For those who wonder why this reaction is so severe: there is of course no break-out line for "libertarians" in the poll.
Dee is doing what Obama politely refers to as "making stuff up."
http://www.newsweek.com/id/145556
July 12, 2008 8:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. He lost me. I will vote for him but I've taken his bumper sticker off my car. Nor will I donate any more money to him under these conditions. He's been bought off. Let his "owners" pay the bill.
July 12, 2008 12:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
CNN is all about stirring the pot and no longer a viable 'news' outlet.
"I guess he was not smart enough to understand the one wedge issue that he had this fall...
he blew it."
Really? Gee, guess we're all wasting our time, energy and money - let's skip the GE and just hold McCain's inauguration now! At least we're fortunate to have patriots such as you and nats to provide real leadership! So generous of both of you to share your expertise with all of us.
Oh, by the way - not that we doubt your status as intellectual patriots who work hard to bring about positive change for our country, but would you please supply a 'resume' listing all your research and factual basis for your wise posts?
Thanks. We're all looking forward to it and by golly, you lead and we'll surely follow! Because you both are just so much smarter than Obama or any of us!
July 12, 2008 12:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
What's interesting is that the people Gallup is polling this week seem to hate civil liberties. Can there be any other explanation for Obama's rising Gallup numbers?
Someone ought to get to the bottom of this mystery. Why is Gallup excluding "libertarians and independents" from its polls?
July 12, 2008 1:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Gallup probably isn't polling working-class white people or patriotic people, either. (Sorry, these polls measuring Obama's devastating weaknesses make me nostalgic for the classics sometimes.)
July 12, 2008 1:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
When McCain reminds voters of Obama's vote on this most important issue, he can then explain why he didn't bother to cast a vote at all. After all, the FISA bill was described by Bush as a vital tool to defend the country against terrorists, yet McCain didn't find the time to vote on a bill to defend this country. If we can't count on McCain's leadership and judgement to make the difficult vote while in the senate, how can he be counted on to make the tough decision as president?
July 12, 2008 3:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Of course, no rational person believed in the LA Times inane 15-[pint Obama lead nationiwde.
Now that their poll is in line with all the others - the ones showing Obama comfortably ahead of mcCain in almost every demographic,I think we can safely stop worrying about the 897 Libertarians out there - who will vote for Barr (and thereby harm McCain) in any event. :)
July 12, 2008 5:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has lost me. The flip on what is a very fundamental privacy issue is hard to dismiss.
There is an obvious constitutional hierarchy that has been violated here. I don't believe it is possible to elevate subordinate concepts within this hierarchy. Doing so demonstrably alters the ordering of core elements we most strongly believe in.
In this case we have a condition where an authority has been assigned to government that previously was fully perceived as a necessarily regulated authority with clearly defined boundaries. The boundaries were governed by those precepts that presumably were positioned on upper level rungs in the hierarchy.
What we have ended up with is a reorganization of the hierarchy that is inconsistent with maintaining the original notions of precedence.
Most notably the precedent of privacy has been changed where citizens have become subordinate to government. I don't think it possible to construe this as anything less than a fundamental alteration of the hierarchy.
July 12, 2008 7:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hey GrannyD,
On the other hand, perhaps the FISA bill has more to recommend it than many of us believed. Theh Volokh Conspiracy (via Sullivan:
[quote]As I see it, the new law takes the basic approach of the Protect America Act of 2007 and adds privacy protections and bolsters the scope of judicial review. On the whole, the new law strikes me as pretty good legislation: It nicely responds to the widely expressed fears last year about how the Protect America Act could be implemented. and it ensures that the FISA Court will play a major role in reviewing surveillance of individuals located outside the U.S. Indeed, it seems to me that the new rules create pretty much the regime that critics of the Protect America Act wanted back in 2007.[/quote]
I admit that I'm disappointed by Obama's vote, but I recognize that this NSA surveillance may have been going on for far longer than we realize and that any additional legal protections are valuable. The main issue is, IMHO, Bush has shown on multiple occasions that he's more than happy to bypass settled law, so at this point it's more important that his policies not be extended for a 3rd term than the details of this legislation.
It's too easy for us political junkies to assume that "our side" is right and the other side is wrong and not take the time to really study the details. It's also important, IMHO, to recognize that it's always better to go to original sources than just rely on newspaper reports and blogs.
Recall that John Dean, someone who knows a lot about issues like executive power and legislation, thinks that the FISA bill isn't exactly clear on its implications...
On the issue of Obama's vote and the standing in the polls - it's far too early to be rending garments and gnashing teeth. The polls are going to be volatile - they always are this early. Obama's going to do very well this fall.
For those who are greatly upset by Obama on this, recognize that there are always going to be issues of disagreement (yes, even on major Constitutional issues) with candidates who are willing to take a stand. Don't cut off your nose to spite your face...
In other words, DON'T PANIC!
July 12, 2008 7:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Grr. My kingdom for an edit/preview function...
July 12, 2008 7:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Uhhhhm what policy would independents and libertarians choose to endorse? You seem to see the issue as "exclude" a 3rd term of Bush though he is not running.
You still don't grasp the independents and libertarian's view point.
We don't start with a conclusion and build an assumption as a generalization.
July 12, 2008 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's see Newsweek had Obama up 15 now they have him up 3.
Given the fact that all other polls have been fairly consistent I would certainly not look at Newsweek as a reliable poll.
Also looking at polls in July for a November election just dumb.
July 12, 2008 9:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Trends, js, trends.
July 12, 2008 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like one, the people will vote for the real Republican every time." -Harry Truman
July 12, 2008 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Carry the battle to them. Don't let them bring it to you. Put them on the defensive and don't ever apologize for anything." - Harry S. Truman.
July 12, 2008 12:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
No dot after the "S". It didn't stand for anything and is not an abbreviation.
July 12, 2008 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I knew 2/3 of that...
July 12, 2008 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know this poll is gratifying for all of you who are convinced that you, and only you, know what the one true principalled postition on every issue is, and thus necessarily conclude that all deviations from this True Knowledge are unprincipled sell-outs.
But, sorry, this poll is a methodological trainwreck. You don't get to claim a "14 point drop" from the last poll when the "last poll's" demographic profile is ridiculously different from this one. Its not apples to apples or even apples to oranges. Its apples to rutabegas.
Newsweek polls are absolutely useless for just this reason. Its like they're making the whole process up for the first time each time they take a poll.
Find me two polls where the ratio of Democrats to Republicans hasn't drastically changed for no reason at all and where the median age hasn't suddenly, mysteriously skewed toward the "old" end of the spectrum, and we'll talk.
July 12, 2008 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Were both polls weighted? I think both were.
July 12, 2008 7:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess the myoptic want the polls of just teh democrats counted, as if we were still in the primaries.
But it is general election time and that means that independents and libertarians closed out in voting in some states are now allowed to vote. In MD for example, registered independent??? If so no priamry for you to participate in.
yeah NewsWeek included independents and libertarians in their polls, and these folks will vote in Nov as well.
July 12, 2008 1:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unlike those rotters at Gallup, who rigorously weed out the libertarians in order to enforce their corporate agenda.
July 12, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree and will not vote for Sen. Obama. Make any excuse you need, to make you comfortable with Sen. Obama after his reversal on FISA, but the fact is he reversed himself on a very important tenet of who he is (or pretended to be) and many here rightly disavowed him. For me, it's not enough that Sen. Obama is almost the right guy. I think that he took a spineless position and would continue to do so throughout his presidency. That doesn't mean that I will necessarily vote for Sen. McCain although he has a longer record than Sen. Obama, and one that actually includes courageous votes on issues of principle. As far as the campaign goes both persons have behaved like pandering politicians.
July 12, 2008 5:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who would have thunk it. Libertarians upset with senator Obama. Libertarians is just another words for Loners, and you know how well that sort loves to participate in team efforts. Loners refusing to stop behaving like loners: What a revelation! almost as shocking as hearing that vegans refuse to eat meat!!!
July 12, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oops! Not "Libertarians upset with senator Obama." Rather "Libertarians more upset with senator Obama than they were in mid-June."
July 12, 2008 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Libertarians do not support any Democrats. They can barely stand even being aligned with the Republicans. Independents are not aligned with Libertarians, as much as the author of this thread would like to conflate the two. You know why that is. It is because Libertarians are an insignificant bunch who held their national convention in a telephone booth, and then nominate a life long Republican from Georgia. Of course they try to attach their selves to Independents as a way to puff up their appearance of strength.
It is a case of a mouse claiming to be in an all powerful alliance with a bear, and strutting around proclaiming: fear us! fear us! fear us!
July 12, 2008 8:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
We get the president we deserve. Keep that in mind as you feed your moral outrage and practice waxing indignant. You might also want to consider this column:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/10/opinion/10collins.html
July 12, 2008 10:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Elizabeth, I hope that article wasn't meant to help any decisions about voting for Obama. Of course, it is right and it is what Hillary supporters were saying the whole time(since he isn't a fighter he is going to give away a lot of stuff that we don't want to be given away) but that is.....history.
July 12, 2008 11:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
The article is a great argument for supporting Obama.
July 12, 2008 11:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment