I thought this was a very interesting post by David Nather on CQ Politics. It shows how much more mature Obama is than McCain despite their ages. Obama even exchanges a warm greeting with Lieberman for Christ's sake!

Obama Makes McCain Very Uncomfortable By David Nather | October 1, 2008 8:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Let the record reflect that Barack Obama made the approach to John McCain tonight.

As the two shared the Senate floor tonight for the first time since they won their party nominations, Obama stood chatting with Democrats on his side of the aisle, and McCain stood on the Republican side of the aisle.

So Obama crossed over into enemy territory.

He walked over to where McCain was chatting with Republican Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida and Independent Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut. And he stretched out his arm and offered his hand to McCain.

McCain shook it, but with a “go away” look that no one could miss. He tried his best not to even look at Obama.

Finally, with a tight smile, McCain managed a greeting: “Good to see you.”

Obama got the message. He shook hands with Martinez and Lieberman — both of whom greeted him more warmly — and quickly beat a retreat back to the Democratic side.

I thought that was an interesting data point in the latest Rasmussen poll. It's the only white demographic group where Obama has a lead. This reinforces my suspicion that this group is being unfairly maligned as stupid, racist, voting against their own interest etc.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

It's being publicized and used dishonestly, and I can't belief TPM is going along with it. When Barack Obama was ahead 50-43 % among registered voters last week, RealClearPolitics did not add the figure to their average. The explanation - according to someone here - was that it was reflective of the three-day Gallup rolling poll.

Now John McCain is ahead 54-44 % among LIKELY VOTERS, RCP has added it to their average to give McCain a lead.

USA Today/Gallup did not give a likely voter figure for Obama. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.) So to provide and use the 54-44 for McCain is so unfair it leaves me breathless. This is besides the fact that the result is so unlikely that the methodology and motivation of the pollster should be questioned.

And while polls don't contribute to the final outcome, they do contribute to a narrative and a momentum that could affect the outcome. And that's why they're important and that's why I'm upset about this.

I'm hoping TPM would remove the USA Today poll or use the registered voter result. But you know why I think they, RCP and others are so eager to jump on it? They want to create an I-told-you-so narrative. They don't really believe Obama can win. Or they think he's running his campaign all wrong. So - yay! - here's a poll that proves them right. Shame on you TPM!

I’m not a swimming fan. But I’ve been following Michael Phelps’ Olympic races obsessively.
I’m not a political junkie. But I’ve been following Barack Obama’s campaign obsessively.
I suspect there are millions like me around the world. We’re drawn to these two men for the same reason: They’re doing something that seemed impossible before they attempted it. They’re giving us something to root for. They’re inspiring us.

This is the reason, I think, Barack Obama got a bump in the polls after he defeated the once-thought-invincible “Clinton Machine” and clinched the Democratic nomination. It’s the reason he vaulted to a nine-point lead in the Gallup daily tracking poll after his gaffe-free, smoothly executed tour abroad. It’s the reason he’ll very likely get a similar bounce after formally accepting his party’s nomination with a spectacle rarely attempted by political candidates: packing tens of thousands of people in a football stadium.

I call it the Michael Phelps Effect. Someone sets a bold goal, they achieve it, and they earn the public’s goodwill and respect. I know a lot of commentators here and elsewhere question whether the trip was a good idea. They question the political propriety of the Mile High speech. Obama himself bristled at the suggestion that his trip was “audacious.” But, come on, it was audacious! A junior senator with few international connections and a young campaign staff with little experience on a national stage were going to - in one week- visit eight countries and meet with multiple world leaders. They also hoped to draw thousands of people to hear the senator speak in Germany. Wow! No wonder it drew so much media attention. Audacity, I think, is exactly what makes Barack Obama’s candidacy so compelling.

I remember how good I felt that whole week Obama was abroad, seeing this son of a goatherd and a small town girl interact with world leaders like he was born to it. It was the best period of the election so far. Now I follow the everyday back and forth of the campaigns with varying levels of queasiness. I watch as it becomes nastier and nastier as Obama’s jittery supporters encourage him to “Hit harder! Hit harder!” and he seems to be following their advice.

I’m worried. Not that he would lose. I feel he has too many historical and economic factors on his side. I worry that it would be another narrow victory, with almost half the electorate dissatisfied with the result. I worry that he’s squandering an opportunity to really change the way elections are won in the US, i.e. by scaring enough voters away from the other side. I’m worried he’s squandering an opportunity to ride the Michael Phelps Effect to a landslide victory.

So while I have no experience running a campaign, and I hate these advice-to-Obama posts as much as anyone, as an observer who really wants change, I have a suggestion for the Obama campaign: Do more audacious stunts. Do them within America. They will draw media attention, just like the trip did, and give you an opportunity to have your policies heard. They will reduce the need to join John McCain in the mud and give you a chance to really inspire people and have them rally around Obama’s candidacy. I have two suggestions, although the ideas can meld.

1. A Celebrate America tour or a Hope and Change tour. The tour can have a record-setting goal, for instance - and this is completely arbitrary - 60 stops in six days. The tour can be by bus. Hold events before landmarks in towns across America. Feature town heroes, or people who’ve accomplished something against the odds. Tell the American people, “I want to put in place policies that will lead to more Joe Whatevers, more Debbie Whatevers.” Explain those policies. In his speech Sen. Obama can mention some inspiring aspect of the town’s history.

2. A Red State tour. Visit a few places the senator is thought to have no chance of winning. Choose from towns in Sen. McCain’s Arizona, Arkansas, Tennessee, Kansas, Mississippi, Louisiana etc. Tell residents the equivalent of ‘I know you won’t support me but I’ll support you.’ Reach out to Republican mayors and governors if that is possible. Show that talk of there being no red states and blue states isn’t just lip service.

The Republicans and the media want this election to be petty, small, mean. It’s the only way the Republicans can win and it’s a way to get good ratings on the cheap. But I think there’s another way to victory. There’s another way to draw people’s attention. Michael Phelps has shown us how.