"Friends,
The polls are tightening across the nation, and one thing is clear: this year's presidential election will be one of the closest in history. We know that John McCain and Sarah Palin will change Washington, but before they reform our nation's capital, you have to send them there first.

Now more than ever, your vote is critical. And there's no better way to vote than by voting early, or with an absentee ballot. Voting early, or with an absentee ballot, is the best way to avoid the long line on Election Day and get your vote counted. Many states allow you to vote early by requesting an absentee ballot through the mail. Please visit www.JohnMcCain.com/AB for more details on early voting and absentee ballot requests in your state.

Your support is extremely important to electing John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin in November, and your vote will matter. I'm encouraging you to visit our website and either register to vote or sign up for early voting or an absentee ballot. Your vote will make all the difference in November.

Thanks for your support and for your vote!

Rick Davis
Campaign Manager

P.S. Please forward this email to your friends, family, neighbors and colleagues and encourage them to either register to vote or sign up for early voting or absentee voting. Remember, this will be a close election and the work we do now will make all the difference in electing John McCain and Governor Sarah Palin. Thank you

Here's an interesting video that shows how objectivity becomes a cover for weakness. I think David Gergen just disagrees, and I'll give him a pass. But two things stick out to me from this: 1.) It's OK that Palin was clueless about the Bush Doctrine because most Americans and journalists are clueless about it. By that logic, most Americans are qualified to be president. 2.) Palin's ignorance only matters if it affects the "game." In other words, unless McCain loses votes on this, it's actually irrelevant. This is the sort of analysis that arises when your more interested in process than in actual results. It's also, interestingly enough, pretty judgmental. The more I watch, the more I think it's not that you have to be objective, you just have to be careful what you're objective about.

When facts are used to discredit Sarah Palin, emotion trumps facts. The instinct is to defend against the facts. Consider: you meet someone and like him or her on a gut level. A stranger – someone who doesn’t have built-up personal credibility with you – gives you a list of reasons not to like that person. How do you react?
...

...“Sarah Palin is very likable. There’s nothing wrong with liking her. But this isn’t a zany sitcom where a friendly, plucky Everywoman with dangerous ignorance on foreign policy gets to be vice president. Americans don't deserve someone too scared to do a press conference. Fun for a TV show, but running the country doesn't permit second and third takes when you mess up the scene."

And then the argument on how to handle this weirdness:

a man at Palin's rally in Carson City heatedly told an Obama volunteer in response to his anti-Palin argument, "I don't trust the facts!" Some people hear that and think: "I cannot relate to someone who would say that." I hear it and think: "Defended around emotion and feels under attack." People under attack can't be persuaded. And persuasion is the goal, remember? You can’t reason someone out of his or her feelings. But you can validate those feelings, buy their willingness to listen, and then calmly make your logical case.

Palin runs up the score among Republicans and evangelicals (+37, +32 more minus less likely to vote for McCain, respectively).  But moderates say Obama's pick of Biden makes them more likely to vote for Obama (+12 more minus less), with Palin having neither a positive or negative net affect for McCain.

 

These findings build upon earlier results I wrote about this week.  It seems increasingly unlikely that former Hillary Clinton supporters will move to McCain because of Sarah Palin.  But during the heat of the Republican convention, the Republican base is indeed energized. 

The headlines are about the broad polling reaction to Palin. But the most fascinating part of the first Rasmussen poll on the matter is how those who are currently undecided in the election feel. They, after all, are the votes both campaigns are trying to win over with their veep picks. The key data is in the cross-tabs, which have been missed in some of the coverage so far.

On the critical question, "With Palin As Vice-Presidential Nominee, Are You More Or Less Likely To Vote For McCain," there's a striking result. Among those already for McCain, 68 percent say it makes them more likely to vote for him; only 6 percent say less; and 23 percent said no impact. Among those already for Obama, Palin made only 9 percent of them more likely to switch to McCain, 59 percent less likely, and 30 percent said it would make no difference.

But among the critical undecideds, the Palin pick made only 6 percent more likely to vote for McCain; and it made 31 percent less likely to vote for him. 49 percent said it would have no impact, and 15 percent remained unsure. More to the point: among undecideds, 59 percent said Palin was unready to be president. Only 6 percent said she was.If the first criterion for any job is whether you're ready for it, this is a pretty major indictment of the first act of McCain's presidential leadership.

One other striking finding. If McCain thought he could present Palin as a moderate, he was wrong. A whopping 69 percent view her as conservative (37 percent as very conservative), and only 13 percent see her as moderate.

From this first snap-shot (and unsettled) impression, Palin has helped McCain among Republicans, left Democrats unfazed, but moved the undecideds against him quite sharply. I totally understand why."