…the end of man is to know

Yes, yes I’m back…let’s spare the niceties.

Being a student at Northwestern, located deep in ObaManiac Headquarters, I’m trying to figure some stuff out. Namely, how on earth is Obama so damn good. The answer is that he has completely controlled political discourse, at least among 18-25 year olds. I ask why people support Obama and it’s all about “GDeorge W Bush’s failed policies”. Yea, I get that. The economy blows, Iraq was (probably) a mistake, Osama is still at large, and gays can’t marry (it’s not that I don’t think gay marriage in California or Massachusetts should be delegalized. It’s that I think anyone in California or Massachusetts should not be entitled to federal funding that results from marriage.). I won’t bother arguing whose fault it is. The, albeit correct, argument that Democrats are responsible for Fannie and Freddie mess is too indirect and convoluted to be effective. The argument that the surge has worked is irrelevant to those who opposed the war all along and think pre-emptive defeat is an adequate response to pre-emptive war.

McCain’s inability to find his message has kept dominated him. The only times he has surged in the polls were when he bashed Obama on being a celebrity over the summer and when he got Palin as his VP. It’s finding a message and delivering it. Since June we have seen: celebrity, foreign policy experience, maverick, Obama tied to Ayers, and now we get Joe the Plumber/taxes.

There are many roads to Rome (or the White House), but you have to actually take one. To borrow some of the brilliant Jay Cost’s analysis, I’d love to see McCain run this ad a lot more:

10. Sarah Palin has named her kids Bristol, Piper, Track, Willow, and Trig.

9. She has taken on corrupt Alaskan bureaucrats. She has angered Senator Ted Stevens and strongly supported her Lieutenant Governor’s bid to unseat 18-term congressman Don Young in the Republican Primary.

8. In light of McCain’s health problems: Sarah Palin runs marathons.

7. She is a moose hunter. Not a Bull-Moose hunter, but actual Moose. (Mooses? Meese? Moosen?)

6. Palin’s husband works as a commerical fisherman and is in a labor union…can’t much more blue-collar than that.

5. Palin’s husband is a champion snowmobile racer, winning the Tesoro Iron Dog, billed as the world’s longest snowmobile race, four times.

4. Her eldest son, Track, will be going to Iraq with the US Army next month, not unlike the other VP candidate

3. In 1984, Palin was named Miss Wasilla and runner-up as Miss Alaska.

2. Her youngest son, Trig, was born in April with Down’s Syndrome. Palin has made a point to talk about her son and her decision to not have an abortion despite knowing about Trig’s condition during pregnancy.

And….the best thing about Sarah Palin is:

Her parents were called this morning by their son-in-law to listen to the radio for a special announcement. They almost missed hearing about their daughter’s VP nomination because they were *drumroll* CARIBOU HUNTING.

Lest there be no doubt: the GOP has returned to the party of small government, increased transparency, and support the working-class!

McCAIN-PALIN 2008!

YES HE CAN! YES SHE CAN! YES THEY CAN!

In what is the most “No ‘Effing Way” of every “No ‘Effing Way” I have written, McCain has pulled a rabbit out of his hat. Everyone had Romney, Pawlenty, or Lieberman as the top 3 with Condi, Cantor, and Kay Bailey Hutchinson in the second tier. Instead, he completely hoodwinks the entire country and launches Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate.

I always thought she was a great pick, but her lack of media coverage and speculation made me think it wasn’t going to happen. Serious props to The Midnight Ride, who called Palin as a VP pick in late June. Also, Madison Classical Liberal talked about her in early July. Finally, Extremism in Defense of Liberty also called it in late June. I privately talked to Extremism, Midnight Ride, and The Silent Majority about it, but I didn’t have the onions. I was weak and didn’t want to the risk in formally endorsing her. I was wrong.

Palin is a TREMENDOUS pick for a ton of reasons, increasing in legitimacy:

1. She is a woman. There is no bigger middle finger to Obama’s “post-racial” campaign than putting a woman on the ticket. It’s hard to argue you have a monopoly on change when Palin is the first woman with a serious shot to be in the White House (no, Geraldine Ferraro does not count).

1A. Moreover, this could get the Hillary supporters. Clintonites have long argued that Obama and the media were sexist and unfairly cruel to Hillary. Now that Clinton is out of the race, female voters who want to fight sexism will be drawn to Palin. She has a son with Down’s Syndrome and is a former beauty queen. Palin is feminine and has definite appeal to disgruntled female voters looking for a role model.

1B. Palin is tough to beat in a debate. As someone who spent 5 years in speech and debate, I would dread going toe-to-toe with a female, especially an accomplished and intelligent one. It is hard to be a male and go offensive against a female. The fact of the matter is that anytime a guy gets aggressive, he runs the risk of being perceived as a know-it-all sexist pig. While Palin has to face the prospect of being seen as an icy bitch if she gets aggressive, this puts a huge burden on Biden in the VP debate.

1 C. Palin is EXTREMELY attractive. This is a stupid reason. Okay, it’s a really stupid reason. At the end of the day, thousands upon thousands of males will vote for “The Hot Chick”. I think it is exceedingly shallow to vote based on aesthetics, but if it means helping out the conservative movement, I won’t resist. Behold, the new White House Hottie:

2. Palin has real conservative credentials. Any Evangelicals who didn’t trust McCain, must vote GOP. Any small-government libertarians don’t have to waste a vote on Bob Barr. Palin took on the most corrupt state in the country, Alaska, at a time that what was really hard. Ted Stevens is terribly corrupt. The Murkowski family is a dynasty of corrupt, incompetent leaders. Palin has gotten rid of superfluous government expenditures and slashed the budget. She has sound energy policy and is the ultimate on how to reduce oil prices.

3. She balances out this ticket in a way that no other candidate could. Male-female. Old-young. Experienced-fresh. Senator-Governor. There is nothing “missing” from this ticket. There is no weak link that applies to both candidates. They have strengths which back up the other’s weaknesses. Even if Obama wants to hammer Palin on experience, it’s tough-sledding. Obama has 3.5 years of experience in the Senate and Palin as 1.5 years experience as Governor. That difference is relatively small. Also, Palin has been in the City Council from ‘92-’96 and served on Alaska’s Oil & Gas Commission, before resigning in protest of the lack of ethics. She is on the young side, but has achieved great things.

Perhaps Palin’s (and McCain’s) greatest achievement? Taking ALL of the wind out of Obama’s sails, bumping him from the top of the headlines and making this race even more competitive.

I recently lamented the fact that Rachel Maddow got her own show. I was pretty upset that the channel which once bisected CNN and Fox News moved to the left of CNN in the past year through Olbermann’s transformation into leftist wacko and bringing on his sidekick, Maddow. Worse, supposedly non-partisanThe channel has gotten great ratings from Olbermann and Olympics coverage, so it’s not a bad business move. I won’t suggest that the media has a “higher calling” because I have sufficient faith in the viewers and the free market to promote effective, popular media.

MSNBC’s lone conservative, Joe Scarborough, was talking earlier about John McCain’s recent accomplishments in polling. Objectively speaking, Scarborough makes two valid points: a few months ago, the McCain campaign was dead in the water facing a double-digit deficit nationally AND the Obama campaign thought it was impossible to lose this race. Keith Olbermann has an open mic and blasts Scarborough:

The next morning, Scarborough was clearly angry. He had David Shuster, who is liberal, on his show. When Shuster hits Scarborough for not being critical enough of McCain, Scarborough loses it:

I don’t think the tirade was necessary or appropriate, but I can understand it. Scarborough has criticized Republicans and is wildly mocked among “conservative” circles. Also, Scarborough must be upset that Tim Russert passed away (Russert was known as a peacemaker and stabilizing force among network anchors), Andrea Mitchell has become an Obama surrogate without telling anyone, Olbermann has turned himself into a hitman, and Rachel Maddow now gets David Abrams’ timeslot in primetime. For Shuster to claim to be Indpendent was the final straw. Scarborough never wanted to be the token right-winger on the network. He wants to be a small-government former congressman who calls them as he sees them. The network he signed onto no longer exists.

I don’t think this is the end of MSNBC. I don’t think this will hurt ratings. Actually, it should improve ratings as people wait to see what train wreck will happen next. As sad as it is to see Joe completely lose it, hopefully this dispute will get people talking about MSNBC’s shift to the left. More likely, MSNBC’s leftists will further the unfair characterization of Scarborough as a bitter Republican who is watching mainstream America shift to the left.

After watching Biden’s speech, I was pretty impressed. Not as a fan of Biden, but as a political observer. He hit all the notes that he had to and did everything he could. It was going to be interesting to see Biden’s style and I give him a ton of credit for last night.

As a self-professed moderate who happens to be the 3rd most liberal in the entire Senate, Biden couldn’t pander to the far left. As someone who said he would run on John McCain’s ticket, he had to temper the negativity. As someone who said Barack lacked the experience to lead, he needed to limit his own Oba-Mania.

Check. Check. Check.

Biden played it as a moderate Democrat. He harped on Iraq spending, the low minimum wage, outsourcing, oil profits, not privatizing Social Security, education spending, and bringing focus back on Afghanistan and Pakistan. He’s wrong on most, if not all, of these issues. However, he played some winning issues in a non-extremist way. Most importantly, he didn’t lose any credibility as an experienced moderate.

He handled McCain the best. He did throw out some red meat to his supporters. He did attack McCain on some of the comments he has made. However, this is the line that Democrats need to hit, “These times require more than a good soldier; they require a wise leader, a leader who can deliver change–the change everybody knows we need.” There it is. I think calling Obama “wise” is somewhere short of hilarious, but the mood is right. Biden, and now Obama, CAN’T HIT McCAIN ON PERSONAL ISSUES. The man has been through too much personally and politically to be attacked for partisanship or corruption or experience. Shifting the debate from personality and leadership to politics is exactly what Obama-Biden must do. Biden handled his friendship with McCain and campaign against McCain extremely well.

His support of Obama was also at the appropriate level. Biden will not be able to escape his criticism of Obama in the debates. His arguments were not policy, but overly questioned Obama’s ability to lead. Through his own overinflated sense of self, Biden now can argue that he brings the wisdom and experience to Obama’s vision and message. If the GOP can divide the ticket into: 1. Biden is a Washington insider who is very liberal and supported McCain before he supported Obama and 2. Obama has no idea what he is doing and no plan for the future, they win. If the Democrats can hold the ticket as a solitary unit, we’re in trouble.

As important as unity between Hillary supporters and Democrats is, I think ticket unity is more important. Biden recognizes that united they win, divided they lose. And in a speech that was short on vision, message, and style, Biden made a great stride in achieving unity.

Good luck tonight as you watch Obama. I heard that being so close to The Chosen One and hearing his clarion calls can cause people to speak in tongues, hyperventilate, or have heart attacks. .

Just so this post cannot be interpreted as support of Biden or Obama:

1. Biden wants to critique McCain on foreign policy?

Biden opposed the Persian Gulf War in 1991.

Biden supported the Iraq War that apparently only Obama had the fortitude to oppose (mind you, Obama wasn’t a Senator in 2002, so he never actually voted against the war)

Biden opposes McCain’s support of spending money in Iraq, but voted for the spending (Biden even criticized Obama for not supporting the spending because Obama wanted to withhold money necessary to safely and properly equip our soldiers)

Biden opposed the troop surge, which has been fantastically successful

Biden opposes free trade agreements, like NAFTA. Since NAFTA was passed in 1994, the American economy has grown by 50%!!!! Those kinds of gains are only possible when countries can freely swap goods and maximize profits.

Biden wants to tax oil companies for offering a fair service at market value. The real “audacity” is not of hope, but of the idea that the government can arbitrarily declare when companies make too much money, seize that money, and give it to constituents.

Biden is too afraid to let Social Security money enter the economy and spur economic growth instead of being a lender for pet projects. He also fails to recognize the impending collapse of the system unless we start making fundamental changes soon.

If John McCain sends out a telegram (we know he doesn’t do text messaging), I really want it to say, “McCain-Lieberman. Tell that Obama boy to take his partisanship and shove it…” Alas, it won’t.

Before I crash the bi-partisan party, humor me as I look at all the positives:

1. Lieberman still caucuses with the Democrats, but could be powerful in slamming them. He was kicked out by the Democrats after losing his primary to Ned LaMont. After no Democrat asked for his support in 2008 and McCain did, Lieberman officially supported Johnny Mac because he wants to cut through partisan hackery. As a punishment, the Democrats stripped Lieberman of his superdelegate status, making him the same as an *bad pun coming in 3,2,1* average Joe.

Lieberman could be effective in talking about how the Democrats have failed him, and America. His public disputes with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi could be very effective. If Obama wants to pretend that he has great bi-partisan support, he will have a hard time selling the American people if Lieberman is on the other side. Also, McCain’s negative ads may not seem so harsh since they are coming from both sides of the aisle.

2. He is a moderate liberal on domestic issues. libertarianism (small “l” is intentional) is growing as a political movement. The public is seeing the value in enhancing personal liberty. Whether that means low taxes through the elimination of superfluous issues or protecting a “woman’s right to choose”, libertarianism is an appealing philosophy. With McCain running policy, he can hold the conservative base together while Lieberman dances on the sidelines and convinces confused liberals to jump ship. Unless voters are willing to bet on McCain’s death AND a Supreme Court vacancy, Lieberman will be helpless to promote a progressive social agenda on the courts. In any event, some voters are on the fence and a pro-choice VP on the GOP ticket could be just enticing enough.

3. If McCain doubles-down on experience, they could absolutely tear apart Obama-Biden. Obama took Biden because he knew he was lacking in experience. Four years in the Senate simply doesn’t cut it to be a successful President. Biden brings 35 years in the Senate and is the Chair of the Foreign Relations Committee. These solid credentials will be thrown out if McCain takes Lieberman.

Think of it this way: if McCain takes a foreign policy lightweight, like Romney or Pawlenty, then McCain can crush Obama, but Biden will hit Romney/Pawlenty in debates. Though the Presidential debates are more visible and more important, not taking Lieberman mitigates McCain’s great policy advantage.

With Lieberman, McCain gets to maintain a strong edge on foreign policy AND accuse Obama of being a hypocrite by taking a Washington Insider as a running mate. It’s win-win.

4. Lieberman is old and will not seek a second term. In this race, the only way McCain can win is to be far as possible from party identification. In a generic election, voters prefer Republicans to Democrats by double-digits. Therefore, it is crucial to make this election as non-generic as possible. McCain can win on the platform of being a maverick outsider. Bringing in Lieberman fits that mold. Given their ages, it is a sure bet that neither will run in 2012. The White House will have two men who have proudly served their country and are immune to the rigors of campaigning for re-election or kowtowing to party bosses. If America wants to give it a try, it can get four years of good, honest politicians working for the people, not themselves. That is a powerful message, but is incumbent upon McCain and Lieberman promising not to seek re-election.

5. Lieberman is Jewish. I know that being Jewish and in politics is not rare enough to be “special”, it would dispel a few myths and problems for the GOP. First, if Obama wants to be the first bi-racial person in the White House, then McCain can ask Americans to put the first non-Christian in the White House. The DNC spent all night last night focusing in on minorities (Pelosi: female Italian-American, Jesse Jackson Jr: black, Ted Kennedy: catholic, Obama’s half-sister: Asian, Michelle Obama: black). It is hard to call the GOP the WASP party when it’s VP nominee is Jewish.

Also, being Jewish offers electoral advantages. Prior to Obama’s run, Jews were the most partisan demographic, including African-Americans and Hispanics. Lieberman will certainly appeal to Jewish voters and can go hog wild on Obama’s anti-Israel stance (call me anti-anti-Semitic, but I’m pretty sure Lieberman could have a field day talking to Jewish retirees in Boca Raton about Obama’s relationship with Jeremiah Wright and Louis Farrakhan). While most Jews are in solid blue states, Florida, Colorado, Pennsylvania and Nevada are battlegrounds and could use any boost possible.

The negatives:

1. McCain is already too far to the left. The conservative base is pretty unhappy with McCain. Campaign finance reform, a path to citizenship for illegals, opposing torture, and waffling on the Bush tax cuts are all very damaging. McCain got beat by Bush in 2000, because the Rove machine turned out the Evangelicals. McCain certainly will have trouble doing that if he has a pro-choice running mate who is mildly sympathetic to gay rights. If McCain can’t hold together the conservative base, there is no amount of moderates that can save him.

2. Lieberman is hawkish, hurting chances of building a bi-partisan coalition. If the Democrats want to win this election on the drumbeat of failure in Iraq, then Lieberman doesn’t help McCain. Democrats can turn the tables and say that it didn’t leave Lieberman, Lieberman left the party. Joe’s hawkish stances on Iraq, Iran, and Israel are all directly at-odds with the Democratic Party’s platforms. The Democrats will only need to make a slight alteration from “The Republicans caused this war and the war needs to stop” to “the War Hawks caused this war and the war needs to stop”. It’s a pretty simple sidestep and mitigates the appearance of bi-partisanship.

3. Lieberman is too old. If you thought the charges of senility on McCain were bad, wait until he gets Lieberman. The campaign will be branded Grumpy Old Men. I think of Walter Matthau as more McCain and Jack Lemmon more Lieberman, but the Obama people can sort it out. As Obama is trying to show, it is very easy to cast old people as “out of touch”. And that is exactly how the Dems will play it.

The easiest way to win an election is to get 50.1% of the population as close as possible to the edge of not voting for you. The GOP needs a big coalition to take down Obama. To cater to multiple groups, it must be willing to risk losing them. But it cannot afford to. The question is whether or not McCain-Lieberman pushes to the Evangelicals into staying home. If not, this pick will all but seal a Republican victory. It is this question that is tearing up the McCain War Room.

So there it is. Obama-Biden 2008.

Biden might make an Obama administration more tolerable (I can’t help but giggle thinking about Biden telling Obama, “Barack, you can’t give up the seat on the UN Security to Kenya. You can’t do this!”). However, it doesn’t make Obama more electable.

The GOP has been red hot with the accusations that Obama has his head in the clouds AND is becoming a “washington insider”. So what does Obama do? He brings on a guy who has said that Obama lacks the experience the lead an is the ultimate washington insider. Good job, guys.

In case you’re interested, here’s an illustrious of comments that Joe Biden will regret

Two months ago, this race was absolutely over. McCain trailed by double digits and electoral projections had Obama winning by roughly 75 electoral votes. Virginia was undoubtedly blue, Georgia was a serious toss-up, and Badlands region was under attack. Over the summer, John McCain has completely turned this race on its head. The south is unquestionably Republican. The Badlands have been saved. Alaska is firmly Red. Virginia is thrown back into the toss-up. Florida is leaning slightly to the GOP. In fact, RealClear Politics actually has McCain ahead in the electoral college! While Republicans dance in the street, the real question is HOW DID THIS HAPPEN?

It is only through understanding, and my glorious collection of past posts, that we continue the McCain Train.

A few thoughts:

1.The GOP has turned a debate on how to fix the economy into a debate on oil prices. Offshore oil drilling has been a diamond in the rough. It sat undiscussed for years and was dug up at the most opportune time. The Republicans are correct. Increasing the supply of oil and stifling oil speculators which are driving up prices is not partisan. It is not ideological. It is fact. John McCain is on the correct side of the issue and Obama, Pelosi, and Reid are too wrapped up in their own ideological bubble to get out of their own way.

1A. My concern is that if oil prices come down, the economy may still slump. Poor investments and the housing bubble are not the GOP’s or Democrats’ fault. They are the fault of the Fed, the global economy, congressional protection of Fannie and Freddie, and the American people. Yes, we are to blame. We have too many damn credit cards, buy too much house, and save too little. If those failures are seen as the real problems, voters may turn misplaced anger at McCain. So we need the Democrats to keep being obstinate on oil…at least until Election Day.

2. I won’t say that war is good, but the conflict in Georgia made foreign policy an issue again. Hillary’s 3AM advertisement almost doomed Obama in Texas and Ohio. Luckily for him, he was so far ahead in delegate counts at that point that it just didn’t matter. McCain actually got the 3 AM ad in real life. President Bush did get the unexpected surprise about the Russian invasion. He did have to make hard choices and he does have to sort it through with the rest of the world. Not just did the issue help, but the responses did, as well. McCain was on-point and able to flaunt his credentials. Obama seemed lost and unwilling to take a stand (Barack afraid to make a choice? NO ‘EFFIN WAY!)
2A. This issue doesn’t have enough legs to get to November. It will slip to the back pages of newspapers behind the Olympics, the Conventions, and Labor Day grillfests. I certainly don’t hope for another international conflict, but McCain must continue to invoke Georgia. He doesn’t need another 9/11 to remind Americans that security is important. The troop surge has worked, he has experience, and he rhetorically crushed Obama when both faced an international crisis.

3. McCain beat Obama at Saddleback. For anyone who doesn’t have Obamania, McCain crushed Obama. The disparity was so bad that Team Obama needed to allege that McCain cheated. When a presidential candidate starts accusing the other of cheating in a forum that took place in a church of all places, it’s getting ugly. I have said this for a while, but McCain is better off-the-cuff. His maverick style plays well and he doesn’t have a problem engaging with people. His life story is remarkable. Obama’s? Not so much. His written speeches are, unfortunately, phenomenal. There is no doubt that he is a great orator. However, he gets into trouble when he doesn’t have a teleprompter. The “bitter” comment came off-the-cuff. His reponse to Georgia was unprepared. His suggestion that abortion is “above his pay grade” clearly was poorly rehearsed.

3A. Rick Warren wasn’t the most objective interviewer. While he asked fair questions identically to each candidate, the emphasis on values in a Christian setting will always favor the Republican. Formal debates will allow Barack to give his scripted responses, in all of their rhetorical glory, behind a podium. However, McCain isn’t afraid of Obama the way Hillary was. He knows that he can beat this young upstart on even ground. And, as the American people repeatedly prove, confidence is everything in presidential debates.

4. The mastermind. De facto campaign manager Steve Schmidt has been phenomenal since taking over for Rick Davis. Under Davis, McCain’s people were largely decentralized and granted a great deal of autonomy. Staffers couldn’t stay on-message because the message changed from day-to-day, office-to-office. Obama wasn’t being attacked and continued to showcase his best attribute, not talking about the issues. In early July, the campaign let Schmidt take over day-to-day operations. Since then, the campaign has been a well-oiled machine. The message was consolidated: McCain has experience and Obama doesn’t know how to lead. The oil drilling issue was all McCain would talk about for weeks. The campaign also used Obama’s celebrity, a huge asset, into a weakness.

So do you want to know why McCain has made a comeback? Because Steve Schmidt turned this:

into this:.

While we were hyped up about Michael Phelps’ chase of athletic immortality, McCain and Obama had interviews with Evangelical Superminister Rick Warren. Warren interviewed Obama for an hour while McCain was held in a green room. He then interviewed McCain with the exact same questions. (More on the media bias and Meet the Press’ Andrea Mitchell’s uncritical report of a lie perpetrated by the Obama campaign forthcoming.)

This style of debate completely levels the playing field, as no candidate has the benefit of suiting his answer based on his opponent’s particular response. At the same time, it does dilute some of the quality, since candidates can’t respond to each other and show the actual clash of opinions and policies.

In any event, by all accounts outside of Obama’s camp, McCain won. And he should have. Even though Barack Obama is seen as the gold standard of political rhetoric (apparently his 2004 speech was enough to ordain him as president), he has struggled in impromptu environments. McCain isn’t the most inspiring orator, but he benefitted from not sharing a stage with Obama, which would have made the oratorical, and aesthetic, contrast much clearer. McCain was playing with a home-field advantage. Evangelicals are one of the largest, most committed demographics to the GOP. McCain’s conservatism, espeically on abortion, made him the fan favorite.

In order to win this election, McCain has to do two things: mitigate Obama’s popular support among starstruck political neophytes and emphasize his values.

1. The incredible effectiveness of the celebrity ad is paying dividends for McCain. Hillary used “elitist” as the buzzword, but McCain couldn’t get it to stick. He went for elitism’s hotter, younger sister “celebrity”. I have a hunch that most Americans were a bit confused about Obama’s trip to Europe and the Middle East. They couldn’t put a finger on why, but they were a bit uncomfortable. McCain filled in the blanks and labeled him as a self-involved, celebrity who doesn’t understand what it means to be president. “Country first” may seem a bit hokey as a campaign slogan, but it fits McCain. 20 year olds who are voting for the first time in a presidential election aren’t going to be wooed by patriotism (except for yours truly). McCain knows that it doesn’t matter. The more hysterical and extremist McCain can paint Obama and his groupies, the better off he’ll be.

2. Obama’s biography is largely confusing. He is bi-racial, born in Hawaii to a bigamist father. He then mysteriously spends a few years in an Islamic school in Indonesia. And then he’s Ivy-league educated Chicago community organizer. There isn’t a narrative there. I’m sorry, Democrats. The tale of a mysterious, elitist globe trotter isn’t that appealing.

John McCain’s narrative is much better. He is a true war hero, enduring years of torture. He has spent decades in the Senate, working tirelessly as he sought to build coalitions of like-minded politicians, regardless of party affiliation. In 2000, he was ruthlessly smeared by the Bush campaign and did not sink to Bush’s (read: Rove’s) level. He adopted a child from Bangladesh in 1993 and housed foreign children in need of medical care.

McCain was fantastic this weekend, in showing off of his values. While it wins over the religious right, touting pro-life credentials will tick off half the country. However, his response to two questions in particular were deeply moving and introspective. First, he explained that his greatest moral failing (go to the 3 minute mark of this video clip) was the failure of his first marriage. McCain took the issue of divorce and his presumed infidelity head on. I applaud him for bringing it up and not trying to hide from it. Second, he addressed his most agonizing moral decision (9 minutes, 25 seconds) was when he accepted continued torture in the face of an offer to be set free. As the son of a high-ranking officer, McCain did not foresake his fellow POWs.

In comparison, Obama seemed young and inexperienced. Somehow drug use and “selfishness” pale in comparison to divorce in terms of moral failings. Worse, Obama’s claim that the decision to not go to war (1 minute 50 second mark) was an agonizing decision is odd because he didn’t make a decision! Obama wasn’t in the US Senate and had no sway over American foreign policy in late 2002! What decision did he have to make? He never voted on authorizing war! Even if we pretend (as Obamaniac Tim Kaine is apt to do) that Obama’s force of personality can will things to happen or not happen, voting for war seems a bit meek compared to enduring additional years of torture as a POW. Nearly every American president has made a tough choice on whether to engage in a particular conflict. Few have shown the intestinal fortitude necessary to endure torture and contrition over a failed marriage. That is the difference in this race. One candidate talks about morality and war, the other has experiences them.

During May, June, and July, Obama was enjoying near double-digit leads over McCain nationally. Coming off of a hardfought victory over Hil-dog, Obama had all the momentum in the world. He was a fresh face with new ideas and oozed charisma. He believed that he could change not just the world, but the electoral map. Obama used Howard Dean’s 50-state strategy and set up outposts in hostile territory. Though the election is still 3 months away, it appears that Obama has failed. In his boundless hubris, he has failed to understand that you can’t make an entire country blue. The old swing states of 2000 and 2004 will be the same deciding votes in November.

First, we should look at what states Obama targeted and why. The most fun is Alaska. One of the reddest states, Alaska supports Republicans under any and all circumstances. If not for potential jail time, Ted Stevens was up for re-election. The same guy who has been using federal pork for Alaskans and thought the internet was a “series of tubes” ran virtually unopposed for decades. I would say that Obama thought he could take advantage of McCain’s opposition to drilling in ANWR, but so does Obama!

Obama also thought he could do well in the South. North and South Carolina and Georgia were up for grabs for about .3 seconds. The huge amount of unregistered black voters was a potential boon for Barack. But there are two small problems: blacks don’t vote and are outnumbered by whites. Southern whites overwhelmingly support McCain and the African-American population represents a relatively small portion of likely voters. So the Solid South is yet again solid…this time in the GOP column.

Obama has also looked at the badlands area: Montana and the Dakotas. He’s still in the mix in those states, but McCain is the favorite. Since these states have so few electoral votes and such sparse populations, building political infrastructure is next to impossible. Frequent visits to Bozeman, Montana and Bismarck, North Dakota are inefficient. These voters have lifestyles and preferences that are not identical to suburban Virginians or inner-city Philadelphians. Obama has a serious problem tapping into a voter-base that is largely conservative and only votes for a moderate Democrat in the face of a weak GOP candidate and a strong party candidate (such was the case in ‘92 and ‘96, when Clinton did very well in the Badlands). Yet, if Obama is doing so much better than a weakened McCain, he doesn’t need the Badlands’ electoral votes anyway. Huge margins beget upsets in traditional non-swing states. That isn’t politics, that’s history.

The Four Corners Region (NM, NV, and CO) are not new battlegrounds, so I award Obama no points for bravery. The area is getting an infusion of Californians and Hispanics, both of which have liberal tendencies. If McCain wasn’t so good (and Obama so bad) at courting the Hispanic vote, these three states would already be in the Democratic column. Any race where the GOP can effectively neutralize the Hispanic tendency to vote Democrat offers a huge advantage for the Republican.

McCain, with fewer resources, elected to not bother defending these states.

So what states are the big tickets and who has to win what?

Using the Cook Political Report, Obama is up 240-174 with 124 EVs in play. So if Obama can win at least 30 of the 124 remaining EVs, he takes the White House. In the interest of making the race competitive, I’ll give McCain any “toss up” state where he currently has a lead (MO, FL, NC, VA) for a total of 56 EVs.

We are now at Obama: 240, McCain 240, Undecided: 68. After giving McCain Nevada and Obama Iowa and Colorado it is 256-245 with only OH and MI left. If Obama wins either OH or MI, it’s over. If McCain can pull out OH and MI he wins 282-256. Yet, if McCain dominates the rust belt, but loses Virginia, it’s 269-269. At that point, bust out your Civics textbook, because we got a tie!