Why Obama Will Lose Today
The mainstream media did everything they could to knock off Hillary Clinton in the Primary Election and John McCain in the General Election in order to help elect Barack Obama the 44th President of the United States. Fortunately, their attempt to convince the American people that the inexperienced and untested Junior Senator from Illinois was qualified to be President has backfired.
While the media try and weave a story of a unified Democratic Party and a Republican Party in turmoil, the facts point to a different outcome. While I may be one of the few pundits in America that think John McCain will win on Tuesday, I hold firm to the lessons learned in the Democratic Primary and Politics 101.
For anyone to win the Presidency, he/she must unify their base, split the Independent votes and steal one more vote from the other side. Although the media's polls have unanimously concluded that Obama will sweep to victory on Tuesday, there remains fundamental problems for the Obama campaign with their base of Democratic voters. Since Obama's problems from this summer's Democratic Primary have not been resolved, nor reported by the national media, the Electoral College map signals trouble for the media's main man.
Throughout the Democratic Primary election, Obama never garnered significant support from four of the major groups within the Democratic base. Union members, women, older voters and Jewish voters all were Hillary Clinton supporters in significant numbers. While the national media did focus on the disgruntled female supporters of Hillary Clinton in the lead up to the Democratic National Convention in Denver, they dropped the issue after Obama won the nomination at the Convention. However, the media's short attention span has not solved the problem for the man whose Pastor of 20 years still gives many Americans pause. Additionally, there has been very little written or aired about the lack of support for Obama with older voters, Jewish voters and union members. The assumption that the 25 million people who voted for Hillary and the rest of the Democratic candidates now have Obama yard signs will prove to be a fatal mistake for the media and Howard Dean. Now I will admit that the majority of the members of these groups will ultimately end up voting for the Democratic nominee, but the slightest amount of slippage in the percentage of these voters means Obama will not have the support the media and the polls are assuming he will have. And this is no small problem. Since Obama has not united the Democratic Party the way Sarah Palin helped John McCain unite the Republican Party, the 44th President of the United States will be John S. McCain.
If this doesn't make sense to you then your emotions have carried you away from reality. McCain doesn't need the majority of supporters from these traditional Democratic groups in order to win today. McCain needs to get only a small amount because these voters are not independents or swing voters, these people are traditional and frequent Democratic voters. None of the main media outlets have looked in to whether or not these groups, who did not support Obama in the Primary, have come back to the Democratic base. But they have not. How else does one explain the fact that Pennsylvania gave Hillary a huge win in the Primary and is still giving Obama trouble today. Pennsylvania is a traditionally Democratic State and yet in this anti-Republican year, Obama has failed to close the deal. A closer look at Ohio, West Virginia, Missouri and even Michigan suggests that union members and older Americans are not comfortable with Barack Obama.
The media, however, have all but called the race for Obama; but they have overplayed their hand. While CNN reports, as they did last week, that Obama is up in Missouri and NPR and the New York Times are trying to convince us that North Carolina and Virginia are really toss-up states, the American electorate quietly wait for the opening of the polls.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Two gems from the above piece that are really fun to read today:
1. "Pennsylvania is a traditionally Democratic State and yet in this anti-Republican year, Obama has failed to close the deal."
2. "Since Obama has not united the Democratic Party the way Sarah Palin helped John McCain unite the Republican Party, the 44th President of the United States will be John S. McCain....
HAHA!!!
I guess you are no fortune teller. I hope no one put money on your little prediction.
Good call there Richie!
Sarah Palin united the Republican party? Tell that to the hoards of Republicans (and Republican pundits) who have jumped ship in the past weeks. Tell that to Mr. Grennell's former colleague, Colin Powell.
This rather ill-informed opining also completely overlooks the fact that many unions have publicly endorsed Obama and campaigned heavily for him throughout the so-called Rust Belt. And there is a peculiar form of denial in Mr. Grenell's assessment of Michigan, where Obama has maintained a healthy lead sufficient to inspire McCain's withdrawal. If, based on external and internal polling even McCain thought MI was a lost cause, I'd wager he was on to something.
I understand positing circumstances favorable to one's candidate, but I'd also expect some degree of expressed fallibility. Then again, as an employee of the Bush administration Mr. Grennell has likely developed a formidable aptitude for burying his head in the sand.
Thanks for the comic relief!
Sport, you have no idea what you are talking about. Your ignorance about the Democratic Party is matched only by your arrogance.
Buh-bye.
Slick.
The only ....the only chance republicans have to pull this off is to cheat...an
Question is ...will it be enough.
But you......h
smooth move.
But...you'
We are trying ..with all our might to do away with politics and politicians like you.
Mr. Grenell-you are, of course, entitled to your opinion. But that is all it is. And what are you talking about women and Jews are not behind Obama? That is simply not true.
Personally, I have had it up to here with the attitude we more liberal leaning people have had to endure for so long now from people of your mindset-that attitude of patronizing contempt and belittlement. My emotions have not gotten the better of me. On the contrary, my support for Barack Obama is a very scientific, rational, logical one. I look at the absolute unmitigated disaster the eight years of the Bush administration has created and I choose to try something else. It's my right, btw and I don't like being called over emotional or some other depreciating remark.
It seems some communications specialists worry too much about communicating at populations and don't put enough resources into receiving information.
Huh, an article offering a convoluted theory that everyone else is wrong and offering absolute faith in an unlikely outcome.
Imagine my surprise when I learned the author is a Bush appointee. Gosh, they're never wrong.
The upbeat stock market on election day telegraphs that big business is happy about a sure obama win. They understand that a share the wealth program will force all Americans to spend rather than save. That is good for big business because it will increase consumer spending and jump start the economy. Every dollar earned will be spent. All people will have enough for basics and none will go hungry or be homeless. Nationalized healthcare will cover every American at no cost. We will become the healthiest nation in the world and poverty will be eliminated. Some wage earners that have been living large will have to pay more taxes, but for the sake of a fairer nation they will be happy to make the sacrifice.
Government interference in the private life of its citizens will be minimal. Its purpose would be to collect taxes and make sure that every American had a decent standard of living. Big business would serve the nation even in its pursuits of profits. They will supply every basic need. It will be a kinder economy and a showcase for the world.
You have a right to your opinions, as well as a right to express them. That said however, you are most certainly wrong. You grossly underestimate the collective voice of the American people, once they're unified in a common cause, in adequate number. We are most assuredly galvanized, collectively, in seeking change, and we've got the sufficient numbers this time round to make sure that desire for change is turned into a reality, and our collective voice will be heard today.
I would hardly say the electorate is "unified in a common cause."
The winner of this election will at most receive 55% of the vote. In other words, how can we be "unified" in a common cause when darn near half of us disagree.
Respectfully
It certainly didn't stop people from proclaiing Bush had a mandate in 2004 when he won by 2.5%.
sdskelton03, I believe I said unified in a common cause, in adequate number. I believe the numbers will prove to be quite adequate. You'll never get every single person to agree on anything, but fortunately we don't have to elect people by unanimous vote, just majority.
The smugness and arrogance of this article helped solidify my thought: Republicans are running scared and they know it, simply by hiding behind these feelings. I believe that the writer needs to apply that "emotions carried [you] away from reality" attempted spin to himself. Sticks and stones, hypocritical baby.
Just put in my vote early this morning. As one poster said, the writer of the article will soon be eating crow.
Obama/Biden '08!
Unless you have been living on a planet far, far away for the last eight years, you should be in a position to understand why he will win by a huge margin.
Yours will be a very unpopular post today.
Although I believe it matters very little, I hope you are correct.
Bob Barr for President.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
