Panoptiblog 2.0

Frustrated as I am with Blogger at the moment, I'm giving WordPress a try. Please follow the link, and let me know what you think...

The New Panoptiblog

Ambinder Responds

Marc Ambinder has responded to my concern about early voting and exit polls (I'm "a reader," having sent an link to Ambinder and Sullivan). He claims that early voters will be counted, sort of:

Let's take a state like Florida. The exit poll consortium will conduct a telephonic survey on election day in order to determine the skew of the early vote; they'll use numbers compiled by the secretary of state's office to determine the size, and they'll factor those in when crunching the numbers on election night.

While I agree that early votes can therefore be part of the calculus, this seems a much less exact way to come up with exit poll numbers, which is already an inexact science. I stand by my prediction that the exit polls will therefore be further off than is usually the case. But I appreciate Marc's response.

Early Voting = End of Election Day Exit Polls?

Through Sullivan, I see the Washington Post is reporting that "more than 60 percent of those across the country who have taken advantage of early voting are registered as Democrats." This, despite the fact that registered Democrats make up only a little more than 30% of the electorate, with Republicans a bit below that, with most of the remaining unregistered, Independent, or other party affiliations. [If somebody has better numbers than this on registration, lemme know.]

Set aside whether the 60% number is exactly right for the moment. Suppose that, in early voting, Democrats simply make up a much larger percentage than their share of the electorate overall. This makes sense to me, as those who are excited by the possibility of the first African-American president would want to get out and make sure their votes are counted. Democrats have an advantage in enthusiasm according to just about every poll that has been out there this cycle.

But doesn't this also mean that we're in for a long night on November 5? If Democrats have voted early, they're not around the voting booth on Election Day to be asked by pollsters who they voted for. Therefore, while they would be overrepresented now, when nobody's around to ask them, they'll be underrepresented on 11/5. What might that mean for the kind of election night coverage we've come to expect, when networks "call" the states before the votes have been counted? Remember, when CNN or whoever "calls" a state for one candidate or another, they're not doing it based on counted votes, but on overwhelming exit poll numbers.

A prediction: Just as last cycle saw exit poll numbers favorable enough to John Kerry that websites like Slate showed a smiling Kerry, suggesting that the super-secret-yet-somewhat-leaked poll numbers were putting Kerry ahead of Bush, the exit polls will be way off. All day long, cable news will be teasing that maybe McCain unexpectedly has closed the gap, maybe the Bradley Effect was real, maybe Obama couldn't seal the deal, whatever, because all the exit polls will show McCain's share overrepresented. In the end, we truly won't know until all the actual votes get counted, rather than what will by then be obviously unreliable exit polls.

Bottom line: whether it ends up being close or not, don't expect to know who's president before you go to bed on the night of November 5th (or the morning of the 6th).

Monday Night Thoughts

The Broncos are just awful tonight.

The Phillies finally have an opponent for the World Series.

Obama has seemingly consistent leads in Colorado, North Carolina, and Virginia. Who would've thought it? And is McCain seriously giving up on Colorado but contesting Pennsylvania?

More support for Obama and his positions, from conservatives, here, here, and here (though Luger's is not an endorsement).

Sarah Palin Stat of the Week
SNL Appearances: 1
Press Conferences: 0

Friday YouTube

I'm all politics-ed out.

It's Friday. Unplug.

Pre-Debate Thoughts

Watching these debates has been nerve-racking for me. I can barely stand to actually sit and watch them. But here I'll be, in the computer lab, trying to stream the video (if we don't have customers in the lab). It is, as many have said, McCain's last chance to change the story, but unless he reveals that he has just returned from the mountains of Tora Bora, and personally drags Osama bin Laden onto the stage in handcuffs, I'm not sure what he can do to change perceptions 20 days out.

Obama has to stay calm, having no idea if he's going to be debating the McCain that Palin wants to see, or the McCain that Bloomberg wants to see (though I think I know which one will be more persuasive to undecided voters). Fortunately, he's good at remaining calm.

And I have to say, after reading this, I'm glad I had posted this. Now let's hope it turns out to be a brilliant trap that McCain will walk right into.

I'll try to post about the debate afterwards.

And let's not forget, my Fightin' Phils are one game away from the World Series...

Tina Fey Kills the Last Reason to Vote McCain

If McCain wins, she won't keep playing Palin.

The Debate That Might Have Been

Quick Sunday Notes

The AP describes Denver as "the bumbling Broncos" as they lose to Jacksonville, at home, 24-17. But they were without Royal, Scheffler, and Young, and without Stokely after the first quarter. So I'll hope this is an aberration. Didn't see the game, so I can't comment further...

The Phillies' day was also over as soon as it began. They're currently on the wrong end of 7-1 in the fifth inning. Hopefully I'll have to update this post to say, "Wow, I spoke too soon!" But I doubt it...

Burn After Reading was the perfect title for the Coen Brothers' 2008 offering; not a trace of it is left behind once it's over. A good cast hasn't been wasted this badly since I'm Not There. And if a Coen Brothers cast is going to be wasted, I'd prefer it to be like Lebowski...

Saying It to His Face

I didn't get to see the first two-thirds of the debate last Tuesday, and what I saw didn't make me worry for Obama's chances. I don't have much new to add several days after the fact, but what's unfolded afterward has me wondering if Obama's playing the Ayers game wrong. People saw that Ayers didn't come up during the debate, and McCain made no attempt to bring it in, despite that everyone was supposedly "taking the gloves off" in this one, and that he'd been up with ads about Ayers suggesting something dark and troubling about Obama's past.

Obama's response to the absence of Ayers in the debate, when asked about it by Charles Gibson, should've been, simply, "He didn't bring it up in the debate, because he knows Americans don't actually care who lived in my neighborhood years ago in Chicago." This would've made it even harder to bring it up next time.

Instead, Obama said this:

"I am surprised that, you know, we've been seeing some pretty over-the-top attacks coming out of the McCain campaign over the last several days, that he wasn't willing to say it to my face. But I guess we've got one last debate. So presumably, if he ends up feeling that he needs to, he will raise it during the debate."

On its face, this is bold. Go at his strength; challenge McCain's masculinity. It's a trap disguised as a challenge: either McCain can bring it up and look like someone hopelessly out of touch and possibly dishonest, or don't bring it up and look like a coward... and still possibly dishonest.

But there's another possibility in this next debate. Bob Schieffer, who'll be moderating, could ask a question that sounds something like, "Senator McCain, you've been running ads questioning Senator Obama's ties to former Weather Underground member William Ayers. Senator Obama noted that you didn't seem anxious to 'say it to his face.' Would you address the relevance of Ayers to the campaign now, given the tough economic times?" This would give McCain the opportunity to make scurrilous suggestions while getting him off the hook for having brought such a frivolous thing up. It would also satisfy the media's need to seem less Obama-friendly, and their need to spice up the debate after the second one was widely panned.

This might be a little paranoid. I'm probably looking for something to worry about, and the electoral map isn't providing it. But it seems a little early to be call the dogs in, and whatever else James Carville said:

Biden-Palin Debate

Haven't had a chance to blog on this, and now the news is cold so I won't say much. On what we might call a combination of "arguments" and "facts," Biden blew Palin away. But that isn't the game Republicans are playing this year, and so I am supposed to be impressed by this completely incompetent person because she made the editor of the National Review feel all tingly in his pants.

Palin continues to be a national embarrassment, but as she didn't trip and fall down throughout the debate, and stuck to her memorized talking points for about 3/4 of the debate, she gets to continue to go around the country and say absurd things.

Thank God that, after a month from today, we won't have to hear from Palin for a few years, at least until she runs for the presidential nomination herself, as soon as 2012.

Hat tip to Ezra Klein for the chart.

Hilarious Quote of the Day (II)

Wow. Here's Sarah Palin on the right to privacy and Roe v. Wade:

And I believe that individual states can best handle what the people within the different constituencies in the 50 states would like to see their will ushered in an issue like that.

Parse that sentence. I dare you.

Worse, I dare you to watch the video, which I will post as soon as it's available.

UPDATE: Well, here's part of it. Besides Roe v. Wade, what Supreme Court decisions does Palin disagree with? She'll get back to ya:

Branaugh to Direct "Thor"

Ross Douthat has been, all year long, expressing frustration that really good directors and actors are spending their time with the genre. And I understand his point. But my inner geek still gets excited with news like this (from Peter Suderman, at the Confabulum):

Kenneth Branagh, Shakespeare’s cinematic translator (or mangler, depending on your standpoint), is making a Thor movie.

Sorry, Ross. That's awesome.

Hilarious Quote of the Day

From Kathryn Jean Lopez, at the far, far right blog The Corner, on Sarah Palin:

She did much better with Hugh Hewitt yesterday than in those Couric interviews.

Um, yes, I bet. Here are a few sample questions from the even-further-right Hewitt:

Have you followed the attacks on you, say, via Drudge or the blogs? Some of them are just made up and out of left field, others are just mocking. Do you follow those?

Do you think the mainstream media and the left understands your religious faith, Governor Palin?

Last question, Governor. Have you and Todd heard from your son? And how is it on your nerves having your son deployed?

Gosh. That is truly hard-hitting journalism. If she can handle that, surely she's ready for the vice presidency.

UPDATE: Then again, I'd have thought she could handle a question like this...

Important Numbers of the Day

POLLS
Pennsylvania (Quinnipiac): Obama 54, McCain 39
Virginia (CNN/TIME): Obama 53, McCain 44

SCORES
Philadelphia 3, Milwaukee 1