Obama has a lot of favorable winds at his back. It's up to him as the candidate to do the rest. He can start by showing he's not afraid of McCain by hitting him hard. His ads are still too soft.

These polls mean nothing. if they really reflected america's views on the candidates then we wouldnt have a whole bunch of polls showing different numbers. we should go by poll of polls, that might be better.

New Ohio GOP Ad uses Hillary against Obama

How would you define hitting hard?

I'm satisfied with Obama attacking McCain on the issues. I think he's trying to avoid getting into character assassination games, because they'd likely backfire.

I saw that ad on CNN Monday.

Obama's line of attack will be like this, on issues. He's not going to use GOP-style character assassination, period. But he needs more positive ads for the olympics. It's a risk for sure, but it's more risky to jump on a mud fight like Karl Rove wants. It's too early to tell but I feel that the Celebrity ad it's slowly backfiring.

Some hard-hitting attacks can be done by MoveOn or others outside groups.

New Obama Ad: McCain Has Voted Against Fixing Energy For 26 Years

That's like criticizing a baseball team for doing nothing for the first 8 & 2/3 innings (26 outs) and then the team goes and wins with a walk-off home run.

My question is why does Obama hate baseball, and thus, why does he hate America?

Prior ad said 1k tax rebate, and I thought it said immediately, this ad says tax cut, that is kind of confusing. And when is the tax cut? Is it now, next year on tax return?!

I still think Obama needs harder hitting ads. If he doesn't want to go there, then get someone else to do it. McCain could not even answer a relatively easy question in Florida the other day. He sounded and appeared out of it and old. Somehow, these incorrect answers he is consistently making need to be pointed out. He needs to be made to look his age, as he often appears when speaking, but no one is calling attention to it. One doesn't have to mention age, just use the gaffes played over and over, there must be like a hundred. If they just used the Florida race question the other day and played that, wow, he sounded ancient.

I agree with above, these ads are too soft and easy to blow off.

I just have to send out a cheer for Time Magazine. Hooray! ...That really doesn't happen often.

This ad is not as powerful as the last one on gas prices and big oil. He needs to hit a lot harder against McCain and be more specific. Voters do not remember or pay attention to softball ads like this one.

I also think he should start running ads about health care since McCain is preaching for more of the same free market health care and the public knows what a disaster the system is mired in.

I am glad to see Obama continuing to call out McCain but he has to be much more hard-hitting and aggressive. He is bringing a feather to a gunfight. He needs knock the wind out of McCain, not give him butterfly kisses

Obama is holding town halls in PA today? I thought those were beneath him.

Amelie - that article at HuffPo - that makes sense to me - that accounts for this bullshit - it's basically a lie and they've used the numbers to make it look like a situation that actually doesn't exist.

My gut has told me for weeks that these polls are not right. They can't be and they aren't. It's totally illogical to have McLame winning an election that the rest of the GOP is convinced they are all going to lose. And every single indication is that they will lose. And according to the HuffPo article - McLame isn't winning.

I hope Obama continues to hammer McCain on the issues and stays away from character assassination. I just get the sense If he does it regularly, he will goad McCain into a major gaffe while staying above the fray.

It turns out that expanded drilling would meet one percent of the nation's fuel needs, while better car and tire maintenance would lower fuel consumption by up to seven points if everyone did it. "In other words," the magazine concludes, "Obama is right."

Kudos to Time for taking the time to get the record right on this issue. If you have a spare moment today, please take send an email to the author (you can click on his name at the topic of the article which is linked by Greg above) and thank him for his follow up on the issue.

You may also want to send an email to Kate Phillips and Brian Knowlton, writers for the Caucus blog at the NYT, who haven't yet caught up on the issue (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/04/tired-of-talking-tires-yet/#more-5797. You can point them to the Time article, give them the helpful factoids, and suggest that they give these important clarifications a little ink.

The Time story was nice and all, but how about CNN covering the story?

If Obama went to Sturgis and said what McCain said, the proverbial shit would have hit the fan and the MSM would be all over it.

I would love for somebody to ask McCain where he is going to bury all of the spent nuclear material. I bet he wouldn't give a straight answer.

"In other words," the magazine concludes, "Obama is right."

B-but, I thought the important thing was the psychology of permitting more drilling! I mean, don't we all just feel better knowing that oil companies are making even more profit because of our irrational fears?

Exxon only made $12,000,000,000 last quarter. How are they supposed to get by without more supply?

Chronospark - Your post makes a lot of sense because I think that is and has been Obama's strategy all along and it is a good strategy. It's going to win this election.

Someone during the primary came up with the tortoise and the hare as an analogy and it's a good one. Obama has a plan and had one going in to this campaign and I don't think one other candidate had or has a long term plan to win.

He does. And he's sticking to it.

Anybody who doesn't think this spot hits hard enough isn't paying attention. Inside that warm, folksy voice is a masterful bit of reframing.

"New Energy for America" quite deftly shifts focus back onto the issue at hand, and ties the current crisis to McCain's age and undistinguished legislative record. It signals that the campaign is smart enough to call upon people's fears about McCain's lack of focus without needing to give voice to them outright. And, unlike Republican dogwhistles, there's a real causal relationship there that, while toxic to speak aloud, needs to be referenced. People need to start thinking about what a McCain administration would look like and what he would do. This ad gently puts forward the idea that old energy:oil:McCain, while new energy:alternative fuels:Obama.

These guys are good. And they're for real. This ad has got to be the leading edge of a major effort to reframe the narrative of the election away from "scary black guy" and toward "young, accomplished and full of fresh ideas."

Listened briefly to the talking heads (Carl Bernstein, Ed Rollins, et al.) on Anderson 360 early this morning (wife fell asleep with the tv on and it woke me up) and I tell you, they didn't at all think BHO was in a bad position. I think Rollins even said something like "Look, it's August and nobody is really paying attention to any of this now". Let those GOP clowns burn themselves out with this nonsense and once the conventions end and the debates begin, BHO can come out all guns ablazin' and really kick some butt. Let's face it, if America chooses to go with McCain because of what he's doing now, other than leave the country, there is not enough we can do other than keep doing what we're doing.

"voting experts say the registration numbers may signal the beginning of a move away from Republicans that could affect local, state and national politics over several election cycles."

The technical term is realignment and if 2006 is the trend setter we are in a good position for 2008.

Several things:

DW13, you're right. There's been a significant realignment in my county in Florida which went for Bush both times. In the most recent report from our Supr. of Elections, 6 Dems registered for every 1 Rep during the month of June.

With respect to surrogates, not having cable, I watch NewsHour with Jim Lehrer. Judy Woodruff has been moderating the surrogate match-ups. The Obama camp has recently matched Brooks Jackson and Frederico Pena against McCain's Nancy Pfotenhauer. She's absolutely vicious -- rude, ridiculing, mocking, cackling.

Pena and Jackson present Obama's economic and energy policies like they're in a board meeting. Then Pfotenhauer diminishes and marginalizes them. It's obvious the Obama camp is trying different people -- finding the right one will be a huge challenge. IMHO, Obama's surrogates right now are his biggest weakness. McCain's surrogates are likely the only reason he's still a contender.

Regarding polls, Obama said either during or before his overseas trip he wouldn't be surprised if there were a dip in the polls upon his return. There you have it.

aka CindyMax

POLLS:

The most important things to remember about the polls, both national and state are

1) No cell phone users. Cell phone only users (young, urban) will be overwhelmingly for Obama
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/07/14/cell_phone/

2) Likely voters: polls weighted by likely voters pretty much rule out exactly the people that Obama has been targeting in the voter registration drive.

If, come Nov, 'unlikely' voters actually vote (and there is a fair overlap with cell phone only here), everyone will be wondering how all the polls were so horribly wrong.