Fox Poll: Nearly Two-Thirds Say Ayers Makes No Difference To Their Vote
These numbers, buried in the internals of a new Fox News poll out today, are the first time a national poll has tried to gauge the impact of Barack Obama's association with William Ayers. And the numbers are pretty bad for McCain:
There has been some discussion of Barack Obama's relationship with the former radical activist William Ayers. Because Ayers is linked to plots to bomb the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol in the 1970s, and because Ayres recently said he wished he had done more, some people say Obama's association with Ayers calls into question his judgment. Does Obama's connection with Ayers make you less likely to vote for him for president or does it not really make a difference to your vote?Less Likely 32%
No Difference 61%
Strikingly, the numbers are worse for McCain among independents: Only 29% say the Ayers association makes them less likely to vote for Obama, and more than twice as many -- 64% -- say it makes no difference. The data suggests that the vast majority of the respondents saying it makes them less likely to vote for Obama are Republicans, who probably wouldn't have supported him anyway.
Meanwhile, the poll suggests that McCain's attacks could be blowing back on him: A majority -- 51% -- say he's running a negative campaign, as compared to only 21% who say that about Obama.
Our handy TPM Election Central calculator tells us that the number of voters think McCain is running a negative campaign is nearly double that of the number who care about McCain's primary attack line right now. Go figure.
Could it be that voters have something on their minds other than the question of what a former violent radical who's now respected in Chicago was doing when Obama was walking around in shortpants?
Late Update: A quick additional point on this. Obviously this attack isn't really about Ayers; it's about sowing vague doubts about Obama's patriotism and background. Whether that dimension of the attack is working is harder to measure, and may not be perfectly reflected in the answers to direct pollster questions about Ayers. Still, the above numbers are striking.
Wow - and it's Fox, which means it's probably closer to 100%.
The funniest things I've seen in this campaign have been the vid of the Fox guy taking a straw poll in that cafe and everyone raised their hands for Obama and he turns around says, "well, it looks like there's split here..."
And there was another similar Fox instance more recently.
Those have cracked me up.
October 10, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Also look at how the Q is framed. "Let me tell you Obama loves terrorists, would you still vote for him?" YES.
October 10, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seriously. Wonder what the numbers would have been had the question been: "Does Obama's relationship with William Ayers...."
October 10, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reason no. 1 why I love polls so much.
;)
October 10, 2008 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
First question should have been - have you heard of William Ayers, who is he?
Oh yeah, doesn't he play for the Red Sox?
October 10, 2008 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know what would be very instructive to me? Put a roomful of Fox regular viewers in front of the video of the talking head taking a straw poll that the viewer can plainly see the hands raised and the Fox talking head turns around and says it's split, as if we didn't see the show of hands. I'd like to ask them if they believed the hands they saw and didn't see raised or the talking head who turned around and told them something that they clearly saw didn't happen.
I'd like to know the extent to which Fox viewers regularly disbelieve their lying eyes in order to make everything fit their world view.
October 10, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or "Does Obama's association with a former member of the weather underground who is now a respected citizen of Chicago..."
October 10, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, you know, Chicago is almost as bad as San Francisco, as far as McLame is concerned. And let's not even talk about New York.
The Rethugs are running out of cities to hang out in. Might be a good thing - they might voluntarily limit themselves to the small towns they love so.
October 10, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
what's sad is that I live in chicago, and if you know chicago politics, the least you think about is obama. The machine is not what it use to be, and trust me, its dirty: like todd stroger's son taking over for him, dan lapinski, etc...but what bothers me, and this might be very selfish, is that chicago is asking for the 2016 olympics. Now imagine if mccain wins, how is he gonna sell the 2016 olympics, if according to him chicago is the 7th layer of hell?
October 10, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
We'll always have...Wasilla.
October 10, 2008 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
They're having the Olympics in Wasilla? They're going to have so many problems keeping the athletes off drugs - is meth a performance enhancing drug?
October 10, 2008 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anything goes in Palin-town!!
October 14, 2008 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
ditto
October 10, 2008 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, FOX is push polling now, I see. Anything they can do to help, I guess.
October 10, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dear Voter,
Does knowing that Barack Obama is a militant black terrorist with ties to multiple terrorist groups make you more likely to vote for him, less likely to vote for him, or no difference?
Voter? Did I remember to include that he's a militant black terrorist in that question?
October 10, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
They *are* the primary media outlet of the GOP, after all...
October 11, 2008 10:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, the second one was the Luntz focus group of undecideds after the VP debate. Only a couple people raised their hand when he asked if they had made a decision after the debate and he said, "Well, watch for the changes in the polls."
October 10, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
In all fairness, the FOX correspondent was referring to a split between those on camera supporting Obama, and the FOX viewers themselves, who are 100% Bush supporters located in a Dunkin Donuts in the Ozarks.
October 10, 2008 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
We need to call this Faux poll what it is, it's clearly a Push Poll.
Fox is scummy, but running Push Poll for McCain's camp? Wow, this actually drops Fox News to a new low.
October 10, 2008 5:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
best bit of that was the whole diner lol after he said it
watching fox when these polls came out they were making out it was bad for obama that his support was slipping because of the attacks interesting bit was they did not show the independent numbers when I was watching
October 10, 2008 10:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder why FOX NEWS and the McCain campaign aren't pulling this poll and using it-- oh yeah, they have nothing else to go on.
We want substance, talk about the issues!!!
We want substance, talk about the issues!!!
We want substance, talk about the issues!!!
October 10, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Apparently it makes 7% of people more likely to vote for Obama, too.
On the upside, it is a decent figure even given the completely incorrect question.
October 10, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
i actually don't think this is amazing news for dems. if, say, 40 percent of the people in the poll had already made up their minds pre-Ayers (b/c of racism or politics or party) then they might very well answer "no effect." just as i would say keating five has little effect on the fact that i'm voting for obama. that 32 number still bothers me.
October 10, 2008 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
The point, Putney, is that this is not in any sense a real poll.
As several people have pointed out, the question and the preamble to it are both skewed to get a negative reaction -- and it still didn't work.
A real question would have been: "Which candidate does McCain's attack on Obama over Ayers make you more likely to vote?"
I'd be curious to see those results.
October 10, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
The purpose of the Ayres nonsense, however, was to drive up the number of people less likely to vote for Obama, and drive it up dramatically. The strategy doesn't appear to have worked in this respect (or in any other).
Which, of course, doesn't mean they're going to abandon it. What else could they put in its place?
October 10, 2008 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
"and more than two-thirds -- 64% -- say it makes no difference"
Umm, 64% is not more than two-thirds.
October 10, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
My inner avatar has access to the real math. We have convinced the press that it is whatever we say it is. Especially if their publication or network paid for it.
October 10, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!
Maybe after 7+ years of eating the crap sandwhich dished out by the Republicans and W., American voters might actually be tired of these "shenanigans".
October 10, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
But when all you've got is a glass one third full, you play it to the max. Double down and all that.
October 10, 2008 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't trust these numbers at all. If they don't say 50-50, bias is at play.
October 10, 2008 2:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
HAH! The numbers in the Hotline/Diageo poll are almost identical. 54% say McCain's running a negative campain; 20% say Obama.
October 10, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please do not let me cheat on my final exam off the 46-49% who do not say he is running a negative campaign. I need to ace this test and I stayed up late posting with Natasha.
October 10, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, McCain, what else ya got?
October 10, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
it is like the Earl Weaver quote that George will brought up. Weaver, the former manager of the Baltimore Orioles used to say it to umpires:"Are you going to get any better or is this it?"
I think this is it for McCain; in more ways than one.
Here is the link to the Will column:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/08/AR2008100802926.html
October 10, 2008 3:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
While I pimped (as opposed to inked) that column yesterday, I didn't quote it. I would not, sir, have done it as you have. I would not have left out the damned dead sheep.
October 10, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL
October 10, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Having ennervated my nattering nabobs of negativism I prepare to unleash Sister Sarah, Martyr of All Gotcha, for the final assault of Wrighteousness. And did we mention he is black?
October 10, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
The leading question asked is overbearingly funny and painful.
October 10, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which makes the result an even more delicious comeuppance.
October 10, 2008 2:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Uh huh.
I know it puts a big smile on my face.
October 10, 2008 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
the thought of John McCain as Earl Weaver is priceless
October 10, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
And pretty insulting to Earl Weaver.
October 10, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
That 32 number should be considered pretty damn low given the extremely leading, push-poll quality question posed by Fox News.
If you click through the link, you'll see that their next question is about Charles Keating. They offer no details regarding the Keating Five scandal (as opposed to their Ayers rundown), and they make sure to say that McCain was "cleared of any wrongdoing," or something like that.
Fair and Balanced!
October 10, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I appreciate that 51 percent think McCain is running a negative campaign. But who are the other 49 percent? You'd think there's not enough pot, x box and Seinfeld reruns to distract people from what's going on.
http://pufferfish.typepad.com/
October 10, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sam Wang sez forget about the Presidential race.
37798. jexster - 10/10/2008 8:31:47 PM
OOOPS
October 10, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
samwang buy that guy a drink
October 10, 2008 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
and here's the OOOPS..
http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/10/the-collapsing-distribution/#more-1737
OOOPS
October 10, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eric and Greg?
Contrast what y'all say with Halperin's take:
Wonder if all that water carrying he does for McCain is bothering his back at this point.
October 10, 2008 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess it might have been a nice idea to actually include what he said, wouldn't it?
October 10, 2008 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen! I started there and then read this. Had to go back and see how I could have completely missed the point of the story. Heh, it's not me, after all.
October 10, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Man! As someone who works in survey research, I can tell you that roo_P is entirely right to call this a "completely incorrect question". This is just about a push poll question -
(a) The respondent is hit over the head with "relationship with Ayers", "association with Ayers", "connection with Ayers"
(b) "Some say" it calls into question his judgment, but no word on any "some" who might say it is a trivial non-issue
(c) Only "less likely" and "no difference" are provided as choices. If "less likely", "more likely", and "no difference" were provided, it would have anchored "no difference" as the neutral point and more people would have selected it.
What horrible survey research :-(
October 10, 2008 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
You've touched on the modus operandi with Fox News in (b). They're always saying "some are saying," "some are claiming," "some accuse," without citing any source.
October 10, 2008 3:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I call that the Judy Miller method of journalism, in honor of the crap she kept writing leading up to the war.
October 10, 2008 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Aspens all turn at the same time; they are all joined at the roots.
[rolls eyes]
October 10, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Come back. Come back to your home. It's time.
Excuse me, I have to hurl.
October 10, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Theodulf, you missed this zinger:
d) "Ayres recently said he wished he had done more."
Um, I believe he said that in an interview more than SEVEN YEARS AGO.
October 10, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, 7 years is recent in McCain years -- a mere blink of an eye for JohnnyBoy.
October 10, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I often wish I'd done more seven years ago, but I forgot more of "what." And back then I forgot how much of "what" I already had when I wished for more.
October 10, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
With poll results like this, can we expect a major directional shift in the McCain campaign? If so, what could it possibly be?
October 10, 2008 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nah, these people are teh stoopid. They'll just figure that if Ayers didn't work, maybe Wright will.
Just keep flinging shit against the wall, like the monkeys they are.
October 10, 2008 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
At this point the McCain camp knows this whole Ayers "issue" won't work, but they can't back off of it or the pitchfork-wielding hag masses at their Klan rallies will turn on them.
October 10, 2008 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, General, you are using your powers for good? I would have thought you would be for the other guy . . .
:-P
October 10, 2008 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain stirring up all this shit is terrible from a strategical POV.
If, God forbid, one of his crazed supporters ever takes a shot at Obama, Obama's numbers will go up even further. He will win in an LBJ style landslide.
October 10, 2008 3:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
If that happened, I would expect John McCain to publicly apologize and withdraw from the race right then and there.
October 10, 2008 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can't be serious. They'd probably say it just goes to show how angry people are.
October 10, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well I'd like to believe the pressure on him to apologize publicly and withdraw if that happened, would be too great for him to resist.
But you know, you could be right - I have no fucking clue anymore about what these people will and won't do.
October 10, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's stop talking about that. It scares the shit out of me.
October 10, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed.
sorry - truly.
October 10, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
After the last few weeks it should be easy. Just think of the most depraved, bigoted, divisive thing they could do that even Karl Rove wouldn't stoop to.
October 10, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
More likely one of these nuts will take a swing at a local Obama supporter.
I volunteer. Bring it on.
October 10, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm with you oskieoskie. I'm cleaning my Glock, for personal protection, just in case. See ya at the ballot box.
October 10, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am going to vote early, so I can probably get by with a real mean look.
October 10, 2008 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's already got an LBJ-style landslide; an assassination attempt would make it 50-state table-run.
October 10, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
The one positive to come out of these rallies is that most rational, thinking Republicans (yes, there are many!) are disgusted with the low info, low intellect crowds and their outbursts.
McCain is alienating an entire swathe of the GOP and he doesn’t even seem capable of comprehending it.
These rally ranters are more “skin head” than “conservative” and most people would rather not be identified as members of the same party.
PEACE (damn it, I mean it!)
October 10, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
My mom used to tell me, when I didn't really want to go to some kid's birthday party, "You go to that party and you have a good time, and that's an order! Did you hear me?"
October 10, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL
I think we must have had mothers who were separated at birth.
my fave used to be when it was time to shop for school clothes and my mother would go on and on about "if you don't really like it don't tell me to get it, it will just hang in the closet." Then she'd pick out a dress and go crazy for it and I'd say: " I don't like it." And she'd just erupt: " I'm never taking you shopping again, you don't like anything..."
heh
October 10, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Who wrote the poll question? Sean Hannity?
October 10, 2008 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was Sean, with an assist from Satan.
October 10, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
The language is far too complicated for the likes of Inannity.
October 10, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sean will interpret the results showing 49% saying McCain is not running a negative campaign
as proof positive he has not hit the Ayers connection hard enough yet.
October 10, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
The he will show footage of the angry dude in Wisconsin as anecdotal proof of his point. "They are angry because McCain has gone soft."
October 10, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Norm Coleman, incumbent Republican candidate for MN senate, senses backlash of the McCain virus and press-releases:
“As of today I am suspending all negative campaign ads and am calling on those who support me to do the same,” Coleman said. “I’m doing this for two reasons. First of all, this is a terrible time for so many people with the financial crisis...And second,...I want folks to vote for me, not against the other guys."
October 10, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seriously? Or are you just teasing us??
October 10, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
The content of the press release is true. The opening sentence is my interpretation.
October 10, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Regardless, Al Franken is leading and going to win.
October 10, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Laughed so hard, I snorted in the office!
October 10, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fox has bush at 25% approval? Then that's the floor for mcShame!
October 10, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that's probably true; Bush did bounce down to 19% for a bit - and I was kind of hoping that was our floor.
But I've really always thought that about 25% is about right.
October 10, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
It bounced back up to 25% when they added back in the Wasilla meth heads, people in comas, and the snowflake babies.
I'm John McCain and I approved this message.
October 10, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL
I do that avatar -
October 10, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do love that avatar.
excuse me.
October 10, 2008 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Back at ya - are you channeling Sister Sarah with those glasses?
October 10, 2008 6:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
OT: All those who're freaking out about ACORN, read Josh's take on the front page.
Kudos to Josh.
I second the opinion already expressed in the previous thread. They must be scared not us.
October 10, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
They always come for ACORN when they're scared of what will happen on election day. I've never seen it fail in Dallas Co.
October 10, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your post reminded me of when I saw that story break a couple of mornings ago. The lede in the Dallas Morning News alleged that the fraudulent registrations had the names of Dallas Cowboys players. That was about the extent of their interest in the story.
October 10, 2008 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please send the link out to all.
It really is amazing that, if ACORN really is trying to achieve voter fraud, that there really is no feasible way they could get enough fraudulent votes in the boxes to sway an election. Fake name -- can't vote. Duplicate registrations -- only one will count, others won't show up at the polling places.
October 10, 2008 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes but oddly, Bat, the Republicans I guess bank on people not figuring that out because their attacks on ACORN never vary one iota. It's always the same fucking thing -
Every time they are losing.
October 10, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Poor Mr. Ayers,,,, Faux has knocked a hole in his self of steam. So sad.
October 10, 2008 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
self-esteem!
October 10, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe in the next poll, they can add how Ayers is actually responsibly for the financial mess. And dandruff.
October 10, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
And McCain's energy policy.
October 14, 2008 7:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
BEHOLD THE HYPOCRISY!
McCain Already Scheming to Play Bush-Style Politics
http://thetruthburns.wordpress.com/2008/10/10/mccain-already-scheming-to-play-bush-style-politics/
October 10, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
With the re-injection of Ayers, this election has turned almost exactly into that scene in the first Die Hard movie where the older, white FBI agent, leaning out of a helicopter with a rifle, yells "Just like f***in' Saigon, eh slick?" to the younger black FBI agent, who responds with a smile, ""I was in junior high, dickhead."
October 10, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Droll understatement in the question: "There has been some discussion..." I guess they can be forgiven for not wanting to say, "One of our nut-job hosts, Sean Hannity, has been talking about this nonstop since March."
October 10, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
McProgression
McMaverick
McStraightTalk
McJournalistsBestFriend
McFuckedbyBush
McFuckMeAgainGeorgieHarderHarder
McCalifragilisticexpialadouchebag
McSleaze
McBooger
McShame
McCoward
McSkinhead
McRiot
McAneurysm
McUndead
October 10, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
you forgot "mcbaghdadstroll"
October 10, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
My good friend if currently being taught law by Ayers' wife at Northwestern. My friend says that she routinely brings in cookies that Ayers baked for the class.
I told her I hope she never plans on running for office.
October 10, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL
October 10, 2008 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
So I just noticed this on the RCP blog. There - the blogger tries, without being obvious about it, to make the point that, perhaps, maybe, hopefully? the attacks are working!
So I emailed him this:
"Also interesting - more Independents say Palin makes them less likely to vote for McCain (40) than Ayers for Obama (29)."
October 10, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hahahaha. Maybe they can pour in some more beer money to link him to something else. Like someone really black. Maybe Pastor Muthee?
October 10, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is closing in on 80 at InTrade.
October 10, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Glad something is going up today.
October 10, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
After even the tactically-challenged McCain campaign finally realizes that the Ayers issue is having no effect on Obama's polling, then the McCain campaign will be running Wright ads against Obama non-stop until election day.
What's that you say? McCain promised that he would not go there? Well, did you also believe that McCain when he said he was suspending his campaign and you did not think it was a polling stunt? If so, you are one of the least cynical people left in America.
October 10, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I cast my vote today in Vermont for Obama. I had really planned to vote for Jim Douglas, the Republican incumbant for governor, but all this shit had me switching over to Gay Symington, the Democrat, when the time came. Seriously, if Jim Douglas endorses McCain, I can't vote for him. I had voted for him the last two terms.
Another thought, every time I hear about Bill Ayers, I am reminded of Lew Ayers, movie actor activist pacifist, who starred in "All Quiet On The Western Front." I think he refused to serve in WWII.
October 10, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is it possible that McCain-Palin are trying to rile up the rable to cause some type of event that will enable Bush to declare Marshal Law and suspend the election?
October 10, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
O please don't go there.
I really didn't want to relive every single nightmare from the 2004 election. Let's just let that lay until we get some indication it might happen.
things are crazy enough right now - at least, they are crazy enough for me right now.
;)
October 10, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
O - and besides that, I really think that these days, Bush is Nancy Pelosi's bitch.
;)
October 10, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
"america's mayor" suggested suspending elections in new york after 9-11 while the towers were still smouldering. even then the city told him no-effing-way. what do you think people will tell bush?
October 10, 2008 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly - and who is listening to him these days, anyway?
October 10, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fox viewers after debates.
October 10, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, Tena, but I have to say this martial-law-to-prevent-violence meme is taking strong hold here in Kentucky. That was the first interpretation a lot of people had of the "terrorist" rallies.
October 10, 2008 4:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't get it - violence from the rally goers? Why would martial law have to be imposed? Local law enforcement should be able to handle that - there aren't that many, we have no idea that they are armed - that's wack. I'm sorry - that's way out of line.
October 10, 2008 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Definitely way out of line, but no more so than abandoning the search for bin Laden to attack Iraq. No more so than searching for foreign terrorists by wiretapping domestic phone calls. No more so than trying to get useful information via torture.
We are through the looking glass.
I hope I'm wrong.
October 10, 2008 6:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
These Faux News poll results are....
EXCELLENT NEWS!!!! FOR JOHN McCAIN!!!!!!!!
Palin Mania!!!!!
October 10, 2008 3:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am touched that Fox released the poll results in the first place.
October 10, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Q: There has been some discussion about Barack Obama serving with William Ayers on the board of a foundation headed by Leonore Annenberg, who was a close personal friend of Ronald Reagan and served in the State Department in the Reagan administration, and who has also endorsed John McCain for president, as the McCain campaign proudly announced last week. Does the knowledge that a former Reagan administration official and prominent McCain supporter appointed former Weatherman terrorist William Ayers to serve on the board of her organization make you more or less likely to vote for John McCain?
October 10, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg and Eric:
I'm afraid you're engaging in pretty shoddy reasoning. If 1/3 of the voters say that an issue like this could make a difference positive or negative to their vote at this late stage that's actually pretty HUGE and not small at all.
Look, probably 80% of the electorate, at least, has been locked in since the two nominations were sewed up. Ask a diehard democrat if Ayers would make a difference and the answer is certain to be no. That person is already signed, sealed, and delivered for OBama and almost nothing could either increase or decrease his/her likelihood of voting for Obama.
Same with a diehard Repugnant. Almost nothing could increase or decrease his/her likelihood of voting for McCain.
Unless you think that 1/3 includes lots people who say "I'm already inclined to against Obama and this makes me even less inclined" then this is a huge number of people who might potentially be negatively influenced by the Ayers thing.
Probably there are some in the sample for whom this is just "hardening" their opposition to Obama, but even that is a big deal. Because that's one less voter that Obama can woo away from McCain or that McCain has to worry about defending.
And if some of that 1/3 are people who were not yet inclined to vote against OBama but are now, that's an even bigger deal.
I think you're missing the fact that election now isn't about moving the vast majority. It's about moving a relatively small % of the voters. If a candidate whose at roughly 45% can move just over 5% his way, he wins. If he's got 32% of the voters to work with, he's still in the game.
October 10, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree that moving just a small slice of the electorate can have a significant effect, but I disagree with your interpretation of the 32%. Given the wording of the question, it is informative that only 32% said Ayers would have an effect.
October 10, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
It all depends on the composition of the 32%.
IF it's all "I'm already unlikely to vote against OBama and this makes me even more likely" then it's irrelevant.
If 5-6% are either (A) people who were somewhat inclined toward Obama and are now less inclined toward him or (b) people who were genuinely on the fence between the two then it's a huge big deal and might even be enough to swing the election on its own.
Because politics involves so many people and so many decisions people seem not to realize that most advertising is considered VERY successful if it moves just 4-5% of potential viewers.
IF McCain can move 5-6% of potential voters with this kind of stuff, he will be ecstatic, believe me. And it won't matter at all that it left the remaining 95% cold.
October 10, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I completely agree with your argument that moving 5 - 6 % over to McCain's side is a significant accomplishment. I guess I'm questioning how valid that 32% actually is, given the outrageous wording of the question. They could have probably substituted "John Brown" for William Ayers and gotten the same result.
October 10, 2008 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I genuinely believe that, based on the wording of the question, that a large number of hard-core mccain supporters would answer "it would make me less likely to vote for Obama." Even if they were dead-set against him to begin with, so technically, the answer should be "no difference." Because for them, answering "it would make no difference" would be the same as saying Ayres is irrelevant, and to these people, he is very much relevant. So they are going to answer "less likely". Also, keep in mind, these people are aware of how polls work. They want to see high numbers of responses to "less likely" to that question, so that's how they will answer it.
October 10, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not working, but that doesn't matter. They know McSame is toast, but won't stop smearing Obama even after the election. This is more about delegitimizing the Obama administration than about swaying independent voters. When the de-Bushification of the US government begins, you'll hear the repugs screaming even harder that the "terrorists are taking over" and purging conservative "freedom fighters" in the DOJ, et al.
October 10, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Precisely.
October 10, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another winning week for McCain.
October 10, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
as much as i hate to say it, i think that the campaign and surrogates are going to have to push the palin-alaska independence party story. if she is going to use "obama finds america so imperfect" lines, what is more symbolic of finding america so imperfect that you support/affiliate/join (in todd's case) a party that seeks for the state to secede from the union? i think many do not yet know about this since it was reported on when palin first came on the scene and, on the right, most of it was bundled into the "unfair liberal media attacks" including the rumors about the baby really being her daughter's. but, this is real and the mccain campaign has had to admit it. her video presentation to the aip's convention is on you tube. why not push this story to the fore-front? if they are going to start hitting with rezko and wright, i would prefer a pre-emptive strike that shuts it down. thoughts?
October 10, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Because the public could not care less right now. The economy is fucking crumbling and the best thing for Obama to do is stay on message and stick to the issues.
The public doesn't give a shit about Ayers or AIP.
October 10, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
My thoughts?
Obama, Plouffe and Axelrod are geniuses and I don't have to worry about that shit.
And they don't listen to us anyway, so what difference does it make what anyone's thoughts are?
October 10, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey Tena, I know it doesn't look like it, but I'm pretty certain the Dow bounced back today. It closed down 128, but I think it's hit bottom. Panicky investors have been driven out, the market closed above 8200 (the bottom I've been expecting) and volume was low compared to yesterday. And it's Friday, and world markets crashed last night. All in all, some encouraging signs. I picked up some serious deals today. I'm back in with a vengeance.
October 10, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're so sweet to tell me that. I know it bounced up, fell, and then I didn't know what happened. If will just bottom out I will feel sooooo much better. Once it does, it will eventually go back up.
Rather slowly I imagine.
October 10, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
There was not even a mention of ayers on the fox website today
October 10, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think McCain's advisors know at this point that Ayers won't win them an election. But, I suspect that most of them know that nothing will win the election. So their strategy is to whip up that base and set up the opposition for the next four years. They want to do everything they can to throw obstacles at an Obama administration in the hopes of a win in 2012.
McCain may still be delusional enough to think he can win, but all those Roves behind him are laying the groundwork for 2012.
October 10, 2008 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Co-sign. I think that is exactly it.
October 10, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Very true.
The Ayers attack is doing nothing to Obama. I expect the other attacks will have a similar effect. No reason to respond to something that doesn't hurt you.
McCain is shoveling the dirt on his own political grave with the strategy he using now. Just let him do it.
October 10, 2008 4:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry to offend any Hillary supporters, but she tried the same thing. It backfired on her too. Though now, ironically, she did Obama a favor by prematurely detonating this nonsense during the primaries.
Obama knows how to let adversaries whip themselves into a frenzy, reveal their ugliness, and then exhaust themselves to the point where Obama hardly has to lift a finger to defeat them and does so with popular support.
btw, this is a stark contrast to GW Bush's FP that McCain would follow. Bush and his bellicosity defeated himself. He alienated our allies and couldn't assemble a real coalition.
Had he been more skillful in rallying our allies, as even his father had done, then there would be a much broader coalition in Iraq and Afghanistan today, including Arabic speaking Muslim peacekeepers. which would obviously make an enormous difference for both optics and substance, and eventually real differences in outcomes.
October 10, 2008 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
A Faux poll??!! Somebody put Sean Hannity on suicide watch.
October 10, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well what about if Ayers was Barack's gay lover? What then, America?
GoBama: http://tinyurl.com/6xr3b7
October 10, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
somewhere deep in a closet in one of eight (nine? ten?) mcmansions, a stomach-churning portrait of mcworse has developed yet another boil.
October 10, 2008 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain admitted he did not forsee the housing bubble burst until the press asked him how many he owned and he couldn't remember.
October 10, 2008 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's reword the Fox News poll question and ask it this way:
There has been some discussion of John McCain's relationship with the current President of the United States George W Bush. Because Bush is linked to the disastrous foreign and domestic policies that are destroying America, and because Bush remains unrepentant, some people say McCain's association with Bush calls into question his judgment. Does McCain's connection with Bush make you less likely to vote for him for president or does it not really make a difference to your vote?
October 10, 2008 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's a nice sales pitch contained in the question. Did you say this was a poll, or a push poll?
It reminds me of some of the "polls" they do on Lou Dobbs: "Does the complete failure of Congress, led by by Democrat Nancy Pelosi, to help the American people, and Barack Obama's support of a corrupt and incompetent Speaker of the House make you mad as hell and convince you that Barack Obama is not fit to lead this great nation, and that Lou Dobbs should run for president in 2012? Yes or no. Cast your vote at loudobbs.com."
The whole poll reads like a goddamn Republican push poll: "Do you think this is a time for higher taxes and larger government or is this a time for lower taxes and smaller government?"
Do you think this is a time for the weasels at Fox to call voters and push their right-wing agenda, or do you think this is a time for America to get fed up with this sort of dishonest bullshit and permanently change the channel?
October 10, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess the Washington Times reran that false story about Obama cutting a deal in Iraq, and Palin is using this as her new attack point.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/with-donors-palin-keeps-up-attacks-on-obama/
Nice to see she was greeted with protesters as she pulled up to the fund raiser.
October 10, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is going to be massive election fraud. Are you guys ready?
October 10, 2008 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
In other news, Neanderthals found to be extinct, and therefore not in fact capable of global leadership in the present tense, neither economic nor cultural, dashing the hopes of some pro-Neanderthal advocacy groups.
October 10, 2008 4:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
This farce will soon be over.
October 10, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Same Poll through the eyes of Mark "The Tool" Halperin:
See? McCain is winning!
October 10, 2008 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, their Ayer's BS didn't work. Next stop, Rev. Wright. That will be there meme next week.
October 10, 2008 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Definitely time to permanently change the channel on Fox.
Spencer's Mom said "The one positive to come out of these rallies is that most rational, thinking Republicans (yes, there are many!) are disgusted with the low info, low intellect crowds and their outbursts."
Some of those "thinking Republicans" are starting to speak out about the hate speech. see Huffingtonpost.com.
October 10, 2008 5:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, compare these two questions:
"There has been some discussion of Barack Obama's relationship with the former radical activist William Ayers. Because Ayers is linked to plots to bomb the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol in the 1970s, and because Ayres recently said he wished he had done more, some people say Obama's association with Ayers calls into question his judgment. Does Obama's connection with Ayers make you less likely to vote for him for president or does it not really make a difference to your vote?"
"As you may know, there has been some discussion of John McCain's involvement with Charles Keating, of the so-called Keating Five savings and loan scandal of the 1980s. McCain was cleared of all charges and ethical complaints,
but some people think McCain's past association with Charles Keating still calls into question his judgment. Does McCain's past connection with Keating make you less likely to vote for him for president or does it not really make a difference to your vote?"
Fox News is a joke.
October 15, 2008 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink