October 09, 2012
— Ace This isn't about polls, per se. It's bigger than that.
Trende's argument -- I feel stupid digesting it because he's perfectly succinct and clear in explaining it himself -- is that this election's real story is "Obama vs. Gravity," or "Obama vs. the Fundamentals Which Are Largely Against Him." Being a "bandwagon" sort of candidate, it's crucial for him to maintain the Winner's Edit -- like in a reality TV show, you know who's going to win or lose based on who gets the Winner's Edit, and who gets the Loser's Edit.
The pattern of the race, and the polls, has been this: Obama wins a newscycle, big, for whatever reason, and ekes out a 4-6 point lead. But then the public remembers about the fundamentals of the state of the nation, and that lead begins to deteriorate down to about 2 points, or a tie. And at that point Obama comes out with another big attack on Romney (it's almost always an attack blitz) and pushes his lead up... for a time. Until gravity overtakes that again, and pulls it back down, in which case it's time for the Next Big Narrative-Grabbing Attack.
It's not so much a "theory" as "exactly what's happened."
He notes the downside of this strategy-- the bandwagon effect relies on an all but permanent Winner's Edit. What happens when he starts to lose? Compare the Virtuous Cycle (for the White House) that the Winner's Edit provides him with the Vicious Cycle the Loser's Edit saddles him with:
First, the bandwagon effect affects fundraising. Once you move outside the partisan core, people like to back winners. This is especially true of the business community. By assiduously cultivating its front-runner status, the Obama campaign has aided its ability to press future arguments.Second, maintaining a lead allows greater leeway in the arguments it can make. Something like the “cancer ad” from August looks hard-hitting from a campaign that is leading (and I certainly include candidate super PACs as part of the “campaign”), but would probably be described as “desperate” from one that is losing.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, it affects press portrayals of the candidates and party enthusiasm. This is the most important thing here: I still think the default expectation here has been that Obama should be losing. “Defying gravity” is hardly an original motif for this election, after all.
So the view that Obama is going to lose can -- or at least could have -- quickly become the conventional wisdom. If that happens, we would end up with a vicious cycle that looks something like this: The Democratic base becomes downtrodden, its enthusiasm falls, the rightÂ’s enthusiasm skyrockets, the likely-voter screens skew more Republican, and Obama falls even further behind in the polls. Instead, we have a campaign where everyone marvels at Obama's constant lead, further adding to the mythos surrounding his supposed inability to lose.
This is why the Oct. 3 debate really might have marked an important, structural change point in the campaign.
As Trende notes, this has an important impact on media coverage.
There are a lot of things Obama doesn't want to be on the front pages of newspapers, from the economy to the Benghazi Massacre, the negligence of that, and the deliberate cover-up. So long as Obama's winning, the press can pretend it's "just reporting the news" by just talking up his winning campaign. That's news, too. Isn't it? And if the press seems to be overcovering the horserace aspect while ignoring Obama's many failures... well, they'll just note "we overcovered the horserace" on November 15th and then go about their business.
But if he's losing, the press is either going to talk about process issues -- Why is he losing? Where did he lose it? -- or these other issues Obama also doesn't want to make headlines.
The Winner's Edit permits the press to hide all that, to focus on Happy Things.
But if he's losing, they don't have that cover. It's either This Bad Thing or That Bad Thing.
Of course, given that Obama's campaign has consisted of deploying a Kill Romney meme every time he gets behind, or close to behind, one has to worry what their last couple of cards are.
A really terrific piece that you'll be poorer for for not reading. Just seems to reveal so much that has been mysterious.
Bonus: Gallup Likely Voting polls began being published today.
They said the polls would "wipe out the president's lead" and result in a tie; they lowballed it (or they said this before last night's polling came in).
It's 49-47, advantage Romney, and their seven-day track still has pre-debate numbers in it from Tuesday and Wednesday of last week. (I assume that most of Wednesday's calls were placed before the 9 PM Eastern debate.)
Posted by: Ace at
09:08 AM
| Comments (99)
Post contains 827 words, total size 5 kb.
Posted by: Tami at October 09, 2012 08:52 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: Soothsayer at October 09, 2012 08:52 AM (jUytm)
Romney is smart to keep smiling as he eviscerates Obama's policies (and never attacks him personally). Obama has fucked off for four years without anyone noticing and he thought he could do it a few months longer.. but the jig is up.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 09, 2012 08:52 AM (f9c2L)
Posted by: tasker at October 09, 2012 08:52 AM (r2PLg)
Posted by: CAC at October 09, 2012 12:52 PM
Sorry, should have tweaked the sock, CAC
Posted by: kbdabear at October 09, 2012 08:53 AM (wwsoB)
He sort of got away with that--until the debate. Romney, like Reagan in 1980 proved to record audiences ( seeing and hearing him for the first time ) that he was a capable viable alternative to a failed President
Posted by: Isaac Davis White at October 09, 2012 08:53 AM (Dll6b)
Posted by: RioBravo at October 09, 2012 08:54 AM (eEfYn)
Posted by: IdowhatIwant at October 09, 2012 08:55 AM (a4CUi)
Posted by: The Mega Independent at October 09, 2012 08:55 AM (anTy6)
Mine has been 6 days now.
Posted by: Clutch Cargo at October 09, 2012 08:56 AM (Qxdfp)
Posted by: Dave S. at October 09, 2012 09:10 AM (tWrwm)
Posted by: t-bird at October 09, 2012 09:10 AM (FcR7P)
Posted by: Fire with Fire at October 09, 2012 09:12 AM (lcwvr)
Posted by: Brother Cavil presents at October 09, 2012 09:12 AM (GBXon)
a time machine, I have. Morlocks and Eloi everywhere...
Posted by: Isaac Davis White at October 09, 2012 09:12 AM (Dll6b)
Posted by: Soothsayer at October 09, 2012 09:12 AM (jUytm)
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at October 09, 2012 09:13 AM (QKKT0)
Posted by: eastvalleyphx says fuck islam at October 09, 2012 09:13 AM (GRvW4)
Brought it from last post. =)Posted by: cajun carrot at October 09, 2012 09:13 AM (UZQM8)
RCP = Romney +1
Heads will explode.
Posted by: Dave in Fla at October 09, 2012 09:14 AM (98+n7)
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at October 09, 2012 09:14 AM (Pixxe)
Posted by: tasker at October 09, 2012 09:14 AM (r2PLg)
For LIVs, 'the narrative' can override reality: They don't watch political events or follow politics, so they gravitate towards effective narratives.
Posted by: Isaac Davis White at October 09, 2012 09:14 AM (Dll6b)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD the revelator at October 09, 2012 09:14 AM (VtjlW)
33 The SCOAMF has been weighed in the balances and found wanting.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at October 09, 2012 01:13 PM (QKKT0)
Mene, mene, tekel, upharsin
Posted by: Fire with Fire at October 09, 2012 09:14 AM (lcwvr)
Posted by: Nate Silver at October 09, 2012 09:15 AM (ma+gB)
To quote Double-Rainbow Guy: "Too much... too much!"
Posted by: HoboJerky, now with 45% more DOOM! at October 09, 2012 09:15 AM (xAtAj)
Posted by: Agent Smith at October 09, 2012 09:15 AM (Pixxe)
Do not agree at all, unless you are saying that this is the attempted narrative. I assert that Obama has not been in the lead at any time in the last year.
Posted by: SpongeBob Saget at October 09, 2012 09:15 AM (SDkq3)
Posted by: Countrysquire at October 09, 2012 09:17 AM (QB3JR)
Posted by: cajun carrot at October 09, 2012 09:17 AM (UZQM8)
Posted by: ErikW at October 09, 2012 09:19 AM (hEG70)
Heads will explode.
I hate the RCP average because it's so unsound, mathematically, but since the trolls love it...let them suck on it.
Posted by: AmishDude at October 09, 2012 09:20 AM (T0NGe)
"The media has been lying to you" ...[about Barky]
Another good thing, about the events of the past week...is that the Dem-media has thoroughly confirmed this.
That they've been in the tank...and lying to support Barky.
They've beclowned themselves with their excuse-making.
And in doing so...they've done some additional hurt to Barky, by destroying what was left of their flailing credibility.
Posted by: wheatie at October 09, 2012 09:20 AM (l5RhJ)
http://tinyurl.com/9l8zc98
Things are moving too fast for me I've accidentally posted on the wrong thread twice now.
Posted by: Buzzsaw at October 09, 2012 09:20 AM (tf9Ne)
I think the 47% video was their nuclear bomb. They dropped it thinking it would turn Romney into dust and they would coast the rest of the way to victory and shift the Party money into the Senate and House races to get Obama a better Congress to work with in 2013.. If they have any other bombs to throw at Romney they won't be as big. There sure as hell isn't any DUI or sexual affair in Romney's closet. Unless Romney really steps on his dick ina gigantic way in the next 4 weeks, Obama doesn't have anything that could arrest a Romney lead.
Obama managed through October 1 to make this election an actual referendum on Mitt Romney. On October 2, he lost that election. Now he is scrambling to come up with a brand new election strategy and make it work in 4 weeks. I don't think even Axelrod and Plouffe are that good. They've already wasted an entire week since the debate with silliness about Big Bird.
Posted by: rockmom at October 09, 2012 09:20 AM (aBlZ1)
Posted by: Barky O'Genius at October 09, 2012 09:21 AM (QKKT0)
Megyn Kelly talking about Stacey Dash...and how celebrities are getting persecuted by Dems, if they support Romney.
Posted by: wheatie at October 09, 2012 09:21 AM (l5RhJ)
Very true.
Posted by: AmishDude at October 09, 2012 09:21 AM (T0NGe)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Channelling Breitbart at October 09, 2012 09:21 AM (5DR1j)
Posted by: runninrebel at October 09, 2012 01:18 PM (N/1Dm)
Yes, but if you know enough to compare your situation to the overall economy ( and blame the incumbent ), you're not a LIV. You've made a rational analysis based on your own situation compared to the overall state of the nation.
Voting surveys since the 1950s show that 20 % of voters cannot ( or will not ) do that. Their voting decision is based on entirely emotional, non-rational factors.
Posted by: Isaac Davis White at October 09, 2012 09:22 AM (Dll6b)
Posted by: pray for peace at October 09, 2012 09:22 AM (oZfic)
Posted by: yankeefifth at October 09, 2012 09:23 AM (Z9EHQ)
And it makes you look ugly.
So very ugly that you've forced me to vote for Obama.
Again.
Posted by: Ann Althouse and her Precious Vag at October 09, 2012 09:23 AM (imtbm)
Posted by: phoenixgirl what did huma abedin know? team dagny at October 09, 2012 09:23 AM (Ho2rs)
Posted by: ErikW at October 09, 2012 09:23 AM (hEG70)
Posted by: Jay at October 09, 2012 09:23 AM (3LaGb)
Posted by: Tami at October 09, 2012 09:23 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at October 09, 2012 09:23 AM (2Oas0)
Posted by: Jon at October 09, 2012 09:24 AM (/YJYi)
Posted by: phoenixgirl what did huma abedin know? team dagny at October 09, 2012 09:24 AM (Ho2rs)
Yes, a good False Narrative needs one or more strawmen / scapegoats. Hussein's was Romney as an out-of-touch Rich White Man who's indifferent to women, the Needy, "low minorities" with ObamaPhones, etc
As soon as Unfiltered Romney is seen by 70 million people, the narrative begins imploding-very quickly
Posted by: Isaac Davis White at October 09, 2012 09:25 AM (Dll6b)
Posted by: General Woundwort at October 09, 2012 09:25 AM (06lNq)
You just wait, things will turn around. Obama was suffering during the first debate because of some bad choom and blow he got from the Mexicans. They were upset because the guns didn't get to them already fully automatic. Next debate Obama will be straight and he'll mop the floor with Romney and go on to glorious victory!
And I need to get out of this basement to help. Mom, let me out!
Posted by: Not doing Gerg worth a damn at October 09, 2012 09:26 AM (qrxlE)
Posted by: runninrebel at October 09, 2012 01:08 PM (N/1Dm)
----------------------------------------------------
In full agreement on this. I've never bought into the breathless daily reporting of polls. All one has to do is look around and see the SCOAMT's failure everywhere. It was more a matter of time and the element of being given an alternative, or choice of national direction.
Posted by: Soona at October 09, 2012 09:27 AM (GZmzv)
Posted by: phoenixgirl what did huma abedin know? team dagny at October 09, 2012 01:24 PM (Ho2rs)
In the dossier you go.
Posted by: Cicero (@cicero) at October 09, 2012 09:27 AM (QKKT0)
67 wheatie
ashley judd was concerned about how people who support the scoamf are maligned.... i hope she doesn't burst into tears...her face will get all puffy
"Maligned"..?
Elitist limosine-liberal millionaires...are being 'maligned' for supporting Barky?
Boo hoo.
I hope they finally figure out why their box office numbers have been falling for years.
Ashley Judd can kiss my ass.
Posted by: wheatie at October 09, 2012 09:27 AM (l5RhJ)
Posted by: yankeefifth at October 09, 2012 09:28 AM (Z9EHQ)
Posted by: Tom at October 09, 2012 09:30 AM (kEkHp)
r.e., Big Bird Flap:
“nothing says “I’ve completely lost control of this narrative” like embracing…a seven-foot-tall yellow-feathered multi-millionaire.”
— Jeff Emanuel (@jeffemanuel) October 9, 2012
That. Is. Going. To. Leave. A. Mark.
Posted by: rickb223 at October 09, 2012 09:30 AM (zji3t)
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at October 09, 2012 01:14 PM (Pixxe)
So who plays the role of the banjo-playing tard?
Posted by: joncelli at October 09, 2012 09:31 AM (RD7QR)
Axelrod: So that's it. We're pulling them out. It was Denver.
David Plouffe: It was too little debate prep.
Maddow: No, it was after Denver.
Mathews: And the fog, in England.
Saul Alynski: Doesn't matter what it was. When one man says to another, "I know what let's do today, let's play presidential debate."... mythology dies
Posted by: Dblwmy at October 09, 2012 09:32 AM (BvTwT)
Posted by: phoenixgirl what did huma abedin know? team dagny at October 09, 2012 09:32 AM (Ho2rs)
===========
I couldn't agree more. And another prediction. The Town Hall debate will be structured to give every, single advantage to the stuttering POS. The cards will be stacked to high against Romney. I'm praying he holds his own, because if we think 67 million viewers for the first debate was a lot....this one will be even higher, as those who missed the first schtumping of Barry will be tuning in to see what happens this go 'round.
Posted by: Lady in Black at October 09, 2012 09:33 AM (lTVJy)
At a SanFran fundraiser Obama makes jokes about Romney going after elmo in a high speed chase a la OJ Simpson.
That's a real knee slapper. Making jokes about a murderer on the run who slayed two people.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, we are in a shit load of trouble at home and abroad.
Posted by: Cheri at October 09, 2012 09:34 AM (G+Wff)
This is like dueling banjos, except with posts, or something.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at October 09, 2012 01:14 PM (Pixxe)
So who plays the role of the banjo-playing tard?
JEF? Too easy.
Posted by: rickb223 at October 09, 2012 09:35 AM (zji3t)
Posted by: Lady in Black at October 09, 2012 01:33 PM (lTVJy)
--------------------------------------------------
Mitt's going to be fine. His message is clear and he'll deliver it with the same even confidence that he did in the first debate.
Baraka, in my prediction will be suitably coked up and will over-conpensate. He'll sound like the perverbial snake-oil salesman (with a black southern preacher's delivery).
Posted by: Soona at October 09, 2012 09:40 AM (GZmzv)
"different" how?
Posted by: Jay at October 09, 2012 01:27 PM (3LaGb)
In many, many ways: Bush had a good economy; Hussein has a f*ckin disaster. Romney has millions of Ultra-Angry voters waiting to vote; Kerry didn't.
No two elections are identical, and most aren't similar. This election is closer to 1980 than 2004.
Posted by: Isaac Davis White at October 09, 2012 09:41 AM (Dll6b)
Posted by: joncelli at October 09, 2012 01:31 PM (RD7QR)
--
I ain't picking sides in this one.
Posted by: Agent Smith at October 09, 2012 09:43 AM (Pixxe)
Obama needs to stop worrying about telling people about his positive accomplishments and vision for the future and go negative on Romney they way Romney has been going after Obama for months. He needs to expose Romney's Lies.
Romney is lucky to have the Media on his side but it doesnt matter because so few americans trust the lying media anyway. At the next debate, when the midia bias filter can't hurt him, Obama will talk directly to the American people and they will realize how much this great preisdent loves this country and wants to protect its principles from this Radical vulture capitalist who wants to send all of the jobs overseas and make poor people starve.
I feel sorry for you republicans, you are getting your hopes up, but Obama is going to crush them with a magnificent performance next week. Couple that with the absolute drubbing Joe Biden will deliver to that light weight short on details Paul Ryan and its going to be over.
Polls dont matter...Americans will never elect this america hating Mitt Romney over our great president who has sacrificed so much to heal this country and bring its economy roaring back with 1 million (114K added + 883K found) new jobs last month.
Posted by: Greg at October 09, 2012 09:44 AM (ovpNn)
Posted by: DC in Towson at October 09, 2012 09:58 AM (P47hr)
Posted by: DC in Towson at October 09, 2012 09:59 AM (P47hr)
Isaac Davis White,
per your details in #4, then it is probably safe to assume Obama is polling 8%-10% worse than Bush was in 2004. Or perhaps, will perform 8% below what Bush did in actual votes.
Which would be quite delightful.
Posted by: Jay at October 09, 2012 09:59 AM (3LaGb)
Posted by: PJ at October 09, 2012 10:09 AM (DQHjw)
I haven't read this yet, but Fox is reporting that the guys at Goldman Sachs have bought a clue, and have mostly dumped Obama for Romney.
Posted by: Optimizer at October 09, 2012 10:32 AM (As94z)
Posted by: steevy at October 09, 2012 10:58 AM (6o4Fb)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.1746 seconds, 227 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at October 09, 2012 08:49 AM (f9c2L)