Change is in the air

[exsequar]

I feel in my bones that the game has changed dramatically this year, but I've had a hard time articulating why. I don't really have the authority or experience to sufficiently support what I know in my gut. Instead, this article does it for me: For GOP, Reliable Wedge Issues Suddenly Fall Flat

We are looking at a paradigm shift on a massive scale. I know it's hard to believe in until the numbers come in, but I don't think that polls lie. Not to the extent that some think they may be. Once bitten, twice shy, okay, I get it. But if either Gore or Kerry were going to win, they would have done it by the skin of their TEETH. They never expanded into Republican territory - in fact, they didn't try. They aimed for the core 19 states (or so?) that would put them just over 270. And that's all they COULD do. But Obama started out with a philosophy that it's not how many states go blue, but how many people do that matters. This ideology is emphasized by the sheer extent of his ground effort. I read a statistic today that 35,000 new Democrats were registered in Texas. Texas! Which could never go blue in anyone's wildest imaginations. Yet there are still 35,000 new people in that state who are engaged and paying attention to Obama's message, plus goodness knows how many other swingy voters that have seen the light.

My point is that Obama has broken out of the restrictive "liberal" electoral box. By all measures and polls, he has completely locked in states that were battlegrounds only a month ago: Michigan, Oregon, Iowa, Pennsylvania, New Mexico. He has made massive inroads in Virginia, Colorado, and New Mexico, while Ohio and Florida are both looking very good. Meanwhile, West Virginia is officially a toss up, and Indiana is a pale pale pink. Fivethirtyeight.com has a great post up today about what its model considers battlegrounds now, and what the battlegrounds of a month ago look like now. The numbers are pretty staggering.

But taking a step away from the polls and electoral college for a minute. The article I linked above goes into an eloquent analysis about how the Republicans have tightly controlled the dialogue for four decades now. In the 60s there was a huge shift in what "liberal" meant - Republicans grabbed onto that shift and successfully defined liberalism in terms of forcing people to sacrifice in order to help the "under class". The inherent selfishness of human nature rebelled against that; furthermore, liberalism was associated with radicalism and race riots. So many people stopped self-identifying as liberal, and became "conservatives". Yet a truth is coming to the fore - these people are actually policy liberals, at least when it comes to things that affect them personally: healthcare, education, and social security. Democratic policies on these items appeal to a great amount of the electorate, which feels by an overwhelming majority that the government is not currently spending enough money on these issues (see the article for numbers). Obama is the perfect messenger to frame the Democratic economic ideals in this way, and he is aided by the dire straits we find ourselves in. Add on 8 years of misery under a despised president, widespread doubt in an extended war, and Obama's looking pretty great.

Ahem. *gets off soap box*

(I would like to emphasize that I am not encouraging complacency. I personally will be volunteering my time to phone bank in the next weeks, and particularly on election day. We have to get people to vote, yes. But I think that optimism is not uncalled for, and in fact is better. People are excited about this election - the support for Obama is of an unprecedented tenor. They will get their asses to the polls, I promise you, and whoever doesn't will get poked into action by the massive GOTV efforts. This IS going to work.)

Comments

[darsynia.livejournal.com]

One of the things that has me dancing in the aisles was an article on NPR today about whether it's irresponsible of the media not to recognize that Obama is so far in the lead that the election is almost locked. They said that when they run the electoral vote numbers, Obama currently has enough for 270 without the toss-up states, and is ahead something like 14% in a really reliable poll.

\o/

Also, McCain's Faces Scared Undecided Voter. LOL.

[iltaru]

This?

Makes me happy. As a citizen of the world (of Ireland, in fact... I ain't no subject of the British crown) I desperately want Obama to be the most powerful man on the planet.

(Did you see Russell Brand at the MTV awards being scandalously shocking and saying that he could tell the US was a progressive country because George Bush (a "retarded cowboy fella") had been given the chance to be president whereas in Britain "he wouldn't be trusted with scissors"?

OH RUSSELL BRAND, HOW YOU KILL ME WITH LAUGHTER.)

[bexone.livejournal.com]

I'm just cynical enough to say that the polls are awesome, but let's wait and see what the voting machines tell us.*

y halo thar, diebold and sequoia systems.

--

*not necessarily what the vote is -- what the voting machines tell us.

[jamesinclair.livejournal.com]

Texas was blue in 1976. So was the rest of the south.

California was red.

We've just been led to believe red vs blue = north vs south or something.

Im sleepy.

[redbrickrose.livejournal.com]

I'm hopeful - and yet still terrified and McCain makes me so ANGRY.

Your enthusiasm, however, makes me happy. It does look good. It looks really good. Come on America, yes, we can.

[sorchasilver.livejournal.com]

I really, really, REALLY hope you are right!