Quinnipiac University announced the results of a multi-party poll indicating that “Obama leads McCain 49 – 44 percent, including 51 – 39 percent among independent voters” in Colorado. That’s got to be a little scary for state Republicans, particularly Schaffer’s camp (for U.S. Senate).
I do not doubt that much of Obama’s support comes from his paternalist economic rhetoric. With his simple, confident talk, Obama will be able to fool many of the people much of the time. But these results are also a repudiation of the religious right’s sway over the Republican Party. Most independents get pretty nervous with McCain’s talk of “ending abortion.” Then there’s the war — McCain’s talk of limitless sacrifice for endless occupations also frightens many. (The connection between the war and religion is more distant but still present.)
Does abortion really matter? This poll result captures broader opinions and sentiments, but the difference between women and men is telling: “Obama leads 53 – 39 percent among Colorado women likely voters, while men back McCain 50 – 45 percent.”
This is disturbing: “Obama’s race won’t affect their vote, 91 percent say.” What’s disturbing is that 9 percent said race either will affect their vote or they’re not sure. That’s far too high a figure. While there are many reasons to vote against Obama, his race is not among them, and we 91 percent need to keep pounding home that message to the dissenters.
This is not surprising: “The economy is the most important issue in their vote, 47 percent say…” Obama is the only one in the race saying anything at all interesting about the economy. Everything he says is wrong, but at least it’s interesting. McCain sounds like he can do little but “me too” both Bush and Obama. This, to me, is the greatest lost opportunity of the election. An eloquent, principled candidate could explain how national monetary and housing controls led to the real-estate mess, how entitlements threaten our future, and how free-market reforms would pave the path to a more secure and prosperous future. Such a candidate would also explain how decades of political controls have mucked up health care and how a return to liberty would lower costs and increase quality. Instead, McCain is too busy talking about new controls and corporate welfare in the name of the environment. Meanwhile, the xenophobic right has helped give Obama a 62 – 36 percent lead among Hispanics, to use figures from the same poll.
Whoever first crosses the finish line, the result will still be a train wreck.
This line is a bit knee-jerk, Ari, and disturbing for other reasons:
What’s disturbing is that 9 percent said race either will affect their vote or they’re not sure. That’s far too high a figure. While there are many reasons to vote against Obama, his race is not among them…
I’m not among the 91%, or the 9% – and have long since become UNregistered to vote for choices of evils. But if I WAS less principled in that regard, I’d have no difficulty in voting for a man like Walter Williams, or a Dr. Ron Paul – regardless of his color.
But Obama has undeniably played the “Race Card” far too often, as his radical preacher(s), wife, and other hangers-on makes painfully clear. I have a strong suspicion that some among that 9% who object to Obama on “racial” grounds don’t object to his ethnicity, per se, but to the fact that he is not merely “black”, but Black. Even his book makes this point in black and white.
(And the reason I’d pick for rejecting Obama based on color is different, too. It’s not that he’s black, it’s that he’s RED.)