Many historians see little chance for McCain

One week into the general election, the polls show a dead heat. But many presidential scholars doubt that John McCain stands much of a chance, if any.

Historians belonging to both parties offered a litany of historical comparisons that give little hope to the Republican. Several saw Barack Obama’s prospects as the most promising for a Democrat since Roosevelt trounced Hoover in 1932.

“This should be an overwhelming Democratic victory,” said Allan Lichtman, an American University presidential historian who ran in a Maryland Democratic senatorial primary in 2006. Lichtman, whose forecasting model has correctly predicted the last six presidential popular vote winners, predicts that this year, “Republicans face what have always been insurmountable historical odds.” His system gives McCain a score on par with Jimmy Carter’s in 1980.

“McCain shouldn’t win it,” said presidential historian Joan Hoff, a professor at Montana State University and former president of the Center for the Study of the Presidency. She compared McCain’s prospects to those of Hubert Humphrey, whose 1968 loss to Richard Nixon resulted in large part from the unpopularity of sitting Democratic president Lyndon Johnson.

“It is one of the worst political environments for the party in power since World War II,” added Alan Abramowitz, a professor of public opinion and the presidency at Emory University. His forecasting model — which factors in gross domestic product, whether a party has completed two terms in the White House and net presidential approval rating — gives McCain about the same odds as Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and Carter in 1980 — both of whom were handily defeated in elections that returned the presidency to the previously out-of-power party. “It would be a pretty stunning upset if McCain won,” Abramowitz said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080615/pl_politico/11090

according to this historian.

Or not. They can't count on stealing Ohio this time (the new Governor and Secretary of State are Democrats) and Florida may be a little more difficult, what with the candidate's brother not counting the votes.

and I know a lot of people who have been voting Republican for 40 years. My guess is most of those people will stay home this election.

A couple of stats that show how bad off the GOOP and Gramps are...

The first is the large turnout of Democrats in the elongated primary system. In '00 and '04, the balance favored Repugnicans over Democrats, now that number has been flipped and then some. One can assume that most of those who voted this year is sure to be back in November, and most will be casting Democratic ballots.

The second is Gramp's dismal performance in his own party...he never won 80% of the vote in any primary and actually was losing ground in the final weeks. Polls constantly show Repugnicans would prefer another choice and Gramps support is a mile wide and an inch thick. He'll need every vote that boooshie got in '04 if he's gonna stand any chance...and I don't see the fundies cramming the church busses.

Lastly, with all the focus on the Democrats, Gramps got a two month vacation...a free pass to build up his image and candidacy...he failed. For any chance in November, Gramps needs at least 45% of the vote...and I have seen few, if any polls, that show him anywhere near that number. Boooshie never fell below that number. And I suspect that polling still isn't including Bob Barr.

In short, I don't see Senator Obama losing any state that John Kerry won in '04...and I see several that are ripe for the taking (Iowa, Colorado, Virginia, Ohio (Yes, Ohio)...while Gramps is going to have to play defense and be stretched to gain any ground in even purple areas. Add that to him being an awful candidate and the indications are he'll go down bigtime. But that's not assured as long as the corporate media continues to be his campaign managers.

I just want to slap them silly.

McCain didn't call the media "his base" for nothing.

Not to mention Clinton in the primaries. Anyone can see that McCain will have a hard time. But the Repubs have won in the last couple of decades in exactly the same way that Truman beat Dewey, and the Democrats used to always win. They get the South to vote for them in a block.

Any candidate we chose would have faced a slanderous campaign meant to cost us the South, as Kerry and Gore can both attest. By November, they will have tried to paint Obama as completely undesirable, untrustworthy, and unelectable. On the other side, McCain is genuinely likable (we fool ourselves if we pretend otherwise). He's experienced, wily, crafty, funny, and has some admirable traits, like his military service.

And they have already begun to try to undermine our party, with the recent allegations against Johnson, Dodd, and others concerning Countrywide. That's the early stage of a planned attack. They will try to paint our party as corrupt, as they did in 94.

In the end, the Republican strategy will be to make the Democrats look corrupt and ineffective, Obama look inexperienced and untrustworthy, and McCain as the smart, experienced, likable candidate who may be a bit boring, but is at least better than the other guy. The known undesirable against the unknown possible horror.

Obama SHOULD win, anyway. We just don't need to start heading for the showers yet, is all I'm saying. It will be a different race in November. A different world. This campaign will take all we have, and if we do win, the hard campaigning will begin. They won't let up on Obama any more than they did on Clinton. Hell, they are still attacking Clinton, and they've done it so long that even some in our party have started believing their crap. Obama will be no different. Prepare.