Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Blagojevich roundup - It ain’t exactly pretty
Next Post: Lisa Madigan: Concern troll
Posted in:
* Recent battleground state tracking polls showed a big jump for Barack Obama. But a Democratic news outlet dumped a tanker truck of cold water on Obama’s presidential aspirations yesterday….
In an unusually candid interview, a top official for the largest union backing Obama said that internal union polling shows that the race remains much more volatile and fluid in key battleground states than public polling suggests. He warned that low-information swing-state voters are saying they still don’t have a firm enough grasp on Obama’s life-story, character and record for the Illinois Senator to close the deal with them. […]
“This election remains extremely volatile in the battlegrounds,” [AFL-CIO deputy political director Mike Podhorzer] told us. “The public polls are giving a false sense of precision about where the race is. That’s a story that’s not really being told.”
Strikingly, Podhorzer said that his union’s internal polls — which push voters hard on the question of whether people are really firmly committed to their pick — show that as many as “15 to 20 percent” of battleground state voters remain “persuadable,” as he put it, despite what public polls say about the level of undecided voters.
“There are more voters than you’d expect who are just starting to pay attention to the election,” he said. “And there’s a lot of room for people to go back and forth.” […]
“Low information voters who haven’t been following this don’t know very much about Obama, in a way that might be different from other elections,” he said. “Voters are saying, `I really don’t want another four years of this, but I don’t know much about him.”
* As if the uncertain polling, the Tony Rezko deals, machine endorsements, and his ties to people like Senate President Emil Jones and Gov. Blagojevich isn’t enough already, the FBI is now reportedly looking into one of Sen. Barack Obama’s bestest buddies…
FBI agents met with Will County Auditor Stephen Weber for two hours Wednesday morning regarding an investigation the auditor initiated into a countywide office, the Tribune has learned. […]
Sources say the investigation centers on Will County Executive Larry Walsh’s office. Walsh, who faces Joliet businessman Dan Kennison in the November election, was outraged by rumors that investigators were looking into whether one of his employees was improperly accepting payments from a lobbying firm hired by the county.
Walsh, a Democrat, blamed the accusations on gutter politics. Weber is a Republican who also faces a November challenger, Democrat Kevin Duffy Blackburn.
Walsh has been prominently featured in some of Obama’s TV ads during the presidential campaign.
* More…
At 9:45 a.m., Chicago agent Joseph Basile and another man walked into the offices of Will County Auditor Steve Weber. They walked back out again just after 11 a.m. […]
“If you are insinuating that [chief of staff Matt Ryan] is receiving some kind of monetary reimbursement from them, I find that totally preposterous,” Walsh said.
The lobbying firm has secured quite a bit of federal funding for the county, including money to clean up and modernize the water and sewer system in Joliet Township’s Ridgewood neighborhood; to do engineering work at 143rd Street and Interstate 355; and to add laptop computers to the squad cars driven by Will County police. […]
“I have never received one nickel of compensation from anyone, including Mr. Smith, since I have been a county employee,” Ryan said.
Walsh is up for reelection, so this could just be a political game. But the timing isn’t just bad for Walsh, it’s bad for Obama.
Please remember our rule forbidding the use of mindless DC talking points in the comment section. They’ll just be deleted anyway, so you might as well come up with something original to begin with. Thanks.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 10:21 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Blagojevich roundup - It ain’t exactly pretty
Next Post: Lisa Madigan: Concern troll
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I don’t understand why the county auditor is involved. Are county tax dollars somehow involved?
Comment by Cal Skinner Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 10:27 am
It’s hard to believe there is such a thing as low-information voters at this point. Maybe there’s just so much information and media out there that people tune out.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 10:30 am
If it is a game, it would be almost the same as the game played four years ago when the FBI marched into the Will County Land Use Department right before the election. So far, nothing has come from that raid.
Comment by Anon from BB Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 10:30 am
I am surprised by the poll results at all. The economic news is causing a huge push away from anything related to Bush. But that is not going to completely carry for the next month.
I think people are way underestimating Palin tonight. The night is a huge risk for Biden. If he makes a factual error, people will be on him far more than Palin. Plus, Palin seems pathetically likeable, so Biden is going to have a walk a very narrow line between “calm and experienced” and “condescending.”
If Palin has some facts tonight, it will not be good for Obama. If she doesn’t and she looks too pathetic, is still might not be good for Obama.
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:01 am
Not sure that this Will County angle will get any national play - too ambiguous. I agree that the poll numbers are likely to move a few more times before election day. The race remains volatile, despite Obama’s clear advantages with Democrat trends and a largely worshipful media. Obama’s “newness” is both an advantage and a liability.
Comment by phocion Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:03 am
Correction — of course I meant “I am NOT. . .”
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:05 am
I think a significan chunk of voters will walk into the polling places still unresolved.
I think there’s a desire among many to cast a historic vote for the first AA Prez but they weigh that against his experience, his liberalism, and the unknowns that the Labor piece identifies.
Comment by Bill Baar Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:05 am
I think that your last sentence may be completely backwards, BB.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:07 am
“A tanker truck of cold water”? More like a mountain out of a molehill. The supposed bombshell here is that 1 in 5 or 6 voters may change their minds in the next month. How is that a surprise? I think it’s more remarkable that 80 to 85 percent of voters, by this measure, say they’re locked in to their candidates despite three debates remaining and five weeks left on the hustings.
You’re also not asking WHO those 15-20 percent of voters are now supporting. But in fact a national poll out today from Time magazine did just that — and found that nearly a QUARTER of all McCain supporters say they could flip to Obama. By contrast, just one in six Obama supporters indicated they could yet be persuaded to back McCain.
Bottom line, yes, a chunk of the electorate is just tuning in. Naturally these voters haven’t totally made up their minds. And that seems to represent some ray of hope in a rolling wall of dark clouds for McCain. But it also offers lots of room for further growth for Obama, too.
(And this is all leaving aside the fact that every empirical indicator is pointing strongly in Obama’s direction. He appears to be in strong position in all the Kerry states, with only New Hampshire appearing especially vulnerable right now. Iowa and New Mexico are Bush states that now seem sure to flip. And Obama is clearly on the offensive in many other Bush states, including Virginia, Nevada, Florida, Indiana, Missouri, Ohio and even North Carolina. Holding the Kerry states, adding Iowa and New Mexico and flipping just one of the latter seven equals an Obama victory.)
(And that’s not even accounting for the huge uptick in new registrations–a new NBC poll finds first-time voters favor Obama by more than 30 points. It’s not accounting for the likelihood of historic turnout among youth, people of color and other groups predisposed to vote Obama. It’s not accounting for cell-phone-only voters who according to Pew favor Obama by 20 points. And it’s not accounting for the large disparity in field organization that favors Obama in all the battleground states.)
Comment by Reality Check Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:23 am
==low-information swing-state voters are saying they still don’t have a firm enough grasp on Obama’s life-story, character and record for the Illinois Senator to close the deal with them==
Patronizingly stupid thing to say.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:24 am
Rich, Obama wrote about being a blank slate and how people projected all sorts of things on him. That’s true.
I think a lot of fairly conservative people want to vote for him but his liberalism becomes a problem.
People want to vote for him but his short experience becomes a problem….. I think that won’t get resolved until voters are inside the booth.
I think that’s the Brady effect. It’s almost the reverse of racism. People want to vote badly for an AA candidate and tell pollster they will, but than they get in the booth and tell themselves he/she is a great candidate, but I don’t agree with them much… do I want to cast a historic vote for someone I’m going to have regrets about later?
Comment by Bill Baar Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:26 am
BB, whose Brady? Do you mean Bradley?
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:28 am
===How is that a surprise?===
Because no media poll has the undecideds at 20 percent.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:28 am
Brady effect, Brady effect…
What we’ve been really seeing are voters who don’t like old people or women in office more than whether they like a candidate’s skin tone.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:28 am
The folks I have talked to that are undecided are afraid of electing an African American. Information that would resolve their internal conflict in favor of Obama is overlooked or rejected. I think their is a strong bias in favor of voting for the person who seems to be the most like you, and, unfortunately, I think many people go with looks first because they are unable or unwilling to spend the time to dig deeper.
The tendency of people to hang onto their views even in the face of strong evidence to the contrary, was touched on during NPR’s TOTN Tuesday afternoon. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=95209118
Comment by Pot calling kettle Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:30 am
If the national press has given Joe Biden a pass for not knowing who he president was during the great depression as well as not knowing that television was discovered after the depression was over, I see no reason to be concerned that they will start taking him to task for factual errors now.
Heck the press really nailed Hillary for her ‘under fire’ story in Bosnia, but have given Joe a pass on the shot down helicopter and being fired on in Iraq gaffes.
Thank goodness though, the national press protected us from an archaic spelling of potatoe.
Comment by Plutocrat03 Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:32 am
===How is that a surprise?===
Because no media poll has the undecideds at 20 percent.
It doesn’t say the AFL finds 15-20 percent undecided. It says the AFL finds 15-20 percent could change their minds. They may be true undecideds or they may be leaners.
Of course different polls push and allocate leaners differently, but I doubt you could find any election in which more than the current 80-85 percent of the electorate says they’re locked in to a candidate more than a month out.
And again, McCain leaners appear to make up many more of these soft supporters (persuadables) than do Obama leaners. So it’s at least as much evidence of further opportunity for Obama to expand his lead than it is a hint of weakness.
And this in a context that is both favorable for Obama and clearly, irrefutably trending his way.
Comment by Reality Check Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:44 am
I was inartful with my word choice. Still, there is little coverage of how the numbers in media polls could switch back and why. Trend or no trend, there are some unique aspects to Obama’s candidacy, two in particular: his status as a relative unknown and hisa race.
Trend shchmend. McCain may be running a horrible race, but it ain’t over yet if the AFL-CIO, of all people, are freaking out.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:51 am
I believe the entire push to discuss this Bradley effect is patronizing and insulting. I am not pleased to watch, listen or read opinions that claim that some voters are unable to overlook our junior senator’s skin color. Once again, we are seeing self-annointed “enlightened” people tell us that racist won’t like their candidate.
Well, sexists won’t like Palin. We’ve had just as many voters indicate a preference against Palin and Clinton because they cannot imagine a woman with presidential powers. Just as we’ve never elected a African-American to the presidency, we’ve never elected a woman either. So why the bias against women?
We’ve had only two women candidates for governor in Illinois, (both lost), yet we see African American men and Carol Braun holding statewide office without controversies regarding race.
There is a stronger indication that voters have a problem with female candidates yet we are not seeing this touted by the “enlightened”, are we? If their candidate was Hillary Clinton, what do you want to bet that this issue would not be so hidden? We’d be hearing, reading, and watching stories about voters who are too “low information” to make the same choice as they.
Honestly, the patronizing we are being subjected to is over the top. The “justifications” being given by the “enlightened” ones regarding why this particular candidate faces a racial challenge is belittling and insulting.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:54 am
Does the FBI visit have to do with Tony Rezko talking?
Comment by Steve Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 11:55 am
We can agree that it most certainly ain’t over yet. As Nate Silver said on 538 today, “We are both close to the end and yet nowhere near.” (Though if you click through to that post, you’ll see Silver finds that Obama has enough electoral votes to win in just the states where currently has at least a six-point lead. You could give VA, NH, OH, FL, NV, IN, NC and MO to McCain and Obama still prevails. For the GOP, that’s a tough row to hoe.)
Re the AFL “freaking out,” I think you may be overstating the tone of that piece. However, I’m curious about what this says for Obama’s chosen path to the White House: Is it possible that he is not placing near as much emphasis on traditional union voters as recent Dem candidates have done? Does his coalition depend more on independents, progressives, young people, people of color, disaffected Republicans and new voters from all these groups than it does on union voters? And if so, is union support softer than expected because less attention has been paid to their issues and concerns? Is this article a couched complaint? All interesting questions to me.
Comment by Reality Check Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 12:06 pm
What do you expect a labor organizer to say, “We’ve got this one in the bag - you don’t need to come out and volunteer, guys!”
Prime rule of field organizing: Pretend you are losing by one vote, and the next volunteer you recruit is the one that will carry you over the top. Repeat.
Comment by Dennis P Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 12:12 pm
===#
I think that’s the Brady effect. It’s almost the reverse of racism. People want to vote badly for an AA candidate and tell pollster they will, but than they get in the booth and tell themselves he/she is a great candidate, but I don’t agree with them much… do I want to cast a historic vote for someone I’m going to have regrets about later?
Slight problem–both Wilder and Bradley were conservative Democrats and so your entire argument is either for a new phenomenon or is just flat out wrong.
Comment by archpundit Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 12:31 pm
===Patronizingly stupid thing to say.
If that’s what the data he has shows, how is it patronizing?
Comment by archpundit Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 12:34 pm
This will county thing is a BS smokescreen cooked up by the Steve Webber, the Will County Auditor–a guy who may have hired Jack Riley (county board member Susan Riley’s husband) as part of a deal to secure Susan Riley’s vote for Jim Moustis as county board chairman. Meanwhile, Jack Riley has been a “grant writer” for the auditor and has failed to write ONE SINGLE GRANT. Auditor Steve Webber is supposed to be the one watching our money and not blowing it on political shenanigans. In the last four years, Jack Riley has cost Will County a $250,000 salary for doing absolutely NOTHING. Hey Rich, how come the papers don’t write about the money paid to Jack Riley for doing nothing? And, did I mention that the state’s attorney advised the auditor that Riley’s ability to write grants would be limited, and Webber hired him anyway?
This is but a ploy to get the spotlight off Webber.
Comment by anon Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 12:49 pm
A Sept. poll, by the Univ. of Wisconsin, said that, in IL, Obama was ahead of McCain, 49%-34%. 2% supported other candidates, and 15% were undecided. The margin of error was 3%, so Obama might win about half of the vote, in his homestate.
Comment by Phil Collins Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 12:52 pm
“Low information voters who haven’t been following this don’t know very much about Obama, in a way that might be different from other elections.”
The data doesn’t show that. His interpretation of the data is deliberately condescending and insulting.
“Low information”, who is he referring to as low information voters? OH, those who aren’t supporting Obama!
His usage of the word “might” is also indicative of his interpretation, not the data at hand.
If you believe in self-government and believe in democracy then you have to show respect to those who disagree with you and accept the fact that those who disagree with you aren’t ignorami who simply need to be lead like “low information” lemmings into enlightenmeent.
The data shows that Obama has some work to do to reach those who are not currently supporting him. It does not show that these voters are “low information” people as though it uncovers a group of the developmentally challenged.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 12:56 pm
VM, these low info voters, I think he means, are going back and forth and are also sometimes undecideds.
Take a breath.
Do you deny that there are Low Information voters out there? Please.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 1:00 pm
Plutocrat:
Bad timing for those remarks.
Turns out, McCain doesn’t know much about those subjects either:
It has been reported:
“This morning on Fox News, Sen. John McCain tried to slam Sen. Joe Biden by saying at least Gov. Sarah Palin knows President Franklin Roosevelt “didn’t talk to the American people over television.”
While Biden wrongly said last week that FDR addressed the American people on television after the 1929 stock market crash, McCain is wrong that FDR didn’t talk to the American people over television.
Roosevelt was the first president to appear on television when he spoke at the opening session of the New York World’s Fair on April 30, 1939. The first presidential address from the White House was by President Harry Truman on Oct. 5, 1947. “
Comment by Skeeter Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 1:07 pm
Re the Larry Walsh thing, here is what I think happened. Steve Webber asks the FBI to come talk with him. While the FBI is in Webber’s office listening to whatever nonsense Webber has to say, the reporter is outside. The FBI leaves agent leaves feeling rather agitated that Webber has used him as a political pawn. The reporter outside is then given enough info by Webber to where she can write a story, unaware that she has been single handedly duped and used by Webber. This is a nonstory, nonissue, cooked up by Wbber to deflect attention from the fact that he has what practically amounts to a ghost payroller in his office named Jack Riley.
Comment by nice kid Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 1:42 pm
Whatever is going on in Will County is completely irrelevant and non-germane to Obama’s quest for the Presidency. Tony Rezco also is completely irrelevant.
Barring some national security crisis that resulta in a diversion in the public’s top concern from the econonmy, this election is over. Obama will smash McCain on economic issues not because Obama is an economic genious, but becasue the Republican have been in charge for the last 8 years.
Are we better off than we were 8 years ago? With higher unemployment, higher gas prices, incredible budget deficits, growing trade deficits, continued loss of good paying manufacturing jobs, and the worst economic meltdown since the Great Depression, voters are likely to blame the Republican Party, George Bush, and by extension, Johm McCain. McCain’s record, his behavior last week, and his public political humiliation related to these issues/behaviors translate to poor credibility on economic issues.
Becasue of his race and his strange sounding name, Obama does have a higher hurdle to overcome than any other Democratic candidate.
Obama seems to be rising to the challenge of overcoming that hurdle based upon his perforamnce in last Friday’s debate. Obamaa held his own, and polls suggest he was perceived by the public as the clear winner of that debate because he was cooler under fire and more likeable than McCain. Hot, angry, publicly uncivil candidates seldom do well on TV.
McCain also lost his cool during his meeting with the editorial Board of the Des Moines Register simply because they asked questions McCain didn’t like.
If you are betting on a McCain resurgence during the next month, you’re likely to be politically and financially bankrupt on November 5th. McCain has peaked and appears to be failing the critical tests presented by the crucible of a Presidentcial campaign, starting with the unqulaified and ignorant person he selected to be a heartbeat away form his presidenct.
McCain knows he’s losing - why do you think he’s so angry -, professional Rebuplcan politicians know McCain is losing, and you all know he’s losing, unless you are in deep denial of the strong Obama trend that has developed during the last two weeks after the Palin bubble exploded.
I do agree that the electorate is volatile.But I am confident that Obama will overcome the inevitable challenges that confront him during the next month, pretty mcuh the same way he survived the Clinton’s appeals to hard-working white people.
It ain’t over till its over. But it’s almost over.
Comment by Captain Anerica Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 1:55 pm
First, its Weber not Webber.
Second, you don’t toy with the FBI. I doubt Weber called the Feds about anything false or unwarranted. That would be a bad move. Now, the timing may be political (could he have called them in April?), but that doesn’t mean that Weber has nothing worth looking into.
Comment by wc kid Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 1:59 pm
Captain Anerica:
Please remember our rule forbidding the use of mindless DC talking points in the comment section.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 2:40 pm
We are dropping into the minutea here if you think what Sen. McCain said is erroneous. Sen was addressing what Sen Biden said. i.e. speaking to the American people in response to a crisis. Opening an exposition at a time that the common person did not have a receiver is not the same as addressing the nation.
Regardless, my point was and remains that the national press gives Sen. Biden a pass when he ‘’is less than accurate’ while piling on McCain/Palin for anything they say.
Comment by Plutocrat03 Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 3:21 pm
I think most voters are “low information” voters. They have a few issues or characteristics that they focus on when making their decision. This is understandable in light of the vast amount of information available.
The parties and candidates try to find key issues that many people focus on, and that works for some voters. Other voters go for the “feel” of a candidate, and that is quite a bit trickier to nail down. In this area, race, age, experience, and demeanor are all factors, and there are many people who feel about a candidate in a way they are not comfortable sharing in public. Those people might well tell a pollster one thing and do something else in the privacy of a voting booth. I suspect that this is the source of the AFL/CIO’s worry.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 3:38 pm
Just heard on NPR: McCain is pulling out of Michigan…
Comment by Pot calling kettle Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 3:39 pm
I predict Illinois is turning Red.
Comment by No More Taxes Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 3:44 pm
Hey Anon – this is Jack Riley – Why don’t you repeat your smack to my face or are you just a Democrat flunky who wants to hide behind a pseudonym.
The facts are County Tax-payers pay Larry Walsh and all his family members who work for the county over $1,000,000 per year. Next Walsh hires a political lobbyist Matt Ryan as his chief of staff (has no experience) for $104,000 per year and then he needs to hire a lobbyist in Washington for $120,000 per year to get earmarks and grants.
But here is the “piece de resistance” Walsh has to hire his own grant writer – So Walsh rams through the County Board a contact for Lois Mayer as his grant writer for $70,000 per year telling the County Board Lois Mayer will be a full time contact employee (that’s 40 hours per week) but she also has another full time paid job as Administrator of the Immanuel EV Lutheran Preschool.
Do you know what Lois Mayer’s nick name is at the County? “The ghost of the Emco building” because she is never in her office or at work. How much money does Walsh and his friends expect taxpayers to give them?
So in the last four year Walsh and Friends have been paid over $8,000,000 over four years – every Will County Taxpayer has to be saying ouch!
I am tired of being the Matt Ryan’s punching bag. I will put my credentials up against Matt Ryan any day. I have a BS in Economics specializing in Econometrics and a Masters in Business Administration in Accounting and Finance. I was an Executive for a Fortune 10 Company running business all over the United States including starting a new business in the People’s Republic of China. Now I work as a Financial Analyst for County Auditor Steve Weber. Again I work for you money as a Financial Analyst And it is MR. WEBER to you. Anon stop by and see me some time! I am always in the office
Comment by Jack Riley Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 6:42 pm
Sounds like Larry is qualified to be VP! Chief Exec of a county with a population slightly bigger than Alaska, knows how to get jobs for his friends, knows how to punish those who are not. The only question that remains is: “Is he folksy enough?”
As an outsider on this Will Co. thing, it sounds like Mr. Weber and Mr. Walsh are appointing people they know and trust and like (politically & personally) to positions within their offices. This is news? This is unusual? I suspect that Ms. Mayer does as much work as Mr. Riley; take that however you like…
Comment by Pot calling kettle Thursday, Oct 2, 08 @ 10:39 pm
Jack, Lois Mayer and that Smith guy have actually brought money into the county. they collected a paycheck AND did their jobs. You just collect a paycheck.
Comment by uhm... Friday, Oct 3, 08 @ 7:05 am
-uhm, $750,000 - $8,000,000 = ($7,250,000)
Now I understand why there is a minus in front message.
Maybe you can apply for some of the $7B bail-out.
Comment by Jack Riley Friday, Oct 3, 08 @ 3:17 pm