Convention Thoughts
Aug. 27th, 2008 04:04 pmAs I'm sitting here taking a break from getting the house ready to sell, I did a little Internet surfing. (I can stop surfing the Net anytime I want to.) One of the folks on my f-list, ![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
pyropyga who's real name I keep forgetting, was wondering where Obama's "bounce" in the polls was. Well, first, Politico.com shows a one-point bounce in the Gallup tracking poll.
Second, and more importantly, apparently Obama's not looking at the tracking poll. The linked article says that Obama's people are looking at the polling in 18 key states. This actually ties in well with this lengthy series of articles (hat tippyropyga ) on how Obama won the nomination.
Basically, Obama and his people sat down and read the DNC rulebook on how to get nominated. This may sound shocking, but Clinton's people didn't. More to the point, what the rulebook told them was "get delegates." They then figured out how to do so. They (Obama) also had a Plan B. When Plan A, knocking out Clinton quick, didn't work, Plan B, which was settle in for the long haul, was already in process. Thus, Obama had a ground game running in states before Clinton even got any people there.
I find that flexibility and contingency planning very comforting. I voted for Reagan in '84 and Bush in '88. I voted for Clinton when he ran, having become convinced that Bush 41 was lacking clues. Even so, I was ambivalent about Gore in '00, and voted for him more for Clinton's record then anything Gore said. I actually liked Bush's "humble" foreign policy, and really didn't become convinced that Bush was an idiot until it became apparent that Plan A in Iraq* was "they'll give us roses" and there was no Plan B.
There was no Plan B for Iraq. Not even written down, let alone in process of being executed. Any time somebody undertakes something as complicated as a war, there had damn well better be a Plan B. Strategic thinking and being able to execute alternative plans are things to look for in a President.
* Hardly a humble thing to do. Yes, situations change, but still, not humble.
pyropyga who's real name I keep forgetting, was wondering where Obama's "bounce" in the polls was. Well, first, Politico.com shows a one-point bounce in the Gallup tracking poll. Second, and more importantly, apparently Obama's not looking at the tracking poll. The linked article says that Obama's people are looking at the polling in 18 key states. This actually ties in well with this lengthy series of articles (hat tip
pyropyga ) on how Obama won the nomination. Basically, Obama and his people sat down and read the DNC rulebook on how to get nominated. This may sound shocking, but Clinton's people didn't. More to the point, what the rulebook told them was "get delegates." They then figured out how to do so. They (Obama) also had a Plan B. When Plan A, knocking out Clinton quick, didn't work, Plan B, which was settle in for the long haul, was already in process. Thus, Obama had a ground game running in states before Clinton even got any people there.
I find that flexibility and contingency planning very comforting. I voted for Reagan in '84 and Bush in '88. I voted for Clinton when he ran, having become convinced that Bush 41 was lacking clues. Even so, I was ambivalent about Gore in '00, and voted for him more for Clinton's record then anything Gore said. I actually liked Bush's "humble" foreign policy, and really didn't become convinced that Bush was an idiot until it became apparent that Plan A in Iraq* was "they'll give us roses" and there was no Plan B.
There was no Plan B for Iraq. Not even written down, let alone in process of being executed. Any time somebody undertakes something as complicated as a war, there had damn well better be a Plan B. Strategic thinking and being able to execute alternative plans are things to look for in a President.
* Hardly a humble thing to do. Yes, situations change, but still, not humble.
