SNIPPETS, our daily collection of short items and comments, is here.

--------------------------------------------- 

Our next subscription drive will be in October.  However, readers are invited to subscribe at any time.  Subscriptions are voluntary, but are critical to keeping us going.  Subscribe in the right-hand column.

--------------------------------------------

Answers to last week's "Current Question" are here.  The new "Current Question" is here, in the right-hand column.

--------------------------------------------

I did a podcast with Silvio Canto Jr., who is active in the Cuban-American community in Texas.  For those interested, you can hear it here.

MONDAY,  SEPTEMBER 22,  2008

SARAH

Posted at 7:56 p.m. ET

I have not done this before - printed a full text of a speech, the way The New York Times did when it was still a great newspaper.  But a disgraceful event in New York this past week has suppressed this speech, and I will not have it. 

As many of you know, Sarah Palin was invited to address an anti-Ahmadinejad rally outside the UN, and accepted.  Hillary Clinton had also accepted, but, as soon as she learned Sarah was to appear, she pulled out, which says a great deal about her priorities.  Intense pressure was then placed on the inviting organizations - including, apparently, a threat to review their tax status - unless they disinvited Sarah Palin.  Eventually, they caved.  Sarah did not appear.  Had she done so, her speech would have gotten worldwide publicity.  But petty politics, and the obvious fact that many Democrats really don't care about the Iranian threat, intervened.

Here is the speech Sarah Palin would have delivered had her invitation not been withdrawn.  It is reprinted from the New York Sun.  I cannot guarantee that she wrote it herself.  That's unimportant.  She would have given it, and it would have been a great occasion for the forces of light.  Please read:

I am honored to be with you and with leaders from across this great country — leaders from different faiths and political parties united in a single voice of outrage.

Tomorrow, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will come to New York — to the heart of what he calls the Great Satan — and speak freely in this, a country whose demise he has called for.

Ahmadinejad may choose his words carefully, but underneath all of the rhetoric is an agenda that threatens all who seek a safer and freer world. We gather here today to highlight the Iranian dictator's intentions and to call for action to thwart him.

He must be stopped.

The world must awake to the threat this man poses to all of us. Ahmadinejad denies that the Holocaust ever took place. He dreams of being an agent in a "Final Solution" — the elimination of the Jewish people. He has called Israel a "stinking corpse" that is "on its way to annihilation." Such talk cannot be dismissed as the ravings of a madman — not when Iran just this summer tested long-range Shahab-3 missiles capable of striking Tel Aviv, not when the Iranian nuclear program is nearing completion, and not when Iran sponsors terrorists that threaten and kill innocent people around the world.

The Iranian government wants nuclear weapons. The International Atomic Energy Agency reports that Iran is running at least 3,800 centrifuges and that its uranium enrichment capacity is rapidly improving. According to news reports, U.S. intelligence agencies believe the Iranians may have enough nuclear material to produce a bomb within a year.

The world has condemned these activities. The United Nations Security Council has demanded that Iran suspend its illegal nuclear enrichment activities. It has levied three rounds of sanctions. How has Ahmadinejad responded? With the declaration that the "Iranian nation would not retreat one iota" from its nuclear program.

So, what should we do about this growing threat? First, we must succeed in Iraq. If we fail there, it will jeopardize the democracy the Iraqis have worked so hard to build, and empower the extremists in neighboring Iran. Iran has armed and trained terrorists who have killed our soldiers in Iraq, and it is Iran that would benefit from an American defeat in Iraq.

If we retreat without leaving a stable Iraq, Iran's nuclear ambitions will be bolstered. If Iran acquires nuclear weapons — they could share them tomorrow with the terrorists they finance, arm, and train today. Iranian nuclear weapons would set off a dangerous regional nuclear arms race that would make all of us less safe.

But Iran is not only a regional threat; it threatens the entire world. It is the no. 1 state sponsor of terrorism. It sponsors the world's most vicious terrorist groups, Hamas and Hezbollah. Together, Iran and its terrorists are responsible for the deaths of Americans in Lebanon in the 1980s, in Saudi Arabia in the 1990s, and in Iraq today. They have murdered Iraqis, Lebanese, Palestinians, and other Muslims who have resisted Iran's desire to dominate the region. They have persecuted countless people simply because they are Jewish.

Iran is responsible for attacks not only on Israelis, but on Jews living as far away as Argentina. Anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial are part of Iran's official ideology and murder is part of its official policy. Not even Iranian citizens are safe from their government's threat to those who want to live, work, and worship in peace. Politically-motivated abductions, torture, death by stoning, flogging, and amputations are just some of its state-sanctioned punishments.

It is said that the measure of a country is the treatment of its most vulnerable citizens. By that standard, the Iranian government is both oppressive and barbaric. Under Ahmadinejad's rule, Iranian women are some of the most vulnerable citizens.

If an Iranian woman shows too much hair in public, she risks being beaten or killed.

If she walks down a public street in clothing that violates the state dress code, she could be arrested.

But in the face of this harsh regime, the Iranian women have shown courage. Despite threats to their lives and their families, Iranian women have sought better treatment through the "One Million Signatures Campaign Demanding Changes to Discriminatory Laws." The authorities have reacted with predictable barbarism. Last year, women's rights activist Delaram Ali was sentenced to 20 lashes and 10 months in prison for committing the crime of "propaganda against the system." After international protests, the judiciary reduced her sentence to "only" 10 lashes and 36 months in prison and then temporarily suspended her sentence. She still faces the threat of imprisonment.

Earlier this year, Senator Clinton said that "Iran is seeking nuclear weapons, and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps is in the forefront of that" effort. Senator Clinton argued that part of our response must include stronger sanctions, including the designation of the IRGC as a terrorist organization. John McCain and I could not agree more.

Senator Clinton understands the nature of this threat and what we must do to confront it. This is an issue that should unite all Americans. Iran should not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. Period. And in a single voice, we must be loud enough for the whole world to hear: Stop Iran!

Only by working together, across national, religious, and political differences, can we alter this regime's dangerous behavior. Iran has many vulnerabilities, including a regime weakened by sanctions and a population eager to embrace opportunities with the West. We must increase economic pressure to change Iran's behavior.

Tomorrow, Ahmadinejad will come to New York. On our soil, he will exercise the right of freedom of speech — a right he denies his own people. He will share his hateful agenda with the world. Our task is to focus the world on what can be done to stop him.

We must rally the world to press for truly tough sanctions at the U.N. or with our allies if Iran's allies continue to block action in the U.N. We must start with restrictions on Iran's refined petroleum imports.

We must reduce our dependency on foreign oil to weaken Iran's economic influence.

We must target the regime's assets abroad; bank accounts, investments, and trading partners.

President Ahmadinejad should be held accountable for inciting genocide, a crime under international law.

We must sanction Iran's Central Bank and the Revolutionary Guard Corps — which no one should doubt is a terrorist organization.

Together, we can stop Iran's nuclear program.

Senator McCain has made a solemn commitment that I strongly endorse: Never again will we risk another Holocaust. And this is not a wish, a request, or a plea to Israel's enemies. This is a promise that the United States and Israel will honor, against any enemy who cares to test us. It is John McCain's promise and it is my promise.

Thank you.

And thank you, Governor Palin.  You would have been applauded by some members of the other party - Roosevelt, Truman, Jack Kennedy, Henry Jackson, Pat Moynihan.  But they are no longer with us.

September 22, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 7:07 P.M. ET:   The WMUR/Granite State Poll conducted by the University of New Hampshire Survey Center shows that 47 percent of likely voters plan to vote for McCain, with 45 percent saying they plan to vote for Obama. The poll of 523 likely voters was conducted From Sept. 14 to Sept. 21 and has a margin of sampling error of 4.3 percent. 

COMMENT:  Could be important for McCain, if it holds, and if it's accurate.  The key to all these state polls is the consistent closeness of the race in most battleground states.  New Hampshire is a battleground state.

UPDATE AT 6:37 P.M. ET:  New state polls are out, following a reasonably familiar pattern.  Rasmussen has McCain up four in Ohio, five in Florida and two in Virginia.  He has Obama up three in Pennsylvania and seven in Michigan.  The surprise here is Michigan, which has been much closer in other polls.  If McCain can take either Pennsylvania or Michigan, he'd turn this around.  But "if" is the biggest word in Politics, and so far Obama has stubbornly held onto leads. 

NOTE AT 5:07 P.M. ET:  I find it remarkable that there are so few questions about the timing of the financial meltdown last week - right in the middle of a presidential campaign.  I make no accusations.  I have no inside information.  Maybe it's entirely coincidental.  At the same time, markets can be manipulated, and some of that manipultion can be done from abroad.  It seems to me that any journalistic or legal investigation of the meltdown must "follow the money," and determine whether "financial terrorism" was in any way involved.  That's the only way to avoid unwarranted conspiracy theories. 

UPDATE AT 4:58 P.M. ET:  A new CNN/Opinion Research poll just published has Obama up four.  It does appear, based on the consenses of polls, that Obama now has a small but solid lead in the race, possibly 3-5 points.  While reversible, the history of this campaign shows that only an "event" can dislodge voters.  The selection of Sarah Palin is an example.  The next event will be Friday's presidential debate, followed six days later by the vice presidential debate.  Then the election will be a month away.  If Obama's lead survives the debates, I suspect Senator McCain will have a very difficult time.  But underestimating McCain hasn't been too healthy a practice for some pundits, so be optimistic. 

OFFICIAL CLARIFICATION FROM BILL CLINTON, AT 4:06 P.M. ET:  Despite saying she would accept the offer to be vice president, Hillary Clinton never really wanted to be Barack Obama's running mate, her husband former President Bill Clinton told ABC's The View.

Oh.

TRACKERS

Posted at 1:52 p.m. ET

(Please note that an earlier error in "Trackers" has been corrected.  Battleground has McCain up one, not Obama, as earlier reported.  UA regrets the error.)

Three of the four available trackers for the day have been published, essentially showing no change.  Rasmussen has Obama up one, and Gallup has him up four.  Battleground has McCain up one.  In a way, the national polling news over the last few days has been reasonable for McCain.  The slippage he suffered last week appears to have stopped, but more days of polling will be needed to demonstrate that. 

Only the Hotline poll for today is yet to be published.

There are some new state polls, though, and unfortunately they're not encouraging.  Obama is up six in Virginia - one poll only - and eight in Minnesota.  Recent polls have had McCain up inVirginia, and have shown Minnesota to be competitive.  A North Carolina poll has McCain up three, but he should be further ahead there.  A poll in Pennsylvania has Obama up two.  There may be hope there.

This remains a tight race.   Whoever wins the electoral college may do it by piling up two- and three-point margins in a number of states.  The bottom line is that we've returned to a pattern we saw before the convention - McCain is close, but Obama is ahead, and close doesn't count in politics. 

UPDATE AT 2:10 p.m. ET:  Hotline is now out, showing Obama up five.  He was up one in this poll yesterday.  This jump is unexplainable, and is not matched by the other trackers.  We'll have to follow Hotline over four days or so.

Only one national poll, Battleground, has McCain leading.

September 22, 2008.       Permalink          
 

BULLETIN AT 9:32 A.M. ET:  First tracker of the day is out.  Rasmussen shows results identical with those of the last few days - Obama up one.  This is four days before the first presidential debate, scheduled for Friday night in Mississippi.

Three other trackers for the day have yet to be released.

UPDATE AT 9:43 A.M.:  Battleground tracker just released has McCain up one.

MAGNIFICENT

Posted at 7:41 a.m. ET

It was actually published a few days ago, but I have held this piece by Bill Whittle until Monday morning, when it could get maximum exposure at Urgent Agenda.  It is a superb rendering of the stakes in this election, and I urge you to read it:

On February 9th, 1933, the ruling elite of the world’s great Civilization held a debate in the Oxford Union. With thunderclouds growing dark across the English Channel, at a time when resolute action could still have averted the worst catastrophe the world has ever known, these elites resolved that “This House will in no circumstances fight for its King and Country.”

The Resolution passed by a vote of 275 to 153. Needless to say, this vote did not avert the fight. It guaranteed it.

It's known as the Oxford Students' Oath, and it was noticed in Berlin. 

I live a few miles from Santa Monica High School, in California. There, young men and women are taught that America is “a terrorist nation,” “one of the worst regimes in history,” that it’s twice-elected leader is “the son of the devil,” and dictator of this “fascist” country. Further, “patriotism” is taught by dragging an American flag across the classroom floor, because the nation’s truest patriots, as we should know by now, are those who are most able to despise it.

And some of the most enthusiastic students drive to school in BMWs.

Two generations, now, are being raised on this poison, and the reason for that is this: the enemies of this city cannot come out and simply say, “Do not defend the city.” Even the smartest among us can see that is simple treason. But they can say, “The City is not worth defending.” So they say that, and they say that all the time and in as many different ways as they are able.

And...

The pattern is always the same: at the height of a civilization’s powers something catastrophic seems to occur — a loss of will, a failure of nerve, and above all an unwillingness to identify with the values and customs that have produced such wonders.

And there are the usual suspects.

I sit with others in darkened rooms, watching films like Redacted, Stop-Loss, and In the Valley of Elah, and see our brave young soldiers depicted as murderers, rapists, broken psychotics or ignorant dupes –visions foisted upon me by bitter and isolated millionaires such as Brian de Palma and Paul Haggis and all the rest.

I’ve been told this story in some form or another, every day of every week of the past 30 years of my life. It wasn’t always so.

But who can stop it, this rush into decline?

And standing against all this hypnotic power — the power of the mythmakers in Hollywood, the power of the information peddlers in the media, the corrosive power of America-hating professors on every campus in America… against all that we find an old warrior — a paladin if ever there was one — an old, beat-up warhorse standing up in defense of his city one last time. And beside him: a wonder. A common person… just a regular mom who goes to work, does a difficult job with intelligence and energy and grace and every-day competence and then puts it away to go home and have dinner with the family.

What becomes of those two?

No wonder they must be destroyed. Because — Sarah Palin especially — presents a mortal threat to these people who have determined over cocktails who the next President should be and who now clearly mean to grind into metal shards the transaxle of their credibility in order to get the result they must have. Truly, they are before our eyes destroying the machine they have built in order to get their victory. What the hell is so threatening to be worth that?

Only this: the living proof that they are not needed...

...Not needed. We can do it — and do it better — without all of them.

Are you cheering?  If not, you're not breathing.

Civilizations fall only because each citizen of the city comes to accept that nothing can be done to rally and rebuild broken walls; that ground lost may never be recovered; and that greatness lived in our grandparents but not our grandchildren. Yes, our betters tell us these things daily. But that doesn’t mean we have to believe it.

A great conclusion:

It is the small-town virtues of self-reliance, hard work, personal responsibility, and common-sense ingenuity — and not those of the preening cosmopolitans that gape at them in mixed contempt and bafflement — that have made us the inheritors of the most magnificent, noble, decent and free society ever to appear on this earth. This Western Civilization… this American City… has earned the right to greet each sunrise with a blast of silver trumpets that can bring down mountains.

And what, really, is a Legion of Narcissists and a Confederacy of Despair against that?

Nothing more need be said.  Save this one.  Great writing by someone who understands what this year is about.

September 22, 2008.      Permalink          

WOMEN

Posted at 6:28 a.m. ET

We can now say with a high degree of certainty that it is possible to speak to American women without the permission of Gloria Steinem.  This will come as a shock to Ms. Steinem and her humorless brigades, but it is true.

The Politico reports on a survey that shows Sarah power is having its impact.  We smile, we rejoice:

Since Republican presidential nominee John McCain chose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate, he has erased Barack Obama’s once-commanding lead as the candidate seen by women as having a “better understanding of women and what is important” to them, a new poll of likely female voters shows.

Sen. McCain now has a two point advantage – 44 to 42 percent – over his Democratic rival on that score, according to the poll conducted by pollsters Kellyanne Conway and Celinda Lake for Lifetime Television. In a July poll by Lifetime, Sen. Obama was seen as more empathetic to women’s concerns, by 52 to 18 percent over McCain.

If McCain/Palin can pull this election off, Sarah becomes the most powerful woman in America, and she didn't have to marry the governor of Arkansas to get there.

In this latest poll, conducted Sept. 11-15, age remained a key determinant in response to the question about women’s concerns. Young women, ages 18-34, chose the Obama/Biden ticket as more empathetic to their needs, while women aged 35-64 went for McCain/Palin. Unlike black and Hispanic women, white women saw McCain and Palin as most understanding of their concerns.

In addition, about one in four women who supported Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in the primaries said McCain and Palin have a better grasp of women’s needs than Obama and his running mate, Sen. Joe Biden.

Okay, those are attitudes.  The bottom line is votes.  How did that come out?

The survey comes as women overall favor the Democratic ticket, 48 to 44 percent, according to the weekly summaries of Gallup polling. That marks a wider margin than Democrats enjoyed in 2004 on Election Day, but less than in 2000.

And the Dems lost both times. 

The Sarah phenomenon was temporarily derailed last week by the financial crisis, and yet she drew some of the largest crowds of the campaign.  One rally in Florida had some 60,000 cheering Sarah fans, according to one knowledgeable source.

The next ten days, building to the vice-presidential debate on Thursday, October 2nd, will be crucial.  The Republicans must put their new star front and center, and let her do her thing.  She must also get through the debate and hold her own.  I have a gut feeling she may do much more.

September 22, 2008.      Permalink          

SUNDAY,  SEPTEMBER 21,  2008

NOTE AT 7:23 P.M. ET:  Tale of two news stories.  From the AP:

                   
               Palin's first Fla. campaign stop a safe one

THE VILLAGES, FLA. (AP) - Sarah Palin played it safe Sunday on her first trip as John McCain's running mate to the battleground state of Florida.

And from The Tallahassee Democrat:

Sarah Palin's visit to Florida draws thousands of supporters

THE VILLAGES -- Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin told wildly cheering, flag-waving, chanting supporters that John McCain is “the only great man in this race” and promised Sunday he will fix the nation’s economy if voters give the GOP four more years in the White House.

Choose whichever one makes you happy.

SMALL MAN

Posted at 6:52 p.m. ET

Once again, a foreign reporter - well, Canadian - has one of the sharpest takes on the American campaign.  Rex Murphy of Toronto's Globe and Mail examines the man he calls "Incredibly Shrinking Obama":

Journalists used to tell stories, now they plumb narratives. Narrative is a pretentious borrowing from the abstraction-clotted world of academic criticism, where texts are interrogated, authors are dead and high-toned fatuousness is king. I'll see your postmodern and raise you a meta.

Mr. Obama's campaign, however, has renewed narrative's trendy fizz. It is the very Perrier water (or is it San Pellegrino now?) of the better campaign reportage. Take no hike up Pundit Mountain without it. From the moment, the Obama surge took forceful shape, everyone - reporters, the scholars of blogland, the partisan howler monkeys of cable-news cage matches - has chattered on about Mr. Obama's narrative.

Wonderful.  And more...

Mr. Obama remains something of a floating, uncrowded presence. His story (and he is so impressively self-aware as to have made the most acute comment on it) is temptingly open-ended, very much a page to be written on. He himself has written, most memorably: "I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views."

That is as bold a statement as it is an insightful one. Bold, because it is a remarkable confession from a presidential hopeful. Insightful, because it matches the facts.

And...

Mr. Obama, however, has a kind of welcoming emptiness. Eager acolyte or stern observer, both find it difficult not to add, or project, the most flattering, even jubilant, fill-ins. The Obama candidacy, in its rocket-blast phase when he outsoared Hillary Clinton, drained the dictionaries of every superlative. The great "O" had them swooning in the stands. Why?

True, Oprah had passed her potent wand over him, but even the afternoon regent of a thousand therapies has stays on her sorcery. Mainly, his was very much a candidacy constructed by those who were drawn to him....

...Mr. Obama was the slate; the crowds brought their own chalk.

But the slate is getting dulled.

The sparkle has, in fact, dimmed. He travels now in a lower orbit, closer to Earth - which is to say, he grows more mundane. The great word "hope" sounds less frequently now. He picks a running mate thick with the dust and rancour of many long years in Washington...

...Of late, the flash supernova of U.S. politics is seen "competing" with a second-on-the-ticket female governor of a remote state.

Finally...

He has shrunk into a combative partisan. He crowds his own screen, leaves less space for projection. Others are not writing his narrative now - he's inscribing his own.

A candidacy that leached so much of its energy and drive from the imagination of others, Gatsby-like, is shedding its gift. The narrative stage is over. It's all tactics from here on in.

Maybe there's a kind of genius to our political system, with its long presidential campaigns.  The truth starts to come out.  We can only hope that the American people will recognize it in time.

September 21, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 6:25 P.M. ET:  Two Florida polls out today spell trouble for Senator McCain, if they are accurate.  One shows McCain up by one, the other by two.  A week ago it was assumed that McCain was well ahead in Florida.  If he loses Florida, it's unlikely he can win the election.  Again, a poll is a snapshot in time, so we'll be looking at the trends.

TRACKERS

Posted at 3:45 P.M. ET.

Three trackers are now available for Sunday.  We reported that Rasmussen still has Obama up one.

Now Hotline also has Obama one up.

And Gallup, which had Obama leading by six yesterday, has him leading by four today.

We can cautiously observe that Senator McCain may have stopped the slippage of the past week.  We'll see.  Stopping slippage is one thing, leading again is quite another.  As long as the economic hurricane is on page one, it's not helpful to McCain.

Some have raised questions about the timing of the economic catastrophes of the last week.  There have been suggestions of economic terrorism.  I have absolutely no inside information on that, but I do hope there is a complete investigation, by regulatory agencies, Congress, and those few elements in the media who can take on such a probe and do it well, especially The Wall Street Journal.  Without a body of facts, we should hold off on the conspiracy theories.

September 21, 2008.       Permalink            

UPDATE AT 11:52 A.M. ET:  From The Toledo Blade:  In the battle for Ohio’s 20 electoral votes, Republican presidential nominee John McCain holds a 48 percent to 42 percent lead over Democratic opponent Barack Obama — but with lots of time left in a volatile race, according to the first Ohio Newspaper Poll.

SARAH TO THE UN

Posted at 10:50 a.m. ET

I don't think we've ever run a story at Urgent Agenda where the real meat was in the comments sent by readers, but here's one that will prove that Palin Derangement Syndrome is now an accepted and medically recognized disease.  By the way, Medicare will cover it, but Blue Cross has doubts.

Andrew Malcolm of The Los Angeles Times reports:

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin will meet in New York next week with Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai, among other world leaders scheduled to visit the United Nations annual autumn General Assembly Session.

She'll also meet with the president of Colombia, Alvaro Uribe, and former secretary of state Henry Kissinger.

A spokesman for the McCain campaign confirmed the surprise visits tonight as well as hinted at as yet unannounced sessions between the Republican Party's surprise vice presidential pick and other foreign leaders.

And...

Introductions by the well-traveled McCain of his running mate to numerous world leaders, they hope, are clearly designed to help draw voters' attention back to her, as well as to establish some photographic foreign policy creds, much the way their Democratic opponent Barack Obama traveled all the way to Paris to be photographed patting the French president on the back.

I'm glad he reminded readers of Obama's let's-get-to-know-the-foreigners tour.

I suggest linking to this story, and then reading the comments below, starting with "Is this Take Your Daughter to Work day?"  You'll get a real taste of what psychiatrists see every day.  Show your friends.

September 21, 2008.      Permalink          

UPDATE AT 9:37 A.M. ET:   The first tracker is out for today.  Rasmussen shows no change from yesterday, with Obama up one over McCain.  We'll check other trackers this afternoon, but I have a sense that the race has now stabilized after a week of small losses for McCain.  The problem is, it's now back to where it was before the conventions, with no poll showing McCain ahead. 

THE DIVIDE

Posted at 8:33 a.m. ET

The AP is running a story that's being picked up by most of the major news organizations that we monitor.  It's the story we all expected during this campaign - claiming that race can cost Barack Obama the election:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Deep-seated racial misgivings could cost Barack Obama the White House if the election is close, according to an AP-Yahoo News poll that found one-third of white Democrats harbor negative views toward blacks - many calling them "lazy,""violent" or responsible for their own troubles.

The poll, conducted with Stanford University, suggests that the percentage of voters who may turn away from Obama because of his race could easily be larger than the final difference between the candidates in 2004 - about 2.5 percentage points.

Certainly, Republican John McCain has his own obstacles: He's an ally of an unpopular president and would be the nation's oldest first-term president. But Obama faces this: 40 percent of all white Americans hold at least a partly negative view toward blacks, and that includes many Democrats and independents.

Already I don't like this story.  I'm sure 40 percent or more of Americans hold at least a partly negative view of a number of groups.  Some men may not feel that women are up to the job.  Others may not like southerners.  Reagan was deemed "too Hollywood" for some.  And of course the most loathed group in American society is the "Washington insider," almost an ethnic group by now.  But let's go on.

"There are a lot fewer bigots than there were 50 years ago, but that doesn't mean there's only a few bigots," said Stanford political scientist Paul Sniderman who helped analyze the exhaustive survey.

It takes a Ph.D. to figure that one out.

The findings suggest that Obama's problem is close to home - among his fellow Democrats, particularly non-Hispanic white voters. Just seven in 10 people who call themselves Democrats support Obama, compared to the 85 percent of self-identified Republicans who back McCain.

This is automatically racism?  Some people have discovered that Obama's resumé can fit on the thin edge of a 3x5 card.  That might have something to do with it.

Not all whites are prejudiced. Indeed, more whites say good things about blacks than say bad things, the poll shows. And many whites who see blacks in a negative light are still willing or even eager to vote for Obama.

I have absolutely no idea what that paragraph says.  If you can figure it out, please e-mail me with the highest urgency.  Do you get the feeling that some guy got a grant to do this and had to go through with it?

Statistical models derived from the poll suggest that Obama's support would be as much as 6 percentage points higher if there were no white racial prejudice.

But in an election without precedent, it's hard to know if such models take into account all the possible factors at play.

Six percent?  That's remarkably low, and the country should be commended.  What about the increased number of African-American voters who'll go to the polls, understandably, out of pride?  What about young people who'll vote for Obama because of his race, to make a political statement?  Were those factors considered?

Researchers used mathematical modeling to sort out the relative impact of a huge swath of variables that might have an impact on people's votes - including race, ideology, party identification, the hunger for change and the sentiments of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's backers.

Just 59 percent of her white Democratic supporters said they wanted Obama to be president. Nearly 17 percent of Clinton's white backers plan to vote for McCain.

This is because of race?  How about resentment?  How about liking older, experienced presidents?

And here's the kicker:

Among white Democrats, Clinton supporters were nearly twice as likely as Obama backers to say at least one negative adjective described blacks well, a finding that suggests many of her supporters in the primaries - particularly whites with high school education or less - were motivated in part by racial attitudes.

Wait a minute, wait a minute.  Read that again.  It actually says that some Obama supporters said negative things about blacks.  So what does this whole survey prove?

Look, some people have bad racial attitudes.  They will vote against Obama, or, just as likely, stay home.  But, as I've said, some will vote for him because of his background.  And we're now seeing that Obama's standing in the polls, rather than dragging behind his party, may actually be consistent with the Democrats' standing at this moment.  It's true that earlier this year the Democrats were well ahead of the Republicans in voter preference, but that gap has narrowed dramatically.

I'm afraid that surveys like this will provide a ready excuse for explaining away an Obama defeat, which would probably be caused by much more solid factors. 

September 21, 2008.      Permalink          

"What you see is news.  What you know is background.  What you feel is opinion."
    - Lester Markel, late Sunday editor
      of The New York Times.

SUBSCRIPTIONS:

Subscriptions to URGENT AGENDA are voluntary.  Why subscribe to something you're getting free?  To help guarantee that you'll continue to get it at all.  Subscriptions sustain us.  Payments are through PayPal and are secure, but you do not have to sign up for a PayPal account.  Credit cards are fine.

FOR A ONE-YEAR ($48) SUBSCRIPTION, CLICK:

FOR A SIX-MONTH ($26) SUBSCRIPTION, CLICK:

IF YOU DON'T WISH A SET SUBSCRIPTION, BUT PREFER TO DONATE ANY OTHER AMOUNT TO SUSTAIN URGENT AGENDA, CLICK:

SEARCH URGENT AGENDA:

POWER LINE:

It's a privilege for me to post periodic pieces at Power Line. To go to Power Line, click here.

To link to my Power Line pieces, go here.

THE CURRENT QUESTION

This space will regularly raise questions that relate to the news, but transcend daily headlines.  The idea is to stimulate talk about basic issues. Our last question asked: 

Last week we asked,

What should John McCain's strategy be until election day?

You can view the answers here.

NEW CURRENT QUESTION

How would you explain to an angry, disillusioned foreigner why Barack Obama lost the election?

If you'd like to send us your thoughts, click:
response@urgentagenda.com
(Please stay within two or three paragraphs.  We try to print every reply, if space allows.  Place your name at the end of the message if you wish your name published.  This question will stay up through Sunday.)

CONTACT:

YOU CAN E-MAIL US, AS FOLLOWS:

If you have wonderful things to say about this site, if it makes you a better person, please click:
applause@urgentagenda.com

If you have a general comment on anything you see here, or on anything else that's topical, please click:
comments@urgentagenda.com

If you must say something obnoxious, something that will embarrass you and disgrace your loving family, click:
despicable@urgentagenda.com

If you required subscription service, please click:
service@urgentagenda.com

FAVORITE SITES

Power Line
Faster Please (Michael Ledeen)
OpinionJournal.com
Hudson Institute
Bookworm Room
Bill Bennett
Red State
Pajamas Media
Michelle Malkin
The Weekly Standard
The New York Sun
Real Clear Politics
The Corner
City Journal
Gateway Pundit
American Thinker