Ward Report

Not good for McCain.

The Economist e-mailed a questionnaire to 683 research associates of the National Bureau of Economic Research which the magazine called "America’s premier association of applied academic economists". The magazine received a total of 142 responds, of whom 46% identified themselves as Democrats, 10% as Republicans and 44% as neither.

The results of the unscientific survey are reported here.The detailed responses are bad news for Mr McCain (the full data are available here). Eighty per cent of respondents and no fewer than 71% of those who do not cleave to either main party say Mr Obama has a better grasp of economics. Even among Republicans Mr Obama has the edge: 46% versus 23% say Mr Obama has the better grasp of the subject. “I take McCain’s word on this one,” comments James Harrigan at the University of Virginia, a reference to Mr McCain’s infamous confession that he does not know as much about economics as he should. In fairness, Mr McCain’s lower grade may in part reflect greater candour about his weaknesses. Mr Obama’s more tightly managed image leaves fewer opportunities for such unvarnished introspection.

A candidate’s economic expertise may matter rather less if he surrounds himself with clever advisers. Unfortunately for Mr McCain, 81% of all respondents reckon Mr Obama is more likely to do that; among unaffiliated respondents, 71% say so.

Keating Economics, the movie,

The Palins have released their 2006 and 2007 tax returns (prepared, by the way, by H&R Block).

It would appear they owe thousands in back taxes, not withstanding an opinion letter issued by McCain campaign attorney Roger Olsen.

Here's what the tax geeks think,

1. The Palins did not report as income some $17,000 that Governor Palin’s employer (the State of Alaska) paid her as an “allowance” for her travel. Can they do that? Yes, most likely.


2. The Palins did not report as income some $43,000 that the State of Alaska paid the Governor as an “allowance” for her husband and children’s travel. Can they do that? No, most likely not.


3. The Palins deducted $9,000 on their 2007 return, claiming it was a loss from Mr. Palin’s snow machine racing activity. Can they do that? Most likely not, but more info could make the deduction o.k. If any of the above issues goes against the Palins they then risk getting hit with the section 6662 penalty for “negligence or disregard of rules or regulations.”


4. Can the Palins avoid the section 6662 negligence penalty by claiming that they reasonably relied either (a) on the W-2’s sent to them by their employer, which did not reflect either the $17,000 or the $43,000, or (b) on their tax return preparer H&R Block, or (c) on Mr. Olsen’s opinion letter dated September 30, 2008? The three reliance defenses are unlikely to succeed, but more info may make the (b) defense a good one.


5. Does Mr. Olsen have any exposure to sanctions by the IRS because of his letter? I believe Mr. Olsen’s letter probably violates 31 C.F.R. section 10.35. If so, he would be exposed to possible sanctions from the IRS Office of Professional Responsibility.

It seems pretty clear to me that the $17k "travel allowance" would not be taxed as income if Gov Palin had actually been traveling, but that $17k was paid to her as a travel allowance while she was living in her family home and sleeping in her own bed. Is that not a difference that makes a difference?

Florida is a legitimate swing state that last voted Democratic in 2000.

Obama has averaged a 5 point lead from the last 4 polls.

Virgina hasn't voted Democratic since the passing of the Civil Rights Act in 1964.

So, check out this trend.



The two most recent polls place Obama's lead in Virgina at 11 points, and while I think that's too high, if it's half that, it's remarkable.

From today's Wall Street Journal, John McCain would pay for his health plan with major reductions to Medicare and Medicaid, a top aide said, in a move that independent analysts estimate could result in cuts of $1.3 trillion over 10 years to the government programs.
_____

But Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Sen. McCain's senior policy adviser, said Sunday that the campaign has always planned to fund the tax credits, in part, with savings from Medicare and Medicaid. Those government health-care programs serve seniors, poor families and the disabled. Medicare spending for the fiscal year ended Sept. 30 is estimated at $457.5 billion.

Jon Meacham asks in Newsweek's cover-story, "Do we want leaders who are everyday folks, or do we want leaders who understand everyday folks"?

Meacham's not buying the folksiness nonsense.

Here's the gist,John McCain is a man of accomplishment and curiosity, of wide and deep reading, travel and experience. He is smart without being a snob. He has authored legislation and books. He is a man of parts—the kind of figure whom one could effortlessly imagine being president. Are there many politically attuned people in America now who can honestly say the same thing of Sarah Palin? That they can effortlessly envision President Palin in the Oval Office, ready on day one to manage a market meltdown or a terror attack? Whether one agrees or disagrees with his politics, there is no arguing that McCain is qualified to be president of the United States. But there is plenty of argument about Palin's qualifications. Why should we apply a different standard to the vice president who would stand to succeed him?
_____

Sitting with her for part of the Couric interview, McCain implicitly compared Palin to Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan, saying that they, too, had been caricatured and dismissed by mainstream voices. The linkages are untenable. For all of his manifold sins, Clinton was a longtime governor, and George H.W. Bush's attacks on his qualifications failed for a reason: people may not have respected Clinton's character, but they did not doubt the quality of his mind. A successful two-term governor of California, Reagan had spent decades immersed in politics (of both the left and the right) before running for president. He did like to call himself a citizen-politician, and Lord knows he had an occasionally ambiguous relationship with facts, but he was a serious man who had spent a great deal of time thinking about the central issues of the age. To put it kindly, Palin, however promising a governor she is, has not done similar work.

One of the good things to come out of the global financial crisis is a stronger dollar.

The New York Times looked into their alleged relationship and didn't find much.

No trips on Ayers dime to the Bahamas, for instance.

Marc Ambinder reports that Obama has green-lighted hitting McCain on his involvement in the Keating 5.

UPDATE: Check out this new site put up by the Obama campaign. I guess he can play hard ball too.

Retaliation for McCain's decision to link Obama to 'questionable associations' or did McCain just provide a convenient excuse?

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said, "John McCain once said he would run a respectful and honorable campaign -- but now his campaign says that he wants to turn the page on the economy and make character assaults. That’s his choice. But on this issue, his involvement in the Keating scandal is relevant to the economic crisis we find ourselves in."The Obama campaign intends to release what they are calling a 'documentary' which should drive the news cycle on Monday and really piss off McCain in advance of the town hall debate.

'No drama Obama' seems pretty unflappable, but McCain not so much. Maybe the Tuesday debate won't be so boring.

I really do have Palin fatigue. I'm tired of talking about her; I'm tired of thinking about her. But I have to say that her willingness to tell bald faced lies is really breathtaking. Every pol stretches the truth and the best ones become expert in half truths, but out right bald face lies really are another matter.

Like Matt Yglesias and I suppose everyone else, when Palin said in Thursday's debate that she compelled the $40 Billion Alaska Permanent Fund to divest from Darfur, I believed she had.

She lied. Actually, she killed a bill to divest. "The [Palin] administration killed our bill," said Alaska state representative Les Gara, D-Anchorage. Gara and state Rep. Bob Lynn, R-Anchorage, co-sponsored a resolution early this year to force the Alaska Permanent Fund – a $40 billion investment fund, a portion of whose dividends are distributed annually to state residents – to divest millions of dollars in holdings tied to the Sudanese government.

The next presidential debate is Tuesday night, October 7, at Belmont University in Nashville TN.

The 90 minute format calls for two-minute answers, followed by one-minute discussion for each question. Tom Brokaw, the moderator, will include questions submitted by Internet at MyDebates.org with questions from the citizen participants.

It's not clear how spontaneous the questions will be. Will all questions have been chosen by the beginning of the debate or will it be possible for audience members (and Internets viewers) to be able to submit questions during the debate calling out either candidate for an evasive answer.

Brokaw is a big McCain fan (video here) and has been sucking up to the McCain campaign for NBC -- It will be interesting to see if this colors his conduct.

More interesting is how the candidates will interact. McCain is launching a new, uglier campaign in hopes of derailing Obama. McCain is not a good loser and has famously been angry of late. How will all of this play on national TV Tuesday night? 'No drama Obama' needs to kill McCain with kindness and really get under his skin.

SNL is never better than during election times, and Tina Fey has just been amazing as Sarah Palin. Last night was no exception.

And how about Queen Latifah making a cameo Gwen Ifill?

Both candidate take deserved hits.

Jake Tapper has the transcript and here is the video,

-->

UPDATE: I've been watching the Sunday shows and literally everyone of them has been running an SNL clip. Not good for Gov Palin.

And the line that got the biggest audience reaction that everyone is afraid to touch? Fey as Palin: "I believe marriage is meant to be a sacred institution between two unwilling teenagers."

As I mentioned last night, the McCain campaign has pushed the panic button and vowed to get very ugly.

Obama has a new ad out today in response to yesterday's WaPo article calling McCain out in very strong terms. A pitch perfect response.



Let us know in comments if you see this ad in your state. So far, nothing here in Saint Louis.

And they intend to get very ugly.

Per the WaPo, Sen. John McCain and his Republican allies are readying a newly aggressive assault on Sen. Barack Obama's character, believing that to win in November they must shift the conversation back to questions about the Democrat's judgment, honesty and personal associations, several top Republicans said.

With just a month to go until Election Day, McCain's team has decided that its emphasis on the senator's biography as a war hero, experienced lawmaker and straight-talking maverick is insufficient to close a growing gap with Obama. The Arizonan's campaign is also eager to move the conversation away from the economy, an issue that strongly favors Obama and has helped him to a lead in many recent polls.

"We're going to get a little tougher," a senior Republican operative said, indicating that a fresh batch of television ads is coming. "We've got to question this guy's associations. Very soon. There's no question that we have to change the subject here," said the operative, who was not authorized to discuss strategy and spoke on the condition of anonymity.This mean Rev. Wright and heavy-duty race baiting. What else do they have left? They've already called Obama a traitor (repeatedly) and have insisted he wanted to teach 'comprehensive sex education' to 5 years.

Race is all they have left. I expect within a week to be seeing McCain ads with video and audio of Rev. Wright's most inflammatory remarks.

UPDATE: I saw on "This Week" a very hard hitting ad that the Obama campaign has out this morning that hammers McCain. It's excellent and exactly the kind of response I've been seeking from Obama. I've looked for it online with no luck, but i will keep looking.

By the way, from the Republicans today it's all William Ayers all the time.

I try not to pay too much attention to the national horse-race polling but Barack Obama has hit a milestone worth noting.

Today, Barack Obama broke the 50% mark in the average of all major national polls.

As I expected, Palin scored a 'pass' tonight which was the most McCain could hope for. She did fine.

Biden did very well, but this debate wasn't about him.

And yes, Gen McClellan was in charge of the Army of the Potomac at the beginning of the civil war and has been dead for 100 years, and made no comments today about Afghanistan. But voters don't care about such things.

Palin stuck to her talking points, got over her early nerves and, as one talking head said, "won by not losing."

My guess is that McCain may get a little bounce out of this, but it won't amount to much.

Looks like Biden will look past Palin and focus on McCain and the Republicans.

Let Palin try to come to McCain's rescue.

Stunning.

If Palin goes on the attack tonight she's fair game, right?

Why would she want to do this? She will be judged pass/fail. Picking a fight with Biden would be foolish. Biden could disembowel her with a smile on his face.

All Palin has to do is be polite, spout talking points about what McCain / Palin would do (ie positive, not negitive) and she remains sympathetic, denies Biden license to attack and more importantly, she gets a pass.

Go on the attack and all bets are off.

Of course, I hope she goes on the attack right out of the block.