For the Record

The volatility seen in the polls is volatility in the polls, not the electorate. Watching the national coverage is reminescent of Charlie Brown going up to kick the football. It's going to be different this time, except that it never is. The polls start out with a wild preference for one candidate or the other, show a little bounce around the conventions, and then start converging as people who were always going to vote left or right "come home." Thus even the most historic victories tend to take place in a band of just a few percent plus or minus.

Anyway, this has been the Democrats' election to lose since 2005 or thereabouts. The long slog in Iraq and the wave of GOP congressional scandals stripped the party of its reputation as the more trustworthy steward of foreign policy and taxpayer dollars. The Surge came too late to shift that narrative, and congressional leaders failed more or less every major test that could have clawed back some of the voters' favor. Anyone who read these tea leaves and saw a GOP victory needed a new set of glasses.

Nothing has changed. The party loyalists are settling in so we are left with the late-deciders, who to the best of my knowledge have broken strongly in favor of the anti-status-quo candidate every time. I still believe that McCain was probably the Republicans' best bet, but he's run a 45% campaign. Like Bob Dole and George H.W. Bush in 1992, McCain has failed to break out of the dynamic of this race. Actually, his selection of Sarah Palin was his one good, bold move. Unlike Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani, who will within a year be shuffled off the stage for good, I am convinced we have not seen the last of Sarah Palin. All you need to do is look at the turnout for her rallies and you can see the makings of a 2012 primary victory. Then again, Bobby Jindal will also be looking pretty good then. 2012 is four light-years away from today.