Now that we are within a month of the election, each campaign has embarked on their "end game" - trying to attract the yet undecided votes before the go to the polls in November. The Rasmussen poll shows Barack Obama leading John McCain 51-44% - with only 13% of voters still classifying themselves as "undecided". At this point, for McCain to win, he would have to attract 80% of the undecided vote - a nearly impossible task.

The biggest issue working in Obama's favor is the disasterous situation with the economy. As public fears regarding the direction of the economy have increased, so has the support for Barack Obama. Today, more than half the population believes that Obama has a better handle on the economy and that opinion is strongly represented in his polling numbers.

It is highly unlikely that the economy will show any improvement between now and November. In fact, it is likely to get worse before it gets any better with "profit" forecasts due out shortly which are likely to drive the market down even further. I would expect the Obama campaign to continue to hammer McCain on the economy for the next weeks and paint the Republicans as the ones responsible for the current economic disaster.

The McCain campaign, will concentrate on the various "scandals" in Obama's past, especially Rev. Wright, Rev. Phleger, Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko. It is unlikely, however, that this will be enough to turn the tide for the McCain campaign.

Ron

Yes, but there is already voter and campaign finance FRAUD not just being investigated but being charged. There are a lot of things to attack Obama on, not just his past, but the fraud they have been committing even defeating Hillary.

You won't see much about that in the MSM, TB. For the averaqe voter, it will stay "under the radar" and pretty much played down with "political spin" anyway.

Ron

Thanks for an unbiased assessment of where you see the landscape. My thinking is very much the same.

Reading things the way you "want" them to be rather than the way they actually are serves no valid purpose from my perspective. It doesn't mean I "like" it - but things are the way they are.

Ron

TB, you're so full of wild,unverified fraud in a desperate hope that you might yet find something to pin your hat on.

Fraud against Hillary? What fraud? There's a wide difference between fact and fiction.

It's true that Republicans have asked for an audit of Obama's contributions but they aren't going to find anything that violates election law.

It's equally trye that Republicans are running so scared they're trying to suppress the vote in several states through caging and even moving against additional polling sites. Those are long-standing Republican tactics--to deprive American citizens fron exercising one of their most precious rights.

You're all talk and no proof.

In reality the FEC is still investigating a series of what appear to be "illegal" campaign contributions to the Obama campaign including "Mr. Good Will" and ‘Pro, Doodad" - both of whom have contributed more than the $2,300 personal donation limit.

None of this will have any impact on the campaign, however.

Ron

NOONE, by intent, has been deprived of their voting ability. Bullsh*t left over from the Florida lies.

There are always a couple "voter irregularities". Let's face it, when you have a few $100 million to spread around, even the dead can vote.

Ron

shirley:

TB, you're so full of wild,unverified fraud in a desperate hope that you might yet find something to pin your hat on.

Fraud against Hillary? What fraud? There's a wide difference between fact and fiction.

It's true that Republicans have asked for an audit of Obama's contributions but they aren't going to find anything that violates election law.

It's equally trye that Republicans are running so scared they're trying to suppress the vote in several states through caging and even moving against additional polling sites. Those are long-standing Republican tactics--to deprive American citizens fron exercising one of their most precious rights.

You're all talk and no proof.

You are a stupid little "squirrel". Read the post right under yours and then if you want do some research...

We believe that the American people should know first and foremost if foreign money is pouring into a presidential election," said RNC Chief Counsel Sean Cairncross.

Cairncross alleged there was mounting evidence of this, and cited a report in the current issue of Newsweek magazine that documents a handful of instances where donors made repeated small donations using fake names, such as "Good Will" and "Doodad Pro."

The Newsweek report says that earlier this year the Obama campaign returned $33,000 to two Palestinian brothers in the Gaza Strip who had bought T-shirts in bulk from the campaign's online store -- purchases that count as campaign contributions. The brothers had listed their address as "Ga.," which the campaign took to mean Georgia rather than Gaza.

<link>

I'm kind of surprised that neither Clinton nor McCain made more of the Rezko matter. Of all the "scandals" in Obama's past, that one seems to have the most meat on it. It wasn't just a matter of Obama sitting down to have tea with the guy, or failing to object to offensive sermons. Obama actually profited handsomely from his relationship with Rezko. He put himself in a position where he was personally indebted to a really sleazy character. Odd that it has gotten so little mention.

The Tony Rezko affair was the strongest suggestion of political corruption during the campaign and you're right - it gained far less attention than the Rev. Wright connection. But then, the videos of the Wright sermons made for much better TV.

Ron

I think there were two other factors that also made a difference. The Rezko scandal is reminisicent of Whitewater, and there didn't end up being any wrongdoing by the Clintons on that one, so in addition to being a dry topic, lots of people are probably predisposed to think it's much ado about nothing. As for the Wright matter, I think it plays into the race panic of many white centrists. If Obama and Wright were both white, and Wright said the same kind of stuff, people would just write it off as looney religious stuff, and not care much, the same way they do with Palin's and McCain's looney religious connections. But, instead, Wright plays into a potent stereotype that scares a lot of white peopel, as the angry black radical preacher, and Obama's connection to that is much more damaging than if race weren't in the mix.

Sure, that's undoubtedly a part of it. I wouldn't be surprised to see it begin to resurface near the end of the campaign as well.

Ron

It was the only really effective attack on Obama, so far. But the advantage Obama has on Wright is that it got such a very thorough airing in the primary that most people are now going to regard it as old news, and the McCain campaign will have a hard time pushing it back into heavy rotation.

Assuming things continue like they are and there's no terrorist attack, things should get pretty ugly as we get closer to the election. McCain knows this is his last shot, so if he sees himself going down to defeat, he'll have to make a call of whether he wants to exit with a certain kind of gravitas and elder-statesman authority (like Dole, in '96), or whether he wants to pull out all the stops to try to win at the last minute. If it's the latter, it'll be as entertaining as it is disgusting. I just wonder what October surprise has been burning a hole in the pocket of the McCain team.