There is one reason the Democratic Party is in the political ascendancy - the George W. Bush Administration. Let's face it, the Democratic Party is, by and large, craven and toothless. It stands for little and does even less. But they will be swept into complete control of the Presidency and the Congress in November because the Bush Administration has been the worst in the history of the Republic. Today's New York Times offers headlines that remind us this is so.

First, Defense Secretary Robert Gates is promoting a $20 billion plan to double the size of the Afghan military: [More . . .]

Obama's ten day Hawaii vacation begins today, as do the Olympics. The Democratic Convention starts August 25. So Obama's VP announcement will come sometime between the 18th and the 25th. If the Vice President is going to be anything more than an afterthought (and at this point, it seems clear that the Obama camp does not want the Vice Presidential choice to get much attention at all imo), it will have to be early in that 7 day period. Why not just before the Convention? In my opinion, yesterday's events (with Barack Obama shrewdly offering Bill Clinton a Wednesday night speaking spot) made clear that to the degree the Democratic National Convention is not about Barack Obama, it will be about Bill and Hillary Clinton. Because of that, Ann Kornblut makes me chuckle when she writes:

[Wednesday night], officials expect the vice presidential nominee to dominate the stage, along with, potentially, a separate keynote speaker (the role that Obama filled in 2004)

More...

About a week ago, Kevin Drum wrote about a new book that discusses polling fallacies. Kevin quoted Taegan Goddard discussing "The Opinion Makers by David Moore:

The author — a former senior editor of the Gallup Poll — says that today's opinion polls misfire due to an intrinsic methodological problem: survey results don't differentiate between "those who express deeply held views and those who have hardly, if at all, thought about an issue."

I would have framed the issue differently. The problem with polls on issues is they rarely describe how intensely a respondent feels about an issue and how they will vote because of that issue. Case in point - today's Ras poll on Hillary as VP:

On Morning Joe, Chuck Todd said that the "feeling in Chicago," presumably referring to the Obama campaign, is that Hillary Clinton is seeking treatment that she would never have given Barack Obama had the roles been reversed. If they REALLY believe that, then they are fools. If Hillary Clinton were the nominee, Barack Obama would have been the vice presidential nominee a month ago. I can not believe Todd is passing on this foolishness.

Todd said something else that is quite foolish - that the last few days have given Obama the "high ground" in how he treats the Clinton camp now. The high ground? Is Todd crazy? Suppose that were true, how in the hell does "having the high ground" help Barack Obama with Clinton supporters? How does it help him win in November? Or is that NOT the goal?

More . . .

Didn't Gov. Tim Pawlenty get the memo? Republicans aren't supposed to praise Barack Obama. They're supposed to mock him while misleading people about his positions.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, often mentioned as a possible running mate for Republican presidential candidate John McCain, said Wednesday GOP candidates would do well to adopt a positive tone like that of McCain's Democratic rival, Barack Obama.

"Say what you will about Barack Obama," the Minnesota Republican told a conservative group, "people gravitate when you have something positive to say."

Why has Pawlenty gone off-message? Did John McCain tell him he won't be the VP candidate? Was he referring to McCain when he followed up with "They don't want to follow some negative, scornful person"?

The latest CBS News poll (PDF) tells you all you need to know as to why Obama is a shoo in in this election and what he needs to do to win a landslide. The poll has Obama leading 45-39 over McCain, the same margin he has held now for 3 months. But Obama is not winning by wooing Independents or Republicans. Heck, he is not even dominating Dems as he should. He is winning, and is a shoo in, because the country hates Republicans. Starting with George Bush who has a 25% approval rating.

Obama wins because Dems lead Republicans in party ID by 7 to 10 points. McCain does better with Republicans, 78-11, than Obama does with Democrats, 74-10, while they split Independents 40-40. But there are more Democrats than Republicans now. That is why Obama is winning.

More . . .

As both Big Tent Democrat and I wrote separately today, a Veep announcement from Sen. Barack Obama is not expected this week.

There was no announcement today in Indiana where he campaigned with current media front runner Sen. Evan Bayh.

Obama won’t be tipping his hand for running mate this week, one campaign official said, and he won’t do it next week either, at least not while he’s vacationing with his family in Hawaii. That vacation ends Aug. 16, giving Obama about a week and a half to make a decision in advance of the Democratic convention.

The State of Florida has 27 electoral votes, more than Indiana (12) and Virginia (13) combined. According to both SUSA, and now PPP, Obama is losing in Florida because is losing women to John McCain:

The numbers show an unusual gender gap, with McCain leading by 11 points among women while trailing by 5 points with men. Last month's results similarly showed Obama doing eight points better with men than women, a trend PPP has not seen in any of its other state by state polling.

Hillary Clinton as VP can help Obama win Florida. She will strengthen him with women and seniors. Yet another reason why she should be the VP pick. Let me add from PPP's release (PDF):

Obama earns just 76% of the Democratic vote, with the folks in his party supporting McCain disproportionately older white females. “The Democrats crossing over to support John McCain are your prototypical Hillary Clinton supporters,” said Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling. “Barack Obama still has some work to do getting those folks on his side if he wants to have any chance of winning Florida.”

(Emphasis supplied.)

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

CBS will release a new poll tonight on voters' views of the importance of the vice-presidential candidate. Here are some of the findings:

30% say the choice is important to their vote. Among undecided voters, 47% say the choice will influence their vote.

The poll also shows a lack of confidence in both candidates on the question of which would make the right decisions on the economy:

Just 12 percent said they were very confident that Obama would and 9 percent said the same about McCain. Forty percent said they were somewhat confident that Obama would make the right decisions and 41 percent said that about McCain

As to making the right decisions about Iraq, it seems Obama's trip to the Mideast didn't help. While there's a lot of dissatisfaction with both candidates, McCain seems to be ahead on this issue: [More...]

Howard Fineman writes:

Does Barack Obama think he needs the Clintons’ help this fall? And do the Clintons really want to give it to him? The answer to both questions seems to be a resounding “no.” And this could very well be the reason why a slam-dunk Obama victory in November becomes a down-to-the wire race against John McCain.

(Emphasis supplied.) Fineman quotes a Clinton fundraiser saying:

“It’s not that we’re being dismissed,” she said. “The Obama people are perfectly happy to have our support. But their attitude seems to be, ‘we can win without you.’ And I guess that’s why none of us is going from rah-rah Hillary to rah-rah Obama.”

As I have written, I think Obama is certainly going to win this election -- and that he can win without the Clinton Wing of the Democratic Party. The question is why does he want to win that way? Why go for a close victory without the Clintons when you can have a slam dunk victory, a mandate giving victory, with them?

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

Bush's Third Term. It is pretty obvious, but it seems to have taken a while for the Obama campaign to get back to the narrative of John McCain as Bush's Third Term. This Obama ad is what we need:

More of this please.

Via Pontificator (who argues for Hillary as VP), the Financial Times reports:

Obama officials say privately it is unlikely a running mate will be selected before the candidate returns from a week’s holiday in Hawaii, which starts this Friday. That leaves about 10 days until the start of the Democratic party convention in Denver.

More . . .