Political science is not a predictive science. Yes, there are those who try to predict election outcomes. But the models usually only “work” retrospectively (this minimizing their “predictive” value).

So no predictions from me.

That said, here’s what we know. Democrats vote for Democrats and Republicans vote for Republicans. More than 80% of the time. Both parties had to deal with unity issues – the Dems. worried about the middle (Clinton voters) and the Repubs. worried about the base (Huckabee voters and social conservatives). Both have done that. Obama is polling around 85% of Dems. and McCain at 90% of Repubs.

Issues will not decide this election. Yes, the Dems “win” on issues. Get over it. The Republican narratives are stronger because they are built on strong frames. Government is wasteful and taxes are evil. Until the Dems. figure out how to change the narrative, they will not win on issues alone.

But, in the next 60+ days issues will but used to reinforce or undermine the narratives. And for that reason, the Dems. have the advantage – in order to unite his party, McCain has only two issues with broad public appeal: drilling and taxes. He loses on the war, but probably wins as the best one to end it. But many of the other issues will better reinforce the Dems. message than the Republicans. In short, McCain went all in on the Change message. Here’s the problem – Obama staked that ground out already. McCain has spent too much time uniting his party, appealing to his base, and literally and figuratively embracing President Bush. The next phase of the campaign favors the Dems.

The competition for swing voters will be easier for Senator Obama because he’s been doing it longer. McCain will end up having to disavow Governor Palin’s positions on a large range of issues. She is a captivating candidate but will be holding the campaign captive on a number of issues – including that of abortion rights.

The election will be determined by turnout. The simple assumptions that high turnout favors Dems. and low turnout favors Repubs. is NOT true. High turnout in 2004 benefited President Bush. But, in 2008 the Dems. are FAR more likely to be helped by turnout. Why? Voter registration are overwhelmingly trending to the Democrats, and the campaign is a 21st Century model – unprecedented targeting of voters, unprecedented numbers of volunteers, and an unprecedented organization. The Republicans are STARTING to organize this week. The Dems. have been organizing since January. Obama has precinct captains, voter contact lists, and a massive organization in 50 states. The Republicans do not. They now have the churches and faith organizations, but early voting starts in about a month in some states. It’s late. It takes two years to get out the vote not two months. The Dems. are prepared, the Republicans are not.

McCain will undoubtedly get a bump from the convention. He’ll at least pull even if not take the lead. The Dems. however are better positioned for the end game. This is not to say that Obama will win, but the campaign was structured to win in the last 60 days…. to win the debates and roll into election day and potentially open up a 5-6 point lead (like Reagan in 1980). The McCain campaign was structured to get to today. This was their high point – their best shots have been fired – McCain as maverick, McCain as POW and war hero. Their endgame is not yet designed.

McCain can most certainly still win, but based on past elections and what political science tells us about voting behavior and public opinion, I think the odds remain strongly against it.

So, I have one more post to come, in which I’ll try to insert a bit of political science into the punditry. But before that, I wanted to share a handful of quick thoughts:

One thing that was striking tonight was the reaction of the crowd to the various lines in McCain’s speech. For instance, his line about standing up to lobbyists and oil companies was VERY poorly received (imagine that) while the line about drilling was exceptionally well received. There is a basic tension in the party here between its primary funders and interests (which are increasingly linked to oil and gas) and the social conservatives that make up the base. Governor Palin speaks to both. The nominee, Senator McCain, speaks to neither. They love his bio. But they don’t love his stances on issues.
Governor Palin had a line last night that got a lot of attention. It was the one line she ad-libbed, about hockey moms being like pit bulls with lipstick. What is interesting is that in the hub-bub over her fantastic performance one interesting fact has gone unnoticed -  focus groups were unimpressed. In the echo chamber that is a national convention, it seemed that EVERYONE appreciated the speech. And the reaction from Democrats was one of concern. Her shots on Obama were largely direct hits. Dems. were worried that this would appeal to moderates and Republicans were convinced. Someone needs to tell that to moderates and independents. This reminds me of the assumption of both parties that Edwards would help in the south. The pundit class was convinced. Kerry/Edwards got shut out. Maybe the two parties should stop guessing how swing voters will react and pundits guess from inside the bubble. It appears that they were not moved. At least a couple of the veteran print journalists I’ve spoken with think the pit bull line was a SERIOUS mistake… that voters actually don’t want a pit bull as Veep. I would imagine the handlers were not thrilled with the one deviation from the text.

Of all of the attack lines, former NYC Mayor’s criticism of Barack Obama as “cosmopolitan” was perhaps the most hilarious coming from the mayor of America’s most cosmopolitan city while defending America’s small towns. Bizarre.

I wasn’t going to say anything, BUT… after applauding vigorously while Guiliani accused Dems and the national media of sexism in their treatment of Governor Palin, I heard several references, FROM DELEGATES, to Palin’s appearance… namely, the line that “she’s hot”. In fact, today, there were large and promenant buttons about the “hot girl” and “Hoosiers for the Hot Chick”. Glad to see they are concerned about sexism.

Both parties delivered solid spectacles at their conventions and the narratives for the fall campaign have lined up. For Obama it’s change vs. more of the same, future vs. past, and economic issues as primary (using the McCain gaffes about the economy as evidence of being out of touch). For McCain it’s service vs. speechmaking, strong vs. weak/indecisive/even effeminate, and authentic vs. messianic (using Obama’s gaffes about “clinging” to guns and religion and questions about when life begins to being above his pay grade.

Plenty of Good Seats Still Available

Hey, it’s Angelia Jolie’s dad.

Utah Senator Orrin Hatch

Libertarian Presidential Nominee Bob Barr

Former Presidential Contender Gary Bauer:

The Architect:

The Republican’s backdrop/PowerPoint presentation

Theme: America First

The balloons ready to fall on Thursday night.

The relatively sparse set:

I have to admit finding the PowerPoint thing a bit distracting as below

The California Delegation

First, the speech was fantastic. VERY well written, and well delivered. Governor Palin has an amazing capacity to dig in the knife without looking like she’s doing it. Democrats who underestimated her wish they didn’t. They need to get to work. She most certainly left herself open when she once again repeated the easily refutable claim that she opposed the bridge to nowhere. But aside from that, was very effective.

Sure there wasn’t much “new” about her biography, and there wasn’t much policy with the rare exception of energy independence. But she came across (at least in the hall) as confident, compelling, and feisty.

These delegates were waiting for three days to hit hard on Obama and thus far the hits have been well off the mark. But there were a few tonight that seem to be on point for the fall campaign.

Tonight excited the base. I heard dozens of people proclaim after the speech that the race is “over”, but not in the way that Republican operatives Mike Murphy and Peggy Noonan said today on an open mike referencing Palin’s nomination (oops). Again, not quite the buzz of Denver – the upper deck was half full and nobody to the sides or rear of the stage (in Denver every seat was full, including those with obscured views). So the buzz in the hall was palpable, but it’s hard to say how far that will travel.

Still, it seems to me that the general election is ON now. And McCain went (at least for one night) from being an impulsive gambler who failed to vet his Veep choice to a brilliant judge of talent. I will repeat for the 100th time that the Veep choice rarely matters, but in this case, it might have rescued the party from internal squabbling (as would have certainly been the case if McCain got his choices in Ridge or Lieberman) or malaise (if the staffers had gotten theirs in Romney or Pawlenty). Not sure it reaches swing voters or supporters of Senator Clinton once her record is examined more fully and she begins answering questions, but for a night, all of that is to rest.

There wasn’t a whole lot today to get excited about in the opening acts.

The back-to-back CEO speeches by Carly Fiorina and Med Whitman were flat and while substantive, most ignored by the crowd. It’s striking that the two most substantive addresses were probably the worst received. Then again, the bio line “from California” might have sent folks packing.

Mitt Romney got sustained applause but frankly his argument was a bit convoluted – he advocated on behalf of change… from a “liberal Washington to a conservative Washington” apparently blaming all of the economic and international challenges on 20 months of a Democratic Congress. This is the same Congress that has been berated here as “do nothing”. Isn’t it “either/or”?

Anyway, Mitt suggested that voters “throw out the big government liberals.”

And in the line of the night (in that it would be more applicable if given by a Democratic in reference to the Bush administration than the converse) was “it’s time for the party of big ideas, not the party of big brother.” Amen, Mitt.

Mike Huckabee did himself some good. The delegates seemed openly a bit reticent when he began, but warmed up quickly and he turned the crowd around. He suggested that Obama brought back “European ideas” from Europe on his trip, which is probably the first time he’s been attacked as “too European” in this election. But the crowd loved it anyway. He struck me as the Brian Schweitzer of this convention. Not sure that the substance was really there, but came across as very genuine and likable.

Then Hawaii Governor Linda Lingle gave a relatively bland defense of Governor Palin’s record as mayor and governor. However, she did get delegates excited by suggesting that the Obama/Biden ticket has “no executive experience… Zero” The delegates took that cue and began chanting “Zero” at every reference to Obama. Pretty funny stuff. But some of the red meat was bizarre – like the argument that Alaska has as many electoral votes as Delaware and that it’s 120 times larger in size. But she seemed to give away the playbook in asserting that Palin is a strong social conservative, fiscal hawk, and proponent of free market economics, but could reach out to independents, young people, and women. I’m sure of the first three, but not certain about the last three.

The last warmup act was Rudy Guiliani. I have to admit that I don’t get the appeal. He dished out a lot of attacks on Obama, but most were off the mark. And the line that Democrats are in a “state of denial” about September 11th seemed sad given how his “all 9/11 candidacy” flamed out.

He did hit Obama in two places that I would expect to see repeated in the fall: a reference to Obama’s contention that some people “cling to guns and religion” and a rant against Islamic terrorism and the complaint that Democrats will not explicitly call it that (this might become the “flag pin” of the 2008 election.

My most favorite moment of the night… (and I am ABSOLUTELY not embellishing here) when Rudy praised McCain’s line about the conflict with Russia that “we are all Georgians” … the Georgia delegation gave a prolonged standing ovation. OOPS!

Today’s message was supposed to be about the economy. Instead, it was another day of tribute to the rather remarkable John McCain biography.

And there was ZERO substantive discussion of policy, with the lone exception of energy independence, which in this crowd means oil drilling. They chanted “drill baby drill” over and over again as prompted by former Maryland Senate Candidate and GOPAC Chair Michael Steele. I have to admit to a bit of culture shock.

There were some references to taxes and small businesses, certainly, but not much of an economic blueprint.

Clearly, however, Republicans think that drilling is a winning issue for them – if not so much for the policy – which most economists would agree would make no immediate difference in oil prices and little difference down the road – but rather in terms of symbolism. This is akin to Governor Schwarzenegger’s “action, action, action” pledge. People are disempowered and want the sense that something is being done. Whether that something “matters” or not is beside the point. It would seem to me that if Dems had framed drilling in environmental terms or in corporate terms (this is just another way to make Exxon money), they’d have
the upper hand here. But it’s either drill or do nothing. And in that frame, drilling wins.