Obama's crank-and-bank strategy (voters, campaign, poll, president)

[atxcio]

Is it just me, or is the Obama campaign once again redefining the winning strategy? Will politicians look back at his presidential campaign strategy, like they do with his primary strategy, and say "Why didn't I think of that?"

I think the Obama camp expected the race to tighten; and they may have wanted insurance against a potential Bradley effect. They might have expected, perhaps even planned, to have their support peak during the early voting period.

It's been noted that Obama has been campaigning only in states that have early voting. It's also been observed that early voting could top 30%. During the past 2 weeks, Obama has had a significant lead in the polls; if we take the RCP "Poll of Polls" average, it's been between 6-7 points. If early voting mirrors the polls, and 30% vote early, Obama is essentially "Banking" two percentage points (+2). So come election day, McCain would have to not only close the gap, but cover the two points in addition. I realize these are national #s, but they can be applied state-by-state as well. And in some states, the lead is much larger than 6-7 points for Obama. Some states he is cranking through right now, may be banking +3s or even +4s. If you are a betting person, or someone playing the decision markets, you gotta love your chances having the favorite AND the points.

To counter that, McCain should have been discouraging early voting in general; he should have tried to prevent extension of hours in Florida, for example. He can't let those undecideds/independents to vote while his numbers are so low. McCain's only hope is that the winds shift just prior to election day, and the Bradley effect (if it still exists) would kick in. And for that to really work, he needs MAX numbers of undecideds and independents on election day.

Given this, might Obama actually want his poll numbers to go down now? I'd say maybe. His lead has been getting large enough that it might actually lull voters, especially new ones, into a sense of complacency. A closer race would motivate election-day turnout. I think that's why we might be seeing fewer ads, targeted in different places than you'd expect, to relieve some pre-election "euphoria" that big leads in certain states may be giving him. His election-day strategy needs to be turnout, especially among new voters (and not so much traditional undecideds/independents -- those, as mentioned above, are expected to swing some towards McCain.)

Political historians will already be talking for a long time about Obama's primary strategy. While he was at the top of his popularity, he cranked-and-banked several small states in fantastic run, while Hillary may have been focusing too much on larger states. In some ways, she got exactly what her strategy wanted; wins in big states. But with Obama banking a lead in delegates beforehand, it meant that the math was against her going into those races. She had not only to win, but increase her margin to landslide levels, something much more difficult to do than win a squeaker. And I think may be where McCain is ending up -- the "math" may be against him... he's closing the gap, but the math makes him have to pull of more than a "squeaker" with the election day voters.