No, I don’t think he’ll win and I’m praying to God that he won’t. I may not be the world’s biggest John McCain fan, despite the fact that he was very friendly with members of my family at one time, but I trust him more to defend our nation than anyone else.

I’ve also made sure that I have a sick day for Wednesday because I work in The District and when Obama loses, I think it may be unsafe to come to work for a day or so! And isn’t that the saddest commentary of all? The riots will be caused by the infants who are still having a tantrum over 2000 when they LOST and 2004 when again, they LOST. But why screw up a good pout with reality, eh?

Anyway, as we will likely see tomorrow, the challenge for Republicans in the long-term is that places such as Colorado, Virginia, North Carolina, and Nevada are going to look a whole lot more like Illinois from a political standpoint as opposed to Nebraska. This significant change to the electoral map is going to force the Republican Party to figure out how it is going to reach voters in those states in the future.

I guess.

The biggest problem I have with the plan is, why does it have to be so complicated? For decades all money collected by the three federal income taxes (the income tax and the two flat taxes: FICA and Medicare) have all been thrown into a giant slush fund. There is rhetorical talk about the Social Security/Medicare surplus, but that surplus is meaningless since any surplus in these taxes has been spent since they were created.

I am all for lowering taxes on the working poor. It is sad that we punish the working poor with a flat tax around 8% (FICA and Medicare) and then further discourage employers from continued hiring by kicking them for that same flat amount.

Why not just lower those tax rates? Why not lower them and increase the income cap on Social Security? Sure, we could argue the program was meant to be one where we tax those who derive benefit from it. However, let’s be pragmatic. For decades, Social Security has been considered a responsibility and as long as you don’t make too much money (or trigger the Windfall Elimination provision), you are entitled to this pension at age 62+.

So if it’s simply a shared social responsibility, why not start lowering those rates to help the working poor, increase the cap to get the richer folks to pay their part of the responsibility, and maybe consider graduating the tax scale?

In fact, why not just consolidate the rates into one federal income tax rate. It sure would be more transparent, and I thought transparency in government is important?

But the Obama plan is about obfuscation. If we make it complicated enough, there might be many people who actually get a refund back that is larger than their income tax (often zero), FICA and Medicare tax combined. Then it’s no longer a tax cut but simply welfare. And that’s where it becomes immoral. The welfare department should be separate from the revenue department. You might call it shuffling the deck chairs, but it certainly prevents a double dip into an already sinking Treasury.

Why so complicated? What would be wrong with just lowering the Social Security and/or Medicare tax rate for now? Why not drop the income cap and lower the rates to keep that balance revenue neutral? If we have a “surplus” then why don’t we let the people keep that surplus and raise the rate as we need it? It’s not like the money is being saved anyways.

Is it so the Democrats now have permanent campaign issues? “I’ll double the credits Obama started,” will be the new campaign pledge, until some working poor aren’t just getting $100 or $1000 dollar refund over their FICA and Medicare, but $2,000. Then $5,000. It’s the new “Social Security” for the 21st century, and of course, it’s unsustainable. But once it’s in there, you can’t ever get it out.

That would make too much sense. And look, the GOP is not saintly. They are too stupid to propose such common sense reforms because they are scared about the inevitable attacks that they just want to privatize or end Social Security. They are too stupid to try and simplify the tax code. The party is too fragmented to even stand for limited government and strong defense.

Why make it so complicated, Senator Obama, when there is such a simple, transparent solution? Is it that this plan might actually lower taxes for the working poor but not past the point of paying no taxes at all?

Well meaning Middle Americans are hearing the broad and incorrect term “tax cut” and thinking: “Well, that doesn’t sound like a Democrat. This Obama guy must really be a moderate.” And being a moderate, for some reason, is the holy grail of American politics. The media will uphold you as “bipartisan” and someone “trying to get things done”.

Things seem to go so much more smoothly when Congress can’t get anything done to screw up our lives any further.

There’s another big reason why no one buys all the crap the right-wing have pushed on B.O: no matter how hard you try, he doesn’t conform to the stereotypes you push on him of his “associates”.

If the guy who once went to a party that W. Ayers was at had been, say, a member of the American Communist party until 2007 - if his Senate record had included any genuine radically lefist ideas - if he hadn’t left a trail a mile wide at, for example, the U. Chicago full of outspoken character witnesses, Republicans included, to his moderate temperament, comfort with free-market economics, etc, etc - you’d be having more luck.

The picture you’re pushing isn’t working because people see so much of the enormous picture that contrasts it. His platform is very small-c conservative. Shifting from Iraq to Afghanistan is nothing like Dennis Kucinich’s plan. Repealing Bush cuts for the top 5% has been Dem. consensus since at least 2004. Cap and trade was first proposed by John McCain. Etc. etc.

All you’ve been able to come up with are, no matter how many times you yell and scream to the contrary, marginal records of barely incidental contacts from 15 years ago. Given how late a start you got on painting your insane picture of him as some kind of Marxist and how much contrasting picture there is, it can’t take root. But it could have taken root if we’d nominated Dennis Kucinich. You’re just trying to shove a square peg in a round hole, and it only works on people who already hate Democrats; i.e. not the swing voters; i.e. not the people in your examples.

In other words, I agree with you.

Case (1) Older lady (90ish) in the local garden club (New York State), who I discussed politics with for an hour. Lifelong Republican. She was tending towards voting for Obama (a few weeks ago). The primary issues were (a) McCain’s age and medical history (b) McCain’s choice of Palin. She thought McCain was showing his age and didn’t seem sharp enough to be president, and was worried that Palin might become president. She thinks Obama is smart and reasonably careful and conservative (small c) in his outlook.

Case (2) Pennsylvania family. Lower middle class, some working two jobs. Reasonably well-informed. 3 claimed to be voting for Obama, one for McCain. Worried mainly about the economy and wanting some change from the last 8 years. The McCain voter in the group thinks McCain will be better for the economy, and the others think Obama will be better and that McCain will continue Bush policies.

Case (3) Aunt in her 90s in Virginia. Lifelong Republican family active in the local party org, and I believe she’s a lifelong Republican as well. She is (a) worried about McCain’s age and health and (b) does not think Palin is qualified (except in the constitutional sense) to be president. Believes that it is good that Obama will be willing to talk with our enemies.

The takeaway is that for these people, the usual left/right talking points didn’t resonate much. They were looking at character and competence and behavioral style, and trusted their own observations of debates and other unscripted appearances more than other stories from the media.

You see, as a voting bloc, Illinois is left leaning. Most Illinoisans, not located in the major cities like Chicago, are still center left or even, in some cases, very left of center. That doesn’t stop them from being hard working, buzy people who still want government to work for them, it simply means that they tend to be more liberal than those who are in Kansas, Oklahoma, Missouri or Nebraska. I know. I grew up in St. Louis, south side, and saw how the left of center attitude destroyed a once great city of 800,000 to a crime ridden, corrupt city of 350,000. And I can promise you, my family, who were raised to think that FDR could walk on water and Harry Truman and JFK were the “second coming” are not voting for Senator Obama.

People do care who Obama’s friends and associates were. They do care that he has been involved, in one way or another, with people they would not speak to on the street. I live in a “blue” town, every office here being held by a Democrat. And the signs are all over the place; Democratic signs for judges, city council, sheriff, state representatives. But one is missing; the Obama/Biden sign. And it is not unusual to see a sign that says “Remember Peace and Prosperity, Vote Democratic” with a McCain/Palin sign next to it in the same yard.

Americans are informed. And they judge a candidate by the same values they place on their neighbors, friends and acquaintences.

So while you may think that Obama will blow it out of the water, I am not so sure. I also think you discount all the disillusioned Hillary voters who feel the nomination was taken from their candidate by Howard Dean, Donna Brazille and the DNC rules committee.

All politics, when it boils right down to it, are local. People vote their wallets and those, who are looking a a prosperous income in their future do not want to be saddled with higher taxes when they do reach that goal. They want to know that their income will not be taken to force charitable giving to someone else who didn’t work, and sacrifice, for that income.

We may well see an Obama administration. But unfortunately, it is a prescription for disappointment as there is absolutely no way he can keep all the promises he has made. And the Democrats, the “middle” Americans I talk to, are smart enough to know that.