John McCain enjoys a five-point lead over Barack Obama in the latest Zogby poll of likely voters. That last part is important. Many of the polls touting an Obama lead have been of registered voters, discarding sampling methodology for a naive wish that everyone registered will vote.

Remember Senator Obama's "President" label on his campaign jet? His coronation tour through Europe and the Middle East where he prematurely met with other heads of state? His declaration that the "the odds of us winning are very good"?

When will the ghosts of Democrats past pay Obama a bedtime visit? Michael Dukakis posted a seemingly insurmountable lead against George H. W. Bush. So did John Kerry against George W. Bush. But sadly for those men, elections are held in the fall, not the summer. Even Jimmy Carter, who, unlike Dukakis and Kerry, squeaked into the presidency, posted a 33-point summertime lead over Gerald Ford. The only modern Democrat candidate for president, at least the only one that I can think of, whose election-day performance discernably improved from his summertime poll performance was Hubert Humphrey. He closed well, but he didn't close the show. Democrats, in other words, are strong out of the blocks but weak finishers.

Why is this so? My own sense is that the media gives many like-minded candidates a free ride. When voters aren't paying attention in the dog days of summer, they let the idiot box do their thinking for them. In the fall, voters look at the candidates more closely. A sizable number then shift from the candidate the media told them to vote for, to the candidate who more closely represents their ideas on policy, character, leadership, etc.

This phenomenon should especially trouble Barack Obama supporters. Senator McCain is a known political brand. He has run for president before. He has been in the Senate for twenty-two years. Even prior to a life in politics, Americans may have heard of him as fighter pilot downed over North Vietnam. In other words, he is a known commodity. People have formed their opinions about him. Going negative won't change those opinions much.

Barack Obama, on the other hand, seemingly stepped into the political limelight the day before yesterday. He has been in Congress for less than four years. It will be relatively easy for negative ads to reshape opinions of a man who we really don't know. Thus does the flavor of the month become the flavor of last month.

Obama's handlers would be wise to tell their candidate a bedtime story about President Michael Dukakis or President John Kerry. If that doesn't shake his arrogance, perhaps one of Aesop's Fables will do the trick: "With a careless glance at the tortoise, now halfway along the course, he decided to have another snooze before flashing past the winning post. And smiling at the thought of the look on the tortoise's face when it saw the hare speed by, he fell fast asleep and was soon snoring happily. The sun started to sink, below the horizon, and the tortoise, who had been plodding towards the winning post since morning, was scarcely a yard from the finish. At that very point, the hare woke with a jolt. He could see the tortoise a speck in the distance and away he dashed. He leapt and bounded at a great rate, his tongue lolling, and gasping for breath. Just a little more and he'd be first at the finish. But the hare's last leap was just too late, for the tortoise had beaten him to the winning post."

Politico reports today what many others have been speculating: signs that McCain will pick Joe Lieberman as his running mate. (See http://tinyurl.com/6prbpo).

Now, Lieberman was Gore's (Gore!) running mate just 8 short years ago. He is solidly anti-life on questions of abortion and stem cell research. And his lifetime ACU rating is a dismal 16.38. (And lest anyone thinks he has been moving right since being wronged by the Dems and going Independent, his most recent rating is only 17.)

So here's my question: How many of these "likely" voters on the right will still show up to pull the lever for McCain?

In my mind, any who do so -- if they could really be characterized as conservative -- have sold their souls for the lust of power and have given up all pretense of holding to any meaningful principle, choosing party above all. They deserve only contempt from anyone truly conservative.

The only honorable position for a conservative to take if McCain takes this tack, imo, is to either sit out the election or vote third party. There is no washing of one's hands if they pull the lever for McCain.

Funny how the same leftists (and their surrogates in the press) who were touting how polls indicated that Dukakis had lead over Bush I and Gore/Kerry had a lead over Bush II are the same group now pooh poohing McCain’s present lead.

As usual, in their own little worlds.

If McCain wins I'll be at the town hall the next day changing my party affiliation to unenrolled.

Lesser of the two bad guys Obi. Almost hate to say it, but I hope you're changing your party on Nov. 5. Almost.

McCain is the greater of two lessers. I thought that after 2006 there was some hope that the Republican Party would change in a good direction. They didn't. And if McCain wins then that puts a nail in the coffin. There is no point in being conservative, especially on matters of foreign policy, and remaining in the Republican Party.

Understood, but have to disagree. Given another variety of Democrat contender, I would be in complete agreement with you. But I really think that Obama could screw things up to the point of putting the country in imminent danger whereas with McNasty we only have to suffer with putting the party in danger. It all quite $uck$, really.

I think it’s all moot anyway. Unless Clinton can steal the nomination somehow, Obama runs against McAmnesty and wins in November.

Obi Juan and I are in near agreement here. I still think we can take back the GOP, though - esp. if McCain loses.

As it is, the neo-cons, liberals, and the most militant of the hawks are clearly in control of the Party now. Check out some of the names in this roster of speakers at the RNC - keynoted by none other than that "ban the guns" fascist, Rudy Giuliani:

Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.)
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-Calif.)
Former Gov. Tom Ridge (R-Pa.)
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani ***KEYNOTER***
Former Gov. Mitt Romney (R-Mass.)

Ironically the theme of the GOP convention will be Service, Reform, Prosperity and Peace. If the last 3 parts sound familiar it is because they were lifted from the Ron Paul campaign. I hope Paul's alternate rally sells out and is able to give some what of a black eye to the GOP. But ticket sales are a little under 10k at the moment (18k seats in the arena).

I think McCain has demonstrated and has spoken to who he is. Although, he did sound almost Conservative at Saddleback. And I think he's somewhat getting the message from the Conservative base that he's wanting. Still, I think The 'Maverick' is too old to change now.

Orwellian. Peace is not peace, and all that.

Once he is on office why does he need to listen to the conservative base anymore?

He doesn't. That what my last line regarding his reputation as a Maverick was about. The other stuff was wishful thinking taking into account McCain's recent performances. But I don't believe he'll change.

Dan wrote:
"When voters aren't paying attention in the dog days of summer, they let the idiot box do their thinking for them. In the fall, voters look at the candidates more closely. A sizable number then shift from the candidate the media told them to vote for, to the candidate who more closely represents their ideas on policy, character, leadership, etc"

I think your take on it is EXACTLY right. No matter how you cut it, these leftists are OUT of step with every day Americans who work hard for a living. We depend on conservative values for so many things we consider "American." Some old-fashioned Democrats are some of the most conservative people I know. If it weren't for them, Republicans would never win national elections.

"I still think we can take back the GOP, though - esp. if McCain loses." Lanborgh

Who is we? You and a few other inconsequential bloggers?

A case can be made that Obama would be the "greater evil," but then again a case can also be made that McCain would be the "greater evil." The best thing to do would be to vote for a third party -- a party that isn't irredeemably corrupt -- and not give away that one tiny influence you have -- your vote -- to one of the two major parties.

The worst Obama may do is increase taxes and splurge on social programs, but so what? Taxes are not the full measure of the burden of government -- spending matters also -- and that has grown by leaps and bounds under the Republicans. McCain, however, could very easily do something crazy and start WWIII, so I think McCain has the potential to be far worse than Obama. But again, McCain may come to his senses, avoid WWIII, and actually try and hold the limit on spending. It's difficult to say, but it's going to be ugly either way.

Lefty wimps have been warning about WWIII since Kennedy. Please grow a set and understand that the world is a nasty place and that diplomacy alone will not cure it.

"I think McCain has the potential to be far worse than Obama".

At least McCain can answer direct questions directly. Obama is a political and philosophical opportunist who really doesn't know where he stands or, at least, can't answer a question honestly because he either has no center or he doesn't really want to expose what his center is.

Obama is a joke. And thinking Dems are coming around to understand that.

Eric,

I'm talking good old fashioned conservatives: those of us who truly believe in truly limited, well-defined, de-centralized government.

And you may have misunderstood me. I haven't voted for the GOP nominee for President since Dole/Kemp, and I regretted that vote. (I've given the nominee of the Constitution Party my vote ever since. And McCain won't get my vote no matter who he picks as running mate.

So I believe we need to make sure the GOP doesn't think it can take our votes for granted and still win. But the way the oligarchic system is set up, the best course true conservatives and paleolibertarians can take is to take over the GOP, but never place party over principle in our efforts. Pat Buchanan learned this the hard way, as I have heard him express his regret at trying the third party route.

IOW, I'll vote third party with no compunction; but given the stacked deck against ever achieving lasting electoral success as a third party, I will focus on winning back the GOP from within and from the grassroots. This is what Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty is all about; and I'm all for it.

I don't think McCain can answer questions very directly, or at least there are still some outstanding questions on how he will govern. Will he support amnesty? Will he increase border security to cut off the flow of illegals? Will we stay in Iraq for 100 years or maybe another 10? Will McCain only appoint pro-life Justices to the court or not? McCain cannot answer these questions definitively, and even if he could why should we believe him? He's an opportunist as well.

We don't know much about Obama but he is supported -- for foreign policy reasons -- by Zbigniew Brzezinski and with the exception of Kissinger, Brzezinski is probably one of the most influential foreign policy thinkers today. While I disagree with him, it's not as though Obama will just make up his own foreign policy if he wins the White House.

Eric,

I admire your idealism, but you'd have a better chance to take over the Democratic Party in the name of liberty, less government etc. than the Republican Party. The Republican Party is as hostile to freedom as the radicals who stormed the winter palace.

Eric,

You may very well prove right. Indeed, I think the chances of (re)taking the GOP somewhere between dim and very slim.

And yet, I wouldn't call my position here "idealism." Rather, it is born of pragmatism. The party aparatus is in place, so a governing majority for conservatives is still possible through it. Meanwhile, the oligarchic campaign rules, plus the formidable logistics, rule against any realistic shot of an insurgent third party become a majority one, or even a continually contending one.

For my latter point, see this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gYF_K5p38E

Eric,

As is usual, you’re wrong. McCain couldn’t be clearer about his intentions with regard to border control and illegal immigration. In fact, he’s been so straightforward and vocal about this issue that he embraced Fat Teddy Kennedy to push legislation that almost made it out of the Senate and has been crystal that he will continue to push new legislation. You can’t be clearer about your intentions than that. And I think you have this backwards, he’s blatantly answered all of the questions you note in the positive.

In fact the border/immigration issue is just one more reason that John McCain disgusts most Republicans. Not only is he not a Conservative but also he goes out of his way to spit in the face of his GOP base.

You guys just can’t handle the truth when it hits you head on. You’ve been dealing with lying cheating liberal candidates for so long, you probably can’t believe that a candidate would not speak untruths.

Don’t know much about Obama? You bet. But the more we find out about this guy, the more unimpressive and dangerous that he demonstrates he is. I don’t think being supported by in your face leftists is a good reason to vote for an inexperienced empty suit to take over the most powerful position on the Planet. But, you guys do and that’s why many would question your judgment and intelligence.

But, for the Obots, your guy could show up at the Convention wearing a Nazi uniform in full swastika regalia and sacrifice a goat and they’d still vote for him.

ASDF,

Who is "you guys"? I for one have been singing your tune re: conservative apostates like McCain for years now.

Sorry Eric L.. I was directing that missive at Eric W.. In fact, there's not much that you write that I don't agree with.

So the "you guys" I was referring to was the lefty cool aid drinkers who are not being honest about their pick as the Democratic nominee. And if they do believe they're being honest, there is something wrong with them given the information available about their candidate.

The diff is that at least Republicans/Conservatives know what they've got in McCain the (arghh!) GOP nominee and ARE honest about who he is. I think we run the gamut of those who will accept him and be sick about it, knowing that the alternative is much worse, and those who flat out refuse to accept him as part of a plan to wait for that next true Conservative.

I'm not making a judgement about the latter point. Whatever works individually for people as long as we're still on the same team.

Eric,

So your politics isn't "idealistic," but mainly just a waste of time. I don't see that as much of an improvement. All conservative, all Americans really, should pray for the death of both political parties.

ASDF,

John McCain did say on the O'Reilly Factor that he had "gotten the message," on immigration. Of course I'm not exactly sure what that means, but that's just the point: I cannot say for certain how a President McCain will deal with the border situation. Again, I cannot say for sure how long McCain thinks we need to occupy Iraq -- somewhere between 5 and 100 years? I don't know if McCain thinks we should go to war over South Ossetia or if we should bomb Iran. I know McCain is not a conservative because he has supported open borders and the Iraq war but I don't know how a President McCain will fake his conservatism once in office.

Politics does strange things to people. It's a foggy world where principles, agendas, money, influence, blackmail all come together and then try and sort themselves out. What we do know is that all these factors are currently working to the detriment of our country and McCain is no answer.

Obama has virtually no experience but I don't regard this as a weakness; who has more experience in government than Dick Cheney and he's basically mad. But no President comes in as an "empty suit." The Democratic bigwigs will guide Obama's domestic and foreign policy; his role will largely be symbolic.

But I don't support Obama and never have.