Rahm Emmanuel is a bulldog being put in a position where he is solely responsible for executing an agenda as quickly as possible by any means necessary. He is uniquely qualified to produce instant kinetic energy. Not to mention that he has the respect of members of both parties.

Robert Gibbs has consistently been Obama's best surrogate for the last few months. For a long time Obama seemed to struggle to get his message and talking points across (remember when Kerry was a top surrogate?). That changed when Gibbs started showing up more often. He stays on message, he knows when to shut up, he knows how to needle members of the press and he knows how to strike the correct tone at any given moment.

Both these men are not only highly qualified for their spots, but those spots are tailored to maximize their strengths. Furthermore, these are both men of action, men who are the polar opposite of Obama in temperament in positions that require just that. It reminds me to an extent of The Godfather. I remember thinking while reading the book how differently things would have turned out had Luca Brasi not been taken out. Great minds need ruthless people to back them up, and I look forward to a little hardball. If this is how Obama will be approaching his staff, I have confidence in his ability to govern and execute his plan.

Update [2008-11-6 12:40:36 by vcalzone]: Thinking about it, I realized something else. Obama got the toughest Democrat in Congress to do what he wanted, even though it may not be in his self-interest. That, in and of itself, is highly impressive. That took balls.

One question I have, though, for Jerome if he's watching. I know you've had serious problems with Robert Gibbs in the past. Do you still? And even if you do, do you think Gibbs will excel in this post the same way Ari Fleischer did?

Sorry for the caps, sorry for the lack of commentary, but this is absolutely stunning to me. And apparently, there's more to tell. Anyone still want to defend her? Holy shit.

Jesus, it's worse than we thought. Look!

OBAMA! The HAMBURGLAR! And look, they're at the KREMLIN! This is big, people.

Of course, there's also this, but I don't really see how it's particularly relevant. I mean, this was 20 years ago.

Jesus Christ... This is just brilliant. They aren't even reacting, they've been planning this. The site says that there will be a full documentary at noon tomorrow. They even registered the domain name back on September 25th. McCain's people can't compete with this. Not only that, but the angle they are taking makes the incident relevant by tying it directly to the most current, most politically volatile situation, so they've instantly made this more damaging and more relatable than McCain's unfocused accusations of knowing bad people. AND that strategy gives them an argument against John McCain's primary defense, that he learned his lesson. Because now McCain has been running with the same crowd. He hasn't cleaned up his act, he just found out how to hide it.

They've essentially pulled a Bugs Bunny cannon trick. John McCain's people yell to ready the cannons, and then immediately Obama's ship opens up and reveals cannons about twice the size. Whatever misgivings I once had about this campaign have long been alleviated.

The current economic crisis demands that we understand John McCain's attitudes about economic oversight and corporate influence in federal regulation. Nothing illustrates the danger of his approach more clearly than his central role in the savings and loan scandal of the late '80s and early '90s.

. . . .

The Keating scandal is eerily similar to today's credit crisis, where a lack of regulation and cozy relationships between the financial industry and Congress has allowed banks to make risky loans and profit by bending the rules. And in both cases, John McCain's judgment and values have placed him on the wrong side of history.

Rasmussen put out a new poll featuring favorability numbers for the VP candidates after the debate. Conventional wisdom was that Palin was much more likable and that Biden was nice, but dull and people didn't respond to him. And the question of "Who won the debate?" showed a conflicted view. He won by a somewhat slim margin of 45%-37%. But when you look at the difference in favorability from a poll taken on September 24, you understand what Joe was trying to do.

Biden had a lot to gain in terms of favorability. I maintained that he had extremely high uncertain numbers that would almost assuredly go up rather than down, and that not only would he win the "ready to be VP" test, but he would emerge as the winner in favorability as well. So what do Rasmussen's head to head numbers show?
On this table, I count the difference on each level, counting a rise in favorable ratings and a drop in unfavorable ratings as positive.

Candidate	++	+	-	--	?
Palin	36%	18%	11%	31%	3%
	36%	17%	16%	29%	2%
	0%	-1%	-5%	+2%	-4%
Candidate	++	+	-	--	?
Biden	22%	27%	20%	21%	10%
	25%	34%	21%	17%	3%
	+3%	+7%	-1%	+4%	13%

This clearly shows what happened. 13% total difference towards a more favorable view of Biden (double counting, but whatever), and 4% of a total net loss for Palin. If you want to weigh it by giving the changes on both extremes double value, it gets even better for Biden, becoming -2% to +20%.

Granted, this top polling happened before the Couric incident, but it still captures the net result. Granted, you can argue that the debate made a difference from her standing immediately beforehand, but that is not the point. The point is that Biden went from reasonably popular to overwhelmingly popular in the last week and a half, while Palin actually got a little LESS popular. Remember: The ONLY metric Sarah Palin can win on is favorability.

Knowing that, the question of did better isn't even up for discussion.

It comes at around 55 seconds in. I know, it's a joke, but Jesus Christ, could he have more blatantly said how out of touch with people he is? How little seriousness that he has for Americans that are struggling and really aren't rich men? Furthermore, for someone who describes themselves as a gambler, is it a great idea to admit that you're a lousy gambler?

The ad hits Obama on Rezko, Emil Jones, Mayor Daley William Daley, and Blagojevich. I think McCain took the wrong meaning from that SNL sketch.

Is this really what they wanted to do? None of these will stick, because Obama was cleared of all guilty associations. Unlike John McCain, who continually surrounds himself with corruption while telling himself that he's above it all.

Well, if they decided that the "liar" meme was the direction they wanted to go in, they've got it. Just hope that Obama doesn't have a plan for it. Even though it already came up and he already swatted it down once before.

Update [2008-9-22 7:41:8 by vcalzone]: Jesus, as it turns out, I was wrong, it doesn't even mean Mayor Daley, it shows William and casually mentions that William is his brother. This is by far the sleaziest, most dishonest ad yet. What is their game on this one?

Called it! When it became clear that McCain was going to use the hurricane to try and squeeze political points, I said Obama should use his army of volunteers to try and get assistance to the victims. While this might score political points, it would certainly be the fundamentally decent thing to do. Fortunately for all of us, Obama is a fundamentally decent man.

Sen. Obama gathered the pool outside after services at St. Luke's Lutheran Church. He told us that his camapaign plans to mobilize its huge e-mail list of supporters to volunteer or send money once the impact of Gustav becomes apparent and authorities know better what kind of help is needed. He said his campaign is coordinating with local authorities.

"We can activate an e-mail list of a couple million people who want to give back," he said. "I think we can get tons of volunteers to travel down there if it becomes necessary."

Your pooler asked him if McCain's visit now is appropriate.

His response: "A big storm like this raises bipartisan concerns and I think for John to want to find out what's going on is fine."

"The thing that I always am concerned about in the middle of a storm is whether we're drawing resources away from folks on the ground because the Secret Service and various security requirements, sometimes it pulls police, fire and other departments away from concentrating on the job."

"I'm assuming that where he went that wasn't an issue. Were going to try to stay clear of the area until things have settled down and then we'll probably try to figure out how we can be as helpful as possible."

While John McCain seems to think that service is about individual effort, Obama understands that the path to service is through collective action. I can think of no better example.

As for Obama and my prediction, all I can say is that Obama constantly lives up to my better inclinations and steers clears of my worst ones. I wasn't originally an Obama guy, but I am now.

On a less political note, we should all have the residents of that area in our thoughts and/or prayers, and when we get that email, I hope we can all respond.