In Douglas, Wyoming, there is a museum created to honor the "jackalope", a mythical creature that is a hybrid between the jackrabbit and antelope. While nearly all sane people believe that the jackalope is a fictional creature, there are those who still believe, and some who have actively devoted themselves to hunting these fierce creatures:

Here at DKos, I feel like I am on a similar search- the hybrid between the Chicken Little and the Ostrich.

John McCain's statement that the Georgia/Russia conflict is the first "serious international crisis since the Cold War" is a big gaffe. Beyond the Iraq-Pakistan border. Beyond Czechoslovakia.

It's one that Obama can and should pounce upon, because it exposes the weaknesses of McCain's worldview in several areas.

Talk about coming from left field...

John McCain's new negative spot (couldn't stay positive for too long, huh John?) doesn't seem to have as much traction as "Celeb" though it uses some of the same imagery and themes. However, like yesterday's "Broken" ad, it gives Obama plenty of fodder for responses in the near term. Importantly, it is running in the same 11 states that "Celeb" did.

Some analysis below the jump.

So, when he'd spent the entire last week destroying your own brand, it makes sense that John McCain would shift back and try to regain some of that "maverick" branding that has propped him up for years. His attempt to do so: a new ad, "Broken".

However, this ad provides many lines of attack for Obama, both in the short-term and long-term.

From Halperin's The Page, John McCain has a challenge for Barack Obama:

Says Obama should call on Congress to return from their vacation and deal with the energy problem now.

This makes absolute sense. John McCain has always put his Congressional duties above all others. I've created this diary as a tribute to all the things that John McCain has done in the Senate in the last three months. This should serve as an example to those pesky Congressional leaders who want a "vacation".

The corporate media loves to point out that McCain is significantly running ahead of the generic Republican in the presidential race. For once, they are right in that regard.

The new round of negative advertising, however, is positively destroying McCain's own brand.

There was a recent diary by rennert expressing...well, disgust for the fact that John McCain is running a deceitful, sickening ad lying about Barack Obama and the visit to wounded soldiers in Germany.

But this whole incident shows how inept the McCain campaign is.

Now that I've said this: I care deeply about this devastating legislation. I believe that Hoyer, Pelosi, Reid and Rockefeller should be ashamed of the legislation that went through/will go through their watch. There was no need for "compromise", and definitely not "compromise" which gives up all that has been fought for on this issue for a couple of years now.

Much has been made of the new Ohio poll from PPP showing Barack Obama up 50-39 in Ohio. While I must admit that there are a couple of things in the poll that don't quite make sense to me (McCain's high African-American support, no gender gap, etc.), much of the criticism of the poll is coming from these Party ID numbers: 55% Democrat, 30% Republican, 15% Independent.

These numbers seem huge. They seem unrealistic. They seem unbelieveable.

But what if they are accurate?

While I'm glad that the primaries are over, there were some staples that I miss:

1. The "I voted" thread

2. The daily Superdelegate thread

3. The primary prediction thread

So, for old times (a week and a half ago) sake, predict the Obama-McCain numbers for the NBC poll to come out 15 minutes from now.

Below I've assembled things that are more inspiring and exciting than Senator John McCain. Enjoy.

I love DKos, but sometimes it contributes to my paranoia. I was hoping that the community could help to relieve some of the stress that I'm feeling.

New SurveyUSA numbers out of Oregon: Obama 55, Clinton 42. Obama is up 1 point from last week, Clinton is down 1. The crosstabs seem to make more sense than the Suffolk +4 numbers from earlier.

According to the Washington Times (yuk) of March 29, 1996 (can't link it because I got it off of Lexis-Nexus), an interesting sideshow occured in the presidential election campaign. It involved chickens, John McCain, Bill Clinton, and diplomacy.

John McCain had his feathers ruffled over nothing- but he said one truth he should have remembered yesterday.

Earlier today, Markos posted an exhaustive list of reasons why Barack Obama lost in Pennsylvania. The last reason, and in my opinion, one of the most important reasons, were the rhetorical constraints of the frontrunner position:

Rhetorical constraints. Clinton has nothing to lose, so she's thrown the kitchen sink and then some at Obama. Her path to the nomination necessarily requires her sundering the party in civil war, so if she pisses a few people off? Who cares! It's all part of the plan!

Obama, on the other hand, can't take that approach. He's already won this thing, so he has to tread carefully. He gets too aggressive with Clinton, he risks pissing off her supporters more than they are already pissed off (can you believe that Obama insists on staying in the race even though he's won?!). So he can't really open up on Clinton and make the same kind of arguments she's making against him. He's trying to maintain some modicum of unity rather than engage in the sort of slash-and-burn politics that now characterizes the Clinton campaign handbook. The inability to truly go negative is a real disadvantage in politics.

How can the Obama campaign turn this into a positive?

The biggest thing about the CNN exit poll is its breakdown of where the vote came from. It explains the low number of young voters, high number of seniors, low number of African-American votes, etc.

(Promoted from the diaries by kos. I don't buy the final prediction, but this is a good look at why the numbers vary from poll to poll. I was about to write up a similar post, but now I don't have to. )

In the last couple of days, a slew of PA polls have come out, with ranges from a 13 point Clinton lead to a 3 point Obama lead. Follow me below the jump for some interesting things that come out of the crosstabs.

For this diary, I'm focusing on the five polls for which some level of crosstabs are available (I have the Rasmussen subscription to see their crosstabs):

I was waiting to get the SurveyUSA crosstabs before publishing the diary, but I'm impatient- I did use some data from the WCAU news story on that poll.

I couldn't care less about anything Zogby or ARG say.

Here are some things that strike out at me:

The Suffolk regional demographics

Obviously, the Suffolk poll is the most favorable to Clinton out of this group. There is one big thing that stands out in this poll:

Suffolk is the only polling firm approximating that SW PA (including the Allegheny area) is an equal voting bloc to Philly & SE PA. Other firms have the numbers at:

Obviously, with Philly/SE being Obama's strongest area, these regional demographics are a big deal. Suffolk has him up 57-40 in the SE region (higher than any other polling firm other than PPP- we'll get there next), but a huge disadvantage in Pittsburgh/SW (63-29 Clinton- also higher than any other pollster) means a large disadvantage in the state.

Let me put this on record, using both other polling data and historical/demographic data- there is no way Obama loses Pittsburgh+SW PA by 34 points (Quinnipiac has Pittsburgh proper at Clinton 50-44 and the rest of Southwest PA at Clinton 68-26; I think that means about a 20-25 point loss in Pitts+SW PA. Let me also add: there is no way that SW PA is equal to SE PA in total number of votes. Philly/SE has far more registered voters and every other pollster has that region as just under half of total voters. This makes sense to me.

In conclusion, Suffolk is way off- maybe not on the final number, but definitely on the way they got there.

The PPP "Outlier"

PPP, while a reputable pollster this primary cycle, seems way off on their poll this time showing Obama up 3. I've heard talk that the poll is an outlier; not exactly correct since an outlier is that 1/20 polls that is just way off, and PPP has been consistently showing Obama stronger than others. Regardless, there is not another pollster within 8 points of this projection.

Strangely though, their data on most of the state is roughly similar to that of other pollsters. The big difference: Philly/SE PA.

In Philly/SE PA, the pollsters show:

There's your difference. And it sets up a baseline for what would have to happen for Obama to win PA- he would need a 20+ point gap in Southeast PA and Philly, or a 15-20 point gap with a massive turnout to make that area over 50 % of the total vote. Probably not going to happen.

One interesting thing about the PPP poll- it does show undecideds breaking 60-40 Clinton, which is about what I and others expected.

Rasmussen & the A-A vote

One oddity about the Rasmussen poll- it shows Clinton with 21% of the African-American vote. If that happens, I'll never post an analysis again- just not going to happen. Every other pollster has it at 81-84 percent Obama, 10-12 percent Clinton, with about 7 percent undecided. I think it'll end up like 86-14 Obama.

There are some other oddities here and there. Clinton's lead among women varies from 8 points (Rasmussen) to 23 points (SUSA). Obama leads or is tied among men in every poll but Suffolk (I think the regional analysis shows why he's down with men in Suffolk), though it ranges from a tie (Rasmussen) to 21 points up (PPP). White voters are fairly static in the polls (ranging from a 14-21 point Clinton lead). The non-Pittsburgh/Philly parts of the state seem fairly close as well- about a 15 point Clinton lead.

My gutcheck prediction

If Philly/SE comes in at about a 12 point Obama lead (far below PPP, in between M&D, SUSA and Suffolk, and the rest of the state (including Pittsburgh) comes in at about a 15 point Clinton lead (pretty close to what everyone other than Suffolk says), all of which I believe:

Clinton 51, Obama 49

That's my pick, and I'm sticking to it until misled by exit polls tomorrow.

Update by kos: Sorry to intrude into this post, but SUSA has released its crosstabs, and their regional breakdown is: