There’s been a rightward drift of the left party but that’s not the same thing at all…

To my mind, that makes Obama even less likely to win.

When a guy to the left of the mainstream runs against a guy to the right of the mainstream he loses… ”

Because that isn’t always the case? It has been the case for the most part since 1968, but even since then there have been exceptions. It’s true that Carter and Clinton ran as the “centrists” of their day, but they were demonstrably as left-of-center as their opponents were right-of-center, if not more. Now it’s true that Carter almost lost, and Clinton won because of flukey three-way split votes both times, but as we all remember Gore lost only very narrowly, and then only in the Electoral College. Simply being left-of-center isn’t enough to sink a candidate anymore. That said, you’re right that Obama isn’t attempting to cloak or moderate his views, and he is running a campaign that is farther to the left than any since 1972. The question is whether the Democratic field went too far to the left and managed to outstrip the country’s leftward drift, thus leaving whichever candidate emerged at the end unelectable.

When a guy to the left of the mainstream runs against a guy to the right of the mainstream he loses…

Plus, Obama (unlike Carter) isn’t even trying to seem mainstream…

The question is, could McCain be counted on to oppose them? That is not clear to me.

You should get some sort of prize for that description. “Veto every beer,” indeed! If uttered by anyone except McCain, it would be considered the gaffe of all time. Yours is certainly a better way of summing up McCain’s flaws that saying that he grimaces like a cartoon pirate, though I quite like that one, too.

There were some debates where he didn’t do that badly, but we do agree that his competition made that easier for him.

The same principle carries through on most other levels of the campaign. McCain just doesn’t come off well, whereas Obama does, especially in comparison. McCain does have a media-generated reputation which he has sailed by on up to now. But that can take him only so far. The more people see of him, the more he seems like a bad fit for the job. The more they see of Obama, the more plausible he becomes. He doesn’t have to come off as the savior of mankind, plausibility is all that matters. As you say, the competence issue, which is different from the experience issue. One thing we can say about this whole campaign so far is that Obama, while having less experience in national campaigned than either Clinton, Edwards, or McCain, has proven himself by far the more competent leader, building a hugely competent campaign organization that makes few mistakes and has unprecedented capabilities at every level. McCain, from what I hear, is virtually a bumbling moron at campaign organization, and is not only way, way behind Obama, he seems not to care. He doesn’t think actually being competent matters. Instead, McCain seems to believe in his own magical biography. He believes that when people get to know him better, they will just flock to him like bears to honey. In other words, he’s living in a bubble. The reality is that seeing McCain in action is more cringe-inducing that anything else. I for one can’t believe how badly he comes off. All the media hype about him is a bubble ready to burst. lack of competence in governing can certainly be glossed over and hidden by highly competent campaigning abilites and staff. Rove and Bush proved that. But if one is also incompetent at campaigning, it’s hard to see how he’s got a chance.