There are 24% of people in this nation who believe in witches. There are still people, according to the BBC, that still believe the Earth is flat, even in this nation. And now there's this conspiracy theory-one that has absolutely no base on any side-that President Obama was not born in this nation, and thus cannot president.
Welcome to the world of the Birthers. As today's report on Politico will tell you (click the link for it), the Birthers are a 300000-person strong group that believe, with strong conviction, that Barack Obama is not from this nation. They also believe that President Obama cannot be a citizen because his father was not a citizen.
Reality check here, though-the belief that President Obama was not born on this nation is akin to saying Barack Obama is not on this planet. Hawaiian officials have confirmed that he was born in Honolulu in 1961. The conservative site WorldNetDaily has seen the birth certificate, and has said it is legit. The idea that Obama cannot be a citizen because his father wasn't is complete bunk- (a), his mother was a citizen, and (b) he was born here. He is a natural-born citizen, born in this nation, and he is older than 35-thus, he meets the qualifications of the presidency.
Regardless, people still cannot believe that President Obama meets the qualifications of the presidency. And, yes, these folks are far too many fries short of a Happy Meal. In courts around the country, the Birthers have stated their claim that President Obama is not president-and they have been shot down. In their appeal to the Supreme Court, they were not given a writ of certiorari-most likely because their argument is both alack of logic and fact. Even conservative pundit Michael Medved has said that the Birthers are "crazy, nutburger, demagogue, money-hungry, exploitative, irresponsible, filthy conservative imposters" who are "the worst enemy of the conservative movement." And let's face it, one of the movement's leaders, Alan Keyes, fits that discription. I think he's still ticked that he was thrown around the state of Illinois by Obama in 2004.
According to Politico, the main calls from the Birthers are for the state of Hawaii "to release for public inspection Obama's original birth certificate rather than the notarized copy typically issued." Governor Linda Lingle (Republican, and erroneously referred to by the movement as a Democrat) of Hawaii has refused, saying that is against state law.
The real reason behind this obviously isn't logic or reason or even opinion; it is fear. Simple racist fear from those who think that he is a Muslim and was sworn in on a Koran (he wasn't; that was Rep. Keith Ellison of Minnesota-and, by the way, it was Thomas Jefferson's Koran he was sworn in on); that he does not pledge allegiance to the flag from a picture (it was taken before Obama put his hand on his heart; when in the Senate, Obama often led the Pledge of Allegiance); and that he wasn't president because the Oath of Office wasn't read right (Even if President Obama and Chief Justice John Roberts didn't do it a second time, Obama was president before the oath of office at 12:05 PM; he was president at noon, sometime when Yo-Yo Ma was bow-synching on his cello). These people will not stop at anything to make it impossible for change to come in America; indeed, they will be the ones held back.
01 March 2009
03 January 2009
I Promise, this is the Last Election Math and Aftermath (Part III)...
...I hope.
But according to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Al Franken, barring legislation by Norm Coleman (who will undoubtedly bring suit of some sort), will be the next junior Senator from the state of Minnesota. Franken leads by 225 votes, according to the Star-Trib. This would bring the balance of power to 59-to-41. The result, however, is well less than my prediction that Franken would win by two percentage points. But perhaps I meant two votes...
Stay tuned for a eulogy of the Bush administration, in 15 days.
Also, quick public service announcement for politically upright New Jerseyites: check out my blog Draft Codey for Lieutenant Governor, by clicking the link above.
But according to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Al Franken, barring legislation by Norm Coleman (who will undoubtedly bring suit of some sort), will be the next junior Senator from the state of Minnesota. Franken leads by 225 votes, according to the Star-Trib. This would bring the balance of power to 59-to-41. The result, however, is well less than my prediction that Franken would win by two percentage points. But perhaps I meant two votes...
Stay tuned for a eulogy of the Bush administration, in 15 days.
Also, quick public service announcement for politically upright New Jerseyites: check out my blog Draft Codey for Lieutenant Governor, by clicking the link above.
Notepad Classics
I wrote this post, what was meant to be the first Notepad video, on 19 March 2008. President Bush had spoken at the Economic Club of New York earlier that week...
A Romantic Moron, a Romantic Liar
Mr. Bush on the troops, 14 March 2008 at the Economic Club of New York. Here was President Bush’s attempt to make up for all the faux pas he has delivered to the troops: the jokes he told months before the 2004 election, the swiftboating of John Kerry and the irrefutable, irrevocable destruction of Senator Kerry’s name as a veteran, the countless times he has refused to meet with Cindy Sheehan, a gold-star mother and not just some political activist, and being in cahoots with Blackwater and Halliburton, allowing them free reign as hired guns-mercenaries- giving them three times the pay and furthered protection, withholding troops promised to come home, not to come home indefinitely, and not giving troops any timetable from which their time in Iraq will ultimately end. How romantic and envious, indeed.
Mr. Bush’s attempt to ‘make nice’ to his subordinates came off looking like Minuit’s attempt to ‘make nice’ with the Lenape-give them praise or material goods in order to snooker them some more. While Bush and his Republican colleagues will not vote on a timetable to get the men and women of Iraq out of there-even as leverage for the Iraqi government to do something, they also will not investigate Blackwater’s shooting of Iraqi civilians, nor their possible smuggling of weapons to the Kurds-at taxpayers’ expense of course-nor Halliburton’s countless violations of our trust and of our ethics: their overpricing of their and former subsidiary KBR’s services-again, at taxpayers’ expense-the unethical ties to Mr. Cheney, and the gang rape of a contractor. Why has this not been investigated? In turn, the soldier has been turned into propaganda. Cases in point: Corporal Pat Tillman, a great man who gave up millions of dollars to fight in Afghanistan, had his death used as propaganda to continue our “War on Terror”- as far as going to say that he had been killed by a Taliban convoy, instead of friendly fire-and possibly murdered. When Private Jessica Lynch was rescued from her prison of war, her story became a virtual ad campaign for war in Iraq. Quoting Lynch, “They used me to symbolize all this stuff. It's wrong. I don't know why they filmed [my rescue] or why they say these things.”
And Mr. Bush stated that “if I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed.” First of all, when he was much younger, he could have fought in a war, he could have had this fantastic experience. It was called the Vietnam War. He could have volunteered, he could have fought on the front lines just like Senator Kerry, just like Senator Max Cleland, who came home from Vietnam with just an arm- he could have brought glory to his name. He could have been drafted and faced it, just like thousands who did and came home, or did and died. Instead, he chose to go into the Texas Air National Guard-where he could have served diligently and with respect. Instead, he went AWOL- this is fact, not CBS-fabricated lies. Mr. Bush went not to fight against the Viet Cong, but instead fought for the Republican senatorial candidate in Alabama.
Mr. Bush, you could have fought before. You could have been the Great American Soldier to which you romanticize. And you can be that soldier now. While still Tsar of Russia, Nicholas II went to the Eastern Front, leading on the front lines at war, instead of leading in St. Petersburg. While still Emperor of France, Napoleon fought and faced his worst battles while the executive. John Dickinson, delegate from Pennsylvania at the 2nd Continental Congress, became a brigadier general in the Pennsylvania militia, and then the Delaware militia, in the Revolutionary War. Julius Caesar, the man Bush seems so much to emulate via his wishes to extend his executive powers to the point of dictatorship, continued to fight Pompey as Dictator, gaining enough power to become emperor.
Mr. Bush, follow this long line of leaders in your war. The populace believes this is your war. The corporations which you have so diligently bankrolled believe this is your war. The Capitol believes this is your war. Why don’t you make it your war? Why don’t you follow this romantic dream of yours, Mr. Bush? Confront the danger you have fomented! Make the history you have created, what will be remembered as a dark time in American history, following in the line of Hoover, Harding, Adams! Follow your dream! If you are to romanticize a war the men and women serving abroad disagree with, go to war and romanticize your own self.
A Romantic Moron, a Romantic Liar
"I must say, I'm a little envious…if I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed…it must be exciting for you ... in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You're really making history, and thanks.”
Mr. Bush on the troops, 14 March 2008 at the Economic Club of New York. Here was President Bush’s attempt to make up for all the faux pas he has delivered to the troops: the jokes he told months before the 2004 election, the swiftboating of John Kerry and the irrefutable, irrevocable destruction of Senator Kerry’s name as a veteran, the countless times he has refused to meet with Cindy Sheehan, a gold-star mother and not just some political activist, and being in cahoots with Blackwater and Halliburton, allowing them free reign as hired guns-mercenaries- giving them three times the pay and furthered protection, withholding troops promised to come home, not to come home indefinitely, and not giving troops any timetable from which their time in Iraq will ultimately end. How romantic and envious, indeed.
Mr. Bush’s attempt to ‘make nice’ to his subordinates came off looking like Minuit’s attempt to ‘make nice’ with the Lenape-give them praise or material goods in order to snooker them some more. While Bush and his Republican colleagues will not vote on a timetable to get the men and women of Iraq out of there-even as leverage for the Iraqi government to do something, they also will not investigate Blackwater’s shooting of Iraqi civilians, nor their possible smuggling of weapons to the Kurds-at taxpayers’ expense of course-nor Halliburton’s countless violations of our trust and of our ethics: their overpricing of their and former subsidiary KBR’s services-again, at taxpayers’ expense-the unethical ties to Mr. Cheney, and the gang rape of a contractor. Why has this not been investigated? In turn, the soldier has been turned into propaganda. Cases in point: Corporal Pat Tillman, a great man who gave up millions of dollars to fight in Afghanistan, had his death used as propaganda to continue our “War on Terror”- as far as going to say that he had been killed by a Taliban convoy, instead of friendly fire-and possibly murdered. When Private Jessica Lynch was rescued from her prison of war, her story became a virtual ad campaign for war in Iraq. Quoting Lynch, “They used me to symbolize all this stuff. It's wrong. I don't know why they filmed [my rescue] or why they say these things.”
And Mr. Bush stated that “if I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed.” First of all, when he was much younger, he could have fought in a war, he could have had this fantastic experience. It was called the Vietnam War. He could have volunteered, he could have fought on the front lines just like Senator Kerry, just like Senator Max Cleland, who came home from Vietnam with just an arm- he could have brought glory to his name. He could have been drafted and faced it, just like thousands who did and came home, or did and died. Instead, he chose to go into the Texas Air National Guard-where he could have served diligently and with respect. Instead, he went AWOL- this is fact, not CBS-fabricated lies. Mr. Bush went not to fight against the Viet Cong, but instead fought for the Republican senatorial candidate in Alabama.
Mr. Bush, you could have fought before. You could have been the Great American Soldier to which you romanticize. And you can be that soldier now. While still Tsar of Russia, Nicholas II went to the Eastern Front, leading on the front lines at war, instead of leading in St. Petersburg. While still Emperor of France, Napoleon fought and faced his worst battles while the executive. John Dickinson, delegate from Pennsylvania at the 2nd Continental Congress, became a brigadier general in the Pennsylvania militia, and then the Delaware militia, in the Revolutionary War. Julius Caesar, the man Bush seems so much to emulate via his wishes to extend his executive powers to the point of dictatorship, continued to fight Pompey as Dictator, gaining enough power to become emperor.
Mr. Bush, follow this long line of leaders in your war. The populace believes this is your war. The corporations which you have so diligently bankrolled believe this is your war. The Capitol believes this is your war. Why don’t you make it your war? Why don’t you follow this romantic dream of yours, Mr. Bush? Confront the danger you have fomented! Make the history you have created, what will be remembered as a dark time in American history, following in the line of Hoover, Harding, Adams! Follow your dream! If you are to romanticize a war the men and women serving abroad disagree with, go to war and romanticize your own self.
30 December 2008
More Awards!
It’s now time for the 2nd annual Paddy Awards. There are a few new ones, but mostly old one’s on the menu today, as we look back on the political year:
The Worst Lie of the Year Award goes to...
Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, for her statement-which she reiterated for circa eleven times, according to MSNBC’s First Read, after she was “unveiled” as the vice presidential nominee for the Republican Party-that “I said to Congress, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’ on that Bridge to Nowhere,” that infamous Ted Stevens and Don Young-endorsed bridge that would span from Gravina Island (population: 50) to Ketchikan International Airport to replace a ferry-oh, and it would cost a whopping $398 million. The problem here is that Candidate Palin in 2006 was FOR THE BRIDGE TO NOWHERE, stating at a debate, “I would like to see Alaska's infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now – while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.” A month earlier, Candidate Palin wore a shirt saying “Nowhere, Alaska 99901”, the zip code being the zip code of the Ketchikan area. The first flip-flop of many in what would become a death knell to the McCain campaign.
The New Kid On The Block Award goes to...
Al Franken! Perhaps this award is premature, but while not being a senator officially, Candidate Franken has been able to present a campaign that, while not without its controversy (issues on paying back taxes to the IRS, an article in Playboy degrading to women), has allowed for a comedian-of all things-to possibly win an election. A man who once wrote a book about a possible presidential campaign entitled Why Not Me?, Franken has shown strong political views on environmental reform, an income tax that helps the common worker, marriage rights for all-including same-sex couples-and a well-needed promise to our Constitution in the form of a “quickie impeachment.” Most importantly, however, he and incumbent Senator Norm Coleman have shown the need for election reform, showing the dos and don’ts of how to decide an election.
The “Don’t Let the Door Hit You Where the Good Lord Split You” Award is shared by...
Eliot Spitzer and Rod Blagojevich! The dynamic duo of detestable leaders brought to light the murky nature of Albany and Chicago politics, filled with “pay-to-play,” the “Bear Mountain Compact” that reporters won’t talk of fornication north of the New York landmark, the sale of the Senate seat of the next president of the United States, the blackmailing of Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, and the “Emperor’s VIP Club.” Bye-bye, governors! Enjoy prison...
Honorable Mention to Ted Stevens, for his ethics conviction and subsequent senatorial defeat, adding insult to injury. He probably won’t enjoy prison like the aforementioned two, instead getting to enjoy his repaired-free-by-VECO Alaska home.
The Bush Scandal of the Year Award goes to...
The President’s massive destruction of civil liberties and global charters in the form of suspension of habeas corpus, use of “enhanced” (i.e. corporal punishment) ways to gain (mostly false) intelligence, and application of mercenaries (i.e. KBR, Blackwater) in his war in Iraq to run amok killing innocent civilians, that in total merit not only impeachment and conviction, but war crimes and crimes of aggression at The Hague, the Netherlands, at the International Criminal Court.
The Political Comic Relief Award goes to...
British PM Gordon Brown! The following video speaks for itself-click the link!
The Political Relief from Comedy Award goes to...
Clarence Thomas! According to a study by the Yale Law Review, Thomas is the unfunniest Supreme Court justice, in that he produced zero instances of laughter in the Court’s transcripts. The reason for this is that he hasn’t asked a question in THREE YEARS! What has he done the last three years? Nobody knows...
And a Special Editor’s Award for Civility in Recounting goes to...
The Minnesota Canvassing Board, of course! After the first day of its rapid judgment of the plethora of challenges of ballots, the best line of the entire campaign was spoken-“Milk and cookies at 9 AM.” Compared to a 2000 circus in which people were rioting in the Canvassing Board offices, screaming “Let us in! Let us in!”, a time for milk and cookies is well needed.
Happy New Year, everyone. Milk and cookies.
The Worst Lie of the Year Award goes to...
Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, for her statement-which she reiterated for circa eleven times, according to MSNBC’s First Read, after she was “unveiled” as the vice presidential nominee for the Republican Party-that “I said to Congress, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’ on that Bridge to Nowhere,” that infamous Ted Stevens and Don Young-endorsed bridge that would span from Gravina Island (population: 50) to Ketchikan International Airport to replace a ferry-oh, and it would cost a whopping $398 million. The problem here is that Candidate Palin in 2006 was FOR THE BRIDGE TO NOWHERE, stating at a debate, “I would like to see Alaska's infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now – while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist.” A month earlier, Candidate Palin wore a shirt saying “Nowhere, Alaska 99901”, the zip code being the zip code of the Ketchikan area. The first flip-flop of many in what would become a death knell to the McCain campaign.
The New Kid On The Block Award goes to...
Al Franken! Perhaps this award is premature, but while not being a senator officially, Candidate Franken has been able to present a campaign that, while not without its controversy (issues on paying back taxes to the IRS, an article in Playboy degrading to women), has allowed for a comedian-of all things-to possibly win an election. A man who once wrote a book about a possible presidential campaign entitled Why Not Me?, Franken has shown strong political views on environmental reform, an income tax that helps the common worker, marriage rights for all-including same-sex couples-and a well-needed promise to our Constitution in the form of a “quickie impeachment.” Most importantly, however, he and incumbent Senator Norm Coleman have shown the need for election reform, showing the dos and don’ts of how to decide an election.
The “Don’t Let the Door Hit You Where the Good Lord Split You” Award is shared by...
Eliot Spitzer and Rod Blagojevich! The dynamic duo of detestable leaders brought to light the murky nature of Albany and Chicago politics, filled with “pay-to-play,” the “Bear Mountain Compact” that reporters won’t talk of fornication north of the New York landmark, the sale of the Senate seat of the next president of the United States, the blackmailing of Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, and the “Emperor’s VIP Club.” Bye-bye, governors! Enjoy prison...
Honorable Mention to Ted Stevens, for his ethics conviction and subsequent senatorial defeat, adding insult to injury. He probably won’t enjoy prison like the aforementioned two, instead getting to enjoy his repaired-free-by-VECO Alaska home.
The Bush Scandal of the Year Award goes to...
The President’s massive destruction of civil liberties and global charters in the form of suspension of habeas corpus, use of “enhanced” (i.e. corporal punishment) ways to gain (mostly false) intelligence, and application of mercenaries (i.e. KBR, Blackwater) in his war in Iraq to run amok killing innocent civilians, that in total merit not only impeachment and conviction, but war crimes and crimes of aggression at The Hague, the Netherlands, at the International Criminal Court.
The Political Comic Relief Award goes to...
British PM Gordon Brown! The following video speaks for itself-click the link!
The Political Relief from Comedy Award goes to...
Clarence Thomas! According to a study by the Yale Law Review, Thomas is the unfunniest Supreme Court justice, in that he produced zero instances of laughter in the Court’s transcripts. The reason for this is that he hasn’t asked a question in THREE YEARS! What has he done the last three years? Nobody knows...
And a Special Editor’s Award for Civility in Recounting goes to...
The Minnesota Canvassing Board, of course! After the first day of its rapid judgment of the plethora of challenges of ballots, the best line of the entire campaign was spoken-“Milk and cookies at 9 AM.” Compared to a 2000 circus in which people were rioting in the Canvassing Board offices, screaming “Let us in! Let us in!”, a time for milk and cookies is well needed.
Happy New Year, everyone. Milk and cookies.
02 December 2008
Election Math and Aftermath, Pt. II
Well, call it Democratic wishful thinking in Georgia. With both parties putting in campaign infrastructure and money, along with party dignitaries and celebrities (Sarah Palin, John McCain, Rudolph Giuliani, and Mitt Romney of the GOP, Donna Brazile, Al Gore, Ludacris and T.I. of the Democratic Party), Jim Martin couldn't pull off victory in the Senate run-off, necessitated by incumbent Saxby Chambliss' 49.8% of the vote on November 4. According to NBC News, AP, CNN, and Sean Quinn of FiveThirtyEight, Saxby Chambliss will win the run-off with 69% of the vote in, with Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight saying that Chambliss will defeat Martin by about 10 points. It looks as if Martin could not get out the African-American vote in Democratic-heavy DeKalb and Fulton Counties (Martin was actually losing to Fulton County at time of post). This ends the chances of Democrats gaining a super-majority; with the Senate race in Minnesota between incumbent Republican Norm Coleman, Democrat Al Franken, and Independence Party candidate Dean Barkley still being contested, Democrats hold a 58-41 majority in the Senate, with, since last post, Democratic challenger Mark Begich defeating incumbent and convicted felon Ted Stevens in Alaska (leading to a bizarre standing ovation and hours-long veneration of the man, including Larry Craig eerily saying, "I'll miss you, Uncle Ted.")
However, the bigger aftermath of the election comes in President-elect Obama's Cabinet. Mr. Obama has appointed the following posts:
White House Chief of Staff: Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), former advisor to Bill Clinton, Chairman, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2006
Secretary of the Treasury: Timothy Geithner, President, Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Vice Chairman, Federal Open Market Committee
Secretary of State: Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), former First Lady
Secretary of Defense: Robert Gates, current Defense Secretary
Attorney General: Eric Holder, former Deputy Attorney General under Clinton
Secretary of Homeland Security: Gov. Janet Napolitano (D-AZ)
Secretary of Commerce: Gov. Bill Richardson (D-NM), former Energy Secy. and UN Ambassador
Additionally, it has been reported that former South Dakota senator Tom Daschle will be appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services.
An interesting effect of this is who will replace these people. Obviously, Mr. Holder and Dr. Gates need not be replaced from their current positions, as the former does not have one in government and the latter will remain in his current position. However, here's how it will all break down:
Democratic Lt. Gov. Diane Denish will replace Gov. Richardson in the Santa Fe state house.
Republican Secy. of State Jan Brewer will replace Gov. Napolitano, who was rumored to be considering a run against John McCain in 2010 for the Senate (she would have to leave the state house due to term limits that year anyway).
Vice-President Elect Joe Biden will be replaced by his chief of staff, Ted Kaufman. Kaufman stated that he will not run for the Senate in the 2010 special election, possibly making way for the Vice-President elect's son, Beau, who is the Delaware Attorney General. Other possible candidates include outgoing Lt. Gov. John C. Carney, Jr. for the Democrats, and Rep. Michael Castle for the Republicans.
What is unknown is who will replace Rep. Emanuel, Sen. Clinton, and President-elect Obama. Rumors state that Gov. Rod Blagojevich will appoint Illinois Dept. of Veterans Affairs Director Tammy Duckworth, Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr., or Blagojevich himself as Senator, with no special election needed (Obama's seat would have been up for election in 2010 anyway). Other names that could float to the surface include Chicago Mayor William Daley and former Senator Carol Moseley Braun.
2010 will be a very interesting year for New York politics. Not only will both of the senatorial seats be up for election (one of which will, barring a bizarre turn-of-events, be easily won by incumbent Democrat Charles Schumer), the governorship (and vacant Lieutenant Governorship) will also be up for election. Also, in 2009, the mayor of New York will be elected, which could cause an even larger problem in New York politics, as Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (I), who has wrangled away the rights of voters to choose whether or not city elected officials could serve a third term, instead choosing in favor of the third term himself, could possibly run for governor. With a Marist University poll showing incumbent Gov. David A. Paterson leading Bloomberg 44% to 40%, with 16% undecided, Gov. Paterson's got some thinking to do as to who will be the next junior Senator. In the same Marist poll aforementioned, 43% of registered voters believe current Attorney General Andrew Cuomo ought to be appointed Senator. This would make the most sense for Paterson: Cuomo, former Housing and Urban Development Secretary and eldest son of former New York City mayor and New York governor Mario Cuomo, has been rumored to run for the Democratic nomination for governor in 2010, so pushing a rival out of the picture would be optimal for Paterson. Other possible candidates include Reps. Steve Israel, Nydia Velasquez, or Gregory Meeks (who, by the way, is my Congressman and was the only one of the three to be parodied on SNL).
And then there's my choice, the one that will never happen. That's former President Bill Clinton. I think that this would be a very good pick: Bill's immensely popular, knows how to win an election, and can raise money at will (along with funding his own campaign). I also like it for the history; he would become the first president since later-Chief Justice William Howard Taft to be re-involved in the federal government, the first president since Andrew Johnson (ironically, one of the two-along with Clinton-to be impeached) to serve in the Senate, and the first spouse to replace their Senator spouse since Jean Carnahan was appointed to her replace posthumously elected husband Mel in 2000.
On Friday, I will post an apolitical post, On the Malice of the Human Spirit, in response to the debacles involving Stephon Marbury of the New York Knicks, and the tragic death of a man, who apparently used to live on my block, at my local Wal-Mart. Next Thursday, I will post On the Need to Impeach the Current President. Also, stay tuned for the live blog, The Great Nexus: On Religion and Politics, on Tuesday, December 23; the Second Annual Paddy Awards on Monday, December 29; and my final post of the Bush Administration, my Eulogy of the Bush Administration (which I may do as a video), on January 19.
However, the bigger aftermath of the election comes in President-elect Obama's Cabinet. Mr. Obama has appointed the following posts:
White House Chief of Staff: Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), former advisor to Bill Clinton, Chairman, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2006
Secretary of the Treasury: Timothy Geithner, President, Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Vice Chairman, Federal Open Market Committee
Secretary of State: Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY), former First Lady
Secretary of Defense: Robert Gates, current Defense Secretary
Attorney General: Eric Holder, former Deputy Attorney General under Clinton
Secretary of Homeland Security: Gov. Janet Napolitano (D-AZ)
Secretary of Commerce: Gov. Bill Richardson (D-NM), former Energy Secy. and UN Ambassador
Additionally, it has been reported that former South Dakota senator Tom Daschle will be appointed Secretary of Health and Human Services.
An interesting effect of this is who will replace these people. Obviously, Mr. Holder and Dr. Gates need not be replaced from their current positions, as the former does not have one in government and the latter will remain in his current position. However, here's how it will all break down:
Democratic Lt. Gov. Diane Denish will replace Gov. Richardson in the Santa Fe state house.
Republican Secy. of State Jan Brewer will replace Gov. Napolitano, who was rumored to be considering a run against John McCain in 2010 for the Senate (she would have to leave the state house due to term limits that year anyway).
Vice-President Elect Joe Biden will be replaced by his chief of staff, Ted Kaufman. Kaufman stated that he will not run for the Senate in the 2010 special election, possibly making way for the Vice-President elect's son, Beau, who is the Delaware Attorney General. Other possible candidates include outgoing Lt. Gov. John C. Carney, Jr. for the Democrats, and Rep. Michael Castle for the Republicans.
What is unknown is who will replace Rep. Emanuel, Sen. Clinton, and President-elect Obama. Rumors state that Gov. Rod Blagojevich will appoint Illinois Dept. of Veterans Affairs Director Tammy Duckworth, Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr., or Blagojevich himself as Senator, with no special election needed (Obama's seat would have been up for election in 2010 anyway). Other names that could float to the surface include Chicago Mayor William Daley and former Senator Carol Moseley Braun.
2010 will be a very interesting year for New York politics. Not only will both of the senatorial seats be up for election (one of which will, barring a bizarre turn-of-events, be easily won by incumbent Democrat Charles Schumer), the governorship (and vacant Lieutenant Governorship) will also be up for election. Also, in 2009, the mayor of New York will be elected, which could cause an even larger problem in New York politics, as Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg (I), who has wrangled away the rights of voters to choose whether or not city elected officials could serve a third term, instead choosing in favor of the third term himself, could possibly run for governor. With a Marist University poll showing incumbent Gov. David A. Paterson leading Bloomberg 44% to 40%, with 16% undecided, Gov. Paterson's got some thinking to do as to who will be the next junior Senator. In the same Marist poll aforementioned, 43% of registered voters believe current Attorney General Andrew Cuomo ought to be appointed Senator. This would make the most sense for Paterson: Cuomo, former Housing and Urban Development Secretary and eldest son of former New York City mayor and New York governor Mario Cuomo, has been rumored to run for the Democratic nomination for governor in 2010, so pushing a rival out of the picture would be optimal for Paterson. Other possible candidates include Reps. Steve Israel, Nydia Velasquez, or Gregory Meeks (who, by the way, is my Congressman and was the only one of the three to be parodied on SNL).
And then there's my choice, the one that will never happen. That's former President Bill Clinton. I think that this would be a very good pick: Bill's immensely popular, knows how to win an election, and can raise money at will (along with funding his own campaign). I also like it for the history; he would become the first president since later-Chief Justice William Howard Taft to be re-involved in the federal government, the first president since Andrew Johnson (ironically, one of the two-along with Clinton-to be impeached) to serve in the Senate, and the first spouse to replace their Senator spouse since Jean Carnahan was appointed to her replace posthumously elected husband Mel in 2000.
On Friday, I will post an apolitical post, On the Malice of the Human Spirit, in response to the debacles involving Stephon Marbury of the New York Knicks, and the tragic death of a man, who apparently used to live on my block, at my local Wal-Mart. Next Thursday, I will post On the Need to Impeach the Current President. Also, stay tuned for the live blog, The Great Nexus: On Religion and Politics, on Tuesday, December 23; the Second Annual Paddy Awards on Monday, December 29; and my final post of the Bush Administration, my Eulogy of the Bush Administration (which I may do as a video), on January 19.
06 November 2008
Election Math and Aftermath
Hopefully, we will all remember where we were at 11:02 PM Eastern Time, on Tuesday, November 4. Some of you may have been in Chicago's Grant Park, or on Harlem's 125th Street, or in Times Square, or quite possibly just outside of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue-where Barack Obama will reside, effective at noon on January 20, 2009. Obama won, at post time, 364 electoral votes to McCain's 163-with one electoral vote still in doubt, that being the electoral vote of Nebraska's 2nd Congressional District-which Obama looks to win, according to Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight and the Omaha World-Herald. Obama won with a staggering 64 million votes-52% of the popular vote.
Here's a look at the Electoral Map:
The real struggle, though, is in the Senate. Let's take a look at the ten races I saw as the closest, and if I got my predictions right:
10. Colorado:
PREDICTION: MARK UDALL (D) BY 15
Okay, so it was closer than I thought. Udall did win in a landslide, though, by nine points over former congressman Bob Schaffer. Colorado was a big state for the Dems this year; they made their gambit by holding the DNC in Denver, and the west went with them.
9. Texas:
PREDICTION: JOHN CORNYN (R) BY 7
And this one wasn't as close as I thought. Although Obama campaigned more there than most Dems, and I thought that the youth (especially in the Austin area) was underpolled in an already close race (according to polls), challenger Rick Noriega just couldn't win here, losing by 12. Chalk it up to left-wing wishful thinking.
8. New Hampshire:
PREDICTION: JEANNE SHAHEEN (D) BY 6
Finally, one where I was close! Former Governor Shaheen beat incumbent Sununu by 7 points!
7. Kentucky:
PREDICTION: BRUCE LUNSFORD (D) BY 1
Alas, sometimes a Republican can win. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell got in very hot water in this race, which wasn't called until late in the evening. But Bruce Lunsord couldn't eke this one out: McConnell by 6.
6. Georgia:
PREDICTION: JIM MARTIN (D) BY 3
In the first vote, I was wrong. Incumbent Saxby Chambliss won a plurality, winning approximately 49.9%. However, in Georgia, you need 50% of the vote, plus one-a majority-to win. Thus, there will be a run-off on December 2, says the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. It's all hands on deck here: expect huge amounts of money-whatever's left in the war chest-from both campaigns, especially the national parties. But you have to wonder if blacks, who came out in droves for Obama-especially in DeKalb County-will come out to elect Martin in December. So, maybe I might be right in the second vote!
5. Oregon:
PREDICTION: JEFF MERKLEY (D) BY 5
Right now, I'm wrong. With 85% of the vote in (including 80% in from Portland and Multonomah County, and only 60% in from Eugene and Lane County-both Democratic strongholds), Jeff Merkley has been projected to defeat incumbent Gordon Smith's Senate seat. It may actually exceed my prediction by the time all the votes are counted.
4. Mississippi-B:
PREDICTION: ROGER WICKER (R) WINS BY "A FEW THOUSAND" OVER RONNIE MUSGROVE
I was waaay off on this one. The close polling a week ago in Mississippi's Special Election came out as a farce, as incumbent-by-two-years Roger Wicker defeated former Gov. Musgrove by 10 points.
3. North Carolina:
PREDICTION: KAY HAGAN (D) BY 3
The surpriser of the 2008 season did go the Democrats' way, as Kay Hagan won in a 9-point landslide, defeating incumbent Elizabeth Dole. Liddy's campaign tactic to tie State Sen. Hagan to the group, Godless Americans, and even insinuating that Hagan is an atheist, backfired-Hagan shot back at Dole's comment, saying that she has taught Sunday school for the last 5 years.
2. Minnesota:
PREDICTION: AL FRANKEN (D) BY 2
Another super-close race. With 99% of the vote in, incumbent Norm Coleman leads radio commentator and former SNL writer Al Franken by 336 votes-out of over 2.4 million. This initiates a statewide-recount, which probably will be over in a couple of weeks. My prediction: the absentees go overwhelmingly for Franken (who has actually been in Iraq and Afghanistan for the USO-Coleman, from my knowledge, has not gone to Iraq or Afghanistan), who wins by my margin.
1. Alaska:
PREDICTION: "I'LL TELL YOU IN A FEW DAYS"
Well, I forgot to tell you. But after Sen. Ted Stevens' conviction on seven felony counts dealing with ethics, I thought that challenger Mark Begich would win in a landslide. But don't think Stevens will trade in his suit and Incredible Hulk tie for an orange jumpsuit yet-with 99% of the vote in, Sen. Stevens leads by just over 3,000 votes. There are more votes coming in through early voting and through absentee ballots that may see Begich win this, but it will be especially close. I think that along with a "Bradley effect," the widely talked-about polling phenomenon, we have to add the "Stevens-Young effect": In the state of Alaska, people will say that they will not vote for those who were or are in ethics scandals (i.e. Stevens and House Republican Don Young, who won by 7 points in spite of polls saying it would go Ethan Berkowitz' way by near-double-digits), but will instead-causing a massive polling breakdown.
So, that's how the Senate races look. In the end, the Democrats will have at least a 57-43 majority in the House-enough to work with, especially when you consider that President-elect Obama may appoint a Republican such as George Voinovich (OH), Olympia Snowe (ME), or Arlen Specter (PA) to his Cabinet, allowing Democratic Govs. Ted Strickland, John Baldacci, or Ed Rendell, respectively, to appoint one of their own.
In other news, Democrats gained a governorship, with Jay Nixon winning the gubernatorial election in Missouri. Republicans gained a governorship, though-in Puerto Rico, with Luis Fortuño, former non-voting delegate, defeated Anibal Acevedo-Vila. Democrats now control 29 offices of governor, with 21 offices held by Republicans.
In the House, Democrats gained 24 seats (along with Puerto Rico's non-voting delegate), making a 259-176 majority. Democrats also gained, as of post, 4 State Houses, according to AP, bringing their control of state legislatures to a score of 27 to 14, with 7 ties and the nonpartisan Unicameral in Nebraska. Democrats won in New York State Senate, gaining control (with my state Senator, Malcolm A. Smith, becoming Majority Leader!!!), gained seats in Alaska, where they now officially hold a tie, and caused a split of the Ohio legislature, winning their Senate.
Here's a tentative map of the new State House control:
Expect a few new posts in the coming weeks, as we transition back to our normal posts.
Here's a look at the Electoral Map:
The real struggle, though, is in the Senate. Let's take a look at the ten races I saw as the closest, and if I got my predictions right:
10. Colorado:
PREDICTION: MARK UDALL (D) BY 15
Okay, so it was closer than I thought. Udall did win in a landslide, though, by nine points over former congressman Bob Schaffer. Colorado was a big state for the Dems this year; they made their gambit by holding the DNC in Denver, and the west went with them.
9. Texas:
PREDICTION: JOHN CORNYN (R) BY 7
And this one wasn't as close as I thought. Although Obama campaigned more there than most Dems, and I thought that the youth (especially in the Austin area) was underpolled in an already close race (according to polls), challenger Rick Noriega just couldn't win here, losing by 12. Chalk it up to left-wing wishful thinking.
8. New Hampshire:
PREDICTION: JEANNE SHAHEEN (D) BY 6
Finally, one where I was close! Former Governor Shaheen beat incumbent Sununu by 7 points!
7. Kentucky:
PREDICTION: BRUCE LUNSFORD (D) BY 1
Alas, sometimes a Republican can win. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell got in very hot water in this race, which wasn't called until late in the evening. But Bruce Lunsord couldn't eke this one out: McConnell by 6.
6. Georgia:
PREDICTION: JIM MARTIN (D) BY 3
In the first vote, I was wrong. Incumbent Saxby Chambliss won a plurality, winning approximately 49.9%. However, in Georgia, you need 50% of the vote, plus one-a majority-to win. Thus, there will be a run-off on December 2, says the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. It's all hands on deck here: expect huge amounts of money-whatever's left in the war chest-from both campaigns, especially the national parties. But you have to wonder if blacks, who came out in droves for Obama-especially in DeKalb County-will come out to elect Martin in December. So, maybe I might be right in the second vote!
5. Oregon:
PREDICTION: JEFF MERKLEY (D) BY 5
Right now, I'm wrong. With 85% of the vote in (including 80% in from Portland and Multonomah County, and only 60% in from Eugene and Lane County-both Democratic strongholds), Jeff Merkley has been projected to defeat incumbent Gordon Smith's Senate seat. It may actually exceed my prediction by the time all the votes are counted.
4. Mississippi-B:
PREDICTION: ROGER WICKER (R) WINS BY "A FEW THOUSAND" OVER RONNIE MUSGROVE
I was waaay off on this one. The close polling a week ago in Mississippi's Special Election came out as a farce, as incumbent-by-two-years Roger Wicker defeated former Gov. Musgrove by 10 points.
3. North Carolina:
PREDICTION: KAY HAGAN (D) BY 3
The surpriser of the 2008 season did go the Democrats' way, as Kay Hagan won in a 9-point landslide, defeating incumbent Elizabeth Dole. Liddy's campaign tactic to tie State Sen. Hagan to the group, Godless Americans, and even insinuating that Hagan is an atheist, backfired-Hagan shot back at Dole's comment, saying that she has taught Sunday school for the last 5 years.
2. Minnesota:
PREDICTION: AL FRANKEN (D) BY 2
Another super-close race. With 99% of the vote in, incumbent Norm Coleman leads radio commentator and former SNL writer Al Franken by 336 votes-out of over 2.4 million. This initiates a statewide-recount, which probably will be over in a couple of weeks. My prediction: the absentees go overwhelmingly for Franken (who has actually been in Iraq and Afghanistan for the USO-Coleman, from my knowledge, has not gone to Iraq or Afghanistan), who wins by my margin.
1. Alaska:
PREDICTION: "I'LL TELL YOU IN A FEW DAYS"
Well, I forgot to tell you. But after Sen. Ted Stevens' conviction on seven felony counts dealing with ethics, I thought that challenger Mark Begich would win in a landslide. But don't think Stevens will trade in his suit and Incredible Hulk tie for an orange jumpsuit yet-with 99% of the vote in, Sen. Stevens leads by just over 3,000 votes. There are more votes coming in through early voting and through absentee ballots that may see Begich win this, but it will be especially close. I think that along with a "Bradley effect," the widely talked-about polling phenomenon, we have to add the "Stevens-Young effect": In the state of Alaska, people will say that they will not vote for those who were or are in ethics scandals (i.e. Stevens and House Republican Don Young, who won by 7 points in spite of polls saying it would go Ethan Berkowitz' way by near-double-digits), but will instead-causing a massive polling breakdown.
So, that's how the Senate races look. In the end, the Democrats will have at least a 57-43 majority in the House-enough to work with, especially when you consider that President-elect Obama may appoint a Republican such as George Voinovich (OH), Olympia Snowe (ME), or Arlen Specter (PA) to his Cabinet, allowing Democratic Govs. Ted Strickland, John Baldacci, or Ed Rendell, respectively, to appoint one of their own.
In other news, Democrats gained a governorship, with Jay Nixon winning the gubernatorial election in Missouri. Republicans gained a governorship, though-in Puerto Rico, with Luis Fortuño, former non-voting delegate, defeated Anibal Acevedo-Vila. Democrats now control 29 offices of governor, with 21 offices held by Republicans.
In the House, Democrats gained 24 seats (along with Puerto Rico's non-voting delegate), making a 259-176 majority. Democrats also gained, as of post, 4 State Houses, according to AP, bringing their control of state legislatures to a score of 27 to 14, with 7 ties and the nonpartisan Unicameral in Nebraska. Democrats won in New York State Senate, gaining control (with my state Senator, Malcolm A. Smith, becoming Majority Leader!!!), gained seats in Alaska, where they now officially hold a tie, and caused a split of the Ohio legislature, winning their Senate.
Here's a tentative map of the new State House control:
Expect a few new posts in the coming weeks, as we transition back to our normal posts.
03 November 2008
We're getting closer...
...To Election Day. It's one hour away. Here's the latest polling data:
On Electoral-Vote, Obama has led 353-185 in the Electoral College for the last two days, picking up Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia, in theory. The Senate (including Sens. Sanders (I-VT) and Lieberman (I-CT)) will theoretically be held by Democrats, 58-42, with Alaskan Mark Begich, the Udall cousins, Mark in Colorado and Tom in New Mexico, Jeanne Shaheen in New Hampshire, Kay Hagan in North Carolina, Jeff Merkley in Oregon, and Mark Warner in Virginia picking up seats in theory, with the battle between Al Franken and Norm Coleman in Minnesota being a statistical tie.
In the latest tracking polls...
- CBS News (Obama +13)
- Diageo (Obama +5)
- Gallup Expanded (Obama +9)
- IBD (Obama +2)
- Opinion Research (Obama +7)
- Pew (Obama +6)
- Rasmussem (Obama +5)
- Research 2000 (Obama +7)
- Washington Post/ABC News (Obama +11)
- Zogby (Obama +6)
FiveThirtyEight reports in the latest calculations that Obama will theoretically win 346.5-191.5, with a 98.1 possibility of victory, while the Senate will move 59.1-60.9Democratic. Obama will most likely win somewhere between 291-378 electoral votes. Among the more interesting simulations:
-Obama has a 31% likelihood of a landslide (>375 EV's)
-Obama has an 84.05% likelihood of winning the election while losing Ohio and Florida.
Some things to look at, hour by hour (all Eastern Time):
7:00: Polls close in Virginia, which will really be a bellwether for the way the race will go (along with having an important Senate race), Indiana, another swing state(which is generally one of the fastest to call), Kentucky-where there is a dogfight in the Senate between Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Bruce Lunsford-and Georgia, where there is another battle, this time between Jim Martin and incumbent Saxby Chambliss.
7:30: Three big states: Ohio, North Carolina (watch out in the Hagan/Liddy Dole race!) and West Virginia. 'Nuff said.
8:00: Polls close in Florida, Mississippi (home of a race between sitting senator Roger Wicker and former governor Ronnie Musgrove), Missouri, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania.
8:30: Popcorn break as the numbers come in-perhaps a call???
9:00: Polls close in Arizona, Colorado (Mark Udall-Bob Schaffer race, along with a swing state), Louisiana (thrown into near-toss-up territory in the last few days), Minnesota (Franken-Coleman race), New Mexico (swing state and Tom Udall race), and South Dakota
9:40: My prediction for a virtual call.
10:00: Polls close in Iowa, Montana, and Nevada.
11:00: Polls close in California (look at the Prop 8 vote), North Dakota, and Oregon.
11:20: I go to sleep.
1:00 AM: Alaska polls close. You've got problems if you stay up this late.
Stay tuned for tomorrow's live blog, right here on Notepad. Also, if you're in the New York area, you can go to "Election Plaza" at Rockefeller Center, where you can see the NBC shows tape along with seeing the numbers come in at 30 Rock and the rink, or at Times Square, which will be the headquarters of ABC's coverage.
On Electoral-Vote, Obama has led 353-185 in the Electoral College for the last two days, picking up Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, and Virginia, in theory. The Senate (including Sens. Sanders (I-VT) and Lieberman (I-CT)) will theoretically be held by Democrats, 58-42, with Alaskan Mark Begich, the Udall cousins, Mark in Colorado and Tom in New Mexico, Jeanne Shaheen in New Hampshire, Kay Hagan in North Carolina, Jeff Merkley in Oregon, and Mark Warner in Virginia picking up seats in theory, with the battle between Al Franken and Norm Coleman in Minnesota being a statistical tie.
In the latest tracking polls...
- CBS News (Obama +13)
- Diageo (Obama +5)
- Gallup Expanded (Obama +9)
- IBD (Obama +2)
- Opinion Research (Obama +7)
- Pew (Obama +6)
- Rasmussem (Obama +5)
- Research 2000 (Obama +7)
- Washington Post/ABC News (Obama +11)
- Zogby (Obama +6)
FiveThirtyEight reports in the latest calculations that Obama will theoretically win 346.5-191.5, with a 98.1 possibility of victory, while the Senate will move 59.1-60.9Democratic. Obama will most likely win somewhere between 291-378 electoral votes. Among the more interesting simulations:
-Obama has a 31% likelihood of a landslide (>375 EV's)
-Obama has an 84.05% likelihood of winning the election while losing Ohio and Florida.
Some things to look at, hour by hour (all Eastern Time):
7:00: Polls close in Virginia, which will really be a bellwether for the way the race will go (along with having an important Senate race), Indiana, another swing state(which is generally one of the fastest to call), Kentucky-where there is a dogfight in the Senate between Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Bruce Lunsford-and Georgia, where there is another battle, this time between Jim Martin and incumbent Saxby Chambliss.
7:30: Three big states: Ohio, North Carolina (watch out in the Hagan/Liddy Dole race!) and West Virginia. 'Nuff said.
8:00: Polls close in Florida, Mississippi (home of a race between sitting senator Roger Wicker and former governor Ronnie Musgrove), Missouri, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania.
8:30: Popcorn break as the numbers come in-perhaps a call???
9:00: Polls close in Arizona, Colorado (Mark Udall-Bob Schaffer race, along with a swing state), Louisiana (thrown into near-toss-up territory in the last few days), Minnesota (Franken-Coleman race), New Mexico (swing state and Tom Udall race), and South Dakota
9:40: My prediction for a virtual call.
10:00: Polls close in Iowa, Montana, and Nevada.
11:00: Polls close in California (look at the Prop 8 vote), North Dakota, and Oregon.
11:20: I go to sleep.
1:00 AM: Alaska polls close. You've got problems if you stay up this late.
Stay tuned for tomorrow's live blog, right here on Notepad. Also, if you're in the New York area, you can go to "Election Plaza" at Rockefeller Center, where you can see the NBC shows tape along with seeing the numbers come in at 30 Rock and the rink, or at Times Square, which will be the headquarters of ABC's coverage.
On the Importance of Service to Our Nation
In approximately 24-and-a-half hours, we will know the winner of this most historic election. Indeed, the two presidential candidates have become the most polarized candidtates since, in my opinion, 1800, when John Adams and Thomas Jefferson went at it. However, there is one thing in common: a dual call to service for the American people. For which I wholeheartedly agree: service to one's nation is not just a virtue, but a necessity. One must serve their nation, for they must give back to the country that bore them. The rights of the people are inalienable, nor are the responsibilities.
There is one single act that can somewhat absolve the need for service: voting. Voting allows for the change in power that is necessary if change is requested. As the Beastie Boys said, "You gotta fight for your right to party!", and you've got to fight for the right to change your government. For if someone retains power, we can complain all we want, but we had the ability to do something about it. In short: vote. It will help you in the long run. To quote Monk, "You'll thank me later."
However, we must serve beyond this point. Every point when there was a crisis in this nation-World War II and 9/11, for example-we came together to serve our nation and do our part. In World War II, we had our food rationed, children collected tin cans, and we all sold war bonds while women went to the workplace-and baseball, too-when the men were at war. After 9/11, we came together and made a stand against the people who attacked us (but that all changed when this president took advantage of it-but that's another post). And we must continue to serve. Be it in terms of volunteer fire and EMS departments, reading to children or senior citizens at a library, or what have you, doing one's part is a necessity.
Volunteer, and vote.
There is one single act that can somewhat absolve the need for service: voting. Voting allows for the change in power that is necessary if change is requested. As the Beastie Boys said, "You gotta fight for your right to party!", and you've got to fight for the right to change your government. For if someone retains power, we can complain all we want, but we had the ability to do something about it. In short: vote. It will help you in the long run. To quote Monk, "You'll thank me later."
However, we must serve beyond this point. Every point when there was a crisis in this nation-World War II and 9/11, for example-we came together to serve our nation and do our part. In World War II, we had our food rationed, children collected tin cans, and we all sold war bonds while women went to the workplace-and baseball, too-when the men were at war. After 9/11, we came together and made a stand against the people who attacked us (but that all changed when this president took advantage of it-but that's another post). And we must continue to serve. Be it in terms of volunteer fire and EMS departments, reading to children or senior citizens at a library, or what have you, doing one's part is a necessity.
Volunteer, and vote.
02 November 2008
Top 5 Reasons to Vote for the candidates
I originally wished to make this two different posts, but due to time constraints, I had to consolidate...
Only 4 percent of the electorate in the United States has faced the ultimate voting dilemma-who in the world am I voting for? Indeed, this is a dilemma, for the reason that the candidates have shown their policies, their strategies, their views, their goals, and their biographies, to the best of their ability-and then comes the question aforementioned! In fact, as the New York Times reports, some undecideds have considered the use of a coin flip to decide their vote. Rather than using coin flipping, plucking petals from a flower, or using the ultimate decider- “Eeny, Meeny, Miny, Moe”-here’s some reasons to vote in either direction:
The Top 5 Reasons to Vote for Barack Obama (in ascending order):
5. He has voted judiciously: Sure, the National Review said that Obama was the 4th-most liberal member of the Senate. But why, then, would William F. Buckley endorse Obama? Because this report is a farce. Obama has crossed party lines in terms of CAFE miles-per-gallon standards, on foreign policy with Richard Lugar (R-IN), and even confirming John Roberts as Chief Justice. However, he voted against funding in Iraq because they didn’t have timetables, and was against ultra-right justice Samuel Alito.
4. He’s served in the community: Maybe this isn’t especially important in the grand scheme of things, but being a community organizer, he did have responsibilities-to help citizens get what was needed on a small scale. And he’s fought for this ever since.
3. If you’d like the environment to be changed: Obama is for putting more funding into alternative fuels, while still having clean coal resources and offshore drilling involved; however, the latter is more a spoke rather than a hub of the project. Indeed, Obama’s policy is not unlike the Pickens Plan, which I support.
2. If you want to end the war, he’s your guy: Sen. Obama has proposed a 16-month withdrawal from Iraq, with all troops eventually leaving the country. Instead of focusing on Iraq in the “War on Terror”, he will instead focus on Pakistan and Afghanistan, where Osama bin Laden probably is.
1. He’ll fight for the common worker: Being a site that advocates neo-populism-a return to Populist politics, fighting for the common worker-I believe it is important to view the economy by the common worker’s stance, and solving it using that standpoint. And the Obama campaign will do that-by giving a tax cut to those making under $200,000, and having those making 200-250 thousand not having a tax increase. The increase only comes to those making over a quarter-million dollars a year. Also, he’ll strive to increase jobs, especially in terms of infrastructure and “green-collar” jobs.
Top 5 Reasons to Support John McCain:
5. If you don’t have healthcare and you can get a policy really, really cheap: McCain will give a tax credit of $5,000 to families that do not have healthcare-but will tax all benefits given by employers. So, if you get a good plan, you’ll be taxed-and the net wouldn’t be good, as your taxes would, in reality, increase. But, if you have absolutely nothing, and you’ve got a friend in the healthcare industry, you’re in pretty good straits under McCain’s plan.
4. You’re pro-life: McCain is against Roe v. Wade, and would appoint pro-life justices, but would want it decided by the state. McCain is for choice in the cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother-but not the health of the mother. Gov. Palin, on the other hand, is against all types of abortion.
3. You work in the oil or nuclear industry: McCain’s energy plan is centered around two things: offshore drilling, and building forty nuclear plants within four years. Ultimately, McCain’s plan is merely a ploy to gain the funding to the oil and nuclear lobbies (just as Obama is for gaining the funding of the clean coal and oil lobbies, I’ll admit), but the rest is fairly solid: giving a prize to those who find new ways to lower emissions and further increasing CAFE standards, for example, are good policies from where I’m standing. Just one question to ask Sen. McCain: Where the hell are you going to put the nuclear reactors?
2. If you are a soldier in Iraq who supports the war: McCain supports seeing what is going on in Iraq in January, and going from there. Of course, based on his “100 years” idea, he might be insinuating opening up permanent bases in Iraq to keep the peace. It looks like the tide is turning militarily, but is it turning politically?
1. If you make a lot of money: McCain supports giving tax cuts-good. McCain also supports giving the largest tax cuts to the rich-good if you’re rich.
I do care who you vote for, yes. But I also care about how you vote. Thus, tomorrow’s post includes voting: “On the Importance of Service to Our Nation”. Remember to vote, and then read Tuesday night’s live blog, beginning at approximately 6:30 PM right here. Expect some regular “issues” posts, along with a Thanksgiving post, “The Paddys”, and much more as the months rage on.
Only 4 percent of the electorate in the United States has faced the ultimate voting dilemma-who in the world am I voting for? Indeed, this is a dilemma, for the reason that the candidates have shown their policies, their strategies, their views, their goals, and their biographies, to the best of their ability-and then comes the question aforementioned! In fact, as the New York Times reports, some undecideds have considered the use of a coin flip to decide their vote. Rather than using coin flipping, plucking petals from a flower, or using the ultimate decider- “Eeny, Meeny, Miny, Moe”-here’s some reasons to vote in either direction:
The Top 5 Reasons to Vote for Barack Obama (in ascending order):
5. He has voted judiciously: Sure, the National Review said that Obama was the 4th-most liberal member of the Senate. But why, then, would William F. Buckley endorse Obama? Because this report is a farce. Obama has crossed party lines in terms of CAFE miles-per-gallon standards, on foreign policy with Richard Lugar (R-IN), and even confirming John Roberts as Chief Justice. However, he voted against funding in Iraq because they didn’t have timetables, and was against ultra-right justice Samuel Alito.
4. He’s served in the community: Maybe this isn’t especially important in the grand scheme of things, but being a community organizer, he did have responsibilities-to help citizens get what was needed on a small scale. And he’s fought for this ever since.
3. If you’d like the environment to be changed: Obama is for putting more funding into alternative fuels, while still having clean coal resources and offshore drilling involved; however, the latter is more a spoke rather than a hub of the project. Indeed, Obama’s policy is not unlike the Pickens Plan, which I support.
2. If you want to end the war, he’s your guy: Sen. Obama has proposed a 16-month withdrawal from Iraq, with all troops eventually leaving the country. Instead of focusing on Iraq in the “War on Terror”, he will instead focus on Pakistan and Afghanistan, where Osama bin Laden probably is.
1. He’ll fight for the common worker: Being a site that advocates neo-populism-a return to Populist politics, fighting for the common worker-I believe it is important to view the economy by the common worker’s stance, and solving it using that standpoint. And the Obama campaign will do that-by giving a tax cut to those making under $200,000, and having those making 200-250 thousand not having a tax increase. The increase only comes to those making over a quarter-million dollars a year. Also, he’ll strive to increase jobs, especially in terms of infrastructure and “green-collar” jobs.
Top 5 Reasons to Support John McCain:
5. If you don’t have healthcare and you can get a policy really, really cheap: McCain will give a tax credit of $5,000 to families that do not have healthcare-but will tax all benefits given by employers. So, if you get a good plan, you’ll be taxed-and the net wouldn’t be good, as your taxes would, in reality, increase. But, if you have absolutely nothing, and you’ve got a friend in the healthcare industry, you’re in pretty good straits under McCain’s plan.
4. You’re pro-life: McCain is against Roe v. Wade, and would appoint pro-life justices, but would want it decided by the state. McCain is for choice in the cases of rape, incest, and the life of the mother-but not the health of the mother. Gov. Palin, on the other hand, is against all types of abortion.
3. You work in the oil or nuclear industry: McCain’s energy plan is centered around two things: offshore drilling, and building forty nuclear plants within four years. Ultimately, McCain’s plan is merely a ploy to gain the funding to the oil and nuclear lobbies (just as Obama is for gaining the funding of the clean coal and oil lobbies, I’ll admit), but the rest is fairly solid: giving a prize to those who find new ways to lower emissions and further increasing CAFE standards, for example, are good policies from where I’m standing. Just one question to ask Sen. McCain: Where the hell are you going to put the nuclear reactors?
2. If you are a soldier in Iraq who supports the war: McCain supports seeing what is going on in Iraq in January, and going from there. Of course, based on his “100 years” idea, he might be insinuating opening up permanent bases in Iraq to keep the peace. It looks like the tide is turning militarily, but is it turning politically?
1. If you make a lot of money: McCain supports giving tax cuts-good. McCain also supports giving the largest tax cuts to the rich-good if you’re rich.
I do care who you vote for, yes. But I also care about how you vote. Thus, tomorrow’s post includes voting: “On the Importance of Service to Our Nation”. Remember to vote, and then read Tuesday night’s live blog, beginning at approximately 6:30 PM right here. Expect some regular “issues” posts, along with a Thanksgiving post, “The Paddys”, and much more as the months rage on.
31 October 2008
23 October 2008
Hot Senatorial Races
A few months ago, Notepad did a very early coverage of the senatorial elections. Now, let's cover the top 10 closest campaigns, according to Electoral-Vote and FiveThirtyEight:
10. Colorado: Wayne Allard (R) is retiring at the end of this Congress, leaving the seat open-but remember, this is a state that has been quickly shifting left; they have a recently elected Governor (Democrat), Senator (Democrat), and they control the state legislature. Mark Udall, Democratic Congressman from Boulder, is currently leading Bob Schaffer, a former congressman and current oilman. The polls show that Mark Udall is leading big-a 94% likelihood of victory, says FiveThirtyEight-but, hey, ten's a round number and I only have got four close races. By the way, Mark's cousin, Tom, a Democratic congressman, is leading big in New Mexico against Steve Pearce in Pete Domenici's (R) seat. PREDICTION: UDALL BY 15
9. Texas: John Cornyn, inexplicably, is winning only by six points to Rick Noriega, a state representative and Afghanistan war veteran (who came in first in a five-man primary that included-no joke- a man named Gene Kelly. GOTTA DANCE!!!) This is unbelievable that it is this close in the polls, and it has continued to go up since late August. This may be a seat that the DSCC will put money in, but I don't think that they will win it. PREDICTION: CORNYN BY 7
8. New Hampshire: Let's face it, if George W. Bush lived in New Hampshire, his name would be John E. Sununu. He's only voted 84% of the time with Bush, but, to steal a quote from Sen. Obama, "I don't want to take a 16% chance on change." He's for the war in Iraq, voted to suspend the right of habeas corpus for detainees at Guantanamo, and voted against renewing the assault weapons ban. That's not to say he's been terrible, but Jeanne Shaheen, former 3-term Governor, would be better. In her six years in Concord, she'd reformed healthcare for children, shown her pro-choice standpoint by repealing a law that would make abortion a felony in the state, and had been a fervent supporter of early education. But she only has an 8 point lead in the polls, after having led by almost twenty. PREDICTION: SHAHEEN BY 6
7. Kentucky: This isn't the most surprising shift, but Mitch McConnell is in trouble late, after having led by almost 20 points to veteran and one of the founders of Vencor, a healthcare company. McConnell, simply put, has voted with Bush on Iraq-a death knell for any candidate. He's also cited as one of the leaders in the "do-nothing Senate" they always talk about. McConnell is now only ahead by 4 points, and can fall victim to the Obama effect. PREDICTION: LUNSFORD BY 1
6. Georgia: I'll just appropriate a quote from Muhammad Ali to describe Saxby Chambliss: "He's a bad man!!!" After running a campaign in 2002 that involved smearing Vietnam veteran, triple-amputee Max Cleland, who earned a Silver Star and a Bronze Star in Vietnam, comparing him in advertisements to Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. Now, he's again in hot water, for-guess what!-being for the war in Iraq! And who is he running against now? A Vietnam veteran!!! It just keeps getting better and better. Except this time it's not Cleland, but Jim Martin, former Georgia state representative. He's for a staged withdrawal from Iraq, and with the Obama effect in Georgia, this might turn, as well-he's only down by two in the polls. PREDICTION: MARTIN BY 3
5. Oregon: Gordon Smith's a really nice guy. I mean a really, really nice guy. He's a Republican who has crossed party lines and got the job done. But we said the same about Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island just two years ago, when he was defeated by Sheldon Whitehouse-not because he did anything wrong, but that he was a Republican. This looks like it's having the same effect for Jeff Merkley, who is leading by 4 points in a recent Research 2000 poll. PREDICTION: MERKLEY BY 5
4. Mississippi-B: In Mississippi-A, Sen. Thad Cochran (R) will cruise to a victory. However, in the Mississippi-B race, where Roger Wicker (who was appointed to the Senate in Trent Lott's seat, after the latter resigned to become a lobbyist last year) is in a dogfight with former Gov. Ronnie Musgrove. Musgrove wasn't the most popular governor in Mississippi(he divorced his wife in mid-term, and was part of a controversial ordeal with the divisive Mississippi state flag), and he won't be a favorite with the rest of the Democrats (he's against same-sex couples adopting children, much less getting married; is for putting "In God We Trust" in public schools; and wished to keep the Ten Commandments in the State Capitol). But, let's face it-he's had a good stand on education, and is against what's going on now in Iraq. This race has been nailbiting-Wicker's leading by just 1 point in the latest poll-and the Obama effect may cause this to turn. PREDICTION: WICKER BY A FEW THOUSAND
3. North Carolina: This one is the surpriser of the entire campaign. The fact that Obama is doing well in North Carolina: stunning. The idea that Elizabeth Dole, running for a second term, is losing to Kay Hagan, an unknown state senator? Amazing beyond one's wildest dreams (or nightmares, depending on who you support). Along with her service as president of the National Republican Senatorial Committee-boy, she did a great job!, she's voted with Bush 92% of the time. This is more fire for Hagan, who has gotten support in the form of rallies from Senator Obama, and she's also been strong on education. PREDICTION: HAGAN BY 3
2. Minnesota: Norm Coleman-poor, poor Norm Coleman. Again, not a terrible guy-in fact, he used to campaign for Democrats. But he's been for Iraq from the beginning-and that's where Al Franken comes in. The former comedian (but that doesn't mean he's not funny anymore) and political commentator has been to Iraq (he's done several tours for the USO) and has been fighting very hard the last two years. Let's face it, at this point in the campaign-where Franken and Coleman are tied-this is priority number 1 for the Democratic Party. PREDICTION: FRANKEN BY 2
1. Alaska: Ah, the corruption capital of this nation. Home to Don Young, indicted Congressman (who will probably lose to Ethan Berkowitz come next Tuesday); Sarah Palin, VP nominee and proven to be unethical in the Troopergate scandal; and Ted Stevens, who is right now, as I write this, having a good shot to have his political career decided by 8 women and 4 men. Stevens is on trial for violations of ethics acts, with the decision probably coming in the next couple of days. That will probably be the deciding factor in this campaign between Stevens and Mark Begich, mayor of Anchorage, the state's largest city. If Stevens is found guilty, Begich will win, probably by at least 5 points. If he's acquitted, Stevens might win, although there's still a possibility. Rembember he's the guy who brought you the "Bridge to Nowhere"-but also remember that he's seen as the breadwinner for Alaska on that front. Will that play a role? PREDICTION: I'LL TELL YOU IN A FEW DAYS
Expect a feature post tomorrow, "On Maverick Status". I will also post, by Monday, a Campaign 2008 Spotlight on the presidential candidates, and "Declaration of the Rights of the municipal New Yorker".
10. Colorado: Wayne Allard (R) is retiring at the end of this Congress, leaving the seat open-but remember, this is a state that has been quickly shifting left; they have a recently elected Governor (Democrat), Senator (Democrat), and they control the state legislature. Mark Udall, Democratic Congressman from Boulder, is currently leading Bob Schaffer, a former congressman and current oilman. The polls show that Mark Udall is leading big-a 94% likelihood of victory, says FiveThirtyEight-but, hey, ten's a round number and I only have got four close races. By the way, Mark's cousin, Tom, a Democratic congressman, is leading big in New Mexico against Steve Pearce in Pete Domenici's (R) seat. PREDICTION: UDALL BY 15
9. Texas: John Cornyn, inexplicably, is winning only by six points to Rick Noriega, a state representative and Afghanistan war veteran (who came in first in a five-man primary that included-no joke- a man named Gene Kelly. GOTTA DANCE!!!) This is unbelievable that it is this close in the polls, and it has continued to go up since late August. This may be a seat that the DSCC will put money in, but I don't think that they will win it. PREDICTION: CORNYN BY 7
8. New Hampshire: Let's face it, if George W. Bush lived in New Hampshire, his name would be John E. Sununu. He's only voted 84% of the time with Bush, but, to steal a quote from Sen. Obama, "I don't want to take a 16% chance on change." He's for the war in Iraq, voted to suspend the right of habeas corpus for detainees at Guantanamo, and voted against renewing the assault weapons ban. That's not to say he's been terrible, but Jeanne Shaheen, former 3-term Governor, would be better. In her six years in Concord, she'd reformed healthcare for children, shown her pro-choice standpoint by repealing a law that would make abortion a felony in the state, and had been a fervent supporter of early education. But she only has an 8 point lead in the polls, after having led by almost twenty. PREDICTION: SHAHEEN BY 6
7. Kentucky: This isn't the most surprising shift, but Mitch McConnell is in trouble late, after having led by almost 20 points to veteran and one of the founders of Vencor, a healthcare company. McConnell, simply put, has voted with Bush on Iraq-a death knell for any candidate. He's also cited as one of the leaders in the "do-nothing Senate" they always talk about. McConnell is now only ahead by 4 points, and can fall victim to the Obama effect. PREDICTION: LUNSFORD BY 1
6. Georgia: I'll just appropriate a quote from Muhammad Ali to describe Saxby Chambliss: "He's a bad man!!!" After running a campaign in 2002 that involved smearing Vietnam veteran, triple-amputee Max Cleland, who earned a Silver Star and a Bronze Star in Vietnam, comparing him in advertisements to Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. Now, he's again in hot water, for-guess what!-being for the war in Iraq! And who is he running against now? A Vietnam veteran!!! It just keeps getting better and better. Except this time it's not Cleland, but Jim Martin, former Georgia state representative. He's for a staged withdrawal from Iraq, and with the Obama effect in Georgia, this might turn, as well-he's only down by two in the polls. PREDICTION: MARTIN BY 3
5. Oregon: Gordon Smith's a really nice guy. I mean a really, really nice guy. He's a Republican who has crossed party lines and got the job done. But we said the same about Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island just two years ago, when he was defeated by Sheldon Whitehouse-not because he did anything wrong, but that he was a Republican. This looks like it's having the same effect for Jeff Merkley, who is leading by 4 points in a recent Research 2000 poll. PREDICTION: MERKLEY BY 5
4. Mississippi-B: In Mississippi-A, Sen. Thad Cochran (R) will cruise to a victory. However, in the Mississippi-B race, where Roger Wicker (who was appointed to the Senate in Trent Lott's seat, after the latter resigned to become a lobbyist last year) is in a dogfight with former Gov. Ronnie Musgrove. Musgrove wasn't the most popular governor in Mississippi(he divorced his wife in mid-term, and was part of a controversial ordeal with the divisive Mississippi state flag), and he won't be a favorite with the rest of the Democrats (he's against same-sex couples adopting children, much less getting married; is for putting "In God We Trust" in public schools; and wished to keep the Ten Commandments in the State Capitol). But, let's face it-he's had a good stand on education, and is against what's going on now in Iraq. This race has been nailbiting-Wicker's leading by just 1 point in the latest poll-and the Obama effect may cause this to turn. PREDICTION: WICKER BY A FEW THOUSAND
3. North Carolina: This one is the surpriser of the entire campaign. The fact that Obama is doing well in North Carolina: stunning. The idea that Elizabeth Dole, running for a second term, is losing to Kay Hagan, an unknown state senator? Amazing beyond one's wildest dreams (or nightmares, depending on who you support). Along with her service as president of the National Republican Senatorial Committee-boy, she did a great job!, she's voted with Bush 92% of the time. This is more fire for Hagan, who has gotten support in the form of rallies from Senator Obama, and she's also been strong on education. PREDICTION: HAGAN BY 3
2. Minnesota: Norm Coleman-poor, poor Norm Coleman. Again, not a terrible guy-in fact, he used to campaign for Democrats. But he's been for Iraq from the beginning-and that's where Al Franken comes in. The former comedian (but that doesn't mean he's not funny anymore) and political commentator has been to Iraq (he's done several tours for the USO) and has been fighting very hard the last two years. Let's face it, at this point in the campaign-where Franken and Coleman are tied-this is priority number 1 for the Democratic Party. PREDICTION: FRANKEN BY 2
1. Alaska: Ah, the corruption capital of this nation. Home to Don Young, indicted Congressman (who will probably lose to Ethan Berkowitz come next Tuesday); Sarah Palin, VP nominee and proven to be unethical in the Troopergate scandal; and Ted Stevens, who is right now, as I write this, having a good shot to have his political career decided by 8 women and 4 men. Stevens is on trial for violations of ethics acts, with the decision probably coming in the next couple of days. That will probably be the deciding factor in this campaign between Stevens and Mark Begich, mayor of Anchorage, the state's largest city. If Stevens is found guilty, Begich will win, probably by at least 5 points. If he's acquitted, Stevens might win, although there's still a possibility. Rembember he's the guy who brought you the "Bridge to Nowhere"-but also remember that he's seen as the breadwinner for Alaska on that front. Will that play a role? PREDICTION: I'LL TELL YOU IN A FEW DAYS
Expect a feature post tomorrow, "On Maverick Status". I will also post, by Monday, a Campaign 2008 Spotlight on the presidential candidates, and "Declaration of the Rights of the municipal New Yorker".
16 October 2008
100 Minutes After the Debate
Make it 4 for 4.
Senator John McCain needed a huge momentum swing in tonight's debate; he needed a win with both burdens-the burden to not lose, and the burden to truly win. But Senator Barack Obama would have none of that, counterbalancing McCain's plans with a solid set of his own, and taking attacks in stride, while making his own against McCain.
Here are the decisions from the Network 3, the Cable 3, PBS' The News Hour, Mark Halperin of TIME magazine's "The Page", and Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post's "The Fix":
CBS: McCain looked disrespectful and fatigued; not Obama's best performance, but still a win.
NBC: Not a game changer; fairly neutral debate.
ABC: Obama "perfected the 'rope-a-dope'"; McCain couldn't change momentum, but still performed well.
CNN: Lean Obama; McCain looks better than last debate; "worst debate" for Obama
MSNBC: Obama win; big win on intangibles; McCain didn't attack directly.
Fox News: Obama clearly won Miami focus group; panel disagreed.
The News Hour: Neither elaborated on the economy; a tie.
Halperin: McCain wins, A- to B; "does it matter?"
Cillizza: McCain did not get "knockout blow", but did perform very well.
I also have CNN's polling data (there's more today!):
All polls have a margin of error of +/- 4%, with the breakdown of those polled being 40% Democrats, 30% Republicans, and 30% independents.
Who did the better job?: Obama, 58%-31%
Favorability Ratings:
Obama, originally 63-35 favorable, is now 66-33 favorable
McCain, originally 51-45 favorable, is now a 49-49 tie
On party breakdown, Obama won Democrats 88%-5%, independents 57%-31%, with McCain winning Republicans by an underwhelming 68%-18%.
On who will fix the economy, 59% believed Obama would fix it better, compared to 35% for McCain; on Healthcare, 62-31 Obama, and on taxes, 56-41 Obama.
On who portrayed themselves as the better leader, Obama won 56-35, and 70% found Obama more likeable, compared to 22% who found McCain more likeable.
Here's my notes on tonight's debate:
>Obama showed that he could present himself on a variety of issues, including on social issues; his answer on abortion was probably the clincher of the night, as he substantiated his opinion rather than just simply asserting.
>McCain was able to diversify his claims on education, which was important, as he went beyond simple talking points-but it was something I thought Obama did well throughout.
>I think that every news station got it right when they said that the winner of tonight's debate was "Joe the Plumber", the Ohio voter (and McCain supporter) that spoke with Sen. Obama yesterday and made headline news in the New York Post. "Joe the Plumber" is now Sen. McCain's best friend, as he made 21 separate references (with Obama making a few in retort) to the man-1 reference every 4 minutes and 15 seconds; in contrast, he only said "my friends" once, and he never used the word "maverick". Could this be a shift in the McCain-and the American-lexicon?
>McCain attacked on Ayers and on ACORN, but Obama did the most important thing-he rose above it, showing that at least one glimpse of that "changing of politics" is still there. McCain just couldn't stick those claims to him.
Here are my round-by-round assessments on the victor of tonight's debate:
Economy: While Obama was able to diversify, McCain came right around in circles. Obama was also able to tie McCain to Bush. Win Obama.
Campaign Strategies: This one goes to Obama, because McCain really could not win unless Obama truly got screwed from claims of his associations with Ayers. Knocked down statements about Ayers, ACORN, and Rep. John Lewis, while going after McCain on the statements made at his rallies.
Energy: Again, Obama was able to diversify his claims-while McCain was kind of stuck showcasing nuclear energy and offshore driling (although he did a better job of bringing other things to the forefront), Obama was able to show the broad spectrum of the energy debate, and how he would implement a variety of alternative energy sources, along with showing the need for fuel efficiency, which had the CNN "tick-polls" buzzing-it was roofing for about a minute. Win Obama, but it was kept close by McCain.
Healthcare: This segment was a true turning point for Obama. He was able to present his plan, while continuing to deride McCain's. Meanwhile, McCain was on defense more than offense about his plan. Win Obama.
Social Issues (Abortion): This one was a slight win for Obama, for the reason (as stated above) that Obama could truly go in-depth on his reasoning to support abortion, along with refuting claims of his prior views in Springfield, while McCain gave a simple assertion.
Education: This one I viewed as a tie. Both candidates presented their views clearly and well and, while I support Obama's policy (but not as vigorously as the rest of his policies), I was pleasantly surprised that McCain sees more than just vouchers as a way to get out of things. An important attack by Obama was on Phil Gramm, who basically said that the youth was a special interest group and not all special interest groups can be attended to.
Intangibles: As in the prior debates, I gave the win here to Obama in the first half-hour. McCain didn't look at Obama until the second half-hour, was sighing often, and kept interrupting Obama when he spoke.
Overall victor: Obama, but McCain put up a good fight-this one isn't the "game changer", but I think that, instead of a "win by knockout", it'll be a "win by decision" for Obama, contuing the sports analogy, Obama has "run the clock out" by providing no positive effect for McCain this evening.
Stay tuned to Notepad for Campaign 2008 Spotlights on the four major candidates, at least 4 feature posts, a handicap of the senatorial elections across the land, what really happens in the Electoral College, and a special Election Night live blog.
Senator John McCain needed a huge momentum swing in tonight's debate; he needed a win with both burdens-the burden to not lose, and the burden to truly win. But Senator Barack Obama would have none of that, counterbalancing McCain's plans with a solid set of his own, and taking attacks in stride, while making his own against McCain.
Here are the decisions from the Network 3, the Cable 3, PBS' The News Hour, Mark Halperin of TIME magazine's "The Page", and Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post's "The Fix":
CBS: McCain looked disrespectful and fatigued; not Obama's best performance, but still a win.
NBC: Not a game changer; fairly neutral debate.
ABC: Obama "perfected the 'rope-a-dope'"; McCain couldn't change momentum, but still performed well.
CNN: Lean Obama; McCain looks better than last debate; "worst debate" for Obama
MSNBC: Obama win; big win on intangibles; McCain didn't attack directly.
Fox News: Obama clearly won Miami focus group; panel disagreed.
The News Hour: Neither elaborated on the economy; a tie.
Halperin: McCain wins, A- to B; "does it matter?"
Cillizza: McCain did not get "knockout blow", but did perform very well.
I also have CNN's polling data (there's more today!):
All polls have a margin of error of +/- 4%, with the breakdown of those polled being 40% Democrats, 30% Republicans, and 30% independents.
Who did the better job?: Obama, 58%-31%
Favorability Ratings:
Obama, originally 63-35 favorable, is now 66-33 favorable
McCain, originally 51-45 favorable, is now a 49-49 tie
On party breakdown, Obama won Democrats 88%-5%, independents 57%-31%, with McCain winning Republicans by an underwhelming 68%-18%.
On who will fix the economy, 59% believed Obama would fix it better, compared to 35% for McCain; on Healthcare, 62-31 Obama, and on taxes, 56-41 Obama.
On who portrayed themselves as the better leader, Obama won 56-35, and 70% found Obama more likeable, compared to 22% who found McCain more likeable.
Here's my notes on tonight's debate:
>Obama showed that he could present himself on a variety of issues, including on social issues; his answer on abortion was probably the clincher of the night, as he substantiated his opinion rather than just simply asserting.
>McCain was able to diversify his claims on education, which was important, as he went beyond simple talking points-but it was something I thought Obama did well throughout.
>I think that every news station got it right when they said that the winner of tonight's debate was "Joe the Plumber", the Ohio voter (and McCain supporter) that spoke with Sen. Obama yesterday and made headline news in the New York Post. "Joe the Plumber" is now Sen. McCain's best friend, as he made 21 separate references (with Obama making a few in retort) to the man-1 reference every 4 minutes and 15 seconds; in contrast, he only said "my friends" once, and he never used the word "maverick". Could this be a shift in the McCain-and the American-lexicon?
>McCain attacked on Ayers and on ACORN, but Obama did the most important thing-he rose above it, showing that at least one glimpse of that "changing of politics" is still there. McCain just couldn't stick those claims to him.
Here are my round-by-round assessments on the victor of tonight's debate:
Economy: While Obama was able to diversify, McCain came right around in circles. Obama was also able to tie McCain to Bush. Win Obama.
Campaign Strategies: This one goes to Obama, because McCain really could not win unless Obama truly got screwed from claims of his associations with Ayers. Knocked down statements about Ayers, ACORN, and Rep. John Lewis, while going after McCain on the statements made at his rallies.
Energy: Again, Obama was able to diversify his claims-while McCain was kind of stuck showcasing nuclear energy and offshore driling (although he did a better job of bringing other things to the forefront), Obama was able to show the broad spectrum of the energy debate, and how he would implement a variety of alternative energy sources, along with showing the need for fuel efficiency, which had the CNN "tick-polls" buzzing-it was roofing for about a minute. Win Obama, but it was kept close by McCain.
Healthcare: This segment was a true turning point for Obama. He was able to present his plan, while continuing to deride McCain's. Meanwhile, McCain was on defense more than offense about his plan. Win Obama.
Social Issues (Abortion): This one was a slight win for Obama, for the reason (as stated above) that Obama could truly go in-depth on his reasoning to support abortion, along with refuting claims of his prior views in Springfield, while McCain gave a simple assertion.
Education: This one I viewed as a tie. Both candidates presented their views clearly and well and, while I support Obama's policy (but not as vigorously as the rest of his policies), I was pleasantly surprised that McCain sees more than just vouchers as a way to get out of things. An important attack by Obama was on Phil Gramm, who basically said that the youth was a special interest group and not all special interest groups can be attended to.
Intangibles: As in the prior debates, I gave the win here to Obama in the first half-hour. McCain didn't look at Obama until the second half-hour, was sighing often, and kept interrupting Obama when he spoke.
Overall victor: Obama, but McCain put up a good fight-this one isn't the "game changer", but I think that, instead of a "win by knockout", it'll be a "win by decision" for Obama, contuing the sports analogy, Obama has "run the clock out" by providing no positive effect for McCain this evening.
Stay tuned to Notepad for Campaign 2008 Spotlights on the four major candidates, at least 4 feature posts, a handicap of the senatorial elections across the land, what really happens in the Electoral College, and a special Election Night live blog.
14 October 2008
360 Minutes Before the Debate
After three straight Obama/Biden wins, John McCain and the GOP are desperately trying to swing their momentum. The Electoral College projections have been at their highest point so far this campaign, with Obama leading 361.4-176.6 on FiveThirtyEight and 357-181 on Electoral-Vote, not to mention an almost 96% chance of an Obama victory. Tonight's debate at 9:00 PM at Hofstra University may be the last chance for the McCain campaign to swing the momentum back. Tonight's theme is domestic policy; it's been a large part of all the debates so far, and it seems like both are getting better at this portion of the debate.
Here's what I think should be looked at in tonight's debate:
>Will he or won't he?: That's the question that everyone's asking of John McCain, who's gone negative, gone more negative, and has now had to backtrack and pick up the mud he slung over the past week on '60s Weathermen leader William Ayers, whom Obama had worked with in the 1990s. At rallies last week in Ohio, McCain had to confront claims from supporters that Obama was "an Arab", "a terrorist", and that we have to fear an Obama Administration. Also, political flames have been stoked by lower-level members of the GOP, such as the Virginia head of the Republican Party, who compared Sen. Obama to Osama bin Laden, because both "have friends who bombed the Pentagon." If McCain doesn't attack in tonight's debate, it will only show the hypocrisy of his campaign. However, if he does go negative, will Sen. Obama fight back with, say, the Keating Five scandal, or delving into what Rolling Stone magazine delved into in their newest issue on Sen. McCain's military record?
>Does Obama have an advantage?: With tonight's debate being about domestic policy, something Sen. Obama and the Democrats generally have an advantage on, Obama seems to have the edge in tonight's debate. However, with recent economic changes and in the past week-and-a-half, through an economic roller coaster ride (first 1500 points down last week, including a 777-point drop, then 953 points up yesterday alone, and now, at press time, an over 500-point drop in the last two days), a global bailout in Europe and a focused bailout in the U.S., the economic meltdown of Iceland, and the seemingly global endorsement of regulation with the awarding of the Nobel Prize in Economics to Paul Krugman, it is important now more than ever that we truly see the economic policy of the two candidates. With the microscope put on, we'll see how Obama and McCain do.
>Does Obama have home-field?: With tonight's debate in Democratic stronghold New York, it will be interesting to see how the crowd melds tonight's debate.
Tonight's debate, at 9:00 PM Eastern Time, from the Mack Sports Center at Hofstra University on Long Island, NY, will be moderated by Bob Scheiffer, former host of the CBS Evening News and longtime host of Face the Nation. Stay tuned to Notepad for a special live blog coinciding with tonight's debate, starting at 8:45 PM. Then, expect circa midnight a post-debate wrap-up, with in-depth analysis from myself, the Network 3, the Cable 3, and more, along with polls from the major networks.
Here's what I think should be looked at in tonight's debate:
>Will he or won't he?: That's the question that everyone's asking of John McCain, who's gone negative, gone more negative, and has now had to backtrack and pick up the mud he slung over the past week on '60s Weathermen leader William Ayers, whom Obama had worked with in the 1990s. At rallies last week in Ohio, McCain had to confront claims from supporters that Obama was "an Arab", "a terrorist", and that we have to fear an Obama Administration. Also, political flames have been stoked by lower-level members of the GOP, such as the Virginia head of the Republican Party, who compared Sen. Obama to Osama bin Laden, because both "have friends who bombed the Pentagon." If McCain doesn't attack in tonight's debate, it will only show the hypocrisy of his campaign. However, if he does go negative, will Sen. Obama fight back with, say, the Keating Five scandal, or delving into what Rolling Stone magazine delved into in their newest issue on Sen. McCain's military record?
>Does Obama have an advantage?: With tonight's debate being about domestic policy, something Sen. Obama and the Democrats generally have an advantage on, Obama seems to have the edge in tonight's debate. However, with recent economic changes and in the past week-and-a-half, through an economic roller coaster ride (first 1500 points down last week, including a 777-point drop, then 953 points up yesterday alone, and now, at press time, an over 500-point drop in the last two days), a global bailout in Europe and a focused bailout in the U.S., the economic meltdown of Iceland, and the seemingly global endorsement of regulation with the awarding of the Nobel Prize in Economics to Paul Krugman, it is important now more than ever that we truly see the economic policy of the two candidates. With the microscope put on, we'll see how Obama and McCain do.
>Does Obama have home-field?: With tonight's debate in Democratic stronghold New York, it will be interesting to see how the crowd melds tonight's debate.
Tonight's debate, at 9:00 PM Eastern Time, from the Mack Sports Center at Hofstra University on Long Island, NY, will be moderated by Bob Scheiffer, former host of the CBS Evening News and longtime host of Face the Nation. Stay tuned to Notepad for a special live blog coinciding with tonight's debate, starting at 8:45 PM. Then, expect circa midnight a post-debate wrap-up, with in-depth analysis from myself, the Network 3, the Cable 3, and more, along with polls from the major networks.
10 October 2008
NEWS FLASH-Palin Report Unveiled...And Post-Debate Remarks
Before we begin with the regularly scheduled post-debate remarks after I settled down, we have a big news story coming from Juneau. The Alaska State Legislature's bipartisan investigation on the firing of Alaska Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan by Gov. Sarah Palin (R), the Vice Presidential nominee for president, has been released by a unanimous 12-0 vote. The findings of the report state that, Gov. Palin unethically stepped in to fire Mr. Monegan and the claim that he was fired for not terminating state trooper Michael Wooten (the former brother-in-law of the Governor) is true; however, it is not the exclusive reason, and the Governor followed all procedural rights and requirements, as stated in the report by Stephen Branchflower, leader of the investigation: "Governor Palin's firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her consitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads."
What do I make of this? I think that this will be another mitigating factor for Palin (as we haven't seen them already); she was put on the ticket as a "Washington outsider", but now she is seen as corrupt and possibly in need of disciplinary action. However, will it affect the campaign? Possibly, although there are a boatload of other things flying around that I will elaborate on in this post.
Click on the post title to get the full PDF file of the report by the Alaska State Legislature (NOTE: This file needs the Adobe Acrobat Reader plug-in to work; also, it's 263 pages long, so it's not recommended for a connection with a low bandwidth).
And now, back to our regularly scheduled blogging...
Obama got a huge boost from the debate on Tuesday. States such as Georgia, Arkansas, even Montana are in play. According to FiveThirtyEight, Obama is behind in Arkansas only by 7 points, 5 in Georgia, and just under 5 points in Montana. Obama even has a chance to win not one, but two electoral votes in Nebraska: since they are one of the only two states (along with Maine) that apportion electors by district, along with the at-large electors for the senators (which will, without question go to McCain), Obama is only behind by 6 points in East Nebraska, and by 4 1/2 points in Omaha. Overall, FiveThirtyEight has a projection of a 348.3-189.7 for Obama in the Electoral College, along with a 90.9% chance of victory, while Electoral-Vote has Obama leading 343-184, with the state of Missouri tied. According to Electoral-Vote, Obama leads in swing states Virginia, West Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Colorado, and Nevada, while McCain leads in Indiana and North Carolina, which has inexplicably become a swing state. There are also 235 Strong Democratic EV's (meaning that the polling data shows that it is double-digits in favor of Obama), so Obama has to only to hold a couple of states that are in the "Weak Dem" category (i.e. Ohio, Nevada, Colorado, Florida) to win.
However, the level of negative attacks by the McCain campaign-and its supporters-is frightening. Governor Palin and others have embarked on a quest to make Obama and William Ayers sound like they were separated at birth, despite the fact that they were born over 30 years apart. Cindy McCain said that when she found out Obama voted nay on a defense spending bill because it didn't include a timetable "sent a cold chill down [her] spine"-even though McCain voted against an almost identical bill, that did have a timetable! Finally, smaller, local-level campaign managers have gone on to use incessantly Obama's middle name, Hussein. Bobby Maye, campaign chairman in Buchanan County (VA), went as far in an editorial as saying that Obama would "hire Ludacris to paint the White House black." The McCain supporters, though, are the scariest of all. Frequent chants of "terrorist" and "kill him, kill him" have been made by supporters at rallies when Obama's name is mentioned. Some supporters have gone so far as to call him "an Arab." Others have said, "Bomb Obama." The McCain has fear-mongered, and they have gone to far. McCain supporters have gone to the point where they will support killing Obama. The attacks on Obama's credibility have been so great that Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN) declined McCain's invitation to have a joint rally (Coleman is in a very tight race, behind Democratic candidate, comedian Al Franken). The fearmongering must stop; people have to learn the facts. I respect Sen. McCain, but I think that he has gone to far, and has to go back to being reasonable in his attacks. This is an important point in history: we have seen the point at which people are most polarized in a presidential campaign since 1800.
We leave now with Senatorial projections. On FiveThirtyEight, the Democrats will have 56 senators to the GOP's 42, with the 2 independents, come January 2009, while Electoral-Vote has a projection of 58-41 Democrats, with the final seat, North Carolina, being a flat-footed tie between Former Gov. Kay Hagan and incumbent Senator Elizabeth Dole. However, the states of Kentucky (where Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is only up by 4 to challenger Bruce Lunsford), Mississippi-B(where Sen. Roger Wicker [who replaced Trent Lott after he resigned last year] is up by 4 to Former Governor Ronnie Musgrove), and Georgia (where smear artist Saxby Chambliss [I'll have more on him later] is leading former state representative Jim Martin by 6) are moving towards going blue.
Tomorrow (I just can't do it tonight), I will post my next feature, "On Maverick Status". Sometime this weekend, I'll also post the next of the Campaign 2008 Spotlights on Sen. McCain, handicap the hottest Senate races, and post the next feature post, "On the Importance to Impeach the President". Also, stay tuned to Notepad on Wednesday for the final presidential debate, from the Mack Sports Complex at Hofstra University on Long Island, NY. I'll be presenting not only pre-debate reports 30 minutes before the debate and post-debate reports 90 minutes after, but also a live blog during the debate-so I can show the points I generally write in my debate notebook for you, the reader.
What do I make of this? I think that this will be another mitigating factor for Palin (as we haven't seen them already); she was put on the ticket as a "Washington outsider", but now she is seen as corrupt and possibly in need of disciplinary action. However, will it affect the campaign? Possibly, although there are a boatload of other things flying around that I will elaborate on in this post.
Click on the post title to get the full PDF file of the report by the Alaska State Legislature (NOTE: This file needs the Adobe Acrobat Reader plug-in to work; also, it's 263 pages long, so it's not recommended for a connection with a low bandwidth).
And now, back to our regularly scheduled blogging...
Obama got a huge boost from the debate on Tuesday. States such as Georgia, Arkansas, even Montana are in play. According to FiveThirtyEight, Obama is behind in Arkansas only by 7 points, 5 in Georgia, and just under 5 points in Montana. Obama even has a chance to win not one, but two electoral votes in Nebraska: since they are one of the only two states (along with Maine) that apportion electors by district, along with the at-large electors for the senators (which will, without question go to McCain), Obama is only behind by 6 points in East Nebraska, and by 4 1/2 points in Omaha. Overall, FiveThirtyEight has a projection of a 348.3-189.7 for Obama in the Electoral College, along with a 90.9% chance of victory, while Electoral-Vote has Obama leading 343-184, with the state of Missouri tied. According to Electoral-Vote, Obama leads in swing states Virginia, West Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Colorado, and Nevada, while McCain leads in Indiana and North Carolina, which has inexplicably become a swing state. There are also 235 Strong Democratic EV's (meaning that the polling data shows that it is double-digits in favor of Obama), so Obama has to only to hold a couple of states that are in the "Weak Dem" category (i.e. Ohio, Nevada, Colorado, Florida) to win.
However, the level of negative attacks by the McCain campaign-and its supporters-is frightening. Governor Palin and others have embarked on a quest to make Obama and William Ayers sound like they were separated at birth, despite the fact that they were born over 30 years apart. Cindy McCain said that when she found out Obama voted nay on a defense spending bill because it didn't include a timetable "sent a cold chill down [her] spine"-even though McCain voted against an almost identical bill, that did have a timetable! Finally, smaller, local-level campaign managers have gone on to use incessantly Obama's middle name, Hussein. Bobby Maye, campaign chairman in Buchanan County (VA), went as far in an editorial as saying that Obama would "hire Ludacris to paint the White House black." The McCain supporters, though, are the scariest of all. Frequent chants of "terrorist" and "kill him, kill him" have been made by supporters at rallies when Obama's name is mentioned. Some supporters have gone so far as to call him "an Arab." Others have said, "Bomb Obama." The McCain has fear-mongered, and they have gone to far. McCain supporters have gone to the point where they will support killing Obama. The attacks on Obama's credibility have been so great that Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN) declined McCain's invitation to have a joint rally (Coleman is in a very tight race, behind Democratic candidate, comedian Al Franken). The fearmongering must stop; people have to learn the facts. I respect Sen. McCain, but I think that he has gone to far, and has to go back to being reasonable in his attacks. This is an important point in history: we have seen the point at which people are most polarized in a presidential campaign since 1800.
We leave now with Senatorial projections. On FiveThirtyEight, the Democrats will have 56 senators to the GOP's 42, with the 2 independents, come January 2009, while Electoral-Vote has a projection of 58-41 Democrats, with the final seat, North Carolina, being a flat-footed tie between Former Gov. Kay Hagan and incumbent Senator Elizabeth Dole. However, the states of Kentucky (where Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is only up by 4 to challenger Bruce Lunsford), Mississippi-B(where Sen. Roger Wicker [who replaced Trent Lott after he resigned last year] is up by 4 to Former Governor Ronnie Musgrove), and Georgia (where smear artist Saxby Chambliss [I'll have more on him later] is leading former state representative Jim Martin by 6) are moving towards going blue.
Tomorrow (I just can't do it tonight), I will post my next feature, "On Maverick Status". Sometime this weekend, I'll also post the next of the Campaign 2008 Spotlights on Sen. McCain, handicap the hottest Senate races, and post the next feature post, "On the Importance to Impeach the President". Also, stay tuned to Notepad on Wednesday for the final presidential debate, from the Mack Sports Complex at Hofstra University on Long Island, NY. I'll be presenting not only pre-debate reports 30 minutes before the debate and post-debate reports 90 minutes after, but also a live blog during the debate-so I can show the points I generally write in my debate notebook for you, the reader.
08 October 2008
100 Minutes After the Debate
(This post was begun at 11:24 Eastern Daylight Time, and ended at 12:13 AM Eastern Time. The uploaded time is below)
We now see it is evident that Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has 90 minutes to survive and change the tide in the presidential election. Although there are 27 days remaining until the presidential election, Sen. McCain has only one platform remaining: next Wednesday’s debate, the final debate of the campaign, from Hofstra University in Long Island, NY. McCain simply didn’t change the tide in the momentum held by Sen. Obama (D-IL), and he’s simply running out of time.
Here are the decisions from the Network 3, the Cable 3, PBS’ The News Hour, and TIME magazine’s “The Page” by Mark Halperin, in order of channel number in the New York City market:
CBS: Tie, and no effect from debate
NBC: Obama gets win on foreign policy; tie overall.
ABC: Obama wins; kept game from being changed.
CNN: Obama wins
MSNBC: Tie, but lean Obama, McCain showing that he is “swinging and missing.”
Fox News: Obama wins overall; McCain wins on economy.
The News Hour: Obama wins; proved he was presidential
TIME: Obama wins, but not a game-changer; Obama B+, McCain B
And some more info, in the form of polling data:
CNN:
CNN had dial-polls (‘tick-polls,’ as I like to call them, because they change by the second) among a focus group of uncommitted Ohio voters, sequestered in a library at The Ohio State University, and they were just as they were in last week’s VP debate; when Obama spoke, the tick-polls shot up-especially among women-while when McCain spoke, it was the Columbus Morgue-absolute flat-line. Among the focus group, 12 said that Obama had won, 10 said McCain had won, and 3 thought it was a tie.
Among the polls performed (all of which had a margin of error of +/- 4%):
Among who did the better job, Obama wins 54%-30%.
For opinions of Obama, 64% of people think favorably, up from 60% before the debate, with 34% thinking unfavorably, down from 38%.
For opinions of McCain, there was no change-it’s still 51%-46% favorable.
CBS:
CBS only had a post-debate poll this time around (at least, I didn’t see the dial-polls-they may have done them): 39% said Obama had won, 27% said McCain had won, with 35% saying it was a tie.
Here were some of my observations from this evening’s debate:
>The first thing that jumps at me is this quote:
“It was an energy bill on the floor of the Senate loaded down with goodies, billions for the oil companies, and it was sponsored by Bush and Cheney.
You know who voted for it? You might never know. That one. You know who voted against it? Me. I have fought time after time against these pork barrel -- these bills that come to the floor and they have all kinds of goodies and all kinds of things in them for everybody and they buy off the votes.”
That one? THAT ONE?! The McCain campaign has justified it as rhetoric used on the campaign trail, but I think of it as two things: first, it’s patronizing and disrespectful towards the Senator (he has a name, and he has a title), and it shows that McCain can’t shake his caricature of being a doddering, angry old man.
>From there, things got a bit more mundane. McCain didn’t go after Obama using Rezko, Ayers, or Wright-maybe he’s not willing to do that. Obama linked McCain to Bush well, distanced himself from Bush, even linked his energy policy to JFK’s statement on the space race. The turning and clinching points both came in the foreign policy section: after McCain used his catchall, “he doesn’t understand,” in terms of Obama and foreign policy, Obama said this:
“Well, you know, Sen. McCain, in the last debate and today, again, suggested that I don't understand. It's true. There are some things I don't understand. I don't understand how we ended up invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, while Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda are setting up base camps and safe havens to train terrorists to attack us.
That was Sen. McCain's judgment and it was the wrong judgment. When Sen. McCain was cheerleading the president to go into Iraq, he suggested it was going to be quick and easy, we'd be greeted as liberators. That was the wrong judgment, and it's been costly to us. So one of the difficulties with Iraq is that it has put an enormous strain, first of all, on our troops, obviously, and they have performed heroically and honorably and we owe them an extraordinary debt of gratitude. But it's also put an enormous strain on our budget. We've spent, so far, close to $700 billion and if we continue on the path that we're on, as Sen. McCain is suggesting, it's going to go well over $1 trillion. We're spending $10 billion a month in Iraq at a time when the Iraqis have a $79 billion surplus, $79 billion. And we need that $10 billion a month here in the United States to put people back to work, to do all these wonderful things that Sen. McCain suggested we should be doing, but has not yet explained how he would pay for.”
He took what McCain said about him not understanding-an attempt to show him as just a new face-and went right back after him with his words.
The clincher was this: Sen. McCain had just quoted Teddy Roosevelt, that he spoke softly and carried a big stick. Obama then asked for a follow-up and, once granted, he said this:
“Sen. McCain, this is the guy who sang, "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran," who called for the annihilation of North Korea. That I don't think is an example of "speaking softly."
This is the person who, after we had -- we hadn't even finished Afghanistan, where he said, "Next up, Baghdad."
So I agree that we have to speak responsibly and we have to act responsibly. And the reason Pakistan -- the popular opinion of America had diminished in Pakistan was because we were supporting a dictator, Musharraf, had given him $10 billion over seven years, and he had suspended civil liberties. We were not promoting democracy.
This is the kind of policies that ultimately end up undermining our ability to fight the war on terrorism, and it will change when I'm president.”
Obama went right on the attack on this one; at this point, I kept waiting, and waiting, and waiting, but nothing came from McCain to make up for this.
Here’s my take on the debate, going section by section:
Economy: The economy section took approximately 30 minutes, according to CNN, and it was the first issue discussed. I thought both had a good amount of clash, and that both presented their platforms well. This one was a tie.
Energy: While McCain couldn’t get the ball rolling past nuclear plants and offshore drilling, Obama was able to talk about his diverse plan for energy, comparing his goal of being energy-independent in 10 years with JFK’s goal of getting a man on the moon within 10 years. McCain also ended with giving a plus to Obama, saying that Obama did in fact support nuclear power as part of his campaign. Obama gets a big win.
Healthcare: Obama expressed his healthcare plan concisely, and attacked McCain’s to begin. McCain did not. Obama also linked his policy to his own story, making him more real. Obama wins the round.
Foreign Policy: Both the turning point and the clincher in this round; while McCain kept repeating, going back to Iraq, Obama tied it all together, and clashed with McCain. Obama wins big in this round.
Closing: The final question was, verbatim: “What don't you know and how will you learn it?” I think Obama did well answering this question, saying that his wife has a longer list of what he doesn’t know, tied it back to his own story, and tied it back to the common voter. McCain had a good closing, and it almost matched up with Obama’s, but I give the win, just barely, to Obama on this 1-question round.
Intangibles: I awarded this one to Obama in the first half-hour; while McCain looked confused, forgetting the name of one questioner-in mid-answer-standing in front of Brokaw while he was reading the end script on the teleprompter, and also angry, pacing often(maybe he didn’t like the barstool-like chairs), crossing his arms, and sighing often á la Al Gore, circa 2000, Obama was calm and looked presidential.
The victor tonight was Obama; he ran the gamut of categories with excellence, while rebuking McCain’s claims.
Tonight’s “Reagan-o-meter”, the night’s acknowledgements of Ronald Reagan, was only at three. A new feature tonight, the “My-friends-o-meter”, was at 17 uses of the phrase, “my friend,” or, “my friends”-one use about every 5 minutes!
The final debate will take place at 9:00 PM Eastern Time, from the Mack Sports Complex at Hofstra University on Long Island, NY, on Wednesday, October 15th. Bob Scheiffer, host of CBS’ Face the Nation, will moderate. Notepad will follow the debate before, during, and after, with pre- and post-debate coverage, and a live blog for the ninety minutes.
Friday on Notepad, I provide some additional thoughts from tonight’s debate, and post-debate polling data, and “On Maverick Status.” On Monday, a Campaign 2008 Spotlight on John McCain, and “On Our Duty to Impeach the President.”
We now see it is evident that Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has 90 minutes to survive and change the tide in the presidential election. Although there are 27 days remaining until the presidential election, Sen. McCain has only one platform remaining: next Wednesday’s debate, the final debate of the campaign, from Hofstra University in Long Island, NY. McCain simply didn’t change the tide in the momentum held by Sen. Obama (D-IL), and he’s simply running out of time.
Here are the decisions from the Network 3, the Cable 3, PBS’ The News Hour, and TIME magazine’s “The Page” by Mark Halperin, in order of channel number in the New York City market:
CBS: Tie, and no effect from debate
NBC: Obama gets win on foreign policy; tie overall.
ABC: Obama wins; kept game from being changed.
CNN: Obama wins
MSNBC: Tie, but lean Obama, McCain showing that he is “swinging and missing.”
Fox News: Obama wins overall; McCain wins on economy.
The News Hour: Obama wins; proved he was presidential
TIME: Obama wins, but not a game-changer; Obama B+, McCain B
And some more info, in the form of polling data:
CNN:
CNN had dial-polls (‘tick-polls,’ as I like to call them, because they change by the second) among a focus group of uncommitted Ohio voters, sequestered in a library at The Ohio State University, and they were just as they were in last week’s VP debate; when Obama spoke, the tick-polls shot up-especially among women-while when McCain spoke, it was the Columbus Morgue-absolute flat-line. Among the focus group, 12 said that Obama had won, 10 said McCain had won, and 3 thought it was a tie.
Among the polls performed (all of which had a margin of error of +/- 4%):
Among who did the better job, Obama wins 54%-30%.
For opinions of Obama, 64% of people think favorably, up from 60% before the debate, with 34% thinking unfavorably, down from 38%.
For opinions of McCain, there was no change-it’s still 51%-46% favorable.
CBS:
CBS only had a post-debate poll this time around (at least, I didn’t see the dial-polls-they may have done them): 39% said Obama had won, 27% said McCain had won, with 35% saying it was a tie.
Here were some of my observations from this evening’s debate:
>The first thing that jumps at me is this quote:
“It was an energy bill on the floor of the Senate loaded down with goodies, billions for the oil companies, and it was sponsored by Bush and Cheney.
You know who voted for it? You might never know. That one. You know who voted against it? Me. I have fought time after time against these pork barrel -- these bills that come to the floor and they have all kinds of goodies and all kinds of things in them for everybody and they buy off the votes.”
That one? THAT ONE?! The McCain campaign has justified it as rhetoric used on the campaign trail, but I think of it as two things: first, it’s patronizing and disrespectful towards the Senator (he has a name, and he has a title), and it shows that McCain can’t shake his caricature of being a doddering, angry old man.
>From there, things got a bit more mundane. McCain didn’t go after Obama using Rezko, Ayers, or Wright-maybe he’s not willing to do that. Obama linked McCain to Bush well, distanced himself from Bush, even linked his energy policy to JFK’s statement on the space race. The turning and clinching points both came in the foreign policy section: after McCain used his catchall, “he doesn’t understand,” in terms of Obama and foreign policy, Obama said this:
“Well, you know, Sen. McCain, in the last debate and today, again, suggested that I don't understand. It's true. There are some things I don't understand. I don't understand how we ended up invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, while Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda are setting up base camps and safe havens to train terrorists to attack us.
That was Sen. McCain's judgment and it was the wrong judgment. When Sen. McCain was cheerleading the president to go into Iraq, he suggested it was going to be quick and easy, we'd be greeted as liberators. That was the wrong judgment, and it's been costly to us. So one of the difficulties with Iraq is that it has put an enormous strain, first of all, on our troops, obviously, and they have performed heroically and honorably and we owe them an extraordinary debt of gratitude. But it's also put an enormous strain on our budget. We've spent, so far, close to $700 billion and if we continue on the path that we're on, as Sen. McCain is suggesting, it's going to go well over $1 trillion. We're spending $10 billion a month in Iraq at a time when the Iraqis have a $79 billion surplus, $79 billion. And we need that $10 billion a month here in the United States to put people back to work, to do all these wonderful things that Sen. McCain suggested we should be doing, but has not yet explained how he would pay for.”
He took what McCain said about him not understanding-an attempt to show him as just a new face-and went right back after him with his words.
The clincher was this: Sen. McCain had just quoted Teddy Roosevelt, that he spoke softly and carried a big stick. Obama then asked for a follow-up and, once granted, he said this:
“Sen. McCain, this is the guy who sang, "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran," who called for the annihilation of North Korea. That I don't think is an example of "speaking softly."
This is the person who, after we had -- we hadn't even finished Afghanistan, where he said, "Next up, Baghdad."
So I agree that we have to speak responsibly and we have to act responsibly. And the reason Pakistan -- the popular opinion of America had diminished in Pakistan was because we were supporting a dictator, Musharraf, had given him $10 billion over seven years, and he had suspended civil liberties. We were not promoting democracy.
This is the kind of policies that ultimately end up undermining our ability to fight the war on terrorism, and it will change when I'm president.”
Obama went right on the attack on this one; at this point, I kept waiting, and waiting, and waiting, but nothing came from McCain to make up for this.
Here’s my take on the debate, going section by section:
Economy: The economy section took approximately 30 minutes, according to CNN, and it was the first issue discussed. I thought both had a good amount of clash, and that both presented their platforms well. This one was a tie.
Energy: While McCain couldn’t get the ball rolling past nuclear plants and offshore drilling, Obama was able to talk about his diverse plan for energy, comparing his goal of being energy-independent in 10 years with JFK’s goal of getting a man on the moon within 10 years. McCain also ended with giving a plus to Obama, saying that Obama did in fact support nuclear power as part of his campaign. Obama gets a big win.
Healthcare: Obama expressed his healthcare plan concisely, and attacked McCain’s to begin. McCain did not. Obama also linked his policy to his own story, making him more real. Obama wins the round.
Foreign Policy: Both the turning point and the clincher in this round; while McCain kept repeating, going back to Iraq, Obama tied it all together, and clashed with McCain. Obama wins big in this round.
Closing: The final question was, verbatim: “What don't you know and how will you learn it?” I think Obama did well answering this question, saying that his wife has a longer list of what he doesn’t know, tied it back to his own story, and tied it back to the common voter. McCain had a good closing, and it almost matched up with Obama’s, but I give the win, just barely, to Obama on this 1-question round.
Intangibles: I awarded this one to Obama in the first half-hour; while McCain looked confused, forgetting the name of one questioner-in mid-answer-standing in front of Brokaw while he was reading the end script on the teleprompter, and also angry, pacing often(maybe he didn’t like the barstool-like chairs), crossing his arms, and sighing often á la Al Gore, circa 2000, Obama was calm and looked presidential.
The victor tonight was Obama; he ran the gamut of categories with excellence, while rebuking McCain’s claims.
Tonight’s “Reagan-o-meter”, the night’s acknowledgements of Ronald Reagan, was only at three. A new feature tonight, the “My-friends-o-meter”, was at 17 uses of the phrase, “my friend,” or, “my friends”-one use about every 5 minutes!
The final debate will take place at 9:00 PM Eastern Time, from the Mack Sports Complex at Hofstra University on Long Island, NY, on Wednesday, October 15th. Bob Scheiffer, host of CBS’ Face the Nation, will moderate. Notepad will follow the debate before, during, and after, with pre- and post-debate coverage, and a live blog for the ninety minutes.
Friday on Notepad, I provide some additional thoughts from tonight’s debate, and post-debate polling data, and “On Maverick Status.” On Monday, a Campaign 2008 Spotlight on John McCain, and “On Our Duty to Impeach the President.”
07 October 2008
30 Minutes Before the Debate
(This post was begun at 8:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time, and completed at 8:58 PM EDT; the time in which it was uploaded is listed below)
“When I was walking in Memphis
Walking with my feet ten feet off of Beale
Walking in Memphis
But do I really feel the way I feel?”
-Marc Cohn
After two blasé wins for the Democrats in the debates of Mississippi and Missouri, we have reached the closest thing to the People’s Debate: the “town-hall” debate, from the Curb Events Center at Belmont University in Nashville, TN. The debate, moderated by retired NBC Nightly News anchor Tom Brokaw (still a Special Correspondent, and interim Meet the Press anchor, for NBC), will feature questions not only from the moderator, but also from the audience, and even from the Internet. Here are some pre-debate observations and things you should look at for tonight’s debate:
>McCain has the upper hand (or does he?): The McCain campaign has stated in the past that a town-hall format is his specialty, and asked the Commission on Presidential Debates for 10 town-hall debates. However, McCain has made some of his biggest gaffes at town-hall events, including his infamous “Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran” song, appropriated from the Beach Boys’ “Barbara Ann”, and his statement when asked if we would stay in Iraq for 40 years, “Why not a hundred?”
>McCain is on his last legs: You can see the way McCain’s wheels are coming off from the current campaign language. For the first time this campaign, McCain is directly attacking Sen. Barack Obama’s merit, with Gov. Sarah Palin going after Obama for his relationship on a charity board with William Ayers, leader of 1960s radical organization Weather Underground-even though in The Audacity of Hope, Obama’s second book, he had expressed that Ayers was, essentially, a nut. Will McCain himself follow the line of desperate mudslinging this evening in Memphis? And will Obama respond with his own mudslinging, most likely on the subject of Sen. McCain’s involvement in the Keating Five scandal?
>This may be McCain’s last shot: With only one debate remaining (and the topic being domestic policy, an Obama stronghold), Sen. McCain may have his one final shot to break Obama’s momentum; while a win can turn the tide and bring him surging back in the polls, a loss may clinch a win for Obama as the number of swing states shrinks; Obama now leads 349-174, with the state of North Carolina still tied, on Electoral-Vote, winning in Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Colorado, Nevada and Virginia (McCain’s got Indiana and West Virginia, but is even slipping in Montana, Mississippi, and Georgia [the latter two have fierce Senate races going on]), while FiveThirtyEight has Obama winning 345.4-192.6, with an 89.2% probability of victory.
Tonight’s debate, from Memphis, Tennessee, begins at 9:00 PM. Expect a post-debate report, with reactions and polls from the Network 3, the Cable 3, and more circa midnight.
“When I was walking in Memphis
Walking with my feet ten feet off of Beale
Walking in Memphis
But do I really feel the way I feel?”
-Marc Cohn
After two blasé wins for the Democrats in the debates of Mississippi and Missouri, we have reached the closest thing to the People’s Debate: the “town-hall” debate, from the Curb Events Center at Belmont University in Nashville, TN. The debate, moderated by retired NBC Nightly News anchor Tom Brokaw (still a Special Correspondent, and interim Meet the Press anchor, for NBC), will feature questions not only from the moderator, but also from the audience, and even from the Internet. Here are some pre-debate observations and things you should look at for tonight’s debate:
>McCain has the upper hand (or does he?): The McCain campaign has stated in the past that a town-hall format is his specialty, and asked the Commission on Presidential Debates for 10 town-hall debates. However, McCain has made some of his biggest gaffes at town-hall events, including his infamous “Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran” song, appropriated from the Beach Boys’ “Barbara Ann”, and his statement when asked if we would stay in Iraq for 40 years, “Why not a hundred?”
>McCain is on his last legs: You can see the way McCain’s wheels are coming off from the current campaign language. For the first time this campaign, McCain is directly attacking Sen. Barack Obama’s merit, with Gov. Sarah Palin going after Obama for his relationship on a charity board with William Ayers, leader of 1960s radical organization Weather Underground-even though in The Audacity of Hope, Obama’s second book, he had expressed that Ayers was, essentially, a nut. Will McCain himself follow the line of desperate mudslinging this evening in Memphis? And will Obama respond with his own mudslinging, most likely on the subject of Sen. McCain’s involvement in the Keating Five scandal?
>This may be McCain’s last shot: With only one debate remaining (and the topic being domestic policy, an Obama stronghold), Sen. McCain may have his one final shot to break Obama’s momentum; while a win can turn the tide and bring him surging back in the polls, a loss may clinch a win for Obama as the number of swing states shrinks; Obama now leads 349-174, with the state of North Carolina still tied, on Electoral-Vote, winning in Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Colorado, Nevada and Virginia (McCain’s got Indiana and West Virginia, but is even slipping in Montana, Mississippi, and Georgia [the latter two have fierce Senate races going on]), while FiveThirtyEight has Obama winning 345.4-192.6, with an 89.2% probability of victory.
Tonight’s debate, from Memphis, Tennessee, begins at 9:00 PM. Expect a post-debate report, with reactions and polls from the Network 3, the Cable 3, and more circa midnight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
