Friday’s campaign round-up

April 11, 2008

Today’s installment of campaign-related news items that wouldn’t generate a post of their own, but may be of interest to political observers:

* The latest AP-Ipsos poll shows Barack Obama tied with John McCain in a national hypothetical match-up, at 45% each. Obama held a 10-point lead in the same poll in late April. The biggest concern for the Dem’s campaign: independents no longer back Obama by a wide margin. The same poll showed Hillary Clinton narrowly leading McCain, 48% to 45%. (Thanks to reader R.K. for the heads-up)

* The DNC polled swing voters in 17 swing states late last month and found some interesting results: “76% of swing voters said America is on the wrong track” and “64% of swing voters saw McCain holding similar views to Bush. This was before the surveyors started laying down information about McCain.”

* Apparently, there’s “a long-standing Philadelphia ritual” in which Democratic candidates hand out “street money” to party leaders, who in turn give out money for GOTV (get out the vote) efforts in the city. While the practice is legal, the Obama campaign has apparently decided not to pay “street money,” and ward leaders, who call this a local “tradition,” aren’t happy about it.

* WSJ: “After weeks of news about superdelegates choosing rival Barack Obama, Clinton picked up three endorsements in 36 hours.”

* Unprompted, Dick Cheney told Sean Hannity yesterday how much the Jeremiah Wright controversy offended him. “I haven’t gotten into the business of trying to judge how Senator Obama dealt with it, or didn’t deal with it, but I really — I think, like most Americans, I was stunned at what the Reverend was preaching in his church and then putting up on his website,” the VP said.

* Obama told The Advocate this week that he will take a stand against “don’t ask, don’t tell” as president. “We’re spending large sums of money to kick highly qualified gays or lesbians out of our military, some of whom possess specialties like Arab-language capabilities that we desperately need,” he said. “That doesn’t make us more safe.” Obama added, however, that he would not use a litmus test in his appointees to the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

* A Clinton campaign office was destroyed by fire in Terre Haute, Ind., last night. No one was reported injured and firefighters are investigating the incident.

* Howard Dean told reporters yesterday that he was always more concerned about Mitt Romney getting the GOP nomination than McCain, describing the former Massachusetts governor as “the candidate I feared the most.”

* The media is back to talking about Hillary’s laugh?

* Sen. Ted Stevens’ (R) race in Alaska continues to look like a real pick-up opportunity for Dems.

* To the disappointment of a surprising number of Republicans, Gen. David Petraeus will not seek elected office. Pressed on the point by NBC’s Brian Williams, Petraeus said, “Never. And I’ve tried to say that on a number of occasions. Some folks have reminded me of a country western song that says ‘what part of no, don’t you understand?'”

“This was before the surveyors started laying down information about McCain.”

If the DNC survey had contacted more than

  • As I was saying…

    Since the DNC survey contacted fewer than 100 people in each state, “laying down information” probably doesn’t make it a damn push poll.

  • Unprompted, Dick Cheney told Sean Hannity yesterday how much the Jeremiah Wright controversy offended him. “I haven’t gotten into the business of trying to judge how Senator Obama dealt with it, or didn’t deal with it, but I really — I think, like most Americans, I was stunned at what the Reverend was preaching in his church and then putting up on his website,” the VP said.

    And the worst things Wright has said are as nothing compared to the war crimes committed by the worst Vice President in the history of the United States. That a scummy pair of hypocritical fascists like Hannity and Cheney can sit there and act like members of the human race makes me want to scream. And that there are a few million morons who think they’re the “good guys” really drives me up the wall.

  • The Clinton office being destroyed by fire is the summer of 1968, with its black urban riots, all over again. I know. I lived through it and I know Mayor Daley did what he had to do. Obama’s supporters will stop at nothing, including burning down campaign offices and making fun of Senator Clinton’s perfectly delightful laugh. You hate her when she’s serious and you hate her when she’s lighthearted. Meanwhile, no one can stop talking about Mr. Pretty Boy’s beautiful smile and how handsome he looks when he furrows his brow to pretend he’s a serious person. This country stinks.

  • The biggest concern for the Dem’s campaign: independents no longer back Obama by a wide margin.

    Unsurprising – I figured that “independents” would abandon Obama if McCain was the nominee. Hopefully the youth vote is being undercounted in these polls AND he’ll be able to get them to turn out for the general.

    The same poll showed Hillary Clinton narrowly leading McCain, 48% to 45%.

    Slightly surprising if you don’t realize that the MOE on the poll is about 3%. With that bit of info it’s not surprising at all – Clinton and Obama are both statistically tied with McCain at this point. And Clinton’s numbers vs. McCain haven’t budged at all since the last time the poll was offered. McCain has been on the rise against her – probably picking up conservatives who were saying that they would refuse to vote for McCain a few months ago along with “independents” who are coming around and realizing that they’re just going to vote for the Republican again in November same as they always do.

  • And the worst things Wright has said are as nothing compared to the war crimes committed by the worst Vice President in the history of the United States.

    I’m not sure Cheney is the worst Vice President in the history of the United States. Yes, he is absolutely horrible, and probably worse in most ways than Bush, but Burr did lead an insurrection against the country so the bar is much higher for worst Vice President than it is for worse President.

  • No one was reported injured and firefighters are investigating the incident.

    I’ll bet it was Ned Lamont’s supporters.

  • “The media is back to talking about Hillary’s laugh?”

    And they should be in this case. This laugh was an obvious and successful dodge by Hillary Clinton to avoid a legitimate question on the conflict of interest caused by Bill Clinton taking $800,000 from pro-Colombian free trade interests.

    Conflict of interest shouldn’t just be laughed off. Answer the question.

  • What “The Other Ed” said. That Bill Clinton got $800,000 from pro-Columbian free trade interests is no laughing matter. So now both her (former) chief strategist and her husband have been involved in supporting a free trade agreement for Columbia and she expects us to dismiss it out of hand. Come on, people of Pennsylvania–wake up!

  • Fortress Hillary fire

    It is going to be ridiculously comical if this fire was caused by Hillary’s people forgetting to unplug the coffee pot—and the professor scary-mary copycat keeps playing the Obama card. It’ll play nicely with the Lieberman stunt, where they blamed Lamont for a Bu$h-quality computer program.

    “Can’t unplug the coffeepot—but we’re supposed to trust them at 3 AM with access to our nuclear arsenal?” Please—even old, sun-dried roadkill that’s been picked over by vultures isn’t that stupid….

  • #5 NonyNony – Sorry but that’s not what the “margin of error” means. It’s misused by the media all the time, partly from ignorance, and partly from their zeal to inject drama into the horse races. Hence the term “statistical tie,” which has no meaning in statistics.

    It’s got to do with confidence intervals and probabilities and random sampling and normal curves.

    When one candidate is ahead of another by 3%, and the “MOE” is 4%, it does NOT mean that they are tied. It actually means that the probablity is 95% that the leading candidate is ahead by 3% + or – 4%, that is, that the probablility is 95% that candidate A leads B somewhere in the interval [7% to -1%]. That is, it’s much more likely that candidate A is ahead than B. That is not a tie.

  • The media is back to talking about Hillary’s laugh?

    And why not? It is phony laugh… a lying laugh… just like a lot of the other slime that oozes out of Clinton’s mouth. Even Jon Stewart saw her laugh as obviously fradulent…

    Since the Clintons are hated by a majority of Americans, ridiculing them is a fun game for both the media and the public: Let’s see if we can make Chelsea tear up… Let’s pull Bill’s thumb and see what happens… Let see if we can make the witch cackle…

    Fun and games. A new sport called Clinton-baiting. It is fast becoming our national pastime. No different really than poking fun at the Bush family’s collection of arrogant imbeciles. Indeed I wonder… which family do you suppose is hated more?

    Barbara or Hillary? Bill or George? Chelsea or Pierce? Yuck or Yeech?

    It is dealer’s choice for each of these… I am almost to the point of screaming: Goddamn America for shoving these two sick families in my face for 20 years.
    I have had enough. Haven’t you?

    No?
    Well then check out Pierce Bush…
    He is in your future: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWidr0Uwj8E

  • The latest AP-Ipsos poll shows Barack Obama tied with John McCain in a national hypothetical match-up, at 45% each… The same poll showed Hillary Clinton narrowly leading McCain, 48% to 45%

    Given the overwhelming advantage Dems have in in issue and confidence surveys, both Dems should be slaughtering McCain in these type of matchups. But instead of running against McCain — who aside from being on the wrong side of almost every issue, happens to be running one of the sloppiest campaigns I can recall — Dems are locked in a self-defeating struggle whose outcome is all but certain. It would be comical if 7 years of Bush/Cheney hadn’t brought us to the threhold of losing democracy as we knew it.

  • It is great that young people, of all colors, love Obama. He is like the Pied Piper of Hamelin Town. They follow him blindly. They see something in him that older people will never understand. They see that he will be an asset to our country and that the old rules need to be changed. Who knows, in 2012 an Hispanic American or Asian American will be running for president. It’s about time for changes to be made!

  • The street money thing is hilarious. Sen. Obama doesn’t need to pay the local ward leaders to do GOTV — he’s got volunteers flooding into the state to do that.

  • Obama’s campaign won’t pay street money? It doesn’t work that way in Phily. You pay to play. The ward leaders will not turn people out for him without it.

    Some people think all he needs is his volunteers to turn out the vote. Good luck with that in Philly.

  • “Obama told The Advocate this week that he will take a stand against “don’t ask, don’t tell” as president.”

    Take a stand. That has to be the stupidist think I have read this year. The man is going to be commander-in-chief. He just have to tell all military officers that they can kiss promotion or good commands good bye if they abuse the current policy.

    Which is what they are doing.

    Then he can go about changing it.

  • I haven’t seen any Clinton people suggesting that it was arson or that Obama’s supporters did it. But, spreading the rumor that they are doing so is a pretty effective smear, in my opinion.

    What favors is Bill Clinton accused of providing in exchange for Columbian money? To my knowledge, Clinton is an EX president and I’m not sure what people think he can do for the money. Simply taking money from someone is not bad — it is what you do for the money that matters. You have to show that there is a quid pro quo involved in order to call something a bribe, imply that there is corruption, assert that someone is bought and paid for. I don’t know the details and I’m sure TR will provide them, but I do think that Bill Clinton is permitted to have a life and engage in business activities or political fundraising or philanthropies, even speech-making, without everyone assuming that he is doing something dirty and that Hillary is his accomplice. Details matter — in exactly what way is Bill accused of being corrupt?

  • What favors is Bill Clinton accused of providing in exchange for Columbian [sic] money? To my knowledge, Clinton is an EX president and I’m not sure what people think he can do for the money.

    Not too much, as it turns out, since he and his wife won’t be regaining the White House. Between Penn and Bill, those Colombians have gambled a lot of money on a losing horse.

  • — To my knowledge, Clinton is an EX president and I’m not sure what people think he can do for the money. —

    Go ahead and promise me that if Michelle Obama, who has never held elected office and doesn’t have the contacts of a former president, were working for the Colombian Gov’t to pass legislation her husband opposed, that you’d be writing the same thing. Or even just not writing about it at all.

    Uh huh, pretty hard to imagine.

  • As usual, the Clintons are smeared by an ungrateful nation for simply sharing of their time and expertise. There is no reason to assume that anyone paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for a speech to a man whose wife is running for president would have any expectations beyond hearing Bill share anecdotes of his ex-presidency, which FYI ended in 2001, in his very charming and engaging way. Unless you can prove that Bill Clinton, who is an ex-president and whose presidency has concluded, made explicit promises and what they were, there is zero reason to assume that anybody wanted anything from the Clintons other than their good company and warm fellowship.

  • IFP sez: there is zero reason to assume that anybody wanted anything from the Clintons other than their good company and warm fellowship.

    Honestly, I promise that that’s ALL I want from them right now and for many decades to come.

  • Mary, I think you’re right. I’m sure the Columbians gave that money to Bill just because they like him. I’m sure they don’t expect anything in return. Enough said. Heck, what influence does he have to sell? Naw, they just like him a lot and wanted him to have the money.

  • Leadership and taxes

    “It’s important to have core principles and values, but if you’re going to be active in policy and politics, you have to be a realist.” —Hillary Clinton

    “We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re going to cut short and not give it to you. We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.” —Hillary Clinton, in a 2004 fundraising speech to wealthy liberals in San Francisco

    Bipartisanship and reaching across the isle

    “I believe in evil, and I think that there are evil people in the world.” —Hillary Clinton, in 1993, stating her opinion not of the terrorists who had just bombed the World Trade Center for the first time in 1993, but of those who opposed her health care reform plan

    “You have got to hand it to them, these people are ruthless and they are relentless.” —Sen. Hillary Clinton, just a few months after 9/11, giving her opinion of Republicans

    Health care

    “We just can’t trust the American people to make these types of decisions. …Government has to make these choices for people.” —Hillary Clinton circa 1993, speaking to Rep. Dennis Hastert on the issue of who should control the allocation of money in her health care reform plan

    “We can’t afford to have that money go to the private sector. The money has to go to the federal government because the federal government will spend that money better than the private sector will spend it.” —First Lady Hillary Clinton, in 1993, regarding health care reform

    Free speech

    “We’re all going to have to rethink how we deal with the Internet. As exciting as these new developments are, there are a number of serious issues without any kind of editing function or gate-keeping function.” —First Lady Hillary Clinton, in 1998, days after the Monica Lewinsky story was reported

    Blaming America

    “I pledge allegiance to the America that can be.” —Hillary Clinton, reluctant to say the Pledge of Allegiance, according to Chris Matthews

    “The unfettered free market has been the most radically disruptive force in American life in the last generation.” —Hillary Clinton

    Imagination

    “The fact of the matter is, I’ve always been a Yankees fan.” —Senate candidate Hillary Clinton, soon after launching her campaign in 1999, and ignoring prior public statements about growing up as a Cubs fan in Chicago

  • Here’s what AmericaBlog said about it:

    “In June 2005, Clinton was paid $800,000 by the Colombia-based Gold Service International to give four speeches throughout Latin America. The organization is, ostensibly, a development group tasked with bringing investment to the country and educating world leaders about the Colombia’s business opportunities.”

    There is no evidence that Clinton was lobbying on behalf of the trade agreement while giving these speeches, nor that he was paid to do so. The rate paid ($200,000 per speech) seems to be his going rate, a high figure because he is the former president. Further, Clinton has been up front about supporting NAFTA and CAFTA and is in favor of such trade agreements — that is consistent and it is his right to hold such opinions. HILLARY CLINTON, a separate and distinct person, has been equally up front about opposing NAFTA and also opposing the Columbia trade agreement. She is not the one who gave those speeches. There is nothing underhanded going on here.

    There will no doubt be many people on a president’s staff with differing opinions. The president listens to a variety of inputs and makes the decisions. HILLARY Clinton is perfectly capable of making up her own mind, with or without input from her husband, who may or may not share the same opinions as she does on an array of different issues. Expecting past, present and future 100% conformity of opinion between the two is unreasonable and even silly.

    This is another non-issue.

    What concerns me is why people in this comments section seem to be so unwilling to tolerate dissension. Why can’t people hold different opinions here without being maligned (e.g., Insane Fake Professor)? Criticizing the Clintons for not being in lockstep opinion-wise seems strikes me as akin to piling on people here for holding different views about the relative merits of Clinton vs Obama. However, if the goal is to portray Hillary Clinton as a surrogate for Bill, then of course whatever Bill says and does matters a lot. There have always been men who cannot see a woman as anything other than an extension of her husband.

  • Why can’t people hold different opinions here without being maligned (e.g., Insane Fake Professor)?

    I agree. You guys have been way too hard on Insane Fake Professor.

  • I have a challenge for MR. DEAN! Invite Mitt Romney to a debate. Just the two men and a neutral moderator.

    This way, we’ll learn just how and why the democrats have been fearful of Mitt Romney long, long before Mitt announced he was running for president.

    If anyone wonders why Mr. Romney is feared, it’s because he deals best with facts. To be as amazingly successful as he is he’s dealt with and faced facts head on with great success!!

    For starters go to your favorite search engine and put these items in as keywords: Romney Bain 113%…..

  • Obama added, however, that he would not use a litmus test in his appointees to the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    Oh, come on, Barack. I think you should insist that all members of the Joint Chiefs be gay. Take a tip from the Spartans, look what ass-kickers they were!

  • If anyone wonders why Mr. Romney is feared, it’s because he deals best with facts.

    If he’s so good with facts, how can he be a Mormon? If ever there was a fact-free religion, that is it.

  • Back in the 60’s when Cheney was very busy avoiding the draft because he “had more important things to do.” The Rev. Wright spent 4 years on active duty with the Marines, and he was not a chaplain.

    It is really amazing how the Legion and VFW crowd worship Cheney who made a career of flunking out of one college after another, yet always had the resources to find another school to get into, all to avoid the draft and Vietnam. If this crowd thinks a draft dodger and a president who was AWOL is an example of patriotism then they must really have another agenda. I wish they would put the flag down and state what it is they really believe.

  • 26.
    On April 11th, 2008 at 3:45 pm, Mary said:

    Here’s what AmericaBlog said about it:

    “In June 2005, Clinton was paid $800,000 by the Colombia-based Gold Service International to give four speeches throughout Latin America. The organization is, ostensibly, a development group tasked with bringing investment to the country and educating world leaders about the Colombia’s business opportunities.”

    Mary… I know (because you said so) that you’re a a Professor and a native speaker of English, while I’m just a dumb Polack. But, all the same, I’d like to suggest that you check a dictionary, *any* dictionary, for the definition of the word “ostensibly”. It won’t give you the full spectrum of how the word is used, but it *might* sow some seeds of suggestion.

    Also. While I do not know what you’re Professor *of*, I have a feeling — call it a hunch — that your knowledge of matters other than your own subject might be somewhat limited. Therefore, I suggest that, while you’re researching the word “ostensibly”, you also look into the Roman mythology, the two-faced god Janus in particular. Even before the advent of the Clintons he was an interesting one to know, facing both to the old and the new year…

    Regarding Insane Fake Professor… You aren’t being “maligned” (check *that* one in a dictionary also; you don’t seem to have a grasp of the word’s meaning); you’re being spoofed, caricatured. With an uncanny accuracy, actually. The Insane Fake Professor uses a lot of your own statements as his/her basis and hen magnifies/shines a strong spotlight on them, till *everyone* can see what a sad bag of nonsense you are

  • First, I will address the polls about Hilliary Clinton, Barack Obama, McCain. A poll cannot determine who the American people will vote for. Hilliary Clinton’s campaign is full of clichés and why she’s still in the race for the presidency is a mystery to me…Maybe she is still campaigning for the money. I’d bet she will come up with a book shortly after the election.
    Second, since when has superdelegates been a priority in the election? Superdelegates should NOT be able to have a vote independent of the popular vote. Its unconstitutional and is not a reflection of the people.
    Third, I would not worry about how Dick Cheney feels about the Jeremiah Wright controversy. Dick Cheney would not support Obama anyway because he is a Republican. Also, Obama is the only person in the election in which people have been to his church and recorded what was said. I haven’t seen any lobbyists/media in the church of any other candidate for the presidency Also, I would not put too much weight on the opinion of someone who shot their friend in 2006 and did not have a comment about it until 3 or 4 days later. What kind of friend is that?

  • Hark is wrong regarding the margin of error. It is actually the case (nder some simplifying assumptions) that the 95% confidence interval (margin of error) for the difference between the candidates is equal to the margin of error of the study times the square root of two (roughly 1.4). So even if the candidates differ by more than the margin of error of the study, it is not always the case that the difference is statistically significant. Using his figures, there is a 95% likelihood that the difference between the candidates is between 8.4% and -2.6%.

    • Comments are closed.