Tuesday’s campaign round-up

May 20, 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:

* Over the last 24 hours, there’s been some superdelegate news, with Obama picking up 6.5 new superdelegates (West Virginia’s Robert Byrd, Kansas’ Larry Gates, Washington’s Dwight Pelz, Alaska’s Cindy Spanyers and Blake Johnson, Iowa’s Scott Brennan, and Guam’s Madeleine Bordallo). He also gained three pledged delegates yesterday (one in Nevada as an add-on delegate, and two who had been pledged to John Edwards.) As far as I can tell, Clinton has not picked up any new delegate over the last 24 hours. (Obama was also endorsed by Michigan superdelegate Eric Coleman, but at least for now, his vote doesn’t count.)

* Voters in Oregon and Kentucky will head to the polls today, and while Clinton is expected to cruise to an easy victory in Kentucky, a couple of polls out of Oregon show Obama looking pretty strong. SurveyUSA today shows Obama up by 13 (55% to 42%), while Public Policy Polling (D) has him up by 19 (58% to 39%).

* Warren Buffett isn’t a superdelegate, but as the world’s richest man and a successful businessman, his opinions tend to draw some attention. Yesterday, Buffett, who had offered support to both Obama and Clinton, endorsed Obama. “He is my choice,” Buffett said.

* In the latest Gallup Daily Tracking poll, Clinton has dropped below 40% for the first time during the campaign. Obama now leads by 16 points, his largest margin to date.

* Rep. Vito Fossella (R-N.Y.), ensnared in a DUI and adultery scandal, will not seek re-election in November. Whether he will resign before the end of the year remains to be seen.

* Al Gore still hasn’t endorsed.

* VoteVets.org launched a couple of very hard-hitting TV ads this morning, targeting John McCain and Texas Sen. John Cornyn for their opposition to the bipartisan GI Bill modernization efforts, currently pending in the Senate.

* A new Rasmussen poll shows incumbent Sen. Frank Lautenberg looking strong against his primary challengers, Rep. Rob Andrews and Morristown Mayor Donald Cresitello. Lautenberg, who I personally support, is ahead with 49%, followed by Andrews with 19%, and Cresitello with 7%.

* Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) doesn’t like the Tennessee Republican Party’s ad attacking Michelle Obama, and has asked the state party to remove the ad from the party’s website and YouTube. Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) doesn’t like the ad, either. His office issued a statement saying, “There are probably better ways to communicate our pride in America, and we need to focus on those.”

“He is my choice,” Buffett said.

Much overlooked were the endorsements from three former SEC chairmen: Arthur Levitt (appointed by Clinton), William Donaldson (Bush 43) and David Ruder (Reagan). Along with former Fed chair Paul Volker (Carter & Reagan), and Sen Dodd, that’s quite a coup.

  • Danp, I think Paul Volker was one of Obama’s biggest gets.

    That endorsement speaks volumes, especially in this post-Greenspan-as-messiah times.

  • Lautenberg, who I personally support… -CB

    Oooo…a rare break in impartiality!

    Re: Buffet

    Best part of the AP article:

    “They say in the stock market … buy stock in a business that’s so good that an idiot can run it because sooner or later one will,” he added.

    “Well, the United States is a little like that. We can take a little mis-management from time to time,” Buffett said.

    Did he just call Bush an idiot? I think he did.

  • Cresitello is a very scary guy. He is the idiot who wanted to have his police officers be deputized as immigration officers so he can arrest all the illegal aliens in his town.

    The fact that he is getting 7% scares me. I had hoped that there weren’t that many stupid Democrats in New Jersey

  • Don’t look now, but Israel is talking to Hamas. I’m sure the wingnuts will now accuse Israel of being “appeasers”.

    Or not.

    Participants at a recent inner cabinet meeting were listening to details of the Egyptian mediation initiative between Israel and Hamas on a cease-fire in the Gaza Strip recently, when a senior minister reportedly reminded those present that Israel does not negotiate, directly or indirectly, with Hamas. Shin Bet security service head Yuval Diskin interrupted, saying there was no other way to describe the talks…

    http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/984388.html

  • Things are beginning to look very good for Obama; he now needs a whopping 27% of all remaining delegates (pledged and supers combined) to lock down the nomination. That equates to Clinton needing 73% now. Also of note should be the current fact that Obama is coming out and openly challenging not only McCain, but Bush as well—not defensively, but offensively. I’m not seeing Clinton do this; she and all her cohorts combined are not hitting the ReThugs anywhere near as hard as Obama is.

    She tried to ride on “experience;” he rides on open action—and it is what we do—not merely what we claim to be underneath—that defines us. It always has been that way, and it always will be that way. That’s why Obama has won this thing, and it’s why he’ll beat McPhony into the mud come November.

    GOP >>>>> R.I.P.

  • Gore is doing the right thing by not endorsing (Obama doesn’t need it) and instead using his influence to get Clinton-Obama fundraisers together. That’s much more valuable to the party and all Democratic interests in the long run.

    I think Lautenberg is kind of an ass, but that doesn’t mean he needed taking out. It’s not like he was a Bush Dog. There’s no good reason to vote for Andrews.

    Bummer about Fossella not running again. That would have been a very entertaining race. As it is, we can just enjoy the spectacle of a vehemently anti-gay, “family values” guy hoisted on his own petard.

  • Buffett is the biggest get in my opinion. His influence knows no bounds and he’s respected by free-market Republican’ts.

    On a side note relevant to nothing here, Crummy Church Signs is running a caption contest. Please go vote for your favorite (gridlock) quote!

  • Steve…what I find interesting is HOW Obama is hitting them. Remember part of Clinton’s claim was that she, not Obama, was tough enough to battle the Republicans. Well we can imagine what kind of gutter politics her battles would be. Obama is taking it right to their front door. He’s not getting down in the mud with them, he’s taking them apart on the issues. That’s what people will be seeing…and it will be very hard for the Republicans to battle that. They can’t campaign on their record of the last seven years, and that’s all they have. Its only May and Obama has alreadly tangled up John McCain in a Jacob Marley chain called George Bush that he won’t get out of.

  • I’m concerned when Hillary starts citing Karl Rove as a reason she should stay in the race: “Just today . . . one of the TV networks released an analysis by, of all people, Karl Rove, saying I am the stronger candidate…”

    The problem is, her followers are starting to drink the Kool-aid in large numbers, saying they’ll vote Repuglican if she doesn’t get the nomination.

    This needs to stop…soon!

  • Fascinating polling info via TPM:

    The latest national numbers from Gallup show some startling movement towards Obama among Dems who have been among Hillary’s most reliable supporters.

    It finds that Obama is now tied with Hillary among whites (47%-47%); leads her among women (49%-46%); edges her among Dems with a high school graduate [sic] or less (46%-47%); and leads her among Hispanics (51%-44%).

    Those groups, obviously, have been the bedrock of Hillary’s candidacy. The only major demographic group that Hillary gets 51% or more of are women aged 50 and older.

    These numbers suggest that Obama’s support is broadening daily, and that the party’s rank and file — in addition to its institutional players — appear to be coalescing behind him.

  • I thought all of Oregon voted by mail and has been for several weeks. Can we actually say they are going to the polls today? I mean I know the votes will be counted today, but still ( yes I’m nitpicking.)

    Bob Corker also said he hated the ad that the GOP ran against Harold Jr 2 years ago, you know the infamous ” call me, Harold” ad? His displeasure means nothing, they won’t take it down. Kinda like McCain hates the ugliness of campaign ads but won’t get the GOP to stop funding them. A little inaction goes much further, even with public condemnation by the candidates.

    And Maria, thanks for the TPM stuff, that’s great news! Slowly we are coming together.

  • Maria, you confirm my observations. Here at Shady Deal Retirement Estates where women outnumber men 15:1 and Gloria Steinem is a patron saint, it is Hillary, Hillary, Hillary, Hillary. Why I was just talking to Mary the other day…

  • Dee Loralei (13): I thought all of Oregon voted by mail.

    In Oregon all ballots are delivered to voters by mail, but they can bring them in as late as today.

    As for the Buffett and SEC chairmen endorsements, the reason I am impressed by the SEC is that these men were in charge of enforcing rules. Their biggest obstacle was that Congress underfunded them, and the Bush administration, especially, wasn’t particularly interested in creating problems for old friends. A few years ago, I read Levitt’s (Clinton’s chairman) “Take on the Street”. While he struck me as rather feckless, it was clear he didn’t have the tools to avoid the problems we later faced with the Anderson/Enron scandal or the stock option scandals that followed. The Republicans in Congress were the biggest problem, but even Dems like Dodd and Lieberman were unhelpful. So it’s nice to see people from all angles of the banking and investment issues coalesce in support of the same candidate.

  • Mich Man @ 11

    The truth is that Rove’s analysis is not new, this same analysis has been available for some time at electoral-vote.com.

    Today’s edition has Clinton ahead of McCain 284-237 and Obama losing to McCain 242-285.

    The problem is that this is not Rove saying it, it is the PEOPLE saying it. Both his analysis and elctoral-vote.com’s analysis are an average of state-by-state polling and assigning electoral college votes to the expected winner of said state.

    This is not rocket science, and should not be discounted just because Rove pointed it out.

  • The gallup tracking poll doesn’t mean anything. People are responding to the pollsters with who they think will be the likely nominee, not who they prefer.

    This is the very reason that Rasmussen has publicly stated they will no longer perform these daily polls for the democratic race.

    In other words, the MSM announcing unabashedly that Obama is the nominee is skewing the numbers.

    The truth is that she will win the popular vote, and that is one hell of an argument to make to the super delegates.. Either vote with the majority of Americans, or possibly lose big to McCain in November with the weaker candidate.

  • Greg said: “The truth is that she will win the popular vote, and that is one hell of an argument to make to the super delegates….”

    Except that it’s not the truth, and the superdelegates know it. So…while it is “one hell of an argument,” it doesn’t work quite the way Clinton (and you) intend.

    You have noticed the superdelegate numbers of late?

  • The problem is that this is not Rove saying it, it is the PEOPLE saying it.

    Wouldn’t you think Hilllary would be humiliated to be choosing Rove to quote from among all those “people,” then? An appeal to authority using Karl Rove? It makes one cringe with embarrassment for her.

    Has it occurred to her to stop and think why Rove wants her to be the candidate? Hmmmmm.

    Both his analysis and elctoral-vote.com’s analysis are an average of state-by-state polling and assigning electoral college votes to the expected winner of said state.

    Good gracious. Some of those polls go back to mid-February. This chart is, at best, a guess at this point.

    The gallup tracking poll doesn’t mean anything. People are responding to the pollsters with who they think will be the likely nominee, not who they prefer.

    Even though the question is who they prefer. Yet you put all your fervent little faith in electoral-vote.com’s predictions. Got it.

    This is the very reason that Rasmussen has publicly stated they will no longer perform these daily polls for the democratic race.

    Somebody forgot to read that memo, I guess. They’re still doing them every day.

  • Oh, and Greg, nice hair-raising dishonesty on this one: “People are responding to the pollsters with who they think will be the likely nominee, not who they prefer. This is the very reason that Rasmussen has publicly stated they will no longer perform these daily polls for the democratic race.”

    Here’s Rasmussen’s actual explanation of the discontinuation–which again, hasn’t occurred yet:

    However, while Senator Clinton has remained close and competitive in every meaningful measure, she is a close second and the race is over. It has become clear that Barack Obama will be the Democratic nominee.

  • Bee@2
    I still like me some Greenspan.
    The policy that got me was… he endorsed tax cuts to eliminate Clinton’s surplus because he (justifiably) feared Congress would spend it.

    When the surplus vanished and King George passed the cuts anyway,. Greenspan exited stage right. He knew the Charley Foxtrot was on its way. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink. Greenspan gets too much blame for the current financial conditions.

    When successful Republican men cut out at the top of their game (Powell, Greenspan) you know some feces is headed for an air circulator down the road and they want to be far away. Powell’s contribution to the launch of the feces was well before public realization of the squishy impact. His complete disappearance from the public eye starts to look like not just shrewd judgment, but contrition.

    • Comments are closed.