Friday’s campaign round-up

March 14, 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:

* Won’t someone please stop the madness: “Two more Democratic presidential debates were announced on Thursday, the first to take place in Philadelphia on April 16, and the second in North Carolina on April 19. ABC News will host the first debate, to take place in advance of the Pennsylvania primary on April 22. The North Carolina debate will be hosted by CBS News and moderated by Katie Couric and Bob Schieffer. Both Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama immediately released statements saying that they would accept the invitations to appear in Philadelphia. Senator Obama also accepted CBS’s invitation.”

* Close to a deal on a Michigan re-vote? “The Obama campaign’s Michigan co-chair says that all the momentum right now in private negotiations between Michigan Dems is behind the option of having a redo primary in the state, suggesting that an agreement on a redo is likely.” Word may come later today; I’ll let you know what happens.

* The Obama campaign seems anxious to make disclosure and transparency an important part of the debate, and released a list of every earmark request he’s made since becoming a U.S. senator. “Bringing real change requires changing the way we do business in Washington,” Obama Communications Director Robert Gibbs said. “If Senator Clinton will not agree to join Senator Obama in releasing her earmark requests, voters should ask why she doesn’t believe they have the right to know she wants to spend their tax dollars.” The Clinton campaign, which has also not released the candidate’s tax returns, did not respond to the earmark challenge.

* House Speaker Nancy Pelosi continues to throw water on an Obama-Clinton (or Clinton-Obama) ticket: “I do think we will have a dream team, it just won’t be those two names,” She said. “Whoever our nominee is and whoever he or she is and whoever he or she chooses, will be a dream team as the Democrats go forward.”

* At least he won’t be surprised: “A resigned National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) Chairman John Ensign (Nev.) said this week that goal [of reclaiming the majority] is a ‘very long stretch’ at this point, and he conceded that recruitment failures and an unhelpful Senate GOP conference have hindered his efforts in what was already a perilous cycle.”

* MoveOn has a new video contest: “Who needs Samantha Power when you’ve got Eddie Vedder, Ben Affleck and Moby? Those three are just a few of the cast of celebrities the liberal advocacy group MoveOn.org assembled as a panel of judges for their new ‘Obama in 30 Seconds’ competition. The contest, reminiscent of MoveOn’s 2004 anti-Bush ad contest, asks amateur and professional filmmakers to submit pro-Barack Obama campaign advertisements in the hopes of receiving a $20,000 gift certificate and having their ad aired nationally. MoveOn endorsed Obama in February.”

* Obama was asked about the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s “God Damn America” comment by the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. He responded, “Obviously, I disagree with that. Here is what happens when you just cherry-pick statements from a guy who had a 40-year career as a pastor. There are times when people say things that are just wrong. But I think it’s important to judge me on what I’ve said in the past and what I believe.”

* We may have Mitt Romney to kick around some more. Even if he doesn’t make the GOP ticket (I’d bet he doesn’t), Romney “intends to establish a new political action committee to help elect Republican candidates.” Eric Fehnrstrom, Romney’s long-time aide, said, “We’re thinking about what new entity can be created to allow Governor Romney to remain politically active so he can raise money and campaign for Republicans, and advocate for the issues he cares about.” In other words, Romney’s thinking about 2012.

* AP: “Representative Robert E. Cramer, a nine-term Democrat from Alabama, said he would not run for re-election in November. The announcement leaves little time for campaigning before the state’s June 3 party primaries and opens up a competitive district that Republicans have long eyed. Mr. Cramer, 60, of Huntsville, said he believed this was ‘a good time for me to step aside.'”

* And finally, former Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura (I) is apparently mulling over a possible independent presidential campaign this year. In the opening of his upcoming book, the former wrestler writes, “As I begin to write this book, I’m facing probably the most monumental decision of my 56 years on this planet. Will I run for president of the United States, as an independent, in 2008? Or will I stay as far away from the fray as possible, in a place with no electricity, on a remote beach in Mexico?”

March 14, 2008 at 12:11 pm

The House version of the FISA bill is being debated right now, on CSPAN. John Conyers is presenting the Dems side as we speak.

Or will I stay as far away from the fray as possible, in a place with no electricity, on a remote beach in Mexico?”

Yes, please. We don’t need any distractions. No more Naders. Not now. Too important.

I did love your Church as a crutch line, though. BRAVO on that one!

Obama was asked about the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s “God Damn America” comment by the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. He responded, “Obviously, I disagree with that. Here is what happens when you just cherry-pick statements from a guy who had a 40-year career as a pastor. There are times when people say things that are just wrong. But I think it’s important to judge me on what I’ve said in the past and what I believe.”

I heart Obama big time. But he must nip this in the bud. I’ve already had one person ask me about this (he’s disgusted by the comments) and it’s tough to defend. Obama needs to grow some cajones and denounce and reject Wright and his comments. He can’t thread this particular needle. He has to drop the hammer or he’ll be screwed in the general election.

What Next in Democratic Primaries?
With Barack Obama’s win in Mississippi he now leads Hillary Clinton in pledged delegates 1411 to 1250. So the question arises, can Hillary Clinton catch up with Obama if she wins Pennsylvania, Indiana and Puerto Rico? A total of 272 delegates (not counting super delegates) are in play.

Assuming that Hillary Clinton wins all three primaries and delegates are allocated by same margin as in Ohio (Hillary’s 75 to Barack’s 66), she will gain 144 delegates to Barack’s 128. This will bring her total pledged delegates to 1394 compared to Barack’s 1539, so she will still be behind by 145 delegates. There still remain other states like North Carolina, where Barack is expected to win with a large margin.

If the democratic Party is seriously interested in taking back the White House, isn’t it time for it to put some sense into the Clintons and tell them this is beyond their reach. Intrigue, insult and large state argument will not win her the nomination. It is the number of delegates that counts at the end of the day. McCain is out fund raising and consolidating while Democrats are still fighting it out.

Isn’t there anyone in charge of the Democratic Party who can say enough is enough and tell Hillary to fold her tent gracefully?

Yes, Jesse, because what better way to prove you’re ready to lead the most powerful nation in the world by stating that your other option is not to even BE in that country?

Did anyone like that $1 million dollar earmark he got for that Chicago hospital, the one his wife works at as a Vice President of Looking Out of Windows (that’s the job where she got a 200% raise, to a salary of around $370,000 per year, immediately after he was elected)?

That is exactly correct. Al Capone made it a big deal to open up soup kitchens, and was instrumental on getting expiration dates put on milk so that customers knew when it would go bad (he was very upset that children were getting sick drinking spoiled milk), all after the Great Depression got rolling (and after he was indicted on income tax evasion; it was a PR move after the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre to “soften” his image). Somehow, I don’t think Barack Obama would have wanted anything to do with Al Capone, despite all the “gooooood” Capone did. So, why does Obama want to have a racist as his spiritual adviser? That’s some goofy thinking as far as I’m concerned.

Are there going to be any posts or links to the Pentagon report regarding Saddam and Al Qaeda that ABC News put up? You know, the one that ABC says showed “no links” (which is false since it showed “no direct operational links”, which has a different meaning). Except that it does show links. It isn’t a “smoking gun”, it’s a “smoking double-barreled shotgun”.

Another debate, another chance for Hillary and Obama to point out the deficiencies of the other, and provide more fodder for the GOP.
Senator Clinton I beg of you to step aside. Do whats best for the party and bow out. The longer you drag this out the harder its going to be for a dem to win in November.
Yes you are experienced, I hear you have 35 years of experience, but if your experience tells you anything, it should tell you that you can’t win this one. It was a nice fight, but its over. For sake of the party, for the sake of this country, please drop out. Maybe if you’re nice Obama will reserve a spot in his cabinet for you and Bill.

Don’t run away Jesse we will be needing ex – Special Forces if we contunue down this path . De Oppresso Libre !

Post it if you’ve read it .

Ajaz @ 4
There was some concern that Terry McAuliffe weighed in too heavily and very early in 2004 as he allowed the circular firing squad in Iowa to take out both Gephardt and Howard Dean, a progressive candidate who threatened the DLC’s status quo.

Dean probably remembers the anti-democratic effect of party machine members whittling away at voter choices all too well.

Yes, there is someone at the helm, but he prefers to let the voters decide this election. They are the wind in the sails of this ship we call the DemocratIC party. It is the voters that can propel us to the new world.

Wait, is Ventura putting this to a vote, and are these our only options? I say, screw Mexico. That’s just too close. I’m thinking we ship him off to some wasteland deep in Australia, arming him only with three bottles of tequila and a crowbar with which to open the crate once he gets there. After that, if he makes it back alive, he’ll face-off against Ross Perot, Gary Coleman, Ralph Nader, and Michael Bloomberg on a reality show to determine who will win the nomination of the Egotistical Narcissist Party, with Vice President going to the runner-up. Flavor Flav will host.

Frankly, I think it’d be hilarious for Ventura to team up with one of those little guys as his VP. Pure comedy gold. If only people let me organize these things…

Are there going to be any posts or links to the Pentagon report regarding Saddam and Al Qaeda that ABC News put up? You know, the one that ABC says showed “no links” (which is false since it showed “no direct operational links”, which has a different meaning). Except that it does show links. It isn’t a “smoking gun”, it’s a “smoking double-barreled shotgun”.

You mean like this one from two days ago when it was a brand new story, SteveIL? If you’re going to be a shill, at least take a little time to read first. And kudos with the comparison of Obama to Capone, that’s one of the very few left that hasn’t been touched yet. It’s subtle because it’s indirect! Unfortunately, your race-baiting still has a ways to go before it’s up to Clinton campaign snuff.

“moderated by Katie Couric and Bob Schieffer”

Is it humanly possible to get a moderator that isn’t a complete hack ? I am just running through the questions Couric is going to ask, “boxers or briefs”, “cats or dogs”, and “favorite color”. They started out OK, but since it’s been Obama and Clintion, nothing but hacks.

How is it R’s can manage to dig up pro-R people, yet we get Tim ‘gotcha’ Russert, Wolf ‘OK Jack’ Blizer, and Katie ‘what day is it’ Couric. You Tube question moderator does not count.

From Wikipedia:
Schieffer is the older brother of Tom Schieffer, a friend and former business partner of President George W. Bush, who was appointed U.S. Ambassador to Australia 2001-2005 by President Bush and as of November, 2005 is currently the U.S. Ambassador to Japan.

Obama “disagrees with some of the statements” from Wright???

Give me a break! To sit and listen to ANY of that crap for 20 years makes Obama just as dirty as Scumbag Wright (don’t call him Rev. again; he ain’t no man of God!).

For Obama or anyone else to sit in that cult “church” and listen to that evil B.S., just lends a false credibility to such an imposter.

Now we see where Obama’s wife feeds her hatred from too.

I don’t care how many “good” things a person has to say. When their “evil” finally shows through, it’s time to stay away permanently.

Obama displays TERRIBLE JUDGEMENT!!!!!! He should NEVER be allowed to make decisions for this country!!!

Hey Obama, try explaining what parts of Wright’s message you DO agree with!

L Boom, maybe you should go revisit the ABC site, since the one that was linked to on your CB link is old; like Pre-Cambrian old. ABC has the actual report they received from the Pentagon. The report that is a “smoking double-barreled shotgun”.

And kudos with the comparison of Obama to Capone, that’s one of the very few left that hasn’t been touched yet. Get your comparisons right; I was actually comparing Wright with Capone. Although it really isn’t a fair comparison; Capone was an equal-opportunity employer and less of a racist than Wright.

I could speak for 40 years and never say “God Damn America”. Obama’s defense that in 40 years someone is bound to say something inflammatory is specious.

Obama’s request for Clinton to disclose her earmarks clearly favors him because he will inevitably have fewer earmarks because he has been in the Senate for a shorter time. Unless a voter is astute enough to compute an average number of earmarks per year (or some such), the comparison will only help Obama, even if Clinton were restrained in her requests for earmarks. I can’t see Obama supporters being careful about presenting only the non-misleading statistics, so it is better for Clinton to just decline.

On the other hand, isn’t this public knowledge? Why doesn’t Obama just compile a list of their respective earmarks — or is it unclear who requested what from the record of what was funded?

Does Obama really want to buy into the idea that all earmarks are frivolous or are harmful pork? Aren’t some projects necessary? Is he a bit too eager to jump on a no-spending bandwagon just because Republicans have abused the process? If he cannot be thoughtful or judicious about what gets funded, instead of just claiming that all earmarks are bad, he isn’t a nuanced enough thinker, in my opinion. Next thing, he’ll be promising no new taxes.

Isn’t it all too ironic that Michigan moved up its primary to be more “relevant” and got booted from the convention. And now, after knowing the potential consequences of what they wanted to do, may actually end up having MORE influence because the primary is being pushed back through the reported “redo”?

GreyGuy,

That’s precisely the reason I feel that any revote in FL or MI should only allow them to seat half of their delegates. I’m too much of a buy-the-books guy to allow advantage to be gained by breaking the rules.

I don’t care how many “good” things a person has to say. When their “evil” finally shows through, it’s time to stay away permanently.

Wait, are we talking about Bill Shaheen, Mark Penn and Geraldine Ferraro?

If he cannot be thoughtful or judicious about what gets funded, instead of just claiming that all earmarks are bad, he isn’t a nuanced enough thinker, in my opinion.

Christ, that’s funny. Mary claiming someone else isn’t a nuanced enough thinker.

I know reading comprehension isn’t a strong suit with you, but if you’ll read the reports on this, you’ll see that Obama has simply released — not renounced — the list of what he’d earmarked. Clearly, he thinks these are justified. He’s just calling for a little transparency in government.

Just as he did in releasing his own tax returns. And again, we’re still waiting for Hillary’s 2001-2007 returns.

Anyone who would quit a race when only trailing by a nose would not be a good president.
HRC won’t quit.

Looks like a mighty big nose to me.

Anyone who would quit a race when only trailing by a nose would not be a good president. -Nell

What if, my libertarian friend, that nose is, as this nose assuredly is, an insurmountable nose? The nose knows.

You’re right, Hillary won’t quit; but that doesn’t mean she shouldn’t.

I can’t see Obama supporters being careful about presenting only the non-misleading statistics

Shorter Mary: Cherry-picking data is fine for me, but a sin for thee.

Anyone who would quit a race when only trailing by a nose would not be a good president.

No, but if there were no way for her to take the lead and she decided to quit, she would certainly be a good Democrat.

In past years, a person coming into the convention with a larger number of delegates would be in a stronger position to wheel and deal at the convention. There was never any suggestion that people should drop out of the race in order to “be a good Democrat.” Someone might fold because they ran out of money, but not when they were in contention because no one had the race sewn up. It was recognized that candidates still running might be trying to show strength in various demographic groups, aiming for VP or hoping for leverage in other ways. Now, when Clinton has a serious shot at winning the nomination, the chorus of voices calling for her to step aside in favor of Obama is loudest. That stinks and people should see it for what it is — an Obama campaign tactic.

I believe that women are more likely to be asked to step aside in favor of men’s aspirations, to take one for the team, to exactly the extent that they are not seen as legitimate contenders themselves. There are no doubt people here who would never see Clinton as viable no matter how many primaries and caucuses she won. This talk about stepping aside is something women (who are high achievers) learn not to listen to. It is no different in this situation. (For a clear example of what I’m talking about, see the movie The Competition, with Amy Irving and Richard Dreyfuss.) Those of you who think the requests for her to step aside are eminently reasonable given the circumstances, I invite you to examine your own sexism.

Everyone told Hillary that she couldn’t win a senate seat in NY against Rudy but Rudy knew better and withdrew and Hillary went on to win handily.

Mary @27 – Can you please explain to us which other delegate conventions you’re speaking of where this happened? I don’t think this kind of thing has happened in recent memory and don’t think we have a real precedent of how this is supposed to work.And believe it or not, MOST candidates drop out, even when no candidate has the race sealed up. Just in this primary alone, the only candidate who waited until someone sealed the race up before dropping out was Huckabee. All the others dropped out bother that. My own guy, Dodd dropped out after Iowa. He didn’t have to. He just knew there was no point in staying in. And Thompson should have dropped out before he even started, and however encouraged him to run should be run out of politics. It’s quite common for candidates to drop out, even if they might still win.

And finally, I invite you to examine your own sexism. You really think this is all about gender? You don’t think Hillary’s people would be trying to get rid of Barack if she was the one leading in delegates and he had almost no shot of winning? Of course she would. Not because she’s a woman or he’s black; but because he wouldn’t have any real shot at winning. Look, I know it sucks to have backed a losing candidate. But at some point, you’re just going to have to learn to deal with it. There is no double standard here. This is no sexism. Your candidate lost. Get over it. Sure, it’s possible Hillary could still somehow win. But it’s also possible that McCain will have a heart attack, thus giving the nomination to Huckabee.

Of course, I don’t actually think Hillary should quit right now. Had she not won Ohio, she’d have needed to drop out. I just wish she’d stop playing such hardball and try to win this thing based on merits; instead of mud. Sure, you approve of every smear against Obama, but even if they’re true, he’s our candidate. And the longer you drag his name through the mud, the easier you’re making it for Republicans to keep beating him up for the next four years. Every smear you’re now repeating will be thrown at you a hundred times when you try to defend him. This isn’t about sexism or Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. This is about the future of our country. This primary will end, but everything else will keep on rolling. I don’t think she should drop out, but the brass knuckles should be put away by both sides.

Everyone told Hillary that she couldn’t win a senate seat in NY against Rudy but Rudy knew better and withdrew and Hillary went on to win handily.

Wow, so let me get this straight. Some anonymous people thought Giulani would beat Hillary, Rudy disagreed and dropped out of the race, and Hillary beat someone else. How inspiring. That reminds me about that Rocky movie where Mr. T challenged Rocky to a fight that everyone thought Mr. T would win, but Mr. T realized he might lose, so he dropped out and Rocky beat up a little kid instead. And just as Rocky was vindicated by beating up the little kid instead of Mr. T, Hillary was vindicated by beating up Rick Lazio instead of Rudy Giuliani.

And that’s totally applicable to a presidential nomination that Hillary was supposed to win, but now appears to have lost, with her last hope being to tarnish the leading contender so much that people will decide they want second-place Hillary instead. Yet another true tale of inspiration. I think the moral of the lesson is that maybe Obama will decide to drop out and be replaced by Rick Lazio, too.

Comments are closed.