Thursday’s political round-up

March 1, 2007

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:

* Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) kinda sorta made his presidential campaign official last night, during an appearance on David Letterman’s talk show. “The last time we were on this program — I’m sure you remember everything very clearly that we say — but you asked me if I would come back on this show if I was going to announce,” McCain told Letterman. “I am announcing that I will be a candidate for president of the United States.” McCain added that he’s make the real announcement in April. “This is the announcement preceding the formal announcement. You know you drag this out as long as you can. You don’t just have one rendition. You’ve got to do it over and over.”

* Former Gov. Mitt Romney (R) has been cautious about criticizing his better known rivals, but appearing on Pat Robertson’s Christian Broadcasting Network, Romney went after Rudy Giuliani. “He is pro-choice, he is pro-gay marriage, and anti-gun,” Romney told CBN. “That’s a tough combination in a Republican primary.”

* Speaking of Romney, he’s taking the informal straw poll at this weekend’s Conservative Political Action Conference pretty seriously. The Romney campaign is “paying for three vans, scores of registration fees and at least a half-dozen hotel rooms to pack collegiate supporters into the event.”

* Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-N.C.) is starting to look vulnerable to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. This week, the DSCC circulated the results of a poll that showed just 35% of North Carolina voters describe themselves as certain to vote for Dole’s re-election campaign next year.

* And those who believe a national primary is the ideal way to choose the parties’ presidential candidates will be pleased to know that Feb. 5 may turn into a de facto national primary — 20 states, and perhaps more, plan to hold their primaries on that day. The Hill reports, “Delaware, Missouri, New Mexico and Oklahoma in 2004 held their nominating contests on the first Tuesday of February, and are likely be joined this time by such big states as California, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, New York and Texas. They may be joined also by smaller states including Tennessee, Arkansas, Arizona, Alabama, Georgia, North Dakota, Utah, Kansas, Colorado and (for the GOP only) West Virginia and Nevada. The legislatures of Pennsylvania and North Carolina are holding hearings on the issue but the outcomes of these are uncertain.”

There are two sets of clear winners from the move to a “national primary.” The first group is McCain, Giuliani, Romney, Hillary, and maybe/probably Obama and Edwards–the ones who can afford to go for big wins in the big states. The less well-heeled among the rest of the candidates–including people like Richardson and Huckabee who would have a clearer shot in a “normal” year–are really screwed.

The second set is the people who are positioning themselves for what I call the “buyer’s remorse” season–that looooong stretch between when the nominations are decided and the summer conventions. I’m not totally sure who’s in this group other than, potentially, Mike Bloomberg (who could run as an independent on a platform of competency and post-partisanship) and Chuck Hagel, IF he’s willing to soft-pedal his social conservatism in order to appeal to moderate Democrats.

What could be really interesting is if Hagel teams up with a moderate Democrat like Biden or Richardson under the “Unity ’08” banner.

  • Interesting word choice for McCain: you don’t just do one rendition, you do it over and over. Guess he really is just like BushCo!

  • dajafi – Al Gore seems to fit your “buyers remorse period” beneficiaries very well.

  • “He is pro-choice, he is pro-gay marriage, and anti-gun,”

    Talk about projecting…

    jeez Romney you were all those things just 9 short months ago……

  • Zeitgiest–I thought about that. But the problem is he evidently only appeals to Democrats. Just saw something this morning about how even Dems give him very little chance of winning, were he to run. And the other side doesn’t hate him as much as they do Hillary… but it’s fairly close. Were Biden, Richardson, Webb et al to run under some non-partisan label, they could expect to draw votes from across the spectrum; Gore is just too identified as a Democrat.

    It’s a damn shame that we can’t charge the mainstream media with the political murder of Al Gore. They’ve rendered it almost impossible for the man to get around the caricature.

  • Oklahoma is trying to push its primary up even earlier, perhaps to Saturday, Feb. 2 or Tuesday, Jan. 29. They got so many visits in 2004 (especially from Edwards) that they really want to attract more this time with two open nominations. Gore is bringing his slideshow to Norman, OK today and Barack Obama will appear in the state in March. I used to think that it was stupid to have Iowa and N.H. have a lock on the early voting, but it’s starting to get out of hand and turning into something that only the best-financed will be able to pull off. I also imagine that if states like California and Florida are leaping into the fray, all the early little states will end up losers because they’ll go where the most delegates are. I think the best suggestion (forget who made it) was letting Iowa and N.H. keep their first dates and then have four or five regional primaries that are spaced a month apart. With this front-loaded madness and both parties likely to have nominees before the end of February 2008, the fatigue that will set in from a 9-month general election battle will turn off voters and create a prime environment for third party challengers to cash in on the alienation.

  • One interesting thing about a national primary, defacto or not, is that it will largely eliminate the period where people in states holding later primaries could watch what happened in earlier ones to help them make up their minds.

    There won’t be time to build a bandwagon of support. Folks will just have to throw their cards on the table and see who agrees with them or not. Could be very disconcerting for some, but definitely a change of pace.

  • Zeitgeist,

    dajafi – Al Gore seems to fit your “buyers remorse period” beneficiaries very well.

    Are you assuming he’d run as a 3rd party candidate? If not, given that the the nominations would be essentially decided, are you suggesting that a Dem convention battle may be in the making?

    FWIW, I think Gore will either not run, or will get in around Labor Day of this year. I don’t think he’d want the uncertainty of either option I mention above.

  • Romney went after Rudy Giuliani. “He is pro-choice, he is pro-gay marriage, and anti-gun”

    Romney ought to help bring Brother Rudy to the light by explaining to him how such a person can be brought to the correct view. Perhaps Romney could share the “experiences” which caused him to flip his positions on those issues.

  • “Grumpy” says that “Romney could share the “experiences” which casued him to flip his positions” with Mr. Giuliani. Let’s try to get a few things straight shall we Grumpy? Mitt Romney has always been personally and morally opposed to abortion and gay marriage. On abortion, he simply did not feel that it was his right to impose his beliefs on others. Thankfully time and “experience” has caused him to change his mind on that. As for gay marriage, find just one line anywhere, where Mr. Romney has EVER stated that he supports gay marriage. You won’t. What he supported was a 1992 version of anti-discrimination aganist those who are gay. Hopefully no one is actually opposed to those views. Do we honestly think that we should encourage gay bashing, job discrimination, etc.., simply because we disagree with their life-style choice? Gay marriage wasn’t even in the picture when Mr. Romney made his earlier remarks. It was simply about treating all people with respect. Certainly, Mr Romney’s record on fighting gay marriage in MA speaks for itself.
    Mr Giuliani on the other hand, once said he would actually pay for his teenage daughter to have an abortion if she needed (or wanted) one. That does not sound like someone who is morally opposed to abortion. As well, after the infamous breakup with his second wife while mayor on New York, Mr. Giuliani moved out of the mayoral mansion and into an apartment with a gay couple. Hmmm? Couldn’t you just see the headlines now? “President Giuliani in Breakup With Fourth Wife, Leaves White House, Moves in With MA Married Gay Couple.” Lovely.

  • Do we honestly think that we should encourage gay bashing, job discrimination, etc.., simply because we disagree with their life-style choice?

    *we*, kemo sabe????

    And if you think that all people should be “treated with respect” – then why the redicule because Giuliani happened to have 2 friends who let him crash with him while he was going through a difficult personal time? What happened to the “respect” there, bigot? and as for the “life-style choice” crapola – being ignorant and a bigot is more a life-style choice than being gay is, fella….

  • Thankfully time and “experience” has caused him to change his mind on that.

    The question remains: what experience? Enquiring minds want to know.

    • Comments are closed.