A Blue View

Activist Judges On Supreme Court Over Turn Established Precedent & Hand The Keys To America To Big Money

From the NY Times:

The Supreme Court has handed a new weapon to lobbyists. If you vote wrong, a lobbyist can now tell any elected official that my company, labor union or interest group will spend unlimited sums explicitly advertising against your re-election.

"We have got a million we can spend advertising for you or against you — whichever one you want,’ ” a lobbyist can tell lawmakers, said Lawrence M. Noble, a lawyer at Skadden Arps in Washington and former general counsel of the Federal Election Commission.

The decision seeks to let voters choose for themselves among a multitude of voices and ideas when they go to the polls, but it will also increase the power of organized interest groups at the expense of candidates and political parties.

It is expected to unleash a torrent of attack advertisements from outside groups aiming to sway voters, without any candidate having to take the criticism for dirty campaigning. The biggest beneficiaries might be well-placed incumbents whose favor companies and interests groups are eager to court. It could also have a big impact on state and local governments, where a few million dollars can have more influence on elections.

The ruling comes at a time when influence-seekers of all kinds have special incentives to open their wallets. Amid the economic crisis, the Obama administration and Congressional Democrats are trying to rewrite the rules for broad swaths of the economy, from Detroit to Wall Street. Republicans, meanwhile, see a chance for major gains in November.

Democrats predicted that Republicans would benefit most from the decision, because they are the traditional allies of big corporations, who have more money to spend than unions.

In a statement shortly after the decision, President Obama called it “a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics.”

As Democrats vowed to push legislation to install new spending limits in time for the fall campaign, Republicans disputed the partisan impact of the decision. They argued that Democrats had proven effective at cultivating their own business allies — drug companies are spending millions of dollars to promote the administration’s health care proposals, for example — while friendly interest groups tap sympathetic billionaires and Hollywood money.

Change Comes To The U.S. - U.N. Relationship: We Finally Pay Our Bills

Another remnant of the Bush approach to foreign policy bites the dust. From Better World Campaign:

Each year, Congress is responsible for approving and allocating the payments requested by the President for U.S. assessed contributions to the United Nations' regular and peacekeeping budgets. Currently, the U.S. is assessed 22% of the UN regular budget and 26% for UN peacekeeping operations. For many years, due to Administration and Congressional underfunding, the U.S. fell well behind in its treaty-obligated payments to the UN. But in June 2009, Congress voted for and the President signed legislation that erases all the debts that had been building over the last decade.

U.S. Funding for the UN:  An Overview
To ensure that the U.S. remains in good financial standing and honors its obligations at the UN, the United States must continue to pay its dues to the UN in full and on time. While the June 2009 supplemental bill addressed part of this, more needs to be done.  Learn More

 

How do dues and contributions to the UN work? 
Funding for the UN and its agencies comes from two sources: assessed contributions to finance the UN’s regular budget, peacekeeping operations, and some specialized agencies, and voluntary contributions, through which more than half of the UN’s funding is provided. Learn More

The Difference Between A Pitbull & A Hockey Mom Is That Pitbulls Are Loyal (cartoon)

 

Obama Wins F22 Vote. McCain Says It “really means there’s a chance of us changing the way we do business in Washington”

Following up on a Perfect Example Of What's Wrong With Washington, it seems that, sometimes in Obama's Washington, change does happen. Even John McCain thinks so.

From the NY Times:

With some of his political capital on the line, President Obama won a crucial victory on Tuesday when the Senate voted to strip out $1.75 billion in financing for seven more F-22 jet fighters from a military authorization bill.

The president had repeatedly threatened to veto the $679.8 billion bill if it included any money for the planes. The 58-to-40 vote clearly gives the Obama administration more leeway to overhaul military spending.

The F-22, the world’s most advanced fighter, has been a flashpoint in a battle over the administration’s push to shift more of the Pentagon’s resources away from conventional warfare projects, like the F-22, to provide more money for fighting insurgencies.

Senate aides said that some Democrats who otherwise might have voted for more planes sided with the president out of concern that a loss could have hurt him in the fight for health care reform.

“The president really needed to win this vote,” Senator Carl Levin, a Democrat from Michigan who led the fight to cut financing for the plane, said after the vote.

Lockheed Martin, the prime contractor for the F-22, has estimated that work on the plane provides 25,000 jobs and indirectly supports about 70,000 others. But Robert M. Gates, the defense secretary, has said that the Pentagon needs to accelerate a new plane, the F-35, and that doing so would offset the job losses.

About 1,000 suppliers in 44 states provide the jobs, which will gradually be phased out as some of the 187 F-22s that have been ordered are completed.

About two-thirds of the jobs are in ...

How Different Would Things Be Now If McCain Had Won?

A very intriguing thought experiment from Michael Lind:

Picture, if you will, an America apparently like our own. A country like ours bogged down in war on two fronts and suffering from the greatest economic slump since the Great Depression of the 1930s. An America indistinguishable from ours in every respect except that when you turn on the nightly news you see the face of President John Sidney McCain ...

OK, Rod Serling as host of "The Twilight Zone" probably would have said it better. But seriously -- where would we be in the summer of 2009, if in last November's election John McCain rather than Barack Obama had been elected president of the United States?

"No difference!" would be the answer of those alienated populists and leftists for whom Republicans and Democrats are merely different tentacles of the same Bilderberger or Trilateral Commission octopus. Certainly from the perspectives of socialists or libertarians -- or fascists or Islamic theocrats -- the consensus shared by America's two parties seems much greater than their differences. But from the vantage point of mainstream American politics, the differences between the Obama administration and a hypothetical McCain administration would have been real and can be vividly illustrated by counterfactual history.

<Continue reading>

On balance, however, I think it is hard to argue that the country would not be in worse shape today under President McCain than it is in under President Obama. In foreign policy we would probably have a revival of neoconservatism, with incalculable damage to America's reputation in the world. In domestic policy, President McCain might have used his veto power and an alliance with conservative Blue Dog Democrats in a Democratic majority Congress to salvage the Bush tax cuts and thwart an adequate stimulus. Then there's regulatory reform of the financial sector, which has yet to occur. As deferent as the Obama administration is to Wall Street, can anyone doubt that a McCain administration would have been even more deferent?

The Obama administration deserves, and can benefit from, thoughtful criticism. But before giving up on Obama after only a few months, critics of this president should ask: WWMD? (What Would McCain Do?)

Obama Embraces John McCain's Son At Graduation

Sarah Palin's Popularity At Home Dives

From the Wall St Journal:

Once billed as the most popular governor in America, Alaska Republican Sarah Palin has seen her popularity take a dive.

According to a recent Hays Research poll, 54% of Alaskans have either a very or somewhat positive view of the governor and 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee while 42% have a very or somewhat negative view.

The results are vastly different than a similar poll taken by Hays Research about a year ago which gave Palin an 86% positive rating and a 9% negative rating.

Certainly one factor: stupid moves like The Bristol Pallin Center.

Letterman to Couric: What happened?

Dave is still digging into McCain's ditching of him and his show:

Leno Interview With John McCain

Part I:

Part II:

Part III:

Reaction To Obama's Victory: Slideshows

Der Spiegel 1 and 2.

Huf Post 1 and 2.

McCain supporters.

Forget Nostradamus, 'The West Wing' Got It Right

From 52 To 48 With Love

     

  

 

More photos (you can contribute your own too).

Fox News Knew Palin Didn't Know Africa Was A Continent & Kept Quiet

They were willing to potentially let an idiot move to within a 72 year old heartbeat of the Presidency:

All these McCain campaign leaks about Palin are doing her, and as this video shows, Bill Kristol, in:

We're Going To Have A Giant Turnout Today

I know this not from a large, scientific poll but rather from a conversation I had yesterday with my 72 year old Dad.  While he generally holds liberal opinions (as befits an older Jewish gentlemen living in Manhattan) he has not voted for anyone since Kennedy in 1960 (due to generally being very busy combined with a misplaced fear he'd end up having to serve Jury Duty). 

Given that he lives in true blue New York, I did not feel the need to push him this cycle to register or vote (we had quite a few fruitless arguments 4 years ago) so I was pleasantly surprised when he informed me a while ago that he had registered to vote. Yesterday, without prompting, he told me he was actually going to vote today for the first time in 48 years! When I asked why, he simply said

This is the most important election of my lifetime ... I have to vote; everyone has to vote.

I think we're going to do well today.

Palin: Last Of The Culture Warriors

From Peter Beinart:

Why has America turned on Sarah Palin? Obviously, her wobbly television interviews haven't helped. Nor have the drip, drip of scandals from Alaska, which have tarnished her reformist image. But Palin's problems run deeper, and they say something fundamental about the political age being born. Palin's brand is culture war, and in America today culture war no longer sells. The struggle that began in the 1960s -- which put questions of racial, sexual and religious identity at the forefront of American politics -- may be ending. Palin is the end of the line ...

From her championing of small-town America to her efforts to link Barack Obama to former domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, Palin is treading a path well-worn by Republicans in recent decades. She's depicting the campaign as a struggle between the culturally familiar and the culturally threatening, the culturally traditional and the culturally exotic. But Obama has dismissed those attacks as irrelevant, and the public, focused nervously on the economic collapse, has largely tuned them out.

Palin's attacks are also failing because of generational change. The long-running, internecine baby boomer cultural feud just isn't that relevant to Americans who came of age after the civil rights, gay rights and feminist revolutions. Even many younger evangelicals are broadening their agendas beyond abortion, stem cells, school prayer and gay marriage ... 

The economic challenges of the coming era are complicated, fascinating and terrifying, while the cultural battles of the 1960s feel increasingly stale. If John McCain loses tomorrow, the GOP will probably choose someone like Mitt Romney or Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal to lead it back from the wilderness, someone who -- although socially conservative -- speaks fluently about the nation's economic plight and doesn't try to substitute identity for policy. Although she seems like a fresh face, Sarah Palin actually represents the end of an era. She may be the last culture warrior on a national ticket for a very long time.

Gallup's Final Poll: Obama 55% McCain 44%

From Gallup:

The final Gallup 2008 pre-election poll -- based on Oct. 31-Nov. 2 Gallup Poll Daily tracking -- shows Barack Obama with a 53% to 42% advantage over John McCain among likely voters. When undecided voters are allocated proportionately to the two candidates to better approximate the actual vote, the estimate becomes 55% for Obama to 44% for McCain.

The trend data clearly show Obama ending the campaign with an upward movement in support, with eight to 11 percentage point leads among likely voters in Gallup's last four reports of data extending back to Oct. 28. Obama's final leads among both registered voters and likely voters are the largest of the campaign.

Gallup's final estimate is based on Gallup's traditional likely voter model, and assumes an estimated turnout of 64% of the voting age population, an increase over 2004 ... This year's higher turnout estimate is fueled by a surge in early voting -- 28% of registered voters in the final poll indicated they had already voted -- and higher turnout among blacks than in any of the last four presidential elections.

Gallup has been calculating and reporting an expanded likely voter model alongside its traditional model over the past month. In the end, the candidate selection estimates of the two models converged, and both show the same unallocated 53% to 42% margin for Obama.

Why They're Voting For McCain

Two new videos, in the style of Why I'm Voting Republican ...

Women for McCain:

Gays for McCain:

McCain's Socialist, Welfare Appeal

Jonathan Chiat joins the growing list of folks who think McCain's socialist, redistributor charge is actually a dog whistle, racist appeal:

Ross Douthat scratches his head wondering why the McCain campaign is "pinning their hopes on a working-class backlash against the progressive income tax" in Pennsylvania. Ross thinks the answer is incompetence. Maybe he's right, and the McCain campaign is unaware of, say, polls showing that Americans favor Obama's tax hike on the rigch or years of evidence showing that Americans by overwhelming margins believe that wealth should be distributed more evenly.

But the more likely possibility seems to be that the McCain campaign is not monumentally stupid, and is trying to play on fears that Obama will take money from whites and give it to blacks. Hence McCain's claims that Obama plans on "taking from one group of Americans and giving to another," that Obama would turn the IRS into "a giant welfare agency," and his television ads repeatedly flashing the word "welfare" to describe Obama's plans.

Certainly, Pennsylvanians seem to see McCain's argument here as something other than an attack on the principle of progressivity in taxation. The Boston Globe reports:

Still, there remains a deep distrust of big government programs here, and strong skepticism about Obama. A number of voters feared he would transfer wealth from the middle class to help people "who don't work" or who don't deserve it. ... McCain's focus on casting Obama as the wealth "redistributor in chief" is hard to miss around here these days ...

The concept of wealth redistribution is as unpopular here as it is in most of America, Borick said, and the notion may play on racist fears of black welfare recipients siphoning money from working-class whites - fears that have special resonance since Obama is black.

Note that both the Gallup poll I cited and Borick say that "wealth redistribution" is historically unpopular. That's exactly because the phrase plays on fears of taking money from the middle class and giving it to the poor, especially minorities. When the idea is phrased in terms of takign from the rich and giving to the middle class -- which happens to be exactly what Obama is proposing -- then it becomes extremely popular. McCain's line of attack here only makes sense as an attempt to misportray Obama's tax plan as redistribution from middle- and working-class whites. Again, maybe McCain is just doing something completely stupid, but that wouldn't be my bet.

McCain has been accused of playing upon racism many times where the accusation is a stretch. (Though conservatives are overly sensitive here, as what often happens is that one blogger or columnist makes an accusation that does not gain any broader traction among liberals or Democrats.) But this case seems pretty blatant.

Vote For Hope

A very cool Obama video that is actually a good music video too (thanks to A Blue View reader Diane!):

Most Polls Undercount Young People

Rick Davis was on all the Sunday shows talking about "structural bias" in the polls (by which he pretended to believe the polls had too few Republicans and too many Democrats in their counts).  Unfortuneately for McCain's campaign manager, if there is a bias in the way the polls are constructed and conducted, it demonstrably appears to be in a bias against the young.

538.com compared recent results of polls that call mobile numbers and those that do not (The polls that include cell phones are highlighted in orange, those that don't are in gray). Of course, this distinction is important because many young people (especially in the fanatical, Obama supporting, cohort of college students) only have mobile phones and don't have land line phones: which leads to their undercounting in polls that ignore their increasingly common phone choice.

Obama leads by an average of 10.0 points in the cellphone polls, versus 5.1 in the landline-only's:

 

These Kids Want You To Vote

These kids are really into it! Thanks to A Blue View reader Zak:

What Will Defeat Do To The Republicans?

Paul Krugman thinks that it will become even more extreme and marginilized:

You might think, perhaps hope, that Republicans will engage in some soul-searching, that they’ll ask themselves whether and how they lost touch with the national mainstream. But my prediction is that this won’t happen any time soon.

Instead, the Republican rump, the party that’s left after the election, will be the party that attends Sarah Palin’s rallies, where crowds chant “Vote McCain, not Hussein!” It will be the party of Saxby Chambliss, the senator from Georgia, who, observing large-scale early voting by African-Americans, warns his supporters that “the other folks are voting.” It will be the party that harbors menacing fantasies about Barack Obama’s Marxist — or was that Islamic? — roots.

Why will the G.O.P. become more, not less, extreme? For one thing, projections suggest that this election will drive many of the remaining Republican moderates out of Congress, while leaving the hard right in place ...

Also, the Republican base already seems to be gearing up to regard defeat not as a verdict on conservative policies, but as the result of an evil conspiracy. A recent Democracy Corps poll found that Republicans, by a margin of more than two to one, believe that Mr. McCain is losing “because the mainstream media is biased” rather than “because Americans are tired of George Bush.” {See Republican Delusion.}

And Mr. McCain has laid the groundwork for feverish claims that the election was stolen, declaring that the community activist group Acorn — which, as Factcheck.orgpoints out, has never “been found guilty of, or even charged with” causing fraudulent votes to be cast — “is now on the verge of maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy.” Needless to say, the potential voters Acorn tries to register are disproportionately “other folks,” as Mr. Chambliss might put it.

Anyway, the Republican base, egged on by the McCain-Palin campaign, thinks that elections should reflect the views of “real Americans” — and most of the people reading this column probably don’t qualify.

Thus, in the face of polls suggesting that Mr. Obama will win Virginia, a top McCain aide declared that the “real Virginia” — the southern part of the state, excluding the Washington, D.C., suburbs — favors Mr. McCain. A majority of Americans now live in big metropolitan areas, but while visiting a small town in North Carolina, Ms. Palin described it as “what I call the real America,” one of the “pro-America” parts of the nation. The real America, it seems, is small-town, mainly southern and, above all, white ...

The G.O.P.’s long transformation into the party of the unreasonable right, a haven for racists and reactionaries, seems likely to accelerate as a result of the impending defeat.

This will pose a dilemma for moderate conservatives. Many of them spent the Bush years in denial, closing their eyes to the administration’s dishonesty and contempt for the rule of law. Some of them have tried to maintain that denial through this year’s election season, even as the McCain-Palin campaign’s tactics have grown ever uglier. But one of these days they’re going to have to realize that the G.O.P. has become the party of intolerance.

Bruce For Barack

Cleveland OH, Nov. 2, 2008:

GOP Provides Zero Proof Of Voter Fraud

Though McCain thinks we may be experiencing "one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy,” when pressed, his campaign doesn't come anywhere even close to backing up the claim. From the Politico:

For weeks, Republican leaders have warned that widely reported problems with fake voter registrations could result in a flood of phony votes in pivotal states. But Ronald Michaelson, a veteran election administrator and member of the McCain-Palin Honest and Open Election Committee, said in an interview that he could not name a single instance in which this had occurred ...

Michaelson, who served for 27 years as executive director of the Illinois Board of Elections, said the sharp exchanges over registration fraud have undermined voters’ confidence in the electoral system.

“The fact that so many of these illegal registrations are being made public raises a perception in the minds of people,’’ he said. “That’s more of a general concern. You don’t want to perpetuate the idea that our election process is lacking integrity.”

Asked whether his own party was responsible for fostering that perception, Michaelson said, “Well, it doesn’t help. It has captured the attention of a lot of people.” Why do it, then? “Maybe it’s because there’s nothing else to talk about,” he said.

Michaelson could not cite a single real example of how registration fraud has led to voting fraud. He said that an election-rigging scheme starting with phony application forms would not make much sense.

Pole Result

McCain Speaks The Truth

During SNL's Weekend Update McCain provided the most accurate, honest assessment of his campaign I've ever heard:

I thought I might try a strategy called the reverse maverick. That's where I'd do whatever anybody tells me. And if that didn't work, I'd go to the double maverick. I'd just go totally berserk and freak everybody out.

Cheney's Poorly Timed Support

Here's what Obama said (which he repeated at every rally yesterday) about Cheney's statement:

And here's the ad his campaign is now running:

State Of The Race

From Nate Silver:

This is beginning to look like a five-state election. Those states are Virginia, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Nevada. Essentially all relevant electoral scenarios involve some combination of these five states.

I should caution that by far the most likely scenario is that Obama wins some relatively decisive victory of anywhere from 3-12 points in the popular vote. If Obama wins the popular vote by anything in this range, he will find plenty of blue territory, accumulating somewhere between 300-400 electoral votes. The electoral math will matter very little.

We can probably assume, however, that IF the national polls tighten significantly (and to reiterate, the likelihood is that they will NOT), McCain will edge out a victory in North Carolina, Florida, Indiana, North Dakota, Montana, Georgia, and Missouri; put those states in the McCain column for the time being. Likewise, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa all appear safe for Obama, even in the case of significant tightening. Put those in the Obama column.

That leaves our five states in play. The victory conditions for Obama involving these five states proceed something as follows:

1. Win Pennsylvania and ANY ONE of Colorado, Virginia, Ohio, or Nevada (Nevada produces a 269-269 tie, which would probably be resolved for Obama in the House of Represenatives.)
2. Win Ohio and EITHER Colorado OR Virginia.
3. Win Colorado AND Virginia AND Nevada.

Now, suppose you think that Colorado is already in the bag for Obama because of his large edge in early voting there. We can then simplify the victory conditions as follows:

1. 1. Win Pennsylvania
2. 2. Win Ohio
3. 3. Win Virginia AND Nevada

That's basically what it comes down to, although I'm sure each campaign would claim that there are a larger number of states in play.

Al the Shoesalesman Gets a Tax Cut

Calculate your tax cut.

Gallup Daily Tracking: 52% Obama, 42% McCain

For the first time, Gallup's two voting models have converged and are showing the same result:

Barack Obama leads John McCain in Gallup Poll Daily tracking interviewing conducted Wednesday through Friday by an identical 52% to 42% margin among both traditional likely voters and expanded likely voters. Obama leads by a similar 52% to 41% margin among all registered voters.

This is the first time since Gallup began estimating likely voters in early October that there is no difference between Gallup's two likely voter models. Obama's lead of 52% to 42% using Gallup's traditional estimate of likely voting criteria takes into account past voting as well as current intentions. Obama's identical lead using the expanded model takes into account only current voting intentions. Both of these likely voter estimates in turn are almost identical to Gallup's 52% to 41% registered voter estimate.

Dick Cheney Does NOT Endorse Obama; He Picks McCain & "Talented" Palin

Good luck with thiw John!

A Really Scary Horror Movie Trailer

McCain Opts For Ads Over GOTV (Get Out The Vote)

A potentially lethal mistake reported by the Wash Post:

Sen. John McCain and the Republican National Committee will unleash a barrage of spending on television advertising that will allow him to keep pace with Sen. Barack Obama's ad blitz during the campaign's final days, but the expenditures will impact McCain's get-out-the-vote efforts, according to Republican strategists.

McCain has faced a severe spending imbalance during most of the fall ... The decision to finance a final advertising push is forcing McCain to curtail spending on Election Day ground forces to help usher his supporters to the polls, according to Republican consultants familiar with McCain's strategy.

The vaunted, 72-hour plan that President Bush used to mobilize voters in 2000 and 2004 has been scaled back for McCain. He has spent half as much as Obama on staffing and has opened far fewer field offices. This week, a number of veteran GOP operatives who orchestrate door-to-door efforts to get voters to the polls were told they should not expect to receive plane tickets, rental cars or hotel rooms from the campaign.

"The desire for parity on television comes at the expense of investment in paid boots on the ground," said one top Republican strategist who has been privy to McCain's plans. "The folks who will oversee the volunteer operation have been told to get out into the field on their own nickel."

Their Closing Arguments

Peggy Noonan Makes The Case For Obama

The Alabama anecdote in the third paragraph of her WSJ column is an evocative reminder of the historical importance of this election:

He has within him the possibility to change the direction and tone of American foreign policy, which need changing; his rise will serve as a practical rebuke to the past five years, which need rebuking; his victory would provide a fresh start in a nation in which a fresh start would come as a national relief. He climbed steep stairs, born off the continent with no father to guide, a dreamy, abandoning mother, mixed race, no connections. He rose with guts and gifts. He is steady, calm, and, in terms of the execution of his political ascent, still the primary and almost only area in which his executive abilities can be discerned, he shows good judgment in terms of whom to hire and consult, what steps to take and moves to make. We witnessed from him this year something unique in American politics: He took down a political machine without raising his voice.

A great moment: When the press was hitting hard on the pregnancy of Sarah Palin’s 17-year-old daughter, he did not respond with a politically shrewd “I have no comment,” or “We shouldn’t judge.” Instead he said, “My mother had me when she was 18,” which shamed the press and others into silence. He showed grace when he didn’t have to.

There is something else. On Feb. 5, Super Tuesday, Mr. Obama won the Alabama primary with 56% to Hillary Clinton’s 42%. That evening, a friend watched the victory speech on TV in his suburban den. His 10-year-old daughter walked in, saw on the screen “Obama Wins” and “Alabama.” She said, “Daddy, we saw a documentary on Martin Luther King Day in school.” She said, “That’s where they used the hoses.” Suddenly my friend saw it new. Birmingham, 1963, and the water hoses used against the civil rights demonstrators. And now look, the black man thanking Alabama for his victory.

This means nothing? This means a great deal.

... let’s be frank. Something new is happening in America. It is the imminent arrival of a new liberal moment. History happens, it makes its turns, you hold on for dear life. Life moves.

A fitting end for a harem-scarem, rock-’em-sock-’em shakeup of a year—one of tumbling inevitabilities, torn coalitions, striking new personalities.

Eras end, and begin. “God is in charge of history.” And so my beautiful election ends.

"My Friends" The Musical

Clever and well done!

The Best Election Ever?

Starting at 1:50, Bill's New Rules brilliantly reviews the 2008 race:

I don't know if this was the best election, but it might be the best New Rules ever.

Are The Politics Of Bigotry Over?

Another fascinating article by Matt Tabbi in Rolling Stone:

I have come to the 4th Congressional District in Colorado ... to cover the re-election campaign of Rep. Marilyn Musgrave. Musgrave was Sarah Palin before Sarah Palin, a turbocharged born-again supermom who went into politics because she couldn't stand all the naughtiness. Her first political gig was on the school board in Fort Morgan, where she devoted her energies to blacking out — literally blacking out — passages in sex-education textbooks. Later, as a state legislator, she pushed a concealed-weapon law that would have allowed guns on school grounds. She was a preposterous caricature of an evangelical politician, an Anita Bryant with a beer gut, but like Palin she was already on her way to a Major Elected Office by the time anyone thought to stop laughing. Her first act upon making it to Congress in 2003 was to introduce an amendment to ban gay marriage. She declared unequivocally — after 9/11 and the launching of two wars — that the union of same-sex couples is "the most important issue we face today."

Musgrave was re-elected twice by a 4th District that since 1972 has been among the most solidly Republican territory in America. Her grandstanding against buggery and other forms of extra-biblical recreation has helped earn her a 100 percent rating and a top spot on the American Conservative Union's list of the most right-wing members of Congress. She's a living symbol of the Era of Rove, when all a politician needs to do to get elected is go to church, make freckled babies and whine about how things are going to shit because some minority group is queering the deal.

That strategy has worked for a long time — but now, suddenly, things are different in places like the 4th District. Not only does the torch-bearing evangelical Colorado of Ted Haggard and James Dobson appear poised to turn its nine electoral votes blue for a nonwhite presidential candidate, but the congressional seat belonging to one of America's most celebrated gay-bashers in this once-impregnable Republican stronghold is also up for grabs.

If Musgrave is ousted in November, as polls suggest she'll be, it's worth asking just what exactly is going on. Has there been a sea change in the electorate? Is there a place on the American map where you can actually see the country outgrowing the politics of bigotry? <Continue reading.>

What The "Real American" Newspaper Endorsements Have Had To Say

The current Editor & Publisher's tally Of endorsements has a landslide for Obama at 240-114:

The circulation of the Obama-backing papers stands at over 21 million, compared with McCain's 7 million. Obama's lopsided margin, including most of the major papers that have decided so far, is in stark contrast to John Kerry barely edging George W. Bush in endorsements in 2004 by 213 to 205. Obama, with 231, has already easily topped Kerry's number with many more yet to be tallied ...

At least 50 papers have now switched to Obama from Bush in 2004, with just four flipping to McCain. In addition, several top papers that went for Bush in 2004 have now chosen not to endorse this year, the latest being the Indianapolis Star in key swing state Indiana ... Three of the top five dailies in deep red state Texas switched from Bush to Obama this time.

Gallup: "Political landscape could be improving for Barack Obama"

From Gallup:

The political landscape could be improving for Barack Obama in the waning days of the campaign. Gallup Poll Daily tracking from Oct. 28-30 shows him with an eight percentage point lead over John McCain among traditional likely voters -- 51% to 43% -- his largest margin to date using this historical Gallup Poll voter model.

Since Tuesday, McCain's support among traditional likely voters has dropped by four points (from 47% to 43%), Obama's has risen by two points (from 49% to 51%), and the percentage of undecided voters has increased from 4% to 6%.

Thursday night's interviews are the first conducted entirely after Obama's widely viewed 30-minute prime-time campaign ad, which ran on several television networks Wednesday evening. Obama held a substantial lead over McCain in last night's polling, however no greater than what Gallup found on Wednesday.

Obama's lead among expanded likely voters is only slightly greater than that seen among traditional likely voters. He now leads McCain by nine-points, 52% to 43%, using this looser definition that does not factor in whether respondents have voted in past elections, but strictly relies on their reported level of interest and intention to vote in the 2008 election.

Obama's current 11-point lead over McCain among all registered voters -- 52% to 41% -- is up from an eight-point lead in yesterday's report, and ties his highest advantage on this basis, last recorded 10 days ago. (Complete trend here.)

Obama's favorable position among traditional likely voters in the latest polling is partially reflective of his strong position among all registered voters. However, at other times when Obama has led McCain by 11-points among registered voters, his likely voter advantage has been lower than it is now, in the five- to seven-point range. Thus, Obama's improved likely voter standing also reflects a higher turnout propensity for his supporters than what Gallup has seen at earlier times this month. This could stem from the superiority his well-funded campaign appears to have over the McCain campaign in contacting his supporters to get out and vote.

The "Socialist" Dog Whistle

Earlier today, The End Of Dog Whistles? posited that the Net Roots are forcing a level of increased transparency on the political world that, while deterring the most egregious smears, will not make remove them all ... that's up to us, the voters:

Like any other transparency measure, however, this process only enhances the potential for accountability. It does not automatically halt any conduct. It does not ensure, as Schmidt may imagine, that "Rovian" attacks are now futile--or that voters will always recoil from them. Instead, it simply means that candidates will increasingly have to answer for their code words and targeted appeals.

Michael Lind goes on to prove the point in discussing what McCain's "socialist" smear is really about:

Without exception, all of the policies supported by Obama belong to broad categories of public policies that have been supported, in one form or another, by conservative-libertarian thinkers like Friedman and von Hayek and conservative politicians like Reagan, George W. Bush and McCain himself. The differences between them and Obama are differences of degree, not of kind.

But while this is true it may not matter, if McCain's last-minute clarion call is really a racial "dog whistle." The McCain campaign may appear to be debating public philosophy, when in fact it is making a disguised appeal to white racism. If that is the case, then "redistributionist" and "socialist" may be intended to be understood by white swing voters as code words that function the way that "welfare queen" did for the Reagan campaign. A "socialist" or "redistributionist" is a politician who taxes white people like Joe the Plumber and gives money to ... you know who.

If this is the tactic, then it might be working. The polls are tightening in the final days of the campaign. Should McCain surprise the pundits and pull off a victory, historians may judge that it was because of his desperate insinuation that white people would be taxed to pay for welfare for Latinos and blacks. And if he should lose, conservative operatives planning for the next cycle may decide that this was the right tactic, pursued too late. Whether he wins or loses, by using "socialist" and "redistributionist" in an environment in which they were likely to be interpreted as racially-charged smears, John McCain may have damaged not only his reputation but our society.

Joe The Plumber IS Sarah Palin

Once again the "fake" journalists at the Daily Show put the "real" journalists to shame: the point Stewart makes here about McCain's preference for elevating an unknown, blank (and empty) slate to a role of national prominence applies to both Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin:

The End Of Dog Whistles?

Thanks to A Blue View reader Diane for pointing me to this article from the Nation:

Everyone can hear it now. This Internet-driven, hyperactive presidential race is forcing accountability on two of the oldest tricks in politics: dog whistles and secret smears.

With a "dog whistle," politicians use code words to signal unpopular stances to one target audience, while avoiding a backlash because the reference is lost on others. Many people miss President Bush's layered language for evangelicals, from hinting that legal abortion is like slavery to his odd prediction that history will see Iraq as just "a comma." (It only makes sense if you know the proverb, "Never put a period where God has put a comma.") Code words don't fool everyone, but from "states' rights" to "welfare queens," GOP campaigns have tapped racial resentment without facing widespread opprobrium. Secret smears run on a similar axis, enabling politicians to undermine an opponent without taking responsibility for the attack. But the times are changing.

From his race to his name, Barack Obama seemed like the perfect target for such coded attacks ... Yet ... the McCain campaign, underestimated not only Obama but a new media model that swiftly blasts would-be Swiftboaters.

Obama's Florida Bet

From Jay Newton-Small:

Politico reports this morning that Al and Tipper Gore will campaign for Obama tomorrow in Fort Lauderdale and West Palm Beach – the first time the former vice president has stumped for a presidential candidate in the Sunshine State since his narrow loss there cost him the presidency in 2000.

The Goracle's trip comes after Obama held a midnight rally with Bill Clinton last night and broadcast live before 20,000 Sunrise, Floridians ...

All of this points to an Obama bet that Florida could be an early clincher for him. Polls here close 7pm EST and if he takes Florida and simply holds the rest of Kerry's 2004 states it's game over for McCain. A DCCC source says to keep an eye on the vulnerable GOP Miami House races for an early indicator on how Dems are playing there on Election Night.

Early voting looks promising for Obama where registered Dems are outpacing GOP voters 45.4% to 39.0%, though there's no way of telling which way those ballots were cast. Obama holds a 3.5% lead in the RCP average and a 4% lead in our latest poll. And, taking no chances, Obama deployed his ground game guru Steve Hildebrand to Miami three weeks ago. Also lurking around the Sunshine State: Paul Tewes, the guy who won Iowa for him and had been Obama's liaison to the DNC, who's been hanging out at Obama's Tampa HQ. (Both men are mailing in their day jobs from Florida).

Oy, McCainia!

Picking up on the negative impact Palin is having on the McCain ticket (Palin Increasing Drag On McCain; "Contours of the race hardening") her selection has had a big impact on one voting demographic: it has solidified the Jewish vote for Obama. Even Ed Koch has endorsed him.

And it has produced lots of videos like this:

Palin Increasing Drag On McCain; "Contours of the race hardening"

From a new NY Times / CBS News poll:

All told, 59 percent of voters surveyed said Ms. Palin was not prepared for the job, up nine percentage points since the beginning of the month. Nearly a third of voters polled said the vice-presidential selection would be a major factor influencing their vote for president, and those voters broadly favor Senator Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee.

And in a possible indication that the choice of Ms. Palin has hurt Mr. McCain’s image, voters said they had much more confidence in Mr. Obama to pick qualified people for his administration than they did in Mr. McCain.

After nearly two years of campaigning, a pair of hotly contested nominating battles, a series of debates and an avalanche of advertisements, the nationwide poll found the contours of the race hardening in the last days before the election on Tuesday. Twelve percent of the voters surveyed said they had already voted. These were among the findings:

• Mr. Obama is maintaining his lead, with 51 percent of likely voters supporting him and 40 percent supporting Mr. McCain in a head-to-head matchup.
• Some perceptions of race are changing, with a marked increase in the number of people who say they believe that white and black people have an equal chance of getting ahead in America today.
• Mr. McCain’s focus on taxes, including his talk about Joe the Plumber, seems to be having some effect, as a growing number of voters now say Mr. McCain would not raise their taxes.
• Eighty-nine percent of people view the economy negatively, and 85 percent think the country is on the wrong track.
• Mr. Obama continues to have a significant advantage on key issues like the economy, health care and the war in Iraq.

The survey found that opinions of Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain had hardened considerably, as 9 out of 10 voters who said they had settled on a candidate said their minds were made up, and a growing number of them called it “extremely important” that their candidate win the election. Roughly half of each candidate’s supporters said they were “scared” of what the other candidate would do if elected. Just 4 percent of voters were undecided, and when they were pressed to say whom they leaned toward, the shape of the race remained essentially the same.

Bolstered by the fiscal crisis and deep concerns about the direction of the country, Mr. Obama has seemed to solidify the support he has gained in recent months. When likely voters were asked whom they would vote for in an expanded field that included several third-party candidates, Mr. Obama got the support of 52 percent of them, Mr. McCain 39 percent, Bob Barr 1 percent, and Ralph Nader 2 percent.

The Economist Endorses Obama Saying, "It's Time"

From The Economist

IT IS impossible to forecast how important any presidency will be. Back in 2000 America stood tall as the undisputed superpower, at peace with a generally admiring world. The main argument was over what to do with the federal government’s huge budget surplus. Nobody foresaw the seismic events of the next eight years. When Americans go to the polls next week the mood will be very different. The United States is unhappy, divided and foundering both at home and abroad. Its self-belief and values are under attack.

For all the shortcomings of the campaign, both John McCain and Barack Obama offer hope of national redemption. Now America has to choose between them. The Economist does not have a vote, but if it did, it would cast it for Mr Obama. We do so wholeheartedly: the Democratic candidate has clearly shown that he offers the better chance of restoring America’s self-confidence ...

There are also longer-term challenges, worth stressing if only because they have been so ignored on the campaign. Jump forward to 2017, when the next president will hope to relinquish office. A combination of demography and the rising costs of America’s huge entitlement programmes—Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid—will be starting to bankrupt the country. Abroad a greater task is already evident: welding the new emerging powers to the West. That is not just a matter of handling the rise of India and China, drawing them into global efforts, such as curbs on climate change; it means reselling economic and political freedom to a world that too quickly associates American capitalism with Lehman Brothers and American justice with Guantánamo Bay. This will take patience, fortitude, salesmanship and strategy ...

The Candidate McCain of the past six months has too often seemed the victim of political sorcery, his good features magically inverted, his bad ones exaggerated. The fiscal conservative who once tackled Mr Bush over his unaffordable tax cuts now proposes not just to keep the cuts, but to deepen them. The man who denounced the religious right as “agents of intolerance” now embraces theocratic culture warriors ... rather than heading towards the centre after he won the nomination, Mr McCain moved to the right.

Meanwhile his temperament, always perhaps his weak spot, has been found wanting. Sometimes the seat-of-the-pants method still works: his gut reaction over Georgia—to warn Russia off immediately—was the right one. Yet on the great issue of the campaign, the financial crisis, he has seemed all at sea, emitting panic and indecision ... The choice of Sarah Palin epitomised the sloppiness. It is not just that she is an unconvincing stand-in, nor even that she seems to have been chosen partly for her views on divisive social issues, notably abortion. Mr McCain made his most important appointment having met her just twice.

Hey McCain, 58% Of Americans Are "Redistributors"

A fascinating new result from Gallup:

A majority of Americans (58%) say money and wealth should be more evenly distributed among a larger percentage of the people, although slightly less than half (46%) go so far as to say that the government should redistribute wealth by "heavy taxes on the rich."

Gallup has been asking Americans periodically for over 20 years whether the distribution of money and wealth in this country is "fair," or whether they should be "more evenly distributed among a larger percentage of the people." (The question wording does not include a reference to exactly how they would be more evenly distributed and does not mention the government.)

Across the nine times the question has been asked, a majority of Americans have agreed with the thought that money and wealth should be more evenly distributed. The current 58% who agree is one of the two lowest percentages Gallup has measured (along with a 56% reading in September 2000). Sixty-eight percent agreed in April of this year and 66% in April 2007.

The responses to this question are extraordinarily differentiated by partisan orientation, reflecting a fundamental fissure in Americans' views on this money/wealth distribution concept:

Just 30% of Republicans say there should be a more even distribution of money and wealth, compared to 60% of independents and an overwhelming majority of 84% of Democrats.

The sentiment that money and wealth should be more evenly distributed does not address the issue of exactly how this objective would be achieved ... the longtime argument in economic and political philosophy over government's ideal role, if any, in attempting to redistribute money and wealth through the use of taxes.

Gallup has from time to time asked a question that addresses this issue in part -- a question that Roper first asked in a Fortune Magazine survey conducted in March 1939, near the end of the Depression. The question is phrased as follows: "People feel differently about how far a government should go. Here is a phrase which some people believe in and some don't. Do you think our government should or should not redistribute wealth by heavy taxes on the rich?"

This question is notable because it directly invokes the idea that government should intervene and redistribute wealth through taxes on the rich. The question phrase "heavy taxes on the rich" is certainly not one the Obama campaign would choose to describe its plan, which Obama repeatedly says would return high income tax rates only back to where they were under Bill Clinton in the 1990s, before the Bush administration tax cuts. Still, the question generally addresses the basic issue of taxing high-income individuals to transfer wealth in a society.

Continue reading "Hey McCain, 58% Of Americans Are "Redistributors"" »

From the Politico:

John McCain's campaign is looking for a scapegoat. It is looking for someone to blame if McCain loses on Tuesday. And it has decided on Sarah Palin.

In recent days, a McCain “adviser” told Dana Bash of CNN: “She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone.” Imagine not taking advice from the geniuses at the McCain campaign. What could Palin be thinking?

Also, a “top McCain adviser” told Mike Allen of Politico that Palin is “a whack job.”Maybe she is. But who chose to put this “whack job” on the ticket? Wasn’t it John McCain? And wasn’t it his first presidential-level decision?

And if you are a 72-year-old presidential candidate, wouldn’t you expect that your running mate’s fitness for high office would come under a little extra scrutiny? And, therefore, wouldn’t you make your selection with care? (To say nothing about caring about the future of the nation?)

McCain didn’t seem to care that much. McCain admitted recently on national TV that he “didn’t know her well at all” before he chose Palin. But why not? Why didn’t he get to know her better before he made his choice? It’s not like he was rushed. McCain wrapped up the Republican nomination in early March. He didn’t announce his choice for a running mate until late August.

Wasn’t that enough time for McCain to get to know Palin? Wasn’t that enough time for his crackerjack “vetters” to investigate Palin’s strengths and weaknesses, check through records and published accounts, talk to a few people, and learn that she was not only a diva but a whack job diva?

But McCain picked her anyway. He wanted to close the “enthusiasm gap” between himself and Barack Obama. He wanted to inject a little adrenaline into the Republican National Convention. He wanted to goose up the Republican base. And so he chose Palin. Is she really a diva and a whack job? Could be. There are quite a few in politics ...

From Jonathan Martin:

In a mix of nostalgia and superstition, John McCain is likely to hold one final town hall meeting in the state that rocketed him to political stardom in 2000 and revived his White House hopes earlier this year.

McCain is planning to return to Peterborough, New Hampshire, this weekend, where he held his final town hall meetings before both Granite State primaries.

Campaign aides declined to confirm the plan -- 11th-hour travel plans are held closely and can change depending on polling -- but the Union Leader's John DiStaso reports that McCain officials have booked the venerable Peterborough town hall.

Obama supporters should plan on visiting the state this weekend too.

McCain Camp Scapegoating Palin

From the Politico:

John McCain's campaign is looking for a scapegoat. It is looking for someone to blame if McCain loses on Tuesday. And it has decided on Sarah Palin.

In recent days, a McCain “adviser” told Dana Bash of CNN: “She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone.” Imagine not taking advice from the geniuses at the McCain campaign. What could Palin be thinking?

Also, a “top McCain adviser” told Mike Allen of Politico that Palin is “a whack job.”Maybe she is. But who chose to put this “whack job” on the ticket? Wasn’t it John McCain? And wasn’t it his first presidential-level decision?

And if you are a 72-year-old presidential candidate, wouldn’t you expect that your running mate’s fitness for high office would come under a little extra scrutiny? And, therefore, wouldn’t you make your selection with care? (To say nothing about caring about the future of the nation?)

McCain didn’t seem to care that much. McCain admitted recently on national TV that he “didn’t know her well at all” before he chose Palin. But why not? Why didn’t he get to know her better before he made his choice? It’s not like he was rushed. McCain wrapped up the Republican nomination in early March. He didn’t announce his choice for a running mate until late August.

Wasn’t that enough time for McCain to get to know Palin? Wasn’t that enough time for his crackerjack “vetters” to investigate Palin’s strengths and weaknesses, check through records and published accounts, talk to a few people, and learn that she was not only a diva but a whack job diva?

But McCain picked her anyway. He wanted to close the “enthusiasm gap” between himself and Barack Obama. He wanted to inject a little adrenaline into the Republican National Convention. He wanted to goose up the Republican base. And so he chose Palin. Is she really a diva and a whack job? Could be. There are quite a few in politics ...

McCain To Visit New Hampshire This Weekend

From Jonathan Martin:

In a mix of nostalgia and superstition, John McCain is likely to hold one final town hall meeting in the state that rocketed him to political stardom in 2000 and revived his White House hopes earlier this year.

McCain is planning to return to Peterborough, New Hampshire, this weekend, where he held his final town hall meetings before both Granite State primaries.

Campaign aides declined to confirm the plan -- 11th-hour travel plans are held closely and can change depending on polling -- but the Union Leader's John DiStaso reports that McCain officials have booked the venerable Peterborough town hall.

Obama supporters should plan on visiting the state this weekend too.