Sorry for not having posted in a bit but, hey, it's summer...the pace slows down a bit. Not for the candidates, mind you, but for those who follow them. But all good things come to an end (at least for me), so now back to the campaign trail. Here's a roundup of recent events. And thanks for the kind compliments that have come in; they are much appreciated.
Whiners:
When we last left you, the Rev. Jesse Jackson, said he wanted to cut off part of Democratic Party presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama's anatomy. The senator, in the Rev. Jackson's view, was "talking down to black people" with remarks on responsible fatherhood. It caused a flap and the Rev. Jackson had to apologize, which he did, early and often.
But soon after, former Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, an adviser to the Republican Party's nominee, Sen. John McCain, said, in essence, that Americans who complained about the economy were "whiners." This has been the Republican tack for some time on the economy--things are not that bad and you don't know how good you have it.
Once again, the hammer came down, and Senator McCain had to apologize for former Sen. Gramm's remarks. Politically, the remarks were seen as close to an insult to voters who have been wracked by high gas prices, the threat of home foreclosures, increased overall costs, etc. It seemed out of touch and insensitive. Whatever advantage Senator McCain may have gained in the Jackson-Obama flap (and it probably wasn't much) was lost immediately in the flap over the "whiner" comment.
Curiously, some on the conservative side defended Sen. Gramm's remarks saying Americans were whiners. While you can point to lots of statements and polls that show Americans do tend to whine on certain topics, politically it was not a great thing to say. Advantage: Obama.
But speaking of Obama, it has not been a great couple of weeks for the senator. His lead in the polls over Sen. McCain remains small (in fact, in a Newsweek poll, it dropped from 15 to 3; others show it essentially tied) and his movement to the political center has caused angst among his most fervent anti-war supporters.
Senator Obama based his entire campaign on his early opposition to the Iraq war. He has said consistently he would withdraw troops the first day he took office and have them out within two years. He also opposed the "surge" in Iraq which, by most accounts, has worked to lessen violence and bring some stability to the country. Now, any criticism of the surge is no longer on his website.
So, Senator Obama has been "clarifying" and "moderating" his position on Iraq in advance of a trip to the region. He says he tie any decision on American forces in Iraq to events in the ground after talking to commanders there. Although he still says he will withdraw forces, it's a lot fuzzier now than it was before.
In a speech today, and in previous opinion pieces, he said that if elected, he would be sending "additional Afghanistan brigades," and argued "the U.S. faces a growing threat from a resurgent al-Qaida in Afghanistan." Polls show Americans are more optimistic about the war in Afghanistan than in Iraq (but not by much), so perhaps, Sen. Obama is trying to show he is committed to the war on terror (to please voters who are not anti-war types but have concerns about Iraq) by fighting it in Afghanistan.
This is costing him some support among his passionate anti-war activists, but so far, his personality and the change he represents still attracts a strong base of support.
However, among independents and non-partisan voters on both sides, the Obama of 2007 and the winter of this year is not the same Obama as now. His focus seems to be much less clear and it's hard to pin down exactly where he is standing (although today's speech should give pundits lots of food for thought).
Voters who are considering casting a ballot for Obama haven't made up their minds yet, and they still have doubts based on his age, and shall we say, modest, experience on the national scene. Of course, nobody has to make up his or her mind yet, as there are 112 days to go before Election Day on Nov. 4.
Obama staffers believe over time, voters will grow comfortable with the idea of Sen. Obama as commander in chief. But as the underdog, every day that decision is put off, is a good day for the campaign of Senator McCain.
July 15, 2008
July 10, 2008
The Rev. Jackson's "Cutting" Remarks
If this campaign gets any weirder, well, I don't know what I'll do.
The other day, the 66 year-old Rev. Jesse Jackson, the civil rights leader and former presidential candidate, was on a talk show on the Fox network about the election. When he thought the microphones were off, he said that Democratic Party presumptive nominee, Sen. Barack Obama was, "talking down to black people" when the candidate was making speeches at black churches. Senator Obama's crime? He apparently was telling the audience that black parents need to set better examples for their children..particularly fathers.
"Too many fathers are AWOL (absent without leave), missing from too many lives and too many homes," Sen. Obama said.
For some reason, this angered the Rev. Jackson, who then said, referring to Obama, "I want to cut his --- off," (you can find the exact quote elsewhere) according to the Fox News Web site.
Immediately, the punditry went into high gear. Of course, the Rev. Jackson was angered. As a two time presidential candidate (class of '84 and '88) who came nowhere near winning, he is probably angered at Senator Obama's success at becoming the first African-American to win the nomination of a major party and perhaps the first African-American to win the office of president. Jealousy? Envy?
I report, you decide.
But is Senator Obama talking down to "black people?" His advice could apply to people of any race. It isn't just black fathers who are AWOL in their childrens' lives. But it is a particular problem in the black community.
For instance about ten years ago, 57.7 percent of all black children, 31.8 percent of all Hispanic children, and 20.9 percent of all white children were living in single-parent homes. Entertainer Bill Cosby has spoken out about this quite regularly; he, too, has been criticized for doing so.
Nevertheless, the Rev. Jackson began to apologize to anyone who would listen and reemphasized that he remained a supporter of Sen. Obama. Gee, I would hate to hear what he had to say if he was an opponent :-)
Even his own son, Jesse Jackson, Jr., a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, blasted his dad (although he said he loved him) for the comments. There's family...and there's politics.
But the real hoot (at least to me) was the instant analysis of whether or not this would "help" Senator Obama with working class white voters who are a tad more traditional than either the Rev. Jackson or Sen. Obama. Their verdict? It would!
"It reinforces Obama's effort to present himself as an advocate of responsible personal behavior, a position that Republican candidates like to secure as uniquely their own," said Mark Rozell, Professor of Public Policy at George Mason University.
Please....
Voters may select candidates for a variety of odd reasons (he has a mustache, I never vote for a person with a mustache; she wears loud color dresses and looks drab; he's too young) but this is not one of them. I doubt anyone is going to pull the lever in November based on an insult made in July. And an insult that is going to be viewed as one of personal pique.
This won't have any effect at all; it highlights the way pundits think American voters are like children. It angers me at times that something like this would even be considered to "help" or "hurt". I think voters make decisions based on a lot more than that...all right, at least most voters.
But it may point out a little quiet divide between older civil rights leaders and Senator Obama, the "post-racial" candidate. If Senator Obama wins the presidency, you can expect a great deal of heavy pressure put on him by the civil rights establishment for long-time cherished goals like increased social spending for blacks, reparations legislation, and more.
Will Senator Obama go along, or believe his path to mastery over U.S. politics lies somewhere in the middle?
In American politics, the middle ain't a bad place to be.
The other day, the 66 year-old Rev. Jesse Jackson, the civil rights leader and former presidential candidate, was on a talk show on the Fox network about the election. When he thought the microphones were off, he said that Democratic Party presumptive nominee, Sen. Barack Obama was, "talking down to black people" when the candidate was making speeches at black churches. Senator Obama's crime? He apparently was telling the audience that black parents need to set better examples for their children..particularly fathers.
"Too many fathers are AWOL (absent without leave), missing from too many lives and too many homes," Sen. Obama said.
For some reason, this angered the Rev. Jackson, who then said, referring to Obama, "I want to cut his --- off," (you can find the exact quote elsewhere) according to the Fox News Web site.
Immediately, the punditry went into high gear. Of course, the Rev. Jackson was angered. As a two time presidential candidate (class of '84 and '88) who came nowhere near winning, he is probably angered at Senator Obama's success at becoming the first African-American to win the nomination of a major party and perhaps the first African-American to win the office of president. Jealousy? Envy?
I report, you decide.
But is Senator Obama talking down to "black people?" His advice could apply to people of any race. It isn't just black fathers who are AWOL in their childrens' lives. But it is a particular problem in the black community.
For instance about ten years ago, 57.7 percent of all black children, 31.8 percent of all Hispanic children, and 20.9 percent of all white children were living in single-parent homes. Entertainer Bill Cosby has spoken out about this quite regularly; he, too, has been criticized for doing so.
Nevertheless, the Rev. Jackson began to apologize to anyone who would listen and reemphasized that he remained a supporter of Sen. Obama. Gee, I would hate to hear what he had to say if he was an opponent :-)
Even his own son, Jesse Jackson, Jr., a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, blasted his dad (although he said he loved him) for the comments. There's family...and there's politics.
But the real hoot (at least to me) was the instant analysis of whether or not this would "help" Senator Obama with working class white voters who are a tad more traditional than either the Rev. Jackson or Sen. Obama. Their verdict? It would!
"It reinforces Obama's effort to present himself as an advocate of responsible personal behavior, a position that Republican candidates like to secure as uniquely their own," said Mark Rozell, Professor of Public Policy at George Mason University.
Please....
Voters may select candidates for a variety of odd reasons (he has a mustache, I never vote for a person with a mustache; she wears loud color dresses and looks drab; he's too young) but this is not one of them. I doubt anyone is going to pull the lever in November based on an insult made in July. And an insult that is going to be viewed as one of personal pique.
This won't have any effect at all; it highlights the way pundits think American voters are like children. It angers me at times that something like this would even be considered to "help" or "hurt". I think voters make decisions based on a lot more than that...all right, at least most voters.
But it may point out a little quiet divide between older civil rights leaders and Senator Obama, the "post-racial" candidate. If Senator Obama wins the presidency, you can expect a great deal of heavy pressure put on him by the civil rights establishment for long-time cherished goals like increased social spending for blacks, reparations legislation, and more.
Will Senator Obama go along, or believe his path to mastery over U.S. politics lies somewhere in the middle?
In American politics, the middle ain't a bad place to be.
July 8, 2008
Safeco Acceptance Speech
Democratic Party nominee Senator Barack Obama plans an unusual departure from convention orthodoxy when he accepts his party's presidential nomination in a 76,000-seat stadium rather than the 15,000-seat convention hall in August.
The nomination will be August 28--the 45th anniversary of the Rev. Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream Speech--and the setting should be a roaring, adoring crowd, the kind of venue in which Obama performs best.
The networks are scrambling because they have spent four years preparing for the four-day convention which they assumed would be held in the Pepsi Center; now it will change locations. There is grumbling on the part of the networks and threats to reduce convention coverage, but the theatre of August 28 plus the symbolism will be much too much to ignore. Bet on massive coverage of the acceptance speech on television.
But what if it rains?
Just asking...(as others have in the press).
I keep reading that in this race, it truly will be a referendum on Barack Obama and that Republican Party nominee Senator John McCain, is really "incidental" to the whole question of who will take the oath of office at high noon on Jan. 20, 2009.
While there is some truth to this, it is exaggerated, and the closeness of the presidential polls in what should be a landslide year for the Democrats hints that Senator McCain and the Republicans (at least so far)are not "incidental".
There are some interesting political calculations going on which I will have more on later but that's it for now. Gotta run...
The nomination will be August 28--the 45th anniversary of the Rev. Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream Speech--and the setting should be a roaring, adoring crowd, the kind of venue in which Obama performs best.
The networks are scrambling because they have spent four years preparing for the four-day convention which they assumed would be held in the Pepsi Center; now it will change locations. There is grumbling on the part of the networks and threats to reduce convention coverage, but the theatre of August 28 plus the symbolism will be much too much to ignore. Bet on massive coverage of the acceptance speech on television.
But what if it rains?
Just asking...(as others have in the press).
I keep reading that in this race, it truly will be a referendum on Barack Obama and that Republican Party nominee Senator John McCain, is really "incidental" to the whole question of who will take the oath of office at high noon on Jan. 20, 2009.
While there is some truth to this, it is exaggerated, and the closeness of the presidential polls in what should be a landslide year for the Democrats hints that Senator McCain and the Republicans (at least so far)are not "incidental".
There are some interesting political calculations going on which I will have more on later but that's it for now. Gotta run...
July 2, 2008
Shakeup at McCain HQ
According to various press sources, Republican Presidential nominee in waiting, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, has shaken up his campaign.
The campaign manager, Rick Davis, will now be spending much of his time on fundraising, planning the convention and the vice presidential search. Unpaid advisor Steve Schmidt, who has been traveling with the senator, moves into a more day to day control position.
What is interesting to me is that Steve Schmidt ran the successful rebranding of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenngger in his re-election campaign as well as the "war room" for President Bush and Vice President Cheney in 2004. He is a details man who is said to be a stern taskmaster and a guy who can control all the various aspects of a presidential campaign.
Many press accounts indicate Republican Party frustration with the McCain campaign for what they said was the squandering of the time after the Arizonan won the nomination that could have been put to use "identifying" himself with the American public at large. That would have been difficult at any rate because most media types were reporting in overdrive on the Clinton-Obama race. Nevertheless, many Republicans feel that the campaign has been literally adrift. The last straw could have been a speech on June 3 in which Senator McCain appeared before a stark green backdrop and gave a speech before what has been called a "sparse" and "uninterested" crowd. The speech was generally panned.
Compared to the speech given by Senator Obama (it was the night he clinched the nomination and was at the Excel Center in Minnesota) who was speaking before a roaring crowd in a packed house, the McCain effort was found wanting. Again, the man and the moment reverted to Obama and while his speech ran long that night, all networks covered it almost in its entirety while ignoring, for the most part, Senator McCain.
At any rate, such things as appearances matter and Republicans hope Steve Schmidt can fine-tune the operation.
Given the challenges facing Senator McCain and the Republicans in this election, he needs to run a near-flawless campaign.
Polls still show it's close so the good news for Senator McCain is that Senator Obama does not have a big lead at this point. But in this day and age of visual, visual, visual, the McCain campaign has to show it can compete with that of Obama's on a variety of levels. Given the way the Obama campaign has performed, that won't be easy.
Something else to keep in mind is that Mr. Schmidt's sucess with Gov. Schwarzenngger involved a candidate who came into office as a conservative firebrand and morphed into a moderate Republican who embraced global warming and other social policies. This may be what he needed to do in liberal California, but it could also serve as a hint that the McCain camp thinks it needs to appeal more to independents and moderates who may be uncomfortable with the increasingly difficult to understand and ever-evolving positions of Senator Obama.
The McCain camp has its work cut out for it, but this election is far from over, at least in current polling.
The campaign manager, Rick Davis, will now be spending much of his time on fundraising, planning the convention and the vice presidential search. Unpaid advisor Steve Schmidt, who has been traveling with the senator, moves into a more day to day control position.
What is interesting to me is that Steve Schmidt ran the successful rebranding of California Governor Arnold Schwarzenngger in his re-election campaign as well as the "war room" for President Bush and Vice President Cheney in 2004. He is a details man who is said to be a stern taskmaster and a guy who can control all the various aspects of a presidential campaign.
Many press accounts indicate Republican Party frustration with the McCain campaign for what they said was the squandering of the time after the Arizonan won the nomination that could have been put to use "identifying" himself with the American public at large. That would have been difficult at any rate because most media types were reporting in overdrive on the Clinton-Obama race. Nevertheless, many Republicans feel that the campaign has been literally adrift. The last straw could have been a speech on June 3 in which Senator McCain appeared before a stark green backdrop and gave a speech before what has been called a "sparse" and "uninterested" crowd. The speech was generally panned.
Compared to the speech given by Senator Obama (it was the night he clinched the nomination and was at the Excel Center in Minnesota) who was speaking before a roaring crowd in a packed house, the McCain effort was found wanting. Again, the man and the moment reverted to Obama and while his speech ran long that night, all networks covered it almost in its entirety while ignoring, for the most part, Senator McCain.
At any rate, such things as appearances matter and Republicans hope Steve Schmidt can fine-tune the operation.
Given the challenges facing Senator McCain and the Republicans in this election, he needs to run a near-flawless campaign.
Polls still show it's close so the good news for Senator McCain is that Senator Obama does not have a big lead at this point. But in this day and age of visual, visual, visual, the McCain campaign has to show it can compete with that of Obama's on a variety of levels. Given the way the Obama campaign has performed, that won't be easy.
Something else to keep in mind is that Mr. Schmidt's sucess with Gov. Schwarzenngger involved a candidate who came into office as a conservative firebrand and morphed into a moderate Republican who embraced global warming and other social policies. This may be what he needed to do in liberal California, but it could also serve as a hint that the McCain camp thinks it needs to appeal more to independents and moderates who may be uncomfortable with the increasingly difficult to understand and ever-evolving positions of Senator Obama.
The McCain camp has its work cut out for it, but this election is far from over, at least in current polling.
July 1, 2008
Back on the Trail
Hey there...
Now that my one-week vacation is over, I can return to the world of politics. Let me tell you, since I escaped the Beltway for a week, most Americans do not spend every waking hour worrying or wondering about who will succeed whom in what office. At least now. Maybe later, but not now.
Politics outside of Washington is like a radio playing in the background. People may watch a bit of a newscast here or there but then move onto other things--like what is for dinner, what the kids are doing, the weather, and griping. Politics is not a dominant fixture in their lives.
They know who is running for office, they know the issues, but there's plenty of time before they need to get serious, so why do it now?
While I was away, I saw that Senator Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama appeared on the same stage at the same time; Senator Clinton's husband spoke to Barack Obama in a long anticipated "chat," the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Americans have the right to own guns in their own homes for self-defense, and the candidates continued sniping back and forth over this and that.
Senator Obama had to give a speech saying that he was an American patriot (countering claims that he wasn't) and Senator John McCain was being attacked on his military record (seems like a dumb move to me).
We are going to see a lot of this back and forth trying to win the news cycle for the next several months so get used to it. That and lots of polls released almost daily by dozens of organizations, some of whom should not be in the polling business. Don't worry, I'll sort them out for you.
Basically, Senator Obama can be safely described as "ahead" although not by very much. Given President Bush's low approval ratings and the large advantage Democrats enjoy in generic polling, it could be said that Senator McCain should be grateful it's this close. It can also be said that given all the Republican Party's woes, it's a good sign for Senator McCain that he is only slightly behind (in most polls, not in all).
There was an interesting article posted about a focus group in the Washington Post recently. Focus groups are gatherings of 5-10 people chosen demographically and are asked questions and followups. Unlike a poll, a good focus group leader can drill down into peoples' emotions and feelings about a candidate or party and glean things that could make a diference in a campaign.
This one particular group showed that a consensus leaned towards Senator Obama but that there were still many unknowns about him because he has so recently become a national figure. There's interest but no finality and if Senator Obama can't close the sale, Senator McCain will be there to fill the void. So, the election is still pretty fluid, as far as I am concerned, although I would say Senator Obama is still the guy to beat.
Lately, Senator Obama's statements on such issues as gay marriage (he does not favor gay marriage but does favor gay "unions" and wants the issue left to the states but does not favor a referendum in the state of California to prohibit gay marriage) are beginning to leave a muddled taste in some polling. What does this guy really think? Is he the true post-political figure who can bring Americans together, or is he trying to slide an ambitious political agenda through a series of mushy bromides?
Senator McCain was viewed by this focus group as too close to President Bush and the Democratic argument that electing Senator McCain would fulfill a third term for President Bush is falling on receptive ears. People in this group felt a change was necessary but were not quite agreed on what that "change" was or should be.
Voters will have to decide but they will have time to do it, and at their own pace. Even if it's not the pace of Beltway insiders who think of politics all the time. Tonight, I actually found myself thinking: what's for dinner? :-)
Now that my one-week vacation is over, I can return to the world of politics. Let me tell you, since I escaped the Beltway for a week, most Americans do not spend every waking hour worrying or wondering about who will succeed whom in what office. At least now. Maybe later, but not now.
Politics outside of Washington is like a radio playing in the background. People may watch a bit of a newscast here or there but then move onto other things--like what is for dinner, what the kids are doing, the weather, and griping. Politics is not a dominant fixture in their lives.
They know who is running for office, they know the issues, but there's plenty of time before they need to get serious, so why do it now?
While I was away, I saw that Senator Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama appeared on the same stage at the same time; Senator Clinton's husband spoke to Barack Obama in a long anticipated "chat," the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Americans have the right to own guns in their own homes for self-defense, and the candidates continued sniping back and forth over this and that.
Senator Obama had to give a speech saying that he was an American patriot (countering claims that he wasn't) and Senator John McCain was being attacked on his military record (seems like a dumb move to me).
We are going to see a lot of this back and forth trying to win the news cycle for the next several months so get used to it. That and lots of polls released almost daily by dozens of organizations, some of whom should not be in the polling business. Don't worry, I'll sort them out for you.
Basically, Senator Obama can be safely described as "ahead" although not by very much. Given President Bush's low approval ratings and the large advantage Democrats enjoy in generic polling, it could be said that Senator McCain should be grateful it's this close. It can also be said that given all the Republican Party's woes, it's a good sign for Senator McCain that he is only slightly behind (in most polls, not in all).
There was an interesting article posted about a focus group in the Washington Post recently. Focus groups are gatherings of 5-10 people chosen demographically and are asked questions and followups. Unlike a poll, a good focus group leader can drill down into peoples' emotions and feelings about a candidate or party and glean things that could make a diference in a campaign.
This one particular group showed that a consensus leaned towards Senator Obama but that there were still many unknowns about him because he has so recently become a national figure. There's interest but no finality and if Senator Obama can't close the sale, Senator McCain will be there to fill the void. So, the election is still pretty fluid, as far as I am concerned, although I would say Senator Obama is still the guy to beat.
Lately, Senator Obama's statements on such issues as gay marriage (he does not favor gay marriage but does favor gay "unions" and wants the issue left to the states but does not favor a referendum in the state of California to prohibit gay marriage) are beginning to leave a muddled taste in some polling. What does this guy really think? Is he the true post-political figure who can bring Americans together, or is he trying to slide an ambitious political agenda through a series of mushy bromides?
Senator McCain was viewed by this focus group as too close to President Bush and the Democratic argument that electing Senator McCain would fulfill a third term for President Bush is falling on receptive ears. People in this group felt a change was necessary but were not quite agreed on what that "change" was or should be.
Voters will have to decide but they will have time to do it, and at their own pace. Even if it's not the pace of Beltway insiders who think of politics all the time. Tonight, I actually found myself thinking: what's for dinner? :-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
