Tag: Elections

Topic Header

Anger Issues Could Become Campaign Issues for Both GOP Frontrunners

Jon Ponder

Mayor Giuliani was so “mean and thin-skinned” he made criticizing him a criminal offense. A GOP pol has called McCain a “vicious person.”

Campaigning for president is above all else an exhausting experience. The 2008 campaign will be the longest on record — it is underway now, and will ramp up in intensity over the next 21 months.

When people get tired, they get cranky, and crankiness can make them mean. For the two leading Republicans — former New York City mayor Rudolph Giuliani and Sen. John McCain — exhaustion could prove to be perilous. Both men, even fully rested, are meaner than most.

Competency will be a threshold qualification in 2008, for obvious reasons. To give Giuliani and McCain their due — unlike George W. Bush in 2000 — both men have long and successful, though not unblemished, careers in public service.

But our Bush-fatigued nation will also be looking for a leader who has a calm, even-tempered demeanor and who can roll with the punches — someone who is emotionally mature. The challenge facing these two tantrum-prone hotheads is that in the heat of the campaign even a small outburst of temper can quash a candidacy, sending it from top of the heap to limping toward last place within the course of a news cycle or two.

“It goes to temperament,” the pundits will say, which means, “We can’t have a hothead with his finger on the nuclear trigger.”

Based on their past performances, it is more than likely that “temperament” will become a deciding issue for both Giuliani and McCain.

[…]

Poll: Some Underdogs Could Run With the Big Dawgs

Buck Banks

Long shots: The MSM has predictably focused on the front runners in the 2008 presidential race: Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani. But according to the National Journal’s poll of D.C. insiders, several lower-tier candidates could jump the pack, while some are undoubtably road-kill, even this early in the race.

Nearly half of the 81 GOP insiders said former House Speaker Newt Gingrich could make a huge comeback.

Democrats largely agreed that New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson ought not be underestimated. A 46-percent plurality of the Democratic insiders said the former energy secretary and U.N. ambassador’s foreign and domestic policy experience could eventually propel him to the front of the pack.

Other less mainstream candidates were also seen as having a shot. A quarter saw hope for former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, and 23 percent said Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd could possibly pull it off. One insider said about Vilsack, “I know it’s not the ‘exciting’ pick right now, [but] he’s a former governor, a Washington outsider, and he’s serious about serious things.” As for Dodd, “he can raise money, has a network across the country,” and “is liked by just about everyone in the party.”

Insiders largely deemed Biden’s candidacy and a potential Wesley Clark bid as DOA, and not one of the 81 Democrats surveyed picked Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich or former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel.

Nearly half of the 81 GOP insiders said former House Speaker Newt Gingrich could make a huge comeback. Describing GOP primary voters as “somewhat desperate,” one insider predicted, “Newt’s star will shine brighter and brighter.”

Rounding out GOP insiders’ top three dark-horse picks were staunch conservatives Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas (20 percent) and Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas (12 percent). Front-runners Giuliani and Arizona Sen. John McCain are best known for being moderate Republicans, although McCain has been trying to shore up his social-conservative credibility for some time and Romney is dogged by his Mormon faith and his past statements on abortion.

An insider who tapped the Republican from a place called Hope said Huckabee was “the buzz in New Hampshire,” adding, “The top tier all appear to have ‘junk in the trunk'” — a term usually applied to women’s derrieres. Neither Reps. Duncan Hunter of California nor Tom Tancredo of Colorado received a single vote, and 5 percent said none of the lower-tier hopefuls would be taken seriously by 2008.

Just as Many Repugs Running as Dems

Trish

There are so many Democratic candidates for president in 2008 because Democrats are flighty and disorganized and usually out of left field. In fact, trying to get them to move together is like herding cats.

At least, that’s the sentiment that underscores the punch lines of the recent jokes on late night T.V. on the subject.

But according to my count, there are at least as many contenders on the Republican side. Why aren’t we yukking it up over how many and varied they are?

Democrats Declared or Expected to Run for President in 2008:

1. Sen. Joe Biden
2. Sen. Hillary Clinton
3. Former Sen. John Edwards
4. Sen. Barack Obama
5. Gov. Tom Vilsack
6. Sen. Chris Dodd
7. Rep. Dennis Kucinich
8. Gov. Bill Richardson

Republicans Declared or Expected to Run for President in 2008:

1. Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani
2. Gov. Mike Huckabee
3. Rep. Duncan Hunter
4. Sen. John McCain
5. Gov. George Pataki
6. Gov. Mitt Romney
7. Rep. Tom Tancredo
8. Sen. Chuck Hagel
9. Rep. Mike Pence

Then there are the nightmare wild card candidates: Jeb Bush, Newt Gingrich, Condo Rice. And once that pesky constitution gets amended (or — more likely by the time Bush leaves office — just plain trashed), Arnold Schwarzenegger. The only comparable wishful thinking maybe on the Democratic side is Al Gore.

So enough with the jokes about the sea of Democratic candidates. From where I sit, there are about a dozen too many Republicans on the way.

By Stifling War Debate, GOP Senators Risk Handing Dems a Super Majority in ’08

Jon Ponder

In shutting down debate yesterday on Pres. Bush’s escalation of the Iraq war, Senate Republicans embarked on what could be the riskiest legislative gambit since House Speaker Newt Gingrich shut the government down during a budget dispute with Pres. Clinton.

If Dems were to hold all their seats in 2008 (as they did in 2006) and pick up just 10 of 13 GOP seats that are in play, they would have a 60-seat “super majority.”

The GOP filibuster puts GOP senators squarely on the opposite side of public sentiment. In a Rasmussen poll released last Friday, 55 percent of Americans said they favor a firm timetable for withdrawing troops that gets our troops out within one year — while only one-third (33 percent) said they believe the escalation will succeed.

All but two Republican senators voted with their leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, to close the debate on a non-binding resolution — a rebuke of the president so mild that critics view it as little more than a slap on the wrist. Sen. Joe Lieberman, the independent from Connecticut, voted with the Republicans.

The two GOP senators who voted with the Democrats — Susan Collins of Maine and Norm Coleman of Minnesota — are both up for reelection in 2008.

And they are not alone. In fact, what makes the GOP gambit so risky is that nearly half the members the GOP Senate conference — 21 out of 48 — are up for reelection next year, whereas only 12 of the 48 Democratic seats are in play. (Neither seat held by independents — Lieberman and Bernie Sanders of Vermont — are up.)

If their votes now to stifle debate on this unpopular war were to become an issue in campaigns next year, the GOP losses could hand a 60-seat majority to the Dems, giving them the magic number required to shut off filibusters on bills and nominations.

As things stand now, one GOP senator, Wayne Allard of Colorado, has announced his retirement, and five GOP seats are considered vulnerable — Collins, Coleman, John Sununu of New Hampshire, Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina and Gordon Smith of Oregon — with seven seats called “Republican favored.” If the Dems were to hold all their seats (as they did in 2006) and pick up just 10 of the 13 seats that are in play, they would have a 60-seat “super majority.”

In 1996, voters’ dim view of Gingrich’s government shut-down — especially after he admitted that he was motivated by a fit of pique after feeling slighted by Pres. Clinton on Air Force One — made it a winning campaign issue for the Clinton-Gore campaign.

Similarly, voters in 2008 who are angry over the Senate Republicans’ seemingly bizarre support for an unpopular war and an even more unpopular president may be surprised to learn that Minority Leader McConnell has close, even intimate, ties to the Bush administration. His wife, Elaine Chao, is a Bush Cabinet member; having served as secretary of labor since 2000.

Florida Kills Paperless Voting

Jon Ponder

Interesting timing. One month after Jeb Bush leaves office as Florida governor, the state that gave his brother the presidency because of wiggy voting systems announces it is mandating a paper trail for all votes:

Fifteen of Florida’s 67 counties use paperless touch-screen voting machines. The remaining counties use optical scan machines where a voter marks a paper ballot with a pencil and it is electronically scanned.

Gov. Charlie Crist said Thursday he wants to spend about $32 million to convert all voting machines in Florida to produce paper trails.

”What we’re talking about here is Democracy and it is precious,” Crist told a crowd of several hundred people at a gathering of the nonpartisan Voters Coalition of Palm Beach County.

”You should, when you go vote, be able to have a record of it,” Crist said, calling it ”common sense.”

The proposal will be part of Crist’s budget he presents to the Legislature on Friday.

Fifteen of Florida’s 67 counties use paperless touch-screen voting machines. The remaining counties use optical scan machines where a voter marks a paper ballot with a pencil and it is electronically scanned.

Critics of the paperless machines say voters are disenfranchised because there is no record for a manual recount should questions arise about an election.

”We love our country, we love our Democracy, we cherish our freedom, but the bedrock of that freedom is the right to vote and the right to have our votes count,” said U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler, D-Boca Raton, who joined Crist for the announcement.

Crist said he hoped to have paper trails for all voting machines by the 2008 election.

Lots of speculation now that Florida’s move will lead to other states making the same decision.

’08 Election’s Over — McCain Has as Good as Won

Buck Banks

Mojito mojo: A year before the first primary, and South Florida’s legislative Cuban triumvirate has thrown it’s endorsement like a spoonful of vaca frita behind Arizona Sen. John McCain. State reps. and hermanos Lincoln “Not Abraham” Diaz-Balart and Mario “Not Super” Diaz-Balart joined U.S. Rep. Ileana “Kill Castro Now” Ros-Lehtinen in backing the increasingly testy Republican candidate.

Talk about placing yer bets early. I just hope some of my least favorite local representatives aren’t too disappointed when McCain flames out.

Barak to Fox: Don’t Mess with Obama

Buck Banks

Cold shoulder: Remember last week when Fox News “reported” a story from the Moonie fishwrapper Washington Times about how Illinois Sen. Barak Obama was brainwashed in an Indonesian Muslim madrassah when he was 7? And remember how all the talking tools on wingnut TV and radio shows picked up the unattributed, unresearched and, as it turned out, untrue story?

Well, Obama has retaliated by cutting Fox reporters off. No comments, no interviews, no thanks, you’re not welcome on my really kool campaign for president.

If a candidate is serious about running for president, he or she is going to need Fox to reach out to voters in red and purple states.

The Fox reporters, typically, are whining:

“I’m still in the freezer,” one Fox journalist said, noting that the people at Fox “suffering the most did nothing wrong.”

My favorite, though, is the unnamed “source” who made the following addle-pated statement:

One source familiar with the dynamic between Fox and Obama, who asked not to be named, said Obama and his staff are in for a rude awakening if they think they can write off Fox News. If a candidate is serious about running for president, he or she is going to need a network like Fox to reach out to all those voters in the red and purple states, the source said.

One, red-staters who watch Fox News are not going to vote for a guy who’s even just half black. Second, Obama is going to get tons of coverage because — he’s Obama! Even voters who only watch Fox News and listen to Rush Limbaugh will still hear about him and his message.

So don’t let Fox off the hook too soon, Barak. Enjoy watching them twist in the breeze for a while.

Will the 2008 Prez Election See More ‘Purple States?’

Buck Banks

Electoral speculation: Charlie Cook of the National Journal offers up a trenchant analysis of some of the demographic and population trends that could influence the apparent GOP lock-down on the Electoral College in the next election. Of course, we know that the Electoral College isn’t essential to winning the presidency — all you really need is a crooked state attorney general, a Bubba for a governor and a compliant judiciary.

Top strategists in both parties have identified 11 states as moving away from whichever party long dominated them.

Only three states switched their allegiance between the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections. When George W. Bush first ran for the White House, he won New Hampshire but lost New Mexico and Iowa. Four years later, he lost New Hampshire but won New Mexico and Iowa.

Even though the margins in those states, plus a dozen others, were razor-thin, the fact that 48 states ended up in the same party’s column in back-to-back presidential elections suggests a certain amount of stability in Electoral College voting patterns. But, if they’re stable, will they remain so in a country whose recent presidential balloting has been so evenly divided?

Three weeks before Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980, Horace Busby, a longtime adviser to President Johnson who later became a first-rate political analyst and the author of a terrific political newsletter, The Busby Papers, declared that there was a “Republican lock on the Electoral College.” Indeed, the GOP won five of the six presidential elections from 1968 to 1988, losing only in 1976 with the election of Jimmy Carter as a direct result of the Watergate scandals and the pardon of President Nixon.

Busby’s theory dovetailed nicely with that of another enormously talented political-operative-turned-analyst, Kevin Phillips, who had been a key strategist in Nixon’s successful 1968 presidential campaign.

Phillips noted that not only population had shifted from Democratic strongholds in the Frost Belt of the Northeast and Midwest to the more Republican Sun Belt of the South and Southwest but also political power had shifted toward the Sun Belt in both Congress and in the Electoral College. Today, this is conventional thinking; then, it was new grist for the mill.
[…]

McCain Has Mini Meltdown at Dinner with Journalists

Jon Ponder

Does Sen. John McCain have the temperament and judgment to be president? His behavior at a dinner with journalists last week indicates he may be too emotionally volatile to make it through the campaign without embarassing himself.

Arianna Huffington was at the dinner, and wrote about it (“John McCain Bites My Head Off”) here:

McCain’s “volcanic” temper is legendary and there were concerns in GOP circles during the 2000 campaign that his tantrums could become an issue.

Toward the end of the conversation, I raised my hand and asked McCain:

“Given that you’ve said that you are ‘scared to death that it’s going to be a very hot spring in Afghanistan,’ and given that you have also said, repeatedly, that only a substantial increase in troops in Iraq would make a real difference, why not send the 21,000 troops headed to Iraq, in what is clearly an act of desperation, to Afghanistan instead?”

During his response, McCain equated those opposing his position with “the far left.”

“Do you consider Sam Brownback part of the far left?” I jumped in.

The Senator flared and told me that if I’d only let him finish his answer instead of interrupting, we could have “a civil discussion.”

He then continued on about why he supports the escalation … Along the way, he denied that he had used the phrase “the far left.”

Wow, I thought, the Straight Talk Express has run so far off the rails McCain is now denying things he’d said in front of close to two-dozen note-taking journalists not half-a-minute before.

I pressed on: “You keep presenting the Iraq debate in terms of left vs right and Democrat vs Republican, when there are clearly major rifts in your own party over the direction we should take. And you yourself have changed your mind about the number of troops we need.”

With a growing edge in his voice, McCain explained that he had sat down with General Patraeus. “He looked me in the eye,” said McCain, “and told me ‘I can do it with 21,000. And if I can’t, I’ll ask for more.'” McCain went on to say he believes that in a country of 300 million we should be able to have a large enough volunteer army to do whatever we need to do.

“That’s all very good in theory,” I replied, “but, in practice, where are these additional troops going to come from? And you keep saying that the American people are ‘frustrated’ about Iraq, which totally minimizes the outrage there is at continuing to be mislead by this administration.”

He had clearly had it with me and told me that since what I had just said was a statement and not a question, he didn’t have to respond.

McCain’s bad temper is legendary and there have been longstanding concerns about it in GOP circles. For example, in 1999, during McCain’s first presidential bid, the Washington Post reported that Arizona GOP officials who had felt the wrath of McCain’s “volcanic” temper were fearful his tantrums could become a factor in the 2000 race. After McCain won the New Hampshire primary, operatives for then.Gov. George W. Bush started a whispering campaign in South Carolina against McCain that characterized him as “unstable.”

Last Sunday, on “Meet the Press,” Sen. McCain seemed vey depressed. It appears something’s going on behind the scenes with the GOP’s putative frontrunner.

UPDATE: Republican tool Bob Novak has a column up criticizing McCain’s performance on MTP:

Democratic strategists … were surprised and delighted by his dour appearance on NBC’s “Meet the Press” last Sunday. One Democratic leader referred to McCain’s performance … as “comatose.” A Republican adviser to McCain said it was one of the worst performances ever on “Meet the Press.”

Poll: Prez Hopefuls’ War Stance Evaluated

Buck Banks

McCain’s brain: The Pensito Review brain trust was standing around our virtual water cooler yesterday, scratching our heads over Sen. John McCain’s siding with George Bush on the surge deal in Iraq. Not to mention some of McCain’s recent appointments to his exploratory committee and his tactics on dealing with Mitt Romney’s campaign. Thank goodness every Friday the National Journal polls D.C. insiders on the hot topics of the day and then shares what movers and shakers in both parties have to say about a topics — or we’d still be scratching our heads.

On John McCain: ‘It’s hard to run as a maverick when you are supporting the status quo.’

This week’s National Journal poll of political insiders asked participants whether they thought McCain’s support of the surge would be advantageous to his presidential bid. Of the 77 Democrats tested, 82 percent said no — that it would hinder his chances.

“Once the Republican candidate that Democrats were fearful of, [he] has changed dramatically,” one Democratic insider said. Another pontificated, “It will help him in the primary, but just kill him in the general.”

GOP insiders were fairly split, 48 percent to 43 percent, in favor of McCain’s stance helping his chances. The respondents who said McCain’s support would hurt him offered sentiments similar to the Democrats’, including one who said: “It’s hard to run as a maverick when you are supporting the status quo.”

Insiders were also posed a question on a top-tier Democrat who hopes to return to the White House in 2008. Asked whether it would be a good move for New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton to denounce her 2002 vote authorizing the use of force in Iraq, seven in 10 Republicans said no. Like the Republicans were on McCain, Democrats were split, 56 percent to 44 percent, with the majority saying that Clinton should come forth and say her vote was a mistake.

A Democrat who might like her to do so explained, “One moment of candor, authenticity, real emotion would be a plus.” Another called the vote “the dividing line between her and the Democratic nomination.” On the other end of the calculation, one said, “She’s in a box on this one, but changing now might do more damage as it would appear just too politically expedient.”

Republicans on the “no” side agreed, saying that she’d be viewed as a flip-flopper if she changed her position, and that former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama have already earned their chits in the field as anti-war Democrats. But as one Republican voting “yes” put it, “She looks incapable of admitting mistakes if this continues.”

What do you think? Leave a comment.