Zakaria Interviews Rice

Fareed Zakaria is one of the most thoughtful observers of the American geopolitical landscape and today he interviewed US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice. Some have suggested Rice is a very unlikely candidate for McCain's VP spot because she clearly pins him to the Bush Administration's foreign policy, but I think she is probably on the very short list right now in part because she would represent the smooth policy transition advocated by McCain, a position that has become increasingly popular as Iraq stabilizes. However the main reason to pick Rice would be to sway the Clinton supporters and soft Obama supporters for whom Rice might represent a viable alternative to Obama's likely ticket, which almost *cannot* include a woman other than Hillary Clinton and is *unlikely* according to most to include Clinton.

CNN GPS Website:
http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/fareed.zakaria.gps/

More about Zararia's GPS

Swiftboating backlash?

Although historically negative advertising has been very effective in many elections, I think the upcoming Obama and McCain campaigns have the potential to change the way elections are run. Not so much because they are virtuous - though I think both candidates are good guys - but because voters may actually have become sophisticated enough to reward a higher road.

This may be too optimistic but clearly Obama's campaign against Clinton appeared to benefit from taking a higher road. When Clinton attacked in debates and in advertising, Obama usually paried rather than fought back. I think many Americans found this very appealing. Clinton supporters feel that she was treated unfairly by press and by the Obama campaign but I think on balance both the Democratic and Republican primaries were dignified and without nearly the amount of negative campaigning there could have been given the years of political and personal baggage from most of the candidates involved in the races.

In terms of Obama vs McCain I think Obama has a huge edge in the sense he can easily lable McCain a Washington insider as he talks about Obama vs McCain's "change" themes. On the other hand McCain cannot label the young and politically inexperienced Obama much except as being young and inexperienced - arguably very desirable traits to many Americans in the current election as long as the candidate is smart and appealing as Obama certainly appears to be to most.

Dem leaders: It's over. Hillary: Its not over until I get to sing

The Democratic Primary has dragged on for over a year, tiring even the most fervent political junkies. Several strategic gaffs by party leaders and state foolishness have led to contention and disenfranchisement of two major states, but Obama maintains a narrow lead over Hillary Clinton even if you allocate Florida and Michigan delegates very disporportionately to Clinton.

With party leaders lining up (indirectly) with Obama in this fashion it's probably only a matter of a few weeks before we'll see a large enough block of superdelegates move to Obama to put him over the top. This ability to manipulate the results "after the voting" is partly why the Democrats have superdelegates in the first place, though I have seen no good explanation for what is obviously a system that horribly mangles the "one person one vote" philosophy that is supposed to lie at the heart of democracy. The electoral college system is bad enough, yet at least it is an attempt to balance state's rights with national rule rather than disenfranchise voters. The Democrats have managed to add in a power elite component to boot - superdelegate votes have thousands of times the impact of a normal party member vote.

Predictions? Very tough in this case. The Clintons are *very pissed off* and it is not clear they will put what leaders think are the party's best interests ahead of their own concerns. Complicating matters is that it's not clear party leaders have a good sense of what is in the best interests of the party. Contention keeps you in the news and my view is still that the Clinton Obama battles are not going to hurt Obama's chances in the regular election. As a candidate of "change" it is to his advantage to appear early and often on TV screens across America while McCain sits almost unnoticed in the corner.

Bill Clinton in Oregon

Bill Clinton was here in Oregon today wrapping up a final Oregon Hillary hyping tour before the Oregon primary vote gets counted on Tuesday. Here in Oregon we vote by mail, so many people have already sent in their ballots or won't vote at all.

Still, many will wait until Tuesday to vote and although the outcome here is likely to favor Obama and very unlikely to affect the fact that the superdelegates are going to make this decision, it's fun to see Oregon get more national attention than in the past.

Meanwhile John McCain was on Saturday Night Live and appeared to do well. It will be fascinating to watch how McCain works a strategy to keep his conservative credentials but also appear very hip and cool to the younger voters who are currently overwhelmingly in the Obama camp. Will McCain seek those young votes or focus more on stripping away the Clinton Conservatives such as older women and some southern men who indicated they'd vote for Hillary over Obama but for McCain over Obama.

McCain is 71, Obama is 46. Will this be an issue? Count the years on it.

Indiana Primary Looms. Obama and Clinton Stumping as Usual

One simply has to marvel at the *stamina* of American politicians, who spend pretty much 16 hours per day on the campaign trail for more than a year. While John McCain can take something of a break from the breakneck schedules of his opponents and focus on the November election, Clinton and Obama remain locked in a very close race that will probably be determined by superdelegates during the Denver Democratic Convention coming up in a few months.

Although Obama had the big "mo" until recently, he is not plagued with the Reverend Wright issue which has given Clinton a very needed boost in the polls both in primaries and in the national polls that pit Clinton or Obama vs McCain in the general election.

Obama as Liberation Theological Manchurian Candidate = Ridiculous

As Americans we like to see things in Black and White (no pun intended here), where gray is the color of compromise and the color of politics. It's unfortunate to see the contest for the Presidency swirl around the ranting of a retired pastor who clearly does not speak for Obama.

Although Reverend Wright's naive and misguided liberation theology themes are a legitimate issue, they should not be considered a major issue. Why? Because Obama's record is clear on many topics already, and he's not getting elected to be the national pastor. It's very reasonable to take Obama to task regarding his long term relationship with a person who holds the US Government in such great contempt, but it's not reasonable to reject Obama's answers out of hand.

The story is a perfect storm of fodder for right wingers like Sean Hannity, who is always on a crusade to cut down moderates and left-wing politicians like Obama. More than anybody Hannity has massaged this minor issue into a major one. One can only wonder if Hannity would even *pay attention* if the issue were racist rantings of white pastors. I don't think Hannity is a racist, but I believe he's hyping this issue beyond reasonable measure to further the Republican political agenda.

It's working.

McCain's High Road

John McCain and Barack Obama have so far shown remarkable restraint in terms of "going negative" in their campaigns. If Obama is the Democratic nominee I expect these personal crusades against negativity to continue, but also almost guarantee that the soft money campaigns will be doing a lot of dirty work. Swiftboating will be the mainstay of both campaigns as the candidates will be able to honestly say they have nothing to do with the negativity while their distant supporters bash away.

But I don't understand all the whining about negative campaigning . Like positive campaigns, people refuse to pay attention to issues and pundits and media refuse to address the issues. Ergo, it's a wild west out there and will always be that way in our quirky American pseudo-Democracy, the best Democracy money can buy!

Pennsylvania Primary Approaches

From here in China our American system sure seems distant, but unless I am misreading things people here are much more intrigued with Obama than other candidates. Of course that could also be said of the USA, where Obama´s appeal is as much about his speaking style and personal history as policies or other factors.

Realclearpolitics.com summary of polls still suggests a Clinton win in Pennsylvania, making the Democratic Primary about as close as it can get moving into the Convention.

The Politics of Race

America cannot seem to escape an obession with issues surrounding race. Decades ago racial discrimination created huge tensions, and launched the civil rights movement which in turn brought to prominence many civil rights leaders who went on to create significant social, legal, and moral progress in the quest for racial equality.

Now, racial issues are usually talked about in more subtle ways, with many crying foul or, worse, suggesting their opponent is using "code" language to bring a racial attack without actually talking about race.

The mainstream media's current obsession is with two race related stories - Geraldine Ferraro's comments about Barack Obama and Obama's preacher's controversial sermons. Neither story adds much if anything to our understanding of the candidates, and it is unfortunate that we the people find this type of debate more relevant than real issues such as global development, war, health care, and the economy.

Geraldine Ferraro. Feminist pioneer or ranting racist?

The new political sensibilites are really straining my credulity.

Reasonably, Barack Obama invokes MLK and other themes that very appropriately draw on his African American heritage on pretty much a daily basis. Obama appropriately and accurately expresses his pride in his heritage and the fact the Democrats deserve a lot of social credit for having a woman and an African American as the top nominees of the party.

Enter Geraldine Ferraro, a feminist pioneer and civil rights *activist*, who suggests the transparently obvious notion that race is a factor in Obama's success.

Then..... all hell breaks loose and Ferraro is branded a racist.

There is a a rational argument that suggests that although Obama is certainly *gaining* some votes because of race he is also *losing* some because of his race. Thus the balance in voting is hard to calculate and if race is invoked it is some sort of code language that is trying to pull him down.

Yikes - but that argument is not being made and is pretty questionable mathematically.

Rather I'm hearing otherwise intelligent people suggesting that "race has nothing to do with this" even as they themselves express approval about the racial diversity of the campaign. Folks you simply cannot have it both ways. Race is either a factor in this or it is not a factor. If you think it's a minor factor say that, but to suggest that race is of zero consequence in this campaign is, in a word, nonsense.

So, how is race and gender influencing the Obama Clinton contest? This would require a close look at exit polling, and hopefully we'll see more of this rather than the nonsensical punditry going on all over the networks as this mini-scandal dominates the coverage of the election.

Pennsylvania a last stop? No way.

As much as I enjoy all the commentary on CNN, FOX, and especially MSNBC, I don't think the "experts" are in touch with America enough to have *any clue* about what is likely to transpire.

For example many seem to think a Clinton / Obama ticket is not likely. If Clinton wins I think is it about 90% likely she'll pick Obama as running mate. It would be idiotic not to do this. Karl Rove proved in past elections that playing powerfully to your base was a good tactic in general elections, and Obama would give Clinton the chance to play both to her base and also to act more conservative than otherwise, scooping up support from the middle ground.

It is not as clear to me that Obama would choose Clinton for VP because she in many ways contradicts his theme of change from the past. Obama would probably pick Wesley Clark or another moderate with a strong military presence and background in an effort to move his campaign to the right enough to appeal more to moderates who will be uncomfortable with Obama's very liberal politics.

Clinton Wins Texas

Exit polling is so close that they are not calling Texas for Clinton yet, but she's likely to win given the current totals which have Clinton up by about 2%. Exit polling is closer:

Exit polling shows this:

Male (43%) Clinton: 46% Obama: 52%

Female (57%) 53% Obama: 46%

Note even before the math that since there are more women voting than men and Clinton is winning with women more than Obama with men she's probably got it barring glaring exit poll errors.

The maths suggest the final tally is this:

Clinton: .43 x .46 + .57 x .53 = 49.9%
Obama: .43 x .52 + .57 x .46 = 48.58 %

OK, this is *so close* I can see why they are not calling it for Clinton. But President Picker is not so cautious, because we are a blog and have far lower journalistic standards than, say, Fox news. Wait .... let me rephrase that...

The last Hiatus?

As the final big primaries approach Democrats Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama remain locked in a tight race, though many think that if Obama wins in two or even one of the three remaining big states he will effectively "earn" the nomination by making it very hard for Clinton to continue to claim she has more broad based support than Obama and very unlikely for her to exceed his popular vote totals.

Although Pennsylvania still appears likely to go to Clinton, Ohio is getting closer and Texas now appears to favor Obama.

March 4 will be a big day for both candidates. Big wins for Obama likely will mean the race is over, but more close races will probably keep Clinton in through the convention when a lot can happen quickly. For example if the Florida and Michigan delegates are seated, and if a majority of superdelegates switch to Clinton she could gain the nomination even after losing most of the states in the popular vote. Given the Democrats concerns in 2000 it's hard to know how all this will shake out. Disenfranchising voters has been a key Democratic criticism of Republicans yet this is exactly the penalty they extracted from Michigan and Florida for holding primaries early. On the other side of the coin is the fact that Superdelegates have far more voting power than regular people, leading many to consider this elitist politics.

Lot is at stake in Texas Primary, March 4th.

The March 4 Texas primary was not expected to be all that significant in the early stages of the Democratic primary process, but it is now clear that Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are close to "must win" states for Hillary Clinton. Clinton still leads the polls in all three although her Texas-sized lead in Texas has evaporated, leaving Obama and Clinton within a few percentage points in the Texas primary.

If Obama wins Texas it weakens Clinton's case even further that she is the best choice for the Democrat who can win in the general election. With most polls showing Obama as the stronger candidate against John McCain and many Democratics shifting from undecided to Obama, the Clinton Campaign arguably must sweep the 3 big states in a few weeks or start to prepare to conced the race to Obama.

You call that negative?

The term "negative campaigning" should be reserved to mean the nasty, mean spirited, or misleading stuff that has become so common in American politics. Here, CNN calls a Hilary Clinton Wisonsin campaign commercial "negative" when all it does is goad Obama for refusing a debate, which he has done because stratically it is wise for him to do so and for Clinton, generally a better debater, to try to bring on more debates. This is not exactly the type of thing we saw back in the elections of the 1800s where candidates took outrageous shots at their opponents.

We can have a spirited, healthy interactions free from the media-induced nonsense that tends to color everything in the most confrontational light.

Obama Keeps on Rolling

Barack Obama won the Virginia Democratic Primary and all the other primaries today, making him undefeated since February 5's close Super Tuesday results. Although this was expected it's another boost to Obama's roaring campaign.

Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas are big primaries and although all are currently polling for Clinton, I think Obama's campaign machine in full gear will be formidable when he starts speaking more in those states. His "Rock Star" quality, combined with the ability to talk inspirationally but very vaguely about policies, arguably make Obama the front runner now. Totals are not in yet but I think he'll be pulling just ahead of clinton in delegates after today, even with superdelegates included.

It's all about the O...Obama

Barack Obama swept today's Democratic primaries winning in WA, LA, and Nebraska. Although this was expected it's another boost to Obama's campaign train, and the size of the victories was great enough that he's got powerful bragging rights tomorrow.

Although Clinton is still expected to take Pennsyvania and Ohio, huge states with large numbers of delegates, it's looking more and more like the election could hinge on the superdelegates.

Delegate Count before today's Feb 9 primaries: Clinton by a nose but only because of superdeletgates

RealClearPolitics.com is counting the Democrat delegates and boy are they close. Clinton holds a very slight lead *if you include the superdelegates*, Obama leads with popular vote delegates. I'm sure Howard Dean and other party leaders are dreading the possibility that superdelegates could make the difference in the winner, throwing the party

On Tim Russert David Brooks suggested that Clinton has the edge because the remaining states have lower education levels and he suggests that slightly favors Clinton, and also that Superdelegates may make the difference.

A paper obtained from the Obama Campaign by Russert had these totals *before* the superdelegates come into play:

Obama: 1806
Clinton: 1789

Wow, that's CLOSE!

Clinton to Win CA - Exit polls

Despite a powerful showing in other states by Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton appears poised to win the California Primary, tonight's big prize in the Democratic Primary Contest.

Exit polls make it clear she's got the race and with 15% of the vote in she's way up:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#CA

Democratic primary math

RealclearPolitics has great coverage of the campaign math. Although it's a simplification, the delegate counts for the top big states at 11pm EST assuming current % stay the same and proportionality is the same as the main voting percentages (VERY approximate here!)

Obama Clinton
CA
NY 88 137
IL 101 49
GA 63 34
NJ 46 56
MA 36 55
-----------------------
334 331

Wow, that's close!