Showing posts with label republicans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label republicans. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 06, 2012
Exit Polls - Romney Wins Ohio
With a victory soon to be announced in Ohio, Mitt Romney is ever closer to wrapping up the Republican nomination. Although Santorum appears to have a respectable showing tonight, and even Newt Gingritch and Ron Paul have shown some regional strengths, the Romney Juggernaut is very likely to prove too hard to overcome.
Monday, January 03, 2011
The new political landscape. Stay Tuned.
As the Republicans take control of congress and the Tea Party starts to weild real power, the American Political landscape will again change. Too many analysts seem confused by what is wrongly perceived as a shift in the way people view big government. Obama's election was not an endorsement of big government - rather it reflected the powerful desire on the part of the public for new people and new approaches. In some ways the electorate is "experimenting" with politicians - bringing in new ones until they find something they like. Dissatisfaction with GW Bush and the feeling that neither Hilary Clinton nor John McCain would bring new and inspired innovation and leadership largely account for Obama's win. Those factors were probably more important than his own policies.
In many ways the "seesaw" Democracy we have is inefficient, but it does serve to change the game. Unfortunately we don't see this in the congress and Senate. Founders such as Franklin and Jefferson generally advised in favor of term limits but these rules were only constitutionalized for the office of the Presidency.
What's in store? If events immediately preceding the elections are any indication, Obama may continue to find ways to cooperate and compromise to avoid the gridlock many are predicting. Was Obama to some extent handicapped by Democrats control of the congress which forced him to support fiscally questionable policy making? Now in power, will Tea Party folks continue to fight for the strident conservative spending principles of their campaign?
Stay ... Tuned ... America
Friday, July 24, 2009
The Circular Nature of Politics Favors Obama in 2012. Birth Certificate Nonsense.
It's hard not to like Barack Obama. All but his harshest and largely irrational critics find fault with a Presidential persona that quickly captivated not only a majority of Americans but a majority of *the world's population* We have not seen this level of enthusiasm for an American President since John Kennedy, and in Obama's case it's arguably more justified as Kennedy's hard line stances separated him more severely from the global "peasant class" than Obama.
The latest exhibit of the Obama charm is his perfect handling of the arrest of Professor Robert Gates of Harvard by the Cambridge Police. Gates and a friend forced entry into Gates' home due to a problem with a door, police were called, and although details are not entirely clear yet it appears Gates heaped verbal abuse on the arresting officer until the officer decided to arrest him for disorderly conduct. After initially calling the arrest "stupid" and helping to make the case national news, Obama took back this characterization, noted that both men probably overreacted to the situation, and invited them to the White House for a beer and handshake. This is both Presidential theater and politics and it's brilliant - with Obama effectively diffusing a simple but explosive situation with a simple act.
Enter the Republican Party and the anti Obama crowd, best represented by Rush Limbaugh and other right wing talk radio people and Fox news. Even as one can reasonably characterize Obama's budget busting stimulus as mistaken and dangerous these clowns are focusing on items of little interest to the general public and of almost no significance to an informed person.
First, the nonsense about Obama's birth certificate. The Right wing argument suggests that the "Mainstream Media" is burying the story *because it is real*. This of course is preposterous since 1) It's hardly buried - it's pretty much a regular lead story on right wing blogs and radio and perhaps soon even part of CNN's Lou Dobbs' increasingly nutty rants.
The story that Obama is not a citizen *if true* is a guaranteed Pultizer Prize for any legitimate reporter, so it takes a mind blinded by blathering conspiracy nonsense to think this is a cover up.
Of course it is curious that Obama has not allowed his team to produce the document, and I think it's very probably a lost / defaced / tampered certificate. Another possibility is that a perfectly normal certificate is sitting around and Obama is cleverly allowing the right to stick out it's head until the next election when he'll produce the document - effectively allowing the "enemy" to waste time and resources fighting for a lost cause.
Here's how I think this will play out over the next 3 years:
* Right wing gang will keep up the heat.
* Obama will eventually give in when the cost exceeds the cost of battling the next stage from the vast conspiracy crowd.
* The vault BC will be messed up or missing or defaced.
* The chant will shift again. What began as "Born in Kenya" and morphed to "Not born in USA" will become something like "Mother too young to be citizen" or "Obama can't be President with a defaced Document".
People should bother reading the constitution about this even though "Natural Born Citizen" is far too vague to be of help. Ironic that the Republicans are once again trying to use technicalities to take over. Perhaps after the Bush 2000 vote fiasco - where Gore won Florida but technicalities made that impossible to enforce - Republicans started to think presidential races should be determined on technicalities rather than by the consent of the governed.
But I'd caution them not to try to make that case to Washington, Adams, Jefferson, or Madison who would view the very differently. If there is ONE THING that is clear in the constition of the USA, "Consent of the Governed" matters, and the right wings attempts to thwart the will of the people should leave a bad taste in the mouth of even the staunchest Republican partisan.
Although almost every legitimate constitutional scholars will say the claims against Obama are preposterous, a handful of kooky lawyers plus the shrill and irrational voices of Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh will keep making the case, hoping it will win votes in 2012.
It won't.
Obama probably is vulnerable - and very legitimately so - in 2012 if the fight is about massive debt. Luckily for him it won't be. It'll be about "no birth certificate" for Obama and "No marriage certificate" for gays. These stupid talking points helped GW Bush win in the past, but there appears to be no Karl Rove waiting in the wings to help the next Republican challenger for the Presidency. The Republicans will knock themselves silly on culture war issues until they realize the country simply does not care that much about that stuff. They care about the economy, international challenges, health care, and massive debt.
My prediction: The Republicans have lost this before the campaign has even begun.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
The Four Buffoons of the Republican Apocalypse
It's hard to imagine the frustration many smart conservatives must be feeling as Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Sean Hannity, and Joe the Plumber rise to take the ideological helm of the Republican Party.
The prestigious Party of Lincoln has historically been a bastion of economic sophistication and the principles of the founders of our great American experiment. It has now dissembled into a motley band of knee-jerk economic and social dimwits spewing red baiting nonsense and preying on the new found extreme ideological gullibility of conventional Republicans.
Although I supported Obama for President, I've always shared many of the concerns of American conservatives about the economy, most importantly that massive government spending tends to go wrong and tends to lead to unintended, usually undesirable consequences.
More importantly I very much agree with a cornerstone idea of true conservatives (noting there are few real conservatives left in the USA). We're spending too much now and have been for decades. The founders vision has largely been undermined by both the Democratic and Republican bureaucracy. The founders feared this sort of bureaucratic class would emerge without more citizen involvement and volunteerism than we have.
Ironically the wildly successful American experiment, grounded in the ideas of personal liberty, free speech, and entrepreneurialism created so much wealth that an extremely powerful bureaucratic class developed both in government and especially in the military where we spend more than every other nation combined. Many who call themselves conservatives (but are reckless spenders and therefore no friend of the founders) suggest that big spending is called for in the military, but they haven't done any homework. The founders would not support the massive military and defense spending both parties now tolerate as part of our ongoing reckless fiscal policy.
So, how in the world did conservatism and the Republican party get co-opted by the likes of Limbaugh, Palin, Hannity, and Joe the Plumber? Do people seriously think this parade of fools represents the best America has to offer? These people represent much of the worst in our great nation - hate, opportunism, and hypocrisy to name a few items.
I think much of this lies in the popularity of the "culture wars" where hot button themes like abortion and religion are mixed with politics to incite hatred and divisiveness. Limbaugh and Hannity have made a mint off of of admirers playing on their fears and hate. They are brilliant entertainers and great snake oil salesman, but they are not good representatives of our great country.
It is painful to watch smart conservatives like David Brooks and George Will get relatively little mainstream respect while buffoons like Limbaugh soak up attention, but Republicans are now reaping what they sowed in the last election.
The prestigious Party of Lincoln has historically been a bastion of economic sophistication and the principles of the founders of our great American experiment. It has now dissembled into a motley band of knee-jerk economic and social dimwits spewing red baiting nonsense and preying on the new found extreme ideological gullibility of conventional Republicans.
Although I supported Obama for President, I've always shared many of the concerns of American conservatives about the economy, most importantly that massive government spending tends to go wrong and tends to lead to unintended, usually undesirable consequences.
More importantly I very much agree with a cornerstone idea of true conservatives (noting there are few real conservatives left in the USA). We're spending too much now and have been for decades. The founders vision has largely been undermined by both the Democratic and Republican bureaucracy. The founders feared this sort of bureaucratic class would emerge without more citizen involvement and volunteerism than we have.
Ironically the wildly successful American experiment, grounded in the ideas of personal liberty, free speech, and entrepreneurialism created so much wealth that an extremely powerful bureaucratic class developed both in government and especially in the military where we spend more than every other nation combined. Many who call themselves conservatives (but are reckless spenders and therefore no friend of the founders) suggest that big spending is called for in the military, but they haven't done any homework. The founders would not support the massive military and defense spending both parties now tolerate as part of our ongoing reckless fiscal policy.
So, how in the world did conservatism and the Republican party get co-opted by the likes of Limbaugh, Palin, Hannity, and Joe the Plumber? Do people seriously think this parade of fools represents the best America has to offer? These people represent much of the worst in our great nation - hate, opportunism, and hypocrisy to name a few items.
I think much of this lies in the popularity of the "culture wars" where hot button themes like abortion and religion are mixed with politics to incite hatred and divisiveness. Limbaugh and Hannity have made a mint off of of admirers playing on their fears and hate. They are brilliant entertainers and great snake oil salesman, but they are not good representatives of our great country.
It is painful to watch smart conservatives like David Brooks and George Will get relatively little mainstream respect while buffoons like Limbaugh soak up attention, but Republicans are now reaping what they sowed in the last election.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Obama leading McCain by about 15%
Two national polls - Gallup and Newsweek - nearly agree that Obama now leads John McCain in national polling by about 15%. This substantial lead seems consistent with what many see as Obama's huge popularity in the face of McCain challenges with image and with associations with the unpopular Bush presidency.
Adding to McCain's concerns is the fact that Obama appears to be on the verge of amassing the greatest war chest in presidential history, where even a modest level of contributions from existing supporters will give Obama over $200,000,000 to fight McCain who is unlikely to see much more than half that amount in my view. Soft money may prove to be more important in this election however, and in that department the Republicans can draw on the larger average incomes and give amounts far exceeding the 2300 maximum for personal contributions.
Adding to McCain's concerns is the fact that Obama appears to be on the verge of amassing the greatest war chest in presidential history, where even a modest level of contributions from existing supporters will give Obama over $200,000,000 to fight McCain who is unlikely to see much more than half that amount in my view. Soft money may prove to be more important in this election however, and in that department the Republicans can draw on the larger average incomes and give amounts far exceeding the 2300 maximum for personal contributions.
Monday, January 14, 2008
It's a horserace!
As the primaries go to different players with no clear winners in sight the 2008 campaign is shaping up to be a close race in both parties as well as the general election.
Clinton's surprise win in New Hampshire raised more questions about polling validity as almost all polls showed Obama winning handily. McCain's strong showing in New Hampshire has revitalized his sagging campaign, suddenly focusing a lot of attention on Romney's
vulnerabilities.
Tomorrow's Michigan race could be a critical one for the Romney campaign. He's from Michigan where his father was a popular Governor. If McCain beats Romney in Michigan look for some major strategy changes by the Romney campaign, and perhaps even a drop out though I think that is very unlikely. Romney's personal wealth gives him a powerful financial backing that is lacking in the McCain, Giuliani, or Huckabee camps.
For the Dems, look for some lively debate tomorrow night as Edwards, Clinton, and Obama duke it out in Las Vegas in the first debate with only those three frontrunners.
Clinton's surprise win in New Hampshire raised more questions about polling validity as almost all polls showed Obama winning handily. McCain's strong showing in New Hampshire has revitalized his sagging campaign, suddenly focusing a lot of attention on Romney's
vulnerabilities.
Tomorrow's Michigan race could be a critical one for the Romney campaign. He's from Michigan where his father was a popular Governor. If McCain beats Romney in Michigan look for some major strategy changes by the Romney campaign, and perhaps even a drop out though I think that is very unlikely. Romney's personal wealth gives him a powerful financial backing that is lacking in the McCain, Giuliani, or Huckabee camps.
For the Dems, look for some lively debate tomorrow night as Edwards, Clinton, and Obama duke it out in Las Vegas in the first debate with only those three frontrunners.
Monday, December 31, 2007
Michael Bloomberg to enter the Presidential race ! ?
New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg's staff has been preparing for a possible presidential run on a third party ticket. This could be a very significant development given the ambivalence towards the frontrunners in both parties. Bloomberg is a Democrat but as a billionaire businessman would also have appeal to many Republicans, so his effect on the ultimate outcome is hard to predict and, unlike Ross Perot, Bloomberg arguably has a higher quotient of personal+professional appeal than Clinton, Obama, Giuliani, or Romney.
President Picker is waiting for more information on the possible Bloomberg candidacy, but at the very least this is a potentially destabilizing development for both parties. If more than two fo the current frontrunners appear to falter without a surge by the competition, look for Bloomberg to jump in to the Presidential race as a third party candidate.
Hey, I bet Donny Deutsch knows if Bloomberg will run and I'm hoping to meet him at CES Las Vegas. Deutsch's masterful advertising expertise helped bring Bill Clinton to power, and clearly marketing is a key skill for a presidential team so it wouldn't surprise me if Donny's already been contacted by the Bloomberg staff for ideas and thoughts on the possibility of a Bloomberg run.
President Picker is waiting for more information on the possible Bloomberg candidacy, but at the very least this is a potentially destabilizing development for both parties. If more than two fo the current frontrunners appear to falter without a surge by the competition, look for Bloomberg to jump in to the Presidential race as a third party candidate.
Hey, I bet Donny Deutsch knows if Bloomberg will run and I'm hoping to meet him at CES Las Vegas. Deutsch's masterful advertising expertise helped bring Bill Clinton to power, and clearly marketing is a key skill for a presidential team so it wouldn't surprise me if Donny's already been contacted by the Bloomberg staff for ideas and thoughts on the possibility of a Bloomberg run.
Romney leads Republicans in latest Iowa poll
Mitt Romney now shows as the likely winner in Iowa, four points up on Huckabee according to the latest MSNBC McClatchy poll some 4 days before the caucuses. For Republicans the polls are more relevant becuase the caucus process does not involve "speaking up" for your candidate or switching support as does the Democratic caucus procedure which is more likely to shake things up.
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Iowa Republican Race: Romney vs Huckabee
Recent surges for Mike Huckabee make him a real contender in Iowa, and president picker now thinks Huckabee could even win Iowa although Romney will certainly be close. We continue to predict a Romney win in Iowa.
Recent polls show Romney and Huckabee neck and neck, each with about 30% in Iowa. McCain's weak Iowa showing reflects the problems with a system that puts so much emphasis on Iowa, where (stupid and foolish) heavy subsidies for Ethanol are popular. McCain, much to his credit, has opposed these subsidies and lost a lot of votes for doing that. McCain is now a frontrunner in New Hampshire - a state he won against GW Bush in the 2000 race.
Unlike the democratic caucus process Iowa's Republican race uses a ballot process, thus the polls are more relevant because people will not have to "stand up and argue" for their candidate as they do in the Democratic caucuses.
President Picker predicts that Huckabee's popularity will soon fade with a poor New Hampshire showing and increasingly public scrutiny.
President Picker Predictions: Look for a small Romney victory in Iowa and a McCain win in New Hampshire, Giuliani continues to fade as will Huckabee. McCain cash problems will hurt him in South Carolina. Thompson drops out after South Carolina or even New Hampshire.
Recent polls show Romney and Huckabee neck and neck, each with about 30% in Iowa. McCain's weak Iowa showing reflects the problems with a system that puts so much emphasis on Iowa, where (stupid and foolish) heavy subsidies for Ethanol are popular. McCain, much to his credit, has opposed these subsidies and lost a lot of votes for doing that. McCain is now a frontrunner in New Hampshire - a state he won against GW Bush in the 2000 race.
Unlike the democratic caucus process Iowa's Republican race uses a ballot process, thus the polls are more relevant because people will not have to "stand up and argue" for their candidate as they do in the Democratic caucuses.
President Picker predicts that Huckabee's popularity will soon fade with a poor New Hampshire showing and increasingly public scrutiny.
President Picker Predictions: Look for a small Romney victory in Iowa and a McCain win in New Hampshire, Giuliani continues to fade as will Huckabee. McCain cash problems will hurt him in South Carolina. Thompson drops out after South Carolina or even New Hampshire.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Tancredo leaves Republican field
Tom Tancredo, dead last in the polls, will drop out of the race today. It's not official yet but will happen during the press conference he'll hold before Thursday afternoon.
Tancredo's strong anti-illegal immigration message did not appear to resonate with voters.
Meanwhile, Republicans continue to vigorously court New Hampshire voters. Iowa is more a Democratic battleground although both states could provide a huge boost to winners in terms of support as well as the mother's milk of politics - cash.
Tancredo's strong anti-illegal immigration message did not appear to resonate with voters.
Meanwhile, Republicans continue to vigorously court New Hampshire voters. Iowa is more a Democratic battleground although both states could provide a huge boost to winners in terms of support as well as the mother's milk of politics - cash.
Republican New Hampshire - Romney v McCain
Mitt Romney has a substantial lead in New Hampshire according to the NBC Wall Street Journal poll results discussed today on Chris Mathews Hardball. As we predicted some time ago Romney is the Republican to watch and the man to beat, as Giuliani's lead dwindles in the face of closer public scrutiny.
Likewise on the Democrat side Clinton maintains a sizable lead in New Hampshire although Obama now leads in Iowa 33% to 29% for Clinton.
President Picker is skeptical of the Iowa poll results showing an Obama lead. Although he may win, we still predict a Clinton Victory, feeling that support for Obama will prove "softer" than support for Clinton. Iowa Caucusing requires a substantial committment from supporters and it's not at all clear that Obama's new campaign troops will be as enthusiastic on caucus night as they have been attending Obama pep rallies with Oprah.
Likewise on the Democrat side Clinton maintains a sizable lead in New Hampshire although Obama now leads in Iowa 33% to 29% for Clinton.
President Picker is skeptical of the Iowa poll results showing an Obama lead. Although he may win, we still predict a Clinton Victory, feeling that support for Obama will prove "softer" than support for Clinton. Iowa Caucusing requires a substantial committment from supporters and it's not at all clear that Obama's new campaign troops will be as enthusiastic on caucus night as they have been attending Obama pep rallies with Oprah.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Yahoo Political Dashboard
Webguild reports that the The Yahoo Political Dashboard is up and running, though Reshma notes several caveats in how you'd want to interpret this data.
The Yahoo Dashboard is very nicely done visually, and allows a lot of key comparisons quickly. The money raised column may be the most relevant in terms of the prospects of these candidates as we kick the primary season into gear in early January. Why? Campaigning in small states like Iowa and New Hampshire is not expensive, but in California and New York you need tens of millions to sway those pesky undecided voters who arguably are the key voters who determine the outcome in our market-driven elections system.
The following candidates won't have money problems if they can perform OK in the early primaries: Clinton, Obama, Romney, Giuliani, Edwards. I'd say McCain and Huckabee are at great risk regardless of performance because they'll need cash to continue, and unless they have huge showing early on I predict people will try to "bet on a winner" and donations will continue to flow to the frontrunners. Look for Romney and Edwards to fund their own campaigns heavily if their prospects look good. President Picker still predicts that Romney will win the Republican Nomination and Clinton the Democrat, but we acknowledge the Iowa and New Hampshire races have become closer than we thought they would be. Obama's strategy is almost flawless so far - he's taken a high road on the campaign which has made Clinton look petty and mean - the latter a key attribute her campaign is trying to counter even as it struggles to fine Obama's Achilles heel.
Ironically the Clinton campaign's new advertising is designed to make people feel more "warm and fuzzy" towards Clinton. I see this as a strategic error. Everybody knows she is a tough and seasoned politically and has a hard and intense personality. Suggesting otherwise appears deceptive because it is, and also because media are viewing this approach skeptically - skepticism that rubs off on viewers. These are not attributes the campaign should be diminishing, rather they should be promoting her as a potentially "tough as nails" negotiator and commander in chief. Obama's campaign has recognized correctly that their goal is almost the opposite - make him kind, gentle, and accessible to the indecisive female voters who otherwise would have gone for Clinton on the basis of gender.
The Yahoo Dashboard is very nicely done visually, and allows a lot of key comparisons quickly. The money raised column may be the most relevant in terms of the prospects of these candidates as we kick the primary season into gear in early January. Why? Campaigning in small states like Iowa and New Hampshire is not expensive, but in California and New York you need tens of millions to sway those pesky undecided voters who arguably are the key voters who determine the outcome in our market-driven elections system.
The following candidates won't have money problems if they can perform OK in the early primaries: Clinton, Obama, Romney, Giuliani, Edwards. I'd say McCain and Huckabee are at great risk regardless of performance because they'll need cash to continue, and unless they have huge showing early on I predict people will try to "bet on a winner" and donations will continue to flow to the frontrunners. Look for Romney and Edwards to fund their own campaigns heavily if their prospects look good. President Picker still predicts that Romney will win the Republican Nomination and Clinton the Democrat, but we acknowledge the Iowa and New Hampshire races have become closer than we thought they would be. Obama's strategy is almost flawless so far - he's taken a high road on the campaign which has made Clinton look petty and mean - the latter a key attribute her campaign is trying to counter even as it struggles to fine Obama's Achilles heel.
Ironically the Clinton campaign's new advertising is designed to make people feel more "warm and fuzzy" towards Clinton. I see this as a strategic error. Everybody knows she is a tough and seasoned politically and has a hard and intense personality. Suggesting otherwise appears deceptive because it is, and also because media are viewing this approach skeptically - skepticism that rubs off on viewers. These are not attributes the campaign should be diminishing, rather they should be promoting her as a potentially "tough as nails" negotiator and commander in chief. Obama's campaign has recognized correctly that their goal is almost the opposite - make him kind, gentle, and accessible to the indecisive female voters who otherwise would have gone for Clinton on the basis of gender.
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Mitt Romney Religion Speech
Here is the transcript of the Mitt Romney Speech on his religious beliefs and how they affect his politics. This transcript provided by the Mitt Romney website:
"Faith In America" Remarks As Prepared For Delivery The George Bush Presidential Library College Station, Texas December 6, 2007
"Thank you, Mr. President, for your kind introduction. "It is an honor to be here today. This is an inspiring place because of you and the First Lady and because of the film exhibited across the way in the Presidential library. For those who have not seen it, it shows the President as a young pilot, shot down during the Second World War, being rescued from his life-raft by the crew of an American submarine. It is a moving reminder that when America has faced challenge and peril, Americans rise to the occasion, willing to risk their very lives to defend freedom and preserve our nation. We are in your debt. Thank you, Mr. President. "Mr. President, your generation rose to the occasion, first to defeat Fascism and then to vanquish the Soviet Union. You left us, your children, a free and strong America. It is why we call yours the greatest generation. It is now my generation's turn. How we respond to today's challenges will define our generation. And it will determine what kind of America we will leave our children, and theirs. "America faces a new generation of challenges. Radical violent Islam seeks to destroy us. An emerging China endeavors to surpass our economic leadership. And we are troubled at home by government overspending, overuse of foreign oil, and the breakdown of the family. "Over the last year, we have embarked on a national debate on how best to preserve American leadership. Today, I wish to address a topic which I believe is fundamental to America's greatness: our religious liberty. I will also offer perspectives on how my own faith would inform my Presidency, if I were elected. "There are some who may feel that religion is not a matter to be seriously considered in the context of the weighty threats that face us. If so, they are at odds with the nation's founders, for they, when our nation faced its greatest peril, sought the blessings of the Creator. And further, they discovered the essential connection between the survival of a free land and the protection of religious freedom. In John Adams' words: 'We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people.' "Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone. "Given our grand tradition of religious tolerance and liberty, some wonder whether there are any questions regarding an aspiring candidate's religion that are appropriate. I believe there are. And I will answer them today. "Almost 50 years ago another candidate from Massachusetts explained that he was an American running for President, not a Catholic running for President. Like him, I am an American running for President. I do not define my candidacy by my religion. A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because of his faith. "Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin. "As Governor, I tried to do the right as best I knew it, serving the law and answering to the Constitution. I did not confuse the particular teachings of my church with the obligations of the office and of the Constitution – and of course, I would not do so as President. I will put no doctrine of any church above the plain duties of the office and the sovereign authority of the law. "As a young man, Lincoln described what he called America's 'political religion' – the commitment to defend the rule of law and the Constitution. When I place my hand on the Bible and take the oath of office, that oath becomes my highest promise to God. If I am fortunate to become your President, I will serve no one religion, no one group, no one cause, and no one interest. A President must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States. "There are some for whom these commitments are not enough. They would prefer it if I would simply distance myself from my religion, say that it is more a tradition than my personal conviction, or disavow one or another of its precepts. That I will not do. I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers – I will be true to them and to my beliefs. "Some believe that such a confession of my faith will sink my candidacy. If they are right, so be it. But I think they underestimate the American people. Americans do not respect believers of convenience. Americans tire of those who would jettison their beliefs, even to gain the world. "There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church's beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance. Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree. "There are some who would have a presidential candidate describe and explain his church's distinctive doctrines. To do so would enable the very religious test the founders prohibited in the Constitution. No candidate should become the spokesman for his faith. For if he becomes President he will need the prayers of the people of all faiths. "I believe that every faith I have encountered draws its adherents closer to God. And in every faith I have come to know, there are features I wish were in my own: I love the profound ceremony of the Catholic Mass, the approachability of God in the prayers of the Evangelicals, the tenderness of spirit among the Pentecostals, the confident independence of the Lutherans, the ancient traditions of the Jews, unchanged through the ages, and the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims. As I travel across the country and see our towns and cities, I am always moved by the many houses of worship with their steeples, all pointing to heaven, reminding us of the source of life's blessings. "It is important to recognize that while differences in theology exist between the churches in America, we share a common creed of moral convictions. And where the affairs of our nation are concerned, it's usually a sound rule to focus on the latter – on the great moral principles that urge us all on a common course. Whether it was the cause of abolition, or civil rights, or the right to life itself, no movement of conscience can succeed in America that cannot speak to the convictions of religious people. "We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism. They are wrong. "The founders proscribed the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square. We are a nation 'Under God' and in God, we do indeed trust. "We should acknowledge the Creator as did the Founders – in ceremony and word. He should remain on our currency, in our pledge, in the teaching of our history, and during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places. Our greatness would not long endure without judges who respect the foundation of faith upon which our constitution rests. I will take care to separate the affairs of government from any religion, but I will not separate us from 'the God who gave us liberty.' "Nor would I separate us from our religious heritage. Perhaps the most important question to ask a person of faith who seeks a political office, is this: does he share these American values: the equality of human kind, the obligation to serve one another, and a steadfast commitment to liberty? "They are not unique to any one denomination. They belong to the great moral inheritance we hold in common. They are the firm ground on which Americans of different faiths meet and stand as a nation, united. "We believe that every single human being is a child of God – we are all part of the human family. The conviction of the inherent and inalienable worth of every life is still the most revolutionary political proposition ever advanced. John Adams put it that we are 'thrown into the world all equal and alike.' "The consequence of our common humanity is our responsibility to one another, to our fellow Americans foremost, but also to every child of God. It is an obligation which is fulfilled by Americans every day, here and across the globe, without regard to creed or race or nationality. "Americans acknowledge that liberty is a gift of God, not an indulgence of government. No people in the history of the world have sacrificed as much for liberty. The lives of hundreds of thousands of America's sons and daughters were laid down during the last century to preserve freedom, for us and for freedom loving people throughout the world. America took nothing from that Century's terrible wars – no land from Germany or Japan or Korea; no treasure; no oath of fealty. America's resolve in the defense of liberty has been tested time and again. It has not been found wanting, nor must it ever be. America must never falter in holding high the banner of freedom. "These American values, this great moral heritage, is shared and lived in my religion as it is in yours. I was taught in my home to honor God and love my neighbor. I saw my father march with Martin Luther King. I saw my parents provide compassionate care to others, in personal ways to people nearby, and in just as consequential ways in leading national volunteer movements. I am moved by the Lord's words: 'For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me...' "My faith is grounded on these truths. You can witness them in Ann and my marriage and in our family. We are a long way from perfect and we have surely stumbled along the way, but our aspirations, our values, are the self-same as those from the other faiths that stand upon this common foundation. And these convictions will indeed inform my presidency. "Today's generations of Americans have always known religious liberty. Perhaps we forget the long and arduous path our nation's forbearers took to achieve it. They came here from England to seek freedom of religion. But upon finding it for themselves, they at first denied it to others. Because of their diverse beliefs, Ann Hutchinson was exiled from Massachusetts Bay, a banished Roger Williams founded Rhode Island, and two centuries later, Brigham Young set out for the West. Americans were unable to accommodate their commitment to their own faith with an appreciation for the convictions of others to different faiths. In this, they were very much like those of the European nations they had left. "It was in Philadelphia that our founding fathers defined a revolutionary vision of liberty, grounded on self evident truths about the equality of all, and the inalienable rights with which each is endowed by his Creator. "We cherish these sacred rights, and secure them in our Constitutional order. Foremost do we protect religious liberty, not as a matter of policy but as a matter of right. There will be no established church, and we are guaranteed the free exercise of our religion. "I'm not sure that we fully appreciate the profound implications of our tradition of religious liberty. I have visited many of the magnificent cathedrals in Europe. They are so inspired ... so grand ... so empty. Raised up over generations, long ago, so many of the cathedrals now stand as the postcard backdrop to societies just too busy or too 'enlightened' to venture inside and kneel in prayer. The establishment of state religions in Europe did no favor to Europe's churches. And though you will find many people of strong faith there, the churches themselves seem to be withering away. "Infinitely worse is the other extreme, the creed of conversion by conquest: violent Jihad, murder as martyrdom... killing Christians, Jews, and Muslims with equal indifference. These radical Islamists do their preaching not by reason or example, but in the coercion of minds and the shedding of blood. We face no greater danger today than theocratic tyranny, and the boundless suffering these states and groups could inflict if given the chance. "The diversity of our cultural expression, and the vibrancy of our religious dialogue, has kept America in the forefront of civilized nations even as others regard religious freedom as something to be destroyed. "In such a world, we can be deeply thankful that we live in a land where reason and religion are friends and allies in the cause of liberty, joined against the evils and dangers of the day. And you can be certain of this: Any believer in religious freedom, any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and ally in me. And so it is for hundreds of millions of our countrymen: we do not insist on a single strain of religion – rather, we welcome our nation's symphony of faith. "Recall the early days of the First Continental Congress in Philadelphia, during the fall of 1774. With Boston occupied by British troops, there were rumors of imminent hostilities and fears of an impending war. In this time of peril, someone suggested that they pray. But there were objections. 'They were too divided in religious sentiments', what with Episcopalians and Quakers, Anabaptists and Congregationalists, Presbyterians and Catholics. "Then Sam Adams rose, and said he would hear a prayer from anyone of piety and good character, as long as they were a patriot. "And so together they prayed, and together they fought, and together, by the grace of God ... they founded this great nation. "In that spirit, let us give thanks to the divine 'author of liberty.' And together, let us pray that this land may always be blessed, 'with freedom's holy light.' "God bless the United States of America."
"Faith In America" Remarks As Prepared For Delivery The George Bush Presidential Library College Station, Texas December 6, 2007
"Thank you, Mr. President, for your kind introduction. "It is an honor to be here today. This is an inspiring place because of you and the First Lady and because of the film exhibited across the way in the Presidential library. For those who have not seen it, it shows the President as a young pilot, shot down during the Second World War, being rescued from his life-raft by the crew of an American submarine. It is a moving reminder that when America has faced challenge and peril, Americans rise to the occasion, willing to risk their very lives to defend freedom and preserve our nation. We are in your debt. Thank you, Mr. President. "Mr. President, your generation rose to the occasion, first to defeat Fascism and then to vanquish the Soviet Union. You left us, your children, a free and strong America. It is why we call yours the greatest generation. It is now my generation's turn. How we respond to today's challenges will define our generation. And it will determine what kind of America we will leave our children, and theirs. "America faces a new generation of challenges. Radical violent Islam seeks to destroy us. An emerging China endeavors to surpass our economic leadership. And we are troubled at home by government overspending, overuse of foreign oil, and the breakdown of the family. "Over the last year, we have embarked on a national debate on how best to preserve American leadership. Today, I wish to address a topic which I believe is fundamental to America's greatness: our religious liberty. I will also offer perspectives on how my own faith would inform my Presidency, if I were elected. "There are some who may feel that religion is not a matter to be seriously considered in the context of the weighty threats that face us. If so, they are at odds with the nation's founders, for they, when our nation faced its greatest peril, sought the blessings of the Creator. And further, they discovered the essential connection between the survival of a free land and the protection of religious freedom. In John Adams' words: 'We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people.' "Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone. "Given our grand tradition of religious tolerance and liberty, some wonder whether there are any questions regarding an aspiring candidate's religion that are appropriate. I believe there are. And I will answer them today. "Almost 50 years ago another candidate from Massachusetts explained that he was an American running for President, not a Catholic running for President. Like him, I am an American running for President. I do not define my candidacy by my religion. A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because of his faith. "Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin. "As Governor, I tried to do the right as best I knew it, serving the law and answering to the Constitution. I did not confuse the particular teachings of my church with the obligations of the office and of the Constitution – and of course, I would not do so as President. I will put no doctrine of any church above the plain duties of the office and the sovereign authority of the law. "As a young man, Lincoln described what he called America's 'political religion' – the commitment to defend the rule of law and the Constitution. When I place my hand on the Bible and take the oath of office, that oath becomes my highest promise to God. If I am fortunate to become your President, I will serve no one religion, no one group, no one cause, and no one interest. A President must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States. "There are some for whom these commitments are not enough. They would prefer it if I would simply distance myself from my religion, say that it is more a tradition than my personal conviction, or disavow one or another of its precepts. That I will not do. I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers – I will be true to them and to my beliefs. "Some believe that such a confession of my faith will sink my candidacy. If they are right, so be it. But I think they underestimate the American people. Americans do not respect believers of convenience. Americans tire of those who would jettison their beliefs, even to gain the world. "There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church's beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance. Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree. "There are some who would have a presidential candidate describe and explain his church's distinctive doctrines. To do so would enable the very religious test the founders prohibited in the Constitution. No candidate should become the spokesman for his faith. For if he becomes President he will need the prayers of the people of all faiths. "I believe that every faith I have encountered draws its adherents closer to God. And in every faith I have come to know, there are features I wish were in my own: I love the profound ceremony of the Catholic Mass, the approachability of God in the prayers of the Evangelicals, the tenderness of spirit among the Pentecostals, the confident independence of the Lutherans, the ancient traditions of the Jews, unchanged through the ages, and the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims. As I travel across the country and see our towns and cities, I am always moved by the many houses of worship with their steeples, all pointing to heaven, reminding us of the source of life's blessings. "It is important to recognize that while differences in theology exist between the churches in America, we share a common creed of moral convictions. And where the affairs of our nation are concerned, it's usually a sound rule to focus on the latter – on the great moral principles that urge us all on a common course. Whether it was the cause of abolition, or civil rights, or the right to life itself, no movement of conscience can succeed in America that cannot speak to the convictions of religious people. "We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America – the religion of secularism. They are wrong. "The founders proscribed the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square. We are a nation 'Under God' and in God, we do indeed trust. "We should acknowledge the Creator as did the Founders – in ceremony and word. He should remain on our currency, in our pledge, in the teaching of our history, and during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places. Our greatness would not long endure without judges who respect the foundation of faith upon which our constitution rests. I will take care to separate the affairs of government from any religion, but I will not separate us from 'the God who gave us liberty.' "Nor would I separate us from our religious heritage. Perhaps the most important question to ask a person of faith who seeks a political office, is this: does he share these American values: the equality of human kind, the obligation to serve one another, and a steadfast commitment to liberty? "They are not unique to any one denomination. They belong to the great moral inheritance we hold in common. They are the firm ground on which Americans of different faiths meet and stand as a nation, united. "We believe that every single human being is a child of God – we are all part of the human family. The conviction of the inherent and inalienable worth of every life is still the most revolutionary political proposition ever advanced. John Adams put it that we are 'thrown into the world all equal and alike.' "The consequence of our common humanity is our responsibility to one another, to our fellow Americans foremost, but also to every child of God. It is an obligation which is fulfilled by Americans every day, here and across the globe, without regard to creed or race or nationality. "Americans acknowledge that liberty is a gift of God, not an indulgence of government. No people in the history of the world have sacrificed as much for liberty. The lives of hundreds of thousands of America's sons and daughters were laid down during the last century to preserve freedom, for us and for freedom loving people throughout the world. America took nothing from that Century's terrible wars – no land from Germany or Japan or Korea; no treasure; no oath of fealty. America's resolve in the defense of liberty has been tested time and again. It has not been found wanting, nor must it ever be. America must never falter in holding high the banner of freedom. "These American values, this great moral heritage, is shared and lived in my religion as it is in yours. I was taught in my home to honor God and love my neighbor. I saw my father march with Martin Luther King. I saw my parents provide compassionate care to others, in personal ways to people nearby, and in just as consequential ways in leading national volunteer movements. I am moved by the Lord's words: 'For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me...' "My faith is grounded on these truths. You can witness them in Ann and my marriage and in our family. We are a long way from perfect and we have surely stumbled along the way, but our aspirations, our values, are the self-same as those from the other faiths that stand upon this common foundation. And these convictions will indeed inform my presidency. "Today's generations of Americans have always known religious liberty. Perhaps we forget the long and arduous path our nation's forbearers took to achieve it. They came here from England to seek freedom of religion. But upon finding it for themselves, they at first denied it to others. Because of their diverse beliefs, Ann Hutchinson was exiled from Massachusetts Bay, a banished Roger Williams founded Rhode Island, and two centuries later, Brigham Young set out for the West. Americans were unable to accommodate their commitment to their own faith with an appreciation for the convictions of others to different faiths. In this, they were very much like those of the European nations they had left. "It was in Philadelphia that our founding fathers defined a revolutionary vision of liberty, grounded on self evident truths about the equality of all, and the inalienable rights with which each is endowed by his Creator. "We cherish these sacred rights, and secure them in our Constitutional order. Foremost do we protect religious liberty, not as a matter of policy but as a matter of right. There will be no established church, and we are guaranteed the free exercise of our religion. "I'm not sure that we fully appreciate the profound implications of our tradition of religious liberty. I have visited many of the magnificent cathedrals in Europe. They are so inspired ... so grand ... so empty. Raised up over generations, long ago, so many of the cathedrals now stand as the postcard backdrop to societies just too busy or too 'enlightened' to venture inside and kneel in prayer. The establishment of state religions in Europe did no favor to Europe's churches. And though you will find many people of strong faith there, the churches themselves seem to be withering away. "Infinitely worse is the other extreme, the creed of conversion by conquest: violent Jihad, murder as martyrdom... killing Christians, Jews, and Muslims with equal indifference. These radical Islamists do their preaching not by reason or example, but in the coercion of minds and the shedding of blood. We face no greater danger today than theocratic tyranny, and the boundless suffering these states and groups could inflict if given the chance. "The diversity of our cultural expression, and the vibrancy of our religious dialogue, has kept America in the forefront of civilized nations even as others regard religious freedom as something to be destroyed. "In such a world, we can be deeply thankful that we live in a land where reason and religion are friends and allies in the cause of liberty, joined against the evils and dangers of the day. And you can be certain of this: Any believer in religious freedom, any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and ally in me. And so it is for hundreds of millions of our countrymen: we do not insist on a single strain of religion – rather, we welcome our nation's symphony of faith. "Recall the early days of the First Continental Congress in Philadelphia, during the fall of 1774. With Boston occupied by British troops, there were rumors of imminent hostilities and fears of an impending war. In this time of peril, someone suggested that they pray. But there were objections. 'They were too divided in religious sentiments', what with Episcopalians and Quakers, Anabaptists and Congregationalists, Presbyterians and Catholics. "Then Sam Adams rose, and said he would hear a prayer from anyone of piety and good character, as long as they were a patriot. "And so together they prayed, and together they fought, and together, by the grace of God ... they founded this great nation. "In that spirit, let us give thanks to the divine 'author of liberty.' And together, let us pray that this land may always be blessed, 'with freedom's holy light.' "God bless the United States of America."
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
Giuliani in trouble. Big trouble
Rudy Giuliani's campaign is in *very big* trouble. It's not really because of the recent allegations that he abused spending in New York City to cover his mistress' (now wife's) security during his affair. It is because he's simply not the kind of candidate Republicans can back very enthusiastically.
Giuliani has a personally very checkered past, he's pro-choice, and he's kind of squirrely in the personality department. Reagan represented the "ideal" candidate for the Republican set of sensibilities. Handsome and imposing but also jovial and "old boy network", no-nonsense with his conservative policies, somewhat polished but not brilliant.
So, who gains from this? Huckabee. It's Huckabee v Romney now, and even though I earlier suggested Romney was "in" I think Huckabee has a shot at this if he can quickly assemble a *substantial* war chest. In America you can't buy elections, as Ross Perot's bottomless money potential only got him so far. But without much campaign cash you will lose. Period.
Giuliani has a personally very checkered past, he's pro-choice, and he's kind of squirrely in the personality department. Reagan represented the "ideal" candidate for the Republican set of sensibilities. Handsome and imposing but also jovial and "old boy network", no-nonsense with his conservative policies, somewhat polished but not brilliant.
So, who gains from this? Huckabee. It's Huckabee v Romney now, and even though I earlier suggested Romney was "in" I think Huckabee has a shot at this if he can quickly assemble a *substantial* war chest. In America you can't buy elections, as Ross Perot's bottomless money potential only got him so far. But without much campaign cash you will lose. Period.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Romney, Huckabee and the Republican debate
Mitt Romney was not "weak" in tonight's debate but he didn't really shine either. In fact the candidate that really seemed to stand out as a forceful and thoughtful proponent was Mike Huckabee, perhaps an indication of why he's surging in many polls.
Huckabee appeared the most poised as he addressed issues like religion and the death penalty.
As candidates often do, Romney carefully parses many answers carefully to avoid damaging sound bites. His exchange with McCain over torture and waterboarding left one wondering if Romney is willing to take a strong stand, though his abortion statements seemed to please the crowd when he said he was wrong to be pro-choice early in his career and is now emphatically pro-life.
Huckabee appeared the most poised as he addressed issues like religion and the death penalty.
As candidates often do, Romney carefully parses many answers carefully to avoid damaging sound bites. His exchange with McCain over torture and waterboarding left one wondering if Romney is willing to take a strong stand, though his abortion statements seemed to please the crowd when he said he was wrong to be pro-choice early in his career and is now emphatically pro-life.
Republican YouTube CNN debate
Tonight the Republicans debate was hosted by CNN and YouTube. Anderson Cooper did a stand up moderating job. I'm not enamored with the YouTube format, feeling that the questions tend to be quirky or sort of "gotcha!" style rather than a thoughtful reflection on the perils and promises of our American democracy.
But who am I kidding? The American elections are more an entertainment and marketing excercise than a study in debate and democracy, and tonight was no exception to that as YouTubers did ask some good questions like "what will you do about Black on Black violence" and "What would you do to repair the image of America" in the eyes of the world?
But who am I kidding? The American elections are more an entertainment and marketing excercise than a study in debate and democracy, and tonight was no exception to that as YouTubers did ask some good questions like "what will you do about Black on Black violence" and "What would you do to repair the image of America" in the eyes of the world?
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Republican Presidential Debate
FOX News hosted a debate among the Republican contenders for the 2008 US Presidential Crown. It is interesting to see how Huckabee as an "up and coming" candidate in the polls and Romney as one of the leaders seemed to be in top form. At one point Tom Tancredo, who has been an outspoken critic of how the other candidates are not conservative enough, stopped to note that he thought all the candidates were men of quality but offered different alternatives.
As in the prior debate I saw, Thompson seems to be failing to address criticisms and seems to be falling back on canned statements rather than possessing the quick wit of a Giuliani, Huckabee, or Paul. Thompson does clearly not have the campaign presence of Ronald Reagan despite the fact he's being billed like that by Republican supporters. I predict this will condemn his campaign after what will likely be lackluster showings in southern states - probably around February or March of 2008.
Despite a standing ovation after John McCain's joke and criticism of Hilary Clinton, his performances lack the "fire" needed to win this race. He was the front runner and failed to consolidate his position early in the race. I actually think age is playing a role with McCain and he simply does not have the energy required for these massively social experiences which involve traveling millions of miles annually and meeting tens of thousands of people every month.
Man to watch here? Mitt Romney. Clearly he's got *all* the others in the stature department, most conspicuously Giuliani who always looks squirrely and shrill in a Romney v Giuliani persona lineup. Contrary to what most of us think about how we evaluate people it's based in large part on the way they look and carry themselves and not on what they say or do. This factor, in my opinion, will trump what seem to be diminishing concerns about Romney's Mormonism.
Prediction: 2008 election will be Romney vs Clinton
As in the prior debate I saw, Thompson seems to be failing to address criticisms and seems to be falling back on canned statements rather than possessing the quick wit of a Giuliani, Huckabee, or Paul. Thompson does clearly not have the campaign presence of Ronald Reagan despite the fact he's being billed like that by Republican supporters. I predict this will condemn his campaign after what will likely be lackluster showings in southern states - probably around February or March of 2008.
Despite a standing ovation after John McCain's joke and criticism of Hilary Clinton, his performances lack the "fire" needed to win this race. He was the front runner and failed to consolidate his position early in the race. I actually think age is playing a role with McCain and he simply does not have the energy required for these massively social experiences which involve traveling millions of miles annually and meeting tens of thousands of people every month.
Man to watch here? Mitt Romney. Clearly he's got *all* the others in the stature department, most conspicuously Giuliani who always looks squirrely and shrill in a Romney v Giuliani persona lineup. Contrary to what most of us think about how we evaluate people it's based in large part on the way they look and carry themselves and not on what they say or do. This factor, in my opinion, will trump what seem to be diminishing concerns about Romney's Mormonism.
Prediction: 2008 election will be Romney vs Clinton
Sunday, September 30, 2007
3rd Quarter Money Results expected soon
Money is the mother's milk of politics, and the 3rd quarter is historically a hard time to raise funds. So observers will be watching the upcoming money results carefully.
Richardson's reported about 5 million in third quarter 2007 and other Democrats and Republicans will be reporting soon.
It's now clear to President Picker that, barring an enormous scandal, Hilary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee in 2008. The Republican race is still up for grabs - President Picker sees Giuliani or Romney as the most likely winners.
CNN political ticker
Richardson's reported about 5 million in third quarter 2007 and other Democrats and Republicans will be reporting soon.
It's now clear to President Picker that, barring an enormous scandal, Hilary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee in 2008. The Republican race is still up for grabs - President Picker sees Giuliani or Romney as the most likely winners.
CNN political ticker
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)