It's the Economy, and we are ALL stupid.

On the one hand, it is mistaken to suggest that the pending economic disasters are the fault of people or parties more than the collective fault of our hopelessly inefficient and politicized, lobbied, and manipulated regulatory systems combined with serious flaws in our capitalist infrastructure.

That said, it's very hard to escape the fact that the Bush administration will be seen - probably with justification - as the party most asleep at the wheel as the American economy was teetering on the brink of collapse. This is likely to play far better for Obama the McCain, and unless the McCain party line can find a way to distance itself from the huge failures of current US economic policy Obama's lead is likely to become insurmountable. McCain will have to find a way to acknowledge that the current economic situation is totally unsustainable but not the fault of the Bush administration. This will be a tough row to hoe.

I'm by no means suggesting that Obama and fellow Democrats should not shoulder some of the blame for the current crisis. Although they have been ranting against the current economic approaches of the Bush administration it appears pretty clear that the Democrats - like the Republicans - failed to see looming catastrophe until it was too late. More importantly Democrats failed to intervene years ago when the seeds of the current catastrophe were planted. In fact a key Obama advisor was the CEO of Fannie Mae until 2004. If Obama keeps him on board (or lets him go as he shoud) I'd say both of them have some explainin' to do.

I'm very unclear about why this crisis was not at least the subject of a lot more speculation, because it has been obvious for at least two years that the real estate bubble would burst, dropping trillions in equity from balance sheets.

The polls are starting to show a shift to Obama based on the dire economic news, and it seems likely this shift will continue. The importance of the debates on Friday is likely looming large for many undecided voters desparate to know who can return prosperity to a flagging US economy.

Wall Street Connections for Obama and McCain

This excellent article has details about both McCain and Obama's campaign contribution connections to Wall Street, including some of the firms now getting bailed out by ... you and me and other taxpayers.

Twisted campaign commercial banter notwithstanding, it's clear to anybody that their is a very questionable relationship between campaign contributions and legislation. It's not that Obama or McCain have some sort of quid pro quo with contributors - they do NOT have that. However, it's clear that contributions help keep supporters in power and keep those to whom they contribute within earshot, key reasons companies spend so much on politics.

Like pigs with lipstick, the campaigns and foolish journalistic lackeys failing are failing to discuss or report about the key issues in the race: A Challenged Economy and looming home equity disaster, war and global hegemony and dangerous adversaries, and massive Government Spending. Unfortunately clear thinkers won't find a candidate with good ideas about all these things. Where are the founders when you need them?

Let the real race begin!

The Convention dust appears to have settled, leaving us with a close race and a slight Obama lead - probably narrower than before the conventions and the remarkable rise of Sarah Palin as McCain's muse. Palin has effectively consolidated McCain's formerly unenthusiastic conservative support and appears to be drawing votes from some moderates who would like to see a woman in the office regardless of her politics.

A factor of interest that makes the polling even harder to read it the increasing level of media bias in the election. Where CNN maintains a modest, sufficient level of journalistic objectivity, Fox's talk shows and even some Fox anchors have always been unabashedly and unapologetically in support of the Republican agenda. Yet now we find a similar kind of zealotry on MSNBC, especially with Rachel Maddow Kieth Olberman whose partisanship is giving right winger Sean Hannity a run for his ideologically influenced journalistic money.

The challenge for the viewer is that the poll numbers are getting reported differently - so much so that today we have MSNBC reporting Obama in the lead and Fox reporting McCain, each probably overweighting their own problematic sampling methods. As usual RealClearPolitics is a great way to cut through the chatter with a great summary of all major polls and the RCP running average, which I'd suggest is the best way to determine what's going on nationally.
RealClearPolitics.com

The Sarah Palin Interviews

ABC, with the only Sarah Palin interview to date, is slowly releasing clips with a longer edition tonight on ABC's news program 20/20. The interviews are in a fairly informal format with Charles Gibson, one of the most knowledgeable reporters on network TV.

In my opinion Palin has produced no gaffes nor really shined. She appears to be a sincere, conservative ideologue, very dedicated to her party and the McCain campaign. She is clearly not particularly well informed on broad global issues, seeming to prefer tight, ideologically based opinions to those formed from detailed research or a study of history.

It remains to be seen how the critical "swing voters" of key states like Ohio, Michigan, Virginia, and Colorado will view Sarah Palin. Polls still seem to reflect the overwhelming media attention of the past few days so it will be a week or so before meaningful information sort of sets the "starting point" for the big race, and as always the race will be won or lost not on the basis of total votes but on electoral voting and state by state strategies.

Rove: Watch Michigan, Ohio, Virginia, Colorado

Karl Rove penned a very interesting electoral analysis last month where he suggests that the race is likely to hinge on the outcome in four key states: Michigan, Ohio, Virginia, and Colorado. Since the decision is made on the basis of electoral votes and not popular vote, and since several states award all their votes rather than proportional distribution of electoral votes, certain states will matter where others are pretty much a given for either McCain (e.g. Texas) or Obama (e.g. New York).

I see Ohio as pretty much the key battleground state. Ohio was key in 2004 when GW Bush's narrow victory there gave him the win over John Kerry. Although the 2004 race there was not as close as Florida's (where the butterfly ballot fiasco created a super narrow win for Bush even though the intention of several thousand voters was to to vote for Gore but ballot design meant they voted for both Gore and Buchanon and thus had the ballot spoiled. As I've note before Florida 2000 is usually analyzed strangely and wrongly - either as a Supreme Court "coup" or as a real "win" by Bush. It was neither, rather it was a fluke of our terrible electoral system (which should award electors proportionally) and ballot irregularities (which are hard to fix but won't matter nearly as much if we use a national vote count).

So, Ohio probably holds the key to the election, and if you live there get ready to watch more TV ads than you've ever seen on a single topic in your entire life...

Palin's first major media interview with Charlie Gibson, ABC News

ABC has posted some small clips from tonight's interview with Sarah Palin here:
http://abcnews.go.com/wn

You may want to wait for the full interview later tonight to avoid watching a 30 second ad to see a one minute clip.

McCain beating Obama in popular vote, electoral still edging towards Obama.

The Republican convention dust and bumps have yet to settle, and perhaps more importantly Sarah Palin remains carefully closeted away from personal media interaction. Yet one thing that is clear is that McCain's choice of Palin has breathed new life into his campaign and that he appears to be leading in the national popular vote, though most electoral counts still seem to favor Obama by a very narrow electoral vote margin. Given the incredible closeness it is again possible that we'll see our very questionable electoral voting system overtun the popular vote as it did in 2000. It is important to note that it's not clear how the popular voting would change if candidates could spend more time campaigning in their strongholds - something that is not done much in the electoral system because the battleground states are the key to the win.

Ohio is again emerging as the probable *key* battleground state, with polls showing McCain and Obama tied right now.

McCain v. Obama

As the dust and bluster of the two conventions dies down and polls appear to be closing we enter the final and decisive stretch of the Presidential election. If today's speech action is any indication of what is to come, we'll see McCain and Palin as a hard hitting tag-team combining a lot of patriotism talk with sharp criticism of "our opponent".

In what I think is a strategic blunder by the Obama campaign is appears to be failing to understand Palin's appeal to patriotism and positivism. People like to feel good about their country and the coming changes, yet Obama's talking points are moving to negative themes like the economy and the tired "more of the same" talk that McCain's choice of Palin's has effectively demolished.

Reagan's campaign used this strategy successfully against Carter in 1980 when he branded Carter as the "malaise" President and himself as the reformer.

I think that if the campaign themes offer America the choice between moving *away* from problems (Obama) vs moving *towards* solutions (McCain), we'll see McCain breath a whole new life into a campaign that initially appeared crippled by his choice of a very conservative and somewhat inexperienced running mate.

McCain Obama in the polls

The best place to follow the Presidential polls is RealClearPolitics.com where their RCP running average of major polls is arguably the best indication of where things are headed in the Presidential Election this year.

Today's running average shows Obama with a lead in all but the tied CBS News results, an average lead of 4.4% over McCain. These results do NOT reflect the post Palin speech results which promise to be interesting. Voters are now being force fed about as much information about Sara Palin as for any candidate in history, and it appears the McCain campaign will seek to control her interviews in a structured way - at least based on the recent cancelled interview after CNN's Campbell Brown challenged McCain's PR guy to provide examples of Palin's relevant executive experience. When he failed to do so she seemed exasperated and later the campaign "punished" CNN by cancelling a Larry King interview with Palin. I'm guessing the strategy will be to have Palin come out swinging in controlled environments like speeches and FOX news interviews but avoid direct confrontations with what McCain will increasingly brand as "liberal sympathizers" in the media. I continue to think this strategy will backfire as mainstream Americans will come to think that Palin's very strident conservatism is not in line with the average American's more moderate views on government, abortion, gun control, and more.

CNN's Cafferty today showed Iowa polling results with Obama in huge lead, arguing that this indicates how popular Obama is with white voters, though he's foolishly failing to note that Obama spent an *enormous* amount of time in the Iowa Caucus process. That state is not representative of how most Americans will view him, and tells us little about how the battle for middle class rural voters will shake out in the coming election.

Palin's Speech Enthusiam 40/45

CNN's poll of Palin Speech support appears to reflect party lines, though it would be interesting to see this broken down by party. Presumably Palin will need overwhelming support from Republicans for McCain's Palin strategy to work as she must peel off some Democratic support for the McCain Palin ticket to have much of a chance of success.

Most polls show Obama with a small lead of 3-5 percentage points, though the best measures are likely to come in a few weeks after all the convention excitement subsides.

How do you rate Republican VP choice Sarah Palin's convention speech?
Thumbs up 40% 22657
Thumbs down 45% 25051
Didn't watch 15% 8520

Who is that old guy next to Sarah Palin?

Gov. Sarah Palin and Sen. John McCain
Originally uploaded by buddhakiwi

As the third day of the Republican Convention gets underway it's hard to hear much news about anything but McCain's VP pick Sarah Palin, Alaska's conservative reformist Governor who will speak tonight in Minneapolis - a speech that may attract as much attention as Barack Obama's rockstar-like show in Denver last week.

I'm starting to understand the simple and risky strategy behind McCain's very unusual choice of Palin, and I think it will prove to be a blunder of near Presidential proportions, but this remains to be seen.

One part of the strategy that has worked magnificently is how quickly Palin's VP nod has focused attention away from Obama and the Democratic Convention but Palin was also one of the very few (she may be the only) national polical figures who fit the following bill:

* Conservative. (esp. on pro life, pro guns, pro big military, anti social spending) McCain's lackluster support among many conservatives has been a major thorn in his side. Palin is *more* conservative than most of his conservative critics, and they clearly love this choice and will fight harder for this ticket than become disaffected by a McCain / Lieberman ticket which would have much better suited McCain's personal and political sensibilities.

* Female. McCain felt a woman on the ticket would help keep at least some disaffected Clinton supporters off balance and undecided. Despite the handful of Clinton-turned-Palin women FOX news will parade as an example of this strategy working, it's very unlikely that many of the core Clinton supporters will change party and ideological allegiance so dramatically. How many women will put gender above almost every other key Democratic issue? Very few.

* Young and attractive. McCain, more than anybody, is feeling the pain of going up against a rock star candidate. Palin's personal appeal helps shore up that front.

* Fighter. This last factor may be the single most important in the equation, and it is the one that helps make sense of what many see as a very strange McCain decision. McCain's personal style matches Palin's in several ways, and he sees Palin's unique situation with respect to her own baby Trig and her daughter's teen pregnancy as positive and provocative talking points in their fight for the presidency. Where some would say the Palin children challenges reflect some hypocrisy, McCain Palin will argue that the problems are not caused by teen pregnancy so much as missing dads and unsupportive families, and that right to life issues trump any potential disabilies - even the severe ones faced by Palin's baby son.

My view on this last factor is that it will probably backfire because it will be impossible for Palin to bring these talking points up without sounding like she is exploiting her family challenges for political gain. Only if she is directly challenged can she react dramatically and combatively and retain the sympathy of middle of the road Americans, and you won't see this type of direct attack. Democrats don't need to bring these issues up at all anyway. The media, always hungry for red meat analysis and conflict, will continue to report on them while Palin will struggle to find ways to counter those stories effectively since they won't be coming from a clear enemy.

End game? Palin gives Obama about 5-10 point advantage he would not have had if McCain had continued to focus on the "experience" issue and brought on an experienced VP.

Of Pregnancies and Palins.

It is painful to watch how hungrily the media has latched on to the Palin's pregnancy issue, even though you can argue that there is considerable irony or even hypocrisy when family values candidates appear to fail to even convince their own children to avoid the complex pitfalls of early sexual activity.

I would challenge the many conservatives who love to cast stones to spend a little more time looking in their mirror and at their candidate's kids. In a contest for "most responsible kids" you'd be hard pressed to find better examples than the kids of Kerry, Clinton, Biden who sure appear to believe more in personal accountability than their Republican counterparts who are not "bad kids" but sure do not seem to act as mature or responsible. But this is not all that relevant to the national debate (unless you try to proclaim that family values candidates make better parents).

My take on most of this is that the character assassinations that dominate politics (since the founders!) are pretty much a bunch of crap as far as I'm concerned. People like Palin, Obama, McCain, Biden all have some questionable stuff in the closet but nothing that suggests to me they don't have the best interests of the country at heart.

There are real differences in how we should move ahead, but I'm very confident *any* of those four people could steer our clumsy ship of state USS USA competently. I'm a big fan of Bill Clinton and JFK's intellects, but both made near-catastrophic errors of judgement many times in their presidencies.

The solution? Most decisions are best left to the experience of a good cabinet, and I think we should vote for each of those positions rather than let the president pick them paying too much attention to ideology and not enough the expertise, brilliance, and experience the cabinet deserves.

Republican Convention Plans Change

On the Eve of Hurricane Gustav's landfall near New Orleans the Republicans have changed Convention plans though the details appear to remain fluid. President Bush and VP Cheney will not appear tomorrow in Minneapolis as planned, and other major speakers like the Governor of Louisiana will not be in attendance either.

The latest reports suggest the convention may only last one day, Presumably to nominate John McCain, and then be postponed to another date. Strategically this may actually have the advantage of giving the Republicans a monster event with monster media coverage much closer to the election than is usual.

Gustav is about to bring flooding and high wind to the Mississipi and Louisiana coastlines and the convention would have been both interrupted for Hurricane news and have been a conspicuous "celebration" in the midst of potentially another major storm tragedy for the Gulf Coast.

Biden v. Palin Round ONE

Joe Biden - World Economic Forum Extraordinary Annual Meeting Jordan 2003
Originally uploaded by World Economic Forum

Wow, the buzz over Sarah Palin is sure a lot bigger than the Biden Buzz was! Did I just say Biden Buzz Wuzz? Yes, I did.

McCain may actually have a challenge (or advantage?) being eclipsed by Palin who may emerge at the "rock star" of that team while Obama keeps his star persona intact with his pick of Joe Biden whose demeanor is unlikely to overshadow that of his running mate the way Palin may overshadow McCain's personality and style.

Sarah Palin's Official Website & Blogs

Almost everybody is asking "Who is Sarah Palin" so I thought I'd provide a list of the best links, including some to her official websites that come from the state of Alaska where she is the Governor.

McCain's Palin pick is certainly successful at focusing attention on her and away from the Democratic Convention and Obama which have completly dominated the US news cycle for the past four days. Unlike Obama's VP Joe Biden, Palin has a very "new and interesting" appeal to the media, though I remain skeptical that Hillary Clinton supporters are likely to change their party allegiances to vote for somebody who is even more conservative than McCain.

Alaska Governor - Sarah Palin's official web site

Sarah Palin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Alaska Governor Bio - Sarah Palin

Sarah Palin Profile by Fred Barnes at Weekly Standard in 2007. Barnes is a conservative pundit who speaks for many Republicans in the conservative wing of the party, and may have been a significant influence in McCain's decision.

Palin at Politico (a critical Palin piece)

Palin at Huffington Post (critical)
Palin from Michelle Malkin (a favorable Palin Piece)

McCain picks Palin as his VP running mate

In a move that seems to have surprised almost everyone, John McCain has picked Alaska Governor Sarah Palin for his Vice Presidential running mate.

The announcement came this morning, strategically undermining a news day that otherwise would have been filled with Democratic Convention imagery making Barack Obama look as much like a rock star as a presidential candidate. The pick also is clearly an attempt to chip away at what appears to be Obama's weakness in appealing to some Hillary Clinton supporters.


Palin is a conservative who is pro-life, favors drilling in Alaska (ironically McCain has opposed this but I think will change his position after the election), and is a strong advocate for gun rights.

The McCain campaign strategy here appears to be an attempt to please the conservative base - many of whom like Palin a lot for her outspoken and conservative ideas about Government - while also appealing to what appears to be a minor backlash among Democrats against Obama for not choosing Hillary Clinton as his running mate.

It's going to be very interesting watching the Biden - Palin debates, though I can't help but think Palin will struggle to show how she can match Biden's foreign policy and military experience. Biden will be hard to swiftboat given his affable nature and non-confrontatational history in the Senate, where Palin's youth, experience, and good looks may hinder her ability to connect with voters.

McCain to pick Meg Whitman ?

Update: Sarah Palin is the McCain VP Pick

As the Democratic National Convention wraps up tonight with what promises to be a near "rock star" event featuring Barack Obama, John McCain is preparing to announce his pick for Vice Presendential running mate tomorrow at a large rally in Ohio.

President Picker says that McCain will probably pick former EBAY CEO and billionaire Meg Whitman both thanks to her strong economic background in the private sector and the appeal a woman will bring to the ticket for the millions of older women who have suggested they'll either support McCain or not vote at all after their disappointment with the failure of the Hillary Clinton campaign.

For McCain, this is a complex strategy but I think it's a viable one. Polls are showing that many Clinton supporters, especially women, are feeling disaffected. There is arguably no better way to encourage them to either switch to McCain or stay away from the polls than to force them to vote *against* a woman on the ticket. In all of US history there has only been a single woman on a presidential campaign ticket - Geraldine Ferarro with Walter Mondale almost three decades ago.

Will women vote for McCain only because he's got a woman on the ticket? A few will, but more importantly from a strategic point of view the choice of Whitman will help keep the disaffection alive on the Democratic side as a constant reminder to women of Obama's decision that he would *not* place Hillary Clinton on his own ticket, leaving women out of the Presidential power game yet again.

Obama Nominated by Acclamation at Democratic National Convention

(not reporting live from convention)

Barack Obama was just nominated by acclamation after an appeal for that by Senator Hillary Clinton as the New York Delegation prepared to cast their votes.

Party Chair Nancy Pelosi then called for the yes vote and after an enthusiastic yes crowd shout, whe did not wait for any "no" votes to be shouted and quickly concluded the nomination. Rules of order meant that Obama then would officially accept the nomination.

It's day three of the Democratic Convention and there has been little to suggest the powerful levels of discontent in the party a few months ago as Barack Obama narrowly beat out Hillary Clinton for the nomination.

Democratic Convention Day 2

(not blogged from the convention)

Day 2 of the Democratic Convention brought us the much anticipated speech of Hillary Clinton, which to all but the sharpest critics was a very powerful endorsement of both the party ideals and Barack Obama.

After a touching mother and daughter introduction, Senator Clinton gave what I felt was probably the most powerful and the most important speech of her entire career, essentially fully conceding the election to Obama and expressing in no uncertain terms that her supporters should support him now.

Although cynics would say Clinton had no choice here because to fight would have been to lose future party support, I think these relationships are fairly well defined from the outset, and Clinton has known for some time that she'd be backing Obama pretty much as she has for the past several months. The election will not hinge on Clinton support - rather Obama must try to convince the approximately 10% of Clintonians who say they will now support McCain that although Clinton was their choice, Obama is their man now. Given that Clinton and Obama's politics are very similar this is unlikely to be a problem.

Tonight there are likely to be some minor Clinton supporter skirmishes but it will be very hard to stand in the way of what has so far been a very positive and powerful message of support for Obama from all corners of the Democratic Party, including a simply brilliant speech by Michelle Obama on Monday night.

Democratic Convention Day One

As Michelle Obama prepares to address the Democratic National Convention in Denver the pundits are talking about the tone of the convention which so far has been very much a sort of cozy, feel good affair rather than a presentation of the talking points most strategists think the Democrats must hammer home to win the election - points such as economic challenges and the Iraq war.

However it appears to me the strategy is solid, and is to present Obama as a friendly and unifying force rather than a combative one. Appealing to people's desire for change is complicated because many of our natural tendencies
are to keep comfortable with the status quo and view agents of change with great skepticism. This is a natural and functional response and playing off this tendency will form much of the McCain strategy moving forward. Already Fox news and other conservative spokespeople are trying to paint Obama as an unknown force of change - almost as a foreigner rather than a dedicated pubic servant.

Thus I think the counter strategy by the Democrats is to make people feel comfortable with Obama. Look for an almost constant dialog promoting this agenda - Obama as a composed, friendly, stable fellow American who will make the changes many Americans feel are needed in the country.

Michelle Obama's delivery is brilliant so far - she's polished and confident, yet speaking almost conversationally with the very enthusiastic Denver crowd. Her mother and brother's introduction was touching and it is not hard to believe Michelle Obama is herself an exceptional example of the American dream.

John King at CNN is very correctly noting that the idea is to make a connection for people who otherwise see little in common with Obama.

David Gergen "She rescued the evening for the Democrats"

Obama VP is Joe Biden

In a pick that hasn't generated all that much buzz or press, Barack Obama has picked Delaware Senator Joe Biden as his Presidential running mate. The choice seemed to fly in the face of some conventional wisdom about running mates in that Obama and Biden share a lot of ideology and Biden is unlikely to attract many more southern or moderate voters to the Obama camp.

Near the eve of the Democratic Convention we find Obama and McCain equal in most polls, perhaps in large part because, as CNN polling director Holland has noted:

"The number of Clinton Democrats who say they would vote for McCain has gone up 11 points since June, enough to account for most, although not all, of the support McCain has gained in that time," Holland said.

Obama VP Choice Made - Wed Announcement Probable

Barack Obama is reported to have selected his vice presidential partner during his vacation time in Hawaii, and the announcement is expected to be made by email and probably also twitter and facebook alerts to Obama supporters/subscribers on Wednesday early in the morning.

Kaine, Bayh, and Biden were normally suggested as Obama's top picks, but others are possible as well.

McCain accidentally names his VP at Saddleback?

John McCain, asked by Rick Warren to cite the three wisest people he knows, quickly named General David Petraeus but then seemed stumped. He named John Lewis - a liberal congressman with whom McCain has less in common than most in politics, and then Meg Whitman, EBAY CEO who is in a key player in the McCain campaign . Given that he's been thinking every day about his VP nominee I'm wondering if he sort of panicked and let slip her name. Whitman is a superb strategic choice for VP given that she'd peel away some of Obama's support from middle aged and older women who have been very frustrated to see Hilary Clinton's failure, and Whitman would reinforce McCain's pro business "economically sophisticated" appeal to moderates.

Saddleback Forum

Barack Obama is taking questions at the Saddleback forum from moderate evangelical Pastor Rick Warren. Warren may emerge as a significant player in the election as his moderate philosophy is appealing to many, and the evangelical vote represents a key electoral block. McCain tends to hold most of that vote and will for the election, but if Warren speaks equally about the qualifications of each candidate it'll be a boon to the Obama campaign, possibly justifying for some evangelicals a vote outside of their normal frame of reference. Alternatively if Warren comes out strongly for McCain we could see a new groundswell of the support McCain has lacked so far - the kind of passionate conservative power block that helped GW Bush in both his presidential campaign victories.

John Edwards stealing the show

As the conventions approach - events that will more clearly than anything shape the coming battle in November for the presidency - it is the John Edwards sex and alleged payola scandal that has grabbed most of the headlines.

Rather than signalling a willingness to undermine the Democratic primary process, I'd suggest that Edwards, having failed to capture a significant shot at winning, tired of the process, leading him to succomb to the moral lapses that are now making headlines.

More significant than the affair - at least in terms of legality and credibility - are what appear to be hush payments. Although I doubt Edwards was involved in these you can make a case he bears more responsibility here than he appears willing to take on.

This episode may be good news for Obama, who has the lead and more than anything simply needs to just keep on keeping on. McCain, on the other hand, needs to either grab the spotlight or shine it on Obama problems. Edwards is keeping that from happening, and thus may have an interesting impact on our attention deficit political process.

Aloha Mr. Kaine?

With Obama sitting in Hawaii deciding on a VP, and Tim Kaine standing to tip the hat in the closest of the "close states", it's looking good for Kaine as the new Obama VP.

The latest "close state" polls at RealClearPolitics.com show a dead heat (as in a real tie, not the silly "statistical tie" the media often refers to in very misleading fashion when results lie within error bounds):

Colorado	47.3	45.7	Obama +1.6
Virginia	46.7	46.7	Tie
Missouri	45.0	47.3	McCain +2.3
Michigan	46.0	42.8	Obama +3.2
Ohio	46.0	45.5	Obama +0.5
Florida	45.8	47.0	McCain +1.2

Obama's looking pretty strong in this comparison, though it's important to note that flipping a few of the current electoral state results by a few percentages quickly gives the election to McCain. Our crazy Electoral college system, as we (failed to learn) from the 2000 Florida fiasco, puts an enormous amount of value on states that are close. This distorts the campaigns, forcing them to focus attention on swing voters in swing states a lot more than the rest of the population.

The founders intent was to balance things out, but it is unlikely they'd approve of the current situation because state's autonomy is of far less importance in the modern context than it was in the founding days of the USA.

US History

Scratch Edwards out of Veepstakes

Today John Edwards admitted his affair with a filmmaker who (later?) worked for his campaign making commercials.

Edwards' wife Elizabeth's cancer was a significant issue in the campaign and this indiscretion is magnified by the fact that many who admired the courageousness of her campaigning in the midst of a cancer battle will be particularly upset by Edwards' infidelity. Of course campaigns, sex, lies, and videotape are all intertwined in complex ways in American politics so it is possible this matter was already known to Elizabeth, as Bill Clinton's many dalliances were well known to Hillary even as she helped him imply there was little or no foundation to the rumors.

This unsavory story certainly destroys any chance Edwards has of becoming Obama's VP.
Fair or not, stories like this are political suicide.

What's wrong with Rasmussen?

While most polls show Obama with a lead over McCain, Rasmussen Reports has for some time suggested that McCain is leading in several key states as well as I think overall leading nationally.

Although it's possible Rasmussen is on to something other pollsters are missing, common sense suggests that his results - out of the statistical probability ranges for the other polls - are the result of a polling error.

I want to see their methodology but I'm wondering if the cell phone factor is an issue. Young voters are more likely to support Obama but also *far* less likely to be polled by traditional means, which often exclude cell phone calls. I'm assuming some polls are trying to factor in this complex cell phone variable but assume that factor may create a lot of variability.

Veepstakes at Hardball

Hardball arguably offers the most intense political analysis, and they are sizing up the VP competition as following:

McCain's top 3 in what Harball says is the increasing order of likelihood of winning:

3. Former Rep. Bob Portman
2. Governor of Minnesota Tim Pawlenty
1. Mitt Romney, Former Governor of Massachusetts.

Although Romney is a good pick for McCain, I think they missed the boat here. Another smart choice is Kay Baily Hutchinson to peel away the Hillary Supporters still reeling from the Obama defeat. As a woman she'd pull more total votes than other VPs, though I'm not clear if that support would come from the necessary states. Still, enough states will be close that the best VP strategy is a powerful *national* support getter.

For Barack Obama:

3. Senator Evan Bayh
2. Tim Kane, VA Governor
1. Joe Biden, Senator from Delaware

I think two senators are weak on a ticket, so it'll be Tim Kane in this group but I think more likely is Wesley Clark, a smart and sharp campaigner who could put to rest any military challenges to the ticket.

McCain is a Luddite?

I'm not sure if this New York Times characterization of McCain is fair, but certainly Obama has the upper hand in terms of online sophistication.

Ironically it's the McCain campaign that could do wonders with better online activity, since most younger folks are Obama supporters already. ie McCain might peel away support from Obama - something he'll have to do to win in November - by bringing the fight online where views are cheap and support can be fickle.

The Ludacris File: Ludicrous

The punditry is bending over backwards to connect BS and irrelevance to both candidates.

Today the stupid awards goes out for suggesting rapper Ludacris latest hip hop commercialized rant tune tells us anything important about Obama (it does not). On the McCain side of the pundit follies we have the normally very insightful Rachel Maddow on MSNBC suggesting that the McCain campaign's claims that Obama is presumptuously asserting himself is pandering to racism (they are not - Obama is somewhat presumptuous, you silly Rachel!). Obama's been the huge beneficiary of a combination of McCain's non-attack strategy and our cultural oversensitivity to any ads that could have racial overtones).

Swiftboating will be coming on in full force very soon, but it will leave any racial references to the imagination or it will fail as Obama is likely poised to quickly and effectively brush aside such issues as racial nonsense, immediately ceding the high ground to Obama.

This is natural in the 24/7 news cycle when people will simply change the channel if Rachel Maddow and Pat Buchanon start waxing philosophically about the merits of prudent fiscal management rather than arguing over silliness.

Now, McCain also deserves a stupid award for the new TV ad showing how popular Obama has become and asking "is he ready to be President?" Excuse me, but pointing out how your opponent is more popular than you are is NOT a good approach to winning.

Obama BBQ With Kaine?

Newsweek is practically suggesting that Virginia Governor Tim Kaine will be Obama's VP pick, perhaps as early as tomorrow. I remain very skeptical that the politically inexperienced Obama will pick a politically inexperienced Kaine rather than a liberal with stronger military credentials.

However, if Kaine's at the BBQ tomorrow maybe Obama will be cooking up more than just some ribs and chicken.

48 to 40 or 45 to 49? What's up with the polls?

Gallup was out today with a 48 to 40% vote margin between Obama and McCain via tracking poll AND a 49 to 45% McCain advantage via a regular poll.

Despite what appear to be close poll numbers, and although the election season is only moderately underway, and although the electoral college craziness could rear its ugly head and deliver bizarre results, it really appears that McCain has a very long row to hoe in terms of planting and nurturing support for his campaign. On the upside for McCain is the fact the race remains fairly close despite the media infatuation with Obama and Obama's superior resource base.

Today one report said McCain was greeted by only a *single* reporter at a campaign stop in New Hampshire while Obama seems to be a key topic of liberal and conservative journalism alike.

Vice Presidential running mates remain the key pre-election issue and decision for both McCain and Obama. McCain appears to be leaning towards Mitt Romney although I would not count out Huckabee as somebody who would galvanize American conservatives into voting for McCain, candidate that seems to have failed to inpisire much enthusiasm in that core Republican constituency.

My hunch is that Obama's choice is likely to come *after* McCain, who, currently in Obama's media shadow, would likely grab more media buzz by choosing first. If Obama goes first he'll lose the ability to counter McCain's choice with a strategic decision and also McCain will then be able to better control the VP buzz with his own strategic decision. ie I see it as in McCain's advantage to go first, Obama second and therefore predict that's how this will shake out.

Or....you could just flip a coin.

Predictions? Pundits don't make them because they are chicken sh**z, but here at President Picker we don't fear error at all:

McCain & Romney
Obama & Wesley Clark

Obama lead seems to be narrowing

CNN Reports that an average of five national polls puts Obama ahead of McCain by 6 percent in the national presidential election. Obama enjoyed a larger lead weeks ago, and it may be that the shine of the new and exciting candidate has worn a bit. Strategically look for McCain to criticize Obama's foreign policy experience, and Obama to focus more on the economy and tying McCain to President Bush and the current huge challenges facing the American economy.

Elections often boil down to economic considerations and this gives Obama a huge advantage as things are not getting better and are very unlikely to improve by November. Voters who like McCain may still reject him on the basis that they want "change" in the economy and are willing to take a chance with Obama.

Of course the reality is that presidents are not the primary economic drivers by any means, and neither Obama nor McCain is likely to fix our economic troubles anytime soon.

New Yorker's Obama Fist Bump Cover

Excuse me but what in the world ... ?

I suppose the uber-sophisticated New Yorker deserves some latitude in parody, but this seems to be designed more as an offensive sort of predatory swipe than a funny satire. But I'll have to read the article, and also I'll be interested in how McCain is treated by the same cartoonist, assuming he's still got a job after the Obama cover mini-firestorm.

48% to 40% with 117 days to go

Barack Obama maintains a very strong lead in the US Presidential race as we close in on the final stretch after what seems like an eternity of campaigning. In fact I think "campaign fatigue" is working in Obama's favor both because he's the guy going into the final few months with the big mo as well as the guy with stamina that will certainly last through the end of this election. Although yesterday's Iran comments by both candidates were weak, McCain stumbled so badly one almost had to wonder if he was suffering from some sort of mental lapse during the interview.

The latest polls appear to show the huge McCain Obama gap closing, but it's not clear to me how significant this is, or even how significant the polls are at this stage. Look for undecided voters in the tossup states to be the critical factor in this election. Obama cannot lose California or New York, and McCain cannot lose several states in the South. It is the voters in Florida, Ohio, Michigan, and other close states that will push somebody over the top, and it will not necessarily be the candidate with the most votes. In fact I'd argue Obama is very likely to win the national popular vote by at least a million, but this will not necessarily translate into the electoral votes needed to win. In fact the electoral college was in part designed to equalize smaller states and larger ones and the smaller states are more conservative, so McCain will likely benefit from more folly in what has become the questionable legacy of our seriously flawed electoral college system.

Fliip Flopping or Wisdom?

While the vacuous TV news pundits discuss whether Jesse Jackson likes Obama or not and something about McCain and a viagra comment, the candidates struggle to discuss real issues such as Iran and Iraq. The middle east can't seem to leave the American stage regardless of who is in power, and the next president is certain to inherit the complexity of that situation.

Kudos to McCain and Obama for working towards stability in the middle east. Although there is some political hay made of what is a likely change in Obama's tone on Iraq, it it to his credit that he's reassessing the situation in light of the new circumstances.

Cindy McCain and International Aid

Kudos to Cindy McCain for her excellent relief work over many decades. McCain will travel soon to Rwanda to help bring assistance to a country ravaged by civil war, genocide, and poverty.

Cindy McCain has a long and distinguished history of bringing her influence and money to trouble spots around the globe, and even the most partisan among us owes this kind of effort some admiration and thanks.

CNN Sure Likes Obama

In the midst of the powerful conservative bias of FOX News CNN generally stands out as a much more reasoned point of view, but I'd have to say their profiles of the Obamas and the McCains sure seemed to favor Obama. Although it is reasonable to suggest both Cindy and John McCain's past is more controversial in many respects than Barack or Michelle Obama's past, the profile highlights seemed to focus almost exclusively on the McCain's defects and the Obama's virtues.

One can't help but suspect that the hip CNN crowd strongly favors a presidential win by Obama, who even detractors would agree is a lot cooler than McCain. The fact that this opinion seeped so powerfully into the profiles is cause for concern, though CNN would have to do a lot more than this to even hint at the kind of bias we see daily on FOX news, which is so heavily spun to the right it's often hard to extract the real news from the spin.

The Crackpot Vote - how big?

A critical question in elections is not so much how confirmed party members with long voting histories will behave, rather it is how those who don't think much about issues or implications will vote after they have seen the barrage of advertisements, appearances, and media coverage of the candidates.

The coming election will see a lot of effort attempting to influence that "crackpot voters", those who have little care for real issues and instead are concerned with bizarre or stupid interpretations of the candidates views, histories, and other aspects of the campaign.

I'm going to remain optimistic that this won't play a large role, given that the crackpot vote probably balances out fairly well between the candidates. Also, if the latest silly claims of "swiftboating" are any indication of the worse the campaigns have to offer each other we can remain hopeful that the election really will focus on issues rather than personal quirks, and voters will make their decisions wisely. Hmmm - that sounds way too optimistic.

McCain with Palin as VP?

Still something of a long shot for VP, I would suggest that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin would be an interesting choice for McCain because she'd pull some of the soft Obama support from former Clinton folks. Having a woman on his ticket, especially if Obama does *not* have one on his, would help equalize the advantage the democrats currently enjoy for promoting a form of "affirmative action" lacking in American presidential politics for the past 240 years.

Obama's choice? I'd say he's still getting lobbied by Hillary and the gang for her, but that is only about 20% likely. Biden? Maybe, but he's not the military strategist that, say, Wesley Clark or Colin Powell would be which is why I think they are probably on Obama's "A list" for Veeps.

Wesley Clark's Comment in the Swiftboat Context

Ironically there has been almost no activity so far one could call "Swiftboating", yet the big media is so hungry to make that case they are pulling even soft comments like Wesley Clark's snippy response to a question as evidence of attack politics.

Clark was being political of course, but said nothing unreasonable when he suggested that McCain's service alone does not necessarily qualify him to be commander in Chief. He did not even say McCain is *not* qualified to be President!

Here is the issue we should be discussing:

The World is a complex, potentially dangerous place. Candidates must understand a lot about current military issues to be a good commander in chief. A great one would cut the military budget significantly while increasing security using advanced technology and targeted spending and military activity. However almost nobody is willing to consider that because most Americans are effectively brainwashed by their own stupidity into thinking Government effectively spends half the global military budget - some 550 billion each year. We don't spend it effectively, and it's an outrageous drain on our economic security, and neither candidate will deal effectively with this.

Whether McCain or Obama has more strategic military inspiration is almost a trivial issue. Asymetric warfare and the global economics of the military have changed the game so significantly that it's not clear what skills are needed.

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.

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

ObamBraham Lincoln?

Joe Klein's article about how Obama is conjuring up so very old fashioned stuff is worth a click for the *picture alone*.

Lincoln, in my opinion, would not be surprised to see an African American running for the American Presidency, and he would certainly be pleased that racism's shadow over the USA has shrunk to the point where race won't play a major role in the election.

Obama to forego $84,000,000 federal campaign financing

Barack Obama today announced that he would not take federal financing, opting instead to finance his own campaign. McCain has suggested this means Obama has backed away from a written pledge to do otherwise.

As Kenneth Gross noted tonight on PBS news, this is clearly a money play. Obama has raised a spectacular sum so far in the primaries - over two hundred million dollars, and should have no problems raising far more than that for the general election. With a donor average which I think is still in the neighborhood of 100-200 and a maximum of 2300 per donor, look for Obama to fill his campaign warchest with at least another 400,000,000 before the November votes are tallied.

McCain's ability to raise the huge funding needed to compete is much less certain. Republicans sensing a likely loss in 2008 may choose not to send as much to McCain as if he was more competitive. So far McCain has only been raising about 21 million per month on average. Unless he sees a huge and dramatic surge in funding McCain will be at a huge financial disadvantage barring some huge help from the Republican National Committee and the 527 groups that have far less stringent financial requirements and therefore can take large donations from wealthy Republicans.

McCain will likely be much more comfortable now with the 527 group "swiftboating" ads which may offer his only hope at competing with Obama.

Tim Russert RIP

Tim Russert was a fine journalist - clearly a guy who loved his country but did not let that get in the way of reporting the good, the bad, and the ugly of our American experience.

I do have to agree with this Slate Article, however, that suggests the media has spent more time on Russert than was warranted by his many years of fine journalistic service to NBC. Of course the media *always* gets relevance totally wrong. Network news spends at most a a few minutes monthly discussing the Military spending despite the near-insanity of the current US Military budget (even though you pitch in thousands as an average taxpayer, I bet you cannot guess this number to within #100,000,000,000 of the right answer. Yet you think this is probably money well spent? It is not. Yes, you should be ashamed and NO, this extraordinary level of waste, fraud, and abusive spending is not keeping the USA safer than smart spending would. Also YES, we should be cutting social services massively as well. The founders would be completely outraged about how Government has absorbed so much productivity in the name of good national stewardship.

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.

Electoral Showdown: Obama Leads Strongly

Barack Obama is squarely leading John McCain in both national polls of the popular vote and also the far more important electoral vote count, though McCain strategists will find some comfort in the fact that the "solid" electoral base for McCain appears stronger than the solid base votes for Obama.

However if we split the tossup states listed here at RealClearPolitics
Obama wins the Presidency handily.

Show Obama the Money

Barack Obama has raised tens of millons more than John McCain, but McCain is the one with huge personal wealth. USA Today reports

Where the Obama's appear to have a net worth of about a million, John McCain is awash in money with net worth in the range of about 27+ million and a wife who is worth well over 100 million thanks to her inheritance of a beer distribution business that she now runs.

Unfortunately for the McCains personal wealth does not translate into political success. John Edwards and Hillary Clinton both had more than Obama but still lost elections and billionaire Ross Perot managed a distant third place in the general election despite his immense personal wealth, which many believe he would have used if his prospects were greater to win.

McCain's Daughter: Blogger

Kudos to John McCain's daughter who is blogging her experiences along the campaign trail and elsewhere. I was surprised that Mitt Romney's sons did not get more attention for their efforts blogging, but I think many bloggers think this are publicity stunts more than sincere expressions from key insiders in these campaigns. There is a bit of the former I am sure, but fakes are easy to spot and I haven't seen any indications that these candidate kids are not writing most if not all of their own stuff.

Obama is up, McCain is down

The early polls pitting John McCain against Barack Obama suggest that Obama is in the lead in electoral votes, and that clearly Obama is the man to beat as states line up for the voting in November.

Before the big campaigns start in earnest it is impossible to predict how things will shake out, though the basic early conditions clearly favor Obama, and strongly. His remarkable political machine has created a huge groundswell of support that appears likely to increase as the Clinton factions come over to Obama. McCain remains challenged in terms of funding and hard support from the traditional key Republican sectors who historically have not favored McCain's traditional maverick stances.

Obama and Clinton Meet at Senator Feinstein's Place... in secret

Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton met today in Washington. Clinton will speak tomorrow, conceding to Obama, but it is not at all clear what they talked about. There is huge buzz about whether Obama might name Clinton as his VP. Most pundits are saying he will not but they appear to have very little inside information.

Swift Boats .... Launching

Now that it is Obama vs McCain in the general election look for a fairly dignified level of direct exchange between these two senators along with a *hurricane* of personal destruction stories from advocates for each side.

A friend mentioned a story to me about John McCain verbally abusing his wife in public. I'm still not convinced the upcoming book is a reliable source, but you can bet the claim will make it into the pro-Obama blogOsphere very quickly:
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/McCain_temper_boiled_over_in_92_0407.html

If true this is a very alarming anecdote but does this rise to the level of showing McCain is an abusive bad character? Will this be countered with Obama drug use stories from the McCain Swiftboating teams?

Are blogs reporting, and you deciding, or is all this out of hand?

Clinton to Concede on Friday

Hillary Clinton will concede the election on Friday, apparently following a large number of influential calls today suggesting that it was important she not stay in the race now that Obama has effectively clinched the party's nomination.

Hillary "No Decision Yet"

Despite millions of votes in the primary, Hillary Clinton appears to be in the small minority of Democrats who think she's got a shot at the Primary, even as Obama has clinched the decision based on current and almost certain totals. In fact by morning more superdelegates will commit to Obama, giving him an even more insurmountable lead in the Primary.

My take is that Hillary is now "running for VP", and her strong speech was basically telling Obama "you need my peeps".

Obama, however, is unlikely to choose Hillary as a running mate based on most reports that suggest the gravity of the Clintons is simply too overwhelming to support her as VP and Bill as ex president in residence.

But hey, we are talking about party politics where ... anything can happen.

It Is Obama

Even as the final state votes come in favoring Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama now has clinched the nomination based on the delegate total after the South Dakota primary.

Clinton is speaking in New York at 9:45 EST but it's still not clear if she will officially concede or wait until later to do so. Clinton's speech is both powerful and intriguing as she's not yet giving a clear indication of her intentions.

We'll know more in a few minutes....

Obama Within 7 Delegates - Will Clinch For Certain

Obama may actually clinch the nomination *before* the polls close today, though strategist Karl Rove speaking on Fox appears to have it right - the Obama campaign wants to win tonight based on pledged delegates putting them over the top rather than the party hack vote from superdelegates.

Obama To Clinch Nomination at 10pm EST

It's now *very* clear that Barack Obama will clinch the Democratic nomination within minutes - and probably within seconds - of the close of the polls tonight in Montana at 10 pm EST.

Many superdelegates have already said they'll be committing to Obama at the close of the polls, including some of the most potentially influential superdelegates such as Jimmy Carter and several US Senators.

Hillary Clinton may not concede the race tonight though I'm guessing she will do so, and immediately announce her unqualified support for Obama. Network TV is reporting that Clinton has said she'll accept an Obama VP spot based on conversations with campaign insiders.

Electoral Vote Mapping McCain and Obama

This site has a great idea - track the state by state voting polls and then assign electoral votes based on that to see if McCain or Obama has the edge in the National Election.

Unfortunately the methodology has a serious flaw until the Demcratic primary is over, and that is the fact that Clinton supporters are likely to shift their perceptions dramatically once Obama is the "annointed" candidate. My view is that almost all of Clinton's support will flow to Obama even though at this time there are many Clinton supporters saying they won't vote at all or will even support McCain.

My view is supported by the 15 day average which shows Obama winning general election while the 50 day average favored McCain. By next week, when the Democratic Primaries are wrapped up and Obama will be the presumptive adn perhaps the actual winner, I think the electoral voting will line up with national polling and show Obama with a strong lead over McCain.

Obama to Clinch Nomination within minutes after SD Polls Close

Extremely reliable sources are reporting that some superdelegates will pledge to Obama *immediately* after the polls close in South Dakota on Tuesday June 3rd.

The pressure to commit to Obama and effectively line oneself up with the next President is already weighing heavily on the remaining superdelegates and it is likely the party will seek to have a large block - enough to put Obama over the top - commit to him Tuesday night.

Prediction: Obama will clinch the nomination Tuesday, and Clinton will concede Wednesday morning.

Half a disenfranchisement is better than a whole

The Democratic Party rules committee has decided to give half power to the delegates from Florida and Michigan. Had this decision been made earlier it would have seemed wiser than now,and Clinton is suggesting she may dispute this decision later. The inept process has made the end of the Democratic Primary as much an example of contentiousness and poor planning as party unity, which is still sorely lacking for the Democrats.

The Clinton campaign is now making the (correct) case that more voters cast a vote for her than for Obama, although the process is not about total votes and thus it's not clear how you should allocate, for example, caucus activity since those states did not have a popular vote.

As with the 2000 election we are seeing that our "democracy" is ... seriously flawed. Rather than simply count everybody's vote in both primaries and the general election we have system that are designed to "balance out" the process but have been co-opted by party insiders to make it messy and questionable. The solution is very, very simple. One person, one vote, abolish delegate voting and abolish electoral college.

Obama resigns from church over controverial pastor comments

There are many ironies and defects in the American political experience and Obama's resignation today from his church of some 20 years, the Trinity United Church of Christ, brings out several of those defects and ironies.

The most glaring one is that the church is not Obama. Clearly his plan and his presidential decisions would be well within the pale of Democratic mainstream American approaches to conflicts here and abroad.

However, it's also true that the church is probably more representative of Obama's views about America than he's letting on. Clearly this was a church that used racial conflict themes as a way to energize the members. Ignoring the debate about that strategy most Americans don't like that approach.

Also provocative is the endorsement of liberation theology - a concept popularized in central America during those severe conflicts that often winds up accepting (or even endorsing) violent socialist revolution as a good solution to the problems of societies, which many in Liberation theology see as the evils of US style corporate capitalism. Even if you buy this point of view, it is not even in the ballpark of mainstream American values.

Ironic that the Church's recent rhetoric, the frenzied media response, and Obama's quitting at a strategic time are all part of the political process - a process we are supposed to work hard to keep separate from religion.

So, on with the game! Let the *second inning* ? Begin as Obama, the very likely nominee, begins the battle with McCain. Those guys may have energy for it but I'd have to say I think most of us are pretty darn weary of it all!

Democrats Meet on Michigan and Florida's Fate Soon

Saturday will bring discussion and a probably decision by the Democratic National Committee on how to treat the delegates from Florida and Michigan. Although Clinton has more pledged support in the meeting it appears unlikely that the committee, which I understand had voted earlier to NOT seat these delegates, will now reverse itself. Most likely would seem to be a compromise that will seat some of the delegates. Even seating all of them would not put Clinton over the top, and any major departure from the original gameplan is likely to create a backlash from the superdelegates who can put Obama over the top.

Prediction: Bet on Clinton to get some delegates seated and Obama to win the big show, probably as soon as next week when it appears likely a large block of superdelegates will move to his support based on pressure from the party.

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.

The Popular Vote Totals: Michigan and Florida Factor

There's finally some buzz in the media about the issue of Florida and Michigan disenfranchisement. The Florida and Michigan Votes do not appear to shift the delegate count to Obama by my earlier calculations but it is true that if you count - as they stand now - the Florida and Michigan votes Clinton is actually beating Obama in the popular vote by a very narrow margin.

The issue of disenfranchising Florida and Michigan is, as we have noted before, a terrible defect in the Democrat's primary process although it also seems unreasonable to simply give Obama zero votes in Michigan and the relatively small Florida number which is partly because he did not campaign in Florida. Obama was not even listed in Michigan. That said, even if the election had been held on the "sanctioned" date so the delegates would count, it's likely Clinton would have won Florida handily and probably Michigan as well.

Here is a great chart of the popular vote totals from RealClearPolitics

Given that there is not a good alternative, what is the right answer? Both Obama and Clinton appeared to see strategic advantage in this approach, which is why we had no protests from either at the time. Are the rules more important ... or the votes?

I think the clear answer is a revote in these states. This was the right answer in 2000 when Gore would have won Florida had voter intention been properly measured but was not due to defective Butterfly ballots in Palm Beach County.

Hillary's Assassination Comment

Hillary Clinton's sound byte sized comment that appeared to suggest one reason to stay in the campaign is that Obama might be assassinated is, as usual, getting hopelessly and stupidly discussed in the media.

*Obviously* she pretty much meant what she said. She meant "shit happens that can affect the campaign dramatically" and it does happen. Both Clinton and Obama almost certainly get threats every day from many sources and unfortunately we live in a violent culture. It's not unreasonable for a person to factor this in to the campaign equation.

However *obviously* this was an inappropriate statement. Discussing assassination in this context only inflames the debate and issues largely irrelevant to the campaign. She let slip a concern any intelligent observer of American politics must consider.

Now media people, let's talk about real issues.

Recount - A Film About the 2000 Election Problems

Kevin Spacey will star in HBO's "Recount" which will be shown Sunday and dramatically address issues that still swirl around the 2000 USA Presidential Election where GW Bush beat our Al Gore despite losing the popular vote and a razor thin margin in Florida.

We've talked a lot about the recount here at President Picker. Gore clearly should have won Florida, but not for the reasons often cited which are vote fraud (no indication of much of that) and Supreme court stopping the recount proposed by Gore (which was not a full recount and would have left Bush with the win according to most standards of counting). However, Gore *would have won* if you factor in the clear intention of voters in Florida. Thousands of the punched butterfly ballots of Palm Beach County were spoiled because they had votes for both Pat Buchanon and Al Gore when the voters clearly would have voted only for Gore if they had understood the poorly designed ballot. Also, an analysis of overvotes indicates that counting them would have shifted the win to Gore (overvotes are where voters left scratches or marks or extra punches).

Recount is somewhat biased towards a Democratic partisan viewpoint but otherwise does a commendable job of detailing how complicated and political the decision making became in Florida 2000.

I personally take a bit of comfort in recognizing that the founders anticipated resolving this type of vote trouble which is why the "safe harbor" provision left it to the state legislature to allocate the electors (as they used to do in all cases - popular vote allocation of electors is a somewhat modern notion).

Still, the system failed - dramatically - and could fail again. How to prevent this? Abolish the Electoral College before we have this happen again. This means fraud or irregularities in a given area will matter much less, and be far less likely to affect the outcome.

Obama Wins Oregon

Obama has handily won the Oregon Democratic Primary by a large margin - some 58% to 42% Clinton in the still unofficial vote tally.

Speaking in Iowa it's now clear Obama will not only play the frontrunner, he's strategy is to play the elected candidate, talk much more about McCain than Clinton, and challenge the Clinton campaign to make their case against his candidacy which they are not inclined to want to do. This appears to be a plan that will seek to immunize him against a last minute superdelegate coup by Clinton - an act that even the media would be likely to challenge so severely that it's become a non-strategy for the Clintons who are down to their last few cards. As we showed earlier this week even an allocation of most of the Florida and Michigan delegates to Clinton is unlikely to affect the delegate outcome and although she can make a claim to the popular vote that is somewhat unfair since Obama did not campaign much in Michigan and Florida and popular vote appears to have gone out of style in the 2000 election, though this electoral and delegate craziness remains one of America's great shames.

Obama in Iowa "We have returned with a majority of elected delegates"

Barack Obama is speaking in Iowa and getting very close to claiming victory in the Democratic Primary. It's a good strategy to make it much harder for the Clinton campaign to work the Florida and Michigan and Superdelegate angle - an incomprehensible mess left over from a poorly structured primary.

The Obama campaign is keeping up the "hey, we have won this now!" spin as he spoke today in Iowa. He's even cleverly throwing out kudos to Hillary Clinton, lauding her participation and saying he's grateful to her .... and now going on to suggest the party needs unity.

So has he won? Of course not. Obama however has a clear lead in elected delegates, and as we calculated earlier this week even if you assign a generous number of the Florida and Michigan delegates to Clinton she'd still have fewer than Obama. Therefore it's unlikely that the Clinton's will turn as many superdelegates as Obama. Superdelegates will want to go with a winner, so look for a large block of them to soon announce that they are pledging to put Obama over the number needed to win - this could happen as soon as this week. At that point Hillary will very likely drop out so the Democrats can have a unified convention.

Clinton Crushes Obama in Kentucky

As happened in the West Virginia primary Hillary Clinton soundly won today's Kentucky democratic primary with 65% of the vote to Obama's 30%. Clinton must be thinking "oh what a difference an Iowa makes" as she contemplates a strategy that now appears to have failed to gain enough support early in the primaries to carry her on to victory. Although it is not clear that Obama's 11 consecutive victories before Pennsylvania were the key factor in his probably primary victory, I think a combination of strategic errors cost Clinton an election she would have won with a different approach. The key mistakes:

1) Waiting *far* too long to gripe about Florida and Michigan's missing primary votes. Clinton's point is very valid that these states have been disenfranchised. In fact to any clear thinker this is an outrage. Yet I think the Clinton strategy was very foolish, waiting until she was the underdog to complain about this. Now the question is one of fairness to the states who had their votes voided vs fairness to the process of electing which was also seriously compromised here. A revote is the answer, and the Democratic party should fund a new vote unless it can be shown that the outcome would be very unlikely to have an effect on the outcome of the race.

2) Failing to name Obama as her choice for VP after Edwards dropped out of the race. This would have won her superdelegate support and might have turned the tide in some states - most importantly it would have stolen Obama's momentum at a critical time.

McCain vs Obama's Iran Smackdown

The McCain and Obama campaigns are obviously out testing strategies for their general election matchup. Obama is speaking much more aggressively, calling McCain for example a "creature" of Washington and lambasting his stance on the Iraq War. McCain is getting tag team help from no less than the President of the USA himself, GW Bush, who is calling Obama's approach to foreign affairs the "appeasement" that Bush says has historically failed in dealing with other countries.

As usual this election will probably be won or lost with the indecided voters who have yet to make a firm decision. A key indication of the outcome will be how the Hillary Clinton voters react to her likely demise. If, for example, West Virginia and other conservative southern states go towards McCain the Obama campaign will be pressured to "conservatize" Obama in ways that won't make his key support base happy.

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.

Race and Gender? let's talk about it.

The media discussion about the role of race and gender is almost hopelessly naive and misguided. By any reasonable measure the Democratic primary process has blown completely out of the water the notion that race or gender bias are key driving forces in our society. They are *factors* but they are no longer major factors.

Lost in much of the debate is the fact that relating to a candidate on the basis of race or gender is NOT an indication of prejudice. I was glad to see two high level insiders on Bill Moyers tonight essentially agreeing that the WV vote for Clinton was not so much about race as it was about relating to the candidates. Obama as a northern bright and dynamic guy would have lost regardless of race. Perhaps a small percentage is a "racist" vote, but the fact he's the presumptive nominee of the party and the national frontrunner really should give pause to the many who think the national dialog remains too racially or gender biased for clarity. On the contrary I worry that we are now at risk for making too many topics off-limits because they will be unfairly labelled as "code" for race or gender issues that should not be discussed.

So the news is good - America is a more open minded society than many have suggested. Let's honor this and stop trying to take so many topics off limits. Talking about gender and race - rather than stifling debates and questions - is the best way to honor the national diversity we all enjoy in this country.RR

John Edwards Endorses Obama

John Edwards has endorsed Barack Obama in what may be considered another sign of Clinton's diminishing chances at the nomination. Coming strategically a day after Clinton's huge victory in the WV primary, Edwards will shift media focus away from that thorn in Obama's side.

Watching the two stand together on stage waving and hearing Edwards say "we" a lot in his speech, I got the idea he's on the *very* short list for VP. As a populist southerner Edwards would appeal to the block of southern democrats who are not showing much support for Obama.

Bob Barr = 2008's Ralph Nader?

Well, not exactly politically, but Barr could certainly become a spoiler for McCain in a very close election if he pulled away a few percent of the conservative voters.

Bob Barr is running as a Libertarian, though he'd likely appeal to very conservative voters and would be running as something of an alternative to John McCain - a more appealing choice for some conservatives who like Bob's no holds Barr'd very conservative agenda and can overlook the tarnish he took on his reputation when Larry Flynt revealed some of Barr's earlier indiscretions during his first of three marriages.

Ironically though Barr is now working for the ACLU, a group hardly noted for their pro-conservative stances.

Florida voters disenfranchised ... again

The extremely poor coverage of the big story of this election has been a disgrace of mainstream media incompetence more than bias but I think both are a problem in this election. Party insider politics rather than voting are determining the outcome of the election. Most in the press are fretting that it will be Clinton who would pull a backroom play while they fail to talk much about the most significant aspect of the Democrat primary so far - the disenfranchisement of *every voter* in Florida and Michigan.

The first problem is that the popular vote should be determining things rather than state by state voting. The idea is to mimic our seriously problematic electoral college system which determines the national election, but with all the superdelegate and back room disenfranchisements it's not having that effect anyway. The people - not the party hacks - should control all the elections and America is dangerously close to failing in that area ... yet again.

Did the voters make the decision to hold these primaries early? NO! Did Florida and Michigan voters decide to delete their votes? NO! Party hacks determined this outcome though I don't understand how or why. Presumably both the Obama and Clinton campaigns saw strategic advantages to this or they would have bitched louder. But that is not particularly relevant. The key question regarding teh nominee should be simply this: Who do Democrats want to represent them? Party insiders have made it hard to determine this with clarity. The race is extremely close and a huge number of delegates may not be seated. The superdelegate process is an anti-Democracy outrage, clearly designed to take control away from voters and give enough control to party insiders to determine the outcome.

Florida voters must be getting used to being disenfranchised - in 2000 the butterfly ballots of Palm Beach County were seriously flawed (they were designed by Democratic Party officials). Ballot spoilage threw the entire state - and the presidency - to George Bush. The focus was all on the chads which would *not* have affected the outcome had a recount been allowed. However the Palm Beach Butterfly ballots - Designed by a democrat - almost certainly threw the election to Bush.

Yet the Democratic Party had few qualms about the decision to delete the Florida vote from the current primary.

It is certainly true that rules should matter, both campaigns agreed to these rules (why?!), and Obama supporters are right to say that it's not "fair" to allocate to Clinton votes that might have gone to Obama if Florida party hacks and national party hacks had not mangled this process, but it's *even more unfair* to disenfranchise the Florida voters - again.

However if they did allocate the delegates according to votes in Michigan and Florida here are some scenarios:

Michigan popular vote: 55% to Clinton, 40% Uncommitted to Obama -
Clinton gains 23 delegates.

Michigan split the uncommitted vote: 75% to Clinton, 20% Obama -
Clinton gains 85 delegates

Florida: 50% to Clinton, 33% to Obama. Clinton net gain of 36 delegates.

Thus if we count these states Clinton would gain a net of either 59 delegates or 121 delegates depending on how you allocate the Michigan uncommitted vote.

As of today 1884-1718 = 166 votes separate Obama and Clinton so even the rosiest picture for Clinton would still have her trailing Obama by some 55 delegates, throwing the election squarely to the superdelegates and more party hack back room wheeling and dealing.

A solution to this mess? Clearly, new elections are needed in Florida and Michigan. Party hacks decided against this earlier in the year, but they were wrong to discard the only fair option. However this is very unlikely to happen. Welcome to our new Banana Republic voting system.

Gamesmanship is deciding the outcome of the election. Ironically this is likely to lead to an Obama victory as his strategists have more masterfully played their cards than Clinton's have and Obama really does seem to have a kind of groundswell support sorely lacking in Clinton voters.

Historically there has always been gamesmanship and strategy - but the extent to which that trumps the pure and unadulterated Democracy we all should seek is the extent to which we have a good vs a bad system. What shoud be clear to all after the elections debacle of 2000 and the questionable backroom politics of 2008 is that we have a bad system that is subject to uncertainty and manipulation.

The solution is simple - one vote to one person and no electoral college.

Clinton Wins West Virginia

The votes are not yet in but Clinton will certainly win the West Virginia Democratic Primary, throwing somewhat more uncertaintly into the complex and poorly constructed Democratic primary process. Although most pundits are exaggerating the demise of the Clinton dynasty West Virginia to some extent confounds the notion that "it's over", given that Clinton is likely to win by as much as 20% or more. Race appears to be a key factor in this victory, though it's simplistic to see race as a one way factor in an election where Obama consistently can count on some 80 or even 90% of the African American vote in most states.

Surprisingly few have challenged the incomprehensible system that almost all the candidates and parties signed on to over a year ago, but it's making it very hard for the Democrats to define their process clearly in the face of this close election.

If Clinton can leverage this victory into better treatment for the Florida and Michigan delegations which in turn might shift superdelegates to Clinton, the race would become even closer, and Obama's "frontrunner" lead could evaporate overnight. Is that likely? No, but neither was the GW Bush victory over Al Gore in 2000, and the Democratic process is looking more like it could hinge on defects in the process or on elitist insider plays rather than the popular vote.

Battleground: Oregon

Here in Oregon the TV advertising is starting to get very heavy, especially for Obama. It appears he may be trying to set up the campaign to effectively "declare victory" after this primary, arguing that his delegate total is greater and superdelegate total about equal.

However I'm inclined to think that both campaigns are going to settle this at the convention- probably in an amicable fashion and probably with Obama as the victor although skeletons in the closet could still rear their ugly heads and totally derail either campaign. This election is in the hands of the superdelegates now and it is not at all clear how they'll respond to the circumstances.

The Democratic party really should be ashamed to have such an un-Democratic process for choosing candidates. Although there are a handful of justifications for having "elite" voters with much more power than regulary people, the notion flies so flagrantly in the face of true Democracy and good elections practices that it's surprising the party hacks didn't realize this would create problems in a close election.

Clinton Wins Indiana

Although the Indiana race is going to be close the exit polling, which is almost *always* correct, indicates that Hilary Clinton will win Indiana by a narrow margin:

Male (45% of vote ) 51% for Clinton 49% for Obama
Female (55% of vote) 53% for Clinton 47% for Obama

The Male and Female stats cover all the bases, and therefore the likely outcome, assuming the exit polling was done fairly well, is that Clinton will get (.45 x .51 .2295) + (.55 x .53) = 52.1% of the total Indiana vote and Obama will get 47.9%. There is enough error in polling that this outcome is not certain, but it is very probable.

Contrary to what many think the exit polling in Florida was correct to suggest that Al Gore won the state. The key factor in Gore's "loss" in Florida was that the butterfly ballots of Palm Beach County which led to thousands of spoiled votes due to double voting. The exit polls can't measure this spoilage - they have to assume that people's votes actually *counted* where in the case of Florida the cast ballots were destroyed.

An important tangent to that is that the chad situation - even if Gore's Supreme Court challenge had moved ahead with a recount - would still have decided the election for Bush. Only certain unusual treatments of hanging chad counts, or the calculation where the spoiled palm beach ballots were mathematically allocated to Gore would have given him the edge. In a sense most of the analyses there were wrong. Republicans did not steal the election, but Gore did in fact win it. Blame our foolish Democracy and ballot procedures which fail to do a good job in some close elections.

North Carolina to Obama

Barack Obama has won the North Carolina Primary, beating Hilary Clinton in the state with the largest number of remaining delegates. Indiana also voted today but that race is too close to call by the TV networks.

President Selector from SelectSmart

Not sure who to vote for? Select Smart has a candidate selector that will ask you several questions and help you find the right man..or woman... for the job:
http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008.html

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.