Down to the Wire

Well, here it is, finally - the last day before the 2012 election. And things are looking relatively good for President Obama, thanks to the October Surprise that turned out to be Hurricane Sandy.

According to Nate Silver, the President now has an 86% chance of winning reelection, thanks to leads in the battleground states and a growing lead in the polls for the popular vote (now at 50.6 vs. 48.5). Although Silver says there are plenty of other reasons that Obama has rebounded since his performance at the first debate, I have no doubt that the hurricane and its aftermath did play a part in Romney's recent slippage.

I live in New Jersey, which, along with New York City, suffered the worst damage in the storm. Thankfully for us here in Northern New Jersey, the worst we got was a lot of downed trees and power lines. Since the rain wasn't that bad, we were spared the flooding we got last year during Hurricane Irene. But as everyone knows by now, the Jersey Shore was virtually destroyed and will take a long time to rebuild.

The destruction in New York City and New Jersey brought an endorsement for President Obama from Mayor Michael Bloomberg, an Independent former Republican, who said he thought the president is best equipped to do something about climate change, which he said the storm made clear was an important issue.

And, even more importantly, Republican Governor of New Jersey, Chris Christie, who gave the keynote speech at Romney's convention, praised the President's response to the hurricane and accompanied him on a tour of the devastation at the Jersey Shore.

"Christie told news outlets that the president’s response had been 'outstanding,' said that coordinating with the administration had been 'wonderful,' and remarked that 'the president has been all over this and he deserves great credit.' He even told Fox News the president had done a 'great job for New Jersey' while staying above the fray about politics: 'I’ve got a job to do here in New Jersey that’s much bigger than presidential politics, and I could care less about any of that stuff.'" 

After receiving criticism from the Romney camp for his embrace of President Obama during the crisis, Christie reiterated his support for Romney but refused to back down on his praise for the President.

"'I'm a Republican, I've endorsed Mitt Romney and I support him. I intend to vote for him on Tuesday,'" Christie said. 'But the fact of the matter is that if the President of the United States comes here and he is willing to help my people, and he does it, then I'm going to say nice things about him because he's earned it.'"

In the meantime, Romney didn't do himself any favors by cynically calling an already-planned campaign rally a "storm relief rally" and actually buying some of the "donations" that supporters then picked up to "donate" to hurricane victims. It also doesn't help that he ignored the fact that the Red Cross discourages physical donations and prefers monetary aid, as sorting and shipping actual goods just takes more time, when it is usually faster to use the money to buy goods from locations closer to the center of the crisis. (You can go here to donate to the Red Cross, by the way!)

Romney's campaign also shot itself in the foot by airing deceptive commercials in Ohio during this same time period that warned Jeep and General Motors were sending jobs to China. Both Chrysler (which owns Jeep) and GM emphatically denied the accuracy of the ads.

So the general public saw President Obama acting presidential, suspending his campaign to look at storm damage, putting politics aside and joining a Republican governor in commiserating over his state's losses, while his opponent was holding a storm disaster campaign photo op and airing commercials that people knew were lies. Romney supporters shouldn't wonder why their candidate has lost his momentum and President Obama is pulling ahead.

But nothing is certain yet, as Republican governors in Florida and Ohio are doing their darnedest to suppress the vote in their states by limiting early voting, making sure there are horrendously long lines to vote in the (mostly) Democratic areas of their states, and any other strategies they can come up with.

In contrast, Christie has tried to make it easier for those displaced by the storm in New Jersey to vote, by adding early voting opportunities at county clerks' offices, extending the ability to vote by email to all citizens of the state, and allowing people to vote using provisional ballots if they are currently staying in a location outside of their usual voting area.

I am no fan of Christie, but I am very impressed with his fairness and bipartisanship during this crisis. There are certainly a lot worse Republican governors - and the ones in Ohio and Florida come to mind.

This is a very close election and every vote counts. Be sure your voice is heard and go to the polls tomorrow, if you haven't already voted early or with an absentee ballot!

A Cat's Eye View - of Ron Paul

Baxter here. Sorry to have been Silent for so Long but I am at the Mercy of the Humans in terms of when I can Blog or not. Luckily my Female Human has taken it into her Head to get back to the Business of Blogging again and is giving me the Access I deserve to expound on My Opinions here. It's not that I can't Type, but I am not Very Good at the management of Software and I don't know HTML so my Human has to help a little when I want to do things like make things bold or whatever. And I have Strong Opinions so I need some bold now and then!

OK, so where was I? Oh yes, Ron Paul. The so-called Libertarian among the GOP field. As a Cat, I am sure you would understand that I like the idea of being a Libertarian. There is no one more Libertarian than Cats. Dogs are certainly NOT Libertarians. They do whatever their Masters want, or at least they try to. Sometimes their Brains are Too Relaxed to understand what is Wanted. But if they figure it out, they'll do it. Well, maybe except That Dog they call Diva. She tends to do what SHE wants. But the New One, Angel, she tries to Please; except for one thing - she still wants to chase Me and Bark. But I digress.

Many Humans who usually think Progressively tend to kind of like the idea of Ron Paul. Not Ron Paul himself, mind you, but their IDEA of Ron Paul. They think of him as Someone who would get Government out of their Hair and Leave them Alone. They also know that, unlike front-runner Romney, he thinks legalization of Marijuana should be left to the states and there should not be a federal law against it, which they think is kind of Cool - and that he was against the War in Iraq, also a Good Thing in many People's Eyes. But they may not have read the Details of his other ideas on the issues. If they did, they would be Much More Concerned about Mr. Paul. For instance:

He is "Pro-Life," saying he believes Life begins at Conception and Roe vs. Wade should be reversed. In addition, he opposes any Government Funding for Things People Don't Believe in - which in this case means:

"Ron Paul will also protect the American people’s freedom of conscience by working to prohibit taxpayer funds from being used for abortions, Planned Parenthood, or any other so-called “family planning” program."

Now, as a Neutered Cat, issues of Contraception have No Interest to Me. But I'm sure there are Many Progressive Female Humans who would find these Ideas Alarming. I also wonder, if Conservatives think the "American People" should not have to have their Taxes go toward Things they Don't Believe In, why does that only apply to Things Conservatives Don't Believe In? Shouldn't Liberals and Progressives have the Right to refuse having their Taxes go toward Things They Don't Believe In either? Like, for instance, My Humans would Choose not to have their Taxes go toward Wars and Military Spending. Why should the Consciences of Conservatives be the Federal Government's only Concern?

Ron Paul has More Ideas. Lots of them. For instance, he wants to Abolish the Income Tax, the "Death" Tax, the Capital Gains Tax, and the Federal Gas Tax. Oh, but he also wants to Balance the Budget. I Wonder how he would Do That? Sounds Confusing to Me; but of course, I am Only a Cat.

As for Energy, Paul is of the Drill, Baby, Drill! mindset. More Oil! More Gas! Nuclear Power! Coal! Oh, and Abolish the EPA - that's just a Lot of Troublemakers Ruining the Economy and keeping our Energy Prices up!
"As President, Ron Paul will lead the fight to:

* Remove restrictions on drilling, so companies can tap into the vast amount of oil we have here at home.

* Repeal the federal tax on gasoline. Eliminating the federal gas tax would result in an 18 cents savings per gallon for American consumers.

* Lift government roadblocks to the use of coal and nuclear power.

* Eliminate the ineffective EPA. Polluters should answer directly to property owners in court for the damages they create – not to Washington."

I particularly Love the idea that Property Owners would have to Go to Court to get Polluters to pay for the Damages they create. How would that work, exactly? My Humans would have to sue the owner of the local Gas Station or the nearby Industrial Brownfield for the contamination of the Groundwater? And wouldn't that Clog up the Courts indefinitely? Or better yet, for Mr. Paul, I guess he figures People would get Tired of having to Sue to get anything or wouldn't be able to Afford the Lawyer Fees and Big Polluters would just Get Away With It.

Home-Schooling? He's all for it.

"Ron Paul believes no nation can remain free when the state has greater influence over the knowledge and values transmitted to children than the family does.

And the truth is, no big government spending program can or will solve our nation’s education problems."

Personally, I would rather the Human Children be Taught by Professionals and not a bunch of Evolution-Denying, Anti-Intellectual Parents who will Brainwash the Kids to grow up thinking Just Like Them. And the More People who Homeschool, the fewer People will be paying for Public Education (Mr. Paul, of course, wants these Parents to get a Tax Credit for Homeschooling their Kids) and Public Education will Continue to Go Downhill.

What about Guns and the Second Amendment, you may ask. Well, of course, Ron Paul is all Pro-Second Amendment and Pro-Gun!

"With our gun rights under constant attack from our own government and the anti-gun United Nations, as well as the threat of rising crime due to our country’s economic woes, Congressman Paul believes it has never been more important that our President be 100% committed to defending our God-given right to keep and bear arms."

(Of course we All Know how much God likes us to have Guns; that's why it is our God-Given Right to have them!)

True, some Progressives and Liberals will like some of his Ideas on the Military. After all, who Among Us would argue that there is a lot of Waste in the Military Budget, and that we probably don't need to give Money to "Rich Dictators." And it probably IS a Good Idea to follow the Constitution and have Congress Declare War before actually going to War.

But to Me, as a Liberal Cat, his other Ideas are Just Too Dangerous. I hope my Fellow Liberals and Progressives will read Mr. Paul's positions Very Carefully.

So that's It from Me today. I hope you Enjoy Your Weekend and Have Enough Catnip to Get Through this Election Season. It's only going to Get Worse before it Gets Better!

Haiku Monday

January is
Such a long and dreary month
But so far no snow.

It's global warming
I venture to speculate;
No complaints from me. 

The Republicans
Have converged on New Hampshire
Tomorrow's the vote.

Mitt Romney screwed up;
Said he likes to fire people
Poor choice of wording.

Newt Gingrich cancelled
Because protesters showed up
He can't take the heat.

And Rick Santorum
Isn't faring much better
In the Granite State.

He heard the booing 
Due to views on gay marriage 
Over in Concord.

After tomorrow
The whole circus moves onward
Let's hope it ends soon.

A Cat's Eye View

Baxter here. Yes, I know. I've been Gone a Long Time. Not MY idea, let me tell You. My Humans have been in the Dumps for the past three weeks what with the Election Results and all. Plus they've been taking that Little Cat and That Dog up to their Cabin for the weekends and leaving Me here Alone. I have been Annoyed for weeks now with this Behavior. So I've been taking it out on Them by leaving Turds on the Carpet in the Foyer. I intend to keep Doing This until they Get the Message and stop all this Traveling. I don't mind it once in awhile but This is Ridiculous.

OK, so here I am, and High Time it is. I too am Disgusted with the Midterm Election Results but that isn't going to stop Me from Blogging. All the more Reason to be Involved, I say. I know my Female Human had hoped that the Rally to Restore Sanity might actually inspire Younger People to get out to the Polls on Election Day. Unfortunately it apparently didn't, since more stayed Home and didn't vote compared to 2008. However, those Younger People who did vote, still tended to vote Democratic, so that was still Encouraging.

In Fact, Democrats in General didn't turn out at the Rate one would have hoped, resulting in the "Shellacking" that Democrats received in the Election. Everyone has a Story as to Why this happened. But you know what? I don't care. To Me it just shows that that apparently most Humans are Stupid and have the Attention Span of a Gnat. Economy not fixed in less than Two Years? OMG, Massive Fail! Let's vote out the Democrats! Puh-leeze, it took eight years to get INTO this Mess; Ceiling Cat Himself couldn't have fixed it in two.

So now instead of the BiPartisanship and Kumbya spirit Touted at the Rally to Restore Sanity - or even a Return to Real Values that maybe the folks who showed up at Glenn Beck's rally may have Wanted - we get Two More Years of Total Gridlock in Washington. This isn't really what the Humans were voting for on November 2nd, in My Opinion. It's going to be like a couple of Tomcats sitting in opposite corners of the Yard caterwauling at each other for the next Two Years. And then who knows? The Humans may throw all those New Guys out too. You live by the Revolt, you die by the Revolt.

Of course, it would be Nice if President Obama finally realized the Republicans will NOT work with him come Hell or High Water, and finally started just Doing Stuff because it's Right instead of watering Everything Down to make the GOP happy - since it didn't Work anyway. Hey, President Obama: When you have a Senate Minority Leader saying Out Loud that his main purpose is to make you a one-term President, doesn't that give you a Hint that maybe it won't help to try to Compromise with his Party?

I mean, I'm as BiPartisan a Cat as you can find; I try to look for Middle Ground with other Cats - but I do draw the Line at Dogs unless they are willing to Meet Me Halfway.

On Other Subjects, it is Almost Winter, and as an Indoor Cat, it really doesn't bother Me at all. But the Humans are acting Dejected. Soon they won't be able to go up to That Cabin they go to. I'll be Happy but Little Cat will probably not be. She'll have to share the house with Me for the next few months with no Breaks. But so far we are getting along a Bit Better. She minds her Business and I mind Mine, and That Dog has been pretty much keeping out of our Hair altogether. I think Little Cat has cowed her and she's more Respectful to Me these days. Guess Little Cat wasn't that bad an Addition to the Family after all.

So, that Holiday the Humans call Thanksgiving was yesterday, and as Usual they had that Cooked Bird they make in the Oven. My Humans don't use the Oven much so I always know it's some kind of Holiday when they turn it on. At least when they're not heating up Pizza.

I had a few Scraps of Turkey but I'm really not big on Human Food. Little Cat enjoyed hers, as did That Dog.

Next I think comes that other Holiday where they put a Tree up in the House. I've never quite Understood this but it Smells Nice for awhile until it dries out.

Of course Today is what is known as Black Friday to the Retailers. I Personally have never understood why Anyone would purposely go to a Mall or other Large Store on a day when EVERYONE ELSE would Be There. Of course, I am a Private type of Cat and prefer having a Lot of Personal Space. But my Humans agree with Me on this. In fact, my Female Human has done all her Holiday Shopping On-Line for at least the last 10 years.

So, in the Meantime since Nobody here is Shopping, I thought I'd try to find some Bits of News that you might like to Know About that have nothing to do with Politics. Let's face it, we're all kind of Burned Out now, and it is only going to get Worse as the 2012 Election approaches. Right now I have No Idea who'll be running for the Republican nomination, except the possibility of Sarah Palin. Makes my Fur Twitch to even think about it.

So...other News.

Of course you are All aware of the Big Furor over the new TSA Scanning and Pat-Downs at the airports. Humans everywhere are talking about what an Intrusive thing this is and how it is tantamount to being Felt Up or Violated by the TSA. Well, now there is a Solution! The wonders of American Capitalism at work. Yes, it's Underwear with "Fig Leaves" to cover the Important Parts. (Actually for Women it's Clasped Hands over those Parts - strange, to Me. Why not Fig Leaves for Everyone?). It also makes Me wonder, if it can cover your Parts, can't this same Material cover the Plastic Explosives? It would seem that having this Underwear on would just make You subject to one of those Feeling Up Pat-Downs You don't want to have either.

Anything to do with Private Parts always bothers Humans. Apparently down in Australia they are having a Big To-Do because of some Art depicting Humans with the Heads of Dogs. It wouldn't be That Big a Deal since the Dog-Humans aren't doing anything Obscene, but apparently they are Naked and since Humans have no Fur their, um, Parts are showing. Check out the Link for more Info.

As for News in the Animal World, out in San Jose, California a Family got featured on the TV Show "Hoarders" for having so many Rats that they were Tearing Apart the House. Afterwards the Humane Society rescued 1000 of the Critters and they are now Available for Adoption. Oh come on, just let Me, Little Cat and That Dog at them. We'd make Short Work of them and there would be no further Rat problem in San Jose!

In a Report that hits - ahem - Rather Close to Home, a recent Study reports that not just Humans, but also Animals that live near them, are getting Fatter. This even applies to Lab Rats, whose Diets are Controlled and have not Changed much over Time. There are several Hypotheses as to Why. Scientists think it could be Pathogens, Hormones or even Temperature that is causing it. Maybe my Humans are keeping the House warmer these days. Or perhaps Global Warming is making us Fat? Either way I'm relieved of Any Responsibility since my Humans control the Food I eat and the Temperature! (For those that don't know, I am a Bit Overweight Myself - 22.5 lbs. last time I went to that Vet Office).

So that's All for Now. I hope you All had a Wonderful Thanksgiving and are enjoying the Long Weekend. Stock up on your Catnip to get you through the Holidays and I'll be Back Soon.

YES WE CAN!!!! AND WE DID!!!

Photo from MSNBC.com.

It's a landslide!!! Obama wins!!!

It is amazing and wonderful.

Waiting for the Answer

So far so good here in New Jersey. There was a good crowd at the polling place when DH and I went to vote at around 11 a.m. - and a friend of ours who is a challenger said that there were lines early this morning and there had already been more people there than usually vote all day.

I was distributing literature (a legal distance from the polls of course!) at another location, and they had had a huge turnout as well. The people we were approaching were overwhelmingly voting for the Democrats. But of course in New Jersey this isn't surprising.

I'm more concerned about the swing states - and hear there are substantial problems in some of the key locations. Strange how this always happens, isn't it? Maybe not so strange. Well we can't put up with this again! Let's hope enough people voted early and enough people are willing to stand in lines when machines break down, and that no one is denied their right to vote!

Countdown

Days are crawling by
We await November 4th
Hope fighting with fear

Polls are looking good
But anything can happen
I am still afraid.

Fear of bad weather
The dreaded Bradley effect
Even voter fraud.

Diebold malfunctions
Late "October surprises"
Something might happen.

Trolling the poll sites
Viewing electoral maps
Or Magic 8-Balls.

Not until Tuesday
Will any of it matter
Then the vote is real.

A Cat's Eye View

Baxter here. My Humans finally got Home after being gone for Too Long, in My Opinion. At least I was here by myself without That Dog, since they take It with them. My Humans' friend came and Served Me in their Absence.

Well, this has been an eventful couple of Weeks, hasn't it? I have to tell you, I am so glad I am only a Cat and don't have to worry about Money. My Humans have given up on the idea of ever looking at their 401ks again, as that Stock Market thing just keeps sliding downward. Today at first it looked as if it was going to be Better, and then in the last 10 minutes it tumbled over 200 points! Those People who invest in it keep looking for it to be the Bottom but it never is.

In other News, it was just announced that Senator Ted Stevens was convicted of corruption. While I don't like to wish Evil on anyone, it is Good to see him get his come-uppance. However, he still intends to continue his campaign for re-election to the Senate. I find this Bizarre:

"Despite being a convicted felon, he is not required to drop out of the race or resign from the Senate. If he wins re-election, he can continue to hold his seat because there is no rule barring felons from serving in Congress. The Senate could vote to expel him on a two-thirds vote."

From what I understand, regular Humans who are convicted of a Felony lose their right to vote - but apparently Senators don't lose their right to be a Senator? This just makes no sense to Me...but of course we Cats probably just don't understand the intricacies of Government.

Meanwhile, the Obama Human continues to lead in the Polls, which is good news. Despite my Female Human's fear of a Stolen Election, I think he's going to actually win. Interestingly, about 40 telemarketers in Indiana walked off the job rather than read a Script attacking Obama. I wonder if THAT had ever happened before?

In the meantime, there is some Scary Stuff going on Out There. There are breaking reports of a white supremacist plot to assassinate Barack Obama having been, thankfully, broken up by the Feds. But how many more are Out There? This Country is a Very Scary Place. I am glad that, being a Cat, I can just hang out at Home and not put Myself at Risk. The Obama Human deserves a Lot of Respect for putting himself Out There and taking these Risks.

Apparently the United States has launched yet another Attack on some other Country out of the Blue - killing a bunch of people in Syria, including some Children. According to the Report,

"Syrian officials lashed out at Washington on Monday for a 'sheer violation of international law,' saying the U.S. attack killed eight people and wounded one."

Seems to Me that a Country can't get away with calling other Countries "Terrorists" if that Country is going to act the Same Way they do. I mean, what is Up with THAT?

Well, telling you all this News has now made Me depressed. I was trying to find some Lighthearted Stories to share with You but couldn't find Any. That is Scary in itself, isn't it?

My Female Human is thinking of taking off on Election Day to make calls to Get Out the Vote. Even though she lives in a Blue State, there should be no taking anything for Granted this year, no matter where You live.

So with that I leave you with this LOLCat from YesWeCanHas.com:

Sinister Goings-On in the Swing States

According to the New York Times, a number of swing states have been purging their voter registration rolls, possibly illegally.

"The actions do not seem to be coordinated by one party or the other, nor do they appear to be the result of election officials intentionally breaking rules, but are apparently the result of mistakes in the handling of the registrations and voter files as the states tried to comply with a 2002 federal law, intended to overhaul the way elections are run.

Still, because Democrats have been more aggressive at registering new voters this year, according to state election officials, any heightened screening of new applications may affect their party’s supporters disproportionately."

I am not convinced that these purges aren't intentional. We must be vigilant that this type of thing does not end up costing Obama this election. Polls will mean nothing if the people who say they will vote for Obama aren't able to cast their votes.

This may be behind what happened to Enigma, who lives in Ohio and recently checked to see if she was registered and couldn't find her name on the list.

So, well before the election, be sure to double check whether you are on the list of registered voters in your state - even if you have voted in the past and have no reason to think you wouldn't be on the list.

Getting Back to Basics

I didn't have the heart to post about the primaries yesterday. Although I have said all along that I will support Hillary if she wins the nomination, my fear is that if she wins, she will not be able to beat McCain.

I watched McCain's victory speech on Tuesday night. He is very dangerous to our progressive cause because he could easily appeal to a vast swathe of voters.

He is a veteran; in fact, his years in the Hanoi Hilton qualify him as a hero. This is a vast change from the chickenhawk we have in power right now and gives him a level of credibility on military issues that Bush could never have. It is true that many of us disagree with his stance on the Iraq war; but remember there are those out there who still believe in trying to win that war. And in one way, McCain is right: Whether or not we were right to go into Iraq in the first place, we are there now, and we need to figure out the best way to get out while not leaving it in such chaos that terrorists are left there to flourish. Yes, it's true that they weren't there before the war; but they are there now, and we need to figure out how to get rid of them.

On another front he is also dangerous. He is likable. Yes, again, a lot of people on the progressive side may not see that, but for a large number of people I think he will come across as an everyday kind of guy who is kindly and down-to-earth. Heck, I even liked him myself from the times he's appeared on The Daily Show. I think even Jon Stewart likes him. Don't be fooled by your own hostility toward him; many people will like him, just as they liked Reagan and voted for him.

A recent poll I saw still shows Obama beating McCain by about 12 points while Clinton only beats him by 4. It's a long election season and I'm afraid we may need that extra margin of safety.

Mother Jones has a good analysis of why Obama is better positioned to beat McCain. According to Mother Jones:

"No matter what advantages John McCain has, and no matter what nasty stuff the right wing throws at Clinton or Obama, there may be a nationwide resistance to conservative leadership after eight years of George W. Bush that is impossible to overcome for the Republican nominee.

And that is one of the two reasons why Obama is likely better positioned that Clinton. Obama better embodies change because he represents a different generation, in both thinking and appearance, than McCain. His foreign policy thinking is completely different—he didn't support the war in Iraq, didn't vote to label Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, sees the silliness of our policy toward Cuba, and rejects the Bush-Cheney approach to diplomacy that refuses to meet with rogue leaders. Clinton mirrors McCain on all of these issues (though she obviously has a very different view on Iraq right now). And in terms of appearance, Clinton and Obama are both divergences from the old white male archetype, but only one would represent the widest age gap between two major party candidates in modern history. Obama was born in 1961. McCain was born in 1936. That's a 25-year difference.

Also, McCain does well amongst independents. Obama likely matches him in that category, while adding a number of young voters. Clinton, however, finds most of her supporters in core Democratic constituencies."

For Obama supporters, the recent results in Ohio and Texas are concerning. Pennsylvania, the next big contest, is much more likely to be Clinton territory than Obama territory. If Clinton wins this state she will go on to make a case to the superdelegates that only she can deliver the big states with the high number of electoral votes in November. This is not necessarily true; the very strong Democratic turnouts in all of the state primaries so far would seem to mean that either Democrat would probably be able to deliver these states. But Obama does need to prove that he is able to overcome her advantages in these states and stand strong against McCain there in November.

So how does he do this? I personally feel Clinton has sucked him into her territory by constantly harping on his lack of "substance" - as a result he got on the defensive and is now making more "substantive" speeches. But as he tries to best her in her territory he may not be making the emotional connection he was making with voters previously.

It's time he got back to basics. No one doubts Clinton is good at policy; what she's not good at is that emotional connection. That's his strength and he needs to keep playing to it. Yes, policy matters, and he has a lot of it on his website. Yes, he should answer questions as to what he would do in various situations. But he has to keep making clear the differences between himself and Hillary, and it's not just policy.

David Brooks had a very interesting op-ed piece in the NY Times the other day before the Tuesday primaries, about Obama and Clinton. While I don't usually agree with Mr. Brooks, as he is a conservative, in this case he nailed the differences between them.

Describing speeches made by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in November of 2007, he compared them as follows:

"Obama sketched out a different theory of social change than the one Clinton had implied earlier in the evening. Instead of relying on a president who fights for those who feel invisible, Obama, in the climactic passage of his speech, described how change bubbles from the bottom-up: 'And because that somebody stood up, a few more stood up. And then a few thousand stood up. And then a few million stood up. And standing up, with courage and clear purpose, they somehow managed to change the world!'

For people raised on Jane Jacobs, who emphasized how a spontaneous dynamic order could emerge from thousands of individual decisions, this is a persuasive way of seeing the world. For young people who have grown up on Facebook, YouTube, open-source software and an array of decentralized networks, this is a compelling theory of how change happens.

Clinton had sounded like a traditional executive, as someone who gathers the experts, forges a policy, fights the opposition, bears the burdens of power, negotiates the deal and, in crisis, makes the decision at 3 o’clock in the morning.

But Obama sounded like a cross between a social activist and a flannel-shirted software C.E.O. — as a nonhierarchical, collaborative leader who can inspire autonomous individuals to cooperate for the sake of common concerns.

Clinton had sounded like Old Politics, but Obama created a vision of New Politics. And the past several months have revolved around the choice he framed there that night. Some people are enthralled by the New Politics, and we see their vapors every day. Others think it is a mirage and a delusion. There’s only one politics, and, tragically, it’s the old kind, filled with conflict and bad choices.

Hillary Clinton has fought on with amazing resilience since then, and Tuesday night may well bring another surprise, but she’s always been the moon to his sun. That night in November, he defined the campaign."

This is what Obama must continue to remember - he defined the campaign back then and he must continue to set that tone. It's time for him to go back to basics and do what he does best: Be the sun to Hillary's moon.

Another Win for Obama

(Picture credit Tim Johnson/Reuters)

Barack Obama has won the Wisconsin primary with a 57% to 42% margin over Clinton, with over 3/4 of precincts reporting.

He beat Clinton among white male voters, split women voters in a near-tie, won among Independents, and gained among white, working-class voters, according to MSNBC. He also led on electability (63% to 37% for Hillary).

According to the New York Times,

"Almost two-thirds said Mr. Obama would be more likely to unite the country and about 55 percent considered him more likely to improve foreign relations."

Although the Clintons can never be counted out, and there are some big states yet to vote, the momentum is continuing to propel Obama forward. The Associated Press characterized the win in a way that does not bode well for Hillary Clinton's chances:

"Barack Obama cruised past a fading Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Wisconsin primary Tuesday night, gaining the upper hand in a Democratic presidential race for the ages. It was Obama's ninth straight victory over the past three weeks, and left the former first lady in desperate need of a comeback in a race she long commanded as front-runner."

The win came after controversy generated by the Clinton campaign regarding his using certain phrases that had previously been used by Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick. The two men are friends and Obama had credited him with one of the phrases in a previous speech. According to the CNN Political Ticker, the whole thing was old news:

"A Boston Globe article in the spring of 2007 titled 'Patrick, Obama campaigns share language of "hope"' noted many similarities between their stump speeches, and said that the two men shared a 'symbiotic friendship.'"

Another controversy arose when Michelle Obama was quoted as having said that for the first time in her adult life, she was proud of her country.

The statement was taken somewhat out of context, as Ms. Obama added, "Not just because Barack is doing well, but I think people are hungry for change." She went on to say:

"'I have seen people who are hungry to be unified around some basic common issues and it has made me proud,' she told supporters."

The statement immediately generated all kinds of commentary in the media, and no doubt will be used against Obama by his opponents. But when you take into consideration the fact that Michelle Obama, at 44, has had an adult life that really only began in the middle of Reagan's presidency, she may have a point there.

Let's see...we've had policies that made the rich richer and the poor, poorer. We've had a president who was impeached for having sex in the Oval Office and lying about it. We've had a president who invaded another country without provocation, killing perhaps as many as a million of its citizens, including women and children, with no end in sight. We've seen our country's image tarnished throughout the world as a result. We've seen political partisanship poison our government to the point that nothing can be accomplished.

I'm not saying that there aren't plenty of reasons to be proud of our country despite all this. But I am saying that Michelle could have her reasons for feeling more positive toward this country than ever before.

Obviously neither controversy bothered the voters in Wisconsin, since Obama's margin of victory was decisive.

The Plot Thickens - 3rd Party Candidacy a Real Possibility

I heard the news on the radio that Michael Bloomberg, among others, has announced a meeting scheduled next week among influential Democrats and Republicans to discuss ending the partisan politics in Washington, and possibly deciding to back a third-party candidate.

The Washington Post has a detailed article on the upcoming meeting, which was announced before the Iowa caucuses in order to avoid the appearance of the meeting being a reaction to any one candidate.

According to the Post,

"Those who will be at the Jan. 7 session at the University of Oklahoma say that if the likely nominees of the two parties do not pledge to "go beyond tokenism" in building an administration that seeks national consensus, they will be prepared to back Bloomberg or someone else in a third-party campaign for president."

The group includes influential Democrats such as former senators Sam Nunn (Georgia), Charles S. Robb (Virginia) and David L. Boren (Oklahoma). Among the Republican organizers are Senator Chuck Hagel (Nebraska), former party chairman Bill Brock, former senator John Danforth (Missouri) and former New Jersey governor Christine Todd Whitman.

Whitman served as head of the EPA under Bush but resigned in 2003 "to spend more time with her family" - however, many surmised she had serious differences with the Bush administration in regard to its environmental policies.

According to the Post,

"Boren, who will host the meeting at the university, where he is president, said: 'It is not a gathering to urge any one person to run for president or to say there necessarily ought to be an independent option. But if we don't see a refocusing of the campaign on a bipartisan approach, I would feel I would want to encourage an independent candidacy.'"

So far the only candidate advocating for any degree of bipartisanship is Barack Obama.

If the group does decide to run a 3rd-party candidate, it is likely they would have the financial - and political - wherewithal to pull it off.

"Others who have indicated that they plan to attend the one-day session include William S. Cohen, a former Republican senator from Maine and defense secretary in the Clinton administration; Alan Dixon, a former Democratic senator from Illinois; Bob Graham, a former Democratic senator from Florida; Jim Leach, a former Republican congressman from Iowa; Susan Eisenhower, a political consultant and granddaughter of former president Dwight D. Eisenhower; David Abshire, president of the Center for the Study of the Presidency; and Edward Perkins, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations."

If they do choose to run a candidate, it is likely to be Mr. Bloomberg, given that he has been expanding his role in recent months to travel the country and comment on matters outside the New York City political area.

The group seems to be really serious about this effort.

"A letter from Nunn and Boren sent to those attending the Jan. 7 session said that 'our political system is, at the least, badly bent and many are concluding that it is broken at a time where America must lead boldly at home and abroad. Partisan polarization is preventing us from uniting to meet the challenges that we must face if we are to prevent further erosion in America's power of leadership and example.'

At the session, Boren said, participants will try to draft a statement on such issues as the need to "rebuild and reconfigure our military forces," nuclear proliferation and terrorism, and restoring U.S. credibility in the world.

'Today, we are a house divided,' the letter said. 'We believe that the next president must be able to call for a unity of effort by choosing the best talent available -- without regard to political party -- to help lead our nation.'"

For those of us who have been sitting back watching the circus that our political process has become, the endless campaign that began nearly two years before the election, the countless repetitive debates on both sides, this prospect may actually add a lot of excitement and enthusiasm to the upcoming election.

It is not too late for a new candidate to emerge, one that appeals to the vast middle portion of the electorate, that is repulsed by the Republicans' appeals to the basest instincts of our nature (racism, anti-immigration, fear) but is not quite ready for the most radical liberal ideas either.

The important thing is for that candidate to be serious, not just act as a spoiler. Someone like Bloomberg could be that candidate, given the vast financial resources he can muster, as well as the connections he has forged in both parties.

If nothing else, it will at least make the coming year interesting!

UPDATE:

Just to be clear, I am not in support of Bloomberg running - a third party candidacy by Bloomberg would hurt the Democrats more than the Republicans, and if he acts only as a spoiler, this could be a disaster; President Huckabee, anyone? :-(

From what I know about Bloomberg, I don't think he'd run if he'd only be a spoiler - I think he'd only do it if he thought he could win. But of course that might not be good either, depending on what his policies would be. We'll have to wait and see what happens...he may just be trying to shake things up; he may even be sincere about wanting bipartisanship in government. I realize sincerity is not in plentiful supply in our political system but you never know.

Mayor Mike - Still in the Picture

(Picture courtesy of Time, Inc., credit to Sacha Waldman / Levine and Levitt)

According to the Huffington Post, New York's Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been receiving foreign policy briefings from "Nancy Soderberg, a former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and a Clinton Administration foreign policy adviser."

This is very interesting. Despite the Mayor's frequent denials that he plans to run for President, it seems he is continuing to prepare for just that. Why else would he need foreign policy briefings?

I wrote about this before when Mayor Mike first switched from Republican to Independent. Apparently since then, he has quietly been making more preparations.

If he runs, it will throw the 2008 election into a free-for-all. It is hard to say which side a Bloomberg candidacy would pull from the most. As an ex-Republican, you might think it would be the Republican side. But he is also an ex-Democrat and has liberal views on many issues. It would also depend on who he picked as a running mate.

I am not at all sure we won't end up with a Republican president in 2009. If Clinton wins the Democratic nomination, it is likely the GOP would mobilize its base with their hatred of all things Clinton. Rove (or should I say, his replacement) would have a field day digging up old dirt on Hillary and Bill. In the meantime, a Bloomberg candidacy would just confuse things further and, in the ensuing chaos, we might end up with President Romney or President Guiliani. It is a scary thought.

As I've said before, Bloomberg as a candidate is rather appealing. But under our current system, it is impossible for a third-party candidate to win. I often think it would be better if the national election process provided for the possibility of a runoff if no one candidate received a majority of the votes. To me, that would be a fairer way to decide the election. But of course it would require a Constitutional amendment and no one would ever propose it.

In the meantime, we watch and wait to see what is going to happen in 2008.

Election Day!

Election days are always exciting for me. Since I was a small child, my parents kept me involved in the political process. I remember when I was only 6, my mother woke me up in what seemed to me to be the middle of the night - and perhaps it was - so I could hear the election returns coming in on this, the first election that she knew I would remember. To this day I distinctly remember hearing the voice on the radio saying that Kennedy was leading by just 100,000 votes.

I remember having an argument with my friend Sally, whose family were Republicans, during the 1964 election, and telling her that Barry Goldwater "would start World War Three." Mind you, I am sure I did no research of my own to hold this political opinion and was no doubt repeating something I heard my parents say. But my feelings were sincere and my opinion was strong!

Then in 1968 came the tumultuous year that Lyndon Johnson decided not to run, and left the Democratic field wide open. It was the year of McCarthy, Bobby Kennedy, and ultimately, Hubert Humphrey. I was devastated when Kennedy was shot (I found a whole folder of clippings about his death that I'd compiled back then, when I was cleaning out my mother's house last year). Once the candidate was Humphrey, however, I was a strong supporter. I still was too young to vote, but I did distribute flyers. And I remember how uncertain everything was even the next day. We still weren't sure who had won, until finally the bad news was clear: It was Nixon.

In 1972, the first year I could vote, I was in college in Boston, and cast my first vote for McGovern. Massachusetts was the one state that went for him, so I appreciated the bumper stickers that popped up on Massachusetts cars after Watergate broke, saying "Don't blame me, I'm from Massachusetts."

Since then there have been many more elections; and in the past 10 years I've become involved in local politics; not as a candidate, but as a supporter. I've stuffed envelopes, walked the neighborhood with candidates occasionally, made donations, and made phone calls.

This evening our town's Democratic slate once again swept the election. It is very interesting; when we first moved to this town it was a mainly Republican town. But over the past decade or so, the demographics have changed markedly, and the town has become much more diverse. The population has become younger, and there are many transplanted New Yorkers here now, who all tend to vote Democratic.

So, in celebration of the Democrats, here is today's haiku:

Democratic sweep
All politics is local
We are glad they won.

OK, that was lame. But it's almost midnight and I have to get this posted! NaBloPoMo is becoming stressful!