Please Don’t Bush v Gore Us

Yesterday, I was thinking of posting something about how the Democratic deal-making at this year’s conventions could be really disgusting if Obama/Hillary remain neck-n-neck that Dems may not mind a supreme court decision on this one. Today, I’m a little scared that I was thinking that because the Wall Street Journal op-ed page is thinking the same thing:

How ironic. For over seven years the Democratic Party has fulminated against the Electoral College system that gave George W. Bush the presidency over popular-vote winner Al Gore in 2000. But they have designed a Rube Goldberg nominating process that could easily produce a result much like the Electoral College result in 2000: a winner of the delegate count, and thus the nominee, over the candidate favored by a majority of the party’s primary voters.

Imagine that as the convention approaches, Sen. Clinton is leading in the popular vote, but Sen. Obama has the delegate lead. Surely no one familiar with her history would doubt that her take-no-prisoners campaign team would do whatever it took to capture the nomination, including all manner of challenges to Obama delegates and tidal waves of litigation.

Indeed, it has already been reported that Sen. Clinton will demand that the convention seat delegates from Michigan and Florida, two states whose delegates have been disqualified by the party for holding January primaries in defiance of party rules. The candidates agreed not to campaign in those states. But Sen. Clinton opted to keep her name on the Michigan primary ballot, and staged a primary-day victory visit to Florida, winning both of those unsanctioned primaries. Her campaign is arguing that the delegates she won in each state be recognized despite party rules and notwithstanding her commitment not to compete in those primaries. Of course. “Count every vote.”

As the convention nears, with Sen. Clinton trailing slightly in the delegate count, the next step might well be a suit in the Florida courts challenging her party’s refusal to seat Florida’s delegation at the convention. And the Florida courts, as they did twice in 2000, might find some ostensible legal basis for overturning the pre- election rules and order the party to recognize the Clinton Florida delegates. That might tip the balance to Sen. Clinton. [Theodore B. Olson.  Wall Street Journal (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Feb 11, 2008. p. A.19]

 Ok, but let’s smarten this up a bit and say what the Journal’s Op-Ed page won’t: this has nothing to do with Senator Clinton’s character or that of her campaign – it’s systemic. Beyond the polemics though, Mr. Olson makes a great point: this will be really gross for certain righteous liberals…

…or Obama could just hurry up and win the damn thing so we don’t have to worry about it. Despite its ad-hoc nature (half-way through it becomes clear that pre and post-primary articles were cobbled together), Chris Cillizza gives a good sense of what Obama’s victory in today’s Potomac Primaries could mean [WashingtonPost.com]:

If Obama sweeps today’s three votes, he would enter next Tuesday’s contests in Wisconsin and Hawaii as a favorite. Victories there would set up primaries in Ohio and Texas — scheduled for March 4 — as must-wins for the Clinton campaign.

Clinton’s campaign strategists have long viewed Ohio and Texas as a firewall for the former first lady, two large, diverse, delegate-rich states that could offset Obama’s string of victories in smaller caucus states where Obama’s campaign has been more adroit in organizing and turning out supporters.

But recent events have troubled Clinton supporters and donors, with some fearing that if Obama extends his string of victories, the momentum could well carry into Ohio and Texas, undermining Clinton’s bid for the nomination.

Obama’s victory in Virginia is huge – I’m shocked by the margin. In light of the looming delegate-gate battle between Clinton and Obama, margin will be meaningful.

 

The Tipping Point

Haven’t been here in a while and don’t have much time today, besides it’s a lot more interesting watching this whole thing play out then listening to people trying to get inside the head of superdelegates [Washingtonpost.com]. I know it’s great to have a real ‘race,’ but it could get pretty disgusting if things stay like this until August and “party loyalists” end up deciding.

And by ‘this’ I mean incredibly intense. Obama’s momentum seems to be perfectly matched right now by Hillary’s…well…Clintonism. She’s shaking up her campaign today [FinancialTimes.com], but somehow it doesn’t feel desperate and I think most people are too focused on the next set of results to care. Things seem to be at a tipping point, but looking at the states left to decide, it’s hard to imagine Clinton being able to overcome Obama’s momentum [politico.com] and gain ground beyond the few big-delegate states that she has been confident in for months [Texas, Ohio, Pennsylvania].

If it comes down to anything, it’ll come down to state’s like Virginia and Obama’s ability to steel some delegates in the liberal pockets of the above ‘Hillary’ states. Or perhaps John Edwards’ endorsement [Fox News] will tip things? Or how about a return to the negative campaigning? [Guardian UK]

And speaking of negative, how about one last link to support my ‘it got personal with Mitt Romney‘ theory [Time Magazine, thanks JDS].

Let’s Play the Feud

After a week of the press drooling over the possibility of an all-out Obama v Clinton brawl, the candidates decided to end the nastiness and debate nice just in time for super Tuesday [NPR]. So now, it’s the Republicans’ turn [Bostonist].

What’s interesting is that you don’t hear anyone among the candidates, their surrogates, or the press calling for McCain and Romney to chill out, end the bitterness and focus on the issues.  The Dems got a lot of that, but everyone seems content to watch the Republican front runners duke it out – particularly the Republican front-runners. The LA Times looks at the historical roots of this battle:

 On Sept. 19, 2000, John McCain rose in the Senate to rail against what he called the “staggering” sums that the federal government planned to spend to help Salt Lake City stage the 2002 Winter Olympics…

Mitt Romney, who headed the Olympics, counseled calm when reporters from Utah’s Deseret Morning News reached him in Sydney, Australia. Romney challenged McCain’s arithmetic, arguing that taxpayers would provide only $250 million…

The clash over Olympics spending, which dragged on for two years, helps explain some of the acrimony that now characterizes the race between the two front-runners for the Republican presidential nomination. The dispute provided an early preview of the fissures that still divide McCain and Romney as they face what may be decisive contests Tuesday.

“It may be a source of the sniping between the two,” said Quin Monson, assistant director of the Center for Elections and Democracy at Romney’s alma mater, Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah. Kelly Patterson, the center’s director, agreed: “People have long memories in politics.”

This piece is on the right track, though it needs to be a lot longer. The context of the ‘02 Olympic feud only underscores the futility of Romney’s amnuition against McCain – the former Mass. Governor wants America to believe that Washington is the problem in this country, while his opponent represents nothing of the sort [washingtonpost.com, Zachary Goldfarb]:

For his part, Romney belittled McCain’s endorsements, saying, “I know that the political establishment is going to try and pull for John McCain, but I expect that I’m going to get the support of the people.”

As if McCain needed a reason to dislike Romney more.

So let the Democrats touch, feel, and unite – Romney/McCain will continue to get nasty right through Tuesday’s polls. Oh, and don’t forget about the Huckster, he’s making a great fan for the flames and a great surrogate for McCain [Conservative Pulse]:

Huckabee is someone who has been known to hold the occassional grudge and he feels badly burned by the brass knuckles campaign that Mitt Romney ran in Iowa.  By staying in the race, Huckabee is drawing votes that might otherwise go to Romney.  And if he stays in the race until Wednesday, Huckabee will be able to help tip things to McCain.

Huckabee would like to be Vice-President and all signs suggest McCain would like having him on the ticket.  The two men get along well and have a great deal of respect for each other.

Ron Paul’s Series of Tubes

More endorsements: TechCrunch backs Obama and McCain. An interesting one though, because the uber-geek site invited its readers to vote for the ‘tech candidate’ and Ron Paul, despite not being interviewed as part of the website’s series, won big on the republican side. To TechCrunch’s credit, they resisted the vocal minority and did not endorse Dr. Paul who, as I’ve said before, really can not match his supporters when it comes to web savvy.

Now, to his credit, Paul initiated a retro-interview and attempted to deliver a more nuanced view on net neutrality. But look closely at his words Paulites: your man is not exactly straight-talking. And beyond the circular reasoning, the dr. had time to figure this net-neutrality thing out and convey and actual understanding of an actual issue (as opposed to an unrealistic stance on a non-issue, which is Paul’s usual tact):

So it’s something I really struggle with and hope that I can come up with something that is practical and also consistent with my philosophy that you don’t resort to government regulation, because I want to be very consistent. I don’t want the government involved in the internet and I don’t want taxes on internet. And I may not understand everything I have to about the internet, but I do know one thing. That we can’t allow the government intrusion into the internet, because there has even been moves on for international controls and international taxation and to me it’s a saving grace.

Surprise, surprise, TechCrunch received 300 + comments in response to its failure to endorse Paul, the readers’ pick. Just like their candidate, the Paulites aren’t really interested in engaging on the issues on an analytical level.

So Long Suckers

Both Rudy Giuliani [NBC News] and John Edwards [Washingtonpost.com] dropped out of the race today. A year ago, I would have named each of these men as their respective party’s most electable candidate. Turns out, neither one campaigned as their party (or at least the voters) expected: Giuliani didn’t give a damn and Edwards gave too much of a damn.

I don’t think there’s much of a question around whose endorsement is worth more to the recipient – that would be Giuliani – but it will be more interesting to see who Edwards will endorse, if anyone. Meanwhile, I think a McCain endorsement out of Giuliani is a good bet.

Update: Turns out Giuliani endorsed McCain during his concessions speech [Financial Times]. And with Rudy out of the race, apparently McCain is the only “American hero” left and he’s got the former Mayor and even Arnie on his side to prove it:

After announcing his exit, Mr Giuliani said Mr McCain was “the most qualified candidate” to be president, describing him as someone who could be “trusted in times of crisis”.

Mr McCain said he was honoured to have won the support of an “American hero”, referring to Mr Giuliani’s leadership of New York after the September 11 attacks, and vowed to use him as a “strong right arm” in tackling terrorism.

Arnold Schwarzenegger, the governor of California, is expected on Thursday to endorse Mr McCain, aides to the Arizona senator were reported as saying, adding momentum to his campaign.

Mr Schwarzenegger recently told the Financial Times that Mr McCain was an “action hero” who had proved he could cope with the pressure of being ­president. “In the end, when people go in the voting booth, those are the things they carry with them in there. They don’t remember so much all the policies,” he said.

A Win’s Not Always a Win

Some updates:

Most media outlets are declaring a win for McCain in Florida [Washington Post]. I’m waiting for concession spam from Floridians for Immigration Enforcement.

Meanwhile, the Hillary Clinton Media Outlet is declaring victory for HRC and washingtonpost.com’s Dana Milbank is not amused:

 But in a political stunt worthy of the late Evel Knievel, the Clinton campaign decided to put on an ersatz victory party that, it hoped, would erase memories of Obama’s actual victory in South Carolina’s Democratic primary. “Thank you Florida Democrats!” Clinton shouted to the cheering throng. “I am thrilled to have this vote of confidence.”

Honestly though, what is she suppose to do? I’m pretty sure this whole primary dates mess is not the Clintons’ fault (thought my staff is factchecking) and it’s important Democrats across the nation understand the level of support HRC has in such a key state, so can you blame her?

And an update on the importance of a Sebelius endorsement for Obama following her rebuttal last night…just check out the comments section and you’ll understand that her star didn’t exactly continue its rise [HuffingtonPost.com]. And I’d have to agree, Obama is still the next Obama.

Spamming For Closed Borders and Closed Minds

Today’s Republican primary is big. Crucial for some [AP], life or death for others [Baltimore Sun]. Which would explain why some interest groups are turning to spam to get the dirtiest messages across:

Floridians  for  Immigration  Enforcement

AMNESTY Truth Express On the Move

FL East Coast Report:

Thanks to the folks who helped with the Florida East Coast AMNESTY Truth Express.  We were able to hand out many amnesty information flyers, show the “McCain=AMNESTY” sign on the van to many and provide live reports to three talk radio shows.

No, I was not in Jacksonville over the weekend protesting John McAmnesty, but apparently Floridians for Immigration Enforcement wanted to thank me with a spam-mail anyway. You know, in order to heighten the debate:

Senator McAMNESTY has appointed a former Mexican Cabinet official as a Director in his campaign!  And this is the new McCain who professes immigration enforcement#$%@?  McCain for President —- of Mexico!

More Multiculturalism:

Actually, this is more like transnationalism. A reader alerted me to the fact that McCain’s “Hispanic Outreach Director” is the same guy who held that job for Mexico’s President Vicente Fox!

…Demonstrators Needed for SW FL:

Sen. McCain and illegal immigration:

But this has not been the case with his disingenuous blustering on illegal immigration – particularly when his cosponsorship of mass-amnesty legislation with Sen. Edward Kennedy is raised.

Mel Martinez to endorse McCain!

Ah, nothing like a little last minute campaign-bigotry.

Monday Links: Obama in the news

From the Obama-centric link wire:

Kathleen Sebelius, Governor of Kansas and rising star in the Democratic party will present the Dems’ rebuttal to the President’s State of the Union tonight and according to The Atlantic, will endorse Obama later this week. This could be a big boost if her speech gets the kind of hype as let’s say a Barack Obama 2004 Convention speech…

But no one should overestimate the importance of a Sebelius endorsement, particularly in light of the Kennedy endorsements. Some, like The Guardian, are wondering if Kennedy’s endorsement will be a negative for team Obama. Please. This is still the primaries. If Obama gets the nomination, this will not be something his GOP opponent will be able to make much of a wave with – right now, making up ground in liberal ’super-Tuesday’ states is the primary objective for Obama at this point, and Kennedy helps that a lot.

Howard Kurtz’ Media Notes looks at the curious appeal of the Obama campaign’s lack of effort to win over the press corp.

But apparently the Illinois Senator has no trouble with the British Press (Guardian UK).

Wrestling With Pigs

I said it once, and the New York Times will say it again for me: it’s not just politics, the Republican candidates don’t like Romney. Yes, this is, in many ways, a junior high popularity contest:

“The glee the other candidates go after Romney with is really unique…”

“They think he didn’t pay his dues…”

“John McCain and his friends used to beat up Mitt Romney at recess…”

And Romney’s locker-room style defense:

A spokesman for the Romney campaign, Kevin Madden, said, “I think it’s largely driven by the fact that everybody’s taught to tackle the guy on the field with the ball.”

Please. McCain’s venom for Romney was strongest when he had already stripped the ball from the former Massachusetts Governor. Romney has a distinctly different approach to the veteran politician. Mitt knows the rules well, but he’s use to playing in a totally different arena, a totally different sport than McCain, Huckabee and Thompson. I’d bet that even Romney’s staff end up drinking alone while everybody else is joking about them at the bar next-door…

“Never get into a wrestling match with a pig,” Senator John McCain said in New Hampshire this month after reporters asked him about Mr. Romney. “You both get dirty, and the pig likes it.”

Getting Clintoned

In response to the most recent Democratic debate, Lawrence Lessig got about as heated as Lawrence Lessig can get (when he’s not talking about Sonny Bono, that is):

But disappointment is one thing; (this word sounds too harsh, I know, but) disgust is something else. For there was a basic lack of integrity in the Clinton show last night. As a former friend of Clinton put it to me last night, “I now understand just why people hated the Clintons so.” [Lessig.org/blog]

While Lessig may protest too much, his is also a reaction the Clinton camp should be concerned about: how much utility is there in using Bill as a surrogate? Won’t this strategy only bring up bad memories for many Dems and play to Obama’s strength (‘hope’ or something that sounds like it)? And even if the Democratic base is risilient to such primitiveness, won’t it at least make them think twice about Hillary’s electibility?

Seems to me the HRC primary campaign is doing nothing to reverse the negative perceptions that will be a bigger problem during the general.