Republicans
March 12th, 2008...
The Veepstakes Have Begun
That's the word from Reuters Steve Holland, who reports that McCain has begun looking for a running mate. I can imagine the ad now: "70-something Republican presumptive nominee looking for 40-50 year old running mate. Must enjoy long, hard slogs on the beach and share a passion for fiscal restraint." Anyway, here's a real quote:
Steve Holland - March 12th, 2008 McCain said he was just beginning to put together a search team to vet potential candidates and seek background checks on them. He joked that he has had "at least 100 volunteers to lead" the search for a No. 2.
Holland adds that "no decision was expected any time soon."
Probably true, but we can still look forward to the inevitably leaked shortlist. Smart money's still on Pawlenty, I suppose, assuming you can't bet The Field.
February 22nd, 2008...
Turning a Weakness Into a Strength
Well, that was fast.
Within a day of the New York Times piece on the vague possibility that anonymous aides to John McCain may have suspected he might possibly appear to have a potentially intimate relationship with a lobbyist (whew), the McCain camp had not only torn the article to shreds, but rallied conservatives to their side to aid in the defense.
This was stunning work by the McCain camp, who have known about the possibility of the story since November, and came out totally prepared to shoot it down. Jonathan Martin at Politico has a great article up to this effect:
Jonathan Martin - February 21st, 2008 “We wanted to be fast, forward-leaning and as open and transparent as possible,” said a McCain aide involved in the effort.
Craig Shirley, a public relations consultant working for McCain, called conservative media critic Brent Bozell—a McCain skeptic. Bozell, who heads the media watchdog group, Media Research Center, then issued a statement ripping the Times while defending McCain. Shirley’s firm sent that criticism, along with comments from Pat Buchanan, out to all conservative contacts, ranging from radio hosts to producers to bloggers. As one of the first conservative leaders to come to McCain's defense, Bozell provided ideological cover to others, including morning talk show host Joe Scarborough—another McCain skeptic—to support McCain and go after the Times.
It's worth a read.
One might think that every shot at a candidate, even if its discredited, can harm the candidacy in question. Often, this is correct; even raising these issues in people's minds can be enough to make them doubt a candidate's sincerity and ethics...especially when that candidate is running largely on their unimpeachable integrity, as McCain is.
However, when the story is discredited this quickly, and this thoroughly, it can clearly help its intended target. The NY Times' piece may have unwittingly made a martyr out of McCain, and the fact that his reputation can so easily deflect the throwing of such a cheap elbow makes it look all the stronger as a result.
February 14th, 2008...
Mitt to Endorse Mac
CNN is reporting that Mitt Romney will endorse John McCain later today.
Of course, the big question is whether or not this will help smooth things over between McCain and many of the conservative activists who backed Romney. It's hard to say, but it stands to reason that it'll help at least somewhat.
Give credit to Romney, who's been very gracious in defeat throughout this campaign. By emphasizing McCain's steadfast commitment to winning in Iraq, Romney has demonstrated the kind of perspective and priority of policy that so many of his supporters have lacked.
Romney is apparently "releasing" his 286 delegates and encouraging them to back McCain. Assuming most of them go along, this puts McCain at somewhere around 1,000 delegates, just shy of making his presumptive nomination a factual reality. Is this the tipping point that finally persuades Huckabee to drop out?
February 11th, 2008...
Preemptive Revisionism
Once upon a time, PoliPundit was an interesting multi-person blog focused on conservative issues. After immigration became a major issue, it became increasingly a single-issue blog and has, to put it nicely, gone completely insane.
They now have an entry up predicting what all eight years of a potential McCain Presidency might look like. Here's a quote:
"PoliPundit" - February 11th, 2008 What would a John McCain presidency look like? We need only look at the examples of Bill Clinton and Arnold Schwarzenegger - two chief executives who resemble McCain in many ways.
Naturally, no supporting evidence is given. Instead, he accepts his own premise without question, and proceeds to map out, in abstract terms, the twists and turns of this imagined administration:
"PoliPundit" - February 11th, 2008 Having won the election from the center, Clinton and Schwarzenegger immediately tried to consolidate their power by implementing policies supported by their parties’ ideological core. McCain will probably try something similar. But McCain, like Clinton and Schwarzenegger, will pay a heavy political price for this. Instead of winning over ideologues, he will alienate the center. Like Clinton and Schwarzenegger, he will inevitably see his political standings rapidly fall.
It has been evident for several months now that the people over at PoliPundit have gone a little crazy, but this takes the cake. The author promises to do a similar write up of Hillary Clinton, which gives away the whole goofy strategy; he wants to put them side-by-side in a feeble attempt to substantiate the idea that McCain and Clinton would govern similarly.
It's an untenable case to make, but I'd still hope that people would try to make it without dragging crystal balls into the equation. It's not without reason that the fictional McCain Presidency described is devoid of policy specifics, as any frank comparison of McCain and Clinton's policies forces any thinking person into acknowledging the chasm between them.
February 6th, 2008...
The Conservative Vote Isn't Split
Speculation is all well and good. I enjoy listening to "experts" drone on with half-baked analysis as much as the next person.
But this is only the case when their hand is forced; when there's so little data that they have to speculate if they wish to keep talking (and all of them do). When we do have data, and it contradicts them, it becomes more than a little tiresome.
Case in point: the oft-repeated claim that McCain is the beneficiary of a split among conservative voters. The basic logic is that, if Huckabee were not in the race, his supporters would vote for Romney, instead, and that Romney would be more competitive in a two-man race.
The bizarre thing, of course, is that conservative activists, bloggers, and talk show hosts have been bemoaned Huckabee's alleged liberalism ad nauseam. And then, out of the other side of their mouth, they try to sell the idea that he's drawing highly conservative votes from Romney. Right.
You don't need any data to tell you that this idea is absurd...but we've got some anyway. Joe Carter over at The Evangelical Outpost lowers the boom (emphasis added):
Joe Carter - February 6th, 2008 In the latest USA Today/Gallup poll Huckabee supporters were asked for whom they would vote if the race came down to John McCain or Mitt Romney.
The results showed that McCain wins over Romney as the second choice of Huckabee voters by more than a 2 to 1 margin, 64% to 28%. McCain beats Romney 42% to 24% with Huckabee in the race (Huckabee gets 18% of the vote) and expands that margin to 53% to 30% with Huckabee voters forced to choose between the two candidates.
So, both common sense and what data we have on the issue suggests the opposite of the initial claim: that McCain has actually put together a reasonably formidable coalition of Republican voters, but has had potentially larger margins stolen by Huckabee's presence.
Some people have this wrong because they have airtime to fill, to be sure, but the common denominator of most of the misinformation being spread about is simple: a small, angry contingent of the Republican party that wants to inflate its own relevance. Hence the "threats" to stay home if McCain wins the nomination, and the continually louder insistences that Republicans can't win without them.
They're not just small and angry, though; as you can see from all the above, they're angry because they're small.
January 19th, 2006...
Steeling a Victory
Rasmussen is reporting that Lynn Swann, who officially entered the Pennsylvania Governor's Race on January 4th, currently holds a 2-point lead over incumbent Ed Rendell:
Scott Rasmussen - January 19th, 2006 January 19, 2006--Our latest poll of the race for Pennsylvania governor shows Republican Lynn Swann, the former receiver for the Pittsburgh Steelers, narrowly leading Democratic Governor Ed Rendell 45% to 43%.
Fifty-four percent (54%) of voters view Swann favorably; 47% view Rendell favorably.
Swann formally declared his candidacy just two weeks ago, on January 4. But he has enjoyed early success in securing endorsements from two of six regional caucuses in his quest for the party nomination. The Republican state Committee will endorse a candidate on February 11.
Rendell does much better against former Lt. Governor Bill Scranton III, leading 46% to 36%.
For those who don't know, Swann is a former Pittsburgh Steeler (and Hall of Famer) with no political experience. His entry into the race, and apparent viability, have led a number of people to ponder the effect that his former team's dramatic playoff run might have on the race.
The Steelers, you see, have clawed to within a win of the Super Bowl despite a considerably difficult road throughout the playoffs. And while we'd all like to believe that the voters of Pennsylvania (of which I am one) would never let such an emotional thing sway their vote, it's not unthinkable that Steeler Fever could, at the very least, translate into an improved Get-Out-the-Vote effort for the PA Republican Party.
Either way, it's looking like celebrity governors are the new black.
April 12th, 2005...
The Best Defense Is A Good Offense
Such is the old saying. And it is, for sure, the unofficial motto of the Bush administration; both on the campaign trail, and in The White House. Case in point:
Associated Press - April 9th, 2005 "While we came up just a little, teensy, itsy-bitsy short in Wisconsin, this victory would not have been possible had it not been for your efforts," said Rove, a White House deputy chief of staff who is credited with mapping out Bush's campaign victories in 2000 and 2004.
Rove said Kerry was forced to play defense in Wisconsin, visiting the state eight times in the last week of the campaign.
This is what they're all about: playing offense. President Bush lost Pennsylvania in November, but he did so by just over 2%; half of Gore's margin in 2000. Clinton won the state by 10 points over Dole, and 9 over Bush Sr. It's not a Democratic stronghold, but it wasn't supposed to be so heavily in play, either. But it was because Bush campaigned there heavily.
Bush lost the state, but not before turning it into a battleground, and therefore forcing his opponents to focus more attention there. This strategy was echoed in other states. The result is that the Democratic party was too busy protecting the blue states to start picking off the red ones. Take a look at the map; the red states were far redder than the blue states were blue.
This is almost perfectly mirrored in Bush's push to reform Social Security. Tom Maguire has postulated that perhaps Bush is on the offensive on Social Security not only to push for reform, but because it has allowed a number of other items on his agenda to find their way through Congress.
This is how Bush plays politics; he goes right after you, and while you're defending home base, he easily picks off the outposts, all the while forcing you to fight on his terms. That last part, you'll notice, also mirrors his foreign policy; "we will take the fight to the terrorists," "we will fight the terrorists overseas so we do not have to fight them at home."
I realize I am now in danger of stretching a casual observation into a Grand Unified Theory of George W. Bush, but it is becoming increasingly clear that his philosophy is largely based around putting his opponents, both domestic and foreign, on the defensive. It's also becoming increasingly clear that it's working.
April 7th, 2005...
Schiavo Memogate Author Fesses Up
For those of you unfamiliar with this story, it is summarized thusly: a memo of "talking points" concerning the political benefits of supporting Terri Schiavo found its way into a reporter's hands. It was claimed that the memo was from the Republican leadership.
The blogosphere quickly pounced on this, pointing out that it was unsigned, unverified, and wasn't even on Senate letterhead. Another lazy forgery, in other words.
Turns out, neither side was wholly right. Today, the Washington Post reports that its author has stepped forward:
Mike Allen - April 7th, 2005 The legal counsel to Sen. Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) admitted yesterday that he was the author of a memo citing the political advantage to Republicans of intervening in the case of Terri Schiavo, the senator said in an interview last night.
The memo was clearly in poor taste, but a Senate aide exercising poor judgement independent of the party leadership is hardly a scandal.
Most of the blogosphere has focused on the reporting of Mike Allen. As John Hinderaker points out, Allen's earlier piece on the matter is looking more and more inaccurate with each revelation. In it, he describes the memo as something "declared" by "Republican officials." He then refers to it as "distributed to Republican senators by party leaders."
Andrew Sullivan offers the laughable defense that the original reporting was "vague." Actually, vague would've been nice; the problem is that it was too specific, pointing the finger squarely at the Republican leadership. Is vague a new synonym for "inaccurate"?
Meanwhile, the rest of the blogosphere's still waiting to see that much-lauded process of mainstream media verification and fact-checking. Any day now, I'm sure.
March 15th, 2005...
Where the Republicans Are Weak
La Shawn Barber has posted an interview with John Smallberries, a project volunteer for the Minuteman Project, about border security.
I'm pretty thoroughly convinced that border security is one issue in which the Democrats could easily outflank the Republicans. It's a glaring weak spot for a party that is otherwise seen as much more trustworthy than their opponents on issues of national security.
March 10th, 2005...
More Conservative Satire
You know, it's common for someone in a heated exchange on any topic to feign amusement, to appear at-ease with what is really troubling subject matter. In the case of anti-Bush hatred, however, it really is amusing. From the ever-subtle parody blog BlameBush!:
"Liberal Larry" - March 7th, 2005 If there's any blame to be placed, it's on the Bush administration's reckless "shoot first, ask questions later" policy concerning cars that charge military checkpoints. Common sense dictates that until such a time that he actually explodes, a "suicide bomber" is simply a guy taking a leisurely drive with 50 pounds of explosives strapped to his chest, and must be considered innocent until proven guilty.
Forget iPods; Bush-hating satire is the real growth market.
Mild ruffling of the fedora to PoliPundit, who noticed this before I did.
March 7th, 2005...
"Spiderman Conservative"
Get it? "With great power comes great responsibility." This genius turn-of-phrase was coined today by Mark over at the oh-so-forward-looking Decision '08.
We must get this phrase into the nation's political vernacular as soon as possible. Spread the web...er...word.
March 5th, 2005...
Lynn Swann for Vice Governor?
My day job entails meeting and talking with a fair number of politicians and policy gurus. Yesterday one such gentleman was discussing Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell's strength, and the likelihood of his reelection.
I asked him what he thought about former football great Lynn Swann's chances, given that he appeared to be gearing up for a run. He was thoroughly convinced that Swann had little chance of winning, but that another Republican candidate could benefit by pledging to make Swann his Lieutenant Governor; almost like a running mate.
Of course, Swann, who played for the Steelers, wouldn't likely much appeal to the Eagles fans in Philadelphia, which is an area that any prospective Republican candidate will have to hold their own in to unseat Rendell.
Still, the thought of gubernatorial candidates employing de facto running mates is an intriguing one, and may very well gain steam over time, especially in larger states like Pennsylvania.
March 2nd, 2005...
Conservative Satire Watch Update
Further evidence of a possible shift in the tone of political satire:
Emily Wagster Pettus - March 2nd, 2005 Jackson Mayor Harvey Johnson Jr., a Democrat who's seeking re-election, gave Dean a key to the capital city and told him: "You're already upsetting Republicans here in Mississippi. Keep up the good work."
Hours before Dean arrived in Mississippi, the state Republican Party issued a news release that spoofed his extended whoop after he conceded last year's Iowa caucuses.
"AIEEEHHHH!!! The incredible shrinking party. The Great Dean Exodus from the MS Democratic Party begins," said the GOP announcement that the Tippah County sheriff was switching from Democrat to Republican.
This isn't Scrappleface, people; this is a new release from the Mississippi GOP. Juvenile? Yes. Funny? Oh yeah. Ya' gotta feel for Dean, though; there's 2-to-1 odds that "YAAAAHHHH!" will be on his tombstone.
February 21st, 2005...
Conservative Satire on the Rise?
GOP.gov has posted a spoof of the David Spade Capital One (™) "No" commercials. You can download it here. Wonkette oh-so-subtly mocks it here.
It's not particularly funny, though the concept is good. I'm more interested in what it indicates, however. Seems to me here's a lot more conservative satire floating around than there used to be. South Park leans right, in my opinion, and sites like Scrappleface and Iowahawk usually hold their own against the likes of Jon Stewart.
This is a tad surprising. Parody, by its nature, mocks convention, tradition, and -- most of all -- those in power. We all know Leno and Letterman will berate whoever happens to be in office. So it's interesting that the parody playing field is looking a bit more level even though the formerly marginalized side of satire has more -- rather than less -- power.
|
|
Calendar
More Entries
Blogroll
Instapundit
Andrew Sullivan
Tom Maguire
Decision '08
Patrick O'Keefe
Categories
Blogging
Democrats
Economy
Elections '04
Elections '06
Elections '08
Entertainment
George W. Bush
Iraq
Media
Miscellaneous
Republicans
Social Security
Supreme Court
Technology
War on Terror
Email Me
|
