Completely Unnecessary

I managed to read the announcement of a Grant Park rally on election night just before going to class today. I’m not usually much of a star-struck type (seeing Maxine McKew notwithstanding), but I was like, OMG!!!!! I am SO there!

It’s a bit embarrassing.

But in that tingly way.

Anyway - the election is just kind of saddening me at this point - what with the ‘terrorist’ chants, dead bears, Palin’s possible $150,000 wardrobe and the like.

It’s, like, time to vote already - let’s get on with it.

I suppose it’ll be interesting to see if Michelle Bachmann (R-MN6) loses her seat after the latest in a series of silly comments out of her.

And it was nice to see McCain supporters fight back against the racists in their midst (via Megan at Jezebel).

But, you know, Bush is still enacting annoying things like giving federal money to orgs that only hire people of one faith, despite that being totally against the rules.

And the media is focusing a lot on that Iraqi puppy, Rachet, and him going to his girl in MN. It’s a charming story, but the amount of money and press attention showered on a dog instead of, say, the Iraqi people or the troops is kind of depressing.

Well, that was useful. That got rid of some of the links in my browser. I swear some days that’s the only reason I blog - to clear out links that I’m too lazy to post to del.icio.us.

That’s how much you mean to me.

Oh, and since we’re soooo close - if you have a line on Obama tickets… yes, please!

Vaguely Related

• Palin Abuses Her Authority, McCain His Responsibility
• McCain Gets Lots Done Before Debate

The Chicago Tribune endorsed the Democrat.

The Tribune itself is highly impressed by this fact, and would earn a number 3 (25%-50%) for Question 34 in the study I’m working on: ‘Percentage of story content devoted to metacoverage’.

The four long paragraphs outline the history of Tribune presidential endorsements. They note the paper’s devotion to abolition and smaller government, as well as its deep, abiding admiration for the Chicago Tribune.

The Ed Board writes eloquently of Senator Obama, though their prose is somewhat marred by the graphic running with the article:

Other questions they considered included:

• Do you consider us still relevant?
• Like, totes relevant?
• Is our lame redesign causing you to consider canceling your subscription?
• If you are thinking about it, can you please not do that?

Anyway, despite a long series of bad endorsements (Dole ‘96!), nice to see the hometown paper coming on board.

Vaguely Related

• NYT’s Clinton Must-Read
• Life Without Hillary Clinton

Yeah, it didn’t go so well.

According to CNN’s little worm thingie, women didn’t like McCain so much generally, but he really failed in two key areas:

The first was vouchers. It’s a pretty standard conservative talking point, but he might have played it differently.

The vast majority of public school teachers are women (74.5% in 1999-2000 and likely higher since), and they don’t tend to like vouchers much.

Whilst probably striving to draw points of difference between himself and Obama, McCain still might have played up his support of charter schools instead. They’re a bit more palatable from a teacher standpoint.

McCain started out well. In my liveblog, I thought he’d hop right into vouchers, but hit charter schools first. That was a good approach, supporting both and leading with charters.

And then he got wrapped up in Obama’s opposition to vouchers and banged on about how well DC charter schools are working.

But maybe a lot of Clinton supporters aren’t teachers; maybe they weren’t affected by the voucher stuff.

Well, I’m sure the uterus stuff got them on the Straight Talk Express:

I would consider [any judge] in their qualifications. I do not believe that someone who has supported Roe v. Wade that would be part of those qualifications. But I certainly would not impose any litmus test.
…
Let me talk to you about an important aspect of this issue. We have to change the culture of America. Those of us who are proudly pro-life understand that. And it’s got to be courage and compassion that we show to a young woman who’s facing this terribly difficult decision.

Okay. McCain used to hold a sensible anti-choice position (sorry to be all rhetoricy, but he doesn’t get to wear the pro-life moniker anymore as far as I’m concerned). He even tried to get the Republican Party to amend its platform to include exceptions for rape, incest, and the health of the mother in 2000.

I just love the double-speak in the first part of that quote above.  It’s a little unclear what he’s saying, but I don’t think one could argue that he’s saying he would simply ignore a judge’s support of the Roe ruling. As I wrote yesterday, it seems like he’s saying, “I impose no litmus test, but [support of] Roe v. Wade means they are a bad judge.”

Still relatively reasonable. I don’t agree, but at least they were having a fairly rational discussion (about something that almost no one actually changes their vote on).

And then this happened:

I don’t know how you [Obama] align yourself with the extreme aspect of the pro- abortion movement in America. And that’s his record, and that’s a matter of his record.

And then this, complete with ironic finger ‘quotes’ (video here):

Just again, the example of the eloquence of Senator Obama. He’s health for the mother. You know, that’s been stretched by the pro-abortion movement in America to mean almost anything. That’s the extreme pro-abortion position, quote, “health.”

Before I fly off the handle - as I promise you I will do in just a moment - there was a better way to say this.

Some argue that stipulations for the health of the mother go too far in including things like mental health. They argue that this could be used to get around laws preventing abortion by claiming ‘mental health’ for a wide variety of reasons.

Quietly and reasonably arguing that point might not have totally lost him the rest of the (Clinton) women.

Palin is there to pick up (ostensibly) women and the base. Women appear not to have responded to Palin, but the base has. McCain didn’t have to come out swinging on this issue. The reponse, instead, seems to have come from frustration with Obama and the election.

And so, Vagina-Americans* got caught up in McCain’s downward spiral of poor polling numbers and increasingly bitter rhetoric.

John McCain might not have noticed, but those two things are connected.

My own brand of alarmist, hateful screed after the jump.

* - For the record, I might prefer Uterized-Americans.

(more…)

Vaguely Related

• No related posts.

1:32: The SBS guy is just offloading everything he remembers about the debate. McCain scribbled a lot. Alright, I’m out of here.

1:31: Michelle Obama is really rocking the florets lately. I hope that’s not coming back in. Is that back in?

1:30: GOOD JOB, GOOD JOB, GOOD JOB! Cut their mics!

1:30: Bob is the new Dan Rather with his folksy anecdotes.

1:29: Middle class for Obama in the closing - good.

1:28: Brighter days are still ahead. Isn’t that a Reagan quote? Kennedy?

1:28: Damn McCain he put the ‘if you can trust us’ - that’s a dog whistle for all his ads.

1:27: McCain: Please vote for me. I will keep your tax dollars safe. By spending nothing on anything, except hatchets.

1:26: McCain just did creepy laugh plus a SNORT! Bob is unfamiliar with websites.

1:24: ‘…precious children who have autism. Sarah Palin knows about them’. I think that’s my favorite quote of the debate.

1:23: McCain: Reauthorize NCLB - well there go the teachers that Obama pissed off earlier.

1:22: ‘You, I, Cindy, and… your wife…’ That’s Michelle.

1:21: ‘I don’t think America’s youth are interest groups’ - if McCain’s adviser really said that thing about the interest groups, that’s absurd.

1:19: McCain likes Teach for America? I’m kind of surprised by that.

1:16: McCain: ‘We’ve achieved equal access to schools?’ Oh, I see now that this is going to vouchers. Oh, it went to charter schools. And then to vouchers. Right.

1:15: No freaking way. Education. Thank you.

1:15: Oh, I didn’t know that ‘health of the mother’ meant killing babies. Who knew? When did McCain get so crazy pro-life? He sounded more extreme than Bush when it came up in his races. I guess he’s trying to keep what’s left of the Appalachia vote.

1:13: Here’s another 10 minutes of the debate gone on this issue. That’s 30 minutes total on nonsense.

1:12: ‘Extreme aspect of the pro-abortion [faction] of this country’ - Jesus, McCain.

1:10: ‘Proudly pro-life’, McCain? Not in 2000. Why is this now about abortion? And why is McCain bothering to shore up the pro-life vote? That’s what Palin is for.

1:10: The Ledbetter decision. Obama brings the rest of the women home to the Dems. That was a seriously bullshit decision.

1:08: ‘Rights shouldn’t be left to state referendum…popular vote’. Well put.

1:07: Why does Obama hate Breyer so much? Why? McCain: I impose no litmus test, but Roe v. Wade means they are a bad judge.

1:05: ROE V WADE. Screw you, Bob. Screw you. Education. Education. Our kids are stupid. Only 13% of voters vote on abortion.

1:04: Senator Government! If you chose to add ‘Joe’ to your drinking game. You now cannot get health insurance because of your pre-existing liver damage.

1:02: Holy shit. What are you talking about John? We’re all communists or something, and Joe knows. But is rich, so will not be part of the Revolution. Gold-plated Cadillac health care. I don’t think we’ll have that in Communist America.

1:01: I bet Joe doesn’t exist. Or if he does, that his last name is Sixpack.

(more…)

Vaguely Related

• Second Debate Delay
• McCain Attacks Obama on Cuba Policy

I complain a lot about the gender-based coverage received by women candidates. Overly effusive physical description is one the most prevalent ways in which this gender-tagging occurs.

So, I feel it’s important to call out the media when they gender-tag men, too.

Levi Johnston - Bristol Palin’s fiance - isn’t a candidate, but is apparently important enough to interview.

Johnston is described first as ’soft-spoken’, a frequent gender-tag, but the AP’s Adam Goldman doesn’t stop there:

Johnston, a Wasilla heartthrob, said he wanted to set the record straight.
…
Johnston is an avid hunter. He’s dark haired, tall and muscular, sports a bit of stubble and drives a red Chevy Silverado truck. He’d be the perfect cover for Field & Stream.

Erhm, can someone check Goldman’s notebook for heart doodles? That’s insane.

This is one of the weirdest stories I’ve read in a while. The interview apparently occurred in Levi’s driveway, providing the reader with less of a portrait of Johnston, than concerns about the AP’s stalkiness.

And it’s written in a peculiar, extremely colloquial tone:

He’s bagged bears, sheep, elk, and caribou. Some of the antlers are scattered about his yard. Last July on a caribou hunt he lost a “promise” ring that Palin had given him. He said he decided to tattoo her name on the finger and not bother with more rings because he’d just lose them anyway.

Asked to describe his feeling about the Republican Convention, Johnston replied, “At first, I was nervous… Then I was like, ‘Whatever.’”

That feeling also seems abundant in his attitude toward the democratic process, of which he’s unwittingly become a part; Johnston did not register to vote in this year’s election.

Well, that’s what we learned in our ‘rare interview with The Associated Press’ - I just hope Johnston’s mother doesn’t have to call the Wasilla police to get Goldman off the lawn.

Vaguely Related

• The Toxic Mess on Main Street - The VP Debate
• Privacy and Publicity at the GOP Convention

Troopergate investigation finds ‘duh‘:

Gov. Sarah Palin abused the powers of her office by pressuring subordinates to try to get her former brother-in-law, a state trooper, fired, an investigation by the Alaska Legislature has concluded. The inquiry found, however, that she was within her right to dismiss her public safety commissioner, Walt Monegan, who was the trooper’s boss.

Meanwhile, more and more stories are coming in about the whipping up going on at McCain/Palin events - some of it bordering on race-baiting. In one particularly disturbing incident:

Palin then went on to blame Katie Couric’s questions for her “less-than-successful interview with kinda mainstream media.” At that, Palin supporters turned on reporters in the press area, waving thunder sticks and shouting abuse. Others hurled obscenities at a camera crew. One Palin supporter shouted a racial epithet at an African American sound man for a network and told him, “Sit down, boy.”

Megan at Jezebel has a good rundown (with link list at the bottom), so I won’t list them all here.

McCain and Palin have not discouraged this behavior from their supporters. Instead Obama’s campaign got the blame today:

McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers adds in another statement: “Barack Obama’s attacks on Americans who support John McCain reveal far more about him than they do about John McCain. It is clear that Barack Obama just doesn’t understand regular people and the issues they care about. He dismisses hardworking middle class Americans as clinging to guns and religion, while at the same time attacking average Americans at McCain rallies who are angry at Washington, Wall Street and the status quo.”

I’m not even sure that ‘irresponsible’ can describe this behavior (and the dog-whistle response). John McCain used to be better than this. He’s the head of his party and an authority figure; failure to denounce it is tantamount to endorsement.

If someone gets hurt - and I’m thinking most the media people at these events - it will be on McCain’s shoulders.

Vaguely Related

• Navigating the Sarah Palin Daughter Pregnancy Scandal
• Legitimate Concern on Palin

There are 25 days left in the race, and - barring the mother of all October surprises - the electoral map looks as though it’s becoming nearly impossible for McCain.

West Virginia is in play, for god’s sake.

Nearly every pollster, including right-leaning, has Obama above the 270 threshold. Many have him well into the 300s.

The angry tenor of McCain/Palin rallies has garnered the attention of the Secret Service. Today the cable channels ran with video of McCain having to grab the mic back from Minnesota supporter who called Obama ‘an arab’. This also happened:

When a man told him he was “scared” of an Obama presidency, Mr. McCain replied, “I want to be president of the United States and obviously I do not want Senator Obama to be, but I have to tell you — I have to tell you — he is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States.” The crowd booed loudly at Mr. McCain’s response.

The campaign is way off on its tone. Average people - notably the independents and right-leaning Dems McCain needs to pull - don’t want ranting crowds with pitchforks.

How can we tell? Well, Norm Coleman senate race is a fair indicator.

Coleman (R-MN) has seen his solid lead over Al Franken collapse in the last few days. Coleman’s response? Get as far away from the McCain strategy as possible. He’s stopped running all negative ads in the ‘nice’ state. [Update: Coleman also pulled out of a planned appearance with McCain.]

The question now becomes how many will McCain drag down with him. Minnesota voters no doubt got footage of that nasty rally on all channels tonight. Coleman’s move clearly indicates his desire to seperate himself from the kind of negativity that’s now associated with the top of his ticket.

It might not work.

Senate races all over the country that have no business being in play are up for grabs. Coleman’s seat was always going to face a strong challenge, but Georgia?

Saxby Chambliss might actual lose his seat to Jim Martin. And last night’s debate appears not to have gone well for the incumbent.

If you’re a returning reader your likely question is (as always), ‘What’s the point of all this?’

If McCain looks like he’s going to go down hard, the RNC is likely to use its money to staunch the bleeding in Senate and House races. If you’re thinking about making a political donation, it might be time to think about at least splitting your donation between Obama and some seat races.

Some choices:

• Al Franken in Minnesota
• Kay Hagen in North Carolina
• Jeff Merkley in Oregon
• Jim Martin in Georgia
• Ronnie Musgrove in Mississippi (B)
• hell, even Mitch McConnell’s seat might be within reach - Bruce Lunsford in Kentucky

Putting money into House races also stretches your contribution dollar (though donations to Obama invariably help candidates downticket as well).

60 in the Senate seemed unthinkable even just a short time ago. Despite my general advocacy of divided government, it’s hard to look at that number and not try to reach for it.

Vaguely Related

• Legitimate Concern on Palin
• Stevens Loses Senate Seat

[Editor's Note: Have tried to remove jinx factor...]

It’s a question that - I swear to god - didn’t occur to me until today.

With the race seemingly tightening up, it might be time to have a look.

In Illinois, the governor replaces the sitting Senator until the next Congressional election. This means that Rod Blagojevich (D) will fill Obama’s seat and that person will be up for re-election in 2010.

For those of you not from Illinois - here’s the political lay of the land:

Blagojevich essentially comes from the Chicago Machine, but has a weird relationship to it. He’s the son-in-law of Chicago boss Dick Mell, who put him in the governor’s office. Blago and Mell, however, more or less openly dislike each other.

Blagojevich’s other main problem is Illinois House Speaker and IL Democratic Party Leader Mike Madigan, who pretty much hates his guts. Madigan has done everything in his power to thwart Blagojevich over the last few years. Madigan’s daughter, Lisa Madigan, is the Attorney General and a likely candidate for governor in 2010.

Not that Blago has helped himself much. He’s almost certainly had some quite dirty dealings, and it most likely ‘Public Official A’ in Peter Fitzgerald’s most recent excursion into Illinois corruption. Between this and the Congressional gridlock he’s helped to create, Illinois voters are extremely pissed off.

Sure they returned him to office in 2006, but his opponent Judy Baar Topinka inspired a lot of nose-holding for downstate Republicans as well. The Green Party candidate got over 10% in that election, which is pretty unheard of for a third-party candidate in a gubernatorial election.

All caught up?

With this much hatred to spare, Blagojevich is likely to make a strategic appointment. He’s got enemies pretty much everywhere, but a couple of names stand out for consideration.

Lisa Madigan - she’s the Attorney General and well-liked. She’s likely to challenge him in 2010, so putting her in the Senate might keep her out the way. She’d have to choose between renewing her Senate seat or going for Blagojevich’s.

Any of the Chicago US House delegation - He’d get to make nice with the Machine, and appointing an African-American, like Davis, Rush or Jackson Jr., would give him support from the South Side in 2010.

Dan Hynes - Illinois Comptroller. Another likely candidate in 2010 - though one with less chance of beating Blagojevich in a primary. Would make Machine people happy though, and maybe get them off Blagojevich’s back.

Jim Oberweis - because it’s the only way Jim Oberweis is every going to get elected anything. Seriously, how freaking amazing would that be? I mean, aside from the reality of it.

Alan Keyes - is he still carpetbagging with us? He was Obama’s opponent in 2004, and… nah, can’t even write the end of that sentence seriously.

The Daily Herald also suggests Alexi Giannoulias, the State Treasurer, who Obama likes a lot. Bill Daley, the brother of Mayor Richard M. Daley. That seems over the top - I think people would be pretty up in arms about a Daley getting to the Senate without dead people voting for it or anything.

The DH also points out that Blagojevich could appoint himself and basically get the hell out of Illinois. The governor gig isn’t going so well, to be sure, but he’d be up again in 2010. I think once people picked their jaws up off the floor, they’d vote him straight out. Plus, the Democrats don’t need one of their senators dealing with corruption charges, which will almost certainly feature in Blago’s near future.

I’m not counting my chickens just yet, but it’s interesting to think about. And I know nothing about Arizona internal politics, so… yeah, who knows what happens if McCain wins?

God, you just know Jim Oberweis has thought about calling up Blago and offering his service.

Vaguely Related

• Stroger, the County Tax and the Fine
• Adventures in Reading: Illinois Terror Edition

Hi both. I was teaching during the debate today and have an appointment now, so I’m furiously trying to watch part of the debate before I go.

I cannot tell you how much this is killing me.

Update: 7pm - Sigh. I’m still watching. I’m not going to bother commenting much, though, since it seems like everyone - including The Weekly Standard - is calling it for Obama.

It is - as many have pointed out - kinda boring. McCain didn’t totally explode (though he did call Obama ‘that one’) and Obama didn’t smack someone in the audience (though there was a lot of smirking when Obama was talking). McCain needed something awesome to happen. It didn’t.

If you want to fact check the debate - the NYT has an article up. You can also check out FactCheck.org or Politifact who will have more detailed comments up tomorrow, presumably. CQ Politics also has some bests/worsts/mosts.

Ugg, I just watched McCain make a ‘joke’. His awkward laugh makes me so nervous every time. I pray that someone chuckles with him just for pity’s sake.

Vaguely Related

• Last Debate Liveblog
• First Debate Liveblog

[Updated below.]

On the day the Wellstone Bill was finally signed into law, Minnesota’s making me nervous.

Today’s SurveyUSA poll shows McCain with a 1% lead in the Humphrey/Mondale state.

It’s only one percent, I know. Here’s why that troubles me: Al Franken has been making inroads into Norm Coleman’s lead in the Senate race, but hasn’t been able to close the gap.

The most recent polling has Coleman with a ten point lead on October 1. The race seems to be trending away from the Democrat, and McCain might be able to ride Coleman’s coattails.

Franken might not be the best candidate (he’s a comedian and has been hit or miss with the tone of his campaign), but it’s hard to argue against Minnesota being a changing state.

In 2000, Gore won handily and the state handed the Green Party a large enough percentage to get them on the ballot.

Then 2002 happened. Tim Pawlenty won the gubernatorial election after the progressive vote was split between three strong candidates: a Dem, a Green and an Independent. Wellstone died nine days before the election, and the combination of the backlash at the memorial and replacement candidate Mondale’s mild campaigning style handed Coleman the election.

Minnesota Dems have had six years to organise to win back Wellstone’s seat - and their lack of success in this department has more to do with a gradual reddening of the state than Franken alone, I’d argue.

Minnesota’s been making me nervous for awhile now, though I didn’t add it in to my maps the other day. McCain’s pulling out of Michigan is going to allow him to put more resources into Wisconsin and Minnesota.  Wisconsin polling (and its proximity to Illinois) makes it seem pretty safe, but I think it’s time to start looking at the map without Minnesota.

Luckily, it doesn’t factor so long as Obama wins VA, CO, MI and PA. That still brings in 272.

[I know that lots of other electoral math has Obama way up - well into the 300s. After 2000 and 2004, I'm just a nervous, glass-half-full kind of bunny. I'm trying to be very conservative in what I think Obama will win.]

It just shouldn’t be this close. I guess it’s more the symbolism of Minnesota - this is, after all, the only state to go Democratic in Reagan’s 1984 rout.

And it would prove the Republicans right about their ability to take the state - they had their convention there for the same reason we had ours in Denver.

Kind of makes you wonder what might have happened if McCain had chosen Pawlenty instead of Palin. Might have really changed up the map.

Update: 538 notes that a STrib poll has Franken up 9 points versus the SurveyUSA’s 10-point Coleman lead. Nate argues that both polls are untrustworthy. I’d say, it shows that MN is anybody’s guess.

Also, speaking of 538 - they’re arguing that one of Nebraska’s electoral votes might be in play. (Maine and Nebraska split their votes). That’s incredible to think about…

Vaguely Related

• As McCain Implodes, Think of a Senate 60
• This Week’s Historical and Vice Presidental Detritus