On The Civil Rights Act of 1964

I was going to let this go, but then the whole “Ted Kennedy was incensed” thing surfaced.

Let me be as frank as possible: To narrow the passage of the Civil Rights Act to one party let alone one person, is about as foolish as you could possibly be. If anyone wants to comment, please read this or something like it first. Multiple parties were involved, multiple presidents (JFK got it through the House (the easier chamber, but by no means easy), and Johnson got it through the Senate. Without key Republicans like Bill McCulloch and Clarence Brown, the issue may not have even gotten out of the House. And Johnson delegated a lot of the work in the Senate to Hubert Humphrey. And this happened in 1964; were the same group of politicians together in 1954, it surely would not have passed. Think about why, it’s not that complicated.

My point is that this controversy is complicated, and anyone that wants to comment should understand the historical context.

I suppose, yes, that this means that Hillary Clinton’s original statement was not entirely accurate. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 took a massive amount of bipartisanship and cooperation even with a movement helping it. It was no doing of one person - that goes as much for King as it does President Kennedy as it does President Johnson.

And frankly, if the press had any idea at all, they would have worked to inform the public about the subtleties of the passage instead of letting it linger this long.

Sphere: Related Content

Huckabee Digging Deep For Money, Supporters Selling Personal Belongings To Donate

In terms of finances, Huckabee is certainly struggling. As of today, he’s only raised about $3.4 million of his goal of $10 million by Super Tuesday. For starters, Huckabee really needed this money at least a few days before Super Tuesday in order for it to make any effect. Supporters of his campaign are currently organizing a “Max Out For Mike” event tomorrow. I’m all for grassroots efforts, but ones that suggest people sell personal belongings, work overtime or borrow against their anticipated tax refunds in order to donate as much as possible are somewhat unnerving. The organizers ask:

Although we don’t encourage anyone to contribute money they simply don’t have, look around you… what can you sell to a friend or online? Can you work some overtime? Can you cut back sacrificially on your spending temporarily? Also, how funny would it be to donate your forthcoming income tax rebate check from the government to Mike’s campaign and help put the IRS out of business!

Mike Huckabee’s campaign is promoting the effort on its official blog. I asked whether the Governor supports the suggestion that his supporters should go through the above mentioned lengths in order to support his campaign, but requests for comment from the campaign have not been responded to.

In other Huckabee fundraising news: Through the Huckabee’s Rangers program supporters are also offering matching funds to other donors in order to boost Huckabee’s coffers. Huckabee also turned to religion groups in order to raise funds. Last week, Huckabee, ostensibly skirting campaign finance laws, received approximately $1 million in pledges after a fundraising event at Kenneth Copeland Ministries in Texas:

The Trinity Foundation, a charity that monitors televangelists and viewed a live Internet broadcast of the event, said the fundraiser took in $111,000 and generated pledges nearing $1 million, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reported in a copyrighted article Tuesday.

“Basically, Kenneth Copeland simply asked him how he could pray for him and the governor asked him to pray for physical stamina for the team and the financial resources that they need each day,” she said. “I’m not sure who called who.”

Huckabee’s campaign released a statement saying it rented a room for “a separate event that was hosted by a private individual” and was not affiliated with Copeland’s ministry. The campaign said the event conformed with campaign finance laws and tax regulations.

Huckabee has always had fundraising issues, but to his credit he does have a dedicated core of supporters. At this point, Huckabee’s lifeline will be Missouri, a delegate rich state and one where he has a legitimate chance to win on February 5. Huckabee himself recognizes the need to win Missouri, but he’s going to have to do a better job at convincing MO voters to support than he did at a recent campaign stop there. Right now, the momentum is with McCain and the money is with Romney, so Huckabee’s going to really need an effective Missouri strategy in order to pull out this critical victory and I really don’t think Ducan Hunter’s endorsement is going to make much of a difference.

[Photo Credit: NY Times]

Sphere: Related Content

Live Blog of the CNN / LA Times / Politico Clinton - Obama Debate In Hollywood, California (January 31, 2007)

6:36: Tonight, it’s not about hope, it’s about hype.

The final scheduled debate of primary season is here. Finally. After 19 Republican debates and what will be tonight be the 21 debates for Democrats, it will finally be over. Aside from any debates that get scheduled on Meet the Press or some other show (please, no more Tim Russert.) We’re glad you stuck with us through all of this.

Of course, this will be the first of any of these debates to include only two people, making it either exceptionally theatrical or exceptionally meaningful. Frankly, it’s too soon to tell.

And with this much on the line, you want as much information as possible. That’s why CNN was kind enough to give us the best information they had available: a time lapsed video of the set being constructed. (We’re going to be in for a LONG night, folks).

Clinton! Obama! Blitzer! NO RULES!

Tonight, 8 ET. Live online on the CNN and LA Times webpages.

6:56: The Washington Post’s “Fact Checker” has the headline: “Democratic Debate, Jan. 30, 2008.” You cannot make this stuff up. It’s even in the URL!

7:31: Let me be quick on goals for tonight. Obama needs to make sure he maintains likability, especially after the whole (stupid) snub thing from the State of the Union. Clinton needs to distinguish herself from Obama as much as she can while maintaining the look of a frontrunner. And Blitzer needs to somehow regain his dignity.

Meanwhile, Bill Schneider on CNN invokes Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure in comparison to this debate. You know, the movie where Keanu Reeves was the good actor.

7:51: Leo Dicaprio, Steven Spielberg, Rob Reiner, and more are apparently in the house.

7:54: CNN notes that there’s signs against the war and signs for Ron Paul. Has such a large movement ever been worse than the Paul people at convincing people to even listen to their position? Even the 9/11 Truthers get more people to take them seriously.

7:56: CNN’s British comparison notes that it’s “almost a certainty” that the Democrats will nominate a woman or a black President. At an economic class, the top issue is apparently … the economy. Thanks, CNN!

7:58: Melissa Long points out how expensive the Kodak Theater was to build, and then runs the stupid time lapse video I referenced above. She then stresses that she walked by Brandy earlier. Uhm, wow.

8:00: Blitzer says we’re in the midst of glamour. Thanks, Wolf.

8:02: It’s the first time a woman and an African-American will be vying for the Democratic nomination, says Wolf. Really? Are you sure? Wolf moves on to introducing the press pool. Then, Clinton and Obama come out together, all smiles.

8:03: Three symbolic white folks come out to remind people others consider them important.

8:04: Blitzer demands that the press pool leave, and he says this “will be a debate in a traditional sense.” Oh yeah? Who’s on government and who is on opposition? Oh wait, they don’t mean that.

8:05: NO RULES! Opening statements.

8:06: Obama starts by thanking John Edwards. PANDER ALERT! Then says that either he or Hillary will be the next President, and that they are and will be friends. (FIX THE SNUB!). The segues into a few sentences from his stump speech. Says its not about demographics, but looking backwards or the future. Says it’s more than change from George Bush.

8:08: Clinton says its about 1/20/09, and it will be Barack or her, and who can deal with the problems sitting on the desk that date. Cites Iraq, Afghanistan, the economy, health insurance, energy, global warming, and other problems that will emerge. Goes over her Day 1 schtick, before citing the Edwardses (Obama cited Elizabeth too). Cites those living in poverty. Says that a problem solver who rolls up their sleeves is important.

8:11: First question is what Clinton considers the most important policy difference? She says he’s not a Republican at first. Well, thanks. Goes over health care, saying hers is like Edwards’. PANDER ALERT. She wants a moratorium on foreclosures for 90 days and to freeze interest rates for 5 years. She wants to be realistic and optimistic on foreign affairs. She does not want the prestige of the Presidency on the line to meet with dictators in the first year. She tries to link Republicans with the status quo and both of them with change.

8:14: Obama says those are generally differences. Cites health care being 95% the same, citing how both would help people like his mother. Says the problem is reducing costs of health care and making it affordable. Says Clinton would force people to buy it, and it requires an enforcement mechanism (applause). He says that they agree to keep people in their home. Says that he does not want an interest rates freeze as that would cause other rates to go way up. Blames it on Bush and a lack of oversight, and links it lobbyists, and says that it’s a real difference on influence. Cites Edwards (JE PANDER ALERT). Cites differing judgment on Iraq looking forward to show how they would differ. Cites the NIE on Iran.

Great start, mainly with no Wolf.

8:19: Question on Obama’s plan being voluntary. Why would his plan be superior if 15 million are left out. Obama says anyone who wants it can get it. Obama says that means there are 15 million who do not want it, and he disputes that. Mandatory for children, and people up to 25 will be covered under parents. Obama cites Massachusetts plan that has problems with mandates. Says what do you do with people who cannot afford it, citing garnishing wages.

8:21: Wolf says it’s a difference. Gee, thanks. Clinton is passionate about it, citing in passing ‘tackling it during my husband’s administration.’ Clinton says that her plan is to help the uninsured and underinsured. Says her plan is “aggressive” and provides “subsidies.” How is that different? I’m not sure. Mentions health care tax credits. Is that the ghost of Giuliani? Says that single-payer, mandate employers, or shared responsibility are the only three options. Clinton says Obama does nto think it would be politically feasible for mandates for adults, as Obama cooly shakes his head and indicates he wants a response. Cites Edwards on “biting the bullet.” (JE PANDER ALERT)

8:24: Wolf jumps in about those that do not buy in getting sick. Obama says that paying back premiums for those gaming the system. Obama says some subsidies on Clinton’s plan are insufficient. He says he wants to lower premiums, not cap them. Cites Ted Kennedy saying that Obama can pass health care. Says that you need to bring Republicans and Democrats together and not negotiate behind close doors, and instead broadcast negotiations on CSPAN. That’s a bit naive. Wolf asks if the CSPAN thing is a swipe at Clinton, Obama says transparency offsets the power of lobbyists. CNN cuts to Rob Reiner.

8:28: Blitzer cites the health care plan being formed in secret in 1993. Clinton says it was the beginning of a “conversation.” Uh, dodge. Cites S-CHIP. She wants to regulate the health care industry to covering everyone. Really? Under what authority can you make a private company do that, exactly? I’m genuinely curious. Clinton says too much is spent on the clinical studies and experimentation and Medicare needs to be able to negotiate. Finishes where she started, with calling for universal health care. Cites the attack ads in 1994 about what people want and will accept. Talks about persuading Congress to air meetings on CSPAN being hard. Sigh. What a dumb area to have a disagreement over. Talks about building a pro-health coalition.

8:31: Why are you raising taxes to pay for health care? Obama says the GOP lost fiscal responsibility, and suddenly Obama rips into McCain way more than Romney did by saying that the Straight Talk Express lost its wheels after he stopped criticizing the Bush tax cuts. Moves into what his tax plan, been there done that. Buffet paying too little, and middle class too much, etc. And George Costanza is in the building. Someone needs to knee-cap the director here.

8:35: Clinton would allow tax cuts of those earning over $250k to expire. Talks about how bad US health care is for what they spend. Cites infant mortality rate. Cites other ideas, like electronic medical records and the Rand Corporation. Wolf wants to be precise!

8:37: Will there be an effective tax hike? They both start answering, and Clinton defers before Obama does, and he jokes about the rich crowd there being able to pay a bit more. Clinton wants to underscore that they are the tax rates of pre-Bush.

8:38: Immigration, now. What about the negative impact of immigration on the African American community? Obama first. He cites his work as an organizer and that the insecurity is beyond any one race. Says that it is scapegoating to just blame immigrants. Says that getting control of the borders is important, as it cracking down on employers. Cites a pathway to citizenship for illegals already here. Cites the problem being a problem of a bad economy, infrastructure and education.

8:42: Drivers license for illegals for Clinton. She says that employers exploit undocumented workers and there are job losses. Cites a black man telling her that he cannot get construction jobs anymore. Talks about helping “friends to the south” create more jobs as well. Goes over what the standards for citizenship would be. Says drivers license would be a ‘privilege’ that you can only address down the line.

8:46: Obama is asked about when he stood up for immigration. Cites who he worked with, again getting a dig on McCain. Says it does not poll well but it is the right thing to do. Blitzer thinks he was insulting Clinton. Obama says you have to stand up when its tough, not on the campaign. Wolf does not understand! He says that if you pass comprehensive immigration reform, you won’t have to deal with drivers licenses.

8:48: Wolf asks if she was MIA. Clinton says she cosponsored a bill before Obama came to the Senate. Do people understand how easy it is to cosponsor something? I just cosponsored 5 things. Done. She segues into discussing her endorsement of the Farm Workers. People out there are nervous about immigration and people are looking for some immigration. Clinton says she asks people what they would do about it, and they then understand. Wolf says what about drivers licenses. Clinton says it is a diversion from building a coalition.

8:51: Obama says she gave numerous answers before. Obama says it is a difficult political issue, and he agrees with Richardson (PANDER) on the issue. Says they agree more between themselves.

8:52: Clinton says they agree on that, and that she was supporting her governor but did not agree and Obama did not answer a question a week later. Says fair minded Republicans will join them on the issue.

Garkbit … err, I mean … Wolf Blitzer throws us to a break.

8:57: Question for Obama on Clinton being more experienced. Obama says a lot of Americans disagree as well. Says that he spent his life trying to bring about change. Organizer, civil rights attorney, legislator, and Senator. Says that bringing people, ethical reform, and talking straight is important. Says he respects Clinton’s experience but the skills he needs are important.

9:00: Wolf asks what of her experience in the White House means. She says it goes back 35 years to the Children’s Defense Fund. She worked for the Legal Services Corporation and grew it. Aide to prisoners and reform in Arkansas. Says she had responsibility in the White House, and if she was not successful, she got SCHIP through. Drug reform and adoption from foster care reform as well. Talks about negotiating with the Macedonian government and talking about women’s rights in Beijing. Said she worked with people who did not think they would work with her.

9:02: An ONLINE question! Ooooooohhhh! What about a running a government like a business like Romney? Clinton says government is not a business, and George W. Bush is a CEO type.

9:04: Obama says that his management style over the past year compares well, and Romney did not get a good return on his investment. Obama’s pretty funny tonight.

9:05: Clinton is asked about the endorsement of Ted Kennedy, she says she has her own Kennedys and that being the first woman president is a big change. I think actually making that argument is pretty bad; it’s about what the President does, not what race or gender they are. If George Bush turned out to be a woman, would that change anything for anyone? Aside from Laura Bush, probably not. Clinton then segues into a long discussion of whom you vote for based no the person themselves.

9:07: For Obama, how should you remember the Clinton administration? Obama says they look good, especially compared to the Bush Administration. Agrees you have to decide on whom they are. Obama says that he is bringing in a whole new generation of voters. Says part of being President is not settling and is reaching out to people. Obama talks up the high level of support he brings in (being careful to not take total credit).

9:10: Another online question: How can you have change when there is the Bush / Clinton thing. Pierce Brosnan in the house! I wonder if he pretended to kill some old guy in the bathroom with Greg Kinnear. She says she is proud of Bill’s administration. Talks up the change under Bill of jobs and surpluses. gives the line about takinga Clinton to clean up after a Bush to some insane applause for a line that’s been around for 9 months.

Wolf throws to a break! Just remember: “The purpose of the office of the president is not to wield power, but to draw attention away from it.”

9:16: Wolf tells us people are outside. Sucks for them. Iraq! Both called for gradual withdrawal; why should people not worry about an open ended commitment. Talks about how she got into an argument with the Pentagon. Says it is more than bringing troops home, and is about protecting the embassy and what to do about Iraqis that helped Americans. Wants to confront the Iraqi government on taking action. Says they were both ‘pressed’ by some of their opponents in debates on the matter. Anti-pander? She hopes that 16 months is appropriate.

9:20: Obama doesn’t distinguish himself from Clinton on the matter, rather taking on McCain. Then talks about Pakistan and China, and how the war is undermining long term security. Obama says setting a date is important to send a message about how serious we are. Obama says that the approach to Iran within Iraq is a real difference between them, and that because of the difference he would offer the most clear contrast. Talks of ending the mindset that began the war.

9:23: Blitzer says it is a “clear swipe” at Clinton. Both of them disagree. Clinton cites Maxine Waters as someone that wants to get out of Iraq, and the CNN celebrocam 5000 actually finds her on cue. Clinton goes over some of the same territory. Clinton then says Iran and Syria will be drawn into divisiveness in the area and that you have to bring Iran and Syria to the table. Didn’t they just have the question on whom they will negotiate with? Clinton goes off on the ‘no permanent bases without approval of the Senate’ thing again.

9:25: Question on judgment on Iraq. Why did Clinton not vote for the Levin amendment? She said she believed in inspectors, and respects Levin, but that amendment was drafted in a way to subordinate judgment to the UN Security Council. Says she voted with Byrd on the value of a pocket constitution, err, I mean authority limited to one year. She blames Bush for waging the war and waging it poorly. Says that the issue is Republicans v. Democrats, citing McCain attacking her. Says the nominee has to have credentials and gravitas for commander in chief. (Uhm, that’s a swipe). She’s calling out Obama for being perceived as inexperienced.

9:29: Wolf jumps in with Petraeus’s comments on stability. Obama says he welcomes the progress and he wants the mission completed honorably. But says that calling it success means the bar is set below the sand. Says we are back to where we were 2 years ago, while Afghanistan is worse than it was before Iraq. Obama says consistency on the matter is an issue, and that it is beyond a problem of execution. Says it was a conceptually flawed mission from the start. Gives the standards for what he would do as C-in-C.

9:32: Wolf wants Clinton to just say the vote was a mistake. Clinton says sending inspectors was a good idea, and she believes in ‘coercive diplomacy.’ Says no one could anticipate how obsessed Bush would be. Says that she would not have done that if she was President. Talks about her visit to Afghanistan. Says you have to be as strong or better than Republicans on national security to “join issues of the future.” What does that mean? Wolf wants to know is she was naive for trusting Bush, and the crowd gets all over him for the bad question. Clinton answer by talking about how her and Obama were the same once he came to the Senate on the issue. Clinton says she was told by the White House that it was just about inspectors. Cites “we” bombing them in 1998 to get inspectors back in.

9:37: Obama cites the title to use force in Iraq, and it was potentially a vote to go to war, and the headlines reflect that. Obama says its about being right on day 1, and his judgment is relevant to how we make judgments in the future in a dangerous world. Cites the danger of terrorism and having finite resources. Says you need clear intelligence and a good rationale.

Blitz throws to a break. As for Wolf, “Charming man. I wish I had a daughter so I could forbid her to marry him…”

9:43: Back. Question for Obama on whether there is too much sex and violence out of Hollywood. Says he looks at it as a parent, and the primary responsibility if from parents, and not of censorship. Says parents need to have tools to deal with TV and the internet. Stevie Wonder! Rob Reiner! Obama wants concern on whom the more violent things are being marketed to, and you need to work with the industry on that.

9:45: Question on Bill for how he has criticized Obama. If you cannot control him now, what will it be like in the White House? Clinton says it is her campaign and should be focused on issues. Anyone care to bring up the NYT Kazakhstan article tonight? Anyone? Hillary is happy Chelsea is here, apparently.

9:47: People see them as a dream ticket, says Wolf! Jokes aside, Obama says that there is more road to travel and is premature and presumptuous to say anything. Obama says that he wants great people who can disagree with him in the White House. He says people want to know that government is on their side.  Wolf wants an answer!? He says Clinton would be on anyone’s short list.

9:50: Clinton agrees with Obama. Why is Wolf pushing for a hard answer to such a meaningless question that they have an obligation to not answer? Clinton says there will be a unified Democratic party.  Clinton segues into an awkward plug for her national townhall meeting on Monday. That was really, really, really weird.

That wraps up the debate. And one last line of our last live blog for the time being.

OR IS IT?? Wolf says there will be debates on Feb. 27 and 28 if there is no resolution by then.

As for post debate coverage on CNN, remember: “For a moment, nothing happened. Then, after a second or so, nothing continued to happen. “

Sphere: Related Content

Live Blog Of CNN / LA Times / Politico Republican Debate In California (January 30, 2008)

[NOTE: If you're looking for coverage of the CNN/LA Times/Politico Democratic Debate in California between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, you can find our live blog of that debate here]

Tonight is the CNN/Los Angeles/Politico Republican Debate at the Ronald Reagan Library in Simi Valley, California. It will begin at 8pm est and will air on CNN and will stream live at both CNN and LA Times‘ websites. The participating candidates will be Mitt Romney, John McCain, Mike Huckabee and Ron Paul.

7:45: 15 minutes to go. I’m not sure what the seating locations will be yet, but I do know that McCain’s staffer won the first pick for location on the stage and had to call back to headquarters to confirm the location.

7:49: Format: No rules, No time limits. I guess ever since Wolf Blitzer threw out the rules at the last debate, CNN’s just decided to really go wild.

7:58: Lou Dobbs is expressing outrage (not necessarily about anything specific…just outrage…he wants you to know that he’s very disturbed).

8:00: And here we go! Anderson Cooper begins with a history lesson about the room they’re in. Usually, I’m opposed to these kind of explanatory intros, but given the fact that the debate is being held under the old Air Force One, I can understand the need to explain what the deal with the plane is.

8:03: First question, are Americans better off now than they were 8 years ago? Mitt Romney says that that’s a question for President Bush, then launches into defense of his record in Mass. Anderson Cooper gets indignant and wants an answer, Romney shows viewers that he’s able to stand up to Anderson Cooper, but does offer some discussion of the problems he sees in America now.

8:06: McCain says he’ll bring some straight talk, offers a bit of gloom and then talks about making the Bush tax cuts permanent. McCain states that he believes Americans are better off now than they were 8 years ago, if you look at everything.

8:07: Huckabee plainly states that he doesn’t think we’re better off now than we were 8 years ago, states that the President isn’t solely responsible, so is the congress. Huckabee says that Americans want someone that is honest and straight with them. I wonder if he’s aware that McCain already has that catchphrase locked up?

8:09: Paul states the problems are caused by foreign policy and we must acknowledge that those policies need to come to an end.

8:12: Romney takes a shot at McCain’s conservatism by noting McCain’s NY Times endorsement. McCain reminds Romney that both of Romney’s hometown papers, which know him best, endorsed him over Romney. Ouch. McCain continues to talk up his conservatism by mentioning some people that support him.

8:15: Romney defends his record on job growth by noting that some of the negative data on job growth included a time period under the former Governor. He also explains the fee increases under his administration. Romney also touts the work he did on health care and notes that when he left there was a balanced budget and a small surplus.

8:18: Huckabee talks conservatism: lower taxes, streamlining the government, amendment banning gay marriage and a life amendment. Something about these, “who is more conservative” questions seem sort of pointless at some point.

8:21: McCain is asked about Gov. Schwarzenegger’s environmental law proposals, which are much different than the steps that the Bush Administration would take towards combating climate change. Given the impending endorsement for Arnold, obviously McCain needs to tread lightly and he does. He responds by noting that he believes in federalism, which has really turned into code for “I won’t force you to do something. Please don’t shy away from me because of this issue.” McCain then gives his oft used version of Pascal’s Wager for support of green technology.

8:25: Romney says that he supports states’ rights to control and regulate their own emissions. Huckabee then tries to explain why Federalism is good, he then goes on to state that Alexander Hamilton was wrong. Uhhhh….he’s having a difficult enough time staying in this race against Romney, McCain and Paul…I’m pretty sure injecting Hamilton into this race would only make it worse for him. *sigh*

8:29: Paul asks for some time to discuss and issue and Cooper denies him. For a debate that wasn’t really supposed to have rules, Anderson Cooper seems awfully indignant.

8:33: Talk turns to the economy…excuse me while I relocate to the top floor of my building, preferably a seat near the edge…

8:35: On the economic stimulus: McCain says that we will probably need more. Wow! This is like saying that we need more puppies, fluffier pillows or locations that have Coke Zero available from the fountain.

8:36: McCain is challenged on his initial opposition to Bush’s tax cuts on the grounds that they favored the rich too much. McCain states that he was a foot soldier in the Reagan revolution…then proceeds with obfuscation.

8:40: The topic changes to immigration. Huckabee thinks we need to secure the border. He says that two things need to happen in order to do that: 1) build border fence and 2) all current illegal immigrants will need to go back to their home countries and wait in line. Ultimately, Huckabee thinks this is the most compassionate and kind thing…

8:41: Romney is asked about his statement that most illegal immigrants could be deported within 90 days. He didn’t initially recall saying it, and the questioner offered him the quote. Romney talks about being courteous deportation. For example, if the family has a child in school, you let the child finish that school year first. Romney reemphasizes he would not allow illegal immigrants to remain here permanently, then suggests that McCain’s legislation would have allowed for such a thing.

8:44: McCain is asked if his legislation were to come to the floor of the Senate today, and he states that it won’t happen. After being pressed, he states that he would not vote for it because it’s clear that people want the borders to be secured first. It seems somewhat inconsistent for McCain to tout sticking to his principles and ignoring the majority on Iraq…yet, so freely acknowledging deference to the will of the American people on the immigration issue.

8:47: Huckabee is asked if Reagan’s appointment of O’Connor was the right call. He won’t answer the question, but then launches into a discussion of why it’s important to support life and how he would want judges that were pro-life. Ron Paul is given a chance to respond, he says he wouldn’t have nominated her because of her view towards the constitution. Both McCain and Romney dodge the question and instead state the types of judges they would appoint. In a bold move, McCain cites Alito and Roberts as examples of the kinds of conservative judges he’d support. Romny ups the ante and cites Alito, Roberts, Thomas and Scalia as the type of conservative judges he would nominate (Yea, that’s right, take that John McCain). Then, stupidly, Romney takes a shot at O’Connor for apparently not following the Constitution enough and for legislating from the bench. I don’t care if you’re a Republican, Democrat, hardcore liberal or conservative, if you think Justice O’Connor was a bad Justice, then you’re either completely uninformed or completely incapable of making evaluations. Sheesh, and I thought Huckabee was going to take home the award for baseless attacks on historical figures (yes, I know O’Connor’s still alive, but she’s done enough to be part of history).

8:57: And we’re back. Maybe, they’ll finally include Ron Paul in this last half hour.

8:58: Romney is asked about Peggy Noonan’s contention that George W. Bush destroyed the Republican party. Romney states that George W. Bush showed everyone that when America is attacked, we’ll respond. Uhhhh….is that really the best defense he could give?

9:00: Romney promises success in Iraq, which he defines as no safe havens for terrorists in Iraq. He strongly stated that he does not have a date for withdrawal and does not support a timetable. He accuses McCain of being un-Reagan like by raising the issue before the Florida primary and indicates that it may explain the results of Florida.

9:03: McCain reiterates his argument by reading the quote to Romney. Romney asks him what it means. Romney continues to try and defend himself. The audience seems to be on Romney’s side on this issue. Romney and McCain bicker. McCain’s tone during this exchange, reminds me of my grandfather’s tone when we were having an argument about cathode ray tubes once (he used to be an engineer).

9:06: Anderson Cooper regains control, unfortunately, it required his blue steel look in order to calm things down. Cooper asks Romney why he wouldn’t comment explicitly on the surge back in 2006 as he was preparing to announce his run. Romney is mad and accuses McCain of “Washington style” politics.

9:08: McCain responds to the Washington style politics line, by reminding Romney of the negative ads he used against him and Huckabee. He also reminded everyone that Romney used millions of his own dollars in his campaign so far.

9:10: Paul is asked about McCain’s line that we could be fighting in Iraq for the next 100 years. So let me get this straight, the rare chance they include Paul, it’s to ask him a question about John McCain? Paul states that both Romney and McCain are parsing over minor details of the same general policy - both supported going in and both support continuing the war. Paul’s gotten the loudest cheers so far.

9:12: Anderson Cooper asks Huckabee the same question given to Paul. Huckabee complains about not getting time and questions. Then casually says in regards to the 100 year fighting line, “oh it doesn’t take that long.” Then goes on to say that he’ll stay however long it takes to win.

9:13: Huckabee is asked what he sees when he looks int Putin’s eyes. Huckabee states that Putin has taken actions that lead to concern and that we need to have a foreign policy that emphasizes strength. Advocates a stronger military, you know, for deterrence. Is he actually arguing that a return to mutually assured destruction is the only viable foreign policy vis-a-vis Russia at this point? *sigh*

9:17: Romney explains geopolitics: Russia using energy to control policy, China “the wild west of energy” using energy and giving nuclear power to influence policy, Al Qaeda using terrorism to influence policy and the USA, which stands for free enterprise and freedom of the individual. I don’t even know how to respond to this painfully oversimplified explanation of geopolitics. However, would Romney’s analogy make Chris Patten the Wyatt Earp of China? I think so. But aside from that, Romney didn’t even discuss the topic (that he himself said he’d address), which was how he’d deal with Russia.

9:21: Romney’s argument: people ultimately look to Governors and not Senators to lead this country. He was a governor, ipso facto, he should be the next leader. Aside from that, he worked in the private sector, and then goes on his economic argument rant…

9:23: Romney is asked why he’s more qualified to be Commander-in-Chief than McCain. Romney doesn’t believe you need military experience to be Commander-in-Chief. Romney says that he prefers chess to checkers (I’m serious).

9:24: McCain responds, takes an irrelevant shot at Romney for having led corporations that fired people. Another ouch. McCain mentions Tom Ridge for the second time this evening.

9:25: Ron Paul states that these people don’t understand that the President isn’t supposed to run the economy and reminds everyone of that fact. Paul then discusses the monetary system. Paul’s discussion of substance causes Andersoon Cooper to become impatient.

9:28: Huckabee complains more about time. Then talks about less government and why it’s important. He states that governors are good presidents because they understand that no issue is isolated..that everything is connected. Metakuya Oyasin.

9:30: Anderson Cooper graciously gives all of the candidates 1 minute to explain why Ronald Reagan would endorse them. This is an appalling question for several reasons, none the least of which is Nancy Reagan’s presence in the first row.

9:31: Mitt Romney says Ronald Reagan would support him because he’d lower taxes. McCain says that Reagan wouldn’t support someone that changes positions and that Regan would support him because he held firm on Iraq and because he was a foot soldier in the Reagan Revolution.

9:32: Ron Paul talked about how he supported Reagan in 1976, when only 4 other members of congress did and how Reagan campaigned with him. He states that Reagan was very sympathetic to the gold standard (an issue that Ron Paul is very much in favor of).

9:33: Huckabee doesn’t presume to know who Reagan would endorse. Then speaks to the goodness of Reagan and how it’s important to recapture that can do spirit.

9:34: And we’re done.

Sphere: Related Content

Today In Presidential Campaign History

Three separate stories today in our regular look at Today in Presidential Campaign History:

In light of two candidates dropping out of the race today, we look at an article 24 years ago today from the Christian Science Monitor at why the John Glenn campaign failed to catch on:

What went wrong? Plenty. Glenn failed to organize. He failed to ”press the flesh,” New Hampshire-style. He failed to line up local supporters. He failed to take advantage of opportunities.

Dan Calegari, local Manchester organizer for Gary Hart’s campaign, shakes his head in disbelief when he talks about the Glenn campaign here. It seems to lack ”astuteness,” he says. Mr. Calegari gives this example:

A few weeks ago, the mayor’s office in Manchester staged a Christmas luncheon for about 1,500 senior citizens. It was a perfect opportunity for a little politicking with all those voters in one spot, especially for a candidate like Glenn, who is making his appeal to middle-of-the-roaders. Calegari dispatched Hart volunteers to the luncheon, and they worked it hard, passing out leaflets and campaign buttons and shaking hands. But not a Glenn worker was in sight, even though about 80 ”Buckeye” volunteers for Glenn were here that week from Ohio.

Also, in the New York Times that day, after Ronald Reagan had the previous day announced his intention to run for reelection, a curious statement was made:

Frank J. Fahrenkopf Jr., the Republican Party chairman, predicted a ”close, tough election.” ”But,” he said, ”with a record of success and a vision for the future, Ronald Reagan and the Republican Party will enjoy a great victory in November. Momentum is on our side. More importantly, the American public is on our side.”

None of us can be right all the time, apparently.

Lastly, this article by Jonathan Alter in Newsweek should immediately end all comparisons of the Obama campaign and the Gary Hart campaign:

Presidential candidate Gary Hart likes to compare himself to Mikhail Kutuzov, the commander in Tolstoy’s “War and Peace.” Kutuzov waited patiently while Napoleon (read the other Democratic candidates) bogged down in the snow. That’s Hart’s plan, though in 1983 it was Hart himself who bogged down, squandering his early glamour-boy promise with wooden campaigning and lackluster fund raising. Now, just when his campaign looked hopeless, Hart has begun to display stronger organizational talent in New Hampshire, and he boosted his visibility with an effective performance at last week’s televised Dartmouth debate. The Hart campaign is nearly broke and still far behind, but suddenly it is showing signs of life.

Hart’s immediate challenge is not to catch Walter Mondale or even John Glenn, but to find a perch above the so-called “second tier” candidates like Alan Cranston and Ernest Hollings. George Bruno, the Democratic state chairman in New Hampshire (who has endorsed no one), believes Hart is on the verge of doing that. “Out of those people [in the second tier], he’d be the one to surprise people,” Bruno says.

Still, the Hart campaign’s poor financing remains a severe handicap. In Iowa, his lack of media money has forced him to venture out on long days of personal appearances in small towns across the state. In New Hampshire, Mondale’s organizational advantage in working-class Manchester also has forced Hart and other candidates to shift their battleground to the state’s smaller towns. Hart’s strength there is an especially capable crew of New England college students, about 1O0 of whom knocked on doors during their recent semester break and will do so every weekend until the Feb. 28 primary. By then, Hart strategists say they will have canvassed most of the state’s Democratic or independent voters.

Sphere: Related Content

David Axelrod Plagiarizes Himself

Barack Obama today in a speech in Denver, Barack Obama echoed a line from the 1996 Bill Clinton campaign (my emphasis):

With Caroline Kennedy at his side, making her debut on the campaign trail, Mr. Obama urged Democrats taking part in next week’s Colorado caucuses to fight temptation “to simply turn back the clock and to build a bridge back to the 20th century.”

While some (or rather, most) will look at this as another attack on Clinton, I’m more interested in the symbolism. It turns out that phrase when used by the Clintons was written by one David Axelrod, now chief stragist for Obama:

From some advisory work he did for Bill Clinton during the 1996 campaign, when he wrote the memo that introduced the phrase “Bridge to the 21st century” into the political vernacular, Axelrod learned that for a Democrat the future always trumps the past. He says he also learned from Clinton that a pol’s biggest task is “to narrow the distance between the people and government.”

It’s surely an interesting use of the phrase, if nothing else. Between this and making it about bring right on Day 1 instead of ready, Obama seems to have moved into a phase of throwing Clinton’s words (and Bill Clinton’s words apparently) back at them.

[Photo Credit: Flickr user justinhamilton.org under a Creative Commons license]

Sphere: Related Content

Edwards “Suspension” Speech

Whoops, not that suspension. This one:

Incidentally, I think Chris Beam has the best analysis of why Edwards failed. The whole ‘blame the media’ thing is, to paraphrase someone else, one of the biggest fairytales I’ve ever heard.

Sphere: Related Content

Kos Pains Me…

Kos writing on who Bill Richardson should endorse:

Endorse no one, Bill! Except he’s one of my two top choices for the veep slot (the other is Gov. Kathleen Sebelius), and I doubt that slot will go to someone who sits out the primary.

This is the kind of silly talk that makes me realize that if I started this website 8 years ago instead of 1 year ago, that it’d be just as big (probably bigger) than Daily Kos. My point being that people can’t really be flocking to him for brilliant political analysis, right? It must be because he’s just been around a while. I mean my goodness…

I’ve already touched on the subject of a Richardson VP possibility before, but with all the new talk out there, I’ll probably update this analysis in the next couple of days. What I said in early December about why a Hillary/Richardson ticket will not happen (not all, but some of the same arguments apply to why an Obama/Richardson ticket is also unlikely): Read more

Sphere: Related Content

John Edwads Drops Bid For White House

John Edwards exits the Democratic nominating contest today. He will deliver a speech at 1pm est in New Orleans. It makes sense, since he’s been dropping hints about it the past couple of days. I really don’t have anything else to say at this point, other than tomorrow’s Democratic debate just got a lot more interesting…

Oh, and he won’t be endorsing anyone anytime soon.

[Photo Credit: Indecision 2008]

Sphere: Related Content

McCain Wins Florida; Giuliani to Endorse?

Well … so much for our predictions. McCain wins and has a massive advantage in the Feb. 5 states especially with the news below, except in the South … where McCain friendly Huckabee has a massive advantage.

As for Giuliani, Mark Halperin says he could drop out and endorse McCain as early as tomorrow.

McCain wins the nomination unless he drops the ball or Romney pulls a miracle in the next week.

Sphere: Related Content

Giuliani Campaign Obits For Everyone!

I was going to compile a list of all the Giuliani obituaries that ran today, but over the course of an hour, I could barely make a dent. Sadly, the obituaries included sending people to Mars, Jon Voight fighting a dog, Junichiro Koizumi throwing a baseball, Rudy himself phone banking and more.

Rest assured, while the Florida race is too close to call, what is assured is Giuliani is going to come in a distant third at best. Howard Fineman is already reporting that Giuliani is unlikely to appear at the debate tomorrow night. With everyone in the media treating this as his wake, he’ll probably end up dropping out at some point tomorrow. If he doesn’t, he’ll probably just embarrass himself more.

Sphere: Related Content

Mitt Romney’s Strategy Comes Back to Haunt Him?

From Jim Geraghty at NRO (my emphasis):

According to the guys at Hot Air, but did anyone else catch this? “Fox is running demographic exit polls now. McCain wins among seniors and veterans — but only by a point(!) — and crushes Giuliani among Hispanics, 50-26. Romney wins on immigration, 45-26, but on the key issue, the economy, McCain wins by four.”

….

Couple this with another exit poll result (this one from ABC)— “The economy is by far the top issue — just about half said so in these preliminary results. That’s double the next highest priorities, terrorism and illegal immigration…”

Isn’t that a bad sign for Romney? That he’s losing among voters who place highest priority on his signature issue? Sure, he could make up some ground on immigration, but if the Fox News exit poll is right, Romney’s got fewer voters to work with on that issue…

Romney never started campaigning on being the most effective candidate to manage the economy until the perception of him was made up in people’s minds on whom he was. People that looked at who he was (such as those at NRO) probably have a much higher favorability rating of Romney rather than those whose minds were only shaped through the campaign process, where Romney was constantly hit for flip-flopping and the like.

To be more to the point: How many of the voters in Florida today would describe the economy as his signature issue?

More proof that even nowadays, campaign strategies matter.

Sphere: Related Content

Pre-Florida Results Notes

Below are some thoughts before the results of Florida’s primary are released…

• I was thinking this earlier, but Michael Crowley actually wrote it down and contextualized it. What if Obama out-performs polls in Florida? Clearly, that would be a big story after Clinton touted it so much. Of course, Clinton’s talk about seating the candidates probably allows her to not be worried about such a phenomenon, as presumably voters would be attracted to a candidate saying their vote counts more than one staying silent on the issue.
• Exit poll alert! McCain up barely over Romney, with Giuliani nowhere nearby. On this basis, I’m predict it for Romney. Exit polls are never right, and McCain’s organizing on early voting was awful compared to Romney and Giuliani. And Romney is apparently up in the absentee voting, as it turns out.
• We stayed out of this one because it was obvious, but McCain pretty much lied about Mitt Romney and the surge. Justin at Donklephant was a bit more charitable to McCain than I would have been, but right on all points, and far better than most mainstream coverage. I’ll add that these sort of dishonest attacks are going to hurt McCain among the independent base of his that values his ’straight talk.’ I wish columnists would draw the necessary conclusions about what this says of McCain’s campaign instead of using limited lines like ‘misleading low blow‘ or something similar. It’s a bit shameful that most of the heavy lifting on this was done by pro-Romney sites like the National Review.
• Meanwhile, Romney attacks McCain over spending … that is, not doing enough of it.
• How much will getting the endorsements of Crist and Martinez help McCain? That it’s a closed primary with only Republicans, and they are more moderates, means possibly not as much as he would like.
• Also, as far as delegates, it’s winner take all. But that 2 point win or loss margin sure doesn’t sound that bad, does it? In other words, this is the third fight of McCain-Romney, not the last. (Apologies to SC, Wyoming, and Nevada, but you were not really contested by both even if you were won by one.)

Sphere: Related Content

On Political Coverage This Weekend

The Clinton campaign pushed hard for free media coverage in primetime this week, and was rebuffed:

Insiders tell TVNewser the Hillary Clinton campaign was prepared to give exclusive access for the next 48 hours to ABC’s 20/20, but because of a scheduling conflict, ABC News passed on the offer. Sources tell us the campaign had wanted ABC to accompany Sen. Clinton for a 48 hour period beginning today, with the report airing Friday night on 20/20.

With the Super Bowl airing Sunday, and thus presumably lower than normal viewership for 60 Minutes, an appearance on 20/20 would have been the Clinton campaign’s best shot at getting a prime time network audience before Super Tuesday. Nightline’s Cynthia McFadden will spend tomorrow with the candidate for a “day in the life” story which will air tomorrow night.

Candidates are not going to get much of a chance after the CNN debates to change the perception of them before Feb. 5, with the Super Bowl this weekend. Unless someone does something dramatic on Saturday, I suppose, but even then…

The debates tomorrow (for Republicans) and Thursday are looming especially large.

Sphere: Related Content

It’s, Like, Totally Irrelevant

All the talk about snubs and photo analysis and whether Clinton looked at Obama before cheering once … it’s ridiculous. You’re the press corps, not someone on The Hills gossiping about what vapid character X did last night. (Sorry, I couldn’t make a better reference since I made a conscious choice not to watch awful shows like that).

Stop trying to imply there’s a secret issue between the candidates, or one of the candidates is that insecure. If you have enough sources to report that, do it. Otherwise, move along.

These are real human beings in real life, not characters in a novel or movie whose mere existence begs such interpretation. A glance or someone turning away is NOT a story that should affect who is president.

Frankly, it’s embarrassing that so many people are devoting so much time to this. And perhaps telling.

Sphere: Related Content

New Hampshire Paper: Clinton Lied to Voters

The New Hampshire Union, whose editorial board is (famously?) conservative, hits Clinton over her emerging position on the Michigan and Florida primaries, calling her explicitly a liar at one point. An excerpt:

“I will try to persuade my delegates to seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida,” Clinton said last week, after the New Hampshire primaries and Iowa caucuses were safely over.

Clinton coldly and knowingly lied to New Hampshire and Iowa. Her promise was not a vague statement. It was a signed pledge with a clear and unequivocal meaning.

She signed it thinking that keeping the other candidates out of Michigan and Florida was to her advantage, but knowing she would break it if that proved beneficial later on. It did, and she did.

New Hampshire voters, you were played for suckers.

Clinton never made Florida an issue until it was clear she would lose South Carolina by a non trivial margin. (At which point she also left the state for a few days to let Bill campaign on his own).

Campaigns held dueling conference calls over this issue earlier today, but we’ll weigh in and say that no one campaigned in Florida. The best argument that the Clinton camp has is a pretty bad one: national ads on MSNBC and CNN for Obama were seen in Florida. Really? That’s it?

Memo to the Clinton campaign: She’s a viable candidate who is capable of beating Obama in an election. She was the inevitable front runner for a long time, according to you. How about you have a fair straight up campaign without silly tricks like this? You don’t need to stoop this low to win. America will be impressed when she wins a campaign, not an uncontested beauty contest. Hell, just looking at strategy, people would probably be more impressed with Florida if your campaign was making no big deal about it at all. Did anyone think of that possibility? (And can we end the myth of the Clinton campaign being the best and most disciplined one ever?) You can do better. The time to start doing so was yesterday at the latest. But lying at worst and a cheap political stunt at best is surely beneath what everyone agrees is the national frontrunner. That’s seemingly obvious, and it’s why you’re not going to get the coverage you want. Not because people hate you or something.

We’ll have more on the Republicans later this afternoon.

Sphere: Related Content

John Edwards Admits He’s Going to Lose … Sort of

Hat tip: TPM Election Central

His campaign manager elicited a desire to the NYT to be involved heavily in a brokered convention today:

But they have also floated other rationales for a continued Edwards candidacy, suggesting that his delegates could be used to promote his platform or to help him act as a power broker at the Democratic convention.

“We’re still hoping that John is the nominee,” said David Bonior, the national campaign manager. “But with a chunk of delegates, you can leverage what you’ve been fighting for and standing for. You can raise these issues to where they should be on the Democratic agenda. We’re running for those two reasons: to get the nomination and to have his voice heard on his issues.”

t’s
This is essentially the only reason Edwards can run anymore, and makes him the 2008 version of what Dennis Kucinich famously did in 2004. Will Edwards get in trouble with the FEC if it becomes clear mathematically that he will not get delegates, as Kucinich did?

As for who this helps, it’s hard to say. You can make reasonable arguments for Edwards prescence drawing away from either Clinton or Obama, although Edwards would more than likely lean towards Obama should it actually get to the convention, which still is highly unlikely. We’ll discuss this more in upcoming podcasts.

Sphere: Related Content

Yes, Bill Richardson Was That Crazy

The definitive proof comes in:

Richardson’s torn. He served in the Clinton White House, first as ambassador to the United Nations, then as Clinton’s Secretary of Energy. “I have a history with the Clintons,” Richardson said. “And I’ve always liked her. She always seems very genuine.” But Richardson considers Kennedy, who’s long been respected by Hispanics, as “a mentor.” In 1982, when Richardson ran for Congress for the second time — he lost two years before — Kennedy flew to Santa Fe and campaigned for him. “That might have been the reason I was elected,” Richardson said. And he said he likes Obama, telling a story about how Obama saved him during one of last year’s Democratic debates:

“I had just been asked a question — I don’t remember which one — and Obama was sitting right next to me. Then the moderator went across the room, I think to Chris Dodd, so I thought I was home free for a while. I wasn’t going to listen to the next question. I was about to say something to Obama when the moderator turned to me and said, ‘So, Gov. Richardson, what do you think of that?’ But I wasn’t paying any attention! I was about to say, ‘Could you repeat the question? I wasn’t listening.’ But I wasn’t about to say I wasn’t listening. I looked at Obama. I was just horrified. And Obama whispered, ‘Katrina. Katrina.’ The question was on Katrina! So I said, ‘On Katrina, my policy . . .’ Obama could have just thrown me under the bus. So I said, ‘Obama, that was good of you to do that.’”

On the bright side, we know he was not wearing an earpiece.

As for his endorsement, there’s a reason he’s not being listed with Kennedy, Gore, or Edwards as a powerful potential endorsement.

Sphere: Re