Did McCain Pick Romney?

Mark Halperin cites two GOP operatives who say McCain will announce Mitt Romney as VP next Friday. Unless those operatives include the likes of Steve Schmidt, Mark Salter, or Rick Davis, I’m inclined to view it with a very large grain of salt. And even so, leaking something like this now would completely undermine the purpose of holding off the announcement for the extra week. Not to mention that leaking that the richest guy in politics as your VP is a bad idea on the day that you’re already getting hit for owning too many homes.

This seems more to me like an intended leak to calm down conservatives who are in an uproar after pro-choice VP candidate after pro-choice candidate (Ridge, Lieberman, etc.) being leaked.

Romney will surely be on the list, but in short, I’m not convinced.

PS: This news would also make Mike Huckabee go nuts. Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty may be the one candidate who is borderline acceptable to the entire broad coalition McCain is trying to build.

Sphere: Related Content

Presidential Candidates As Batman Super Villains

With all the silly political talk of comparing the Bush Administration to Batman, I thought I’d take a look on the lighter side and compare various Presidential candidates to different Batman villains. This isn’t serious political analysis, but dammit, I have this site as a forum and I intend to use it. (And frankly, if it’s good enough of a topic for Wall Street Journal editors, It’s good enough for me.) I picked super villains arbitrarily. I don’t want to get into a “who is Batman and who is evil” argument. That’s just boring.

Barack Obama as Harvey “Two Face” Dent: The idea that spawned this post. While others are doing strange things like comparing Dick Cheney to Batman or something like that, given that the arch of the story is the rise and fall of newcomer and beacon of hope DA Harvey Dent, I’m surprised there’s not more comparisons between the two. There’s this article, sure. But that seems more intent on criticizing platitudes than it does at looking at something deeper: are figures of hope like Obama and Dent doomed to failure? Clearly they are doomed to dim. Wile the article criticizes Obama for lack of particular details, it’s ultimately Dent’s drive for only results that dooms him. When pushed towards the edge by his horrific scaring and in TDK the (spoiler!) death of Rachel Dawes, Dent is concerned only with the ends, not with the means, of resolving problems. One gets the feeling that more contemplation on platitudes would have helped him, not hurt him. So I think Obama differs in that respect. On the other hand, that side of Dent always existed; it was just hidden by both his meteoric rise and previous success. After all, anyone can keep their secrets hidden while succeeding.

Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton as Ra’s al Ghul and Talia al Ghul: In the comics, they are father and daughter; here they are husband and wife. Let’s just gloss over that difference. In the comics, Ra’s could not be killed thanks to the Lazarus Pits; where he could rise from the dead. Surely, this reminds everyone of the numerous times that Bill himself rose from what was surely political death. The intrigue between the al Ghuls rivals the reported intrigue between Bill and Hillary. Bill has actively and inadvertently hurt Hillary in the past, as any sane person would admit. In the comics, this antagonism even leads Talia and Batman to sleep together. Similarly, Hillary and Obama used to be close allies, with Hillary even fundraising for Obama at one point during his Senate run, the political equivalent of sex if there is any. Moreover, this also means that the normal Clinton confidantes are known as the League of Shadows. Just as in Batman Begins, they are regarded as formidable by Ra’s, but in the end do absolutely nothing to help him, and only allow the enemy to take him down. One can imagine Obama as Batman goading Bill to please bring on four pawns (Mark Penn, Harold Ickes, James Carville, and Terry McAulliffe) instead of just four. Although in reality, it’s because the four will get in each others ways. Of course in this analogy, Hillary as Talia has her own henchwomen, who are none the more competent (Patti Solis Doyle) for the most part. (You’ll never, ever hear me say anything negative about Maggie Williams, mostly because I think she would have me killed for real.)

Tom Tancredo as the Dr. Jonathan Crane, aka The Scarecrow: A candidate who bases his entire campaign on fear. But more than that: Tancredo never intended go through with his campaign. In Batman Begins, Ra’s al Ghul states that Scarecrow believes the plan was to hold the city to ransom. It seems Tancredo’s entire campaign was based on the premise that he would hold the Republican Party hostage unless they elected someone he agreed with. And then they decided not to anyways.

John McCain as the mob. Yes the mob as a whole. Carmine Falcone, Sal Maroni, the whole bunch. In the comics and in the Dark Knight there are factions of the mob, just like they are factions of McCain supporters. Rick Davis, John Weaver, Mike Murphy, Steve Schmidt and others all had their time to be in control before circumstances forced them out, and they all do not like each other, and do not work well together (as seen in the mob scene in The Dark Knight before the Joker arrives. Each of them backstabs and steals from the other, ostensibly to protect the rest). Moreover, there is no control over them from the mob as a whole. McCain is said to be a laissez faire manager just as the mob as a whole favors looser rules. Moreover, McCain absolutely seems to abhor Barack Obama, just as the mob abhors Dent for the type of change he wishes to bring. They want things to change to, but jsut to the way things used to be. They are in a way as old as McCain is. In the movies, the mob is somewhat like McCain in that they refuse to go away. Like the Hydra, you can cut off one head, but two more will sprout in its place. McCain similarly seems to never go away no matter how many times he seems out. Like the mob turning to Joker in the Dark Knight, McCain also seems to have no good plan whatsoever, and changes plans on the fly when things turn out to be different than he thought. Does this say anything about what McCain is doomed to be? I don’t think so. The mob keeps on existing, but never in the same format. It’s certainly not predestined in any movie that the mob will lose. Indeed, the only comparison seems to be that McCain’s campaign could turn out to either be the Joker tormenting the mob’s opponents, or the Joker later threatening the entire barge full of mob associates with death. Also like the mob, McCain functions better when backed into a corner. Lastly, McCain lacks a certain shine and appeal that the mob also lacks in comparison to other “freak” type villains.

Mitt Romney as Oswald Cobblepot, AKA the Penguin: Whereas the Penguin used his ownership of the Iceberg Lounge to gain entry into Gotham, Romney uses his leadership at Bain Capital for much the same purpose. There was always a question of taking what Penguin says as truth: he never comes across as sincere. Romney may not have come across as insincere as Penguin did in, say, Batman Returns, but his numerous problems with flip-flopping caused serious problems for him this cycle. Moreover, his sons are everywhere, just like the Penguins were seemingly in Batman Returns. And just as the Penguin in One Year Later seemingly abandons crime for a legal presence, Romney also aborted what was a previous hard line stance against McCain suddenly to endorse him shortly after Super Tuesday. Most superficially, the Penguin is the high society type criminal compared to all the rest; similarly, Mitt Romney seems the most high society of all the candidates, due in large part to his massive wealth. Note: If there is one supervillain Romney is not, it is Deadshot.

John Edwards as Waylon Jones, aka Killer Croc: The easy choice for Edwards is Two Face. Running a completely different campaign than his first time, being an impressive trial lawyer and all. But in reality, the specific flaws and details of Edwards this cycle have nothing to do with the flaws and defining characteristics of Harvey Dent. Killer Croc is the one villain whose entire existence is almost entirely defined by his appearance: his reasons and justifications for doing what he did are inconsequential, if they exist at all. In this campaign, despite the support he got (which, compared to all but Obama and Clinton, was very substantial), Edwards was doomed because of the perceptions he allowed to be created about himself: the expensive haircuts, the video of him combing his air, etc. Essentially that he came to be defined in the market place as someone really, really vain. Killer Croc is the only Supervillain similarly concerned with image. While Edwards allowed himself to be defined by his, Croc hid and acted out because of his image. And yes, there’s also that small matter of Edwards sneaking around in basements of hotels being stalked. Very Croc-ian.

Dennis Kucinich as Jarvis Tetch, aka the Mad Hatter: Like the Mad Hatter was inspired by Lewis Carroll, Kucinich seems torn out of a different era of politics, one where William Jennings Bryan and Eugene Debs were the constant candidates. The delusion of the Mad Hatter strikes me as exactly the same as the delusion of Kucinich that he can win. His many tricks in the comics are similar to Kucinich’s tricks in politics. Tetch was seemingly run over by a train, only for it to turn out to be a trick; similarly, Kucinich was thought done when he ran the city of Cleveland into bankruptcy, only to emerge years later as a Congressman. Moreover, anyone who is not his supporter wonders why he is still trying. I’ll just end with that there’s something of a physical resemblance as well.

Fred Thompson as Bane: Bane was introduced in the comics as essentially the negative version of Batman: awesome power, awesome intellect. He ended up breaking Bruce Wayne’s back. But I’m not comparing Thompson to that Bane. I’m comparing him to the Bane in Batman and Robin, the horrible fourth batman movie. In that movie, going on the legacy of the comic book Bane, Bane instead becomes an unimportant tool who only serves as muscle; That is regularly noted as one of the worst transitions from comics to movies ever. Thompson similarly entered the race to great fanfare, only to find out he was far too little far too late. Thompson, like Bane, was a supposedly fierce character who when put into a campaign fizzled beyond what anyone expected. The comic Bane is the Fred Thompson that people expected; the awful film version is the one people got. I also have no problem comparing Holly wood to a South American prison. Many suggest that a new interpretation of Bane in the current Batman series could be widely successful; I’m not so sure. Wildly intelligent, strong, and athletic people tend to not sneak around in masks. While the true believers may never admit it, the concept at heart just is not very believable. Note: Just because Thompson and Clayface both were actors does not make them similar in any meaningful way.

Ron Paul as Lennie Adkin, aka Anarky: One sentence in Wikipedia says it all: “Lonnie Machin, a teenage prodigy who, believing in Anarchism, creates improvised gadgets and attempts to subvert government in order to improve society.” Paul himself was not young - the opposite of it - but he certainly attracted youth en masse to his libertarian oriented campaign. And while some would say the dominant Paul story as the racist old newsletters, Paul had no chance to win before or after that story broke. Moreover, Paul’s campaign innovated on the internet in ways few others have ever done, either their notable moneybombs and extensive social networking (and comment bombing). Moreover, the obvious comparison is in the goals of Adkin and Paul: both wanted substantially smaller governments (Adkin clearly went further than Paul). Does Adkin’s failure indicate that Paul’s crusade will never be successful? I don’t think so. There will probably never anytime soon be an extensive, successful libertarian movement, but there can certainly be small steps made in that direction. As a bonus, the character was created in part from Paulite hero and Alan Moore creation V from V for Vendetta.

Rudy Giuliani as Eddie Nashton, aka The Riddler: The Riddler, simply put, is known for leaving riddles after crimes; it’s a dare to be caught, whereas conventional wisdom would normally lead criminals to, you know, try to get away with the crimes they commit. The defining tactical decision of the Giuliani campaign was skipping all the early states that conventional wisdom said he had to at least get a symbolic if not a real victory in for him to be competitive in later states such as Florida. He decided not to. Moreover, the Riddler is covered with question marks all over his suit that give away not only his identity but also his only useful sentence was a Riddle to lead people to him. And while Giuliani’s innumerable references to 9/11 were not at all that pathological, there was clearly something in Joe Biden’s joke that ever Giuliani sentence contained a noun, a a verb, and 9/11. In short, Giuliani was the Riddler in that a lot of his campaign was built on one very simple and repetitive riddle.

Mike Huckabee as Arthur Brown, aka The Cluemaster: The Cluemaster was a failed game show host, and if there’s any four word phrase in Batman history that could define Huckabee, it is ‘failed game show host’ - with the possible exception of ’successful game show host’. The rise of Huckabee’s campaign was in large part due to his charm, and the fall of his campaign was ultimately responsible for his inability to transcend that charm as, say, Ronald Reagan did. The comic plight of Cluemaster is largely not very similar, except that Cluemaster ends up doing surprisingly well and survives a battle even when many thought he was dead from being shot in the chest. Similarly, Huckabee’s campaign refused to die even when it was mathematically impossible for him to win.

Bill Richardson as Catwoman: Get your gender jokes out of the way, I’m not interested in them. Good? Ok. The essence of the history of Catwoman as defined by Wikipedia: “Selina Kyle, starting as a criminal who wore a cat-themed costume and often operated as a burglar, has a love/hate relationship with Batman. For years, she skirted on the edge between villain and antiheroine. However, she has largely reformed in recent years, adopting the role of the guardian of Gotham’s crime-infested East End, though she still comes into conflict with Batman on occasion.” This mirrors Bill Richardson in many ways. First of all, Catwoman is the ultimate resume villain: she’s done it all. For evil, for good, she’s been there. If I had a nickel for every time Richardson said “Look, I’m a governor” this election as to prove what he has done, I would be able to hire someone to write this post. Moreover, Richardson essentially had a love-hate relationship with all his opponents. Clinton supporters liked him when he defended Hillary during debates, and then were outraged when he first appeared to help Obama on Iowa Caucus night and then endorsed Obama after allegedly promising not to. (Obama supporters were the opposite). In the end, Richardson was distrusted by all and left to run hos own state which was shockingly bad in most rankings. Similarly, the most recent Catwoman movie was shockingly bad by even the most generous standards. The Catwoman character, like Richardson, is championed by a small minority who think it is essential to Batman; others think its inclusion in any TDK sequel would be repetitive and boring. I’d be inclined to agree with the latter. The Catwoman character is played out and in the end not very interesting. A jewel thief who is athletic? In the Nolan’s Gotham, that’s about as small and pointless as they come. Meanwhile, just like some predicted Richardson would be a dark horse candidate, once people got a long look at him,  he disappointed; the more the Catwoman character has been exposed in movies, the less popular they have gotten. It’s fair to say that to some extent the character was a failure in Batman Returns and was again surely a disappointment in Catwoman. Also, Catwoman would probably defend cats as innocent ipso facto them being cats, just as Richardson accidentally defended Alberto Gonzalez in the first debate just because he was Hispanic.

Duncan Hunter as Garfield Lynns, aka Firefly: I don’t even have to add comment on this one. Wikipedia on Firefly: “Garfield Lynns, an orphan who became a pyromaniac and has developed a fireproof suit and flamethrower to further pursue his ‘hobby’. He was originally known as a cunning criminal who invented numerous weapons that use light to commit crimes with.” And Eve Fairbanks on Duncan Hunter: “During the trip, we stopped at a gold mine, and Hunter got the idea that the Brobdingnagian ore haulers (whose wheels alone are ten feet tall) would make good troop vehicles in Iraq since they’d resist IEDs. (Possibly true, but they also resist steering.) These kind of pie-in-the-sky, mad-inventor brainstorms earned the nickname “Hunter Specials” among staffers on the committee he chaired, Armed Services. I wondered occasionally if Hunter’s ruthless thrashing in the GOP primaries had dampened some of his unusual style of enthusiasm, but apparently it didn’t. This morning’s Post carried the story of a Hunter Special for the ages: He submitted a request to our embassy in N’Djamena, Chad, to personally hunt and serve wildebeest to needy Darfurian refugees there. ” Wow. Easiest one yet.

Last but never least: The Joker after the jump. ….

Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Huckabee To The Rescue…

No, this isn’t any vice presidential gossip. Rather, it’s just your run of the mill ‘former Governor and presidential candidate saves a man’s life’ stories.

At a luncheon this afternoon in North Carolina, Robert Pittenger, a Republican candidate for NC Lieutenant Governor began choking; fortunately for him, Mike Huckabee was there to perform the Hiemlich maneuver.

Kudos to Gov. Huckabee.

[Photo Credit: The Wave]

Sphere: Related Content

Huckabee Drops Out; Prepares To Run Again

On Tuesday, March 4, Mike Huckabee officially ended his bid for the presidency.  Huckabee won 8 primary contests (Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, West Virginia).  He added that he will do whatever is necessary to get McCain elected, but his staffers already began preparing for a future run: Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Dallas Morning News Endorses Huckabee And Obama; Bars Employees From Supporting Them At Caucus

You can breath easy now, the Dallas Morning News has re-endorsed Mike Huckabee and Barack Obama.

With respect to Mike Huckabee, the paper recognizes that it’s mathematically impossible for him to win, but concludes:

Whatever Texas Republican primary voters do Tuesday, John McCain is all but guaranteed to be the party’s presidential nominee. It is mathematically impossible for Mike Huckabee, the last remaining major GOP contender, to capture the nomination.

[...]

Win or lose in November, the GOP is destined to spend the next few years redefining itself. For many reasons, Reaganism, which made the GOP the dominant political party of the last generation, no longer resonates as it once did with the American public.

[...]

True, a Huckabee vote today won’t do much to determine the 2008 GOP presidential candidate. But it’s a good investment in the Republican Party’s future.

With respect to Barack Obama, the paper recognized Obama has superior substance and leadership style than Sen. Clinton, but also cautioned against some of the scarier parts of his movement: Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Huckabee Cameo on SNL

Mike Huckabee appeared on SNL last night:

You’d think he could have demanded at least one line about his candidacy, instead of only being the butt of the joke. Oh well.

In other Huckabee news, he’s still refusing to run for Senate in Arkansas, despite the pleas of some, saying “”It’s more likely I’ll dye my hair green, get a bunch of tattoos and go on tour with Amy Winehouse.”

That would be something to see. Too bad we don’t have a graphics department.

Sphere: Related Content

Blog Buzz Watch (February 17-23)

Below are graphs that display the number of mentions in the blogosphere for Democratic and Republican candidates between 1:45 PM 02/17/08 through 1:45 PM 02/23/08…

Democrats

Republicans

Sphere: Related Content

Huckabee Seeks To Deadlock GOP Convention (With Magic Number 666)

During an interview on a Texas radio station, Mike Huckabee outlined his strategy for winning the Republican nomination:

“If we win Texas, I think it changes the dynamics of this race. It could well go all the way to the convention.If the convention delegates pick the president, chances are they would pick the most conservative. I would be the one they would end up picking, if that’s the criteria.”

There are a total of 898 remaining Republican delegates (523 pledged and 375 unpledged). In order for Huckabee’s strategy to work, he would need to win 74% (666) of these remaining delegates. Yes, that’s right, the magic number in Huckabee’s winning strategy is 666. Oh sweet irony.

Quite simply, Huckabee’s strategy simply is not plausible. And he recognizes it as such when he compared the continuation of his presidential race to the Battle of the Alamo, adding:

“You don’t engage in battles only because you anticipate you’re going to win them. You engage in your battles because you believe that they’re right.”

This isn’t exactly a fair analogy to the brave soldiers at the Alamo, nor does a presidential campaign want to analogize his campaign to a battle that resulted in the brutal slaying of the remaining soldiers. Huckabee might seem a lot more sincere about his incredibly unrealistic intentions, if he wasn’t performing paid speeches. He gave one last weekend in the Cayman Islands and gave another today in Colorado. The paid speech issue is a bit more complicated and I’ll post on it in the coming days, so stay tuned.

If you’re curious about the math, you can check it out after the jump. Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Morning News Updates: Clinton 527, Obama Op-Ed in USA Today

Marc Ambinder writes of a 527 for Clinton getting ready to blanket Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania:

Allies of Hillary Clinton plan an expensive, stealth campaign to buttress her standing in the must-win states of Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania.

They’re canvassing Clinton donors for pledges of up to $100,000 in the hope of raising at least $10M by the end of next week. The money will be placed in the account of a political committee organized under section 527 of the tax code.

…

Two Democrats said that the 527 plans to run television ads and send pro-Clinton literature in all three states. One of the Democrats said that the ads will also include contrast messages against Obama.

Plans for the 527 were conceived in late January, when Clinton’s campaign was nearly broke. Since Feb. 5, she has raised nearly $20M, but still faces a resource disadvantage. Obama’s aides said they’re approaching their goal of raising money from 500,000 new donors since Jan. 1 and project a total haul of more than $35M for February.

I’m only going to add that I think a lot of people are underestimating the level of political fatigue in Ohio; more ads both from Clinton and Obama (who is also blanketing the state) will have diminished returns when compared with other states. Especially when these are attack ads. I’m giving Obama a slight advantage here as he’s going to be emphasizing the positive aspects of his campaign far more than Clinton will. That gives him a chance to break through the cynicism. But Clinton is still the clear favorite in the state.

On a completely different note, Barack Obama has an editorial in USA Today about his plans to “aggressively pursue” an agreement with John McCain on public funding. He tries to show how the issue is (legitimately) more complicated than just accepting public funding if the other candidate does, as there are outside funds (such as 527s; see above) that could spend money. He never said he would take a vow to accept public financing if the other candidate did, but he had suggested he wanted to very strongly. Given recent doubts, this is an attempt to clear the air. I doubt most people will have a serious problem with it.

Breadth of support is important, but in a primary especially depth is especially important as well. And Obama’s generating exceptional depth of support.

The latest Zogby poll is … extreme. Take that with a whole mine of salt.

The speech to end all speeches was interrupted by another speech. I sh*t you not.

Lastly, Jonathan Martin is very right about the role that Huckabee is serving right now. He’s a punching bag to be sure, but even the best boxers use punching bags.

Sphere: Related Content

Quick Candidate Comparison Tool

From my hometown paper, the Cleveland Plain Dealer:

For more election coverage from The Plain Dealer and cleveland.com, go to cleveland.com/politics.

Sphere: Related Content

Miscellanea of the Week

Here’s a roundup of happenings from this past week:

• Tavis Smiley wants Barack Obama to address his “State of the Black Union” conference in New Orleans and is upset that Obama turned the invite down to campaign in Ohio and Texas. Reasonable people everywhere attempt to show Smiley how stupid he is being, while Smiley rejects an offer for Michelle Obama to address the conference. Hillary Clinton is attending, though; presumably in an effort to continue to rebuild bridges with the community should she win the nomination.
• Clinton started her Wisconsin tour today; she’s already made the decision to cut it short, touting surrogates like Wesley Clark.
• Michelle Obama predicted victory in Ohio. The last time she did that, if I recall, was in Iowa. Bold move, for sure. I’m going to go ahead and say it’ll be an uphill climb at best.
• Hillary Clinton launched an attack that “speeches don’t put food on the table” and Matthew Yglesias argues that it’s a false distinction between the ability to give speeches and having good substance, citing some examples. The line of attack here from the Clinton campaign is definitely meant to prey upon some people’s suspicions that Obama is all talk and no substance. We blog these speeches and these debates and what not, but it’s important to realize there’s more out there; both candidates have extensive plans online that are available for all.
• Western Democrat extraordinaire Brian Schweitzer is telling superdelegates to stay out of the way for the time being.
• Rich Lowry at NRO is bewildered more Democrats are not making the pragmatic vote for Obama to just get the race over with and avoid a nasty fight. Honestly, I don’t think many Democrats think that far in advance; and if they do, it’s only about the general election.
• Mike Huckabee dares me to compare him and his futile campaign to suspected terrorists. Haven’t we reached the point where his jokes are no longer refreshing but are just generally worrisome in terms of him being the Commander in Chief?
• Hillary’s gone hunting before, and has shot a duck.
• Obama is off to Texas immediately after Wisconsin.
• Everyone is speculating about McCain’s running mate. We won’t, at least much.
• Interesting thoughts on the dynamics of the media in the Clinton-Obama race.

Sphere: Related Content

Blog Buzz Watch (February 9-15): McCain Gets More Blog Mentions Than Ron Paul

Below are graphs that display the number of mentions in the blogosphere for Democratic and Republican candidates between 2:30 AM 02/09/08 through 2:30 AM 02/09/08…

Democrats

Republicans

Sphere: Related Content

The Annotated Chuck Todd

I’ve been meaning to do this for a while, but this week Chuck Todd was on Meet the Press went on and on and … well, let’s just say that I need to comment. His comments, followed by mine. I’ll include Russert’s questions, but the first question is just a list of the post - Feb. 5 states and the results.

MR. CHUCK TODD: OK. I’ve got all this blue right here. Here you go. It’s, it’s a remarkable fight. I mean, everything–it, it is a delegate by delegate fight. You know, yesterday the Clinton campaign knew they weren’t going to win any of those three states. Maybe they thought they could–but they were figuring out how to get a few extra delegates in Louisiana. They threw in a few more people in Nebraska because, as one Clinton person said to me, “We don’t want another Idaho situation.” What does that mean? Well, in Idaho they almost didn’t make threshold. They almost didn’t get a single delegate out of Idaho and those caucuses. So they are trying to improve their numbers in some of these caucuses. I think they realize now, looking back, this Obama strategy of getting delegates everywhere he can–I mean, look, he got three delegates out of the Virgin Islands, you know, instead of two–one, you know, you see the 8 percent. Well, if she could have just done up to seven, she could have snagged a delegate, you know, gotten to that 15 percent threshold.

Chuck Todd, political director at NBC News, has no idea why people caucus; it’s apparently just a function of reality that Obama is strong in Republican states he mentioned. The Clinton campaign has to spend resources to keep it merely embarrassingly bad instead of tragically bad. Why do people in Nebraska, Kansas, and Idaho love Obama? Beats him. That’s not his job, he’s just the political director at NBC. The Clinton campaign, meanwhile, dismisses these wins as irrelevant since Democrats cannot compete there in the fall. So there you have it: Democrats in dark red states, you’re irrelevant. Pack it in, move along, hope to see you in a couple decades.

MR. RUSSERT: They asked Willie Sutton why he robbed banks, he said, “That’s where the money is.”

MR. TODD: Right. And so why do you participate in caucuses? Because that’s where you can continue to win delegates.

But let me throw in one big monkey wrench in all this, about these caucuses. When–there are delegates that are allocated to Obama that he’s winning. All of these caucuses still have to go through state conventions and district conventions. And that’s where–for instance, in ‘84, that’s where Walter Mondale cleaned up and stole delegates, basically, from Gary Hart. Gary Hart would win in places, and they would go to the state conventions and somehow outmaneuver them. The Clinton folks could still end up figuring out how to nab extra delegates in here. So this caucus thing, it looks good right now in the totals, but that’s–you want one of the monkey wrenches we could throw into this? That’s one of them.

Chuck Todd, conspiracy theorist, is insinuating the Clinton campaign will cheat the caucus goers of those states out of their support. This is just ludicrous and somewhat insulting. Moreover, the hart campaign lost when Mondale took superdelegates. I’d be more than happy to ask Mr. Vice President how he feels about cheating regional caucuses out of delegates the next time I see him. Moreover, it betrays an awful level of ignorance to estimate that the Clinton campaign with stalk these regional conventions while the Obama campaign does nothing.

Also, let’s point out that Chuck Todd in succession suggested that you go to a caucus to win delegates and that you don’t win delegates at caucuses. His first point is more apt than his second: delegate totals can certainly be estimated from the vote total.

MR. RUSSERT: All right. Before I go around the table, let me just show you two new Mason-Dixon polls. Tuesday is the Washington, D.C., Maryland, Virginia. Here’s Maryland: Obama, 53; Clinton, 35. And in Virginia: Obama, 53; Clinton, 37. It shows the undecideds still 20, still high. Only a snapshot, things could change. But if Obama did sweep D.C., Virginia, Maryland, would he then be ahead in total delegates–elected delegates and superdelegates?

MR. TODD: It’s a–it would have to be an emphatic sweep. He needs to win D.C. with that, you know, 70, 75 percent of the vote. He would have to win in Virginia and Maryland getting close to 60 percent, because the way Virginia and Maryland are, there’s some–some of Obama’s vote is packed into certain congressional districts, the way the delegate split works. But if he got–if he starts approaching 60 percent in both of those, Maryland and Virginia, approaching 75, he could net 25 delegates. There is a path for him to net 25, in our estimate, that would bring him even.

Chuck Todd, mathematical genius, has a projection but doesn’t really stand behind it. CBS already has him ahead. Most (all?) others do not. Does he acknowledge the uncertainly? Not a chance!

MR. TODD: Let me, let me also–there’s going to be a weird role the Internet will play here. They will get their hands on this list, on the superdelegate list. And you watch, there will be people in the DNC that have never gotten e-mail campaigns before against them, and they will get deluged. It will start–you will start seeing crazy campaigns being organized by supporters of both Clinton and Obama that will just bombard these DNC members. And I think they’re going to get overwhelmed, and a lot of them are going to be, like Donna Brazile, “Stop. I don’t want to be a part of this.”

Chuck Todd, humanitarian, is concerned about email deluges against superdelegates. Also, it’s strange that he refers to the Internet like it’s an incompetent Bond villain or something. “We’re going to send them emails, Mr. Bond. Many, many emails.”

MR. RUSSERT: But how do you let their votes count if, in fact, the elections, when they were held, were under the agreement that they wouldn’t count?

MR. TODD: Two scenarios I’ve heard. One is that Michigan–if any of them are going to hold a revote, Michigan seems more likely than not because of labor–those guys are afraid of not getting their place–seats at the table. Florida is going to press this all the way to the credentials committee, and one scenario laid out to me was, well, they may–because the credentials committee’s going to be controlled 50/50 by Clinton and Obama. And the compromise might be “OK, we’ll seat a Florida delegation, but it’s going to be made up of whatever the popular vote is nationally, whatever that is.” And we just showed it, basically 48-48. And that that’s what the Florida delegation will be able to say, 48 percent Obama, 48 percent Clinton. So they’ll be able to say, “OK, Florida, you get your seats,” but they won’t have an effect on the, on the…

MR. RUSSERT: On the outcome.

MR. TODD: …outcome. And who knows.

Chuck Todd, the Perez Hilton of politics, gives the real story on Michigan and Florida. And notice that he spends all this time on one scenario “laid out to him” but he does not say how likely that scenario is or even who told him that. Was it Dean? Al Gore? Or anyone else, who is essentially unqualified? And at the end, he admits he has no idea what will happen. So if he has no idea, why spend all that time sharing gossip from some Democratic friend? Off the record, on the QT, and very hush-hush, I suppose.

MR. RUSSERT: Yeah, yeah. I just quoting–I’m just quoting the man. Now, you heard Tom DeLay say on “Hardball” that he wasn’t sure that he would endorse or support John McCain. Laura Ingraham said, “It’s one thing to say you’re a foot soldier for Ronald Reagan, but what have you done for conservatism lately?” And if you look at the vote count thus far in these primaries, here it is: Republicans have gotten 12.9 million votes, Democrats have gotten 19.2 votes.

It shows a little more intensity and enthusiasm for one party over another, Chuck Todd.

MR. TODD: It’s a huge problem for the Republicans. I mean, they look at these numbers, and they’re very, very nervous. But I’ll say this for McCain. I feel like I’ve seen a weak nominee like this, you know, where you feel like that he has a weak support. Bill Clinton at about this point in 1992, he had the nomination.

MS. IFILL: True.

MR. TODD: And he had this thorn in his side in Jerry Brown. Well, John McCain has this thorn in his side in Mike Huckabee. And Jerry Brown started winning a few primaries, and suddenly you heard some senior guys–I remember, Willie Brown was the one that stuck out, where he was thinking about, out of California then, he was the speaker, “Well, maybe we should hand the nomination over to Ross Perot.” This was when, when Perot was rising up. And you just wonder, I mean, this is the danger John McCain is in. Yes, mathematically–I mean, literally he could–he could fall on–he could have a macaca moment and still probably get the 1191. But he can’t be losing primaries. You know, he can do what happened yesterday. But if he loses Virginia, Texas is not a great state for him. We’ve seen that Huckabee does, does well in some of these Southern states. Then suddenly those whispers. It won’t be just talk radio. It, it will be some serious senior guys will sit there and say, “You know, do we have a problem here?” And that was, you know, it almost doomed Bill Clinton. It almost cost him the nomination and the presidency.

Chuck Todd, historian, apparently spent 1992 in a coma or desperately celebrating just getting a job at The Hotline. Jerry Brown was a minor inconvenience for Bill Clinton. He won Colorado and Connecticut, and that’s about it. Mike Huckabee is a minor inconvenience for John McCain. The real opponent for Clinton was Tsongas, and the real opponent for McCain was Romney. Bill Clinton was not doomed, or almost doomed. John McCain is not doomed right now. Comparing Brown to Huckabee made my head hurt. Brown was a backlash candidate against Bill Clinton; Huckabee is someone who appeals to a particular demographic.

Also, let’s note that McCain’s supporters are more likely to stay home than caucus for 3 hours now that his lead is so formidable. Anyone mention that on what is routinely called the premier political show on TV? Not a chance. Occam’s Razor doesn’t apply to Chuck Todd.

MR. RUSSERT: It’s clear Huckabee wants to stay in until McCain mathematically reaches the 1191 he needs, which could be at least another month.

MR. BRODER: Yes.

MR. TODD: It actually could be two months. Could be Pennsylvania.

Chuck Todd, calendar expert, points out that the Pennsylvania primary is in two months but does not indicate the bizarre things that would have to happen for this scenario to arise.

MR. RUSSERT: We have 10 seconds. Will electability influence Democratic voters in the remaining…

MR. TODD: I think it’ll influence superdelegates. I think they read national polls. It’s in–Obama has to keep those lead in the national polls. If he wins the pledge and he’s up 8-to-10 on McCain, superdelegates will listen.

Chuck Todd, fortune teller, does not resolve the conflict of Obama being down in national polls (on average) and being up significantly in every head to head poll with McCain vis-a-vis Clinton. But one of those is important. Which one, well, I’m sure he’ll claim credit later on for whatever he is right on. Also, he needs to be more clear about his language; he meant winning the pledged delegates, not just ‘winning a pledge.’ Because I like Chuck as a person, I’m going to assume this is a careless error of an overworked transcriber, not him.

Sphere: Related Content

February 9 Results: Kansas Caucuses, Louisana Primary, Nebraska Caucuses, Washington Caucuses

For the Democratic Party…

• Louisana Primary (56 delegates at stake):
  • Results not available yet, click here for latest
  • Notable News: Obama campaign requests assistance after reports of voting irregularities
• Nebraska Caucuses (24 delegates at stake)
  • Obama wins
  • No final numbers yet, click here for the latest
• Washington Caucuses (78 delegates at stake)
  • Obama wins
  • No final numbers yet, click here for the latest

For the Republican Party…

• Kansas Caucuses (39 delegates at stake)
  • Mike Huckabee (59.%), John McCain (23.5%), Ron Paul (11.2%)
  • Final results and delegate allocation here
• Louisiana Primary (20 delegates at stake)
  • Results not available yet, click here for the latest
• Washington Caucuses (18 delegates at stake)
  • Results not available yet, click here for the latest

Sphere: Related Content

2008 Campaign Weekly Roundup (February 4-8, 2008)

A roundup for February 3-8 on the Democratic side…

• Super Tuesday Results:
  • Hillary Clinton won Arizona, Arkansas, California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma and Tennessee.
  • Barack Obama won Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota and Utah.
  • The winner of New Mexico is yet to be determined, but with 99% of precincts reporting Hillary Clinton is currently ahead by 1,123 votes.
• Delegate Standings Projections (including superdelegates):
  • Hillary Clinton: 1076
  • Barack Obama: 1006
• The Obama campaign has stepped up its argument that if Hillary Clinton is the nominee elected Democratic officials in conservative areas may suffer from a backlash by sending out a mailer that blames the Clintons for Democratic losses between during the 90’s and the 2000 election.
• The Clinton campaign clashes with MSNBC and just two days after TPM asks “Is Obama Being Hurt By MSNBC And His Other Media Worshippers?”
• Debatarama: Hillary Clinton challenges Obama to a debate a week (including one on Fox News) between now and March 4. After some back forth, the campaigns eventually agreed to hold two debates - one in Ohio and one in Texas.
• Obama campaign pushes for the release of Hillary Clinton’s tax returns.  When pressed on this issue during a press conference call, Clinton Communications Director obfuscated by asking “When will Senator Obama release the complete details of his relationship with Tony Rezko?”
• Barack Obama picks up Washington’s Governor Chris Gregoire; Clinton gets Rep. Norm Dicks.
• Fund Race: Following reports that Hillary Clinton loaned her campaign $5 million dollars, the Obama campaign used this information to kick off a fundraising blitz, which the Clinton campaign countered.  Now that the dust has cleared, the totals so far since Super Tuesday show Obama with an edge, but Hillary Clinton isn’t getting blown away:
  • Barack Obama: Over $7.5 million (figures disclosed yesterday, so this number is sure to be higher now)
  • Hillary Clinton: About $8 million; 75,000 new donors (figures disclosed today)
• Bill Clinton promises to be nice going forward, clarifies his role in a Hillary Clinton administration; JW criticizes.

A roundup for February 3-8 on the Republican side…

• Super Tuesday Results:
  • John McCain won Arizona, California, Connecticu, Delaware, Illinois, Missouri, New Jersey, New York and Oklahoma.
  • Mitt Romney won Alaska, Colorad, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota and Utah.
  • Mike Huckabee won Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Tennessee and West Virginia.
•  Delegate Standing Projections:
  • John McCain: 724
  • Mitt Romney: 281
  • Mike Huckabee: 196
  • Ron Paul: 14
• Mitt Romney suspended his presidential campaign on February 6 and noted that he was motivated in part out of concern that continuing his quest would help get Obama or Clinton elected, which would mean surrender to terrorists (Romney’s argument).
• Fred Thompson endorsed John McCain and called on the rest of the party to get behind McCain.
• Mike Huckabee promises to carry on with his campaign and demonstrated his commitment to the trail by appearing as a guest on the Tyra Banks Show (you have respect anyone that wants something so bad that they’re willing to sit across from Tyra for an hour…*shudder*).
• James Dobson backed Mike Huckabee; Huckabee’s connection to televangelist Kenneth Copeland are likely to be the subject of a Senate investigation into Copeland’s ministry (we blogged about Huckabee’s connection to Copeland in late January).
• Ron Paul’s blimp was grounded after being vandalized.
• Question: Ron Paul making a third party run?  Answer: No.
• Cindy McCain taken to task on her “grudge list” among other things.

Sphere: Related Content

Results: West Virginia Closed Convention (Republican)

West Virgina’s primary isn’t until May, but the Republican Party held their convention today. The convention determined the allocation of 18 of the 30 delegates to the Republican Convention. Read more

Sphere: Related Content

Romney’s Hucked

Mitt Romney lost the GOP caucus in West Virginia this afternoon. It was repeated voting until someone got over 50%.

After the first round of voting, Marc Ambinder wrote:

After the first round of balloting in West Virginia, Mitt Romney was solidly in the lead with 41% of the votes, followed by Mike Huckabee with 33% and John McCain with 16%.

Since 50% is needed to win all 18 delegates, a second balloting is underway.

But sources say that representatives for John McCain called many of his reps in WV and asked them to vote for Huckabee…in order to thwart Romney on the second ballot.

Well you can guess what happened. All the candidates’ representatives, even Paul, ganged up on Romney. This is a state that Romney absolutely had to have, and now he needs a bigger miracle.

The Romney camp is … not so happy over this deal. To say the least. The campaign manager Beth Myers went off:

“Unfortunately, this is what Senator McCain’s inside Washington ways look like: he cut a backroom deal with the tax-and-spend candidate he thought could best stop Governor Romney’s campaign of conservative change.

“Governor Romney had enough respect for the Republican voters of West Virginia to make an appeal to them about the future of the party based on issues. This is why he led on today’s first ballot. Sadly, Senator McCain cut a Washington backroom deal in a way that once again underscores his legacy of working against Republicans who are interested in championing conservative policies and rebuilding the party.”

The good news for Romney? Hugh Hewitt did not think he needed West Virginia. Hewitt is being pretty optimistic on Romney, I’ll say that much.

Sphere: Related Content

Huckabee Blogs From Future…

Apparently, Mike Huckabee can travel to the future.  Why isn’t he talking about this ability more on the campaign trail?  Forget cable news, just ask Huckabee for today’s results…

[In case you missed it, look at the date]

Sphere: Related Content

Next Page »