The Chase for Change 2008: DNC Thoughts

Despite John McCain stealing the thunder the day after I think the Democratic National Convention in Denver this week went as well as can be expected. The case was made better than ever for why Democrats should vote FOR Barack Obama and finally many Democrats went full blown after John McCain – it was more than past time for that. Aside from Obama/Biden I’d argue the best speeches were from Hillary Clinton (Obama could not have expected better), Bill Clinton (I was pleased that he made the parallel back to the dynamics of the 1992 race), John Kerry (finally got his revenge for the “Voting for it before you were against it” smear you got in the last campaign), Bill Richardson (made the points I’ve been making about how on the very few principled stands McCain has taken like on taxes, the environment and torture, he’s reversed on every one) and Al Gore (good to see he noted the uncanny Lincoln parallel in terms of their experience and that at least 1 and up to 3 Supreme Court justices could be selected by the next President which will resonate for decades not 4 years). I wish others got more time like Kathleen Sebelius or Janet Napolitano because with less time you obviously can’t give the show stopper speeches others could. They still did well though.

Joe Biden did quite well, but I wasn’t blown away – still he’ll make an excellent VP and I think he’ll be great for the ticket.

Obama’s speech was definitely as good as it had to be. Not sure I can say it was his absolute best, but definitely blows away what anyone at the Republican convention will offer. All in all I can’t say the Democrats have much to be disappointed about from their convention and early news is they’ve gotten a bump in the polls from it.

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: A Missed Opportunity for Obama's VP

UPDATED
So the worst kept secret is finally out of the bag – it’s Joe Biden. I never got around to outlining what I thought was required for Obama’s VP pick, but had I done so I would have said (you’ll just have to trust me on this) that the VP pick should have executive experience (e.g., be a governor), be able to put some Southern and Midwestern states in play (e.g., be from the South or Midwest), be a woman (because so many female Democrats felt let down by Hillary’s loss and it would give them a milestone to still fight for, not to mention it's well past time), be able to reach out to Hillary Clinton’s supporters (e.g., someone who worked on Hillary’s campaign or Hillary herself) and have solid foreign policy experience. Joe Biden only has the last one so I would count him as a disappointment and a missed opportunity.

What states is Joe Biden going to help Obama with? Will he help win Virginia, Indiana, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado? I’d say no – in fact McCain will be happy to cast the ticket as two liberal Northern Senators who don’t represent the rest of America.

How does Biden help counter the critique that Obama has no executive experience?

If Obama really wanted experience he should have gone with Bill Richardson, he doesn’t meet all my criteria (to be fair no one did), but at least he’s a Midwestern governor with solid domestic AND foreign policy experience, ties to the Clinton administration (even though Carville hates him now) and would have been another first – the first Hispanic (the fastest growing demographic) on the ticket. For those who say Americans couldn’t stomach two "firsts" and Obama needed an old white guy I say that’s offensive and I just don’t think that holds water.

I also thought the argument against Hillary Clinton was that she had been in Washington too long and it would go against his “change” message? So he picks someone who’s been in Washington two decades who has made countless gaffes while he’s been there and who said quite emphatically and he did NOT want to be Vice President? (Yes I know there was the Bill Clinton problem too but that could have been managed) How does Biden help reach out to Hillary supporters? The fact that he slammed Obama so much during the race doesn’t seal the deal I’m afraid and the disaffected Hillary Clinton supporters I fear are going to be fuming.

My top picks would have Kathleen Sebelius (Governor of Kansas) and Janet Napolitano (Governor of Arizona). While they lacked the foreign policy experience Biden has and were Obama supporters they satisfy the other criteria and were strong female governors (which would appeal to many disaffected Hillary supporters who still feel it’s crucial to have a woman in the oval office) who could have helped Obama win in the Midwest and ultimately that’s what Obama needs to win and Biden doesn’t really help much with that from what I can see.

John McCain may now pick a female VP (though I’m certain she’ll be anti-choice and not really onside with the women’s movement) and while I hope not many women get fooled (just imagine someone like Cheryl Gallant leading the country) – I think it would win over some former Hillary Clinton supporters and Obama has left this opportunity wide open for McCain by not just choosing a well-qualified woman himself.

To be clear I’m sure Joe Biden will make a great VP and he is well-qualified and certainly miles better than anything John McCain will put up. To be fair, I’ll refer you to two posts on why Biden will be good for the ticket. Still, from a strategic standpoint I personally just don’t understand this and I happen to feel strongly that there were better, more qualified people who deserved the position more. And as a woman I'm disappointed that this sends a message to wait until 2016 for a woman on the ticket.

The fact remains though that America and Canada and the rest of the world still needs Barack Obama as President. I’m disappointed because I think this pick works against that. No going back of course, but I’ve been frank on the faults made through this Presidential race by any candidate and will continue to do so. Obama is only human and he can learn from his mistakes pointed out by his supporters and recognize the weaknesses that still remain for a Obama-Biden ticket.

In the end I (and I hope many others, particularly in the U.S. so the media takes notice) and many others will continue to point out that John McCain would be MORE CONSERVATIVE on domestic policy and MORE HAWKISH on foreign policy than George W. Bush and would therefore be even worse on both fronts, not to mention he would set back women’s rights 30 years. And I will continue to point out all the great qualities an Obama Presidency would bring. So it won’t be hard to say Obama-Biden is by far the best option for Americans on November 4th. I still look forward to watching the Democratic Convention.

UPDATE: So after reading more posts in favour of Biden and watching his speech in Springfield with Obama, and a couple other videos, I must say I feel a lot better about him as the choice, I think he'll do better in states like Ohio than I gave him credit. When you are getting praise from Republican Senators AND Michael Moore at the same time, along with the high favourability ratings Scott Tribe noted, that is quite a good testament of cross-partisan support. I now feel better that he'll do well for the campaign and he definitely had some good lines in Springfield. That said some of the drawbacks I outlined remain - no executive experience, no regional balance to the ticket, and kind of goes agains the long-standing Obama arguments of "you can't change the culture in Washington by sending the same old faces back and expecting a different result" or that you can't credibly run against John McCain on Iraq when you voted for the war (which Biden did). Also the fact that Biden is on record saying he would be proud to be ON John McCain's ticket and that he encouraged John Kerry to take McCain as his running mate will take some of the sting out of Biden's attacks on McCain. Obama would do well to be well aware of these remaining weaknesses and Biden ought to have an answer ready of why he said he would be willing to be on McCain's ticket or wanted Kerry to have him in 2004.

But I did want to update this to say I feel better about him than I did before so the title of this post has changed a bit. Still a missed opportunity though, I would have liked to seen a strong female governor chosen and I still believe others would have done better and been more qualified for the ticket, for instance, I've yet to hear one argument why Joe Biden was a better pick than Bill Richarson. Biden will be a great VP though regardless. Still looking forward to the big convention speeches :).

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: Hillary Clinton Endorses Barack Obama (Video)

I would say this was easily the best speech I've ever seen her give. She ran a very strong campaign and she laid out the stakes in this election and its historic nature extremely well. The speech was positive in tone from start to finish (no even mention of John McCain) showcasing the great message Democrats are bringing in this election. I think it's a great step in unifying the party and I know no matter what role Hillary Clinton is given, she can be a strong asset to Barack Obama's campaign. If Democrats are united that will defeat John McCain as America and the world so badly needs.

Recommend this Post

Deja Vu

The ad above is paid for by Republican Party (RNC).I warned this would happen, but I guess the Democratic leadership candidates didn’t pay attention to what happened after the Liberal leadership race. Even so turning down the negativity on Obama on all sides certainly couldn’t have hurt – it’s a lesson for all party nominations: stay positive and just watch you don't get too negative or else it will come back later. What was said in the Democratic race was actually far more negative than anything in the Liberal leadership race though (I still say the Conservative ads here were pretty weak).

I don’t think this will have large effect though just like in Canada the Liberals rebounded in the polls after a short drop. Obama would be wise though to hit back with an ad of his own and use his massive war chest to blanket the airwaves with it.

His ad should take the experience or “not ready” attack head on – perhaps it could contrast him to Lincoln who has the exact same political experience going into the Presidency while also noting the community work Obama has done in his life. So the ad could say he’s ready to bring the change we need on Day 1 whereas John McCain is only ready to carry on the same failed policies of the past. Or it could be similar to his previous ads that what is needed in a President is the judgment to make the right decisions and time and time again Obama has been right and McCain wrong.

Either way Obama will be able to combat this and there's no point getting upset about the past and stopping it from the party coming together, but I do hope lessons can still be learned to make sure the next race for the Democratic Party leadership(which I hope isn't till 2016) isn't this negative.

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: Barack Obama for President of the United States

It's been a long hard and sometimes quite divisive campaign but it's finally over: Barack Obama is the presumptive nominee to go against John McCain. I know a lot of progressive minded people who are disappointed that Hillary Clinton didn't win and who are upset about some of the things that happened in the race, but for the greater good it's extremely important that all progressives unite up behind the Democratic nominee for reasons I've outlined before. Hillary was right to stay in until the last votes were counted and she come extremely close to being the first female Presidential nominee. Women ought to be proud of that and the 18 million votes she got and I hope in 2016 there are multiple strong female candidates in the race (with Barack Obama's VP being just one of those women). It may seem a long time to wait but the time will come and I know one day the Liberals will have a female leader as well. It remains important for women to know though that those who lead the Democratic Party and Liberal Party of Canada are committed to women's issues. I am certain Dion is and I am pretty sure Obama is as well and I believe they are both the right now to lead our countries.

I do hope all Clinton supporters can see that Barack Obama's platform was extremely similar to Hillary Clinton's and is committed to involving her in his administration (either as VP or in cabinet or perhaps endorsing her for Senate majority leader) and that Hillary's signature policies would become law under an Obama administration and she would receive the credit (I am also hopeful that a woman will be on his ticket whether it is Hillary or not). Virtually none of the changes that Hillary has called for would happen under a McCain Presidency and in fact women's rights would go backwards with McCain's next appointment to the Supreme Court.

It won't be an easy race but it would be dark days indeed to have another 4 years of a Republican Presidency and I believe in Obama's message so I'm certain the world and Canada would be much better off with him as President.

Be back later tomorrow tonight with my reflections on the race and thoughts about where it goes from here.

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: Many Democrats Losing Sight of Larger Picture Re: Offensive Supporters and Michigan/Florida

I know many Democrats and progressives have gotten very involved and committed to one side or another in this campaign, but when you are up against someone who will...

1) Set women's rights back 30 years through his promise to appoint a prolife judge to replace Justice Stevens - the most Liberal judge on the Supreme Court who WILL retire in the next term (he is 88 years old). Roe V. Wade would likely be overturned (it is 5-4 right now) and as many as 30 states would then criminalize abortion.

2) Wage a Mike Harris style war against the poor through his promise to balance the budget by "cutting spending dramatically" - remember he is NOT a moderate he has been rated as one of the most CONSERVATIVE Senators of all time by Conservative groups (see here and here - with a score over 70 points higher than Obama and Clinton and even 40 points higher than Republican Arlen Spector)

3) Undermine and slowly destroy the UN through his "League of Nations" (yes he did call it that) proposal to create a parallel organization that would exclude China and the entire Muslim world and also get to overrule the UN on every important world matter. Apparently McCain doesn't know how the first League of Nations turned out, repeating the same mistakes is a recipe for disaster.

4) Spending another trillion or more dollars on Iraq rather than putting that money into health care and education. Universal health care and quality public education once again denied to continue endlessly (because McCain has said they will NEVER withdraw without victory) a war that should have never been waged.

And a host of other problems it’s extremely important to focus on the bigger picture and ensure the Democratic nominee wins.

All of the above is in McCain's platform and public statements and it means we would see a President more dangerous on foreign policy (I'm disappointed no one in the media has really examined his League of Nations idea) and worse for the poor on domestic policy than even George Bush. If anyone can show me why I'm wrong on any of the points above please come forward. The media has done a real disservice by portraying McCain as a moderate.

The U.S. and the world desperately needs wholesale change after 8 years of George Bush not someone who would be even worse. Not to mention Obama’s and Clinton’s policy proposals 90% overlap with each other and hardly at all with McCain. So it troubles me when I see bloggers (yes this one has said she is a dual citizen so she can vote) and Democratic party activists musing about not being able to support the Democratic nominee.

The campaign has been brutally negative at some points with absolutely stupid and sometimes extremely offensive things were said by members of both sides. Geraldine Ferraro’s comments that Obama would be nowhere if it wasn’t black were extremely wrong and offensive. Samantha Power calling Clinton a monster had no place in the campaign, but neither did Hillary Clinton talking about how she is the choice of “white voters” (Clinton herself later agreed with a statement that it was “the stupidest thing she could ever say”) or talking about assassinations (I chalk that up solely to extremely poor judgment in choice of words but the example actually made no sense since the nomination was won in 1968 by someone who didn’t even compete in the primaries who a lot of historians think would have won no matter what, but any mention of assassination within the current election context is unacceptable) . The latest terrible insult was with Reverend Pfleger who basically inferred that Clinton and her supporters were racist and that her supporters were angry particularly that a black man might take the nomination from her (if that wasn’t what he was implying why did he keep invoking Hillary and Obama’s race in his sermon?). He has no place on any campaign and so Obama has denounced him, won’t have him involved with his campaign any longer and Obama is no longer part of the same church that invited this man and once had the even more offensive and bigoted Reverend Wright as pastor.

So while people on both campaigns have been hugely in the wrong on different occasions, the important thing is that these comments were later denounced and (when it wasn’t Clinton or Obama him/herself making the comments) the people involved were kicked off the campaign entirely. Sometimes you think you know someone well when you put them on the campaign, but if in the end you find out they hold bigoted or other unacceptable views there is no choice but to condemn their remarks and throw them off the campaign because these people don't belong in politics let alone a Presidential campaign. But its wrong to claim that Clinton or Obama must agree with the comments of their surrogates or that they must have known they held these views.

Now there is the issue of Michigan and Florida’s delegates.

I would say first of all the Democratic Party dropped the ball on this entirely. They should have done what the Republicans did and just say in advance the delegates would each only get half a vote and leave it at that. You don’t see any outrage on the Republican side on this so it’s clear that would have been best. But you can’t change the past so the Rules Committee had to do their best to repair this situation before more damage was done.

In the end the decision for Florida is EXACTLY the same as what the Republicans have done. Not to mention Terry McCauliffe is chair of Clinton’s campaign and said as DNC chair in 2004 that the appropriate penalty for moving up one’s primary is cutting the delegates from the state in half. So I find it puzzling to see a Democratic candidate say "If this is not resolved so that there is 100 per cent representation of every vote cast, I will never again vote for a Democratic candidate." So then he will vote for a party that did the same thing or stay home and allow that much worse party to win? Again losing sight of the bigger picture.

Michigan was the harder choice, but both Obama and Clinton’s camps were proposing completely unreasonable proposals. It would be ludicrous to split the delegates in half as Obama proposed since there is little evidence he would have gotten half the votes if he was on the ballot. At the same time it was ridiculous to give Clinton her share of delegates and leave the others as Uncommitted to be fought for at the convention when Obama wasn’t on the ballot and all the others campaigns have endorsed Obama now. So the Michigan Democratic Party proposed a compromise. Carl Levin, a Clinton supporter, backed the proposal. This WASN’T some 30 party hacks who came up with this idea it was the Michigan Democratic Party and the members of the Rules Committee endorsed the proposal.

I tend to think things would have been a lot easier if Obama was just given the 55 uncommitted delegates but you could certainly argue that more of his supporters would have turned out if he was on the ballot and some people who voted for Clinton wouldn't have if there were other candidates on the ballot. You can’t just pretend it’s no big deal that Obama wasn’t on the ballot, it’s hardly even a Democratic election when there is only one major candidate on the ballot so again the Michigan Democratic party tried to forge a compromise and I don’t think it’s worth dividing the party further to fight over 4 half-delegates (so 2 votes on the convention floor). I think Harold Ickes would have been better to just say “we respectfully disagree with this decision but it is more important for the party to be united” rather than going on a large tirade about how this doesn’t help to unify the party and it was unprecedented and so on. I do hope they can see the larger picture and realize that this wasn’t such an outrageous proposal and it is more important to unify the party. This kind of fiasco should never be allowed to happen again though.

So Democrats or other Clinton supporters can get all bitter and support McCain or stay home and see the country and the U.S. reputation destruct for another four years so you can say “I told you Obama couldn’t win!” but small comfort that will be to the millions more thrown into poverty and losing their health insurance and the women who would then have to travel across the country or to Canada to exercise their choice over whether to have an abortion.

People who would continue to wage old battles that would lead others to suffer just because they are angry that their preferred candidate didn’t win or angry at some things the opposing candidate’s supporters did is the height of narrow-mindedness and selfishness. If you supported Clinton’s ideas then why in the world would you help someone who has NOTHING in common with Clinton against someone who would do as President 90% of the same thing Hillary Clinton would?

So there are just a few primary contests left, it will all be over June 3rd and officially then or very soon thereafter. I really hope the Democrats can put these divisions and grievances behind and focus on the larger picture. Americans and the world can’t afford to wait another 4 years for change. Just like with the environment the longer you wait to change the more it will cost to fix and the more irreversible damage will have been done. So I think goal number one for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for the next month and beyond HAS to be unifying the party.

With the party united John McCain can be defeated, but if they can’t unite, millions will suffer and it will have been a real opportunity blown simply because people couldn’t put their minute differences aside.

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: West Virginia Edition

So last night was not a great for Obama, but it also wasn't unexpected. Last week many journalists predicted a 40 point blow-out and that's what we saw (67% - 26% was the final tally -though am I the only one wondering where the rest of the 7% went? The numbers added up roughly to 100% in every other primary). I'm sure Obama hoped to close the gap though and he failed to do so. I do note though that he got more votes last night than John McCain did :). I'm not sure he will win West Virginia but I'm confident that with the massive Democratic turnouts in every state in these primaries Democrats will turn out in November in large enough numbers in enough states to give him the White House.

That said, two things are clear after last night: Clinton will now almost certainly stay in until the last primary state has voted and Obama has to pick his VP very carefully with an eye to bringing in voters in states where he did not perform as well. Once the nomination race is officially over and assuming Obama wins (which is still extremely likely), I'll lay out my thoughts on who Obama's VP should be, but how these next few weeks play out I think will play a role in that, as it will be important to see if Obama does manage to do better in areas where he hasn't in the past.

I think it's absolutely terrible of Clinton to be focusing on how whites versus blacks vote and making any arguments versus Obama's candidacy on that basis, but Obama does need to do better in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida then he has in these primaries so hopefully his VP will help with that.

As for Clinton going forward, her victory speech was interesting. It had some good messages and good lines - the one about the woman who was born before women had the right to vote who cast an absentee ballot for Clinton in South Dakota literally from her death bed was a compelling story (though I didn't think the story of how an 11 year old boy was donating to her campaign was a particularly strong follow-up). Importantly she refrained from attacking Obama directly, but the speech did sound mostly like a final plea to superdelegates (in fact her speech said plainly they will decide the race) and a plea to be the VP if she loses (before North Carolina and Indiana I supported the idea as her as VP, but after the past week and some of her comments I have had second thoughts though I think an experienced woman definitely should be on the Democratic ticket). Though saying no Democrat was won the White House since 1916 without West Virginia ignores that Democrats owned the deep South and pretty much the opposite regions of the U.S. than they do today right up until the Nixon years (and Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton are the only Democrats elected since then and Bill Clinton won with heavy vote splitting on the right). It was interesting though that she only said she would be in the race until the last state had voted (as opposed to the convention) and talked about how "we" will come back to West Virginia and win. I would say though the speech didn't focus enough on John McCain which I hope she will do more of if she's staying in the race.

I think at this point Clinton knows she won't win, but despite what so many were saying about her refusing to be VP it seems she wants to be on the ticket more than Obama wants her. No matter what though Obama would have to find some way to reach out to her supporters when it is all said and done, he will regret it if he doesn't.

So now it's on to Kentucky and Oregon, where we will see a repeat of West Virginia in one state but Obama should at least be able to cushion the blow with a win in another. It will all be over soon though...

UPDATE: John Edwards endorsing Obama tonight will certainly help towards bringing this race to a close.

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: Obama Vs. McCain?

So after what I noted was a very bad night for the Clinton campaign and a good night for Obama, we have heard many voices now say the race is over for the Democratic nomination.

However, what's most telling this time is when you actually look to what Clinton's own supporters are saying.

For instance, one of her supporters George McGovern (someone who is no stranger to having party division damage the Democratic Party's chances of winning the Presidency) today has called on Hillary Clinton to withdraw. I won't be surprised if some of her other supporters follow suit.

You see as well among Clinton supporters on the blogs that they now see the race as essentially finished. For instance, if you go over to mydd.com (which I read every now and then for progressive commentary on American politics) you have one Clinton supporter (Todd Beeton) who regularly posts there who says "there is no way to spin away what happened tonight: Senator Clinton had a really bad night and Senator Obama had a phenomenal one. ...sadly I no longer see a real path to victory for Hillary Clinton and I now believe Barack Obama will be the nominee of our party. "

Another Clinton supporter (Jerome Armstrong) posts "As for Clinton's chances going ahead, they are minimal. I gave about a 10% shot after she won TX & OH, and upped that to 15% after her PA win, and around 20% a week ago. Now, it's slimmer than ever before. There's little doubt that, considering any marker, Obama is on the path to the nomination, now more than ever. Congrats to all his supporters on a good night."

But do I think the race for the nomination is over? Well the math is now very close to impossible now for Clinton even if Michigan and Florida are counted (and if they are, it's reasonable to presume that at the the least Obama will get Michigan's uncommitted delegates) - you can see CNN's delegate counter for the evidence (h/t).

I'm cautious never to say it's over until it's officially over as I know a week is a lifetime in politics and things can change in an instant, but if I were a betting person, I would be putting my money heavily on Obama at this point. Hillary Clinton will win big in West Virginia and Kentucky most likely, but she faces extremely long odds now. Just because Obama made a dumb comment about Indiana being a "tiebreaker" (and even then she barely won there) doesn't mean all the superdelegates remaining will believe that. She would have to at this point take more than 60% of the remaining pledged delegates AND more than 60% of the superdelegates in order to win and I think that's why her supporters are quite somber today.

The second question though is should she now drop out? I would argue actually that she can stay in the race until the end of the primary season without harming the Democratic Party and if something very dramatic happens to shake up the race that leads a huge majority ofsuperdelegates to flock to her, then she could at least in theory still win (but yes the chances are extremely remote at this point). However, in order to ensure she is not harming the party's chances in November by staying in she should stick to a few things:

1) Stop running negative ads directed at Obama. Given his huge front-runner status she's not going to be winning over superdelegates now by throwing the kitchen sink at the guy most Democrats now are sure is going to be the nominee. At the same time I would hope Obama stops running any negative ads directed at Hillary Clinton.

2) Continue to push for a fair solution to have Michigan and Florida's delegates counted. This has to be resolved or Democrats will pay the price in November. I think a fair solution might be to either count both delegations at half-strength (the Republicans did this and you don't hear the cries from their side about being disenfranchised) or if they are to count fully then at the least Obama has to be given the uncommitted delegates in Michigan (it is simply not reasonable to assume that Clinton should get to take such advantage of no one else being on the ballot there). This will have to wait until the end of the month until a decision is made but it must be addressed.

3) Focus her message now primarily on why John McCain needs to be defeated in November and why Democrats need to be united. By spending the next few weeks rallying her supporters with this message and still holding large rallies for the cause she would be promoting the same message Obama is. She actually started this well last night, but continuously saying "we" need to stop John McCain and by complimenting Obama. Of course she can continue to stress her own personal positives, but her supporters have to get the message loud and clear just how awful John McCain is and how badly the Democrats desperately need to win back the White House in November. If Obama becomes the nominee and she fails to get her supporters to back him, then even if the Democrats lost in November (which would be a catastrophe for Americans and the world at large at this critical stage) Democrats might not ever forgive her if it's perceived she didn't pull her voters to vote for the Democratic nominee. If by contrast she is seen as contributing to a Democratic victory even if she isn't on the ticket (which will be the subject of a later post - I think she should be on the ticket but I'm not sure it will happen) then Democrats won't forget it either and she would become Obama's heir apparent (if you say she would be too old, just look at McCain right now who took his party's nomination 8 years after losing the first go at it).

If she sticks to these things without going negative then I think she should be able to stay in the race as Mike Huckabee did on the Republican side until Obama reaches the magic number for an overall delegate majority (which could happen in the next month if enough superdelegates come off the fence) or either until all the states have voted (whichever comes first). If her and her supporters continue a negative path against Obama then I think it will backfire and the calls for Clinton to withdraw will grow louder so I think it would be in her own self-interest not to take that road. As of now though it looks like she definitely wants to continue on to West Virginia at the very least.

So it's far from clear if Clinton might concede anytime soon. Regardless there are still primary states left and the Chase for Change series will continue to cover them as they go on. So there will another edition next week when West Virginia votes. Till then I think it will be a tough week for the Clinton campaign.


UPDATE: So she hasn't followed my advice. This is quite disappointing. Her remarks were completely wrong and I think the calls for her to withdraw will get louder now.

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: Indiana and North Carolina Edition (Live Blog)

So will tonight be the turning point that ends or dramatically changes the dynamic of the race? We shall see.

Here are my predictions for tonight:

Indiana

Clinton 54%
Obama 46%

North Carolina

Obama 55%
Clinton 45%

I was almost on the mark for Pennsylvania, but this time I could easily be hugely off base. Anyways I'll be live-blogging as the results come in.

7:05 PM: So the polls have closed in Indiana and Clinton has an early lead: 58% - 42% with 4% in.

7:20 PM: Clinton still leading huge 58% to 42% with 11% in (you see the results as they come in here). If this holds that would be very bad news for Obama. I expect a call for Hillary in this state soon.

Polls stilll aren't closed in North Carolina. When they do close at 7:30 PM, you can find the results as they come in here.

7:35 PM: Ok with no results officially in, Obama has been called the winner of North Carolina and yet Clinton is up 58%-42% still in Indiana with 20% in and it hasn't been called for her yet. Curious, makes me wonder why Obama's margin in North Carolina will be tonight.

7:50 PM: Hillary Clinton has held at least a 14 point lead in Indiana ever since results started coming in. Still 57%-43% with 28% in. I can't help but wonder what kind of data they have that's preventing CNN for calling it for Clinton when she's been leading so strongly since the polls closed.

8:03 PM: Obama leading 69% - 31% in North Carolina, but less than 1% is in. I think a 15 point win or greater in North Carolina would look good for Obama, but I don't see how he pulls out a win in Indiana. A double digit loss (or close to that) in Indiana would be enough for Clinton to justfy continuing.

8:10 PM: Obama has a 30% lead still with 5% in for North Carolina.

8:23 PM: CBS has has called Indiana for Clinton, no one else has though. I'm sure they will follow soon. Obama will 28% lead still in NC.

8:49 PM: Gap has narrowed somewhat in Indiana - now 54% - 46% with 53% in. CNN still hasn't called it, Scott noted in the comments that it could be because Obama strongholds still remain.

Obama keeps his 28% lead in NC with 15% in.

9:10 PM: Obama is out to speak in NC.

- Mentions he's won in a big state and a swing state, trying to counter the Clinton talking points against him
- Says he doesn't believe her supporters won't support him or vice-versa. Good touch and I think this needs to be in both Obama and Clinton's speeches from now on.
- "We will have to remember who we are as Democrats. We are at our best when we lead with principle, with conviction, to a higher purpose. We all agree that at this defining moment in our history - two wars, economy in turmoil, a planet in peril, a dream that feels like it's sleeping away - we can't afford to give John McCain a chance to complete George Bush's 3rd term, we need change and that's what we will be united"
I hope he's right.
- More stump speech stuff he's said before: anecdotes of people taken advantage of the health insurance industry, people suffering from the economy, an energy policy written by the oil companies, a recklessly waged war on terror that has left veterans uncared for, etc.... Even though we've heard it all before he does make the case well why McCain needs to be defeated in November.
- Talks about the importance of government aid to give people the leg to succeed. His and his wife's story provides some great anecdotes - loans to buy a home and financial aid to help them go to school allowed them to make the country more prosperous - didn't just reward wealth but those that created it.
- Talks about McCain's attemps to do nothing but divide the country.
- "The question isn't what kind of campaign they will run, but what kind of campaign we will run. It's what we will do to make this race different. I wasn't running for President to avoid this kind of politics but I am running because this is the time to end it."
- "We will end it by telling the truth forcefully, repeatedly and confidently and trusting that the American people will embrace the need for change even if it comes from an imperfect messenger." That's great in theory, but in American politics, I think that's a bit naive to think that will be enough
- Says again election is about the people not the nominees and about securing "your portion of the American dream. We can choose not to be divided to finally come together. This time can be different. This is the time to answer the call by insisting that by hard work and sacrifice the American Dream will endure."

I'd say this speech was better than his speech after Pennsylvania. I think it lacked policy specifics though.

He finishes up as it's now 52% - 48% in Indiana and Obama still leads 57%-41% in NC with 51% in. Clinton must not be happy at all with tonight's results so far. CNN still won't call it.

10:12 PM: Alright not much has changed in the past 30 minutes. Obama leads 56%-42% in NC with 70% in. Still 52-48% with 83% in.

CNN still won't call in: Scott Tribe (noted Obama supporter) has an explanation (see comments) at least: "Lake County in Indiana (where the city of Gary is) is not going to start reporting til 11 pm EST. A late night perhaps.. at the very least, Clinton's victory speech will be after everyone goes to bed in the East :)"

10:40 PM

- Clinton is out. I knew she would bring up the "tiebreaker" comment (which was a really dumb and unnecessary remark by Obama), but I didn't think it would be the first thing she said.
- Says she's going to the White House because she won this "tiebreaker" (well CNN still hasn't called it yet)
- Crowd chants "Yes She Will"
- Needs their support and wants them to go to hillaryclinton.com to support her campaign against someone who outspends her.
- Talks about people feeling invisible under the Bush administration. "I will never stop fighting for you"
- Stump speech stuff: Ready on Day 1, knows how to make economy work for the middle class, etc...
- Talks gas prices (I haven't endorsed either candidate, but I think Clinton is wrong on this for the same reasons a GST cut was wrong, not to mention the fact her plan will never pass Congress this summer like she claims and is bad environmental policy with gas prices already exremely low in the U.S.)
- Talks about sticking together - good.
- Talks about how close the race and that it's good Democrats are so exciting about the primary process.
- Says she will work hard for the Democratic nominee and her supporters cheer - Good we need to hear more of this from both repeatedly so their supporters get the message.
- Thanks Senator Evan Bayh for his support. He may have made the difference for her between winning and losing given the narrow margin.
- Thanks Governor of North Carolina for his support.
- Gives condolescenses to victims of cyclone in Burma and calls on the junta to let the rest of the world in to help. I commend her for calling attention to to this, very good on her.
- She's going to compete for Indiana and Kentucky in the genearal election. Mentons West Virginia too where everyone knows she will win next week.
- She's running to be President of all America - "That's why it's important to count the votes of Florida and Michigan" Crowd chants "count the votes". I agree they have to resolve this somehow.
- Wants everyone to start acting like Americans again. Exits to This is Our Country.

I still don't think her speeches inspire like Obama's do, but at least she seemed to attack Republicans more in this speech then after her Pennsylvania victory and stressed the importance of party unity more. It seems she is going to continue on while pushing hard to get Florida and Michigan counted to close delegate gap.

I think it showed though that she was not as pleased with tonight's results as after Pennsylvania. She may dominate in West Virginia next week, but she has now lost the momentum she had after April 22nd and I'm not sure that's something she can afford at this point in the race. She faces much longer odds after tonight now.

86% in for Indiana, CNN still won't call it.

11:26 PM: Only 87% in still in Indiana, no change, I thought the results were coming in at 11 PM? 97% in fo NC, Obama wins 56% to 42% that will probably be the final margin.

11:28 PM: CNN says their exit polling indicates that Obama did much better among white women then they expected. They speculate it may be because they were turned off by Clinton's negativity. Perhaps that's true, I've said before both candidates need to stop running excessively negative ads against each other - it does not help the cause in November.

12::02 AM: So this night has gone on later that I (or probably the journalists covering it) thought. The gap is definitely narrowing - 91% in, the lead is down to just over 20,000 votes. If Obama took about 65% of what's left he will win. I don't think he will but this is definitely closer than the Clinton campaign would have wanted.

1:12 AM: FINALLY! CNN calls Indiana for Clinton.

Final results tonight.

North Carolina: Obama wins 56%-42%
Indiana: Clinton wins 51%-49%

I think an unbiased observer can clearly say it was a great night for Obama and a bad night for the Clinton campaign. I think it will be a tough week ahead for Hillary Clinton for sure.

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: Pennsylvania Edition After Thoughts - The Race Goes On

If you want to read my coverage of this primary as the results came in earlier tonight click here. So with the final results being a 10 point victory for Clinton my first thought is one I've been saying again and again: despite what many pundits have said Clinton is not finished. I mentioned a scenario back in March in which if she took Pennsylvania by a wide margin she would argue to superdelegates that Democrats are having "buyer's remorse" about Obama and that he's damaged goods. That indeed I'm sure will be her argument going forward.

So let's see where the race stands now from each campaign’s perspective.

Clinton

The Good:
- She's got momentum and she got the 10 double digit lead her critics said she needed.
- She was dramatically outspent by Obama and he campaign much harder in Pennsylvania then he did in Ohio and yet he still lost by 10 points.
- I still think Michigan and Florida will be seated at the convention and even if Clinton has to compromise in some way (such as manybe spltting the Michigan delegation with Obama but keeping her Florida share) this will boost her delegate tally.
- Framing the race as 1988 all over again may have resonance with some superdelegates. If she successfully casts Obama as being like Dukakis that will spell trouble for him. People have to remember that while there is clear argument on the basis of fairness for superdelegates to vote the "will of the people" these are in the end the party establishment who have had a reputation for not being well in touch with grass roots. You may argue it's a foolish choice but nothing stops superdelegates from coming up with any argument they want to justify giving the race to Hillary such as (NOTE: these are NOT my reasons, I'm just saying what they could come up with as possible rationales): Obama can't beat McCain (in fact polls right now she her doing better on a state by state basis then Obama - see the front page of http://www.mydd.com/), Obama can't win working class voters the Democrats need to win, Obama can't win states Democrats need to win (Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio), voters in all the earlier states would have voted differently (i.e., for Hillary Clinton) if they knew more about Obama and so on. All these arguments are dubious on some levels but they could be used to justify thwarting the popular will to give Hillary the nomination.
- The narrative may shift now to "why couldn't Obama seal the deal?" or "why can't Obama win working class voters?" away from "why won't Hillary drop out"

The Bad:
- She has no chance of winning the most pledged delegates and has extremely little chance of winning the overall popular vote in the end. (she may yet turn to the electoral vote argument as Clinton supporter Evan Bayh mused about, but I'm not so sure that will fly because it's been a very late tactic and seems all too convenient as the Democrats have a proportional system for a reason). Even though it will be the party establishment deciding the nomination there is no more powerful argument against doing so then they would be dramatically over-ruling the grassroots of the party (don't rule that out though).
-Voters are hungry for change and Hillary still does not embody that. I don't know how many voters will be impressed by her trying to co-opt Obama's slogan and make hers "Yes We Will".
Her speech had some good lines, but for the most part she still doesn't excite voters the same way Obama does.
- Personally, I am turned off by her negative ads (the same goes for any negative ads Obama runs but I've found Hillary's worse) and I hope she doesn't feel those were what give her a victory in Pennsylvania. They may backfire on her yet if they continue as The Democratic Party simply can't afford to have its two candidates continually digging up dirt and slamming each other at every turn - all it does is make for Republican campaign commercials down the line (the Liberals here in Canada should know that all too well). Clinton and Obama wining the nomination is worth nothing if they are too damaged for the general.
- Clinton needs a stronger positive message that resonate to the same level as Obama's change message. Even though her speech was mostly positive, I'm not sure she's found that yet ("Yes We Will" just sounds too much like she's imitating Obama to work).
- She's on pace to lose in North Carolina and may yet lose Indiana (though I think she'll win there by getting a bump from tonight's victory). That could stunt any momentum for her.

Overall, she's got to be happy tonight, but she's still the underdog, she still has a lot of work to do to convince superdelegates to overrule the popular will, but if she takes the lion's share of the remaining primaries (which by no means is a sure thing), her chances will get better. As I've said since New Hampshire don't count Clinton out easily.

Obama

The Good:
- Obama narrowed the gap from what could have been considered a blowout (15-20 points) to a 10 point loss. Not great (and I don't think he's happy at all with the results tonight), but no one will call this an absolute disaster for him.
- He's going to win the most pledged delegates AND the popular vote. He will be able to use that argument right till the very end and it fits well within his entire reframe of being the people's candidate who will stand up to the establishment.
- After 8 years of disastrous Republican policies his argument of a clear break from the past resonates very well. Voters in America seem angry with Washington in general and he fits best in the role of Washington outsider who's going to shake things up. Also someone who won't take money from lobbyists or PACS and yet who has raised more money then anyone in history is definitely an inspiring model.
- Clinton is trying to steal his message and co-opt his slogans. I think many people will see this as an admission that she realizes Obama's message is one that works.
- Going forward Obama will have more money to blanket remaining states with advertising. It's not enough at all (as tonight showed), but it certainly doesn't hurt to have this capability.

The Bad:
- Obama just can't seem to seal the deal. All those people who said Hillary just needs to step aside for Obama I think are going to go quiet now. The narrative I think will change to being about why Obama can't wrap things up and that's not going to help him. He's going to be on the defensive over the next week and how he handles that will be important.
- He has to combat the argument that he can't win among working class voters. He can't afford to be painted as Dukakis so he should make the case soon of all the ways in which that comparison is completely wrong.
- He needs new speech material. I'd say both speeches tonight were good and some good new lines, but for the most part were just repetitions of what has been said before. Each of Obama's early primary victory speeches incorporated new elements that made them more memorable, he needs to do that again or he runs the risk of being seen as having a somewhat stale message.
- Even though he actually has talked in depth about his policies on his website and in some past speeches there's still a common perception that all he talks about is "hope" and that he never spells out what he would actually do as President. It's not true, but I think Obama has to find a way to put this myth to rest perhaps by doing a policy focused tour because I think one thing preventing some voters from coming his way as that they think he lacks substance. His speech on race actually went a long way to impressing some of those voters, but that was just one major issue, he should be doing a whole tour about different policies in my view and use all that to frame out some new speech material.

In all, I still say Obama is the favourite, but he's been wounded tonight. If he lost by 5% things would have been different, but a double digit lost is a big symbolic blow for someone many thought had the race in the bag and who actually did campaign quite hard in Pennsylvania. He's got to re-group and re-tool somewhat in order to get his momentum back. Will he accomplish this? We'll see, but he still remains in better shape than Hillary Clinton is in.

I'll be curious to see if Obama agrees to the tentatively scheduled debate for April 27th (as far as I know he hasn't), but if he does I do hope the questions are a bit more substantive than the last debate (I mean 45 minutes until a question came on a legitimate policy issue that's pretty sad).

I say now I can't see how this race gets called before the end of June (for the sake of badly needed progressive change I do hope superdelegates heed Dean's call and end the race by then so Democrats can focus on the general). At the least the Chase for Change series won't have to wait so long till the next primary.

Till then there's lots to talk about in Canadian politics...

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: Pennsylvania Edition (Live Blog)

The Chase for Change returns and so do this blog from its hiatus! With school done now it will be back to business as usual here. So I’ll be live-blogging the Pennsylvania results as they come in.
An early prediction: I say Hillary wins by 7% (wait (9:10 PM): since it seems only Obama and Clinton are on the ballot I doubt 1% of Dems will spoil so a 8% spread makes more sense- wasn't sure if Gravel was still hanging around though I see Paul and Huckabee are still on the Republican ballot) and stays in the race. CNN says the race is close based on exit polls. However, we know how accurate American exit polls have been in the past so we will see… Anyways check back later at this link as the results keep coming in

I’ll also be doing a post later tonight on the past week in Canadian politics that has surely made Conservatives happier than they ever been.

8:40 PM: With less than 1% in (keep checking that link if you want the up-to date results), Hillary leads 65% - 35%. Strongly doubt this kind of lead will hold.

8:50 PM: According to exit polls (again I'm not totally sold on these) late deciders went for Clinton, but newly signed up Democrats went mostly for Obama. Interpret as you will...

8:51 PM: 3% in Hillary up 55% - 45%. This seems more like a number that could hold but early yet.

9:03 PM: According to exit polls (alas, the talking heads have little else to talk about right now), 40% of voters tonight were over 60, while only 10% were under 30. That's surprising I'd say...
Gap is narrowing though, 52%-48%. It's only 6% in, but the Clinton campaign might be getting worried right now.

9:05 PM: Ok Hillary has been pronounced the winner of Pennsylvania now by CNN. But what matters really is the spread, she needs to do better than a 5% win I'd say.

9:15 PM: Turnout was apparently almost 50% in this primary (compares with 18% in 2000). Bodes well for the Democrats in November anyway...

9:23 PM: The mood has gotten a lot better over at Clinton HQ I'm sure as she's up 53-47% with 18% in.

9:39 PM: The Clinton argument to come: She's won working class voters and Obama would lose them to McCain ending up like Dukakis in 1988 who lost Pennsylvania to Bush Sr because he lost working class voters to him. It's definitely true the Dems need to win Pennsylvania in November but we'll see if this argument has any traction.

9:50 PM: Clinton up by 10% now. Exit polls look like they were wrong again.

10:10 PM: Clinton up by 8% (close to what I predicted) with 55%. I think she's about to hit the stage. Governor Rendell is coming out now, I think he'll introduce her.

10:15 PM: Out she comes. She's looking happy. I guess Obama will speak later from Indiana. I expect her to mention more than once that Obama outspent her 3 to 1 and/or talk about how hard he campaigned there, etc....

10:16 PM: Bill Clinton is behind her this time for what I think is the first time in awhile for a victory speech. Not sure that's a great move, he just seems to be full of controversy this race.

- Talks about family roots in Pennsylvania.
- She's in this race till the end
- She'll stand up for the common people
- Compliments Obama and his supporters. Nice touch.
- Talks about women born before women could vote who could say to their granddaughters if Hillary were President: "see you can be anything you want." Good line.
- Ok so now she mentions Obama outspent her "so massively". Boos from the crowd.
- Mentions Obama's spending again: Obama spent more than anyone in history of the state. I was right she's hitting that point more than once.
- "America is worth fighting for, you are worth fighting for"
- Talks about the importance of the feminist and civil rights movement: "This generation will grow up taking for granted that an African American or woman could be President of the United States" Another good line. Somehow don't think we'll be hearing it from John McCain.
- "The question isn't whether we can, but whether we will!"
- So she's trying to make "Yes We Will" her slogan
- So she says Yes She Will change this country. "God bless" and she exits to "This is Our Country"...

10:36 PM: 75% in, Clinton leads 54%-46%, this looks like this might hold. Even though her speech made it obvious she wants to carry on, I think she will have enough of a claim to do so.

10:42 PM: Obama is being introduce now. LOL Obama enters to "This Is Our Country!" Guess Clinton and him aren't just getting closer in slogans, but theme music too.

- Congratulates Clinton
- Mentions people thought he was going to be blown out and he's closed the gap. So there's the two arguments - Clinton says Obama spent too much money and couldn't win while Obama says he still narrowed the gap substantially.
- Obama says he registered record number of voters and it will be those that bring victory to Democrats in November.
- "We aren't here to talk about change for change's sake we are here because our country desperately needs it, we can't afford to keep doing what we've been doing the last 4 years."
- Uses the same line he's used 100 times before "we can't send the same players to Washington and expect a different result"
- John McCain isn't offering meaningful change from the policies of George W. Bush (I notice now Hillary didn't talk about McCain very much)
- Another line used for the 1000th time: "A war that should not have been authorized and should not have been waged."
- Goes off about McCain's support of Bush
- John McCain thinks America is making progress but he's blind to the problems that exist.
- The question "isn't whether the other party will bring change to Washington we know they won't the question is whether this party will"
- "We can be a party that takes money from lobbyists, we can look the other way for 4 years as they prevent us from changing health care or we can rein in their power and take our Government back"
- "We can regain not just an office, but the trust of the American people."
- "We can continue to cut this country into Red States and Blue States or we can continue the movement we started in this campaign and bring all Americans together....mentions each American demographic" (Note: I still think Obama is naive to think Republicans will work with him or any Democratic President)
- "The status quo in Washington will fight as hard as they can to stop us from now till November but don't forget that you have the power to change this country - you can make this election about what you want"
- "If we're willing to believe in what's possible again, we won't just win this primary season, we will change this country and we will change this world and this country will meet it's promise in the 21st century, let's get to work" And that's it for him.

11:06 PM: 84% in, Clinton up 55% - 45%. It will be a strong symbolic argument for her if she lands that double digit win.

12:30 AM: 98% in, Clinton still up 55% - 45%. I think her supporters will be happy with that.

Be back soon with my thoughts on tonight's results (my Pennsylvania follow-up can be found here)....

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: Wyoming (D) and Mississippi Edition: Things Looking a Little Better for Obama

It's been busy times, but I haven't missed covering a single primary yet so the last two will be no exception.

So after losing Ohio and the popular vote in Texas I had predicted Obama would win the next couple races and yes he did, winning 61% to 37% in Miss. and 61% to 38% in Wyoming. He also got bolstered by the news that he won the Texas caucuses and will actually win more delegates in Texas than Clinton has. So from a delegates perspective Obama has now won 15 out of the last 16 races. So this takes a bit of the sting out of the argument from the Clinton campaign that voters are now having "buyer's remorse" with Obama.

I can now say that even if Michigan and Florida do a do-over Obama should go into the convention with the pledged delegate lead. As well, the Clinton campaign was rocked by ridiculous and offensive comments made by Geraldine Ferraro. She has an important place in history and was a trailblazer as the first female VP nominee, but she was completely out of line in what she said. It would be offensive for people to say Hillary is where she is just because she is a woman and it's offensive for Ferraro to imply that Obama is just where he is because he is black. When people chant "Yes We Can" and "We Want Change" you'd think she could clue in that it's Obama's message of hope and change that has brought him to the top and not much else. Remember Obama rose to stardom off an amazing speech at the Democratic Convention in 2004 and it's been his message of hope and his ability to inspire and bring a whole new generation back into politics that's kept him in the news ever since and more recently brought him to the top of the polls. So Clinton was right to ask Ferraro to resign. If anyone in the Obama campaign says Clinton is where she is because she's a woman they ought to resign as well because these comments have no place in politics.

But she's resigned now and I bet Clinton is now hoping everyone starts to focus on the next primary in Pennsylvania. It will be a long month for both campaigns I'm sure and I imagine they are both just hoping for so major gaffe to change the outlook of this race, but right now I can bet Clinton wins Pennsylvania like she did in Ohio and that will be enough to convince her to stay until convention especially if Michigan and Florida get a re-vote because I imagine she will win there too. Still it's diificult for her to catch up to Obama in pledged delegates (but she may overtake him in overall delegates before the convention). But the framework of the race could change over the next month.

And oh yeah the Republican race....For those who believe it is extremely detrimnental to have the Republican race wrapped up so long before the Democratic one, I do think there may be somewhat of a siliver lining here. After all who paid attention to McCain's victory in Miss.? Who's getting more attention now by the media Hillary/Obama or McCain? Yes Hillary and Obama are still fighting each other rather than the real enemy for a few months longer but as a consolation it is keeping the focus squarely on the Democratic candidates so that whoever wins will have actually gotten more coverage over these past few months than McCain will have. All the while the Democratic candidates both know which Republican to attack and McCain has to focus his sights on both of them.

Anyways I hope something BIG happens in the next month or so in this race between now and Pennsylvania or the Chase for Change Series may have to take a little hiatus. Don't let me down guys!

So I imagine it will be back to solely focusing on Canadian politics again for the next while. So this blog will go back to its Roots!

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: TX, OH, VT, RI Edition: Why's It's Anyone's Game Again for the Democratic Nomination

So this past Tuesday has another big night. For the Republicans, no big surprises, I predicted McCain would wrap things up on March 4th and he did. For the Democrats though it's a whole new ball game again. Watching the CNN coverage you could tell the Clinton campaign played their cards right over the past two weeks. Remember after Obama's 11th straight victory so many people were saying that she had to win HUGE in Ohio AND Texas in order to stay in the race. So she won Ohio by 10% (not huge compared to Obama's recent margins) and Texas by 4% (though she's on pace to lose the caucuses there) and won big in Rhode Island, but it's clear from all the coverage that's all she needed to get right back in this race. So how did she pull it off? Well some people think it was the negative ads about how Obama can't answer calls at 3 AM, but I'd like to think not since those ads really looked like something the Republicans could have put out.

I hope Hillary Clinton learns that it's not wise to try and make the general election about national security, because while she thinks it may help her win against Obama, it won't against McCain. The Democrats shouldn't want an election on national security for the same reason Liberals in Canada don't want an election on crime, it's just an issue that the public as a whole tends to be less rational and more emotional about (even more so in the U.S. than in Canada) and in turn that favours Conservatives on those issues.

But Hillary's 3 AM ads play into the notion that national security is what this election is about, she even says "John McCain is going to make this election about national security", why in the world should the Democrats let him? Shouldn't they do everything they can to focus on the other issues plaguing America at home and abroad? Because everything else aside from national security (and maybe crime) are the Democrat's strong suit. I hope Hillary changes tack because it's not worth winning the nomination if you've boxed yourself in for the general but running on an issue you won't win against McCain on.

Though to get back to answering the question of why she dominated Ohio, I think the extreme downplaying of expecations combined with the gift wrapped NAFTA leak about Obama played a big role. Liberals here in Canada are right to continue asking Harper questions about the leak because it had an undeniable impact and the source may yet lie in Harper's entourage. Obama was dead even or leading in Ohio and Texas until that story broke that Obama wouldn't really do much to re-negotiate NAFTA as it played right into Hillary's desired narrative that Obama isn't as genuine as he claims. So with that gift Hillary attacked Obama's biggest strength (which given the enormity of the revelation was the smart thing for her to do) and pulled out a big win as a result. Truthfully I don't think either Obama or Hillary would do much to re-negotiate NAFTA (it would probably be similar to the few concessions Chretien obtained when he came into office and I don't think many remember what those were, but he did put up a fuss after he became PM about not ratifying until concessions were made) but now only Hillary can credibly claim she would.

So where do things go from here? I'll make one prediction now: This will go to the convention and it will not be pretty. Why? Because Obama has an almost unssailable lead in pledged delegates, yet Hillary just won some big states that have earned her the right to stay in until Pennsylvania votes on April 22nd and she'll probably win there too, so she will maintain enough momentum to stay in and will have more tail end victories in the big states to claim people are having buyer's remorse over Obama and that will justify her remaining. So the superdelegates will have the last say.

As well, there remains the unresolved issue of Michigan and Florida's delegates. It is quite plausible that Obama's pledged delegate lead will not exceed what Hillary would have gotten if Michigan and Florida counted. This would allow to Hillary to say that she would really be ahead if voters in those two states weren't disenfranchised and she'll use that argument to woo superdelegates. So foreseeing this in sight Obama and Hillary may yet agree to a do over in those states, but that also benefits Hillary because she will win those races comfortably (running as the one who stood up for their votes all along) and this time there would be no dispute over their status and Obama would have to accept them. So Hillary could still win this race yet, I'm not placing any bets yet.

Obama should win the next primary in Mississipi next Tuesday so that should help him a bit, but the calendar ahead points to enough victories on both sides that this thing won't end without a big fight unless something dramatic happens that leads one of the campaigns to self-destruct between Missisippi and Pennsylvania (as we go over a month with no primaries scheduled in the interim). Unfortunately, McCain will be laughing all the way, but I see no other way of how this could end, I just hope Democrats and all progressives can all come together behind their nominee when it finally does because America and the world cannot afford another 4 years of more of the same failed Republican policies.

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: WIS, HI (D), WA(R) Editions: More Big Wins for McCain and Obama

So on the Republican side not much new news, McCain contnues slowly waltzing to officially wrapping things up with comfortable wins again in Wisconsin and Washington. Huckabee still pulls a respectable showing but I think he will be out for sure after March 4th.

On the Democratic Party side it was a huge night for Obama and a very rough night for Hillary Clinton. I said previously that until I saw some polls that showed her lead in Ohio and Texas narrowing to less than she needs to have a convincing win there I would still consider her in good shape. However, now we have seen polls showing her with just a single digit lead there and she needs more than that to get the momentum back. Worse for her, Obama did significantly better in Wisconsin that almost any poll indicated he would. Many people thought she would keep close or maybe even squeak out a win and instead she did about as well as Mike Huckabee did percentage wise and Obama tripled her vote in Hawaii (which is definitely much worse than what her campaign had predicted). So this all has to be pretty disappointing for her.

So I would say now it's safe to say Hillary has become the underdog in this race given the thumping she took last night and the must-win big scenarios she will need to get back in this race to make up for last night's poor showing.

She's not out yet though. If she does pull off big wins in Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania she'd be able to confidently go toe to toe with Obama for a long time yet. But those big wins she needs seem just a bit less likely right now.

Though she may be tempted to go strongly negative against Obama to try to blunt his momentum after 10 straight wins, I think that would be a huge mistake for her. Obama didn't get to the front of the pack by being strongly negative, he got there I think because he gave Democrats something they would want to vote FOR (you may not buy everything Obama is saying but you can't deny that a lot of Democrats like what they hear from him).

Hillary can and should try everything she can to do the same and put forth a strong positive vision of why she would be the best President and resist the urge to go negative. Going negative hasn't worked for her in the past (see Wisconsin for the evidence as she ran negative attacks ads there all week) and she's now losing key demographics she once commanded to Obama. I think she has a chance to win these people back, but she also has a chance to slide further behind if she goes into attack mode. That said, if Obama commits a gaffe she has every reason to pounce on it but other than that I think she'd fare better in this campaign and any future ones by staying above the fray and outlining every way she can why Americans need her running the Oval Office.

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: Potomac Primaries Edition: Obama and McCain Run the Table

So to make sure I'm not missing a beat, I thought I'd chime in on the latest rounds in Maryland, Virginia and D.C..

For the Republicans, it's time to start taking bets on WHEN Mike Huckabee will be dropping out because after a hiccup in the last set of primaries McCain seems ready to steam roll to the finish line. There's no way he'll lose, it's just a question of when he officially wraps it up.

On the Democratic side again it wasn't a surprise Obama won in each race, but the margins were pretty impressive. That said, even though the media seem to be starting to go with a narrative that there may be no stopping him, until you show me a single poll that doesn't show Hillary way out in front in Ohio, Pennsylvania or Texas then she's still easily in this thing and with solid victories in those states she would have the wind at her back again, but she will absolutely need clear victories there to stop the narrative that is currently forming.

On to Wisconsin and Hawaii...

Recommend this Post

The Danger of John McCain: Why Progressives NEED to Line Up Behind the Democratic Nominee

Given that McCain has pretty much wrapped up the Republican nomination, I thought it was about time I wrote my thoughts about the man. Well truth be told, I think the man would a terrible President that at best would be marginally better than George Bush and at worst could leave the world (and the U.S. at home and abroad) in much worse shape than Bush did. Here’s a list of reasons why all progressives should be throwing their support behind whoever the Democratic nominee ends up being:

1) I don’t care what Coulter and Limbaugh say, McCain is NOT A MODERATE. His record in the Senate has been VERY conservative. His lifetime rating by the American Conservative Union is a very high 83 (see here). To give some context, everyone said Fred Thompson was very Conservative, yet his score is only 3 points higher (see here), while real Republican moderates like Arlen Spector get a score of 42 and Hillary and Obama both score under 10. That alone should tell you just the starkly different policies the Democratic candidates would put in place compared to McCain. But there’s many more reasons why McCain would be a progressive’s nightmare…

2) Justice Stevens (the most liberal judge on the SC) will almost certainly retire in the next term. McCain has vowed to only appoint pro-life judges. Thus, you could very likely see Roe V. Wade overturned with a McCain Presidency which would lead to about 30 states criminalizing abortion. So there’s a lot at stake for women’s rights here.

3) McCain would undermine the UN with his plan for a parallel “League of Democracies” (see here). This would starve the UN of funding and undermine its legitimacy. At a time when conflict is rising in the Middle East this is the last thing we need, as this organization would effectively cut out that entire region (though I bet Pakistan gets to qualify as a “democracy” under McCain’s plan). It would be repeating the mistakes of the failed League of Nations by excluding key countries from the dialogue. I think the UN has gone a long way towards preventing a Third World War and McCain’s plan would be a huge step backward.

4) McCain has been the most fervent backer of going to War in Iraq and openly says he’s fine with the U.S. being there for another 100 years.

5) McCain has openly stated that the U.S. may need to bomb Iran, thus creating a possibly even more disastrous war.

6) McCain firmly believes in the Mike Harris doctrine: cut taxes and slash spending much more deeply. The poorest Americans would suffer even more greatly under John McCain then they have under George Bush as McCain is much more committed to balanced budgets and vowed to accomplish them almost solely through slashing spending. The Bush tax cuts were bad policy and yet McCain wants to extend them through and take out the lost revenue on the poor.

7) McCain will almost certainly select an even MORE conservative running mate. The only reason the fanatics on the right make noise about McCain is because of his stances on immigration (where he stood with Bush anyway), global warming, torture, and campaign finance reform. McCain has not swayed from the Conservative dogma on any other issue that I know of, but the aforementioned ones are so important to Conservatives they will press him hard to pick someone even more Conservative then he is because McCain cannot afford to have them sit out the election (after all Bush would not have won in 2004 without them). McCain himself may not run again in 2012 so that would make his VP the front-runner for the Republican nomination then. Do we want to accord an even stauncher Conservative the benefits of incumbency in 2012 or even 2016?

8) McCain has gone back on virtually every modestly progressive stance he ever took.
- He opposed Bush’s tax cuts, now he wants to extend them even though that would plunge the US into further debt and deficit or mean drastic cuts to social programs.
- He criticized Jerry Falwell and the religious right in 2000, yet this year he spoke at their universities and courted them heavily.
- He stood up for immigration reform (though even then his position was similar to Bush’s), now he says he’ll just focus primarily on border security.
- He once supported gay marriage, now he's firmly opposed to it.
- He stood firm against torture, but then caved and voted for a bill that would allow the Bush administration to define what torture really was (thus waterboarding may be continuing even though McCain says he opposes it).

You could say McCain just went back on his earlier positions to win over Conservatives in the primaries, but isn’t his whole appeal that he’s “principled”. Don’t all these reversals fly in the wind of that?

The only credit I give McCain is for his stances on campaign finance reform and global warming as he is to the left of his party on these issues for sure, but even then both Hillary and Obama have more sensible and progressive stances on these issues as well. On the vast majority of issues he is as just as, or much more, Conservative than Stephen Harper so it concerns me when I read or hear from Liberals thinking about supporting McCain or Hillary supporters saying they can't support Obama or vice-versa. You have to think how would John McCain really represent a step forward after George W. Bush? Doesn't the USA and the world need a radical departure from where Bush has been taking it?

So I’d be curious to hear from any progressive thinking of supporting McCain. Why?

Even though Canadian bloggers aren’t going to have a big impact on the influence the U.S. outcome, some of us have U.S. readers and some Liberals have gone down South to campaign so we aren’t irrelevant to what happens down there and what happens in this election will influence Canada and the rest of the world. That’s why I’ll continue to write about it and that’s why I am really hoping all progressives can get behind the Democratic nominee because the stakes are high and Canada and the world cannot afford John McCain as President.

Now you don’t just need a negative reason to support the Democrats, both Hillary and Obama have reasonably progressive platforms that would bring the USA at least somewhat closer to how Canada operates and the vision the Liberal Party of Canada represents. They support universal health care, a strong plan to combat global warming, campaign finance reform, a better code of ethics in Washington, and a saner foreign policy. They’ve got a long way to go though and I think we’ll need at least 12 years of the Democrats in office before the damage of the Bush administration is even remotely undone. McCain unfortunately would be just a basic continuation of the last 8 disastrous years.

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: Obama Wins Big, McCain Suffers a Minor Embarassment

So it wasn't terribly surprising that Obama swept the three races last night or that he won Maine today, but the huge margins of victory certainly now have the Clinton campaign pretty worried (judging by the firing of Hillary's campaign manager). So Obama is definitely going on more momentum here.

However, even if Obama runs the table on the rest of the primaries this month, I still give the slight edge to Hillary for two reasons:

1) In order to be able to credibly claim he leads in pledged delegates going into the convention (which I think ultimately will be what will swing the oustanding superdelegates) Obama needs a lead greater than the number of delegates Michigan and Florida would have awarded Hillary had those two states not been stripped of their delegates. If he has anything less, his claim to be in the pledged delegate lead would be severely questioned and would cause some huge friction in the Democratic party and put the superdelegates in a very difficult position in deciding who to go to as Hillary would simultaneously claim she has the true pledged delegate lead.

2) The latest polls showed Hillary in the lead in Texas and Ohio which are two HUGE delegate states left. IF (and that's a big IF) Hillary wins in those two states as big as she did in New York and California then that would carry huge momentum going into Pennsylvania (where I think she's also favoured) and then I think she would go on to the nomination.

We'll see though. At one point many poeple thought Hillary would take Maine and she lost by double digits, but at the same time, all of Obama's momentum going into Super Tuesday didn't help him in Mass., New York or California. Still too close to call for sure.

As for the Republicans, I was surprised to see Huckabee win Kansas and Louisana; however, I hardly think it will have much too much of an impact. What it will mean is that McCain will have to spend a bit more money and a bit more time campaigning in reminaing primary states to avoid the appearance that he limped across the finish line, but I am 100% certain that McCain will still win the nomination before the convention. More on him tomorrow though.

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: Super Tuesday Post-Mortem: McCain Pulls Away, Obama Gains Ground

So Super Tuesday is done and one race seems almost over and another somewhat closer than I thought it would be.

McCain hasn't officially won the nomination yet, but Romney was seriously wounded with a loss in California and if he drops out I can't possibly see how Huckabee could win toe to toe with McCain. I was surprised Huckabee did so well last night, but if he has any hope of playing king-maker and being the VP nominee he had better hope Romney stays in in the race. Still I think McCain will officially get the required delegate threshold on March 4th when Texas and Ohio vote.

As for the Democratic race, Hillary won by a wider margin in California and New York than I expected and took Mass. which I had not expected (and also shows the limited power of the Kennedy endorsment there). However, Obama took more states than I had expected, particularly a lot of red states where some people once said he could never play in. Clinton remains ahead though in the delegate count when you factor in superdelegates.

I understand the next few contests favour Obama, which may add a bit more momentum to his campaign, but I also understand the big delegate states Texas and Ohio favour Clinton and it seems Clinton has done really well in the big states so far so I still give her the edge for the nomination, but it's definitely gonna be close and there's no way it will be decided until March 4th and could easily carry on after that.

Recommend this Post

The Chase for Change 2008: Super Tuesday Predictions

Here is the quick run-down of my predicions for tonight before the results, roll in.

I've got a mixed record on these things, but this time I feel lucky! I'm not giving exact percentages for each state because that would be insane, but I am at least ballparking the margins of victories in each state. So here goes...

Democrats

Alabama - Obama (by less than 5%)
Alaska - Hillary (by 5-10%)
Arizona - Hillary (by less than 5%)
Arkansas - Hillary (by 5-15%)
California - Hillary (by less than 5%)
Colorado - Obama (by 5-10%)
Connecticut - Hillary (by less than 5%)
Delaware - Hillary (by 5-15%)
Georgia - Obama (by MORE than 10%)
Idaho (D only, No R primary) - Obama (by less than 5%)
Illinois - Obama (by MORE than 15%)
Kansas (D only, No R primary) - Obama (by 5-10%)
Massachusetts - Obama (by less than 5%)
Minnesota - Hillary (by 5-15%)
Missouri - Hillary (by less than 5%)
New Jersey - Hillary (by 5-10%)
New Mexico (D only, No R Primary) - Hillary (by 5-10%)
New York - Hillary (by 5-15%)
North Dakota - Hillary (by 5-15%)
Oklahoma - Hillary (by 5-15%)
Tennessee - Hillary (by 10-15%)
Utah - Obama (by 5-10%)

Republicans

McCain will win everywhere by 5-15% EXCEPT:

- McCain will narrowly beat Romney in California (by less than 5%)
- McCain will narrowly beat Huckabee in Oklahoma (by less than 5%)
- Romney will WIN Massachusetts by 5-15%, Delaware, Montana and Utah by 5-10% and Colorado (caucus) by 5-20%,
- Huckabee will WIN Arkansas by 5-15%
- Huckabee has already won West Virginia (52% to 47% for Romney), so I didn't make it in time for that one.

Recommend this Post

Videos The Liberals Could Take Points From

Hillary Clinton Versus

Barack Obama

Personally, I think the Hillary one (even though it is a bit older) comes off better but both show the poential for a Democratic Party campaign that will blow the Republicans out of the water.

There's something for Liberals to learn from here too. We should definitely be putting out stuff like this that makes clear the case for why we need a change in government so badly in this country.

I hear the Hillary Clinton video was done by someone at Seneca college. If it's at ANY way possible I say the federal Liberals should really try to sign this guy up before someone else does!

Recommend this Post