June 21, 2007

6/21: You Win Some ...

The Politico reported that Barack Obama "scored a victory among progressive activists" by winning the straw poll of activists at Take Back America. Indeed, he edged John Edwards among the largely anti-war crowd that booed Hillary Clinton. And yet, he still hasn't reached Howard Dean-like status among the progressives online.

That will be even harder to do with incidents like one in NH recently, when his campaign shut out a blogger who wanted to attend a forum there. That blogger was from Buckeye State Blog, an important one in an important state. And while it's not a death blow by any means, people are clearly disappointed. As coverage of the (D-Punjab) showed, the lofty expectations that have been set Obama also mean an increasingly higher standard.

CONGRESS: That Election Feels Like Months Ago, Doesn't It?

A new Gallup Poll shows that Congress' confidence rating has plummeted to 14%, an all time low. Glenn Reynolds: "It's well-earned. Nonetheless, this is troubling, and not just for the Democrats, who are only doing somewhat worse than the GOP Congress did. How long can we have a free and successful nation with such an unpopular -- and deservedly so -- political class. ... You need a certain amount of confidence for a nation to operate as a nation. Worse yet, I think this low approval number is justified, which illustrates that we're being pretty badly governed. That's a problem, too."

Anonymous Liberal: "The electorate is fed up with Congress for very different reasons. Some (a very large percentage I suspect) are upset because they think Congress is not doing enough to stop the Iraq War. Others, particularly those on the far right, disapprove of Congress because it is trying to stop the Iraq War. Still others, also mostly on the Right, are fed up with both Democrats and Republicans in Congress because of their joint efforts to pass comprehensive immigration reform. And still others, particularly independents and moderates, are upset because they perceive Congress to be gridlocked by partisanship and unable to get anything done. Frankly, I'm surprised anyone has confidence in Congress. But that's neither here nor there."

Roger L. Simon: "This should give a little pause to those Democratic Party triumphalists who think their crowd is going to waltz into the White House in '08. But that's the least of it. The more important question is why our government is run by such dimwitted mediocrities on both sides of the aisle." At The Corner, Ramesh Ponnuru writes: "Republicans should not get too gleeful about this finding. If the public is just unhappy with all the politicians, they may take it out on the party they perceive to be in power -- and that is still the Republicans."

Gun Toting Liberal: "These numbers, in my eyes, reflect our collective rage at Congress's impotence and inaction on the war front, not anger that they're not governing like the 109th. I personally can't imagine the Republican's making gains in this sort of atmosphere."

John Hawkins: despite all these woes, the voters trust Democrats more than Republicans on 10 out of 10 "key issues" that Rasmussen tracks -- which raises an interesting question -- how bad do the Republicans have to be to be keep losing to the Democrats? It's like going on Jeopardy and being crushed by Paris Hilton."

DEM FIELD: Mr. Brightside

The other day, Kos explained what bothered him about the current field. Today, the good stuff:

• Hillary Clinton: "I celebrate and embrace anything that pisses off the right wing, and is there anything in the world that pisses them off more than HIllary Clinton? Heck, what bigger a 'FU' could we give not just the wingers, but the corporate media establishment than to return a Clinton to the White House, laying waste to their fiction that Clinton was 'unpopular' and somehow rejected by the American people. And isn't it past time we had a woman president?" She is "rough on Iraq," but would "be more responsive to popular sentiment and the U.S. Congress. On other issues she's pretty solid."
• John Edwards: "I remember heartily booing Edwards" at the CA Dem convo in '03, when he "just three days removed from Bush's invasion of Iraq, lectured the attendees on why it was important to support this war. He's come a long way since, chucking his b.s. and timid consultants and being more open to following his conscience. He's made several missteps, but I'm more willing to forgive a candidate for making his own mistakes, than for making those of his risk-averse consultants. ... This lone white dude is also the least risk-averse, the boldest, and the most passionate candidate in the race."
• Barack Obama: "Like Hillary, the historical ramifications of an Obama president would be huge, and a great step forward for our nation. Obama may be running a risk-averse campaign, but his actual performance in the Illinois lege and Senate gives us someone who would be reliably progressive on all the important issues -- perhaps the most solid of all our choices." He has a way "of dressing up liberal policies in a way that makes them sound appealing to even conservatives, and there's HUGE value in that."
• Bill Richardson: "The more I see him in action, the less impressed I am with him as a politician. But on the substance, he's solid. As the cliche goes, he has the strongest resume of the lot. ... It may be an indictment of our system that actual governing skill may mean little without the political skills, but it is what it is. The fact that he sucks as a presidential candidate shouldn't mask that beyond that facade, there's real substance."

"Like I said yesterday, none of these guys may be lighting me on fire, but I'll have no trouble getting behind any of them once the nominee is chosen. As much as we may quibble around the edges, step back and it's hard to argue that they're all solid candidates."

OBAMA: Rut Ro

Jerid of the Buckeye State Blog writes under the headline: "Don't Tell Obama You Blog." "At least that's the message his New Hampshire campaign sent me last night. I would've had a glowing post up today about all the neat approaches to faith the campaign is taking, or maybe how 'the audience was really interested in what the Obama campaign had to say,' or even maybe something I learned. Instead all I have is this. A picture of the door to the meeting that I wasn't allowed into because, for better or worse, I blog."

The event was a "Faith, Action, Change" forum in Keene, NH. It was "billed as an opportunity for Progressives to discuss their faith in terms of social change, they're free and open to the public." When he introduced himself as a blogger to someone from Obama's NH camp, he was told: "Oooooooh, I'm sorry, but you'll have to leave. These events are closed to the press." Jerid: "I was dumbfounded. Searching for words I spurt out, 'But I'm a blogger,' as she started to usher me out of the room. Apparently that didn't matter. It was of no consequence that I'm a Democratically slanted activist who's trying to learn as much about all of the candidates in New Hampshire as I can. It didn't matter that I phonebank and canvas for candidates I support. I didn't matter that I put my 'super friendly blogger hat' on when I go to these events and am respectful of folks privacy, taking great care with what I write about. All she saw was the press. The Obama campaign, along with some of the other prezzies, don't understand the concept of citizen journalists."

Jerid contrasts this with the fact that Obama paid for a table at the '06 OH Dems dinner so that bloggers could attend. Later, in the comments, he clarifies that Obama wasn't present, that it was just a gathering organized by the camp.

Kos: "It's stupid to keep people out of events because they have a blog. In today's world, everyone has a blog, or writes at blogs, or has a MySpace or Facebook page, or participates in online forums like bulletin boards. It's 2007. Please have your campaign update its SOP accordingly. As for bloggers, don't say that you are bloggers. I'm not sure what benefits you get from announcing it to the world."

OBAMA II: For What It's Worth

Obama's straw poll win was not much of a surprise. Philip Klein: "All the normal caveats apply in a straw poll such as this, but you can either say that it's incremental evidence that the progressive base of the party is gathering behind Obama/Edwards, or consider it a decent showing for Hillary with this wing of the party, and the things she would need to do to make a stronger showing in a crowd like this could hurt her general election strategy."

Matthew Yglesias: "For eons, liberals have dreamed of a straw poll whose meaninglessness could equal that achieved by the Ames Straw Poll on the GOP side. The Politico/Take Back America straw poll doesn't quite reach those lofty heights, but it's the best we've got." It's also noted that Ben Smithreported that Obama's camp was offering free tickets to the event via Facebook.

IRAQ: Madame Speaker ...

Jonathan Singer interviewed Speaker Nancy Pelosi and asked about the Dems' political strategy with Iraq. Pelosi: "I believe that we're right on course. We had the votes to say that there are timelines and the President had to honor them. The President vetoed the bill. There isn't much more you can do after that. But we have changed the debate in our country." She adds: "I know outside people are dissatisfied. And I am too. I would have liked him to sign the bill and bring the troops home. But that's not where he is. And he's not respecting the wish of the American people in that regard."

Pelosi, on the path ahead: "We have a number of options, but the timing will relate to when we think it's best to do them. One will be to repeal the authority of the President's ability to conduct the war. Another will be to have appropriations similar to the McGovern resolution that says that our troops come home, except to fight Al Qaeda, protect our diplomats and train the Iraqis. A much, much, much smaller number of troops would be needed for that."

Andrew Sullivan doesn't like what he hears from David Petraeus. "You get the sense that, in Petraeus' mind, only al Qaeda and Iran are preventing total success in Iraq, and that he is almost preparing for war against Iran as a result."

The Left Coaster sees more bad news as Iraq's political house is falling. "The Shiites are splitting apart in advance of a major power struggle, while Cheney works with the Saudis to arm the Sunnis. This isn't a recipe for success, and yet our forces are being ordered by the White House to police it all, and to die trying."

Meanwhile, Kevin Drum is happy to see that the State Dept is responding to Amb to Iraq Ryan Crocker's urgent call for staff. He adds: "I don't get it. These guys believe in the free market. Why not just keep raising the salaries for postings in Baghdad until they get enough volunteers? I doubt they'd have to go much above a million bucks a year."

BLOOMBERG: Still Trying To Figure It Out

Ramesh Ponnuru: "My gut feeling is that his chief appeal will be to upscale social liberals, and will therefore cut into the Democratic vote. David Frum makes a pretty good counter-argument: Bloomberg is likely to spend his ad money attacking the Republican candidate. But of course, if he does that, it will be because he is running a campaign that emphasizes the liberal aspects of his political identity: So the anti-Republican effect will be muted by the fact that his candidacy will appeal to Democratic voters."

David Brody notes that Bloomberg "may not do too well with the Fundamentalist crowd." According to the New York Sun, he said: "It's probably because of our bad educational system, but the percentage of people who believe in creationalism is really scary for a country that's going to have to compete in a world where science and medicine require a better understanding."

Meanwhile, Steve Soto looks at timing: "There's something to be said for making the committment, doing all the hard work in 2007, and putting yourself out there instead of waiting until the masses beseech you to come into the race late as a savior. I am starting to feel this way about Gore, although I understand why he doesn't want to jump in now, if ever."

GIULIANI: The Morning After

Bloggers continue to react to the Newsday story about Rudy Giuliani's role on the Iraq Study Group. James Joyner "Frankly, faced with a choice between $1.7 million and participating in a group with a bunch of other people who aren't experts to present advice to the president he isn't going to take anyway, I'd take the $1.7 million every time. (In full disclosure, I must confess that neither alternative has been offered.) Then again, I'm not, as Kevin Drum puts it, "running for president based on his reputation as a hero of 9/11." Drum's right, too, that this is a significant story and that it's odd that there has not been more press coverage.

Drum, meanwhile, can't believe the lack of coverage. "A quick Nexis search shows that among the mainstream media, the New York Times wrote a short piece, and the Kansas City Star and Chicago Tribune carried brief blurbs. That's it. On TV, Olberman discussed it, but no one else. I'm keenly aware that an awful lot of blog criticism of the mainstream media is basically just partisan sniping. But is this seriously not considered news?"

F. THOMPSON: Take That, Obamagirl

David Brody links to this video, "I've Got A Crush On Fred Thompson's politics."

Thompson also gets some attention for calling out CAIR in his ABC radio commentary.

PAUL: We're Going To Get So Much E-mail For This

IMAO lists some "Fun Facts About Ron Paul Supporters."

• Ron Paul supporters not only appear when his name is invoked 3 times, it drives them crazy, an admittedly short trip.
• The Federal Reserve killed most of Ron Paul's supporters puppies.
• If you're bitten by a Ron Paul supporter if you don't become one, you do become a carrier.
• Where do Ron Paul supporters have their meetups? A house of mirrors.

BLOGGERS VS. THE MSM: What Bias?

The Corner's Jonah Goldberg jumps on the MSNBC.com story about political giving from reporters. "Reporters giving money to Dems by a margin of 9 to 1 is a glorious thing to behold." Michelle Malkin: "The Left wants increased regulation to address the lack of ideological diversity in talk radio. What do they have to say about the lack of ideological diversity in America's newsrooms?"

Greg Sargent criticizes AP's Ron Fournier for leading an HRC profile with "Slick Hillary." "Look, we have no problem with the piece for pointing out questions Hillary won't answer. We were frustrated, for instance, with Hillary's refusal to say whether she favored a Libby pardon. But artful dodger? Slick Hillary? Can't we be a little more subtle about our panting desperation for a nineties." rerun?

Meanwhile, Media Matters hits Politico for not reporting about Rudy Giuliani's quitting the ISG panel, but frequently writing about John Edwards' haircut. McJoan: "Now maybe it's just us crazy lefty bloggers who want to know about the actual, you know, substance behind various candidates' positions, posturings, and claims to fame. After all, Rudy is trying to inherit the national security mantle of the GOP by touting his thus far entirely made-up and over-blown credentials. This is the man who wants to inherit the Iraq debacle, but couldn't be bothered to actually work on the issue. And this story is trumped by a haircut? Really? No wonder Politico is Drudge's new BFF."

SENATE '08: Double Take!

Blue Hampshire almost had us when we saw the headline: "Lieberman to Hold Fundraiser for Sununu in Manchester Tonight." Turns out, they are just urging support for Tom Allen's (D-ME) virtual fundraiser, meant to counter Sen. Joe Lieberman's (I-CT) event for Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME). "It's only a matter of time before John E. reaches out for some Joementum cover. But you can help put a stop to that by heading him off at the pass now."

Meanwhile, Daily Kos polls readers to ask which GOPer up in '08 they'd most like to see ousted. The leader: Senate Min. Leader Mitch McConnell (KY), followed closely by Sens. John Cornyn (TX) and Norm Coleman (MN).

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: No Need To Move Your Primary Up

Jonah Goldberg weighs in on some of the news from SC, which is "shaping up to be party central. You've got coke dealing Republican treasurers and daredevil rooftop fornicators falling from the sky. No wonder everyone wants to cover the South Carolina primary."

LEST WE FORGET: At Least It's Not "What Do You Dislike Most About America?"

10 Zen Monkeys scours YouTube for some of the submissions for the CNN debate. "YouTube has barely managed to assemble more than 50 questions to choose from." They offer the five worst of the bunch. One, from a user named "DickGhostmoon" "wants to ask the candidates 'a very, very serious question ... about aliens.'"

Posted by Conn Carroll at June 21, 2007 02:41 PM