July 18, 2007

7/18: Obama vs. Dean

Trolling through the comments at MyDD in response to Jerome Armstrong's doubting of Barack Obama's "the largest grassroots campaign in history" claims, we think Obama defenders are missing the point of Armstrong's criticism. Armstong's main beef seems to be that the Obama campaign tabulates a grassroots supporter in their favor every time someone buys a $5 ticket to an event or a bumper sticker, while Howard Dean's '04 campaign only counted a supporter after they signed up for emails updates, or attended a MeetUp. Obama defenders counter by arguing that only someone who supports Obama would buy his merchandise. It may be true that 99% of people buying Obama gear truly support the guy, but the better question is whether that purchase really signals any future involvement with the campaign. Turning Obamabuzz into actual votes is the only test that can prove if Obama does have "the largest grassroots campaign in history."

DODD: So Is Levin-Reed Un-firm Or Unenforceable?

Blogging that "every additional day we stay-the-course in Iraq more American lives are lost, our standing in the world is further eroded, and our country becomes more vulnerable" Chris Dodd makes the case to Huffington Post readers for his own amendment to the DoD authorization bill that would end "the financing of combat operations, mandate a phased redeployment of combat forces from Iraq, and ensure that the administration actually carries out that redeployment."

Dodd still supports the leadership's chosen change-the-coure amendment, Levin-Reed, but he remains "concerned about aspects of the amendment -- the extended delay in commencing redeployment and absence of any funding linkage to redeployment. ... Based on past experience with this administration -- my fear is that the President would simply ignore the legislation proposed by the distinguished Chairman of the Armed Services Committee and the Senior Senator from Rhode Island." Dodd calls his amendment "a firm and enforceable deadline for the redeployment of our combat troops from Iraq."

EDWARDS: It's The Caring Stupid

Seeking to help those that "cannot follow along in reality" MyDD diarist jsamuel is collecting links and pictures for MyDD readers on John Edwards "The Road To One America Tour." From Edwards' official website Edwards fans can follow along with this interactive road map, get up to the minute updates including blog, summary, and pictures, and even get phone text messages which can be signed up for by texting TOUR to 30644."

jsamuel also explains the purpose of the tour: "He is using this tour as an appeal to the media to bring attention to what he calls his 'purpose in life.' ... John Edwards does what a president would need to do to win support for his ideas and plans. He is arguing with us. He is telling the American public and the media that we need to change."

At TAPPED, however, Garance Franke-Ruta has a lengthy piece titled "What Edwards Doesn't Get About Poverty" with a subhead: "John Edwards's failure to appeal to low-income voters proves the poor want more than just new programs." Franke-Ruta explains: "Edwards' problem is that poverty in today's America, as in New Orleans, has not merely been the result of too low a minimum wage or other defects of bureaucratic liberalism. It is also a consequence of a lack of social and political power among certain groups of people ... Government programs can help reduce the negative consequences of the lack of power, and have a tremendous positive impact on how poor people are able to live. ... But offered a choice between the promise of new programs and political candidates who might enhance their social standing and political power, many poor people are choosing the promise of social change."

Also at TAPPED, Paul Waldman doubts Garance's premise that Edwards poverty focus is even targeted at poor voters. Waldman quotes James Carville: "as a candidate, you must choose to emphasize issues not because they poll well or are objectively our biggest problems, but because they best show the kind of person you are." Waldman comments: "Poverty functions in the same way for Edwards (or at least it should). The political effect is that it tells people something about who Edwards is: that he cares about people who are suffering, that he hasn't forgotten the modest circumstances from which he came, and that he has the courage to tackle big, seemingly intractable problems."

Also attempting to explain Edwards lack of traction, TAPPED's Ezra Klein blames a lack of media attention. The Plank's Jason Zengerle counters with a listofEdwardsmagazinecovers and quips: "I'd imagine Dodd and Biden and Richardson would love to be similarly ignored."

Finally, AMERICAblog's John Aravosis flags a YouTube from a Hickory, NC pastor "upset with Sen. Edwards over gay rights and religious bigotry."

EDWARDS II: Every Issue Leads Back To Poverty

TAPPED's Dana Goldstein reports on Elizabeth Edwards' case for her husband before Planned Parenthood 7/17: "Elizabeth tied John's women's health platform into his support for universal health care and the alleviation of poverty, assuring Planned Parenthood that it would be recognized as a service provider under her husband's plan, that all prescription drug coverage would include regular and emergency contraception, that pharmacists would not be allowed to refuse such drugs to women or girls, and even that abortion would be eligible for federal funding under an Edwards administration."

Goldstein shares: "My only complaint is that Elizabeth seemed to add a caveat onto John's support for abortion rights. "John opposes any ban that does not include an adequate protection for a woman's health," she said. But what about bans that protect women's health, or claim to? Is it okay to erect barriers to abortion in cases when a woman's health may not be clearly at risk, but abortion remains her choice? How about late in a pregnancy?"

OBAMA: Doing It For The Little People

Netroots veterans from Howard Dean's '04 run are still irked by Barack Obama claims that his is "the largest grass-roots campaign in history." MyDD's Jerome Armstrong tracks New York Times and Washington Post write ups on Obama's strategy of "selling $5 tickets to over a dozen mega-events and selling merchandise at events and on his website" to add "tens of thousands of small donors to his total" and responds: "The strategy by Obama's campaign, of broadening the small donors through something more tangible than emails -- tickets and merchandise for campaign events, has played out excellently. They have been able to partly dictate the numerical terms on which the process stories which dominate the year prior to the elections, are played on."

Armstrong concludes: "One of the things that's interesting here is how you are counted as part of the campaign. With Dean in 2003, anyone was counted if they merely signed up their email (640,000 total) or attended a Meetup (160,000 total) during the campaign. For Obama, you have to give money to be counted. ... Yes, if the number of donors is the only metric for self-proclaiming yourself as 'the largest grass-roots campaign in history', Obama has his place in history."

Open Left's Chris Bowers also looks at Obama's small donor base, placing Obama's small donor dollar total sixth all time behind Bush '04, Kerry '04, Bradley '02, Dean '04, and Bush '00. Bowers writes: "As large as Obama's current small donor base is, there is no guarantee he will surpass Dean's totals. Right now, he is about half way there. He will probably pass Dean, but with the earlier primary calendar, he also might not have enough time to do so."

More impressed with the number of Obama's small-dollar contributors, The Huffington Post's David Sirota hopes their presence will "counter the influence that" "Wall Street titans" and Obama campaign contributors Lehman Brothers ($160,760), Citadel Investment Group ($152,150), Goldman Sachs ($103,550), JP Morgan Chase ($101,950) and Citigroup ($61,125) will all have on his thinking on economic positions.

OBAMA II: Obama Is Pro-Family ... Details To Follow

TAPPED's Dana Goldstein reports Obama attempted "to shift the choice debate" while speaking to Planned Parenthood 7/17. Goldstein blogs: "He called for "updating the social contract" with gender pay equity, paid maternal leave, and longer school hours that make it easier for mothers to work. ... As a consequence, Obama -- surprise, surprise -- was somewhat less specific on how he'd ensure access to reproductive health care than Elizabeth Edwards was. ... Obama was clearly more interested in talking about how reproductive rights could fit into a family values agenda."

Also at TAPPED, Ezra Klein hears Obama policy dir. Karen Kornbluh's influence in his 'updating the social contract' language. Klein adds: "So if you want a glimpse of where these ideas are headed, you may want to check out her Democracy manifesto on creating a social insurance system keyed to the needs of modern families, or her Washington Monthlyarticle on the need for workplaces to become more family friendly."

WEBB: The Future Of The Party. (No, Seriously. I'm In The Tank).

The Huffington Post's David Sirota likes what he hears about Sen. James Webb (D-VA) in the Washington Times: "He criticized what he called 'the Rubin wing of the Democratic Party,' after Robert Rubin, former President Bill Clinton's Treasury secretary, saying those Democrats share the same problem as many Republicans." Sirota comments: "This critique from Webb echoes his earlier statements, and regular readers know that I couldn't agree more. Whether it's wages, jobs, outsourcing, globalization, health care or pension protection, the future of the Democratic Party lies in leaders who are willing to take on the fundamental issues of corporate power and wealth concentration in a sustained way - David Broders and Joe Kleins be damned."

GOP FIELD: Mitt Won, We Can All Go Home Now

With the help of some nifty mapping software Andrew Meagher tracks state-by-state traffic patterns to GOP '08 official websites for the past six months, and then totals the number of delegates each candidate would currently receive if they won the states which trafficked them the highest. If clicks were votes, Mitt Romney would be the GOP nominee with 916 total delegates. Fred Thompson came in second with 713, Rudy Giuliani third with 567, and John McCain in fourth with 262.

GIULIANI: Come On In, The Ocean's Fine

The Brody File reports that "supporters" of Rudy Giuliani are pushing back against Mitt Romney's 'Ocean' ad (where Romney promises to "clean up" pornography and violence) with YouTube clips of Giuliani talking about "his record of actually cleaning up pornography from the streets of New York." NRO's Jim Geraghty is getting similar email also reminding social conservatives of Giuliani's fight to ban public funding of a painting of the Virgin Mary using elephant dung. Geraghty blogs: "Will Rudy's accomplishments in these areas counter-balance his stands that irk social conservatives? Well, it raises a question that I've been wondering about since Rudy expressed his interest in running for president: How many social conservatives across the country have visited New York since he became mayor? And how many never would have done so during the bad old days of the Dinkins and Koch years?"

Townhall's Hugh Hewitt links to Geraghty's speculation and responds: "When I praised Romney's "Ocean" ad yesterday, I noted that part of its impact was Romney's willingness to make the social conservative agenda part of his message. Rudy's got a great record on some of these issues as well, but he needs to put them at the center of his campaign to persuade especially the values voter that the toughness with which he pursued the agenda in New York will also mark a White House tenure."

GIULIANI II: Since When Are Lawyer Endorsements So Popular?

Giuliani sought to broaden the scope of the unveiling of his Justice Advisory Cmte pressing not only his strict constructionist preference in judges, but also his eagerness to change the legal system. On the second issue, the inclusion of OverLawyered's Walter Olson particularly impressed conservatives in attendance. Power Line's Paul Mirengoff writes: "In short, Olson is convinced that (1) Giuliani understands that our legal system is given to excess and (2) he doesn't like it. That's not a bad testimonial."

At OverLawyered Olson also makes the case fro Rudy: "I try not to clutter the site overmuch with my personal candidate preferences, but I find the former NYC mayor to be the clear standout candidate in this year's White House pack, despite my disagreements with a number of his stances in the past. Early interactions between the legal advisory committee and the candidate have further strengthened my confidence in the kind of leadership he'd provide in office."

Giuliani faced tougher questions on the strict constructionism question. AmSpec Blog'a James Antle explains: "While it would be nice if the electorate was dominated by principled originalists, we're kidding ourselves if we don't acknowledge that many voters hear "conservative judges" as code words for their policy preferences on abortion, affirmative action, religion in the public square, and crime." Also at AmSpecPhilip Klein recounts that Rudy's surrogates declined to promise Giuliani would make overturning Roe a litmus test for appointments and comments: "Nothing that Giuliani says now could make up for the fact he is pro-choice. However, lining up an impressive list of conservative judicial advisors can help him make conservatives who may otherwise be inclined to support him, comfortable enough that he would appoint good judges, to look beyond his views on abortion. When it was just Olson out there defending him, people could chalk it up to the fact that they are old friends. But rolling out this team shows that the Olson endorsement was not an outlier."

GIULIANI III: A McCain Mirror Or The Fred Factor?

Pollster.com's Charles Franklin looks at recent polling trends and makes the case Giuliani will soon be joining John McCain as an also ran: "Since early March, Giuliani's support has fallen by an estimated 8 percentage points. McCain's fell by 10 points since January. And the rate of decline has been a bit steeper for Giuliani than for McCain. The saving grace for Giuliani has been that he started his decline from a higher point, around 33%, while McCain's slump started down from 25%."

Outside the Beltway's James Joyner replies: "The obvious rejoinder is that the emergence of a new major candidate, Fred Thompson, naturally siphons off support from the others. ... Giuliani's first drop came in March upon Thompson's emergence, losing four points or so while Thompson came in around 10%. ... Whatever the explanation, the fact that Giuliani's numbers have been essentially static, varying only within the margin of error, in the combined averages since early May, would seem to indicate that he's not in free fall."

ROMNEY: This Ad Can't Swim

The inboxes of conservative bloggers seem to indicate that Mitt Romney's 'Ocean' ad is not a home run. RCP Blog's John McIntyre reports: "Yesterday I asked people to send me their thoughts on the Romney campaign's new ad. Here is a representative sample of some of the emails. On balance, sentiment in the emails toward "Ocean" runs around 3-to-1 negative." The Brody File includes these responses:

• "This new Mitt Romney spot that is about to assault the air waves brings back fond memories of really bad PBS PSAs complete with beach, disasterly pathetic voice overs and can we forget the canned Muzak that fills the air of the soundtracks background."
• "Now, the message is sweet and I see where he wishes to take the piece however the whole "our children" "beach/water" metaphor bushed the envelope of really bad Hallmark writing."
• "Amen to this commercial - This seals his commitment to having a strong family value platform. Cleaning this ocean is the most important environmental pollutant to clean.very effective!"

IRAQ: If You Want People To Say The GOP Is Filibustering, Then Make The GOP Filibuster

At deadline it may still be too early to judge the success of Sen. Maj. Leader's Harry Reid's (D-NV) Iraq funding debate slumber party, but judging from the expectations of the netroots going into the night, the event was less than successful. Wishes as to how the night would turn out include:

• Open Left's Matt Stoller: "The strategy for this maneuver is pretty clear; drive press coverage and force the Republicans to have to pay some sort of price for their obstructionism on Iraq. It was becoming conventional wisdom that every vote took 60 Senators to pass in the Senate instead of a filibustering being an extraordinary event. This was meant to address that problem, and we'll see how the coverage is tomorrow."
• The Huffington Post's Miles Mogulescu: "It's unclear from Sen. Reid's statements if he just plans to keep the Senate in session for one night on Tuesday, and then cave in and move on if he can't, in one night, achieve a cloture vote on the Republican filibuster. If he's serious, and can't achieve a cloture vote in one night, he should keep the Senate in session for as long as it takes to get an up or down vote on the Levin/Reed bill to redeploy the troops. Otherwise, Republican talking points that this is just a political theater stunt will ring too true."
• Daily Kos' BarbinMD: "Read the names of all the U.S. military men and women who have died in George Bush and the Republican Party's war. Have Democrat after Democrat continue to read the names. They have all night. Maybe they'll even manage to get through all 3,618 names."
• TPM Cafe's Greg Sargent: "Under Senate rules, Reid would be able to ask the Sergeant-at-arms to go get the missing GOP Senators and bring them back to the Senate. ... Reid hasn't said whether he'll do this. But if he did, imagine the storyline...the Sergeant-at-Arms going out to chase down awol Republican Senators refusing to show up for a debate on the Iraq War. Seems like a narrative that Reid, who likes a bit of drama, might not mind all that much.

Early indications from MSM reports and headlines show Dems did not drive coverage as they hoped. TPM's Josh Marshall details unsatisfactory results from McClatchy, AP, Washington Post, and Reuters.

ABC's Diane Sawyer was singled out for the greatest netroots abuse for telling GMA 7/17 that Reid "vows to filibuster, talking all night to close out all topics besides a vote on Iraqi troop withdrawals." Media Matters explains: "by planning to extend the Senate session throughout the night, Reid is not "vow[ing] to filibuster," as Sawyer reported. Rather, he is highlighting the Republicans' blocking of an up-or-down vote on the proposal; in other words, it is the Republicans who are filibustering the withdrawal proposal by requiring that 60 senators vote for the amendment in order for it to pass."

Crooks and LiarsJohn Amato links and comments: "It looks like there are some reporters who stand to learn a few things.

IRAQ II: Worst Slumber Party, Ever

Few conservatives stayed up to enjoy the Iraq debate, but after the APreported that Reid "loosened up a bit on his plans to teach members of the minority that Democrats set the schedule on the debate over Iraq" sometime around midnight, Captain's Quarters was happy he did. CW blogs: "So what did this accomplish? Nothing. After midnight, most of the Senate disappeared. It turned into nothing more than a huge bluff, and Reid lost."

CQ explains: "Reid counted on Republicans forcing an end to the session by having a single member present to challenge for a quorum. No votes could take place without one, including the instruction motion to the Sergeant-at-Arms to arrest recalcitrant members and drag them back to the chamber. That would have allowed Reid and the Democrats to accuse Republicans of dodging the debate, calling them cowards to take the spotlight off of their insistence on retreat. ... but it turns out that Mitch McConnell is a little smarter than Harry Reid. Instead of denying Reid a quorum, the Republicans showed up for the debate, perhaps charged up by John McCain's earlier speech on the floor. Once Reid figured out that the Republicans would not give him the satisfaction of walking out the door, he caved."

McCain's floor speech was also immensely popular among conservatives. RedState's Mike Krempasky blogs: "Where can I donate to McCain's campaign? Keep him where he is, for as long as he wants the seat."

LEST WE FORGET: What Would Harry Do?

Inspired by the Harry Potter Alliance's mission to make sure "sure our Harry Potter-crazed world recognizes the powerful social justice messages in the adventures of J.K. Rowling's young wizards," Open Left's Justin Krebs identifies some progressive themes in Rowling's latest:

• On the evil of torture: Dumbledore begs the Ministry of Magic to rid themselves of the Dementors, saying that a free society has no place for their kind in our penal system.
• On the right to trial: Harry's godfather Sirius Black was held and tortured for 13 years without a trial, and in the most recent volume Stan Shunpike and Mundungus Fletcher were imprisoned without trial despite the Minister's knowledge they may be innocent.
• On the value of diplomacy: communicating with the foreign and frightening Giants proves better option than isolation or violent conflict.
• On racial equality: full rights for "purebloods," "mudbloods" and Muggle-born wizards.
• On worker's rights: Hermione's campaign to empower the House Elves.

Posted by Conn Carroll at July 18, 2007 12:39 PM