November 07, 2007

11/7: Change Agent Wanted

Parsing down ballot results from 11/6, First Read notes and asks: "[I]t seems the electorate may be showing signs of simple distrust in government. Voters don't think government can accomplish the things it claims it can do with extra money, whether that money is a loan (as in New Jersey), new taxes (in Oregon), or simply shifting tax dollars (in Utah). Is it voter anger or distrust? And how will voters define change? Anecdotally, one can sense the yearning for some outsider white knight when it comes to the presidential but do any of the current candidates fit this mode?"

In a not unrelated story, Glenn Greenwald attempts to explain the Ron Paul phenomenon: "While Barack Obama toys with the rhetoric of challenging conventional wisdom, Paul's campaign -- for better or worse -- actually does so, and does so in an extremely serious, thoughtful and coherent way. And there are a lot of people who, more than any specific policy positions, are hungry for a political movement which operates outside of our rotted political establishment and which fearlessly rejects its pieties, even if they disagree with some or even many of its particulars."

We couldn't agree more. There was a huge opening for Obama to connect with voters distrustful of establishment government, but for whatever reasons he has failed. Change is clearly the name of the game in '08 and so far no one is capturing it.

GOP FIELD: What About Men Voters Searching For The Right Woman?

Kate O'Beirne hosted a National Review sponsored "Women Voters and the Right Guy" forum 11/6 at the National Press Club.The panel included Barbara Comstock of the Romney campaign, Karen Hanretty of the Thompson campaign, Jill Hazelbaker of the McCain campaign, and Katie Levinson of the Guiliani campaign. AmSpec Blog's Jennifer Rubin reports: "[I]n a nutshell we saw a microcosm of the race: Romney is running on the three legged stool while his opponents make the argument he is not a credible messenger. Rudy runs on leadership while his opponents focus on his positions on social issues. Thompson runs on an aura of comfort and McCain on foreign policy expertise. Now, if the candidates were only as polished, likeable and effective as these advisors the GOP would have 2008 in the bag."

GIULIANI: First They Came For The Street Vendors...

Davis Adesnik pokes fun at TNR's John Judis' case that Rudy Giuliani exhibits "a reluctance to cede power and a contempt for the democratic process." Adesnik blogs: "It reminds me of that famous poem by Martin Niemoller about the Third Reich. First they came for the street vendors, and nobody protested. Then they came for the jaywalkers and nobody protested. Then they came for the Art Museum and nobody protested. Finally, they came for me and there was nobody left to protest."

At The Corner, Rich Lowry critiques Giuliani's 'two stool' (free-market economics and a strong national defense) electoral strategy: "He ... proposes fundamentally changing the successful Republican coalition of the last 30 years. Why is he doing this? Well, maybe he really believes it. Otherwise, it is self-destructive and unnecessary. Rudy's speech at the Values Voters summit a few weeks ago shrewdly emphasized all his common ground with social conservatives. He should be saying that there are three pillars to the GOP coalition-free market economics, national defense, and social conservatism-and he's going to keep them intact, even if he doesn't always agree with the social cons. But he's not."

MCCAIN: Don't Call It A Comeback

Campaign Standard's Matthew Continetti links to a recent John McCain anti-ethanol speech in IA and comments: "A friend notes that this speech may be laying the predicate for McCain's abandonment of his Iowa campaign. If McCain then devotes his full resources to New Hampshire, this friend further notes, it is possible he will repeat his 2000 victory and - depending of course (as assumed) on the Iowa result five days before - be in a position to capture the Republican nomination. It's a risky strategy. But the reward is great."

At The CornerDavid Freddoso notes Team McCain "is excited over two new national polls that show him moving ahead of Fred Thompson. His problem, of course, is money.

At Open Left, Chris Bowers links to recent polling showing that while "overall Democrats support withdrawal by a 95% - 4% margin" 12% still believe McCain "would do the best job handling the situation in Iraq." [among GOPers McCain (33%) finishes behinds Rudy Giuliani (36%) on the same question] Bowers laments: "This is very disheartening. If voter education in one of our smallest and most heavily targeted states on the biggest issue of our time is this difficult, or even rendered impossible because of the willingness of so many people to set aside their own judgment, then what is to be done?"

PAUL: Who Will Pass The Paul Test In NH?

Even after his impressive 11/5 fundraising haul, conservatives are still not embracing Ron Paul, but they are busy handicapping how he might affect the race:

• The Corner's David Freddoso: "So here's what a good run by Ron Paul looks like: He runs ads and spends a lot of time in New Hampshire. ... Meanwhile, Hillary becomes a prohibitive favorite on the Democratic side, and so the unaffiliated voters decide they will skip their boring primary and vote for Paul in the GOP primary. ... At that point, Paul's supporters run another big Internet fundraiser ... Other conservative candidates (Thompson, Tancredo, Huckabee) fizzle in New Hampshire, and Paul (along with Romney, probably) becomes one of the beneficiaries."
• AmSpec Blog's James Antle: "There are two ways Paul could affect the race ... First, any top-tier candidate who finishes behind Paul in New Hampshire or Iowa will face increased pressure to depart from the race, even if Paul didn't actually take votes from them. Second, a respectable showing by Paul will create a narrative that a critical mass of Republicans have turned against the war, even if much of his support doesn't come from traditional Republicans."
• The Corner's Mark Steyn: "The more it looks like Hillary's a shoo-in, the more "independents" will be minded to cast their vote in the more turbulent Republican field. It doesn't matter if half your support is from anti-war liberals if enough of them turn out to make mischief in the GOP primary."
• The Corner's Ramesh Ponnuru: "I keep reading posts about how Ron Paul will, in a general election, primarily appeal to the antiwar Left and thus help Republicans. But don't forget that Rep. Paul is a pro-lifer, and single-issue pro-life voters might not have anywhere else to go next fall."

Most taking a second look at Paul, still do not like what they see:

• Power Line's Paul Mirengoff: "it's an anti-war candidacy and little else. Notice how during debates, he routinely turns questions about domestic policy - normally meat and drink for a libertarian - back to Iraq The only other seriously distinguishing feature of the campaign is that it's nutty. ... Again, the only only distinguishing feature of Paul's small government platform is its nuttiness - the gold standard, the Federal Reserve conspiracy stuff, etc."
• Hot Air: "The gold standard stuff is not a schtick. ... he's a Bircheresque crank who happens to be running as a Republican, and who is allowing himself to be an empty vessel for whatever crankery isn't otherwise represented by any of the other candidates."
• Campaign Standard's Sonny Bunch: "At every 9/11 Truth event I've been to over the last six months, at least one speaker has called on their fellow conspiracy theorists to support a Ron Paul candidacy. ... Twice in the span of one week last September, I found myself in Lafayette Park - once to attend an 9/11 Truth rally, and once to attend an anti-war protest sponsored by ANSWER. Both times I found Truthers campaigning for Ron Paul."
• Ross Douthat: "[H]is remarkable fundraising success is good news for extremists everywhere. I don't mean to use extremist pejoratively; I just mean that the entire apparatus of national politics in this country, from how the parties are organized to how the media covers election, has evolved (or been intelligently-designed, perhaps) to exclude anyone who deviates too far from what's understood in Washington as the political mainstream.

THOMPSON: Two Thumbs Up

Fred Thompson's first television ads brought out the Siskel and Ebert in conservatives:

• Townhall's Mary Katharine Ham: "'Strength, Conviction, Honesty' is the tagline for the ad. Why different from his campaign's tagline, 'Security, Unity, Prosperity?' I guess "conviction" and 'honesty' are digs at Rudy and Romney, but what of 'strength?' There's something to be said for brand consistency, and this tagline is so similar to the campaign's tag, it's a little confusing.
• Campaign Standard's Matthew Continetti: "I like this new Fred Thompson ad and believe it may resonate among likely Iowa GOP caucus-goers. Why does Thompson always bounce his head up and down while he is addressing the camera? He had a similar tick back when he announced his candidacy in September. Maybe he's trying to lock up the Bobble Head vote."
• AmSpec Blog's Philip Klein: "I think both ads do an effective job of communicating his message, and could remind people why they liked him in the first place. He just needs to back it up with a more effective overall campaign."
• NRO's Jim Geraghty: "this seems like a very Iowa-centric ad. There are an awful lot of senior citizens in this ad - the coffee shop patrons, the folks sitting on their front lawn, the farmers. Is there some polling suggesting that Thompson does best among older voters?"

CLINTON: Kyl-Lieberman Lives

Push back against netroots fav./HRC endorsee/fmr. Amb. Joe Wilson's 11/4 Huffington Post essay defending Hillary Clinton on Iran has been slowly mounting. Posts from 11/4 through 11/7 include:

• The Huffington Post's Sam Sedaei: "I have a great deal of admiration for Mr. Wilson's courage ... But despite his reasoning, the fact is that by voting for [Kyl-Lieberman], Senator Clinton has managed to squander the possibility of ever having a chance of being taken seriously in diplomacy with the Iranian regime. (Usually when you call a country's army "terrorists," they're not going to want to make deals with you). ... As I have said before, any Iran policy that does not have the clear distinction between the pro-western and secular young population and the religiously fanatical regime at its core will fail miserably."
• The Huffington Post's Mona Gable: "I'm having trouble with Hillary....Her waffling on Iran and her macho posturing. You can't be leading the charge in the Senate to declare Iran's revolutionary guard a terrorist organization one minute, flinch when you get attacked for being so transparently calculating, then claim that, well, you were really just misunderstood."
• Talk Left's Big Tent Democrat: "But where Wilson is dead wrong is in the belief that there was any positive merit to [Kyl-Lieberman]. The simple fact is the Bush Administration can not be trusted on anything or at any time. These are not normal times where the Congress can work with the President on such issues. ... Clinton was very wrong to vote in its favor."
• The Washington Note: "The problem is that the Bush administration exploits opportunities that the Congress gives. ... I think Hillary Clinton is sincere in her view that designating the IRGC a terrorist entity helps diplomacy. I disagree."

EDWARDS: Attacking On Style And Substance

Reporting from IA, The Huffington Post's John Deeth says John Edwards is offering "as much criticism for Democratic rival Hillary Clinton as he [does] for the Bush Administration." Deeth catches up with Edwards strategist Joe Trippi who explains: "We're here to keep making the clear differences between us and Hillary Clinton. On Iraq, she wants to continue combat missions, we want to end it. In Iran she's bought into the terminology of the Bush administration of the 'global war on terror', and Bush is already using that. Her vote to call the Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization was a mistake. We wouldn't have done that, Biden didn't, Dodd didn't."

Back in DC, TAPPED's Ezra Klein is impressed by the Edwards on Clinton attacks he is seeing in his inbox: "The Edwards team's attacks on Hillary are getting very sophisticated. Now that they've decided on a weakness -- the double talk -- they're hammering all their policy differences within that framework. ... Those are, of course, precisely the questions Clinton has been brilliantly able to muddle and slip through. Now that her evasions are an issue, however, the other candidates can make her non-answers exactly as dangerous as her answers."

Back in IA, The Huffington Post's Sam Stein: "as part of an increasingly aggressive push to make up ground in the race, he has staked out a position on immigration that is to the right of his chief primary opponents. ... In recent trips to Iowa, Redlawsk noted, Edwards has highlighted aspects of his immigration policy that go over well with the Iowa crowd. He has been greeted with applause for declaring that illegal immigrants should learn English as a perquisite for citizenship. ... Edwards' opposition to granting driver licenses to illegal immigrants appears to fit this mold."

ELECTION DAY: Purple Haze

Progressives are celebrating their new control of the state senate in VA and conservatives are celebrating a sweep of top offices in MS.

Those looking for a definitive answer on how immigration affected the races will have to wait. DailyKos' founder Markos Moulitsas and Raising Kaine both claim Dem victories in northern VA show purported GOP strength on immigration is all bark and no bite. Other reports from Kossacks in NOVA and NY suggest otherwise.

On 11/6 TAPPED's Garance Franke-Ruta previewed two NOVA races that might turn on immigration: state senate district's 27 and 29. In both cases the more pro-immigration candidate won.

MD 04: Rage Against The Machine

Open Left's Matt Stoller links to news House Dems are "quietly preparing to give the president enough spending flexibility to keep the war going" and pitches readers on the importance of donating money to Donna Edwards: "While we've had success in electing Democrats, and success in knocking off incumbents, we have not yet knocked off a Democratic incumbent with a progressive challenger. When we do that, it will be immensely powerful, because we will have inserted into the incumbent club of Congress someone who beat their system. We will show local officials all over the country that it's possible to run against the machine, and win. And we will make it clear that progressives who govern will be rewarded, while Democrats who ignore the public will face costs."

By midnight, Atrios announced they were only $1.5K short of their $100K goal.

THOUGHT OF THE DAY: Civilization Not Always So Civilized

Tyler Cowen previews Randall Collins' new book, Violence: A Micro-sociological Theory:

The main argument is that people are not as predisposed to violence as we might think. ... People are more naturally tense and fearful, sometimes full of bluster but usually looking to avoid confrontation unless they have vastly superior numbers on their side. ... The greatest dangers of violence arises from atrocities against the weak under overwhelming conditions, ritualized violence enacted in front of supportive audiences, or clandestine terrorism or murder. ... most political violence does not follow from centuries-old grudge matches, but rather from recently fabricated, dynamically dangerous social ritual interactions. Violence can appear on the scene rapidly but it can vanish as well, so there is hope for Iraq.

LEST WE FORGET: Venison Is Not Legal Tender

Jezebel watches Judge Judy so we don't have to:

Every once in a while, the magic of a Judge Judy case will come not from JJ herself, but from kooky litigants in her court. In the clip above, a woman, from what I'm guessing is the backwoods of Louisiana, is suing her sister and former neighbor for the cost of repair to her car. The defendant - an amazing rubber-necker - borrowed the car, hit a deer, thus killing it, then took it home, and ate it. She tried to make amends for the damaged car by offering some of the meat to the plaintiff and was very offended when the plaintiff declined. The sisters have since been in a huge fight that the defendant likened to the Hatfield-McCoy feud. Seriously, why isn't there a banjo playing in the background the whole time?

Posted by Conn Carroll at November 7, 2007 12:35 PM