McCain’s “Favors” for One Special Lobbyist: The Bob Bennett Angle

/78 Comments/in , , /by

If I’m not mistaken, NYT’s blockbuster detailing McCain’s inappropriate relationship with a telecom lobbyist is the matter in which Bob Bennett was representing the good Senator (no, I’m not–Bennett’s out working this story hard tonight). If you haven’t already read about this on every other lefty blog, here’s the jist:

Early in Senator John McCain’s first run for the White House eight years ago, waves of anxiety swept through his small circle of advisers.

A female lobbyist had been turning up with him at fund-raisers, visiting his offices and accompanying him on a client’s corporate jet. Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself — instructing staff members to block the woman’s access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him, several people involved in the campaign said on the condition of anonymity.

When news organizations reported that Mr. McCain had written letters to government regulators on behalf of the lobbyist’s client, the former campaign associates said, some aides feared for a time that attention would fall on her involvement.

Now, there are many angles to this story. The "McCain in charge of Senate oversight of telecoms" angle. The "McCain dalliance with a torture lobbist" angle. The "why does this woman look just like McCain’s wife?" angle. But for now, I’m just interested in the Bob Bennett angle.

Bennett’s been out pitching his new book; as part of that, I heard him on Diane Rehm. Bennett said he was representing McCain in a matter in which he allegedly gave a lobbyist special "favors."

Hmmm.

But that’s not the part I’m a bit stunned by. Actually, there are three parts I’m stunned by, just off the top of my head:

  • This story broke in the NYT. The last time we saw Bennett (before he was giving Jose Rodriguez’ story when Rodriguez refused to do so himself, I mean), he was standing in a hallway in the Prettyman Courthouse accepting Max Frankel’s thanks … "you did a good job for us today." Meaning "us," the NYT. In some twisted way, Bennett only recently rescued the NYT from its embarrassment named Judy Miller. But here his next big client save one is, having his Presidential aspirations seriously rocked by the same NYT. If I’m Bob Bennett right now, I’m bitching about those ingrates at the Times. Read more →

Democracy in Action

/38 Comments/in /by

Have you been getting that feeling that this year is going to be different?

Early voting starts today in Texas. In Waller County, a primarily rural county about 60 miles outside Houston, the county made the decision to offer only one early voting location: at the County Courthouse in Hempstead, TX, the county seat.

Prairie View A&M students organized to protest the decision, because they felt it hindered their ability to vote. For background, Prairie View A&M is one of Texas’ historically Black universities. It has a very different demographic feel than the rest of the county. There has been a long history of dispute over what the students feel is disenfranchisement. There was a lot of outrage in 2006, when students felt they were unfairly denied the right to vote when their registrations somehow did not get processed.

According to an article in today’s Houston Chronicle:

Waller County has faced numerous lawsuits involving voting rights in the past 30 years and remains under investigation by the Texas Attorney General’s Office based on complaints by local black leaders. Those allegations, concerning the November 2006 general election, related to voting machine failures, inadequate staffing and long delays for voting results.

The article adds,

"I was angry after registering to vote in the 2006 election only to be turned away at the voting booth," said sophomore Dee Dee Williams.

So what are the students doing?

1000 students, along with an additional 1000 friends and supporters, are this morning walking the 7.3 miles between Prairie View and Hempstead in order to vote today. According to the piece I saw on the news (there’s no video up, so I can’t link to it), the students plan to all vote today. There are only 2 machines available at the courthouse for early voting, so they hope to tie them up all day and into the night.

Watching this video sure makes me believe this year is going to be different.

Still Trying to Read Poppy Bush’s Lips

/19 Comments/in , /by

Am I the only one that finds it especially ironic that Poppy Bush endorsed McCain one day after McCain came out with a "no new taxes" pledge? If the timing was unintentional, I’d consider it a rather inauspicious coincidence if I were McCain.

GOP Poisoning Swing State Voters to Win Elections

/10 Comments/in , /by

great-lakes-concern-areas.jpg
I’m not surprised the Administration is withholding the report showing polluted sites around the Great Lakes may be contributing to elevated cancer rates.

The lead author and peer reviewers of a government report raising the possibility of public health threats from industrial contamination throughout the Great Lakes region are charging that the report is being suppressed because of the questions it raises. The author also alleges that he was demoted because of the report.

I’m just wondering whether they’re doing so for explicitly political reasons.

You’ll recall the description of why Dick Cheney intervened into the Klamath River dispute.

In Oregon, a battleground state that the Bush-Cheney ticket had lost by less than half of 1 percent, drought-stricken farmers and ranchers were about to be cut off from the irrigation water that kept their cropland and pastures green. Federal biologists said the Endangered Species Act left the government no choice: The survival of two imperiled species of fish was at stake.

Law and science seemed to be on the side of the fish. Then the vice president stepped in.

First Cheney looked for a way around the law, aides said. Next he set in motion a process to challenge the science protecting the fish, according to a former Oregon congressman who lobbied for the farmers.

Because of Cheney’s intervention, the government reversed itself and let the water flow in time to save the 2002 growing season, declaring that there was no threat to the fish. What followed was the largest fish kill the West had ever seen, with tens of thousands of salmon rotting on the banks of the Klamath River.

Characteristically, Cheney left no tracks. [my emphasis]

After deciding for farmers over fish, the Administration did a bunch of photo ops to claim credit with voters in the area.

It was Norton who announced the review, and it was Bush and his political adviser Karl Rove who traveled to Oregon in February 2002 to assure farmers that they had the administration’s support.

[snip]

Norton flew to Klamath Falls in March to open the head gate as farmers chanted "Let the water flow!"

Now, as the map included in the report makes clear, this report is talking about toxic hazards in the potential swing states of MN, WI, MI, and OH. Read more →

Obama Heads to (?!?!?) Michigan

/33 Comments/in /by

Update: Per martha, either Jane and I misheard or MSNBC doesn’t realize that there are GM plants all through the Midwest–Obama is going to Janesville, Wisconsin. And Wisconsin does, in fact, have a presidential primary well before 2012, so it takes no guesswork to figure out why Obama would go to a GM plant in Wisconsin. Thanks martha! And sorry for misleadig you all.

I heard NBC report (and Jane confirms that she heard it too) that Obama will head to Michigan tomorrow to give a speech at GM about the economy. Last I checked, there wasn’t a presidential primary or caucus scheduled in MI anytime before 2012. So what’s going on?

First, understand that I haven’t heard anything about a electoral mulligan from within MI–I’ve seen national reports of such a mulligan, but nothing from inside the MDP (though, of course, I’m in DC, not MI right now). Last week, MDP Chair Mark Brewer met with Obama supporters to explain how the uncommitted delegates will be assigned–so at least as far as has been said publicly, MI will proceed to assign delegates based on the grand clusterfuck.

So why is Obama headed to MI, rather than OH, to talk about the economy?

I’ve got several speculations–I’ll try to find a real answer in the next few days.

Possibility 1, the most likely: this is a bid for Edwards support

Note the timing. Obama was due to go request Edwards’ support yesterday, but then rescheduled. That means this speech at GM will happen before Obama heads to North Carolina to ask for Edwards’ support. Knowing that Edwards’ priority is fighting for the economically disenfranchised, making a big speech on the economy–in the state with the worst economy in the country–is a pretty good way of auditioning.

Possibility 2, just as likely: this is a bid for Edwards’ supporters’ support

As I said, the MDP is working with the assumption that we’re going to assign delegates based on the clusterfuck. That would mean Hillary would get 55% of the delegates, and "uncommitted" would get 40%. Or rather, Hillary would get 55% and Edwards’ and Obama’s supporters would fight over those 40%.

Now I suspect some of those delegates can be tied to specific supporters–"uncommitted" won my county, which has 40,000 students in it, many of them likely Obama supporters. And Conyers was advertising for "uncommitted" in Detroit, in support of Obama. So Obama can probably rightly claim a big chunk of the uncommitted delegates in places where he’s got very strong support. But if Obama has to fight for those 40% of MI’s delegates, he’s got to persuade Edwards’ supporters.

And if you think about it–those MI delegates are one of the very tangible things that Edwards would have to give Obama, if he gave him his support.

Read more →

Definition of a Caucus

/46 Comments/in /by

There’s been some discussion of a do-over, an electoral mulligan, for the great clusterfuck of Michigan. And–in the ongoing debate whether Obama’s victories in caucus states are "real"–discussions about caucuses. As those two subjects potentially converge, I wanted to saw a few words about caucuses, in general, and caucuses in Michigan.

I agree with Lambert’s general dissatisfaction with caucuses:

However, the caucus system clearly disenfranchised several classes of people:

1. People who couldn’t get away from work, and since Maine is a state that’s both big, poor, and challenged by the weather in the winter, that’s a larger percentage than you might think;

2. People who have child care issues;

3. People with disabilities;

4. People without cars;

5. People who are elderly and/or sick.

When this season is over, the caucus system should be abolished everywhere, in favor of a system where all votes count equally.

And for all these reasons, I don’t think a caucus state should have first in the country privileges, under any circumstances (though I am sympathetic to the notion that parties ought to organize their primaries or caucuses in such a way as to foster ongoing participation, which is one benefit to traditional caucuses). When canvassing in Iowa in 2004, for example, I ran into a bunch of restaurant workers who would have to forgo an entire night’s wages to caucus. Imposing that kind of poll tax is a terrible message for the Democratic party to send.

That said, not all caucuses are created equal. Michigan’s caucus–at least as it was run in 2004–is a lot closer to NM’s caucus: it’s just an election that the party, as opposed to the state, runs. It’s open for about 8 hours, and once you cast your vote, you’re done, pack the kids back in the car and drive them to their volleyball game. At least as we ran it in 2004, there were fewer caucus locations, so longer lines and longer drives/cab rides/free rides to polls, which is a problem. And the rules for challengers allow for each candidate to have one–but only one–loudmouth standing at the entrance pitching her candidate (this was my role in 2004, one I relished).

In two ways, though, Michigan’s caucus has greater accessibility than your garden variety state-run primary. Read more →

Is Dem Turnout So High Because They Like Us … Or Because We’re Spending Money?

/119 Comments/in /by

This is a question I’ve been pondering for about a week. We know that, in just about every state–including many bright red ones–Democratic turnout for the primaries has dwarfed Republican turnout. Nevertheless, national head-to-head polls still show a fairly even race, particularly when polling McCain against either Hillary or Obama. So what does the big turnout tell us? Some possibilities are:

  • The national polls are wrong, and either Democratic candidate would have, in reality, a much larger lead on McCain or any other Republican
  • Democrats and anti-Bush independents and Republicans are just so determined to get someone better, they’re turning out in larger numbers
  • Democrats are spending more money on every kind of campaign expenditure–ads, ground game, calls, candidate appearances–than Republicans, which has resulted in higher turnout
  • Democrats are finally building grassroots support in every state, which is resulting in greater turnout

These aren’t mutually exclusive. It could be the money invested in offices and local campaign staff is resulting in the grassroots networks that will build turnout, and that while this doesn’t show in national polls, yet, it will lead to greater support. And undoubtedly, the anti-Bush energy is real, but so is the pro-great candidates (both of them) energy.

Check out the analysis below. But I’m going to make a really rough guesstimate that about 5% of our increased turnout stems from enthusiasm for Democrats, whereas we’re getting about 5-10% greater turnout because we’re spending money in states. I consider this post an outtamyarse speculation at this point, but I’d love your opinion.

Candidate Spending

Here’s the candidate fundraising and spending through the end of last year.

Candidate Total Raised Total Spent COH Debt
 
Clinton $118,301,658 $80,353,784 $37,947,874 $4,987,425
Obama $103,802,535 $85,176,287 $18,626,248 $792,681
Edwards $44,259,384 $36,468,927 $7,792,217 $9,400,863
Dem Total $266,363,577 $201,998,998 $64,366,339 $15,180,969
 
Giuliani $60,238,856 $48,476,576 $12,776,812 $1,166,509
Huckabee $9,003,808 $7,107,362 $1,896,445 $97,676
McCain $40,383,022 $37,907,049 $2,948,427 $4,516,030
Paul $28,219,349 $20,379,929 $7,839,420 $0
Romney $90,076,401 $87,644,953 $2,431,447 $35,350,000
Thompson $21,812,644 $19,672,377 $2,140,266 $404,221
  $249,734,080 $221,188,246 $30,032,817 $41,534,436

Read more →

Doesn’t Hillary Have Anything Better to Do?

/42 Comments/in /by

In a matter of 22 hours, Hillary has made two announcements that are only tangentially related to the fact that almost half of all delegates will be awarded today. Yesterday, she once again generously offered to unilaterally decide to reinterpret my state of MI’s Clusterfuck vote, all in the name of democracy. And today, smack dab in the middle of the biggest election day this side of November 4, Hillary has challenged Obama to join her in treating Fox as a legitimate news outlet, rather than the propaganda arm of the Republican party.

Now, I’ll leave it to Jane and Markos (and Stoller) to talk about how stupid it is for Hillary to pander to Fox News. And you already know how I feel about Hillary’s attempts to dictate the meaning of our Clusterfuck.

Still. It amazes that anyone is reporting either of these Hillary ploys without first prefacing that reporting by noting how odd it is that she is spending Super Tuesday on anything except winning Super Tuesday. Isn’t this a rather telling attempt to distract from the most momentous day, thus far, of this primary?

And if she’s got so much free time on her hands, don’t you think it would be better spent in DC trying to save the Constitution, rather than cozying up to Rupert Murdoch?

Ground Game

/104 Comments/in /by

As momentous as the possibility of a perfect 19 game seasons is (Go Pats!! Go hit ’em, thuggish Rodney Roid!), Tuesday’s Super is way more momentous than today’s, not least because it’ll have significant input over whether we send the first woman or the first African-American to the White House, and because either one promises to start our painful recovery from the Bush disaster.

But the story most people are telling is still missing the equivalent of Bill Belichick’s pre-game film analysis. Though it has arguably been decisive in all four non-Clusterfuck Democratic contests thus far, few people are talking about ground game. Obama out-performed polls (except one) in Iowa and South Carolina (the latter by an astounding amount); what appeared to make the difference was real grass-roots mobilization–and effective execution–among many who had been largely disaffected in the past. Hillary’s win in NH was at least partially her GOTV. And her win in NV can be attributed to a combination of her own ground game and Obama’s failure to make the most of union support. Ground game is the story of this election thus far.

Now, there’s one big reason why you’re not hearing about ground game. The teevee networks, which still largely set the narrative of the election, cannot sell "ground game." They can sell ads that appeal to women or African-American voters, their insider pundits can either rail for or against the Big Dog and provide value to the network that way. But they have no product to sell called "ground game." As a result, it’s simply not part of the story.

But it’s more than that. Perhaps for this very reason, the media have missed another big story–what has happened to the ground game over the last four years.

When I was at the "No News Is Good News" conference in Boston, one of the participants (I think I remember who it was, but I’m not positive so he’ll remain nameless) said,

If I had to choose between us [the media] picking the President or the County Chair picking the candidate in a smoky room, I know which one I’d pick.

Read more →

Hillary, YOU Don’t Get to Decide to Seat Our Delegates

/74 Comments/in /by

This is probably going to get me kicked out of the MDP, but this is bullshit.

Statement by Senator Hillary Clinton on the Seating of Delegates at the Democratic National Convention

I hear all the time from people in Florida and Michigan that they want their voices heard in selecting the Democratic nominee.

I believe our nominee will need the enthusiastic support of Democrats in these states to win the general election, and so I will ask my Democratic convention delegates to support seating the delegations from Florida and Michigan. I know not all of my delegates will do so and I fully respect that decision. But I hope to be President of all 50 states and U.S. territories, and that we have all 50 states represented and counted at the Democratic convention.

I hope my fellow potential nominees will join me in this.

I will of course be following the no-campaigning pledge that I signed, and expect others will as well.

Its bullshit for a number of reasons. Hillary is pretending that this matter won’t be decided, by the party, well before her delegates get to Denver. She’s pretending the decision hasn’t already been made that, once it becomes clear a candidate has the nomination, the DNC will announce that MI’s and FL’s delegates will be seated in Denver. And she’s pretending that she can somehow give us voice in the nomination process, when MI’s Clusterfuck has already guaranteed we will have no voice.

It’s a shameless pander to Florida’s voters, an incredibly dangerous move suggesting that Hillary might someday try to claim MI’s and FL’s delegates to contribute to her total, and it’s a nasty cynical tactic that cheapens my vote.

OUR state gambled with the Clusterfuck and lost. That’s an issue between us, our party leaders, and the DNC. But it is not your place, Hillary, to swoop in and make it better. And to suggest it is your place really, really, risks damaging the party.

Back during the Clusterfuck, I scoffed when people said Hillary would try to seat MI’s delegates. Such a tactic would only be tried, I thought, by a reckless person who put herself above the larger good.

Apparently I was wrong. About Hillary, that is. Not about the recklessness of this.