...Obama, McCain and Hillary! This is a cute package from CNN's Jeanine Moos on the Youtube phenomenon of babies for presidential candidates. Apparently there are a lot more 'Babies for Obama' videos out there, but according to the report, it's probably because the syllables 'ba' and 'ma' are a lot easier for babies to say. This video is a cute cross-section of politics and technology.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=WBuEqzGm3VA
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Monday, April 7, 2008
Condoleeza Rice for VP?
I heard on the news that there has been speculation about Condoleeza Rice running on the Republican ticket as Vice President. While McCain says that he has not heard anything about this, others are saying that this might be a positive boost to his campaign. Speculators explain that she would be a good vice president and could aid in defeating the democratic opponent. Because issues of gender and race have played a huge role in this year’s campaign, many think that Condoleeza will help defend Republicans in attacks that they are insensitive to these groups. It will also make things more even if there are minorities running in both parties so that neither has an edge against the other. I disagree with focusing on race and gender to win an election, but agree with the idea that no matter a person’s race or gender, we must elect the person who is best equipped to run and lead our country.
Meet Bob Barr
It may seem a little late in the game for new players to be entering the race, but we must remember that the Democratic and Republican Parties aren't the only ones choosing a nominee for November. Last weekend, former GOP Congressman Bob Barr announced the launch of a Presidential Exploratory Committee to kick off his pursuit of the Libertarian Party's nomination.
Barr's political reputation is that of a staunch advocate for civil liberties, limited government, low taxes, and secure borders; he likely hopes to provide an alternative for conservative Republicans who might feel that McCain falls short of their expectations. Barr acknowledged that some might view him as a would-be "spoiler," but said that the stakes are too high to let political expediency prevent his run. Barr stated: "America today faces a grave moral and leadership crisis, and those of us who care about our country's future can no longer sit on the sidelines and remain neutral."
A Representative of Georgia's 7th District from 1995 to 2003, Barr has since joined the Libertarian Party because, according to bobbarr2008.com, he felt it was important to align himself with "a party that is 100 percent committed to protecting liberty." In 1986, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as U.S. Attorney for Northern Georgia. He was also a CIA official for 8 years during the '70s. He is a current Board Member of the National Rifle Association. As an attorney and consultant, Barr has focused his efforts on advancing the principles of smaller government, lower taxes, and abundant individual freedom.
Clearly, Barr's conservative cred is solid, but it remains to be seen how viable his candidacy will be in the current climate. Might Ron Paul supporters rally behind Barr, since the candidates share many positions? Will many McCain voters embrace him as a candidate that better fits their ideals, or would the prospect of a Democratic victory inspire enough distaste to keep those voters with the guy who has a real shot? Ralph Nader will grapple with a similar conundrum on the other side. With polls indicating that the general election will be a close contest, it's worth keeping an eye on these third party candidates to anticipate what effect, if any, they might have on the ultimate outcome.
Barr's political reputation is that of a staunch advocate for civil liberties, limited government, low taxes, and secure borders; he likely hopes to provide an alternative for conservative Republicans who might feel that McCain falls short of their expectations. Barr acknowledged that some might view him as a would-be "spoiler," but said that the stakes are too high to let political expediency prevent his run. Barr stated: "America today faces a grave moral and leadership crisis, and those of us who care about our country's future can no longer sit on the sidelines and remain neutral."
A Representative of Georgia's 7th District from 1995 to 2003, Barr has since joined the Libertarian Party because, according to bobbarr2008.com, he felt it was important to align himself with "a party that is 100 percent committed to protecting liberty." In 1986, Barr was appointed by President Reagan to serve as U.S. Attorney for Northern Georgia. He was also a CIA official for 8 years during the '70s. He is a current Board Member of the National Rifle Association. As an attorney and consultant, Barr has focused his efforts on advancing the principles of smaller government, lower taxes, and abundant individual freedom.
Clearly, Barr's conservative cred is solid, but it remains to be seen how viable his candidacy will be in the current climate. Might Ron Paul supporters rally behind Barr, since the candidates share many positions? Will many McCain voters embrace him as a candidate that better fits their ideals, or would the prospect of a Democratic victory inspire enough distaste to keep those voters with the guy who has a real shot? Ralph Nader will grapple with a similar conundrum on the other side. With polls indicating that the general election will be a close contest, it's worth keeping an eye on these third party candidates to anticipate what effect, if any, they might have on the ultimate outcome.
Clinton urging bush not to support the olympics
Clinton's suggestion for Bush to "not plan on attending the opening ceremonies in Beijing, absent major changes by the Chinese government." (CNN.com) is a move that helps highlight the difference in polices clinton wants us to believe she will adopt, (i.e. challenging the bush administration and highlighting a 'need for change') but is not a realistic suggestion that any administration would carry out. If president bush adopted Clinton's suggestion and did not attend the olympics, not only would the move be viewed as aggressive and inappropriate, the consequences in terms of the economy and international trade may possibly be severe. If the Chinese and US Government allowed the olympics to harm their relationship, China, the worlds largest exporter may loose out on trading with one of their main trade partners, the united states. The mechanics of the political arena between China and the US are driven largely by trade, and as long as trade is profitable, neither country will let an event affect their relationship. This is not to say that the olympics are not important, but it is to say that trade valued in billions of dollars is worth more than an annual sporting event. Besides the economy, Barack Obama raised a point that may justify Bush's presence at the olympic games. "I'm hesitant to make the Olympics a site of political protest because I think it's partly about bringing the world together." (CNN.com) This viewpoint not only makes Barack seem more competent in international politics, but also reflects the true meaning and purpose of the Olympic games.
The darling of the news media
On March 26th, the New York Times ran an interesting story that fits perfectly in our class. The maverick and the media tells readers how John McCain has become the media’s favorite candidate. Indeed, while McCain started the campaign far behind the other candidates, presently, “the mainstream news media by and large don’t cover Mr. McCain; they canonize him.” According to Neal Gabler, the reason is that “Mr. McCain is an ironist wooing a group of individuals who regard ironic detachment more highly than sincerity or seriousness.” The article describes how McCain has cleverly transformed the relationship between the journalists and him; the (apparent) candor with which he approaches this relationship has allowed him to fraternize with them. As a result, journalist have become part of McCain’s communication team; “since the reporters on the bus liked Mr. McCain too much to report on his gaffes, he really didn’t need protection. His candor was without consequence. It was another blandishment of the press.” According to the author, “McCain can be called the first postmodernist presidential candidate” because of “his acknowledgement of the symbiosis between himself and the press and, more important, his willingness, even eagerness, to let the press in on his own machinations of them.” However, the author of the article highlights McCain’s experience as he knows that candidates are the very leaders of the relationship with the press. In fact, the media may have gotten trapped by McCain; “if in the past he flattered the press by posing as its friend, he is now flattering it by posing as its conspirator, a secret sharer of its cynicism. He is the guy who “gets it.”
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Fundraising Trouble for Anti-McCain Group
An article posted Sunday on Politico discussed the trouble Democrats have had thus far in trying to raise money for anti-John McCain advertising.
Democrats set up the fundraising group "Fund for America" in order to change how "independent" attack ads are executed, as the party wanted to create a more permanent organization dedicated to supporting their candidates and trashing the other side. Therefore, instead of a 527 group, which became well-known as a category in 2004 for the impact "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" had in questioning John Kerry's Vietnam War service, this new Democratic group was created as a 501(c)(4) charity. This status allows the group to exist beyond this one election cycle, and it allows money they raise to carry over as well. "Fund for America," therefore, was set up as a central organization designed to raise as much money as possible for a concerted Democratic attack strategy against the Republicans, which will then be executed by the group "Campaign to Defend America." "Campaign to Defend America" will create and air the majority of "independent" Democratic attack ads in this election cycle, and their hope was to begin their efforts early on this year with a strong anti-John McCain push.
As the article mentions, everyone in politics and political advertising knows how crucial it is to define your opponent first before they get a chance to define themselves on their own terms. Painting McCain as a man tied too much to the policies of President Bush or the failed planning of the Iraq war might be effective campaign strategies later on this year and would make great campaign ads. The problem, however, has been that Democratic donors, for the most part, have been slow to come around to the idea that they need to be pouring their money into this group and its efforts this early on.
Democratic campaign donors, for the time being, are still transfixed on the race for their party's nomination, and therefore most money is still being poured into the efforts of either Clinton or Obama. The article mentions that there is growing frustration in the party that donors are not realizing the need to begin focusing on John McCain now, as the Democratic race appears to be somewhat heading toward a conclusion and McCain's polling is stronger than ever. Now is the time to begin attacking his character and record, the "Campaign to Defend America" argues, but the public and the big party donors have not yet turned their attention fully to the general election just yet. As one donor's representative stated, "We know we're going to have a good Democratic nominee — it's time for Democrats to turn their attention to John McCain."
Democrats wanted to "drop the hammer" on John McCain right from the get go after he became the presumptive Republican nominee, as many regretted their handling of political ads in 2004, when the Republicans were much better at quickly and forcefully defining the opposition. But with fundraising efforts decidedly "mixed" thus far for this central Democratic attack group, they have only been able to create one prominent advertisement, entitled "McSame," and were able to air it in only a few relatively-inexpensive markets. They have begun testing their messages and potential ads among swing voters and focus groups, but their efforts have been limited much more so than they expected by a lack of sufficient funding from the party.
Democrats are having a hard time looking too far ahead beyond the current Clinton-Obama match up, it seems, despite the need to begin running against Republican John McCain. Anti-McCain research and message testing may be adequate for the time being, but with McCain polling about even with both Democratic candidates and his nomination competition entirely out of the way, McCain may begin to open a real lead over his opposition in the coming weeks as he stresses his strengths, values, and personal history. If Democrats want to win in November, they need to start supporting the "Fund for America" and "Campaign to Defend America" now, as their long term success may depend on how well they begin the general election debate.
Democrats set up the fundraising group "Fund for America" in order to change how "independent" attack ads are executed, as the party wanted to create a more permanent organization dedicated to supporting their candidates and trashing the other side. Therefore, instead of a 527 group, which became well-known as a category in 2004 for the impact "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" had in questioning John Kerry's Vietnam War service, this new Democratic group was created as a 501(c)(4) charity. This status allows the group to exist beyond this one election cycle, and it allows money they raise to carry over as well. "Fund for America," therefore, was set up as a central organization designed to raise as much money as possible for a concerted Democratic attack strategy against the Republicans, which will then be executed by the group "Campaign to Defend America." "Campaign to Defend America" will create and air the majority of "independent" Democratic attack ads in this election cycle, and their hope was to begin their efforts early on this year with a strong anti-John McCain push.
As the article mentions, everyone in politics and political advertising knows how crucial it is to define your opponent first before they get a chance to define themselves on their own terms. Painting McCain as a man tied too much to the policies of President Bush or the failed planning of the Iraq war might be effective campaign strategies later on this year and would make great campaign ads. The problem, however, has been that Democratic donors, for the most part, have been slow to come around to the idea that they need to be pouring their money into this group and its efforts this early on.
Democratic campaign donors, for the time being, are still transfixed on the race for their party's nomination, and therefore most money is still being poured into the efforts of either Clinton or Obama. The article mentions that there is growing frustration in the party that donors are not realizing the need to begin focusing on John McCain now, as the Democratic race appears to be somewhat heading toward a conclusion and McCain's polling is stronger than ever. Now is the time to begin attacking his character and record, the "Campaign to Defend America" argues, but the public and the big party donors have not yet turned their attention fully to the general election just yet. As one donor's representative stated, "We know we're going to have a good Democratic nominee — it's time for Democrats to turn their attention to John McCain."
Democrats wanted to "drop the hammer" on John McCain right from the get go after he became the presumptive Republican nominee, as many regretted their handling of political ads in 2004, when the Republicans were much better at quickly and forcefully defining the opposition. But with fundraising efforts decidedly "mixed" thus far for this central Democratic attack group, they have only been able to create one prominent advertisement, entitled "McSame," and were able to air it in only a few relatively-inexpensive markets. They have begun testing their messages and potential ads among swing voters and focus groups, but their efforts have been limited much more so than they expected by a lack of sufficient funding from the party.
Democrats are having a hard time looking too far ahead beyond the current Clinton-Obama match up, it seems, despite the need to begin running against Republican John McCain. Anti-McCain research and message testing may be adequate for the time being, but with McCain polling about even with both Democratic candidates and his nomination competition entirely out of the way, McCain may begin to open a real lead over his opposition in the coming weeks as he stresses his strengths, values, and personal history. If Democrats want to win in November, they need to start supporting the "Fund for America" and "Campaign to Defend America" now, as their long term success may depend on how well they begin the general election debate.
Clinton's Superdelegate Lead Keeps On Shrinking
Obama has been picking up more superdelegates through recent state conventions and newly named add-on superdelegates. At demconwatch, they have Clinton up by 24 superdelegates.
Her presumptive win in Pennsylvania will be offset my Obama's predicted win in North Carolina. He's polling hire in NC than she is in PA. Both states offer several delegates with PA having more. I don't see the superdelegate trend changing anytime soon.
Her presumptive win in Pennsylvania will be offset my Obama's predicted win in North Carolina. He's polling hire in NC than she is in PA. Both states offer several delegates with PA having more. I don't see the superdelegate trend changing anytime soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
