Obama Beating McCain 48% - 42% in Ohio

• Author: Kyle Kutuchief
• Filed under: Ohio 2008, Republicans '08
• Date: Jun 18,2008

From a Quinnipiac University poll released today:

"With strong support from women, blacks and younger voters, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, the apparent Democratic presidential contender, leads Arizona Sen. John McCain, expected to be the Republican candidate, among likely voters in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, according to simultaneous Quinnipiac University Swing State polls released today. "

OHIO: Obama 48% - McCain 42%
FLORIDA: Obama 47% - McCain 43%
PENNSYLVANIA: Obama 52% - McCain 40%

Ben has told me in previous posts that I live in a fantasy land where Clinton Democrats end up supporting Obama. It has only been 11 days since Senator Clinton dropped out of the race and already Obama's numbers are moving, which is a sign of our party coming together. The numbers in Ohio and Florida are especially encouraging and expand the battleground states. Now, I realize this is only one poll, but I believe over the next couple of weeks we'll have several polls showing similar numbers. I think mid July is when Republicans are going to really start to panic over the candidate they have nominated.

One Term and Done?

• Author: Ben Keeler
• Filed under: Presidential, Republicans '08
• Date: Jun 2,2008

Back in the news today was the potential one term pledge by Senator John McCain. Marc Ambinder of the Atlantic:

When he formally announced his presidential candidacy last year, Sen. John McCain was inches away from making an unprecedented pledge: if he were elected, he would serve only one term as president….. the idea to serve one term had long been discussed among top advisers, and McCain was on board. A one-term pledge was set to be the central thread of his presidential campaign, and Mark Salter, McCain's chief speech writer, crafted an announcement speech around it. But less than a day before he was set to speak in New Hampshire on April 25, McCain ordered his aides to excise the paragraphs describing the pledge.

This would be gutsy. Very gutsy. It is going all in. There are some good aspects to this potential pledge. McCain comes off as a politician who wants to serve his country above all else. He states he wants to finish off the success of the surge in Iraq. He would add some other big ideas to his speeches on the trail; taxes, cutting spending and entitlements, judges, etc. This strategy also would mean that more skeptical Democrats (bitter people leaning Clinton) would be willing to vote for him, knowing things start fresh in 2012. Conservative holdouts also would fall under that thinking. "Well, he isn't my first choice, but we can use these four years to rebuild the movement while avoiding Carter's second term." They can vote for McCain knowing that four years of McCain is better than four years of Obama. Effective. It makes Obama look like some ambitious politician while McCain is trying to save the country with his service.

There are three major negatives I can see: First, and obviously, McCain starts off as a lame duck, so there really isn't much incentive for Congress to work with him (though too much obstruction could hurt them in 2010). The minute he is sworn in, speculation starts about 2012. For quite some time now, Democrats have been stalling on all sorts of federal nominations by the Bush Administration, hoping to run out the clock and put in their own people. No reason they wouldn't just employ the same tactics. Secondly, it brings up the age factor. I for one have never seen the big deal here, but maybe some people do. It could be interpreted as "I am only healthy enough for one term." Lastly, I sense that voters like the idea that they can "fire" who they elected. If McCain won't be running in 2012, then he really isn't accountable again. This would rub some folks the wrong way. That is probably my biggest concern.

If McCain starts to trail Obama by 5-10 points in the polls on a consistent basis this summer, this is something he is going to look hard at. McCain badly wants to be the 44th President. If he thinks this will help him get there, I don't think he will back out of making the pledge a second time. The chattering class and know it alls think that it is going to take a miracle to win this election for McCain (after all, he is running against a god). If they are right, something like this totally changes the dynamics of the race. Nearing the end of two very long and polarizing administrations, people might see this as a breath of fresh air. But it is something he has to do before (if) he falls too far behind, because doing it then makes him look desperate.

Ramesh Ponnuru of National Review suggested this back in October 2007.

Veepstakes Update, Alaska Governor Edition

• Author: Ben Keeler
• Filed under: Republicans '08
• Date: May 30,2008

Recently I listed a number of people who were possible candidates to be John McCain's running mate. One name I did mention was Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. I didn't have a whole to say about her except a mention in passing. Now we hear from the Weekly Standard via Wizbang that the man heading up McCain's search (no, it isn't Dick Cheney) is in Alaska. He probably isn't there on vacation. Palin is currently a hot topic in the blogosphere, see here, here, and here for some examples. From the Standard:

There's only one reason the person heading McCain's search would be there - to meet with Alaska Governor Sarah Palin about the Vice President position.

This comes on the heels of McCain's Memorial Day weekend barbecue attended by Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, former White House budget director Rob Portman, and Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman. Supposedly that was in informal affair, not a vetting session, but it appears that the VP selection game is very much afoot.

Sarah Palin is a Christian conservative and a budget-cutting fiscal hawk. She is also against "pork barrel" projects, much like McCain. She recently vetoed $269 million in spending, something I sure haven't seen out of Washington in a long, long time. Palin ran in the GOP primary in 2006 against the incumbent Governor Frank Murkowski. Murkowski was always a popular senator there but found troubles when he relocated to Juneau. Palin ran against the corrupt Republican hierarchy of Alaska’s power structure - and won. The Alaskan establishment hates her and the people of her state love her. Her approval ratings at home are consistently in the 80's and higher. Her appeal, unlike that of others who are being talked about, is all about who she is and what she has done in Alaska - not about where she is from.

I think this would be a real gamble - but with a real upside potential. But with any risk, it could backfire. There is no question that McCain is going to try and paint Obama as inexperienced, and rightly so I would add. Adding Palin to the ticket undercuts that argument in my eyes. Palin’s been governor for two years - less time than Obama has used his Senate seat as a springboard for his current activities. I view her as a "swing for the fences" type pick; a pick you make when you feel you are down or maybe close to even in the polls and need something that adds a real spark (kind of like how Mondull picked Ferraro in 1984). We will know quite a bit about where McCain really thinks he stands vs. Obama headed into the election based on this selection. This would be a blatant signal (chosing Palin) to disgruntled to Hillary supporters and no one knows how it would be recieved. Some speculate it may force Obama into taking a woman as well…..

Now, if she could just get rid of Ted Stevens we would be on to something. If the pick is Palin, I would advise McCain to break from tradition and do it ASAP. It forces Obama's hand and if he picks a female it makes him look like he is copying. If he chooses first, say Clinton or Sebelius from Kansas, then some of the appeal is already gone and critics will say we did it just because they did it. As of late, McCain has been able to control the general election campaign, and this would continue it. But McCain typically doesn't take advice from people like me (conservatives). Again, I will not be profiling potential Democrat picks because they will like whoever it is just because Obama picks them and says he/she is the best choice.

When I wrote about Cheney above, I just realized I have not seen him in the news in weeks. I can't remember the last time I saw him anywhere.

Have a good weekend. Liberals included.

A Growing Hostility in the Ranks

• Author: Ben Keeler
• Filed under: National Landscape 2008, Republicans '08
• Date: May 16,2008

John McCain is obviously going with the strategy of getting himself into office with no coattails, all other elected Republicans out there for themselves. Yes, GOP candidates all across this land are facing tough conditions. You may have guessed that. What are Republicans this fall supposed to run on? Certainly not their nominee for president; he is proving that he will be running on his own brand. Just running against the other candidate really isn't all that inspirational to people like me. It is lost on most Washington Republicans how destructive it is for them to not stand for anything. Three times in the last four days I have gotten mail from either the RNC or McCain. Zero times of the three have I been compelled to open the letter. This is a drastic change from 2003-2004 when I couldn't wait to get my mass mailed "personalized" letters from Bush/Cheney 2004. I am still donating, but as of now it is to individual candidates in certain races. I see nothing right now that makes me say, "Yes, I am going to go to the trouble to go get and send a money order (I dont do checks) to the RNC or John McCain." I want it to be different. I really do. I want to send my small sums of money to them.

The conservative moment is more or less dead. But it is dead from only a leadership aspect. People like me are waiting for someone to step up and take the mantle. The problem is that in 1980 Reagan was waiting to do just that; there is no one on the horizon right now for us that is filling that role. John McCain, though I am certainly voting for him (provided his running mate is not Mike Huckabee), does not qualify. George W. Bush was not a movement leader.

In the long run an Obama win would be a good thing for Republicans. In the short term, a loss in November would be a bad thing, and put Republicans out of power in the House, Senate, and the White House. That is a recipe for disaster; the "Rubber Stamp" in Congress times 100. At the same time, you can only shake your head at some of decisions by Republicans even though they are in the minority in Congress right now. McCain probably wouldn't help matters, though on some things like spending he would be a welcome change (not to be confused with Obama style change). Do you sacrifice the present (in this case November) for future gains? I am in the school that says win now and worry later. I think that Jimmy Carter 2.0 would be comparably far worse than any conservative damage McCain would do.

If we lose to Obama, then the whole party will have to rebuilt, because we are total failures. There is no way he should win, but he may. If the most radical of leftist is preferable to the Republican brand then there are very serious problems. Some would argue we need to do the rebuilding now. A total party shake up. New House leadership, new Senate leadership, new people in all leadership roles. After what I have seen the last few weeks, it might not be a bad idea. Show people that the status quo is not good enough. There is a growing hostility born of utter frustration in the ranks. The Dems that are winning are posing as conservatives. They are acting more conservative than the Republicans in Washington!!! Yet Washington Republicans keep fumbling along, with voting for the bloated farm bill as the latest example. People are frustrated. I read it and hear it each and every day. I know McCain is going to try and win with the center, but he still needs the right. If he actually has conservative ideals he wants to accomplish as president, it will be tough working with a 55 seat deficit in the House and a close to filibuster proof Senate. That seems to be where we are headed unless the decision makers in Washington wake up. Do they have such short memories that they forgot about 2006?

The decision to not vote or cast a protest vote in November does not occur in make believe land. If McCain does not win, that means his opponent did. And his opponent will probably have a lot less to like policy wise than McCain could have offered. McCain is counting on that as his victory strategy; people like me sucking it up and voting for him. It is risky. The Dems have a reservoir of grand plans they are waiting to shove down our throats given the chance. It would be much easier, however, to be excited about voting if the rank and file conservatives were given something.

(Yes, I know I promised you Obama wouldn't win in the fall. I am just a worrier by nature.)

Finally A Real Conservative For President: Bob Barr

• Author: Kyle Kutuchief
• Filed under: Presidential, Republicans '08
• Date: May 12,2008

Today, Bob Barr announced that he will be seeking the Libertarian Party's nomination for President of the United States. The former Georgia Congressman plans to use a unique blend of staunchly conservative politics and hip emo glasses to give right wing Republicans a real alternative to Senator McCain. Mr. Barr explains why he left the GOP in the following video:

Barr will campaign on limited government, more individual liberty, secure borders, and non interventionist foreign policy using rhetoric that speaks to the Republican base. The former Georgia Congressman earned a 98% rating from the American Conservative Union before losing his House seat in 2002. In that same year, McCain scored a 78% rating from the conservative organization. Barr may become a real contender and by comparison make McCain look soft. The key for Barr is to start to raise a lot of money fast. View Barr's website to see how much he has raised already today.

Needless to say, I wish Barr would not run. Of course, it is his right to do so, I just wish he wouldn't. I am not going to be a Democrat and say things like "Nader cost us the election in 2000." Gore was never entitled to those votes that Nader took from him, just like McCain is not entitled to any votes that may go to Barr or anyone else. Third parties are allowed to field candidates to give additional choices to voters who are not happy with the current selection in front of them. Obviously some Republicans are in this boat. If McCain had not upset conservatives so often the last few years, this might not be happening. Or maybe it would, I can't get inside the head of Barr. (Note: Not talked about enough is the effect that Nader had on the 2000 Senate elections, where Democrats won some very tight races. High on that list is the Maria Cantwell / Slade Gorton race).

Brief background on Barr: Worked for the CIA from 1970-1978. In 1986 he was appointed by President Reagan to be an attorney for the Northern District of Georgia. In 1992 Barr ran for a US Senate seat but lost to eventual winner Paul Coverdell (also a Republican) by less than 2,000 votes in a run-off. In 1994, he was one of the Republicans swept into power with the Contract of America class. Prior to the 2002 elections, the Georgia legislature combined his district with that of a neighboring one which was that of John Linder, also a Republican. One Republican had to lose, and it was Barr, and he lost by a lot. During his time in Congress, Barr was regarded as one of the most conservative members of Congress. However, Barr's criticism of the Bush Administration's policies on civil liberties after the September 11 attacks started to gain him attention. Now he is an ACLU member who wants to repeal the Patriot Act. Makes sense, right? I wouldn't vote for him based on both parts of that sentence. That leads us to today.
Read the rest of this entry »

McCain Veepstakes

• Author: Ben Keeler
• Filed under: Presidential, Republicans '08
• Date: May 12,2008

A few other people have taken a stab at this, so I figured I would give it a try. I know he needs a better pick than the lackluster one John Kerry made in 2004.

Note: I will not be doing this for Obama's possible selections. First, it seems clear he should go with Jim Webb or Wesley Clark. Second, his people will roundly praise whoever the pick is just because he is Obama's pick. He could pick Robert Byrd and his followers would say it was a great selection to balance the ticket.

In no particular order at all:

Tom Ridge - Former Governor of Pennsylvania and the first Director of Homeland Security. Popular in Pennsylvania, a big plus. The biggest drawback is that Ridge is pro choice. The fact that a VP nominee is pro-choice doesn't phase me at all. If Ridge could make PA a toss-up, you almost have to go with him to pin down the Democrats and their resources in the state.

Condoleeza Rice - Secretary of State and National Security Advisor for President Bush. McCain won't take her due to ties to the war. Smart and impressive woman.

Tim Pawlenty - Governor of Minnesota. On everyone's short list. I am not sure why he stands out other than being a governor from a swing state. I do wonder if last summer's bridge collapse would hurt Pawlenty if he was the running mate. It shouldn't, but Democrats would certainly try. Undetermined if he could help bring Minnesota to the Republican column, but Pawlenty must be a tough candidate - he was one of the few targeted Republicans that survived the 2006 thrashing.

Charlie Crist - Governor of Florida. Gave a huge endorsement to McCain right before the Florida primary that might put him over the top in the state, thus basically getting him the nomination. From a critical swing state. Only been in office for two years, which could be a negative.

Bob Taft - Just seeing if you are paying attention.

Jeb Bush - Former Governor of Florida. Would be an obvious pick if he had a different last name; McCain is already hearing the talk of serving out George W. Bush's third term. History would be different today if Jeb had won his race for governor in 1994 against Lawton Chiles. He would probably be president right now.
Read the rest of this entry »