Picture of the Day 2/13: Good Lookin' Beagle

Uno became the first beagle to win Best in Show at the Westminster Kennel Club Show, as best dog in the country. I'm no expert, but that's one cute dog.

For McCain, a Choice Looms

The Washington Times has begun the speculation on who John McCain will tab for his running-mate later this year. On the shortlist, it suggests, are: Governors Mike Huckabee (AR), Bobby Jindal (LA), Charlie Crist (FL) and Mark Sanford (SC), among others.

Huckabee is a bad choice because it could alienate the moderates and independents McCain will need, particularly in a race against Barack Obama.

Crist is a good option because he's a popular governor of a swing state McCain has to have, and has already said he's interested in the job.

Bobby Jindal is an attractive candidate that has a lot going for him: he's an Asian- American-- the country's first Indian governor, and is only 36 years old. So he could counter the "symbolic change" argument of Democrats nicely. He also has the backing of party Conservatives (Rush Limbaugh called him "the next Ronald Reagan"). However, he's only been in the governor's office one month (after a special election).

Another strong option is South Carolina's Sanford. He's a young (47) Washington outsider (although he was a Congressman), popular in a very Southern state. His good looks and fake tan should put voters at ease when pulling the leaver for a 72- year- old. He's also a personal friend of McCain's.

I actually have an inside operative in the Sanford camp, and spoke with my source in a SAM exclusive.

Sanford, a Long Island, NY native, is a very nice man, although also very cheap. He drives a clunker of a car (described as a 1980 Chevy Lumina) despite marrying into one of the wealthiest families in America (we're talking GE money).

But his wife is supposed to be amazingly smart and pretty, and managed his gubernatorial campaign. And Sanford is equally charming, with a picture perfect clan of kids to boot.

I think he and McCain would make a formidable pair.

Sweeeeeep!

The Potmac Primaries are over, and Barack Obama is now 8-0 since Super Tuesday. By margins of 64- 35 (VA), 60- 36 (MD) and 75- 24 (DC) he mopped up Hillary Clinton, and picked up at least 65 delegates to her 33. John McCain also won all three contests and probably forced Mike Huckabee out of the race.

But it's not just that Obama won, it's how he won. Up to this point, Clinton's campaign had been about a coalition of women, Hispanics, older and blue- collar ("beer drinking") Democrats. Meanwhile, Obama did well with Blacks, the upper-class ("wine drinking") and students.

However, the NY Post reports that last night Sen. Obama made significant inroads into Clinton's supporters, as Obama...

Bettered Clinton by nearly 60 percent to 40 percent among women.

Bested her 59-40 among those making less than $50,000 a year.

Won 52 percent of voters age 65 and over.

February 19 there are primaries in Hawaii and Wisconsin, and there's a very good chance Obama wins both of those as well. That would make him 10-0 since Super Tuesday, and set up the March 4 primaries in Texas and Ohio (Vermont is also that day) as Hillary Clinton's firewall. Rudy Giuliani tried that in Flordia, and he's now campaigning for John McCain.

If the trends of the Potomac primaries continue, Sen. Obama will win either Ohio or Texas, and this thing will be over.

Tuesday Afternoon Weather Experiment

Let's test the weather theory today.

RealClearPolitics.com has averaged the latest polls and, as expected, Obama is the heavy favorite today. Here are the spreads which presumably do not take weather into account:

Virginia: Obama +17.7 and Maryland: Obama +22.3.

The theory goes, when the weather is bad, Obama meets or does slightly worse than expected. In the Super Tuesday sample, he never exceeded expectations where it rained. The weather will be bad in all three states voting today.

I'll let it go after this

Quote of the Day 2/12: Doug's Status Msg.

My friend, Doug Flynn, has had the following as his message on GChat for a while, but for some reason it really cracked me up this morning, so I thought I'd post it.

"We need to counter the shock wave of the evildoer by having individual rate cuts accelerated and by thinking about tax rebates."

- George W. Bush, in a speech to the Labor Department on October 4, 2001, on how to stop the terrorists (tax cuts, of course). Find the full text here.

McCain video: Maybe a Hundred

A week ago, I posted a cool music video Will.i.am put together with celebrities in support of Barack Obama, singing his New Hampshire concession speech ("Yes, we can"). Well, John McCain has his supporters, too, and there's a similar video, see below.

The Gore-acle Says...

The man many waited to join the '08 Democratic field may be on the verge of endorsing Barack Obama.

Al Gore, who words inspired this site, had vowed to stay on the sidelines throughout the primaries. And perhaps after the former Veep's honest dismissals of a possible third run for the White House, we should take him at his word. But the NY Daily News reports that he's considering coming out for Obama.

It's no secret that Gore and Hillary have been at odds since the 90s, and that the division deepened after the 2000 campaign. But Gore also is keenly aware of his new role of elder statesman, and may prefer to stay above the fray.

The News quotes two anonymous sources:

"The level of animus between them is unbelievable," a well-placed Hillary partisan confided.

A prominent Democratic strategist with close ties to both camps echoes: "The Clintons and the Gores can't stand each other."

The Gore endorsement would be a huge get for the Obama camp-- he's the "ultimate prize among uncommitted Superdelegates."

NY Times: Army Supressed RAND Study

The New York Times ran a bit of an expose today about a study the RAND group did for the Army. RAND is private, but receives government funding to do research for the armed forces.

In 2005, RAND was commissioned to do a study on the planning for post-war Iraq-- the mistakes that were made, what worked and what didn't. The study was critical of the higher-ups in the Bush administration: President Bush, Secretaries Powell and Rumsfeld, and NSA Rice. The study pointed out the boarders should have been secured quicker to prevent foreign insurgents from streaming over the boarders. The general insufficiency of post-war planning was also detailed.

RAND then went to have the report, which was supposed to be public, published in November 2005, but was stopped by Army officials. They thought it would be useful in planning future missions.

For his part, General Lovelace released a statement that said, in part: "The RAND study simply did not deliver a product that could have assisted the Army in paving a clear way ahead; it lacked the perspective needed for future planning by the U.S. Army."

"E Plurbis Unum" for 2k8

Stephen J. Dubner, coauthor of the best-seller Freakonomics, has a blog with the same name through the New York Times. Last week, inspired by a contest in the UK and a new book on 6- word memoirs, Dubner began a contest to give the USA a new, 6 word national motto.

Here are some interesting submissions:

Just like Canada, with Better Bacon

Equal Representation*
*Offer void in D.C.

Liberals hate it–must be good.

Powered by people - driven by fools.

Mind the GOP please.

The Best Country Credit can Buy

Coming to a Country Near You!

Shut up! The Hills is on.

Driving While Annoying

From Yahoo News: An 18 - year- old Republican from Minnesota is standing up for free speech, in his own mind anyway.

Corey Hauer has gotten repeated citations for a large sign he has posted over his back windshield that reads: Ron Paul Revolution. A city ordinance states that such decals cannot obstruct a driver's view.

But young Corey considers the citations an affront to his Constitutional rights, and the police force guilty of political oppression.

"I support Ron Paul, the city police department doesn't," he said. "They gave me a DWR — driving while Republican."

For his part, Sheriff Shaun LaDue said, "The political aspect of this doesn't enter into the equation at all. It's very clear in state statute that you cannot have anything that obstructs the driver's vision."

Besides being in violation of the law, Hauer showed disrespect toward the officer during each traffic stop, LaDue said. "He talks himself into a citation each time," LaDue said.

Hauer said he'll argue in court that the law violates his First Amendment right to free speech.

"To be honest, I'm probably not going to win, but I'm going to go down fighting," he said.

Economist vs. Newsweek

There's an interesting article in the NY Observer about a talk Newsweek Editor John Meacham gave at the Columbia school of journalism. When he asked which students read his magazine, none of them volunteered. This confirmed a frustrating fact for Meacham, that the new generation high brow intellectuals prefer publications like the Economist to traditional news magazines Time and Newsweek.

"Look, I need you," Meacham told his cosmopolitan audience. "And I need—I've got people out there risking their lives right now. The Economist is not, by the way. I've got four people in Baghdad who could be killed at any moment who are trying to tell the truth the best they can of that story. We have people in 13 different countries. We have a guy in Afghanistan who has Taliban sources who the federal government has asked about because we have better intelligence than government does—he's risking his life.

"And how to communicate that we have things to say that are both factually new and analytically new and to get you under the tent is a fact that scares me—not The Economist per se. It's an incredible frustration that I've got some of the most decent, hard-working, honest, passionate, straight-shooting, non-ideological people who just want to tell the damn truth, and how to get this past this image that we're just middlebrow, you know, a magazine that your grandparents get, or something, that's the challenge. And I just don't know how to do it, so if you've got any ideas, tell me."

Apparently, the students offered only the vague idea of re-branding, which seems like more of the problem than the solution.

If it's any consolation to Mr. Meacham, I often read Newsweek at the gym, of course I'd decidedly "middle-brow" so that might not be too helpful.

Strike Ending

The Writer's Guild of America's East and West Coast boards of directors are meeting today to give formal approval to a deal that would mercifully end their 3 1/2 month strike. You can click the link to read the details. Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to go stock up on snacks and test the springs in my couch before new episodes debut.

Great column in WSJ today on Obama's chances

Today Peggy Noonan outlined why Hillary Clinton is going to lose this thing, and just how formidable Obama will be in November. She makes a compelling argument:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120241915915951669.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries


She's the first I've heard willing to admit Clinton's losing:

"I ruminate in this way because something is happening. Mrs. Clinton is losing this thing. It's not one big primary, it's a rolling loss, a daily one, an inch-by-inch deflation. The trends and indices are not in her favor. She is having trouble raising big money, she's funding her campaign with her own wealth, her moral standing within her own party and among her own followers has been dragged down, and the legacy of Clintonism tarnished by what Bill Clinton did in South Carolina. Unfavorable primaries lie ahead. She doesn't have the excitement, the great whoosh of feeling that accompanies a winning campaign. The guy from Chicago who was unknown a year ago continues to gain purchase, to move forward. For a soft little innocent, he's played a tough and knowing inside/outside game."

She basically says nobody is willing to admit Hillary's losing because they are afraid of a New Hampshire-like miscalculation. They're playing it conservatively, just like networks' reluctance to call state's based on exit polls since Bush-Gore.

But the most compelling part of the article comes at the end when she talks about just how unstoppable Obama will be in the general:

"But Mr. Obama will not be easy for Republicans to attack. He will be hard to get at, hard to address. There are many reasons, but a primary one is that the fact of his race will freeze them. No one, no candidate, no party, no heavy-breathing consultant, will want to cross any line--lines that have never been drawn, that are sure to be shifting and not always visible--in approaching the first major-party African-American nominee for president of the United States..."
"...He is the brilliant young black man as American dream. No consultant, no matter how opportunistic and hungry, will think it easy--or professionally desirable--to take him down in a low manner. If anything, they've learned from the Clintons in South Carolina what that gets you."

And Noonan saved the best line for last:

"The Democrats have it exactly wrong. Hillary is the easier candidate, Mr. Obama the tougher. Hillary brings negative; it's fair to hit her back with negative. Mr. Obama brings hope, and speaks of a better way. He's not Bambi, he's bulletproof."

Brilliant.

There's no doubt about it, Clinton is on the ropes. Everyone is saying that this thing is a tie, but what they are not saying is that a tie is a loss for Clinton. This woman has been running for President since 1992--Bill used to say America was getting "two for the price of one." Yet, Obama, who was not even on the national radar until his speech at the Democratic convention four years ago is slowly pulling support away from her. This is the first day since Iowa that I've actually felt he may win this thing.

One more thing, Noonan suggests that it's Obama's race that makes him such a difficult target for Republicans in November; I disagree. I think it's his message, not his race, that makes Obama such a tough target. With McCain at the top of the Republican ticket, this election will be another referendum on the war in Iraq and Obama has the credibility and moral authority to get us out. His consistent opposition to the war coupled with his likability and willingness to see both sides of an argument make him an outstanding general election candidate.

Letterman: Top 10 Signs John McCain is getting too cocky

**Update** McCain certainly has reason to be cocky today, as Mitt Romney suspended his presidential campaign. In the words of Ferris Bueller: "Are you still here? It's over."

Top Ten Signs John McCain Is Getting Too Cocky

10. Canceled tomorrow's campaign appearances so he doesn't miss "Lost"

9. Spent the afternoon roughing up Romney supporters

8. Last night, he blew half campaign war chest playing internet poker

7. Already working on his 2012 re-election strategy

6. Plans to campaign for the next three days in "Vodkachusetts"

5. Recently told voter "Keep that ugly ass baby away from me"

4. Now refers to Mike Huckabee as "Mike Suckabee"

3. Has started yelling, "Bingo!" when he doesn't even have bingo (come on, folks, he's old!)

2. Renamed his campaign bus the "Bite Me Express"

1. Went to Mexico with Jessica Simpson

And on the Late Show Website, they provide these additional entries that make didn't make the cut:

· Already standing in front of White House yelling at kids to get off his lawn

· Yesterday in Arizona, invited press to watch him vote three times

· The new "Commander-in-Chief" tattoo on his ass

· He's taking a break from campaigning to tour with Hannah Montana

· Taking time off from campaign so he can compete on 'American Gladiators'

· Ends every speech by daring guys to come up and fight him

· Telling everyone to call him by his rap name: McDiddy

· "Straight Talk Express" now has stripper pole

· Devoting all his campaign money to the primary in Oaxaca

Quote of the Day 2/7: From Sir Charles with Love

"I don't believe in them. They always play the race card, and you can't always play the race card. Sometimes the race card is needed but not in every situation. We have to hold blacks more accountable for their actions."

- Charles Barkley on why he won't be inviting Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton to campaign for him as he runs for governor of Alabama in 2010. Barkley said he is "definitely" running.

Did Rain Hurt Obama?

It appears that rain may have cost Obama some votes (or even states) yesterday.

A poli sci grad student at UCLA has charted Obama's Super Tuesday performance where it rained versus where it didn't rain. In states where it didn't rain, Obama performed at or above expectations (i.e. he met or exceeded pre-election polls). Where it did rain, Obama only performed at expectations. In other words, the likelihood that Obama over-performed in a primary was greater if the weather was good.

Why would rain hurt Obama's turnout? According to my Bruin source, the answer probably lies in the fickleness of some Obama supporters. According to pre-February 5th exit polls, Obama is doing very well with (1) people who tend toward political independence and (2) voters under 45 years old. On average, political independents are notably less engaged in politics than partisans; among other effects of this lower engagement, they are less likely to be habitual voters. Thus their intended participation could be impeded by bad weather. Those with the voting habit are much less likely to say: Well it's raining, so I guess I won't vote today. The same considerations apply to younger voters: The voting habit is still being developed before age 40.

There are two things Obama can do to help his turnout in light of these findings. First, he should talk to the Chinese about weather control. Second, he would do well to put voter mobilization at the top of his investment list. He's swayed a number of people to be generally willing to vote for him--now he just needs to literally deliver them to the polls.

A Contradiction?

I've been confronted with an apparent contradiction of my two previous posts: In the last one I write that if the Democratic race goes to a brokered convention, Clinton is the beneficiary; yet in the prior post, I write that "the longer this drags on the more it favors Obama."

My muddled meaning is that Obama will do better with voters the longer the nominating contest goes. He'll have more time to persuade with his charisma and message. More than that even, more time to let people get used to the idea of him as president, especially older (Hispanic) voters who were so focused on the idea of Hillary.

The fact that he'll have a ton more money than she does won't hurt, either.

So where's the rub? Here: the Clintons are in General Sherman mode, they will slash and burn, leave nothing in the tank to get to the convention. They figure as long as they stop Obama from getting to that magic 2025 number, they can get to a brokered convention where their well- earned bartered respect will secure Hillary's nomination.

I realize that this makes Hillary seem like a schemer, attempting to steal the nomination from the people. I don't think it's like that. First, she could still win it outright, because the delegates are apportioned and it's just so damn close. At this unprecedented stage, with this unbelievably small margin, don't fault her for pulling out all the stops.

Would you want anything less of a president?

It's all about the delegates, baby

Last night, both Clinton and Obama vied for momentum and maybe even some kind of inevitability. It didn't happen for either of them.

Under the last post, someone made a smart comment about the way the calendar shakes out from here. The rest of February's primaries favor Obama: Virginia, Washington DC, Washington state and others. He could win five in a row. Then, in March, Ohio and Texas vote, which carry huge numbers of delegates, and figure to be Clinton strongholds.

The commenter, an Obama supporter, hoped that Hillary would bow out under the momentum of a string of Obama victories. Make no mistake, Bill and Hill are in it to the convention. So, we'll see a push for Obama in the coming weeks, but Hillary will pick up a solid amount of delegates (they're are apportioned) headed into March. The bottom line: Forget about momentum and spin and focus on the delegate count. More than half of Democrats have voted, but neither candidate has more than half the delegates needed for the nomination.

That means there is a very real possibility that this heads to a brokered convention, which favors three people- Hillary Clinton, John McCain and me. Hillary Clinton because she has the party establishment behind her, who could anoint her the nominee in a backroom (and make her pick Obama as her running-mate). John McCain because he'll have sewn up his party's nomination have a head start raising money campaigning for the fall. And me because a brokered convention would make Chris Matthews head explode, and I've always wanted to see that.

What Happened Last Night?

NBC's Chris Donovan reports:


MCCAIN
9 states
3 red states /6 blue states
Arizona
California
Connecticut
Delaware
Illinois
Missouri
New Jersey
New York
Oklahoma


ROMNEY
6 states
4 red states / 2 blue states
Colorado
Massachusetts
Minnesota
Montana
North Dakota
Utah

HUCKABEE
5 states
5 red states
Alabama
Arkansas
Georgia
Tennessee
West Virginia

OBAMA
13 states
9 red states / 4 blue states
Alabama
Alaska
Connecticut
Colorado
Delaware
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Kansas
Minnesota
Missouri
North Dakota
Utah

CLINTON
8 states
4 red states / 4 blue states
Arkansas
California
Massachusetts
New Jersey
New York
Oklahoma
Tennessee

My Take: It looks like the Republican race is all but over. Romney failed to claim California, Connecticut or any southern state. So he didn't establish himself as McCain's "conservative alternative," as he'd hoped. Instead, he won Mormon- heavy states and his home state. Huckabee, meanwhile, impressed, and seems likely to be the Vice Presidential nominee.

It's air- tight on the Democratic side right now. Each candidate did what they had to, but nothing more. Obama hoped for a coup in New Jersey or California, but didn't threaten Clinton in either. However, he was able to pick up red states and show his general appeal. It affirms my earlier prediction that Obama will have an easier time beating John McCain (especially with Huckabee on the ticket, which is a tough combo), and showed his appeal in "moderate" states.

As for Hillary, she got a nice surprise with such an easy win in Massachusetts, and she handily won the big prize-- California. She was not able to claim true victory, however, and the longer this drags on, I think, the more the situation favors Obama.