Donald Draper, Matt Denn and Mickey Mouse

Did anyone else see the latest episode of Mad Men? I was blown away by the first season but I think this season is drifting away from the format that made season 1 so badass. What the hell was Don Draper doing having sex with some hippy in Los Angeles? Why is there some gay European walking around Sterling Cooper? I don't need this show to get all preachy on me, I just want to see more of the alcohalic New York business work of the late 50s/early 60s.

I was walking around the UD football game this weekend handing out Charlie Copeland literature. One woman was unloading stuff from her car when she heard my friend and I talking with another group of people. When she heard Charlie's name she spun around and walked tword us. She said she has worked with Matt Denn at the Insurance Commissioner's office for the last 4 years and is ready to do anything she can to help Charlie win. This is not the first time we have gotten a similar response out of people who have been working with Denn in Dover. We gave her a sticker and she gave us her e-mail. I really hope more people get a chance to meet Matt Denn before the election.

And just in case you missed it, Mickey Mouse is now registered to vote in Florida. God Bless ACORN.

Catholics for Obama

http://store.barackobama.com/product_p/rs29552.htm

I think this will just make for backlash.

Has he really picked yet?

Not that I've given it too much though, but what possible advantage is there to waiting this long? By now potential candidates have built up followings that are about to be disappointed, home states and districts have gotten excited. I see opportunity cost in this play and no gain.

I don't think Obama has made up his mind yet.

Man that was a fun Primary!

No matter who you were backing you have to admit – that was pretty awesome. But now to the business end – Conservatives – are you feeling lucky?

The Democratic party had two options; a moderate liberal and a rather extremist liberal. If they had gone with Hillary they would have had a better shot at the 2008 election, the 2012 election and so on but they would have advanced the leftist agenda less. Barack’s Socialism will be unpopular and if he somehow manages to capture the 2008 election he will be packing his bags by 2012, but how much damage can he get done by then?

Barack will play poorly in the polls and if elected will pave the way for a very conservative president in 2012 (it takes a Carter to get a Reagan) but in those 4 years a lot could happen.

So, in the long run are we better off with the moderation of McCain right now or would we be better off with Reagan part II trying to undue 4 years of Socialism in 2012?

Shopping for a Third Party Candidate in 08 – Part II

As was expressed here, I am interested in the delicate act of protest voting and wanted to advise all of my friends on the right who could not bring themselves to vote for John McCain. Of the candidates that have a shot in this election John McCain is by far the least bad, I support him and think there are plenty of reasons you should too. If McCain is either clearly going to win or clearly going to lose Delaware and my presidential vote wouldn’t make a difference anyway I may vote third party. Out of curiosity I also wanted to see who else was out there. Right now, this is the field;

Libertarians – The most promising place for my vote right now, the Libertarians emerged from their convention having nominated a Barr/Root ticket. I really like the looks of Barr and I’m glad to see that Root has clearly specified he does not believe abortion is a federal issue. I’d still like to know more about Barr, particularly where he stands on illegal immigration but he has a pretty solid record from Congress. Right now this is probably where my protest vote is going.

Constitutionalists – Nominated a fellow named Chuck Baldwin. Don’t know too much about Chuck but it looks like he would be a solid anti-illegal immigration, lower-taxes, shrink the government vote if Barr doesn’t pan out for some reason.

Prohibitionists – When you’ve finally had enough of politics. Not sure if they’ll be on the ballot in Delaware.

Ralph Nader – got 2,000 votes from DE in 2004, he’ll probably be on the ballot again this year.

Greens – seem set to nominate Cynthia McKinney, she may very well be to the left of Arden.

Mike Gravel! – Alas, the dream has died. After finishing fourth at the Libertarian National Convention Gravel does not appear to be further pursuing a presidential run.

There are a couple other Third Parties but it is unlikely they will make it onto the ballot in Delaware. Nationwide, if you’ve got a problem with McCain send a clear message to Republican leadership with a vote for Barr or Baldwin.

Hilary has taken the lead in the popular vote

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html

At this rate, even if she loses the nomination she will have gotten the most votes.

Shopping for a Third Party Candidate in 08 - Part I.

There are only really 3 people who have a chance at claiming our nation's presidency, and of those people John McCain is far and away the best, I pray he wins and I'll probably be voting for him.

I say probably because if it looks like McCain is either clearly going to win, or clearly not going to win Delaware I'm going to throw up the protest vote. I like McCain but I am weary of him on some issues, particularly illegal immigration and I think it is not illogical to fear that McCain could shift the Republican party a few notches to the left. But protest voting is tricky - people have to understand that it is protest.

Some of my more conservative friends have suggested that we all need to vote for the democrats in 2008 to show the Republican party that we're not happy with their moderate candidates. I think that's silly - how do we expect the Republican party is going to get that message? Are they going to look at a Hillary win and say "Wow! The conservative voter is disgruntled with us and voted for the opposition out of spite, we'd better select more conservative candidates"? No, they're going to say "Wow! People really like Hillary".



I did a little shopping (mind you, it was on wikipedia) to look for a third party candidate that would send the message I want to send ("hey Republican party, I'm still open to voting for you but in the future put up someone who is a little more libertarian and will enforce our immigration laws") and I think I found a decent one. Out of the Libertarian Party we have Wayne Allyn Root - reduced government spending, increased personal liberties and responsibilities, strong international stance though weak on social issues like abortion.

There are also a few other decent candidates up for the Libertarian primary, as well as up for the Constitution Party and as a last option I've got the Prohibition Party. Under no circumstances will I be voting for either of the democrats or any of the Greens, Communists or Socialists.



So to recap - of the realistic options on the table I'm backing McCain and will only vote third party if the margins are far enough away that a vote for McCain will be pointless. If you plan on a protest vote against McCain for motivations similar to mine I ask that rather than just voting for the dem you vote for a candidate like Root who will send a relatively clear and productive message to the GOP.



On a related note - Mike Gravel is running for the Libertarian Party's nomination, and while that isn't funny his campaign ad is - http://youtube.com/watch?v=bA2LgJviH9w
I hope all the crazies vote for him

I was really hoping stuff like this would wait until after the democratic primary

Hillary was caught clearly, clearly lying about her experiences in Yugoslavia but I’m not sure it will damage her campaign all that much. While this will invariably do a little long term damage to her I think she’ll still take PA and I think if Obama’s campaign sputters toward the end (which it very well might) she still has a good shot at the nomination.

BTW, check out the video, just playing this over and over again on TV would be a slam dunk campaign, I hope Giuliani challenges her in NY and uses it.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=8BfNqhV5hg4

Obama's "Dean Scream"?

Say Howard Dean and most Americans will think back to that high-pitched "YeaAHah!!!" he boomed for all of West Des Moines, and indeed, the world, to hear. That was defiantly the moment his chance at the Democratic Nomination took a dive, but I don't believe that was the reason.

People didn't really like Dean all that much; his positions on many areas were bordering on communism, his supporters were creepy and potentially unreliable, he wanted to make national fights out of local issues, he probably wasn't all that viable in a race against a determined Republican president, he didn't know much about international relations and he came off as a bit of a jerk to a lot of people. Wow that was a long sentence, but those were the real, complex reasons behind Dean's downfall. The scream was just the moment, something undeniably tangible that people could easily point to rather than explain all those other reasons that Dean didn't sit well in their guts.

Obama gave a pretty good speech this week, maybe even a great speech. It told us what we should all already know - some ethnic groups in America don't get along all that well and there are sometimes legitimate reasons behind this ill will. Mr. Obama doesn't really have any particular solution for this problem but never the less honestly talking about race in America doesn't hurt anything. So why are people, particularly democrats, reacting to this speech badly? Some will say its racism but those people are silly, any objective analysis says Obama's racial makeup has decidedly aided his campaign. I think this was Obama's Dean Scream Moment.

Obama is in many ways a Democratic candidate flawed in the same ways (though not to the same extent) as Dean was. He has an army of young volunteers who while enthusiastic are often not only poorly informed but also not registered to vote and will probably be made mince meat of by the efficient RNC cadres. His positions are not just left of center, economically they're left of left of left. He has no foreign policy experience. He too is looking to make federal issues out of state decisions. Above all else the Obama campaign of propelled by a naive optimism that more and more democratic leaders are seeing could be less effective than the tried and true Clinton machine.

I thought Obama's speech was at worst empty rhetoric, certainly there was noting bad about it but this opinion is not shared by many influential democratic bellwethers.

After February 4th there was a long stretch when all that was in the news was this unprobable swath of Obama victories which built momentum and enthusiasm. But that is over now, the voters and the Democratic party have a month and a half to sit back and as if they really want a state senator from south Chicago to be running the most powerful nation mankind has ever seen.

Obama is still in this, but after this speech I predict a chilling effect. I think donations will slow, the media will be more critical, he will get rocked in Pennsylvania, Indiana will not look good for him.

Hillary sucks at offence

Though it is not yet do or die time for Hillary it is game time and she is not playing well. Hillary is now behind Barack by 16 points nationally and by 100 delegates, she is now officially the underdog and that gives her the right to go on the attack, and she should, but she sucks at it.

Hillary’s attacks are heavy-handed and are making her look worse than her opponent; During a recent debate she mocked Barack’s “change you can believe in” by saying he is “chance you can Xerox” – weak burn Hillary – the dude who originally made that statement encouraged Barack to use it and her slogan doesn’t rhyme with the old one. And there are so many better things to mock Obama about! If he gets it McCain is going to rip into him – why can’t Hillary? This recent photo is a great example – if it is from their camp it should have been released in a way that it couldn’t have been traced, if it wasn’t their camp they should call Obama dishonest turning the guilt on him (and getting more people to look at that goofy photo).

Hillary’s campaign staff was shaken up two weeks ago, I suspect the original members were appointed more for political reasons than performance as they have been replaced with more fiscally conservative old-hands. After these recent blundering excursions into negative-land she might want to shake up some more of that staff.

HRC – down, but not out

On February 7th 2008 Mitt Romney, knowing his presidential campaign had become a hindrance to the Republican Party dropped out of the race. I was there when he did it, he was magnanimous. He still stood a chance, he still had cards to play but he dropped out for the advancement of what was always his paramount goal; the common good of the United States. Hillary shares no such goal.

Hillary is behind in the national polls by a fair bit but there will be no Mitt Romneyesque bowing out for Hillary. Hillary is, and always has been in it for herself and as long as she stands any chance at all she’ll stay in the race and she still has one hell of a chance. She isn’t too far behind in the delegate count, she is still ahead by a lot in PA, she is making inroads into Barrack’s pledged delegates and more importantly still has Florida and Michigan to play. If Hillary can bring this to convention there is a great chance that she, the bureaucratic in-fighter with years of national experience, will be able to win over more delegates in backroom deals than an inexperienced Illinois state senator can.

The news has been talking about Texas/Ohio a lot recently, saying Hillary will be finished if she doesn’t win at least one of them by a large margin. But they’re doing that because they’re the news – they want you to think this race is as suspenseful as possible so that you’ll watch it. Don’t expect HRC to back down unless she loses by at least 60-40 in both big states.