Presidential Primary Road Show Finally Opens in Kentucky

As I've written before, as far as I'm concerned, the Democratic Presidential Primary ended after the majority of Texas delegates went to Senator Obama. The battle is now against McBush and the wingnut freakazoids.

However, Senator Clinton appears not to have gotten the memo.

So, after a brief stop in West Virginia next week, the Great Fifty State Primary arrives in state number 47, the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

Where, much to progressive delight, the good guys are lining up with Senator Obama, and the bad guys with Senator Clinton.

Media Czech of Barefoot and Progressive nails it, as usual.

Barack Obama will have John Yarmuth and Ben Chandler at his side, two squeaky clean guys, one of whom is the single best progressive Democrat we have in this state, and the other whom I'm hopeful will straighten up and make us proud this year.

Who will Hillary Clinton have at her side? The festering boil on the ass of the Kentucky Democratic Party: Jerry Lundergan. And his henchman, Jonathan Hurst. And Steve Friggin' Henry.

One of the (many) reasons we, progressives, all worked so hard to get Steve Beshear elected was to oust the untrustworthy Lundergan and his good ol' boy clan from power.

And what is Hillary doing? Letting all the good 'ol boys run back into the room so they can control things.

Jerry Lundergan is EVERYTHING THAT IS WRONG WITH THE KENTUCKY DEMOCRATIC PARTY. Want the endless Mark Nickolas dossier at Bluegrass Report? Here.

As I wrote back in March, the appearance of Lundergan leading Senator Clinton's Kentucky campaign was more than sufficient proof that she is doomed in Kentucky. Now it looks like Lundergan's slimy negativity field might have slithered across the border to hurt her in Indiana.

Steve Henry's appearance on her side just added the turd topping to the campaign's giant Cake O' Failure. Former Lt. Governor Henry has a genuine talent for turning to shit everything political he touches. And causing financial chaos in every campaign he joins.

Polls may have Senator Clinton up by 25-35 points, but Lundergan and Henry have fucked up against bigger odds than that.

Corss-posted at Blue in the Bluegrass.

There's more: "Presidential Primary Road Show Finally Opens in Kentucky" >>

Exploding the "Primary Win = General Win" Myth

Josh Marshall refutes Hillary's specious claim that only she can win in the general the states she won in the primary.

As Patrick Healy explains (in Thursday's New York Times), it is simply a fallacy to claim that winning a state's Democratic primary means you're more likely to win that state in the general election or that your opponent can't win it.

(SNIP)

And it's really not a big mystery that the argument doesn't hold up because it wasn't devised or conceived as an electoral argument. It's a political argument -- one that only really came into operation at the point at which the Clinton campaign realized that it was far enough behind that it's path to the nomination required making the argument to superdelegates that she's elected and Obama is not.

That's not to say there isn't a difference between the two as general election candidates -- at least in their current incarnations. There is. It's just not this big state nonsense. Peter Hart who, for what it's worth is actually part of the same polling firm as Hillary's new pollster/strategist Geoff Garin (though himself not working with either candidate), comes much closer to the mark when he says in the Times article, "Hillary goes deeper and stronger in the Democratic base than Obama, but her challenge is that she doesn't go as wide. Obama goes much further reaching into the independent and Republican vote, and has a greater chance of creating a new electoral map for the Democrats."

(SNIP)

Given the spottiness of state by state polls, for now it's best to watch the national popular vote polls, which show the two Democrats basically even in how they'd face McCain. But there are differences. They run better in different parts of the country. But the 'big state' argument is just malarkey, an artifact of the spin necessities of the post-Super Tuesday campaign.

Both Josh and the Times go into a lot more detail about geographic differences, including a pretty depressing analysis of Kentucky by Josh.

Cross-posted at Blue in the Bluegrass.

There's more: "Exploding the "Primary Win = General Win" Myth" >>

Four Weeks and 36 points to Kentucky Primary

Josh Marshall concludes that Hillary's 10-point win in Pennsylvania keeps the race pretty much at the same place it's been for a couple of weeks, all spin to the contrary.

But for Democratic voters on both sides in the remaining primary states, the victory in Pennsylvania is that our votes still count.

The last non-Pennsylvania primary polls are more than a week old, although new Indiana and North Carolina polls should be coming in shortly. Here's a roundup:

May 6 Indiana primary, Survey USA April 14: Clinton 55, Obama 39.

May 6 North Carolina primary, Survey USA April 8: Obama 49, Clinton 39.

May 20 Oregon primary, Survey USA April 7: Obama 52, Clinton 42.

Kentucky's primary is May 20. On April 15, five weeks before Kentucky's primary, Survey USA had Hillary up 36 points over Obama, 62-26.

Four weeks ago, Hillary led Obama by 20 points in Pennsylvania. That Obama made up only 10 points in a month despite outspending her more than 2-1 does not bode well for him making up 36 points in Kentucky.

Indiana's right next door, though, and if Obama beats her there - and Obama and Kentucky Democrats get on the ball promoting it - that could start some hard thinking by Kentucky Democrats, who may be conservative but are also practical. We know that states that go for Hillary, especially late in the primary season, are not likely to make President Obama's Christmas card list.

But there's another practical aspect for Kentuckians to consider. Since 1964, in every presidential contest, Kentucky has gone with the winner of the general election. (And since 2000, the person who got inaugurated.) As of April 17, Survey USA showed Clinton and McCain in a statistical tie (46-48) in Kentucky, while McCain holds a 34-point lead (63-29) over Obama.

Obama's great strength is that once he starts concentrating campaign resources - especially his personal appearances - in a state, his numbers always rise substantially and fairly quickly.

He probably can't make up thirty-six points in Kentucky in the remaining four weeks, especially without a giant-killing Pennsylvania result to build on.

But as I pointed out Monday, the key now is Controlling the Narrative. Hillary can't win either the primary or the general; don't let her fool anyone into thinking otherwise.

Cross-posted at BlueGrassRoots.

There's more: "Four Weeks and 36 points to Kentucky Primary" >>

The Vote It's Safe to Ignore

The Fear That Dare Not Speak Its Name is running off at the mouth. Apparently Democrats don't have enough to worry about on this Pennsylvania Primary Day, so they've started obsessing about racism.

Specifically, how all those horrible American racists are going to doom Democratic hopes in the fall by voting Republican.

I am going to type this very slowly so everyone gets it the first time:

Racists, wingnuts, religioids and other fascist, freakazoid republicans never, ever, EVER vote for the Democratic candidate.

Not even the ones who are registered Democrats.

Yes, the Democratic Party is infested with racists and other republican freakazoids. Unfortunately, I am personally acquainted with some of them. They are registered Democrats, they call themselves Democrats, but they never, ever, EVER vote Democratic.

So can we please kill off for good this myth that it's possible to persuade such people to vote Democratic?

Seriously. This idiocy is rapidly approaching psychosis.

Democrats win by getting real Democrats off their fat asses and into the polling booth.

Period.

Anything else is a waste of time, money and effort, and the primary reason Democratic candidates lose.

Congressional Candidate John Yarmuth of Louisville stood up in 2006, proclaimed himself a Proud Liberal Democrat, and beat the shit out of five-term republican incumbent and Mitch McConnell pet Anne Northup.

He did it without getting one single vote from a racist, a wingnut, a religioid, or a republican of any kind, shape or form. And he didn't waste a single minute or a thin dime trying.

He spoke directly to the real Democrats who have always been ignored by DINOs like Hillary, and he drew them back to the polls, where they rewarded him with victory.

That's how real Democrats win. That's how Obama has won the Democratic primary. And that's how Obama will win the Presidential Election in November.

(Part of this post originally appeared as a comment on Salon.com.)

Cross-posted at BlueGrassRoots.

There's more: "The Vote It's Safe to Ignore" >>

Pennsylvania Primary Precautions

Before the polls open in Pennsylvania in the morning, let's remember what's really at stake in the remaining primaries: Control of the Narrative.

Hillary Clinton cannot - repeat, cannot - win the nomination. She lost philosophically on Super Tuesday and mathematically in Texas.

What she can do, however, is win enough delegates to cast permanent doubt about Obama among Democrats, independents and even fed-up Republicans.

I don't actually care why she's bound and determined to see this suicidal course through to the end; suffice that nothing, up to and including endorsements of Obama from Al Gore, Bill Clinton and John McCain - is going to stop her.

So the only remaining goal for Democrats who actually care about winning the general election in November is to make sure that Hillary does not control the narrative.

No matter how tomorrow's Pennsylvania presidential primary (seriously, it should get an alliteration award) turns out, here's what Hillary is going say:

"This is a huge win for the real Democrats who support warmongering conservatives like me, and a huge, disastrous and well-deserved defeat for the elitist, Communist terrorists who worship Boy Obama like a god."

And here's how you counter it:

One month ago, Survey USA had Hillary up 19 points in Philadelphia. One week ago, Survey USA had her up 12 points. This morning, it had her clinging to a six-point lead.

Let me make this crystal clear right now:

Any Pennsylvania result that falls short of Hillary winning by 10 points is a ginormous defeat for the superannuated Goldwater Girl.

Don't let anybody tell you anything different.

Tomorrow night: What the Pennsylvania result means for the May 20 primary in Kentucky.

Cross-posted at BlueGrassRoots.

There's more: "Pennsylvania Primary Precautions" >>

Apology Not Accepted

Sooner or later in this campaign, Barack Obama is going to have pull on the boxing gloves and start delivering some hard hits. He should start today by telling Rep. Geoff Davis, R-KY4, to shove his "apology" up his tight Canuck ass.

"My poor choice of words is regrettable and was in no way meant to impugn you or your integrity. I offer my sincere apology to you and ask for your forgiveness," Davis wrote in a letter that staffers said was hand-delivered to Obama's U.S. Senate office.

Davis, a Republican representing Northern Kentucky, continued: "Though we may disagree on many issues, I know that we share the goal of a prosperous, secure future for our nation. My comment has detracted from the dialogue that we should all be having on legitimate policy differences and in no way reflects the personal and professional respect I have for you."

How excruciatingly polite. Makes it sound like Davis criticized the Illinois Senator's choice of ties. Maybe even implied Obama was color-blind.

But of course, that's not what Davis said. What Davis said was a racist slur about an inch and a half short of the n-word. And he said it in front of hundreds of people at the biggest Republican politican event of the year in Northern Kentucky. Said to the laughter, applause and cheers of the filthy rich and disgustingly lily-white audience.

Davis spoke at the Northern Kentucky 4th Congressional District Lincoln Day Dinner, also attended by Republican Sens. Mitch McConnell and Jim Bunning.

Davis compared Obama and his message to a "snake oil salesman." He said in his remarks at the GOP dinner that he also recently participated in a "highly classified, national security simulation" with Obama.

"I'm going to tell you something: That boy's finger does not need to be on the button," Davis said. "He could not make a decision in that simulation that related to a nuclear threat to this country."

National media are dismissing this as at worst the kind of slip expected from southern politicians who forget themselves in front of friendly audiences.

Senator Obama: this was no "slip." This was the opening salvo in a planned campaign of "accidental" racist "slips" that will have you wasting all your time graciously accepting passive-aggressive non-apologies.

As Media Czech points out, Geoff Davis is about as southern as Ted Kennedy.

Where was Geoff Davis Geoff born and raised? In friggin Canada.

Where did he go to college? In the good ole southern town of Pittsburgh.

This cannot simply be dismissed as a slip of the tongue due to his southern upbringing. He is a Northern carpetbagger, through and through. This is an unmistakable code word, and it was quite deliberate.

The cowardly, racist bullies are laughing at you, Senator Obama, sure you will graciously forgive them this time. And the next time. And the time after that.

What they're not expecting and have no defense for is a fast fist to the mouth, followed by a nasty kidney punch and double-handed neck-chop.

Tell Geoff Davis you don't accept fake apologies from racist, carpetbagging, dumb-as-a-rock Bush-worshippers.

Cross-posted at BlueGrassRoots.

There's more: "Apology Not Accepted" >>

Heather Ryan Steals Hillary's Show

It appears the real star of Hillary Clinton's visit to Madisonville, Kentucky yesterday afternoon was Mitch target and Democratic Congressional challenger Heather Ryan.

Jim Pence of Hillbilly Report got the video, and briansmith of BlueGrassRoots has the report.

Last night Congressional candidate Heather Ryan made her debut as the most dynamic Democrat to emerge from Western Kentucky since Alben Barkley. Speaking at the annual Governor Ruby Laffoon dinner in Madisonville, KY she rocked the audience with an impassioned call to end the “culture of complacency” fostered by her opponent, republican “Exxon” Eddie Whitfield.

Read the whole thing, watch the video,and if you're as inspired as we are, heed Brian's plea:

Please visit Heather’s website at RyanForKentucky.com and donate to the redheaded firebrand who will be travelling the length and breadth of the enormous First District from now until November.

There's also a Facebook group for Heather Ryan supporters. Join and invite your friends.

Cross-posted at Blue in the Bluegrass.

There's more: "Heather Ryan Steals Hillary's Show" >>

Obama Fever in Kentucky

PageOneKentucky has the scoop:

Easily 1,000 people (I stopped counting at 900) showed up for the opening of Barack Obama’s campaign office in Louisville this cold, windy morning. A thousand people who had never shown their face at a political function before today. And Obama himself wasn’t even there to greet them. So I think we can safely say that Louisville is suffering from a severe case of Obama Fever.

Photographic evidence.

Current polls have Hillary at more than 60 percent. About the same double-digit lead she had in Texas a couple weeks before it went for Obama. It's seven weeks and three days until the Kentucky primary. Talk to me when we're 24 hours out.

Cross-posted at BlueGrassRoots.

There's more: "Obama Fever in Kentucky" >>

Bill Clinton in Kentucky: Support Hillary Or Else

It's been obvious for quite some time that the only use Hillary Clinton has for the proles is as attendants carrying the train at her coronation, but this is ridiculous.

BenRay of What's Required reports from Bill Clinton's campaign tour of Kentucky:

So, I don’t know how many of you have heard Bill on his tour of the Commonwealth today–why he so scrupulously avoided population centers, I don’t know–but there’s something that shocked me about the rally: the price of admission.

No, it didn’t cost any money to get in, but it did require you to fill out a volunteer card for the campaign– presumably at least so you can receive direct mailers later. I attempted to refuse to fill one out, and was at first blocked, and then told by the sympathetic volunteer to just put my name on it. I wonder if the high school kids that just wanted out of class had to supply their info to the campaign?

Every campaign event I've ever been to asked everyone to fill out a card with name, address, email, etc., but none so far have been stupid enough (and I've been to some pretty stupid ones) to demand personal information as the price of admission.

Consider also that the Clinton events were specifically and broadly publicized as public events, at which all members of the public are welcome, and the "sign up or get out" behavior starts to look downright sinister.

Yes, BenRay got in (read his full report), thanks to a volunteer's common sense, and let's all hope his initial blocking was a freak occurance.

But if it wasn't, I'd say Hillary appears to have adopted not only Smirky/Darth's permanent war/fuck the poor philosophy, but also his campaign event technique of permitting loyal followers only.

Cross-posted at Blue in the Bluegrass.

There's more: "Bill Clinton in Kentucky: Support Hillary Or Else" >>

Breaking: MSM Pretending Clinton Still Viable Candidate

Yes, the "Breaking" part is sarcasm. We've known this for quite some time.

What's new is that the Politico (pardon me while I retch) has exposed the we're-all-in-on-it fraud and explained the psychology/stupidity/innumeracy behind it.

Some choice excerpts:

Unless Clinton is able to at least win the primary popular vote — which also would take nothing less than an electoral miracle — and use that achievement to pressure superdelegates, she has only one scenario for victory. An African-American opponent and his backers would be told that, even though he won the contest with voters, the prize is going to someone else.

People who think that scenario is even remotely likely are living on another planet.

(SNIP)

In other words: The notion of the Democratic contest being a dramatic cliffhanger is a game of make-believe. The real question is why so many people are playing.

Read the whole thing.

h/t TPM

Cross-posted at BlueGrassRoots.

There's more: "Breaking: MSM Pretending Clinton Still Viable Candidate" >>

Proof Hillary is Doomed in Kentucky

Seriously. Her most prominent backer is disgraced former Kentucky Democratic Party chair Jerry "Ensuring Democrats Lose Since 2003" Lundergan.

In the Lexington Herald-Leader's coverage of Wednesday night's Meet-Ups for both Clinton and Obama, Ryan Alessi perfectly captures Lundergan's unctuous, reality-defying, counter-productive cheerleading.

"Hillary knows she's ahead in Kentucky. She knows she's going to win in Kentucky. And we're going to deliver," declared Jerry Lundergan, the former state Democratic Party chairman, at the March 9 meeting of more than 30 Clinton supporters.

Nine weeks to Kentucky's May 20 primary, and in just one restaurant, Obama's supporters outnumbered Hillary's more than two to one (70 to 30.)

But we long-time followers of Lundergan's Republican-pleasing political career are not surprised.

Jerry has unerring radar for not just DINOs, but for the most egregious republican-lites ever to lose landslides to real republicans.

In 2006, Lundergan used his power as party chair to shut progressive Democrats out of elections in every county of the state, ensuring that not one single Democrat beat an incumbent Republican.

Except John Yarmuth, a proud liberal who defied every expert prediction to overthrow five-term Louisville repug congresswoman Anne Northup.

Yarmuth did it despite Lundergan, who refused Yarmuth a single dime or minute of state Democratic party support.

Then in 2007, Lundergan appeared to violate state party rules by covertly supporting a candidate in the Democratic gubernatorial primary.

That's not the best part. The candidate he supported was Bruce Lunsford, Criminal, Abuser of Poor Sick Old People, Democratic Traitor, Sore Loser, Republican Campaign Contributor and Best Friend Forever of Mitch McConnell.

Lunsford's 20-point loss in the gubernatorial primary to Steve Beshear pretty much proved the theory that Jerry Lundergan's support was the Kiss of Death.

The very first thing Beshear did on Primary Night, immediately after kissing his wife Jane, was to fire Lundergan's corrupt, losing ass from the party chairmanship.

A lot of us hoped Lundergan would slink back to his cave to sulk for a few decades, but we should have known he couldn't resist a war-mongering, corporate-owned repug-lite candidate like Hillary.

However, his public support of Hillary's campaign is as close as you can get to a guarantee that she'll lose in Kentucky.

Forget the polls. Watch The Lundergan. It's infallible.

Cross-posted at Blue in the Bluegrass.

There's more: "Proof Hillary is Doomed in Kentucky" >>

Loved Edwards? Vote for Obama

The day before Barack Obama fought Hillary Clinton to a draw on Super Tuesday (or by some calculations, actually won decisively), Ben Carter and Joe Sonka of BlueGrassRoots wrote a brilliant analysis of why Edwards supporters should change their allegiance to Obama.

There's a lot of crap on the Internet right now from fanatic Clinton and Obama partisans, as well as the usual gag-making pablum from the usual DLC mush-mouths.

This, however, is the kind of sharp, clear, make-no-bones endorsement that once upon a time graced the nation's finest newspapers. It strikes the perfect balance between practicality and idealism, avoiding both cynicism and cult hysteria.

I trust Ben and Joe will forgive me for excerpting most of their post here, because it's just too well-written and closely reasoned to edit.

(Excerpt after the jump.)

We believe America has a fight on its hands. Entrenched powers have trillions of dollars riding on maintaining the status quo and if Americans want cleaner energy, more wholesome food, safer and cheaper prescription drugs, and a health care system that treats all of us like we’re human beings, well, we’re going to have to fight for it.

In this Democratic primary, there have been two (viable) candidates that have advocated for these changes—John Edwards and Barack Obama. The difference between them, from what we can tell, came only in their envisioned means of change. As John Edwards said, “(Obama) believes you can create change by bringing everyone to the table and talking about it. That drug companies and energy companies will voluntarily give up their power. I don’t think it works that way. I think we’ve got a fight on our hands.” Amen.

With John Edwards out of the race, we turn to Barack Obama. We are hopeful, especially because of something he said after the New Hampshire primary. In response to John Edwards, he said, “I believe everyone deserves a seat at the table, including drug companies and energy companies. But that doesn’t mean you let them buy every chair.”

This rhetorical flourish provides an appropriate transition to the other reasons why we are supporting Obama, some principled, others pragmatic. First, the man can inspire. Wow! We see in Barack Obama the same kind of transformative political figure for the Democratic Party as Ronald Regan was for the Republicans. We believe he has the ability to forge a new American majority and achieve change, not through half-measures, triangulation, and compromise, but by inspiring the American people to demand the kind of fundamental change we need. Instead of doing only what is politically possible, we believe he can expand the field of what is possible by tearing down fences on the political landscape so long established others accept them as natural.

Second, Barack Obama was right on the war. He was right in 2002 and he’s right today. The war in Iraq has been America’s greatest foreign policy disaster in a generation and enabling it is the Democratic Party’s great shame. Related to this issue is America’s desperate need to restore its image abroad. To use the language of Madison Avenue: we have a branding problem. We believe Barack Obama can enunciate to the world a vision that resonates across cultures, across nations, and across religions. Amen.

Third, we mentioned some of our reasons were pragmatic. Above, we spurned the cynical view that politics was the art of the possible. However, the tension in politics must always be between that cynicism and idealism. We temper our idealism with pragmatism. We may support Dennis Kucinich, but we could never support him. Our support of John Edwards stemmed in part from our desire to have a candidate who could put all fifty states into play for the Democrats. We believed a John Edwards candidacy could have reclaimed part of the South for Democrats, and a strong Southern Democrat would certainly have made life more difficult for Mitch McConnell in this fall.

While we are reticent to use a term crafted in the bowels of the DLC—electability—at this point it would be foolhardy not to look at the dynamics of the race ahead. It is clear to us that the Republican’s only hope of retaining the White House is John McCain. They seem to be figuring this out, as well, and we presume he will be their nominee this fall. Against McCain, we believe Barack Obama is our only chance.

A Clinton/McCain duel would be fought along conventional lines with conventional weapons and we believe McCain wins that duel. Hilary Clinton is too polarizing to inspire, too entrenched in traditional political calculus to adapt, and too wedded to big business to convincingly articulate a different vision for America. Against McCain, we will need someone who can change the political calculus and inspire new alliances.

Barack Obama, his communications staff, and his campaign managers have demonstrated a remarkable ability to craft a message that endeavors to create new political realities. This work requires courage, creativity, and conviction, all of which Barack Obama has in abundance. BlueGrassRoots is proud to endorse Barack Obama for President of the United States.

Cross-posted at Blue in the Bluegrass.

There's more: "Loved Edwards? Vote for Obama" >>

Dear Remaining Primary States: Please Let Our Votes Count. Love, Kentucky

At the risk of tempting fate, I have to finally articulate the hope I've been harboring since Iowa:

It's possible that 2008 will see the first time since 1988 that primary votes cast in Kentucky will actually count in determining the Democratic nominee.

Kentucky's presidential primary is May 20, the same third Tuesday in May on which every Kentucky primary election is held. Oregon also votes on May 20, then Puerto Rico in June, and that's it.

But for Puerto Rico and the Pacific Time Zone, Kentucky primary voters are dead last in the nation.

We haven't seen a presidential candidate during an actual election year since Lexington homeboy Henry Clay ran in 1852.

In 1988, a wild hair got into the ass of somebody who moved our primary to Super Tuesday. About 14 people - obviously confused by the winter weather - actually voted, so the presidential primary was quietly moved back to almost Memorial Day.

I remember fighting back tears in May 2004 as I cast my defiant but meaningless vote for Howard Dean. If only we'd had a February primary, Howard, we could have saved you!

But now Super Tuesday, instead of crowning the usual hopeless establishment loser, has given us the priceless gift of an actual tie between two strong candidates. And the very real prospect of staying a tie right through Memorial Day.

As Josh Marshall noted after the results were in:

But I think all these competing scenarios make one point clear. The only arguments for one side or the other being a winner here come down to airy and finally meaningless arguments about expectations. And the result tells a different tale. It's about delegates. It's dead even. You've got two well-funded candidates who've demonstrated an ability to power back from defeats. And neither is going anywhere.

The flip side of the proportional representation in delegates is that not only does it allow a challenger like Obama not to get put away early, it also makes it difficult to put away an opponent late. The conventional wisdom is that Obama will do well in this weekend's and next Tuesday's contests. But if he does, proportionality will reign there too. It's hard to see where this doesn't go all the way to the convention.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, party split, help the repugs, wasted money, blah, blah, blah.

I don't care. Just this once, I want my presidential primary vote to count. I don't think that's too much to ask.

Virgina? Ohio? Texas? Pennsylvania? What do you say?

Cross-posted at BlueGrassRoots.

There's more: "Dear Remaining Primary States: Please Let Our Votes Count. Love, Kentucky" >>

The Endorsement War Is Finally Over

Tomorrow, Florida voters will go to the polls a final time. By the weekend, over 800,000 early votes had been cast. An additional 421,000 absentee ballots have been requested. Tuesday is shaping up to be one of the highest voter turnouts in years. I think that means that Floridians are paying attention and they are overwhelmingly hearing McCain-Obama.
[keep reading...]

I did a review of the papers that issue endorsements in such races and the high profile politicians who are endorsing. Here's how it shakes out.

McCain sweeps the newspaper endorsements with 10. He also received the University of Florida's student paper endorsement. The big plum, however, was Governor Charlie Crist's endorsement which was a surprise to even McCain. That was the final nail in Giuliani's coffin, by the way.

McCain also captured Sen. Mel Martinez's vote which is meaningless. With McCain's immigration stance, he's okay with the Republican Hispanic community but this single issue will sink him with the Republican base. That's why Romney is still so strong in the polls.

Obama captured 7 endorsements including what I thought were some unlikely ones: Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel and the Pensacola News-Journal. He also captured the student newspapers for UF and the University of Central Florida. He's picked up a lot of local leader support, but not a big name. Still with the national endorsements he has, and the demographic in Central Florida, he could make the race a lot closer than anyone expects.

Clinton captured 2 Central Florida newspaper endorsements and struck out in the rest of the state. Nothing in South Florida is very bad as these are Democrats who turnout and vote - older and very much her demographic. She did manage to pick up Senator Bill Nelson which struck most of us as him jumping on the bandwagon.

John Edwards picked up one endorsement that carries some weight on the Central Florida east coast. The area, though, doesn't turn out to vote and it will lead to him being just a blip. In an aside, I live in a very red county and Edwards led every candidate - both parties - in fundraising here.

Ron Paul captured the UCF student newspaper endorsement which was quite a surprise. UCF is known for being quite conservative relative to other state colleges.

Giuliani managed to pick up only the endorsement of Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum. Like Senator Nelson, he's also run for just about every office in the state (mostly against Nelson). His opinion holds some sway with the Republican base - I think probably more than Crist's. This might be an advantage with Florida's closed primary, but NOTHING can save Giuliani, especially now that Charlie is off-ship.

Romney and Huckabee scored goose eggs in endorsements from any meaningful source. Tom Feeney is Romney's main guy but that's not a good thing with his troubles. Adam Putnam - the 3rd ranking Republican in Congress - was a Thompson man and it's not likely that he'll make another endorsement since he hasn't done it by now.

Overall, I think the Republican race will be closer than we think and Romney may pull it out despite the media lovefest with McCain. Clinton wins going away but Obama may be a little closer that we thought if young voters show up.

There's more: "The Endorsement War Is Finally Over" >>

The Rudy Watch

I said I'd leave this to others as Rudy withers and dies in Florida but he called in to a local talk radio show here in Orlando (he's in Miami). It was planned time but the phone call alone shows the desperation in the campaign.

To finish out the day, have a good laugh at some of Rudy's insight and lies(paraphrased with actual words in quotations):

On revealing his client list:

The host said that he had taken some hot water over the fact that he hadn't released his client list. Rudy responded by saying that he had. He said that "over 90%" had become known, talked about and researched in the press. The host let him off with that.

Let's be clear: Rudy didn't release anything - not 90%, not 50%. Researchers, reporters, opponents may have surmised who the clients were but Rudy didn't help.

On Fred Thompson dropping out:

"I called Fred and told him he ran a good campaign."

WTF? The concession speech that wasn't. The no fire in the belly. The absent candidate. Of all the things he could have said on this subject - this wasn't graceful; it was disingenuous.

On what he has over McCain:
[keep reading... there's more]

Rudy says that McCain is strong on security. Romney is strong on the economy. Rudy says he's strong on both. He turned around New York City when it was in severe financial crisis by "cutting taxes and reducing spending." On national security - 9/11. 'Nough said.

Let's take these one at a time - 9/11 first because I can't believe anyone hasn't said this. Rudy did nothing on 9/11 that could be remotely be called providing national security. He didn't deploy troops. He didn't fight an enemy. He didn't secure borders. He didn't do anything with regard to national security - period.

He has bastardized his being in New York City in a way that NO ONE has the exact same event occurring at the Pentagon. I'm sick of his using this event to establish his bonafides when he didn't do anything.

The economy. Someone should note this: However big the budget of New York City - I think it was around $50 billion when Rudy was mayor - a city government just does not compare, on any level, to running a state or the federal government. City commissions, borough chiefs, dealing with police and fire unions - these are all fine things but they are local and a lot of wheeling and dealing can be done on a local level that simply has no substitute in the national arena.

Further, let's take a look at his cutting spending. Didn't that result in a sub-standard radio system for the fire department that led to men in the World Trade Center not being notified to evacuate. As the bridge builders in Minnesota are about to find out, when cutting corners costs lives, you pay the piper. Maybe Rudy going down in flames is his payback.

On whether Ron Paul is a "nut" (yes, the host asked that):

He's got some different ideas, especially about Iraq, that "I don't agree with". "Fighting islamoterrorism is the defining issue of our day." It very important and Ron Paul doesn't realize that. We don't need Iraq to become a center for terrorists.

You know what I'm going to say here: Iraq is the best terrorist recruiting tool that we will ever know in our lifetime or our children's. No action we could take moving forward would make that untrue. It might add to it but this debacle will stand as the centerpiece for driving moderate Islamic factions to become enemies of the United States.

On winning Florida:

We got the New York Giants season comparison. They started the season "lagging" and now they are in the Super Bowl. Rudy specifically said that this was exactly what was happening in his campaign in Florida.

Clearly, Rudy needs to visit Disney. He'll be right at home in FantasyLand.

All this in less than 10 minutes! Oh joy! He said he'll be in Orlando tomorrow.

There's more: "The Rudy Watch" >>

In Other Florida News

I'll let the pundits continue the Rudy death watch in Florida as poll after poll puts Romney ahead. That's pretty stunning considering that Rudy was second only to Hillary in fundraising in Florida.

Meanwhile, we missed this. Romney's main man in the sunshine state, Tom Feeney, probably has the fight of his congressional career on this hands. His new opponent has revved up the fundraising machine and I may be living in Fantasyland come November.

For the third quarter, Feeney announced that he had raised the most money EVER in his career - $324,000. Rumor has it that he raised only half that in the last quarter.

Last week, we got the news that Suzanne Kosmas broke Feeney's own record in the last quarter by raising over $350,000. This, when she only entered the race in October.

We can hope.

As an aside, the Republican plot to disenfranchise Democratic voters by moving up the primary so Florida was stripped of its delegates by the DNC appears to have failed.

In Orange County, 45 percent of early voters so far are Democrats and 42 percent are Republican. ...

For absentee votes, 46 percent are from Democrats, 44 percent from Republicans.

Even in Florida, there are times those dirty tricks don't work.

There's more: "In Other Florida News" >>

Obama Found in Florida

Photo Credit

And, boy, is Clinton pissed!

Hillary Clinton campaign advisors are accusing Barack Obama's campaign of violating a Democratic National Committee pledge not to advertise in early primary states such as Florida who moved up their primary dates without the party's permission.

Last night, I posted on the appearance of an Obama ad on CNN immediately after the debate. Discussion ensued as to how it got on the air down here. After all, the Democratic Candidates have vowed not to campaign in Florida thanks to the draconian order of Howard Dean to punish us because Republicans moved up our primary.

Apparently, it was a national ad buy and the ad is really running. I've seen it more than 10 times between CNN and MSNBC and I'm not watching all that much. I think it's the beginning of the end for the candidate blackout even though we have just a week to go.

The Clinton campaign says they "aren't ruling anything out," in terms of whether or not to abandon the pledge to compete in Florida.

This is good! Voters have been inundated with Rudy and Romney ads for weeks. If either of them wins the nomination - okay, if Romney wins - he'll have an incredible brand recognition that Edwards and Obama won't have. Only Clinton has that kind of recognition in Florida with ALL voters.

If this opens the floodgates, just maybe our Democratic candidates can make an impact that might turn Florida to a nice shade of purple on its way to a deep blue.

There's more: "Obama Found in Florida" >>

The Endorsement War in Florida, Part I - McCain

The newspaper endorsement wars have begun just ten days ahead of Florida's "unauthorized" Presidential Primary. The Orlando Sentinel, Palm Beach Post and Gainesville Sun all published their endorsements on Sunday. The tally:

McCain - 3
Obama - 2
Clinton - 1

The least important of these endorsements, in terms of population, may be the most important in turning out the young vote. Both Obama and McCain received the endorsement of the Gainesville Sun. That's important because Florida's flagship school, the University of Florida, is located there. Make no mistake, the hometown newspaper might as well be the campus paper. This is big news to all those college students.

To make it even more interesting, the University's President, Bernie Machen, took the unprecedented step of endorsing John McCain. Like it or not, he is still considered the "maverick" and that will attract the Republican youth vote as much as Obama will attract the Democratic one.

But, what does it mean?

[keep reading for more of what Florida's thinking about McCain ...]

Odd that one of the reasons for his support is the one that will sink McCain in the long run: his immigration stance. He can try to double-speak on this issue, but comments from readers on his endorsements tell me his previous support of Bush's immigration reform will sink him if it becomes a headline.

Machen said he was most impressed with McCain's ability to take stances that were not necessarily popular but that in his opinion were the right thing to do. He said he particularly supports McCain's immigration policy. The Arizona senator has tried to pass broad immigration reform but was met with resistance from fellow republicans.

McCain's Web site now calls for securing the American borders.

It strikes me that McCain is trying to parse his way around his support for the reform and it looks like his endorsers will be complicit. The Orlando Sentinel had five words tucked into his Iraq support:

But on two of his most controversial stands -- support for comprehensive immigration reform and more U.S. troops in Iraq -- he has stuck to his principles at the risk of sinking his campaign.

This is obviously meant to placate the "base" where support of the war is an absolute must to win the Republican vote and support of anything favorable to illegal immigrants is deadly. The Sentinel saw those exit polls that show the MSM's favorite son doesn't have the support of his own party and sought to diminish his worst issue with his most favorable.

The Sentinel labels Huckabee's flip flop on immigration and taxes and Romney's many flip flops and says, "it's hard to know what he really stands for, and what kind of president he might be". But on McCain's two major flip flops - evangelical support and supporting views tax cuts - as well as the previously mentioned immigration flip, the Sentinel says only that he changed his position for "political expediency."

The Gainesville Sun obviously didn't get the message from the Mechan endorsement article and really didn't get the Republican base memo when they touted:

We most admire McCain for his principled stand on immigration reform. He champions a comprehensive rewrite of immigration policies, including a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants, while most politicians are reduced by fear to mouthing empty slogans like "no amnesty."

Seems John has been reduced by fear also.

The Palm Beach Post puts the immigration issue in the category of reaching across the aisle:

... and collaborated with Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., on immigration. Like most Arizonans, he understands that the nation needs a comprehensive approach to immigration that not only tightens borders but deals pragmatically with the 12 million illegal immigrants already here.

Unfortunately, this is not the view of many voters in Florida - Republican or Democratic. Illegal immigration is seen as a real problem here - not just Mexican but Cuban and Haitian as well. Frankly, the Floridians against illegal immigrants are also likely to be against any concession to even legal immigrants.

Ads running in Spanish are met with derision. Read the comments on articles that are written about this and you'll know the Bradley Effect is alive and well in Florida where Hispanics are concerned. An astounding 42% of them specifically mentioned McCain's "amnesty" support of illegals as the reason they would never vote for him. And, I didn't eliminate the Ron Paul spammers from the total count.

While it's not scientific, the comments are representative of conversation after conversation I have with Republicans. This does not bode well.

I'm not proud to be in a state where such hatefulness requires that politicians deny any solution but a wall to a very real issue but it is happening. At the Police Chief conference I was at last week, only Florida's Property Tax Amendment issue got higher play. Giuliani support was abysmal but McCain's stance on this issue evoked more than a majority of negativity.

The Miami Herald reported that McCain won't be getting Senator Mel Martinez's endorsement so as not to offend Giuliani. In Miami's Cuban community - which turns out to vote - this is a fairly big slap, but I'm betting that McCain is breathing a sigh of relief. Otherwise, voters would be reminded that McCain joined with Martinez on the immigration issue:

Some viewed Martinez's decision to sit out as a betrayal of McCain, who helped Martinez push a radioactive White House-backed immigration bill. The measure was roundly condemned by conservatives as ''amnesty'' for illegal immigrants and cost McCain serious political points that helped almost kill his campaign.

Like it or not, this issue is toxic in Florida and Republican's won't forget McCain's high profile support no matter what he says today.

While it looked like McCain might be on top, Rasmussen reports softening support for McCain as well as Guiliani. Last week, it was a four way tie for first; now, Romney is ahead, outside the margin for error. Rudy imploded all on his own but Republican Floridians are surely starting to remembering the immigration fiasco this past summer.

As I've said before, the Republican Party does not like minorities and the base won't vote for anyone who supports them in any way. Factor in the fact the Florida is a closed primary - only Republicans can vote in the Republican Primary - and the only thing left is that McCain's a loser.

There's more: "The Endorsement War in Florida, Part I - McCain" >>

Don't Be Fooled: Presidential Race is Three-Way Tie

Every Presidential Election year around June, people start complaining about how "the media" annointed a party nominee in February, before half the nation had voted for a primary candidates or half the delegates had been awarded.

Yeah, the Tweetys and the Russerts are assholes, but why do supporters of the second- and third-place candidates let themselves be fooled?

I'm starting to hear totally unwarranted panic from Obama supporters and even less-warranted surrender from Edwards supporters, all of which feeds directly into the Big Lie of Hillary inevitability.

(Full Disclosure: I'm a strong Edwards supporter.)

Salon commenter CarolynETaylor makes some good points about why the real "Comeback Kid" in New Hampshire is Edwards:

(More after the jump.)

Yes, it was disappointing to Edwards' supporters that he didn't do better than he did with 17% but that sentence should say "even better" in light of his own progress among New Hampshire voters.

He received nearly twice as many votes as he did in New Hampshire in 2004, going from 26,000 to 48,000, which, given the overall increase in voters meant going from 12% to 17%. That too is significant, although given the agenda of the MSM, it will, I bet, never show up at all, so "lost" in the obsession over this being a Clinton-Obama race, period.

I think it's safe to say that Southerners have tended to have an extra hurdle to mount in NH primaries. In 1992, the very time when placing 2nd made Bill Clinton the "comeback kid," Clinton received 41,540 votes (compared to Tsongas' 55,000). That 1992 Bill Clinton vote count is 6,500 FEWER votes than Edwards received there yesterday.

It all depends on what the media choose to focus on. If they single-mindedly focus only on horse-race results and do not see under the first-place finishes what other data are there to mine which may stand in some contradiction to the more simplistic storyline, then that too is part of the problem. Sure, Hillary is lead story today, but is her new "comeback kid" story the ONLY story out of NH?

Why can't the media just as easily be saying, Wow, Edwards finished 2nd in Iowa over Clinton despite being vastly outspent, now he nearly doubled his numbers in New Hampshire over his previous election, if he can repeat his victory of 2004 in South Carolina (despite the media bandwagon for his opponents), he's just as much in this race as anyone.

Kentucky's primary isn't until May, and if everybody just calms down and hangs in there, my primary vote might actually count, for the first time in my life.

Cross-posted at BlueGrassRoots.

There's more: "Don't Be Fooled: Presidential Race is Three-Way Tie" >>

Florida Again - Sadly

I think this commenter to a Miami Herald story on the Clinton upset has a valid point.

I can see it now. Dem convention in August and Obama is leading Hillary by the amount of the Florida delegates that are not to be counted. Hillary will sue to make them count and Obama will sue not to have them count. Florida will be the center of the voter problem once again.

Howard Dean's punishment of Florida for a Republican decision is sure to put us square in the middle of a controversy should the close election continue. I hope that's not the case but, with Rasmussen's general party numbers showing Republicans on an up-tick, I can't help but think Dean has made a bad decision.

If you're an Obama supporter, the decision is particularly bad. Democrats in Florida know Hillary and JohnEdwards from the 90's and 2004. But, we haven't the slightest clue about Obama. With no trips to the state, there is no way the voters will feel what Brian Williams reported:

In his beautiful, soaring concession speech, Obama mentioned the town of Lebanon for a reason. I was with him in Lebanon the day before — and what we saw there was a defining moment in the campaign. ... We turned the corner toward the event and saw hundreds of people lined up through the streets of the town just to see him, to feel his aura and to later say that they'd done it — they'd been there. There were hundreds more than the venue could hold, and they stood there anyway, and kept coming. Obama, overwhelmed by the overflow crowd, insisted on an outdoor speech before his indoor speech. This much is important, and should be said: Any journalist covering any candidate that day, in that town, would have come away as I did after seeing those people, saying something akin to the old song lyric, "Something's happening here."

The Obama Affect is not being felt here in Florida. We get tuned up on his rhetoric but, as one person at a local gathering put it: "Hey, he's a good speaker. So is Edwards. Hillary's not. But, speaking doesn't get the job done."

TV doesn't allow us Florida voters to experience the aura that the media tells us is Obama. I'm not sure if that's a good thing or bad thing for voters. I'd like to think we're deciding on something more than who can make a good speech. Unfortunately, we're left without answers due to a decision from the DNC.

Why does Howard Dean hate Florida and the democratic process?

There's more: "Florida Again - Sadly" >>