More on Realignment and the Scrambling GOP

Conservative columnist David Brooks wrote a good summary of the battle within the GOP in today's edition of the New York Times.

According to Brooks, there are currently two camps within the Republican Party - the "Traditionalists" and the "Reformists." Brooks says the Traditionalists are the typical right-wing hard-liners including Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, the Club for Growth, the Federalist Society, Americans for Tax Reform, and the Family Research Council.

The Traditionalists believe that the reason for recent GOP defeats is because the Party has not been conservative enough. They blame big-government policies of George W. Bush and East Coast conservatives who are now losing their offices for a reason. They argue for all of the typical neo-conservative points of view.

The Reformists, on the other hand, believe that the Republican Party has to modernize because the conservative hard-liners are making Americans become disillusioned with the highly ideological GOP. They want to address middle-class economic anxiety and global warming rather than abortion, gay marriage, and consistent calls for tax cuts as the only means to solve the nation's problems. They want the new GOP to be similarly modeled after what David Cameron is doing with the Tories in the UK.

But despite the fact that the Reformists might have the better argument as to where to take the Republican Party, the Traditionalists will have the upper-hand for some time.

"[First] Congressional Republicans are predominantly Traditionalists. Republicans from the coasts and the upper Midwest are largely gone. Among the remaining members, the popular view is that Republicans have been losing because they haven't been conservative enough.

Second, Traditionalists have the institutions. Over the past 40 years, the Conservative Old Guard has built up a movement of activist groups, donor networks, think tanks and publicity arms. The reformists, on the other hand, have no institutions.

There is not yet an effective Republican Leadership Council to nurture modernizing conservative ideas. There is no moderate Club for Growth, supporting centrist Republicans. The Public Interest, which used to publish an array of public policy ideas, has closed. Reformist Republican donors don't seem to exist. Any publication or think tank that headed in an explicitly reformist direction would be pummeled by its financial backers. National candidates who begin with reformist records — Giuliani, Romney or McCain — immediately tack right to be acceptable to the power base.

Finally, Traditionalists own the conservative mythology. Members of the conservative Old Guard see themselves as members of a small, heroic movement marching bravely from the Heartland into belly of the liberal elite. In this narrative, anybody who deviates toward the center, who departs from established doctrine, is a coward, and a sellout."

Brooks finishes by noting that the GOP will probably move further to the right in coming years. But the trend of realignment will hold true. As issues change and the Reformists - with their finger on the pulse of the issues - grow in number, the cycle will swing the Republicans back from a hard-right minority status into a new age of competition with the Democrats or even to a clear majority.

Democrats Speculate Dean's Successor

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean will be stepping down from his post in January. The former Vermont Governor and 2004 Presidential Candidate who helped reignite the Democratic Party has always said he would only serve one term.

But the Huffington Post reported today that there may be other reasons for his departure.

Despite his promise to not seek re-election at the DNC, many Democrats thought he would do well to stay on given the recent successes he brought to the party. But as President, Barack Obama will be the new leader of the Democratic Party and his choice for a new Chair will almost certainly be approved by the DNC when they hold the upcoming elections. And Obama's new Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, is known to have been at odds with Dean.

In 2006, Emanuel, then Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the architect of the Democratic takeover of the House, criticized Dean within the party ranks for the 50-State-Strategy, which Emanuel felt was wasting resources on unwinnable races.

While Emanuel was certainly not the only critic of the 50-State-Strategy, most Democrats have come to see the operation as a success. It was perhaps the riskiest of Dean's successful (and often revolutionary) accomplishments, including the Neighborhood Leadership Program and the long overdue advances to the party's Voter File technology.

According to the article, the DNC will likely return to the leadership style they used in the 1990s, with a sort-of honorary Chair and an "Operational Chair" who will deal with the day-to-day priorities of the party. The article also lists Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) as a possible Chair and Steve Hildebrand, Obama's Deputy Campaign Manager, as the Operational Chair.

Dean is reported to have told a party operative that he will seek a promise from his successor to preserve the current DNC model - including the 50-State-Strategy - which seems likely to happen given its success.

As for Dean's future, there has been talk of him earning a position in the Obama Administration, but others say his wife will not be willing to give up her medical practice to move to Washington.

Republican Politicians: "When are the next elections?"

It's Sunday, November 09, 2008. Here is what we're looking at.

GOP leaders deny ambitions for Presidential bids in 2012. But former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee and Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal already plan to visit Iowa before the year is out.

The recounts in Minnesota are getting closer. Senator Norm Coleman is trying to use the courts to stop as few as 32 previously uncounted absentee ballots from being included in the recount. Brace for another Florida.

Future White House Chief of Staff, Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) speaks with Bob Schieffer on Face the Nation.

Keeping the Public Engaged

Now that the Presidential campaign has been over for four days, many major players are taking time to relax. Senator John McCain told an aide "I got nine racks of ribs, and I will be cooking them up," and President-Elect Barack Obama started wearing his weekend clothing.

The Press, however, seems to be having more difficulty accepting an end to the race. After all, they have known nothing but following the Presidential campaign for the past two years.

For reporters, the hardest part about the race being over was the end of reporting on Governor Sarah Palin. Lucky for the ones at Newsweek, former McCain campaign aides were all too happy to dish out the darkest secrets now that their candidates lost. Fox News quickly picked up the story.

Others, such as Politico, decided to devote a special webpage to reporting on the days between the Election and Inauguration.

Even the Obama staff has responded to the decrease in Obama-related internet traffic by introducing www.Change.gov, the official website of the Office of the President-Elect. Were you unaware that there was an official office of the President-Elect too?

Of course, if and when the media stops reporting on electoral politics, what will you be looking at then? Better yet, what will we be looking at?

(HINT: You'll have to keep coming back to find out)

Reshaping the Republican Identity

Since the nation-wide electoral defeats Tuesday night, the GOP has been discussing strategy for how to save their party in light of what appears to be realignment.

This comes as former Bush speechwriter David Frum writes extensively on the fall of the GOP in 2008 and how the Republicans can make a comeback.

Current divisions are growing tense within the Republican Party between the populist Evangelicals and the anti-tax neo-conservatives that better characterize intellectual libertarians than President Bush.

The best case study of this tension is Governor Sarah Palin, who continued to embolden the values voters and other populist Republicans, but seriously turned-off the elite neo-cons who were the center of Reagan's GOP.

Peggy Noonan, Christopher Buckley, Kathleen Parker, David Brooks, and Thomas Friedman all wrote negatively of the "Wasilla hillbilly" - including remarkable criticisms such as "she is out of her league" (Parker), "a mark against John McCain, against his judgment and idealism" (Noonan), and "she represents a fatal cancer to the Republican Party" (Brooks).

Our personal favorite may be "If BS were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself" (Parker again).

Even former Reagan Chief of Staff, Ken Duberstein, decided to endorse Obama because of Governor Palin.

Still today, as President-Elect Obama begins his transition to the White House, rumors about Palin continue to haunt the GOP.

On the issues, the Republican Party is having difficulty framing winning arguments on trickle-down economics, climate change, and health care reform. The key issues that Lee Atwater used to bolt the Republicans for over twenty years were welfare and crime, but today they have little resonance.

Demographically, Republicans are scared of their dwindling support among Latinos and other groups. House Minority Leader John Boehner has argued for the party to redirect efforts to win back voters in the Northeast and Great Lakes states.

Republicans may even have to take a cue from the UK Conservative leader, David Cameron, who has had to move his party away from the neo-conservative movement promoted by Thatcher and closer to the middle.

But no matter what the strategy is, the key will be winning moderates that are disillusioned with the populist Evangelical movement without offending their base.

There is even confusion as to how to handle an Obama presidency - over whether they should work with the President so to not appear hyper-partisan, or to criticize him at every move in order to win what battles they can.

Already, a memo has been circulating Washington criticizing Obama's pick of Rep. Rahm Emmanuel (D-IL) for Chief of Staff, and pointing out Iranian President Ahmadinejad's congratulations to Obama. At the same time, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) applauded the Emmanuel pick, and Republican strategist Craig Shirley criticized the GOP for only knowing how to attack a political foe.

No matter what path the Republicans take now, it seems they will be unable to keep their current coalition together - let alone bring in enough moderates to win some elections - for some time.

Why 2008 is as Historic as They Say

On Tuesday, Barack Obama won eight more states than Al Gore did in 2000, and nine more than John Kerry in 2004. Yet he could not pick up Montana, North Dakota, Georgia, or Missouri, which newly became toss-up states this year.

But something happened in these states.

In fact, something happened across the entire country. According to a map in today's edition of the New York Times, the vast majority of counties nation wide saw dramatic increases in Democratic performance. Even in Utah, the most Republican state in the nation, not a single county showed more support for the Republican ticket than it did four years ago. Salt Lake City, for example, carried McCain by only 2,000 votes, compared to 80,000 for Bush in 2004.

The same was true in Indiana, which narrowly slid into the Obama column. Even in reliably Republican, rural counties, there was as much as a 20% increase in performance for the Democratic nominee.

A Brilliant Campaign

No one can deny that this was, in part, due to the brilliant and revolutionary campaign put together by David Plouffe and David Axelrod.

Conventional wisdom in campaign politics is, and has long been, "Fifty-Percent Plus One", and Karl Rove had been able to get as close to that number as possible in 2000 and 2004. The old "divide-and-conquer" negativity tactics of Lee Atwater were combined with new micro-targeting techniques to deliver moderate voters to George W. Bush while emboldening his evangelical base.

There is no question about it, Rovian political strategy delivered Bush his wins in 2000 and 2004 - but it was not a sustainable strategy for the Republican Party. Not only have Americans become desensitized to negative ads and micro-targeted contact with Republican operatives, they are tired of being pitted against one another.

So Plouffe and Axelrod followed the lead of Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and employed the now-famous 50 State Strategy, opening offices in every state, including the Republican states of Montana, Utah, and Georgia, among others.

Democrats in these states, who had never seen a Democratic campaign before, eagerly volunteered to get out the word about the junior Senator from Illinois. They registered new voters and convinced independents and moderate Republicans to support the candidate of change.

They built upon the successes of other Democratic campaigns in states like New Mexico, Colorado, and Virginia, rather than ignoring these places to try to guarantee a win in more populated states such as Florida and Ohio.

Most importantly - while they failed to win all of these Republican states - they set up the infrastructure and volunteer bases for future Democratic candidates. As the blue shift continues, local Democratic parties and activists will be ready to capitalize on it. While "Fifty-Percent Plus One" might give you a victory for any particular election, it does not create the atmosphere for a party legacy.

A Brilliant Candidate

And then there was Barack Obama. His speeches and his ground game touched millions of voters who had always been cynical towards the electoral process. But he was not only inspirational – he was inclusive.

Part of it was that he had to be. Early on, he needed to win over white Democrats in Iowa to win the caucuses. When he won, he convinced the strong African-American base of the party that a black candidate – or at least this black candidate – was viable in the eyes of the majority.

Yet it did not end there. Throughout the entirety of his candidacy, his message was that of a united nation – inseparable by the divisions of class, religion, and race. There was no populist America or elitist America; no Christian America or non-Christian America; no black America or white America. From the very beginning, in his introduction to the country four years ago at the Democratic National Convention, he made his mantra clear: "There's not a liberal America and a conservative America, there's the United States of America."

Even after the decision was made, the votes were tallied, and he was clearly the President-elect of the country, the message continued. "We rise and fall as one people…to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn: I may not have won your vote tonight, but I hear your voices, I need your help, and I will be your President too."

Unlike the claims made by Bush after he won 51% for his second term, it was clear that Obama did not believe his victory was a mandate. He was well aware that nearly half of the country did not trust him, but he made clear he wanted to work with them, and listen to them "especially when [they] disagree".

And with this mantra he has kept throughout the past four years – with only the possible exception of a few words at a fundraiser in San Francisco – he touched the hearts and minds of people in Montana, Indiana, North Carolina, and even Utah.

Realignment

But a brilliant campaign and a brilliant candidate were not the only factors towards this victory. Regardless of whether or not the Obama campaign had succeeded in the primaries – or even began at all two years ago – the word of this election would still have been "change".

Throughout history, political realignment has been fairly consistent – a 25-35 year phenomenon in which a moment of historical significance brings people to shift their political leanings to one party, and pass the loyalty down to their children. But as time goes by, demographics change and loyalty fades, until a new moment of historical significance that creates new party loyalties.

It happened in 1860 when the new Republican Party rose to support abolition, free land, and tariff policies that were at odds with the South, creating a long period of Southern hate for the GOP.

It happened in 1896 when Democrat William Jennings Bryan evoked populist approval for his tirade against the Gold Standard, putting off the more populated Northeast, and giving way to firm Republican control of the country for the next 32 years.

It happened in 1932 when Roosevelt introduced his New Deal policies to relieve the country in the wake of the Great Depression, granting large Democratic majorities nationally.

It happened between the late 1960s and 1980 when FDR's coalition of Democratic supporters was split by the Civil Rights movement and the Vietnam War – and when Ronald Reagan brought the GOP into the neo-conservative movement.

Finally, the results of neo-conservative ideology and its populist Evangelical twist have created a new realignment.

Realignment Today

Nationally, Americans are more than ready for an end to the Bush Era. But there are other changes happening regionally as well.

Let's begin in the West, where Hispanic populations have boomed in states like Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado. Between the surge of Latino voters and other new voters going west for new jobs, Obama won big because Republicans were doomed.

From the New York Times:
The broader problem here was Republican infighting — over immigration, small government versus large government, and socially conservative issues," said David F. Damore, a professor of political science at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Between the libertarian tradition of the West – currently at a crossroads with the Evangelicals in the GOP – and the strong Republican rhetoric against illegal immigration, Republican candidates failed in Colorado, New Mexico, and Nevada. Not only did Obama win these states, the Udall cousins won Senate seats in Colorado and New Mexico, and Democrats were elected in House races across the southwest.

In Montana, the folksy Democratic Governor Brian Schweitzer easily won his re-election. In Idaho, Democrat Walt Minnick was elected to Congress. Even in Wyoming, the home state of Vice President Dick Cheney, the Democrats nearly picked up a statewide seat.

On the opposite side of the country – the northeast – the GOP was all but eliminated. Christopher Shays (R-CT), the long-time incumbent and last Republican House member from New England lost his re-election to Jim Himes, a politically unknown challenger. Senator John Sununu (R-NH) lost his re-election to former Governor Jeanne Shaheen.

Their ties to Bush rocked the incumbents, but there was something else happening. After years of being labeled elitist, anti-American, not part of "real" America, Northeasterners were not going to tolerate the Republican Party anymore. The "Fifty-Percent Plus One" strategy that pitted the populists and Evangelicals of the country against the Northeast had come back to bite the GOP.

Then there are the Great Lakes states, which early on appeared to be the central front in the war for the White House. As the financial crisis got worse and worse, state after state became out of reach for John McCain.

He completely pulled out of Michigan, the RNC stopped their ad-buys in Wisconsin, and even Republican Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann seemed at risk in Minnesota – not to mention Senator Norm Coleman. Eventually, Ohio was declared "leaning Obama" and the so-often Republican state of Indiana was competitive.

But the one reliable region for the GOP – where Rove had built the base – was no longer safe. This is, of course, the South.

While states like Oklahoma, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Louisiana (thanks to the demographic realignment of Hurricane Katrina) supported McCain in greater numbers than Bush, the Bible Belt was seriously competitive. Obama won in the former Confederate states of Virginia and North Carolina. Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) could not garner the 50% needed to avoid a run-off, and Senator Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) was handedly defeated. Even Senator Wicker was at some risk in Mississippi.

But these gains for Democrats are not new, or a coincidence. They are part of a realignment that began in 2006.

The Iraq War, corruption scandals, and budget deficits left the competence of Republicans in question and Democrats were elected to enough seats to take back both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

Meanwhile, Democrats picked-up State Legislatures and statewide administrative offices nationally.

Perhaps the best example is Virginia where Governor (now Senator-elect) Mark Warner (D-VA) created jobs for southern Virginians and metropolitan liberals spilled into the DC suburbs. As a result, the Democratic Party grew a base in Virginia to elect Governor Tim Kaine and Senator Jim Webb.

Or in Rhode Island, where moderate Republican Senator Lincoln Chaffe was defeated for no other reason than the party he belonged to.

Or even Colorado, or Ohio, which had similar stories that year.

Conclusion

It is not certain that Obama could have done this without his Plouffe and Axelrod – or whether the three of them could have done it at all four years ago.

But this much does appear to be true: Barack Obama was the right candidate with the right campaign at exactly the right time.

What We've Done - Sherwin Hughes, Political Strategist, Milwaukee, WI

As an African American man living in the United States, it is very easy to grow increasingly cynical of a country that is often increasingly suspect of you.

This great electoral victory is not just a triumph for African American’s; it is a true national triumph in which we all shall share collectively. Is this Black history? Yes. Is this American history? Absolutely.

An Electoral College landslide and a decisive accumulation of popular votes, equate to a mandate so strong it shall re-write the pages of campaign strategy for the next 100 years.

When placed within the context of American history, this event assumes an even deeper significance. Every bead of sweat dripping from the very brows of tireless marchers for justice, every tear cried and opportunity lost as a result of De facto and De jure, every drop of blood shed during the struggle manifested itself perfectly on the evening of November 4^th, 2008. A civil rights movement executed. A dream no longer deferred.

President-elect Barack Hussein Obama has ignited the American spirit in ways not seen in a generation. 21 months ago, I could not fathom that the “skinny kid with a funny name” could oust the Clintons, build a swollen grassroots organization, and turn a bitterly divided nation into a place that has reignited my pride. We can now focus on being great once again. It is for that in which I am most thankful.

Make no mistake; Senator John McCain is a good man. Senator John McCain is an American hero. As evident by his very eloquent concession, he shall continue to be a servant of this nation. I wish he, nor his republican colleagues, no ill will. However, I remain ever cautious. For the Republican Party is returning to the proverbial drawing board and will eventually reinvent and rebuild.

Politics aside, this campaign was far more. It kindled our most intrinsic values of hope, optimism.

As I celebrated with the best of them into the early morning of November 5^th, I saw things that rocked my very core. Streets flooded with jubilant souls, horns honking, banners waving, and an indiscriminant expression of human love. This campaign did something to us – something absolutely divine.

Politics included, this campaign awoke the better angels of the American nature, and as a result, bent the seemingly fixed lines that characterized the political map of red and blue states.

Even though most of us, in the generation of X, have never bore witness to such a monumental testament of the American will for change, the work is not done.

It is the duty of every American, regardless of political stripe or affiliation, to make sure that President-elect Obama does not walk alone. What he needs now is far more tangible than a vote. He needs our hearts, minds, and steadfast will. I stand before you ready to submit all three—with shining pride.

A weak economy, coupled with two wars abroad and a healthcare crisis, shall take the same determination to resolve as the election took to win. Please pledge with me to commit. As we stand shoulder to shoulder under the direction of a new commander in chief who bears the burden of a nation fractured by eight years of thoughtless policy.

As cliché as these words may be, and as long as they have been a part of my oration, they have never possessed a much more poignant meaning: “God Bless America”.

Preview: What do these Democratic wins mean for Electoral Politics? By HSG

Barack Obama is the new President-Elect of the United States. The Democrats will control at least 56 seats in the Senate, and an estimated 258 of 435 seats in the House of Representatives.

In addition, Democrats won state races for Governor, State Legislatures, and other offices across the country.

What did the GOP do wrong? What did the Democrats do right? What does this mean for the American political landscape?

We will examine these questions tomorrow in a special Post-Election exploration of the revival of the Democrats and the fall of the Republicans.

Everything's Bigger in Texas - Even Irony - By Kelly Fero, Democratic Strategist, Austin, TX

Forty-four years ago, a Democrat from Texas signed the most far-reaching legislation in history to secure African Americans the vote, then famously remarked that he had just cost his political party the South for at least a generation.

Last night, America voted for an African-American to be their next President — and his stunning victory came, to a large degree, courtesy of a Republican from Texas.

If Lyndon Johnson and his fellow Texans were the improbable champions of civil rights, having grown up in the segregated South, George W. Bush and his Lone Star State ideologues were supposed to be the compassionate conservatives. Yet, Bush’s failed presidency ushered in the national hunger for change that propelled the first African American into the Oval Office.

They say everything is bigger in Texas — even irony, it would appear.

Happy Election Day

This is for anyone who has ever worked on a political campaign.

(WARNING: One Politico.com reader said he wanted to throw his laptop at the wall halfway through the video)



And a "thank you" to supporters:



From http://www.youtube.com/user/NatHeadquartersObama

One More Day

With only one more day until the Presidential Election, here is what we're looking at:

1) Barack Obama's grandmother passed away due to cancer this morning. The McCain campaign has offered their condolences.

2) Chuck Todd gives his Election Eve synopsis. Could he be the next Tim Russert? Yesterday he was considered a dark horse, today he's at the top of the list.

3) Pundits on "Morning Joe" discuss the growing success of the Democratic Party - particularly the success of the Obama campaign - and the uniqueness of this election.

4) Although we can no longer find a specific post for it, Politico.com reports that 40% of Florida's total population has already voted!

5) 14 Pundits contribute predictions to this year's Washington Post Crystal Ball Contest.

6) Finally, those of us who are Democrats and Irish-Americans will certainly appreciate this video from the homeland.




One last thing, make sure you know where to vote. Of course, it is likely that 100% of this blog's readers know exactly where to vote, and at least half of them probably voted early. But just in case, visit www.BarackObama.com.

Actual Racists for Obama

Early last week, we posted an article from Politico.com titled "Racists for Obama" for our discussion on the Bradley Effect and the shifting lines of prejudice. However, the Bradley Effect hardly compares to what we have found today.

Esquire.com reported yesterday that there are many White Supremacists that are supporting Barack Obama for President. While he notes that it is hardly a scientific poll of the community, author David Peisner includes statements from the different racists.

"I don't hate black people. I just think it's in the best interest of the races to be separated as much as possible. See, I'm a leftist. I'm not a rightist. I hate the transnational corporations far more than any black person" said Tom Metzger, former KKK Grand Dragon and a 1980 Democratic congressional candidate.

Erich Gliebe, Chairman of the National Alliance, told Esquire "Obama might be a better candidate for our cause because he's racially conscious… Young whites in universities, they've been stripped of any kind of racial identity. Obama may be a racist in a positive sense for his people… They'll see that non-white Americans are allowed to be proud of who they are, to be racially conscious, to talk about their people or their community without being attacked as being racist… I don't think McCain even acknowledges that a white race exists. He's all about granting amnesty to illegal aliens."

Rocky Suhayda, Chairman of the American Nazi Party says "we have a black man, who loves his own kind, belongs to a Black-Nationalist religion, is married to a black women -- when usually negroes who have 'made it' immediately land a white spouse as a kind of prize - that's the kind of negro that I can respect. Any time that a prominent person embraces their racial heritage in a positive manner, it's good for all racially minded folks."

In fact, many Klansmen and other white "racially minded" individuals have shifted ideology in recent years to supporting segregation instead of outright hatred of non-whites. But there are still some White Supremacists that disagree.

"Obama, I think he's a piece of sh**" said Ron Edwards, Imperial Wizard of the Imperial Klans of America. "I don't care that his mother was white…I'm going Republican and I talked to my guys and most of them are voting for McCain too."

On the other side of the spectrum, Esquire interviewed a Black Nationalist supporting McCain.

"Finding out Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee for president was one of the saddest days in black history. Another legacy of black death is about to begin, just like it began back in the '60s with probably the greatest traitor to black people in modern-day history, Martin Luther King. .. he's not even a black man in the terms of what real black people consider a black man. He's of African and white descent. How easily he dismissed his affiliation with Reverend Wright, was a clear indication that this is a politician, not a man of any real conviction. The same way he threw away that Reverend, once he becomes president, he must throw away black people" said Yahanna, General of the Israelite School of Universal Practical Knowledge, a black supremacist group that believes those of African decent are part of the lost tribes of Israel.

This goes to show that politics is not nearly as complex and surprising as extreme racists.

Early Voting Troubles?

There has never been such a large push for early voting, as there has been this year—especially by the Obama campaign. And it has undeniably helped his chance to win next Tuesday.

And voting early has never hurt anybody, right? Well apparently in Florida last week an old lady felt threatened enough to call 911 while voting early. In West Palm Beach she went in to vote and felt so threatened by "Obama's thugs" that she called 911 and left. This is just the beginning.

Racism, latent or otherwise, and how it will affect voters at the polls is a big concern this year. Whether it be public demonstrations, disfranchisement at the polls, or threats between supporters.

However, racism is not the only election day anxiety people are facing. Recently Time Magazine wrote an article about the 7 things that could go wrong on election day: Faulty databases, voting machine issues, and “Mickey Mouse” registrants are only a few of many concerns voters have this year.

Obama and McCain’s campaigns are both amassing lawyers by the hundreds to ensure their candidates’ supporters are protected on election day.

Will Democrats Win the 60th Senate Seat Next Year — in Texas? By Kelly Fero, Democratic Strategist, Austin TX

Questions abound as voters in some states cast their ballots and others prepare to go to the polls next Tuesday in what everyone agrees is a groundbreaking election. One of the most urgent is: Will Democrats win a 60-seat filibuster majority in the U.S. Senate?

The short answer might very well be: Yes — but not till 2009. In Texas.

The delicate Democratic majority of 51-49 currently depends on Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, a Socialist, and Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, a registered Independent, caucusing with the Democrats. That’s why party leaders are pushing for a nine-seat net gain next week to give Democrats the magic 60 number. And Alaska Senator Ted Stevens’ conviction this week on charges of failing to report more than $250,000 in gifts may have brought that goal even closer.

Today’s average of the most recent polls shows Democrats ahead in eight Senate races, including in Stevens’ Alaska. They are close in two other states.

If Democrats fall a seat short next week, the eyes of the political world will turn to Texas next year, where senior Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison is expected to step down early to launch a bid for Governor in the 2010 elections. Her resignation could trigger a special election to replace her for the remainder of her term (which ends in 2012). That special is likely to take place in September 2009 — and be the all-important battle for the Democrats’ sixthieth seat.

Certain to jump into the special election is former state comptroller John Sharp, the state’s leading Democrat. Republicans most often mentioned include curent Lt. Governor David Dewhurst and former Secretary of State Roger Williams.

Stay tuned, because the Democrats’ 60-seat goal could depend on an off-year election in the reddest-of red Lone Star State.

Palin in 2012

Palin has indeed been breaking free of the McCain campaign in recent days. She probably has her doubts as to the success of her ticket this year, and her taste of the national level has probably given her ambition for this stage in the future. That being said – it is unclear whether or not the GOP will take her again.

For starters, she has turned-off the “intellectual” Republicans of the national media. Commentators such as Christopher Buckley, Thomas Friedman, and even Peggy Noonan have decided that her lack of intellect has been a drag on the party and been a major factor towards the anticipated McCain defeat. More important – however – they would not trust her as a future President.

Of course the conservative and populist GOP base adorns her. But will they four years from now? Just as John Edwards – popular among populist Democrats – had difficulty four years after his veep candidacy, Palin will face an uphill battle in 2012. The most important reason will be that they will not see her as electable.

A much more suitable candidate would be Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota. Not only is he popular in the Midwest, he agrees with the base on almost all of the conservative issues. While he is not as well known as Palin will be, he will offer a better chance against a President Obama. Other viable options would be Bobby Jindal of Louisiana or Charlie Crist of Florida. Either way, a governor would be the GOP’s best option because of a lack of popularity among Republican Senators.

We would not put our money on a Palin nomination in 2012, although it is certainly conceivable that it is her goal at this point in 2008.

Showdown in Georgia

Pundits are becoming increasingly interested in Georgia this year, as the traditionally red state has been highly targeted by the Obama campaign, has seen record early-voting turnout, and has a competitive U.S. Senate election.

A column on the Huffington Post reported Friday that Obama could pull off an upset in Georgia because of an unusually high expected turnout among African Americans. In 2004, blacks made up about 25% of the voting population in the Peach State, but are expected to make up over 30% of the electorate this year due to the excitement of a black candidate.

The Obama campaign is capitalizing on this excitement. Between January and October, the campaign registered 400,000 new voters - about half of them black. In addition, Obama has seen success in early voting operations there. He is ahead by 6% among early voters - over 18% of the state's electorate. According to Politico today, 35% of early voters have been African Americans.

And Obama's success in Georgia has helped another Democrat on the ticket. Recent Democratic polls show Democrat Jim Martin within striking distance of incumbent GOP Senator Saxby Chambliss, and that is without weighing the higher expected black turnout.

Concerned about those prospects, the RNSC has released tough ads in Georgia characterizing Martin as a super-liberal.



Congressman David Scott (D-GA) of the Atlanta suburbs has not been so fortunate. He is facing a tough re-election against Republican physician Deborah Honeycutt, who has raised nearly $5 million and has been trying to tie Scott to corruption. But Scott, an African American, still has a lead in a traditionally Democratic district.

Of course, the Republicans still have the upper-hand in the Empire State of the South. The Presidential RCP Average has McCain leading Obama by 5.3% in Georgia and the GOP still has a strong Evangelical base to help their 72-Hour Program.

But if the Democrats are able to pull off upsets in Georgia, it will have a serious impact on the American political psyche, demonstrating that progressives can win anywhere with the smarts and effort needed of them - even in the Bible Belt.

Will Palin Meet the Press or Face the Nation?

Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol – the same man that called for Sen. John McCain to fire his campaign in a column recently – told Fox News Sunday that Gov. Sarah Palin should appear on a Sunday morning talk show next week.

"I'm told she would be happy to do a TV show, if she hasn't gotten authorization…I hope she breaks free this week," said Kristol.

So far, McCain, Obama, and Biden have all appeared on Sunday morning talk shows, including a McCain appearance on Meet the Press this morning. However, Palin has declined every offer to appear.

What Are the Costs and Benefits of Appearing?

According to Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday "this has been a challenge that all serious candidates have always felt they had to meet."

But it is not typically undecided voters who watch these talk shows. There is little-to-no benefit of such an appearance if it will not help win votes.

The potential costs, however, are very real. Palin has not had an impressive record in interviews so far. As mentioned before, she failed to name a Supreme Court decision other than Roe v Wade and defended the claim that she had foreign policy expertise because of Alaska's proximity to Russia during her interview with Katie Couric.

In front of Charles Gibson she failed to give a definitive support or opposition to the Bush Doctrine – quite likely because she was unfamiliar with the term. Most recently, in an interview with a local news station, she said that the Vice President was "in charge of the Senate".



While these interviews did little good for the ticket, they damaged Palin's reputation immensely as these clips from the interviews have been replayed over and over in the media. The risk of Palin making another mistake like the ones we've seen is too great for the McCain campaign to allow a Palin appearance on a Sunday morning talk show. For once, the McCain campaign seems to be making a smart and calculated decision. Perhaps Kristol was wrong about both of his assertions.

Lightening Up the 2008 Elections

In 2004 the Presidential race between John Kerry and George W. Bush was suddenly more light-hearted when the relatively unknown folks at Jib-Jab produced this internet sensation.

After it was released, Jib-Jab had to shut down their server temporarily because of the massive number of people viewing this video.

In 2008 the demand for political humor is just as high. The Daily Show and the Colbert Report offer nightly highlights of the Presidential race while Saturday Night Live is becoming popular again.

The internet has once again provided Americans with the humor to get through this long election cycle. Take this You Tube video released before the Pennsylvania Democratic Primary.

And just like the Rocky movie, there had to be a sequel.





But the most successful video has come from SNL. This skit, following the selection of Sarah Palin, has been watched more online than it was on television.





Now here is a new one, featuring an impressive Obama-McCain Dance Off.

Who still thinks young people are not interested in politics?

Some might argue these videos trivialize the democratic process, but it is more likely that they strengthen it. As Americans become weary of the drama surrounding the presidential race, comic relief helps people avoid complete political cynicism.

Voter Fraud Delusion

At the last Presidential Debate, Sen. John McCain claimed that the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN) "is now on the verge of maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy."

But independent Fact Check organizations have come to different conclusions. According to Factcheck.org there is "no evidence" of such a conspiracy.

Several ACORN canvassers have been found guilty of faking registration forms and others are being investigated. But the evidence that has surfaced so far shows they faked forms to get paid for work they didn't do, not to stuff ballot boxes.

While the higher-ups at ACORN are certainly guilty of hiring the wrong people to register voters, they simply have not conspired to steal this election.

But conservatives have been relentless in their criticism - many even making racially charged remarks and threatening the organization's employees with violence. Emails to ACORN offices from angry individuals include "you're going to have your life ended", "corrupt ni**er Muslims", and "you blue gums are not going to steal the election. All of you porch monkeys need to go back to Africa."

The voicemail messages to the organization are just as bad. Fortunately, some upset with ACORN have a better sense of humor.




But voter fraud is extremely rare. A nonpartisan report in 2005 found that it is statistically more likely for an individual to be hit by lightning than to commit voter fraud.

One complaint was that registration forms handed in by ACORN included the name "Mickey Mouse" - but is a poll worker honestly going to let someone vote as Mickey Mouse?

In fact, after ineligible names are handed in to election officials by ACORN, the officials will inspect the forms to make sure no fraud takes place.

In the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on Wednesday, associate editorial page editor Ernst Ulrich Franzen wrote a terrific summary of the controversy.

We are seeing monsters in this election. And it goes beyond the oft-heard “our opponents are the spawns of Satan” stuff the country has experienced throughout its history. No, this goes to the heart of the process. The left sees a massive voter suppression effort aimed at minorities and the poor. The right sees massive voter fraud. Come Election Day, no matter who wins, I fear there will be loud cries that the election somehow was stolen. And then what happens?

Running Yesterday's Campaign - by Thomas Mills, Political Consultant

The McCain campaign is imploding. This week they may well have squandered whatever chance they had of changing the dynamic in the race. Instead of focusing on serious issues facing the country, they chose to overreach with accusations that are more reminiscent of 1958 or '68 than 2008.

Sarah Palin began the week by accusing Obama, his supporters and even whole states as being "un-American" or "anti-American." Next, McCain laid into Obama for having "socialist" policies. Republicans had to reach deep into their toolbox for this language—past the "liberal" label of the 1980s and 90s, past the "people like us" of the '60s and '70s, all the way to the McCarthy Era of the 1950s Cold War. While these tactics may fire up the base, they alienate a more moderate electorate that is looking for unity and leadership in a time of crisis.

Republicans have long used fear to divide and conquer. What's different this year is who is saying it. In both Bush campaigns and in the 1990s, Republican candidates have let third parties make the most personal or outrageous attacks to give themselves plausible deniability. This year, McCain and Palin are the messengers which means McCain has to own these statements—and they don't sound very presidential.

With McCain and Palin setting the tone, the wing-nuts of the Republican party feel emboldened to say what they think. Congresswoman Michelle Bachman (R-MN) called on the media to investigate Congress to determine which members were pro-American and which are anti-American. Congressman Robin Hayes (R-NC) introduced McCain at rally with "Liberals hate real Americans that work and accomplish and achieve and believe in God." At this time in history, Americans are looking for someone who can bring the country together and they don't want, or need, this type of rhetoric.

McCain had a huge opportunity to look like a leader and refocus the race. Shortly before the third debate, the media was dumping on both campaigns for misleading attacks. McCain could have used the debate as forum to say, "Enough is enough. We'll pull all of our negative ads if Obama will do the same and make this race about the issues facing Americans." Instead, he chose to defend the Bill Ayers attack, another throwback to a time gone by, and to make himself look more out of sync with the conversation taking place across the country.

The "Real" America

Over the past week the McCain campaign has come under more and more scrutiny over comments made by Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

At a fundraiser in North Carolina, Palin referred to small towns as "real America" and commented on how much she appreciated being in "pro-America" parts of the country - which, by implication, meant that there are anti-America parts of the country as well.

According to Jonathan Martin of Politico today, Palin has now apologized for that implication on CNN.

But the damage has already been done, as the GOP base did its best to stay on message with Palin. Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) accused Obama and his associates of being anti-American and asked the media to uncover anti-American Congresspersons in her now famous interview with Chris Matthews.

Meanwhile, Rep. Robin Hayes (R-NC) said "liberals hate real Americans that work and accomplish and achieve and believe in God" at a rally in Concord, NC this past weekend.

The implications have all along been that it is liberals that don't represent "real America", but only with the Hayes comment did it become explicit.

If Republican House members still fail to explain that point, then perhaps a representative from the McCain campaign can clarify things.

According to the McCain surrogate, even though northern Virginians pay Virginia taxes and adhere to Virginia laws, they are not part of "real Virginia" because they are metropolitan liberals.

The rhetoric, however, is not helping the GOP. Bachmann's re-election is now in question and Hayes's opponent is capitalizing on the Republican's remarks.

While staying on message is typically prudent, this controversy demonstrates that there are exceptions to that rule.

Decision '08: Shifting the Frontlines of Prejudice

Throughout most of the presidential race this year, media pundits have asked whether America was ready for a black president. Many have alluded to the Bradley Effect, which kept the black Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley from becoming Governor of California in 1982. The theory is that, despite what the polls show leading up to Election Day, many white voters will be unable to cast their vote for an African American.

But as Politico reported yesterday, the lines of racial prejudices are being blurred. Charles Franklin, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin, has found that many whites who hold general negative feelings about blacks prefer Obama this year. "Racial feelings are not as cut and dried — not as black and white — as people often say," according to Franklin.

The poll asked voters whether they agreed with the statement that "African-Americans often use race as an excuse to justify wrongdoing." About a fifth of white voters said they "strongly agreed." Yet among those who agreed, 23 percent said they'd be supporting Obama.

"This result is reasonable if you believe that race is not as monolithic an effect as we might easily assume," Franklin said, noting that 22 percent of those who "strongly disagreed" said they'd be supporting McCain.

Individual reports seem to confirm this trend.

"I wouldn't want a mixed marriage for my daughter, but I'm voting for Obama," the wife of a retired Virginia coal miner, Sharon Fleming, told the Los Angeles Times recently.

One Obama volunteer told Politico after canvassing the working-class white Philadelphia neighborhood of Fishtown recently, "I was blown away by the outright racism, but these folks are … undecided. They would call him a [racial epithet] and mention how they don't know what to do because of the economy."

Democrats are not the only ones witnessing changes in racial attitudes, however. While the racist and Islamophobic subconscious of many McCain supporters has come to light recently at the Republican's rallies (see yesterday's post by Adam Nashban) other McCain supporters have taken it upon themselves to dismiss the regressive outbursts.

This comes after John McCain himself had to calm down particularly concerned supporters that Barack Obama might be a closet Muslim, telling them they “shouldn’t be scared” and that Obama is a good “family man”.

But despite the calls for civility, and the uncovering of the man behind the Muslim rumors, the emails connecting him to black radicalism and Islam continue to spread - even more rapidly - and Obama has slowly slipped in the October polls.

Throughout the year, many pundits and bloggers have noted that the Bradley Effect might not be applicable to 2008, as the voting population has become more progressive towards race since 1982. Senator Obama has long asserted that the people who vote against him because of his skin color would probably vote against him for his policies anyway. Whether this is true or not will only be realized after November 4^th.

UPDATE:

The Pew Research Center released a report that examines voters’ beliefs and attitudes to Obama’s race and religion - among other concerns - earlier today.

On page 18 of the report, a Pew survey finds that Democrats supporting Obama are more likely to say they know someone who will not vote for Obama because he is black.

Far more Obama supporters than McCain supporters say they personally know someone who will not vote for Obama because he is black (27% vs. 10%). More Democrats (29%) and independents (24%) than Republicans (10%) say they know someone who will not vote for Obama because of his race.

In another survey on page 19, 12% of respondents continue to believe that Obama is a Muslim, while only 55% of respondents can correctly identify him as a Christian.

Most surprisingly, 8% of Obama supporters believe he practices Islam.

Shame on Both Your Houses - By Adam Nashban, Political Consultant

If you heard people say, ”those people,” “I don’t trust black people,” “ain’t voting for a n****r,” would you think it is the 1960s or would you be amazed to think that it is 2008? Unfortunately, comments like these can be heard at inside and outside McCain-Palin rallies around the country. You may have already heard about this and think it is old news but I think it is important for us to keep this issue front and center.

There are two important questions to ask about who is to blame for this: First is a chicken or the egg question, did the supporters always feel this way about Obama or did the rhetoric of the McCain campaign open the door to this kind of language? Secondly, where is the so called mainstream media in reporting this? I will get to both of these questions, but first here are a few outlets and bloggers that have tackled this issue:

This first source of insight into their rallies is from a foreign news source:



This is from the Daily Show I put the whole show in here but start at about one minute in and watch until the first commercial:



Finally, from a blogger outside the rallies interviewing more attendees:



So how did these comments at political rallies start? We need to look at the types of racism that people partake in the overt and covert. Overt racists are comfortable acting in a racist way publicly, covert would only discuss it in the safety of their house or with other friends who feel the same way. Are most of the people we see in these videos usually overt or covert?

One would suggest that they are probably covert, probably have some menacing thoughts at times but their neighbors and friends would probably never know how they really feel. It is not until they think they have a venue in which it is safe to speak out this way will they actually become overt racists. Here is the proof, we did not start hearing these kinds of comments until the McCain campaign began publicly calling Obama a terrorist and questioning his patriotism. It was McCain’s inflammatory language that prompted his supporters to feel safe to act out this way. Give people an inch and they will take a mile.

Above you have seen three media outlets documenting this kind of behavior foreign media, Comedy Central and a blogger. Where is CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC and dare I say Fox in all of this? Yes we may have seen bits here and there about these rallies, but this is a news story that should expand further than the twenty-four hour news cycle. Obviously, in order to stay competitive and up to date during the “you tube” era of politics, mainstream media has to find stories to keep the news fresh. Who loses, Americans who have common sense and would actually like to think and digest what is being flashed across them on the screen. Maybe that is why we chose to hear our news from “alternative” news sources such as blogs like this, you tube, Comedy Central and even Wonkette.

The actions by some of McCain’s supporters brings back images of the 1960’s when there were other prominent African Americans trying to bring about change and equality and the backlash that created in their detractors. It is important that these actions are condemned early- which has not happened- to let people know that comments like these are not acceptable in politics or in the coffee shop. Instead, the fact that McCain has not condemned these comments or the mainstream media has not shown people saying these comments on nightly news; they have only become more empowered.

Shame on the McCain campaign and the mainstream media for allowing these people a platform to spread hateful racist remarks. Country first, sounds more like campaign first.