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.

Paul Ryan is Running for Congress

While the Presidential race takes the most political air time in the Milwaukee area, one cannot ignore the recent Paul Ryan for Congress ads. Below is an example of one of his new TV spots.

Rep. Ryan has been seen as a rising star for the GOP in Washington, but is running TV commercials for what should be a safe seat. His challenger, Marge Krupp, has not raised a tenth of what he has raised this term*, and he is a well positioned incumbent.

So why is Ryan including TV time in his campaign?

It has long been rumored that Ryan will seek candidacy for U.S. Senate in 2012 for Herb Kohl's current seat. Kohl is expected to retire after this term and an open seat would be the best shot for Ryan running for this higher office. The Janesville Republican might even be considering a run for Governor or challenging Sen. Russ Feingold in 2010.

By advertising for his House campaign in the Milwaukee media market, Congressman Ryan may be trying to get valuable face time with swing voters in a very populated area of the state.

Of course, this is all speculation - as it is impossible to say exactly what Ryan's intentions are. But it is more than likely that he is keeping a watchful eye on the future and planting the seeds of a campaign for a statewide race.

*Information provided by Diana Marrero of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

NYC and the Heated Term Limits Debate

The debate over term limits in New York City is one that has been fought for nearly two decades. There have been two referendums on the issue - both of which overwhelmingly supported limiting the terms for the Mayor and City Council Members.

Now Mayor Michael Bloomberg has put it before the City Council again, where 35 of the 51 members are due to lose their seats because of term limits after the 2009 city elections.

At a public hearing Thursday - which lasted 10 hours - New York City residents voiced their disapproval. Annette Keehner, a broker's assistant called it "a scam and a charade." Brooklyn writer Michael Bouldin said "this is an agreement between billionaires and they cannot do this without a third referendum. It would be a slap in the face to voters." And a former police officer said the end of the term limits would mean "dictatorship and tyranny."

Bloomberg argues that it is too late for another referendum on the issue, and must be voted by a simple majority on the City Council. Speaking on Bloomberg's behalf, attorney Anthony Crowell argued "the financial crisis threatens many of the gains we've made as a city" and that the billionaire and former trader was best equipped for handling the troubles on Wall Street.

Not persuaded to support the proposed change, New York Times columnist Clyde Haberman wrote a critical editorial Thursday comparing Bloomberg and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn (who supports the change) to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

"Both the mayor and the speaker bristle at suggestions that theirs is "a backroom deal." They may be right. Who knows what room the deal was made in? But they definitely have, shall we say, an understanding."

Of Bloomberg's supporters, waving signs supporting an end to term limits, Haberman writes "everything about them screamed rent-a-crowd" and refers to them as "minions."

But the Mayor has picked up the support of fellow billionaire Ron Lauder, who used his wealth to bankroll the term-limit referendum "yes" campaigns in the 1990s. And while he does not quite have the majority of the City Council supporting his position, Bloomberg is lobbying the entire Council and may well be able to swing some votes.

What factors will influence the City Council's decision?

35 of the 51 City Council Members are about to lose their seats due to term limits, and that will obviously be a factor.

But the term limits are significantly popular in New York City. By supporting the bill before the chamber, the members would be less likely to win a third race for City Council. Would they really want to spend the time, money, and energy trying to win a third race after such an unpopular decision? Perhaps more importantly, do they want to risk their political futures when running for higher offices?

We will have to wait and see.

Who Has The Better Ground Game in Wisconsin: Republicans or Democrats? By Sara Rogers

Barack Obama’s Campaign for Change is running an unprecedented field operation in Wisconsin. Thousands of volunteers, a real focus on peer-to-peer contact and offices located in traditionally “red” counties are only a few of the ways that the campaign is sharing Sen. Obama’s vision for change to voters across the state.

More than 50 offices around the state serve as organizing locations for the thousands of volunteers, including more than 2,500 Obama Organizing Team members who donate at least 10 hours of their time each week. These offices are found in rural and traditionally Republican areas, many of which have never seen a Democratic campaign office and are constantly filled with eager volunteers making phone calls and picking up canvassing lists to knock on doors in their communities. People who can’t make it to offices are able to participate by printing out call lists at home or neighbor-to-neighbor canvassing lists from online databases that list undecided voters in the area.

Whatever the method, volunteers are talking to hundreds of thousands of doors, giving one-on-one attention to undecided voters, clearly explaining that Barack Obama is the only candidate who offers the real change America so desperately needs. This one-on-one contact echos what we in the labor movement have been emphasizing for the last couple of election cycles, knowing how incredibly effective it is to have face-to-face conversations at the worksite and in our communities.

The campaign is also relying heavily on peer-to-peer organizing, with volunteers reaching out to people who share their interests and talking about the choice in this election. Issues important to seniors, farmers, sportsmen, students, women, veterans, people of faith, and other groups within the state are being addressed on personal levels, showing an incredible commitment to talking to voters about the issues they care about most. All are included in Sen. Obama’s plans for America, and the Wisconsin ground troops are letting them know.

All of that organizing has set the stage for an incredible get out the vote (GOTV) effort around the state, which is beginning to ramp up for the final weeks of the campaign. Tens of thousands of shifts are being filled to make sure everyone who is able to vote can make it to the polls on or before Election Day. Wisconsin’s early vote has also begun, and the campaign is organizing events where voters can cast their ballots at their local clerk’s offices between now and Nov. 4.

On Election Day, look for this incredible grassroots organization to put Senator Obama over the top as Wisconsin issues a resounding call for change from the past eight years of failed Bush-McCain economic policies.

Post-Debate Ads

You know that technology is pretty incredible when you can watch a debate that ends at 9:30 PM (CST) and see brand-new post-debate presidential campaign ads by 9:30 AM the next day. And on your computer, no less!

Both ads - one from the McCain campaign, the other from the Obama campaign - deal with the question of McCain's pro-Bush record. Although polls and focus group results* show that Obama clearly won the debate according to undecided voters, McCain did get the memorable line of the night.

"I am not President Bush," he told Sen. Obama. "If you wanted to run against President Bush you should have run four years ago."

Trying to drive that point home, the McCain campaign released this ad today.

As he did during the debate, Obama disputed the difference between Bush and McCain with this ad - also released today.

Analysis:

The McCain ad is successful in so far as it is positive. The negative ads he has run against Obama over the last several weeks have hurt his own image more than that of his opponent.

However, the ad fails to address how McCain will do the challenging tasks he promises to do. While they may not all understand or memorize those specifics, voters tend to appreciate hearing them.

The Obama ad could be a classic. It has the awkward images of McCain's facial expressions last night, gives verifiable information, and ends with McCain proudly admitting to the charges against him - charges he is now trying to play down, both in the debate and now on TV commercials.

Obama may have handled the debate well, but he is handling the post-debate climate even better.

*See

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=2781429f-786e-4830-bf64-d896decf284c

http://mediacurves.com/

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/10/15/politics/horserace/entry4525171.shtml

Early Voting Trends Favor Obama

According to a new SurveyUSA poll, Sen. Barack Obama is performing considerably better among early voters than Sen. John McCain in several swing states.

Here are the results:

New Mexico

Overall Trend: Obama +6%

Electorate Voting Early: 10%

Trend among Early Voters: Obama +23%

Ohio

Overall Trend: Obama +4%

Electorate Voting Early: 12%

Trend among Early Voters: Obama +18%

Georgia

Overall Trend: McCain +11%

Electorate Voting Early: 18%

Trend among Early Voters: Obama +6%

Iowa

Overall Trend: Obama +10%

Electorate Voting Early: 14%

Trend among Early Voters: Obama +34%

North Carolina

Overall Trend: McCain +5%

Electorate Voting Early: 5%

Trend among Early Voters: Obama +34%

Not only are these positive results in general, but they wildly surpass typical Democratic performance in early voting.

According to a study by Kate Kenski at the University of Arizona, early voters leaned Republican in both 2000 and 2004; with Bush earning 62.2 percent of their votes against Al Gore, and 60.4 percent against John Kerry. In the past, early voters have also tended to be older than the voting population as a whole and more male than the population as a whole, factors which would seem to cut against Obama or most other Democrats.

This is an enormous credit to the Obama Campaign, which has recently been leading a mass effort to encourage supporters to vote early. This week, for example, former presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry has been stumping around Wisconsin to get Obama supporters - particularly college students - to vote early.

Their efforts appear to be paying off.

So how does early voting help the Obama campaign?

As www.fivethirtyeight.com points out:

Now certainly, early voters tend to be your stauncher partisans rather than your uncommitted voters -- just 1-2 percent of early voters in 2000 and 2004 reported that they would have voted differently if they'd waited until election day. So it's unlikely that John McCain is actually losing all that many persuadable voters to the early voter tallies.

The real advantage of having supporters vote early is that the campaign can focus more time and energy on supporters that vote less frequently (because they are less politically engaged) in the final 72 hours.

So have early voting laws made October a month long GOTV period? It would certainly appear so, as this tactic is sure to be used in presidential campaigns to come. The Obama campaign deserves a nod for their skills and foresight throughout this unusually long election cycle - but perhaps for this moment more than any other.

The Palin Problem

While she started off as a great selection for Senator McCain, Governor Sarah Palin has been become consistently more burdensome for the GOP ticket. A recent ABC News poll shows that only 39% of Americans feel she is qualified to be President - significantly lower than it was only a month ago. And while her selection gives the Republican ticket a 6-point boost, it is only half of the boost that Senator Biden has given to Obama's prospects.

There is no question that Palin has helped McCain with the conservative base of the GOP. But following a month of damage - particularly in the Katie Couric interviews where she failed to name a Supreme Court case other than Roe v. Wade, and defended the claims that she has foreign policy experience due to Alaska's proximity to Russia - she has taken a slide in popularity.

Now things look even more dismal for her. The recent "Troopergate" investigation found that she and her husband Todd acted unethically in firing Alaska Public Safety Commissioner Walter Monegan. Monegan resisted pressure to fire State Trooper Mike Wooten after his bitter divorce with Palin's sister.

By the looks of it, it was more than a bitter divorce. Wooten is a likely alcoholic who used his taser on Palin's nephew and made threats against the family. While firing Monegan was technically legal, the personal nature of the case demonstrates an "abuse of power" according to independent investigator Stephen Branchflower.

So how will this effect the Presidential election?

The impact this will have on the McCain-Palin campaign is yet to be seen, but they are already on the defensive. Campaign spokeswoman Meg Stapleton decried the investigation as "a partisan-led inquiry run by Obama supporters."

The Alaska State Legislature now has the grounds for reprimanding or even censuring Governor Palin - but the prospects of such action are unlikely, especially before November 4^th.

Will this election be decided by unmarried women? By Kelly Fero

Pundits have taken great delight during recent election cycles in declaring it the year of the soccer mom or the Nascar dad or some other moniker picked up by the media in a kind of national political shorthand. This year, the chattering classes are focused on the youth vote because so much interest has been generated that new and younger voters are registering in record numbers. And that’s great.

But the fact is, this could be the year of the unmarried woman.

This group of solid middle-class women who earn about $35,000 a year as teachers or nurses or other hardworking folks make up about one-quarter of the voting age population but have traditionally underperformed at the ballot box. Some are divorced mothers struggling to raise their children on their own. Others are coming up against glass ceilings in the workplace. All of them are anxious about the direction of the country in general and the current financial crisis in particular.

During this spring’s primary, for example, unmarried women comprised as much as one-third of the Democratic turnout in Texas (where women overall made up 58 percent of the total turnout). If unmarried women return to the polls next month, they will be a powerful voting block that could put Sen. Barack Obama in the White House and Democratic candidates in offices from Congress to state representative to county sheriff.

According to one recent poll in national battleground states, there is a 30-point “marriage gap” among women, with older married women leaning toward Sen. John McCain while unmarried women strongly support Sen. Obama, providing the Democrat with the edge among women overall.

If unmarried women match their turnout in the 2006 Congressional elections — 34 percent, a full 10 points higher than their percentage of the voting age population — they will elect the next President and reshape the political landscape for years to come.

Where is the GOP going wrong?

Leaders in the Republican Party are expressing concerns about the prospects of a McCain-Palin victory 23 days from now. Some, including Governor Charlie Crist (R-FL) and former Governor Tommy Thompson (R-WI) even show reluctance towards campaigning for their side of the Presidential ticket.

So where is the GOP going wrong this year? The simple answer is "everywhere".

While much of Sen. Obama's success over Sen. McCain has been attributed to tough economic times, one cannot ignore the simple fact that the McCain team is failing to run as smart and strong of a campaign that Karl Rove used to conduct for President Bush and his GOP Congressional allies.

One key reason is a lack of cohesive message. As Saul Anuzis, the Chair of the Michigan GOP noted, "You're starting to feel real frustration because we are running out of time. Our message, the campaign's message, isn't connecting."

The most glaring problem is a lack of consistency with the message of the McCain campaign. Daily Show host Jon Stewart humorously pointed it out this week when Vice-Presidential Candidate Sarah Palin complained about government being the problem instead of the solution, and later demanding more government oversight.

Consistency has not been the only problem. In many cases, McCain was vague on how to handle the financial crisis. When his solution has been clear, he has faced avalanches of criticism. For example, when McCain introduced his plan to buy up bad mortgage-backed securities at tax-payer expense at the recent Town Hall Debate, his conservative base was infuriated.

Beyond the problem with message, however, is a frequent lapse in sound judgment within the McCain-Palin campaign. Perhaps the best example in recent days was the decision to have Palin drop the puck at a Philadelphia Flyers game this weekend.

The fans boo her. It should be no surprise, as Philadelphia fans have also booed Beyonce and thrown snowballs at Santa Claus. Yet the schedulers for Gov. Palin still thought this was a good idea. The stadium actually had to turn the music up to drown out the booing. Below is another shot.

Karl Rove never would have let this happen. But the campaign advisors this time around do not seem to have his wits. The failures of this year's Republican ticket really do demonstrate the difference a smart and strong campaign makes for an election.