Steve Benen points out McCain's departure from his own SOP by picking Palin: the candidates don't know each other. See especially Steve's note at the bottom of the post about McCain's extra careful announcement of her name. Here' the clip. Don't let the two minute tag scare you away; the reference comes right at the beginning. By my estimate, McCain could have been opening the envelope to say "And the winner is . . ."
Sobering.
Here's a Clintonite who will vote for McCain. (Or a troll writing under a surname, but I'm not really that cynical--wait a minute . . . yes I am! Either way, it's worth a read to see what the Obama camp may be fighting, whether actual or merely perceived).
I didn't meet any similar holdouts this week in Denver, although Jenna met one who set up to protest Obama at a screening of Trouble the Water held on Wednesday at the Tivoli Center Starz theater. Jenna's report: the woman couldn't say why she liked McCain's policies, only that she didn't think Obama was ready to be president. When pressed a little harder, she did say she like McCain's stance on immigration. That, however, was all Jenna got from the woman.
In contrast, I met Will Fowlkes, a Georgia delegate and the newly minted state congressman from Georgia's 11th district, who came to Denver as the Clinton delegate from his region along with two Obama delegates. In keeping with the will of his constituents, Fowlkes told me, he cast his vote in favor of Clinton on the convention floor. But, he said, there is no sense of anger or resentment among the Georgia delegation that Hillary is not their candidate. Wholeheartedly, Fowlkes reported that the Clinton delegates would work at Clinton's behest to support Obama, and also support the release of their votes to Obama.
Fowlkes, it should be noted, also took time to explain to me several of the nuances and technicalities of the convention process, which was and is heartily appreciated.
He said it: "By any objective measure, Gov. Palin is more qualified for the presidency than Barack Obama."
For those who don't know, Schmidt is senior strategist for the McCain campaign. I'm looking forward to specifics on those objective measures any moment now.
Yglesias passes along this (preposterous) nugget: McCain has been on the campaign trail longer than Palin has been governor.
Are you kidding me? She's been on the city council, the mayor of a small town, and governor for half a term. The gimmick is to peel off disgruntled Hillary voters and undecided married women, but please. McCain: "She's exactly who I need, she's exactly who this country needs, to help me fight the same old Washington politics of 'me first' and 'country second.'"
I've really tried to be cautious about this all day. My initial impression is that she shows up well and speaks very well. She's likable, and as the old boys will no doubt say, she's got pluck. She seems like a scrapper, though I find it hard to believe that she'll be well enough briefed not to flub some big ones. Joe Biden will have to tread carefully so as not to be perceived as condescending, but I'm already licking my chops at the prospect of hearing "And you madam are no Hillary Clinton!"
To suggest that Clinton supporters should be attracted to this pick is insulting. Clinton herself is in a prime position to live up to her word to get Barack Obama elected and take on Palin in a no-holds-barred-this-ain't-a-beauty-contest public discussion of the complex challenges the country faces today. If the McCain camp thinks that Palin can really hold her own against the withering litany of Democratic arguments against her, then Schmidt & Co. have either vetted their candidate extremely well or not nearly well enough.
The more I read and listen, the more ridiculous it all gets. The danger, however, is to remember that the average voter is not very well informed. If the media give McCain/Palin a pass, if all the nuance gets dropped from the media message and Palin gets the shot to simply appeal to voters, then this could just slip on by and shock us all. I'm inclined to think the opposite is more likely and that the rocket will break apart as it enters the atmosphere. Especially after my exposure to the campaign machine this week in Denver. David Plouffe comes off as the real deal, somebody who knows his stuff. Obama himself is known to run a tight strategy, control the message, stick to the plan. And we don't have to discuss his political intelligence or his rhetorical skill. David Axelrod (whom I did not see in person) is highly regarded as a political strategist--the general you want on the field. Howard Dean and the DNC appear poised to complement the campaign in every necessary way (especially since the Obama camp effectively controls the DNC at this point). And Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Al Gore and of course Joe Biden appear ready to make the public appearances that go along with this campaign and to actually enjoy themselves in the process. All told, this team simply will not miss the opportunity take apart the McCain/Palin agenda, starting with the very decision to pick Palin. But they've got to make it stick, and if 2000 and 2004 taught us anything its that there's never a sure thing.
All that, and we haven't even seen yet how the Obama camp will manage the ongoing investigation into Palin's possible abuse of power in AK. This is gonna get interesting.
So many things to write about, but I think Matt Yglesias takes the right* tone: dig up the stuff that makes us smile.
*Corrected. Thanks Becca.
It is hard for me to sum up the convention when so many have already written so well about Obama's speech and the overall effect of the convention to rally Democrats in this must-win election. I have said this before, and I'll say it again now: We must elect Obama now. If we fail to elect Obama, this nation will not be able to look itself in the eye on November 5.
This is not meant to shame or to brow beat. Until 2000 and 2004, I believed like many Democrats that in our nation it was enough to exercise the vote as the practice of true democracy. Even after 2000, I held to the faith that our country would correct its mistake, and that the collective powers working on behalf of John Kerry would prevail in a gritty election against an incumbent president who was clearly willing to use dishonorable and dishonest tactics to stay in office. That's just politics, right?
But those forces didn't win, and now an entire nation waits with bated breath not only for the announcement of our next president, but for the simple relief of being done with eight of the most damaging years in American history.
If this all sounds a little high-toned, well, I might just be guilty of that. I no longer believe that a Democrat has the luxury to merely cast a vote for Barack Obama and count on that vote to carry the day. We each need to get out and register voters, talk to undecided voters, ask McCain supporters what it is they actually like about their candidate, ask about policies, educate ourselves about the issues, encourage Democratic voters to register for mail-in ballots (both for the paper record and to ensure turnout even if the weather is bad or robocalls spread misinformation on election day), ask our family members the uncomfortable questions about politics that we may not always speak of, and drive voters to the polls on election day.
I haven't simply swallowed the Kool-Aid here. In 2000 and 2004, Democrats lost by incredibly close margins. There is more enthusiasm among Democrats in America for the political process today than ever before, and similarly more discomfort among Republicans. Obama's campaign manager David Plouffe points to Pennsylvania, where over 300,000 new Democrats have been registered to vote while the Republican Party ranks have thinned by some 60,000. Registering voters and encouraging them to check the box to receive a mail-in ballot will do more to ensure Democratic success this fall than any other single effort.
It's not easy to register voters. I speak from experience when I say that a three or four hour shift with the clipboard may only yield one new voter. But, to borrow a phrase from my wife, we do the work of ants. Piece by tiny piece, Jenna and I watched as millions of ants turned out night after night near our home in Oaxaca to take down an enormous tree. There is no doubt in my mind that that tree will soon fall. So too have a million plus volunteers turned out to support this history-making campaign by registering voters, collecting data, making phone calls, knocking on doors, housing campaign staffers, and more.
To the those who read this post, I beg you to take a little of the time you may have and call the DNC or the Obama campaign office nearest you to find out how you can get involved in your neighborhood. It may be as simple as making phone calls from home, or opening your house to host a meeting of undecided voters from your neighborhood. There are many ways to get involved. The choice is ours now on how we each will donate what we can--whether that be time, money, or hard work--to make sure that every American understands the urgency we face.
John McCain scares me more than George Bush ever did. Bush is ignorant, incurious, and incompetent. The damage he's wreaked is difficult to calculate. To put it in perspective, though, John McCain is angry. It'd be like electing Dick Cheney to serve as the highest executive in the land. To be sure, I'd actually prefer four more years of ignorance and incompetence than to see what even one year of anger will do for this country. McCain is angry, mean, and petty, and to echo Obama's speech he simply does not have the temperament to be commander-in-chief. You think incompetence got us in trouble? A McCain presidency would signal the escalation of Cheney-esque leadership at the most visible level, and, to be sure, the guaranteed decline of American leadership, competitiveness, and national character, both at home an abroad.
Pick up your phones, Democrats. Donate a couple hours of your time to the campaign. Let us do the work of ants to rebuild our country.
In a special screening of part of an as yet untitled documentary in the making, Jenna and I got to see Obama on the campaign trail in Iowa at the beginning of 2008. I wish we could get the footage on the Internet. In one scene, Obama tells a small group of supporters on the eve of the Iowa caucus, in a talk held in a public school weight room, about a conversation he and Michelle Obama had recently had.
We're only going to do this once, he recalls Michelle saying. He goes on to elaborate what that means. At the start of the campaign, he and Michelle were still very much a part of the common electorate. They had only finished paying off their student loans in the last three years. Imagine that. A candidate for president who so closely understands the day-to-day frustrations of the American middle class. They still remembered with startling clarity what it was like to live in a condo that was too small for their growing family. They had not yet become the stars that, as it turns out, they are destined to become. Obama's point was, after this campaign, they never get to go back and be as close to the middle class as they were in that moment.
The above paragraph does little to capture the scene. It is Obama at his best. After the screening, I asked the filmmakers if they would be posting any of their work online, because this is the Obama that undecided voters need to see. Unfortunately, they replied, FEC rules forbid the use of this work for campaign purposes. They'll only be able to release their work after the election. Besides, they said, the campaign has plenty of grade-A material of its own. They don't need our help, she said.
I'm not so sure about that.
How'd the speech go over last night? Check out Josh Marshall, Kevin Drum, and Steve Benen. All three of these guys have expressed their doubts, concerns, and criticisms for the Obama campaign, calling out the weaknesses and missed opportunities where they've seen them.
As an endnote to the convention, I'd simply predict that the RNC in incapable of manufacturing even half the excitement and enthusiasm generated by Barack Obama's candidacy.
Much has been made of the McCain campaign's ability to control the argument over the past four weeks. By going brazenly negative, Steve Schmidt & Co. banked on putting the high minded Democratic candidate for change on the defensive and against the ropes. The past month has seen Obama faced with three bad choices: pass on the negative attacks, explain himself in response to negative attacks, and launch similar, negative attacks.
Obama has passed through all three of these phases and weathered a substantial amount of the storm. Passing on the negative ads infuriates Democrats who fear another Swiftboating in the offing. Explaining himself in response to the ads only focuses the electorate on the original smear (and as the old adage goes, if you're explaining, you're losing). Launching negative ads tit-for-tat against negative ads leaves Camp Obama susceptible to (valid) arguments that the candidate for change is running the same old political campaign as every other Washington insider and White House hopeful.
Last night at the Pepsi Center, Obama's options changed. The most effective agent for change that I've heard this entire season took the stage in the form of John Kerry.
Maybe there's something about losing presidential races. As I listened to Kerry speak, I found myself enamored with his sensible lines and his graceful and commanding oratory--qualities I don't remember hearing from 2004 as much as I remember the wooden mannerisms before the camera and the dangerously imperious tone that defined Kerry's style. Just as Al Gore has enjoyed a popularity boost since losing the 2000 election, and as Hillary Clinton appears remarkably poised to fill large shoes in the Democratic party without winning the nomination, perhaps John Kerry found himself last night on the edge of something grand after surviving the abyss of disappointment. Whatever Kerry's role will be, he provided the assault that Barack Obama clearly needed against John McCain.
Kerry dissected McCain's remarkably inconsistent history on almost every issue McCain has ever expressed an opinion on by splitting McCain down the middle.
I have known and been friends with John McCain for almost 22 years. But every day now I learn something new about candidate McCain. To those who still believe in the myth of a maverick instead of the reality of a politician, I say, let's compare Senator McCain to candidate McCain.
Candidate McCain now supports the wartime tax cuts that Senator McCain once denounced as immoral. Candidate McCain criticizes Senator McCain's own climate change bill. Candidate McCain says he would now vote against the immigration bill that Senator McCain wrote. Are you kidding? Talk about being for it before you're against it.
Let me tell you, before he ever debates Barack Obama, John McCain should finish the debate with himself. And what's more, Senator McCain, who once railed against the smears of Karl Rove when he was the target, has morphed into candidate McCain who is using the same "Rove" tactics and the same "Rove" staff to repeat the same old politics of fear and smear. Well, not this year, not this time. The Rove-McCain tactics are old and outworn, and America will reject them in 2008.
[T]he candidate who once promised a "contest of ideas," now has nothing left but personal attacks. How insulting to suggest that those who question the mission, question the troops. How pathetic to suggest that those who question a failed policy doubt America itself. How desperate to tell the son of a single mother who chose community service over money and privilege that he doesn't put America first.
. . . No one can question Barack Obama's patriotism. Like all of us, he was taught what it means to be an American by his family: his grandmother who worked on a bomber assembly line in World War II, his grandfather who marched in Patton's army, and his great uncle who enlisted in the army right out of high school at the height of the war. And on a spring day in 1945, he helped liberate one of the concentration camps at Buchenwald.
This election is a chance for America to tell the merchants of fear and division: you don't decide who loves this country; you don't decide who is a patriot; you don't decide whose service counts and whose doesn't.
Rather than write about the campaign briefing I got to sit in on this morning, which featured Howard Dean and David Plouffe, I'll link to this Mark Blumenthal piece about another meeting that sounds pretty similar, albeit more select.
I also got to hear Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer outline their enthusiasm for this year's crop of U.S. Senate races in which they believe Democrats face tough battles but are positioned to do well. Speakers of note also included Jeanne Shaheen, of NH, whose race against John Sununu, Jr., will be one to watch, as well as Mark Udall here in Colorado. Mark Warner, former Virginia governor and current candidate for senate, also spoke, and I'll simply say that he did more to impress me today than in the keynote address last night.
The last of the morning roundup included a talk with T. Boone Pickens about the Pickens Plan. The oil billionaire is clear about his message: renewable energy is essential for America (and the subtext should always read "and good for Boone Pickens, too"). On the whole, I think the Pickens Plan probably is good for America, but I haven't forgotten that Pickens is responsible for the Swiftboating of John Kerry in 2004 (under whose leadership one can only assume the U.S. would enjoy a more healthful energy policy than the one we tap now). That alternative energies are the key to the future is hardly debatable anymore. The question for me is whether we want T. Boone Pickens to hold the keys to that bright, new kingdom. And that question, unfortunately, did not come up in the talk under the big tent.
More later about the gaveling in of today's session, tonight's speeches, and the party afterward to honor the vice presidential nominee.
Last night after returning home from the Pepsi Center, I wrote the following in an email:
Hillary Clinton really and truly brought her best speech last night. If there are a few remaining, unhappy Clinton supporters who won't vote Democratic this year, I'm not sure where they are. Except for Debra Bartoshevich, of course, but I think Steve Benen summed her radical position in support of John McCain quite nicely: she's just confused.We just got home, still a little bit dazed by all the political star power. Hillary Clinton brought her A-game, and every single note rang as well as it possibly could have throughout the halls of the Pepsi Center.
Here's a thought that's haunted me this evening: If Clinton had managed to connect as well during the primary as she has since, and if Obama had been as anemic through the primary as he's been perceived to be since, I'm not sure the roles wouldn't have been reversed between the two this week at the convention.
On a side note, Deval Patrick gave a great speech, as did Ted Strickland, who delivered one of the best zingers of the night: "Well, with the 22 million new jobs and the budget surplus Bill Clinton left behind, George W. Bush came into office on third base--and then he stole second. And John McCain cheered him every step of the way."
From Sunday's Denver Post Perspective section, Rage Against the Machine calls the government out--without equivocation--on the use of their music to torture detainees. We should all sign the petition should it come around.
Also from yesterday's Perspective, I had to read this twice, and I've decided it's garbage. The author hopes first time voters won't vote because they're not educated enough? Because they cite the wrong reasons for liking the candidate? Spare me. Somebody tell this kid it actually is a popularity contest.
