The Candidates
Howard Dean can breathe a sigh of relief. Now that his ideological twin has won the Democrat nomination, he has been told he will remain chairman of the DNC.
When planning strategy, Dean and Obama can lament how bitter the voters with Confederate flags on their pick-up trucks who Howard Dean targeted four years ago are.
June 6th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
They are both committed to building their party in all 50 states, and that should be a concern.
The GOP is not doing the same in the blue states.
June 6th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
So much for new politics.
Dean is a nasty, angry little man.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
Metro, that’s because you don’t need to win 50 states to be President. I’d rather win 270-268 in the electoral college with a conservative than win 370-168 with a moderate.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
I bet Metro probably likes Dean because of the elitism.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
New poll shows majority of Dems want Hillary as VP, and 1/4 of them thinks she should force it in Denver:
http: //www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/06/poll.obama.clinton/index.html?eref=rss_topstories
Clarence, I’ll respond to #4 shortly.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
I don’t think the GOP is willing to sell itself out to win in all fifty states. The Democrats are only a factor in the south and midwest because they run pro-life, low-tax, value candidates who can take seats from the GOP while still allowing the liberals to set the agenda - preventing any kind of conservative legislation from seeing the light of day.
Republicans shouldn’t work on winning in liberal states, they should work on exposing the above-mentioned trickery to the public.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
The Republicans should field candidates that can win in all fifty states and should focus on whichever conservative themes work in order to win. The reason the GOP wrote off the entire Northeast is because for twenty years it never fielded candidates that bothered to even relate to those voters.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Clarence, I like and respect people who like and respect education and worldliness. Who understand that life’s big opportunities, ideas, and movers, tend to emanate from large metropolitan areas. (As I pointed out the other day, if you were to take an issue of the Wall Street Journal, and plot the location of business leaders discussed or quoted on a map, they would be mostly in the biggest cities.
It’s exactly the same thing that small town folk recognize when they send the best and brightest of their youth to the big city for challenges and opportunities.
What I look down upon is the idea that that is somehow a bad approach, where people think it is somehow admirable to live one’s entire existence in a 20-mile radius, not to have any connection with the big things in the world, or respect for the fact that the big things come from outside of that sphere. I don’t hold it against anyone for LIVING in small towns, as long as they don’t have a small-town mindset. I reject the ostrich approach, and the deification thereof.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
What you people are saying is that you see no need to try to convince others of your ideas. That leads to the death of an intellectual movement.
Why would you not want to convince, say, Californians that they’ll have better health care if they and their doctors fully control their own decisions?
I applaud Republicans like Ronald Reagan, Jack Kemp, Rudy Giuliani, and others, who know how to convince Democrats of the advantages of capitalism.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
..thats fine, but your first comment made it sound like you think we should addopt a DEM-like strategy - which would require us to run liberals.
Something we should absolutely not do.
I agree that we need to work on convincing Democrats and independents that abortion should be stopped, that marriage should be kept in the traditional sense, that taxes should be kept low, and that we have to recognize that diplomacy sometimes doesn’t work.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
ACT,
If the GOP wants to keep up this so-con stuff then whatever. But where so-con theory doesn’t sell, the GOP would be wise to try to field economic conservatives. You don’t just write off entire regions of the country once they don’t drink the kool-aid anymore.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Adam, are you suggesting that the likes of George H.W. Bush and Bob Dole are too conservative to relate to Northeasterners? Because those are the two candidates we fielded in the last 20 years other than the current President.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
Presidential politics is one thing. But there’s no reason not to win Senate and House seats, governorships, etc, in all 50 states.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
I’m suggesting that we have to find some way to talk to Northeasterners. We have to find some way to win in blue states. Even if we win this year, we can’t assume Red states are going to stay red. The Northeast has become increasingly liberal, particularly on social issues since 1988.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Metro,
Exactly. We have to stop calling Specter and Collins RINO’s. And we have to stop allowing idiots like Club For Growth to cause trouble and primary them.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Metro, I actually completely agree with you here, and have said it before on this board many times (and been ridiculed for it many times). Howard Dean’s 50-state strategy is absolutely brilliant.
It’s not all about the Presidency. It’s not all about winning elections. Winning elections is the end result of getting your message out, and it’s why Dean is pouring DNC money into states like mine, Wyoming, where Democrats don’t stand a chance on the national stage - right now. But there’s a lot more Democrats in this state than there used to be, and they are a lot more vocal and visual than they ever have been. It’s why the Democrats can win special elections in red states.
It means that you don’t chalk up any states as automatic losses, as the RNC has pitifully done in pretty much every Senate election this cycle. It means you don’t leave any state parties in disrepair figuring they’ll never win in that state anyway- like the RNC has done with states like Illinois, New York, the northeast, etc.
It means giving money to those state parties in order to build up their infrastructure, their advertising, their office space, their volunteer base, etc. so that in 5 or 10 or 15 years, those states can trend red instead of blue.
Dean is a genius when it comes to his 50-state strategy, and we would do extremely well to follow his lead.
Of course, knowing the RNC, they’ll just elect another knucklehead with no vision to lead the thing, so I’m not holding my breath.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Adam, at the same time West Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee have become more Republican since 1988. So they balance each other out electorally.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Metro, how exactly do you propose that we win in liberal areas while keeping our conservative platform?
June 6th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
#15: Well, I call them RINOs and I support the Club for Growth. There is no need to run economic moderates when people of all cultural values can be convinced of economic conservatism.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
#18: By running on economic conservatism and staying silent on cultural issues in those states.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
Adam, people call Specter and Collins RINOs because they care about ideas, not partisan labels. I don’t like the term RINO either because it is overused cliche. I prefer the term moderate Republican.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Clarence,
WV(5) + KY(8) + TN(11) << NJ(15) + PA(21) + ME(4) + NH(4) + CT(7).
I’m not saying we need to make a play for Mass. or Vermont at the presidential level but the Republicans can’t just keep playing dead across the entire country to the Northeast of a line drawn from Youngstown to Fairfax.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
By the way, Adam, the Club for Growth official policy is that candidates can take any position they want on social/cultural issues. That plank is in there to allow for the approach I am recommending for the blue states. And to get donations from libertarian-economic conservatives.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
#20, John Sununu basically does that, he doesn’t bring up social issues unless asked. However, keep in mind, in New Hampshire, one of the most socially liberal states in the country, we have 2 pro-life U.S. Senators. We have not had a pro-choice Senator since 1992. One of the Congressmen in Maine is a pro-life Democrat, Michael Michaud.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Adam:
I’ll grant you some of those states, but I do not think we are playing dead in PA and NH.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Adam, you know as well as I do that much of Pennsylvania more closely resembles West Virginia than New Jersey/New Hampshire/Connecticut.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
#24 Abortion is only social/cultural issue. Also, a big factor is not mixing religion and politics.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
People call moderate and lbieral Republicans RINOs - because that is exactly what they are, Republicans who do not hold Republican positions.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Act (#18), the same way the Democrats won the state legislatures in Montana and Colorado and Virginia and Iowa and dozens of other states in the past few years since Dean began his leadership of the DNC. You run on issues that people care about, you clearly and persuasively present conservative solutions to those problems, and you run good, effective campaigns.
It’s pretty simple, really.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Metro,
Fine. But we to win first. And the point is that we can’t jettison moderates in favor of ideological purity when Democrats make concessions in the South in order to win. If we can’t be pragmatic in terms if gaining power then we never will. It was stupid for Club for Growth to try to primary Apecter when Bush’s approval in the state was below 50 percent. It was stupid for Club For Growth to primary Linc Chafee - because even though I was certainly no Chafee fan he was better than Sheldon Whitehouse. A guy that votes with the party 30 percent of the time is better than a Democrat that never will.
Democrats seem to get this. They never give Ben Nelson a hard time because they can’t do any better than him in NE. Republicans would be well-served to keep that in mind.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Should be “won control of the state legislatures…”
June 6th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
“#24 Abortion is only social/cultural issue. Also, a big factor is not mixing religion and politics.”
meaning what?
June 6th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
act, surely you can comprehend there is a difference between Republicans who are wishy-washy moderates on everything, such as Specter, Collins, Christine Whitman, etc., and people like Rudy Giuliani or me or Alex Knepper or Aron, who are very far right on economics and defense.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
I meant abortion is only *one* social/cultural issue.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Clarence,
It does. But given the realities of the southeast part of the state the only time we seem to win statewide is when there is a big national Republican wave or when the Dems screw up. All I am saying is that the demand for ideological purity in marginal or blue states is self-defeating. Hell - if Specter was from Tennessee then throw him overboard but don’t demand something from someone that he can’t give and still manage to win.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
And out of state legislatures come candidates for Governors, Congress, and future Presidents (i.e. Obama, Barack).
We’ve got to stop assuming that the Democrats automatically win in states like NY, IL, etc. and build up the infrastructure so we can have solid candidates sometime in the near future. It’s a long-term investment, not a short-term one. The GOP seems sold on short-term fixes that will cost the party in the long-term, while Dean focused on a long-term solution that forfeited some short-term success, got attacked mercilessly for it, but is now a Democratic hero.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
YES! YES! Exactly.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Metro-the socons here really don’t think highly of you! A 50 state strategy is a good idea. How does admitting that possibly come off as an endorsement of Dean’s ideas?
June 6th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Matt C, I’m with you all the way on this!
June 6th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
The Fifty-State Strategy IS a good idea.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
“The GOP seems sold on short-term fixes that will cost the party in the long-term”
You mean, like the entire GWB presidency?
June 6th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Yep. And everyone needs to remember that it was the Rush Limbaughs and the Sean Hannitys and the Ann Coulters of the world that talked up Bush in 2000 as this great leader.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Act,
A model for you might be Romney, who you supported in the primaries IIRC. Romney ran on economic conservatism in the darkest blue state, and in order to win, he tabled the entire abortion issue and basically said he wasn’t going to touch it while he was Governor.
And you even start below Governorships. You start by aptly funding state parties, and then you work on state legislatures. You run on issues that are meaningful to the state, instead of running these insane “The Democrat is just like Barack Obama!” smear campaigns. You run with ideas to fix what is wrong and tell people why your ideas (which are conservative ones) are more effective at fixing it.
The GOP cannot keep giving up control of the MA house and senate, for example. Let’s get some Republicans in there after we build up the state party to support them, to work some fiscal conservatism miracles on the state economy!
June 6th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
eric and Adam, I wouldn’t say the entire GWB presidency. His first term was definitely a lot better than his second term. I was excited and enthusiastic to vote for the guy in 2004. Had I known what 2005-2008 would look like, I probably would have stayed at home or demanded a primary challenger.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
That being said, I have often said that the long-term cause of conservatism has no enemy like the Bush/Cheney administration.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
Arlen Specter does not have to be the way he is to get elected. Bob Casey is basically the opposite of him and won easily.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Adam,
What about primarying guys like Chuck Hagel then? Would you have supported the primary challenge that was mounting this year had Hagel not retired? We can certainly do better then Chuck Hagel in Nebraska (just as the Dems could do better then Lieberman in Connecticut). But, I agree with that central idea; you don’t put undo pressure on moderates in states where moderation is truly your only option. That’s not true, by the way, of Specter; Specter goes beyond moderation (his ACU rating is something like 37 every year) and Pennsylvania was quite red until Clinton, and has only become marginally blue since then. And it’s by far the most culturally conservative state to vote for Kerry or Gore. We could have done much better then Specter. That said, Toomey wasn’t a particularly good fit for the state. In Pennsylvania, you run a Catholic Mike Huckabee type. That’s still a good deal better then Specter (who’s both economically liberal and socially liberal) and fits well with the particular proclivities of Pennsylvania. In light blue upper midwest states, you run across the board conservatives, who soft sell fiscal conservatism, and generally don’t talk about issues. In the northeast you run candidates who are right of center fiscally and socially moderate. Dean’s strategy is simple and is indeed one we should emulate; locally, you run local candidates, or local messages, and under local banners. You don’t send candidates to California with the national Republican message and emphasis; if you do, you’re killed. You run the most conservative candidate that fits within local concerns and values. Some folks have a natural ability to intuit this sort of thing, but the Republican Party writ-large is generally clueless. In 2002, Pawlenty ran against an establishment backed businessman in the gubernatorial primary. His opponent was a good guy and not much more conservative then Pawlenty, but he was selling a national Republican message. Pawlenty edged him out, running on “Sam’s Club Conservatism”. What did Sam’s Club Conservatism mean? It meant “regular ole’ conservatism, only I can sell it”. Because in Minnesota, there’s no wholesale rejection of any aspect of conservatism. Conservatives can be both socially and fiscally conservative and succeed (just as Sunnunu has managed this in NH). They just can’t talk about conservatism the way some candidate in Oklahoma would. Luckily, the Minnesota Republicans wised up, and went with the guy who was more amenable to the Minnesota climate as it were.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Matt,
I think part of that is perception though. I was pissed at Bush in 2004 over Medicare Part D and generally spending like a drunken sailor. I gave him the benefit of the doubt - since a good chunk of the spending increase was because of 9/11 (though certainly not all). Bush has been a PR nightmare ever since Schiavo and a fiscal liberal ever since his first day in office.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Matt Miller,
I agree. I’m not here to defend Specter (though I don’t see any Republican in PA that could actually win the senate race in 2010 except for him) and he grates under my skin at times. But I think you and I are pretty much in general agreement about strategy.
Yes - by all means - Hagel can go. We don’t need someone that’s a thorn in our sides in a crimson red state.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
I’m of two minds on the Bush Presidency. I never voted for the guy; was too young in 2000 and was too unenthused in 2004 (Bush’s horrifically embarassing debate performances were probably the last straw). But, I tacitly rooted for him both times. That said, he’s absolutely destroyed the GOP, which might allow a radical McGovernite to become President. But, I’m not convinced that he’s destroyed the country. I’m still impressed by his fortitude on Iraq. I doubt Republicans will look down on his influence fondly for at least a few generations, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he received a Truman-type bump 50 years hence.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
If I had to choose between Giuliani and Susan Collins. I’d probably prefer Susan Collins. If that was the only choice in the GOP, I doubt I’d be in the party.
June 6th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Check this out
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/News/PressReleases/Read.aspx?guid=67dc3f55-e7e9-4da6-8042-903e6c451fa5
Romney is a full board Michigan guy now.
June 6th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
#47, Matt, I love Brian Sullivan. He gave an excellent speech at the recent state convention. You will not get a more classy guy. He would’ve won in 02, but probably would’ve lost in 06. Still, he’s VP material, not Pawlenty.
June 6th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Howard Dean is the worst DNC chairman in political history. That is why everyone thought Obama was going to terminate him.
1) Unlike the RNC, Dean took all delegates away from Michigan and Florida, resulting in controversy and voter disillusionment.
2) The DNC had only $4 million cash on hand on May 1st.
3) Dean currently has a legal challange against him for workplace discrimination, filed by a former gay employee at the DNC. This has used up DNC resources and his time.
4) The mamaging of the primary season overall has left an impression with voters, that maybe Democrats are not ready to lead and manage.
June 6th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
The more I think about this the more I want Romney to become the head of the RNC as opposed to McCain’s VP. Even if McCain wins, being his VP is likely a dead-end job. However, Romney could make a real impact as the head of the RNC.
Even the people who despise Romney have to admit that he is very accomplished at turning aroundfailing organizations. How about the Republican party? Romney is great on message, great on fundraising, great on organization and great on long-term vision for the future.
I think a combination of Romney’s ability to turn around organizations, fundraising etc, combined with Gingrich’s ideas and message capability would turn the GOP into the dominant type of party it should be given that we live in a center-right country.
June 6th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Howard Dean is an idiot but even a broken clock is right twice a day. It IS important to play in all fifty states.
June 6th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
DSkinner, I agree. I want Romney as head of the RNC. Where do I sign up?
June 6th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Dean definitely has had some drawbacks, but look at the turnaround he has managed.
4 years ago people were talking about a permanent GOP majority. Now there is a very real, albeit small chance of a 60 seat Senate, the Presidency, 240+ seats in the House and replacing 3 aging, liberal Supreme Court justices with 3 young ones that will ensure liberal activism for another generation.
June 6th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
#56 Adam, I am still not sold. That may work in mid-term elections, but Presidential elections….? Every four years we hear about this from both candidates, but it never happens. Bush spent millions of California before Rove stopped it. Kerry tried to complete in states that he eventually gave up on as well. Gore’s 50 state strategy left him without his home state.
The McCain strategy seems more realistic. Somewhere between the Dean and Rove methodology.
- Understand your red states, but do not target for a 50%+1 victory (Rove). Target the purple states, and a few additional blue states where the McCain brand sells better than the GOP brand, such as Mass, NJ and Oregon, etc..
June 6th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
Could McCain ask the current RNC chair to leave and appoint Romney?
June 6th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
No, the last thing we should want is Romney to be the public face of the GOP. Many of the potential VP picks would be great for the position, though. As long as they have an organizational mind.
June 6th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Kristofer - We already clarified that we are not talking about presidential elections, so I think we agree.
Bushboy - Absolutely, just like Obama had to give the okay for Dean to stay on, McCain could push Martinez out.
June 6th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Carly Fiorina.
June 6th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Metro, you give the RNC Chair too much credit as “the public face” of the party. Dean was not the public face of the Dems for the past 4 years. All the blue dog Dems that have gotten elected over the past few years have not done so because of Dean.
The RNC chair is about behind the scenes stuff.
June 6th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
DSkinner, I disagree. The head of the party is on TV all the time representing that party. Think Terry McAuliffe.
June 6th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
How do you explain Howard Dean? He is ridiculed by most people who only remember him for the embarassing Dean scream, yet he has been Chairman over an incredible turnaround by the Democratic party. All the new people in the party didn’t do it because they liked him when they saw him on TV.
June 6th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
I’d actually be okay with Romney as head of the RNC, provided he understood that he’s there to run the thing and not use it as a springboard for the next election.
That, however, could be a tall order for him.
June 6th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
#62, sorry.
May I just add that I believe Dean’s 50 state strategy will fail in the long run, as I believe we will see a repeat of 1982/83. When the extremely liberal congress begins to push for policies (nominating liberal judges, gun control, etc…) that will push “blue dog” democratic members to bolt for the GOP.
I am still trying to figure out how Webb is a long-term Democrat? When we achieve victory in Iraq and the troops come home, what will Webb talk about with his Liberal controlled party? Same with Tester, and others.
June 6th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Kristofer,
That’s just it. Webb and Tester and the “blue dogs” are what we call low-hanging fruit. As soon as the political pendulum shifts back to the right those Democrats are going to be most endangered.
June 6th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Romney would be a great RNC chairman - but a far better VP/Prez, and he can’t do both.
June 6th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Good job Barack Hussein Obama! The DNC’s chairman can keep “hat[ing] the Republicans and everything they stand for.”
Let’s all welcome the “new” politics of Barack!
June 6th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
But, to follow up on #69, there is no other way to do it. You win when the political winds are at your party’s back and you lose when they are not. I don’t believe in any “permanent majority”. Sooner or later the opposing party figures out what it needs to do to win, and sooner or later the party in power loses its way.
June 6th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Did anyone catch McCain on ABCNews yesterday? Gibson asked McCain whether he really wanted to be president or was winning the nomination enough. That is a stunningly condescending question. Sometimes I wonder who these guys think they are.
June 6th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
You right Memnon. Why don’t these clowns ask the same from the Dems.
June 6th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Maybe I’m in the minority here but I’ve never been so energized this fall. Barack’s entire candidacy is nothing more than a manifestation of political correctness and white guilt. This IS nothing more than one great big fairy tale.
Obama did not become nominee on his own merit. He doesn’t deserve it. He didn’t pay his dues. He’s not being honest about what he is or who he chooses to associate with. Everytime the mask gets removed when one of his peeps gets exposed for what they are (Wright, Pfleger, Ayers) he plays dumb and says “That isn’t the person I knew” or pretends not to know him as well as he really does (like Ayers being “a guy in my neighborhood” when he actually kickstarted his state senate career).
I’ve never been more insulted that a nominee from the opposing party is even on the same stage as our guy. I can’t wait to vote against Obama.
June 6th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
I would also be extremely excited about this election if we had a better nominee. Obama is the perfect liberal - a young minority who supports high social spending and a weak military. The damage that a loss by him could do to the lbieral movement is considerable.
But its hard for me to get excited about the prospect of beating him when, even if we win, Conservatives are going to have to spend half their time opposing the White House.
June 6th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Not to thread-jack, but McCain sent out another email earlier. It has Rick Davis giving their synopsis and strategy for the election.
http://www.johnmccain.com/pathtovictory/
He talks about the Clinton supporters in OH and PA, using maps that bring to mind the front-page postings of Sean Oxendine. Seems his abilities are still quite apparent.
June 6th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
It would be nice to see a Rick Davis email about reaching out to Huckabee or Romney voters.
June 6th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
#77: That video makes me worried when Rick Davis is classifying VA as “Solid Dem” and OR and WA as “Toss Up” rather than “Lean Dem,” among other things.
June 6th, 2008 at 9:12 pm
It’s at 9:30 if you wish to skip to the electoral map.
June 6th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
#78: I was a Huckabee voter. I just wasn’t so jaded as to think Huck was God adn that I could never vote for McCain. Besides, I liked McCain back in ‘00.
June 6th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Why would Obama terminate Dean?
Dean was in the tank for Obama from day one, and saw to it that the DNC stopped Hillary at every turn, and committed outright fraud by giving Om]bama Michigan delegates. (Ah, but he was not on the ballot! whined his supporters, to which I say too damn bad Obama kids, suffer the consequences of your own actions, you don’t get something from nothing).
Obambi owes his ’selection’ to Howie boy.
June 6th, 2008 at 10:26 pm
I’m an Independent. I admired Clinton, and detested Obama. It looks like McCain gets my vote.
I believe Obama is a danger to our country - both because of his inexperience, and because he associates with far left radicals. I detested his sexism and playing the race card at every opportunity. I expect him to do that against McCain supporters too.
June 6th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
#82 is correct, the neutral Dean, Pelosi, Reid stopped Clinton. The most under reported story of the campaign was the fact that the “inside” powers stopped the NC debate, after Obama bombed in the Penn debate. No one stuck of for her in the party and in the media.
June 6th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
Kristofer, do you work for the McCain campaign? I just watched the Davis video, and then I looked back at your post from this afternoon on another thread?
“Kristofer Says:
June 6th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Matthew E. Miller,
Interesting how McCain is using campaign finance reform to his advantage. McCain can spend every penny (and must must, as technically it is still for the primary) between now and the convention. At the time of the official nomination, then the McCain team receives the 80+ million in campaign financing.
With 9 weeks between nomination and election day, that would equal 1.5 million per day available for spending. In April, Obama raised an average of 1 million per day. He will be required to increase that by 50% to match McCain’s govt. funding.
Based on the last two months of McCain/RNC fundraising, we should expect McCain/RNC to raise at least $130 million between now and convention, plus what they currently have on hand. We could be looking at $200 million being spent by McCain/RNC in the next three months.
McCain had 22 million on hand at the end of April, and raised another $22 million in May. The RNC had $40 million in the bank and raised another $23 million. The McCain/RNC expenses have been very low as Clinton/Obama fought each other. Post convention, the RNC will continue to fundraise, as McCain receives matching funds. This is why McCain is accepting matching funds. This is the latest we have ever had a GOP convention.
This is the dirty secret in favor of the McCain/GOP. With the DNC having essentailly just enought to pay the rent and salaries and nothing else, Obama will be forced to re-direct fundraising to the DNC.”
June 6th, 2008 at 11:29 pm
Bob, I am not paid by the McCain campaign.
June 6th, 2008 at 11:57 pm
#17, Clarence, you say Kentucky is more Republican than before. It may be in Presidential Elections, but they have 1.6 million registered democrats to 1 million registered Republicans. Just happens that their brand of Democrats are different from the MA ones.