Election Central Morning Roundup
Obama Campaign Targeting 14 Red States
In their efforts to expand the playing field, Obama deputy campaign manager Steve Hildebrand told the Politico that the campaign will be putting resources into 14 states that George W. Bush won in 2004, and will even be targeting states they're unlikely to win, like Wyoming. "If we can register more Democrats, if we can increase the Democratic performance and turnout, maybe we can pick up a congressional seat."
Obama To Give Press Conference Today, McCain In Nevada
Barack Obama will be holding a 3:15 p.m. ET press conference today in his home base of Chicago, following a closed-door policy meeting with business leaders supporting his candidacy. John McCain will be in the swing state of Nevada, with an event in Las Vegas focusing on energy policy.
Hillary Meeting With House Dems Today To Urge Unity
Hillary Clinton is making a Democratic unity tour part of her return to Capitol Hill. Clinton is set to meet today with the House Democratic Caucus, where she will thank her former backers and ask them to work hard on Barack Obama's behalf.
Obama: Dobson "Making Stuff Up"
Barack Obama has responded to James Dobson's condemnation, after Dobson accused Obama of distorting the Bible and having a "fruitcake interpretation" of the law for arguing that religious doctrine should not directly dictate public policy. "I think you'll see that he was just making stuff up, maybe for his own purposes," Obama said.
Utah Congressman Loses Reelection In Primary
Rep. Chris Cannon, a Utah Republican known for his outrageous gaffes over the years, was defeated in his primary last night by a landslide margin. With 100% of precincts reporting, Cannon lost to state political operative Jason Chaffetz by a 60%-40% margin.
San Fran Group Seeks To Name Sewage Plant After Bush
Now this is funny. A group calling itself the Presidential Memorial Commission of San Francisco is planning to put an initiative on the ballot to rename the city's sewage treatment plant after President Bush. The group, which was formed at a bar, is calling their proposal "an appropriate honor for a truly unique president."
Oh Dobson, you do realize you are arguing for a literal interpretation of a fairy tale don't you? What an idiot.
It is sad that in 2008 someone can actually attack someone for now believing in a literal enough interpretation of a ridiculous piece of fiction.
I look forward for the day when public officials can freely admit to not believing in Santa Claus.
June 25, 2008 9:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's already here, that's why it's winter break rather than Christmas vacation.
June 25, 2008 10:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
What Democratic presidential nominee in recent memory has ever spent even a penny to try to increase a congressional majority or build the party? This is why Obama is such a great choice for the Democrats.
June 25, 2008 9:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is definitely a long-term thinker, whereas most other candidates are just concerned with the present and their own political futures.
The foundation Obama is building now is going to sustain an Democratic majority for a long time. We should never stop this kind of work, we need to keep expanding until the Republican Party is no longer a power on the federal (or local) level.
My dream (and yes, it is probably just a dream) is that we can crush the Republican Party, and perhaps turn this into a one party system with the Democratic Party in control, then, inevitably, there will be a split between moderate Democrats and progressives, and they would be like the current Democrats and Republicans, only everything would be shifted significantly to the left...and I guess current Republicans would either join the moderate Democrats or remain a third party. Now wouldn't that be something?
I know it is kind of out there, but any thoughts from people?
June 25, 2008 9:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
GWB got 62 million votes in the 2004 General election. We have a long way to go before the Republican Party is a struggling 3rd wheel.
June 25, 2008 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
But with Obama's amazing ability to bring new people into the process, the idea of a fundamental shift in our system doesn't seem so "out there" anymore.
June 25, 2008 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Its true, we do have a long way to go, but if the Democrats can prove to America that we can do great things (and not just that the Republicans are bad), I think we could really change our political landscape. I wonder what a decade or more of the Republicans being powerless at the federal level (and the majority of states) would do to their party. Obviously with the prospect of living in a long-term minority many of the Republicans in Congress, and locally, are quitting...it will be interesting to see how demoralized they get, and how long it takes them to realize that they need to shift to the left if they ever want to have a shot at regaining power.
It is truly an exciting time to be a political scientist! :P
June 25, 2008 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
I should say, despite my pessimistic response to your original post below, that this election does offer the once-in-a-generation (or more) opportunity to be a realigning election, like 1932, one that ushers in a new era in which progressives dominate our political process. Whether that comes to pass depends not only on winning this fall but the Democratic Party having its act together on all levels so it can deliver on universal health care, better economic security, a sane energy policy, getting out of Iraq, and the key parts of its agenda. That will be the toughest task of all. But having a president who views his mission as the leader of a movement makes it a hell of a lot more likely.
June 25, 2008 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
that's a beautiful dream, lux. although i'd really like to see multiple parties be a working proposition in America. the forced dichotomy that arises when everything is an either/or choice makes for poor policy in general.
June 25, 2008 10:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wish. Though I'm afraid it's not likely to happen.
The Repugnant Party has too much institutional support to wither away: big money, think tanks (e.g. Heritage), their own national network (Faux), 95 percent of talk radio, 90 percent of op-ed columnists (I'm probably exaggerating, but not much), the oxymoronic religious right, the forces of corporate greed, etc.
So even if the party itself somehow fell apart, the Dark Forces behind it would reconstitute themselves and rear their ugly heads again. In the last seven and a half years, this country has come dangerously close to fascism, and even the election of Obama and larger Democratic majorities in Congress won't make that risk magically disappear for all eternity.
I'm afraid the fight against the Repugs and the forces behind them will have to go on for the foreseeable future.
June 25, 2008 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. The 50 state strategy warms the cockles of my heart. This is the way it should be done, IMO.
June 25, 2008 9:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
question for readers: do you want these roundups? find them useful?
June 25, 2008 9:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. Definitely.
June 25, 2008 9:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Although, having so many different topics in one thread does lead to a bit of chaos in the comment section, I like not having to click back and fourth all the time (or keep multiple windows open).
June 25, 2008 9:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
It has the benefit of keeping all the commenters in one spot. When you throw a slew of individual posts up, the bottom ones will get sort of buried.
June 25, 2008 9:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, the round-ups are great. Like the ol' Daily Muck.
June 25, 2008 9:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
yes, please.
June 25, 2008 10:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Absolutely. Please keep them coming.
June 25, 2008 10:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
yes. very much.
the more TPM can be a one-stop site the better (TPM and NPR are my primary sources for news/info, most days i don't get info from anywhere else). the roundups seem to give a place for (and opportunity to comment on) bits and pieces that might otherwise not get mentioned.
June 25, 2008 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
They add to the ease of finding what you want. Please keep it up.
June 25, 2008 11:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Definitely keep them.
June 25, 2008 11:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, thanks.
June 25, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like the roundups, Greg. There're are always multiple subjects that can be discussed and that's both bad and good, but I think these roundups are great.
June 25, 2008 9:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
A preview button would be even greater - provided I used it. LOL!
June 25, 2008 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
ok, thanks all. look for it every day -- including weekends!
June 25, 2008 9:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
PREVIEW AND EDIT BUTTON!
June 25, 2008 9:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
)))))))))))))))-crickets-(((((((((((((((((
But I agree they would help a great deal.
June 25, 2008 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
That last little tidbit is simply tremendous. I love San Francisco.
June 25, 2008 10:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
See, psychological effect isn't a bad thing...
June 25, 2008 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm loving the Bush Sewage Plant.
Considering that the Swiftboaters are forcing that Lie-berry down our throats in Dallas - and no one is happy about it - this does me some good to know that at least one appropriate monument to Bush might come into existence.
I've already decided to endow a trust to keep a tagger paid to tag the Lie-berry with "Worst President Ever" every time it gets painted over.
Technically, one cannot contract with another for an illegal enterprise, but I'm working on a way around that...
June 25, 2008 10:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
527 - Center for honest tagging
June 25, 2008 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nah, I want to see that building spray painted - in perpetuity.
June 25, 2008 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Get your cartons of eggs, toilet paper rolls and flaming bags of shit ready...we're going to the Bushie Lieberry!
June 25, 2008 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Tena, have I ever told you that you are one of my favorite people ever? :)
June 25, 2008 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ah thanks- that made my day. :)
June 25, 2008 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Talk about an oxymoron!
June 25, 2008 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not an oxymoron, more like a redundancy.
June 25, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hunh. I e-mailed this item to Josh and Greg a few days ago, but only Eric picks it up, and that after NYT does. Guess I'm used to TPM being more of a leader than a follower :-)
KCBS here in SF reports that...
Local rag BeyondChron has an amusing commentary on the issue...
Official site: http://presidentialmemorial.wordpress.com/
June 25, 2008 11:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
1. I like the roundups. Quick intros to what to watch. I normally just read Froomkin's White House Watch to get the skinny on what's happened today (past tense). But, it's nice to have another quick summary for whats-going-to-happen.
2. Interesting that McCain is in Nevada doing energy policy just a week or so after Obama did his major energy policy speech there. Isn't California a more energy-aware state?
3. Obama's speech on energy policy announced a couple of initiatives - $15B/year plus oil-lease fees going to renewables R&D after election. That's almost as much as NASA's budget. Opinon: Very cool stuff! I'm glad some of the energy spend is going to R&D to get us out of this mess.
4. Obama's website covered the Cap-And-Trade system positively. I would advocate for a percentage of cap-and-trade fees to go to R&D or subsidies / tax breaks for purchase of renewables.
5. The speech seemed to be saying bad things about nuclear, when it would go a long way to removing coal from the equation (base load, night capacity, etc.) No talk from either candidate on the new, Generation 4 modular nuclear plant designs like pebble bed nuclear reactor designs, which could greatly help our CO2 output decline. Yes, we end up with some nasty waste, but better that than all that CO2.
June 25, 2008 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
I completely agree with you about nuclear power and that's a very unpopular position for a progressive to take. But Europe has been using nuclear for years without problems and it does replace coal which is terrible for climate change. Bush insisted on building 75 new coalpowered plants in Texas, and we already have some of the worst air pollution in the country thanks to Bush and to Smoky Joe Barton.
June 25, 2008 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Uh...McCain's proposed 45 new plants and Obama dissed him for it...
June 25, 2008 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
yep. mccain is pro-nuclear and obama is anti-nuclear.
nuclear power isn't as popular among democrats as it ought to be.
June 25, 2008 11:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
I already said that I know nuclear power is very unpopular with most progressives.
Dude, I've never fully agreed with one other human being in my life on all counts.
Get over it - please. You cannot sour me on Obama, no matter how long you dog my comments - trust me, I don't give one shit what you think of Obama. I'm totally committed to him.
June 25, 2008 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
He also thinks Saxby Chambliss ran a "clean campaign" against Max Cleland.
Where's the "ignore" button?
June 25, 2008 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Oh Dobson, you do realize you are arguing for a literal interpretation of a fairy tale don't you? What an idiot."
You do realize that many Democrats are religious, and your statement is highly offensive to many of them. Among other things, it is that kind of openly disrespectful and antagonistic standpoint that has given the Democratic Party a bad name among devout Americans.
June 25, 2008 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Are you offended by Lux specifically using the term "fairytale" to describe the Bible, or by Lux presenting the viewpoint that the Bible is a work of fiction?
I'm truly curious about this, not trying to be snarky at all.
June 25, 2008 1:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
A group calling itself the Presidential Memorial Commission of San Francisco is planning to put an initiative on the ballot to rename the city's sewage treatment plant after President Bush.
But...but... oh, well, I suppose that I should not begrudge having one actual solution (the treatment plant) associated with this effluent of a president. But... I do. How about: President Bush's Sewage Processing Plant, or is that a distinction without a difference?
June 25, 2008 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm from San Francisco, so I think I should have a say in the naming. PBSPP is OK, but doesn't roll off the tongue. How about: Bush Reclamation Plant (BRP - pronounced "burp")? I was also considering something that includes Cheney, like Bush-Cheney Refined Aquatic Processing, or B-CRAP for short.
June 25, 2008 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Peter B., I won't speak for Democrat 50, but I suggest that the adjective "ridiculous" is the most offensive word in Lux's post.
The bible contains much actual history, it is most assuredly not a "piece of fiction". Nor is every word in it literally true. I am a Christian, yet I recognize that what most of us learned as the Christmas story did not physically occur. The essential question is, how much of the narrative of Jesus' three-year ministry, and of his death and its aftermath, is factual historic reality. I and most Christians choose to believe that much, most or all of it in fact occurred much as the Gospels describe.
Each person is free to make that determination individually. I don't disparage you if you reject it completely. I also don't appreciate your disparagement of my beliefs. And Democrat50 is absolutely correct that such disparagement is completely counter-productive to the goal of making the Democratic Party a real choice in all 50 states.
June 25, 2008 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the answer Ian. I wasn't trying to disparage your beliefs, and I apologize if it came across that way. My intention simply was to find out if it was the principle and the tone/word choice in Lux's post that were offensive to the reader, or just the tone/word choice.
June 25, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, Peter B., I just got off work, and this is the first chance I have had to respond. No, I did not take your comment/question as snarky. I also understand that IanDayre does not speak for me, but he did as well or better! I was most put off by Lux's tone, but yes "ridiculous" would be the most offensive to me and other devout Democrats. Ian said it best, that parts are obvious fiction/allegory, but the Bible is one of the best pieces of historical writing that historians and classicists have available to them. The tone, though, is frustrating, and it is very unwise at a time when Democrats need the support of very devout evangelicals, especially the young who tend to be the most devout, and working-class Catholics. So..principle AND tone/word choice.
June 25, 2008 6:46 PM | Reply | Permalink