Election Central Morning Roundup
Poll Shows Wide Support For Liberal Agenda
A new AP/GfK poll suggests a broad mandate for Barack Obama pursuing liberal policies after he is sworn in. The poll shows 78% saying that removing U.S. troops from Iraq by 2010 should be an important or top priority, compared to only 10% who say it shouldn't be done at all, and 59% say it should be an important or top priority to eliminate the previous tax cuts on families making over $250,000, compared to only 18% who say it shouldn't be done.
Obama Holding Private Meetings Today
Barack Obama does not have any public events scheduled for today, but will instead be holding private meetings in Chicago along with Joe Biden.
Obama To Launch Full Review Of Gitmo Inmates
The Obama White House will reportedly launch a comprehensive review of the roughly 250 inmates at Guantanamo Bay upon taking office, which will be the first step in Obama's pledge to close the prison camp as soon as possible. The big question facing Obama is how to determine which of these men have been wrongly imprisoned, and which of them should still be held in some capacity -- and then to figure out what exactly should be done with that second group.
Obama Taps Nunn For Defense Transition
Barack Obama has reportedly picked former Sen. Sam Nunn (D-GA) to oversee his transition at the Defense Department. The big job for the Obama team is to review the current state of these departments and deciding how Obama will restructure them once he takes office. (Late Update: The Obama team has put out a statement saying that former Sec. of State Warren Christopher will not be involved in the transition, contrary to the AP's contention that he would be involved in the State Department process.)
WaPo: Obama To Replace Intelligence Heads
The Washington Post reports that CIA Director Michael Hayden and Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell expect to be replaced by the new president, and that there is a political consensus among Congressional Dems that they should be replaced. The big issue: Both of them have backed the Bush Administration's policies on wiretapping and torture.
Hispanic Leaders Pushing For Richardson At State
The National Hispanic Leadership Agenda has called upon Barack Obama to appoint Bill Richardson as Secretary of State, which would pit Richardson against John Kerry and other prominent names believed to be in competition for the post. "By all accounts, Latinos were a key part of President-elect Obama's historic victory," said NHLA chairman John Trasviña.
Poll: Public Optimistic About Obama
A new Quinnipiac poll shows that 62% of voters believe Barack Obama will be a good or even great president, 56% think he'll be able to restore the public's trust in government, and 70% expect the economy to be better by the end of his term. On the other hand, 45% expect their own taxes to go up.
Obama Speaks With World Leaders Over The Phone
The Obama transition team announced that Obama spoke over the phone with various world leaders yesterday: President Luiz "Lula" da Silva of Brazil, Pope Benedict XVI, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India, King Abdullah of Jordan, and President Mwai Kibaki of Kenya.
Gitmo Review Huzzah!
November 12, 2008 9:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Take THAT Wall Street Journal.
November 12, 2008 9:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
"The Obama White House will reportedly launch a comprehensive review of the roughly 250 inmates at Guantanamo Bay ...to determine which of these men have been wrongly imprisoned, and which of them should still be held in some capacity ..."
No shit. That's what the tribuals were for.
November 12, 2008 9:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah and the Bush-ites clearly abdicated their duties and responsibilities didn't they.
Yet another steaming pile for Obama to clean up.
November 12, 2008 9:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
Reviewing the status of battlefield combatants (either lawful or unlawful) isn't the "President's" job. That's why there are military tribunals. Just like in Vietnam, Korea and WWII. You're saying Obama will review every case?
November 12, 2008 9:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
If the tribunals had been adequate, Obama wouldn't have to clean up this mess.
But they weren't, so he does.
November 12, 2008 9:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
...oh, I see. A military tribunal is good enough to review the case of a gaurd at Gitmo, just not a prisoner...
November 12, 2008 9:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
The whole idea of Gitmo is stupid.
November 12, 2008 9:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Um, well, if those running the tribunals had been interested in actually getting justice and finding out the truth about each detainee instead of just racking up a streak of show trial convictions, then there might be something for us to discuss here. But, sadly, no.
November 12, 2008 9:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, I see, it's the corrupt JAG Corps officers just trying to pad their stats...
November 12, 2008 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
No it was the politicos who ran the program from Washington NOT the career military JAG lawyers who f*&ked this up. Stop defending the crappiest people to ever trash our constitution and sh*t all over our nations capital.
THEY LOST.
November 12, 2008 9:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
If you're talking about the Bush team...they're undefeated (2-0), McCain's wishy washy maybe Conservative sometime routine got defeated.
November 12, 2008 10:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
uh huh. if only McCain had picked a hard core conservative fundie as a running mate to energize the base.... ah well, maybe next time.
you crack me up!
November 12, 2008 10:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
SFC conveniently forgets that McCain brought on lots of the Bush brains, eg Steve Schmidt and the douchebags who did the "McCain fathered a black child out of wedlock" robocalls. They were tied at the hip, however he tries to deny it.
November 12, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Aren't you the least bit curious about why there are people at Gitmo (some of whom are no doubt innocent) who have been there for more than 5 years and still haven't received anything resembling a trial/tribunal/whatever?
The right of habeas corpus has been around for nearly 1,000 years, and anyone with an understanding of it would know that you can't deny it to one group without effectively denying it from all groups (unless it's unfortunately being denied on the basis of superficial grounds such as skin color or sex). If I'm labeled as an enemy combatant (because an enemy "turned me in" to the state department for a nice reward), how can I challenge that without habeas corpus? How can I prove I'm an American citizen without habeas corpus?
November 12, 2008 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not to mention people who have been found not guilty but have not been released because they'd be persecuted in their home countries, and not released here because the administration officially thinks that (surprise!) after having been held in degrading conditions in an extralegal hellhole for years, they might have a grudge against us (but more likely are just afraid of what they'll reveal about their treatment.)
November 12, 2008 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the tribunals were adequate, most of the prisoners wouldn't still be sitting there after seven years.
November 12, 2008 9:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Richardson as Secretary of State, I like it.
November 12, 2008 9:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
...definately better choice than Kerry.
November 12, 2008 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed.
November 12, 2008 9:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thirded!
November 12, 2008 9:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why pick a political hack who was a late train endorser? Richardson is surrounded by rumors of the Bill Clinton, John Edwards and Henry Cisneros variety.
November 12, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Richardson a "political hack"? Are you serious? Have you seen the guy's resume?
November 12, 2008 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
Late train? How so? You mean back in March? You mean after he called his friends the Clintons and told them he was endorsing Obama, and got an earful from HRC for his trouble?
And rumors are just that, until you post some links at least.
Go Richardson -- Go Jumbos! :)
November 12, 2008 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Me, too. Kerry on the other hand just doesn't resonate with me. I have no particular reason, but he just doesn't impress me as someone who would be an effective SoS. Maybe because Kerry is too much the politician and legislator, where as Richardson is more the executive and statesman.
November 12, 2008 9:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
...please don't open up the "Executive experience vs. Senate experience" can again...
November 12, 2008 9:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's not about experience, it's about how one conducts oneself. During the campaign I would say that Obama was more the executive and statesman than John McCain because of the manner in which he conducted himself.
November 12, 2008 9:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
That battle is over, SFC. Move on.
November 12, 2008 9:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
That was supposed to be funny...
November 12, 2008 9:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, my apologies. I didn't pick up on it.
November 12, 2008 9:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
*I* thought it was funny! :)
November 12, 2008 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
yeah, we don't need to be reminded that the voters chose to send Sarah Palin back to Alaska to gain some more executive experience, as well as more knowledge about everything.
Doesn't appear that she'll be hitting the books anytime soon, just praying that God opens another door for her to plow through despite the fact that the rest of the country wants the door locked.
November 12, 2008 9:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Palin prayed and prayed for victory, so if you believe in G-d, that should be all the answer you need as to Palin being allowed to serve as a blight on anyone other than Alaska...
November 12, 2008 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
As the bombardier who thought he was Christ said in that great episode of MASH:
November 12, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like Richardson, too, but is he astute enough and tough enough for State? Biden probably has a good idea of whether that's true. He certainly would make a great ambassador.
November 12, 2008 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Richardson is a personal scandal waiting to happen.
November 12, 2008 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why do you say that?
November 12, 2008 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, what is your big scoop already?
November 12, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
He's successfully negotiated with Kim Jong Il, Saddam Hussein, Castro, and various military dictators. I don't think there's any serious question about "tough enough."
November 12, 2008 12:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
November 12, 2008 9:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
And she was disappointed the African Queen didn't call, too.
November 12, 2008 9:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
I was hoping that Bush would have invited Obama to attend this week's economic summit as a sign of his willingness to facilitate a smooth transition. Oh well, at least a couple of Obama's aides will attend.
November 12, 2008 9:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think it was Barack's choice not to attend the econ summit. One president at a time and all that.
November 12, 2008 9:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Speaking of smooth transitions....how many "O's" do you think will be missing from the computer key boards when the Obama team moves in? Also how many pornographic pictures will be mixed in with the copier and fax paper?...and profanity laced messages left on the voice mail system? Just wondering...
November 12, 2008 9:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not nearly enough for your liking, I would guess.
November 12, 2008 9:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
You know SFC,
The problem isn't so much the one thing as it is the fact that... wait a minute,
YOU DON'T MATTER ANYMORE!!!
thx Keith O!
November 12, 2008 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
To the extent that those things happened, these represent immature pranks that have little to do with the actual transition from one president to another. And I have seen many people beating Bush up for efforts to transition power to Obama.
November 12, 2008 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
how many "O's" do you think will be missing from the computer key boards when the Obama team moves in?
Probably the same amount as were missing in 2001 - very few, if any at all. That story was debunked years ago, dude.
November 12, 2008 9:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Denial and debunked are two different terms.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CEFDE163CF931A25755C0A9649C8B63
November 12, 2008 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
You need to keep current:
Newsweek:
November 12, 2008 10:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Uh...the article I linked to said pretty much the same thing...that it happened...which was the point of my post. I'm willing to bet that Bush (if he felt it's neccessary) has put out that there had better not be a single "O" key missing.
November 12, 2008 11:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
Neither article had the breathless hype that apparently realigns your political perspective. $14k for wear and tear and some missing keys as a prank didn't get much of a shrug from the average American back then. Trying to whip up a little outrage on an 8 year old non-story tells me that you Republicans are done with the bottom of the barrel and are now digging through the mud underneath. Enjoy your time in the wilderness.
November 12, 2008 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
LOL.
You know the repugs are sucking mud when they feel the need to drag up urban myths from eight years ago.
What fun.
November 12, 2008 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama did NOT want to attend this week's economic summit because he does not want anything that Bush does before Obama goes into office be any stamp on what Obama wants to do.
November 12, 2008 9:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Someone forgot to tell the American people we live in a center-right nation. The MSM has decreed it!
November 12, 2008 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I asked about that yesterday. Where are they getting that from? The entire MSM just says it as if it's established fact.
November 12, 2008 9:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why let the facts get in the way of the established storyline? And why acknowledge reality when it has such a clear liberal bias?
November 12, 2008 10:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's cuz they think they're in the center and realize most are right of them...it's all about perspective.
November 12, 2008 10:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Electing the "most liberal Senator" who was labelled a "socialist" for wanting to increase the top tax rate four percentage points apparently means we're "center-right" as a nation.
Whatever, the voters knew what Obama's plans were, and we expect him to follow through, so I don't care how they label the country. In fact, it's great if "center-right" now includes universal health care, progressive taxation and renewable energy. We already knew that most people were pro-choice, thankfully we're getting that too, and stem cell research.
November 12, 2008 10:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, I"d like to see some Republicans address this cognitive dissonance (or what should cause cognitive dissonance at least). You up to SFCWallace?
(As much fun as it is to pick on him, I have to give him credit for being a good sport.)
November 12, 2008 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'll give it a shot. President Bush's approval rating was in the low 30's election day. McCain (or Bush III as he's been portrayed) lost the election by 7% (NC 2%, FL 2%, IN 2%, OH 4%, VA 7%...) he finished 25 points above the President's approval and 18 points above the "generic Republican" brand. Did he lose? Yes. Was it a resounding victory for Obama and his "pragmatic liberalism?" Not even close.
November 12, 2008 10:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
But when you look at the counties and demographics, almost every group voted more Democratic than in 2004.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/11/05/us/politics/20081104_ELECTION_RECAP.html
Indiana for instance is mostly red, but when you look at much gain toward Democratic ticket it is basically entirely blue. So there is a shift going on toward the message of the Democrats and Obama. Will this trend continue? We'll have to wait and see, but aside from a few things (Prop 8 for instance), it's hard to claim that we are center-right. More like just plain center, and trending to the left unless the conservatives can re-message their agenda.
November 12, 2008 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
In point of fact, with the exception of the south, most counties in the US voted more Democratic than they did in 2004. For a striking visual, see http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2008/
November 12, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's not the south, that is coal-oil country with a little south coast spice. But I agree about the trend.
November 12, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that has more to do with Bush's approval rating than Obama's (or the Democtats) agenda. In CA Obama won 61%-37% and prop 8 was 52%-48%. Obama ran 13 points ahead of the liberal agenda. Obama had to pretend he was for off-shore drilling and clean coal technology (let's see how quick that executive order is reversed). I'm not saying there wasn't a shift towards Democrats (vote-wise) this time, I'm saying it has more to do with personallities than agenda's. Only time will tell.
November 12, 2008 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Funny you don't want to mention the fact that over the last 4 years Democrats have picked up at least 50 house seats and at least 12 senate seats (probably more). That's over 20 percent of the congressional seats republicans held two years ago. This isn't the Wizard of Oz. Clicking your heels together 3 times and repeating over and over again "this wasn't a major leftward shift in the american electorate" won't make it true.
November 12, 2008 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
It's in the moose-dogs Sarah's been feeding Matt "Chowder."
The Village Idiots are the biggest bunch of "common knowledge" peddlers, and they're almost always wrong. They'd have poor "averages" even for meteorologists, let alone pundits.
Personally, I don't have a problem with Obama being "post-partisan." But that's just it...he should be able to govern based on the facts as his administration interprets them (and let's face it, that's the way any administration works). He has said he'll take all viewpoints into consideration and be more inclusive than his predecessor(s). The media needs to shut up and give him a chance to show it.
He hasn't even been inaugurated yet, and they're already trying to line up a horse race against him for 2012. "OOoooo....will it be Newt the Grinch? OOOooo...hope so! Battle royal! Great ratings!"
November 12, 2008 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why close Gitmo? On Jan. 21 we can just transfer Bush administration official there, pending war crimes indictments.
November 12, 2008 10:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Gee, I thought we were a center right country. That's what everyone tells me on TV
November 12, 2008 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Director of National Intelligence Robert Mueller?"
The last time I looked, the Director of National Intelligence was—and remains—Admiral Mike McConnell. Director Robert Mueller is the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
November 12, 2008 10:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
No dispute on Bill Richardson. He's the most qualified for the job. He's held cabinet rank, met and negotiated with world leaders, and he's respected world-wide.
Kerry's fine is as much as Kerry goes, but he doesn't have Richardson's experience.
Plus, Richardson's from New Mexico, so there you go! What more could you want? ; )
November 12, 2008 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
In your article you identify Robert Mueller as Director of National Intelligence. He is FBI director. Michael McConnell is DNI.
November 12, 2008 10:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
oops!
Lafferty beat me to it. Good work.
November 12, 2008 10:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
To the person who said "No Sh*t. That's what the tribunals were for..." to Obama's plan to determine who of the 250 detainees are actually guilty of a crime, it has become common knowledge that many of the incarcerated were put there based on faulty testimony. In many cases innocent men were locked up based on accusations and testimony from the very terrorists we were trying to apprehend. Basically, anything that was done under the Bush Administration needs to be re-looked at with extreme scrutiny. And that's exactly what Obama is doing.
November 12, 2008 11:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the thing about Kerry: Obama owes Kerry BIG TIME. If it wasn't for the keynote address at the '04 convention, Obama would not have had national exposure (which led to his Senate run). Kerry has been very good to Obama. Expect some back scratchin' here.
November 12, 2008 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
I lean toward Richardson, myself: he's got the experience, it would be history-making, etc. The only mark against him is his, ahem, *history*. I don't think it means as much as long as there's no current "situation"--I don't want to see what happened to Secy. Cisneros to happen to him.
That said, I don't think it's an easy choice between he and Kerry. They're both good and they've both been good to him.
November 12, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
And she was disappointed the African Queen didn't call, too.
Moose49
A call from Mama Africa might have been nice, but she was no longer busy being born, unfortunately.
What a singer she was! What a captivating performer!
And I hope Ms. Obama can take inspiration from her wardrobe, which was also wonderful.
Her music was so much the soundtrack to my liberal childhood. Funny, I took it for granted at the time.
November 12, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
I thought Kerry, as a former prosecutor, would be a better fit for AG. I'm not aware of what he's done in the foreign policy arena, certainly not like Richardson as a former UN ambassador and negotiator of various conflicts.
November 12, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
What you said.
November 12, 2008 11:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Geez Josh*** maybe you should just go back to bed to prevent further brain damage or at least until your perspective gets brighter. Maybe grab a copy of the latest Quinnipiac poll of optimism about an Obama Presidency.
Most of us are just fearful about being sold this "country center right" lie and are extremely watchful about anything or anyone on our side falling for it.
Also many of us are making public what we want to happen during the Obama presidency rather than waiting to be critical of what actually does happen.
Medicare expanded to cover everyone, troops out of Iraq,rounding up and confiscating all holdings of Wall street personnel who've been ripping us off the last 8yrs, economic disaster under control, ending the Bush tax cuts and the Reagan tax cuts for the wealthy and ending the corporatocracy, new jobs created from going green and tackling energy problems and global warming, the end of torture and spying and the restoration of habeas corpus...just to mention a few. Maybe when you awake Josh yu can smile and say "I had a dream" rather than pissing on transition optimism.
November 12, 2008 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Soory Josh...I meant "pissing on transition pessimism"...not optimism....okay then there now.
November 12, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink