LEADERBOARD '08

Liberal icon Ted Kennedy dies

2009-08-29T13:21:00.006+03:00

Ted Kennedy's endorsement of Barack Obama last year will be remembered as one of the key symbolic moments of the campaign. It was the passing of the torch in the Democratic Party to a new generation of leaders. The party had found someone who they felt was the next JFK and Ted Kennedy was doing his best to confirm the impression. With the passing of Ted Kennedy, Obama has at least temporarily lost his supermajority and a key ally in the United States Senate. Knowing that he was stricken with a fatal illness, the endorsement of 2008 was probably the last truly significant symbolic act Ted Kennedy could do as the leader of America's most legendary political dynasty. He was fighting until his last breath to achieve health care reform but it was never going to happen during his lifetime.

While Ted Kennedy never was as unreservedly admired as his two assassinated brothers were at the time of their deaths, he was the one Kennedy who could make a career that spanned over several decades always at the forefront of American politics. Within the Democratic Party he was a towering figure who came to stand for the core ideology of the party. This is the role he inherited from Robert F. Kennedy's tragically interrupted 1968 campaign. At that time his presidential prospects might have been the brightest but he was known as a partyboy who was far from mature enough to the task.

Over the decades Ted Kennedy grew into a father figure in American politics. The timing of his presidential campaign in 1980 was the worst possible but his handling of the Chappaquiddick scandal had not left him any other option than to sit out the previous elections where he otherwise might have gone further than he ever actually did. After abandoning his presidential aspirations, Ted Kennedy concentrated on what matters most in politics. That was not what position he might reach but how policy changes actually can be made and implemented through a very arduous process where the hard work itself doesn't always bring the greatest political rewards.

Now that there is a lot of talk concerning Obama's flip-flopping on the gay marriage issue, notwithstanding that he never actually wished to take a clear stand on the issue, the US GLBT community will certainly miss Ted Kennedy as a champion of their cause. When Massachusetts became the first state to legalize gay marriage, Ted Kennedy was rock solid in supporting the new status quo in an issue where those politicians who continually harbor presidential ambitions generally tend to straddle the fence the best they can. That issue is just one of many where Ted Kennedy dared to take a stand and tried to change the opinion climate of America rather than just blindly staring at the polls trying to accommodate his positions to what he saw to be an average assessment of the public will. If America is seriously moving into a more socially liberal direction, it is in no small part thanks to Ted Kennedy who dedicated his life to such a change in course. While Obama is closer to the middle than Ted Kennedy was, he still has lost a key supporter who was able to make many of the legislative compromises that are required to move things ahead. President Obama will be thankful that Ted Kennedy lived long enough to give him that memorable endorsement but he will also have to wonder as to who in his party can take on the ideological leadership that the late Massachusetts politician held for so long, not much challenged by anybody within the party.

Jackson Browne gets an apology from John McCain

2009-07-23T16:19:00.003+03:00

Running on Empty is the song that John McCain's presidential campaign will be best remembered for. This is not because the song was much used during the campaign itself but because of the lawsuit after the election. Ohio Republicans used portions of the song in a McCain web ad during the campaign and Obama supporter Jackson Browne, whose song it is, decided to sue. The song sounds like a hilarious choice for a campaign tune and many wisecracks have been made about the fumbling way of choosing songs for the McCain campaign that culminated in the lawsuit. More visibly the campaign had used songs by John Mellencamp, another artist who strongly supports the Democrats, without permission and apologized about that already during the campaign. Even a Van Halen song was used without permission in the context of the McCain campaign. Jackson Browne wanted the unauthorized use of songs as campaign tunes to stop so he went all the way to court and won. The details of the settlement are not disclosed but John McCain issued a public apology.

The Republican Party promised that they will never again use a campaign song without the artist's permission. This sounds like a big promise so perhaps Jackson Browne got what he wanted. Also now his song will be remembered as one of the defining songs of the campaign even if hardly anyone noticed it or heard it during the campaign. The song itself was used in a negative way, not to promote McCain but to mock the energy policies of Barack Obama, the candidate that the singer-songwriter from California supported. During the primaries Browne had appeared in support of John Edwards but after the candidate had been settled he was fully behind Barack Obama. Just imagine the situation, Browne's song featured in a negative ad attacking a cause and a candidate that the artist passionately supported. Jackson Browne was also by then known for his political activism so the choice of song in the fateful web ad was clearly a miscalculation.

It's not that the Republicans have been the only party to use tunes by musicians known to support the opposing side. Only In America is the song that Brooks and Dunn performed at the 2004 Republican National Convention in support of George W. Bush. After having served well as a Bush theme song it was widely used at Obama campaign events four years later, fitting the theme of that campaign just as well as the case was with the previous winning campaign. I suppose it is flattering for artists that their tunes are used by winners time and again even when the ideological climate changes rapidly. Brooks and Dunn were not complaining about the use of the song last year. Kix Brooks actually was happy about the knowledge that the song "potentially inspires all Americans". Artists don't nearly always complain in cases like this as they can also benefit from the exposure and they like to be listened to by supporters of both major parties as well as everyone else.

Even if the Republican Party has issued a public statement not to use any artist's material without permission, the statement is not actually legally binding. This is probably a big reason why such a grand statement was so easy to make. John McCain himself shouldn't feel too disappointed about the outcome of the lawsuit, a national campaign is a huge undertaking and the responsibility behind the decision to use Browne's song lies clearly with the Ohio Republican Party. Still, it is important to note that this wasn't about a decision made by local staff in Montana or Alaska. Ohio was the very state where the 2004 election had been decided and a number one target for the McCain campaign. As Obama was especially popular among artists in the 2008 election, the Republican campaign had a much more difficult task than the Democrats to pick songs that please the people who have written them.

Obama got his supermajority

2009-07-01T13:40:00.002+03:00

Finally it's July and on time for the Independence Day celebrations the United States Senate finally has a hundred members of that most serene body. The protracted court battle in Minnesota ended in Democrat Al Franken's favor, giving Obama the sixtieth seat that enables him to block filibusters in the Senate. There are now 58 Democrats and two independents that caucus with Democrats and only 40 Republican Senators. Last November's election actually resulted in 41 Republicans but since then Arlen Specter has switched parties. Thanks to that one key switch Obama has now a rare opportunity to at least try to block filibusters. Not all Democrats are bound to vote after party line and especially Specter has said he will follow his conscience rather than directions from his new party that also happens to be the party of his youth.

Al Franken lost the original count but won the recount and then went on to prevail in the momentous court battle. He had more votes when all the votes had been counted and recounted, which is hard for any court to overturn. Franken was also ready for the option of the election to be decided by a court even before the votes had been counted. Norm Coleman simply counted on his incumbency and thought that the comedian Franken would be rejected by the voters as a joke. He was wrong and he should have known better given the history of Minnesota where another celebrity, Jesse Ventura, won a gubernatorial election a decade ago.

Al Franken could well turn out to become the biggest celebrity in the entire Congress, an instantly recognizable character as Arnold Schwarzenegger is among the Governors. Obviously he's not even half as famous as Arnie internationally but he certainly is someone the larger public can recognize as a Democrat and as a comedian. For all these months, Franken has been preparing for the new job. He gets to begin his term half a year later than other newcomers but he is finally there, having unseated an incumbent and proven in his court case that the Bush vs. Gore decision has not left a lasting legacy in the United States legal system. Coleman's only hope was the perception of Bush vs. Gore as precedent but that was never going to happen. In this case the recount had been conducted and recounts always take precedence over original counts when such procedures are used. Al Gore did not have a finished recount to hand him victory in the 2000 presidential election.

How long will the supermajority last? It is fully possible that the Democrats will have somewhat less than 60 Senators caucusing with them as soon as January 2011. It is hard to defend your positions when you are the party in power and already hold a very strong margin in seats. Even a long-term incumbent Democrat such as Connecticut's Chris Dodd can be anything but certain of his re-election. Also another party switch might well upset the balance even before end of the 111th Congress. Just as it was at least in the short term worth it for blue state Republican Specter to switch parties, a red state Democrat might do the same in the opposing direction if the GOP is able to offer anything in return. I think that Obama might well hold the balance as it is for a year and a half simply because it is always easier for the majority party to lure a Senator to switch. Only Democrats and those who caucus with them get to chair committees at present.

Al Franken still waiting

2009-06-18T16:44:00.003+03:00

Will today finally bring the result that Al Franken has been waiting for, a Minnesota supreme court decision that would allow him to be seated as Senator from The Gopher State? If that will happen, Barack Obama will also get his supermajority. The twists and turns of the whole Franken vs. Coleman saga have been so tiring and boring that the voters in Minnesota surely at this point can't feel that all of this is being done to secure that their every vote counts. Norm Coleman made his point a long time ago. Now it seems his lawyers must have informed him way back when that he stands no chance to win, not even with the argument that the Bush vs. Gore precedent should tilt the case in his favor. That hasn't unfazed him since he's out to keep Al Franken from being sworn in as long as possible. Minnesotans have hade to do with one Senator for five and a half months now. Yes, longer delays have happened in Senate history but that is no excuse to keep this seat vacant any longer than necessary for justice to be done. My sincere impression is that this can't be about justice, it's politics as usual.

Since you never can be sure when the election contest will be over, it might be worthwhile to think about what kind of public servant Al Franken will be when he finally gets his seat. After all, he must be seated rather soon since the court is not politically motivated to favor Coleman. Perhaps the delay will not really be that decisive once Franken gets down to business. He is certainly not the most experienced politician out there but it may be of some advantage to Minnesotans that his is one of the most recognizable political faces in the nation. Like Arnold Schwarzenegger, the ultimate celebrity politician, Franken is bound to gain coverage for his speeches, not just by the local Land of 10,000 Lakes media but by the national media. Sure, Schwarzenegger is widely covered by foreign media outlets and Franken will probably be ignored by them. But the chance to have his initiatives covered all over America is a good thing for Franken and the visibility might make up for the time lost with the vacant seat. As Franken is a rather polarizing figure, the coverage of his first steps on Capitol Hill might also turn out to be 50% negative. But it is fully up to him not to create any scandals.

What does it say about the Minnesota electorate that so many went for a comedian in 2008 just as ten years earlier former wrestler Jesse Ventura was such a vote-getter? I guess it says nothing more than the election of Schwarzenegger says about Californians. Celebrities have been elected before and funny talking heads of today are what sports heroes used to be for previous generations of voters. Al Franken had a strong instant name recognition and he was determined to work very hard to get elected. He was also going to get a huge boost from the tendency of the presidential election and indeed the high turnout. Far from all celebrities get elected and those who do have to fight prejudice and voter apathy.

I don't know what Norm Coleman's future plans will be after this contest. It may be that he has prolonged this contest so long because he himself doesn't have a clue what to do now that he is out of office. At least his lawyers must be happy about his indecision, after all they have been able to dig deep in a landmark case and get nice paychecks for their work. What must frustrate them, though, is the impossibility to win the case. Sure, Bush won against Gore and if these judges had exactly the same ideas about this election as the US Supreme Court Justices had in 2000, Coleman would win. It's just that the decision in the Bush vs. Gore case states that it should not be used as a precedent in similar cases. It was also a different election and not all the circumstances were the same. No matter what, Norm Coleman has come to the end of the road with his court case. It's only up to the panel to deliver that verdict so that this circus will not waste any more of anybody's time.

Obama looking forward to supermajority

2009-04-29T16:49:00.003+03:00

As Barack Obama celebrates his first hundred days in office, the prospect of getting a 60-40 supermajority in the United States Senate for his Democrats looks ever closer. Supposedly the Republican victory in the runoff election in Georgia postponed such a possibility by two years. Now, however, Pennsylvania Republican Arlen Specter has switched parties and the Democrats control 59 seats, one short of the filibuster-proof supermajority. One seat in Minnesota is still disputed even if Al Franken was declared the winner of the recount and a court verdict has already fallen in his favor. As long as Norm Coleman has a higher instance to go to in his claim that the election result is flawed, Franken will still have to wait for his being seated. But once the court case is solved, Franken should deliver the supermajority that the Democrats have been looking for.

Obama warmly welcomed the veteran politician from Pennsylvania to the Democrat fold. Arlen Specter used to be a Democrat in his youth and he has now simply gone back to his original political home. Specter is perhaps even better known for his career as a lawyer than for his achievements during his 28 years as a Republican member of the United States Senate. After all, he developed the single bullet theory as Warren Commission counsel which presented Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone gunman in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. As the defense attorney of murder suspect Ira Einhorn, hippie guru and co-founder of Earth Day, Specter succeeded in getting a relatively low bail for his client. Einhorn then disappeared into France for a period of 22 years before being extradited to the United States to serve his life term in prison.

Arlen Specter made a smart move in switching parties back to Democrat. As a Republican he was very likely to lose in the 2010 primary. As a Republican he was also more likely to lose the general election than he will be as a Democrat. Former Club for Growth president Pat Toomey would at least have had a much easier time in defeating Specter in the primaries than he will have if he is to be the Republican nominee in the general election. It is true that Specter already managed to defeat Toomey in the 2004 primary but he was expecting a much tougher challenge this time around. Anyway the Democrats might now soon get a supermajority that they could hold until the midterm elections. Specter may still be defeated then but there are other states where Democrats might make gains. From Specter's point of view, his situation has changed from desperate to difficult. He is probably more at home in the Democratic Party given the huge animosity he has faced from Club for Growth activists and other Republicans who put ideology first and foremost.

While Obama is happy to have Specter in his team, he can also celebrate the confirmation of Kathleen Sebelius as Secretary of Health and Human Services. Now Obama has his cabinet team complete and ready for action. Even if there was a lot of talk about Sebelius not getting any Republican support, the confirmation vote was a rather easy 65-31. Sebelius will now finally get into the business of reforming health care. She was succeeded as Governor of Kansas by Mark Parkinson, a Democrat who switched his party affiliation from Republican as late as 2006.

Sebelius pays her back taxes

2009-04-01T11:06:00.003+03:00

Barack Obama's Health Secretary-designate Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius has announced that she has paid her back taxes now. As the issue of her minor unintentional errors in paying her taxes has been settled, the new cabinet should be clear for action very soon. It is truly a shame that the very important post of Secretary of Health and Human Services has been so hard to fill. After the withdrawal of Tom Daschle Obama settled on Kathleen Sebelius, a very popular Democrat governing a state dominated by Republicans. Senators Pat Roberts and Sam Brownback decided to support the cabinet nomination of their fellow Kansan, especially as Sebelius' new post means she will not be running for the United States Senate seat being vacated by Brownback in the 2010 midterm elections. Representative Todd Tiahrt, who is very much in contention for Brownback's seat, has forcefully announced his dislike of a pro-choice politician being nominated to a cabinet post where the issue matters.

Senators get to vote on Sebelius in the coming weeks and after that every cabinet secretary should be in place. Obama also needs to get the nomination of his Drug Czar-designate Gil Kerlikowske confirmed. The Seattle police chief is taking on one of the toughest jobs in the Obama Administration. But then everybody's job seems to be very tough right now. There will certainly be tougher measures against drug cartels and moves like that to be expected but no-one is expecting miracles on that front. Sebelius, on the other hand, is getting an opportunity to contribute to the transformation of the health care system. She may not have the Washington, D.C. experience of Tom Daschle but Obama is counting on her skills as a communicator to get the message to the American people that an improvement is on the way.

At least Obama got a Secretary of Commerce on the third attempt. Bill Richardson pulled out early on and then Republican Judd Gregg changed his mind as he saw that he couldn't agree with Obama's political agenda. Gary Locke was then confirmed rather easily. One of the highest profiles in the Chinese American community, the former Governor of Washington said that he has "always believed in fair trade". According to Locke "minimum standards" concerning environmental and safety regulations are expected from countries looking forward to trade with the United States. This is obviously meant as something far better than no standards at all. What kind of trade policy this will in practice mean remains to be seen. Obama also had Ron Kirk confirmed as the new United States Trade Representative by a 92-5 vote. Kirk has promised to enforce the current trade rules in his job.

The ease by which Kirk got confirmed promises well for Sebelius. Even Kirk had tax issues, as did Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis. Tom Daschle and Nancy Killefer withdrew their nominations because of tax issues but nothing like that is expected of Sebelius. That so many Obama nominees have had at least minor problems with paying their taxes is probably the most memorable aspect of this confirmation process. In the case of Sebelius the abortion issue will probably not be as significant as expected, either. Representative Tiahrt is simply scoring political points and some of the representatives of the clergy who don't like Sebelius are not being listened to, either. Sebelius decided not to veto a bill in Kansas that would require ultrasound or hearing the fetus's heartbeat before going through with an abortion. She has also said that she is personally against abortions even if she obviously isn't politically against a woman's right to choose.

Tom Daschle withdraws

2009-02-04T11:27:00.004+02:00

Tom Daschle is one of the highest-profile Democrats of recent years. A former Senate Majority Leader, Daschle has also strongly profiled himself as an expert on health care reform. As the nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services, Daschle was expected to bring the needed knowhow to the job and the crucial ability to steer the reform through Congress. His appointment was one of the most important of any that comes Obama's way and the task ahead of him momentous. Now Daschle never got as far as to be confirmed by those former Senate colleagues of his who appreciate his past work. He has withdrawn his name from consideration in midst of a scandal where it turns out he has failed to pay more than a hundred thousand dollars in taxes. "I screwed up", says Obama. Not only has Tom Daschle withdrawn, even Nancy Killefer, who was supposed to take up the new job of White House chief performance officer, has done the same because of her tax troubles.

When Tom Daschle and Bill Richardson were announced among the names in Obama's cabinet, many people assumed that two of the most qualified Democrats were going to hold key jobs in the coming years. Richardson withdrew even before Obama himself was sworn in because of the grand jury investigation he is facing in New Mexico. Now it was the turn of Daschle to fade away. Both the posts of Secretary of Commerce and Secretary of Health and Human Services are still awaiting for an Obama appointee to take over. In the case of Richardson Obama simply decided that if he can't get a qualified Democrat, he'll try with a Republican instead. Senator Judd Gregg is Obama's new surprise choice, giving the cabinet a more bipartisan streak.

Judd Gregg has made it clear that he will accept the cabinet appointment only if Obama is able to see to it that his replacement in the Senate will be a Republican. Governor John Lynch is a Democrat and it is his job to help out with this quirky issue. How he is expected to solve the dilemma is nothing short of amazing. He is going to pick Bonnie Newman, a Republican who supported his gubernatorial campaign, so that the Democrats will not get a supermajority in the Senate but Lynch still gets one of his own supporters, albeit a Republican, for the seat. If Newman is a Lynch supporter, Gregg certainly was no Obama supporter in the presidential election. Bill Richardson was one of Obama's rivals in the primaries and Gregg, the replacement, was sharply critical of Obama during the campaign, trying unsuccessfully to swing the Granite State the way of the Republican Party.

Some appointments always fail but who could have believed that both Richardson and Daschle would lead to scandal and a panic search for replacements at a time when Obama is already in office? Judd Gregg is certainly an interesting choice for Commerce but Daschle will be harder to replace. The health care reform is really getting started in a bad way. Who will be the new nominee? Governor Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas is one possibility. She was one of the names floated around during the vice presidential speculation before Obama settled on Joe Biden.

Nancy Killefer's withdrawal as the chief performance officer nominee sealed the fate of Tom Daschle. After all, Tim Geithner was confirmed as Secretary of the Treasury even though he hadn't paid all his taxes. Yet the Geithner scandal was an embarrassment strong enough to prevent both Killefer and Daschle from taking office. Obama couldn't afford to have a team around him where the best known common characteristic of his officials is their tendency to evade paying taxes. Perhaps what happened to Killefer and Daschle will inspire politicians with ambitions to serve in high offices to pay their taxes. The tax problems of the people Obama originally chose for key posts brings to mind 1993 and Bill Clinton's problems with his Attorney General nominees. Both Zoë Baird and Kimba Wood had to withdraw from consideration after having hired illegal immigrants to look after their children. Baird even had a chauffeur who was an illegal immigrant. Obama at least has had his first choice for Attorney General, Eric Holder, confirmed to that position.

Blagojevich is barred from holding office in Illinois

2009-01-30T12:26:00.003+02:00

The Rod Blagojevich scandal has been quite a story. Governor Blagojevich has now not only been impeached by the Illinois House of Representatives and unanimously removed from office by the Illinois Senate, he even has been barred from ever holding public office again in that state. Illinois lawmakers certainly acted within their powers when removing Blagojevich from office and replacing him with Pat Quinn. But the penalty not to ever hold office again seems seems rather heavy given that there is no criminal conviction as yet. Blagojevich will have his day in court answering to all the charges against him and getting him convicted will not be as easy the process of impeachment was. Blagojevich has been accused of trying to sell Obama's seat in the United States Senate to the highest bidder but ultimately he appointed Roland Burris who is not suspected of having taken any bribes.

Right before Blagojevich was forced to leave office, he granted clemency to a real estate developer and to a former drug dealer. The Chicago real estate developer is known for having contributed heavily to political campaigns but not to those of Blagojevich. He is also known for having bought Oprah Winfrey's farm in Indiana in 2005. He had already been pardoned by a previous governor for the crime he committed in his youth but now his conviction will be expunged from public records. The former drug dealer is a janitor at a homeless shelter in Chicago and he had been convicted in 2001, spent a year in prison and now has his conviction expunged from the records as well.

One of the high points of the Blagojevich impeachment trial was a FBI wiretap where the Illinois chief executive discusses with a lobbyist signing a bill diverting a percentage of Illinois casino revenues to the horse racing industry. The issue is whether Blagojevich was paid by a racetrack owner to sign the casino bill. The racetrack owner's lawyer denies that any payoff was made in connection to this phone call and it is not even the racetrack owner himself who is speaking on the phone. The money quote that cost Blagojevich his job is probably the one about how valuable Obama's Senate seat is to him, from a different phone call: "...uh, uh, I'm just not giving it up for f---ing nothing."

Blagojevich is adamant that he is innocent of any wrongdoing. He claimed in an interview with Fox News that the Democrats in Illinois, the people in his own party, wanted to push through a tax increase that he had been against for the last six years. By removing him the income tax will be raised. Blagojevich also says he considered appointing Oprah Winfrey to Obama's seat, even if he's not so sure Oprah would have said yes to such an appointment. He has no idea what he will do now that he is not allowed to hold public office in Illinois. While the impeachment trial was a very quick affair, Blagojevich is now looking forward to his criminal trial that might last for years. Now he will be calling witnesses and one of them might be Obama's chief of staff Rahm Emanuel.

Inauguration is a day of hope

2009-01-20T15:05:00.003+02:00

Today is the big day when Barack Obama and Joe Biden will be sworn into office. The whole world is watching and hope permeates the atmosphere, probably more so than what will be the case with any other day in the coming months. The economic crisis is deep and the prospect of achieving world peace is far away. But nothing will be achieved without trying. That is the distinctly American feel about this day and hopefully of others to come, whatever the odds, there will be an effort to achieve change. Obama is to many an embodiment of the American dream and his symbolic importance is great. He is going to be there as a source of inspiration and his well-crafted speeches are expected to raise spirits both in the United States and abroad. Many people who didn't care about politics before are following today's events closely. The start is promising but many difficulties lie ahead.

The successors of both Obama and Biden have now been sworn in as members of the United States Senate. Ted Kaufman took his place as Senator from Delaware quietly and swiftly one day after Biden's resignation. Governor Ruth Ann Minner had announced the replacement for Biden long ago and there was never any serious controversy about the pick. This stands in marked contrast to the circus surrounding Rod Blagojevich in his attempt to make the most of having the power to pick Obama's successor. The seat was vacant for about two months until Roland Burris finally was allowed in with the help of the Illinois Supreme Court. In any case it is a relief for the Democrats to have Kaufman and Burris sworn in and part of the Senate shakeup behind them. Two more changes are expected soon with Ken Salazar and Hillary Clinton vacating their seats in order to serve in the Obama Administration.

While Obama's daughters are too young to build a political dynasty just yet, Joe Biden is already rumored to have plans for his son Beau who is currently serving in Iraq. Ted Kaufman is even seen as someone close to the Biden family who keeps the seat warm in between two Bidens. In 1960 John F. Kennedy resigned after having been elected President of the United States. Benjamin A. Smith II, a friend of his, was appointed as his successor in the United States Senate. Two years later Ted Kennedy was ready to run in the special election, taking the seat back to the family. Beau Biden in 2010 could be an attempt to achieve a similar family seat in Delaware as has been the case with the Kennedy clan in Massachusetts. That arrangement proved durable as Ted Kennedy has kept the seat in the family for over 46 years now. As his health is declining, the Democrats could face a fifth Senate appointment within a matter of months. Family name matters a lot in American politics, which is why a possible future presidential campaign by Jeb Bush, the brother of the outgoing occupant of the White House, should not be ruled out. Despite all the talk of dynasties being built and replaced by others, the victory of Barack Obama is a sure sign of Americans feeling tired of dynasties. Even Joe Biden, who would like his son to make it big, has not made it to where he is today because of a famous family name.

The enthusiasm is great and Barack Obama's inauguration speech will automatically be compared with those by famous predecessors such as Franklin D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy. There is a feeling that this moment in American history is pivotal. For the Democrats this is an especially great day because many feel a similar change in the political atmosphere as was witnessed when Ronald Reagan replaced Jimmy Carter 28 years ago. Then the change was in a different direction. Yet there were many things that contributed to Reagan's success in getting his agenda through, some of them becoming apparent in the years after he took office. How much Obama will be able to steer the country his way depends on a myriad of factors. But the country listens to him right now as he reaches the peak of his meteoric career. Who could have foreseen that he can defeat Hillary Clinton in the primaries only two years ago? Winning the general election was perhaps easier given that the Democrats were so strong as a party but actually first going up against the party machine and then unifying the party after the bitter primary season was nothing short of miraculous. More of that magic stuff is needed from him to keep the cabinet together and get the best out of all the strong personalities who expect to get their share of the power that now befalls them.

Al Franken close to final victory

2009-01-07T17:04:00.005+02:00

Comedian Al Franken won the recount in Minnesota and he is likely to take up his seat in the United States Senate at some point in the future. Senator Norm Coleman won the original count, now Franken has won the recount and the next thing to happen in Minnesota is Coleman challenging the result of the recount in court. A court order could still stop Franken from winning in Minnesota. Barack Obama can count on a strong Senate majority supporting him when he is sworn in. Still, his own seat in Illinois is still vacant and the seat in Minnesota is still being contested in court. 59 seats it should be for the Democrats, counting Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who both are nominally independent. The situation in both Minnesota and Illinois is truly bizarre, however, and the new Senate began its work yesterday with 57 Senators caucusing with the Democrats.

Minnesota state law prevents Franken from taking up his seat as long as the court case is unresolved. Norm Coleman doesn't mind that Minnesota will have only one member of the United States Senate as long as the case is not finished. It may even be in his interests for the case to drag on. At least there is some possibility for him to win as long as it is not all over. Coleman's lead was 215 votes after the original count, now it is Franken leading with 225 votes after the recount and Coleman wishes to prove that the recount was flawed. The court case could drag on for months, shortening the six-year term of the incoming Senator. A part of the electorate is going to want to be represented in the Senate rather than a court deciding the final outcome but there's not much those voters can do about it. Yet there are two things for Coleman to seriously worry about. The law suit is going to be very costly. After the recount has been finished, it is not supposed to be cheap to keep a Senator from being sworn in. Even if there will be enough money to go on with a prolongeed court case, the other issue is how exactly are Coleman's lawyers going to prove that the recount was flawed. Coleman apparently has the money and how to win the case is his lawyers' problem. They are being well paid so they won't be complaining.

A panel consisting of three judges is going to determine whether Al Franken won, as is shown by the official recount results, or if Norm Coleman has right in that he was cheated of a victory. Minnesota Supreme Court Justice Alan Page is apparently going to name the panel that will decide the contested election. Coleman said that the lawsuit is going to be worth it even if Franken ultimately wins. According to Coleman, the most important thing is to ensure that every vote counts. Now it will be three people who really count but this is politics and it is hard to avoid a contested election when the result is as close as it is in Minnesota. What probably guaranteed the court case is that different candidates won the original count and the recount. Something obviously went wrong at some point.

As if there wasn't enough drama in Minnesota, Roland Burris of Illinois was turned away at the door of the Senate when he came to be sworn in as the only African American Senator. Rod Blagojevich acted within his powers when he appointed Burris but Illinois Secretary of State failed to confirm the appointment. This gave the officials a reason to prevent Burris from entering the very exclusive club that is the upper house of the Congress. Minnesota will be without the state's other Senator as long as it takes to resolve the court case that Coleman has opted for. Illinois could well be without having been able to pick a successor to Barack Obama as long as Rod Blagojevich manages to postpone his impeachment. His and Norm Coleman's lawyers have the opportunity to reduce the membership of the Senate to 98 for some months to come, if they are clever and imaginative enough. Blagojevich at least gets to be the Governor of Illinois as long as his lawyers are successful in their stalling tactics. Norm Coleman doesn't gain anything personally by dragging on the process but what he wants is to win his court case. That would bring him back to the corridors of power, out in the cold as he is as long as the result of the recount stays on.

Blagojevich announces his Senate appointment

2008-12-31T19:32:00.002+02:00

Roland Burris, a former Illinois politician, is the final choice of Governor Rod Blagojevich for United States Senator from Illinois. The seat has been vacant since Barack Obama resigned soon after having won the 2008 presidential election. The 71-year-old Burris is generally considered a hasbeen and he was not among the seven people rumored to have been the ones Blagojevich seriously considered. Since Blagojevich tried to sell the seat for the highest bidder and he had conversations with the more serious candidates with varying success, he had to redo the selecting process from the start. His discussions had been taped by the FBI and now Blagojevich came up with a last minute effort to save his skin by appointing someone who is known for being honest. A septuagenarian who has yet to be involved in a scandal, Burris may even be considered a rarity in the stormy waters of Illinois politics. He is also not especially popular and this is his only chance ever to get anywhere close to the United States Senate. But there is already a serious twist, no-one appointed by Blagojevich will be welcome in the august legislative body trying to protect its reputation.

Senate Democrats are already out there to attempt to prevent Burris from taking his seat or unseat him immediately after he has been seated, if that is legally possible. Republicans are urging the Democrats on to prevent anyone who has anything to do with Blagojevich from being appointed. Burris has been in retirement after having lost four elections in a row. He actually has hoped for a one more return to the world of politics and he thinks he should be allowed to be sworn in. After all, Burris has not done anything wrong. Blagojevich has full gubernatorial powers right until the very moment when his opponents succeed in impeaching him. They are doing their best but Blagojevich is postponing the process with the help of one of the best lawyers he could find, someone who has the reputation of having succeeded to keep R. Kelly out of court for a period of six years. For Blagojevich it would suffice to be able to stall the impeachment process until he is out of office in 2011.

Rod Blagojevich is fighting for his political life. Illinois lawmakers want him out before the birthday of Abraham Lincoln. They want Pat Quinn to deliver the crucial birthday speech, after all he is not tarnished by being an associate of Blagojevich, at least not during the time of the scandal. It is quite hilarious given that we are talking about the lieutenant governor who maybe should be close to Blagojevich. Quinn is however very proud of not having spoken with Blagojevich at all for a period of several months. African Americans in Illinois are in a quandary right now, Blagojevich is offering to replace Obama with an African American with a long political record, yet there are high hopes that Quinn will appoint Danny Davis who is actually rumored to having been the first choice of the disgraced governor before the scandal broke out.

It is hard to say what the implications of the Blagojevich scandal are to the presidency of Barack Obama. A scandal in Illinois that involves the Senate seat previously held by Obama is certainly not so good publicity. Yet it is obvious that Blagojevich is not close to Obama at all and is actually prolonging the whole process as long as he can, putting his own career or what remains of it first and not caring much about any implications for his party or for the president-elect. Maybe some people even think that Obama is a different breed altogether from people like Blagojevich who represent politics as usual. Blagojevich is still in office, still stirring trouble and he uses his powers to pass bills and to pardon prisoners without anyone specifically objecting to those actions being performed by the chief executive of Illinois. It is at the same time clear that there are many people who want Blagojevich to resign immediately, Obama being one of them. Roland Burris might just want Blagojevich to stay on long enough to get the already announced Senate appointment through. If the other Senators manage to block his appointment until Blagojevich is out, he may never be seated even if it is highly doubtful that there are any constitutional reasons for preventing this specific action as long as other gubernatorial powers are exercised by the same man without legal challenges to those actions.

Senate seat was for sale in Illinois

2008-12-10T10:57:00.004+02:00

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich was trying to sell Barack Obama's seat in the United States Senate for the highest bidder. The seat is apparently not for sale anymore as Blagojevich was arrested and his scheme exposed to the general public. Since Obama resigned from the upper house of the United States Congress, it has been squarely up to Blagojevich to appoint his successor. He could have picked anyone he wanted. He even joked he is the Santa Claus of this holiday season. After all he had a Christmas present to give that most Illinois politicians truly wanted. So Blagojevich apparently decided he'd ask all the politicians what they can give to him in exchange for being appointed. While he otherwise had free hands in picking anyone he wishes to, this practice is also known as corruption and right now it seems highly unlikely that he will ever get to appoint Obama's successor. If he resigns or is removed from office, his successor will get to appoint whoever that lucky person will be.

Illinois politics has been riddled by corruption scandals. Rod Blagojevich will not be the first man in his position to end up with facing criminal charges. Indeed, his predecessor George Ryan was in a precarious position when he left office. The scandal that Ryan, a Republican, was entangled in, basically ensured victory for the Democrats in Illinois in the 2002 gubernatorial election. Blagojevich obviously campaigned against "a system of corruption" but it now seems the change he promised to deliver was at least in some part more of the same. The criminal conviction of former Blagojevich fundraiser Tony Rezko earlier this year raised many question marks about what was going on. If Illinois Republicans had been at an all time low after George Ryan's tenure in office, they are now going to get an opportunity to promise to change the corrupt way of doing things in Springfield. They should even get a serious opportunity at capturing Obama's former Senate seat when that comes up for election. Obama will most likely be succeeded by a Democrat since he will still at first be replaced by appointment but whoever that person is, the next election will be tough because of Blagojevich. The next gubernatorial election will probably be rather wide open. Pat Quinn will rather likely get the keys to the Governor's mansion as his sixtieth birthday present but it remains to be seen whether he intends to stay on in the office for a longer time.

Rod Blagojevich is one of the best known Serbian Americans of all time. He will now be best remembered for this scandal. Americans of other ethnic backgrounds have of course been indicated in the previous corruption scandals in Illinois. The sleaze has been bipartisan and shared among the many ethnic communities of the Chicago area. Still, this is bad news for both Democrats and for Serbian Americans. Senator George Voinovich, the Ohio Republican, and the inventor Nikola Tesla represent high points in the history of the Serbian American community, both of them actually more specifically ethnic Croatian Serbs. Blagojevich is not even the first really famous Serbian American from Chicago, the actor Karl Malden who was born Mladen Sekulovich having been one for decades. Still, Blagojevich's fall is quite a spectacular shock to the Serbian community in Chicago. He won two gubernatorial elections and his supporters had hoped for him to become a major national politician like Obama.

The hypocrisy in the Blagojevich scandal is only too obvious. It brings echoes of everything Eliot Spitzer campaigned against and what he then did as Governor of New York. Still, Spitzer may be a hypocrite but his scandal having to do with buying sex was a highly personal one and not necessarily an indication of how he generally conducted himself while in office. How Rod Blagojevich has handled the political opportunity brought by Barack Obama's resignation from the United States Senate is a different story and an extremely serious matter. Governor Blagojevich was abusing one of the highest powers that befell on him and doing it in an incredibly blatant manner. He was elected to his office as a former prosecutor who promised to get rid of the culture of corruption. Now he is the central figure in one of the most spectacular scandals in the history of Illinois and there has been many such scandals before his time. Still, at his lowest point, Rod Blagojevich is also praised in the news for how he pressured Bank of America to give additional loans to Republic Windows & Doors, a shut down Chicago factory. This he did so that the workers who were laid off could get compensation for their lost jobs.

Obama team taking shape

2008-11-22T16:36:00.002+02:00

President-elect Barack Obama is going to appoint many people close to Bill Clinton in top positions. This was to some extent inevitable as that is where experienced Democrats are to be found. President Clinton himself appointed Warren Christopher as Secretary of State, a politician who had served under previous Democratic president Jimmy Carter. It looks like Obama is going to appoint Bill Clinton's wife, Senator Hillary Clinton, as his Secretary of State. It is a bold move as he is going to give one of the top jobs to a very tough rival of his. But Obama doesn't have the same foreign policy experience as Clinton and if he can make her work together with Joe Biden, he is going to have two strong-willed people with firm opinions around him. President Abraham Lincoln is one of Obama's idols and it looks like the Obama Administration is going to be modeled on Lincoln's "team of rivals". Not all of Lincoln's appointments worked that well, however. It may even be one of the points behind making bold appointments that the persons who get the top jobs are swiftly removable from their positions, much more so than if they were Senators or Congressmen.

Woodrow Wilson appointed William Jennings Bryan, a rival of his, as Secretary of State. Bryan was very much the heart and soul of the party, its chief ideologue and had lost three presidential elections as the party's nominee. Wilson placated Bryan supporters with that move just as Obama is now going to placate Clinton supporters. Bryan lasted about two years in his position and was never to make a comeback in a leading cabinet position after his resignation. Bryan's final hurrah was the job he did for the prosecution in the Scopes Monkey Trial against a teacher who had taught the theory of evolution in Tennessee in the 1920s. If Hillary Clinton is going to go the way of Bryan, the fame she will get after her resignation will be as a lawyer rather than as a politician. I bet she will last longer than Bryan as Secretary of State, though. But no one will last forever.

A very interesting move will be if Secretary of Defense Robert Gates accepts to continue in his job under Obama. I'm sure most people expected everyone in the Bush team to go. George W. Bush and Barack Obama have done all they can to achieve an orderly transition and keeping Gates in his place would cement the tie that would bind the two opposing camps together. Gates used to belong to the inner circle of George H.W. Bush and was called in to rescue when Donald Rumsfeld resigned two years ago. The elder Bush's right hand man James Baker was not willing to come back into the limelight but found the perfect solution in his friend Gates, a somewhat younger man who would bring a wealth of experience to the Obama team. If Gates says yes, a very big if, I suppose he will fit in better with the incoming team than with his current colleagues but not as well as in his natural habitat, the George H.W. Bush Administration.

New York Fed chairman Tim Geithner looks set to be Obama's Treasury Secretary. Larry Summers, Warren Buffett and Paul Volcker would all have been controversial choices. Appointments like Clinton and Gates are uncertain from day one when it comes to how long they will last. Gates will probably be picked with the understanding that he will not serve for the whole of the coming four years. Geithner is the same age as Obama and one of those persons who are expected to stay around for longer. He has studied both Japanese and Chinese and lived in different parts of the world. It looks like he blends in perfectly with Obama, unlike the other potential Treasury candidates. Obama's picks for Attorney General and Chief of Staff, Eric Holder and Rahm Emanuel, both served in different positions under Bill Clinton. Tom Daschle, the choice for Health and Human Services, used to be Senate Majority Leader.

McCain wins Missouri

2008-11-20T10:54:00.003+02:00

Now it is official, Republican John McCain has won Missouri and gets eleven more electoral votes. Democrat Barack Obama won 365 electoral votes and McCain's final tally is now 173. Obama gave McCain a run for his money in Missouri, a swing state that was supposedly one of the Republican's strongest territories. Well, it was not just supposedly, after all McCain lost Indiana, Florida, North Carolina and Virginia. Missouri is a state that he actually won so the result there gives some solace to the McCain campaign; it won't be remembered as a complete failure. The Show Me State usually goes with the winner and McCain is the first loser in decades to carry the state, quite a feat in itself. Ralph Nader can add to his third place finish the merit of having achieved a spoiler role in Missouri, so he might in the end be the most satisfied that Missouri stays with McCain after the votes have been counted. Otherwise Nader's performance was not very strong and having made his mark in a state that has gained very much attention in presidential politics might help some people remember that he was actually a part of this year's election.

While independent candidates weren't much of a factor in the presidential election, some of them made a serious difference in Senate races. In Oregon, Constitution Party candidate Dave Brownlow helped Democrat Jeff Merkley to oust Republican Gordon Smith from the Senate. Smith actually ran attack ads against Brownlow. The attempt to portray Brownlow as a "liberal extremist" didn't help the Republicans but the Democrats must be pleased by it all. Independence Party of Minnesota candidate Dean Barkley was the strongest third party candidate in United States Senate elections this year. No-one still knows who won and who was hurt the most by Barkley's candidacy. In December the recount should be ready and the winner in the contest between Al Franken and Norm Coleman will be known. Dean Barkley was successful but not as successful as Jesse Ventura in the gubernatorial campaign ten years ago that Barkley himself managed. Libertarian candidate Allen Buckley is responsible for the runoff in Georgia between Republican Saxby Chambliss and Democrat Jim Martin. Buckley has praised Martin, especially in regard of the Democrat's stance on civil liberties, but stopped short of endorsing him.

Winning Missouri is a nice result for McCain but it doesn't change the end result, a clear Obama victory overall. Obama has been able to enjoy good news from one Senate contest after the other. The Democrats strengthen their control of the Senate and the filibuster proof supermajority is still a possibility. To get that Al Franken must win the recount, which is highly possible but that won't be enough. Jim Martin has to defeat Saxby Chambliss in the runoff which is a far more improbable feat. So I'm still sticking to my original guess of Democrats getting 59 seats. Gordon Smith and Ted Stevens ended up both being defeated and Norm Coleman's defeat depends on the recount.

Ted Stevens got news of his defeat against Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich on his 85th birthday. Stevens is the longest-serving Republican Senator ever. To those who remember Strom Thurmond I'd like to remind that he switched parties in 1964. Although he was in the Senate for a very long time, Thurmond actually represented Republicans for less than four decades there, until his retirement in January 2003 at the age of one hundred. Ted Stevens has to leave the Senate at 85 now but he will make four full decades as a Republican Senator in December. Ted Stevens was originally appointed to the Senate on Christmas Eve, 1968, to replace his deceased predecessor, Democrat Bob Bartlett. As long a time forty years is, it's not fifty. Today is Democrat Robert Byrd's ninety-first birthday. Come January, Byrd will have Represented the Democrats for fifty straight years. He is already the longest-serving person in the history of the United States Senate, beating Thurmond's previous record by about two years.

Obama gets one electoral vote from Nebraska

2008-11-15T16:14:00.004+02:00

In this year's presidential election two states, Nebraska and Maine, made it possible that their electoral votes could be divided between the candidates. While Barack Obama won all of Maine's electoral votes he has also won one of Nebraska's five electoral votes. Nebraska awards presidential electors per congressional district and Obama won the vote in Nebraska's second district thanks to the urban vote in Omaha. Nebraska becomes thus the sole exception where the state's electoral vote was split. This is all the more surprising given Nebraska's character as a solidly Republican state. Obama has now 365 electoral votes against McCain's 172 with the official result from Missouri still not ready. McCain leads by 4,900 votes in Missouri according to the unofficial results. By winning Missouri McCain's final result would go up to 183 electoral votes.

The state of Nebraska decided in 1991 that all electoral votes should not automatically go to the candidate who gets the most votes in the state. In the succeeding elections, Republican candidates George H.W. Bush, Bob Dole and George W. Bush managed to win all of Nebraska's congressional districts. Even if Dole lost the 1996 election, Nebraska was easy for him coming from neighboring Kansas. This year was different. Barack Obama's campaign had so much money that it was worth the try to invest in a strong effort to get out the vote in Omaha. Even in solidly Republican states, the largest cities tend to vote for Democrats. John McCain gets four of Nebraska's electoral votes with one going for Obama. The mayor of Omaha is very happy about the success of the efforts in his city to get the one electoral vote for Obama. It would be interesting to know whether the inhabitants of Omaha liked the idea that the name of the Democratic candidate sounds vaguely similar to the name of their city. After all the inhabitants of the city of Obama in Japan were especially enthusiastic this year even if they even didn't get to vote. Their city, of course, really is Obama.

Ralph Nader was rather successful in Missouri with nearly 18,000 votes according to unofficial results. Given how small the gap is in McCain's favor Nader could actually claim achieving the spoiler role that he wanted at least in one state. The Show Me State has a tendency to vote for the winner, earning the state the reputation of bellwether in presidential politics. Nader's strong effort there does not cost Obama the election, even if it looks like costing 11 electoral votes but Missouri loses its magic as the state that picks the winner as a result.

As Obama's margin was so clear it is hard to say which state was decisive. Clearly the one electoral vote from Nebraska is just an added bonus. In many ways North Carolina and Indiana also are just additional victories that surprised many people but weren't absolutely necessary for Obama. Nebraska's second district, North Carolina and Indiana were the three cases where I certainly could not guess the winner. Interestingly enough Obama won both North Carolina and Indiana by a plurality and Bob Barr, the overall fourth place finisher, can claim to have played a spoiler role in both states. I would say that Ohio and Virginia were absolutely crucial but of course even Florida was a decisive state in this year's election. Third party candidates didn't really decide the election one way or the other in those states. It was different with Nader in Florida in 2000.

Al Franken ready for the recount

2008-11-09T14:19:00.004+02:00

How large will the United States Senate majority be that Barack Obama will work with? The Democrats got their 57th seat with Jeff Merkley winning the contest in Oregon where they had trouble counting the ballots that were of larger size than usual, at least in Multnomah County. Will comedian Al Franken increase the Democratic majority to 58? Senator Norm Coleman led the count, when the results were in, by a hair thin margin of about 200 votes. But Al Franken is optimistic about the recount that is set to follow. Had Franken wanted to, he could have conceded the election and there would have been no recount. As long as Franken wants a recount, he won't have to finance it himself as Minnesota law automatically requires a recount in elections as close as this one.

When the votes in Minnesota were being counted, Al Franken's campaign team were already expecting victory and some bloggers were denouncing the election of a comedian by the Minnesota voters even before they had any result to be angry about. The last votes to be counted were supposed to be from areas where Franken had strong support. The thin margin grew thinner but at the end of the day, Coleman was still leading the count. The drama continues as it is not only about recounting the votes that already have been counted. Apparently there are yet uncounted absentee ballots from Minneapolis County that Coleman's lawyers have tried, in vain, to disqualify from being counted. Franken expects that the absentee ballots will in the end put him over the top. Coleman's defeat is not yet certain, however. Independent candidate Dean Barkley reached a very good result overall and his success affects even areas where Franken was supposed to be strong.

If the race in Minnesota was tight, even the outcomes in Alaska and Georgia are still uncertain. As amazing as a Stevens victory after the incumbent's criminal conviction sounds, the veteran politicians from Alaska seems like the surest bet for the Republicans. If Stevens wins, it is absolutely certain that Obama will not enjoy the filibuster-proof supermajority of 60 seats that was the most optimistic projection for the Democrats this year. Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia is in an interesting situation. Will he still face a runoff? In Minnesota, even after a recount, the winner will get about 42 per cent of the vote. But they don't do runoffs in Minnesota, as is the case in most other states. But Georgia is different. Chambliss is getting about 50 per cent of the vote, the Democratic candidate about 47 per cent and the Libertarian candidate about 3 per cent. If Chambliss actually has over 50 per cent when all votes have been counted, he has been re-elected, but if he is, say, one vote short of the majority, voters in Georgia would then have a runoff ahead of them.

Senator Joe Lieberman is another question mark for Obama. He used to be a Democrat, was last time re-elected as an independent candidate, yet caucuses with the Democrats and votes with them most of the time. Lieberman is also known as John McCain's biggest fan and no-one could be said to have campaigned as tirelessly for the Republican candidate this year as the white-haired gentleman from Connecticut, also known as Al Gore's running mate in 2000. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is extremely frustrated with Lieberman's appearance at the Republican National Convention not to mention his other appearances for McCain. If Reid manages to get Lieberman out of the Democratic caucus and into the Republican one, in the worst case Obama might actually have to do with 56 seats in the United States Senate. The other independent, Bernie Sanders, the self-styled democratic socialist from Vermont who is not a member of any party, is sure to continue caucusing with the Democrats.

Congressional Democrats win

2008-11-06T10:15:00.003+02:00

It was expected that Democrats would win the elections to both houses of Congress. Not all results are clear, so I'll return to the exact numbers when we know how many Democrats and Republicans will there be in Congress. The Democrats have clearly increased their majority in the House of Representatives with one of the gains being such a core red state area as Idaho's first district. In the Senate one of the most significant successes for the Democrats is the unseating of Elizabeth Dole in North Carolina.

My guess was that eight Republican United States Senate seats would be won by the Democrats. So far we can be sure about Democratic gains in Colorado, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina and Virginia. My analysis of the open seats proved to be correct. Republicans Jim Risch and Mike Johanns scored easy victories in Idaho and Nebraska. Democrats Mark Udall, Tom Udall and Mark Warner captured just as easily Republican seats in Colorado, New Mexico and Virginia.

The excitement was about Republican incumbents in trouble. How many of them would succeed in defending their seats in the United States Senate? Elizabeth Dole and John Sununu lost North Carolina and New Hampshire just as the polls predicted they would. But the power of incumbency is an amazing thing. Already in previous elections I have noticed that incumbents often win even if the polls are against them. Last minute voters often stick with the name they know. In this sense it was quite a bold prediction on my part that Ted Stevens, Norm Coleman and Gordon Smith would also lose their seats. The elections in Alaska, Minnesota and Oregon all are so close that we don't have the final result even now. The margin between Norm Coleman and Al Franken in Minnesota is so close that a recount looks inevitable. But it's Coleman who is leading and he could score a very important victory for the Republicans even if the last days of the campaign looked very bad for him.

Ted Stevens in Alaska is another interesting case. He was convicted of corruption right before the election. As the most senior Republican the 84-year-old has represented Alaskans in the United States Senate since the 1960s. Many Alaskans thought that voting for a convicted felon is a troubling idea but it seems enough of them felt the vote was a referendum on the life work of their beloved elder statesman, "Uncle Ted" as he is known there. Bumper stickers like "Vote for Ted Until He's Dead" told their story about the independent minded Alaskans not being swayed even by a court verdict. The margin is narrow but it is right now looking like a narrow Stevens victory. Sarah Palin, who is wildly popular in Alaska, was not campaigning for Stevens and John McCain said openly that he wanted Stevens to withdraw his candidacy after the guilty verdict. Senator Lisa Murkowski did campaign for Stevens, however, giving significant moral support to the veteran politician that other politicians in Washington, D.C. wished to avoid being seen with.

So I'm still expecting results from Alaska with great interest and another big race is in Oregon, where Gordon Smith is fighting to retain his seat against Democrat challenger Jeff Merkley. Smith has won rural Oregon by crushing margins yet it is still unclear whether the Democrat has won the cities with large enough margins to unseat the Republican incumbent. It looks promising for Merkley but nothing should be taken for granted before all the results are in. Many people have been wondering what's the problem with counting the votes in Oregon. An official in Multnomah County, Oregon that has been furthest behind explained that the size of the ballot was a problem. This year the ballot was 17 inches long, three inches longer than in 2004 and it takes extra time for the machines to count longer ballots.

Obama-Biden ticket coasts to victory

2008-11-05T09:32:00.006+02:00

It has been a moving presidential election and the resulting Obama victory certainly highlights the desire for change among the voting public. Senator McCain was a tough opponent and the result in many states turned out to be close. As the Obama-Biden ticket generally edged out the competition in battleground state after battleground state, the electoral college goes to the Democrats by a very clear margin. It looks like Obama will get a majority of the vote in a country where presidents usually win by a plurality. I felt tears coming in with Obama's words about "the government of the people, by the people and for the people" not having perished even if it was neither my government nor my people. Not that I haven't always felt a deep sympathy for the American people but I guess I hadn't expected such simple and often spoken words to be delivered in such a powerful and calm manner. Even McCain's beautiful and eloquent concession speech felt very touching and on the spot. Already in 2004 I was happy about the relatively high turnout and in this election, I must say, the enthusiasm that was shown everywhere for this vote proves that the political process can still attract millions in a way that all the naysayers telling how passive everyone is getting never could imagine.

North Carolina, Missouri, Indiana and Montana are still processing presidential election results. It looks like John McCain will carry Montana and he is closely leading in Missouri, a state where you can never be sure before every vote has been counted. I predicted a McCain victory in both North Carolina and Indiana. Right now it looks like both states are turning blue by a slender margin and I'm still feeling the grip of excitement about how it will turn out in both states. If Obama wins Indiana, it means that most pollsters and many pundits have totally failed to see the enthusiasm generated by the Obama campaign there. No one expected a McCain landslide there but a narrow Republican victory right at the heart of Middle America. I saw Virginia, Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio, Colorado and New Mexico coming but I'm stunned if Obama really carries Indiana. Had the Democrats nominated Hillary Clinton, it would have been easier to predict the result in Indiana. Even the fact that Indiana votes are still being counted without a clear result shows how much this election was about the economy and about the general trend toward an incredibly strong result for the Democratic Party as such.

If the pollsters were predicting a McCain victory in Indiana, many polls actually predicted an Obama victory in North Carolina. I feel ashamed that I didn't take those polls so seriously. Elizabeth Edwards said the other day that the Bradley effect is going to be about four percentage points in North Carolina. There has been no Bradley effect in the Tar Heel State, even if some kind of an effect might be traced nationally when some polls promised a ten percentage point margin for Obama that, however, never really seemed realistic given McCain's strong push right until the end even if the Republican defeat seemed inevitable. Was there really a Bradley effect in the national polls? It may be that racially motivated voters are less willing to answer the pollsters' questions in the first place than other voters but my general feeling is an absence of racism across the board, an event that makes the Obama victory very significant increasing the respect for the United States in the eyes of the world. I emphatically also wish to say that it is wrong to attribute the support for McCain that actually existed in many states to questions of Obama's ethnic background. Senator McCain has been long respected by a large segment of the American public, not so much by his fellow Republicans but by independents who don't look through the lense of partisan politics. It was just that Barack Obama earned the respect of average Americans with his campaign that managed to raise the enthusiasm of so many people who had previously been unsure about their faith in democracy itself.

This election was always going to be a great triumph of the political process. The closeness of the numbers in states like Florida, North Carolina, Missouri and Indiana shows that even if the end result generally seemed rather certain nationally, in some states a huge enthusiasm about the election was combined with an extremely close race. Right now it looks like Obama will take North Carolina and McCain will take Missouri but a full certainty comes only with the final result. Remember that North Carolina tends to vote Republican in presidential elections and didn't go for John Kerry even when John Edwards was his running mate. The last time Virginia went for a Democratic presidential candidate was in 1964 and McCain is very popular in Florida, another key state in the South. Northern Virginia and the Miami area are far from the typical red state, even if parts of Virginia and Florida are deeply Republican territories. Yet it is one of the northernmost counties of Virginia, Loudoun County, that has often been seen as the surest place to see what the balance in the whole of the Old Dominion will be. It's not the typical American county but important in the politics of Virginia. George W. Bush got 56% of the vote in 2004 in that county with the highest median household income of the United States. This time Democrat Barack Obama carried Loudoun County as he carried Virginia, one of the states Republican John McCain just couldn't afford to lose.

Guessing United States Senate results

2008-11-03T13:16:00.003+02:00

For the president-elect one of the most important things will be the future relation to both houses of Congress. The balance in the United States Senate has been very close but most polls promise a clear majority for the Democratic Party in this year's elections. If Barack Obama wins, he will have a strong position with majorites in both houses of Congress. A landslide victory for the Democrats in congressional elections looks even more secure than Obama's victory in the presidential election. Here I provide a guess for tomorrow's Senate results. Most races are not that competitive with a strong incumbent and a challenger with few resources, so there is not much to guess about Dick Durbin's prospects for re-election in Obama's home state of Illinois, to name one example. Durbin and many others can coast to easy re-election. But there are many competitive races and the tough situation the Republicans are in has resulted in surprisingly tough fights in races that were expected to be easy. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is facing a surprisingly strong challenge from Army veteran Bruce Lunsford in Kentucky, yet McConnell looks like to be one of the lucky ones to actually to be able to keep his seat.

Five Republicans are retiring from the United States Senate. Three of these seats look like they are going to the Democrats. Larry Craig of Idaho and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska are leaving their seats open in such secure red states that the Democrats are not expected to capture their seats. Wayne Allard of Colorado, Pete Domenici of New Mexico and John Warner of Virginia all have represented swing states and their seats look like lost causes to the Republicans, most clearly Virginia. As no Democrats are retiring, of the 35 seats being contested, only five concern an open seat. Representatives Mark and Tom Udall are cousins and they are both on their way to take a Republican seat for the Democrats, in Colorado and in New Mexico, respectively. Mark Warner, the keynote speaker at the Democratic National Convention this year, is likely to achieve a landslide victory in Virginia. Conveniently he has the same last name as the retiring Republican incumbent.

My prediction for the winners of open seats looks like this: Udall (D-CO), Risch (R-ID), Johanns (R-NE), Udall (D-NM) and Warner (D-VA).

Then there are the races with a Democratic incumbent. There are no prizes for guessing who will win in those races. Not a single Democrat is seriously threatened. Mark Pryor of Arkansas, who won his seat six years ago rather narrowly, doesn't even have a Republican challenger. He will win the biggest landslide of all against a Green Party candidate. Had Mike Huckabee chosen to challenge Pryor, the situation in Arkansas would have looked very different but the only seat held by a Democrat that the Republicans could have won is now surely out of their reach.

My prediction for the winners of seats held by Democrats is very clear: Pryor (D-AR), Biden (D-DE), Durbin (D-IL), Harkin (D-IA), Landrieu (D-LA), Kerry (D-MA), Levin (D-MI), Baucus (D-MT), Lautenberg (D-NJ), Reed (D-RI), Johnson (D-SD) and Rockefeller (D-WV). Note that Joe Biden looks set to score two victories, nationally and in Delaware. This means that some other Democrat will be nominated as his successor and the seat will be up again in a special election in two years' time. Had the Democrats nominated someone else, the seat would have been theirs for the coming six years.

The biggest excitement concerns races with Republican incumbents. There are two special elections caused by the resignation of Trent Lott in Mississippi and the death of Craig Thomas in Wyoming. These states get to elect both their senators. In these two deeply red states the Republicans will get a sum total of four victories. There is not much else for them to cheer so they can take solace in their appointees Roger Wicker and John Barrasso coming up with strong performances. As neither of them is an elected incumbent, they could have been the Republicans' weakest links but this is far from being the case. Democrat Ronnie Musgrove has come up with a very strong challenge to Wicker in Mississippi but he has recently lost his lead in the polls. Musgrove is running in a state where McCain is going to win a landslide and he has been fearful of appearing too close to Obama. This means he isn't getting any help from the Obama effect.

My guess for the winners of the seats held by Republican incumbents is not half as informed as the guess for the other seats. Some of these seats are seriously competitive and the outcome can be extremely close, Georgia and North Carolina being among the tightest. This is who I think will win those races: Sessions (R-AL), Begich (D-AK), Chambliss (R-GA), Roberts (R-KS), McConnell (R-KY), Collins (R-ME), Franken (D-MN), Cochran (R-MS), Wicker (R-MS), Shaheen (D-NH), Hagan (D-NC), Inhofe (R-OK), Merkley (D-OR), Graham (R-SC), Alexander (R-TN), Cornyn (R-TX), Enzi (R-WY) and Barrasso (R-WY).

The Republican incumbents who I believe are about to lose are Ted Stevens of Alaska, Norm Coleman of Minnesota, John Sununu of New Hampshire, Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina and Gordon Smith of Oregon. With the three open seats looking like changing hands this would mean eight seats turning from red into blue. Stevens would have won if he hadn't been convicted of corruption right before the election. Minnesota, New Hampshire and Oregon are impacted by the Obama effect, as I believe are the open seats in Colorado, New Mexico and Virginia. Mark Warner is running far ahead of Obama in Virginia and he would have won anyway, so all the credit does not go to Obama. North Carolina is the most interesting of all, as it could vote Republican in the presidential race but vote out Elizabeth Dole nonetheless. That would be the negative impact on Republicans of McCain being more popular than his party.

Guessing the result

2008-10-31T10:46:00.004+02:00

Barack Obama is leading in all the polls and it is hard not to guess him as the winner of the United States presidential election. It is fully possible that the outcome will be closer than what most polls show. Still to me it seems unthinkable to guess that McCain will win, I simply don't see it coming. There is one Fox News poll where McCain is only three percentage points behind but Obama has a stronger lead in the other polls. Even if McCain would come very close to Obama in overall votes, it looks like there is no way he could get enough states behind him to win a majority in the electoral college. I have come up with a guess, state by state, as to which candidate will win each state and the three electoral votes of the District of Columbia.

The hardest to guess was Florida, it is so tight there but I have a strong belief in that the Democratic Party organization will manage to get out the vote in a way not seen in a long time, especially in Florida. John McCain's personal popularity is strong in the Sunshine State and he will get many votes there. I think that McCain could lose both Florida and Ohio simply because he has no other option but to make the greatest effort in Ohio, a state that should be less winnable for him than Florida. Obama, on the other hand, is all over Florida with Bill Clinton and Al Gore campaigning for him. So this is my guess and anyone willing to try is truly welcome to make a guess of their own in the comments section of this blog.

Alabama: McCain
Alaska: McCain
Arizona: McCain
Arkansas: McCain
California: Obama
Colorado: Obama
Connecticut: Obama
Delaware: Obama
Florida: Obama
Georgia: McCain
Hawaii: Obama
Idaho: McCain
Illinois: Obama
Indiana: McCain
Iowa: Obama

Kansas: McCain
Kentucky: McCain
Louisiana: McCain
Maine: Obama
Maryland: Obama
Massachusetts: Obama
Michigan: Obama
Minnesota: Obama
Mississippi: McCain
Missouri: McCain
Montana: McCain
Nebraska: McCain
Nevada: Obama
New Hampshire: Obama
New Jersey: Obama
New Mexico: Obama
New York: Obama
North Carolina: McCain
North Dakota: McCain
Ohio: Obama
Oklahoma: McCain
Oregon: Obama
Pennsylvania: Obama
Rhode Island: Obama
South Carolina: McCain
South Dakota: McCain
Tennessee: McCain
Texas: McCain
Utah: McCain
Vermont: Obama
Virginia: Obama
Washington: Obama
Washington, D.C.: Obama
West Virginia: McCain
Wisconsin: Obama
Wyoming: McCain

McCain sprints to the finish

2008-10-30T15:03:00.003+02:00

Senator John McCain is not about to give in just because he is down in the polls. He is doing all he can to close in the gap. While the polls show that Obama's lead is not as large as it was a week ago, time is definitely running out for McCain. Obama retains a double-digit lead in Pennsylvania even if McCain is continually pouring in resources there looking for an upset. Obama should secure his victory in Ohio. Whether he can do that is the most exciting question of the presidential election. Ohio and Virginia put together is the combination that makes McCain's efforts elsewhere rather futile. Most likely McCain will not lose the election in a landslide. To go down with his head held high suits his style. Even if Florida and Missouri won't be enough to win the presidency, capturing both of them would be a big success for the Republicans as both swing states looked like they were slipping away from them.

Right now McCain and Obama are even in Florida. There will be plenty of excitement in the Sunshine State even if the Obama victory looks like to be decided in Ohio. McCain is up by two percentage points in Missouri with the latest poll showing four per cent of the vote going to Ralph Nader in the Show Me State. The situation in Missouri thus resembles somewhat the scenario four years ago in Florida between Bush and Gore. Nader seems to be the only one of the minor candidates seriously influencing the presidential race and his prospects of gaining third place look good. The poll that gives Nader a key role in Missouri promises Bob Barr one per cent of the vote there.

There is a reason to why Bob Barr is trailing Nader in Missouri. The Libertarian candidate is focusing on Ohio. Barr is very conscious of the possibility that the entire election may be decided in the Buckeye State. Third place in Ohio would then be worth more to Barr than third place overall. In Barr's dream scenario Obama wins Ohio only narrowly with the Libertarian candidate providing the margin of victory. Barr sounds almost like a cheerleader for Obama, telling voters that McCain is a Bush supporter, not a maverick. That's an interesting take on the McCain record but it certainly resonates with Obama's message. Bob Barr said he was in the race to win when he entered the campaign. Now he is out there to get the spoiler role. If Nader might achieve a spoiler role in Missouri, Barr is aiming at such a feat in Ohio, one of the biggest prizes there is.

Let's say that McCain comes across a complete success in everything he does in the days leading up to the election. He will win in Indiana, one state where Obama has been campaigning very hard. Now if McCain will also win North Carolina and Missouri, not many people will be surprised. In McCain's dream scenario he would also win Florida, Nevada and Ohio. I don't believe for a moment he will win all three but let's say he does. He would most probably still lose the election by losing Virginia and Pennsylvania. As the situation in Florida is even, there are no guarantees that McCain even gets close to any kind of dream scenario. A defeat in Florida would be a nightmare for McCain. Obama has run an effective and smart campaign in the Sunshine State and his chances there are as good as McCain's. But try McCain will, in all the battleground states, all he can.

Many battleground states remain close

2008-10-28T18:08:00.004+02:00

While a victory for John McCain still looks extremely unlikely, the race is going to be very tight in many battleground states. The race in Missouri is extremely close and there is no way of telling which candidate will carry the Show Me State. Today my feeling is that McCain could well win there but a lot of things can happen with a week to go. Another state where the candidates seem to be even is North Carolina. Voters there have been toying with the idea of going for Obama but McCain has been waging a tough negative campaign in the Tar Heel State and looks prepared to capture the state that these days usually votes Republican in presidential elections without exception. Obama has a good shot at taking both Missouri and North Carolina and even if he loses both, McCain will have spent plenty of time and money playing defense in states he was supposed to win rather easily.

Losing Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania and Virginia would be absolutely devastating for McCain. While he has a good chance at winning in Missouri and North Carolina, these four big prizes are within his reach, yet winning all of them looks like an impossible task. Obama has a lead in all four and winning two of them should ensure the White House for the Democrats. Of these four most important battleground states Ohio is where McCain has his best opportunity. Hillary Clinton is popular in the Buckeye State but Obama has never really been that big there. It's just that his policies seem to resonate better in Ohio than McCain's, all the hoopla about Joe the Plumber notwithstanding. Ohio will however be close and McCain will give as good as he can because he knows he can't afford to lose there.

Obama's lead in Florida is not very large. The same goes for Virginia but it seems more stable there. Southern states going for the Democrat from Illinois are a huge cause for desperation among the Republicans. Obama's surge in North Carolina really helped him, even if he ultimately loses in the Tar Heel State, he has forced McCain to concentrate much of his Southern strategy there when it was only supposed to be about Virginia and Florida. Everything is pointing toward a close Obama victory in the Old Dominion. McCain is fighting strongly in the Sunshine State and he has a better shot there but so far Obama has the advantage.

Given the trouble McCain is in, he has had to push forward in Pennsylvania all he can. It is mathematically possible for him to win overall without carrying Pennsylvania. Of the big swing states the Keystone State seems the surest bet for Obama. McCain is essentially wasting his resources there but he needs to force Obama to play defense somewhere. The Democrats can never be too sure about victory, however. So McCain's gamble in Pennsylvania is also aimed at Obama taking off his resources from states like North Carolina and Missouri that he can ultimately do without but McCain can't.

Colorado is another swing state where the race is looking like staying close until the finish line. Obama has a good chance of winning Colorado as well as Nevada and New Mexico. Yet the trend toward an Obama victory is not happening in all close states. Day by day McCain is securing his grip of Indiana despite a vigorous campaign by the Democrats there. Georgia is not exactly a swing state. The Republicans are expected to win there even if Obama has kept the race competitive. McCain's lead in the Peach State seems solid enough to hold until the end. Yet Obama is still doing remarkably well there given that he was already previously about to abandon his campaign in Georgia. Of course Obama is not going to win all the close states and there will be plenty of excitement come next Tuesday. McCain is still behind in too many states for him to be humanly possible to turn the tide in enough of them to go all the way to the White House. But he certainly is trying any way he can.

What about third place?

2008-10-26T17:03:00.003+02:00

Third place in the United States presidential election is still up for grabs. Barack Obama is increasingly looking like the front runner to win the election and John McCain will get second place unless he pulls off a dramatic upset victory. Bob Barr entered the race late, yet his prospects for third place still seem reasonably good. But Ralph Nader has a great opportunity to upset the minor parties as an independent candidate. Cynthia McKinney might well finish in fifth place but third place is still possible even for her.

Bob Barr must have known how he is going to be completely ignored by the media when the race between Obama and McCain really gets going. The economic crisis should be a good opportunity to gain publicity for the Libertarian Party platform where economic issues usually seem to come first, second and third. But Barr hasn't really been the right person to attract attention. The Ron Paul effect was supposed to help Barr but it hasn't. More and more people who like Paul are coming to the conclusion that the Republican primary was a much more effective vehicle to hammer home the core issues close to the right-wing libertarian agenda than what the third party presidential candidacy offers. Only an exceptional individual like Ross Perot can pull off a serious third party challenge. Bob Barr is generally coming across as a regular politician. His background in the United States House of Representatives raises the question whether the Libertarian Party is being used as a vehicle by Republicans who are not formidable enough to make a difference in their own party.

It is hard to see Bob Barr getting much more than one percent of the vote nationally. Now this is where Ralph Nader comes in. He is not likely to replicate his stunning performance from the 2000 election but he is perceived as a genuine independent, not as a representative of a disenchanted faction within a major party. Indeed he represents a faction disenchanted with the Green Party whose biggest goal looks like becoming a respectable junior partner to the Democrats. Not that the Democrats will need such a partner in any viable short term scenario. Ralph Nader is nobody's partner. I think he is pretty much even with Barr and could very well get third place.

Cynthia McKinney has be very invisible during this campaign. I can't imagine anything else than many of her supporters secretly dream of Barack Obama winning the election. A third place for McKinney might be nice for them but a first place for Obama could open up opportunities for Green politicians to profile themselves as an alternative to the Democrats governing the country in a way that possibly can't satisfy all the expectations of those people who are now voting for change. The ideological wind is blowing toward more government intervention which is perhaps a reason why Bob Barr hasn't dominated the third party scene this year. Yet Ralph Nader's presence is making it hard for McKinney to find her niche.

Bob Barr is so clearly a former Republican and Cynthia McKinney equally clearly a former Democrat that it is hard to see either of them as truly genuine third party politicians. Neither of them would finish top five in a major party presidential primary, that's at least how I feel about them. Ralph Nader on the other hand is a towering personality but as a truly independent candidate he lacks a credible organization. Nader's presence is very important when looking at who finishes third. Had he chosen not to run, Green Party would've had a serious shot at achieving third place this year. Now McKinney is at least to some extent not only in Obama's but even in Nader's shadow. What's more significant, Nader could beat Barr. Nobody can tell for sure today who will finish third and fourth.

Every day Obama is closer to victory

2008-10-25T16:33:00.007+03:00

Senator Barack Obama's prospects of winning are improving all the time. With a healthy lead in the polls, the general feeling is that time is running out for John McCain. Four years ago, George W. Bush did very well among married women and among white Catholics. Now both demographics are leaning toward Obama. The Republican candidate tends to win among white male voters and this is likely to happen even this time but even there Obama is fully competitive. Most significant is that Obama's lead in Ohio is increasing. The Buckeye State could very well be where McCain loses the election. That's where Bush sealed the deal four years ago.

Sarah Palin did a lot to energize the Republican base in an election where many of the party faithful were not so sure about supporting John McCain. But the Palin effect seems to be evaporating. Active churchgoers and Southern voters feel very good about Palin's status as prolife icon and her presence is helping McCain in red states like Alabama and Mississippi. But the overall effect of McCain's pick seems to be that Palin is not helping the Republican ticket among swing voters. McCain was initially very strong among independents and moderates and his reaching out to the Republican base has undermined much of that advantage.

Obama never had to convince Democrats that he is one of them. There is some irony to the situation right now that Obama is considered as the more centrist of the two candidates by many voters. But there is also a change going on in the political landscape. Something similar happened when Ronald Reagan won in 1980. Views like his had long been far out of the mainstream; one example of which is Barry Goldwater's defeat in 1964. During the 1980s, the mainstream of US political thought came very close to the conservative base of the Republican Party. Now the Obama campaign is out there to embrace a shift in the political mainstream closer to the traditional Democratic Party line. These shifts happen perhaps every once in a generation and the current fiscal crisis is paving the way for the Democrats who are expected to win big in the congressional elections.

The candidacy of John McCain is itself proof of a switch in the American political climate toward the Democrats. Had the Republicans been really sure of the popularity of their core principles, a more ideological candidate would have emerged. The pragmatic McCain is well suited to offer a moderate platform to the voters. But he can't do away with the troubles his party is in right now. All the attention that Sarah Palin has very successfully caught to the Republican ticket has been of the sort that has contradicted the message that voting Republican this year is essentially a moderate vote. McCain and Palin complement each other ideologically in the same way as George H.W. Bush and Dan Quayle did in 1988. But in that election, when moderation also was popular, there was not as much focus on the running mates as this time around. Bush won in spite of Quayle, McCain can't win without the help of Palin and right now the running mate isn't helping him among swing voters, only among those already in the Republican fold.

Ken Adelman endorses Obama

2008-10-24T12:17:00.002+03:00

Barack Obama continues to garner support among prominent Republicans. Veteran foreign policy analyst Ken Adelman who served seven years under Ronald Reagan has not only endorsed Obama but openly questioned John McCain's judgment when it comes to economic policy and the choice of Sarah Palin as the Republican vice presidential candidate. At least among some pundits Adelman's endorsement is seen as a telling sign of McCain being in big trouble. Conservatives have generally viewed Colin Powell as a moderate and someone who is pretty close to Democrats in many of his views. Ken Adelman has been perceived as a solid Reagan Republican, at least until now, as he is emerging as one of the leading Obamacans, or Obama Republicans.

Ken Adelman is neither nationally nor internationally as well known as Colin Powell and there is some skepticism as to the significance of the endorsement. But he is very much a Republican insider with a very long record of service. George Packer of the New Yorker exchanged e-mails with Adelman and broke the story, including the reasons behind the endorsement. It was very clear that Adelman did not give his support to the agenda of the Democratic Party as a whole. His criticism of John McCain was much stronger than his praise for Barack Obama. He hoped, however, that Obama would turn out to be "centrist" and "Clintonesque". It could very well be that the Republican foreign policy gurus voting for Obama are trying to ensure continuity and indeed that their opinions would be listened to in the White House after the switch of parties in power.

Iraq has been one issue where McCain and Adelman have had many things in common. Both supported the war, Adelman even predicted that the invasion would be a "cakewalk". Both McCain and Adelman have been critical of the handling of the aftermath of the invasion and neither of them is presently very close to George W. Bush. Adelman is not even very close to Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld anymore and he used to be their close associate for forty years. The last time a Republican from Arizona was nominated, Barry Goldwater in 1964, young Ken Adelman supported him enthusiastically. Now he supports Barack Obama, not so enthusiastically but with a strong dose of realism based on his appreciation of the failings of the McCain campaign.

When people like Colin Powell and Ken Adelman make cross-party endorsements, some of the swing voters with doubts about Obama's foreign policy may very well see their doubts soothed. Obama is also getting some interesting endorsements from members of the Goldwater family. Barry Goldwater's granddaughter, C C Goldwater, wrote a curious post in the Huffington Post where she lengthily explains why it is possible to stand for her grandfather's principles and based on those vote for Obama. Another Goldwater granddaughter, Alison Goldwater Ross, cast an early vote in Georgia for Obama. Apparently there is a history of resentment between the Goldwaters and the McCains. Barry Goldwater himself originally viewed McCain in very positive terms but was later on disappointed in his successor in the United States Senate. But Barry Goldwater himself is dead and not everyone in the Goldwater family is against McCain. Barry Goldwater, Jr. carries the name forward. The former member of the House of Representatives and his father's namesake who endorsed antiwar candidate Ron Paul in the primaries has endorsed John McCain in the general election, telling his niece C C Goldwater in the best individualist Goldwater tradition that no one should use the family name in an exclusive manner. All Goldwaters decide for themselves but Obama seems to be pretty popular among the younger generation.

Colin Powell endorses Obama

2008-10-20T18:26:00.003+03:00

Senator Barack Obama got the endorsement of former Secretary of State Colin Powell, a key moderate Republican who served during the first term of George W. Bush. In the 2000 election the appointment of Powell was announced by Bush before the election because he was so popular it was calculated as a sure vote-getter. Obama, while campaigning in North Carolina, said he was "beyond honored and deeply humbled to have the support of General Colin Powell." With the support of one of the most prominent African American public figures ever Obama not only underscores the overwhelming support he enjoys among African Americans but also has the backing of a true foreign and defense policy heavyweight.

Senator John McCain countered with reminding of Henry Kissinger, Alexander Haig, Lawrence Eagleburger and James Baker, all former Secretaries of State who endorsed him early on. McCain also pointed out the overwhelming support he enjoys among retired generals and admirals. This is rather natural given McCain's own war record and his background in one of America's most prominent military families. Given the strong support he enjoys among veterans and other people with ties to the military it is all the more significant that McCain is in big trouble in Florida, a state with many military retirees.

Colin Powell made it clear that he had been disappointed by McCain's negative campaign. A lot of people have been upset by harsh personal accusations coming from the McCain camp against Obama but in politics with high stakes, the highest in the world, it is usual that the candidate who is behind tries all the tricks in the book and then some to even out the gap. McCain knows also from personal experience that it is possible to sink even a popular campaign with simple mudslinging. It has been done to him before. But Obama should have all the resources in the world to fight back, something McCain didn't have when he faced the character assassination tactics applied against him in the 2000 Republican primaries.

Obama says that "McCain is almost out of time". Yet with all the robo calls linking Obama to terrorism there is no way to tell how much time is enough. Perhaps McCain will make a strong comeback in the last days in the states where he had the advantage all along. But I can't imagine him winning enough states to get elected, not with the current poll numbers at least. What is clear is that huge resources are being spent to portray both candidates as crooks who hang out with even shadier characters and whose policies are harmful to the nation and to the world. Yet I'd imagine most independent observers would see both candidates as honorable persons, great campaigners and able politicians. It's just a crying shame that an enormous part of all the gigantic campaign resources will have been wasted in mudslinging when this election is over. In the debates and otherwise in person both candidates have played it rather nice. But the campaign teams are ready, ultimately with the approval of the candidates themselves, to unleash dark forces by all the accusations that sometimes border on the ridiculous. McCain is losing much of his esteem because being behind he is forced to play it dirty more than his opponent who needs to play it safe now.

McCain tries to battle on

2008-10-18T11:52:00.004+03:00

Senator John McCain is facing a difficult moment in his campaign. The trend across the board is negative and there is not much he can do to change that. The external situation in the form of the fiscal crisis has simply made the setting for the whole campaign very promising for the party not currently occupying the White House. John McCain has tried his best to distance himself from George W. Bush but that distancing always comes with a price leaving people confused about what the Republican Party stands for and how are the voters supposed to punish the economic policies of the current incumbents that most of them are by now tired of. McCain hasn't simply been the Republicans' strongest voice on economic policy during the Bush years. He has asserted his independence on a matter of issues but he also had to court the favor of the White House many times in order to establish himself as the Republican candidate. Had the Republicans seen it coming that the election is going to be almost only about the economy they most likely would not have picked McCain. Yet Mitt Romney did not succeed in selling his economic expertise to his fellow Republicans who were very concerned about foreign policy and not sure about Romney's record when it comes to world affairs.

If there is to be no major international crisis before the election, there is no way John McCain can shift the focus of this election to foreign policy where he'd like it to be. In domestic policy he constantly looks like trying to focus on issues that are of secondary importance. With his war record and his foreign policy credentials he reminds somewhat of John Kerry four years ago. That's partly how I see him, as a candidate who has a strong record but who isn't sure how to make his mark on the issues that make or break a presidential election. The strongest similarity to Kerry is obviously in the way how both campaigns were given up for dead by the pundits during the primaries, then managed to switch their focus from a presidential perspective to partisan concerns to win the primaries and then facing serious trouble with readjusting the campaign to the main prize again.

It may be too late for McCain to turn the tide and resurrect his campaign. Still, nationally he is only about five percentage points behind and nobody knows yet if Obama's poll numbers will hold. Obama himself reminded of the tendency of Democrats to bungle races that are theirs to win in past elections, a comment that gives McCain some hope but also intended to reassure Democrats that nothing should be taken for granted and it's full speed ahead until the election. McCain tries to defend his advantage in many of the states that Bush won four years ago. He will make a spirited last ditch effort to win Florida, a state where he was supposed to be especially strong. One question mark for his campaign is that even if he succeeds in winning Florida, he may lose Ohio and ultimately the election. Does he really have resources to fight back in both states or is he bound to lose both narrowly?

McCain's main effort will from now on be in states that he can't afford to lose. Obama looks set to win each and every state that Kerry won four years ago without even a very hard fight. This means he can concentrate on taking over Republican territory without having to concentrate so hard on defending the old positions of the Democrats that are looking more and more secured by the day. McCain's original scenario for winning this election was very much based on the idea that Florida, North Carolina and Virginia will fall into his column and he will then proceed to seal the deal in states like Pennsylvania. Now he is defending old Republican positions in the South. He may yet come up with a valiant battle and win Florida and most other Southern states where Obama is currently a threat to him. Even if he does that there is a strong likelihood that he will lose the election in Ohio.

Obama landslide is possible

2008-10-17T14:10:00.002+03:00

I have been generally very cautious about the idea that either candidate will score a landslide victory. Right now many polls point to such a direction that Barack Obama has a shot at taking a clean sweep of all the key swing states, including Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida and Virginia. Losing those four states and to lose big in most blue states would be in my book pretty much of a landslide. I know I'm using the word landslide rather carelessly and even if I now think Obama will win, I'm not at all sure he'll win as big as some polls predict. I'm not very critical of John McCain's campaign, I think he's done as good as he can. This year just looks like to be a very Democratic year. Even if I acknowledge that the landslide scenario is fully thinkable, I expect for McCain to sprint to the finish and the Obama victory not to come as easily as it looks like.

There are plenty of red states where McCain will win big. But he can't help it that some states are switching their color. Virginia has been turning blue for a while now and if Obama wins there I think it's not so much about personalities but about a switch in party allegiance. Senator Jim Webb is one character who has done much to change the political landscape in Virginia. The voters there really like people like him and people like him used to be Republicans. George W. Bush never really hit it off with the moderates in his party. Even if John McCain is strong with moderates and independent voters, his campaign is suffering from many of them feeling that they have been alienated by Bush.

McCain has to fight until the very end in states like Nevada, Colorado and Missouri. But he might lose some of those states, too. He can't ignore Ohio and Florida and by concentrating on the big swing states he risks losing some of the other ones. Obama probably doesn't have to play defense in states like Pennsylvania and New Hampshire that previously looked like places where McCain could pull an upset. For a long time Obama was dreaming of an upset victory in Georgia. It looks like he's giving up on Georgia and focusing on Virginia instead. McCain seems prepared enough in Georgia but the big question mark is if his organization in Virginia can deliver.

Indiana is one swing state where McCain has relatively good prospects of victory. But the bad news from other swing states keep piling up. Obama has more resources and plenty of options. Winning Virginia has been a possiblity during the entire campaign but the opportunity that is opening up in neighboring North Carolina underlines McCain's weakness in some of the Southern states. The Republicans really didn't have a bulletproof option this year. One part of the country disliked Huckabee, another part Romney and McCain clearly has his weak territories. But he wouldn't have to fight in states like North Carolina if it wasn't for the nationwide Democratic tide that he's up against. He's still sure to carry rock solid Republican states like Texas and Tennessee but he's in big trouble in states like Florida, Virginia and North Carolina. If somebody had told me in January that by nominating McCain the Republicans risk losing Florida, I would've said quite the contrary, he's the one candidate that will prevail there. The Sunshine State is leaning toward Obama and I'm not hearing any pundits talking about a McCain victory. He upset all pundits in the primaries but somehow I doubt that he can do it again.

Obama has the advantage after the debates

2008-10-16T09:49:00.007+03:00

John McCain and Barack Obama debated for the third and final time. Senator McCain tried to create the atmosphere of a town hall meeting by directing several of his lines to Joe the Plumber. Apparently the reference was to Joe Wurzelbacher who had had questions about Obama's tax increases outside Toledo some days ago. Senator Obama played along and also gave his version of how Joe the Plumber would get it better if he voted for the Democratic ticket. Wurzelbacher was reported not to have made up his mind even after having watched the third debate.

McCain was highly critical about Obama not going along with a series of town hall style meetings featuring both candidates. To me it's a little late to complain about the format of the debates. There was one such debate, the second debate, and most voters now have a rather clear idea of what the candidates stand for. The differences between them are not enormous, however, and both want to get the swing vote more than anything. The prominence of Bill Ayers is a symptom of there not being that many real issues for the candidates to talk about. McCain made some tough remarks about the connection of Ayers to Obama but he didn't really provide any evidence that the tie between the former member of the Weather Underground and the current Democratic candidate years ago was particularly strong.

Obama looked a little bit less confident in the third debate. He was clearly aware of the weight of the occasion and of how doing well could actually lead him all the way to the White House. Even if I think the pressure at times showed he still pulled off a solid performance. My interpretation is that there was no body blow in the third debate that could derail Obama's campaign. His performance was surprisingly defensive but his performance generally matched McCain's. So much of what was said was a repetition of the previous two debates that there had to be the feeling of the freshness of it all wearing off. The discussion on nasty campaign tactics was also obviously very unflattering to both candidates. It was obvious that both the moderator and the candidates themselves agreed that the campaigns are increasingly getting out of line, yet all Obama and McCain could come up with was laying the blame squarely on the other side.

McCain clearly hasn't given up on this election. He was aware of having to perform better than he probably is capable of to actually win the debate, yet he came up with a strong but not a particularly dazzling performance. He went after Obama as best he could but there was the distinct impression that many of his attacks were leading the discussion off topic, if the main topic was how to rescue the economy. After all it seems that his policies are getting closer to those of Obama as the crisis deepens and there is the increasing need to distance the current Republican ticket from George W. Bush. McCain made it very clear that he represents a break from the Bush years. Now many of the policies he portrays as disastrous to the economy bear the fingerprint of his own party and he can't avoid the voters passing judgment on that record as much as he wishes they would not do that. Which is why I think he made a brave effort, soldiering on, doing what he could with the full knowledge that the odds are against him and there was no magic trick to turn the tide.

A relatively stable performance was enough for Obama to retain his status as front runner. His campaign is on target and with an advantage like he has now he shouldn't lose. Of course the race is still his to lose but he didn't stumble debating McCain in a major way. I think the debates generally were even, both did what they could and there were no really awkward moments. The economic crisis clearly increases Obama's chances to get elected and there was nothing McCain could do about the focus shifting from his strong points to his weaknesses. McCain did relatively well given that he was for most of the time not talking about the issues he really feels strongly about. The third debate was even and the name of the game was for Obama to avoid any mistakes. That's a much easier job to do than facing up to the expectations of sinking your opponent's campaign by performing in a magnificent way in one debate. Obama has a clear advantage in the polls and the focus of the debates has been where he wants it to be for most of the time. I think he has performed solidly and certainly has not blown away his chances of winning in November. Given that he is less experienced than McCain, the series of three debates certainly leans toward Obama being the overall winner. But they were tight debates and even the third one was good to watch even if I had my doubts about the candidates being able to bring up anything new or exciting at this stage.

McCain and Obama to debate for the final time

2008-10-15T18:24:00.003+03:00

The last presidential debate between the Democratic and Republican contenders is to be held at Hofstra University in Hempstead, New York. CBS News broadcaster Bob Schieffer is going to be the moderator, a role he had in the last debate between Bush and Kerry in 2004. The economy is expected to dominate the debate. Another much speculated issue is whether John McCain is going to bring up the fact that Obama knows Bill Ayers from his Chicago neighborhood. Ayers participated in an early Obama campaign but is not currently involved in this campaign. He has been a member of the Weather Underground decades ago and as such is the closest link between Obama and terrorism that his opponents can come up with. Obama's connection to Ayers has never been as close as that to Jeremiah Wright who was brought up during the primaries because of his controversial statements. As the pastor issue didn't really stick, it's hard to see that the former member of Weather Underground can do much damage, either.

As there has been so much talk of Ayers without it ever having been very clear that his connection to Obama is or has been strong, it looks like there is some desperation in the air. That is natural, after all McCain is down in the polls and Ayers is fair game. Now even if the desperation is understandable given Obama's standing in the polls, there are still some weeks to go. Ultimately polls can't guarantee any victory. There are very many voters who aren't sure about which candidate to choose and there are many swing states at play. Obama has more resources and he has the upper hand right now. But anything can still happen.

While I have been generally rather pleased with the first two debates, I have really no expectations for the third one. What else can they really do but to repeat what has been said in the previous two debates? If there are going to be any desperate debate moves left, this is the time for those. There is thus the risk that the third debate might not be of as high quality as the previous ones. Still, it could turn out to be the decisive debate. A lot is still at stake and the excitement is high. While the third debate might turn out to be less pleasing to watch, that doesn't diminish its importance and the high pressure under which both candidates are as the race is drawing to a close.

Is Bill Ayers worth bringing up in the final debate? It's very hard to tell. He has had a strong career as an educator, published fifteen books and has been named Chicago's Citizen of the Year eleven years ago. When Obama got to know him as an able fundraiser in his neighborhood, Ayers was very much known as an upstanding citizen. What is there to ask Obama about Ayers? When and how did he learn of Ayers's past in the Weather Underground? Ayers may have been a terrorist but all charges against him were dropped. I think the Ayers issue might have been big had he been as actively involved in the current Obama campaign as Wright was some months ago. The connection between Ayers and Obama looks simply too small to help make the case that the Democrat is ready to associate with terrorists if it helps his career. Ultimately, my guess is that the voters will look at other issues and they will start with the economy.

Obama looking confident in the second debate

2008-10-08T09:51:00.005+03:00

Belmont University in Nashville hosted the second Obama-McCain debate yesterday. Senator Obama is right now rising steeply in the polls, a situation that clearly helps him to look very comfortable and presidential. Senator McCain made a spirited effort and highlighted his credentials for the highest office in the land but there was constantly the feeling that he is the underdog, the challenger trying to buck the trend in a year that does not look very good for the Republicans. Both candidates were clearly trying to distance themselves from the Bush Administration, a strategy that is ultimately bound to help the Democrats at all levels. The focus was so strongly on what is wrong with the economy that McCain was always going to be somewhat defensive even if he tried to reassure the voters that he knows how to fix the economy, a message that is somewhat at odds with his previous insecurity about economic details. Obama of course tries to be very assertive on foreign policy even if it is obvious that he has less experience than McCain. But this debate was mostly about the economy and Obama looked very comfortable, relaxed and in command.

LA Times tv critic Robert Lloyd put it rather succinctly when he said "the setup highlighted McCain's inner talk show host, while it brought out the professor in Obama". The town hall setup was supposed to bring out the best in McCain. In many ways it did and a professorial Obama can always be interpreted as being the aloof one not connecting so easily with the voters and their emotions. Yet in a debate so focused on fixing the economy this constellation should favor Obama. To me McCain looked like a good talk show host and Obama looked like a good professor. McCain was very engaged, fired up and as soothing as he could be in a style reminiscent of Dr. Phil. Obama sounded like an appealing professor who knows what he is talking about. So much of this election has been about experience, record and competence. When the focus shifts from national security to the economic crisis, everything changes. Suddenly it is McCain who tries to dazzle with his style and Obama looks confident when talking about the actual issues. Ironically this wasn't equally much the case when he was running against Hillary Clinton and it would look very different were his opponent someone like Mitt Romney whose number one favorite topic is the economy.

The poll numbers put sky high expectations on McCain. I think McCain succeeded in many ways in improving his game. In the first debate he looked somewhat condescending compared to this one. This time he was likeable, fresh and well prepared. He would probably have wished to use the town hall format in all of the debates and it showed that he likes to interact with voters more than he likes debating Obama. Were McCain leading in the polls right now he might very well have cemented his lead with this performance. But the economic crisis and the toll it is taking on the party that is currently occupying the White House has raised the bar for McCain in a way that no one probably could respond to. The focus was so completely on McCain's weak points that his task for the debate was in no way to cement a strong position. While McCain did a great job in the Republican primaries from the position of the underdog, his opponents attacking each other was a huge factor that helped him win. In this situation it is McCain himself and his running mate that have to do the attacking. That will always alienate some voters. McCain obviously is using Palin as his attack dog and gave a polite picture of himself in the debate. But he didn't deal any blows that would have hurt Obama, giving his opponent a rather easy job to reassure the voters yesterday.

Now that Obama actually is in a position where he is out to cement his lead in the polls, he doesn't have to attack McCain. When his campaign goes on the attack mode, it is always done with the understanding that what is done is a response to an attack from the opposing side. Having the lead in the polls gives the luxury to appear gracious. The campaign may have become much nastier in the past few days but the debate didn't show any signs of that. Both candidates appear as persons willing to reach out in troubled times in order to achieve the results that are needed. Both of them have the underlying message that the partisan bickering has to end. To remain believable at all, both of them have to play nice when debating each other. That always helps the front runner. Of course nasty moves are being played out all the time but the candidates use their surrogates to do that. Thankfully this is so because at least the debates get the elevated mood that they deserve.

Obama surging ahead

2008-10-05T15:43:00.004+03:00

According to the latest Zogby poll, the Obama-Biden ticket has a four percentage point lead with about a month to go. Obama's surge in the latest polls may very well be in part a result of Joe Biden's solid performance in the vice presidential debate. It will be very interesting to see what will happen after the two presidential debates that are still left. If Biden is seriously contributing to Obama's popularity, there is an irony to it. Very many viewers tuned in to see Sarah Palin's performance in the debate. Had Biden been debating someone less colorful, he would not have gained anywhere close to as many viewers as he now did. While Obama occupies the driver's seat, mostly because voters are still very dissatisfied with the performance of George W. Bush, not least on the economy, my feeling is that the race will be very tight.

National polls are not so decisive. Of course, if Obama ends up with a big lead right before election day, it will in one way or another translate into him getting the resources to win the crucial swing states. If the race stays relatively close, the decision will be made state by state. Obama's huge margins of victory in states like New York, California and Illinois will not be enough. The focus on the economy might help Obama to win Ohio and Pennsylvania, where the election may be decided this time. Minnesota is another state that McCain has had in his sights but is rather likely to end up in Obama's column.

Could McCain lose Florida? He really could not afford to lose there and the state looks like very close right now. Sarah Palin is going campaigning to Florida tomorrow and that's where she will make her most crucial contribution for McCain. If Palin can energize the Republican base in the more conservative parts of Florida, there is still the possibility of McCain carrying the Sunshine State. The presence of the Obama campaign in Florida is very strong. A huge effort is being made by Florida Democrats because a win there could allow Obama to lose other less important states. Florida is worth fighting for, county by county, to the Obama-Biden team even if they were ultimately to lose there. Because of the threat of losing Florida, there are reports that McCain is already giving up Michigan as a lost cause and channeling more resources to Florida than previously intended.

Missouri is one crucial battleground state that McCain is expected to win, ultimately rather easily. Obama is still campaigning in the Show Me State even if it is a long shot. This forces McCain to put some of his resources into securing Missouri that he otherwise could have used elsewhere. Obama's edge in fundraising and in organization means that he is constantly doing offensive maneuvers, while McCain is forced to play defense. Still, McCain is the kind of centrist candidate who appeals to very many purple states. Anything can happen between now and election day but right now Obama is looking comfortable.

Biden and Palin debate

2008-10-03T13:15:00.004+03:00

Both vice presidential candidates exceeded expectations in their only debate at Washington University in St. Louis. A CNN poll put Joe Biden as the winner but an overwhelming majority also thought that Palin had performed better than expected. There was a lot of talk about gaffes before the debate but both candidates were well coached and did not make any major mistakes. Both of them can probably feel relieved that they did not harm their candidate in any way. It is also doubtful if either of them performed well enough to help either presidential candidate to win or if such an outcome even can be within the realm of possibility of a vice presidential debate. Presidential debates are much more significant and there is usually much more substance to them. So much of the vice presidential debate is about the running mates acting as attack dogs and taking cheap shots at the opposing presidential candidate who is not present.

Both Biden and Palin tried to be nice to each other. Had they not done that, they might have lost the voters' sympathy. After all, they are not there to do each other in, their job is to attack the person at the top of the opposing ticket. Palin tried to portray Biden in a favorable way in any way that would present Obama as a candidate worse than his running mate. Biden clearly did the same, trying to portray Palin's policies in Alaska as better than what McCain has stood for in the United States Senate. This type of conversation feels ultimately meaningless, it is done so that the other party does not have much wiggle room for a response yet the attack itself sounds rather hollow and the politeness comes across as forced. I feel it is totally different in a presidential debate where the candidates have the need to appear much more presidential and responsible for what they say.

The Biden vs. Palin debate was rather good for what it was. Both candidates exceeded expectations because the expectations weren't great. The vice presidential debate was very much of a sideshow and it never gets to be much more than that. Biden certainly has a much greater command of policy details and Palin has an aw shucks folksiness that appeals to many ordinary Americans. In that sense Palin is somewhat similar to Mike Huckabee who won the Republican Iowa caucuses in January. Obama chief strategist David Axelrod tried to spin that the debate was about competence and not about folksiness but that's a somewhat dangerous message. Axelrod should know that the electoral victories of George W. Bush both in Texas and in the country as a whole were built upon a well-calculated folksiness that did not originally even come naturally to the scion of a very prominent and well-off American family. While Palin certainly appeals to many voters, the appeal of the vice presidential candidate can only have so much of an impact.

Joe Biden may have failed in his two presidential campaigns. He made too many gaffes both in 1988 and in 2008. As the vice presidential nominee he has the ultimate opportunity to improve his public speaking record. After all, he is one of America's leading foreign policy professionals, a vastly experienced statesman who is comfortable dealing with complicated issues that are of burning importance to the world. In the debate he managed to come across as who he is. He does not have as many fans as Obama, McCain or even his counterpart Palin. He does not dazzle as a campaigner. But he did his part when it really mattered the most. The expectations were higher on him than on Sarah Palin, which is why he could have more easily hurt Obama than Palin could have hurt McCain in the debate. For all of Biden's experience, he still has the number two spot on the ticket. Obama has to impress all on his own to the voters that he is ready to lead.

Dick Cheney has been perhaps the most powerful vice president in history and he also stands for a very extensive interpretation of the constitutional role that he occupies. Interestingly enough, Sarah Palin said she agreed with Cheney on what the vice president's role is. After all, no one expects her to have a role that is anywhere as large as Cheney's if McCain is elected. The vice presidents that get to play an important role are almost always experienced politicians who serve alongside a less experienced chief executive. It's Joe Biden who might get to play a very important role if Obama is elected. Perhaps it was still somewhat reassuring that Biden made it clear that his role is going to be strictly advisory. Biden defended a more traditional interpretation of the constitutional role of the job that he is seeking. Ultimately he might turn out to be more in the mold of Al Gore than of Dick Cheney were he to get the job. Yet what candidates say in debates does not always come out in reality as advertised. After all, in a major crisis situation it is conceivable that Biden could take a more leading role than what even Obama is planning for him.

Both candidates perform well in the first debate

2008-09-27T14:01:00.004+03:00

John McCain changed his mind about the first debate, when Barack Obama wasn't ready to back down. So the debate was aired on schedule with both candidates participating in it. I think it was the best outcome for the University of Mississippi, for the viewers and for the candidates themselves. Both Obama and McCain appeared confident when speaking of issues where the other candidate is deemed to have the clearest weaknesses. Happily both of them did well enough when it came to their own areas of weakness. Many commentators think the debate was a draw with Obama winning on the economy and McCain winning on foreign policy. A CBS instant poll put Obama as the winner, which might be the result of McCain's condescending attitude putting some voters off. After all both candidates performed equally well and neither should have any reason to look down on the other one. McCain was of course trying to come across as the experienced statesman facing the upstart but Obama has proven in his primary campaign against Hillary Clinton that there is no reason for anyone to underestimate him.

When it comes to the substance of the debate, I tend to agree with the commentators who see it as a draw. After all, debates are all about expectations. There is a huge expectation on Obama to outperform his opponent in the series of debates, just as there was the expectation on McCain to shine on this one debate and especially the foreign policy bit. As Obama seemed to be sharper on the economy, an issue that is likely to dominate the three debates as a whole, he is on course to winning the debates when they are all done with. As McCain let his experience and track record on foreign policy show, he did not disappoint those who expected him to do well on that issue.

Always in debates the candidates tend to misrepresent the positions of their opponents. This debate seemed more cordial than when McCain and Romney fought it out in the Republican debates and the candidates yesterday seemed to be equally good at defending themselves. I think it was good that Obama mentioned Joe Biden when debating foreign policy, make no mistake about the Democratic candidate needing strong support from his running mate there. Obama knows quite a lot about foreign policy but it was obvious that he lacks much of the hands-on experience that McCain has. Experience usually counts a lot in practice when making foreign policy decisions. Joe Biden is very likely to provide the visions on how to deal with the toughest crisis situations early on if Obama wins. In this sense I think Obama made the right pick because having Biden around does increase the confidence on his foreign policy platform. Obama did a good job on foreign policy but it was clear that McCain took a leading role in the latter part of the debate and the Democratic nominee admitted on many counts that he agrees with his opponent's analysis of the world stage. The big disagreement was on Iraq but there was a lot of posturing on both sides. After all there is a likelihood that the United States will shift more of its focus toward Afghanistan and Pakistan next year regardless of who wins. Of course a deteriorating situation in Iraq might disallow such a move but in practice it is more likely that even Obama would have the situation on the ground dictate his timetable on withdrawal rather than the other way around. The candidates differ sharply when it comes to the judgment of George W. Bush during the past eight years but I'm not at all convinced that their plans for the future are that different from each other as they wish to let it be understood that they are.

McCain has some issues where he is strong on the economy. In his portrayal of himself as the ultimate spending hawk it was a clever move to point out that he has also been against defense spending when he has seen such spending not to have been the most cost effective. But ultimately Obama is more persuasive when it comes to an overall vision of the economy. McCain may have a very different ideology from Obama but his hands, just as Bush's hands right now, are very much tied by the crisis on Wall Street. The situation on the ground gives very much Obama the advantage just as a different situation would give McCain the advantage. The economy is the issue where the voters are most likely to be persuaded that the keys to the White House should be turned over from one party to the other. McCain is after all very critical of both George W. Bush and his own party. But as the economy is not his strongest point, it is very hard for him to maintain that he of all people is the one visionary who will drastically change course and come across as a different breed of Republican. It is much easier for Obama to portray McCain as less than an independent thinker on the economy compared to when the debate turns into foreign policy. McCain can't really disassociate himself from the economic policy of the Bush years as he has been too keen to have it both ways. He was very much the maverick and a strong critic of Bush seven or eight years ago but at least during the past four years he has had to come rather close to Bush in order to get the nomination of his party. While McCain did a good job in proving that he has the qualifications for the top job, he wasn't very convincing in his message that even he represents change on the economy. He has his strong points and on some of them he performed better than expected but my guess is that the shadow cast by the current impopularity of George W. Bush will come back to haunt him in the two remaining debates.

McCain wishes to postpone the first debate

2008-09-25T19:26:00.004+03:00

As people at the University of Mississippi are getting prepared for the first presidential debate on foreign policy, John McCain makes clear his wish that he thinks the debate should be postponed so that he and Obama could concentrate on tackling the economic crisis in the United States Senate. The situation is rather awkward and can only happen when both presidential candidates are trying to maintain their Senate careers while campaigning full-time. As Barack Obama wishes for the debate to go ahead as scheduled, there should be a debate. Before the debate goes ahead, both candidates get in any case to meet George W. Bush together and discuss with him the crisis package that the White House needs to get passed in the Senate.

The timing of the debate is not so good for John McCain. It is obvious that he would like to discuss foreign policy at a more opportune time when people are not totally focusing on the economy as they are now. After the war between Russia and Georgia could have been a good time for McCain to have a foreign policy debate. Now the viewers are most likely to look for any ways in which the foreign policy questions can be related to the current economic crisis. Foreign policy is simply a sideshow for the moment and only a major foreign policy crisis can change that before the election. Those crises that have occured so far such as the Bhutto assassination and the conflict between Russia and Georgia have led to a clear rise in support for McCain.

Right now Barack Obama is hanging on to a lead in the polls. The crisis that really has rocked Wall Street is a clear reason for the substantial increase in the support for the Democratic ticket. Historically this is no surprise as the Republicans tend to benefit when big business performs well. The worst moment in the history of Wall Street in 1929 led to the Great Depression and two decades of the White House being controlled by the Democratic Party. Eight years of Bill Clinton were also made possible by bad economic times. The unquestionable belief in a free market ideology that in many ways has been the hallmark of the McCain-Palin ticket is less likely to be shared by most Americans in times like this than it would be at any other time in history. But John McCain is also known as a maverick politician, his economic views in the past have not coincided with many of his current supply-side views. It can't be ruled out that he might modify some of his views during the course of the campaign. After all, in desperate times desperate measures are needed. Just listen to Bush and his Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson if there is any need to see how rhetoric on economic issues can change drastically in a couple of weeks. Many people even expect that to happen when the economy is stricken by a crisis.

Hopefully there will be a foreign policy debate. After all, foreign policy and economic policy are interrelated. McCain and Obama are supposed to give their all on both fronts at all times. Obviously running for president may be a superhuman undertaking, especially for members of the United States Senate when their workload is especially heavy. But elections have to go ahead as scheduled. We are not talking about a natural catastrophe or a terrorist strike that may completely change schedules. The candidates are supposed to manage their three debates and deal with the economic crisis in between those debates. It may be that my opinion is rather harsh on John McCain and his big gamble on trying to pose as someone who rather saves his country than runs for the highest office. It's just that I believe running for the highest office and dealing with the debates that are part of it is an extremely important business that should not be taken lightly of by either candidate. If Barack Obama succeeds in making sure that the debate goes ahead, he makes a service to all who have been desperately expecting some serious substance from this campaign. The foreign policy debate often tends to be the high point of substantial discussion in a presidential election in the United States.

Exciting weeks ahead

2008-09-21T14:43:00.002+03:00

At this point it is impossible to tell which candidate will be the next President of the United States. McCain got a huge boost from his pick of Sarah Palin, an effect that is mostly being undone by the economic crisis. Most of the blue states are expected to vote for Obama just as predictably as most of the red states are expected to vote for McCain. There is going to be a lot of focus on swing states and many voters in the purple states where it weighs evenly between Democrats and Republicans are likely to stay undecided for a while yet.

In the coming weeks a decision is going to be made by the American people. McCain and Obama are set to face each other in three debates. In early October Sarah Palin and Joe Biden will have their vice presidential debate. Next week the setting for the first presidential debate will be the campus of the University of Mississippi. Ole Miss was a key scene of the 1960s when the campus was forcefully racially integrated by federal troops. The McCain vs. Obama debate has an important symbolic significance in Mississippi, as it is intended to prove that much of the old racial tension has disappeared.

Heightened focus on the economy will most likely hurt McCain as he has been quite open about not being strong on that issue. The first debate, however, will be on foreign policy, an issue that should be one of his strong points. Even if Obama is somewhat of a favorite to win the debates, the first debate could turn out to be relatively even. It is also to be remembered that the candidate who is perceived to win the debates does not necessarily win the election.

McCain has been successful in his fundraising efforts in Texas. Republican supporters in the Lone Star State were relatively late in warming up to McCain but his major boost in fundraising there apparently took effect even before Sarah Palin was announced as his running mate. Even if McCain gets much more money from Texas than Obama, the Democrat is still doing quite well there given that it is a very Republican state. Even if fundraising does not always materialize as votes, expect McCain to win big in Texas just as surely as Obama is to win in states like New York and Illinois.

Palin reaches out to Clinton voters

2008-09-13T16:51:00.005+03:00

One of the decisive factors in determining whether John McCain's vice presidential pick was a stroke of genius or not is how well Sarah Palin actually manages to appeal to Hillary Clinton supporters. She is certainly trying, praising Clinton and telling reporters that she thinks Obama is regretting not picking Clinton. My immediate reaction to the Palin pick was that she will certainly appeal to many women who weren't going to vote Democrat in any case but the rise in McCain's poll numbers suggests that some Clinton voters may be toying with the idea of the McCain-Palin ticket because of the massive coverage the vice presidential pick has received. A part of the Clinton voters, male and female, were always not going to vote for Obama because of the bitterness of the daunting primary campaign that ended with the nomination of Obama. Some of them may consider voting Cynthia McKinney or Ralph Nader in protest and John McCain's appeal to conservative Democrats should never be underestimated.

Just how can the Palin effect change actual voting behavior? It is so often mentioned that vice presidential picks can always hurt but they never ultimately lead a candidate to victory if the candidate otherwise would have lost. But how to judge a pick as controversial as Palin? After all, the criticism that Palin has received has been as often off the mark as it has been overwhelming. This is something that people who dislike sexism react to, it may be that many of them ultimately will choose not to vote for the prolife Republican ticket but very many of them will give that ticket a second look because of the hysterical negative responses that the pick has generated in some quarters.

Palin has also received a torrent of positive publicity. While the criticism has been harsh and often personal, the fresh vice presidential candidate has also been praised by many. She is popular because she is different from older politicians, she is charismatic, has a compelling personality and delivers her message smoothly. Many of these same characteristics actually helped Obama to defeat Clinton, a candidate with a compelling record yet one who was judged by many to represent old-style politics. Palin's brashness and pizzazz may not be the weightiest reasons to vote for someone, especially when we are talking about the running mate, not the candidate. Still, the Palin phenomenon reminds of the weight that charisma has always had in politics, both in the United States and abroad. People like Theodore Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair inspire people even before they have any weighty merits because of the aura of natural leadership that they manage to radiate. McCain may still be in trouble if Obama manages to present his charisma in the right way but Palin's presence has stolen the limelight from the Democrats at a point in time when many thought that the Republicans were never going to dazzle during this campaign in any major way.

Sarah Palin certainly lacks foreign policy experience and the question of how the United States should respond to any future Russian aggression against Georgia if that country has attained NATO membership may have been a rather tough one for Palin to answer. But I don't think her response really was such an assertive gung-ho readiness to go to war because of Georgia as some people have interpreted it to be. After all she was referring to the nature of NATO. Now, she supports Georgia's membership at least at some point in the future, she was responding to a speculation about a future Russian aggression on the condition that Georgia already is a member then. I guess that's how defence alliances work. That's also how world wars have been started in past times. One country goes to war with another that has its territorial integrity guaranteed by a third. It was probably this fact that Palin was simply asserting.

McCain promises unity

2008-09-05T14:23:00.002+03:00

John McCain has a difficult task in proving that he is trying to unite the Republican Party and bring together the American people regardless of party at the same time. This is where Sarah Palin comes along as her job is to unite the party and keep the money flowing in promising a specifically Republican agenda to key donors. McCain proved with his speech that he is at his best when he makes promises to independent voters and distances himself from his party. He promises to cut both taxes and spending while keeping the American dream alive. He promises to restore integrity to government, giving an impression of an accountable White House if he wins. But is that really a promise that any winning candidate ever fully honors? McCain may have the best of intentions and a specific code of honor that sets himself apart from most of his colleagues but given how much time he has spent in Washington, D.C. it is unthinkable that he really believes all his promises can be delivered upon.

The change that American voters crave has to do with quitting the squabbling and trying to find the common interest across party lines. This is something that both Obama and McCain recognize and they are trying to show good example. They may have many political consultants planning dirty tricks out there but as persons both of them have an aura of integrity seldom seen in the politics of a major world power. One of McCain's major problems is that the voters are not satisfied with the record of George W. Bush and this includes many Republican voters. This is why he went to great lengths in his speech in avoiding to utter the actual name of the current occupant of the White House so that it might not bring bad karma to his campaign.

George W. Bush promised to be a "uniter" eight years ago. He had a demonstrable record of bipartisanship as Governor of Texas and he was going to change the way things are done in the nation's capital. Not a trace of that was shown in his first months in office, only the tragedy of 9-11 could bring an atmosphere of bipartisanship during the Bush years and it lasted only so long as the initial shock of the attacks had its full force in uniting the American people. John McCain's record is probably not the decisive factor in assessing how he will act if elected. Very much is made of how he has voted in the United States Senate but McCain has a long record spanning more than this decade and he has repositioned himself once in a while. The only sure thing about McCain is that he is ready to reassess his positions if he is convinced that he is wrong on some issue. Which way he will tilt in the future is impossible to tell. This is not really about dramatic flip-flopping, it is about the agony of a moderate politician trying to choose sides in a polarized politics. A moderate McCain is at heart, at least in some issues, even if he has sided with Bush in most cases in the Senate. Yet every time he hasn't sided with Bush his opinion has usually been of significance.

At the end of the day neither McCain nor Obama promises too much. The one exception may be energy independence which is something neither of them can afford not to promise. It is not very clear to me how McCain's and Obama's plans to attain energy independence really differ from each other in a drastic way. Neither of them can probably attain that goal. Obama has set his goal to be achieved in nine years' time, fully knowing that the maximum time he may have as President of the United States is eight years. McCain, who many believe would be in office for only four years, is not very likely to be held accountable for breaking that promise as his timetable is not clear. Much could happen in the United States after this election but it is too early to tell how big the difference between the two candidates is. At least both McCain and Obama are especially fond of saying that they feel a stronger affinity to the American people as a whole than what they feel to their respective parties. Whoever wins, the winners may then unite in chanting the name of the country: "USA, USA, USA!"

Palin attacks Obama

2008-09-04T19:32:00.002+03:00

Sarah Palin has a much easier task than Joe Biden to take the role of attack dog in this year's presidential election. John McCain's running mate is not friends with the people who she is running against, in fact they might not have had much of a clue who she was before McCain picked her. In politics when people use something as a weapon against you, it often happens that a politician's response is to use the same thing as a weapon against an opponent. Palin has had to hear ad nauseam that she lacks experience so she attacked Barack Obama for lack of experience. Palin compared her record as the mayor of a small town in Alaska to Obama's record as community organizer. Obama has always had to work with other people who have more power than him, in that position, in the Illinois Senate and in the United States Senate. Palin touts her credentials as the one who has called the shots, first as mayor and then as Governor of Alaska. It's just ironic that Palin is running for the number two spot; her job will not be to call the shots if McCain wins. Obama in his turn might be able to get the most powerful job in the world.

Palin got mixed reactions to her appearance at the Republican National Convention. This was to be expected as her ideological right-wing positions are bound to cause some controversy. Palin of course proudly stood up for "guns and religion" in her speech. Her hatchet job against Obama was classic stuff from a vice presidential running mate. Dick Cheney was no less nasty against John Kerry four years ago. There is no reason why Palin should not have delivered a hard-hitting speech as she was picked to give the audience some red meat. Had McCain picked a different type of running mate such as Kay Bailey Hutchison or even Carly Fiorina, the expectations would have been different. But Palin was picked to be McCain's attack dog just as Cheney was Bush's in 2000 and again in 2004. Some people, however, get especially irritated when a woman acts nasty and tough. I'm not saying that Dick Cheney did not irritate a lot of people from the ideologically opposite end of the spectrum. It was just easier for many to let it pass what he said, maybe because he is a man and maybe because he had a wealth of experience from the world of politics and indeed from world politics compared to Palin.

The teenage pregnancy of Sarah Palin's daughter Bristol has continued to raise discussion. It is important to note that Bristol Palin is not a single mother, her boyfriend appeared at the Republican National Convention with a tattoo spelling "Bristol" to show off his commitment and the young couple are planning to get married, at least according to Sarah Palin. Boston Herald even reported of a single mother who became convinced to vote for McCain because of the attacks that Palin has had to endure because of her daughter's pregnancy. This is all very interesting because Dan Quayle attacked single mothers in 1992, setting the tune for the view of the Republican right-wing on unwed motherhood, telling that the tv series Murphy Brown was irresponsibly setting a bad example for Americans with its portrayal of single motherhood. If Dan Quayle was no favorite of single mothers, Sarah Palin who in many ways shares his values might just become one, not because of what Palin herself has said or done but because of the vehemency of those who have attacked her because of her daughter.

Sarah Palin is a different vice presidential candidate compared to what most pundits expected. All those who had prepared themselves for one of McCain's primary opponents were proven wrong. The same goes for those who thought McCain would pick a man or an experienced one at that. Many of those who expected a woman expected a less strident and more experienced politician. She certainly represents those religious values that many felt McCain's running mate had to represent to balance the ticket but she is also breaking new ground as a new kind of leader of religious right-wingers. Most of all what was a surprise was McCain's boldness in picking such a young running mate. The Republicans were not at all intimidated by Obama's great appeal young voters, going for a running mate who is ready to compete for the votes of first-time voters.

President Bush appears via satellite link

2008-09-03T15:32:00.002+03:00

George W. Bush delivered a short speech to the Republican National Convention via satellite link, as requested by the McCain campaign. Because of Hurricane Gustav, there was no Dick Cheney speech at all. In this way McCain has minimized Bush's impact and yet all the Bush supporters have been able to hear the commander-in-chief tell them that McCain is ready to take over. Laura Bush, more popular than her husband, appeared in person and introduced her husband who appeared via the satellite link. George W. Bush pushed the buttons that McCain expected him to push, emphasizing the experience, foreign policy competence and the moving life story of the Republican candidate. It is somewhat ironic given Bush's own lack of foreign policy experience when he was running in 2000.

McCain was then lavishly praised by his friend and former United States Senate colleague Fred Thompson who at one point was many people's favorite for the Republican nomination this year. Bush praising McCain is never going to be huge hit given the past enmity between the two of them. Thompson, on the other hand, is a person whose praise for McCain appears to be genuine. Independent Democrat Joe Lieberman is one of McCain's biggest fans. For the McCain camp it was probably more important to have Lieberman attack Obama on voting against funding for the troops in Iraq than it was to hear Lieberman praising McCain. Interestingly enough, Lieberman's own voting record does not prove a hundred percent support of every war move by Bush even if he has been one of the most prominent supporters of the Bush foreign policy. Still, the contrast between Lieberman and Obama remains clear. When the War in Iraq started, Obama appeared at an antiwar rally, while Lieberman was the most prominent Democrat to give his full support for the war from the beginning and even after that, even if it meant that he fell out with his party later on.

President Bush praised how principled McCain's running mate Sarah Palin is. This is very interesting given that Palin has been a whistleblower among the Republicans in Alaska. The current political leadership in Washington, D.C. is certainly not one that many people would expect to endorse whistleblowers in their campaigns for high positions. Usually maverick politicians who take on the establishment end up in big trouble with the powers that be. Some of the unease for Palin may stem from this issue. It is hard to believe that Bush really would have been comfortable with people making noise everytime someone around him was benefiting from their connections to big oil. Palin, after all, did just that in the smaller context of Alaska. But Bush's support for Palin may be more heartfelt than for McCain. After all, Palin is promoting much of Bush's agenda on social issues.

Sarah Palin is the one speaker that everyone is expecting to speak to the Republican National Convention. Ron Nehring, who leads the Republicans in California, said that video footage of Palin at a firing range is really helping the pro-gun cause. So Palin is already making people in many conservative lobby groups fired up for this race. It's certainly not just the avid hunters and other pro-gun people. Perhaps many of the Republican activists thought that they were not going to get a candidate on their ticket who will cause real excitement when it comes to wedge issues. Palin is energizing the conservative base in exactly the way McCain intended her to. But she still has to sell herself to mainstream voters. In her big speech, Palin has to reach out to many kinds of people. She is big in Alaska but it remains to be seen whether the broader US audience will receive her as a polarizing figure or as a sunny optimist in the mold of Ronald Reagan.

Gustav changes Republican schedules

2008-09-01T17:29:00.002+03:00

Tonight, George W. Bush, Laura Bush and Dick Cheney were all supposed to address the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minnesota. Because of Hurricane Gustav, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney will not be traveling to St. Paul. Laura Bush is going to spend the day meeting delegates informally. While Cheney will be off to a foreign trip tomorrow, George W. Bush is expected to address the convention through videolink at some point. In any case, the storm gives John McCain a golden opportunity to downscale the Bush-Cheney element at his convention as much as he can.

As Gustav puts most Americans to a rather somber mood, there is no need for McCain to try to match the show that Obama pulled off in Denver. Republican consultant Alex Castellanos has said that some of the effects of the storm are going to be positive from McCain's point of view. McCain doesn't have to highlight his Republican credentials now as he can focus on the patriotism bit. Bush will be focusing on the hurricane and at least he won't be attending the convention. Nobody will be asking for McCain to match the sheer scale of the event that Obama staged for the final night of the Democratic National Convention.

Rudy Giuliani is expected to be the keynote speaker. Perhaps nothing much will happen at the convention until Giuliani's speech. People like Rudy Giuliani and Joe Lieberman are much more likely to excite independent voters than the current occupants of the White House. What McCain really needs now is to focus on the independents. As far as Republicans go, he seems to have wrapped it all up by his pick of Sarah Palin as his running mate. "They're a perfect match", said Cindy McCain about the McCain-Palin ticket.

All eyes will be on Sarah Palin at the Republican National Convention. Many commentators have criticized the choice, citing her lack of experience. But that may be exactly why McCain picked her. Only someone will little or no experience can be a truly credible advocate of change in the current political climate in America. All the noise about Palin's lack of experience is going to give more room to the issue of experience itself. That is exactly what McCain wants as he has more experience than Obama. After all, both Richard Nixon and George H.W. Bush got elected in spite of second-rate running mates. Sarah Palin looks much more secure in her role than either Agnew or Quayle ever did. And few Americans will ultimately decide their vote based on the running mate. But religious donors are already pouring cash into McCain's coffers. Palin's opposition to abortion and gay marriage coupled with her support of teaching creationism has had exactly the effect McCain hoped for on those Republicans who were the most skeptical about his candidacy.

Sarah Palin is a bold pick

2008-08-30T13:11:00.003+03:00

John McCain made a bold move in picking Sarah Palin as his running mate. Now the Republicans have two candidates from the American West who tout the ideology of rugged indvidualism, in tune with the cultural heritage of their states, Arizona and Alaska. Still there is no reason to expect a clean sweep of the West Coast for the Republicans as California, Washington and Oregon stand for very different values and are likely to go for Obama. The Hawaiian-born Obama is also sure to carry the Aloha State without any trouble. Interestingly enough, one of the key questions that arises with the entrance of the Governor of Alaska is how well she will do with working class voters in Ohio? The Buckeye State is absolutely crucial to McCain's strategy and Palin with her style and background might very well to appeal to the Bush supporters in Ohio.

It was almost inevitable that John McCain would pick a religious conservative as his running mate. Moderate or centrist Republicans always pick a right-wing running mate and Sarah Palin fits in with her worldview very well with such traditional choices as Richard Nixon's running mate Spiro Agnew and George H.W. Bush's running mate Dan Quayle. Both of them actually appeared on classic winning tickets, even if they are not among the favorites of vice presidential historians. Compared to those two historic precedents Sarah Palin appears very smart, smooth and appealing. The problem with Republican right-wingers has sometimes been the lack of morals even if very high morals have been professed, such as in the case of the ultimately disgraced Agnew. Richard Nixon, who had been a right-wing running mate to the centrist Eisenhower in the 1950s, obviously had moved to a centrist direction himself when he got to the White House. Because of the Watergate scandal Republicans have actually had a reason to be especially suspicious of centrists within their party when it comes to ethical problems.

Sarah Palin has a solid background in fighting corruption within her own party in her home state of Alaska. As McCain has always been loud in denouncing corruption, the McCain-Palin ticket will finally get such a maverick stamp that will both be acceptable to the Republican grassroots and to many mainstream voters. While politics in Alaska has been very much tarnished by corruption in the past years, Palin has made her mark as the clean one who is ready to give in her fellow Republicans for getting too closely tied up by the big oil companies.

Sarah Palin is in many ways the opposite of Dick Cheney who has been the mysterious insider, schemer and wheeler-dealer supremo of the Bush years. But she shares many things with Cheney, a passion for the outdoors and for hunting, an outspoken advocacy of the anti-abortion cause and a certain toughness often associated with politicians hailing from the American West. Palin was born in Sandpoint, Idaho and her rise in the politics of Alaska has been meteoric over the past few years. One reason why her approval ratings are sky high might be her giving birth to a baby boy with the Down syndrome while in office.

The logic behind the choice of Palin is clear. McCain's dream running mate needed executive experience, which means he was not as likely to pick one of his colleagues in the United States Senate as Barack Obama was. McCain also needed someone who could appeal both to the supporters of Mike Huckabee and those of Mitt Romney. Huckabee actually went to great lengths to prevent Romney from getting the number two slot on the ticket and he must be extremely pleased by the choice of Palin. Probably no other person can combine those values of Huckabee and Romney that best appeal to the Republican grassroots as well as Palin. McCain would have missed an opportunity to make history had he not picked a woman. He had many other women to choose from but only Sarah Palin could enthuse the activists of the conservative movement with her clearcut ideological positions.

McCain ready to announce running mate

2008-08-29T12:43:00.002+03:00

Now that the Democratic National Convention is over, John McCain is ready to grasp the headlines. Barack Obama got his boost from a well-directed show where he himself got to say the last word. The convention in Denver will probably be remembered for two things: Obama fever and the professionalism of the Clintons in coming out strongly for the candidate that they certainly would not have wished to see topping the ticket. How can John McCain respond to Obama's successful convention week? Minnesota's Twin Cities are ready for the Republican National Convention and it is very much up to McCain to try to top what the Democrats did in Denver.

While there was a big reason why Obama needed both the Clintons in visible roles, there is no need for McCain to parade the Bushes or the Cheneys any more than he has to. As hard as it is for many Republicans to accept, what McCain really needs is to showcase Joe Lieberman as the best proof of his maverick credentials. Romney supporters used McCain-Lieberman as an insult during the primary campaign, trying to instill fear that McCain might pick his colleague from Connecticut as his running mate. Interestingly enough, McCain-Lieberman could prove to be a very tough ticket, just as Kerry-McCain would have been four years ago. McCain-Romney sounds a little bit like Kerry-Edwards to me. McCain obviously didn't want to be a part of a bipartisan ticket in 2004, as he wanted to be the Republican nominee this year but there is no way that Joe Lieberman will be the Democratic nominee in 2012. If he's ever to appear on a national ticket again, it has to be as McCain's running mate.

Who McCain has picked is still a well-kept secret. He has had many high profile women to choose from and he probably commits a blunder if he doesn't pick one of them. Sarah Palin would be brash, appeal to conservatives and even suggest that McCain stands for some kind of change. As Joe Biden is an insider, Sarah Palin is as much of an outsider. The idea of a maverick candidate and an outsider running mate could actually work. Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman would bring professionalism to the ticket and either of them would make McCain look much less political, which would be a plus. If I were in McCain's shoes, I would pick Kay Bailey Hutchison because no other running mate would send as powerful a message to Hillary Clinton supporters that the Republicans really can offer some kind of a substitute to her. While Palin would certainly appeal to conservatives, Hutchison might actually appeal to Clinton supporters.

I think McCain will pick a man and most likely his pick will be Mitt Romney. After all, Obama probably picked Joe Biden for his CV and Romney would match that with what he has accomplished so far and he is one of the few options that could go toe to toe with Biden in the vice presidential debate. If McCain picks Romney, his biggest goal is to heal the rifts from the primary campaign with that pick. While it's impossible to know what McCain is thinking, he might have made his final choice between Romney and Lieberman. Romney would be there to unite the party, while Lieberman would be there to appeal to independent voters. Romney's name has been the most often mentioned in speculations but even if McCain were to pick him he would make a gamble. Appealing to Clinton voters would probably be more McCain's own job in that situation than Romney's. McCain will tell us who it is soon enough. Tom Ridge is one of the people appearing with him tomorrow but that would be a huge surprise if it were as the new running mate.

Bill and Hillary Clinton dominate convention coverage

2008-08-28T17:28:00.005+03:00

Barack Obama and Joe Biden were supposed to be the stars of the Democratic National Convention. Mark Warner's job as keynote speaker was to provide an exciting, fresh face to symbolize the drive toward more conciliatory politics that the Obama campaign is asking for. Somehow much of the news coverage is about two rather polarizing figures, Bill and Hillary Clinton. Obama got nominated partly thanks to a big anti-Clinton vote in the primaries. American politics has been for such a long time about the Clinton and the Bush clans that one may be forgiven for thinking that this year's conventions would give the Clintons and the Bushes only minor roles. Democrats in Denver, at least up until Barack Obama's appareance, seemed to be congregated to a Clinton Convention. And even if John McCain is no close friend of the Bushes, George W. and Laura Bush are expected to have a central role at the Republican National Convention due after the Democrats are finished with theirs.

The reason why the Clintons got such a central role is Obama's insecurity about how to get the Clinton vote. Apparently he thinks he can solve this problem by giving Hillary and Bill Clinton maximum exposure and allowing them to tell their supporters in the most eloquent way possible that they want Obama to win. That the Clintons did their part was no gamble. They are very strong speakers and dominating a convention comes naturally to them. The events in Denver proved that the party is still in many ways theirs, Obama has it only on loan and if he loses in November, Hillary Clinton will be the front runner for the 2012 nomination after that. Yet if Obama wins, the party will fall into his hands and to really get control over day-to-day politics the experienced and influential Joe Biden is the ideal ally for him. Many of his other options would have been too lightweight to impress people like the Clintons and there would have been no guarantees that Hillary Clinton herself would have been loyal in a vice presidential role.

The Clintons could not help John Kerry to win but perhaps their support is more important to Barack Obama simply because of all the votes that Hillary Clinton garnered in the primaries. If the Clintons did their part in making it clear that the party stands united behind Obama, it is up to their grassroots supporters to actually react to that message positively. It is clear that some Clinton supporters are way too embittered and will support John McCain. It may not be that there will be enough of them to decide the election in the Republicans' favor. After all there are no major differences in key issues between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Still this election could prove to be extremely close, it could shift either way, and those Clinton voters who are not thrilled about Obama are one key factor in the equation.

Keynote speaker Mark Warner was upstaged by Hillary Clinton. He sort of asked for it in his humble speech, telling how big shoes he had to fill as Governor of Virginia given that Thomas Jefferson had held the same job once and underlining his difficulty to deliver the keynote address after having been preceded by Barack Obama in 2004 and indeed having to do it the same day that Hillary Clinton spoke to the crowd in Denver. Perhaps this approach might help Warner to defeat Jim Gilmore in November but he did not get the kind of instant reaction that Obama got in 2004. Yet perhaps this doesn't have to hurt Obama. It was hurtful to John Kerry that many remembered Obama's speech in 2004 better than Kerry's own speech. Warner's low-key approach might pave the way in a natural way for the real star occasion, Obama delivering his own speech to a huge stadium. Joe Biden seems also to be less aggressive than Dick Cheney was against John Kerry in 2004. Yes, Biden is the attack dog in this ticket but his respect for John McCain certainly dictates that he does not present his criticism too harshly. His attacks were more directed against Bush than against McCain personally. While Biden did his job as expected, Bill Clinton certainly managed to grasp the headlines once more.

Democrats convene in Denver

2008-08-26T13:26:00.005+03:00

The Democratic National Convention kicked off yesterday in Denver, Colorado. Speaker Nancy Pelosi addressed the crowd telling that "this convention will be the greenest, most sustainable, most successful political convention in history". Although the intent is no doubt sincere, Pelosi's words sound to me almost as if she was addressing the opening ceremony of the Olympics. It is hard to imagine the Olympics as the greenest way of practicing sports, yet Pelosi's words remind me of the laudable environmental goals of the Sydney Olympics, a reason why Beijing did not get to host the 2000 Olympics. Somehow it is equally hard to see gigantic conventions as especially green or sustainable political events. As they are not, it may be nonetheless important to try to arrange these huge events in a more sustainable way.

Senator Ted Kennedy took the stage after a video tribute to himself and repeated his endorsement of Obama. Moderate Republican Jim Leach of Iowa lost a re-election bid to the House of Representatives two years ago. He is supporting Obama and was introduced to the crowd by Tom Harkin as a proof that the Democratic campaign is trying to bridge the red-blue divide in American politics. In 2004 the incumbent United States Senator Zell Miller, Democrat from Georgia, delivered the keynote speech at the Republican National Convention. Even if Obama is gaining support from some notable Republicans such as Leach and Lincoln Chafee who lost his seat in the United States Senate two years ago, he is not supported by Republicans currently in high positions. Interestingly enough some of these Republicans now supporting Obama lost their seats because their voters wished to punish George W. Bush by giving congressional control to Democrats.

As the Obama campaign wishes to promote a spirit of bipartisanship, the choice of keynote speaker has gone to a politician who takes especial pride in appearing as a moderate and a centrist. Mark Warner is the former Governor of Virginia who is running for the United States Senate this year, aiming to succeed moderate Republican John Warner. Four years ago the Democratic keynote speaker was Barack Obama himself who gave one of his best speeches and went on to win a Senate seat previously held by a Republican in a landslide. Mark Warner is not going to be hard on Republicans as his job is further to illustrate the willingness of the Obama campaign to unite the country.

Wednesday evening it is time for the convention speech of vice presidential candidate Joe Biden. It could be the biggest speech of Biden's career. If someone will deliver a partisan hatchet job it may very well be Biden, as that is what running mates often do at such events. Biden will still have to do it in a civil manner as he is a longtime friend of the Republican candidate John McCain. Biden, who was born in Pennsylvania, charmed a 59-year-old female delegate by a hand kiss after having learned that she was from the Keystone State. As the Democratic ticket is topped by two members of the United States Senate, further displays of bipartisanship and chivalry are to be expected, especially as they are running against one of their distinguished colleagues. This mood may either be reinforced or completely changed depending on who John McCain's running mate will be. Senators like Kay Bailey Hutchison or Lindsey Graham are very unlikely to deliver nasty hatchet jobs. Some of the other thinkable Republican running mates might give a very different impression, giving new input to the word axeman or -woman.

Michelle Obama did her part to undo the damage that the impression of her as critical to her country has caused among some red state voters. She professed her love of country, gave a values-laden speech and even promoted Barack Obama as the poster boy for American values. She also praised Hillary Clinton who has an opportunity today to upstage the keynote speaker Mark Warner. The Republicans are trying to keep as visible as possible during this week of the Democratic National Convention. Usually the other party has not bothered to do much of an offensive during the convention week of their rivals. In an ingenious ploy to grab attention, a Republican advertisement features footage from the Democratic debates with Hillary Clinton attacking Obama saying: "Senator McCain will bring a lifetime of experience to the campaign. I will bring a lifetime of experience." This is exactly why Obama brought Joe Biden on board, to counter the accusations that the Democratic ticket lacks experience this year.

Amen to Joe Biden

2008-08-23T14:41:00.004+03:00

"I want to say amen to Joe Biden because he's 100% right" is one of the more memorable lines uttered by Hillary Clinton in a debate organized by the AFL-CIO during the early Democratic primary season. This line was then used by Biden in his "Joe is right" commercials. Biden was heavily praised by the other Democratic contenders for his strong debating skills and his command of the issues. The exception was Dennis Kucinich who didn't tend to agree with Biden. In any case, the voters in Iowa weren't equally impressed and Biden had to bow out of the race very early on. Compared with his troubled 1988 run for the presidency he still made a good effort as many people saw in him a natural Secretary of State in case the Democrats win in November. As far as vice presidential ambitions were concerned, Biden was quick to say that he would not want to be Hillary Clinton's running mate given Bill Clinton's central role in such a race. This may already have been a hint that Biden would welcome the opportunity to be Barack Obama's running mate, after all the opportunity for him to be a strong vice president is there if Obama gets elected.

"Amen to Joe Biden" is actually the title of a blog entry by Christian Broadcasting Network's senior national correspondent David Brody more than a year ago. The CBN pundit was responding to Biden's remarks that Democrats should take the religious vote more seriously. Now that Obama announced Biden as his running mate, Brody was rather full of praise for Biden even if he, like other pundits, noted that the Senator from Delaware is sometimes prone to gaffes. In 1988 Biden quoted Neil Kinnock in a speech without attributing the quote to its originator. This was the undoing of his first presidential campaign. The second time his wording when praising Obama as the first mainstream African American candidate was not seen as very politically correct. But Biden has a great touch with working class voters and that is why Obama sees in him such an asset in swing states.

Senator Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. is the Democratic vice presidential candidate in this year's election. The Obama campaign communicated the choice of Biden by sending thousands of text messages to supporters and by issuing a statement at the campaign website. It is easy to concur with those pundits who see Biden as an excellent choice. Obama was facing trouble with almost every other option he had. Biden will obviously prove to be a costly choice if he blunders in his choice of words big time before November but if he doesn't he is also at his best a very articulate politician who can formulate himself clearly in a way that regular voters can relate to.

Biden was not chosen because he will deliver his home state of Delaware any more than Dick Cheney was the decisive factor behind easy Bush victories in Wyoming. Delaware is safely in the Obama column but Biden is expected to appeal to working class voters in states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia, Michigan and Minnesota. If he proves to be a hit in those states, he will be very valuable in November. The main reason for Obama to pick Biden, however, was his foreign policy gravitas. Biden is the perfect person for Obama to have around on day one if elected. He will help in dealing with world leaders and he will help in getting legislation passed through Congress. Before the election he will alleviate many voters' fears about Obama's lack of experience. Now it will be very interesting to see who McCain will pick as his running mate. He has plenty of options and he will now have to think about a suitable counterweight to Joe Biden.

Can Jerome Corsi swiftboat Obama?

2008-08-16T16:18:00.004+03:00

Jerome Corsi is back with a vengeance. He is the co-author of the anti-Kerry smear book Unfit for Command that was such a great success that the term swiftboating originates from the effects of that attack book. Corsi has no military background himself but he wrote the book in co-operation with the so-called Swift Boat Veterans. The idea was ingenuous, to take the one strongest point in Kerry's biography and claim everything that was opposite to Kerry's record. Since Kerry thought his record speaks for itself, the book's claims weren't even countered. Corsi's fame as a conservative pundit grew thanks to the book's success. Swiftboating has often been seen as a classic Karl Rove tactic but Corsi himself isn't even a Republican and he also harbors conspiracy theories about George W. Bush having to do with a future North American Union that would in Corsi's view spell the end of US independence.

Corsi is now in his early sixties and his new book The Obama Nation has hit the number one on the New York Times bestseller list. It is hard to imagine someone like Corsi in John McCain's camp. The book may indeed mostly gain McCain as Corsi states stopping Obama as his main goal. Curiously Corsi has still endorsed Constitution Party candidate Chuck Baldwin after deciding against running for the presidency himself. Corsi's title is a wordplay on the word "abomination", which is apparently how certain white nationalists see the idea of a biracial person in the Oval Office. Corsi himself claims that Obama wishes to wash all his white blood off of him so as to appear all black. It is rather curious that a book like Corsi's would be such a bestseller but the explanation lies in his heightened pundit status after having swiftboated Kerry.

When a journalist asked John McCain what he thinks about Corsi's book, the Republican nominee apparently replied: "Gotta keep your sense of humor". McCain campaign spokeswoman Brooke Buchanan was quick to issue a statement that the candidate had misheard the question and thought he was talking about a tv ad. The situation is rather problematic for McCain given Corsi's attachment to some of the same Vietnam veterans who distorted McCain's own military record in the 2000 campaign, helping George W. Bush to victory in the Republican primaries. McCain condemned the swiftboating tactics very resoundingly in the 2004 campaign. He appeared to be rather close to Kerry then, even if he campaigned strongly for Bush. Now he himself stands to gain from smear tactics. Corsi is known for his hard-hitting style that is a long way from the humor of the attack ads that McCain himself has aired, including the well-known Paris Hilton ad. The McCain campaign is certainly more aggressive now than before but Corsi is a very divisive figure who operates independently from the campaign, trying to keep his own profile as high as possible. Even if Corsi is willing to do anything it takes to destroy Obama, it is had to imagine him being happy about a McCain victory in any way.

Corsi is a regular contributor at WorldNet Daily. He is especially well known for his inflammatory remarks about Islam. He is a nativist, isolationist and certainly does not shy away from using the race card. While Constitution Party is not looking to succeed in the election, the party's best known member has managed to grab the headlines in a big way. So far Barack Obama has defined his own story, not least thanks to the huge success of his two books. Corsi is now leading the counterattack, reading Obama's life story in exactly the opposite way. Everything that Obama's supporters see as signs of greatness and promise is seen by Corsi as a threat. This is no surprise as an Obama victory would certainly mean defeat to many of those policies that Corsi himself supports.

John Edwards admits to having had an affair

2008-08-10T13:59:00.002+03:00

One of the possibilities that Barack Obama had when picking a running mate was choosing John Edwards. After all, he is rather popular and has already gone through the experience of being a running mate on a moderately successful, yet losing ticket against an incumbent. Now that Edwards has admitted to having had an extramarital affair his prospects of appearing on the Democratic ticket are close to zero. Had he admitted to the affair during his presidential campaign, he would not necessarily even have damaged his prospects of winning the nomination. An old affair might not impede Edwards's prospects of the vice presidency. But an ongoing scandal in a situation where Obama can pick and choose among many candidates is a sure thing to put Edwards out of consideration. After all, Edwards admitted to the affair only now and lied about it, apparently with the support of his wife who didn't want their private life public, when he still had the White House as his number one goal.

In some sense the Edwards story was too good to be true. He was the loving husband who agreed to once more run for the presidency to satisfy the need of his cancer-stricken wife for both of them to do something of great public significance. That future might now, as in the Eliot Spitzer case, be more likely to be in philantrophy than in politics. John Edwards has admitted to having had an affair with Rielle Hunter who did documentary filming for his presidential campaign back in 2006. Hunter is saying that she does not want any publicity because of Edwards as she is not herself running for public office. In any case she is also getting her share of tabloid publicity in a situation where Edwards is no longer a candidate in the ongoing election.

The significance of the affair is still great because Edwards is not currently holding political office. As an incumbent he would probably not have to resign, as his circumstances are after all very different from those of Eliot Spitzer. Still this is to be interpreted as the fall from grace of another politician who was the poster boy for family values. The consequences are great, not only because Edwards will not get the vice presidential nomination but because his is now unlikely to get other things that could really have been coming his way. His chances of making a key appearance at the Democratic National Convention disappeared in one fell swoop. If Edwards was likely to get a cabinet post in case Obama wins the election, this might very well mean the end of even those hopes in the short term, meaning the first cabinet that is to be sworn in next January. What is more troubling is that the extramarital affair of John Edwards means that his pet cause, that of reducing poverty in America, is going to get less publicity, at least in the short term. Edwards is after all a powerful advocate of that cause, a telegenic person who is good at capturing the attention of the media.

Should an issue like this really grab headlines and possibly alter the choice of which politicians get to deliver the key speeches at major political conventions? If John Edwards was forgiven by his wife, why should Barack Obama or the media punish him? The answer to these questions in many people's minds is that it is not about the sex, it is about lying. Edwards first said he had not had an affair when he had had one and he went on promoting family values like before. But what values should he have promoted? There are many ways to promote family values and I'm not at all sure that Edwards's conduct is in an equally blatant contradiction to his actions as a politician as in the case of Eliot Spitzer. When Edwards lied about sex, he did it primarily to promote his career but he was also in a way trying to protect both his wife and his former mistress, neither of whom wanted this to be made public.

Mitt Romney's vice presidential prospects

2008-07-31T19:17:00.003+03:00

Mitt Romney is probably the most accomplished candidate John McCain could pick as his vice presidential running mate. He is eloquent, well connected with the Republican establishment and has a strong resumé as a business leader and as Governor of Massachusetts. While the expectations of an Obama-Clinton unity ticket have been going down lately, the buzz about a Republican McCain-Romney unity ticket is only increasing. Being male might help Romney, not necessarily in getting the nomination but in getting more than his fair share of the vice presidential buzz from political journalists. So many pundits expect the Republicans to nominate a straight white male that Romney is increasingly looking like hands down the most plausible option for that type of vice presidential candidate. His religious affiliation with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints still makes him a daring, exotic and diverse choice.

McCain could probably grab more positive headlines by picking Sarah Palin, Carly Fiorina or Bobby Jindal. But in Romney he could pick an insider who has a mercurial quality of presenting himself as many things to many people. His effort certainly fell short against McCain in the primaries and his critics think he is a somewhat insincere conservative standard bearer. The idea that Romney could get well along with McCain does not look probable at all. But he could pull off an act of doing that in order to getting a shot at being a heartbeat away from the big prize. After all, win or lose, Republican unity now could help the party in future elections. Romney says he is not planning to run for the vice presidency but it is obvious that neither he nor any other VP hopeful can make such plans. It is totally up to McCain to make the calculus of who hurts him the least and who brings the most to the ticket.

The number one reason to bring Romney on board would be McCain's lack of interest in economic policy. The Republicans don't look good on that count at all this year. If Romney does not look credible as an ideologue, he is still the managerial type who is ready to debate economic facts and figures with anyone. McCain certainly has his pick of other capitalists such as Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina but Romney has also the political experience. As a religious figure Romney is a very prominent member of his church and no one questions his authenticity as a Latter Day Saint. This issue does not go well with those Evangelicals who are bigoted toward Mormonism but the tolerance toward Romney as the running mate could be greater than it was when he was running for the presidency. This is the presidential election year when Americans are getting rid of their prejudices and Romney's presence on the ticket would underline that trend even if he is the most likely Republican straight white male to receive the vice presidential nod.

How likely is it that Romney will be picked by McCain? Only McCain knows the answer. At least he seems to be better at keeping his doubts about Romney a secret than Obama is when it comes to his doubts about Hillary Clinton with Bill Clinton as a prospective vice presidential spouse. McCain wishes to project himself as the Ronald Reagan of 2008. The Gipper was sure to go for a unity ticket. There was no love lost between him and running mate George H.W. Bush who proved to fit the bill very well. Romney in 2008 would be a very similar choice as the elder Bush was in 1980 and in 1984. That is a capable, experienced politician willing to shift his positions who does not naturally fit in with the candidate yet complements the candidate's lacks. There is even wild speculation about Romney being able to deliver Massachusetts if he is picked. I don't take those calculations too seriously, even if Romney on the ticket might somewhat increase McCain's chances in Massachusetts. The Bay State should still go for Obama unless anything drastic happens.

Obama in Europe

2008-07-24T18:47:00.002+03:00

Senator Barack Obama is visiting major European countries in the part of the election season where he is likely to receive one of his most enthusiastic welcomes anywhere. His problem is that he is not, at least yet, President of the United States and European citizens are not voting in the US elections. Too much enthusiasm for him in Europe might dampen the enthusiasm of American voters who could assume that an Obama victory is more in Europe's than in America's interests. One reminder of Obama's candidate status is that he is not allowed to speak at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin which is the scene of John F. Kennedy's and Ronald Reagan's memorable presidential speeches. Obama's venue is very close to the gate but to get the gate itself as a backdrop for his speech he has to be in higher office than he is currently holding.

Although Obama's visit to Europe is highly publicized and can't really end up as anything else but a success, the Democratic candidate does not visit the EU capital Brussels. This could be interpreted so that Obama sees more weight in bilateral relations with the big European countries than in the US-EU relations themselves. If Obama gets elected, he'll have plenty of time to visit Brussels and any other European capital that is not on his list right now. The Obama candidacy is viewed very favorably by European politicians of all political persuasions and many of them are sure to take notes of his speaking style in order to incorporate some of his dazzle to their own campaigns.

Just as important as visiting European capitals such as London and Berlin is Obama's visit to Israel earlier this week. The US audience is probably paying even more attention to that visit. Much has been made of his remarks to AIPAC about Jerusalem as Israel's undivided capital right after he secured the nomination of the Democratic Party. While in Israel, Obama made clear that he can't and he shouldn't affect final status issues. What he meant by the word undivided is that while it is possible to divide the territory of Jerusalem, it should be only done in such circumstances that no wall is needed to separate East and West Jerusalem. For Jerusalem to also become a Palestinian capital, in Obama's view this requires full access of all the city's inhabitants to all parts of the city. In the end the issue is something that the Israelis and the Palestinians will have to settle for themselves. Foremost in Obama's speech in the Israeli city of Sderot was the insistence that Israel's security should not be compromised in any way.

While Europeans seem to be even more readily charmed by Obama than Americans, there is also the issue that an Obama administration would demand more of Europeans, not least in Afghanistan. Some Europeans are actually worried that it would look very bad not to agree to US requests for more troops if it were Obama rather than the current US leadership who made those requests, given Obama's popularity among European voters. There is after all some fear among Europeans that Afghanistan is a lost cause, mostly due to the deteriorating security situation in that country in recent times. While Obama is getting a warm welcome in Europe, there are also no guarantees that Obama will prioritize EU-US relations over the relations with Asian and African countries, both those continents being very close to his heart thanks to his personal history. One question is whether John McCain would actually put more weight to relations with Europe if he wins, given his ethnic background and his belonging to a generation that gave Europe a more special treatment than future Americans are more likely to do, for quite natural reasons.

Is it only about the economy?

2008-07-12T12:21:00.003+03:00

When Bill Clinton won the 1992 election, it was patently obvious to both the candidates and to outside observers that the economy was the determining issue. As there are signs of an economic crisis this year as well, many people are saying that even this election will be about the economy. To some extent all elections are about it but the White House probably does not affect the economy as much as foreign policy and national security, regardless of which candidate wins. The distribution of income is certainly a key issue but it never tends to get the same amount of interest in US elections as in those in European countries. At least it seems that neither Obama nor McCain was primarily picked to run for their parties because of their promise to provide a solid stewardship of the economy.

The two candidates who provided the most detailed plans for the economy in the primaries were Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney. Both of them seemed to be ready to fight this election on the issue of the economy and neither one of them could make a compelling case for why that should make either of them the leader of the free world. When John McCain is asked what issue could affect the economy the most, his answer is another terrorist attack. While Barack Obama talks a lot about the economy, he has never been willing to go to such detail as Clinton. Both McCain and Obama seem to be very interested in America's standing in the world and how that could be shaped by foreign policy.

As the economy is becoming more important in the campaign by the day, this trend might increase the chances of either Hillary Clinton or Mitt Romney to make a comeback as a vice presidential running mate. Both of them have the problem that they hurt their chances of fruitfully co-operating with their party's nominee by their tough-talking primary campaigns. They might in fact be people whose presence on the stage would remind the public of the weaknesses of the candidates. McCain and Obama are inspirational types, not candidates who market themselves as capable administrators. The vice presidency is not necessarily even the best position in which to place a good administrator, for that matter.

Both Obama and McCain seem to have a propensity to change their minds about taxation and the distribution of income depending on the situation. Neither of them is really an ideologue, even if they sometimes need to appear as such in order to appeal to a core group of supporters. Obama may be more of an ideologue of the two but it is not really the economy that is his passion. In McCain's case it is even clearer. Even if the importance of the economy as a key issue is on the rise, it is unlikely that the presidential candidates are willing to simply focus on that issue. Both tout the competence of their advisors rather than their own personal merits. It is fully possible that the debate where the toughest wrangle on the economy will happen is going to be the vice presidential debate, even in the case that neither Clinton nor Romney are in it.

McCain looking for a running mate

2008-07-11T13:57:00.003+03:00

Senator John McCain's search of a vice presidential running mate is of great interest for many reasons. One of them is certainly that McCain is not that likely to be the Republican candidate in 2012, whereas his running mate could very well be a strong contender for that position. Another reason is that Republican women are featuring very prominently in the search this time around. Unlike the Democrats, the Republicans have never had a female vice presidential running mate. It might also be that there is a greater interest for the number two slot on the ticket among top Republicans than there was for the number one slot. It was hard for anyone to believe that Republicans might win this year before McCain won the primaries. With the only winnable candidate that the party could produce, there is a rising optimism among at least some quarters of the GOP. The detractors of McCain within the party are obviously not enthusiastic about the ticket, regardless of who gets to be the running mate. McCain, who is more experienced but less charismatic than Obama, needs a running mate that impresses voters as a smart pick but who doesn't outshine the presidential candidate.

McCain is trusting on his own experience in matters of national security and foreign policy. He will probably pick an otherwise experienced team, which is why it is hard to think that he would even want to pick a running mate with very long political experience. An exception might be a colleague of McCain's such as the senior United States Senator from Texas Kay Bailey Hutchison with fifteen years of Senate experience. But even she lacks executive experience. Then there is the idea that what McCain really needs is someone with business experience. Meg Whitman was President and CEO of eBay for ten years and she is now seriously considering entering politics as a candidate for public office. She was already active in Mitt Romney's campaign before she joined the McCain campaign team. Another former business executive that is an option is Carly Fiorina who held a very high public profile during her time as President and CEO of Hewlett-Packard. Picking a former business executive would be an unorthodox choice, whereas such a person has often been a natural for Secretary of the Treasury.

What many Republicans want is someone who has experience of governing a state. Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin is only 44 years old but would be a very popular choice among Republicans. Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota is 47 and currently chairs the National Governors Association. Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, son of Punjabi Indian immigrants, is the youngest of them all, 37, and one of the hottest names in the vice presidential speculation right now. Governor Charlie Crist of Florida is 51 and has the distinct advantage of coming from perhaps the most important swing state. These current governors could all be natural choices for McCain, while his former rivals Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney only come to question if choosing one of them could be interpreted as a key step to patch up party unity. As that is still an issue among Republicans, they should not be counted out.

While Sarah Palin and Bobby Jindal would be candidates who are perceived to have similar freshness as Obama, picking a young running mate would definitely highlight McCain's old age. He would look much older standing beside Jindal than beside Crist or Hutchison, who turns 65 in July. But it might be that McCain simply doesn't care about the whole issue of age. The Republican voters would never have chosen him had being around fifty or sixty been perceived as the number one requirement for high office. If he feels that Jindal or Palin creates a lot more positive buzz than Pawlenty or Crist, he could very well pick a much younger running mate. After all, some people think that having a wife younger than him makes McCain himself look younger. Cindy McCain is still, however, two years older than Charlie Crist, although she is sometimes perceived as younger than her age.

McCain is very unlikely to pick someone with a high national security profile. Barack Obama might very well turn to a veteran politician such as Joe Biden or Chris Dodd but McCain neither needs or wants a co-president on issues that have to do with foreign and military policy. George W. Bush picked Dick Cheney who had such experience that he lacked. What McCain, however, lacks, is executive experience. Someone who has run a business or a state could have the right resumé to complement McCain's. As Mitt Romney has done both, his name will not be easily surpassed. But McCain could simply pick someone he gets along with. Having the right combination of profiles does not help if there is no chemistry between the people who share a national ticket. Picking a woman would also create a lot of positive buzz in a year when more women than before have been mentioned as top contenders for the vice presidential nomination. In the choosing of the running mate someone like Carly Fiorina benefits from being a woman with a very high profile, just as Charlie Crist benefits from the importance of his home state.

Obama and McCain appearing at Latino events

2008-07-07T10:23:00.004+03:00

One of the toughest demographics for Barack Obama and John McCain will be capturing the hearts of Latino voters. In the 2004 election George W. Bush narrowly won some key states with a large Latino population, including Florida, in great part thanks to his appeal to Hispanics. While Hillary Clinton would have been a sure hit with Latino voters in 2008, Barack Obama has a lot of work to do to capture all those voters who would have voted for Clinton. Of all the Republican candidates this year, John McCain of Arizona was always the most likely to appeal to Latino voters but he might be still hard hit by Romney's and Giuliani's immigration debates during the primary campaign that were puzzling to many members of the Hispanic community to say the least.

Last week, both Obama and McCain spoke before the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials. On Tuesday, both of them are expected at the League of United Latin American Citizens' conference. Finally, next week, both men are to address a meeting of the National Council of La Raza. Obama is likely to wholeheartedly push for as great a percentage of the Latino vote as possible. His problem is to overcome the feeling of anxiety in the Hispanic community brought about by Clinton's defeat. Obviously Clinton has endorsed Obama but he still remains somewhat of an unknown quantity to Latino voters. John McCain, on the other hand, is someone many Latinos know and who has a long record representing Arizona in the United States Senate. The Grand Canyon State has a significant Latino population, a factor that McCain is used to taking into account in his campaigns.

John McCain faces a great dilemma in courting the Latino vote. He needs both a majority of Latinos behind him and strong support from the anti-immigrant voters who have been strongly leaning Republican in the past few years. He could simply go for the Latino vote, expecting for the anti-immigrant voters to choose him by default holding their noses, after all Obama is both the son of an immigrant and his platform is in the end more pro-immigrant than McCain's. It was obvious that McCain needed to reach out to both Giuliani and Romney supporters during the primary season and this has cost him support among Latino voters. But McCain will never be very popular among the anti-immigrant community and neither is his campaign at this point expected to use any anti-immigrant sentiment. Still, he is trailing badly among Latino voters right now and Obama is benefiting from having appeared on the stump together with Hillary Clinton.

There are no guarantees that Obama will actually win big among Latino voters in November. The primary campaign is over and McCain can now more freely reach out to Hispanics, after all he was always going to reach out to them more than his Republican rivals and he won the nomination. McCain is also estimated to hold a 3-to-1 advantage among the Cuban American community in the Miami area, something that could lead to a big win for him in Florida. But Cuban Americans lean Republican both traditionally and currently, while voters of Mexican or Puerto Rican descent are expected to turn out for the Democrats. Florida is still an important state and it is essential for McCain to hold a bigger advantage among Cuban Americans than what Obama holds among other Hispanics. For Hillary Clinton to win a large majority of those other Hispanics behind her would have been a cakewalk. For Obama it will be a struggle. He is preparing for it and John McCain is preparing for his counterattack.

Obama appealing to the mainstream

2008-07-04T17:28:00.004+03:00

Senator Barack Obama is trying not only to appeal to the mainstream of American politics, he is attempting to redefine and realign that mainstream. Just as Americans were ready for Ronald Reagan's shift to the right in the 1980 presidential election, many of them are willing to embrace Obama now, even if his policies mean an equally clear shift from those of George W. Bush as choosing Reagan resulted in a departure from the Carter years. One of the cornerstones of American politics is patriotism. Obama's opponent John McCain is for many an epitome of patriotism thanks to his time as prisoner-of-war during the Vietnam War. Obama, however, wants to change the discourse on patriotism in a way that would have a lasting impact on the American political climate.

In many patriotic countries it is not acceptable to be open about the dark side of that country's history. This is why there are laws in Turkey to prohibit anti-Turkish statements, to name one example. What Obama is generally trying to accomplish is to change the discourse on the sore spots of American history so that taking up issues such as slavery and segregation would no longer be seen as unpatriotic. After all, many have questioned Michelle Obama's patriotism because of her strong words about American history. By exalting the heroism of figures such as Abraham Lincoln, Barack Obama wants to rewrite the narrative of American history in a way that everyone could see as both glorious and patriotic. To Obama, people who fought slavery and segregation and other forms of discrimination, were nothing but patriots. Of course Obama does not have a monopoly to ideas in American politics but he has a gift of oratory that lifts him above his contemporaries. Now against any other Democrat John McCain would be very likely to dominate the discourse on patriotism but Obama could very well succeed in shifting the terms of that very discourse.

Obama is very good at discussing abstract ideas with voters. But he also faces some trouble when it comes to concrete issues facing the nation right now such as the War in Iraq. Obama certainly needed to capitalize on his early antiwar stance and present himself as a more credible critic of the war than Hillary Clinton who had voted for the war. But that position was of utmost importance in getting the nomination of the Democratic Party. Now he needs to reestablish himself as a more flexible politician for the general election, ready to do anything in Iraq that the situation demands and as someone who will listen carefully to the recommendations of the generals. While he will be a candidate more likely than his opponent to withdraw all combat troops, his previous pledges of a strict timetable will no longer be as central to his rhetoric. While Republicans are already saying that Obama is flip-flopping on the issue, the Democrat is quick to point out that he is still committed to his previous pledge. Yet it is obvious that Obama is toning down the issue somewhat, while there remains a clear difference between him and McCain.

Moving to the mainstream means generally that any candidate tries to be as centrist as possible after having secured the nomination. Most candidates do this and not all succeed in the very difficult game of modifying the positions without seemingly switching them. Here Obama's oratorial skills come in handy. After all, Ronald Reagan is the one exception to the stereotypical candidate who very strongly switches positions before the general election. He switched the terms of the political discourse in America and moved the mainstream closer to his own views. While Obama is obviously moving closer to a more centrist position, he is also trying to emulate Reagan, even if he is pushing America to a different direction than Reagan did. Some politicians succeed in changing the rules of the game because there are times when the nation in general wants change above all. It remains to be seen whether Obama will be successful in his very ambitious campaign.

Bob Barr's prospects of achieving a spoiler role

2008-06-25T17:19:00.005+03:00

The Libertarian nominee Bob Barr is a long shot in 2008. His chances of getting elected President of the United States are next to nothing. Still, he distinguishes himself from the crowd of minor candidates for having been a Republican Congressman from Georgia. Many Republicans fear that he will play a spoiler role, getting just enough votes to stop John McCain from winning the election. One Republican consultant who entertains the possibility is Dan Schnur who worked for John McCain's campaign in 2000. Newt Gingrich, Barr's former congressional colleague from Georgia, does not think such a thing will happen. He believes Republicans are more interested in preventing the election of Barack Obama than in voting for someone who better fits their agenda than John McCain.

There are no guarantees whatsoever that the difference between Obama and McCain in November will be explained by how many votes Bob Barr gets. Some people talk about him becoming the "Ralph Nader of 2008" but there is the distinct possibility that Nader himself might achieve that status this time around again, beating Barr to third place. Barr may have a better shot at third place than Nader but it is not in the bag for him yet. Anything can happen between now and November. Whereas Nader is unapologetic about his third place finish in 2000, Bob Barr goes out of his way in telling people that a spoiler role would be a failure. He wants to win. It's fully possible that such is his wish but the best realistic scenario for the Barr-Root ticket is third place and helping Obama to win. That would force Republicans to take the right-wing Libertarian scene seriously in 2012.

What Bob Barr desperately needs is the possibility to participate in nationally televised debates. His presence there could almost automatically propel him to a spoiler role. Now currently he is polling at six per cent in his home state of Georgia. McCain leads there by a single percentage point. Obviously the way for Barr to achieve the spoiler role would be in delivering Georgia to Obama, even if he would get five per cent or less of the vote there. Still, his support even in Georgia is so low that he will have a very hard time in convincing anyone why he should be included in the McCain-Obama debates. Right now it looks like Barr will most likely bomb in the rest of the country but his presence could in the end dramatically increase Obama's chances of carrying Georgia. The Peach State has been solidly Republican in the two latest presidential elections when George W. Bush has been running but has previously played a significant role for the Democrats as the home state of Jimmy Carter.

Perhaps achieving a spoiler role is too high an aim for the Barr campaign. His presence will be one of the many factors affecting negatively the support for McCain, just as Nader's presence will have the same impact for Obama. There is a full possibility that disaffected voters from both major parties will take a long and hard look at candidates like Barr and Nader this year. Both Obama and McCain have their fair share of detractors among the supporters of candidates like Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney. But serious consideration of a vote for Bob Barr may still result in many cases in a very predictable result: McCain getting yet another vote from a lukewarm supporter of his. Come November most pundits will be talking about only two people: Obama and McCain. It is very hard to see anyone else in the nationally televised debates. If that scenario holds, most voters will automatically choose between the two of them. Many voters will think that a third party candidate would have been better for them personally but not too many will be inclined to spoil their chances of actually voting for a candidate who can win.

Al Gore endorses Obama

2008-06-18T11:11:00.008+03:00

If George W. Bush endorsing John McCain had an important symbolic function for the Republicans as a passing of the torch, for Barack Obama Al Gore's endorsement works in a similar way. Obviously the previous Democrat to get the party's nomination is John Kerry and he already endorsed Obama some time ago. But the Kerry endorsement was different; it came in the middle of the primary season and its function was to help Obama defeat Hillary Clinton rather than recognizing that the definitive candidate has been found. Al Gore has a somewhat higher standing than John Kerry as he is a former vice president and a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. Gore is also somewhat above the day to day politics of the Democratic Party in a way that Kerry can't be as long as he doesn't retire from his position.

It was an important strategic decision for the Democrats to have Al Gore endorse Obama in Michigan. After all, because of the timing of the primary Obama wasn't on the ballot in the Great Lakes State and he didn't even campaign there. John Edwards also made his appearance in support of Obama in Michigan in May. Obama is clearly trying to compensate for the sentiment that Michiganders were left out cold when the Democratic nominee was decided upon. While Edwards appeared with Obama in Grand Rapids, Gore endorsed Obama in Michigan's largest city, Detroit.

Governor Jennifer Granholm introduced Gore and Obama to the crowd in Detroit. As a top politician in an important state, Granholm might otherwise be vice presidential potential but she is ineligible because she was born in Canada. Granholm was a strong Hillary Clinton supporter during the primary season and she also took now the opportunity to endorse Obama herself. The polls in Michigan show that the support for Obama and McCain is almost equal. Given the bad publicity the Democrats have received because of bungling the Michigan primary, McCain has a golden opportunity to pull off an upset victory in the state. This is why campaigning in Michigan is of first rate importance to Obama today. Michigan should be a safely Democratic state but the importance of what happened there during the primary season should not be underestimated. After all, Michigan Democrats were disenfranchised in a drastic way. Of course, Michigan delegates will now get half a vote at the Democratic National Convention. Still they, and Florida Democrats, were sidelined in an unbelievably disastrous fashion. Even with half the delegates at play, Michigan and Florida Republicans got both an important role to play in their party's nominating process.

It was somewhat ironic that Al Gore would point out that McCain's long experience in Washington, D.C. does not guarantee good judgment. Few politicians have ever been seen as so much of a Washington insider as Al Gore when he was the nominee in 2000. Sixteen years in Congress and eight years as the vice president made Gore a creature of Washington. He was even born in Washington, D.C. because his father was serving in the House of Representatives at that time. The decades Gore's father spent serving in both houses of Congress add up to the grooming of a Washington insider that Al Gore is and that is hard to match by anyone. Interestingly enough Gore has today found a niche for himself outside of Congress and his endorsement has a different tone to it compared to John Kerry's or Ted Kennedy's.

Politics is full of ironies and if Al Gore succeeds in a substantial way in helping to make the case that McCain shouldn't be elected because of his long experience, he is indirectly admitting the difficulty with his own case eight years ago. After all, longtime Washington insiders often get access to almost any position with the exception to the highest. Having been in Congress for ages is generally hurtful in the eyes of the voters in a presidential election. Sometimes a consummate insider such as Lyndon Johnson succeeds in ascending to the top job via the vice presidency. Obama has a certain advantage in having been in Congress for a shorter period of time than his opponent. He also had a similar advantage compared to Hillary Clinton that he already used as best he could in the primaries.

Obama's vice presidential search in the spotlight

2008-06-12T16:08:00.004+03:00

When Barack Obama came up with the three people that he appointed to help him vet vice presidential candidates, he didn't realize the extent of media scrutiny his vetters would encounter. Now he has only two vetters left after the departure of Jim Johnson. Obama had picked him because of his broad business experience and his previous experience in vetting vice presidential candidates for Walter Mondale in 1984 and for John Kerry in 2004. Yet it turned out that the vetting process in the search of the vetters was not watertight.

America is suffering of a deep subprime mortgage crisis. Johnson happens also to be the former CEO of the Federal National Mortgage Association and his business ties are now in the changed situation under much more intense scrutiny than in the previous years when he had been vetting vice presidential candidates. Obama couldn't first get it why it is important that the vetters must be thoroughly vetted and he wanted Jim Johnson to stay on in his team. But because Obama has already been under intense heat because of his association to Jeremiah Wright, Johnson moving swiftly out of the picture was necessary. The McCain campaign could already score points in claiming that Obama constantly makes mistakes with the people he associates with and he seems to be arrogant enough not to see that how you choose your associates is one of the most important tasks of the President of the United States.

Since the candidates themselves haven't been found to do anything really bad, the media search for any Obama or McCain religious, political or business associate having said or done anything suspicious has been relentless. That process is for the best because whoever wins, the likelihood for a careful vetting process for any appointments is thus increased. Presidents have often been surrounded by shady people. Many Americans still remember the cast of characters in the Watergate scandal. The Plumbers are a good example of what happens when associates to key people in the White House prove to be of a particularly shady character.

It is funny that Obama would even ask why the vetters should be vetted given that Dick Cheney got his job precisely by taking care of George W. Bush's vice presidential vetting and then coming up with none of the above, proposing himself for the job. Cheney if anyone has a whole host of business connections from a field where the key to success in business is access to politicians. As vice president he has also proven his willingness to promote the cause of his business associates to the point that some people think he is putting the national interest second. While in office, Cheney came up with the choice of Scooter Libby as his closest associate. Libby of course had to resign in the aftermath of the leak of the name of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame. Cheney's role in the leak has never become fully clear. However, Scott McClellan is in his new book What Happened referring to a discussion between Bush and Cheney on Plame; a disclosure that results in McClellan testifying next week in front of the House Judiciary Committee. The Valerie Plame situation is clear proof of a serious lack of judgment in the actions of the vice president and his staff. Such a thing happening could very well be interpreted as a result of the vice presidential vetting job not having been done too seriously in the case of George W. Bush.

Obama looking forward

2008-06-11T13:57:00.003+03:00

Now that Barack Obama has Hillary Clinton's endorsement and he can be absolutely certain of the nomination, it is time for him to look forward and try to bring disappointed Clinton supporters on board. One obvious way would be to pick Clinton as his running mate. Even if the name Clinton does not make people think of change in itself, the idea of the first woman vice president is in itself consistent with Obama's discourse of changing the way by which politics is done in Washington, D.C. If he doesn't pick a woman, McCain could stand to capitalize on many women's disappointment on Clinton's defeat by picking the right woman as his running mate.

Of course there are those who say that a white male running mate is what Obama needs in order to make serious inroads to the white male vote. Senator Jim Webb might certainly fit the bill. He would not just court a diffuse notion of a white male vote as his appeal would be to the very specific group of Southern white Protestants who have been important to Jimmy Carter's and Bill Clinton's victories. Webb certainly has a high profile in his ethnic community of Scotch Irish Americans or people of Ulster Scots ancestry, a group that has been politically very prominent throughout American history. Now the big issue that has been raised about Webb is his relationship to the Confederate flag and other symbols of the Old South. Apparently he was something of a collector of Confederate paraphernalia during his high school years. This issue might certainly endear Webb to a certain Southern white constituency but any hint of Webb's desire to rewrite history books to show the Confederate States of America in a more positive fashion could automatically disqualify him as Obama's running mate.

The rumor is being spread that Obama is looking for someone with a strong military background as a potential running mate. At this point rumors are very interesting as one of the rules of the vetting process is that the team doing the vetting of potential running mates should leak any name they consider to the public in order to use the reaction to that name being thrown around as one of the criteria in the process of selection. Senator Kent Conrad of North Dakota actually told the media that the Obama people had asked how he feels about certain people with a military background. Two names that might be on Obama's short list are Wesley Clark and James L. Jones. Both men have served as NATO's Supreme Allied Commander in Europe (SACEUR).

During the heavy primary campaign Obama lost some of the positives he had in the beginning of this year. In January he was seen as deeply religious and deeply patriotic. After the Jeremiah Wright controversy Obama's religiosity is no longer the positive asset it used to be. For the same reason, his association to his church, Obama's patriotism is being questioned. This might be the reason why a war hero like Wesley Clark or Jim Webb would balance the ticket. But as a white male war hero is one option, picking a woman politician is another way to balance the ticket. If Hillary Clinton carries too much baggage, Kathleen Sebelius or Janet Napolitano may come into question.

Clinton and the vice presidency

2008-06-06T16:37:00.006+03:00

Will Hillary Rodham Clinton be the next vice president of the United States? Two things would have to happen for that to become true. First Barack Obama would have to choose her as his running mate. Then Obama-Clinton would have to win the general election. The first scenario seems now fairly unlikely but not entirely impossible. Candidates often come up with a big surprise when they announce their running mates. Obama is of course thinking whether Clinton as his running mate would decrease or increase his chances. He would lose some votes and win others. It is a tough calculus. After all, candidates usually try to pick a running mate that won't lose any votes at all. Do no harm is one of the key rules of the selection process. Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg, JFK's daughter, leads the group of three headhunters set to interview possible running mates.

Senator Clinton obviously wants to be Obama's running mate. She hurt her chances by offering Obama to be her running mate in a situation when it looked more likely that the only way could be the other way around. Her sense of entitlement is a problem for Obama and it could manifest itself in the White House were an Obama-Clinton ticket to win. Clinton has been very vocal in saying she is interested to be vice president, something that is interpreted by some observers as a breach of protocol. Clinton is trying to mend fences now that her campaign is sending messages that she is not interested and she only wants to help in any way she can. A public display of a lack of interest could then be followed by a patriotic desire to accept the vice presidential nomination as a guarantee of a Democratic victory in the November election.

Obama would certainly prefer someone else as his running mate. He has plenty of options. Kathleen Sebelius, Bill Richardson, John Edwards, Joe Biden, Ed Rendell and Jim Webb come to mind. Each of these would balance the ticket in one way or another. None of them have as many detractors as Hillary Clinton. Of course, no one else has that many supporters, either. The ideal solution for Obama would be to give Clinton a promise of a cabinet post or to promise to try to get her elected as the next Senate Majority Leader. That would give Clinton a powerful reason, enlightened self-interest, to campaign for Obama and the vice presidency could be reserved for someone less divisive and someone who the candidate really genuinely wants to work with every day of the campaign ahead and four years after that. But the fear of losing is also a factor. Hillary Clinton can get the vice presidential nomination only if Obama fears that he will lose to John McCain with any other running mate.

Hillary Clinton might get to be Obama's running mate if the headhunters and the candidate are convinced that this election is going to be a rerun of the 1960 election in one way or another. John F. Kennedy was in a similar situation and he certainly picked his rival, Lyndon B. Johnson. That pick helped to win the election but Kennedy and Johnson never grew close. Now Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg's presence as the leading headhunter is very interesting. As a Kennedy she is a personal friend of the Clintons, perhaps less so after she and her uncle Ted decided to endorse Obama. She will certainly contemplate JFK's experience with LBJ as a model to this election. She will also be aware of the fact that Obama will not get women behind his campaign that easily after the bruising campaign against Clinton. A key lesson of the JFK-LBJ partnership is still that picking your enemy may be a good move for the election but it spells automatic trouble for day one in the office. Of course, Kennedy sidelined Johnson. But still having a vice president around that you do not want to trust with any important task is not the best recipe for governing. A cabinet post is much easier because then there is a better possibility of firing if the job does not lead to quick results.

Johnson got to be vice president because he was Senate Majority Leader and he had a powerful ally in his fellow Texan, Sam Rayburn, who was Speaker of the House. Rayburn convinced Kennedy that he could not win without Johnson on the ticket. As vice president Johnson, being Kennedy's rival, was also going to have less power than he was used to wielding as Senate Majority Leader. Could Nancy Pelosi perform a similar service to Hillary Clinton that Rayburn did in his day to Johnson, tough talk Obama into picking Clinton? Nobody knows what will happen and who Obama's running mate will be. Most probably Obama himself doesn't know it yet. He has some serious calculations to make. But for Hillary Clinton to get to be the Democratic vice presidential nominee would be a huge coup accomplished against all odds. Those odds she has herself worsened by being slow to concede her defeat. Bill Clinton is also deemed by many observers to be a liability. Most of all he might be a liability after the victory of a Clinton-Obama ticket because having a former President of the United States around, even as a vice presidential spouse, spells trouble and can be a cause to conflicting loyalties.

Obama claims victory

2008-06-04T13:33:00.003+03:00

Now that the Democratic Party presidential primaries are over, Barack Obama has claimed that the nomination is his. Of course he hasn't won enough pledged delegates in the primaries in order to secure the nomination. It is because of the sudden increase in the support for Obama among superdelegates that he seems to have the nomination in the bag. One of the latest superdelegates who has decided to endorse Obama is Jimmy Carter of Georgia who was President of the United States three decades ago.

There is nothing much left to do for Hillary Clinton but to accept that she has been defeated by Obama. There may be tactical reasons for her to formally stay in the race. She could after all try to reach a deal where she gets the vice presidential nomination. President Lyndon B. Johnson, a politician she admires, succeeded in getting the number two slot in 1960 after a rather divisive campaign against John F. Kennedy. But Johnson also happened to be Senate Majority Leader and in moving him to vice president Kennedy achieved an important goal in decreasing Johnson's influence in the day to day political decisions. Even Clinton knows that she can't expect to get too much power if she gets the number two job. If Obama picks one of his allies, no one knows how much power a vice president could wield. If Clinton is picked, it will be in order to unite the party and win the election, not to give her too much power after such a victory.

Hillary Clinton ended her primary season in style by winning the South Dakota primary. George McGovern, the most famous politician of the Mount Rushmore State, had switched his endorsement from Clinton to Obama shortly before the primary. This was clearly interpreted as a sign that South Dakotans should vote for the winner that other states already have picked for them. In this sense, McGovern might even have helped Clinton among the independent-minded electorate. But McGovern, Clinton and Obama all know that what really counts is getting the nomination, not the result of the South Dakota primary. Party elders such as McGovern and Carter are very important assets for Obama for the very real victory he has achieved by garnering enough superdelegates behind his bid.

Barack Obama won the Montana primary, an important result in a traditionally Republican state that he would like to see as competitive in November. South Dakota is probably more likely to vote for McCain, even if it is hard to tell what will happen this early. In any case, neither state is the most central to the Democrats, perhaps also because of their small size. Obama delivered his victory speech in St. Paul, Minnesota, in a state that is a must-win for the Democrats. Minnesota is also the home state of Walter Mondale, the 1984 presidential candidate who is a superdelegate backing Hillary Clinton. Mondale was invited to Obama's victory celebration but grabbing center stage at such an event would have been inappropriate for a steadfast Clinton supporter.

Obama leaves Trinity United Church of Christ

2008-06-02T11:17:00.004+03:00

Senator Barack Obama has resigned this weekend his membership of the Chicago congregation Trinity United Church of Christ. In this way the two main presidential candidates, Obama and McCain, continue their competition in who is quicker to denounce in a more drastic way religious leaders whose favors they have previously courted. Ironically it was a guest sermon by a white Catholic priest that prompted Obama to quit his predominantly black United Church of Christ congregation. Obama had hoped that denouncing the sermons of his former pastor Jeremiah Wright would be enough and he wouldn't have to quit his church. Now another friend of his, Michael Pfleger, had used his guest sermon to make anti-white remarks about Hillary Clinton. Obama felt that the media attention the congregation was getting because of his worshipping there was turning both his and the rest of the congregation's religious experience into a "political circus".

Many commentators have previously asked Obama to quit his church because of the anti-white sermons heard there. Obama was risking to lose the working class white vote because of his religious affiliation. Now it might be that the way in which Obama left the church will not be interpreted as the candidate turning his back on the black community. After all, the anti-white remarks that made him leave the congregation were uttered by a white friend of his who isn't a member of the congregation. Leaving the church could proceed in a convenient way. Obama may now get some of the votes that he might have missed had he stayed in his church and he probably did not squander too many votes by leaving his church too rashly or brashly. An important point is that he did not denounce religion; the issues that made him leave the church were purely race related and Obama is still proud of having "found Jesus Christ" while he was worshipping there.

Perhaps the issue of Jeremiah Wright and his inflammatory sermons will now become less important on the campaign trail. John McCain probably has also managed to avoid a continuing pastor controversy by denouncing the endorsements of John Hagee and Rod Parsley. Neither Obama nor McCain is very afraid of the opponent managing to become a huge favorite among Evangelical Christians. Both of them need to keep distance from any religious leaders that might cause controversy. Neither candidate is any longer giving their all to secure the nomination of their party. Among Republican and Democratic partisans the religious communities that were at issue are important and neither candidate could afford to denounce religious leaders too early in the process. Now the task at hand is to appear as mainstream as possible and both candidates will do their utmost to capture the imagination of Middle America.

Obama managed even to take some airtime off of Hillary Clinton's victory in the Puerto Rico primary by announcing his quitting the congregation the same weekend. Clinton has most likely enjoyed her last primary victory of the season. She has fought hard until the end and is now out of money, not expected to await Tuesday's results in either of the last two states voting since Obama is favored in both. From Obama's perspective Clinton's victory in Puerto Rico was rather irrelevant. An interesting extra issue is that Puerto Ricans are not allowed to vote in November; they can only participate in the primary process through their parties by choosing convention delegates. Had the Puerto Rico primary turned out to be decisive, the situation would have been somewhat strange. Now there was not much at play and tomorrow, when South Dakota and Montana have their say, not many people will be listening as the focus is off the primary season and on to the general election. The Democratic Party's decision to allow the delegates from Florida and Michigan only half a vote each was probably more important than any result coming out of the last primaries.

Libertarians nominate Bob Barr

2008-05-26T09:28:00.005+03:00

As expected, Bob Barr won the nomination of the Libertarian Party. He defeated research scientist Mary Ruwart on the sixth ballot. Given the publicity gained by Mike Gravel and Wayne Allyn Root before the nominating convention, Ruwart's second place finish came as a surprise. But there was strong support for a woman candidate as both major parties, the Republicans and the Democrats, look set to nominate male candidates. As Ruwart has been a Libertarian Party member for a long time, she enjoyed the kind of support among long-term activists that Gravel and Root, both very recent converts to the party, could not achieve. Mike Gravel was eliminated on the fourth ballot and Wayne Allyn Root on the fifth. The decisive move for the position of Barr's running mate came when Root, the Las Vegas oddsmaker who calles himself the "King of Vegas", threw his weight behind Barr before the decisive sixth ballot. At that moment Root expressed his wish to be Barr's running mate and Barr assured that he shares those feelings about a Barr-Root ticket. Barr's endorsement played a central role in helping Root win the vice presidential nomination.

Mike Gravel's situation is somewhat similar to that of Alan Keyes. Gravel failed to gain traction in the Democratic primaries and then made a last minute switch to the Libertarian Party that proved to be unsuccessful. Keyes in his turn was even less noticed in his campaign for the Republican nomination, switching at the last minute to the Constitution Party, finishing second at their convention. But Gravel's and Keyes's reactions to having missed the opportunity to get a third-party nomination are very different. Keyes got angry at the Constitution Party activists, making clear he would neither endorse that party's nominee Chuck Baldwin nor stay in the party. Keyes is still considering an independent bid for the presidency, something he might be discouraged to do by the very fact that it will be very hard for him to get his name on the ballot in most states now. Mike Gravel is no longer angry or disappointed for not having been nominated and he is aware of having reached the end of his political career. If Gravel is to be believed, his campaigning for office is now over and he will continue to write and propagate his agenda in other ways. Gravel does not regret leaving the Democratic Party at all and he says "freedom and liberty" will be what he is going to fight for for the rest of his life.

Even if Bob Barr switched from Republican to Libertarian as late as 2006, he was clearly benefited by having been a member of the party longer than Mike Gravel and Wayne Allyn Root. Gravel switched from Democrat only this year and Root made his switch from Republican last year when he announced his candidacy for the Libertarian Party nomination. Barr did not initially make his switch in order to get the party's nomination, his plan was to have an advisory role but Ron Paul's fundraising success in the Republican primaries made him think that maybe he himself could raise funds as effectively as the Libertarian nominee. As Barr's fundraising is not expected to be as successful as Ron Paul's, access to running mate and business mogul Wayne Allyn Root's money may be of help to him. Barr's endorsement did not automatically give Root the vice presidential nod, as the convention had to vote on who to nominate as Barr's running mate. Root, however, defeated cannabis activist Steve Kubby for the number two slot on the Libertarian ticket.

Bob Barr has a somewhat realistic chance of becoming the most successful Libertarian Party presidential candidate in history. He doesn't need too many votes to get that distinction, however. His campaign will be remembered for a long time only if he manages to achieve a spoiler role. For this the election between McCain and Obama needs to get very tight and Barr has to get a good result in the state that ultimately decides the election. Some of the polls so far show relatively good figures for both Barr and Ralph Nader, somewhere close to the mid single digits. Three or four per cent of the vote could be a huge result for either of them, given that the interest in this year's election has been phenomenal and a large turnout coupled with almost exclusive focus on the top two candidates can make it very difficult for the minor candidates to score better than one or two per cent of the vote.

John McCain rejects Rod Parsley

2008-05-23T13:01:00.004+03:00

The controversial televangelist Rod Parsley endorsed John McCain's candidacy but the endorsement wasn't accepted. Adamant at not getting a pastor problem of his own, McCain is wishing to keep clear of the most controversial pastors. His biggest difficulty of having been supported by a pastor was the endorsement from John Hagee, a key endorsement that McCain initially accepted before the important Texas primary. Now after that primary McCain has come clean in rejecting Hagee's endorsement for the general election. Why this is not necessarily a flip-flop is because new controversial comments made by Hagee have now surfaced that were not directly related to the initial anti-Catholic controversy. Indeed, in the case of Hagee the pastor has come out of his way in apologizing to Catholics and McCain has commended that apology.

Rod Parsley has called Islam an "anti-Christ religion" and has used many other derogatory words about the religion in general, rather than of its more extreme versions. As McCain's initial statements about Hagee were seen rather unclear, he decided to deal with the Parsley controversy head on by simply rejecting his endorsement. Why severing the connection to Rod Parsley is especially important is because the Republican candidate has previously called the controversial pastor a "spiritual guide", which would amount to a similar position as Jeremiah Wright has had in relation to Barack Obama. John McCain was quick to point out that he is neither a member of Parsley's church nor attends his church services, obviously underlining the difference between his spiritual relationship to Parsley and that between Obama and Wright.

Rod Parsley is a well known pastor in political circles, having been one of the most visible Bush supporters in his home state of Ohio in the 2004 election, a state that actually decided the outcome of that election. Parsley has previously been best known for his views on gay marriage, something that he thinks is about "the destruction of the very covenant", "perverting" the relationship between God and humanity. His political clout must be the obvious reason why McCain, appearing in Cincinnati, called Parsley "one of the truly great leaders in America, a moral compass, and a spiritual guide." Now, however, that McCain is better aware of the direction of Parsley's compass, he has flatly rejected the pastor who had been basking in the glory that the perception of him being the Ohio kingmaker has given him. So Parsley's was an endorsement that McCain very much needed to court but one that he can't accept in this current climate that is much less charitable to pastors who have difficulty in restraining their rhetoric.

Rod Parsley has even claimed that America was founded to fight Islam, apparently unaware of the so-called Barbary Treaties between the United States and the North African city states of Algiers, Tunis and Tripoli, negotiated between 1786 and 1836, where the peaceful relationship between the newly founded United States of America and the Islamic world was affirmed many times over. John Hagee in his turn came under fire for having said that God sent Adolf Hitler in order to fulfill the Biblical prophecy of bringing the Jews to Israel. This was the reason why McCain had to dump Hagee, not the televangelist's previous emphasis on Hitler's Catholic background. Now Hitler the politician was openly anti-Christian in his writings and Hagee has indeed belatedly tried to undo all the damage he has made in his relation to the Catholic Church. He even got some Catholic support for his controversial statement about the Jews, after all claiming that God sends scourges on earth does not mean an endorsement of those scourges in Christian parlance. There is no way of knowing how Rod Parsley will react to McCain's rejection of his endorsement. In John Hagee's case it seems clear that the powerful pastor from Texas still wants very much McCain to get elected and may even have himself initiated his own rejection by the candidate, in order to avoid negative publicity for his church in a situation when he was getting labeled as the Jeremiah Wright of the Republican Party.

Libertarian convention gets started in Denver

2008-05-22T19:31:00.004+03:00

Today marks the beginning of the Libertarian nominating convention at the Sheraton Hotel in Denver, Colorado. The convention will end on Monday. When the convention is finished, there will be a Libertarian presidential candidate and a vice presidential running mate. This year there are strong expectations for a third place finish. That will not in all likelihood mean much in the bigger competition for first place between Barack Obama and John McCain but if Bob Barr is nominated, he is expected to draw some votes from the major parties, especially the Republicans. This means that those Libertarians who would like to see John McCain as President of the United States are not so likely to support Bob Barr's nomination, even if he has a chance of getting a higher profile for the party, just as Ralph Nader did for Green Party in the 2000 election. Then certainly many Green Party supporters would have preferred Al Gore over George W. Bush but chose their own party's candidate instead, indirectly helping Bush.

Thousands of Libertarians and family members are expected to attend the convention at the Denver Sheraton. There are already some jokes about the convention being held at the Mile High City as the opposition to the War on Drugs is expected to be one of the party's main themes this year. Mike Gravel, who began his presidential campaign as a Democrat, has certainly profiled himself strongly as a staunch opponent to the War on Drugs. Another big issue for the party is gun rights, where Bob Barr has the strongest profile as a former board member of the National Rifle Association.

Bob Barr tries to emulate Ron Paul in his fundraising strategy. Ron Paul aimed at getting as big a sum as possible in one day, achieving over four million dollars in celebration of Guy Fawkes Day. The so-called Bob Barr Money Bomb that was going to kick start the Libertarian's campaign resulted in only 2,000 dollars. Even if the fundraising is not yet on target, the speculation about Bob Barr actually succeeding in achieving a spoiler role this year is becoming rife, even if he has not been even nominated yet. But the other Libertarians have had huge trouble in getting main stream media attention and Barr is already clearly getting his share. This means that it will be very hard for Libertarian Party activists not to nominate Barr, despite Wayne Allyn Root's remarkable personal wealth and Mike Gravel's experience from the United States Senate.

Barr's two most important challengers for the nomination are Root and Gravel. He met both of them at a last minute debate arranged by Reason Magazine at the magazine's Washington, D.C. offices. While there are no indications that Barr actually won the debate, his superior name recognition is guaranteed to bring greater coverage to any of his utterances compared to his challengers' comments. Libertarians have a problem with Barr's opposition to the War in Iraq; his having been for the war before he became vocally against it. Barr still admits that he supports the war effort in Afghanistan, which it not easy to accept for many Libertarian Party activists, yet much easier than if he would still support the War in Iraq. Yet the party faithful have an even bigger problem with Mike Gravel's support of health care funded by the taxpayers' money. That issue alone could tip the balance in Barr's favor.

Obama delivers crucial blow in Oregon

2008-05-21T09:40:00.003+03:00

Barack Obama's victory in the Oregon primary means that he has secured a majority of the pledged delegates at the Democratic National Convention. Now it will be very hard for the superdelegates to nominate Hillary Clinton as the Democratic presidential candidate in the 2008 election. Even if North Carolina was in many ways a more important result for Obama, he has every reason to be happy about winning the Beaver State. Oregonians put him over the top in the only way mathematically possible. In any case reaching the number of pledged delegates needed to make the superdelegates completely irrelevant was never a serious possibility for either candidate, as the race has been so close from the very beginning.

Senator Hillary Clinton scored an impressive victory in Kentucky with 65 per cent of the vote. She even got a slight majority of young voters behind her there. The Bluegrass State will certainly be very hard for Obama to win in November and Clinton would most likely have been a stronger candidate in that particular state. Still, the victory for Clinton in Kentucky is as bittersweet as it gets, with the defeat in Oregon putting her campaign in a state where there is very hard to come back from, regardless how resilient the candidate and her campaign workers prove to be. Perhaps there is some consolation to them in that Clinton's primary performance will go to the history books as the best performance by a woman presidential candidate ever in the United States in the primaries of a major party. To make that record look even better she might want to check out the remaining primaries.

In many ways reaching a majority of pledged delegates is a key turning point for the Obama camp. While the party rules say that the superdelegates count just as much as the pledged delegates, in the eyes of the media Obama will be the nominee now and Clinton will be counted out as irrelevant. John McCain will concentrate his campaign on Obama and vice versa. Obama's appearance in Des Moines was meant to signify that he is now the winner of the primaries. Since he can't win a majority of all delegates in the primaries, this was the appropriate moment for such a victory celebration. The task ahead of him looked daunting when he scored his first win in Iowa. In many ways he got the better of Hillary Clinton thanks to smart strategists. If Clinton's big state strategy has worked well, Obama's strategy of winning as many small states and caucus states as possible has worked much better. Both candidates have come up with impressive campaigns but the rules of the game favored Obama's strategy. Had the Democrats had similar rules as the Republicans, having many big states award all their delegates to the winner of the primary, the situation would have been different.

Clinton's strategists never saw this defeat coming. The candidate herself has pulled up a superb fight; she is still giving her best despite the low odds. The change of the campaign manager midseason is very understandable given that the entire leadership of her campaign did not see how effective the Obama campaign would be. Hillary Clinton was physically and mentally prepared for the long and tough fight, that she has proven. But the overall strategy of her campaign did not seriously take into account the possibility that the road ahead could be this hard. They must have counted that even if the election will be very close, it will be Clinton with the lead in the delegates come June. Now that just won't happen anymore. The Obama team led by campaign manager David Plouffe and chief strategist David Axelrod had simply done their homework in a very impressive way. At some point they simply realized that they can afford to lose the big states as long as they get close enough there and compensate by winning enough smaller states with comfortable margins. The huge Clinton landslides in West Virginia and Kentucky come way too late to seriously affect that calculus. Now with Maggie Williams in charge, the Clinton campaign has learned to play the game the hard way, yet it is all too late now.

Oregon and Kentucky have their say

2008-05-20T14:05:00.008+03:00

Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama continue their fight for the Democratic nomination. North Carolina probably already decided the race in Obama's favor but if Clinton has her hopes raised by the landslide in West Virginia and her status as a strong favorite in Kentucky, she really can't afford to lose Oregon at any rate. If Obama indeed materializes his lead in the polls now that Oregonians get to vote, a Clinton victory in Kentucky will be very much undone by that feat. A very important milestone in the campaign will be if Obama manages to get the majority of pledged delegates behind him by winning Oregon. That result would mean that the superdelegates would have to make a different decision than those delegates voted in by primaries and caucuses, were they to pick Hillary Clinton as the party's nominee. Now that Obama seems at least for now to be favored even among the superdelegates, today's result could be the point when many Democratic Party bigwigs see the inevitable in that Obama will be the candidate.

Hillary Clinton has basically conceded Oregon to Obama. Getting closer to the end of the campaign season it looks like her resources simply were not enough to compete in each and every state. She made a huge effort in West Virginia, doing all she could there and is expected to repeat that performance in Kentucky. In order to do that, she has had to concentrate all her efforts on the Bluegrass State, more or less ignoring Oregon. The problem is that Barack Obama can afford to lose big in Kentucky, as long as he secures Oregon. Perhaps Hillary Clinton would do wisely to reflect closely upon the state motto of the Commonwealth of Kentucky: "United we stand, divided we fall". The time to unite the party and concentrate on the November election is at hand. Mitt Romney did wisely in dropping out of the Republican race at the first moment when it looked like he was not going to win but drawing too close comparisons to that race will not suffice for the Democrats, who have had a much closer race all along.

Winning Oregon is very important to the Obama camp. It is a state the Democrats can very much win in November and his huge popularity there is a good sign for him of things to come. Even if Obama has made a strong effort campaigning in the Beaver State, it is still a little bit strange from that state's point of view why he won't celebrate his victory there. When the results will be in, Obama is going to appear in Iowa where he got his first win, obviously wishing to give the signal that he has now ended the whole primary season victoriously. Certainly winning Iowa will be equally important for him in November and cementing his support there must be a part of his campaign strategy. But not choosing Oregon for the location of his victory party tonight suggests that he perhaps takes the state for granted already. It can also be that he is fully satisfied with his performances in Oregon so far, whereas his focus on the November election rather than on the primaries automatically requires a rather different travel itinerary of him.

As Obama is looking all the more certain of being the Democratic candidate in November, John McCain is concentrating his criticism on him now. Obama has previously publicly said that Iran is not as big a threat to the United States now as the Soviet Union was during the Cold War. According to McCain Obama's view of Iran is based on "reckless judgment". Iran may be America's number one enemy in many ways but the size of the country and its direct military threat are not the same as the case was with the Soviet Union. Obama defended his view of Iran by pointing out that there are no nuclear weapons in that country. While Obama and McCain have a very different rhetoric when it comes to Iran, it is at this early stage still difficult to know how either of them would deal with Iran while in office. Avoiding direct confrontation with Iran has been a key part of America's strategy in Iraq, at least until now.

Libertarian nominating convention ahead

2008-05-18T13:00:00.003+03:00

On Thursday Libertarian Party activists will convene to a convention that is most likely going to reach its climax in nominating the candidate who has the best chance to reach third place in this year's presidential election. Theirs is a very different kind of convention. When Republicans ultimately get to do their bit of convening, the name of the candidate, John McCain, will have been known to everyone for months. Even Democrats look to be certain that when they convene, it won't be to decide on the candidate but to crown Barack Obama as the candidate. Technically it is clear that Democrats could still choose Hillary Clinton and the delegates, not least the superdelegates, could undo the result of the primaries. But Libertarian Party delegates get quite genuinely to pick and choose from a wide variety of candidates.

Bob Barr, the front runner for the Libertarian Party nomination, entered the race as late as possible. That might have been tactically a very smart choice. As the party faithful have been musing about the unkind possibility that a relatively well-known independent candidate such as Ralph Nader could actually push the LP ticket beyond third place this year, in comes Barr who has just the right name recognition and the gravitas among disaffected Republicans to make third place look very likely if he is to be the nominee. As Libertarian Party delegates have been taking a closer look at the rest of the field and have not found a candidate that satisfies all of their tastes, a last minute effort by Barr could very well seize the moment and get him the top slot of the Libertarian ticket. That would be without the delegates taking too close a look at him, as for most of the election season he hasn't even been campaigning or seriously building up a support base.

Libertarians are known to be people to whom ideological purity is number one. The candidate should be both socially liberal and fiscally conservative. The message is simple; the government should not get to make decisions about people's private lives and there should be no welfare state built by taxpayers' money. In the issues where there is internal discord, LP delegates can happily agree that their candidate would like to push as many decisions from the federal level to the state level as possible. If Bob Barr's views on federal issues do not fit the party platform, he can always tell them that he is campaigning to get rid of as many presidential powers as possible so that he would not get to make those decisions even if elected. This might sound like a joke, as Bob Barr has only relatively recently become to be identified as libertarian by anyone but it should work for the LP nomination. Put simply, a key campaign theme will be that George W. Bush has widely overstepped the boundaries of what is a proper role of the presidency and Bob Barr will campaign to constrain presidential power. Conservative as Barr used to be in more ways than one, his defense of civil liberties has in recent years given him enough publicity to be seen as at least somewhat libertarian.

But there is a serious decision to be made at the Libertarian Party convention. The delegates are not there just to crown Bob Barr as the inevitable nominee; they are supposed to genuinely choose between many candidates. As most of the candidates simply lack in name recognition too badly to have any chance of capturing the nomination, there is Mike Gravel who switched parties very late. Liberal as Gravel has been for most of his political career, in some issues at the left wing of the Democratic Party, some of his positions such as in tax issues could this year qualify even him as a libertarian. Gravel's chances have been seriously weakened by Barr's entry to the race. The contest is, however, ideologically very fascinating. When Gravel was in the United States Senate, he was a pacifist left-wing figure. Bob Barr may sound like a born-again pacifist these days but he used to be a right-winger and he tends to explain switching some of his positions as a natural reaction to the policies George W. Bush. Libertarian Party delegates could nominate a person with a long background in the left wing of American politics and subsequently make the party more welcoming to people who are more into civil liberties and less into reining in all spending. More likely, they will nominate a person with a more right wing background who will explain away those positions inconsistent with libertarianism with his states' rights agenda. That should come rather naturally to Bob Barr of Georgia.

Bob Barr enters the race

2008-05-14T11:56:00.004+03:00

Although Hillary Clinton managed to win an even bigger landslide than many expected in West Virginia, it looks like for the first time in a long time the most fascinating news story of the week does not come from the Democratic primaries. On Monday Bob Barr declared his candidacy for the Libertarian nomination. His chances are certainly much more smaller to become President of the United States than Hillary Clinton's but he looks right now most likely to finish third in November. His mere entry and that at a very late date made him the front runner for the Libertarian nomination. That party's nomination would not automatically guarantee him third place, after all Ralph Nader is a candidate this year, too, but Barr seems like just the candidate to reach out to disaffected Republicans and snatch some votes from John McCain in November. He will probably get some votes from Obama as well and many of those voters who supported Ron Paul in the Republican primaries but are not happy with McCain could end up voting Libertarian in the end.

Bob Barr is under no illusions of winning in November but he didn't feel that any other presidential candidate at this month's Libertarian Convention had what it takes to really keep the Libertarian Party brand name front and center in this year's campaign. Bob Barr gained a certain celebrity as one of the House of Representatives managers of the Bill Clinton impeachment trial. Very much the prosecuting attorney type, Bob Barr could still turn out to be a problem for John McCain. Certainly his impact on McCain won't be nothing like what Clinton continuing her campaign for a long time could do to affect Obama's chances negatively. Still, if and when Obama captures the nomination, Hillary Clinton won't be on the ballot unless she gets to be Obama's running mate. But Bob Barr, who has in many ways a similar profile to John McCain, could very well be on the ballot in almost every state. Apparently there is a big problem in getting Libertarian Party on the ballot in Oklahoma this year.

Ralph Nader finished far behind Al Gore and George W. Bush in 2000. But his impact was large in Florida, the state that decided the election, hurting Gore and benefiting Bush. Now Bob Barr, if he will be the Libertarian candidate this year, could very well hurt McCain in crucial swing states in a similar way, even if getting five per cent of the vote nationwide is a utopian dream for him. Barr certainly made a late entry and he still hasn't the Libertarian nomination in the bag. One of his main contenders is Mike Gravel, who made a last minute switch not having made much of an impact in the Democratic primaries. Barr, who was a CIA agent in his youth and later a Republican member of the House of Representatives for eight years, is the biggest favorite to capture the nomination.

Bob Barr is widely respected in the Republican Party. Certainly many people didn't understand why he became Libertarian two years ago and until about a month ago he had seemed very unwilling to run in this year's presidential election. His first goal will be to get as many Ron Paul backers from the Republican Party behind him as possible. Conservative Republicans to the extent that they are disenchanted with McCain are his next target group. Only those who are absolutely sure that they would not have voted for McCain in any case are the ones who could be expected to vote Bob Barr. Still, it is obvious that Barr's appeal reaches far beyond the Libertarian Party crowd. What limits his appeal among Republicans is his antiwar stance. He hasn't been antiwar from the very beginning like Ron Paul but he certainly needs to be very much against all foreign wars and the current troop levels overseas if he is to get the Libertarian Party presidential nomination. Alan Keyes, who made a last minute switch to Constitution Party, lost that party's nomination very much because he couldn't accommodate his views to an antiwar party with strong support for isolationist foreign policy. Barr has been very active in the Libertarian Party now for at least a year and a half and his criticisms of the curtailments of civil liberties in America in the recent years have been widely covered in the media. He has also held a high profile in both the Democrat-dominated American Civil Liberties Union and the Republican-dominated National Rifle Association.

Obama looking forward to nomination

2008-05-09T09:52:00.003+03:00

Although Barack Obama may have a crushing defeat ahead of him in West Virginia next Tuesday, he is fairly confident now that the nomination will be his in two weeks' time. He is back on the road campaigning in Oregon today, a state that will be much more important than West Virginia. Representative Peter DeFazio endorsed Obama yesterday night, adding another superdelegate to his toll. Obama has now three members of the Oregon congressional delegation in his camp but Clinton still enjoys the backing of Governor Ted Kulongoski. Obama is actually so ready for the nomination that he has already commented on how suitable a vice presidential nominee Hillary Clinton could be, after all she would be ready to take over as President, a key criterion for a running mate. Clinton making Obama's vice presidential short list is no guarantee that she will get the number two slot, after all there is a lot of speculation that Obama does not privately like her, a big hindrance to picking her despite her merits.

Obama's announcement of Clinton being vice presidential material is basically a tit for tat, after all Clinton went out in public some time ago talking up the possibility of a dream ticket if she gets to be number one. There is no doubt Obama could be Clinton's best possible running mate but the problem is it looks like a Clinton candidacy is not going to happen. If that's the case, an Obama candidacy is what we have and he has many different options. While Obama would not agree to being a vice presidential candidate himself, the situation is different for Clinton. She sounds more like a candidate for vice president already and her main aim should be to finish the campaign in style, get as close to Obama in the delegate count as possible simply in order to use her delegates as a bargaining chip in order to get the vice presidential nod.

There are many people who Obama could pick as his running mate. Senator Joe Biden was very vocal in saying that he would not agree to be Clinton's running mate. That statement can very well be interpreted as a hint that playing the role of Dick Cheney to Obama could be exactly the kind of vice presidency that would fit Biden's bill. Apparently getting to be Secretary of State is a bigger dream for Biden and were Obama seriously to consider Biden for the top foreign policy job, he could actually pick a vice presidential candidate who has the possibility to bring a swing state into play.

Obama let it be understood that he will get on with the business of picking the running mate right after he has secured the nomination. If Obama thinks he only needs two more weeks to get there, it may be that these vice presidential speculations could become actual before the end of May. Governor Kathleen Sebelius is a strong possibility, given that winning Kansas, his mother's birth state, is something that Obama would love to achieve. Senator Jim Webb is the name that very many pundits come up with. While Webb would appeal to working class voters, white males, defense hawks and libertarians alike, he is very much the kind of person that is hard to imagine as the wingman in the candidate's shadow. John Edwards to some point upstaged John Kerry in 2004. I am not suggesting that Webb will exactly upstage Obama but having a person who feels he is a natural number one as number two amounts to taking a very big risk. It is much easier to imagine someone like Bill Richardson as a vice presidential candidate than Jim Webb who is a consummate maverick.

New endorsements for Obama

2008-05-08T15:12:00.004+03:00

Barack Obama is looking very strong after his big win in North Carolina. 1972 Democratic Party presidential candidate George McGovern has decided to switch his endorsement as he thinks it's time for Democrats to unite and focus on John McCain. McGovern has been with Hillary Clinton from early on and he is a longtime friend of the Clintons. Now he has endorsed Obama simply in order to help his previous candidate to see that the race for the nomination is over and it is time to step aside. Campaigning together for McGovern in 1972 when Obama was in his pre-teen years is an important part of the Clintons' personal history. The 85-year-old may not the person whose lead everybody else is going to follow but he is a historically important figure within the Democratic Party who could ultimately have an impact on many superdelegates for saying out loud at the right time what many people think after the North Carolina primary. There is also a very real possibility that McGovern's defection could hurt Clinton's chances in the South Dakota primary in June if she chooses to remain in the race that long.

While John Edwards is still refraining from making an endorsement, his campaign manager David Bonior is set to endorse Barack Obama today. Bonior has a long political record having formerly been a member of the House of Representatives from Michigan for 26 years. His endorsement is expected to increase Obama's support among labor unions. Obama also got the endorsement of Jerry Meek who leads the Democratic Party of North Carolina. Meek is one of the most recent superdelegates to endorse Obama. Interestingly, even Hillary Clinton got a new superdelegate on board thanks to her performance in the Tar Heel State. Heath Shuler, who represents North Carolina's 11th district in the House of Representatives, had promised to endorse whichever candidate who wins the votes of that mountainous district. Since Clinton got 57 per cent of the vote of Shuler's district, she got the endorsement even if her defeat in the whole state was just as big as Obama's defeat in that particular district.

There are still many prominent Democrats who haven't made up their minds. Senator Mary Landrieu, who is facing a tough re-election battle in Louisiana, promised to remain neutral for the foreseeable future. Some of the Democrats who are running for re-election are understandably afraid of turning off voters by preferring one candidate over the other. But those people who don't have their personal political fortunes at stake like George McGovern are free to urge Clinton to drop out in order to unite the party for the general election. After all, there is a very strong sentiment that Obama's North Carolina victory decided the nomination and there is nowhere to go for Clinton even if she were to do well in West Virginia next Tuesday.

Obama's campaign manager David Plouffe tells that he "can see the finish line", while chief strategist David Axelrod emphasizes the respect for Clinton's right to make her own decisions. Rahm Emanuel predicts that the Democratic Party will have a nominee by the end of May, pointing out to Ronald Reagan in 1976 and Ted Kennedy in 1980 as examples of when the losing candidate in a major party's primaries has caused the defeat of his own party by hanging on too long. This type of rhetoric will be very hard for Hillary Clinton to counter, if she can't present a strategy not just to win West Virginia but how to snatch the nomination from Obama.

Obama wins North Carolina and Clinton barely wins Indiana

2008-05-07T17:33:00.003+03:00

Senator Barack Obama suffered a setback two weeks ago when he lost Pennsylvania but he is now back on the course toward nomination after getting clearly more delegates than his rival Hillary Clinton after primaries in North Carolina and in Indiana. Although Clinton managed to win Indiana with 51 per cent of the vote, Obama's 56 per cent in North Carolina should already seal the deal. Clinton simply couldn't afford to lose that big in either state yesterday without offsetting such a loss with an even bigger victory in the other one. Obama's result in North Carolina more than offsets his narrow loss in Indiana. Of course there is still the issue of the superdelegates and the whole circus with Clinton's two discounted victories in Florida and in Michigan, which is why Clinton may not throw in the towel just yet. But even her rhetoric after the results were in sounded like she is getting ready to support her party's nominee rather than being that nominee herself.

After facing a barrage of negative publicity in the wake of the Jeremiah Wright story Barack Obama has proven that his support is steady and solid. Without the relentless campaign against him Indiana might have been his but there is a presidential election going on. Obama faced a serious challenge from Clinton, his support seemed to plummet for a while, yet he proved that he is back at the top of his game right when he needed it. Hillary Clinton knows deep down that her victory in Indiana falls far short of what she had hoped for. Winning yet another state helps her to end the campaign in style and is proof of her qualities as a fighter. For the past several weeks there has been the feeling that the surge in her support has come too late. A victory in a state like Indiana could have been important earlier on in the season. Now it is no longer about winning for Clinton, only landslides count for her. Even Pennsylvania, a resounding victory for her, really falls short of the landslide she needed there.

It is very hard to get excited about any of the primaries still left in the schedule. West Virginia is next and Hillary Clinton is sending signals that she is keeping up the fight by adding a campaign stop there today to her schedule at the last minute. The Mountain State is simply too small to matter too much in the big picture. Clinton is certainly expected to win there. She may even get a landslide in West Virginia simply because there is no need for Obama to waste his resources on a state where even losing big won't especially hurt him. Obama is taking a well-deserved day off at his home in Chicago today. He probably scored the victory that decided the nomination in North Carolina even if he is mathematically not yet the nominee.

John McCain attacked Obama on the issue of judicial nominess yesterday. The Republican candidate promises to appoint judges in the mold of John Roberts and Samuel Alito. He was especially critical of Obama, who has lectured in constitutional law, voting against these Republican judicial appointments. If McCain reaches the White House and gets to appoint similar judges as George W. Bush to the Supreme Court, the Roe vs. Wade decision on abortion could be overturned. Even if McCain didn't especially emphasize the hot button issue his speech was aimed at the more conservative voters who see the abortion issue as central. While McCain indicated he is very happy with Bush's appointments to the Supreme Court, he criticized heavily Anthony Kennedy, who was appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1988. McCain himself voted at the time to confirm Kennedy. A key issue in Republican disenchantment with Kennedy is the opinion he wrote on outlawing the executions of killers under 18 years of age.

Big challenge ahead for David Axelrod

2008-05-02T17:49:00.006+03:00

David Axelrod is an experienced Chicago political operative and Barack Obama's chief campaign strategist. He played a key role in lifting the almost unknown state senator to political superstardom in the 2004 US Senate race in Illinois. He is the man who designed "Yes, we can" as Obama's catchphrase when the candidate himself would have liked something more intellectual, something deeper. "Yes, we can" was a huge success when Obama defeated Alan Keyes in 2004 for the US Senate seat and it has reverberated many times over this year, becoming well known even in the Spanish version "Sí, se puede" that has been said to be the original version of the chant dating a few decades back to a different context.

Axelrod was hugely successful in creating Obama's image. A candidate that previously just couldn't deliver soundbites was suddenly delivering the catchiest of them. Can Axelrod now reinvent Obama, bring him back to a lead in the polls, starting with a good result next week in Indiana and North Carolina? Of course the results already are there, Obama has a lead in the delegate count that may in any case prove to be insurmountable even if Hillary Clinton keeps doing what she did both in Ohio and in Pennsylvania. But there is a general election coming and Obama needs a new start and get some of that freshness back that put him in the pole position in the first place.

Who would've fought that this far in the campaign the biggest issue that Axelrod would end up tackling is Jeremiah Wright? Obama's former pastor has even accused Axelrod of being responsible for the decision not to include him among the speakers when Obama's campaign was launched in the first place. Obama has denounced Wright's controversial statements in rather clear terms and Axelrod is the person credited with seeing Wright as a problem from the beginning. Axelrod himself has been making public statements, responding to Wright's criticism of him as not being in touch with the African American church scene, saying that Wright is out there for his own good, not any more helping Obama in any way. While Axelrod may have been rather perceptive of the risks of having Wright associated to the campaign in any way, the outfall of the pastor issue is certainly not very good for Obama so far. If Clinton wins Indiana, fingers will be pointed toward those responsible for Obama's campaign strategy and the handling of Jeremiah Wright will certainly be talked about in those discussions.

David Axelrod knows Chicago politics very well. He did wonders for Obama in Illinois and he has long experience working for Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, a rather controversial veteran politician who never has been very close to Obama. Axelrod is also very close to Rahm Emanuel, another Illinois politician who is credited by many as the chief architect behind the successful Democratic strategy in recapturing the majority in the US House of Representatives two years ago. While Wright has been accusing Axelrod of being out of touch with the African American community and steering Obama away from that community, Axelrod has worked successfully even for other African American politicians, Chicago Mayor Harold Washington in the 1980s and more recently, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick. The issue of race is more important in the contest than it has ever been. Axelrod needs all his experience from previous campaigns where race has been an issue in order to get Obama back on track as a uniter who reaches across all ethnic, racial and religious divides. Axelrod may be a rather cynical and harsh political operative, perhaps Obama's answer to Karl Rove but it is Obama's idealism and freshness that made Axelrod choose him over other candidates in 2004 when he could have made much more money working elsewhere.

Clinton wins the Keystone State

2008-04-23T09:49:00.004+03:00

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton emerged victorious from the Pennsylvania primary by a margin of ten percentage points. Getting 55 per cent of the vote was a good result for her but not a sufficient result to turn the race around. For Barack Obama, 45 per cent of the vote is just enough to justify his enormous effort in Pennsylvania. At the end of the day he can claim that Clinton's victory margin wasn't as huge as it could have been and all those people who voted for Obama made a big difference in the race, keeping him on track for the nomination. Had Clinton won by less than ten percentage points, she would have been in a very difficult position. Right now the imminent press for her to drop out will recede for a while but she needs to do well in Indiana and North Carolina in two weeks' time in order to maintain the momentum she has with her now.

Nevertheless, Americans love fighters and Clinton has proven that she is one. She has been counted out, laughed at and told to quit. She comes back and grabs a clear victory in a primary that could have made all the difference had it been earlier on in the season. Pennsylvania was always going to be her state. Tuesday's primary was Hillary Clinton's to win or to lose and she won it. It is a bittersweet victory for her because it is filled with what ifs. Had she won by a twenty point margin, the race would be wide open and Obama would be facing big trouble. Hillary Clinton has simply lost too many primaries by a wider margin than she won Pennsylvania with. To really change the dynamic of the race she needs to be able to repeat her success in Indiana and in North Carolina. Those states will be Barack Obama's to lose. He needs to do well in them and he should do well in both of them.

Senator Barack Obama is still the likely nominee of the Democratic Party for the President of the United States. He got what he needed from Pennsylvania to keep that likelihood as strong as before. There is even the possibility that the Keystone State was the last Clinton-friendly state of the primary season and Obama should now be able to get back to his winning ways. There are many voices out there telling that Obama will be crucially weakened as a candidate by the prolonged primary season and that the advantage of John McCain will be great because of this. The hardball tactics Obama faced in the runup to Pennsylvania and his resulting loss there certainly weakened his possibilities in the general election somewhat. But the perception of that damage done to him will crucially change if and when he actually clinches the nomination. At the end of the day, if he can defeat Hillary Clinton this year, he is a big winner and his future is going to look very bright. Just as John McCain is a big winner for having overcome all the odds to get the Republican nomination. Only one candidate will win the presidency but it will be a battle of two strong candidates with an impressive primary showing behind both of them.

For Barack Obama to defeat Hillary Clinton is a fairy tale. Had he won without a fight with Clinton's campaign simply imploding after the Iowa caucuses, people would simply be talking about Obama's incredible luck and his having defeated a paper tiger. As Pennsylvania showed him, he is facing a real tiger and his victory will be the stuff of legends. Yet he won't be able to enjoy that victory for very long as he will have to focus on John McCain whenever he is done with the primaries. For Hillary Clinton to pull off the nomination now will be nothing short of a miracle. Still, her victory in the Keystone State was hard fought and well deserved. But it wasn't big enough to be counted as the miracle that turns things around. It was just enough to allow her to fight on and help some money pour into her campaign coffers again. She should never be counted out until the race is over but she is facing two very tough primaries that will put together be one of the most important showdowns of the primary season.

Pennsylvania primary ahead

2008-04-22T09:47:00.003+03:00

Democrats in Pennsylvania are ready to vote in one of the most decisive contests of the primary season. Senator Hillary Clinton looks like the favorite to win the very tough primary where most observers agree that a simple victory won't be enough for her to change the dynamic of the race. Senator Barack Obama is aiming for a close second, a result that should confirm his clear position in the lead of the contest for the Democratic nomination. A narrow victory for Clinton will be a tie for all practical purposes. However, an upset victory for Obama could put a quick end to the contest.

As Obama failed to clinch the nomination in Texas and Ohio, the expectations for him to do so in Pennsylvania are remarkably smaller this time. If he gets within five percentage points of Clinton, there will even be rather convincing arguments for him having effectively decided the race in his favor. Yet any kind of second place for Obama will rob him of the moral authority to convincingly ask Clinton to give up. My hunch is that Obama will be somewhere between five and ten percentage points behind Clinton, a result that can only be interpreted as a tie. But if Clinton manages to win by a landslide, she will come up with all new momentum that will help her effort a lot but, however, not guarantee victory for her in the races that follow.

Barack Obama can be happy for a result in which he loses by anything less than ten percentage points. Mathematically he can be happy for any defeat that is less than twenty percentage points but he needs to get closer than that in order to maintain momentum and credibility. After all, who gets the moral victory is very important as the race will not be decided by pure mathematics, given the important role of the superdelegates. Obama has faced an uphill struggle in the past weeks as his role as the media darling has completely changed and he has found himself in the receiving end of many accusations, mainly about the people he associates with. To be fair, most presidential candidates throughout history have associated with all sorts of persons and this issue shouldn't deflect from the crucial issue of what Obama himself stands for.

Even if Hillary Clinton fails in capturing the Democratic nomination, she has fought a courageous battle. She has not wavered, facing almost impossible odds against her and manages to create sufficient enthusiasm among her supporters in order to be in this position of the odds-on favorite in the Keystone State. Even if she will only win by a narrow margin, she will have proven once again the tenacity and doggedness that is her trademark. The Pennsylvania primary is one of the toughest and most important contests of the whole season. Even if it looks before the votes are in that the final decision will move on and the rest of the states will have their say, winning the Keystone State will be the most impressive thing Clinton campaign manager Maggie Williams can add to her CV. After all, if Clinton loses the nomination, it will be because of the contests that the previous campaign manager lost. Maggie Williams has succeeded in gaining new momentum for her candidate so that the minimum campaign aim of the Clinton camp, prolonging the primary season in order that the aura of novelty around Obama gets time to wear out, suddenly looks like achievable.

Springsteen endorses Obama

2008-04-18T16:57:00.004+03:00

Rock star Bruce Springsteen decided to endorse Barack Obama. In 2004 he was probably the most visible celebrity supporter of John Kerry whose campaign theme song was No Surrender. After the endorsement Obama appeared in Greenville, North Carolina to the sound of The Rising. Obama has been usually using U2's City of Blinding Lights as the tune to which he is introduced. Obviously the choice of a Springsteen song was meant to reflect Obama's desire to capture the working class vote. Obama also received the endorsement of the American Hunters and Shooters Association.

The Pennsylvania primary is not far away and it is one more opportunity for Obama to deliver a crucial blow to Hillary Clinton's presidential hopes. He failed in Ohio and Texas but he has a good shot at Pennsylvania, where Clinton's very strong lead has been quickly slimming. This is probably the best possible time for Springsteen to endorse Obama. He is very unlikely to substantially affect the outcome of the general election but among the Democrats an endorsement from the Boss should matter at least among working class voters. After all, it has become quite a truism that Clinton has better appeal among working class voters than Obama. Springsteen is seen by many as a spokesman of blue collar America and when he claims assertively that Obama is a credible candidate to capture the working class vote, there is the full possibility that many people will listen. Obama is right now in such a phase that many Democrats would simply want to see him anointed as the candidate so that they would stop losing swing voters to John McCain because of negative campaigning in the Democratic primaries.

The Rising was an interesting song for Obama to choose to show off his support from Springsteen. It happens to be the same tune that Bill Clinton uses as his theme song at those Hillary Clinton campaign events where he is the main attraction. At least regardless of who wins the Democratic nomination, Springsteen tunes are likely to be heard in the background at least to some extent. Interestingly both Springsteen and U2 have been used by both Clinton and Obama. Hillary Clinton has been using U2's Beautiful Day at some of her events, a song that has also been heard at Obama rallies. Another almost universal favorite among the Democrats is Tom Petty's I Won't Back Down, a song not only used by both Clinton and Obama who are still in the race but also by John Edwards, who otherwise often opted for John Mellencamp songs as his theme tunes.

John McCain still doesn't seem to have any hugely popular musicians endorsing his bid for the White House. He is rising in the polls even without such support. The song his campaign has been most clearly associated with is the 1958 hit by Chuck Berry, Johnny B. Goode, that is used always when McCain exits the stage. Another song he uses is Take A Chance On Me by ABBA. McCain has publicly admitted that he likes ABBA songs. As far as celebrity support goes, his most famous celebrity backers are Sylvester Stallone, Clint Eastwood, Jon Voight and Arnold Schwarzenegger. Heidi Montag, the reality tv star from MTV's the Hill, recently succeeded in getting some publicity by endorsing McCain. The candidate responded by assuring that he watches her show and that he thinks she is talented. A bigger asset for John McCain in capturing the youth vote is probably his 23-year-old daughter Meghan, whose campaign blog has been one of the biggest blogging successes of this election season so far.

Mike Gravel switches parties

2008-04-02T16:46:00.004+03:00

In a surprise move in order to keep his presidential campaign alive Democratic candidate Mike Gravel decided to abandon his party and join the Libertarian Party instead. This means that only two candidates are left in the Democratic primaries: Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The expectation on Gravel was that he was never going to give up even if his campaign failed to gain traction from the very beginning. Now there is a slight chance that he may fare better as a Libertarian. It is still very hard to say what chances Gravel will have as there are already fifteen Libertarian hopefuls aiming at that party's nomination. Although he has been harshly, even bitterly, critical of the establishment of the Democratic Party, he was generally seen as a Democrat and his support of universal health care would certainly appear as a position far from what the Libertarians stand for.

In many issues Mike Gravel has been a member of the left wing of the Democratic Party. It is certainly true that the war issue and many social issues are such that he does not have to change his position in order to qualify as a Libertarian Party politician. Still, there are large philosophical questions that remain unsolved. After all, Mike Gravel for one has been one of the strongest supporters of gay rights in the Democratic primaries this year. Now Libertarian politicians usually do not favor any king of government discrimination against any minority but they don't tend to support any minority rights, either. They just want to keep the government out of as many decisions as possible. Mike Gravel has always seen the government as a positive force in many ways, including helping out those who are in dire straits. Libertarian Party wants the government to remain passive, in foreign policy as well as in domestic policy.

The signature issue of Mike Gravel is his opposition to the War in Iraq. The idea of the government being embroiled in any foreign war is anathema to many Libertarian Party activists but not to the so-called pro-war libertarians, who accept defensive wars and tend to interpret Iraq as a defensive struggle in the wider war on terror. As it is obvious that neither of the two parties will go far enough for Gravel in taking an antiwar position, albeit the Democrats certainly talk of a relatively speedy withdrawal, Libertarian Party is certainly a possibility for him to push his uncompromising antiwar agenda to the top of the ticket of one national party. It is still somewhat puzzling why he didn't choose Green Party instead, after all Gravel, who is not a member of the party, publicly endorsed Jesse Johnson as a contender to the Green nomination as recently as March 11.

Mike Gravel is also an outspoken opponent of the War on Drugs. As such he is going to be embraced by many Libertarian Party supporters, many of whom would appreciate the combination of antiwar and legalizing of narcotics policies that have gained Gravel the most media coverage. As far as tax policy is concerned, Gravel does not belong to the left wing of the Democratic Party, he is more seen as a centrist or even right-wing Democrat on that one issue. That might explain why he chose Libertarian Party but it is fully likely that he will still be rejected by that party on the count that he is not openly antitax, either, and he does have a tendency to be far from libertarian on welfare issues. It is most likely that Gravel will not get the Libertarian Party nomination but his defection is still a major coup to that party. After all, Gravel is either a centrist or a liberal on most issues and his decision gives Libertarian Party a better chance to exploit the antiwar issue as a way of gaining support in quarters where the ideology of the party has previously been laughed at. Those people who see Green Party as too close to the Democrats and indeed, Democratic Party as too close to the Republicans, can see in a lifelong Democrat like Mike Gravel, who turns 78 in May, a new kind of Libertarian Party politician. Ron Paul, the 1988 Libertarian presidential candidate, has led many of the party's supporters to register as Republicans and by that raised a situation where many libertarians envision a Republican shift toward libertarianism as a more likely future scenario than the rise of any third party.

Bill Richardson endorses Obama

2008-03-26T18:40:00.007+02:00

The biggest political event of this Easter was Governor Bill Richardson's endorsement of Barack Obama. The Hispanic Governor of New Mexico is seen by many as a potential vice presidential candidate and his endorsement was very much coveted by both Obama and Clinton. Bill Clinton actually watched the Super Bowl on tv at the Governor's Mansion in Santa Fe together with Richardson in February. It was unclear which candidate Richardson would endorse but it would not have been a big surprise had his choice been Hillary Clinton given his background in the Clinton Administration. He let it be understood that Obama's speech in Philadelphia on the issue of race had made a crucial difference.

Apparently Richardson also had personal reasons to endorse Obama. He pointed out that both men are sons of a foreign-born parent. Obama's father was from Kenya and Richardson's mother from Mexico. While immigrants are not allowed to run for the presidency, it is possible for children of immigrants to do so. Richardson himself had high presidential aspirations but had to drop out of the race after a poor showing in the New Hampshire primary. The two former Democratic hopefuls who have made an endorsement, Richardson and Chris Dodd, have both chosen Obama. Perhaps the most interesting endorsement from a former candidate would be that of John Edwards but it is fully possible that he will refrain from making one.

After the tough spell Obama has been in because of the widely circulated remarks of his former pastor Jeremiah Wright on many issues, the endorsement of the Governor of New Mexico helped the candidate from Illinois to grab positive headlines once again. Senator Obama went on a Caribbean vacation to gather strength and Hillary Clinton succeeded in bringing Wright back to the foreground. She answered a reporter's question by claiming that had she been in Obama's situation, Wright would not have been her pastor after the controversial remarks. It is easy for her to say, just as it is hard to know all the reasons for why Obama chose to remain in his parish even if he was aware of his pastor's politically controversial views for quite some time. As Wright no longer is active as pastor in Obama's parish, there's not much more to be done about the whole thing now. Conservative columnist Kathryn Jean Lopez has suggested that Obama might have had a good reason in not abandoning his pastor because Wright had been a much needed father figure in his life.

Jeremiah Wright was scheduled to deliver a guest sermon this Sunday at the Wheeler Avenue Baptist Church in Houston, Texas. The result of the political scandal surrounding his remarks has prompted him to cancel the appearance. He has moved two events that were scheduled at Texas Christian University to less conspicuous locales in North Texas because of safety concerns. Wright was on his way to fame thanks to coining the phrase "the audacity of hope" that Obama used as the title of his book. The controversial pastor might very well have had some political significance without this scandal but now all the attention he has drawn to Obama's campaign has continued to be negative even after Wright resigned his honorary position within the campaign itself. As Wright was known to be controversial, Obama's opponents were always going to use his closeness to his former pastor as a political weapon. Still, the YouTube videos of Wright's fiery preaching, especially his using the phrase "God damn America" because of his view on the treatment of minorities in the country, have turned out to be a much more effective weapon in the hands of those wishing to question Obama's politics by focusing on his religious connection than anyone could have imagined.

Obama's big speech in Philadelphia

2008-03-18T19:08:00.003+02:00

Senator Barack Obama addressed today the sensitive issue of race in Philadelphia, the largest city in the state of Pennsylvania where the Democrats are facing a key primary in April. The speech was the most important address on a very difficult topic since Mitt Romney's speech on religion last December. Romney made that speech in Texas at a time when he feared that the opposition of some members of the Religious Right to his Mormon faith might turn out to be his undoing. Now Barack Obama has been facing heightened rhetoric on the race issue from different quarters and his fear is indeed that if the issue gets out of hand it may bury his hopes of the presidency.

Interestingly enough, Mitt Romney's powerful speech did not succeed in winning the most crucial constitutency for him, Religious Right voters in Iowa. Despite the speech and the tackling head on of a burning issue, he lost Iowa to Mike Huckabee and subsequently failed to capture the Republican nomination. Barack Obama may be a better speaker than Mitt Romney. It is fully possible that he succeeds in defusing this crisis with one speech. Still, it may be unrealistic to think that Obama's speech on race will decide the fate of the nomination or which party will win the general election. Even with Mitt Romney, any speech might not have prevented the rise of John McCain. This election is not solely Obama's to win. By holding successful speeches, he will increase his chances but he will still have to defeat both Hillary Clinton and John McCain. While his chances of winning the nomination are very large, the general election is a long process and there will be many speeches by both candidates that will weigh in.

A big controversy was created by remarks uttered in the past by Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor at the time. Obama reaffirmed that he had not been present when the most controversial remarks had been made. He also denounced the divisive remarks made by Wright even if he said he can't disown the man. Obama pointed out that he had been born in an era of racial segregation and had also heard many racially loaded remarks made by his white grandmother when he was growing up. In some sense Obama's way out of the controversy is that he is immune to hearing inflammatory remarks from both white and black. After all, as a biracial person he would always end up being uncomfortable hearing blacks disparaging whites and vice versa.

Black and white churches are a legacy of the era of segregation. This is a problem that Obama addressed in his speech, saying that "the most segregated hour in American life occurs on Sunday morning". At the end of the day neither white nor black churches have been innocent of inflammatory remarks. Obama explained his previous tolerance of Wright's speeches as a result of the history of racial segregation and the legacy of that injustice that still lives on in the anger often felt in the black community. Obama made it clear that he has always sought spiritual not political advice from Wright. This could turn out to be crucial for him. Obama is not running to be America's pastor and he has clearly denounced the former pastor's remarks. Wright has resigned from his honorary position in the Obama campaign.

Of course, race wasn't the only issue at stake. Jeremiah Wright's criticism of the United States as a nation has probably brought just as many headlines as his remarks on race relations. A part of that criticism has to do with foreign policy and a big part comes unsurprisingly from his views on racial tensions. Obama has called Wright's remarks "completely inexcusable". The spotlight has been very much on what remarks key supporters have been making during the campaign or before it. This makes it look like the most critical qualification of a presidential candidate is to swiftly denounce any inflammatory or hateful remark that comes from the own side. Pundits then compare reaction speeds and the distances taken to different disparaging remarks. The positive side of it all is certainly that the candidates themselves haven't been hateful enough in their speeches to create scandals. The debate on hate speech is also raising the standards of political speeches at all quarters in an era when the internet code of conduct has generally been seen to lower those standards for a time now. The reactions to Obama's speech today will be very different in different quarters but if he has one strong point in his campaign, it is public speaking in front of audiences composed of more than one race.

Geraldine Ferraro leaves Clinton campaign

2008-03-13T09:53:00.003+02:00

Former member of Congress Geraldine Ferraro has stepped down from the national finance committee of the Hillary Clinton campaign. She was symbolically an important backer of Clinton and one of her key fundraisers. Ferraro is the only woman to ever appear on a major party presidential ticket in the United States as she was Walter Mondale's vice presidential candidate in 1984. Like disgraced Governor Eliot Spitzer, Ferraro is another politician from Hillary Clinton's home state who has been dominating the negative news in the past few days. Ferraro said the exact same thing that conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh had previously said, that Obama would not be where he is if it wasn't for his race. Limbaugh himself has five years ago resigned from ESPN after making comments about a black quarterback named Donovan McNabb who according to the commentator deserved his place only because of his race. Limbaugh has later compared Obama to McNabb, claiming that both individuals get ahead because of the desire of others for black people to do well rather than because of their merits.

The Obama campaign has in many ways transcended race, just like the candidate himself, being half black and half white, cannot choose one race in which he exclusively belongs. A racially polarized result such as that in Mississippi is not a result of Obama having played the race card in politics. That is a card used by people in the Clinton campaign such as Geraldine Ferraro. It is very sad that such a prominent woman politician as Ferraro would make race an issue, knowing that it works the same way as gender used to work in American politics. Hillary Clinton had great potential to garner support among African Americans and she has to some degree succeded in it, at least in her home state of New York. Ferraro's comments on Obama are a sign of desperation that can clearly be attributed to the tensions of a prolonged campaign where Clinton is lagging behind in the overall delegate count. Hopefully Ferraro's resignation will clean the air and make the Democrats understand that having both Clinton and Obama running is changing forever the picture of who can naturally aspire to be President of the United States.

Eliot Spitzer's resignation as Governor of New York means that there will be one Clinton superdelegate less. On Monday, David Paterson will assume office as the first African American and the first visually challenged Governor of New York. Coming from Harlem, the part of New York City where Bill Clinton has his office, Paterson is a natural supporter of the Clintons. But Paterson would have been a Clinton superdelegate already as Lieutenant Governor of New York. Now that his previous position goes to the Republicans, there will simply be one superdelegate less at the Democratic National Convention, that being Eliot Spitzer, one of Clinton's most powerful supporters only last week.

Geraldine Ferraro resigned of her own accord as she realized that the damage done had to be repaired. There was a similar scandal in the Obama campaign only very recently, with senior foreign policy adviser Samantha Power having been swiftly removed of her position after having called Hillary Clinton a "monster". That was yet again a senior Democrat using the kind of hateful language in intra-party squabbling that was previously thought to be an unpleasant way of using hate speech against politicians from the opposing party. Power is a professor at Harvard and has written a Pulitzer Prize-winning book on genocide. It is stunning how lowbrow these top people can get when an election gets really tight. Still there are very good prospects that the general election campaign will be waged in a different tone. Both Obama and McCain have indicated that they are interested in a civil debate on the issues and it should not be forgotten that much of the appeal of both candidates is based on the perception that nasty politics is not their first choice. Clinton has suffered serious setbacks every time her campaign has gone over the top in attacking Obama. Hopefully the remaining weeks before the Pennsylvania primary will be spent discussing the very important issues facing that state and the entire nation.

Obama wins in Mississippi

2008-03-12T10:05:00.003+02:00

Senator Barack Obama has won the Mississippi primary with over 60% of the vote. Obama got nine tenths of the black vote and Clinton three fourths of the white vote in a state that has a long history of racial division. Obama did, however, poll reasonably well among young white voters with the older white vote going solidly for Clinton. The clear victory is another sign of Obama taking back the momentum from Hillary Clinton. Obama's lead in the delegate count is widening and the expectations on Clinton's needed victory margin in Pennsylvania get ever more impossible to match. There are still six weeks to go, so the situation in the polls may be completely different come Pennsylvania. The delegate count is going to remain favorable to Obama and it might be impossible to overturn.

Neither candidate will make a big deal about Mississippi. The Magnolia State is probably the hardest for Democrats to win in November. Clinton has long been complaining about Obama winning big in states that are not even going to be close in the general election. But her campaign can't overcome the fact that Obama has been winning a large number of both traditionally Republican and traditionally Democratic states. Clinton has been as good as Obama in swing states and she has definitely been the better in big states. There is no one argument that can explain why she is behind Obama in the delegate count. Obama's success is a combination of a variety of factors and he appeals to many kinds of voters.

The result of the Mississippi primary was by no means a surprise. The Obama victory there is most likely not going to influence the outcome in Pennsylvania in any way. The only significant thing was the timing of the primary. Clinton would have needed a state favorable to her to build on her success in Ohio. Pennsylvania is in many ways her last chance. If she can't possibly win big enough to swing the margin in the delegate count, at least a big landslide there might convince some superdelegates. While winning Pennsylvania might be too hard for Obama, there is the possibility that he will win all the other states left to vote. He can afford to lose Pennsylvania, at least if the margin isn't enormous, but Clinton is on her way to losing the nomination by not doing well enough in all these other states.

Governor Eliot Spitzer of New York has been caught booking an appointment with a high class prostitute in Washington, D.C. He got wiretapped as he was making the phone call that might undo his career. This is bad news for the Democratic Party. One of the biggest problems that has faced the party in recent years has been winning gubernatorial elections in the largest states. Gray Davis, the last Democratic Governor of California, got recalled from office. Now that Democrats finally got control of the Albany Governor's Mansion a year ago, Eliot Spitzer had huge expectations on him as Governor of New York. Hillary Clinton did not immediately react even if the sex scandal is happening to the chief executive of her home state. This is bad publicity to the Clintons as while the media reports on Spitzer's scandal, old pictures of Bill Clinton's impeachment proceedings and Monica Lewinsky are frequently used to give a historical perspective to the issue of top politicians who get in trouble because of sex.

Obama looking strong for the nomination

2008-03-10T19:08:00.007+02:00

Although Barack Obama lost the popular vote in both Texas and Ohio, he still looks like the clear favorite to capture the Democratic nomination. While the complete results of the Texas caucuses are still unavailable, it is very likely that Obama will get more delegates from Texas than Clinton thanks to his strong caucus performance. Adding to that Obama took a clear victory in the Wyoming caucuses, taking back some of the lost momentum. It is almost a mathematical impossibility that Clinton will be in the lead when the primary season is over and the superdelegates get to decide the race. She could of course get the nomination thanks to a majority of superdelegates but that scenario looks rather unlikely. A big win for Clinton in tomorrow's Mississippi primary could change the situation somewhat but Obama looks like the favorite to win the Magnolia State.

The situation with the Michigan and Florida primaries is almost intolerable for the Democratic Party. Clinton won both with a clear margin but all the voters who participated were aware that their votes wouldn't matter if Michigan and Florida get to a position to decide the race. The Democratic National Committee stripped both states of their delegates and it is still fully possible that neither delegation will be seated at the Democratic National Convention. One scenario is to elect new delegates but it is unclear who will pay for those elections. The primaries that have already been organized were a very costly affair even if there was a common understanding that the votes would not amount to anything. There are plans for caucuses in Michigan but it remains unclear if and when the new delegation might be elected. After all, Obama's name wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan. The situation with Florida is somewhat more complicated as both Clinton and Obama were on the ballot, with Clinton getting half of the vote and Obama a third. Still, no delegates were awarded because the primary was held too early according to Democratic Party rules, the same situation as with Michigan.

Hillary Clinton's chance will come with the Pennsylvania primary in April. For now, her lead in Pennsylvania is almost as strong as Obama's lead in Mississippi. Obama is campaigning hard in the Magnolia State as he knows strengthening his lead in the delegate count will hurt Clinton quite a bit. There is still time for him to campaign in Pennsylvania later on. As Clinton is almost certain of defeat tomorrow, she is already concentrating on Pennsylvania. Bill Clinton campaigned for her in Mississippi over the weekend. Obama is so confident of getting the nomination that he has rejected Hillary Clinton's talk of a unity ticket with her name on top.

The excitement has gone from the Republican race. John McCain has secured the nomination and there is not much campaigning needed in the remaining primaries. Ron Paul has refused to endorse McCain and it looks like he is staying in the race until the finish. But Paul has been very clear about the impossibility of getting the nomination. His continuing campaign is no longer about capturing the nomination at all, the issue is how to best affect party platform. Ron Paul is also clearly downsizing his campaign, his appearance on the ballot in the remaining states and low key campaigning is mostly of symbolic significance. Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee support John McCain and a united party, something that Ron Paul can't do because of his antiwar agenda. In any case journalists will be following closely the remaining Democratic contests at least until either major candidate drops out, while anything that is happening in the Republican primaries is going to be just a footnote. McCain is no longer campaigning against his fellow Republicans, he is concentrating on the main prize, the presidency.

George W. Bush endorses John McCain

2008-03-06T18:43:00.003+02:00

President Bush had promised to give his endorsement to the Republican nominee when it is absolutely clear who the candidate of the party is. So it was no surprise that right after John McCain had secured the nomination, he was invited to the White House to appear to journalists together with Bush. While McCain seemed pleased with the endorsement, he is not expected to make very many campaign appearances together with Bush. It is understandable that some appearances will serve McCain well with the Republican base but the change theme is so dominant in this year's election that staying glued to the incumbent spells doom in November. McCain won the nomination thanks to his maverick reputation. That is his greatest weapon, not the seal of approval from any administration insider, including Bush.

Bush and McCain seemed very relaxed together. Bush even joked that he would say he's against McCain if that would help the Republicans to win. To Bush the biggest promise in McCain's candidacy is the wish to stay the course in Iraq. That is where McCain promises a continuation of the current policy. Change could certainly come in other issues. Yet it is noteworthy to consider that in the immigration issue where McCain has faced his fiercest critics within his own party, his positions are not that far from those of George W. Bush. The only candidate in the Republican primaries with any chance of keeping the high support among Latino voters that Bush has enjoyed, that's John McCain. That objective will still be difficult to reach because the Republican Party itself is less popular among Latino voters than four years ago.

As George W. Bush is known for his phenomenal fundraising ability, the most important effect of being endorsed by the incumbent is most likely to be a greater access to donors. Bush is not very popular and his endorsement will not make a positive difference in blue and swing states, even if it helps to shore up the base in red states. But the issue of fundraising is certainly very important and McCain has a distinct advantage in the enormous amount of money Obama and Clinton are currently spending campaigning against each other. Probably the biggest reason to why Obama spent such enormous sums in the runup to the Ohio and Texas primaries is that he hoped to deal a decisive blow to Clinton and start the general election campaign at the same time as McCain. The Republicans have a certain advantage in that all Republican money spent from now on will be aimed to bolster McCain and to hurt the Democrats. The Democrats have much more money but that will be spent at least until the Pennsylvania primary to a great part in the primary campaign where Clinton and Obama need to undermine each other's credibility in order to snatch the top spot.

It is hard to say who the Republican vice presidential nominee will be. It may even be smart for John McCain to wait all the way until he knows who his Democratic opponent will be. According to McCain the process to evaluate the previous vice presidential selections has been started so that mistakes made in past years would not be repeated. George W. Bush famously gave Dick Cheney the headhunting job in 2000 and the former Secretary of Defense brashly suggested himself for the job. McCain might come up with a different kind of process this year. Mike Huckabee is aware that his chances of getting the vice presidential nod are not great but he is not ruling the option out. One of his Religious Right supporters, radio talk show host Janet Folger urges her listeners to call McCain's campaign office and demand the number two slot for Huckabee. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison has long been rumored to be on a possible short list and she has emphatically repeated that she is not interested as she can accomplish more in her current job and if she wants to switch to something else, there is the Texas gubernatorial election in 2010. A leading vice presidential contender is Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty who is both very conservative and the chief executive of a liberal state that would otherwise almost certainly go to the Democrats.

Critical Tuesday winners are McCain and Clinton

2008-03-05T09:35:00.006+02:00

Critical Tuesday is the name being used of what turned out to be the second Super Tuesday of this primary season. John McCain and Barack Obama approached the day with great confidence, hoping to deliver knockout blows to their opponents. In McCain's case all expectations were exceeded, he won Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont, reaching the threshold required for the Republican nomination in the delegate count. Mike Huckabee recognized the inevitable, dropped out of the race immediately, endorsing John McCain in the name of party unity. When all of Tuesday's delegates are counted, Barack Obama may still be in the lead in the overall delegate count but he was hit hard by a Clinton hurricane rising at the very moment when the campaign is approaching its climax.

Barack Obama extended his winning streak to twelve by capturing Vermont with 60% of the vote. That is where his progress ended, Hillary Clinton taking Rhode Island with 58% of the vote. Then she accomplished the most significant result of them all, winning Ohio with almost as big a margin as Rhode Island. Cuyahoga County, an Obama stronghold, is still counting votes but there are no prospects for Obama to even narrow the margin significantly. Clinton scored a big win in the Buckeye State. This will revitalize her campaign and raise her hopes ahead of the Pennsylvania primary in April, another crucial part of her big state strategy. Clinton won the male vote in Ohio by a narrow margin and the female vote by a clear margin. Her strong focus on the economy certainly paid off there. According to exit polls, the voters in Ohio were much more assured of what her plans for the future are compared to those of Obama. Clinton has been more specific and shown a mastery of details, something that has been harder to grasp in Obama's lofty rhetoric.

The results in Texas are still unclear thanks to the Texas two-step meaning that the voters in the Lone Star State had to vote twice, first in the primary and then after that in the caucuses. Hillary Clinton is narrowly winning the Texas primary but it is still unclear whether all of her supporters stayed for the second vote. While Clinton is getting more votes in Texas, it will still take a long time to determine who will get more delegates. A possible scenario has been all along that Obama could lose the vote and win more delegates because his strongholds, such as Dallas, Houston and Austin were always going to get a disproportionately strong representation thanks to the system that favors those parts of the state. Even if Clinton might get more delegates in Texas, that result in itself won't be of great significance. The delegate count in Texas is expected to be very close to a tie in either case, it is the moral victory of Clinton getting more votes that is the most significant result. Clinton needed a clear victory in a big state, that she got in Ohio, while the narrow victory in Texas could just as well be interpreted as a success for Obama who is defending his lead in the overall delegate count. The big problem for Obama is that he led the polls in Texas a week ago and lost that lead.

Maggie Williams can be very satisfied with Tuesday's results. She has been the Clinton campaign manager for some weeks now and yesterday was her huge test case. Williams has turned the campaign around, she reversed the trend right before the crucial vote in Texas and Ohio. The results are breathtaking with Clinton not just holding on to her lead in the polls in both Ohio and Rhode Island but clearly outperforming those polls. Clinton got more votes in Texas despite Obama's huge and undeniable success among young voters there. The Clinton campaign strategy of going after the Latino vote was vindicated, two thirds of the Texas Latino vote is exactly the kind of margin to put her over the top in the overall vote count. It is true that the victory margin in Texas is not big enough to hand the nomination to Clinton, nowhere near that. The fight goes on to Pennsylvania. But Maggie Williams took over a fledgling campaign that many experts expected to go into critical condition after Critical Tuesday. The big win in Ohio with a strong performance among working class voters was a huge accomplishment, concentrating on the issue of the economy where it was foremost. In Texas the Clinton campaign concentrated on the national security issue, banking on the certainty that the diplomatic and eloquent Obama couldn't be further from the tough cowboy type preferred in the Lone Star State.

While Clinton's big state strategy worked very well, the results were a mixed bag for the Obama camp. The result in Texas has many positives for Obama and he is certainly eagerly awaiting for both the caucus results and the overall effect on the delegates of him winning some of the most delegate rich parts of the state. The outcome of the primary decides the fate of two thirds of Texas delegates, with a third being decided in the caucuses. The blowout win in Vermont was expected but the problem is that Clinton was focusing on the bigger states, which diminishes the value of the one victory that Obama actually scored yesterday. Obama did much better in Texas than he did in California and had he been as successful in Ohio as in Texas, there wouldn't be too much for Clinton to celebrate in the results. The NAFTA issue hurt Obama very much in Ohio. He had been early on very clear that his position on the issue of trade is nuanced, he is skeptical of the strong opposition to free trade among the trade unions and still he has been hammering hard on Clinton for switching her position on the issue. Obama's problem is that he was portraying himself as a hardcore opponent of free trade in the runup to the Ohio primary, a position that Clinton successfully pointed out as contrived. There was even a crucial attack on Obama claiming that his campaign had sent a message to the Canadian goverment that the claim to renegotiate NAFTA was just political posturing and was never going to materialize even if the presidency would be won thanks to taking such a position in Ohio.

Texas, Ohio, Vermont and Rhode Island vote

2008-03-04T18:40:00.004+02:00

The excitement could hardly be higher in the Democratic race. Four states vote and some polls suggest Obama will win two and Clinton will win two. If that is accurate and both candidates win one big and one small state, the result might turn out to be far from decisive. Either candidate getting both big states could, however, make the predictions about today deciding the Democratic nomination turn out to be true. In Texas it looks pretty much like a dead heat between the candidates. As the voting system in the Lone Star State is extremely complex, being comprised of a unique mix of primary and caucus, it is fully possible that one candidate will win the popular vote in Texas with the other one getting more delegates.

Nothing much is happening in the Republican race any more. Were Mike Huckabee to pull an upset win in Texas, probably the biggest dream of his campaign, something could still happen there. Even a narrow win in Texas for McCain should convince Huckabee to drop out of the race. Not being competitive in Florida and losing South Carolina were bad enough for Huckabee but losing Texas, the state he has probably been the best prepared to campaign in, should prove that it's all over. Most other people already recognize that Huckabee has lost the nomination and he is trying to keep up the buzz in order to market himself as a vice presidential candidate but facing the end of the journey is a hard moment for the candidate himself.

Interestingly there has been a lot of talk after Obama's eleven straight wins that Hillary Clinton should pull out and let her opponent focus on the general election. But with the candidates in a dead heat in the polls with the most decisive day of voting happening right now, it would have been incredibly stupid of Clinton to give in. She has a serious chance of winning both Texas and Ohio. It may be that Obama will outperform the polls and Clinton's efforts come to nothing. Even in that case it would be sensible for Clinton to first see what the actual numbers are and how much she could change them by winning Pennsylvania later on. If Texas turns out to be as close as the polls predict, that state won't deliver a knockout blow in the delegate count. Getting the same amount of delegates from Texas would of course be a better result for Obama who is now leading all in all. Still, Clinton has been counted out by so many pundits and she is fighting it to the finish in a way that Texans are bound to appreciate regardless of which candidate wins the state.

If Obama will win one state by a blowout, it will probably be Vermont. It's a small state and the result there won't matter much in the big picture. Still, when today's voting is bound to lead to very close results in the Democratic contests, one big win would look good. Clinton has been leading the polls in Rhode Island and it remains to be seen if she can replicate her victory in Massachusetts in the neighboring state. If Ohio and Texas both end up with a photo finish, it might take several hours until the results are in or indeed until the ultimately winning candidate takes the lead in the vote count. Hillary Clinton did win California by a large margin when most people expected the result to be close, so there are no guarantees that pollsters or pundits have a clue of what is going to happen. In his string of victories Barack Obama has consistently outperformed the polls. The effect of the trend is also hard to say as a week ago Obama was pulling ahead and running far away, after that Clinton has been closing in, especially improving her poll numbers among male voters drastically. It might be that more of those who have voted in advance have voted for Obama than of the late deciders. What speaks for Obama is that the polls might have a difficulty in registering the full effect of the new voters he is actually bringing in. It is hard to predict exactly how many people will vote today and the outcome could vary very much depending on which campaign succeeds in better mobilizing their voters.

Texas decides

2008-03-02T13:15:00.003+02:00

Tuesday's Democratic and Republican nominating contests in Texas are bound to be the most exciting fights left in this primary season. The Republican nomination was effectively decided on Super Tuesday but what is left of Mike Huckabee's campaign could get a decisive blow in Texas, allowing John McCain to concentrate squarely on the general election after next Tuesday. Democrats campaigning in Texas are fully aware that next Tuesday matters the most and Texas is the most important state left. If Hillary Clinton can't win Texas, she simply can't win this year. On the other hand, if Barack Obama can't win Texas after the buzz he has created with his eleven straight victories, his campaign will definitely be shaken. Democrats abroad delivered Obama an eleventh victory and if he wins all four states next up, he could go up to fifteen and have the nomination practically in the bag.

The Lone Star State is a very difficult state to win. Both Clinton and Obama have concentrated their best efforts to get this grand prize. The electorate is both politically and racially very diverse. Even if Texas is a red state, dominated by the Republicans at the latest since the election of George W. Bush as Governor in 1994, many Texans are disappointed with the Bush Administration. Barack Obama leads narrowly in the polls and he is clearly the favorite to win because he is bringing in hordes of new voters to his campaign events in Texas. Independent voters and disaffected Republicans are most likely to deliver Texas to Obama. Hillary Clinton may be stronger with the traditional Democratic Party crowd but that lot has shrunk in Texas very much over the years. The old party organization that dominated politics in the Lone Star State for many decades just isn't there any more. If Obama wins on Tuesday, the people he brings in now are likely to lay the groundwork for the future party organization. If Clinton wins, that would simply have to be taken as a sign of the revival of the old liberal crowd who still reminisce the days of Lyndon B. Johnson and the Great Society with relish.

About a quarter of the Democratic primary voters in Texas are expected to be African American. Since Obama is very strong in this demographic, he has quite an advantage. The white male vote is also very likely to go for Obama but not with as strong a margin as the African American vote, male or female. The white female vote will probably go for Clinton, especially thanks to older voters, whereas young white females are more likely to vote Obama. The big mystery is the Latino vote. Clinton's strategy and her previous lead in the polls was based on capturing the Latino vote in Texas with a sizable margin. Now Clinton is still likely to capture the Latino vote but her margin may turn out to be not large enough. It was large enough among the Latino voters in California but in Texas the fight for the Latino vote looks like very tough indeed. The Hispanic community in Texas is very much divided in two, with Clinton having a much stronger edge among the Latino voters in South Texas where there are many relatively recent immigrants. Obama, however, could well come up with a strong showing among Latino voters in other parts of Texas. Hillary Clinton is aware of this development. While her campaign at first concentrated on the key area of South Texas, both campaigns are now trying to get any votes they can all over Texas as the outcome of Tuesday's vote is expected to be close.

Obama was expected to lose Texas and were that expectation still to hold true, he might be able to afford to lose the state and still keep up his momentum. But now Obama is very much expected to win. Winning Texas will probably decide the nomination for Obama but losing Texas will hurt him more now that he is the favorite, compared to his underdog situation in the state only some weeks ago. In the Republican race, John McCain is expected to finish off Mike Huckabee in Texas. For Huckabee, Texas is his last shot at making big headlines and he is certainly trying to make even the Republican race competitive.

Nader seeking spoiler role

2008-02-29T19:01:00.006+02:00

The prominent Arab American politician Ralph Nader announced that he will run for the presidency yet again as an independent candidate. It took only four days after that for Nader to come up with a running mate, the San Francisco politician Matt Gonzalez. Although both men have achieved their most impressive results as Green Party candidates, they have decided not to seek the endorsement of their old party. In 2004 Ralph Nader was on the ballot in 34 states as an independent and he also got the Reform Party endorsement. His toll was only 0.38 % of the vote. Nader is best remembered for the spoiler role he played as the 2000 Green Party presidential candidate with 2.74 % of the vote. Had Nader voters in Florida voted for Al Gore in that election, the election would never have gone to the Supreme Court. Nader won't obviously win this year's election. The best he can hope for is to repeat the performance from eight years ago. Like most third party candidates, Nader and Gonzalez are convinced that there isn't much of a difference between Republicans and Democrats.

Ralph Nader was born 74 years ago in Winsted, Connecticut. Both his parents were Lebanese immigrants and he is still a member of the Maronite Church, the principal Lebanese Christian community. Nader studied at Princeton University and at Harvard Law School. He started writing articles about consumer safety while a law student at Harvard, becoming later one of America's leading consumer activists with automobile safety as his most famous cause. The 1966 National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act mandated safety belts and many other safety features in cars. The act was passed unanimously and its success has partly been attributed to Nader's vocal advocacy of the cause.

Nader's running mate Matt Gonzalez was born in 1965 in McAllen, Texas. He is one of the most successful Green Party candidates ever, receiving 47 % of the vote in the runoff of the 2003 San Francisco mayoral election, losing to Democrat Gavin Newsom. Gonzalez is of Mexican American origin and he spent the four first years of his childhood in Puerto Rico. He studied at Columbia University and at Stanford Law School. He started in politics as a Democrat but he soon grew disillusioned with the habit of the major parties of trying to exclude third party candidates from debates, feeling that he had more in common with Green Party than with the Democrats. He won election as president of the San Francisco County board of supervisors. One of his pet issues in that office was animal rights and he prohibited the San Francisco Zoo from keeping elephants. After leaving politics, Gonzalez has been working as a collage artist. When it comes to music, bass guitar is his instrument, the same instrument that Mike Huckabee plays. Gonzalez used to play in a rock band called John Heartfield, named after the German Dadaist photomontage artist.

Ralph Nader and Matt Gonzalez are not very likely to achieve an impressive result in this election. Many people felt that Nader was past his prime already four years ago but at least his age won't be such an issue as he is only two years older than John McCain. He has picked an interesting and different running mate who has a slight chance of being better remembered than Nader's running mates in previous elections. Most likely Nader and Gonzalez don't expect to achieve a spoiler role delivering the White House to John McCain by the thinnest of margins. Their real objective is to keep sure that the Democratic Party receives competition from the left so that they can't go very far to the right in capturing the middle ground. There is only one way of achieving either a spoiler role of decisively taking away votes from Democrats or of having an impact on the Democratic Party platform as a serious competing ticket. That way is a visible campaign in battleground states such as Missouri or Florida. I'm not at all sure this ticket has what it takes to finish third in November but Nader certainly has his experience from 2000. Because of the outcome of that election, many people who like Nader didn't vote for him in 2004 and might vote Democrat even in this election.

McCain is a natural born citizen

2008-02-28T18:46:00.003+02:00

The issue of the quality of John McCain's citizenship has been raised again because he was not born in a US state. Senator McCain was born at the Coco Solo submarine base in a US territory called the Panama Canal Zone. McCain's birthplace is in today's Panama but was not at the time of his birth. It was under US jurisdiction, rather comparably to the status of Alaska or Hawaii at the time. McCain was born to two US citizens which fact in itself may qualify him as a natural born citizen. McCain of course made inquiries already before his losing campaign in the 2000 Republican primaries about the issue and is having the issue re-examined now that he is almost certain to be nominated by the Republican Party. One poll shows even McCain leading Obama in a potential matchup so the issue of McCain's birthplace is becoming more interesting by the day.

Is a US citizen born to two US citizens in Guam or Puerto Rico eligible to run for the presidency? Could be, if that person is at least 35 years old and has been a resident of a US state or the District of Columbia for at least fourteen years. There have been Republican primary candidates before who weren't even born in a US territory. Mitt Romney's father George Wilcken Romney, who was an unsuccessful candidate in 1968, was born in Mexico. Senator Lowell Weicker who was born in Paris, was an unsuccessful candidate in 1980 and checked out the opinion of his lawyers before he launched his campaign. McCain's situation is somewhat analogous to that of Barry Goldwater. The losing candidate in 1964 was born in Phoenix but Arizona didn't become a US state until Goldwater was three. When Goldwater was born, the status of the Arizona Territory was similar to those of Alaska, Hawaii or the Panama Canal Zone. Would it be clearer that McCain is eligible if the Panama Canal Zone had become a US state with its own electors later on like Arizona and had not been returned to Panama, a foreign country? Still, when McCain was born there was a US District Court for the Panama Canal Zone and not just military jurisdiction as is the case of US military bases on foreign soil.

Prominent US politicians such as Jennifer Granholm and Arnold Schwarzenegger will not be able to run for the presidency unless the Constitution is amended. The wording of a "natural born citizen" may not be absolutely clear in all cases but there is no doubt that naturalized citizens are not allowed to succeed to the presidency. McCain was born in the USA to two citizens and has been a citizen all his life. The legal issue arises simply because not all US territories get to vote in presidential elections. If McCain is elected and his election is challenged in the courts, the legitimacy of his natural born citizenship is going to be upheld in the courts. Had his parents been Puerto Ricans, I don't know what the outcome would be.

If John McCain's natural born citizenship issue looks like a non-issue, he also received a key boost in his religious credentials. Mike Huckabee's biggest strength in Texas so far has been his ability to appeal to evangelical megachurches. Now one of the best known pastors in Texas, John Hagee, has decided to endorse John McCain. The two issues that made the difference for Hagee are McCain's support of Israel and opposition to abortions. Many other evangelical leaders in Texas have decided otherwise. But the foreign policy issue is foremost for Hagee who has also given the issue of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons a central place in his sermons.

Chris Dodd endorses Obama

2008-02-27T13:51:00.004+02:00

Senator Barack Obama has received new endorsements as next week's big contests in Ohio and Texas are approaching. His former rival and Senate colleague Chris Dodd made a highly publicized endorsement in Cleveland. Obama has already won Dodd's home state of Connecticut. In any case, Dodd grasping the limelight might lure other former Democratic presidential candidates to do the same. The most likely to make an endorsement is Governor Bill Richardson but it is not clear which candidate he might endorse. Chris Dodd is a senior establishment Democrat who speaks good Spanish and might be of help in reaching out to the Latino vote in Texas. He is also a superdelegate. Mayor Mark Mallory endorsed Obama and that might be of help in the key city of Cleveland before the Ohio primary. Representative Stephanie Herseth Sandlin of South Dakota brings to the Obama camp a younger, female politician with a high profile in energy issues.

Obama's winning trend and the clearest lead in the polls that he has ever had probably convinced Dodd and the other superdelegates that are now turning out to support Obama. After next Tuesday the race could be decided, so the endorsements after that might come too late. As Joe Biden most likely will refrain from making an endorsement before there is a nominee, Chris Dodd managed to capture some serious attention that he never got for his own campaign. Given Dodd's gravitas and towering record, he was always more likely to be taken seriously as a kingmaker than as a candidate.

Chris Dodd sharply criticized Obama's lack of foreign policy experience before the Iowa caucuses in January. What happened was that Obama won clearly in Iowa and Dodd dropped out right after the results were in. Dodd's own campaign experience is testimony to the spirit among Democratic voters this year to seek the most charismatic rather than the most experienced candidate. Dodd has the experience but seems to lack the charisma, with Obama it is the other way around. Senator Dodd remembers from his own youth how he was swayed by the lofty rhetoric of John F. Kennedy. As he is Ted Kennedy's good friend, it may not be that surprising that in the end Dodd also fell for the idea of Obama as the next JFK, ushering in a new era in the Democratic Party. Ted Kennedy of course waited with his own endorsement of Obama until his friend Dodd had dropped out of the race.

Those of the elder statesmen of the Democratic Party that are now in the Obama camp recognize the ability of their candidate to attract Republican and independent voters, something that many of them themselves haven't been able to do. If this year's nominees will be Obama and McCain, both candidates are going to try very hard to capture the middle ground but with different messages. There will clearly be a battle of ideas. Hillary Clinton needs something quick to reverse the trend if she wants to change that constellation. Apart from Obama and McCain, she is the only one who still has a chance at the White House. Her campaign apparently tried to get publicity for a tourist photo of Obama dressed in traditional Somali clothes. It is hard to see if that image will do much more than help Obama get more votes from people with Somali ethnic heritage. After all, Clinton herself admitted that she also has donned traditional costumes many times when visiting foreign countries and there's nothing much more to be said about the picture.

Clinton and Obama aim at the nomination

2008-02-23T13:13:00.003+02:00

The excitement just doesn't vanish from the Democratic primary season. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are both still in with a chance of winning the nomination. Obama may be the front runner but Clinton could turn things around by winning two key states: Ohio and Texas. What happens if Ohio and Texas pick different winners? One plausible scenario is that Obama wins Texas, loses Ohio and could still come out on top, yet leaving excitement for Pennsylvania. Either candidate could win both states. Clinton has had her focus on these two states all along, she has strong backers there and has kept up her campaign. The attacks on Obama from her campaign backfired in Wisconsin but there is still a possibility that voters in Texas and Ohio could rethink their opinion of Obama when anti-Obama talking points get repeated often enough.

Barack Obama is enjoying a steeply rising trend in his support and if he wins Ohio, that means overturning a remarkable Clinton lead thanks to the positive press created by his recent string of victories. The importance of Obama's clear victory in Wisconsin should not be underestimated. It could very well be the culmination of his long winning streak that helps to put him over the top in Ohio. Governor Ted Strickland has been very actively campaigning for Clinton and he is still very much hoping for a narrow Clinton victory. Hillary Clinton needs all the help she can get because if she loses both Texas and Ohio, it may be all over for her.

Texas is a very large and very diverse state. It is difficult to make any predictions as to how the Lone Star State is going to vote. Texans are definitively relishing the prospect of their state being of crucial importance, something that has not been the case in a long time. Texans are also known to be very independent-minded voters, there are no guarantees that they will follow the pattern of any other state. Those who expect Clinton to win, look for something similar happening in Texas as happened in California. But the voters in Texas have to be convinced by something else than polls and previous results. After all, if anyone had to name one state the winner of which is most likely to be the Democratic nominee, it would be Texas. Clinton's big win in California and Obama's stunning ten wins in a row cancel each other out. A big win in Texas could even convince superdelegates from other states of the winning potential of the prospective nominee.

Republican candidates are not really aiming at the nomination any more. John McCain has it pretty much in the bag and he is preparing himself for the general election. The New York Times published rumors of McCain's inappropriate ties to a lobbyist eight or nine years ago, rumors that McCain vehemently denied. That story is part of the general election campaign and it would have been published earlier on, had there been a wish to hurt McCain's chances of capturing the Republican nomination. Bay Buchanan, one of Romney's advisers, says that had that rumor been published three days before Florida, it could have helped her candidate to become the nominee. Now it is irrelevant. Mike Huckabee is still out to make his best effort in Texas, so that he can either bow out gracefully or reappear as the vice presidential nominee after that.

Obama and McCain win in Wisconsin

2008-02-20T12:35:00.003+02:00

Voters in Wisconsin gave decisive victories to Barack Obama and John McCain. In Obama's case, winning both the Wisconsin primary and the Hawaii caucuses means that he has now ten straight victories after Super Tuesday. This puts him in the best possible position before Ohio and Texas in March. For John McCain, winning Wisconsin brings him another step closer to the nomination that is something of a foregone conclusion already. Obama has a tough fight in front of him in Ohio and Texas, while McCain can afford to lose even some of the larger states and still continue on course toward nomination. McCain also won the Washington primary yesterday. Earlier on he had won the Republican caucuses in the same state narrowly but now he won the primary with a clear margin. Republican delegates from Washington State are in part allocated by the results of the caucuses and in part depending on the outcome of the primary.

Mike Huckabee's defeats were clear and it is still possible he might not even get as many delegates in total as Mitt Romney's campaign achieved. He had a very short period of upswing after Romney's exit from the race. Now it looks clear that he is not an equal contender to John McCain. For him, Texas is going to be the decisive contest in many ways. The Republican establishment stands relatively united behind McCain now and if Huckabee could still win Texas thanks to his strong support among the Religious Right, it would be significant. If McCain wins Texas, it will effectively finish off Huckabee's campaign.

Unlike Huckabee, Hillary Clinton has not suffered a decisive defeat yet. She is trailing in delegates and her defeat in Wisconsin certainly paints a bleak picture of her chances in Ohio. She can still turn the campaign around by winning Ohio and Texas. Certainly she should not be counted out before it is over. Her campaign went overboard with accusations that Obama had used same phrases as Deval Patrick, who happens to be one of his close supporters, had used in his speeches without the appopriate attribution having been made. Joe Biden's campaign may have floundered in 1988 when he was accused of plagiarizing Neil Kinnock but these charges just don't seem to stick in the way that Obama's opponents are hoping for. After all, both Clinton and McCain have been copying some of Obama's phrases and not every wording is protected by copyright.

Early voting in Texas opened up already yesterday and Barack Obama is expected to benefit greatly from his momentum from his string of ten victories. Right now his campaign looks unstoppable. Still, Texas and Ohio form a kind of test that his campaign has not yet overcome. In a fiercely competitive large state primary in California Obama lost clearly. Hillary Clinton's strategy has hinged greatly on winning large states. Obama victories in Ohio and Texas would mean the undoing of Clinton's strategy. None of Obama's victories as yet is that significant and his lead in the delegate count is still relatively slight. Expect Texas and Ohio to be far more fiercely competitive than Wisconsin and Hawaii. Accusations will be hurled at Obama and so far he has not been hurt in the least by any of them. He will be truly tested in the coming two weeks.

McCain coronation, Democrat rivals fight

2008-02-18T16:27:00.005+02:00

Now that there is only one more day to go to the Wisconsin primaries, today's main event of the Republican side is scheduled in another part of the country in Houston, Texas. As far as Democrats go, Hillary Clinton is expected to leave Wisconsin today, playing down her expectations for tomorrow's primary. Bill and Chelsea Clinton will still be campaigning in Wisconsin for her, though. The big Republican thing that is expected to happen in Houston is something of a coronation. President George H.W. Bush, the father of George W. Bush, is going to officially endorse John McCain. The would-be Republican candidate already embraced Bush-like rhetoric on Sunday, pledging "no new taxes", a promise that gave George H.W. Bush a lot of support in 1988, costing him as much in 1992 as the pledge wasn't kept. McCain probably won't have similar problems as not many people expect him to run for a second term even if elected.

Hillary Clinton would already have left Wisconsin had not some of her campaign stops there for the weekend been canceled because of a snowstorm. Perhaps the appearances the day before the primary will be helpful to her in the end. The polls suggest that she is bridging the gap and will most likely not lose Wisconsin by a landslide even if Obama is still ahead. Clinton is using an attack ad on universal health care to hurt Obama. The anti-Obama ad shows a very diverse group of seven people asking Obama which one would he leave without health care. The Clinton ad claims Obama will leave 15 million people without coverage, while Clinton will deliver universal health care. Attack ads should always be read very carefully as they tend to overexaggerate the differences between the candidates' positions by far.

Barack Obama visited North Carolina quickly in order to try to persuade John Edwards to deliver an endorsement. Clinton had made a similar visit some days ago. Obama looks confident in Wisconsin and he is also expected to win the Hawaii caucuses as he is very popular in the state where he was born. Senator Ted Kennedy was campaigning in Akron, Ohio, for Obama telling Ohioans that their votes on March 4 might decide the outcome of the whole primary season. He is probably right in that an Obama victory in Ohio could turn out to be decisive. Governor Jim Doyle supports Obama in Wisconsin, while Governor Ted Strickland is one of the key Clinton backers in Ohio. It will be interesting to see how that might effect the outcomes of the states in question.

The Clinton camp is accusing Obama of flip-flopping on campaign finance. Senator Obama has not reaffirmed his commitment to accept public financing in the general election. The pledge was of course made in a situation when Obama had much less funds than today and he might have estimated to be dependent on public funds. While Clinton herself has not promised to accept public financing at all, the point of her campaign is that Obama has made such a promise and he might now switch his position on the issue. John McCain has promised to accept public funds in the general election if Obama does, his campaign also generously pointing out that Obama previously already made a similar promise. Obama's position now is that the issue will be addressed when it is time for the general election. It was understandable that Clinton was always going to rely on private funds as she had high confidence on her fundraising ability from the beginning, while McCain, who is not so good at raising funds, has been looking at the opportunity of getting public funds with much relish. Obama has surprised himself by raising enormous sums of money and needs to think if his early promise was a wise decision.

Wisconsin primary ahead

2008-02-17T14:06:00.002+02:00

In the Democratic race one of the most important contests may turn out to be the Wisconsin primary next Tuesday. It is a hugely competitive open primary, with independent and Republican voters expected to favor Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton. If Clinton can't break her losing streak, her chances in Texas and Ohio may suffer because of Wisconsin. As Obama is very much the favorite in Wisconsin in a way that he as yet is not in Texas and Ohio, the most important thing for Clinton really is to avoid losing in a landslide. Although the Republicans vote in Wisconsin on the same day as the Democrats, the position of John McCain as the all but certain nominee is going to lead the independents toward the Democratic primary. Mike Huckabee is still trying but there are no big expectations that he might pull off an upset in the Badger State.

South Carolina, Florida and California are the decisive victories with which John McCain put himself firmly on the path toward the nomination. Nothing as dramatic has happened in the Democratic race yet, if Wisconsin is going to be one of the truly decisive states for the Democrats it is because of Obama's winning streak. A win for Obama in Wisconsin could simply make that streak long enough to demoralize Clinton supporters in other states. An upset victory for Clinton could lead in a huge boost of confidence for her now that some people are wondering if she can break Obama's momentum.

The Wisconsin primary is so late in the season that there were originally no great expectations. Now the turnout promises to be huge and Obama can certainly bring his voters to the polls. What remains unclear is whether a large turnout will help Hillary Clinton in the same way as in New Hampshire. After all, the Obama movement is constantly growing and new people are becoming interested in the Democratic Party in a way not seen in a long time. One important factor is that the Republican race is not half as competitive as it was in New Hampshire. McCain defeated Romney in a very competitive primary in the Granite State and things were at their most exciting. Now the excitement is gone from the Republican primary and Obama is the one big attraction for independent voters. This time his lead in the polls should hold.

Will Hillary Clinton be finished if she loses Wisconsin? Certainly not. With wins in Ohio and Texas she can bounce back very quickly and take back the front runner status. It is just that by winning Wisconsin Barack Obama will take the momentum with him to those bigger states. Wisconsin may even turn out to be something of a prediction of the elections in November. If Obama generates huge excitement and lures large numbers of voters from outside of the Democratic Party to the polls on Tuesday, it says something about his ability to do so even when pitted against John McCain in the general election, were that to happen.