January 31, 2008
Both Rudy Giuliani [NBC News] and John Edwards [Washingtonpost.com] dropped out of the race today. A year ago, I would have named each of these men as their respective party’s most electable candidate. Turns out, neither one campaigned as their party (or at least the voters) expected: Giuliani didn’t give a damn and Edwards gave too much of a damn.
I don’t think there’s much of a question around whose endorsement is worth more to the recipient - that would be Giuliani - but it will be more interesting to see who Edwards will endorse, if anyone. Meanwhile, I think a McCain endorsement out of Giuliani is a good bet.
Update: Turns out Giuliani endorsed McCain during his concessions speech [Financial Times]. And with Rudy out of the race, apparently McCain is the only “American hero” left and he’s got the former Mayor and even Arnie on his side to prove it:
After announcing his exit, Mr Giuliani said Mr McCain was “the most qualified candidate” to be president, describing him as someone who could be “trusted in times of crisis”.
Mr McCain said he was honoured to have won the support of an “American hero”, referring to Mr Giuliani’s leadership of New York after the September 11 attacks, and vowed to use him as a “strong right arm” in tackling terrorism.
Arnold Schwarzenegger, the governor of California, is expected on Thursday to endorse Mr McCain, aides to the Arizona senator were reported as saying, adding momentum to his campaign.
Mr Schwarzenegger recently told the Financial Times that Mr McCain was an “action hero” who had proved he could cope with the pressure of being president. “In the end, when people go in the voting booth, those are the things they carry with them in there. They don’t remember so much all the policies,” he said.
No Comments » | 
Giuliani, McCain | 
Permalink
Posted by Andrew Bennett
January 30, 2008
Some updates:
Most media outlets are declaring a win for McCain in Florida [Washington Post]. I’m waiting for concession spam from Floridians for Immigration Enforcement.
Meanwhile, the Hillary Clinton Media Outlet is declaring victory for HRC and washingtonpost.com’s Dana Milbank is not amused:
But in a political stunt worthy of the late Evel Knievel, the Clinton campaign decided to put on an ersatz victory party that, it hoped, would erase memories of Obama’s actual victory in South Carolina’s Democratic primary. “Thank you Florida Democrats!” Clinton shouted to the cheering throng. “I am thrilled to have this vote of confidence.”
Honestly though, what is she suppose to do? I’m pretty sure this whole primary dates mess is not the Clintons’ fault (thought my staff is factchecking) and it’s important Democrats across the nation understand the level of support HRC has in such a key state, so can you blame her?
And an update on the importance of a Sebelius endorsement for Obama following her rebuttal last night…just check out the comments section and you’ll understand that her star didn’t exactly continue its rise [HuffingtonPost.com]. And I’d have to agree, Obama is still the next Obama.
No Comments » | 
Clinton, Democrats, McCain, Obama, Republicans | 
Permalink
Posted by Andrew Bennett
January 29, 2008
Today’s Republican primary is big. Crucial for some [AP], life or death for others [Baltimore Sun]. Which would explain why some interest groups are turning to spam to get the dirtiest messages across:
Floridians for Immigration Enforcement
AMNESTY Truth Express On the Move
FL East Coast Report:
Thanks to the folks who helped with the Florida East Coast AMNESTY Truth Express. We were able to hand out many amnesty information flyers, show the “McCain=AMNESTY” sign on the van to many and provide live reports to three talk radio shows.
No, I was not in Jacksonville over the weekend protesting John McAmnesty, but apparently Floridians for Immigration Enforcement wanted to thank me with a spam-mail anyway. You know, in order to heighten the debate:
Senator McAMNESTY has appointed a former Mexican Cabinet official as a Director in his campaign! And this is the new McCain who professes immigration enforcement#$%@? McCain for President —- of Mexico!
More Multiculturalism:
Actually, this is more like transnationalism. A reader alerted me to the fact that McCain’s “Hispanic Outreach Director” is the same guy who held that job for Mexico’s President Vicente Fox!
…Demonstrators Needed for SW FL:
Sen. McCain and illegal immigration:
But this has not been the case with his disingenuous blustering on illegal immigration - particularly when his cosponsorship of mass-amnesty legislation with Sen. Edward Kennedy is raised.
Mel Martinez to endorse McCain!
Ah, nothing like a little last minute campaign-bigotry.
1 Comment | 
Giuliani, Immigration, McCain, Republicans | 
Permalink
Posted by Andrew Bennett
January 24, 2008
I said it once, and the New York Times will say it again for me: it’s not just politics, the Republican candidates don’t like Romney. Yes, this is, in many ways, a junior high popularity contest:
“The glee the other candidates go after Romney with is really unique…”
“They think he didn’t pay his dues…”
“John McCain and his friends used to beat up Mitt Romney at recess…”
And Romney’s locker-room style defense:
A spokesman for the Romney campaign, Kevin Madden, said, “I think it’s largely driven by the fact that everybody’s taught to tackle the guy on the field with the ball.”
Please. McCain’s venom for Romney was strongest when he had already stripped the ball from the former Massachusetts Governor. Romney has a distinctly different approach to the veteran politician. Mitt knows the rules well, but he’s use to playing in a totally different arena, a totally different sport than McCain, Huckabee and Thompson. I’d bet that even Romney’s staff end up drinking alone while everybody else is joking about them at the bar next-door…
“Never get into a wrestling match with a pig,” Senator John McCain said in New Hampshire this month after reporters asked him about Mr. Romney. “You both get dirty, and the pig likes it.”
1 Comment | McCain, Republicans, Romney | Permalink
Posted by Andrew Bennett
January 23, 2008
In response to the most recent Democratic debate, Lawrence Lessig got about as heated as Lawrence Lessig can get (when he’s not talking about Sonny Bono, that is):
But disappointment is one thing; (this word sounds too harsh, I know, but) disgust is something else. For there was a basic lack of integrity in the Clinton show last night. As a former friend of Clinton put it to me last night, “I now understand just why people hated the Clintons so.” [Lessig.org/blog]
While Lessig may protest too much, his is also a reaction the Clinton camp should be concerned about: how much utility is there in using Bill as a surrogate? Won’t this strategy only bring up bad memories for many Dems and play to Obama’s strength (’hope’ or something that sounds like it)? And even if the Democratic base is risilient to such primitiveness, won’t it at least make them think twice about Hillary’s electibility?
Seems to me the HRC primary campaign is doing nothing to reverse the negative perceptions that will be a bigger problem during the general.
No Comments » | Clinton, Democrats, Obama | Permalink
Posted by Andrew Bennett
January 22, 2008
Fred Thompson drops out of the race [Washingtonpost.com].
Now that I’ve been reminded that Thomopson was once “in” the race, I’m wondering what happened to the Repbulican base that was apparently “craving” Thompson’s entrance over the summer:
…he [Thompson] appears to be in the right place at the right time and could benefit from the almost palpable craving among many Republican base voters for an alternative to the three current top-tier candidates, whom many Republicans, for different reasons, are reluctant to embrace. [The Hill]
So who have these voters been supporting since Thompson’s in response to Thompson’s lackluster campaign? The best guess is Huckabee. If that’s the case, credit the Huckster for a solid defeat of a great actor, but pity the Republican base who will most likely still have to choose from the “big three” (McCain, Romney, Giuliani) after February 5th.
No Comments » | Fred Thompson, Republicans | Permalink
Posted by Andrew Bennett
January 20, 2008
Plenty of coverage to chew on today for the junkies after a bit of a wild ride yesterday. McCain’s win in South Carolina was huge and that’s a big story, but no one is talking about how poorly he did in Nevada. I mean, I understand the Mormon component, I know he didn’t dedicate much in the way of resources, and I’ll concede that Nevada Republicans are an eccentric bunch, but can anyone explain how he managed to lose to Ron Paul? I realize it’s Nevada - and I was just there: the enthusiasm for Paul was palpable - but can’t McCain manage something for being a Southwestern maverick?
The questions remain, but here’s an interesting strategy from the McCain camp in an attempt to connect with young voters: bring your daughter along on the campaign trail and give her a camera and a blog [UK Sunday Times]. John McCain’s daughter Meghan - check that, “hot” daughter according to the web nerdorati - has her own crew as well and provides an in-depth look into the campaign trail. Apparently it involves a lot of waiting around and is hell on your hair (thanks, C).
[Photo Credit: Meghan McCain]
2 Comments | McCain | Permalink
Posted by Andrew Bennett
January 15, 2008
The optimists view of today’s extra-curricular fracas between Obama and Clinton [PBS News Hour MP3 Download]: the media (and, to a lesser degree, voters) are eager to differentiate between these candidates.
Now, back to the issues:
Solid analysis of the “globalization and technology” policies of the candidates who have won primaries so far from Information Week blogger Mary Hayes Weier:
Obama and Huckabee
Clinton and McCain
Not much in the way of insight, but she covers the breadth of what these candidates have presented thus far.
No Comments » | Clinton, Huckabee, McCain, Obama | Permalink
Posted by Andrew Bennett
January 14, 2008
No, not the candidates, the coverage. That’s what The Nation’s Christopher Hayes is asking:
I think we can all agree that day-in, day-out campaign coverage often sucks, but the question is why?
There’s a number of reasons, but primarily I think the papers’ entire approach to covering campaigns is hopelessly flawed and puts reporters in a position in which they can’t help but produce trivinalia.
According to Hayes, your typical campaign reporter is too much of an outsider, is traveling in a pack of like-minded outsiders, and is held hostage by the campaign she’s covering to the extent that she develops “either a kind of contempt for the candidate and the campaign or a strange version of stockholm syndrome.” I also agree with Hayes’ observation that the problem isn’t what the candidates cover (the horse race as opposed to the issues), but how they cover it - his main remedies:
1) Rotate reporters. There’s no reason to simply assign a reporter and have them stay with a campaign. It’s not like you need “expertise” to cover a campaign or there’s a steep learning curve.
2) Go more for features and less daily reporting.
3) Assign campaign coverage to beat reporters. When Obama released his tax plan. the article that ran in the TImes about the plan was authored by the Obama beat reporter Jeff Zeleny. Zeleny’s a perfectly good political reporter, and he’s been following Obama since ‘03, when he was writing for the Trib, but there’s no earthly reason to think he’s well-equipped to report on a tax plan. Meanwhile, the Times happens to have on staff the Pulizer-Prize-winning David Cay Johnston, who is unquestionably the single best tax reporter in the country.
Agreed. The importance of #2 comes to light when you’re subjected to cable news coverage of the campaigs (Hayes is really talking about print coverage here). Forget about features vs. daily coverage, the CNNs of the world are absorbed in hourly coverage of the campaigns and the result is garbage 95% of the time. So with this level of competition on the tubes and the proliferation of coverage on the Internets by amateur journalists, the need for the professionals in print to provide well-researched features (read ‘do their job’) is at a premium.
Also, check out Hayes’ interview on NPR’s On The Media.
1 Comment | Press | Permalink
Posted by Andrew Bennett
