Tag Archives: Presidential

A dead heat in California? Yes, You Can!

The Field Poll on the presidential race is expected out like…um a few minutes.  I’m hearing right now that the race is now within the margin of error.  If this is true, which at this point I am not able to confirm, this would be a tremendous showing of momentum for the Illinois Senator.  Senator Clinton has dominated the polling in the state since well, forever.

Apparently, this was on the KTVU news at 10 here in San Francisco. I don’t know if that means they violated the embargo or what not, but if you saw KTVU news at 10 just now, help us out here.  The numbers I heard from a friend who saw it on Ch. 2 here in SF said that it was running at Clinton 36, Obama 34, Undecided 18.

At any rate, hard data will be all over the California media within a couple of hours, and likely posted at Field’s archives shortly.

UPDATE: Yup, those numbers were correct. Other/Already voted also had 12%. You can now grab the details here (PDF). As CarlsbadDem points out in the comments, this is a huge surge for Obama, and a slight downward trend for Clinton. It looks like the key will be the number of DTSers who vote in the Democratic primary:

Registered Democrats, who the poll finds are accounting for 87% of those likely to vote in the Democratic primary, favor Clinton by six points, 37% to 31%.  However, non-partisans who represent another 13% of likely Democratic primary voters now favor Obama by a five to three margin (54% to 32%).

Also of note in this poll are the general election matchups. They have Obama leading McCain 47-40, but Clinton at only 45-43. This is a marked difference from the December poll which showed very large leads (and slightly larger for Clinton) against McCain. I’m not sure why this is the case, other than perhaps McCain wasn’t considered really viable in December before the New Hampshire primary.

I also want to point out that if you have marked your VBM ballot for a candidate that has dropped out, just bring your ballot to your regular precinct. They should just tear it up or mark it void and then give you a fresh regular ballot.

Clinton’s backdealings lock up delegates

Congratulations to Hillary Clinton for winning New Hampshire. But there is much more at stake to this horse race than the skim surface of the campaign mechanics the mainstream media tells.

Though Hillary Clinton won New Hampshire, her back door dealings have already seem to have secured her a position in the White House, barely trying.

Just like the general election where the electoral college is the only vote that matters, the primaries have a similar system that parallels the electoral college in process. It’s call the delegates and superdelegates.

Here’s an explanation of what they are and how they’re selected. They aren’t voted for at all:

And here is the list of delegates who have already committed to a candidate even BEFORE the primaries:

Clinton’s campaign co-chair is Terri McAuliffe, who works and is very influential in the DNC. He was able to lock all of the DNC for Hillary anyways. What is your opinion of this?

Inevitable Is as Inevitable Does

Wabooom. Kabbbam. Iowa cauces…couple of thoughts:

  • John Edwards’ number rounds up to 30, Hillary Clinton’s rounds down to 29 (by 3/100ths of a point – ouch). There is a reason why $29.99 appears far less than $30.00
  • With same day registration, Chris Dodd and Joe Biden calling no joy, and fierce Baracketting, New Hampshire looks like another upset win for Barack Obama on Tuesday
  • This means Nevada will become Hillary’s first potential win. This puts California boots in play with the ease of traveling to Vegas/Henderson or Reno
  • Expect this to put a f-ton of small dollar money heading to Anyone But Clinton — I think Obama could best $12 million by New Hampshire
  • Clinton isn’t in the top 3 on the huge facebook poll by the League of Young Voters, Moveon, et al.
  • The San Francisco Obama party at Tosca was packed and emotionally loud. Crowd included Paul Hogarth and Frank Russo and Jared Huffman

Have You Read the Headlines?

Have you seen the headlines?

The squabble to be first in deciding the nation’s fate is intensifying. Early states are cleverly inching their primaries in a race to secure voting influence for their citizens. By the end of February, we’ll know who the presidential finalists are before more than half the nation gets a chance to vote, let alone meet the candidates. Sound Fair?

Check out the primary schedule.

The heavily frontloaded primary schedule does all of America a disservice. Leaving the power to decide who the next president of the America can be to a handful of people is just not right. The demographic make up of all the early primary state, even combined, does not accurately represent the American population. For instance, isn’t New Hampshire the third wealthiest state in the nation?

With less than a month left, there seems like there’s no hope. The Washington Post reports that the American people are being tempted by pessimism, and are losing faith in our political system. But, not to fear.
Register to host a caucus at www.nationalcaucus.com and get involved.

It seems like there’s no hope but to accept the circumstances. However, I came across this website, the National Presidential Caucus, that looks to give voters a fair chance to voice their opinions before the primaries kick off. It’s not a national primary or anything like that, don’t let the name mislead you.

Here’s how it works:
1) Post your caucus online
2) Meet offline with some friends, neighbors, whomever to discuss candidates and issues
3) Post your results from your discussions online

It’s as simple as that. It’s really just an effort to encourage and empower civic engagement and voter opinions. So why not…

How can we claim to go across seas to build a democracy, when our own political system at home is suffering? Get involved. sign up to host a caucus in your neighborhood today.

Animated Presidential Election

Orange County animator’s creation becomes the latest 2008 presidential hopeful

Sheep for President!   As America’s elected leaders become increasingly less trustworthy, is it any wonder that people turn to animated characters like Lisa Simpson for their daily dose of truth? How often have you heard logic and reason (albeit a bit profane) within a South Park episode? Nowadays whenever we hear our leaders speak, our first inclination is to question their sincerity. An animated character, however, can voice opinions no human would dare to express with conviction and tenacity. Well a new animated character is now challenging our nation’s political integrity by becoming the latest to join the 2008 race for the White House:  Introducing — “Sheep”.

    Being a non-human objective observer, Sheep offers a refreshingly impartial worldview. His inspiring message is delivered through his website, www.Sheep2008.com, which features video, music and news commentary. Issues addressed include gay rights, Iraq, health care, the environment and homeland security.

    Sheep’s believability is further enhanced by his half-human, half-animal appearance — due to an experimental animal cloning mishap. Along with his “hybrid” constituents, he shares his vision for a nation that has too long been dominated by humans.

    Sheep’s campaign website includes a video documentary on his life experiences; a video series on America off the campaign trail; original politically-charged music; and warrantless wiretapping before a live audience. News headlines and multimedia programs are updated regularly. Free music downloads and campaign materials are also available.

Here’s a video sample from www.Sheep2008.com:

(Don’t see anything? Go HERE)

Is Positive Campaigning Really This Unusual?

(What a flippen surprise. They focus on the money and past 527 rather than what the group is actually doing. – promoted by juls)

Cross-posted at votehope2008.org

The mainstream media has discovered Vote Hope, and it seems like they can’t quite get their heads around it.

While we are thankful for the publicity (any press is good press as long as they get the url right!), it’s clear that it’s going to be a little difficult for some people to grasp an independent campaign that isn’t designed to ruthlessly smear someone. News stories published in two places today, both the L.A. Times and MSNBC’s “First Read”, are focusing on the past history of negative independent campaigns, rather than on the reality of what Vote Hope is trying to do in California.

Part of that is the cynicism around politics that Vote Hope is explicitly fighting, with a grass-roots campaign that is designed to empower Californians to be involved in this presidential race, and to increase voter turnout in communities that are woefully underrepresented in our state’s electorate.

We do recognize, however, that in the landscape of national politics, what we’re trying to do is different and unique. So while we did explain when we launched in the blogosphere last week where we were coming from, it’s worth saying again.

The people who are leading Vote Hope are activists who have worked in California politics for the last two decades, around issues of economic justice, education and voter engagement. Our PAC is working to win the Feb. 5 California primary for Obama, but we will also use the 2008 election to support local and state candidates who share our values, and to educate California voters about the early primary election.

Contrary to the conventional wisdom, it is possible to spend political money on something that is good for democracy, and that is precisely what Vote Hope is doing. Once the mainstream press realizes that, I hope the story will remain interesting to them, because it truly is a transformative moment that is worth their attention.

Inflated Clinton Poll Theory in California

Why is there a big gap in 2008 California Presidential Democratic Primary in the two most recent poll results?

Hillary Rodham Clinton leads the Democratic presidential candidates in California, with four in 10 likely primary voters saying they will support her, according to a Field Poll released Tuesday.

That is a higher level of support than she has registered in national polling or in a recent statewide poll by the Public Policy Institute of California, which found her leading with 35 percent.

Chris Bowers has started a new page on MyDD dedicated to the Inflated Clinton Poll Theory and his recent calculations of national polls are in line with what we are seeing in California.

Bowers examines whether Clinton performs worse as poll samples are tightened. Since Field Poll only interviewed Registered Voters, here is the situation at that level.

POLL (PDF) Likely Dems Reg Voters Perc. Clinton
PPIC 498 1,542 32.3% 35%
Field 417 1,093 38.2% 41%

Bowers summarizes why this debate is important:

Right now, this is still just a theory. However, it is an important theory to test, because accurate reports on who is currently ahead in the race for the Democratic nomination, and how much that person is ahead by, are crucial to developing an informed Democratic primary and caucus electorate. Whether or not we like it, and whether or not we think it should, information of this sort has an impact on the nomination campaign. As such, it would be a disservice to the Democratic primary and caucus electorate if we did not work to make certain they had accurate information on who is winning, and by how much that person is winning. I imagine there are quite a few Republicans out there who feel the same way about their party.

One professional pollster (read through to his comment) suggests that California may be particularity prone to this which could mean Hillary may not even have a lead:

Among the general election voters who claimed they would vote in the Dem primary, Clinton scored eight points higher than among the past primary voters.

UPDATE: Could there be a reason for this?

New Kind of Political Video talking TO the candidate..just watch

There is a new Wes Clark video that is very unusual at YouTube. Instead of talking about a candidate, in this case Wes Clark, it speaks directly to Wes Clark. I hope this really does go viral. I feel it has a message that Wes Clark needs to hear.

Beyond that impact on Clark himself I think this is the beginning of the ability of a group, individual or campaign to create their own channel that will talk directly to the candidate or from the candidate to the public…with no press editing. I’ll be posting more on this topic as it can impact local, regional, state and federal races.

The full channel name is YouTube/Polcampaign. There is only one video there at least for the moment. I will be putting this on my blogs. I hope other blog owners and members do the same.

This is not a 100% declaration of support for a Clark candidacy on my part.While most know I was heavily involved in the Draft and Campaign, I’m trying to keep an Open Mind for a couple of our declared candidates as they make their case. But I want to listen to Wes Clark too. I firmly believe he will elevate the campaign once in the game. And I think this video may help in that effort.

If Wes Clark again gets a firm demonstration of his built-in support perhaps it will impact his decision making. While most of us expect him to run, based on his own comments, I believe this is a time to demonstrate his support. Circulating this video is one easy way to make the support obvious..and elevate the campaign discussion at the same time. A great President can only help California, the US and the world. I’m all for having all the good people in the race!

‘The New Primaries’…a Disaster in the Making?

[Originally published at The Political Dogfight as part one of four this is a slightly edited version.]

I seriously question the value of the new Primary System developed by the DNC then jumped on by other opportunistic states. February 5, 2008 looms large as a result of these changes.

David Brooks recently had a column about the advice he had for Republican candidates. It was his contention that all the primaries on Feb. 5, 2008 wouldn’t be the decisive ones. He still thought the traditional first three primaries would set the media tone. And he thought the Media tone would set the race on the first Tuesday of Feb.

While I don’t agree that the first three primaries will decide the race, and I don’t agree with Brooks in general, I think he is absolutely right about a slightly different topic: Media Tone

Think of the situation today as seen in the daily papers and on the news programs! According to them there are only 3 real candidates in the race: Senator Clinton, Senator Obama and John Edwards…and John Edwards is coming in a weak third in terms of media coverage. (Or his was until the unfortunate announcement of his wife’s recurring health issues.]

This issue of Media Tone/Media Noice is the real problem.

A few candidates are sucking the Media Oxygen out of the atmosphere and leaving other truly qualified candidates without the ‘free’ media (news) that they need to become more widely known. If this is happening to John Edwards think of the others.

Think of Joe Biden or Chris Dodd. Whether they are your favorites or not, they deserve to be heard and considered. Each of them has substantive experience and each is just as substantive as Hillary Clinton, Obama and John Edwards.

  (More on this topic another time: Rhetoric vs Substance and Goverance in the Election of 2008. )

Will candidates that aren’t getting the ‘free’ media of the Clinton’s etc., have even a fighting chance in 2008? Will they be able to raise the $25-$40Million they need by the fall? If they can’t will this silence voices that should be heard?

I think that forshortening the race does the country and the party a diservice. Now we have an Invisible Primary already in progress with people being labeled winners and losers….and it’s all in the media’s programming…..it’s pure Media Noise.

Since it has no actual voting today, this Primary, since it’s all in the Media and nowhere else, I call ‘The Invisible Primary’. And that Invisible Primary is in full swing.

I despair that we will again nominate people who seem great in short primary seasons,(Gore who was annointed and Kerry who came from nowhere in the most unusual Primary in memory), and then we saw they didn’t have an Authentic voice on the campaign trail! They didn’t know how to remove the Political Mask.

I believe that the American people hunger for an Authentic Voice, not the politicians mask that so many wear and use to speak. My desired outcome would be to have a nominee with an Authentic voice that is backed by large scale experience and augmented by roadmaps to tangible goals with benchmarks built in to those roadmaps.

Rhetoric, however seductive, will not win. Fundraising shouldn’t be a qualifier either for the nominee.

  This is Part 1 of more to come on ‘The Invisible Primary’. Stay tuned for more parts and metrics on the numerics of February 5, 2008.