Mitt Romney is someone who is out of touch with the rest of America. Is it because he’s wealthy that we dislike him? No, not at all but his rather greedy persona and money flaunting habits seems to shed light on the fact that he’s not for the people nor for the well being of this country. Unlike legendary entrepreneurs throughout history such as Walt Disney and Steve Jobs, Romney seems to be missing that humble side that Americans seem to connect to and love. Bill Maher, in a rather funny sound bite, points out his money flaunting habits and even compares Romney to the in-your-face artists of hip-hop. Take a look.

(Cross-posted from Warming Law) 

Buried in Friday's LA Times write-up of Barbara Boxer's California-waiver hearing is a development that bears mentioning, courtesy of California AG Jerry Brown's oral testimony:

The outcome of the tailpipe issue may be determined by the next administration, said Brown, who added that he had written the presidential candidates to ask their positions on the waiver. All the Democrats support California's position, but only one Republican, Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), answered Brown's letter in the affirmative.

Testifying Thursday, Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, urged Californians to focus on the Feb. 5 primary and demand that all candidates endorse the waiver.

Pope, who reiterated that point on his personal blog, is absolutely spot-on here in a way that goes beyond even his call to action (more on that after the jump). It's no coincidence that Hillary Clinton made a point of blasting EPA's decision during a campaign speech over the weekend, and that Barack Obama had previously spoken out against it. Standing up for California is a win-win-win move that allows candidates to demonstrate a commitment to mitigating climate change and growing the economy in the process (the rationale that Clinton used), fealty to the rule of law and freedom from undue corporate influence (which featured in Obama's December 20 statement responding to the waiver ruling), and respect for the states' historic roles as “laboratories of democracy.”

This shouldn't be something that requires too much pressure, either– it's more of a basic legal test for anyone, of either party, that wants to serve as our chief constitutional steward. That Ron Paul, who is not generally seen as a climate champion but has assiduously rooted his campaign in respect for the rule of law, is alone on the GOP field for now is appalling. Perhaps that will change once the Michigan primary passes and candidates don't feel an urgent need to pander to the auto industry, and as California citizens, and influential fellow Republicans weigh in. (Note that Governor Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, which joined California's lawsuit against the EPA last week, is often mentioned as a potential running mate for leading contenders.)

We'd go Pope one better, though, regarding just what kind of a test this might be. Checking off a survey box to state that you support the waiver is worthy of some praise, but backing it with actions that don't have to wait until 2009 is a bit more meaningful. Court proceedings might drag out at length, and EPA's response to the hearing's criticism indicates that the general document release being sought (and delayed) might necessitate a time-consuming effort to dig through its results:

EPA Associate Administrator Christopher P. Bliley told Boxer that her request could entail tens of thousands of e-mails and documents and that the agency would get back to her.

Dogged oversight helps quicken the process to be sure, and Boxer ups the rhetorical ante with her statement that failure to release the documents will demonstrate “contempt for Congress and the American people.” And California's lawyers are working feverishly to grease the wheels for a quicker legal hearing, in a case that they definitely ought to win (not that it would stop the administration from appealing to the Supreme Court). At the end of the day, though, the most effective course might be having Congress try to overturn the waiver legislatively, something that (sadly) would require significant outside pressure in order to even have a real chance. 

Standing up for California should, theoretically, be the easy part, necessary to get a “satisfactory” grade; putting real legal and political pressure on the EPA is the true test, one that cuts beyond partisan politics and straight to the heart of our democracy.

(Cross-posted from Working Californians)

Today seemed like an appropriate time to release the second half of our presidential poll on the Republicans, given that all of them are attending the debate here.  It is split into two polling memos from Mellman, our pollster.  The first is on the horserace, post to come later on the issues.  The summary says:

Our recent statewide poll shows Rudolph Giuliani currently sporting a 15-point lead in the California Republican primary. Despite Giuliani’s lead, however, the race is far from over. His advantage is based importantly, though not completely, on a malleable factor: the belief that he would be the strongest general election candidate. At present, John McCain, a popular second choice candidate, provides the only serious competition. Furthermore, if McCain were no longer running, his supporters would be more likely to move towards Giuliani, while Giuliani supporters are less likely to identify McCain as their second choice. While Giuliani is in a strong position, there is opportunity for other candidates to break through to California Republicans between now and February 5, 2008; the race is very much still up-for-grabs.

There is talk that unless McCain raises $20 million in the second quarter he will drop out.  Our polling makes clear that Giuliani would benefit the most from that development.  Considering the manner in which the Republicans allocate their delegates, even those who have lower numbers have an opportunity pick up a few in California.

Giuliani is nearly as well known as McCain and far better liked.

Giuliani not only has the highest overall favorables, but is also well liked by those who know him; his average favorability rating (a figure which takes into account both the direction and intensity of feeling) is 3.03, so that among those who know him, his average rating is just over “somewhat favorable.” Although Romney is less well known than McCain, he is better liked by those who know him (mean favorability of 2.75, compared to 2.70 for McCain). Neither candidate, however, is as popular as Giuliani among those who know them.

For now, Giuliani holds a strong lead, with McCain in second and Romney trailing.  The Thompson in this case is Tommy.  Obviously, if Fred gets into the race, it will shake these numbers up a bit.

Giuliani’s lead is greater (40%) among those paying very close attention to the primary, while Romney (11%) is actually slightly ahead of McCain (10%) in that attentive segment. Among those paying only somewhat close attention, Giuliani maintains a strong lead with 38% of the vote, while McCain’s support increases to 26%; Romney maintains his third place position at 12%. However, among voters who are not following the election closely, Giuliani’s support declines to 33%, McCain is at 21%, and Romney has just 5% of the vote. Nearly 3 in 10 (29%) voters not paying close attention are undecided.

The race shifts among voters who are familiar with all three top-tier candidates. Among these voters, Giuliani’s support holds steady at 36%, while McCain’s total drops to 15% and Romney’s support jumps to second place with 17%; just 14% of these most knowledgeable voters are undecided. This suggests that part of Senator McCain’s support is based on his higher name recognition, an advantage that could disappear as primary day approaches.

Other highlights from the poll: Giuliani’s support is strongest among Californians highly concerned about national security and iraq.  McCain does relatively well among voters concerned about health care.  Republican primary voters now believe Giuliani has the best chance to win the general.  Giuliani and McCain are equally popular second choice candidates.

Much, much more in the full pollster memo on the .