Tag Archive for 'USA Election 2008'

NO on 8 - US election: the propositions

Published
by
Kim
1 month ago
in Activism, Foreign Elections, Lesbian and Gay, Sexuality and USA
. 11 Comments

Some US states which were influenced by the Progressive direct democracy movement in the early years of last century (which also saw direct elections to the US Senate and the beginnings of the presidential primary) have “propositions” as part of their electoral system - basically legislation or constitutional amendments which can be put on the ballot by direct voter iniative. Californians know how many bizarre votes you can cast in one go (and California also has the recall procedure for state officials - which is how Arnie became Gubernator). It’s largely in the South and the West, though a lot of municipalities also allow direct votes (for instance on bond issues and other local fiscal matters). Since the 1970s, when both anti-gay referenda and the famous Californian “tax revolt” (which incidentally, Murdoch’s Australian tried to transplant to Australia with negligible results), highly ideological measures have often featured on state ballots. Ann at Feministing has a partial list of some of the more egregious ones around the states tomorrow.

The most prominent has been Proposition 8 in California, which would remove the rights to marriage same sex couples currently enjoy. There’s been a vigorous No on 8 campaign in the blogosphere, and here’s a vlog from Riese and Haviland, who some may know and love from Riese’s L Word recap blogging (or maybe that’s just me!):

If Proposition 8 is defeated, there really would be some sign of a shifting cultural climate in the States. A complete list of ballot initiatives and propositions is at CNN, where voting figures will be posted as they become available.

US election: The Senate - race towards 60 Democratic seats?

Published
by
Kim
1 month ago
in Foreign Elections, Polls and USA
. 6 Comments

A sign of a campaign in trouble is normally the plea to make sure the winner doesn’t win too big. In the Australian context, we’ve often had the “send a message” ploy from Oppositions in state elections - Premier X and Party Y is bound to win big, so vote your grumbles and make them more responsive. When the incumbent’s support is soft, it can win you the election - two examples that come to mind are Wayne Goss in Queensland in 1995 (though strictly speaking it took a contested election and a subsequent by-election, etc, etc) and Jeff Kennett in Victoria in 1999. There was a twist on this tactic last year from the Liberals federally - with the “Labor coast to coast” scare, though that was despair from the incumbent rather than an insurgent Opposition. In America, where the legislative and executive branches are elected separately, it’s easy to run this sort of thing - hence the ploy from the McCain/Palin campaign to start a furore over “leftest government ever” if Obama is added to big Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress.

Mind you, I can’t see personally how anyone would be scared of Harry Reid, or why he’s some ultra-liberal commie pinko. And Nancy Pelosi and “San Francisco values”? Well, look what happened in ‘06. In the House, the Democrats are hunting deep in red state territory and in the Republican suburbs and exurbs, actively campaigning in over 60 GOP held districts, while the Republicans play defence. Gains of 20-30 seats are expected.

But there’s probably more interest in the Senate contest. The Senators up for election this time around were elected in 2002 - a good year for Republicans. There’s some hope that the Democrats will increase their current majority from 51, perhaps reaching 60 - a point at which the minority can no longer hold legislation hostage through filibuster threats. (Note, though, that party discipline is nowhere near as tight as it is in parliamentary systems, though it’s much tighter among the Republicans than it used to be since they became more ideologically unified.) The Dems now include among their wafer thin majority two independents - Socialist (more like European style social democrat) Bernie Sanders of Vermont and “Independent Democrat” Joe Lieberman of Connecticut. Lieberman may well lose his committee chair after the election, but in terms of his re-election prospects, he’s still got some incentive to caucus with the majority.

Nate Silver has all the good oil on which races to watch. Stirling Newberry also has a worthwhile analysis of the contests in the South - Virginia, where former Governor Mark Warner (D) (and former 08 presidential hopeful) should easily take Richard Lugar’s seat after retirement, Georgia, where Jim Martin (D) looks good against Saxy Chambliss (R) (and where there might be a runoff under state law if the Libertarian candidate can prevent either the Dem or Repub from getting 50%), and North Carolina where Elizabeth Dole (R) looks to be in trouble. Longer shots are one of the two races in Mississippi (to fill the unexpired part of Trent Lott’s term), and Kentucky where GOP Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is vulnerable. John Cormyn’s seat in Texas is a really long shot, but turnout - if it’s big and big for Obama - may well be a factor in making a lot of the races tighter than they appear to be.

Continue reading ‘US election: The Senate - race towards 60 Democratic seats?’

US election: links post

Published
by
Kim
1 month ago
in Blogging, Foreign Elections, Polls, Religion, Sociology and USA
. 25 Comments

Excitement, or maybe nerves, is building:

I’ll admit it. I just can’t concentrate. How many times can I check 538, pollster, or real clear politics? Hundreds of times a day. I arrived at my office at 8AM with the best of intensions. It’s 10:50. I can’t get anything done. I don’t have any high hopes for tomorrow’s productivity either. Who else is an anxious wreck? Anyone calm?

Martin Kettle looks at why Democrats are stuck in the subjunctive:

What is really happening, I think, is that Obama is going to win, and the Democrats are going to do spectacularly well in the Senate and House races too. But the mood here is like a cup final where your team is ahead with a few minutes to go. Those last few minutes seem to take forever. So near and yet so far. You overreact to every little event on the pitch as the time drags on. You scream manically at the referee to blow the whistle. Right now, Democrats are in that position. They just want it to be over now. But deep down, they don’t really think that they will throw this one away. They just want the whistle to blow so they can cast off the subjunctive and start celebrating.

The last great white hope (sorry!) for McCain may be the Bradley effect, but Thomas Noyes thinks it’s non-existent, while Stephen Guess discusses the terminological inexactitude surrounding the “socialist” charge, and its ideological implications.

Looking beyond election day, Gary Sauer-Thompson thinks the Republicans will be reduced to a Southern and Western rump. In this context, it’ll be interesting to see if Connecticut Republican Christopher Shays loses his seat. Shays is the last GOP House member left in New England, and the only survivor from the wipeout of what remained of the once influential liberal and moderate Republicans of the North-East after the 2006 election. But the South is changing too, and Sasha Abramsky examines how the GOP’s lock on the region could be broken tomorrow. Firedoglake assesses the prospects for a Senate super-majority in the South, which is the battleground for some of the last close seats to take the Democrats close to a filibuster proof majority of 60. That majority would include Joe Lieberman, though he’s not flavour of the month among the Senate Dems (or anyone else bar John McCain, probably).

And if Sarah Palin wants to be the GOP’s standard bearer after a McCain defeat, it might be worth having a squizzy at her bizarre religious affiliations and why she’s just outed herself as a Klingon. One thing is for sure - the Republicans and the noise machine won’t take defeat lying down.

Related post: What to watch and what to expect.

Update: Some interesting links from Xeni at Boing Boing, including an election FAQ.

James Ridgeway at Comment is Free looks at the structural barriers to change Obama will face (including those within the Democratic party).

Update: An interesting post from Jon Perr on the “character war” waged against Democrats.

US election: What to expect and what to watch

Published
by
Kim
1 month ago
in Foreign Elections, Polls and USA
. 41 Comments

I’ll be updating this post as we get closer to Wednesday, but it’s worth making a few points at the outset:

Exit Polls: Take these with a grain of salt. In the states which allow early voting, almost 30 million have already turned out - with big advantages in many states in terms of the proportion of registered Democrats and independents voting over registered Republicans. Obama has “banked”, if you like, a lot of the support he had at the top of the range of his poll results. That doesn’t necessarily mean that he won’t get a lot of support on election day - the number of genuine undecideds would be very low at this point. The race is basically frozen - there hasn’t been much “tightening” and McCain has run out of time. The early voting advantage also means a smoother turnout the vote operation on the day itself, and all the evidence is that the Republicans’ much touted turnout advantage has been completely reversed. In fact, if you put together a lot of what we know about the lack of volunteers and enthusiasm in the GOP camp, this could be quite important.

In addition, the chance of dirty dealing on the results is lessened because a lot of the African-American vote has deliberately turned out early to minimise shenanigans and maximise the chance of votes being counted. So… that takes us to…

Why people are still saying the race could go either way… It’s partly the meejah trying to maintain interest, and partly both campaigns have an interest in making sure their voters think it’s important to turn out. And then there’s Republican denialism and their well known habit of assuming that you can create your own reality. And Democratic nerves.

States in play: Here’s the Kerry/Bush map from 2004 (courtesy of Wikipedia):

The latest polls have Obama ahead in all the Kerry states, and leading in the following Bush states - New Mexico, Virginia, Florida, Ohio, Missouri, North Carolina, Nevada and Iowa. Outside chances are Georgia, North Dakota, Montana, West Virginia and McCain’s home state of Arizona. McCain appears to have a lot of eggs in the Pennsylvania basket, but it doesn’t look likely. The invaluable Nate Silver discusses possible McCain electoral math scenarios here, and the key states to watch here.

Update: Nate Silver sums up where the latest polling leaves the race:

Far more important, of course, is the race for 270 electors. It appears almost certain that Obama will capture all of the states won by John Kerry in 2008. Pennsylvania, while certainly having tightened somewhat over the course of the past two weeks, appears to be holding at a margin of about +8 for Obama, with very few remaining undecideds. Obama also appears almost certain to capture Iowa and New Mexico, which were won by Al Gore in 2000. Collectively, these states total 264 electoral votes, leaving Obama just 5 votes shy of a tie and 6 of a win.

Obama has any number of states to collect those 5 or 6 votes. In inverse order of difficulty, these include Colorado, Virginia, Nevada, Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, Missouri and Indiana. Obama is the signficant favorite in several of these states; winning any one of them may be fairly difficult for John McCain, but winning all of them at once, as John McCain probably must do, is nearly impossible.

Robert Corr has tweaked a map of poll closing times in the various states, adding Australian times to it as a guide for tomorrow, and Nate Silver has prepared an hour by hour guide of what to look for as the results come in.

Update: Related post: Election eve links.

Update: Howard Dean’s pollster at Salon on how to read the numbers.

Update: Related post: What to watch for in the Senate races.

Update: Nate Silver on ten reasons why you should ignore exit polls.

More on Nixonland; of cultural politics and culture wars

Published
by
Mark
1 month ago
in Authoritarianism, Culture, Foreign Elections, History, Howardia and USA
. 35 Comments

In a previous post on expectations of whether an Obama win will reshape politics and end the culture wars, I briefly discussed Rick Perlstein’s Nixonland, which I read recently. The title, incidentally, comes from a passage in a speech by Adlai Stevenson in the 1956 Presidential election, when the Democrats played on Eisenhower’s recent heart attack to stir up fears of Nixon becoming President - convinced as they were that attacking the genial Ike himself would be in vain:

Our nation stands at the fork in the political road. In one direction lies a land of slander and scare; the land of sly innuendo, the poison pen, the anonymous phone call and hustling, pushing, shoving; the land of smash and grab and anything to win. This is Nixonland. America is something different.

Perlstein emphasises the dissonance between Stevenson’s claims to high minded political virtue and his own tactics:

The courtly type, he couldn’t campaign directly against a dying war hero; instead he ran against the man who might replace him. And he did it in a singularly uncourtly fashion. He wrote his friend John Kenneth Galbraith, the (courtly) Harvard economist, “I want you to write the speeches against Nixon. You have no tendency to be fair.” Galbraith acknowledged that as a “noble compliment.”

There isn’t much evidence that Stevenson’s “jeremiads” helped his cause much. His loss to Ike in 56 was comprehensive, and its dimensions were greater than those of his first defeat in 52.

In another excellent book on Nixon, in this case on his various images in the American cultural imagination, David Greenberg emphasises that liberal attacks on the Republican’s devilish character tended to backfire. Nixon’s Shadow highlights the genuineness of the identification between Nixon and many voters, and debunks the claims that such identification was nefariously produced by artifice. Artifice is one of the perennial political arts. Continue reading ‘More on Nixonland; of cultural politics and culture wars’

Those shifty Ayrab eyebrows

Published
by
Kim
1 month ago
in Film, TV, Video etc, Foreign Elections, Levity, Race and USA
. 5 Comments

Not the Sarah Palin campaign… or???

Après le Deluge…

Published
by
Kim
1 month ago
in Blogging and Foreign Elections
. 6 Comments

So, the netroots thing has its role to play in inspiring enthusiasm and turnout, combating stoopid talking points, etc, etc, but what future for the liberal/left blogosphere in the States in the event of an Obama win?

Michael Bérubé recalls the wonders (ahem) of the Clinton administration, and has some advice for the collective(ist) tubes:

But perhaps the left blogosphere could be of some use in this regard, no? It needn’t be consolidated fully into Obama Enterprises Inc.; it could serve instead as a forum for writers dedicated to things like “hope” and “change” and “arguing that Obama was wrong to cave on FISA and better not do that kind of thing as President.” Of course, it could also serve as a forum for charting and mocking all manner of Ace-of-Confederate-Red-State-Yankeespade wingnuts as they venture into new realms of sheer barking lunacy that even the world’s sheerest barkingest lunatics have hitherto been unable to imagine. That might be fun. And it could do “shorters” and cat blogging and Theory Tuesdays and Friday Random Tens too. It’s a blogosphere. It’s a big place, with many many tubes.

Exit Nixonland, stage left?

Published
by
Mark
1 month ago
in Culture, Economics, Feminism, Foreign Elections, History, Media, Polls, Poverty, Race, Religion, Sociology, The Web and USA
. 43 Comments

Writing in Salon, Gary Kamiya describes the near hysteria to which “movement conservatives” are reduced in confronting a likely Obama victory:

…typical of the Limbaugh-inflected (or infected) movement as a whole is the apocalyptic attitude of right-wing columnist Mark Steyn, who thundered that an Obama victory “would be a ‘point of no return,’ the most explicit repudiation of the animating principles of America.”

The ludicrous hyperbole of such Jeremiads is self-refuting. Americans are desperate to fix their economy, end a ruinous, endless war and restore a sense of common purpose to civic life. As they face these challenging real-world goals, the abstract buzzwords trotted out by the right ring hollow.

Of course, Obama hasn’t won the election yet, and it’s vaguely possible that he may not, though highly unlikely if the polls are taken into account.

Kamiya’s analysis of the internal contradictions of the American right is sharp, and it’s certainly true that the movement conservatives’ dogmatic bag of tricks isn’t holding up too well in confrontation with reality. (And there’s some amusement to be gained from observing the cognitive dissonance in the right wing blogosphere.) But I wonder whether the implication - drawn by some - that an Obama victory would represent an epochal end to the culture wars craziness is overstated.

Obama’s election would, more than almost any other Democratic candidate, represent the long-overdue crushing of the barely-disguised racist “Southern Strategy” pursued by the GOP since the time of Richard Nixon. In doing so it would also represent the effective end of the Christian Right as a driving force in US governmental politics.

Continue reading ‘Exit Nixonland, stage left?’

The Reds are coming!

Published
by
Mark
1 month, 1 week ago
in China, Developing world, Economics, Europe, Foreign Elections, Health, International, Markets, Polls and Sociology
. 27 Comments

I’m not sure if I’m the only one who found the juxtaposition on the news last night of discussion of global regulation at a meeting between Chinese and EU leaders and George W. Bush’s “free markets are great!” remarks rather odd. I suspect two things are at work here - first, the defensive reaction to loudly proclaim your ideological purity even at a time when your actions belie your words, and secondly, the related posturing of the Republicans doing their level best to damn Obama as a socialist (which is also rather strange as John McCain wants to spend $300 billion buying up mortgages). For what it’s worth, it doesn’t look like the red smear is working - unsurprisingly polls are finding that a large majority of US voters don’t mind the idea of higher taxes on those earning more than $250000 a year to fund a healthcare plan. Conjuring up these atavistic spectres (”communism!”, “socialised medicine!”) isn’t spooking too many people.

The GOP might also be a tad influenced by Alan Greenspan’s concession that his ideological predispositions led him into errors which contributed to the global financial crisis, which John Quiggin argues illustrates the bankruptcy of the “efficient markets hypothesis” and demonstrates that financial markets have a tendency towards creating instability, rather than the other way around.

So, I think there’s a bit of projection going on - amidst the ruins of their ideological landscape, the GOP are trying to cast the Democrats in the role of the enemies of market freedoms, whose benefits (in the form in which they existed) are looking quite illusory. Continue reading ‘The Reds are coming!’

Stephen Colbert sums up the McCain campaign

Published
by
Kim
1 month, 1 week ago
in Foreign Elections and Levity
. 21 Comments

[Via Crooks & Liars where you can watch the video.]

I for one appreciate the McCain campaign treating us like children. McCain will bring us back to a simpler time. A time when you could identify your neighbors’ jobs by the hats they wore. Like Sam the Fireman, Bill the Cowboy and Jose the stereotype. These are the people in your neighborhood. The people that you meet when you’re walking down the street. They’re the people that you meet each day. And what the people in your neighborhood, the Joe the Plumber, the Wendy the Waitress need are tax cuts for the wealthy and off shore drilling. They don’t need universal health care or last names.

Pennsylvania McCain’s saviour: What’s with that?

Published
by
Kim
1 month, 1 week ago
in Foreign Elections, Race and USA
. 13 Comments

It’s getting pretty difficult based on the current state of the polls for John McCain to map out a strategy for electoral college victory, with all the Kerry states looking pretty good for Obama and the Democrats looking competitive in quite a number of Bush states - such as Virginia, Florida, Iowa and quite a few others. So there’s been a fair bit of interest in why the McCain campaign has been pouring resources into Pennsylvania. Nate Silver’s projections currently show Obama winning there by 9.7 points.

One suspicion is that McCain’s campaign is relying on the “Bradley effect”. Nate Silver also has a convincing argument as to why that “effect” may not manifest itself at all.

The possible reasons for the Pennsylvania focus are deconstructed at FiveThirtyEight.Com and Obsidian Wings. The consensus appears to be that this strategy is a triumph of hope over reason. The punchline?

As a famous Democrat once said, of course, hope is not a strategy.

The American Possum (and the Australian Possum)

Published
by
Kim
1 month, 2 weeks ago
in Blogging, Elections, Federal Elections, Foreign Elections, Politics, Polls, Sociology, Technology, The Web and USA
. 5 Comments

When I first discovered FiveThirtyEight.Com (courtesy of Down and Out of Sài Gòn on one of the American election threads here at LP, if I recall correctly), I thought of Nate Silver as America’s Possum. Coincidentally, there’s a profile of Silver published in New York magazine which makes some very similar points about the emergence of a statistician doing psephological wonkery as an avocation into a major source of expertise and information on elections as an article sounding that theme from Monash University Journalism Professor Chris Nash in the new edition of the Pacific Journalism Review.

Just think what elections would be like without Possums and Silvers! If all we had to rely on for psephological goodness was the dead tree media…

Rational or “values” voting?

Published
by
Kim
1 month, 2 weeks ago
in Culture, Ethics, Foreign Elections, Media, Race, Religion and USA
. 10 Comments

Gary Sauer-Thompson has a really good point to make about the way that Colin Powell has justified his decision to endorse Barack Obama:

Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama on Meet the Press was based on a form of public political reasoning reasoning that addresses issues not personalities, and engages in analysis not demonization. It is a thoroughgoing critique of McCain’s issue-free, fear-mongering campaign and a rejection of the politics of scapegoating and bullying that have defined the Bush years.

As Sauer-Thompson observes, Powell’s response to the constant invocation of Obama’s “Muslim” middle name is also equally as significant (and there can just be no doubt that the McCain campaign’s linking of Obama to “terrorists” is meant to reinforce such suspicions - which have been put about all year by the noise machine). Powell has joined an increasing number of prominent moderate Republicans - such as Susan Eisenhower and Lincoln Chaffee, to name only a few, who have rejected the political tactics of division and emnity which have characterised recent GOP campaigns. While the wingnuts would no doubt live to shriek another day under an Obama presidency, a popular rejection of the poisonous culture wars would be a very significant event indeed.

Obama v. McCain: Debate Round 3 open thread

Published
by
Kim
1 month, 2 weeks ago
in USA
. 44 Comments

With Obama reaching new heights in the polls, Nate Silver more or less sums it up:

It’s fairly unusual for a candidate to have such a sustained run of momentum so deep into the campaign cycle. And it does appear to be real momentum, with some real feedback loops: the worse McCain’s poll numbers become, the more desperate his campaign looks, and the more desperate his campaign looks, the worse his poll numbers become.

McCain now has to go on a run of his own, a large enough run to wipe at least 8 points off of Obama’s lead, and perhaps more like 9 or 10 to cover his inferior position in the Electoral College and the votes that Obama is banking in early and absentee balloting. It is imperative that McCain does not just draw tomorrow night’s debate, does not just win a victory on points, but emerges with a resounding victory, the sort that leaves the spin room gasping for air.

There’s always the possibility that McCain might make the “one term” promise that’s supposed to have been tossed around in his campaign for a long time, as a final attempt at one of his crazybrave “game changers”, but with Palin now very much on the nose with independents and swing voters, that doesn’t look too clever. Meanwhile, Obama may have set a bit of a trap for Walnuts by claiming he’s too yella to raise William Ayers to his face. McCain says he’ll bring up Ayers. Given that most people think the Obama hangs with terrsts card is a big downer, except with the more rabid elements of the base and Fox News and the right wing bloggers, this may be a very bad move.

Update [by Mark] Liveblogging at FiveThirtyEight.com, Feministe, Feministing, Crooks & Liars, Think Progress and this girl called automatic win.

The state of capitalism today II

Published
by
Mark
1 month, 3 weeks ago
in Apocalypse, Disasters, Economics, Europe, Foreign Elections, International, Markets, Media, Nationalism, Politics, Sociology and USA
. 28 Comments

SocProf over at The Global Sociology Blog and I must be reading the same things, and thinking along similar lines, because I had planned to link to precisely the same articles she highlights in an update to my recent post on the state of the global financial crisis.

In The Guardian, Will Hutton explains why measures to halt the cascading crisis have been ineffectual to date. He might have made more explicit the implication that one of the basic structural problems is that action taken at the level of the nation state can be counter-productive given the disseminations and movements of capital, and that there are real domestic political barriers to coordinated action, as well as all the obvious problems of concertation through institutions such as the EU and the G20.

But he does make this point - harmonising with the note I’ve been sounding repeatedly - very clearly indeed:

There was no effective opposition. The left and organised labour collapsed as intellectual, social and political forces; there was no conviction that any alternative to this shareholder value-driven, financial, ’securitised’ capitalism existed, or any political muscle to support it even if there were. Mainstream culture moved away from public purpose and fairness; the new priorities were individual self-fulfilment, personal experience and loyalty to self.

Hutton is perhaps more sanguine than I am, though, about the capacity of state action to turn all this around. Continue reading ‘The state of capitalism today II’