A Second Hand Conjecture

According to the Associated Press, a sequence of interviews with Democratic leaders has revealed this to be the political plan being recommended to the Obama campaign:

1. Tie the Republican to an unpopular President Bush.
2. Let no charge go unanswered.
3. Stress plans to fix the economy.

Well, I’m not sure any of these items is good advice, with a possible qualitative exception on #3.
(more…)

1 Comment »

Some of Bob Woodward’s criticism in his upcoming fourth volume on the Bush presidency: “He had not rooted out terror wherever it existed. He had not achieved world peace.”

No Comments »

(Photo: Alice E. Backer | blog)

Andrew Galasetti at Lyved is an extremely devoted admirer of Obama. While fanatical devotion can blind — Galasetti thinks for instance that the McCain celebrity charge backfired, when the polls suggest a different picture (last week Ras had +6 Obama, now it’s +1 McCain) — it can also be a benefit when you’re looking for someone to find hidden advantages in faults. Often there are adantages, particularly foreign policy advantages, wrapped up inside domestic political vulnerabilities.

(more…)

No Comments »

photo: Citizen Feathers

Feathers has an amusing photograph of Freddy Bernal, the MVR mayor of the Libertador Municipality in Caracas, doing his best George W. Bush impersonation in full cowboy getup. Bernal is one of Hugo Chavez’s most loyal henchmen in the city. He gained some infamy in his own right in 2002, when he was secretly taped ordering members of the Bolivarian Circles to attack civilians who were peacefully demonstrating against the Chavez regime. Several people were killed as a result.

No Comments »

Is the Iraq War hurting John McCain’s candidacy? By “hurting” I’m referring to his struggle to be the true conservative candidate who unites the party. Despite his clear lead in the primary race, McCain has not been able to capture the Christian right (who predominantly go for Huckabee), nor has he been able to win many races without the help of independent voters (strict conservatives breaking mostly for Romney). Indeed, Republicans don’t even seem terribly motivated this election season, as nearly double the number of Democratic voters went to the polls on Super Tuesday compared to Republicans (14.7 million vs. just 8.9 million). Meanwhile, the conservative and libertarian intelligensia (as well as yours truly) have been sniping at McCain from the right, including right-wing diva Ann Coulter who declared that she’ll vote for Hillary (yes, Hillary!) over John McCain. So, what’s going on here when even the hated Hillary Clinton can’t seem to force a consensus amongst the Republican Party to vote for the Maverick?

Amidst the internecine fighting on the right over the McCain “inevitability” train, something has been forgotten: there’s a discernible, even palpable, glimmer of hope on the Iraqi horizon. If Republican voters were as concerned about the Iraq War now as they were in 2004, then McCain would be winning hands down at this point. Since the only positive reason anyone can put forth to vote for McCain is his stance on the war in Iraq [Ed. -- OK, there's this too], it stands to reason that any diminution in the war’s importance as an election issue correlates to a decrease in support for McCain’s candidacy.

In other words, as Republican voters become less concerned about how the war will turn out, they place more importance on other issues — e.g. the economy, abortion, earmarks, values, etc. Because McCain is not perceived as being reliably conservative on all these other issues, he faces greater scrutiny from opinion-makers seeking to advance the small-government, conservative (or libertarian) agenda, and Republicans in general feel free to focus on issues that are closer to home for them personally. Much like Peg suggested as the reason for Rudy’s campaign fizzling out, McCain’s lackluster support amongst the Party base seems to be greatly affected by the decreased urgency and anxiety of the Iraq War, and worries about terrorism in general.

Taking this hypothesis to its logical conclusion, is it possible that Bush’s successes with respect to the GWOT, including the relative post-surge calm in Iraq, will be the undoing of a Republican presidency? Are we on the verge of the Republican Party faithful, who are not only “not in love” with McCain, but also threatening not to “fall in line”, blaming Bush for the loss of the White House? These are strange political times indeed.

2 Comments »

(Listening notes: Magnetic Fields, Husker Du, Queen, Soft Cell, Indigo Girls, The Smith’s, REM, Pet Shop Boys, B-52’s, Scissor Sisters. A homage to Andrew Sullivan of sorts.)

I am here to step into the breach and defend Glenn Reynolds from two people I admire a lot. This week I visited Belgravia Dispatch and came upon this:

I don’t think of Reynolds as a political animal. He has independent integrity. But when push came to shove, Reynolds never challenged in any serious way the abuses of power in this administration nor the extremism of the Malkinesque blogosphere. When a libertarian finds any excuses to ignore or minimize government-sponsored illegality and torture, then he has truly ceased to be a libertarian in any profound sense. If my opinion weren’t so high of his abilities, my disappointment wouldn’t be so deep.

(more…)

2 Comments »