Election 2008

Los Angeles — “Gravitas,” that quality defined as credible expression of knowledge and purpose, was the watchword of the national security discussion. Who would have more of this essential quality on “Day One,” and who has displayed more in his/her political actions to date? Both candidates have skillfully made their practiced debating points on the October 2002 Congressional Resolution, which Hillary voted for, and which authorized military action against Iraq. Hillary did her best with her “If I had known then what I know now” line, and there is no sign of substantial disadvantage to her or advantage to Obama. Who has more “gravitas” is a question left unresolved.

Los Angeles — All campaigns need shorthand phrases, and for Hillary, the experience issue is kicked off by her reference to “Day One,” her first imagined day in the Oval Office as President. She would have the experience to be effective on “Day One,” while by inference her opponents would not. Barack’s response to this argument lacks a shorthand phase, which is one of the difficulties he faces when making a rebuttal in debate.

Los Angeles — Interestingly, foreign and security affairs rated mention by both candidates as they answered the question, What are your principal policy differences? Obama’s choice of words was, as always, original. He said he wanted to “elevate” diplomacy so that it serves U.S. interests. Hillary sounded a note similar to language that Madeleine Albright used in remarks in San Francisco last week. She said she wanted a “realistic and optimistic” foreign policy. We should not “put the prestige of the Presidency on the line” by committing to meet with the worlds worst dictators in the first year.

Los Angeles — In a 90 minute debate, what makes the critical difference? We’ve heard Hillary Clinton use the expression “Gotcha Moment,” meaning a faux pas that a candidate stumbles into. Our electronic media are well known — notorious — for their tendency to emphasize moments of conflict. Tonight we’re looking for not just how people look, or who reacts best when the sparks fly, but who captures the best thoughts, expresses them best, and shows those qualities of courage that were summarized by Hemingway’s definition: Grace under pressure.

Los Angeles — Tonight the road to the White House goes via California.

As the crowds for tonight’s historic debate gather outside the Kodak Theatre, the role of California in electing the next U.S. President is inescapable. The final Republican Debate last night (see my posts below from the Reagan Library) took place in nearby Simi Valley.

Tonight’s debate, in the hall where the Oscars are usually handed out, may give the winner the world’s most important political award.

California has the largest number of Convention delegates to be awarded to both parties’ political conventions.

And the largest number of Electoral College votes for President.

And the most political contributions. (CNN’s excellent bar graphs help tell the story.)

Now, with the California Republican and Democratic primaries taking place next Tuesday, along with votes in 23 other states, this state finally enjoys the advantage of timing. Unlike earlier Presidential election years, when this state held its primaries in June, long after the Republicans and Democrats usually had selected a de facto nominee through votes in other states’ primaries, this year the way California votes really does matter.

In fact, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger could hardly contain his satisfaction yesterday, speaking to reporters at the Reagan Library, that this state “finally is playing its proper role.”

A few more numbers: (more…)

SIMI VALLEY — For the record, any discussion of the “timetables” argument this evening between John McCain and Mitt Romney should start with the actual text of the Good Morning America Q&A with Mitt Romney, from April 2007:

Question: “Do you believe that there should be a timetable in withdrawing the troops?”

Romney: “Well, there’s no question that the President and Prime Minister (Nouri) al-Maliki have to have a series of timetables and milestones that they speak about. But those shouldn’t be for public pronouncement. You don’t want the enemy to understand how long they have to wait in the weeds until you’re going to be gone. You want to have a series of things you want to see accomplished in terms of the strength of the Iraqi military and the Iraqi police, and the leadership of the Iraqi government.”

Based on this quote, McCain attacked Romney in the closing days before the Florida primary for having supported a withdrawal timetable instead of the troop “surge.” Romney protested at that time — as he did again tonight — that McCain misrepresented his position. It began like this:

Question: Obviously, Iraq is still a major issue in this campaign, and over the last few days there’s been a real back-and-forth going on here. Senator McCain has said over and over again that you supported a timetable for a phased withdrawal from Iraq. Is that true?

Romney: Absolutely, unequivocably, absolutely no. I have never, ever supported a specific timetable for exit from Iraq. And it’s offensive to me that someone would suggest that I have. And I have noted that everyone from Time magazine to Bill Bennett over there to actually CNN’s own analysts, he said it was a lie and it’s absolutely wrong. I do not support that, never have. We’ve had — we’ve “ and Senator McCain pointed to an interview I had back in April with ABC, when I said that our president and their prime minister should have timetables and milestones. We have timetables and milestones for progress that we’re making together. But I never suggested a date specific to withdraw and, actually, she asked me a question and that question was: “If Congress were to give you a date specific for withdrawal, would you, Senator, veto it?” I said I’d veto it. I’m opposed to setting a specific date for withdrawal. By the way, we’ve had, since that time, 10-12 debates. Senator McCain never raised that question in any of those debates. If he ever wondered what my position was, he could have raised it. I instead have pointed out time and time again, and let me make it absolutely clear again tonight, I will not pull our troops out until we have brought success in Iraq, and that means, for me, that we do not have safe havens for Al Qaida or Hezbollah or anyone else, that our troops have secured the population from that kind of threat, that they will not have safe havens from which they could launch attacks against us. And if there’s any misunderstanding, those words should make it perfectly clear, as have every single debate that I’ve attended…

Question: Senator…

Romney: … 15 debates. I do not propose nor have I ever proposed a public or secret date for withdrawal. It’s just simply wrong. And by the way, raising it a few days before the Florida primary, when there was very little time for me to correct the record, when the question that was most frequently asked is, “Oh, you’re for a specific date of withdrawal,” sort of falls in the kind of dirty tricks that I think Ronald Reagan would have found to be reprehensible. (APPLAUSE)

Question: Senator McCain, tough words.

McCain: Well, of course, he said he wanted a timetable..

From there, things deteriorated. Readers can check the transcript if interested, but suffice it to say that it is unlikely that John McCain and Mitt Romney will wind up as running mates. McCain wants to keep the story line, at least for the next several days, on his steadfast views on the “surge,” and depict Romney as vacillating in his support; Romney wants to change the focus to his business savvy and skill as executive and governor.

McCain may enjoy some success in pushing this line, based on his reputation for “straight talk,” and based on Romney’s reputation for talk that is sometimes — well, not so straight. Although Romney in general spoke clearly and convincingly tonight, he does have a tendency to dodge questions in a less than artful way. For instance, the first question Anderson Cooper asked tonight was whether Americans were better off today than eight years ago. Romney responded by suggesting that it was only legitimate to ask how residents of Massachusetts felt after his four years as governor. Cooper then repeated his question, and Romney repeated his answer, before the sparring stopped and Romney finally switched into his “Washington is broken” riff on how things have deteriorated. Why not start the answer with that response instead of trying to reframe the question?

This debate was anyway more McCain-Romney fireworks than a balanced discussion between the three main remaining candidates. Mike Huckabee found himself on the far side of the panel, separated from the two leaders by the incongruous presence of Ron Paul, whose references to America behaving as an “empire” must have made the Reaganites present dyspeptic. There was little Huckabee could do beyond striking an occasional populist note or making a lofty reference to conservative principles.

Afterward, in the “spin room” set up in an adjacent building of the Reagan Library, the candidates’ campaign managers and advisers peddled their version of how things went and how they see their prospects in the 22 states with votes scheduled next Tuesday. Not surprisingly, Reagan’s so-called 11th Commandment — not to speak ill of fellow Republicans — continued to be broken. McCain and Huckabee advisers said Romney could only count on Massachusetts and Utah as sure bets, that Southern states like Georgia, Tennessee might well keep Huckabee’s candidacy alive. A Romney adviser suggested that his candidate would be counting on “earned media” — making news pages and newscasts — as much as any advertising blitz. Huckabee’s campaign manager said a national TV ad campaign would begin in several key states on Friday. One of McCain’s top advisers said he thought the campaign’s money problems were over. “We’ve raised more than a million dollars over the Internet since the Florida results came in,” he said.

So now the final days of frantic campaigning begin. Evoking the memory of Ronald Reagan by holding the debate surrounded by mementos of his presidency provided nostalgia and relief, but no one here was annointed as Reagan’s heir. In fact the Reagan era here seems like a museum specimen, pressed under glass, a relic. Today’s reality is a bit different, something I was reminded of earlier in the day.  As staffers scurried to set up the media center, I spied some Spanish-speaking correspondents talking to one of the uniformed cleaning staff as he pushed a broom. “Are you a Republican or a Democrat?” they asked him in Spanish. “I’m neither,” he replied. “I’m Mexican.”

In these last days before Super Tuesday, as struggling campaigns weigh the costs of competing nationwide, both Rudy Giuliani and John Edwards have ended their bids for the Presidency.

What became Giuliani’s central message, national security, will remain a focus of the Republican dialogue for as long as John McCain remains in the race. As expected, Giuliani plans to campaign on behalf of McCain in New York, New Jersey, and other amenable states to his moderate conservative perspective.

John Edwards leaves the Democratic race with assurances from the Clinton and Obama campaigns that the abolition of poverty and his populist will remain a part of the discussion. In his choice to stop campaigning, Edwards leaves himself available for a potentially high-profile appointment under a Democratic Administration next year. For now, he is not endorsing either Clinton or Obama.

Ron Paul has sufficient financial support to carry him through the Republican convention and beyond. Watch for Mike Huckabee to retire his campaign if he does not perform well on Tuesday.

SIMI VALLEY — Rudy Giuliani’s withdrawal/endorsement statement, delivered here at the Reagan Library less than two hours before the final Republican debate, was both awkward and courageous.  Many candidates, of course, make the sudden transition from viable candidate to also-ran, but the ex-New York mayor’s slide was particularly swift, and must strike even the jaded campaign observers here as a stunning study in contrast.  McCain looked confident and focused; Giuliani, standing a long step to his right, spoke with candor and some humor.  He said he would campaign for McCain in California, New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, but with Super Tuesday arriving in less than one week, and given Giuliani’s surprising weakness in the primaries to date, there is perhaps more practical benefit from Giuliani’s withdrawal than from his active campaigning.  McCain, like Romney, will be scraping for every vote in the next week, and Giuliani’s supporters, donors included, are now free to move to McCain, the remaining candidate closest to the views and values of the man once known as “America’s Mayor.”

Today and tomorrow, finally, the Great Debates. The losers of the last two primaries — Rudy Giuliani in Florida and John Edwards in South Carolina — today formally withdraw from, respectively, the Republican and Democratic fields, leaving only John McCain, Mitt Romney and a struggling Mike Huckabee on the Republican side, and Hillary and Barack as the remaining Democrats.

The three-man Republican debate this evening takes place in the suburban enclave of the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, while the Clinton-Obama showdown is at the Kodak Theatre in the center of the huge Los Angeles metropolis.

The timing and surroundings could not be more appropriate — or dramatic. John McCain’s win in Florida yesterday capped a long march to the head of the Republican pack by the self-described “footsoldier” of the Reagan Revolution. The win was not a landslide, as McCain modestly acknowledged, but it was convincing. Only registered Republicans could vote. Romney spent ten times as much as McCain on advertising. Giuliani spent far more time in the state. But McCain led every significant category of voters — conservatives, age categories, critics of Bush, self-described evangelicals. In fact, the disparities within the group that voted for McCain yesterday lead inescapably to the the conclusion that Floridians were voting for the man, and not his policies. Like the popular Florida governor, Charlie Crist, voters in Florida may not have agreed with McCain’s stands on immigration or tax cuts, but they respected his integrity and patriotism. Talk about a Comeback Kid! Last fall, Giuliani was at the top of the national polls and McCain was in single digits and broke. Now Giuliani is set to campaign for McCain.

Most interestingly, Florida Republicans also thought McCain was the most electable. This was not a vote prompted by fervent ideology or narrow political calculation. It was an affirmation of their respect for the man.

Now McCain is clearly the front-runner for the Republican nomination and his advantages are suddenly numerous. His credibility on Iraq gives him support among national security Republicans; his political base is fixed in the red states, his maverick stands are easier to respect than Romney’s changed views on social policy, and with Florida’s 57 convention delegates now committed to him, McCain has momentum going into Super Tuesday next week. Ironically, he now has the advantage of money too, because those looking for a Republican campaign to support have no where else to go. The financial reports for Romney’s largely self-financed campaign will come out this week and will show very little return on investment. Not a very good sign for the man who touts his business and financial acumen — but a very good one for the man who admits there’s a lot about the economy that he doesn’t understand.

Twenty-five delegates are not all that the state of South Carolina has granted Barack Obama this weekend.

The Saturday primary was exactly for what the Obama campaign could have hoped. It was a win for Obama of greater proportions than yet seen in the primary race—margins of thirty-percent in favor of him over Clinton and Edwards.

The exit polls tell the story of a victory among young voters, females, and African-American voters, a compelling story for the Sunday papers, talk shows, and brunch banter.

In New Hampshire Hillary Clinton’s victory was a result of her, well, Clintonian door-to-door/ town-hall style of campaigning around the state (and yes, the “tears” could have helped). But now, less than ten days away from Super, or Tsunami Tuesday on February 5, the meet-and-greet approach is impractical and impossible. At this stage, free media is gold.

Endorsements are central to playing the media game, and few are more coveted within the Democratic party than support from the Kennedy family. Today Caroline Kennedy wrote in the New York Times of her belief that Obama can be a “President Like My Father.” Senator Ted Kennedy is in agreement.

As Democrats are not campaigning in Florida prior to Tuesday’s primary, the candidates’ attention and paid media cash is scattered across the country, from California to Georgia. Any little bit of help from the commentariat can only help.

This weekend Barack Obama took center stage and was able to portray himself as the candidate to beat. Hillary Clinton and John Edwards must reclaim the front page if they are to curtail Obama’s momentum before next Tuesday.

Yesterday Ohio Congressman and now former Democratic Presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich announced that he is ending his second bid for the White House.  Facing a competitive and potentially costly campaign for his current seat in Congress, Kucinich decided to end his Presidential campaign.

Kucinich made immediate departure from Iraq one of his keynote issues, and called for the immediate impeachment of George W. Bush.  It has been clear for some time that Kucinich would not have sufficient support for the nomination, but his participation in the primaries and Democratic debates brought attention to these extreme views among Democrats.

It’s up to Edwards, Clinton, and Obama to now satisfy this wing of the Democratic party.

Yesterday Madeleine Albright addressed San Francisco’s World Affairs Council as part of a tour to promote her book, “Memo to the Next President.” A portion of her comments can be heard here:

Often these set piece discussions are noteworthy for the topics the speaker chooses to avoid, and here the former Secretary of State chose not to mention any of the candidates. Albright is, nonetheless, a prominent advisor of Hillary Clinton, and cheered her on quite publicly at the Iowa caucuses. But at this stage in the Democratic campaign, a no-holds-barred struggle between Clinton and Obama, any prominent supporter’s comment may be scrutinized, and Secretary Albright clearly thinks the best way, for now, to sell her candidate in public is to stick to selling her own book. Not a bad strategy. (more…)

Come over and visit at the FPA Climate Change blog where I’ve got a post on The Present Administration and Some Hopefuls for the Next.

The World Economic Forum opened today in Davos, Switzerland, amid fears of a recession in the U.S., stimulus plans, and the contentious race for the Presidency. George Soros of hedge fund fame, a delegate at Davos and financier of political causes, made his voice heard today on the Presidential race.

As reported by the NYTimes’ Davos blog, Soros mastered the “art of hedge” and avoided only endorsing either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton. A known liberal, Soros differentiated between his personal preference for Obama and the “statesmanlike qualities” he sees in Mrs. Clinton. Soros said he would support either candidate if winner of the Democratic nomination. (It seems to have been a big press day for Soros. He also made headlines when he accused the Federal Reserve of acting “panicky” to the possibility of an economic downturn.)

As one comment to the New York Times story pointed out, political predictions are not Soros’ forte. But the dialogue recalls the proximity with which major businesspeople interact with the political world, as well as the high profile this election has in the international sphere. While Soros is a known quantity when discussing politics, it will be interesting to see if others in the business world fall behind Obama, too.

Photo used under a Creative Commons license.

Forget the Hollywood writers’ strike. Tonight’s televised slugfest between Clinton and Obama had enough drama and tension for an entire TV season. If there were a “sweeps” for televised debates, this CNN debate from Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, would be the winner. Hillary and Barack, up close and personal, traded jibes on hot-button issues, including race, on Martin Luther King Jr. Day, before a predominantly African-American audience. We may have heard the candidates’ views before, but never quite like this. Tonight will be remembered as a “he said, she said” encounter in which the two leading Democrats gave no quarter. Like all good drama series, we’re left anxious, waiting to see what will happen in the next episode.

While we wait for next week’s episode, of greater interest to those taking the long view was the way the debate ended. John Edwards cast a glance at the Republican race and pronounced John McCain the most likely nominee. The race this November — almost an eternity from now — will be about national security, he said:

“And it’s becoming increasingly likely, I think, that John McCain is going to be the Republican candidate.

Now, here’s what we have to be thinking about. Who will be tough enough and strong enough? And who can compete against John McCain in every place in America?..”

Interestingly, Edwards used this to segue into the need for the Democratic candidate to be free of any support from lobbyists in order to stand up to McCain’s strong record on campaign finance reform.  Hillary turned it to a discussion of who would be a stronger commander-in-chief while, Obama, in his turn, quoted John F. Kennedy (”…never negotiate out of fear, but never fear to negotiate…”) as a way of emphasizing his call for a visionary foreign policy.

This final exchange between the candidates was long after the evening’s most dramatic moments, but it’s worth looking at as an indication of where this campaign may be heading and who the winner of this brawl gets to face.  The maverick McCain may be the most interesting actor in the fall season’s new reality show — the one that features High Noon-style duels between a Democrat and Republican.