My Take: Some Election What-Ifs

I. Could Barack Obama lose Florida and Ohio and still win the election?

Yes. I think it's very possible. See scenario below. (As always, click to embiggen the map.)

This puts Obama with 274 electoral votes, four more than needed for victory. This is good news, I think, for those of us with legitimate worries regarding both these states. Recall the Florida shenanigans of 2000 (which cost Gore the election) and the Ohio shenanigans of 2004 (which probably cost John Kerry the election). Hours-long voting lines ... uncounted ballots ... malfunctioning voting machines ... improper purging of voters lists. Fie on election officials in both these states! And in a razor-thin election, like both 2000 and 2004, these things are unconscionable.

II. Could Barack Obama lose the electoral vote count and still win the election?

Yes. See below scenario in which McCain gets 267 (to Obama's 264) but doesn't reach the 270 electoral votes to win.

What happens then? The race is kicked to the U.S. House of Representaives, where Democrats should still have the majority. Result: President Barack Obama. (Fun Fact: If you read The Federalist papers, you'll discover that the Founding Fathers pretty much assumed that no candidate would ever win the election in the electoral college and that all presidential elections would normally be decided in the house. What they didn't see coming was the emergence and dominance of American political parties, which they called "factions." The Founders hated "factions."

III. Will this be a close election?

Despite the scary "McCain is leading" poll numbers in recent weeks, I still think if Obama wins, he wins in a landslide, with Bill Clinton-like electoral numbers, as pictured in the below map, wihch is my official PREDICTION MAP. (http://www.electoral-vote.com/ still has Obama losing the electoral college as of today, based on polling.)


And if McCain or Palin really mess up in a debate or two, and if John McCain still keeps acting like this, and Palin keeps making "window into her soul" gaffes like this, then Missouri and North Carolina and Indiana might turn, too.

Keep hope alive, mis amigos.

(Maps generated using the dailykos.com map generator.)

Mean Girls

For your consideration, here are two quotes of the day.

I. "'Sarah Barracuda' -- she's proud of that name now, she uses it in her campaigns," said her former mentor. "But she got that name from the way she conducted herself with her own teammates. She was vicious to the other girls, always playing up to the coach and pointing out when the other girls made mistakes. She was the coach's favorite and he gave her more playing time than her skills warranted. My niece was on her team; she was a very good player. I used to sit there in the stands, and I would wonder, Why on earth is Sarah getting so much playing time?" Source: Salon.com

II. “She’s a child, inexperienced and simplistic,” she [R. D. Levno, a retired school principal] said of Sarah. “It’s taking us back to junior high school. She’s one of the popular girls, but one of the mean girls. She is seductive, but she is invented.” Source: Maureen Dowd writing in today's New York Times.

A Tale of Two Ads

Below is one of Barack Obama's new attack ads. Some of the liberal blogosphere say it's his harshest ad so far. These bloggers are happy to see this new toughness. I say he has to do better.



It's a good ad, but just exactly who does it win over? It gets people who already support him, like me, to nod their heads. Other than this group, this isn't exactly a water cooler discussion starter. Believe it or not, but that blue collar guy who could put Obama over the top in Virginia doesn't care what Time magazine or any of the other media outlets quoted in the ad think.

Below is an ad from moveon.org. I believe it is that organization's first attack, and I think it's better than the Obama ad.




What's the difference between the two ads? The first ad is more targeted to the head and rational thought processes, and the second ad is targeted to the gut and the heart.

Obama doesn't need to win over thoughtful and rational people -- these well-meaning people (on both sides, by the way) already know who they're voting for. And such an appeal to the intellect didn't do John Kerry, Al Gore or Michael Dukakis much good.

He needs to win over people's passions, touch their hearts, make them laugh, make them mad. He needs to give them something they'll talk about at work the next day or at the family dinner table that night. Has anybody seen this ad so far in the election cycle? I haven't. And if Obama can come up with *that* message, he'll win.

This campaign will be won if Obama is passionate, not if he's dispassionate and professorial.

His passion will win him the election, and his dispassion will make him the president that America deserves.

***

(Coming later this week: I'll flesh out my earlier passing thoughts on why I think Obama will lose the election if it's close, but if he wins, he'll win big. I still feel this way. More later.)

A Freshman Essay

"What's the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick."

-- Sarah Palin, during her GOP convention acceptance speech, borrowing from the old misogynist joke, "What's the difference between a woman with PMS and a pit bull."

***

So what is the difference between Sarah Palin and a pit bull? This is a fair question, and I'd like to tackle the answer as if I were a freshman in high school. A freshman assigned, in his first-semester composition class, to argue the thesis that "Sarah Palin and pit bulls are very different." Here goes:


START OF FRESHMAN ESSAY

Sarah Palin and pit bulls are very different. For example, Sarah Palin wears lipstick, whereas pit bulls, who do not have the requisite oppossable thumbs that would enable them to apply lipstick, do not and cannot wear lipstick.

The differences do not stop here:

Pit bulls don't wear up-'dos and glasses, and don't look like sexy librarians. In fact, pit bulls usually are barred from public libraries and have neither the authority nor the moxie to threaten to fire librarians who refuse to censor books, unlike Sarah Palin.

Pit bulls generally aren't theocrats, as well, and pit bulls do not belong to churches that await the rapture. Pit bulls also are generally against Alaskan secession, according to most reputed published sources, including Wikipedia. Moreover, a pit bull has never been selected as a vice presidential candidate by a major American political party, unlike Sarah Palin, and a pit bull has never been second in the line of succession to the most powerful and demanding job in the world.

Pit bulls also don't have the capacity for speech and human forms of communication, unlike Sarah Palin, who is quite adroit at reading campaign speeches from a teleprompter.

In summary, there are many differences between Sarah Palin and pit bulls. Moreover, whereas an angry pit bull can inspire fear, trepidation and worry in all humans, an angry Sarah Palin only inspires fear, trepidation and worry in liberals, most moderates, Democrats, people with Ph.Ds, people who fear Alaskan secession and John McCain's dermatologist.

Asinine and Brilliant

John McCain's pick of Sarah Palin as his running mate is brilliant and asinine.

She is beautiful, well-spoken and likeable. She has a certain "it" factor that also could be said of Obama. She is unvetted. She is deeply conservative. She has a 4-month-old son with autism. She supported Pat Buchanan in the 2000 presidential election. She said recently she doesn't know much about the Iraq War and that she wasn't sure just what the Vice President does. She is the personification of "change" and is the consumate "Washington outsider" -- two desirable qualities after eight years of Bush. She's a former union member. She hunts. She looks like Tina Fey.

It'd be foolish to underestimate Palin. In the absence of some revelation or other scandal, she is not Dan Quayle and she is not Geraldine Ferraro. Quayle came off like a deer in the headlights during his vice presidential debate with Lloyd Bentsen. My gut feel is that this former beauty queen is more fox than deer -- and not because of the way she looks.

***

Choosing Palin was a liberal, bold gamble made by a conservative. Chosing Biden was a conservative, prudent pick made by a liberal.

McCain's pick was a Hail Mary pass to help him win an election -- more than it was to help him govern. Obama's pick was a run up the middle on first down (five-yard gain) to help him govern -- more than it was to help him win an election. Wouldn't a true conservative prefer the Obama methodology? Is now a good time to gamble as Americans are dying in the Middle East and as our economy tanks?

This will either help McCain win, just barely, or it'll help Obama win in a landslide. I don't think Obama wins a close election. He'll either win big, or he won't win at all.

***

John McCain, who has battled the deadliest form of skin cancer on multiple occasions, turned 72 on Friday. Sarah Palin would be one heartbeat away from the most powerful job in a dangerous world.

If that doesn't make your heart race, what would? On this level, this bold, liberal, non-traditional choice is reckless and asinine.

Ringy Dingy

Gary Hart and Larry David have a message for Hillary Clinton's Red Phone (and Red-State-Appealing) strategy.

I think I've already covered the winning-at-all-costs strategy here.

Here's hoping that America doesn't hang up on Obama based on the politics of fear and irrational, Rovian scare tactics.

Is This Mic On?

The ascent of John McCain means one thing for that band of Johnny One-Notes known as "Rush Limbaugh and the McCain Haters": that this group is becoming less influential and increasingly irrelevant.

Today on the radio, Rush Limbaugh is asking Republicans to cross over in the Texas primary to vote for ... Hillary Clinton. He wants a brokered convention.

If Barack Obama wins Texas, it's just another sign of just how irrelevant Rush Limbaugh has become as an influential voice in the Republican Party.

But we'll see.

If I were a Republican, and I'm the furthest thing from it, I'd be voting tomorrow for Hillary Clinton.

Obama. Obama. Obama. Obama. Hillary. Obama.

Having spent a few days in Ohio, I can tell you that in terms of TV advertising on the type of TV shows that we here at The Cup of Joe are inclined to watch, that probably five out of every six TV commercials over the last four days were for Obama.

And I should note that the commercials were much better, with a better variety, than the commercials he aired in my state prior to Super Tuesday.

Will it help him win? I hope so. But on 60 Minutes last night they spoke with an Ohio voter who was leaning toward Obama but was still concerned that he is a Muslim who doesn't know the national anthem.

Sigh.

Keep Hope Alive.

Hillary Clinton = Lisa Simpson (Sometimes)

Whether it's the Little Miss Springfield Pagaent or a school competition for first saxophone in the school band, Lisa Simpson savors achievement. She is smart, competitive, vulnerable. She is embarrased, often, by the men in her life. Like all perfect students, with her high level of competence and intelligence, she expects to win and hates to lose.

In episodes of The Simpson's involving competition or competitive behavior, Lisa Simpson = Hillary Clinton.

Consider the episode titled "Lisa's Rival," the second episode of the show's sixth season, which originally aired on Sept. 11, 1994.

If you watch this episode and others, feel free to use the below key while reading or listening to dialogue.

Hillary Clinton = Lisa
Barack Obama = Allison
Bart = "Your Call"

From "Lisa's Rival"

At lunch time, Lisa approaches Allison, who is seated on a bench eating a sandwich.

Lisa: Hi, Allison, I'm Lisa Simpson. Oh, it's great to finally meet someone who converses above the normal eight-year-old level.

Allison: Actually, I'm seven. I was just skipped ahead because I was getting bored with the first grade.

Lisa: You're younger than me too? [looks worried, starts breathing into her paper lunch bag]

Allison: Are you hyperventilating?

Lisa: No ... I just like to smell my lunch.

LATER:

Lisa: Well, I gotta go. I have to practice for band auditions.

Allison: Me too! Hey, what instrument do you play?

Lisa: The sax.

Allison: Me too!

Lisa: I'm going for first chair this year.

Allison: Me too!

Lisa: Wow! [disingenuous] We have so much in common, I'm sure we'll be the best of friends...

Allison: Me too.

Lisa: [weakly] Me too...

LATER:

Lisa: I need help, Mom. There's another girl at school who's smarter, younger, and a better sax player than me. Ew, I feel so average.

Marge: Well, you'll always be number one to me --

Bart: [walking past] Ahem, hello ... first born within earshot.

Marge: Mmm, I meant my number-one girl -- [Maggie tugs on Marge's dress] Oh, for cry -- mmm. Honey, if you get too competitive, you'll never be happy. No matter how good you are, there's always going to be someone better than you. {I always thought I had the
tallest hair, but that trip to Graceland really opened my eyes.}

Lisa: But she's better than me at everything that makes me special!

Marge: Oh, believe me honey, she's more scared of you than you are of her.

Lisa: [sullen] You're thinking of bears, Mom.

Later in the episode, Lisa sabatoges Allison's diorama entry -- a scene from Edgar Allan Poe's The Tell-Tale Heart -- during a school competition, hoping to win by cheating, becoming a schemer determined to win at all costs.

You know, sort of like claiming big wins in the basically uncontested Michigan and Florida democratic primaries; intimidating superdelegates; stealing your opponent's pledged delegates; or drumming up phony plagiarism charges against your opponent.

Then again, even Lisa Simpson would probably admit defeat if she had lost 10 consecutive diarama competitions.

They Really Would Like Us? Keep Hope Alive

From Salon.com:

Barack Obama is perceived by Muslims abroad like no other candidate. He would begin a presidency with tremendous potential to heal U.S. relations with much of the world.

Full story.

SPOILER ALERT/Prediction: America's First Female President!

It's going to happen. It's going to happen!

But not until 2016.

Meet American President No. 45, and the first female president of the United States: Michelle Obama.

Here's hoping her husband doesn't embarrass her on the campaign trail.

Mitt Romney: Democrats Want to Surrender to Terrorists!

From an AP story reporting that Mitt Romney is leaving the presidential race:

"If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win. And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror." (SOURCE)

Maybe it's a good time to remind Mitt that the War in Iraq, which Obama has opposed from the start, has actually created more terrorists and America-haters around the world.

And, if he didn't know it, Mitt should also note that Iraq was not responsible for 9/11, either.

People like myself who have been against the War from the beginning don't want to "aid" terrorists, and it's highly offensive for someone to suggest that we do. Highly offensive.

Mitt Romney is a complete a-wipe.

***

UPDATE: He just said the "surrender to terror" line on MSNBC. And, yes, he is still an a-wipe.

Have a Super Tuesday

Hillary Clinton was on the Late Show with David Letterman last night. She was terrific. She came off as likeable and wise. I won't be voting for her today.

I will be voting for Barack Obama. The LA Times endorsement from last week put the "why" better than I can.

In the language of metaphor, Clinton is an essay, solid and reasoned; Obama is a poem, lyric and filled with possibility. Clinton would be a valuable and competent executive, but Obama matches her in substance and adds something that the nation has been missing far too long -- a sense of aspiration.

Here's hoping that you aspire to vote today.

Quote of the Day

"He wasn't experienced enough to authorize the invasion of Iraq."

- Robert De Niro, endorsing Barack Obama.

Obama Girl

The Man I Voted for Twice

I've been meaning all week to write something about the fairy tales that Bill Clinton has been telling about Barack Obama ... about his flat-out falsehoods and misrepresentations ... about how "the first black president" has astonishingly played the race card ... and how I now kind of take anything that comes out of his face with a grain of salt.

Peggy Noonan writes on this today, among other things, and for the first time in the history of this former Reagan speechwriter's career as a columnist for the Wall Street Journal, I agree with every single word.

Every single word.

Psssssssst. Do Something

Peggy Noonan: Men in Their 40s Are Complete Drama Queens

Every Saturday morning the first thing I read in the Wall Street Journal is Peggy Noonan's column. I don't agree with her most of the time, but I love the way she writes, and it's fun dissecting the rhetorical devices she employs to make barbarous statements seem reasonable. Really, it's fascinating.

She wrote in a recent column a simple declarative sentence that is so concise you just want to immediately accept that it's true, and reasonable. This is THE key to Peggy Noonan. Writers and columnists can get away with making outrageous statements, as long as they make them quick and simple or employ beautiful language or a deft turn of phrase with just a kiss o' poetry. If they do this, people might not notice what they're actually saying. She employed this a lot while serving as a speechwriter for President Ronald Reagan in the 1980s.

She wrote recently about Barack Obama:

Is he experienced enough? No. He's not old enough either. Men in their 40s love drama too much. (source)

Men in their 40s love drama too much?

Might I remind Peggy that Republican hero Theodore Roosevelt was 42 when he assumed the presidency.

Theodore Roosevelt: Rugged environmentalist, rough rider ... and drama queen?

George W. Bush was in his 40s when he first reached political prominence as governor of Texas. And he was just a few years out of his 40s when the Supreme Court awarded Peggy Noonan's candidate the presidency over Al Gore on Dec. 11, 2000.

***

Let's take a look at some prominent men in their 40s, all of whom presumably love drama too much and aren't suitable to be president:


Sean Hannity, 46. As a man in his 40s, he can't be president because he is a drama queen. He also can't be president because he is a complete idiot.



Stephen Colbert, 43. He, too, can't be president because he is (like all men in their 40s) a drama queen. He can't even get on the ballot in South Carolina.


Brian Williams, 48. Rock-steady anchor. Killer host of Saturday Night Live. Drama queen. Can't be president.


George Stephanopoulus, 46. Smart. Savvy. Drama-filled. Can't be president.


Roger Clemens, 45. Recently used 60 Minutes for drama-filled ragings against a man who stuck a needle in his butt. Can't be president.

***

I'm clueless how 57-year-old Peggy Noonan could come up with or defend a statement so silly as, "Men in their 40s love drama too much."

Maybe it's because women in their 50s love drama too much.

A Recipe for Smear

Day 1: Say something nasty about someone's past. Get media coverage.

Day 2: Resign for saying something nasty about someone's past. Repeat smear. Get more media coverage.

Day 3: Have your boss issue a statement and hold a press conference about how he or she regrets her former employee's smears from two days ago. Repeat smear. Get even more media coverage.

***

This is exactly what the Clinton campaign did to Barack Obama last week, and it's hard not to believe that they didn't know exactly what they were doing. The smear made the news cycle for three consecutive days, and there might be more today.

I guess some people call this good politics, but not me.

NOT ME.

It's not the politics of keeping hope alive, it's the politics of keeping smears alive.

Good Judgment and Gut Feelings

GUT FEELINGS, PART ONE

In 2003, I and a minority of Americans had a strong gut feeling against the war in Iraq, at a time when the vast majority of the country was cheering it on, and most TV journalists were going ga-ga over wearing American flag pins. You weren't considered a Patriot, or a good reporter, if you remained more objective, like the late Peter Jennings and ABC News reporters, who didn't wear pins, opting instead to report news.

Remember all those splashy and subtly pro-war "Operation Iraqi Freedom" cable news graphics (MSNBC and CNN joined the party just as eagerly as Fox News Channel) that pretty much presupposed that 1) the war was just, 2) the war was necessary and 3) the war was actually about freedom? At times Dan Rather and the supposedly liberal CBS News operation were among the worst offenders and, in my opinion, biggest cheerleaders.

Many of us in the anti-war camp were not fooled -- nor were we shocked and awed -- by snazzy graphics or Republican sophistry -- including Colin Powell's U.N. testimony regarding weapons of mass destruction.

GUT FEELINGS, PART II

In 2007, I have another strong gut feeling regarding the presidential election. Any of the Democratic candidates will be an improvement over Bush, and I think that just about any of the Republican candidates would be an improvement over Bush, too.

But there's one candidate that gives me a strong gut feeling. That this candidate is the right person, at the right time, with the right message.

I'm voting for Barack Obama, and I'm not changing my mind.

Obama also had a strong gut feeling against the War in Iraq way back when, and unlike other leading Democratic candidates he was a vocal opponent of it as an Illinois state senator. (Remember, at this time he was a man with higher ambitions, such as the job in the U.S. Senate, so taking such a stand was not motivated by political polling, just inner conviction.)

How can you describe such opposition, this public disapproval of a popular war from a politician with goals beyond being just a state senator?

It's called "terrible politics" if the year is 2003, but "good judgment" in any other year.

God Bless America. Vote Obama.



TODAY'S MUST READ: Frank Rich's Obama column in the New York Times.