They are called many things. Party leaders. Party elders. Senior statesmen. Bigwigs. Movers and shakers. But whatever you call them, the big voices of the Democratic Party have been remarkably silent when it comes to endorsing one candidate over the other for the party's nomination for president. I speak of such big cheeses as Al Gore, John Edwards, and Bill Richardson. It's time to lay your cards on the table, boys, and let us know which side you're on.

Continue Reading »

[An imaginary news interview from the future...]

"This is King Leadhat reporting here in Denver on the night before the 2008 Democratic Convention begins. Before we begin our interview, we have some scenes from the building where the convention will take place to show you. Our correspondent is standing by...."

"Thanks, King. It's a lovely evening in Denver, but as you can see behind me, there is the possibility of a full-scale fracas in the parking lot here. The Michigan and Florida delegations have banded together and are trying to gain entrance to the building. The Democratic National Committee, along with a huge crowd of Obama supporters are just as steadfastly refusing them entry. While strong words have been exchanged, no violence has broken out yet, but the night is young. Clinton supporters have been slowly adding to the ranks of the Michiganders and Floridians, and the atmosphere is tense. Back to you, King."

Continue Reading »

[THE SCENE: Exterior of a polling place. Could be Ohio, could be Texas -- it's unclear from the building itself. An impossibly-well-groomed pollster (impossibly good hair, impossibly good clothes, impossibly cheerful and chirpy) is waiting for voters to emerge from the polls, clipboard in hand. A GROUP of four people approach the pollster, two men and two women.]

POLLSTER: Hello there, I'm conducting an exit poll, would you mind if I asked you a few questions?

Continue Reading »

This could well be the last installment of my primary picks series of articles -- because both parties may wrap things up tomorrow. My guiding principle since the beginning of this exercise has always been: if some ex-jock two-bit hack can publicly predict on the local television news who will win all the football games each weekend, then political commentators should be willing to take the same risk.

So far, I think my percentages of getting it right are pretty decent. But then it's hard to really compare, because so few others have established any benchmarks for the political prediction game. With today's picks, I will come close to having called 100 races this season. After calling all three races accurately two weeks ago, I have now called 66% of the Democratic races correctly, and 72% of the Republican contests. If I get a few more right tomorrow, I could hit a total of just over two-thirds right for Democrats, and about three-fourths right for Republicans.

Continue Reading »

Happy Leap Day!

Because we are given an extra day this year, I would like to spend it in a good old fashioned Bush-bash. Maybe it's because everyone's focused on the election, or maybe the entire country just doesn't want to think about President Bush anymore, but I feel that he hasn't been getting the attention he deserves of late. And what better way to spend the extra day we get this leap year?

Continue Reading »

A strange thing is going on in the flow of money into Washington politicians' coffers these days -- most of it is going to the Democrats. While Democrats and Republicans alike have noticed this effect (to their respective joy and horror), nobody ever points out that the system itself is designed around a fundamentally flawed principle: positive feedback. This may be part of the inherent nature of the system, meaning any proposals to fix it are going to be a radical re-thinking of the whole campaign donation system. But the process itself needs more attention, I think.

Continue Reading »

While everyone else is having fun determining who "won" or "lost" the Democratic debate last night, I would like to revisit an important topic: Iraq. Because while the national news media (fickle as they are) have lost almost all interest in the situation in Iraq, it is still going to be a large issue in the November presidential election. Which means we should be paying attention to it now.

The right wing press and politicians have done an admirable job of framing on the Iraqi question, reducing it to a simple declaration: "The 'surge' is working!" And, they'll tell you, they have an array of data to back this statement up. So anyone who doesn't agree with it is obviously denying reality.

But Iraq has never been that simple a situation. Iraq is in the midst of a low-grade civil war between as many as six, seven, or even more factions. There are outside influences as well (from Turkey and Iran, to name but two). So it's hard to get any kind of clear picture of what is going on in Iraq to begin with.

Continue Reading »

I have a piece of advice for both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for tonight's debate: take the high road and start trying to outdo each other on who can best take on the Republicans. In other words, both of them should start speaking as if the Democratic nomination is already theirs, and preview their general election campaign to the voters.

Hillary actually started campaigning this way a while ago, back when she was seen as "inevitable." She used phrases such as "When I am president..." and centered her speeches around why we needed to defeat the Republicans. George Bush was mentioned frequently. Barack has, somewhat awkwardly, started transitioning his campaign to general election mode as well in the past few weeks.

But somewhere in between, Clinton and Obama began focusing on the differences between the two of them instead of between Democrats and the Republican candidate. This was natural, since the primary fights have been so close, and so intense.

Continue Reading »

Tomorrow night may be the last debate in the Democratic primary race. This will be the twentieth debate so far, which has to be some kind of record. But contrary to the jaded inside-the-Beltway crowd, I think more is better when it comes to debates.

Because watching a televised debate is really the only chance most voters have to see the candidates answer questions and have to think on their feet in a live format. Which means that the more debates that happen, the more people get to see the candidates. And that is indeed a good thing, because it informs the electorate about the candidates to a certain degree.

The biggest problem with the debates is the inane questions they usually get. The moderators are all part of the mainstream media, and they reflect this by asking endless questions about the parsing of a word or two, or silly campaign charges the candidates have been swatting each other with. Even when the public is invited to submit questions, they are screened by the same moderators to weed out any impertinence on the part of the electorate.

Continue Reading »

No awards this week

A few quick thoughts this week before we get to the talking points. First, I will not be awarding the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week and the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week prizes this week. This is mostly because not much happened. Monday was the Presidents' Day holiday which most Americans don't even get off work anymore, and Congress showed its solidarity with the working men and women of America... by taking the entire week off. Plus, President Bush was out of town, so it was a slow week in Washington.

Secondly, nobody really shone in the spotlight or was caught cowering in the shadows of shame. Except, the newspapers tell me, John McCain.

Continue Reading »