The race...

I am very fortunate.  I am able to subscribe to XM radio and benefit from a variety of programming (almost all of it free of commercials).  One of my newest favorites is XM 130.  This is the POTUS (President of the United States) channel.  And before the members of my Chomsky reading fan base chime in, it is NOT twenty-four seven playing of George Bush saying the word "nucular".  It is a great collection of partisan news programs, non-partisan interviews and commentary from great folks in the thick of the campaign process.  It's been on the air almost a year and covers candidate speeches unfiltered from start to finish.  This channel, like sources such as www.factcheck.org, reflect the continuing evolution of real information politics.  It was observed today that by the principal of a focus group company (www.mediacurves.com) that both candidate's negative ads are being viewed negatively by both sides.  What is clear from the voting population is that they want to hear some substantive ideas from either candidate.  This is something that neither side is delivering.  Between Sarah Palin being pinned down by Katie Couric on John McCain's legislative record, to Joe Biden claiming he was "forced down" in a helicopter in Afghanistan, the candidates aren't giving the voters any meat for their political stew.

 

I have set myself solidly down in the McCain camp.  There are many positive reasons and some negative ones.  On the positive front, I think he will manage the economy better.  He is an advocate for smaller government and revising our tax code to favor growth, innovation and investment.  He is far superior in the realm of national security and his personal military experience (and yes, his captivity) give him a unique human perspective on the cost of conflict.  Finally, he is decidedly out of the mainstream in his party with regard to social issues.  Although he claims to be "pro-life" and touts in a 2007 statement that he will appoint conservative judges to the SCOTUS, his past record and actions contradict that.  My sense is that once elected, he will simply walk away from these "distraction" issues and govern.

 

Senator Obama captures my attention for his ambition, skill and rhetoric.  I am very concerned about his pedigree (Bill Ayers and the Annenberg Challenge specifically).  I am deeply concerned about his position on guns.  I do not think his financial plan for the nation is viable.  As one of the "rich" taxpayers he is targeting, I think his approach to revenue generation is flatly socialist and at odds with the foundation of our nation's economic strength.  He is also opposed to missile defense, the single biggest tool in our diplomatic arsenal.  The mere suggestion that we would place units in Poland or Ukraine gained substantial attention from Russia.  The ability to defend Japan or any of the Persian Gulf states from North Korea or Japan is critical to maintaining stability in the region. 

 

I am not vitriolicly opposed to Obama, as many seem to be towards McCain.  And I don't think that Obama's race makes a whit of difference (although I think that Hillary's did to the DNC).  And so onward the race trundles.  McCain's "put your money where your mouth is" move to delay the debate synched nicely with his "country first" message.  

Pre-Convention Prediction...

At the risk of seeming really foolish - here are my predictions for the November elections in 2008.

 

Popular Vote

• McCain - 53%
• Obama - 44%
• Independent / Other - 3%

I predict Obama to carry Illinois and New York but no other states of consequence.  

 

Why?  Well, dear reader(s), it stems from the simple fact that the nation would rather stand with the known and experienced than the unknown and inexperienced.  I respect Senator Obama's capability to be a good president.  But that's me.  Multiply any personal uncertainty by the population of voters and you have a smoothing effect which places the advantage squarely in McCain's court.    Short of selecting Vladimir Putin as VP, I think the Arizona senator is on the ascendant.

 

Wedge issues are not in play here.  Gun control was taken off the table by the Supreme Court.  The Iraq war is transitioning well.  There is a real risk the economy will improve, as it tends to do in the fourth quarter.  Finally, the behavior of Russia in Georgia will underscore the real threats existent in the world and the role of the United States as the ONLY real bulwark against unchecked aggression, although I am disappointed at our "public" response.

 

So, mark your calendars and place your wagers.  I have been known to make wild bets and lose them gloriously.  As a good friend of mine advised, go big or go home.

 

The rise and fall of Ron Paul....

Many years ago I was a libertarian. I registered and was a member of the party. This was in the heady GOP years of Reagan Bush and the advent of the Clinton era. I was introduced to libertarianism by my very smart brother. He’s a likable fellow. Although he is an attorney by training; he’s really an outgoing lover of the outdoors. He would be right at home in any of the independent western states or Texas.

I liked the libertarian view of government non-involvement and free market support. What I failed to realize in my early romance with the party, was that libertarians are about as close to anarchists as one can get. They do not support foreign policy as a tool of national interest, the space program or any safety net for the populace. It was the failure to support a national space program which turned me off from libertarians.

Ron Paul was once the libertarian nominee for president. He switched parties and now stands as a republican candidate for president from Texas’ 14th congressional district. He appealed to that gulf coast constituency through his voting record against taxes and adhering to a zealot’s interpretation of the constitution. In fact his record was so negative, he became known as Dr. No among the other members of the House of Representatives. Like many in congress, Paul could have quietly lived out his terms in perpetuity with little or no attention from anyone. Only the extremely outspoken, like Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney, have made national news as a member of congress. And she had to strike a police officer to do it.

Paul caught the attention of a number of disaffected Americans with his simplistic economic proposals, listed here at his official site. He would eliminate the income tax, shrink federal government and end ALL our involvement with foreign aid. The problem is that Ron’s facts are in disarray.

Commonly cited by Paul supporters is the site Fact Check. They claim that since this site has not targeted Paul, then his views are accurate. A recent piece by Fact Check touched on only three basic assertions of Paul’s campaign. All proved to be so wildly inaccurate as to raise the question whether he is even qualified to hold his congressional seat. Which is being challenged, by the way, by a member of his own party – a CPA named Chris Peden. An NPR analysis of the article brought on waves of Paulites who spent time criticizing and attacking NPR, the author of the piece and parsing the statements which can be easily found with a Google search and attributable to Paul. Even Glenn Reynolds, the normally free market oriented webmaster of Instapundit, has steered clear of the Paul campaign.

Perhaps most disturbing is the range of adherents to his campaign. At a site called Militias for Paul, the individual(s) proffer their opinions on global conspiracy, Zionist empires and seem to advocate the overthrow of the government. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but one shall be known by the company they keep.

Ron Paul, or as he is referred to by the faithful, Dr. Paul, recently appointed a new economic adviser. Little attention was paid to the pedigree of this individual, that his father is serving time for federal tax fraud or that he espouses the “illegitimacy” of the federal tax system. Paul has been dissected time and time again and come up wanting. If one looks for some insight into Paul's philosophy, one can see it relies upon fear and conspiracy. The initial appeal of independence and self reliance quickly withers when one considers the strange political views expressed in his newsletters. His own involvement and authorship of these documents having never been fully explained.

Like an old time preacher, he offers a fiery oratory full of rhetoric, appealing to the disenchanted. He has spawned a number of support sites, Daily Paul, invigorated many young people and raised a LOT of money. But he has failed to break out of the margin of error in any polls. With his ten term congressional seat in serious danger, this may be the final act for Paul.

Like a persistent chicken little, he now appears to be poised to exit stage right.

Way right.

Contingency...

Remember this? Howard Dean riding high and then collapsing in a primal scream of goofiness. I can only hope the same holds true for the weight losing, Mike Huckabee.

The presidential race is certainly heating up. MSNBC, also known as Major Source of News for Backroom Communists, is predicting a wild turnover of events in the primaries. I am not surprised. With the duration of the campaign season, it is inevitable that cracks would appear in the heir apparent's armor. Personally, I am excited. Politics has seemed to come alive again in the American spirit and a more civil discourse of issues appears to be taking place.

Let me offer a few of my own plans for election day in 2008. As the selection of potential candidates is essentially out of my hands, I will present a simple IF-THEN approach to voting.

Fair warning, I am a registered republican. In college I worked on George H. W. Bush's campaign. I was a registered libertarian for a period in the mid to late 1990s, but never voted the party ticket. I abandoned them after better understanding their overly "hands off" approach to too many critical issues.

1) I see no third party candidate of any interest. The fact that multiple parties still offer up candidates. However, the winnowing of candidates into two parties is efficient and effective. I am of the strong opinion that all politics is local.

2) If Mike Huckabee secures the GOP nomination or VP slot – I will vote against him, even for Hillary Clinton or Mahmoud Ahmadinejad .

3) Barack Obama, for all his naïve nature is VERY electable.

In general I am optimistic. Our foreign policy has not converted the world into a firestorm of US hatred – anymore than it was prior to September 11, 2001. The real challenges remain as global security and human freedom, the economy and managing growth (thus its impact on the environment).

Healthcare, in my opinion is a red herring. This goes for immigration as well. Both require detailed solutions to some of the programmatic and fiscal aspects, but from a policy perspective – no major change is truly warranted.

Coming into the first turn...

It is the end of November and I haven’t posted on the blog. Since I am not receiving any threatening e-mails, then I will presume your November was as busy as mine. I have been poking around the blogosphere noting some issues. Of interest is the resent tragic death of Sean Taylor. His murder was well commented on by FOX Sports writer Jason Whitlock. The choice of view by this author may be incendiary, but they are certainly worth discussing!

On a more insubstantial note, I am starting to think about who I will support in the 2008 election. I have perused the web for some good comparison sites and I think this one fills the bill. They catalog all the top candidates and even have an internet dating style match quiz! Which cuddly candidate will you be spending time by the fire with in 2008?

I took the match quiz and ended up in bed with John McCain. Now I like McCain on defense and other “hard” issues. I don’t think he represents enough of a change this time as he did during the old Straight Talk Express days. So, despite my respect for him and his service in the Navy, I must set him aside.

Sam Brownback doesn’t stand a chance. And as a rule I am not a fan of senators running for president. After all, that’s hardly any qualification. Then I arrive at Tommy Thompson, a good candidate four years ago – now too much in the past. At last we have Guiliani. He was a good mayor, but presidential? That’s tough to say. I like his stand on choice but am concerned that his economic approach may be too light.

Here is the surprise – Bill Richardson! But he’s a democrat! And yet he represents one of the best overall candidates in the field. He is experienced, intelligent and has an opinion which reflects a lot of my views. Now if I could only get him to run with McCain or Romney – but alas, he is destined to be steamrolled by the Clinton / Obama battle.

Here is my prediction – Romney gets the republican nomination. He selects a southwestern running mate (McCain is unlikely). In the democratic camp, Hillary ultimately wins the nomination – picks Richardson as a VP. Then the slugfest begins.

Candidate Summary

REPUBLICANS
George Allen (Former Virginia Senator): lost re-election; has PAC.
Mike Bloomberg (NYC Mayor): Undeclared; active draft movement; has campaign website. Re-registered as independent (instead of Republican) on June 19, 2007.
Sam Brownback (Kansas Senator): Announced.
Jeb Bush (Governor of Florida): Undeclared; denies any plans to run.
Bill Frist (Tennessee Senator): Withdrew Nov. 2006.
Newt Gingrich (former Speaker of the House): Undeclared; says he will decide in June 2007.
James Gilmore (former Governor of Virginia): Announced plans to file FEC papers.
Rudy Giuliani (former NYC Mayor): Has Exploratory Committee; filed FEC papers, Feb. 2007.
Chuck Hagel (Nebraska Senator): Undeclared; active draft movement; has PAC.
Alan Keyes (Radio talkshow host): announced candidacy, Sept. 2007.
Mike Huckabee (Governor of Arkansas): Has Exploratory Committee; announced candidacy, Jan. 2007; has PAC.
Duncan Hunter (California Representative): announced candidacy, Jan. 2007; filed FEC papers, Oct. 2006.
John McCain (Arizona Senator): Has Exploratory Committee.
George Pataki (New York Governor): Undeclared; has PAC.
Ron Paul (Texas Representative): Has Exploratory Committee.
Mitt Romney (Massachusetts Governor): Declared candidacy, Feb. 2007; has PAC.
Fred Thompson (former Tennessee Senator): Has active draft movement; has exporatory committee.
Tommy Thompson (former Wisconsin Governor and Secretary of HHS): Has Exploratory Committee.
Mark Sanford (South Carolina Governor): Has gubernatorial campaign committee; active draft movement.
Tom Tancredo (Colorado Representative): Has Exploratory Committee; has PAC; active draft movement.
DEMOCRATS
Evan Bayh (IN Senator): Withdrew Dec. 2006; Has PAC; has Exploratory Committee.
Joe Biden (DE Senator): announced candidacy, Jan. 2007; has PAC.
Wes Clark (former NATO commander): Undeclared; has PAC.
Hillary Clinton (NY Senator): Has Exploratory Committee; has PAC; has Senate campaign committee.
Tom Daschle (Former SD Senator): Announced not running, Dec. 2006; has PAC.
Christopher Dodd (CT Senator): Announced Jan. 11; has Senate campaign committee.
John Edwards (former NC Senator): Announced Dec. 27; has PAC.
Russ Feingold (WI Senator): Withdrew Nov. 2006.
Al Gore (former V.P.): Undeclared; active draft movement.
Mike Gravel (former AK Senator): Declared candidacy in 2006.
John Kerry (MA Senator): Has PAC; withdrew, Jan. 2007.
Dennis Kucinich (OH Representative): Announced, Dec. 2006.
Barack Obama (IL Senator): Declared candidacy, Feb. 2007; has PAC.
Bill Richardson (NM Governor): Has Exploratory Committee; has Gubernatorial campaign committee.
Al Sharpton (Reverend): Declared he is considering another presidential run.
Tom Vilsack (IA Governor): Announced & filed FEC candidacy, Nov. 2006.
Mark Warner (VA Governor): Withdrew Oct. 2006.


2008 GOP Presidential candidates: (Click on a candidate below for their issue stances)

John Cox (Chair of Cook County GOP) Rudy Giuliani (former NYC Mayor) Mike Huckabee (AR Governor) Duncan Hunter (CA Representative) Alan Keyes (former UN Ambassador) John McCain (AZ Senator) Ron Paul (TX Representative) Mitt Romney (Former MA Governor) Fred Thompson (former TN Senator) Tom Tancredo (CO Representative)

2008 Democratic candidates: Joe Biden (DE Senator) Hillary Clinton (NY Senator) Christopher Dodd (CT Senator) John Edwards (former NC Senator) Al Gore (former V.P.) Mike Gravel (former AK Senator) Dennis Kucinich (OH Representative) Barack Obama (IL Senator) Bill Richardson (NM Governor)

Citizen Deux’s VoteMatch Results – McCain!!! Oh no!!!
Scores & Analysis
Candidate
More Information
Click on 'Social' and 'Economic' for analysis of your answers compared to each candidate's answers.
Click on 'Answers' and 'Stances' for complete details of the sources of each candidate's answers.

Total 80%
Social 69%
Economic 88%

John McCainRepublican Sr Senator (AZ); 2000 Primary Candidate for President
Biographical Profile John McCain's answers John McCain's stances

Total 60%
Social 63%
Economic 58%

Sam BrownbackRepublican Sr Senator (KS)
Biographical Profile Sam Brownback's answers Sam Brownback's stances

Total 60%
Social 56%
Economic 63%

Tommy ThompsonFormer Secretary of H.H.S.; former Republican Governor (WI)
Biographical Profile Tommy Thompson's answers Tommy Thompson's stances

Total 58%
Social 63%
Economic 54%

Rudy GiulianiFormer Mayor of New York City; Republican Candidate for 2000 Senate (NY)
Biographical Profile Rudy Giuliani's answers Rudy Giuliani's stances

Total 55%
Social 63%
Economic 50%

Bill RichardsonDemocratic NM Governor
Biographical Profile Bill Richardson's answers Bill Richardson's stances

Total 53%
Social 38%
Economic 63%

Duncan HunterRepublican Representative (CA-52)
Biographical Profile Duncan Hunter's answers Duncan Hunter's stances

Total 50%
Social 44%
Economic 54%

Jim GilmoreFormer Republican VA Governor
Biographical Profile Jim Gilmore's answers Jim Gilmore's stances

Total 48%
Social 25%
Economic 63%

Tom TancredoRepublican Representative (CO-6)
Biographical Profile Tom Tancredo's answers Tom Tancredo's stances

Total 48%
Social 56%
Economic 42%

Mike HuckabeeRepublican AR Governor
Biographical Profile Mike Huckabee's answers Mike Huckabee's stances

Total 43%
Social 50%
Economic 38%

Mitt RomneyRetiring Republican MA Governor
Biographical Profile Mitt Romney's answers Mitt Romney's stances

Total 35%
Social 50%
Economic 25%

John Edwards2004 Nominee for Vice President; Former NC Senator
Biographical Profile John Edwards's answers John Edwards's stances

Total 35%
Social 63%
Economic 17%

Barack ObamaDemocratic Jr Senator (IL); previously State Senator
Biographical Profile Barack Obama's answers Barack Obama's stances

Total 33%
Social 44%
Economic 25%

Hillary ClintonDemocratic Jr Senator (NY); former First Lady
Biographical Profile Hillary Clinton's answers Hillary Clinton's stances

Total 33%
Social 38%
Economic 29%

Mike GravelFormer Senator (AK)
Biographical Profile Mike Gravel's answers Mike Gravel's stances

Total 30%
Social 19%
Economic 38%

Ron PaulRepublican Representative (TX-14); Libertarian nominee for President in 1988
Biographical Profile Ron Paul's answers Ron Paul's stances

Total 28%
Social 44%
Economic 17%

Joe BidenDemocratic Sr Senator (DE)
Biographical Profile Joe Biden's answers Joe Biden's stances

Total 25%
Social 25%
Economic 25%

Chris DoddDemocratic Sr Senator (CT)
Biographical Profile Chris Dodd's answers Chris Dodd's stances

Total 20%
Social 25%
Economic 17%

Dennis KucinichDemocratic Representative (OH-10)
Biographical Profile Dennis Kucinich's answers Dennis Kucinich's stances

Click on 'Social' and 'Economic' for analysis of your answers compared to each candidate's answers. Click on 'Answers' and 'Stances' for complete details of the sources of each candidate's answers.