I just read a comment on how someone was planning to vote on the Florida Constitutional amendments that are on the ballot this year. The comment suggested to vote No on 2 and yes to the rest. While I'm all for voting No on 2, the so called Gay Marriage ban amendment, yes to the rest gave me some pause.
You see, there is one other amendment that progressives should consider voting no on. As unlikely as that may seem, that one is Amendment 8, the Local Option Community College Funding amendment. While it might seem counter intuitive for progressives to vote against higher education funding, bear with me while I explain my thinking on this.
First, let me say that I am an ardent supporter of expanding higher education opportunities in Florida. I received an AA degree along my educational trail from a community college, so I understand how important they can be.
I am also an ardent supporter of mass transportation, however, and I see Amendment 8 as a possible impediment to the implementation of viable mass transit systems throughout Florida. The reasoning for this is the way that local commuter and light rail systems are typically funded.
Most rail transit systems, and the ones that are being proposed in Florida, are financed by a partnership between local, state and the federal governments. The Central Florida Commuter Rail Project and the nascent TBARTA effort in the Tampa Bay region will both require local funding sources for completion.
Both Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties are considering adding a one cent local option sales tax for mass transit funding. Pinellas already has the Penny for Pinellas local option sales tax as its seventh cent of sales tax. If a community college sales tax penny is added, that would make the transportation penny proposal the NINTH cent of sales tax. I'm very much afraid that would be a penny too far for local voters to swallow.
There are plenty of other options for state of funding community colleges. Local governments are severely limited in their funding sources fortheir portion of mass transit.
If you want to see mass transit in Florida, vote NO on amendment 8.
Showing posts with label 2008 Elections. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2008 Elections. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Saturday, February 9, 2008
Truth Nipped in the Bud
There is a diary by nailbender up on DailyKos right now purporting to
So, let's nip this in the bud....
Here is a document I am sure most of you have never seen. This document is the DNC Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention. It is 27 pages long. And it is augmented by this document, which is the 36 page long Regulations of the Rules and By Laws Committee for the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
Now in the DNC Delegate Selection Rules, Rule 3A states the following:
But here we are at the heart of the problem, at least here in Florida. We had two different rules of the DNC Delegate Selection Rules brought into direct conflict with each other by the actions of the Republican controlled state legislature. Those are the facts. There is nothing to be nipped in the bud here.
The Florida Legislature is dominated by the GOP. It also has absolute authority to set the dates for presidential preference primary elections here in Florida. And the GOP has the votes in the Legislature to do exactly that - with or without the support of the votes of our Democratic legislators. And our legislature set the date for the Presidential Preference Primary as January 29th, in advance of the dates allowed by both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party.
Now, the Florida Democratic Party did not have to elect to use the January 29th Presidential Primary as the
The DNC Rules and By Laws Committee, however, was obviously more concerned with compliance with Rule 11A which protects the right of Iowa and New Hampshire voters to go first than it was with encouraging the "participation of all Democratic voters" in Florida.
Now that's the truth of the matter.
dispel a talking point ... that the FL Democratic Party was bound by the decision of the GOP-controlled FL legislature and Governor to a January 29th date for the selection of Democratic Delegates.This diary is being hailed as a
Great Diary with facts and infoWell, it's not a great diary. It does have some facts and info. But it does not have all the facts and it does not have all the info.
So, let's nip this in the bud....
Here is a document I am sure most of you have never seen. This document is the DNC Delegate Selection Rules for the 2008 Democratic National Convention. It is 27 pages long. And it is augmented by this document, which is the 36 page long Regulations of the Rules and By Laws Committee for the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
Now in the DNC Delegate Selection Rules, Rule 3A states the following:
All official Party meetings and events related to the national convention delegate selection process, including caucuses, conventions, committee meetings, filing dates, and Party enrollment periods, shall be scheduled for dates, times and public places which would be most likely to encourage the participation of all Democrats, and must begin and end at reasonable hours.Rule 11A states, in relevant part:
No meetings, caucuses, conventions or primaries which constitute the first determining stage in the presidential nomination process (the date of the primary in primary states, and the date of the first tier caucus in caucus states) may be held prior to the first Tuesday in February or after the second Tuesday in June in the calendar year of the national convention.It goes on to provide the exemptions for the four "early states" of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina.
But here we are at the heart of the problem, at least here in Florida. We had two different rules of the DNC Delegate Selection Rules brought into direct conflict with each other by the actions of the Republican controlled state legislature. Those are the facts. There is nothing to be nipped in the bud here.
The Florida Legislature is dominated by the GOP. It also has absolute authority to set the dates for presidential preference primary elections here in Florida. And the GOP has the votes in the Legislature to do exactly that - with or without the support of the votes of our Democratic legislators. And our legislature set the date for the Presidential Preference Primary as January 29th, in advance of the dates allowed by both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party.
Now, the Florida Democratic Party did not have to elect to use the January 29th Presidential Primary as the
first determining stage in the presidential nomination processThis is true. However, if it wanted to comply with Rule 3A it did. Because no other method available to it was seen as likely to achieve the "particpation of all Democratic voters" as a primary election would. And here is Florida, Democratic leaders were determined to encourage the "participation of all Democratic voters."
The DNC Rules and By Laws Committee, however, was obviously more concerned with compliance with Rule 11A which protects the right of Iowa and New Hampshire voters to go first than it was with encouraging the "participation of all Democratic voters" in Florida.
Now that's the truth of the matter.
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Let's Get Ready to Rumble - Er, Caucus
One week after nearly 1.75 million Florida Democrats went to the polls to voice their Presidential preference, the question of whether Florida Democrats will have an actual voice in the selection of our Party's nominee remains unsettled. Don't get me wrong here. I have said, and I firmly believe that Florida Dems' voices were heard loud and clear on January 29th. The Florida results are in and they are also into the psyche of the Tsunami Tuesday voters today. Florida's voice was heard by all those voters.
What really didn't get heard in Florida was the candidates voices. Due to that idiotic no campaign pledge foisted upon the candidates by the Democratic Party chars in the four early states, no candidate actually got to have their voices heard by Florida's Democratic voters.
But maybe there is a way to have our cake and eat it too, Florida. Follow along and I'll explain...
I don't want to spend too much time rehashing how we got into this mess, but laying a little of the groundwork here is instructive. The Republican dominated Florida Legislature has the sole power to set election dates in Florida. The Legislature chose January 29th, knowing it was in clear violation of the delegate selection rules laid out by both parties. The parties, in turn, are in charge of their actual delegate selection process. The Florida Democratic Party looked at their options and decided to stay with the plan to select their delegates according to the early primary results. The main reason for this decision was that a primary is the method that garners the most participation from voters. Very Democratic of us, no?
This plan was the one that was rejected by the Democratic National Committee, which stripped Florida of all of its delegates to the Democratic National Convention. That's what began the mess that we currently find ourselves in. OK, that was bad enough. But, even with no delegates at stake, the candidates could not possibly ignore the largest swing state in the country, could they?
This is where it really got ugly for Florida Democrats. The Democratic Party chairs of the four early states (Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina) blackmailed the candidates into signing a pledge not to campaign in any state that violated Party rules by beginning its delegate selection process before the appointed date of February 5th. The candidates, fearing a backlash in these early states which they needed to garner momentum, all complied.
Thus Florida got to hold the strangest election I have ever seen. Florida gave an election party and nobody came - no candidates that is. The Democratic Party chairs in those four early states, jealous of their non god given prerogatives to be heard before anybody else, deprived Florida's voters of the opportunity to have the candidates come to them and make their case. That was fundamentally unfair to Florida's 3 million Democrats. But here is where it starts to get really interesting.
Senator Hillary Clinton, who won the largely name recognition contest that Florida's primary became, is now calling for the Florida delegates to be seated at the convention. Smart on her part. She would get the lions share of the delegates. Senator Barack Obama, not surprisingly, takes the opposite view. Smart on his part.
In today's St. Petersburg Times, Adam Smith is reporting:
Let's amend our delegate selection plan to allocate our delegates based on a caucus to be held in early April. There are no Democratic delegate selection contests scheduled between Mississippi on March 11th and Pennsylvania on April 22nd. This would allow the candidates to come here and campaign for Florida's votes and delegates. It would give Florida's voters a chance to hear the candidates for themselves and to make up their mind after getting a real chance to fully evaluate the candidates in a fair and open contest.
And as it is looking more and more likely that this campaign is going down to the wire, it would make Florida the center of the political universe - again.
Who says you can't have your cake and eat it too. Florida, let's get ready to rumble - er, caucus!
What really didn't get heard in Florida was the candidates voices. Due to that idiotic no campaign pledge foisted upon the candidates by the Democratic Party chars in the four early states, no candidate actually got to have their voices heard by Florida's Democratic voters.
But maybe there is a way to have our cake and eat it too, Florida. Follow along and I'll explain...
I don't want to spend too much time rehashing how we got into this mess, but laying a little of the groundwork here is instructive. The Republican dominated Florida Legislature has the sole power to set election dates in Florida. The Legislature chose January 29th, knowing it was in clear violation of the delegate selection rules laid out by both parties. The parties, in turn, are in charge of their actual delegate selection process. The Florida Democratic Party looked at their options and decided to stay with the plan to select their delegates according to the early primary results. The main reason for this decision was that a primary is the method that garners the most participation from voters. Very Democratic of us, no?
This plan was the one that was rejected by the Democratic National Committee, which stripped Florida of all of its delegates to the Democratic National Convention. That's what began the mess that we currently find ourselves in. OK, that was bad enough. But, even with no delegates at stake, the candidates could not possibly ignore the largest swing state in the country, could they?
This is where it really got ugly for Florida Democrats. The Democratic Party chairs of the four early states (Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina) blackmailed the candidates into signing a pledge not to campaign in any state that violated Party rules by beginning its delegate selection process before the appointed date of February 5th. The candidates, fearing a backlash in these early states which they needed to garner momentum, all complied.
Thus Florida got to hold the strangest election I have ever seen. Florida gave an election party and nobody came - no candidates that is. The Democratic Party chairs in those four early states, jealous of their non god given prerogatives to be heard before anybody else, deprived Florida's voters of the opportunity to have the candidates come to them and make their case. That was fundamentally unfair to Florida's 3 million Democrats. But here is where it starts to get really interesting.
Senator Hillary Clinton, who won the largely name recognition contest that Florida's primary became, is now calling for the Florida delegates to be seated at the convention. Smart on her part. She would get the lions share of the delegates. Senator Barack Obama, not surprisingly, takes the opposite view. Smart on his part.
In today's St. Petersburg Times, Adam Smith is reporting:
Two prominent civil rights figures, former U.S. Civil Rights Commission chairwoman Mary Frances Berry and former Justice Department official Roger Wilkins, are calling on the DNC to straighten out the matter."We are suggesting that the decision be made before the convention in an effort to avoid a floor fight," they wrote in a letter released Monday. "Public floor fights have served the party badly in the past. They left deep-seated ill will and preceded Democratic Party defeats in 1968 and 1972, for example. Resolution of this issue is a matter of fairness, justice and practicality."
So let's be fair to everybody - both the voters and the candidates. Let's figure out a way to allow the candidates to come here and make their pitch to Florida's voters for the right to claim Florida's convention delegates.
Let's amend our delegate selection plan to allocate our delegates based on a caucus to be held in early April. There are no Democratic delegate selection contests scheduled between Mississippi on March 11th and Pennsylvania on April 22nd. This would allow the candidates to come here and campaign for Florida's votes and delegates. It would give Florida's voters a chance to hear the candidates for themselves and to make up their mind after getting a real chance to fully evaluate the candidates in a fair and open contest.
And as it is looking more and more likely that this campaign is going down to the wire, it would make Florida the center of the political universe - again.
Who says you can't have your cake and eat it too. Florida, let's get ready to rumble - er, caucus!
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Florida Democratic Primary - Early Exit Poll
Well, sort of. I went down to the polling place closest to my abode when the polls opened this morning. I went equipped with my CNN=Politics reporters' notebook (a bit of swag from the GOP YouTube debate here in St. Pete last November) and stationed myself in the nicely marked exit polling area. I was wearing my FDP State Convention T-shirt and when the precinct deputy came to shoo me back to the "free speech zone" away from the poll, I told her that I was there to do exit polling for the Florida Democratic Party. Believe it or not, it worked.
My polling place is a church in an old residential area adjacent to downtown St. Pete. D's outnumber R's in this precinct by 45 to 27%. Other registrations actually beat out Rs in this precinct at 28%. In the hour or so that I was in the exit polling area this morning, the turnout was D's-58%, Rs-37, Others-5%. Who says D's won't show up to vote becasue their votes won't count?
For some strange reason, I didn't feel comfortable exit polling folks on their Presidential Preference. Instead, I focused on Amendment 1 and the Democrats most important issue in making their Presidential Preference choice.
If it were up to this precinct's early morning voters, Amendment 1 would be going down to defeat in flames. The folks I interviewed were voting NO at a rate of 59 to 41%. Sorry Charlie.
What really surprised me was the range of issues that were imprtant to the Democrats in making their choice for our nominee. Of the 10 voters I talked to in any length, I only got one repeat most important issue - The economy. That got mentioned twice. Only one Democrat indicated they were "bummed out their vote wouldn't count." And yet she came to vote anyway. The other voters I spoke to listed these as their most important determining issue:
So, this is certainly not an attempt at a complete exit poll. But I just wanted to get a feel for the mood of the voters. I went back by that polling place earlier this afternoon. Some very stalwart Dem friends of mine were still there getting candidate petitions signed. They indicated that the turnout in our precinct had been steady and strong. That really heartens me for the mood of our Democratic voters. We just have to keep that buzz going through November's elections.
My polling place is a church in an old residential area adjacent to downtown St. Pete. D's outnumber R's in this precinct by 45 to 27%. Other registrations actually beat out Rs in this precinct at 28%. In the hour or so that I was in the exit polling area this morning, the turnout was D's-58%, Rs-37, Others-5%. Who says D's won't show up to vote becasue their votes won't count?
For some strange reason, I didn't feel comfortable exit polling folks on their Presidential Preference. Instead, I focused on Amendment 1 and the Democrats most important issue in making their Presidential Preference choice.
If it were up to this precinct's early morning voters, Amendment 1 would be going down to defeat in flames. The folks I interviewed were voting NO at a rate of 59 to 41%. Sorry Charlie.
What really surprised me was the range of issues that were imprtant to the Democrats in making their choice for our nominee. Of the 10 voters I talked to in any length, I only got one repeat most important issue - The economy. That got mentioned twice. Only one Democrat indicated they were "bummed out their vote wouldn't count." And yet she came to vote anyway. The other voters I spoke to listed these as their most important determining issue:
- Who's not married to a former President
- Iraq
- Leadership
- Women's Issues
- Experience
- Change
- Integrity
So, this is certainly not an attempt at a complete exit poll. But I just wanted to get a feel for the mood of the voters. I went back by that polling place earlier this afternoon. Some very stalwart Dem friends of mine were still there getting candidate petitions signed. They indicated that the turnout in our precinct had been steady and strong. That really heartens me for the mood of our Democratic voters. We just have to keep that buzz going through November's elections.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Ted Deutch Campaigning to Get Dem Candidates Here
Yesterday, I reported on State Senator Ted Deutch's letter to the four early state Democratic Party Chairs asking them to release our candidates from the Pledge not to campaign in Florida once the South Carolina Primary is over on Saturday.
Today there is word of a grassroots campaign by Senator Deutch to persuade the four early state chairs to release the candidates from the Pledge after South Carolina. This is from an email sent from Senator Deutch:
Senator Deutch closes his letter as follows:
So there you have it. This is your chance to let the Democratic parties in the four early states know how you feel about the no campaign pledge. And if you want to drop Senator Ted Deutch a line to thank him for his efforts on our behalf, you can do so here:
senatorteddeutch@yahoo.com
Enjoy!
Today there is word of a grassroots campaign by Senator Deutch to persuade the four early state chairs to release the candidates from the Pledge after South Carolina. This is from an email sent from Senator Deutch:
My Fellow Democrats -Senator Deutch goes on to give the email addresses of the parties of the four early primary states. As a public service, here they are:
Each one of you already knows how important it is for Florida Democrats to cast their votes on January 29th. The eyes of the world will be on Florida, and the national media will report that a strong Democratic turnout bodes well for our Democratic nominee here in November. But wouldn't a two-day burst of campaigning help generate even more excitement before this important primary election?...
Please ... reach out to the party officials at the addresses below to remind them that after South Carolina , the pledge should end. Their OK will give us two days of campaigning, two days to drive voter turnout in the largest and most diverse swing state, and two days to remind all Floridians how important it is to elect a Democrat in November.
New Hampshire Democratic Party
office@nhdp.org
press@nhdp.org
Nevada Democratic Party
jderby9@gmail.com
tbrock@nvdems.com
Iowa Democratic Party
mmilligan@iowademoc rats.org
iadem@iowademocrats.org
South Carolina Democratic Party
jwerner@scdp.org
info@scdp.org
office@nhdp.org
press@nhdp.org
Nevada Democratic Party
jderby9@gmail.com
tbrock@nvdems.com
Iowa Democratic Party
mmilligan@iowademoc rats.org
iadem@iowademocrats.org
South Carolina Democratic Party
jwerner@scdp.org
info@scdp.org
Senator Deutch closes his letter as follows:
Please help make this effort a grassroots success.
Your leadership in asking others to help is vital to bringing us the campaign rallies which will generate the record turnout that this election should produce!
Many thanks,
Ted Deutch
SENATOR TED DEUTCH
FLORIDA STATE SENATE
30th District
15340 Jog Road, Suite 201
Delray Beach, Florida 33446-2170
So there you have it. This is your chance to let the Democratic parties in the four early states know how you feel about the no campaign pledge. And if you want to drop Senator Ted Deutch a line to thank him for his efforts on our behalf, you can do so here:
senatorteddeutch@yahoo.com
Enjoy!
Monday, January 21, 2008
Will the Florida No Campaign Pledge Be Lifted (or Broken)?
cn1044 has a diary up on DailyKos titled Florida might be getting interesting detailing how Senator Barack Obama has purchased national cable ads that are now running in Florida. Senator Hillary Clinton's campaign calls this
Could Florida become more relevant all of a sudden? And what can all this mean?
On Thursday, Florida State Senator Ted Deutch sent a letter to the Democratic Party Chairs of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. The letter asks the Chairs of the four early states to release the Democratic candidates from their pledge not to campaign in Florida before February 5th. Florida's primary is scheduled for January 29th, 3 days after the last of the four early primaries in South Carolina on the 26th. Senator Deutch's letter states
Today, the St. Petersburg Times Buzz Blog is reporting here that the Clinton campaign is criticizing the Obama campaign because
Stay tuned.
Update:
Politico is now reporting this form Clinton campaign spokesperson Mo Elleithee:
a clear and blatant violation of the early state pledge that Sen. Obama and the other leading Democratic candidates signed last year.Meanwhile, Florida State Senator Ted Deutch has written a letter to the four early state Democratic Party Chairs asking them to release the leading Democratic candidates from their pledge not to campaign in Florida.
Could Florida become more relevant all of a sudden? And what can all this mean?
On Thursday, Florida State Senator Ted Deutch sent a letter to the Democratic Party Chairs of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. The letter asks the Chairs of the four early states to release the Democratic candidates from their pledge not to campaign in Florida before February 5th. Florida's primary is scheduled for January 29th, 3 days after the last of the four early primaries in South Carolina on the 26th. Senator Deutch's letter states
On January 26th when the polls close in South Carolina, the goals you established in September when you asked the candidates to sign the Pledge will have been fully satisfied, and there will be no compelling reason for you to ask the candidates to continue to abide by the Pledge.No word yet if Senator Deutch has received any responses from the four state party chairs.
For five months, the candidates will have concentrated their attention on your four states. Allow Florida to have two days.
Today, the St. Petersburg Times Buzz Blog is reporting here that the Clinton campaign is criticizing the Obama campaign because
CNN viewers in Florida today are seeing a Barack Obama campaign ad, which is part of a national cable TV buy.The Clinton campaign is quoted as saying
Sen. Obama’s flagrant disregard for the pledge that he signed is disturbing and calls the integrity of the pledge into question.Obama's campaign tell the Times:
We asked the cable channels if we could prevent the ad from airing in Florida and we were told that would be impossible.Meanwhile, Politico.com's Ben Smith is reporting this:
“Both national cable networks told us it would be impossible for us to run advertising nationally that excluded only Florida. For that reason we consulted with the South Carolina Democratic Party Chair Carol Fowler who told us unequivocally she did not consider this to be in violation of pledge made to the early states,” said Obama spokesman Bill Burton.So, is this a sign that the early states might look favorably upon Senator Deutch's request to release the candidates from the pledge after South Carolina's primary? Will the Clinton campaign consider the pledge broken and launch their own national cable ads that will air in Florida?
Stay tuned.
Update:
Politico is now reporting this form Clinton campaign spokesperson Mo Elleithee:
“We have honored the pledge in every way possible,” Elleithee said. “Now … we’re going to review all the options that are available to us moving forward.”
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
I'm Voting Today
Early voting for the Florida Presidential Primary started yesterday. I am going to do what has become my tradition. I am going to vote today, on the second day of early voting. I know my friend Alonewolf would want me to change this tradition and vote by mail, and he is more than probably right. But there is just something for me about going to a polling place to cast my ballot.
And of course, here in Florida there has been all this talk back and forth about whether or not my vote will even count. Well, it counts enough for me to get myself to the Supervisor of Elections office in downtown St. Petersburg to cast my ballot for...
John Edwards, because he speaks directly to me on the kind of things our next President will need to do to take back our country and to begin to repair all the damage that has been done by Bush & Co. I want somebody who is going to fight for me. I want someone who understands that when Republicans talk about compromise and bipartisanship, what they are really talking about is you having to give in to them. These people never compromise their positions. They always expect you to compromise yours. John Edwards understands that. He speaks directly to my values and has earned my vote.
So that's me. What about you? Are you going to let some talking head pundit tell you that your vote doesn't count, so don't bother? Please do not listen to that bull. We are having an election in Florida. The results will be tallied. The winners and losers will be known. And all of this is going to happen one week before Tsunami Tuesday when all those other states vote. The Florida results will undoubtedly have an influence on the outcomes in those states. That's what going early is really all about. It is not about delegates. The candidates did not spend all those millions in New Hampshire to get 9 delegates, the number that both Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama received there. They did it because New Hampshire goes early and its results influence the outcome in all the other states that follow. It will be the same for Florida, only more so.
And what about our independent friends? Florida does have a closed primary system, so they will not be able to vote in our Presidential Preference Primaries. However, we do have a very important state constitutional amendment on the ballot this election on which independents can vote. The so called property tax reform, Amendment 1, is a very weak attempt at reform of our property tax system. In fact, this is not so much reform as it is pandering to homestead property owners.
Homestead property owners have been very well protected by the wildly successful Save Our Homes amendment which caps increases in taxable values of homesteads at 3% per year. This has protected homesteaders from the tax impact of the rampant run up in property values in recent years. Yet almost all of the benefits of this "reform" are directed at them. Small business owners and renters do not have this protection, yet they are getting basically none of the "relief" in this amendment. And this "relief" only amounts to $240 per year for the average Florida homeowner. This amount, while small individually, is large in the aggregate and will have very damaging impacts on the ability of local governments and school boards to deliver to us the services that we want. For these reasons, I am voting No on 1. Sorry, Charlie (Crist, our Republican Governor and a big backer of Amendment 1).
Strangely enough with a property tax cutting amendment on the statewide ballot, we are asking the voters in Pinellas County to keep a tax increase on themselves. Four years ago, voters in my county approved a small increase in their school property taxes. This tax was pledged to go mainly to increased teacher salaries, to keeping arts programs in the schools and to adding technology for our students. The proposal passed overwhelmingly four years ago with well over 60% of the vote. However, our Republican legislature will only allow us to choose to tax ourselves for four years at a time. Thus the measure is back on the ballot for renewal.
This program has been wildly successful. There is an independent citizen oversight committee that ensures that this money is, in fact, going where it is supposed to go. And it is. Our teacher salaries have been able to be increased to the point that we have a regionally competitive advantage in recruiting. We have more arts and music programs than we had four years ago. And we now have computer labs in every high school in the County. I am going to vote to keep this program going. (This is also another measure on the ballot that independents can vote for.)
So, as the Florida Democratic Party has asked, I am going out today to "Make it Count!" I can't wait to put that "I Voted" sticker on. I hope all my fellow Floridians will do the same on or before January 29th. You'll be glad you did.
And of course, here in Florida there has been all this talk back and forth about whether or not my vote will even count. Well, it counts enough for me to get myself to the Supervisor of Elections office in downtown St. Petersburg to cast my ballot for...
John Edwards, because he speaks directly to me on the kind of things our next President will need to do to take back our country and to begin to repair all the damage that has been done by Bush & Co. I want somebody who is going to fight for me. I want someone who understands that when Republicans talk about compromise and bipartisanship, what they are really talking about is you having to give in to them. These people never compromise their positions. They always expect you to compromise yours. John Edwards understands that. He speaks directly to my values and has earned my vote.
So that's me. What about you? Are you going to let some talking head pundit tell you that your vote doesn't count, so don't bother? Please do not listen to that bull. We are having an election in Florida. The results will be tallied. The winners and losers will be known. And all of this is going to happen one week before Tsunami Tuesday when all those other states vote. The Florida results will undoubtedly have an influence on the outcomes in those states. That's what going early is really all about. It is not about delegates. The candidates did not spend all those millions in New Hampshire to get 9 delegates, the number that both Sen. Clinton and Sen. Obama received there. They did it because New Hampshire goes early and its results influence the outcome in all the other states that follow. It will be the same for Florida, only more so.
And what about our independent friends? Florida does have a closed primary system, so they will not be able to vote in our Presidential Preference Primaries. However, we do have a very important state constitutional amendment on the ballot this election on which independents can vote. The so called property tax reform, Amendment 1, is a very weak attempt at reform of our property tax system. In fact, this is not so much reform as it is pandering to homestead property owners.
Homestead property owners have been very well protected by the wildly successful Save Our Homes amendment which caps increases in taxable values of homesteads at 3% per year. This has protected homesteaders from the tax impact of the rampant run up in property values in recent years. Yet almost all of the benefits of this "reform" are directed at them. Small business owners and renters do not have this protection, yet they are getting basically none of the "relief" in this amendment. And this "relief" only amounts to $240 per year for the average Florida homeowner. This amount, while small individually, is large in the aggregate and will have very damaging impacts on the ability of local governments and school boards to deliver to us the services that we want. For these reasons, I am voting No on 1. Sorry, Charlie (Crist, our Republican Governor and a big backer of Amendment 1).
Strangely enough with a property tax cutting amendment on the statewide ballot, we are asking the voters in Pinellas County to keep a tax increase on themselves. Four years ago, voters in my county approved a small increase in their school property taxes. This tax was pledged to go mainly to increased teacher salaries, to keeping arts programs in the schools and to adding technology for our students. The proposal passed overwhelmingly four years ago with well over 60% of the vote. However, our Republican legislature will only allow us to choose to tax ourselves for four years at a time. Thus the measure is back on the ballot for renewal.
This program has been wildly successful. There is an independent citizen oversight committee that ensures that this money is, in fact, going where it is supposed to go. And it is. Our teacher salaries have been able to be increased to the point that we have a regionally competitive advantage in recruiting. We have more arts and music programs than we had four years ago. And we now have computer labs in every high school in the County. I am going to vote to keep this program going. (This is also another measure on the ballot that independents can vote for.)
So, as the Florida Democratic Party has asked, I am going out today to "Make it Count!" I can't wait to put that "I Voted" sticker on. I hope all my fellow Floridians will do the same on or before January 29th. You'll be glad you did.
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Why Vote: To Take Our Country Back
I just got done reading this diary and comments on DailyKos titled Admirers of Constitution Booted for Wearing Impeach T-shirts in DC. This diary chronicles something that happened today, something I would have thought impossible in the United States of America:
However, many things that should never have happened in this country have happened in the past seven years. The current administration has:
None of the current crop of viable Republican candidates repudiates any of this. In fact, most of them fully embrace all of this list. And in a few short days, most of them will be running around all over our state spouting their own brand of nonsense. Meanwhile, our Democratic candidates will not be here. Well, maybe not until January 27th, anyway (the day after the South Carolina Democratic primary).
So we Dems have had a little intra party squabble about moving the primary up. What is that in comparison to the importance of putting an end to the atrocities listed above? We all need to get out and vote for the primary candidate of our choice. We need to show the Republicans, and more importantly, the independents in this state, that we Democrats are going to be fighting hard here in Florida.
So get out and vote, Democrats. Let's show that we are going to fight hard here in Florida to take our country back!
With the original First Amendment "Freedom of Speech" looking on, admirers of the U.S. Constitution in the Washington D.C. National Archives Building today were ordered to leave for wearing tee-shirts reading "Impeach Bush and Cheney."The only thing I could think of to add to the comments was this:
This is just another reminder of why it is so important to elect a Democrat President this year. We have GOT to take our country back from those people.But then I got to thinking, this is why we need to vote in the Florida Presidential Primary on January 29th. We do have to take our country back. Some folks being told they have to leave the National Archives building because their T-shirts bothered the rent a cops seems like a rather trivial thing. But something like this should never happen in our country.
However, many things that should never have happened in this country have happened in the past seven years. The current administration has:
- Ignored the threat from Osama bin Laden and then was surprised when 9/11 happened.
- Failed to finish the job against bin Laden in Afghanistan, thus allowing him to regroup and remain dangerous today.
- Lied us into a war in Iraq for their own political purposes.
- Wiretapped us without warrants.
- Employed torture against captured enemies.
- Thrown away habeas corpus.
- Allowed political hacks to over rule scientists.
- Robbed our national treasury with no bid contracts to their corporate cronies that are then fraught with fraud.
- Allowed the creation of private armies (a la Blackwater)
- All but broken our military with this endless war in Iraq.
None of the current crop of viable Republican candidates repudiates any of this. In fact, most of them fully embrace all of this list. And in a few short days, most of them will be running around all over our state spouting their own brand of nonsense. Meanwhile, our Democratic candidates will not be here. Well, maybe not until January 27th, anyway (the day after the South Carolina Democratic primary).
So we Dems have had a little intra party squabble about moving the primary up. What is that in comparison to the importance of putting an end to the atrocities listed above? We all need to get out and vote for the primary candidate of our choice. We need to show the Republicans, and more importantly, the independents in this state, that we Democrats are going to be fighting hard here in Florida.
So get out and vote, Democrats. Let's show that we are going to fight hard here in Florida to take our country back!
Monday, December 31, 2007
The Answer to Partisan Gridlock
We've been seeing a lot of crap about bipartisanship lately. There's going to be a meeting next week
Follow me below the fold for the surprisingly simple answer...
The answer to partisan gridlock is pretty simple, really. Here it is:
Matt Stoller also does a good job illustrating
In March of this year, The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press released Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007. The subheading for this report:
To undo the damage that George W Bush and the Roadblock Republicans have done to this country, we don't need bipartisanship. We need more Democrats.
And when we give the Democrats the ball, they are going to need to run with it!
challenging the major-party contenders to spell out their plans for forming a "government of national unity" to end the gridlock in Washington.Well, I have an answer to partisan gridlock, and it ain't a "government of national unity".
Follow me below the fold for the surprisingly simple answer...
The answer to partisan gridlock is pretty simple, really. Here it is:
ELECT MORE DEMOCRATS!It's really not any more complicated than that. The Republicans certainly have not been looking to take the bipartisan road to solving our nation's problems. Consider this from the New York Times:
Now Republicans are in the minority, and they have been using skills honed while they were in charge, throwing up procedural roadblocks, forcing vulnerable Democrats to take difficult votes and just generally harrying members of the majoritydoes that sound bipartisan to you?
Matt Stoller also does a good job illustrating
what this bipartisanship is really about is undermining the public's ability to participate in policy-making.Matt uses the famous 2003 $87 billion Iraq supplemental vote to make his point. Even though the public overwhelmingly opposed this funding, Congress , in a show of bipartisanship, passed this measure with huge, bipartisan majorities. This despite the fact that the public opposed the measure by a margin of 64% to 34% - 30 points!
In March of this year, The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press released Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007. The subheading for this report:
Political Landscape More Favorable To DemocratsOn issue after issue, the trend of the American electorate is more and more progressive. This caused the good folks at Pew to write:
Increased public support for the social safety net, signs of growing public concern about income inequality, and a diminished appetite for assertive national security policies have improved the political landscape for the Democrats as the 2008 presidential campaign gets underway.The American electorate wants the government to work to solve the problems that face our country today. And they see progressive solutions as the way to to this. In order to give the American people what they want, we need more Dems in Congress and particularly in the Senate where it has become necessary to get 60 votes to move legislation forward. And we need a Democratic President to sign progressive legislative solutions into law instead of vetoing them.
Even more striking than the changes in some core political and social values is the dramatic shift in party identification that has occurred during the past five years... Today, half of the public (50%) either identifies as a Democrat or says they lean to the Democratic Party, compared with 35% who align with the GOP.
To undo the damage that George W Bush and the Roadblock Republicans have done to this country, we don't need bipartisanship. We need more Democrats.
And when we give the Democrats the ball, they are going to need to run with it!
Friday, December 28, 2007
Looking Forward to 2008
Since I did my look back at 2007 at Thanksgiving, as we enter this long New Year's weekend, I am looking forward to 2008. Man, am I ever!
First off, 2008 brings us the campaign to replace George W. Bush in the White House. It can't come a moment too soon for me. And it really does get out the gate right away with the Iowa Caucuses on January 3rd. Florida finally gets to weigh in when it still matters on January 29th. With all the controversy over going early, we are in a unique position to set the table for Super Duper Tuesday, one week later on February 5th. We could very well know who the nominees for both sides are going to be by the time the smoke clears that night. Or maybe not.
On the Democratic side, I think we have a much better chance of having our nominee decided on February 5th. MSNBC just showed a poll of Iowa Dems showing a literal dead heat with Edwards and Obama tied at 29% each with Clinton right behind at 28%. The winner in Iowa is likely to be propelled to victory from the momentum of an Iowa win. If it's Edwards that's a little less certain, but if it is either Obama or Clinton, my money would be that the winner there becomes the presumptive nominee on the night of February 5th.
The Republicans are much more muddled, but it really doesn't matter much. The Republican field is a slate of midgets compared to any one of the Dems, with the exception of John McCain, (who, believe it or not, is still in this thing) and he's the past, not the future.
The economy is likely to continue to go south through much of 2008 and that only helps the Dem nominee as the voters see us as much better on the bread and butter issues than the Republicans. And any kind of terrorist or other foreign policy "surprise" (October or otherwise) can easily be shown to remind people that after 8 years of Republican "leadership", their efforts have failed to make us safer. Even allowing for our Democratic propensity to screw things up, I just can't see any one of the Goper candidates actually defeating any one of our three top Dems in 2008.
In Congress, I see the same dynamics lifting Dems to big victories in both the House and the Senate. Everything that applies to the Presidential race applies to the congressional races. The lineup of open seats heavily favors the Dems. And, surprise of all surprises, the Democratic Campaign Committees in both the House and the Senate are kicking the crap out of their GOP counterparts in the money raised department.
In Florida, the only Dem who is even threatened is Tim Mahoney in FL-16. However, the Gopers are going to have a nasty primary fight and the winner will be broke coming out of that mess. Mahoney will be there waiting and sitting on north of $2 million. I just don't see him getting beat.
Christine Jennings has an excellent chance to defeat Vern Buchanan in FL-13 (again). CQ Politics has FL-8, FL-15 and FL-24 as Republican favored, but we've got a good chance to pick up one or even two of those seats as we have excellent candidates in FL-8 and FL-24. On top of that, I'm predicting a Democratic surprise victory or perhaps even two. In total, we could pick up as many as 4 House seats in Florida.
In the Florida Legislature, the rising tide is likely going to do nothing but help lift Dem candidates all up and down the ticket all over the state. Here in the Tampa Bay area, where we did so well in 2006, our best chance to pick up at least one more state House seat is with Carl Zimmerman in HD-48. Carl faces first termer Peter Nehr who he came oh so close to beating in 2006.
As far as I'm concerned, 2008 can't get here soon enough. Neither, for that matter, can January 20th, 2009.
Happy New Year!
First off, 2008 brings us the campaign to replace George W. Bush in the White House. It can't come a moment too soon for me. And it really does get out the gate right away with the Iowa Caucuses on January 3rd. Florida finally gets to weigh in when it still matters on January 29th. With all the controversy over going early, we are in a unique position to set the table for Super Duper Tuesday, one week later on February 5th. We could very well know who the nominees for both sides are going to be by the time the smoke clears that night. Or maybe not.
On the Democratic side, I think we have a much better chance of having our nominee decided on February 5th. MSNBC just showed a poll of Iowa Dems showing a literal dead heat with Edwards and Obama tied at 29% each with Clinton right behind at 28%. The winner in Iowa is likely to be propelled to victory from the momentum of an Iowa win. If it's Edwards that's a little less certain, but if it is either Obama or Clinton, my money would be that the winner there becomes the presumptive nominee on the night of February 5th.
The Republicans are much more muddled, but it really doesn't matter much. The Republican field is a slate of midgets compared to any one of the Dems, with the exception of John McCain, (who, believe it or not, is still in this thing) and he's the past, not the future.
The economy is likely to continue to go south through much of 2008 and that only helps the Dem nominee as the voters see us as much better on the bread and butter issues than the Republicans. And any kind of terrorist or other foreign policy "surprise" (October or otherwise) can easily be shown to remind people that after 8 years of Republican "leadership", their efforts have failed to make us safer. Even allowing for our Democratic propensity to screw things up, I just can't see any one of the Goper candidates actually defeating any one of our three top Dems in 2008.
In Congress, I see the same dynamics lifting Dems to big victories in both the House and the Senate. Everything that applies to the Presidential race applies to the congressional races. The lineup of open seats heavily favors the Dems. And, surprise of all surprises, the Democratic Campaign Committees in both the House and the Senate are kicking the crap out of their GOP counterparts in the money raised department.
In Florida, the only Dem who is even threatened is Tim Mahoney in FL-16. However, the Gopers are going to have a nasty primary fight and the winner will be broke coming out of that mess. Mahoney will be there waiting and sitting on north of $2 million. I just don't see him getting beat.
Christine Jennings has an excellent chance to defeat Vern Buchanan in FL-13 (again). CQ Politics has FL-8, FL-15 and FL-24 as Republican favored, but we've got a good chance to pick up one or even two of those seats as we have excellent candidates in FL-8 and FL-24. On top of that, I'm predicting a Democratic surprise victory or perhaps even two. In total, we could pick up as many as 4 House seats in Florida.
In the Florida Legislature, the rising tide is likely going to do nothing but help lift Dem candidates all up and down the ticket all over the state. Here in the Tampa Bay area, where we did so well in 2006, our best chance to pick up at least one more state House seat is with Carl Zimmerman in HD-48. Carl faces first termer Peter Nehr who he came oh so close to beating in 2006.
As far as I'm concerned, 2008 can't get here soon enough. Neither, for that matter, can January 20th, 2009.
Happy New Year!
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Small Biz Likes Hillary, But
Last Friday, masslib posted this diary titled "Hillary Favored by Small Business Leaders". masslib had picked up this story about MarketTools Inc.'s Zoomerang online survey of small business leaders. And the diary was quite right that Hillary Clinton was favored for President by 22% of the survey respondents with Rudy Giuliani coming in second at 17%. That diary drew quite a number of comments (90 as of this writing).
However, I found the press release on the Inc.-Zoomerang Entrepreneurial Report. And to my mind, there is much bigger news in this report than the fact that Hillary is first choice of 22% of the survey respondents.
How can that be, you say? Follow me below the jump...
Some of you of you may remember that I have advocated before that small business leaders are a constituency for the taking for Democratic candidates. In my diary last year, How to Talk to Small Business People , I wrote:
But the news for Democrats gets better yet. This constituency is there for the taking. All they need is someone to talk to them. Again from the Inc.-Zoomerang Entrepreneurial Report:
Democratic candidates need to speak directly to the concerns of these small business leaders. Look at this from the Inc.-Zoomerang press release:
However, I found the press release on the Inc.-Zoomerang Entrepreneurial Report. And to my mind, there is much bigger news in this report than the fact that Hillary is first choice of 22% of the survey respondents.
How can that be, you say? Follow me below the jump...
Some of you of you may remember that I have advocated before that small business leaders are a constituency for the taking for Democratic candidates. In my diary last year, How to Talk to Small Business People , I wrote:
Small Business People also vote overwhelmingly Republican. They are mistaken in their understanding of what the Republican Party stands for (by its deeds, not by its words).Well, this survey indicates that small business people are finally getting it! Here is the subtitle to the aforementioned Zoomerang press release:
Independent Voters and Health CareIn fact, the survey numbers show Republicans and Democrats in a dead heat for the votes of small business leaders. Considering that a US Chamber of Commerce survey taken in the lead-up to the 2004 election found that
Put Republicans at Risk of Losing Traditionally Loyal Constituency
77% of small businesses said that re-electing President George W. Bush would have a positive impact on their businessesrunning neck and neck with the Republicans at this stage is huge.
But the news for Democrats gets better yet. This constituency is there for the taking. All they need is someone to talk to them. Again from the Inc.-Zoomerang Entrepreneurial Report:
85 percent believe that the current crop of presidential candidates do not focus enough on their issues.and
80 percent of the business leaders surveyed feel that government doesn’t do enough to help growing business and is more focused on big business.Small business people are finally getting it. They now are starting to understand that the Republican Party is and always has been the party of big business, not small business. Here's another tidbit from the survey that is very enlightening - 71% of small business leaders surveyed believe that aggressive corporate lobbying hurts competition.
Democratic candidates need to speak directly to the concerns of these small business leaders. Look at this from the Inc.-Zoomerang press release:
In another surprising turnaround, the report shows that this traditionally anti-tax and anti-regulatory constituency today chooses health care as the number one issue impacting their vote. A majority, 57 percent, say that a regulated health care system would be good for growing businesses.Now there's an issue that belongs to the Democrats if there ever was one.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
How to Run a Primary Campaign Without the Candidates
OK, it's Thanksgiving and football games haven't started yet, so I've got a couple minutes on my hands. Let me pose this question: How do we run presidential primary campaigns here in Florida without the candidates?
Florida's presidential preference primary will be held on January 29th. That's just 67 days away. And it will be one week before Super Duper Tuesday on February 5th when so many other states are going to vote. So Florida's voice will have influence this cycle.
The question becomes, how do we begin to make this a fair contest in Florida if the candidates can't campaign here?
This diary is not about all the silliness that has brought us to this point. This diary really is about how do supporters of the various candidates actually mount campaigns without the overt presence of the campaigns and the candidates?
Since we are going to go before Super Duper Tuesday, and our results will be all over the media for that week, what are we going to do to make sure that the voters get a chance to really know the candidates before they go into the voting booth?
You will notice that so far this diary is full of questions and not any answers. I really don't purport to have the answers and I want to hear from y'all. I do have the thought that as members of the Florida blogosphere community and with our commitment to Blog Florida Blue, that we ought to be thinking about how to make that happen.
And we better do it quickly.
Florida's presidential preference primary will be held on January 29th. That's just 67 days away. And it will be one week before Super Duper Tuesday on February 5th when so many other states are going to vote. So Florida's voice will have influence this cycle.
The question becomes, how do we begin to make this a fair contest in Florida if the candidates can't campaign here?
This diary is not about all the silliness that has brought us to this point. This diary really is about how do supporters of the various candidates actually mount campaigns without the overt presence of the campaigns and the candidates?
Since we are going to go before Super Duper Tuesday, and our results will be all over the media for that week, what are we going to do to make sure that the voters get a chance to really know the candidates before they go into the voting booth?
You will notice that so far this diary is full of questions and not any answers. I really don't purport to have the answers and I want to hear from y'all. I do have the thought that as members of the Florida blogosphere community and with our commitment to Blog Florida Blue, that we ought to be thinking about how to make that happen.
And we better do it quickly.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Jeer on the GOP Presidential Hopefuls
This just in from the Pinellas DEC:
Protest Rally in St Peterburg's Pioneer Park - If you saw the St. Pete Times yesterday you would see that the local Republican Party will be hosting a 'pep rally' outside of the UTube Debates on November 28th. However, what you did not read is that many people who oppose the Republican party and its agenda will be rallying at Pioneer Park on this same day. Unlike our Repulican counterparts, you can vote in a straw poll and it WON'T cost you a penny. Many groups will be represented at this rally.
If you are interested in joining us, please let us know. office@pinellasdemocrats.com
Protest Rally in St Peterburg's Pioneer Park - If you saw the St. Pete Times yesterday you would see that the local Republican Party will be hosting a 'pep rally' outside of the UTube Debates on November 28th. However, what you did not read is that many people who oppose the Republican party and its agenda will be rallying at Pioneer Park on this same day. Unlike our Repulican counterparts, you can vote in a straw poll and it WON'T cost you a penny. Many groups will be represented at this rally.
If you are interested in joining us, please let us know. office@pinellasdemocrats.com
Sunday, November 11, 2007
One Year Out
This week marked the date that put us one year out from the November 2008 elections. Much has been written on this subject already. As I have looked at some of these pieces and reflected on the election that just passed this week in my hometown of St. Petersburg, I have been thinking about what this next 12 months will bring us.
The landscape nationally seems to clearly favor November 2008 as being a very happy time for Democrats. That's because one year out polls have been pretty good at predicting presidential winners. All the polling done one year out is predicting a Democratic victory in the race for the White House. Similarly, the generic polling for Congress is giving Democrats the edge.
So, am I just a nervous nellie or is it legitimate to worry about what we could do to mess this up? Actually, I'm more interested in thinking about what we have to do to make sure that we'll be celebrating the happy results a year from now.
We must guard against complacency. While the generic polling is looking pretty good for Democrats, actual head to head polling is not nearly as pretty. Rudy Guiliani currently polls within the margin of error against all 3 leading Democratic candidates. When you get to Congressional races, the popularity of the incumbent figures prominently into the outlook for those races. That and gerrymandering make both Congressional and State legislative races much more of an open question.
Don't get me wrong. I am not all doom and gloom here. In fact I think things are looking pretty damn good for Dems in this upcoming election cycle. All I am trying to say here is that these elections will not be handed to us.
The landscape nationally seems to clearly favor November 2008 as being a very happy time for Democrats. That's because one year out polls have been pretty good at predicting presidential winners. All the polling done one year out is predicting a Democratic victory in the race for the White House. Similarly, the generic polling for Congress is giving Democrats the edge.
So, am I just a nervous nellie or is it legitimate to worry about what we could do to mess this up? Actually, I'm more interested in thinking about what we have to do to make sure that we'll be celebrating the happy results a year from now.
We must guard against complacency. While the generic polling is looking pretty good for Democrats, actual head to head polling is not nearly as pretty. Rudy Guiliani currently polls within the margin of error against all 3 leading Democratic candidates. When you get to Congressional races, the popularity of the incumbent figures prominently into the outlook for those races. That and gerrymandering make both Congressional and State legislative races much more of an open question.
Don't get me wrong. I am not all doom and gloom here. In fact I think things are looking pretty damn good for Dems in this upcoming election cycle. All I am trying to say here is that these elections will not be handed to us.
We must make sure we get out and do the work that is necessary to get our Democratic candidates elected. Precincts need to be organized. Volunteers must be courted and money must be raised. And of course, we should continue blogging away in order to
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Presidential Primary - Adam: Our Votes WILL Count
Well, Adam Smith is at it again. In a front page article in today's St. Petersburg Times, Adam again makes the assertion:
On January 29th, 2008, Florida Democrats will go to the polls and express their preference for the Democratic Presidential Nominee. We will do this before most of the other states have done so. After our votes are counted, and they will be counted, the rest of the country will hear and will be influenced by the Florida results.
That is exactly the goal all Floridians have had in mind when the whole discussion of moving the primary date up began. Floridians were sick and tired of having our nominees selected by small, non diverse states. We were getting stuck with candidates whose plan to win in the South was to win New Hampshire. My apologies to my friends in Massachusetts, but Democrats lost two presidential elections we might have won because these small non diverse states picked nominees who could not win in Florida. Now Floridians are going to have a real voice in who our Party's nominee is going to be.
Here is something else to keep in mind. The Presidential candidates do not go to Iowa and New Hampshire for the massive number of delegates they win by competing there. They go there because these states are first and thus have major influence on the entire process. Florida will now share in that influence.
Our voices will be heard and our votes will count.
Florida Democrats stand to be the only voters in America whose votes won't count toward picking a presidential nominee.This is just not true. Let me be perfectly clear about this, because Adam remains fixated on this. Adam is wrong. Florida's votes will count.
On January 29th, 2008, Florida Democrats will go to the polls and express their preference for the Democratic Presidential Nominee. We will do this before most of the other states have done so. After our votes are counted, and they will be counted, the rest of the country will hear and will be influenced by the Florida results.
That is exactly the goal all Floridians have had in mind when the whole discussion of moving the primary date up began. Floridians were sick and tired of having our nominees selected by small, non diverse states. We were getting stuck with candidates whose plan to win in the South was to win New Hampshire. My apologies to my friends in Massachusetts, but Democrats lost two presidential elections we might have won because these small non diverse states picked nominees who could not win in Florida. Now Floridians are going to have a real voice in who our Party's nominee is going to be.
Here is something else to keep in mind. The Presidential candidates do not go to Iowa and New Hampshire for the massive number of delegates they win by competing there. They go there because these states are first and thus have major influence on the entire process. Florida will now share in that influence.
Our voices will be heard and our votes will count.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
The MSM Is Starting To Get It
The St. Petersburg Times has this story today on the Florida Primary and Hillary Clinton. And while it is harder to see in the web version, the Times is finally starting to get it about the January 29th Florida Primary.
Buried several paragraphs into the story about Clinton's visit to Florida yesterday is this little gem:
So keep beating the drum, folks. You are having an impact!
This story is also on the Buzz here. Be sure to get over there and put in your 2 cents. :)
Buried several paragraphs into the story about Clinton's visit to Florida yesterday is this little gem:
Scoring well in Florida is important, even if the votes technically don't count, given the state's size.Finally! I have been saying exactly that for quite some time now. And in the print edition, the inside headline reads like this:
Even if the votes don't count, Winning Florida ImportantThey are still on the "votes don't count" meme, but at least they are starting to recognize the vast other benefits of winning in Florida.
So keep beating the drum, folks. You are having an impact!
This story is also on the Buzz here. Be sure to get over there and put in your 2 cents. :)
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
YouTube Debate Impressions
The big winner tonight was the format. Questions coming from real people. Yeah, the media (CNN) ultimately picked the ones shown, the universe they picked from was questions submitted by real people.
I went down to a local sports bar to watch the debate. I was told that a bunch of people were going to be there. The bunch turned out to be about 15 folks, and it was a pretty progressive 15 folks at that. Lots of Kucinich fans.
To my mind, John Edwards was the clear winner among the serious candidates tonight. I actually thought Joe Biden did pretty well, but it is hard to take his candidacy seriously. But Edwards was superb most of the night. He talked about taking power away from the special interests as the only way to get big change. He noted that we wouldn't get big change by trading our insiders for theirs. And his answers on Universal Health Care blew the top off the response meters.
Hillary Clinton abandoned the tag liberal, choosing progressive instead. John Edwards rejected reparations for slavery, but noted that there was a lot we could do to make up for the unequal treatment still occurring in our country today. He specifically mentioned predatory lending to blacks. Barack Obama also demurred on reparations, but suggested too that there were investments that could be made, particularly in education, to ease the disparities among the races.
Obama and Clinton got asked the race / gender question. They both tried to shrug it off with humor. Obama suggested that he proves his African American credentials trying to catch a cab in Manhattan. Clinton said she "had no choice" but to run as a woman. But John Edwards still came up with the best answer here. He told folks who were thinking about not voting for Obama because he is black, or for Hillary because she is a woman that "I don't want your vote".
Edwards again led in his answer to a question about who would be a better advocate for women. Edwards pointed out that the issues he stresses in his campaign, poverty and health care have a disproportionate impact on women. He stated that his issues were women's issues. Clinton pointed to her trip to China where she stated that women's rights are human rights.
Edwards got the gay marriage question and promptly fumbled it. He did say that it would be wrong for anyone to use their faith to deny rights to others. However, this was his weal est moment in the debate. Obama hit it on the head by stating that everyone should be equal under the law. As for marriage, that should be left up to the churches. Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding.
Edwards shone again on the health care issue. He has the only plan that mandates universal health care coverage. Hillary has the scars from trying in the early 90s. Obama tried to say his plan provides for universal coverage, but it does not mandate it. Round to Edwards.
I still think there are too many people on the stage. Biden, Dodd, Gravel and Kucinich have no chance to win the nomination. What are they doing up there? All they are doing is taking time away from letting us hear from the candidates who have a chance to actually win some delegates.
Floridians are going to have a real voice in the nomination process this time around. Our late January primary is early enough in the process for our votes to count in selecting the nominee. A new Quinnipiac poll has Hillary Clinton with a 22 point lead at 36% over Barack Obama and Al Gore who were tied at 14%. John Edwards registered only 9%.
Here are two things I don't know. I don't know if enough people are paying attention to these debates for them to make much of a difference in anybodies minds. And I don't know enough people who support Hillary Clinton to get her to 36% in a poll of people I know.
I went down to a local sports bar to watch the debate. I was told that a bunch of people were going to be there. The bunch turned out to be about 15 folks, and it was a pretty progressive 15 folks at that. Lots of Kucinich fans.
To my mind, John Edwards was the clear winner among the serious candidates tonight. I actually thought Joe Biden did pretty well, but it is hard to take his candidacy seriously. But Edwards was superb most of the night. He talked about taking power away from the special interests as the only way to get big change. He noted that we wouldn't get big change by trading our insiders for theirs. And his answers on Universal Health Care blew the top off the response meters.
Hillary Clinton abandoned the tag liberal, choosing progressive instead. John Edwards rejected reparations for slavery, but noted that there was a lot we could do to make up for the unequal treatment still occurring in our country today. He specifically mentioned predatory lending to blacks. Barack Obama also demurred on reparations, but suggested too that there were investments that could be made, particularly in education, to ease the disparities among the races.
Obama and Clinton got asked the race / gender question. They both tried to shrug it off with humor. Obama suggested that he proves his African American credentials trying to catch a cab in Manhattan. Clinton said she "had no choice" but to run as a woman. But John Edwards still came up with the best answer here. He told folks who were thinking about not voting for Obama because he is black, or for Hillary because she is a woman that "I don't want your vote".
Edwards again led in his answer to a question about who would be a better advocate for women. Edwards pointed out that the issues he stresses in his campaign, poverty and health care have a disproportionate impact on women. He stated that his issues were women's issues. Clinton pointed to her trip to China where she stated that women's rights are human rights.
Edwards got the gay marriage question and promptly fumbled it. He did say that it would be wrong for anyone to use their faith to deny rights to others. However, this was his weal est moment in the debate. Obama hit it on the head by stating that everyone should be equal under the law. As for marriage, that should be left up to the churches. Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding.
Edwards shone again on the health care issue. He has the only plan that mandates universal health care coverage. Hillary has the scars from trying in the early 90s. Obama tried to say his plan provides for universal coverage, but it does not mandate it. Round to Edwards.
I still think there are too many people on the stage. Biden, Dodd, Gravel and Kucinich have no chance to win the nomination. What are they doing up there? All they are doing is taking time away from letting us hear from the candidates who have a chance to actually win some delegates.
Floridians are going to have a real voice in the nomination process this time around. Our late January primary is early enough in the process for our votes to count in selecting the nominee. A new Quinnipiac poll has Hillary Clinton with a 22 point lead at 36% over Barack Obama and Al Gore who were tied at 14%. John Edwards registered only 9%.
Here are two things I don't know. I don't know if enough people are paying attention to these debates for them to make much of a difference in anybodies minds. And I don't know enough people who support Hillary Clinton to get her to 36% in a poll of people I know.
Sunday, June 24, 2007
A Good Look at 2008 Congressional Races
There is a very interesting look at potential Dem US House seat pickups in 2008 over at Political Truth. progressiveflademocrat gives a good rundown on some of the potential pickups. Vern Buchanan, Ric Keller and Tom Feeney (he of the newly minted legal defense fund) lead the list.
Also getting mention is Bill Young. There is the inevitable question about retirement. However, I firmly believe that Young will have to be carried out of the Capitol in a box. That does bring up a very interesting prospect however. Death in office requires a special election to be held. That could actually be very good news for the Dems. FL-10 is still a very tough proposition for any Democrat despite the Districts top of the ticket voting pattern. However, with a special election, FL-10 would likely get a ton of attention from the DCCC. This District would be hard pressed to ever get that kind of DCCC support in a regular election cycle.
Just some food for thought.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Candidate Review Wednesday: Recap
Six weeks ago, I set out to try to work my way through what candidate I wanted to support this cycle for the presidential nomination. I had a plan. I reviewed the 3 "top tier" candidates in detail. I did a review on Bill Richardson, because I promised my friend Becker. And last week, I finished up with the Final Four. The only one I haven't done is Al Gore. But then, he's not running... or is he?
So where has all this left me? To find out, you'll have to follow me below the fold.
I started with the premise that
I noted her strength in fund raising in the first quarter. I also talked about having people around her who had made it all happen before. My biggest concern was her ability to win the general elections, should she win the nomination.
What's changed in the past few weeks? Hillary's performance in the first two debates. She has been the hands down winner in each debate so far. She keeps that up, she just might make a believer out of ...?
Next up was John Edwards. I really liked the values expressed in Edwards speeches. He still has the most detailed policy pieces on the issues of any candidate. He is foursquare for ending the war in Iraq now. Edwards did not match the stunning amounts raised by Clinton or Obama. He did raise enough to continue to execute his plan. And his plan to win the nomination (he's leading the polls in Iowa, still) is a good one. Here's what I wound up saying about Edwards:
So that leaves Barack Obama from the top tier. I also really liked the values expressed in Obama's speeches. I noted his "somewhat less forthright" stance on Iraq, despite his having initially opposed the war. Obama has not laid out many detailed positions on the issues. However, his values translate pretty well into the stances on issues that he does talk about. Obama raised a ton of money in the first quarter, stunning nearly everybody. He has surrounded himself with some very experienced campaign operatives. At the end, here is what I had to say about Obama:
I did review Bill Richardson. He has the potential to break into the top tier. However, he has not helped himself in either of the debates so far. And his near melt down on Meet the Press did not help him any either.
As stated earlier, I reviewed the Final Four. Enough said about them.
So, where does that leave me. The candidate who I worry most about general election electability (Clinton) seems to be easing some of those fears in me. Some. Not very many, but some. The guy I seemed to like the best (Edwards) is going nowhere fast nationally, but still has a viable plan to win the nomination. He needs to get better organized (and soon) in some other states than Iowa though. Otherwise Iowa could turn out to be a pretty empty victory. Obama seems to have peaked (for now) in the polls. However, there are recent hints he could have another stunning fund raising quarter. That would certainly keep the buzz going awhile. Richardson is still stuck in single digits and the other guys are still nowhere.
Speaking of nowhere, I am nowhere nearer to figuring out which candidate to get behind than I was six weeks ago. Is Al Gore running?
So where has all this left me? To find out, you'll have to follow me below the fold.
I started with the premise that
There are two top level criteria I am going to use to evaluate the candidates. The first is their ability to win the nomination. The second is their ability to win the general election.To get to the general, one must first win the nomination, no? I had a list of things I was looking at in the candidates:
- Values projected in the Message
- Stance on issues
- Fundraising ability
- Staff competence
- Primary strategy
- Does this candidate make me feel it?
The albatross around Hillary's neckI wondered
Is she doing the right things now regarding Iraq? Is it enough to overcome her initial vote and her continued refusal to admit a mistake?
I noted her strength in fund raising in the first quarter. I also talked about having people around her who had made it all happen before. My biggest concern was her ability to win the general elections, should she win the nomination.
What's changed in the past few weeks? Hillary's performance in the first two debates. She has been the hands down winner in each debate so far. She keeps that up, she just might make a believer out of ...?
Next up was John Edwards. I really liked the values expressed in Edwards speeches. He still has the most detailed policy pieces on the issues of any candidate. He is foursquare for ending the war in Iraq now. Edwards did not match the stunning amounts raised by Clinton or Obama. He did raise enough to continue to execute his plan. And his plan to win the nomination (he's leading the polls in Iowa, still) is a good one. Here's what I wound up saying about Edwards:
John Edwards message and values reaches me. His call for One America, his stance on Iraq, and his ability to clearly communicate his values resonates with me. ... Edwards would be a nominee that I would be excited to support. And best of all, Edwards can win the White House in 2008.What has changed in the last few weeks? Edwards has stayed mired in third in the national polls. He had a better debate in New Hampshire than he had in South Carolina. I had a personal experience with the Edwards campaign in Florida this weekend. At the Florida Democratic Party's big Jefferson-Jackson weekend, the Edwards campaign didn't look like it could organize its way out of a wet paper bag. They sure didn't have a clue how to organize in Florida. And it showed.
So that leaves Barack Obama from the top tier. I also really liked the values expressed in Obama's speeches. I noted his "somewhat less forthright" stance on Iraq, despite his having initially opposed the war. Obama has not laid out many detailed positions on the issues. However, his values translate pretty well into the stances on issues that he does talk about. Obama raised a ton of money in the first quarter, stunning nearly everybody. He has surrounded himself with some very experienced campaign operatives. At the end, here is what I had to say about Obama:
There is a lot to like about Barack Obama. His message of working together to solve our problems, to turn the page does resonate with me. The values expressed in his speeches are my values. I'm more than a little concerned about his unwillingness to let those values guide him in his current views on Iraq. It concerns me all the more because on other issues, he has not laid out any measure of specificity on how he would proceed. In sum, Senator Obama has not closed the deal with me at this point.Has anything changed in the last few weeks? Obama has not exactly helped himself in the debates. He is stuck in second behind Clinton nationally. And he has slipped into third in Iowa behind Edwards and Clinton. Obama did show an organizational presence in Florida this weekend. And if anybody wants to see a passionate plea by a surrogate, get hold of the videotape of Congressman Bob Wexler speaking for Obama this weekend.
I did review Bill Richardson. He has the potential to break into the top tier. However, he has not helped himself in either of the debates so far. And his near melt down on Meet the Press did not help him any either.
As stated earlier, I reviewed the Final Four. Enough said about them.
So, where does that leave me. The candidate who I worry most about general election electability (Clinton) seems to be easing some of those fears in me. Some. Not very many, but some. The guy I seemed to like the best (Edwards) is going nowhere fast nationally, but still has a viable plan to win the nomination. He needs to get better organized (and soon) in some other states than Iowa though. Otherwise Iowa could turn out to be a pretty empty victory. Obama seems to have peaked (for now) in the polls. However, there are recent hints he could have another stunning fund raising quarter. That would certainly keep the buzz going awhile. Richardson is still stuck in single digits and the other guys are still nowhere.
Speaking of nowhere, I am nowhere nearer to figuring out which candidate to get behind than I was six weeks ago. Is Al Gore running?
Tuesday, June 5, 2007
Candidate Review Wednesday: The Final Four
I have previously laid out my plan to review our candidates . The stated goal of this exercise is to help me settle on a candidate to support for the nomination. My reviews of Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Barack Obama and Bill Richardson can be found here.
Today, we are off to see, no, not the wizard. We are off to the (apologies to the NCAA) Final Four. So take a moment and review the other diaries in this series. Then follow me...
The Final Four are Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich. We'll spend a little time looking at each one of them. First though, let's take a quick look at the criteria I have established for this review:
Having said all that , let's look at reality here. None of these four guys has a snowball's chance in hell of actually winning the nomination. None of them is above single digits in any polls. None of them have come anywhere near the top three in fund raising. That should be the end of this diary right here. But I did do some research, so what the heck.
Let's start with Joe Biden. Joe is the Senior Senator from Delaware. He has been in the Senate since damn near as long as I can remember. He has the distinction of actually being elected to the Senate before he had attained the legal age to serve, 35.
Joe is not usually known for his reticence. In fact, he brought the house down with his one word answer of "yes" in the South Carolina debate. Trying to find values expressed in Joe Biden's verbosity was no easy task, but I did find this gem in a speech Biden gave on National Security and Civil Rights:
Chris Dodd, the Senior and only Democratic Senator from Connecticut also suffers from the Issue Trap. Dodd has been in Congress since he was but two years out of law school. I was able to find something that gives us a hint about Dodd's values though. Dodd has this prominently displayed on his web site: Restore Habeus Corpus and is the author of Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007.
Mike Gravel represented Alaska in the U.S. Senate from 1969-81. I had to look it up. Other than making a name for himself as the crusty old bomb thrower in the debates, there is not a lot to say about Gravel. And it was very difficult to find values statements on his web site.
Dennis Kucinich is another kettle of fish altogether. When he was the boy wonder Mayor of Cleveland, he was dubbed "Dennis the Menace." He hasn't changed much since. But in his description of his plan for a Department of Peace I did uncover this:
As for issues, as always I start with Iraq. Joe Biden has been one of the first Democrats to come up with a plan for Iraq. His "federalization plan" has some merit. However, to make it work, a successful settlement of the Iraq oil distribution issue would have to be reached. Biden did not do himself any favors in this area when he voted for the Iraq supplemental without a time table for withdrawal.
Chris Dodd was alone among the senatorial presidential candidates to cast his no vote on the Iraq supplemental while the issue was still in doubt. Clinton and Obama both slunk onto the Senate floor and voted no after the votes for passage were assured.
Mike Gravel is for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. You can probably figure out where "Department of Peace" Kucinich stands. BTW, Kucinich voted against the original AUMF.
None of these guys make me feel it enough to sign on to a Don Quixote campaign. Enough said.
Today, we are off to see, no, not the wizard. We are off to the (apologies to the NCAA) Final Four. So take a moment and review the other diaries in this series. Then follow me...
The Final Four are Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich. We'll spend a little time looking at each one of them. First though, let's take a quick look at the criteria I have established for this review:
There are two top level criteria I am going to use to evaluate the candidates. The first is their ability to win the nomination. The second is their ability to win the general election.
In my attempts to evaluate candidates chances to win the nomination, I am going to look at these factors:
- Values projected in the Message
- Stance on issues
- Fundraising ability
- Staff competence
- Primary strategy
- Does this candidate make me feel it?
Having said all that , let's look at reality here. None of these four guys has a snowball's chance in hell of actually winning the nomination. None of them is above single digits in any polls. None of them have come anywhere near the top three in fund raising. That should be the end of this diary right here. But I did do some research, so what the heck.
Let's start with Joe Biden. Joe is the Senior Senator from Delaware. He has been in the Senate since damn near as long as I can remember. He has the distinction of actually being elected to the Senate before he had attained the legal age to serve, 35.
Joe is not usually known for his reticence. In fact, he brought the house down with his one word answer of "yes" in the South Carolina debate. Trying to find values expressed in Joe Biden's verbosity was no easy task, but I did find this gem in a speech Biden gave on National Security and Civil Rights:
We need not change our national character in order to defeat terrorism. As a matter of fact, we are already defeated by the terrorists if we change our character.Other than that though, Biden suffers from what has been called the "Issue Trap". As a long time Senator, Biden is adept at debating policy, particularly Foreign Policy. But to find values embedded in those policy choices is no easy task.
Chris Dodd, the Senior and only Democratic Senator from Connecticut also suffers from the Issue Trap. Dodd has been in Congress since he was but two years out of law school. I was able to find something that gives us a hint about Dodd's values though. Dodd has this prominently displayed on his web site: Restore Habeus Corpus and is the author of Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007.
The bill will restore Habeas Corpus protections to detainees, bar information acquired through torture from being introduced as evidence in trials, and limit presidential authority to interpret the meaning and application of the Geneva Conventions.
Mike Gravel represented Alaska in the U.S. Senate from 1969-81. I had to look it up. Other than making a name for himself as the crusty old bomb thrower in the debates, there is not a lot to say about Gravel. And it was very difficult to find values statements on his web site.
Dennis Kucinich is another kettle of fish altogether. When he was the boy wonder Mayor of Cleveland, he was dubbed "Dennis the Menace." He hasn't changed much since. But in his description of his plan for a Department of Peace I did uncover this:
The United States was founded on hope, optimism, and a commitment to freedom. We can once again become a beacon of hope for the world. To do that, we must reject the current administration's policies of fear, suspicion, and preemptive war. It is time to jettison our illusions and fears and to transform age-old challenges with new thinking. This is the idea behind my proposal to establish a Department of Peace. This is the idea to make nonviolence an organizing principle at home and abroad and dedicate ourselves to peaceful coexistence, consensus building, disarmament, and respect for international treaties. Violence and war are not inevitable. Nonviolence and peace are inevitable.Not bad for Dennis the Menace, huh?
As for issues, as always I start with Iraq. Joe Biden has been one of the first Democrats to come up with a plan for Iraq. His "federalization plan" has some merit. However, to make it work, a successful settlement of the Iraq oil distribution issue would have to be reached. Biden did not do himself any favors in this area when he voted for the Iraq supplemental without a time table for withdrawal.
Chris Dodd was alone among the senatorial presidential candidates to cast his no vote on the Iraq supplemental while the issue was still in doubt. Clinton and Obama both slunk onto the Senate floor and voted no after the votes for passage were assured.
Mike Gravel is for an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. You can probably figure out where "Department of Peace" Kucinich stands. BTW, Kucinich voted against the original AUMF.
None of these guys make me feel it enough to sign on to a Don Quixote campaign. Enough said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
