Snatching Defeat From the Jaws of Victory

For a long time now, I have been saying that the stars are aligned for the Democrats to win the White House in 2008. All we have to do is to avoid shooting ourselves in the foot. Right about now, I feel like I am picking some of Dick Cheney's buck shot out of my toes.

This is not what we should be focusing our attention on. In a week where the Republicans are imploding (Alberto Gonzales and Larry Craig resign, John Warner retires), Dems should be standing back and let the Republicans continue to hang themselves. Instead we are getting headlines like this:

Democrats boycott Florida race

Here I have been trying to argue that what matters most is that Floridians voices will be heard. Now the Democratic candidates have come out and said that they won't be listening. Here is what John Edwards (who I have been supporting) has to say:

"Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina need to be first because in these states ideas count, not just money. These are places where voters get to look the candidate in the eye and measure their policies, ideas, and integrity."

What we have been arguing all along is that Florida voters are hungry for a chance to:

look the candidate in the eye and measure their policies, ideas, and integrity

at a time when it still matters in the nomination process. Floridians with money have long had that opportunity. Now we were going to have the same chance to measure the candidates as Iowa and New Hampshire have had. And we think that we probably could do a better job picking the Democratic nominee that Iowa and New Hampshire have done.

Here is a "history lesson" that has been circulated among Florida's Democratic leaders:

Of the last nine Presidential elections in which the Democratic candidate was chosen by the current primary system (excluding 1996 when President Clinton faced no real opposition in the primary), our candidate has only twice been elected President. Those candidates, Jimmy Carter in 1976 and Bill Clinton in 1992, both lost the Iowa Caucuses. Clinton lost the New Hampshire primary as well.

Also, the Iowa Caucus has picked a loser every time since it came to
prominence in 1972. Since 1952, the New Hampshire Primary has only picked one Democratic President when the nomination was contested.

So what do we do now? I say it is about time to start using our influence on the candidates campaigns. Let's pick up the drumbeat to get these candidates to change their minds and reject this lunacy of boycotting Florida.

If we are ever going to Blog Florida Blue , now is the time to start.

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:

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.

Candidate Review Wednesday: John Edwards

Last week, in the first diary of this series, I reviewed Hillary Clinton. I included a poll asking whether people thought this process was useful. I was gratified to see that 65% of the respondents did think the process was useful. As of 5:00 PM Sunday, the diary had drawn 106 comments and 18 Recs. Thank you all for participating.

As promised last week, today is John Edwards turn in the barrel.


The two broad criteria I am using to evaluate the candidates are these:

The first is their ability to win the nomination. The second is their ability to
win the general election.

You can check out the other criteria being used at the Overview Diary for this series. But I am a big believer in value based decision making, so I am putting a lot of stock in the values expressed by the candidates.

Here are some of the values expressed in John Edwards speeches:

London School of Economics Speech

When hundreds of thousands of children are now orphaned living in tents and
temporary shelters, their despair and disillusionment is a threat to their
stability and to our security. For disillusionment is the fuel that feeds the
fire of hatred and tyranny. And when millions of people — men and women who used to be able to work and support their families — are at risk of slipping into
poverty, it is the moral conscience of the world to give them hope.

For example, how do we ensure that the great divide between the "haves" and the "have nots" starts to close? How do we lead so that developing countries understand that education, market reforms, and just governments will bring hope to even the most desperate places?

And today, many ask whether America and Europe can continue to work together to ensure the broader spread of democracy. The only answer to that question must be yes.
This is the moment when we must strengthen our partnership to ensure that in the 21st century, the world moves toward liberty and opportunity.

The Transatlantic Partnership in an Age of Global Challenges

America has a responsibility to lead and to lead on the issue of extreme poverty around the world, not just addressing the millions of Americans who live in poverty everyday... How do we win the hearts and minds of young people, especially the millions who are struggling in the Middle East and in Africa who feel that the modern world offers them absolutely nothing? How do we reach them and give them an opportunity to climb out of hopelessness and into a better life just as we did here with the Marshall Plan after World War II?

National Press Club Policy Address

On the America we want to achieve in the next twenty years, I don't think the picture is hard to draw. It is an America where we are well on our way to ending poverty. It is an America where every American has health care coverage — not access to health insurance or other wiggle-word ways we try to describe something less than health coverage for every American. It is time. It is an America where businesses and working people thrive in a competitive and fair international marketplace. It is an America where everyone can join the middle class and everyone can build a better future than their parents had.

I want to live in an America free from dependence on fossil fuels, where our environmental policies reflect our pride in the blessings of a beautiful and abundant country and our commitment to preserve that country for our farmers, our fishermen, our children. Sacrifice, conservation, and innovation will be required.
I want to live in an America that has not sacrificed individual liberties in the name of freedom, where — in the fight to preserve the country we love — we do not sacrifice the country we love, where we don't make excuses for violating civil rights, though we understand the test of liberty is in the moments when such excuses almost sound reasonable.

I want to live in an America where we value work as well as wealth, because we understand that we are only strong because our people work hard, that we are made strong by our longshoremen and autoworkers, our computer programmers and janitors, and disrespect to any of them is disrespect to the values that allowed for America's greatness in the first place.

I want to live in an America where the difference in our best schools and our worst schools cannot be measured by Newsweek, where those who can teach are encouraged and rewarded and where the world of learning is opened to every child.

How do these values translate into play via Edwards' stance on the issues? Let's start with Iraq. If you can not get past the Iraq issue, you are nowhere. In a recent CBS News Poll 36% of Americans named Iraq as the most important issue. No other issue was even in double digits.


Like Hillary Clinton, John Edwards was in the Senate and voted for The Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) in Iraq. Unlike Clinton, however, John Edwards has acknowledged that he made a mistake. Edwards has been urging Congress to stand firm on ending the war in Iraq.

The president today asked for yet another chance. We can no longer afford to bet American troops on a chance. In fact, even members of the president's own party are running out of patience with the relentless pursuit of his failed Iraq policy. Why on earth would Congress make a concession to Bush when support to end the war may be climbing? Congress should stand firm. The only real power it has to end this war is to cut off funds. They passed a plan to support our troops and bring them home, and they should do it again. Nothing else will work. And if the president vetoes it, then it is his willful behavior alone that is standing in the way of what our troops need.

Edwards is alone among the top tier candidates to have rolled out detailed plans on the issues.

Edwards Announces Plan for Universal Health Care
Edwards Lays Out Comprehensive Proposal To Enact His Plan For Iraq
Edwards Announces Rural Recovery Act; Plan would restore economic fairness and help struggling towns
Edwards Announces College Opportunity Agenda

Universal Health Care, Iraq, Rural Recovery, College Opportunity. No other candidate has laid out in such detail their plans for these and other issues important to the voters. That gives Edwards a leg up in this department.

How does Edwards measure up in the fundraising department? He finished behind Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton in first quarter fundraising numbers. That's the bad news. The good news is that Edwards did raise enough money to execute his campaign plan. Here's what the Edwards campaign had to say about the first quarter fundraising numbers:

Edwards Campaign Raises More Than $14 Million During 1st Quarter
John Edwards for President Apr 1, 2007

Chapel Hill, North Carolina – The John Edwards for President campaign announced today that it raised in excess of $14 million during the first quarter fundraising period, far exceeding its budget and nearly doubling the amount Edwards raised during the first quarter in 2003. Americans from across the country and from a wide range of backgrounds supported Senator Edwards' campaign to start changing America today with big, bold ideas.
First quarter fundraising figures from the John Edwards for President campaign include:
More than $14 million raised total.
More than 40,000 contributors from across the country.
80 percent of contributions were $100 or less.
$3.3 million raised from online contributions.
Around $1 million raised in general election funds.

It remains to be seen if Obama and Clinton can continue their torrid fundraising pace into the second quarter. If they do, Edwards will have to pick up the fundraising pace to be competitive with the air time buys of the other two candidates.

John Edwards has assembled a first rate campaign staff. In Iowa, he has many of the same people who helped him to his stunning second place finish in 2004. The Edwards campaign just recently announced:

Joe Trippi Joins The John Edwards For President Campaign

Primary campaign strategy will either be Edwards crowning glory or his Achilles heel. Like a riverboat gambler, Edwards has bet the house on Iowa. In addition to assembling a superb staff in Iowa, he has been practically living there the last 4 years. So far, it is paying off. Edwards leads the polls in Iowa. Last cycle, John Kerry won Iowa and the rest was history. Will history repeat itself?

The Democrats have tweaked the primary schedule this year. Nevada follows Iowa with a caucus this cycle. Although recent polls show Hillary Clinton with a commanding lead, Nevada presents some interesting opportunities for other candidates to fare better than anticipated in the Nevada caucus. Nevada is heavily unionized and John Edwards has worked hard to be the favorite son of unions this cycle. Hispanics make up a large voting block in Nevada, something that New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson hopes to capitalize on. Those factors could cause some surprises to people who only focus on the polls in Nevada.

Early momentum from Iowa and Nevada could make Edwards the apparent front runner heading into New Hampshire and South Carolina, Edwards birth state. Florida's recent legislation moving its primary up to January 29th has still to be figured into this mix. Also, John Edwards beats every other Republican contender in head to head match up polls.

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. His very human reaction to his wife Elizabeth's struggle with cancer resonates with me. There is nothing I don't like about Edwards. OK, $400 haircuts don't excite me all that much. But that, aside, Edwards would be a nominee that I would be excited to support. And best of all, Edwards can win the White House in 2008.

Florida Primary Conspiracy Theory?

Blog Florida Blue

Matt Towery of the Florida Times-Union in Jacksonville has written a story titled Will Howard Dean step in GOP's Florida primary trap? He buys into the theory that moving Florida's Presidential Preference Primary to January 29th is part of some Machiavellian plot by the Florida Republican Party. Here's a sample:

The Republicans know the DNC is governed by hard-nosed and inflexible leaders who have managed to botch numerous presidential campaigns in recent years. Knowing that Dean likely will attempt to make a Jan. 29 Democratic primary meaningless, Republicans recognized the opportunity to be the only game in town.

But wait, it gets better. Towery displays his stunning knowledge of Florida election law thusly:

How does a party reeling from a loss of independent voters hope to win back those independents in Florida, the biggest state still up for grabs in the presidential election?

By holding its primary in a situation where independent voters can only vote Republican if they want their votes to count.

Here is Florida Statute 101.021 :

In a primary election a qualified elector is entitled to vote the official primary election ballot of the political party designated in the elector's registration, and no other. It is unlawful for any elector to vote in a primary for any candidate running for nomination from a party other than that in which such elector is registered.

The only way an independent voter can vote in a primary election is to change their registration from independent (or technically No Party Affiliation) to one of the political parties. A cursory review of voter turnout statistics reveals that there is no substantial evidence of massive voter registration changes and voting in primary elections by Florida's independent voters.

This kind of thing makes it hard to give credence to anything else Mr. Towery has to say on this matter. Having said all that, the Florida Legislature did put the Florida Democratic Party in a box. But that is the point, isn't it? This was an act of the Florida Legislature, not the Florida Democratic Party. Does it seem just to penalize Florida Democrats for the act of the Republican dominated Florida Legislature?

Doctor Dean, now is the time to remember how important the Florida Democratic Party was to your gaining the DNC Chair. Now is the time to ensure that the votes of Florida Democrats, of all people, get counted and counted fairly.

And, oh, bye the way, maybe now is the time to get that 50 state strategy cranked up in Florida so we are not put in this position by a Republican dominated Florida Legislature again.

Blog Florida Blue

Florida Knows How to Fuck Up Elections

Aha, I bet you thought that this diary was going to be about the FL-13 undervote fiasco or maybe the 2000 Presidential election, um, er selection of the Chimp in Chief. Well, you might be right.

This time, Florida is aiming to fuck up the 2008 Presidential election. How can they aim to do that so soon, you ask? Well, actually Florida is aiming to fuck up the 2008 Presidential Primary elections, which really aren't that far away.

So, how is Florida going to do this, you ask? Is it going to be the electronic equivalent of the infamous butterfly ballots as is going on in FL-13 now (maybe)? The electronic version of the hanging chad, which is going on now in FL-13 (maybe)?

Well, if you really want to know...


Florida's Goper dominated state legislature is making serious noises about moving up Florida's Presidential Primary from early March to well, we don't exactly know. But that is not stopping our state legislative leaders from making loud clucking sounds about it.

The Times political editor Adam Smith (shouldn't he be the economics editor or something?) also reports today

That (the) move has bipartisan support in Tallahassee, though the national parties bar most states from holding primaries before the first week of February. Florida could lose some delegates at their national convention if they buck the national parties, but the state still could be the first huge primary prize on the calendar - delivering more delegates than Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina combined.

So, now they are not only screwing up the Presidential Primary calendar, they are potentially screwing up the state's major parties delegate counts at the National Conventions.

More from the St. Petersburg Times

"Sen. Pruitt (incoming President of the Florida Senate) understands this is a priority of (incoming) Speaker (Mario) Rubio," spokeswoman Kathy Mears said of an early primary. "He is very receptive to the idea and wants to be of assistance, and he believes this would be a good change for Florida."

The Times also reports today

Not only are state legislative leaders working on moving Florida's primary to be one of the earliest in the country, but the state GOP is planning a straw vote convention for October 2007.

Yup, a straw poll in October of 2007. Now it's really geting closer.
Now straw polls can be a lot of fun for the state convention delegates. The Florida Democratic Party wanted to have one at their convention in December 2003, but were bribed / scared off the idea by the DNC. Why would the DNC do that, you ask?
Well, the Presidential pretenders, um, er contenders didn't want to have to expend the resources, both in money and staffers to organize the convention delegates for what is really a meaningless beauty contest. Particulary so close to Iowa and New Hampshire.

But the straw poll idea also has support from some other notables

Democrats held one ,,,before the 1992 race. Bill Clinton, ... credited the Florida contest with playing a crucial role in his winning the nomination.

So, maybe, just maybe, Florida is not going to fuck up the 2008 Presidential election after all. Stay tuned.