(cross posted from The Democratic Daily)
On this day 232 years ago some very courageous men announced to the world a document of independence. We celebrate their courage, intelligence and durability for their action was certainly controversial in the colonies.
A structure for a new nation was revealed as The United States of America. In the last line they pledged their "Lives and Fortunes and Sacred Honor" to the independence of this new United States of America.
Because perhaps many, like me, may not have read the entire document lately here it is in full.
Declaration of Independence IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them,
Throughout the last several weeks we all seen in the progressive blogsphere a hardening of positions by supporters of both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
For the moment I'll ignore who I support in order to try and develop some metrics on the General Election voting patterns.
I'm posting a very specific poll about one topic. Who will vote for the nominee regardless of it's Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton? Will Obama supporters vote for Hillary?
Will Clinton supporters vote for Barack?
(If you are still undecided today then here's a thought: If you want 'change', and we all do, then you have to have a change agent that knows the system and has the contacts to create that change. Perhaps my thoughts as I did a 180 degree turn to support Hillary Clinton will be helpful.)
So how did I come to a momentous change 180 degree change? Since I am grounded in Practical Politics, my first concern in any election is winning.
Whoever we pick as the Democratic nominee will be attacked as if they have stinking, slimy baggage by the Republican Party, the nominee and, more importantly, the slimy political world that surrounds the GOP. These 'independent' organizations have a sole purpose: to attack relentlessly, in the most vicious possible ways, the Democratic nominee. There will never be a 'clean' candidate that is exempt from their attacks.
Who, then, I began to think is best equipped to handle the vicious, continuous attacks that the other side will launch? So who could best stand up and fight? Who would be our warrior?
In a conference call this morning Congresswoman Maxine Waters of CA-35 strongly endorsed Hillary Clinton. Summarizing Ms. Waters, she said that HRC had traveled the country listening to the problems of the people. She knew the problems of the urban population and the small towns as well.
It was a strongly worded endorsement. I have not found a transcript yet as this conference call started at just 10:30AM Pacific.
In response to a question HRC said California "is always about the future." Later in the same answer she said, "California is in the solutions business."
Here's a simple political reality that has held true for many, many years: If you want to knock down one opponent that you fear, bring in or back a surrogate you feel more certain that you can beat.
This has been done time and time again from state to federal races and today we see the right wing media effort to raise Obama to the standard bearer because they fear him less.
Why? Hillary Clinton, for whatever flaws she may have, is tougher than nails. She been attacked in every conceivable manner on every conceivable subject, from sexual orientation to murder, and she's survived every attack. She's the candidate with very personal body armor.
What if Iowa sent along all the candidates to NH with momentum? What if even the most partisan supporters of Clinton, Obama, and Edwards agreed to knowingly split their votes and keep the top 5 or 6 candidates in a near dead heat in the race? Why? It's best for the Democratic Party and best for the USA.
Joe Biden, Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson have shown their expertise, ability and experience. The voters of the nation deserve to hear what they have to say.
Split your vote and keep these good candidates in the race. About 135,000 caucus voters will decide the shape this election.
While using different language, Barrack Obama accused the Edwards Campaign of a felony when a former campaign official with an independent 527 was found to be readying $796,000 in media time buys.
From WAPO:"But the fire chief in Orange County, <> complained vociferously that the pool of available assets was too small, especially in the week’s frantic first 36 hours.<> "Yadda yadda yadda," said Fire Chief Chip Prather, dismissing the state’s assurances. "All I know is, I had 12 firefighters deploy their [lifesaving]shelters yesterday, and they shouldn’t have had to do that."
The Democratic Daily, a mainstream Democratic blog, has been redesigned by the editor Pamela Leavey (KerryGoddess), and is open for business at a new URL.
Started as a Kerry supporter blog, The Democratic Daily has morfed into a widely read Democratic blog with a diverse group of writers and viewpoints. The crew at DemDaily tries to keep the vitriol at a minimum and fact based articles at a maximum.
Previously at an embedded URL, The Democratic Daily is now at it's own domain of (drumroll)http://thedemcraticdaily.com . Please update your bookmarks. Come on over for a look at the new site!
(While this diary could be seen as blogwhoring, I hope everyone accepts that it's intended to be an opportunity for readers to update their bookmarks and RSS feeds. It's also intended to be a big round of applause for Pamela Leavey who has, like most active blog owners, given much of her life to building a fine site.)
(This is an updated version of a post of the same name published yesterday at The Democratic Daily.)
Today's candidates, we'll use the Presidential candidates as an example, are aware of the powerful presence of the Blogsphere and, for lack of a better term, The Social Networking Sphere.
Each campaign has hired Online Coordinators, Bloggers and Strategists. We see the candidates themselves make posts from time to time. The actual Campaign Bloggers we see in print more often.
The Campaign's understand that the Campaign Blogger, (CB), isn't a vehicle for releasing media advisories or news releases. The CB must be more than simply another channel for news releases or event announcements. Most campaigns understand that the primary task of the CB is to create two way communication with the blog reader. This two way communication, far more effectively than in the past, gives the reader a greater sense of involvement in the campaign. It can, and does, become a very emotional attachment to the Candidate.
Here, in a single statement, is the meta-strategy for 2008. First the comment then an analysis or, at least, my attempt at one.
"I think the defining issue in '08 is going to be Hillary Clinton."
-- Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), quoted by the Louisville Courier-Journal, when asked if Iraq will be the defining issue in the 2008 campaign. [Hat Tip to Political Wire.]
While partisans of other candidates will have the natural tendency leap to advocate for their candidate, I suggest we that this statement at face value and look for the 'consequence of the consequence'.
I've had a series about The Invisible Primary at the Political Dogfight that focused mostly on the inherent stupidity of jamming the 'final' primary results to, essentially, Feb. 5, 2008.
I can't think of a better way to choose the wrong candidate.
And now I have a bigger question:
Is this Primary really about Policy?
It doesn't appear to be to me. It seems to me to be about Personality, Publicity, Fundraising and Endorsements...with some broad platform stances (which are a different element than true policy statements) thrown in as red meat for the public.
The issue of proper body armor for our troops has been in the forefront of the mismanagement of this goddamn stupid war. Once again the DoD has rejected Dragon Skin as a body armor bidder even though it's better, lighter and takes an enormous hit.
Think of the soldiers and Marines that could be saved. To demonstrate the armor the following was created as an pure test. Simply damn amazing....(video and details below). [Video also available in Flash at Political Dogfight with a downloadable .mov file.]
There is a new Wes Clark video that is very unusual at YouTube. Instead of talking about a candidate, in this case Wes Clark, it speaks directly to Wes Clark. I hope this really does go viral. I feel it has a message that Wes Clark needs to hear.
The full channel name is YouTube/Polcampaign. There is only one video there at least for the moment. I will be putting this on my blogs. I hope other blog owners and members do the same.
If Wes Clark again gets a firm demonstration of his built-in support perhaps it will impact his decision making. While most of us expect him to run, based on his own comments, I believe this is a time to demonstrate his support. Circulating this video is one easy way to make the support obvious..
Yesterday in first post of this series, I voiced my concern that the new Primary Schedule could allow the weakest of candidates to dominate. The nomination might go to a person who can't connect with a true majority of the American people. Today we have a media driven event, 'The Invisible Primary', already in process.
Look at the recent results of early primary determination of the nominee:
Vice President Al Gore was a great VP. He has been an outstanding advocate for the environment. Yet on the campaign trail there was an obvious disconnect between what we were told was his private self and his public self. We were told that in private he was funny, had no problem converting others to his point of view and was generally a great guy to be around.
None of that consistently translated to the campaign. . We saw glimpses of that 'authentic' self but they were fleeting.
[much more on the flip]
[Originally published at The Political Dogfight as part one of four this is a slightly edited version.]
I seriously question the value of the new Primary System developed by the DNC then jumped on by other opportunistic states. February 5, 2008 looms large as a result of these changes.
David Brooks recently had a column about the advice he had for Republican candidates. It was his contention that all the primaries on Feb. 5, 2008 wouldn't be the decisive ones. He still thought the traditional first three primaries would set the media tone. And he thought the Media tone would set the race on the first Tuesday of Feb.
While I don't agree that the first three primaries will decide the race, and I don't agree with Brooks in general, I think he is absolutely right about a slightly different topic: Media Tone
Think of the situation today as seen in the daily papers and on the news programs! According to them there are only 3 real candidates in the race: Senator Clinton, Senator Obama and John Edwards...and John Edwards is coming in a weak third in terms of media coverage. (Or his was until the unfortunate announcement of his wife's recurring health issues.]
This issue of Media Tone/Media Noice is the real problem.
In today's Washington Post, Zbigniew Brzezinski makes a empathic case for the results of the phrase 'War on Terror' being counter productive and of a deliberate effort having gone into the construction of the phrase itself.
The 'War On Terror'as a phrase, is part of the effort by the administration to drive fear (False Evidence Appearing Real)[my personal definition] into the nations fabric. It has reduced our freedoms and has done so in ways that will be hard to reverse.
Mr. Brzenski speaks better for himself so on the flip I will post a few paragraphs for those that haven't done the free registration at WaPo. This is an important column and I urge all to read it.
Last night I watched THE SPEECH with no expectations that anything would change. In most repects I was right as has been pointed out in Front page commentary and a lot of diaries.
But I haven't seen anyone really react to some of the practical considerations embedded within President Bush's speech. Since I constantly advocate Practical Politics maybe I should call this 'Practical Reality'.
First how many noticed the embedded changes of emphasis on which side President Bush is supporting and the internal conflicts within the Speech?
What if Iowa sent along all the candidates to NH with momentum? What if even the
most partisan supporters of 
ability and experience. The voters of the nation deserve to hear what they have to say.
