Dark Knight perfect analogy for Election 08

Just saw the flick and...

If you think about it Hillary is just like Harvey Dent. And Obama is kinda like Bruce Wayne and McCain is like the mob boss. Or no... Obama is like Commissioner Gordon and McCain, the police establishment. And... the Joker is... maybe Cheney. Ok, truth is I have no political analogy that makes this post relevant (feel free to throw your own in the comments). It is funny to see though how many sites, in this s...l...o...w... news cycle (where Obama's gym habits make headlines) are trying to draw a parallel; like Slate.com and their piece on "The Dark Knight's smart serious take on terrorism" which claims that the director "turns the Manichean morality of comic books - pure good vs. pure evil - into a bleak post-9/11 allegory about how terror (and, make no mistake, Heath Ledger's Joker is a terrorist) breaks down those reassuring moral categories."

Ummmmmmm. Ok. Well, here's my two-cents (no spoilers): Look and feel: dead-on. Heath Ledger: fantastic. Bale: good despite using that dumb, raspy voice from the first movie.

Sadly though, the last hour of the flick drags right when it needs to build. This is a bullet train with the power cut. At some point the exhilarating ride begins to slow ever so imperceptibly until the audience is left rolling, creeping into the last station. Such a shame that the writing couldn't keep up with the visual appeal and Ledger's performance. A film with so much potential for greatness, ended up just being really good. Blockbuster? Yes. Classic? 'Fraid not.

Another one bites the dust

Zell Miller Part II

I guess this is a companion piece to Bob's post (sorry Bob - I started writing it before I saw yours). I, too, read the NY Times article and I heard a great story about this on NPR yesterday that really ticked me off.

How quickly things change. Just four years ago (and 8 years before that), Joe Lieberman wanted to be the face of the Democratic Party. Now, he wants to chauffeur the Straight Talk Express for his new BFF McCain. Not only has Lieberman spent most of the past few months promoting McCain, but he has actually been bashing Obama to the point where a few of his colleagues have asked him to tone down his criticisms of Obama. Lieberman recently asked the rhetorical question: "The fact that the spokesperson for Hamas would say they would welcome the election of Senator Obama really does raise the question, Why?" and a few days later (on Fox News), Lieberman called Obama "naive" in his views on Iran.

Lieberman has said that he would consider speaking at the Republican convention. But, not to worry fellow Dems, he has vowed not to attack Obama in his speech, rather, he would advocate for McCain. How diplomatic of him. There is no difference in my view.

I don't want any $$ I donate to the DNC going to support anything Lieberman does. Despite the fact that Lieberman has voted with the Dems on most issues as of late, in my mind, he is no longer a Dem. Lieberman is a one issue politician (Hmmm. think Israel). Never mind McCain's stance on health care, taxes, alternative energy, gas prices, etc. Never mind that Lieberman (1) voted "YES" on banning drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge, (2) "YES" on reducing oil usage by 40% by 2025, (3) received significant praise from the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence for his efforts to ban guns (and an "F" from the NRA), (4) nor that he said during the 2004 campaign that the day he walked into the Oval Office, the first thing he'd do is rescind the Bush administration's restrictions on embyonic stem cells. In contrast, McCain recently voted in favor of preserving the budget for ANWR oil drilling and, according to the League of Conservation Voters, he has taken an anti-environment stance on 4 of 7 environmental resolutions during the 109th Congress. McCain has voted to REDUCE federal funds for renewable and solar energy and opposed tax credits for companies that generate power from solar, wind and geothermal and ocean wave energy. McCain has opposed the efforts of anti-gun groups for years.

Lieberman has lost significant support from his collegues and constituents as a result of his support of McCain. His approval rating has plummeted one of the lowest levels in years. Lieberman's ship is sinking and for me, it can't sink fast enough.

Sound the Zell Bell.

I think I actually liked him better when he was the champion of moral entertainment!

Worth playing for?

Anyone who's watched a few seasons of Survivor know that sometimes the little, squirrely snot that nobody likes becomes the all powerful tie-breaking vote, suddenly wooed by two tribes that struggle just to tolerate him. It goes to his head. It never lasts though...

Today I was just sitting here thinking: What does an Obama presidency mean for our friend, Mr. Lieberman? Personally, I can't wait to hear those five, little words: Joe, the tribe has spoken.

Redefining "not catchy"

Heads up, this is a bit of a nothing post with the possibility of a neck strain. Maybe it's the graphic designer in me, but I have to say something. I was surfing around today when I saw this internet banner (standing vertically obviously). I stared for quite a while. Where to start? Do they realize they put the play button over Obama's face? Apparently there wasn't room to put it anywhere else, what with that big, open red area taking up so much room at the bottom. And what the hell is with this 007 reference? Are they trying to date themselves? Why not compare Obama's unwillingness to agree to townhall-style meetings to Charlie Chaplin's evasion of the bobbies? Or call him the biggest panderer, post-Technicolor? I can only hope McCain's ground campaign is being run anything like his web campaign. These attacks really brighten my day.

How Obama Wins Ohio With Help Down Ticket

How strong Democratic Congressional candidates are going to help Barack Obama win in Ohio.

How did George W. Bush win Ohio in 2004? Karl Rove knew that the only way to neutralize record turnout in the cities was to rack up big wins in almost every single rural county. The strength of our congressional candidates in suburban and exurban districts is going to make that very difficult for Senator McCain.

In 2004, incumbent Republican Ralph Regula received 67% of the vote in Ohio's 16th Congressional District, which has been in Republican control since 1951. President Bush received 57% in Medina, 65% in Ashland, and 62% in Wayne. The fact that there wasn't a serious Democrat challenging Regula in OH-16 gave President Bush and the Republican message a big advantage in 2004. Today, Ohio's 16th Congressional District is a much different story. Democratic challenger John Boccieri has an $182,076 cash on hand advantage over Republican Kirk Schuring in this open seat race. At minimum Boccieri is going to shave a few percent off of each county and his campaign hopes to do much better than that. As Boccieri works to register voters, debate the issues, and get out the vote it will make a big difference for Barack Obama come November.

We have 4 Congressional Districts in play in Ohio that were Republican strong holds in 2004 and have a new blue district (OH-18) from 2006.

Another district that is going to make a huge difference in this presidential cycle is Democrat Congressman Zach Space down in OH-18 (big blue district in the middle that was red in 2004). Space won his rural district in 2006. Currently, Space has $1,141,980 cash on hand and his Republican challenger has a meager $112,437. In 2004, George Bush won two counties in the district with over 60% of the vote and 3 counties with over 70% of the vote. Space's cash advantage is going to mean more Democrats turnout in the district. Again, those counties are going to move a minimum of a few percentage points Obama's way and that is going to make a big difference.

I use Ohio's 16th and 18th Congressional Districts to illustrate my point that as Democrats cut into safe Republican counties, the cumulative effect is going to start to move numbers for Barack Obama. Other Democrat candidates to watch include Driehaus in OH-1 and Wulsin in OH-2, who are both challenging incumbent Republican candidates. Many Republicans are holding out hope that Ohioans may turnout to vote for a Democratic Congressional Candidate, but won't vote for Obama. Maybe so, but Obama only needs to pick up a few percent in each of these districts to carry the state. Plus, there is no predicting how high turnout for Obama will be in safe Democratic districts. I think it will be through the roof.

See fundraising totals in all Ohio Districts

Numbers courtesy of PoliticerOH.com

OH-1

U.S. Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Westwood):

$307,305 in 2ndQ, $1,311,547 cash on hand

State Rep. Steve Driehaus (D-Price Hill):

$200,397 in 2ndQ, $631,440 cash on hand

OH-2

U.S. Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-Loveland):

$301,462 in 2ndQ, $393,028 cash on hand

Dr. Victoria Wulsin(D-Indian Hill):

$309,912 in 2ndQ, $378,084 cash on hand

Businessman David Krikorian (I):

$91,092 in 2ndQ, $131,445 cash on hand

OH-3

U.S. Rep. Michael Turner(R-Centerville):

$176,250 in 2ndQ, $596,171 cash on hand

Advertising Executive Jane Mitakides (D-Washington Twp):

$156,964 in 2ndQ, $130,566 cash on hand

OH-4

U.S. Rep. Jim Jordan(R-Urbana):

$627,924 in 2ndQ, $433,838 cash on hand

Labor union activist Mike Carroll (D-Mansfield)

$11,486 in 2ndQ, $2,298 cash on hand

OH-5

U.S. Rep. Bob Latta (R-Bowling Green):

$73,675 in 2ndQ, $76,921 cash on hand

Businessman George F. Mays (D-Norwalk):

No File Found

OH-6

U.S. Rep. Charlie Wilson (D-St. Clairsville):

$609,691 in 2ndQ, $397,855 cash on hand

Deputy Recorder Richard Stobbs (R-Dillonvale):

No File Found

OH-7

State Sen. Steve Austria (R-Beavercreek):

$341,970 in 2ndQ, $361,244 cash on hand

Attorney Sharen Neuhardt (D-Yellow Springs):

$190,275 in 2ndQ, $108,408 cash on hand

OH-8

U.S. Rep. John Boehner (R-West Chester):

1,000,826 in 2ndQ, $2,263,643 cash on hand

U.S. Air Force veteran Nick Von Stein (D-Mason):

$3,279 in 2ndQ, $6,848 cash on hand

OH-9

U.S. Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Toledo):

$77,135 in 2ndQ, $939,633 cash on hand

Electrician Bradley Leavitt (R-Toledo):

No File Found

OH-10

U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Cleveland):

$147,853 in 2ndQ, $506,235 cash on hand

Former state Rep. Jim Trakas (R-Independence):

$103,033 in 2ndQ, $87,451 cash on hand

Trainer and ex-property manager Paul Visokaj (I):

No File Found

OH-11

U.S. Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-Cleveland):

$177,816 in 2ndQ, $83,848 cash on hand

Thomas Pekarek (R):

No File Found

OH-12

U.S. Rep. Patrick Tiberi (R-Westerville):

$246,060 in 2ndQ, $866,855 cash on hand

Businessman David W. Robinson (D-Columbus):

$52,371 in 2ndQ, $19,976 cash on hand

OH-13

U.S. Rep. Betty Sutton (D-Copley Township):

$72,976 in 2ndQ, $188,693 cash on hand

David S. Potter (R):

No File Found

OH-14

U.S. Rep. Steven LaTourette (R-Chagrin Falls):

$333,813 in 2ndQ, $870,849 cash on hand

Former State Appellate Judge William O'Neill (D-South Russell):

$104,051 in 2ndQ, $46,541 cash on hand

OH-15

State Sen. Steve Stivers (R-Upper Arlington):

$428,922 in 2ndQ, $879,753 cash on hand

Franklin County Commissioner Mary Jo Kilroy (D-Columbus):

$365,962 in 2ndQ, $1,163,267 cash on hand

Former state legislative analyst Don Elijah Eckhart (I-Galloway):

$5,598 in 2ndQ, $370 cash on hand

OH-16

State Sen. Kirk Schuring (R-Canton):

$329,525 in 2ndQ, $348,939 cash on hand

State Sen. John Boccieri (D-New Middletown):

$391,237 in 2ndQ, $531,015 cash on hand

OH-17

U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Niles):

$141,770 in 2ndQ, $424,293 cash on hand

Teacher Duane V. Grassell (R-Mogadore):

No File Found

OH-18

U.S. Rep. Zack Space (D-Dover):

$322,147 in 2ndQ, $1,141,980 cash on hand

Former Ohio Director of Agriculture Fred Dailey (R-Mt Vernon):

$116,317 in 2ndQ, $112,437 cash on hand

My Sit Down With Governor Strickland

Yesterday, Ben Keeler and I met with Ohio Governor Ted Strickland in his State House office. Governor Strickland told us that Lincoln found out he had been elected President of the United States in that office. There was a large bust of Lincoln in the corner. During our interview with the Governor, we discussed his plans to support Barack Obama this fall, his efforts to reach across the aisle, and the Great Lakes compact. Our video turned out a little dark due to sunlight from an open window behind us, but the governor's answers are still quite interesting. The full interviews will be posted as short YouTube clips on Politics.Ohio.com

Slate readers pick a VP

Today Slate.com released the results of their readers' running-mate nominations survey. Take a look.

I've heard Chuck talk about Richardson for a while now, but never really took him seriously. I mean did you see that goatee? Goatees are about as unpresidential as tie-dye. Don't get me wrong, I like Bill, but I always thought that Obama's main consideration in his pick should be helping the ticket across the comfort threshold of the average American, not regional considerations or experience. Now Richardson has a fantastic resume, but the thing about impressive resumes is that low-info voters don't read 'em. They don't even skim 'em. They do however notice if you're dripping sweat on them as you're trying to slide it to them (remember those debates?). I hate to sound so cynical and shallow, but I still have reservations about a Richardson pick despite my love for the guy.

Baby Daddy VETOs Woman's Rights

Sometimes I am amazed at the powerful imagination of those serving in our state legislature. State Representative John Adams (R-Sidney) introduced HB 287, which would require a woman to have the written permission of the prospective father of her fetus before being allowed to have an abortion. Furthermore, if the father's identity is unknown, a paternity test is required so that she may then gain his consent.

Little known facts about prenatal paternity testing:

Can't be performed until at least the 10th week of pregnancy, near the end of the first trimester
Is an invasive procedure using a long needle through the abdomen to collect fetal cells
Is expensive- up to $2,000 per test
Poses a potential medical risk

Under the restraints of this paternity test requirement, many women will be unable to obtain an abortion during the first trimester; likewise, if she is unable to gain the prospective father's permission, she may seek an illegal abortion. In cases of rape, she will be forced to file a police report.

The kooks are pushing for this one to get a scheduled hearing in the upcoming weeks! Act now!!! Planned Parenthood Affiliates of Ohio Action Fund is leading the efforts to fight this legislation-- Donate here and sign the petition against the bill here.

"Magic Wand" Edition

Sorry for the absence. Went to Hawaii. Didn't think it could live up to the hype, but it did. Amazing place. Interestingly, I did not see one single Obama sticker/sign/anything. Obviously, its not the most politically active place, but you would figure someone would be proud that someone that grew up there was going to be President. To make matters worse, I heard Rush Limbaugh playing on 3 channels, at the same time.

Doesn't seem like I missed a great deal of breaking news, except for the glorious return of Bob and the site completely redesigned. Those developments are certainly bigger than listening to McBush continue to lie, or McGraham calling Americans just a bunch of whiners.

Obama did vote for the new FISA law. I am confident Bush's NSA program was illegal and am sick they will probably get away with it. But I am not going to blame Obama for this. It is the party leadership that brought this to a vote (to cover their ass, since they were briefed on the illegal program and did nothing). Further, as Obama points out, this law does not block criminal proceedings.

I just listened to Bush explain (for the 50th time) that he does not have a "magic wand". He speaks of the wand so much, I wonder if he thinks it exists, and is just lamenting that he is not a possessor. Anyway, his lack of wand makes it hard to lower oil prices. Then he went on to yell about how if we would have done more offshore drilling at the start of his presidency, we would be getting that oil by now (because it takes 10 years to get the new oil....close enough on the math for George). Problem: Bush (and McCain) opposed offshore drilling, until this year when they realized they could use it as an exaggerated political issue/excuse.

New Poll: Franken 44%, Coleman 42%. First poll in a long time with Franken leading. It will be so great if Franken wins.

The New Yorker cover excites me. Now there is going to be a cover with Cindy McCain smoking crack in the White House, right? Or maybe John McCain in diapers, while Cindy massages his enlarged neck?
(side note: I am fine with the Obama cover....and I think Jesse Jackson's "nuts" comment was funny)

Speaking of Cindy, I want to clarify that I think its great she has recovered from her felonious drug addiction, which lead to felonious forgeries/theft of prescriptions. However, she needs to still clean up her act and quit stealing baking receipts. Just admit you don't cook because you are a millionaire beer heiress that is so elite you own 9 homes, so you don't deal with cooking.

The resurrection of Governor "Who let the dogs out?"

The bookies and Drudge agree. Romney is pulling away from the pack in the GOP Veepstake.
Question is: What will a Romney pick mean for Obama?

The Beginning of Post-Ideology?

I've recently heard the terms "post-partisan" and "post-ideological" applied to Barack Obama's campaign, particularly in light of his support of the compromise intelligence surveillance bill and comments he made regarding NAFTA and the Supreme Court's DC handgun decision. As an article from Sunday's Washington Post notes (link listed below) these actions and rhetoric have caused some progressives to question Obama's commitment to a liberal agenda, while others view him as "flip-flopping" on the issues. More generally, many question what Obama's ideological commitments really are. Personally, I don't see any of Obama's recent actions/comments to be a betrayal of truly progressive ideals, nor do I view them so simplistically as to believe that he is merely flip-flopping on issues in order to court a certain segment of the population (although, I am sure that some of this is strategic, but I don't believe that they are solely maneuvers to court former Hillary supporters or those in the center who lean some to the right). I certainly do not believe that Obama's campaign is ideologically vacuous.

Perhaps this is where the notion of "post-ideology" comes into play. I will not try to hazard a guess at defining what "post-ideology" entails, but I will say that in Obama's candidacy I find something that I have long suspected to be true of contemporary politics: that ideology and party politics have loosened their grip on the average citizen-voter. This does not necessarily mean that we are all tending towards an imaginary center or that we don't tend to identify with one party over another; instead, I think that it is becoming increasingly evident that we all have political commitments that cut across ideological lines. These commitments tend to manifest to different degrees under different circumstances, and it appears that no single ideology has a monopoly on the full spectrum of any one voter's commitments and beliefs. Maybe there is nothing especially new about this, but Obama has capitalized on this phenomenon; where some see a move to the center or flip-flopping, I see the realization of a campaign that is embracing the variance in (and sometimes fluidity of) an individual's belief system.

William Galston has identified three core "strands" within this approach: "an 'all of us together' approach that rejects 'diversionary interests and short-term gains'...an effort to bring people together across partisan lines...[and] his effort to broaden participation in politics." I respect Galston very much, and I think that he correctly identifies central components to Obama's campaign that signal his commitment to a more inclusive and nuanced form of politics - one that seeks to recognize the legitimacy of claims made across the entire spectrum of ideological beliefs.

Washington Post article

The Obama Firewall

I'm going to try not to get bogged down in the horse-race too much. But I've been keeping an eye on the polls over the past few months (that's putting it lightly), and before we get into the policy debate I want to do a quick brain-dump.

This map is my starting point. I call it The Obama Firewall (trademark pending). If you add up the electoral votes of the blue states you get to 269, exactly half of the total available. The candidates needs 270 to win, but shockingly this time around a 269-269 tie is not out of the question.

What happens if they tie? [hold breath] Strangely it doesn't come down to the popular vote like you might think. The incoming Members of the House settle it with a vote. Like the Electoral College it's winner-take-all on a state-by-state basis, but all states carry equal weight. Now more states currently lean blue under this scenario. It's a complicated, nuanced mess with no guarantees, but definite advantage Obama [exhale in relief].

So in order for McCain to win he needs to take all the white states you see here and tip at least one of the blue. If Obama's firewall holds, he's our 44th President.

Already it looks like NH has gone blue (last two polls: +11%, +12%). And Virginia has been surprisingly strong (last three polls have Obama up slightly). But a blue Ohio is checkmate. It is virtually impossible for McCain to win the general, under any scenario, without Ohio (and it's impossible impossible without Ohio or Michigan).

So how's Ohio looking? See our sidebar for every poll released since April. Or mouse-over our site header for the latest projection.

Point is, aside from some Obama meltdown, if we deliver Ohio, we deliver the White House. No effort is too small. Check the sidebar for events near you, and be sure to sign up for the Ohio Action Wire.

Oh, and Obama is looking to recruit a modest 14,000 Ohio volunteers (one for each of the state's 11,500 precincts) to help bulk up the 300 paid organizers they're bringing into the state for their ground campaign.