1. What’s Your Point, Honey? Coming to Cincinnati but maybe we can get it here too. I’ll have more to say about this tomorrow or later this week.
2. Bad American on a federal appeals court decision re: U.S. discriminates against the blind with its paper money.
3. Announcement: 5/22:
Presidential advisers, state legislators and medical authorities are among those gathering Thursday for Reforming Health Care: Improving Quality, Controlling Costs, Expanding Coverage, part of a series of Brookings Institution discussions dubbed Opportunity ’08.
The event runs from 7:30 to 11:30 a.m. at the Intercontinental Hotel. It is open to the public, and anyone can reserve a seat by e-mailing firstname.lastname@example.org.
Read more here.
4. May is Jewish American Heritage Month – and Lila blogs about it.
5. Examining the Hurdles for Black Feminists and White Feminists. I just can’t even start to say much about this at 10:43pm at night. But if you know anything about what I’ve immersed myself into lately, since WAM!2008, then you’ll be as happy as I was to find this blog and its post. Hattip to What Tami Said.
6. A little help from some friends – in the GOP no less re: not attacking Michelle Obama. As I wrote yesterday, hey, if anyone can make people set a new standard, no reason why it can’t be Barack Obama.
7. There are too many $&%*^#$* events I want to go to: Personal Democracy Forum, June 23-24 in NYC. Sigh. Will have to be next time.
8. Newspapers shares and newspaper company CEOs pay all decline, the former three times as much as the latter.
9. I once was lost, but now, I’m definitely found (media):
Found Media-ites, meanwhile, are the bloggers, the contributors to Huffington Post-type sites that aggregate blogs, as well as other work that somebody else paid for, and the new nonprofits and pay-per-article schemes that aim to save journalism from 20 percent profit-margin demands. Although these elements are often disparate, together they compose the new media landscape. In economic terms, I mean all the outlets for nonfiction writing that seem to be thriving in the new era or striving to fill niches that Lost Media is giving up in a new order. Stylistically, Found Media tends to feel spontaneous, almost accidental. It’s a domain dominated by the young, where writers get points not for following traditions or burnishing them but for amateur and hybrid vigor, for creating their own venues and their own genres. It is about public expression and community—not quite John Dewey’s Great Community, which the critic Eric Alterman alluded to in a recent New Yorker article on newspapers, but rather a fractured form of Dewey’s ideal: call it Great Communities.
11. Wendy Hoke with a fantastic critique of how the Plain Dealer disappoints.
12. Ohio Daily Blog reviews Rasmussen poll that shows McCain and Obama tied in Ohio for the general election. If you thought Ohio was a battleground state in the past, just wait for 2008 to progress.
13. The world is falling apart when a size 8 is considered a plus size. I want to know now – who the eff decided that?
I linked to this last night, but confess that I didn’t actually read any of the clues before now. Many thanks to John Michael Spinelli of ePluribus Media for including not only me but several Ohio bloggers in his crossword. I used to draw mazes on small pieces of paper that I put in my kids’ lunchboxes, but Spinelli’s effort puts mine to shame.
One thing, John – is the answer “Jill” or “WLST”? I’ll send it to my mom, who is a crossword guru. (Go here to see the full page view for completion.)
The Left Anchor appears to be engaged in writing profiles of possible vice presidential picks for the Democrats. Here’s their first one, on Jim Webb, Virginia Senator, and here’s one on Ted Strickland.
An excerpt from the latter:
Strickland is sometimes viewed wrongly as a conservative Democrat, but his voting record would be more aptly described as left leaning-populist. While in the House, he voted against legislation to ban stem cell research, voted against the amendment to make gay marriage illegal, voted against CAFTA, and voted against making the Bush tax cuts permanent. He also supported the effort to formalize net neutrality, which is of particular importance to bloggers such as myself. Especially important when considering Gov. Strickland is the fact that he was one of the few Democrats to vote against authorizing the use of force against Iraq. I believe it is essential for Obama to choose a running mate who opposed the war from the beginning, lest he undercut his case for possessing better judgment.
Read the whole thing, very nice job. And convincing too. Hmmm…
We are fortunate to have the University of Akron’s Bliss Institute of Applied Politics in Ohio. Its director, John C. Green, is a wonderfully affable, wise and intelligent person whom others seek out for analysis constantly. Not to mention a Senior Fellow in Religion and American Politics at the Pew Forum.
I’m no exception. And so, as I struggle to find a way into the pragmatic side I hope all voters possess once they consider what they really want to achieve for the next four years via a new president, I thought, a-ha! I should ask John Green.
Here are two sets of questions I asked him this morning, and his responses:
WLST: I’m curious to know if you’d be willing to answer just a couple of questions for my blog about the issues [raised by the Clinton Supporters Count Too phenom]:
1. What do voters usually do? By this, I mean, suppose you are a Clinton supporter, but primarily (truly, first and foremost) because she is a woman. Is there anything historically parallel to which we can look to say that something similar happened (or maybe happens in many election cycles but further down ticket) and this is what the voters decided to do once their candidate was out and it resulted in…what exactly?
I would ask the same question in regard to Clinton supporters who support her but not because of anything having to do with being a woman. I would think that that group would then be okay with voting for Obama, or maybe even legitimately McCain (as opposed to a protest vote for him).
John Green: There is not exact historical precedent, but contested primaries have been very common. Different voters have done different things under these circumstances. Some get over their anger and back the nominee, others gets disillusioned and stay home, and a few vote for the other party. Most of the defectors to the other party appear to do less out of spite than disagreement with the nominee on issues. So a moderate woman who really liked the idea of a woman president might end up voting for McCain over Obama because McCain is more moderate on economic issues.
WLST: 2. Does the protest vote strategy ever work? By this, I mean, does threatening to vote for McCain do anything more than draw attention? Can a strategy like that actually make Clinton as a VP choice more likely? And again, do we have any historical parallels to which we can look to say, well, this block of voters made this threat, and either the threat was respected and their cause was forwarded, OR, their threat was ignored and they 1) carried through on the threat and what happened or 2) didn’t carry through on the threat and here’s what happened.
John Green: There are two issues here: the threat of a protest vote and the actual protest vote. The threat may work better because the party wants to win–thus efforts may be made prevent a protest vote. A woman on the ticket might work in this regard. A protest vote can work also, but it requires that the party lose the election–that can be an effective message, but with a huge downside. So this doesn’t happen much. Most protest votes go to independent or minor party candidates and involve dislike of both parties.
Pour CommentsFromLeftield, la course est réellement finie depuis fin février. Hillary Clinton n’a plus aucune chance de rattraper son retard en nombre de délégués désignés par les primaires restantes (Montana, Dakota du Sud et Puerto Rico). Au delà de l’”agonie” de Mme Clinton et du frisson de la victoire qui habite Barack Obama, résume WritesLikeSheTalks, ce dernier devient le véritable et unique leader du camps démocrate pour affronter son rival républicain.
I used Babelfish to translate but it still needs help:
For CommentsFromLeftield, the race is really finished since the end of February. Hillary Clinton is not likely any more any to make up for her lost time of many delegates designated by the remaining primary educations (Montana, South Dakota and Puerto Rico). Beyond the “anguish” of Mrs. Clinton and shiver of the victory which lives Barack Obama, WritesLikeSheTalks summarizes, this last becomes the true one and single democratic leader of the camps to face its republican rival.
I couldn’t find a “translate” button or link on the Le Monde site. Anyone who can help, please do.