Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

19

Ohio GOP files new voter mismatch suit, Lt. Gov. wants 5 justices recused

Filed Under Courts, Elections, Government, Law, Ohio, Politics, Republicans, Voting, WH2008 | 1 Comment

In our last episode of partisan tampering with Ohio voters’ confidence levels, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision that shut the door on the Ohio Republican Party’s efforts at accessing literally hundreds of thousands of voter records for the purpose of preparing to challenge them on election day (also known as voter intimidation or vote suppression).

However, on the same day, this past Friday, according to the Columbus Dispatch:

David Myhal, a Republican from New Albany, filed a lawsuit this afternoon asking the state’s highest court to issue an order related to instances when new voter information doesn’t match records in state or federal databases.

Specifically, the lawsuit asks the Ohio Supreme Court to require Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner to order county elections boards not to count any absentee ballot from voters registered after Jan. 1 without first checking the statewide voter registration database to ensure there is no mismatch.

If there is a mismatch, the boards would be required to determine whether the person is an eligible voter.

The connections to the Ohio Republican Party? Yesterday’s article in the Dispatch states that the lawsuit was filed on behalf of Myhal, “…by the same lawyers who handled the Ohio GOP case” – a case that was about the exact same issue and that the party lost on the same day in the U.S. Supreme Court (though the decision wasn’t on the merits; SCOTUS decided that the Ohio Republican Party didn’t have standing to file the case.)

And who is the complainant, David Myhal? PolitickerOH says: Read more

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:50 pm October 19th, 2008 in Courts, Elections, Government, Law, Ohio, Politics, Republicans, Voting, WH2008 | 1 Comment 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

19

Ohio press endorsement tally, E&P says it matters in a swing state

Filed Under Barack Obama, Elections, Endorsements, John McCain, Media, Ohio, Politics, Voting, WH2008 | 2 Comments

The current tally for endorsements of John McCain versus Barack Obama from newspapers in Ohio is as follows (the global tally is Obama 74, McCain 18 – I added in the Times-Reporter from below which Wikipedia didn’t list yet):

John McCain: 2

The Courier (Findlay) (Bush 2004)
The Columbus Dispatch (Bush 2004)

Barack Obama: 7

The Canton Repository (Bush 2004)
The Toledo Blade
Dayton Daily News
Springfield News-Sun
The Plain Dealer (no endorsement 2004)
Akron Beacon Journal
The Times-Reporter (Dover New Philadelphia) (Bush 2004)

There actually is not all that much debate about whether newspaper endorsements matter – many people think they don’t. But candidates still go after them, readers still read them and bloggers, well, we still write about them.

Greg Mitchell of Editor & Publisher wrote this article about if and when the endorsements matter and we might be wise to keep his thoughts in mind as we consider what’s going on with endorsements. First, CW:

Stated or unstated, the common belief is that newspaper picks for president are meaningless; they influence no one, especially in an era when media approval ratings in polls rival the paltry numbers for lawyers. Even if that’s true, it will be interesting to watch the picks that come out of newspapers with conservative new owners such as Sam Zell, Dean Singleton, and Brian Tierney.

But actually, I beg to differ with those who say endorsements have no impact. Consider my amazingly accurate 11th hour predictions in 2004– based solely on newspaper editorials.

But then, instinct:

I knew that endorsements in most states really did mean nothing, since the votes of their readers were barely being contested. The race actually would be decided in a dozen or more “toss-up” states, and in these tight contests, a newspaper endorsement — I believed — could be key, no matter how loudly others scoffed.

So, on election eve, I probed the endorsements in 15 battleground states and awarded electoral votes to one candidate or the other solely on that basis.

…

When the votes were counted, I had accurately picked the winner in 14 of the [15 battleground] states, from Hawaii to New Hampshire — including the one that would count most, Ohio. I had observed that Bush earned the nod from The Columbus Dispatch (reportedly, after some ownership intervention), got a no-decision from The Plain Dealer in Cleveland, and dominated in Cincinnati, Canton, and Youngstown. I had closed my awarding of Ohio with: “A slight nod to Bush, at least until the court cases begin.”

Mitchell’s conclusion about the role of endorsements:

So, did newspapers decide the election? A big maybe. But don’t scoff as endorsements pile up — given the trend in 2004 and some of the early indications this year, Obama may do well. That Canton paper, for Bush in 2004, just went for him.

Obama warns against having any level of certaintly right now, and I couldn’t agree more.  But as you see these endorsements, and think to yourself Bradley effect! Bill Ayers! Michele Bachmann! Pro-America small towns! Helping poor people get houses caused CEOs to lose millions! SOCIALISM! RADICAL LEFTIST CONGRESS!

Remember: even the people bloggers like to vilify the most have to live and breath and raise kids and grandkids and take care of seniors, all in this country.  It IS in our best interest – for all of us – to vote for and see the best person become the next president.  Seventy-four papers already have shown just how well they understand that.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 4:48 pm October 19th, 2008 in Barack Obama, Elections, Endorsements, John McCain, Media, Ohio, Politics, Voting, WH2008 | 2 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

19

[video] MN Rep. Bachman refuses to define “anti-American,” still wants expose; Powell disses her

Filed Under Barack Obama, Congress, John McCain, michele bachmann, Politics, Republicans, Social Issues, Voting, WH2008 | Comments Off

Embattled incumbent Republican congresswoman from Minnesota, Michele Bachmann, appeared on WCCO this morning.  Thanks to Jay Chrepta for the video.

If you’re skipping that for now, the host, Esme Murphy, reads a question to Bachmann that comes from an e-mail Murphy received. The writer wants to know what Bachmann means when she says anti-American.

Bachmann tells Murphy that she means “the associations that Barack Obama has.”  That’s pretty much it.

To my disappointment, Murphy doesn’t press her much.  What Bachmann eventually says is that she finds Barack Obama’s views “concerning” and that she isn’t saying that Obama’s views are anti-American.  She says that anyone who thinks that she has said that Obama’s views are anti-American is misreading what she’s said, and that that’s not her position, and that she just wants the media to take a look because, she feels, the media has “an appalling lack of curiosity.”

Hmm – a misreading of what Bachmann said on MSNBC with Chris Matthews on Friday?  Let’s take a look:

MR. MATTHEWS: So this is a character issue. You believe that Barack Obama may — you’re suspicious because of this relationship — may have anti-American views. Otherwise it’s probably irrelevant to this discussion.

REP. BACHMANN: Absolutely.

MR. MATTHEWS: So you believe it brings into –

REP. BACHMANN: I absolutely –

MR. MATTHEWS: So you believe that Barack Obama may have anti- American views.

REP. BACHMANN: Absolutely. I’m very concerned that he may have anti-American views. That’s what the American people are concerned about. That’s why they want to know what his answers are….

She is “very concerned that he may have anti-American views” but she insists that she has not said that Obama does in fact have anti-American views.  Glad we settled that.

Anyone wonder what it would take for her to come to believe that in fact he does not have anti-American views? Maybe we need to ask the question of her in that way.

Bachmann goes on to tell Murphy that

..[the] Obama and radical leftist control of Congress…this would be the most liberal senator who could be president…if its all Democrats in charge, we could have the highest tax increases in modern times. That could take away the American dream…that’s what concerns people right now.

The clinical cases of projection that are coming out are for the textbooks.

At more or less the same time Bachmann was talking about the “radical leftist” Congress, Colin Powell had finished giving his endorsement of Barack Obama on Meet the Press this morning and spoke afterwards, specifically singling out Bachmann for the wrongness of her extremism and insinuation that we need anti-American witchhunts:

From the transcript:

Reporter: Sir, what part did McCain’s negativity play in your decision, the negative tone of the campaign?

Powell: It troubled me. We have two wars. We have economic problems. We have health problems. We have education problems. We have infrastructure problems. We have problems around the world with our allies. So those are the problems the American people wanted to hear about, not about Mr. Ayers, not about who’s a Muslim or who’s not a Muslim. Those kinds of images going out on Al-Jazeera are killing us around the world.

And we have got to say to the world, it doesn’t make any difference who you are or what you are, if you’re an American, you’re an American. And this business, for example, of the congressman [sic] from Minnesota who’s going around saying, “Let’s examine all congressmen to see who is pro-America or not pro-America” — we have got to stop this kind of nonsense, pull ourselves together and remember that our great strength is in our unity and in our diversity. And so, that really was driving me.

And to focus on people like Mr. Ayers and these trivial issues, for the purpose of suggesting that somehow Mr. Obama would have some kind of terrorist inclinations, I thought that was over the top. It was beyond just good political fighting back and forth. I think it went beyond. And to sort of throw in this little Muslim connection, you know, “He’s a Muslim and, my goodness, he’s a terrorist” — it was taking root. And we can’t judge our people and we can’t hold our elections on that kind of basis.

So, yes, that kind of negativity troubled me, And the constant shifting of the argument. I was troubled a couple of weeks ago when in the middle of the crisis, the [McCain] campaign said, “We’re going to go negative,” and they announced it, “We’re going to go negative and attack [Obama's] character through Bill Ayers.” Now I guess the message this week is, “We’re going to call him a socialist, Mr. Obama is now a socialist, because he dares to suggest that maybe we ought to look at the tax structure that we have.”

Taxes are always a redistribution of money. Most of the taxes that are redistributed go back to those who paid them, in roads and airports and hospitals and schools. And taxes are necessary for the common good. And there is nothing wrong with examining what our tax structure is or who should be paying more, who should be paying less. And for us to say that that makes you a socialist, I think is an unfortunate characterization that isn’t accurate.

I don’t want my taxes raised. I don’t want anybody else’s taxes raised. But I also want to see our infrastructure fixed. I don’t want to have a $12 trillion national debt, and I don’t want to see an annual deficit that’s over $500 billion heading toward a trillion. So, how do we deal with all of this?

Reporter: Are you still a Republican?

Powell: Yes.

Somehow I’m guessing that Bachmann couldn’t care less, except maybe to decide and declare that in her opinion, Colin Powell is anti-American.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 2:51 pm October 19th, 2008 in Barack Obama, Congress, John McCain, michele bachmann, Politics, Republicans, Social Issues, Voting, WH2008 | Comments Off 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

19

Media convergence testifies to power of speaking up about hate in this election cycle

Filed Under Barack Obama, Campaigning, Cleveland+, Elections, Media, Politics, Social Issues, WH2008, Writing | Comments Off

This post at Tim Russo’s Blogger Interrupted demonstrates the power of people’s own words, all the way around.  Of course, I remain fixated on what it is that makes those words form in people’s minds and sometimes hearts and souls in the first place.  But that’s a whole ‘nother thing.

Please read Connie Schultz’s column as well.  Much like MN Congresswoman and Republican Michele Bachmann’s ludicrous suggestion that the people she believes are liberal members of Congress should be investigated to see if hey are anti-American helped raise nearly $500,000 for her congressional opponent, El Tinklenberg, Tim’s videos (and others like Anthony Fossececa’s at Blue Ohioan) have moved people out of complacency.

We are Americans – we get to vote and we get to speak and we should do both, because they are our rights, too.  Not just Michele Bachmann’s and not just people who are xenophobic.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:57 am October 19th, 2008 in Barack Obama, Campaigning, Cleveland+, Elections, Media, Politics, Social Issues, WH2008, Writing | Comments Off 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

19

Columbus Dispatch endorses McCain

Filed Under Barack Obama, Endorsements, John McCain, Media, Ohio, Politics, Voting, WH2008 | 2 Comments

If Barack Obama’s resume is thin, the Columbus Dispatch‘s endorsement for John McCain is even thinner. Here’s why the paper endorses John McCain for president:

For years, The Dispatch has called on the president and Congress to deal with this massive, mounting debt which threatens the prosperity and quality of life of generations to come. But year after year, the nation’s leaders have kicked the problem down the road.

Seriously confronting this problem will require a president able to call on Americans to make sacrifices for the sake of their grandchildren.

The president will have to ask them to accept cuts in popular programs, tax increases and lowered expectations of what government can afford to do.

Because of the personal sacrifices that McCain has made for the nation, he has unmatched moral authority to call on Americans to take their medicine. If elected, that is precisely what he should do.

Is the Dispatch editorial board on the same planet as me?

#1 McCain has been one of the nation’s leaders who has kicked the debt problem down the road, yes?

#2  The whole point of Joe the Plumber, for John McCain, was to suggest that McCain will cut taxes – how on earth does the Dispatch come up with the idea that McCain would be the president who will be able to tell us to accept tax increases? Because it’s so against his interest? Then isn’t he lying to Joe the Plumber? Argh.

#3 McCain has allowed his running mate and his surrogates, particularly in the last couple of weeks, to run amok with rhetoric that implies if not boldly states and fingerpoints at who is American, where real America exists and who is pro-America, and who is not.  Seriously, now – “unmatched moral authority”?  Who wants to take responsibility for writing that line?  Must be someone who hasn’t read any news stories, blogs or heard any radio or watched any television in the last seven weeks.

#4 Okay and while I’m at it – “to take our medicine” – this is a democracy, last I checked.  Anyone know what the Dispatch has written about unitary executive theory (I don’t)?  The last thing I want in a president is someone who treats me like they are my parent or grandparent telling me what’s best for me.  Paternalism? Feh.

The logic contains not one reference to any of John McCain’s behaviors or decision-making processes of the last 18 months. It doesn’t mention his running mate once (compare that to Colin Powell’s statement this morning that the job of the vice president is to be ready to be president).  What’s most stunning to me is the emphasis the Dispatch gives to bi-partisanship in light of the extremely divisive “who’s a real American” lingo that taints McCain campaign ads and speeches.

Finally, I’ve only been following Ohio politics closely since 2005, but this state had one-party rule for 16 years under the Republicans.  Someone please tell me – did the Dispatch support the Democrats against Bob Taft or in efforts to get majorities in the Ohio legislature?  How about the fact that our state has an all-Republican Supreme Court? What’s the Dispatch said about that?  Unless they’ve made the same argument for our own state, their argument about bipartisanship at the national level, and John McCain, lacks credibility.

Other Ohio reaction so far is only at Buckeye State Blog.  I’ll add as they appear.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:35 am October 19th, 2008 in Barack Obama, Endorsements, John McCain, Media, Ohio, Politics, Voting, WH2008 | 2 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

19

In Ohio, WI, violence, property destruction allegedly perpetrated on Obama supporters

Filed Under Barack Obama, Campaigning, Elections, Ohio, Politics, Sarah Palin, Sexism, Voting, WH2008 | 2 Comments

If there are incidents that are being perpetrated against McCain/Palin supporters, people should be writing and blogging those too (like these for example). This story is about an Obama canvasser in Wisconsin reporting that she was physically attacked. This blog post is written by someone I personally know who lives in central Ohio, and I’ve also met his wife, who is the person reporting to him what she saw. I have no reason to believe that she would exaggerate or fabricate:

My wife just called me to mention that along a two mile stretch of Harlem Road in Franklin and Delaware counties, every Obama/Biden sign has been ripped down or destroyed – including some giant billboard-style yard signs. Every single one. This is a stretch of road we travel every day to get to our little horse farm, so we are quite familiar with who has Obama signs, and who has McCain signs.

The McCain signs are untouched. The Obama signs are all gone.

Interestingly, downticket Democratic signs were left unmolested.

I wrote before about how just seeing a “Nobama” sign made me shake my head, because I think of yard signs as positive reinforcement for who you support or how you feel on an issue (as in “Vote Yes” or “Vote No” on Issue # whatever).  So this whole notion of interfering with other people’s freedom of speech really upsets me.

Yes, the anti-Palin shirts are way beyond the pale (Feministing does a great job explaining it) and the question of whether children, depending on their age, should be able to wear pro-this person or anti-that person apparel is ripe, ripe, ripe.  Honestly, I feel like I want to say that we take these on a case by case basis, but there seems to be no common sense of what is offensive and when people are being too sensitive or not sensitive enough, and how any of that matters when free speech is at play.

Where do you draw the line? (Physical assault and property damage are not permissible, fyi, IMO.)

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:02 am October 19th, 2008 in Barack Obama, Campaigning, Elections, Ohio, Politics, Sarah Palin, Sexism, Voting, WH2008 | 2 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

19

[video] Powell endorsing Obama; job of VP is to be ready to be president

Filed Under Barack Obama, Education, Joe Biden, John McCain, leadership, Politics, Republicans, Sarah Palin, WH2008 | 2 Comments

No sharper mind. Someone I know says that he’ll be Obama’s Secretary of State. Attacks many myths and wrong-directedness of McCain campaign.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:15 am October 19th, 2008 in Barack Obama, Education, Joe Biden, John McCain, leadership, Politics, Republicans, Sarah Palin, WH2008 | 2 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

19

Blogs abuzz with Colin Powell’s Meet the Press endorsement of Obama

Filed Under Barack Obama, Endorsements, Politics, WH2008 | 4 Comments

It’s young yet and many people don’t feel it’s even news, but AmericaBlog breaks down how it went:

Watching NBC’s Meet the Press – Tom Brokaw is killing me – he totally buried the lede, asking Powell about the economy and generic issues first. Now we’re finally on to the question of the Presidential race (all quotes are quick verbatims, not exact quotes):

  • Powell was concerned about McCain’s response to the economic crisis.
  • About Palin: I don’t believe Sarah Palin is ready.
  • Powell was angry about the Bill Ayers and how it was used by the McCain camapign and the Republican party.
  • Supreme Court “I would have difficult with two more (conservative) appointments to the Supreme Court”
  • On the use of religion as a divisive issue in : “We have got to stop polarizing ourselves this way”

Based on these issues, Colin Powell endorsed Barack Obama.

How huge do you think this is? I think it’s pretty huge, but in a different sense from the Plain Dealer endorsement.

More from CNN, Fox, Politico, and AP.  On the how huge question, Mike Allen at Politico writes:

The statement will help Obama convince skeptical centrists that he is ready to handle the challenges of commander in chief, and undercuts McCain argument that he is better qualified on national security.

Fox reports that Powell will not be campaigning for Obama:

Powell said with two weeks left until the election, he will not campaign for the Democratic presidential candidate.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:29 am October 19th, 2008 in Barack Obama, Endorsements, Politics, WH2008 | 4 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

19

Houston Chronicle endorses Obama (endorsed Bush 2004)

Filed Under Barack Obama, Campaigning, Endorsements, Joe Biden, John McCain, Politics, Sarah Palin, WH2008 | Comments Off

These are the ones that are most interesting to me.  From the Houston Chronicle:

McCain has an illustrious record of service to America, first as a pilot taken prisoner by the North Vietnamese, and then with a distinguished Senate career. To his credit, he has broken with his own party in the past to fight for campaign reform, oppose the sanctioning of torture and acknowledge the threat of human-induced global warming. However, in his bid for the presidency, he has aligned himself with a more conservative political base and disappointed moderates.

Perhaps the worst mistake McCain made in his campaign for the White House was the choice of the inexperienced and inflammatory Palin as his vice-presidential running mate. Had he selected a moderate, experienced Republican lawmaker such as Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison with a strong appeal to independents, the Chronicle’s choice for an endorsement would have been far more difficult.

Ah, the Texan Kay Bailey Hutchison.  Very, very true.

The endorsements sound the same notes, over and over and over.  And that’s a good thing because the fact is, those of us who know that we will vote for Barack Obama after not supporting him in the primary, had to examine the two candidates too.  And although it was never likely that I’d vote for McCain, and became nil when he chose his running mate, I had the same concerns about Obama that many of the endorsements are facing head on.

There’s not a whole lot of logic one needs to be able to apply to 1) what are the countries problems and 2) who can best attack and resolve them.  The newspaper endorsements, with Obama now 72 to 18, reflect just how straightforward, ultimately, the choice really is.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:15 am October 19th, 2008 in Barack Obama, Campaigning, Endorsements, Joe Biden, John McCain, Politics, Sarah Palin, WH2008 | Comments Off 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

19

Cleveland’s The Plain Dealer endorses Obama

Filed Under Barack Obama, Endorsements, Media, Ohio, Politics, WH2008 | 7 Comments

Wow. In 2004, they withheld an endorsement and we were not happy here.  Here’s the 2008 Obama endorsement from The Plain Dealer.  This is big news.  I’m very, very proud of this endorsement – and in large part because it really covers all the angles.  Hmm, I might even have to start subscribing again.

Two key passages:

Having endorsed McCain and Obama in their respective party primaries, we have little doubt that either could serve capably as president. Certainly, either would be a huge improvement over the incumbent.

We also believe that either would govern more effectively and lead more inclusively than they have campaigned these last two months. They had better, because this fall has degenerated into a disappointing cacophony of attack ads and banality.

McCain has shamelessly exaggerated Obama’s supposedly radical ties and tried to place him far outside the political mainstream. Obama has twisted McCain’s record beyond recognition and attempted to tie him to Republican ideologues he has fought his whole career.

Such campaigning insults the American people and degrades those who engage in it. Voters who hunger for straight talk about the most frightening economy in 70 years, or who long for hope in the face of two grinding wars, deserve better.

And:

We salute McCain as an exemplary citizen and a Washington rebel. But as a presidential nominee, McCain has been a disappointment. He was late to understand the primacy of economic pain. He has failed even to define a rationale for a McCain presidency. Experience is useful, but it’s not vision.

In their first debate, McCain haughtily said that Obama did not understand the difference between strategy and tactics. His campaign suggests that he doesn’t, either.

Take his selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. McCain seemed too caught up in the game-changing possibilities of teaming with a woman reformer to scratch the smiling surface. Had he, McCain might have realized that Palin is utterly unprepared for the job he offered — let alone the one that might fall to her. His trust in her undermines our trust in him.

More reaction tomorrow.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 12:37 am October 19th, 2008 in Barack Obama, Endorsements, Media, Ohio, Politics, WH2008 | 7 Comments 

"));