Back in 2008, I spent a night in the NPR DC blogger warroom with a bunch of other social media political junkies – here’s one post from that evening. And this year, I’m very excited to again be part of the social media activity at NPR’s DC headquarters. They’ve posted a very nice intro to the occasion here, including the twitter handles and names of all my compatriots who’ll be there.
How can you follow along? Several ways:
1. On Twitter, search on the #nprmeetup hashtag
2. Follow me on Twitter – @jillmz
3. Check out the Twitter list, https://twitter.com/JuanSaaa/npr-election-night
Now, if you really want to dig in, the Civic Commons backchannel live-chat with my colleagues Dan Moulthrop, Jason Russell and probably a few others will be the place to be. You can follow that action here. If you haven’t had civic engagement courtesy of a Civic Commons backchannel conversation, you will not want to miss it there tomorrow night.
At NPR, we’re going to have a chance to meet Ken Rudin, the Political Junkie, if anyone has any questions, and Andy Carvin, NPR’s senior social media strategist, really is a rock star in his own right for many reasons but perhaps he’s best known for his coverage of the political and civil movements in North Africa and across the Middle East.
So first – there were plenty of great speeches, we’re told, that came from non-female orators, and that’s great. Slate has posted the full video of four speeches if, like me, you missed them or most of them, including San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro, Former Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland (read the swooning over his speech – nice job!), Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley and FLOTUS, of course. I only caught the last 10-15 minutes of Michelle Obama’s speech and from what I’m hearing, I did well to do that because it started out slow, some are saying.
I’m not part of it but you can read all about them here. It’s an impressive array indeed. I’ve added attending one of these shindigs to my bucket list, which started to form this past summer.
To follow the action on Twitter, check out #ODPatDNC #DNC2012, follow ODP folks @jeridkurtz @laurenharmon or follow the media there like @henryjgomez. I have a batch of friends who’ll be there from the women, politics and tech fields and they should be worth following too – @punditmom and @jljacobson and @rachelsklar to name a few.
The schedule is here for today/tonight and expect Wednesday and Thursdays by 10pm the night before (or so they’ve said).
Of course it’s not me but her name is Jill. I could give her my See Jill Run shirts even.
She’s the Green Party’s candidate, a Harvard/Harvard M.D., age 62. Kinda rockin’. Check her out:
Jill Stein’s candidate website
On Thursday evening, July 5, for the first time in over four years, I saw Barack Obama in person.The last three times I saw him, he was either just plain ole U.S. Senator Obama (2006) or Senator and presidential candidate Obama (2007, 2008). The main differences I noticed? Age, confidence, charisma, and fervor — he displayed more of all four.
You can read the transcript or watch a video of the President delivering his remarks, made at James Day Park in Parma, Ohio. This stop was his last public speaking event of the day after multiple other stops in Ohio, all part of the Obama Bus Tour, complete with Ground Force One – the tripped out rolling home for presidents (note, however, as does the Wall Street Journal, that the campaign is paying for the trip). My tweets tell the story of the Parma stop, while my journalist friend at the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Henry Gomez, covered all of the Ohio visits.
Why, at this point, would anyone who follows politics as much as I do, attend one of these highly choreographed and usually tightly scripted media-ready occasions? Especially when we are on the umpteenth day of 95 degree and 95% humidity weather, with a good mix of thunderstorm threats?
[now go read the full post]
Did you know that working moms who don’t watch Fox are socialists? Neither did I.
But then I asked some folks on Twitter, who were beating up on a friend of mine who is a left of center lady, not unlike myself, and was on Fox this morning (the national cable version, not the local), if they could link to the clip about which they were razzing my friend, since, being a working parent, I don’t watch the morning news shows because, well, I’m working – and parenting. (I know – many of us have the television or radio on in the background while parenting and working but that is not the norm in my home at all – way too distracting; I can parent & work at the same time, but add cable morning news shows to the task list and I’m on overload.)
And their response to my simple and, if I might say so myself, civil request (intended to allow me to make an actual judgement on the razzing they were giving my friend which included them saying that the way she said the word “privilege” regarding Ann Romney was in a perjorative way) was to tell me that, for saying I was working, parenting and not watching Fox, I spoke like a “true Socialist.” Later tweets included mentions of their belief that I envy male anatomy and some other things that have nothing to do with anything, except to demonstrate perfectly how the motherlode of all linkbait is the often-called always-maligned Mommy Wars.
If ever there was a subject in need of being limited to civil discourse-only, this has got to be it.
Read the rest at the Civic Commons (where this working mom works, from home and from wherever civic engagement takes me).
I’m out. I’m just all out. I can read more, talk more, opine more. But really — how much more is there to actually say, that hasn’t already been said, about the Republican candidates remaining in the primary battle to be the party’s nominee for the 2012 general election?
Even his three wins last night, in Wisconsin, Maryland, and the District of Columbia, have failed to seal the deal for the delegate leader, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. For more background on last night’s elections, check out the exit polls and see how moderate the voters were in those three states, especially in comparison to several already-counted primary or caucus states; watch Romney’s victory speech given in Wisconsin, and see Santorum’s “we’re still going for it speech” from Pennsylvania.
Why is this fight not over?
Read the answer at the full post here.
Read my thoughts on that question in my post, “Why Women Voters Will Dictate Ohio’s Super Tuesday Results,” at iVillage and let them know what you think!
Last time, however, it didn’t hold. Will it today? And to be clear, we’re not talking the gap between how men versus women vote for Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich. We’re talking about the gap between who women prefer between the two candidates.
Citing his combative style and personal life, many women in Florida say they won’t support Newt Gingrich in the Republican primary. That gender gap has allowed Mitt Romney to open a commanding lead in Florida over the former Speaker, WSJ’s Neil Hickey reports.
This WSJ report covers why, very specifically, the women going for Newt thing in South Carolina won’t happen in Florida:
Well, the idea that the perceived and polled gender gap that appeared to favor GOP presidential nominee candidate and former Massachusett’s governor, Mitt Romney, absolutely fizzled and flipped when it came to election day in South Carolina last week.
Yet now, here again, CNN is reporting that their polling shows a gender gap favoring – wait for it – Romney again:
A gender gap appears to have developed as well. In South Carolina, Gingrich won among men and women, according to exit polls. But in Florida, although Gingrich has an edge among men, Romney had the advantage among women.
“Some of that may be due to recent coverage of Gingrich’s personal life, but it is almost certainly due to other factors as well. Gingrich’s favorable rating has consistently been higher among men than among women for years before he became a presidential candidate, suggesting that men may find his red-meat approach to issues more appealing than women do,” says [CNN Polling Director Keating] Holland.
Many people have anticipated that Florida is not South Carolina, and I share that opinion. How different is the female electorate in the Sunshine State from the same segment in the Palmetto State?
We won’t know for sure until next Tuesday evening, after they vote. I have my suspicions but I’m going to keep them to myself until election night.
What do you think?
Some of us have work to do that we hope really will make a difference in people’s lives, short-term and long-term, so I’m working very hard to keep myself from being utterly distracted by the inept field of GOP primary candidates, especially after watching last night’s debate in Florida. It’s totally like watching a train wreck – you just can’t turn away.
But here’s my main observation for the day:
To Newt Gingrich: You are not Russell Crowe, the debates are not gladiator matches, NBC is not the Coliseum, but you are a relic.
And good on the local journos who asked excellent questions including one which Rick Santorum totally did not answer (address the risk posed to Florida’s tourist industry by offshore oil drilling versus the jobs it could create) and why is it okay for the candidates to court Florida voters with Spanish language materials but it’s not okay for the government to provide them with anything in their native language?
That latter question led to a disgusting attempt for the candidates to one-up themselves on supporting the assimilation of all the glorious strands of our society into one.
How on earth does that represent anything other than a denial of liberty, the value supposedly so dear to the conservatives?
We all know how much I hatez the English-only talk.
Who will win? It could depend on who votes — men or women — and where they live — the Upstate or coast.
“It may be very close,” Matt Moore, executive director of the S.C. Republican Party, said Friday.
Polling shows Gingrich and Romney running neck and neck. But it also shows a gender divide between the two front-runners, sources in the Romney campaign said Friday. Women voters are breaking for Romney and men for Gingrich, they said.
Frankly, I’ve been wondering when the heck someone was going to write about this so I’m glad to see it noted.
But more interestingly to me, and I can’t believe I really wake up thinking about this stuff: We keep hearing about the importance of “the Evangelical vote.” But who is left in the GOP race? Two Catholics, a Mormon and Ron Paul. And who is in the White House? A man who was with the United Church of Christ for at least 20 years, and who now attends services at the same place – Christian non-denominational – as George W. Bush.
I’ve never not voted for someone because they weren’t Jewish – or because they were Jewish. I’ve been governed by presidents who aren’t the same religion or gender as me my entire life.
And I’m still here. The sky hasn’t fallen and the earth has not swallowed me up.
Identity politics – don’t deny its existence, but don’t treat it like some intractable fealty either.
To no one’s surprise, former Massachusetts governor and candidate for the Republican Presidential candidate nomination, Mitt Romney, won the New Hampshire primary yesterday. He won with an amount (39%) beyond what pundits claimed would otherwise show trouble, and he easily cleared Texas Congressman Ron Paul, who earned 23%. Former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman claimed third place (with an enthusiasm almost more appropriate for a Saturday Night Live skit — watch Huntsman’s primary speech here) by garnering 17% of the vote. Check out a good look at all the numbers from WMUR, including former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum each with 9%. Texas Governor Rick Perry mustered 1% (and gets some love from Smart Girl Politics).
So what happened? More like, what didn’t happen.
Last night, I live-tweeted for about three to four hours as the New Hampshire primary returns came in. You can go to Twitter.com and search on #blogher #nhprimary or just my handle, @jillmz. You can also read this nice wrap-up post of coverage at BlogHer and I’ll be writing my wrap-up of the primary and a look at South Carolina later this morning.
We’re in full political junkie mode.
Mike McIntyre and Ohio.com are highlighting a University of Akron course, Campaign Battleground, that will be offered Thursday evenings for 2.5 hrs, 14 weeks with John Green, Gerald Austin and Mark Weaver starting this Thursday (1/12/12) that sounds like a political junkie’s dream:
This course is about the 2012 American national elections, with a special focus on the presidential campaign. In the spring of 2012 the course will focus on the primaries. We will follow the campaign carefully and investigate the strategy, tactics and conduct for the major contenders in “real time,” that is, as the campaigns are taking place. A special focus will be placed on Ohio, a key battle ground state. No class March 15, 2012 spring break.
If I could find that kind of time, I’d be blogging a lot more about the same and other topics but if you go, please consider starting a blog and writing about the class and how it’s making you think, etc.
And that is not leadership.
Whether we’re talking Herman Cain’s economic plan (9-9-9 or 9-0-9) or how he and his campaign are failing to deal with Politico’s reporting on the settlement specifics between the National Restaurant Association (when Cain was its head) and two of its former employees regarding alleged sexual harassment in the workplace, Cain seems to believe that he can reduce, minimize and make disappear whatever complexities he thinks ail others from being able to come up with solutions.
The problem is, whether it’s people who view certain behavior of his as being inappropriate and constituting sexual harassment (even if he doesn’t see it that way) or people saying that his 9-9-9 plan won’t help the poor but would in fact exacerbate their economic standing, he seeks to make the complicating factors – women and the poor – disappear from the equation altogether.
Lucky for women and sadly for the poor, there are tens of millions in both groups. We won’t disappear and we don’t call people who would like to see that happen, “leader.”
Seriously, Herman. You can claim the leader mantle in a number of ways. Including, leader of the reductionists.
I did little research before this eighth (yes, eighth! and that doesn’t even include the Twitter debate) Republican presidential primary candidates’ debate. Check out this list for videos of each of them.
Luckily, I keep myself pretty immersed in news on a daily basis between online, radio, newspapers, a senior in high school who wishes he could vote and a sixth grader who made it onto student council and now wants to be vice president (of his grade, that is).
But to those who did bone up a bit before watching, it may surprise you to read my very first reaction, as transcribed by me while watching the debate live online:
Sitting at table with Charlie Rose?
Looks like it is a very serious group behind Rose
Yup – I didn’t know about the table thing.
Read my somewhat random impressions and more at the full post at BlogHer.com
Late last night, after watching some spin room action about the Republican primary debate in California, I started thinking about this question in a way that harkens back to just after Hillary Clinton was no longer in the 2008 race.
It’s not going to be Michele Bachmann or Sarah Palin. Yup, I’m predicting that right now. Neither will be the general election presidential candidate for the GOP and I’m doubtful that either will be a VP selection of the eventual nominee either. Might Nikki Haley or Susanna Martinez be the VP choice? Not sure, just not sure. But remember, if they are, then we’re going with the “some part of a term in executive office is better than no part of a term in executive office” again, just as was the case with Palin. And many voters were pretty skeptical about that then. With Palin eventually quitting that job, it’s hard to ask voters to trust, yet again, that being in something only partially through its expected duration means they’ve succeeded. I think this is what Bobby Jindal and Chris Christie know very well – fill out at least one term. There’s no question then about how much stronger a candidate it makes you. Where’s the proof? Well, did you see a single half-term anyone even up on the stage last night? Read more
I don’t get a good feeling from this – but let’s hear from Cuyahoga County Executive Ed Fitzgerald. Very curious to know what his calculation was in agreeing to this, if Ohio SOS Jon Husted’s statement accurately reflects Fitzgerald’s understanding of the agreement. Here it is – I’ve highlighted the pertinent part:
Secretary Of State Husted Statement On Absentee Ballot Applications And Uniformity Of Ohio Elections
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Friday, September 2, 2011
SECRETARY OF STATE HUSTED STATEMENT ON ABSENTEE BALLOT APPLICATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF OHIO ELECTIONS
COLUMBUS – The following may be attributed in whole, or in part, to Secretary of State Jon Husted regarding the mailing of unsolicited absentee ballot request forms and maintaining uniformity in how elections are administered in Ohio:
“Yesterday I met with Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald and Councilman Michael Gallagher to gain a better understanding of our mutual concerns regarding the distribution of unsolicited absentee ballot request forms.
“Through a productive exchange of ideas, we were able to develop a plan and achieve consensus to preserve the uniform standards I have sought statewide.
“Cuyahoga County officials have agreed not to send out unsolicited mailings for the 2011 General Election and the Secretary of State’s office will distribute absentee ballot request forms to voters in all 88 counties for the 2012 Presidential Election – so that each Ohio voter has uniform and equal access to their ballots.
“Leaders in the General Assembly, House Speaker William Batchelder and Senate President Tom Niehaus, have graciously agreed to support this plan and will appropriate the necessary resources from existing and available federal Help America Vote Act funds.
“I am glad we have been able to work out our differences but ultimately it will be the voters who benefit from this agreement. This will help reduce the chance of long lines at the polls during the Presidential Election and voters in smaller counties will have the same conveniences as voters in larger counties.”
For more information, please contact Matt McClellan at 614-995-2168 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 10:54 am September 2nd, 2011 in Council, CuyahogaCounty, Elections, Ethics, Executive, Government, Law, leadership, Ohio, Politics, Transparency, Voting, WH2012, White House 2012, Whitehouse09 | Comments Off