Bush Aims To Register 3 Million Voters

So say the Boston Globe:

President Bush's reelection team, anticipating another close election, has begun to assemble one of the largest grass-roots organizations of any modern presidential campaign, using enormous financial resources and lack of primary opposition to seize an early advantage over the Democrats in the battle to mobilize voters in 2004.

Show Me The Money!

An extremely informative site well worth repeated visits: Fundrace 2004. The Candidate Rankings page graphically illustrates how the candidates compare along three indices, "GrassRoots," "Devotion," and "FatCats." The MoneyMaps page graphically illustrates contribution patterns and levels on a map of the United States, instantly clarifying areas of contributory strength. Plan to spend at least 15 minutes. (Found via Politics1; cross-posted here.)

Update: And while your there, visit the sister site, GoogleRace.com.

Candidate RSS Feeds

I've added a section with the three most recent posts off the blogs of candidates with RSS feeds ... right over there in the right-hand column. Enjoy.

But Does He Do Standup

You can catch Gephardt this Tuesday night on Leno (along with Naomi Watts and Phil Collins, BTW).

All Gephardt, All The Time

Today I also came across the Gephardt Healthcare Calculator, which as near as I can tell, is a thinly-veiled scheme for adding your email address to the Gephardt fund raising rolls. It breathlessly declares "Tell me how much I'll save!" ... yeah, and spam me for the rest of time, too.

More Gephardt Propoganda ...

... here at Gephardt's labor-directed site, GephardtWorks.com.

Gephardt "Critique" Sites

The Gephardt campaign is running websites that critique two other Presidential candidates, Bush (AMiserableFailure.com) and Dean (DeanFacts.com). Notable is their "under the radar" motif, with only a very small "Paid for by Gephardt for President, Inc." notation at the bottom of each page.

Visit each. For a taste of what's at A Miserable Failure, there's

America has lost 3.3 million jobs since Bush took office.
In August, more than 93,000 jobs disappeared.
41 million Americans have no health insurance. (4 out of 5 of them are in working families.)
This is the 29th month of the Bush recession.

At DeanFacts there's

Dean admits to his record on Medicare cuts, stretching from 1995 all the way to 2003. "Dean has said he supported an earlier Republican-backed, balanced-budget effort in 1995 that would have cut $270 billion from Medicare... Dean also supported a balanced-budget plan two years later, which cut $200 billion from Medicare." And he has "said he would limit the growth of entitlement programs to balance the federal budget, one of his chief campaign promises." Dean also "has not publicly ruled out limiting Medicare's rate of growth in order to balance the budget."

I think both feel very much like the online equivalent of going negative ... but judge for yourself.

Gephardt Blog Link

FYI, I've added a link to Gephardt's blog to the right-hand column ...

Dean v. Gephardt

Jack Beatty at the Atlantic Monthly writes on a Dean / Gephardt primary, and who's the more electable of the two.

Turkey on Toast: the New Toast-O-Meter is Up

Dean continues to look good in the newest handicapping of the Democratic field.

Clark Hires Graham's Campaign Manager

From CNN:

Paul Johnson, campaign manager of Bob Graham's unsuccessful presidential bid, was hired Monday for the same position in Democrat Wesley Clark's campaign.

Clark spokesman Matt Bennett said Johnson was hired by campaign chairman Eli Segal and will start next Monday.

Johnson is a Minnesota native and a veteran of several Democratic campaigns for the Senate. He also worked on the presidential campaigns of former Nebraska Sen. Bob Kerrey in 1992 and Walter Mondale in 1984.

The Toast is Still Warm: A New Toast-O-Meter is Up

PoliBlog has the latest Toast-O-Meter with this week's ranking of the Democratic field.

The Power of Incumbency

Along with President Bush, candidates Dean and Kerry have announced they will not use public money (nor be bound by the restrictions that go along with campaigning at taxpayer expense) for the rest of the 2004 presidential campaign. Like former President Clinton, President Bush continues to break fundraising records for an incumbent president. While some find this surprising, it is to be expected. Given inflation, it would take a weak president to raise less money than his predecessor.

The real story is that the Democrats are actually raising more money than the Republicans. According to The Center for Responsive Politics, the Democratic presidential candidates have raised over $98 million vs. just under $85 million for President Bush. (These numbers were accurate according to the numbers reported to the government on October 15; obviously the number has increased by now). The number for the Democrats is actually understated -- Bob Graham's numbers are not shown since he has quit the race.

As my graph shows, even though the Democrats are raising more cash than the Republicans, their money will not be nearly as effective. Their house is currently divided, so even Howard Dean has well under 1/3rd of the money at the disposal of George Bush. And since Bush is unopposed for the Republican primary, he can save most of his money for the actual election, while the Democrats consume much of their current warchests battling amongst themselves.

As I editorialized a few weeks ago, the advantages of incumbency are almost insurmountable by a challenger unless the incumbent is unpopular within his own party and faces an independent challenger who can siphon off some of the incumbent’s traditional supporters. This is not the case with President George W. Bush. The longer the Democrats fight amongst themselves, and continue to divide up the Democratic funds, the tougher their challenge to overcome a popular incumbent.

Dean's Campaign Book Due

Dean's campaign book is due out in December. I know many of you are axious to get your hands on it so in the meantime you can go read Chris Suellentrop's brief summary at Slate.

Excerpt:

Chapter 2: Howard Dean, Farmer. Devoted to Dean's summer jobs as a teenager. Dean writes two sentences about working as a sailing-camp counselor but an entire page about his work on a cattle ranch in Florida. There he earned "agricultural minimum wage," cleared land, dusted crops, and in a yearning-macho voice worthy of Apocalypse Now's Col. Kilgore, he remembers "feeling the cool mist of the herbicide on my bare chest as the plane went over."

Howard Fineman on a Clinton Convention

From MSNBC:

THE SCENARIO, as sketched by this hard-boiled insider, calls for Clinton to make an entrance as healer and unifier at the end of the primary season in May or June in the unlikely--but not impossible--event that none of the existing contenders has amassed a majority of the convention delegates."You'd have to have Howard Dean not wrapping it up, and being an angry, wounded front runner," this adviser said. "You'd have to have two of the other challengers tearing each other apart in primary after primary. Then Hillary could come in, well in advance of the convention, and say, 'Look, somebody has to save the party'."

I'm not sure that this is a plausible scenario. Read my response here.

Handicapping the Dem Field

PoliBlog has the latest Toast-O-Meter with this week's ranking of the Democrati field. Find out who's Toast and who's Wonder Bread.

Instant Gratification

For those of you who are awaiting the result of Louisiana's gubernatorial race to see what impact it may have on the 2004 presidential election, the precincts are just now starting to report their results. (As I write this, 19 precincts out of 4,143 precincts have reported). You can see the official results, as they come in, by clicking here.

Just for the record, I predict that:

1) Bobby Jindal will win tonight
2) Governor Jindal will be one of the main speakers at next year’s Republican convention

Update: With 3,991 precincts reporting (96.3%), Jindal is losing 48% to 52%. Unless absentee ballots are not counted in this, it looks like my prediction was wrong.

New Yorker On Clark

Once again I haunt this page ... thanks to Michael for doing such a great job of holding down the fort. Peter Boyer has an interesting piece about Wesley Clark in the New Yorker ... including a rich review of Clark's military carreer. One of the more interesting passages:

Soon after Clark entered the race, though, another Clinton-era general, Tommy Franks, who retired this summer after directing the capture of Baghdad, was asked in a private setting whether he believed that Clark would make a good President. "Absolutely not," Franks replied. Retired General Hugh Shelton was asked the same question after giving a talk at a college in California. Shelton, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was Clark's boss in 1999 when Clark was unceremoniously told that he was being removed from his position as Supreme Allied Commander, Europe. "I've known Wes for a long time," Shelton said. "I will tell you the reason he came out of Europe early had to do with integrity and character issues, things that are very near and dear to my heart. . . . Wes won't get my vote." Shelton has refused to explain how he came to his conclusion.

Clark indicated that he was puzzled by such comments. "I've known Hugh Shelton for years," he said, with a tight smile. "I always liked him." The comments of Franks, Shelton, and others in the Clinton-era military and defense establishment suggest a paradox in Wesley Clark's candidacy for President: his military career, the justification for his candidacy, may also be a liability.

Read it all here.

Should Dean Quit Iowa? Updated

Update: I've posted a column on this question at the Chicago Report.

A new DesMoines Register poll is showing Dean losing ground to Gephardt in Iowa. Of course, Vodkapundit aptly calls this interpretation into question, especially given the rather high margin of error for the poll.

But the question is, should Dean quit Iowa?

Veteran's Day

I feel a deep gratitude for all those who've fought for this country over the years and I would imagine most TCP readers do too. So don't forget to take a moment to thank them, even if its just in your hearts. Yes ... even Wesley Clark and John Kerry.

Clark Working on SC Veterans

This report from CNN details Clark's South Carolina efforts. After pulling out of Iowa it seems that Clark is focusing his attention on the state he stands the best chance at winning. Moreover, South Carolina comes right on the heals of the New Hampshire primary, merely a week later. Considering Dean's sounthern problem, Clark stands a good chance even if Dean wins big in New Hampshire. Just like the republican primary of 2000, SC could play a major role in stopping the dark horse.

Josh Marshall on Dean's Chances

Joshua Marshall has some pretty good points about Dean's "frontrunner" status over at TPM Especially this one:

Dean clearly now has the biggest constituency. It's activated, mobilized and it's big. But he's in a large field. I think there's a much larger slice of the Democratic primary electorate that doesn't want him than the one that does. And as the field narrows, that will become the salient fact.

I would add to this that that slice that doesn't want to see him win the candidacy is made up of Democratic insiders. If this thing somehow gets down to a brokered convention (which might be possible given the new primary system) this could be a big factor.

Read Marshall's full post.

Activism, Even In Death

Saw this item in my local paper yesterday and thought it brought political discourse to a whole new level:

Gertrude M. Jones didn't want flowers or cards when she died. She wanted to get rid of President Bush.

The 81-year-old woman's obituary asked that memorial donations be given "to any organization that seeks the removal of President Bush from office."

And people around the country are following her wishes.

Now that's commitment to a cause ... any cause, apparently. Read the story here (and this post is cross-posted here).

New Poll

Here is an interesting graphic from a new Newsweek poll out. Read all the results at PollingReport.com. Notice the exact mirror between Dems and Republicans. Its kind of interesting isn't it? While these numbers certainly aren't what Bush wants to see, they aren't incredibly bad either. The most important thing is that the Republicans want him re-elected by somewhere close to 90% and the "independents" remain fairly evenly divided. Given these, Bush still retains a very good chance at being reelected. Because (a) Dems don't turnout to vote as well as Republicans do and (b) swing voters will usually swing toward incumbents.

Edwards Tries to Capitalize on Dean's Goof

As a southerner, Edwards is in a unique position to capitalize on Dean's confederate flag snafu. From CNN:

"It's like saying to any group of voters ... you don't know what's best for you. We know what's best for you," Edwards said. "There's an elitism and condescension associated with that attitude that's enormously dangerous to us" and that voters want to be "treated with respect."

Wes Clark's Iraq Plan

"If his new plan is any indication, Wes Clark lacks the guts, instincts, and temperament to lead this nation at war."

Vodkapundit links to Wes Clark's Iraq plan, and explains why he thinks so.

Dean's Supporters Get Him Out of a Jam

Late this last week Howard Dean announced that his supporters would decide whether or not he should refuse federal matching funs. As I discussed here, one of the motives behind the decision was Dean's inability to make the decision himself for political reasons. He would have been painted eight shades of hypocrite. Well, his people delivered ... and pretty close to unanimously. 85% for refusing matching funds, 15% against. So now the guiltfree Dean can keep his cash machine going all the way to November. As political calculations go, this one was pretty good.

Source: Dean for America

Poll Watch - 11/7/03

Source

A Zogby poll asked likely Democrat voters, "If the Democratic primary for president were held today and the candidates were [see below], for whom would you vote?"

Not Sure 34%
Howard Dean 15
Wesley Clark 10
Dick Gephardt 9
Joe Lieberman 9
John Kerry 7
Al Sharpton 4
John Edwards 3
Dennis Kucinich 2
Carol Moseley Braun 2
Other 6

(Zogby America Poll, 558 Likely Democrat Voters Nationwide, Conducted 11/3-5/03, Margin Of Error +/- 4.2%)

Undecided Still Holds A Commanding Lead. A Marist College poll asked Democrats and Democrat-leaning independents, "If the next Democratic presidential primary were held today, whom would you support if the candidates are [list candidates]?"

Undecided 32%
Howard Dean 16
Joseph Lieberman 12
Richard Gephardt 10
John Kerry 9
Wesley Clark 8
Al Sharpton 5
John Edwards 4
Carol Moseley Braun 3
Dennis Kucinich 1

(Marist College Poll, 339 Democrats And Democrat-leaning Independents Nationwide, Conducted 10/27-29/03, Margin Of Error +/- 5.5%)

IN THE STATES

SOUTH CAROLINA (Primary February 3, 2004)

Kerry Behind Everyone But Kucinich. A poll of registered Democrat voters were asked, "If the South Carolina Democratic Presidential Preference Primary were being held today between [list names, rotate] for whom would you vote?"

Undecided 38%
Wesley Clark 17
John Edwards 10
Joe Lieberman 8
Howard Dean 7
Dick Gephardt 7
Al Sharpton 5
Carol Moseley Braun 5
John Kerry 4
Dennis Kucinich 1

(American Research Group Poll, 600 Registered Democrats And Undeclared Voters, Conducted 10/26-30/03, Margin Of Error +/- 4%)

VERMONT (Primary March 2, 2004)

Few See Clark As Dean Threat. In a poll conducted for CBS Burlington affiliate WCAX, likely voters were asked, "Which Democratic candidate do you think poses the biggest threat to Howard Dean winning the nomination?"

John Kerry 32%
Wesley Clark 15
Richard Gephardt 13
Joe Lieberman 6
John Edwards -
Al Sharpton -
Carol Moseley Braun -
Dennis Kucinich -

(Research 2000 Poll, 400 Likely Voters, Conducted 10/28-30/03, Margin Of Error +/- 5%)

NEW HAMPSHIRE (Primary January 27, 2004)

Undecided In Race With Kerry For Second Place. American Research Group's New Hampshire Poll asked random sample of registered Democrats and undeclared voters, "If the New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Preference Primary were being held today between [list names, rotate], for whom would you vote?"

Howard Dean 38%
John Kerry 24
Undecided 21
Wesley Clark 4
Joe Lieberman 4
John Edwards 4
Dick Gephardt 3
Carol Moseley Braun 1
Dennis Kucinich 1
Al Sharpton 0

(American Research Group Poll, 600 Registered Democrats And Undeclared Voters, Conducted 11/2-5/03, Margin Of Error +/- 4%)

NEW YORK (Primary March 2, 2004)

Sharpton Beats Gephardt, Edwards. A Quinnipiac University poll asked registered Democrat voters, "After I read all nine names, tell me which one you would most like to see the Democrats nominate for president in 2004."

DK/NA 19%
Lieberman 17
Dean 15
Clark 12
Sharpton 11
Kerry 11
Gephardt 9
Edwards 3
Moseley-Braun 3
Kucinich 1

(Quinnipiac University Poll, 483 Registered Democrat Voters, Conducted 11/2-5/03, Margin Of Error +/- 4.5%)

Hillary Holds Dem Hopefuls To Single Digits. The Quinnipiac University poll then asked registered Democrat voters, "Suppose New York Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton decides to run for president in 2004. Who would you most like to see the Democrats nominate for president in 2004?"

Clinton 48%
Dean 9
Clark 9
Lieberman 8
Kerry 7
Gephardt 6
DK/NA 6
Sharpton 4
Edwards 1
Kucinich 1
Moseley-Braun -

(Quinnipiac University Poll, 483 Registered Democrat Voters, Conducted 11/2-5/03, Margin Of Error +/- 4.5%)

A Referendum on Who?

For months, the "mainstream" media and the Democrats have been stating that the 2003 gubernatorial elections would be a referendum on President Bush. I wonder if they will keep saying that after Tuesday's elections. In a span of weeks, the Democrats have lost three governships the year before a presidential election. First Californians recalled their Democratic governor and over 60% of Californian voters supported Republican candidates. Tuesday night, Republicans were elected governors in Kentucky and Mississippi.

The Miami Herald stated that the Democratic candidate, Attorney General Ben Chandler tried to blame Fletcher, as a congressman, for the weak national economy, frequently talking about 67,000 Kentucky jobs lost to "Fletcher-Bush" economic policies. However, last week brought reports of economic growth, noted EKU's Gershtenson. "The good news came at just the wrong time for Chandler," Gershtenson said. "He spends all this time tying Fletcher to the economy, and suddenly the economy starts to improve." Yet another reason the Democratic strategy of depending upon bad news is a bad idea (providing Scott Ott with easy targets is still another reason). Of course, the Democratic party is currently infamous in Kentucky for corruption and this bad reputation hurt Chandler.

However, the Mississippi election was another story. It was expected to be a very tight race between former Republican National Committee Chair Barbour and Democratic incumbent Governor Musgrove. Musgrove is a conservative Democrat (along the lines of Sam Nunn and Zell Miller). He had the advantage of incumbency in a state that has only elected one Republican governor since Reconstruction. How could he lose?

One factor in Barbour’s victory was money, the Republicans made a real effort to win Mississippi and invested some of their national warchest in Barbour’s campaign. However, I believe a very large factor was Mississippian outrage at the Democratic party. Among the many judicial nominees that the Democrats are filibustering in the US Senate is Mississippian Judge Charles W. Pickering Senior. Pickering, who currently serves in the U.S. District Court, has been nominated for to a seat on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans. In an obviously choreographed move, Senate Republicans tried to bring Pickering’s nomination to a vote last week, but the Senate Democrats filibustered once again. Big mistake. When President Bush went to Mississippi to campaign for Barbour, he made Pickering a key issue.

I want to thank Senator Cochran and Senator Lott and, of course, Haley, for standing strong with a nominee I named from Mississippi, Charles Pickering. I stand strong with Judge Pickering, and it's time for some members of the United States Senate to stop playing politics with American justice.

It looks like President Bush has finally decided to start fighting the Democrats about their filibustering. He might as well stated:

OK, Dems, keep filibustering my very qualified candidates. It just cost you one of your popular moderate politicians, making your party both less powerful and more tilted to the Left. I’m going to win Florida in 2004 because of what you did to Michael Estrada, and now that Crazy Bob is retiring, I’ll probably gain my party his seat in 2004 as well. Now are you going to vote on my candidates, or do I need to personally campaign for all the open Senate seats next year and see if I can get us a 60 seat majority?

Given human nature, I doubt the Democrats will allow most of Bush’s candidates to come to a vote, but they are paying a high price for it and will pay an even higher price in 2004.

And there is one more governor’s race coming up this year. The Louisiana race between Democrat Kathleen Blanco and Republican Bobby Jindal should be determined on November 15. Since the Republicans already hold the state governorship (Governor Foster is finishing up his second term and cannot run again), a Republican victory here will not hurt the Democrats as much as their losses in California, Kentucky, and Mississippi. However, it will put a very diverse face on the GOP. If he wins, Jindal will be the youngest governor ever to hold office in Louisiana and the first Indian-American governor for any US State. His story is remarkable and I would not be surprised to see him run for President at some point in his career. If he wins, I predict he will be a keynote speaker at the Republican convention next year.

I would also say the Democrats and the media were correct. The elections were partly a referendum on President Bush and the people have spoken. I wonder if the pundits will now say President Bush has a mandate and that the Democratic obstructionists in the Senate should allow Bush’s nominees to voted upon in accordance with the Constitution. Somehow I doubt it. But I fully expect the People of the United States will continue to make the Democrats pay for their folly.

Flirting with Southern Disaster?

Gosh, I hate to keep talking about Dean but he seems to be the only one doing anything interesting at the moment.

Following on the heels of his confederate flag comments, Dean has apparently decided to make the southern vote just a little harder to win, telling a Tallahasee audience (not true southerners of course) that southerners need to stop voting on "race, guns, God and gays."

On a lighter note, I was right again. Dean also said Tuesday that Bob Graham is on his "short list" for VP.

Update: More from Dodd and Chris Muir.

Source: Tallahassee Democrat via Instapundit

Dean's Campaign Quandry

Alex Konetzki of Chicago Report posted this morning that he had recieved a mass mail from the Dean Campaign asking him to vote on whether should accept federal matching funds that would cap his campaign cash at $45 million. The natural question then was why would Dean put such a decision in the hands of his supporters? Of course Dean's public explanation is that "This is a campaign of the people, by the people and for the people." But there's a little more to it.

Dean has a record demanding that politicians accept matching funds and the cap that comes with them. To now deny matching funds would create fodder for a political feeding frenzy amid the Democratic contenders. So Dean conveniently gives himself an out by letting his "people" decide. This is a pretty good strategy especially since he can probably count on "the people" coming through for him.

To Dean's credit he addresses the apparent hypocrisy:

I have always been committed to public financing. But the federal matching funds law, though it was meant to provide an incentive for ordinary Americans to participate in the funding of our elections, is doing the opposite of what it intended. It could end up punishing a movement that has raised more from ordinary Americans than any campaign in history, while rewarding the campaign that has blatantly abused both the spirit and intent of campaign finance, selling off piece after piece of our country.

Other Sources: Newsmax

Dean Defends "Racist" Comment

I wrote last week that there is plenty of time in Primary 2004 for Dean to falter, such that Clark could still easily win the nomination. Well, I am not really accustomed to being right, but as my step-father used to say, "even a blind man can hit the broad side of a barn once in a while."

Today Dean is being questioned about a statement that was not quite so PC. The former Vermont Governor said he wants to be the candidate "for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks." Of course Dean is trying to put a positive spin on this misstep, and doing quite well, comparing himself to FDR. "What Franklin Roosevelt did was to get the Southern white working class to vote with the Southern African-American working class..."

Dean most likely isn't a racist in the least. But a couple of sound bytes like this will give ammunition to Clark et. al and make the nomination a little less than certain.

(My brief editorial addition here)

Source: DesMoines Register

More on Clark and 9/11

More commentary on the issue at Oxblog and Chicago Report.