Live-blogging My Ballot

Here in CA you need to mail your absentee ballots by Friday (tomorrow) to ensure that they will arrive by Tuesday and be counted. So here goes...

Black pen -- check.

Absentee ballot - check.

Wow, there are actually three African American presidential candidates on this ballot: Obama, Cynthia McKinney and Alan Keyes. Three white guys led by McCain, including Nader and Barr.

...And I just voted for Barack Obama and Joe Biden. Awesome. Please God let him win.

...Voted for Democrats down the line. Diane Watson is my Rep.

...For Superior Court judges, I went with the Democratic party endorsements: Merritt, Loo, Jones, Mack, and Crabb. I have to say that this is no way to pick a judge. You just have to have faith that these people are qualified. Appointments by the mayor or governor, approved by the city or county supervisors would be a hell of a lot better.

...Proposition time. I hate these CA propositions, I wish we could trash the whole system. More often than not, they are abused to the point of crippling our government and allowing the uninformed majority to punish the minority. There is a reason this country is a republic and not a true democracy -- the people should not be allowed to create laws through a majority vote, especially when most voters are too dumb or uninformed to make the right choice.

That said, I voted Yes on 1, 2, 3, 5, 11, and 12. The only one I really care about is 1A - high speed trains. We are so far behind almost every other civilized country when it comes to public transit, this would be a great first step for California. I don't know how selfish or stupid you have to be to vote against this. Even a Hummer driver would enjoy less traffic on the roads due to all the people riding trains instead.

...Voted No on 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. All of them are right wing attempts to restrict abortion, ban gay marriage, or increase criminal penalties in unfair ways. No thanks. I really hope 4 and 8 go down hard. Unfortunately, the No on 8 people have been doing a piss-poor job of taking their case to the public. The Yes on 8 people made this all about teaching gay marriage to little kids, and so now the prop is being fought on those grounds. Not a single TV ad has run with a gay celebrity discussing this as a civil rights issue. Not a single ad has been tailored to the black community, telling them that Barack Obama opposes Prop. 8. I fear this horrible piece of hate legislation might actually pass. The blame falls mainly on the Christian and Mormon conservatives behind it -- they are scum in my opinion. But the No on 8 people just haven't got their act together. They have a good new ad with Diane Feinstein, but why wasn't that ad running a month ago?

...County Measures. Yes on R, so we can fund more rail projects. No brainer.

...School measures. Voted yes because I'm a good liberal. Would rather have money going to schools than to prisons.

...City measures. Voted yes, once again because I'm a good liberal.

All done. Put the ballot in the envelope, signed it, now I'm off to the Post Office. I love being an American.

In A Sinking Economy

I have to agree that these are some of the funniest ads this cycle:







Brilliant.

Deep Thought

Is it possible to be a terrorist, communist, socialist, inexperienced celebrity Marxist Muslim radical -- all at once?

Alternative History

Kevin Drum writes:

Obama has run a good campaign, but if Hillary Clinton had won the nomination (or Al Gore or John Kerry or Socks the cat) they'd all be ahead by seven points too.

I couldn't disagree more. This really, really does not give Obama enough credit. And while it's easy to love Hillary again now that we are all on the same side, let's not forget that Hillary was and is a very polarizing figure amongst independents and Republicans.

Playing a game of alternative history is always fun, so let's do it. Let's say that Hillary won Iowa and somehow performed well enough in the caucus states to pull off a victory against Barack Obama. How would she have performed compared to Obama, and how would have McCain reacted?

Chaos and negativity. First, Hillary's campaign was incredibly poorly run, with the same kind of drama and in-fighting that we are seeing from the McCain camp. With Mark Penn churning out talking points and attack ads, they'd be right in the mud with McCain. Voters would view both candidates as negative, as opposed to the current situation where Obama is viewed as much more positive. The gap in favorability between Obama and McCain? Cut it in half if Hillary were the candidate. Actually, maybe just erase it altogether.

The inspiration factor. Hillary is not an inspiring speaker or motivator. Sure, plenty of Boomer women loved her and worked their asses off for her, but you wouldn't see GOTV operations as fully staffed with excited young people as you do now. Compare Obama's caucus turnout to Hillary's. That's where you see enthusiasm and dedication. Look at Obama's small dollar fundraising versus Hillary's. Same thing. Would Hillary have invested so much time and money into voter registration and GOTV? Nope. She would be running a typical Clinton/Gore/Kerry campaign, based on daily talking points and TV ads.

The financial meltdown. How would Hillary have reacted when McCain suspended his campaign and tried to postpone the debate? No one can know for sure, but I do know that Hillary was prone to stunts and panders all through the primary. With Mark Penn in her ear, she just might have suspended her campaign too and tried to take over the negotiations in the Senate. Hell, she would have tried to stick her terrible "freeze interest rates" and "freeze foreclosures" ideas into the bailout package. I don't think Hillary has the calm or the cool of Obama, and probably wouldn't have played this as masterfully as he did in those decisive days.

Sarah Palin. If Hillary were our nominee, there is no way in hell that McCain would have picked Sarah Palin. Heck, even if Hillary was Obama's VP then Palin would not have been chosen. Palin was strictly a desperate grab for the mythical PUMA vote, and it has backfired spectacularly. I'd say that 60% of McCain's drop in the polls has been a result of Palin, the other 40% because of the financial crisis. Replace Palin with Romney, Pawlenty, or Huckabee and McCain gets an instant 3-4 point bump in the polls, maybe more. Palin has literally destroyed McCain's campaign, leaving him to hope that conservative white voters pull him across the finish line despite the campaign and despite the candidates at the top of the ticket.

Smear and fear. You think that McCain would have had a tough time finding ways to attack Hillary? Ha! Obama is actually hard to attack, because you have to make things up out of thin air. Muslim, socialist, radical, blah blah blah. With Hillary, the Republicans have warehouses full of dirt. Just start with Bill Clinton's 2001 pardons -- Marc Rich, convicted members of the Weather Underground, some Puerto Rican radicals. Or how about a Whitewater rerun? Or maybe endless ads about Hillary's snipergate lies, contrasted with McCain's real war service? Let's not get into Bill's presidential library and the secret donors behind it, or Hillary's connections to convicted Chinese donors. Trust me, it would have been just as ugly as it is now, except there would have been more truth behind the Hillary smears. Half of the stuff has been cycling through right wing media for fifteen years already.

On the plus side, Hillary is a stronger debater than Obama and would have more than held her own against McCain. He's a world class misogynist and might have allowed his patronizing attitude to come through, hurting his favorability. And yes, McCain is a terrible candidate who wouldn't have inspired his base in a world without Palin.

But don't tell me the numbers would be exactly the same with any other candidate. Obama is a once-in-a-generation politician running the smoothest campaign ever seen by a Democrat. He's a world class speaker with sky high favorability and charisma, and incredible political instincts.

With Hillary we would still be favored, but the race would be a few points tighter and nobody can convince me otherwise.

Questions

Would John McCain have ever considered a male governor with as little experience, and as little real world knowledge, as Sarah Palin? After meeting him just once?

If Kay Bailey Hutchinson or Olympia Snowe were about 20 years younger and looked like Sarah Palin, would they have received stronger consideration?

Why does McCain pronounce Washington as "Wershingtun"?

Does anyone else find it interesting that Barack Obama's grandmother is ten years younger than McCain's mom?

What is Obama's 30-minute ad going to look like? Will it be a nuts-and-bolts presentation like Perot's 1992 ads, a sappy campaign documentary, a speech, or what? Personally, I'm hoping it's an entertaining yet informative look at Obama's policies and ideas. A mix of graphs, videos, documentary-style expose, etc. With special guest bits by Joe Biden, Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, and Colin Powell. And I really hope it builds the Democratic brand, not just Obama's. Senate candidates in Minnesota, North Carolina, Georgia and Kentucky could use the boost.

Will Bin Laden or Al Qaeda do anything this week?

Does anyone under age 50 really tremble at the word "socialist"? Anyone over 50? Anyone who is not a Republican?

When will the media finally start ignoring Joe the Tax-Cheating Republican Asshole Plumber?

If Obama wins the election, will there be parties in the streets?

If McCain wins, would he force her to resign rather than keep her one 72-year-old heartbeat from the presidency? Would Palin resist such efforts?

If Democrats win 57 or more Senate seats, will any moderate Republicans (Snowe, Collins, Specter) switch parties the way some Dems switched parties after the 1994 blowout?

Does anyone else think that Palin's clothing looks a lot worse now that she is wearing her "own clothes"? Spending $150,000 is outrageous whether you are a man or woman, but they did look stylish and fitted - unlike the frumpy Mrs. Santa Claus clothes she is sporting now.

Polls and Healthy Skepticism

Here is what Electoral-Vote.com told us the map looked like on October 31st, 2004:

Kerry: 283
Bush: 246
Tied: 9


At the time I thought Kerry had a chance to pull ahead and win. I left L.A. to do GOTV in Nevada, and it wasn't until after knocking on my last door on election day that my bubble was burst. I attended a DNC-funded afterparty at the Rio hotel, and you would have thought it was a funeral.

I was a zombie for the next month.

What happened? How did it go so wrong? Well, electoral-vote.com was being quite generous to Kerry, giving him Florida even though Bush was up in 2 of the 3 most recent Florida polls. Iowa was tied in the polls and he gave it to Kerry. Bush was up in all the Nevada polls, but Electoral-Vote considered it a tie game. Bush was up in the New Mexico polls, but Electoral-Vote gave it to Kerry. Bush won all four of those states, in addition to New Hampshire.

Now, current polling sites give Obama a much, much bigger lead than Kerry had in this compilation. And those Obama leads are generally based on multiple polls where he is leading by more than three or four points. Not to mention, Obama's voters are more enthusiastic and his GOTV operation is unparalleled. But that's not the point. The point is that nothing is done until it is done. Don't trust the polls.

Until I actually see a map filled with blue on election night, until John McCain actually gives a concession speech, this is anyone's game.

One Week To Go

Seven days.

Hopefully sites like 538.com and Electoral-Vote.com are correct and this is a blowout for Democrats across the board. Lord knows I'd love to see it. But honestly, if Obama can win this by a single electoral vote I'll be delighted. After the soul-crushing loss to George W. four years ago, I'll take any win -- ANY win.

As a young Democrat who has seen my party lose so many national elections since 1994, I'm wired to be pessimistic. I have a hard time believing, polls be damned, that Obama will win Ohio, North Carolina, Florida, Indiana, or Missouri. Maybe I just don't want to jinx us after being so confident four years ago, but that's where I stand. I think this comes down to Virginia, Pennsylvania and Colorado.

Anything past that is just gravy. But those are three states we have to win.

Because let's be honest, do you really want to see this image on election night?


I don't think so. John McCain has been running one of the worst campaigns in history ever since about August 29th, the day he blew it by picking Sarah Palin. That's why I haven't been blogging quite as much recently -- it's too much fun watching the slow motion train wreck on TV. Plus, it's hard for me to destroy McCain any better than he is destroying himself.

Watching McCain and Palin go after one another is a lot of fun. Grab the popcorn if Obama wins the election, because you ain't seen nothing yet. We will see top McCain aides going on Hardball or Fox News and describing, in detail, how idiotic Palin was when they sat her down for her first debate prep sessions in September. It's gonna be fun.

But right now is not the time to celebrate or gloat over the carcass of the GOP. They aren't dead yet. I expect OBL to release a video, doing his best to keep these neocons in power, and a whole lot of voters might recoil at the last minute because change is such a big step, and in their minds they'll think that Obama is just too good to be true.

After the election, if Obama wins, probably 60% of the country will claim they voted for Barack, even if they didn't. It's after the election, when all the ads are off TV and the spin doctors go home and the bright light of reality steps in, that most people will be glad Obama won. McCain is the new Dole, Palin is the new Quayle, and Obama is the new JFK. Four years from now, if Obama wins this election and governs well, his approval ratings will be in the 70s. And just about 75% of the people alive today will tell their grandkids they voted for the first black president, even if they didn't.

But this --right now-- this is where we step on the gas and keep going. Donate until Friday, then GOTV in whichever way you can. We could still lose this race. Nobody has voted in Pennsylvania yet. NOBODY. So take some time this week to do your part for change.

And that's all the lecturing you'll get from me this week.

Diane Feinstein Says No on Prop. 8

As a Californian, I feel pretty strongly about this Prop. 8 that the right wing kooks have placed on our ballot. This is the proposition that would make gay marriage illegal and force all married gay couples to get divorced. So I'd like to make a plea to all of my California readers: Vote NO on Prop. 8.

Let's not beat around the bush -- this is perhaps the most hateful and discriminatory propositions we've ever seen in California. I ask you all to vote against it, because that's the right thing to do both as an equality-loving American and as a moral being.

Prop. 8 does not strengthen straight marriage and it won't improve your life. Instead, it destroys the lives of many loving gay and lesbian couples. Simply because of who they are, this proposition would deny them the basic right to a committed relationship with the legal protections of marriage.

I know that some of you may have religious objections to homosexuality. I understand that. But you won't stop people from being gay with Prop. 8, you are only going to deny them the same civil rights that you enjoy. Imagine if there was a proposition that targeted you as a minority? What if there was a proposition that forced all Mormons to get divorced? Or all Catholics? Or all atheists? People would be horrified by that, as they should be.

Most groups were persecuted at some point in history. It is a sign of progress that our society has moved past such hatred and division. Voting against Prop. 8 is part of that timeless struggle for equality.

It used to be illegal for people of different races to get married, but we have happily done away with such discrimination. It is time for us to stop discriminating against gays and lesbians. They have done nothing wrong to you, so you should do nothing wrong to them.

The ad-makers who tell us to Vote yes on Prop. 8 are a bunch of liars. They are making charges that are simply not true, such as their claims that churches could lose tax-exempt status or that gay marriage will be taught in schools. If you don't believe me, here is a legal analysis by a BYU grad that tears apart these false allegations:

http://mormonsformarriage. com/p=35

The Yes on 8 people should simply tell the truth about this. If they believe that being gay is a sin and should be punished with inequality under the law, then go ahead and say it. Don't lie to us, that's insulting and devious.

If Prop. 8 passes, then Britney Spears can still go get married and divorced on the same weekend, yet a lesbian couple who have been monogamous for thirty years cannot get married. Does that sound fair to you

I know some folks wouldn't mind allowing gay couple to have marriage rights, as long as it is called "civil unions" instead of "marriage". But would you really deny somebody basic civil rights over the choice of words Is it really that important in your daily life

So many Californians were overjoyed when marriage became legal for all this past summer. I have many gay and lesbian friends who felt like they'd just become full citizens under the law. Thousands of couples have gotten married as a result, with their loving families in attendance. If Prop. 8 passes, these people will be forced into divorce, and this entire community will be saddened and distraught.

So please, if you live in California, do the right thing and vote against Proposition 8.

As far as the other propositions, I say vote YES on 1A (high speed trains!) and vote NO on Prop. 4.