Saturday, May 15, 2004

Very interesting

Two recent articles in the Boston Globe about the 2000 election are very interesting and prove some of the previous points I have made in this blog.
First, from yesterday, it looks like some Dartmouth Greens are holding their noses and voting for Kerry: ["Pragmatism drives N.H. Naderites to Kerry"]. Now, this is typical type of article published by the Boston Globe which continues to blame Ralph Nader for Gore losing N.H. while ignoring all kinds of evidence to the contrary. Also, mentioning that a handful of college Greens has no plans to vote for Nader isn't such a surprise since Nader has all but blown off the Green Party and its nomination. While they may think Nader is "an idol," these young Greens don't have any loyalty to the man if they are concerned about party-building for the Greens or just want President Bush out of office. However, note this great line in the story:
Bill Shaheen, who ran Gore's operation in New Hampshire in 2000 and is now in charge of Kerry's campaign here, said the campaign is determined to avoid what he sees as Gore's error, writing off states such as New Hampshire, Ohio, and West Virginia too early, when Bush had not solidified support there.
Shaheen, husband of former governor Jeanne Shaheen, Kerry's campaign chairwoman, recalled: "Gore never thought New Hampshire was in play, even though Jeanne was running for a third term, and then three weeks before the general election [the Gore campaign] told me New Hampshire was in play and to get busy. But we had no staff, no money, no budget.
Oh, so that's why Gore lost: He never thought N.H. was in play so he didn't bother until it was too late! It wasn't Nader after all - it was Gore's fault for blowing the state off until the last minute! For years now, Nader supporters have been getting hammered because Gore lost the presidency and in the end, it was Gore's decision to blow off important states he needed to win that cost him the election.
Absolutely amazing. What a great dose of truth from Shaheen - after all these years.
As well, here is another really great point made in the article that needs to be highlighted:
And there are other variables: Republicans are expected to dominate the New Hampshire ballot this November, with Governor Craig Benson, Senator Judd Gregg, and the state's two representatives up for reelection.
"Kerry won't have the kind of inverse coattails that Bush will have from Republicans in the state," Smith said. "Gregg's seat is so safe, for instance, he can just campaign for Bush this fall."
So whether there is a Nader ballot line or not, Kerry is still going to have trouble here. The Globe story - of course - ignores the fact that exit polls show that Nader received twice as many votes from registered Republicans than Democrats in 2000. Although, the piece is quick to point out that Gore lost by 7,000 votes and Nader got over 21,000. Typical.

The second piece is one by Mickey Edwards, a former JFK School of Government professor and representative to Congress from Oklahoma who posts this opinion piece: ["The making of the next Al Gore"]. I especially like these opening lines:
AFTER AL GORE lost the last presidential election, frustrated Democrats publicly blamed his defeat on everybody but Al Gore. They blamed Katherine Harris and Ralph Nader. They blamed Bill Clinton and the Supreme Court. Privately, however, they blamed Gore himself. The country was at peace, the economy strong. Bill Clinton had moved the Democratic Party away from its leftist inclinations and back to the political center. How, they wondered, could Al Gore have blown it? Forget Florida; the bigger question was, why was it even close? It is a question John Kerry should consider, for he is in the process of becoming the next Al Gore.
Kucinich challenges Kerry to meet:
Barring another major intern scandal or something more heinous, John Kerry will be the Democratic nominee in Boston this July. However, Dennis Kucinich continues to campaign for the nomination. I don't know why he is doing this since it is very clear that he won't win. As well, even if Kerry - by some strange miracle - is rejected by the convention, Kucinich will never get the nod. So, why campaign? Well, the Baltimore Sun's Jules Witcover explains why here, via Common Dreams: ["Kucinich Battles On"]. Earlier this morning, the Kucinich campaign - noting that both Kerry and Kucinich will be campaigning in Oregon before Tuesday's primary - offered a joint appearance:
"With both of us being there at the same time, I think that we, as Democrats, have a unique opportunity to jointly share with voters our vision of how the Democratic Party can take this nation in a new direction - especially as it relates to the war in Iraq and our position in the international community. In these past several weeks, I have been asked over and over again by the people of Oregon how the policies of a Democratic Administration will differ from those of the current Republican Administration. Obviously, I can speak only for myself, but next week, you and I have an opportunity to answer those questions together and to listen to what the voters have to say in the interest of building a strong and unified base of support that will lead to a Democratic victory in November."
In some ways, it was a lost moment for Kucinich. He had the opportunity to be a bigger candidate than he was in the primaries. I stated some of this analysis here: ["State of the game, 2004"] and here: ["DailyKos post"].

MA CD 4: Morse makes ballot:
Former radio talk show host and self-proclaimed "rightwing extremist" Chuck Morse has submitted enough signatures to challenge Democrat Rep. Barney Frank as an independent in November. Morse, who originally intended to run as a Republican but got caught in a registration snafu, said in a press release that he was "grateful" to voters and local officials who guided him through the signature process.
"I fully expect that the friends I?ve made in Republican circles will retain interest in my candidacy and as the campaign progresses, unenrolled voters will support me in sufficient numbers to make this a very competitive election."
So far, Morse will be the only candidate facing Frank in 2004. Here is an interesting article from the New Bedford Standard-Times from last month about Morse's trip to D.C. to raise money: ["Frank's opponent Morse goes to Washington"]. Previously, Morse was a talk show host at various metropolitan Boston radio stations including WMFO, WBPS, and WROL. "Talkers Magazine" recently listed Morse as one of the "Hot 100 upcoming talk show hosts in America."

Another reason blogging is so fascinating:
We have all been shocked and horrified by the beheading of Nick Berg. But what if it wasn't him? What if it wasn't true? How would you know? Well, you wouldn't. But some in the blog world suspect the video is fake: ["Bloggers doubt Berg execution video"]. And then there is this: ["Berg's encounter with 'terrorist' revealed"].
According to Berg, his son was taking a course a few years ago at a remote campus of the University of Oklahoma near an airport. He described how on one particular day, his son met "some terrorist people -- who no one knew were terrorists at the time."
At one point during the bus ride, Berg said, the man sitting next to his son asked if he could use Nick's laptop computer.
"It turned out this guy was a terrorist and that he, you know, used my son's e-mail, amongst many other people's e-mail who he did the same thing to," Berg said.
Government sources said Berg gave the man his password, which was later used by Moussaoui, the sources said.
Wow is the least a person can say.

Good luck Martin!
Martin Voelker, the host of "No U Turn Radio" on WMFO in Medford, will be moving to Colorado with his family and will be taking a part-time job with David Barsamian's "Alternative Radio".

No comments: