I heard she was pretty smart, but this was the first extended interview I've seen. It also reinforces a lot of what I am thinking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyBc33UjvDU
Monday, February 18, 2008
Saturday, February 16, 2008
Obamacycling
Check this out:
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/barack-obama-supporters-learn-to-obamacycle/161582213
And see it in action:
http://www.obamacycle.com/forum/topic/show?id=1997397%3ATopic%3A1935&page=1&commentId=1997397%3AComment%3A5058&x=1
Oh what the heck, one more here:
http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2008/02/06/video-interviewer-picks-the-wrong-obama-supporter-to-try-to-railroad/
http://video.aol.com/video-detail/barack-obama-supporters-learn-to-obamacycle/161582213
And see it in action:
http://www.obamacycle.com/forum/topic/show?id=1997397%3ATopic%3A1935&page=1&commentId=1997397%3AComment%3A5058&x=1
Oh what the heck, one more here:
http://thinkonthesethings.wordpress.com/2008/02/06/video-interviewer-picks-the-wrong-obama-supporter-to-try-to-railroad/
Thursday, February 14, 2008
How conspiracy theories are born
Dateline: Houston, Texas
Approximately 1:05 pm, February 14
Office phone rings. My phone is 713-4xx-xxxx... this is important.
It's a recording. Male voice says, this is a short 4 question political survey done on behalf of the American Research Group (a legit polling company, by the way).
Press (1) for Democratic Primary, (2) for Republican Primary. [1]
First Question: Hillary Clinton: (1) only person you'd vote for (2) preferred candidate, (3) acceptable but not preferred, (4) haven't heard of her, ... [3]
Second Question: Barack Obama: (1) only person you'd vote for (2) preferred candidate, (3) acceptable but not preferred, ... [2]
Third Question: Are you definitely planning to vote in the Primary on February 12? Press...
then the phone cuts out.
Now.
First of all, it is 100% possible the phone just cut off. We use wireless phones and they can be spotty. Now I've never had a line drop out during a call, but there was interference I could hear. So I'm willing to accept that the poll just happened to abort after I selected my preferred candidate.
But.
It cut off right on the words "February 12". Leaving them lingering in my mind.
Because the Texas primary is March 4.
Two coincidences?
Actually, it probably is. If you wanted to turn off someone's voters, you'd tell them the primary was *later* than it is, because believe me everyone will hear about the primary over the next 3 weeks. And there were elections in Virginia on Feb 12, and we have offices in Virginia, and though a Texas number was called...
See, it doesn't make sense either way. But, I tell you, that's how conspiracy theories are born.
And if anyone knows the phone # or email for American Research Group, I'd love to hear it.
[Edit #1: Found the number and left them a message.]
[Edit #2: Got a call from American Research Group. Their mistake, poll was being worked on and wasn't supposed to be running yet. They apologized and said it was fixed, thanks to my call. Totally true story. And why, perhaps, I'm not a conspiracy theorist at heart.]
[Edit #3: and the results]
Approximately 1:05 pm, February 14
Office phone rings. My phone is 713-4xx-xxxx... this is important.
It's a recording. Male voice says, this is a short 4 question political survey done on behalf of the American Research Group (a legit polling company, by the way).
Press (1) for Democratic Primary, (2) for Republican Primary. [1]
First Question: Hillary Clinton: (1) only person you'd vote for (2) preferred candidate, (3) acceptable but not preferred, (4) haven't heard of her, ... [3]
Second Question: Barack Obama: (1) only person you'd vote for (2) preferred candidate, (3) acceptable but not preferred, ... [2]
Third Question: Are you definitely planning to vote in the Primary on February 12? Press...
then the phone cuts out.
Now.
First of all, it is 100% possible the phone just cut off. We use wireless phones and they can be spotty. Now I've never had a line drop out during a call, but there was interference I could hear. So I'm willing to accept that the poll just happened to abort after I selected my preferred candidate.
But.
It cut off right on the words "February 12". Leaving them lingering in my mind.
Because the Texas primary is March 4.
Two coincidences?
Actually, it probably is. If you wanted to turn off someone's voters, you'd tell them the primary was *later* than it is, because believe me everyone will hear about the primary over the next 3 weeks. And there were elections in Virginia on Feb 12, and we have offices in Virginia, and though a Texas number was called...
See, it doesn't make sense either way. But, I tell you, that's how conspiracy theories are born.
And if anyone knows the phone # or email for American Research Group, I'd love to hear it.
[Edit #1: Found the number and left them a message.]
[Edit #2: Got a call from American Research Group. Their mistake, poll was being worked on and wasn't supposed to be running yet. They apologized and said it was fixed, thanks to my call. Totally true story. And why, perhaps, I'm not a conspiracy theorist at heart.]
[Edit #3: and the results]
Saturday, February 09, 2008
The kind of things you don't read blogs for
Who said a blog can't be an electronic notepad?
Who said you can't use it to write up all the tedious things you've learned in one evening about home networking, such as:
Do dentists wander around looking at people's teeth in their spare time? This computer stuff is like Invasion of the Body Snatchers sometimes.
Who said you can't use it to write up all the tedious things you've learned in one evening about home networking, such as:
- You can't string wireless routers together. Those are bridges.
- AT&T customer support doesn't care if the tech already told you it was the line coming into the apartment. They will make you get the modem off the carpet and remove the router.
- AT&T customer support doesn't care if you've told them that the problem is intermittent, they will still ask you after each test "is it working now?"
- AT&T customer support are very patient and polite, but have little sense of humor when you respond to their instruction to "now wait until the connection stabilizes" with a pithy "I've been waiting for two weeks now."
- AT&T's DSL technicians are the kind of folks you want as a neighbor to help you with projects. The kind that give you their phone number to call them directly next time. And they laugh. Now where was that number?
- Number of new networking devices purchased in the past 2 weeks: 4
- Number not actually needed: 2
- Number of additional network devices to be purchased this weekend: 2
- Things that can mess up your DSL line: other unfiltered phones, the test ringer the phone company puts on your line, dimmer switches, TVs, modems on carpet, aged modems, phone cords running parallel to the power cords, thin phone cords, long phone cords, logical network routers you cannot see, and apparently at least one more thing yet to be determined.
- Current Internet Crush: Slate magazine. Articles on "Stop hating on the new compact flourescent bulbs" plus a 30+ minute audio book club discussing Eat Pray Love. These are the people I want to invite over to drink the good stuff.
- Single worst thing your router can do to you: give bogus DHCP addresses. Hardcoded IP, subnet mask, default gateway, and DNS servers Ahoy! Remember to reprogram every time you plug directly into the modem to troubleshoot your DSL. And forget about talking to non-PC devices on your network. You don't even want to see the workaround.
- Why your Belkin Network USB hub won't let you connect to your USB devices: Because when you moved your PC and hub onto a new router daisy-chained to the old router, so your DHCP would work and they'd be on the same subnet, the Windows Firewall would not open up as many ports as the original setup, and your UDP packets would be dropped. Which you would see once you read all about the new Vista advanced firewall, with 3 separate modes and rule-builder interface. It's UDP port 19540 inbound that is being dropped, by the way. And no, it's not in the guide. [edit: okay, so it is in the troublehooting help... but who reads that?]
- Chance of your Voice-over-IP wireless router still giving you a dial tone after you daisy-chain it off the wired router that gives out proper DHCP addresses: Guess.
- Reason the remote iPod will not show up in iTunes while the remote digicam will copy pictures: not a clue
- It's one thing troubleshooting stuff like this for 7.5 hours. It's another to do so when your Internet connection bounces up and down constantly for hours at a time.
Do dentists wander around looking at people's teeth in their spare time? This computer stuff is like Invasion of the Body Snatchers sometimes.
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Super Tuesday lessons
Here is what I expect we'll see tomorrow.
McCain has it won, not because he won everything (he won less than I thought), but because Huckabee won the south. Huck won 5 or so states, so he will not drop out. Neither will Romney, though Romney has to keep lending his own campaign money, while Huckabee gets by on free publicity. With both in, McCain builds a lead that is insurmountable.
Why won't one of them (Huck, Mitt) get out? Each thinks the other is a fake conservative, that is, Huck thinks Mitt isn't really a social conservative (those Mormons think Jesus and the Devil are brothers, right Mike?), while Mitt thinks Huck isn't a real economic conservative. Huck loathes the Wall Street crowd, and Mitt can't stand Mike's piousness... neither will back down and each would rather see McCain the nominee. They will both get their wish.
But the point of this blog was to analyze the Democratic results. There are too many easy headlines for the right one to be written, but luckily you came here.
The headline is, with McCain the Republican nominee, Obama has shown that he can compete in the swing states that will decide the election better than Clinton can.
Let's break it down.
Here is how the states will probably come out:
Clinton: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Tennesee. She previously won New Hampshire and Nevada. (Florida and Michigan were uncontested.)
Obama: Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, Utah. Previously: Iowa, South Carolina.
Obama got more states, Clinton got bigger ones, and the easy headline is "Split Decision" and stay tuned to sell more horserace newspapers. And certainly it is a tight race.
But.
In the 2004 election, 12 of the 50 states were decided by 5% or less. Six went Republican, six Democrat. Clinton doing well in Massachusetts or Obama doing well in Utah means little, as everybody knows how those states will vote.
Not everyone knows how these states will vote:
Colorado (+5%R)
Florida (+5%R)
Nevada (+3%R)
Ohio (+2%R)
Iowa (+1%R)
New Mexico (+1%R)
Wisconsin (+1%D)
New Hampshire (+1%D)
Michigan (+3%D)
Minnesota (+3%D)
Pennsylvania (+3%D)
Oregon (+4%D)
To win the 2008 Presidential election, Clinton or Obama needs to do well in these states. Maybe Virginia (+8%R) will be in play after electing its second straight Democratic governor and a Democratic senator. Other states may be up for grabs. Mostly it's about those above.
So let's break them down.
Colorado (+5%R) Obama by +33%
Florida (+5%R) not contested due to party rules
Nevada (+3%R) Clinton by 6%
Ohio (+2%R) not yet held (borders Obama's Illinois)
Iowa (+1%R) Obama by 8%
New Mexico (+1%R) exit polls show Obama by 5-10%
Wisconsin (+1%D) not yet held (borders Obama's Illinois and Minnesota below)
New Hampshire (+1%D) Clinton by 3%
Michigan (+3%D) not contested due to party rules
Minnesota (+3%D) Obama by 33%
Pennsylvania (+3%D) not yet held
Oregon (+4%D) not yet held
So the Clinton has won two contested presidential toss-up states (Nevada and New Hampshire) by an average of 5%, while Obama has won four by an average of 20%, with two more likely wins (Wisconsin, Ohio).
If Clinton has demonstrated an electability advantage, it is not in the midwest battleground states, but in strong support from Latino voters. Latino voters make up a sizable share in Florida, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. Republicans will win Texas, and Democrats California. Republicans will also win Arizona, especially with McCain as their nominee. McCain's moderate and politically brave positions on immigration will make him competitive in Florida and New Mexico. Clinton won both Arizona and California tonight, but neither are tossups. She also won Florida, but as a front-runner with name recognition in an uncontested race. The only relevant Latino-heavy battleground she contested was New Mexico, which it seems she lost (or certainly did not dominate).
The point of all of that is to say, Clinton showed dominance in some Southwestern states, but not the one that mattered (save Nevada). All the other states she won tonight were either her home states, or their neighbors: New York plus Jersey and Massachusetts, and Arkansas plus Oklahoma and Tennessee. Democrats who know her well (home states and neighbors) are loyal to her. And she has a notable advantage over Obama in the Hispanic community, but that doesn't translate (except perhaps in Florida) to an electoral advantage.
Meanwhile, Obama plays well in the western states (Colorado, Minnesota, New Mexico) that will be 2008 toss-ups, and has the potential through both increased African-American turnout and religious-inflected oratory worthy of a Southern preacher , to force a non-Southern non-evangelical McCain to play defense in states like Virginia and Louisiana.
Simply put, Obama probably plays better in Colorado, Iowa, Ohio, Minnesota, New Mexico, and Wisconsin, while Clinton probably only plays better in Florida and Nevada. New Mexico and Nevada are useful but ultimately likely to go to the Arizonan McCain.
To put a further, harsher, light on it, Democratic primary voters have been about 60% women, and the white and Latino women have tended to vote for Clinton. The (fewer) men (all races) have voted more heavily for Obama. In a general election, there will not be a 20% surplus of women voters, so the likely results in a general election in these tossup states would be more strongly for Obama.
Also, some states have closed primaries not allowing crucial swing independent voters. Now I think it is an easy mistake to make, to assume that the candidate with most crossover appeal will do the best, because political moderates usually fail to attract the kind of fanatic support needed to fight a general election. Here, though, Obama's crossover support from Independents and Republicans comes in spite of his most-liberal-in-the-senate voting record (Clinton is #16), and Obama no doubt has fanatic followers. So his crossover appeal doesn't come with the usual downside (ref: the attacks on McCain coming from Limbaugh and Co). And in an open contest (as the general election is), his comparative strength vs Clinton in e.g. New Mexico (closed) and California (closed) would be better.
Conclusion
Clinton has shown she can win in the Northeast, in her home states of Arkansas and New York, in their neighbors, and among Latino voter and older women. Obama has been able to win further outside his (smaller) "comfort zone", including important toss-up states and constituencies that will likely decide the 2008 election.
Hillary Clinton could win the 2008 election, but she would likely need to follow Al Gore's and John Kerry's electoral strategy, but either win Florida or Ohio, while defending marginal upper midwestern and rust belt states. Obama has more strategies available, being able to bring southern border states into play, likely having a native son advantage in the swing states of the upper midwest, with the ability to fight McCain for independents while having a comparatively more motivated political base.
Tonight showed (me at least) that Obama has a far greater chance of winning the presidency than Clinton does.
Key dates and questions ahead:
Saturday: Louisiana and Washington State. Can Obama energize enough turnout to potentially bring the Southern state into play? Or does the Arkansas-neighbor factor work in Clinton's favor? The Washington caucus gives a good sense of who is most competitive in the Northwest, ~+3% Democratic territory that must usually be defended in the general election. Chance for either candidate to demonstrate some electability chops.
Sunday: Maine caucus. Clinton won neighboring NH. Mostly a chance for a winner's picture in the Monday paper.
Tuesday: DC, Maryland, Virginia. DC will go huge Obama, not necessarily a great PR thing as it brings up the race issue. Maryland is reliable Democrat. Virginia is a potential swing state. A big win by Clinton or Obama here gets electability points.
Week Tuesday (Feb 19). Wisconsin. Obama should romp here as a setup to Ohio below. If so, great mo. If not, will send wave of second thoughts.
March 4. Texas and Ohio. Beginning of the end. If Obama can win Ohio (a critical swing state with a modified-open primary), while holding his own in Texas (unwinnable for Dems but demonstrating reasonable competitiveness for Latino voters), he will make a strong case for the electability crown and try to get the establishment (especially superdelegates) behind him. Clinton will spin Ohio as home-field advantage for Obama and hold out for April 22 in Pennsylvania. But that is 6 weeks later, and McCain will be running ads for the general election. Dems will want to shut this game down. Besides, Ohio/Texas is a lot of delegates. If either candidate is within shouting distance of the nomination, there will be tremendous pressure for superdelegates to line up and end it. Obama's trump card is hope that the electability scenario peels off Clinton's superdelegates. Clinton's trump is trying to reinstate the Florida and Michigan delegates she won uncontested.
Stay tuned.
McCain has it won, not because he won everything (he won less than I thought), but because Huckabee won the south. Huck won 5 or so states, so he will not drop out. Neither will Romney, though Romney has to keep lending his own campaign money, while Huckabee gets by on free publicity. With both in, McCain builds a lead that is insurmountable.
Why won't one of them (Huck, Mitt) get out? Each thinks the other is a fake conservative, that is, Huck thinks Mitt isn't really a social conservative (those Mormons think Jesus and the Devil are brothers, right Mike?), while Mitt thinks Huck isn't a real economic conservative. Huck loathes the Wall Street crowd, and Mitt can't stand Mike's piousness... neither will back down and each would rather see McCain the nominee. They will both get their wish.
But the point of this blog was to analyze the Democratic results. There are too many easy headlines for the right one to be written, but luckily you came here.
The headline is, with McCain the Republican nominee, Obama has shown that he can compete in the swing states that will decide the election better than Clinton can.
Let's break it down.
Here is how the states will probably come out:
Clinton: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Tennesee. She previously won New Hampshire and Nevada. (Florida and Michigan were uncontested.)
Obama: Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, Utah. Previously: Iowa, South Carolina.
Obama got more states, Clinton got bigger ones, and the easy headline is "Split Decision" and stay tuned to sell more horserace newspapers. And certainly it is a tight race.
But.
In the 2004 election, 12 of the 50 states were decided by 5% or less. Six went Republican, six Democrat. Clinton doing well in Massachusetts or Obama doing well in Utah means little, as everybody knows how those states will vote.
Not everyone knows how these states will vote:
Colorado (+5%R)
Florida (+5%R)
Nevada (+3%R)
Ohio (+2%R)
Iowa (+1%R)
New Mexico (+1%R)
Wisconsin (+1%D)
New Hampshire (+1%D)
Michigan (+3%D)
Minnesota (+3%D)
Pennsylvania (+3%D)
Oregon (+4%D)
To win the 2008 Presidential election, Clinton or Obama needs to do well in these states. Maybe Virginia (+8%R) will be in play after electing its second straight Democratic governor and a Democratic senator. Other states may be up for grabs. Mostly it's about those above.
So let's break them down.
Colorado (+5%R) Obama by +33%
Florida (+5%R) not contested due to party rules
Nevada (+3%R) Clinton by 6%
Ohio (+2%R) not yet held (borders Obama's Illinois)
Iowa (+1%R) Obama by 8%
New Mexico (+1%R) exit polls show Obama by 5-10%
Wisconsin (+1%D) not yet held (borders Obama's Illinois and Minnesota below)
New Hampshire (+1%D) Clinton by 3%
Michigan (+3%D) not contested due to party rules
Minnesota (+3%D) Obama by 33%
Pennsylvania (+3%D) not yet held
Oregon (+4%D) not yet held
So the Clinton has won two contested presidential toss-up states (Nevada and New Hampshire) by an average of 5%, while Obama has won four by an average of 20%, with two more likely wins (Wisconsin, Ohio).
If Clinton has demonstrated an electability advantage, it is not in the midwest battleground states, but in strong support from Latino voters. Latino voters make up a sizable share in Florida, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. Republicans will win Texas, and Democrats California. Republicans will also win Arizona, especially with McCain as their nominee. McCain's moderate and politically brave positions on immigration will make him competitive in Florida and New Mexico. Clinton won both Arizona and California tonight, but neither are tossups. She also won Florida, but as a front-runner with name recognition in an uncontested race. The only relevant Latino-heavy battleground she contested was New Mexico, which it seems she lost (or certainly did not dominate).
The point of all of that is to say, Clinton showed dominance in some Southwestern states, but not the one that mattered (save Nevada). All the other states she won tonight were either her home states, or their neighbors: New York plus Jersey and Massachusetts, and Arkansas plus Oklahoma and Tennessee. Democrats who know her well (home states and neighbors) are loyal to her. And she has a notable advantage over Obama in the Hispanic community, but that doesn't translate (except perhaps in Florida) to an electoral advantage.
Meanwhile, Obama plays well in the western states (Colorado, Minnesota, New Mexico) that will be 2008 toss-ups, and has the potential through both increased African-American turnout and religious-inflected oratory worthy of a Southern preacher , to force a non-Southern non-evangelical McCain to play defense in states like Virginia and Louisiana.
Simply put, Obama probably plays better in Colorado, Iowa, Ohio, Minnesota, New Mexico, and Wisconsin, while Clinton probably only plays better in Florida and Nevada. New Mexico and Nevada are useful but ultimately likely to go to the Arizonan McCain.
To put a further, harsher, light on it, Democratic primary voters have been about 60% women, and the white and Latino women have tended to vote for Clinton. The (fewer) men (all races) have voted more heavily for Obama. In a general election, there will not be a 20% surplus of women voters, so the likely results in a general election in these tossup states would be more strongly for Obama.
Also, some states have closed primaries not allowing crucial swing independent voters. Now I think it is an easy mistake to make, to assume that the candidate with most crossover appeal will do the best, because political moderates usually fail to attract the kind of fanatic support needed to fight a general election. Here, though, Obama's crossover support from Independents and Republicans comes in spite of his most-liberal-in-the-senate voting record (Clinton is #16), and Obama no doubt has fanatic followers. So his crossover appeal doesn't come with the usual downside (ref: the attacks on McCain coming from Limbaugh and Co). And in an open contest (as the general election is), his comparative strength vs Clinton in e.g. New Mexico (closed) and California (closed) would be better.
Conclusion
Clinton has shown she can win in the Northeast, in her home states of Arkansas and New York, in their neighbors, and among Latino voter and older women. Obama has been able to win further outside his (smaller) "comfort zone", including important toss-up states and constituencies that will likely decide the 2008 election.
Hillary Clinton could win the 2008 election, but she would likely need to follow Al Gore's and John Kerry's electoral strategy, but either win Florida or Ohio, while defending marginal upper midwestern and rust belt states. Obama has more strategies available, being able to bring southern border states into play, likely having a native son advantage in the swing states of the upper midwest, with the ability to fight McCain for independents while having a comparatively more motivated political base.
Tonight showed (me at least) that Obama has a far greater chance of winning the presidency than Clinton does.
Key dates and questions ahead:
Saturday: Louisiana and Washington State. Can Obama energize enough turnout to potentially bring the Southern state into play? Or does the Arkansas-neighbor factor work in Clinton's favor? The Washington caucus gives a good sense of who is most competitive in the Northwest, ~+3% Democratic territory that must usually be defended in the general election. Chance for either candidate to demonstrate some electability chops.
Sunday: Maine caucus. Clinton won neighboring NH. Mostly a chance for a winner's picture in the Monday paper.
Tuesday: DC, Maryland, Virginia. DC will go huge Obama, not necessarily a great PR thing as it brings up the race issue. Maryland is reliable Democrat. Virginia is a potential swing state. A big win by Clinton or Obama here gets electability points.
Week Tuesday (Feb 19). Wisconsin. Obama should romp here as a setup to Ohio below. If so, great mo. If not, will send wave of second thoughts.
March 4. Texas and Ohio. Beginning of the end. If Obama can win Ohio (a critical swing state with a modified-open primary), while holding his own in Texas (unwinnable for Dems but demonstrating reasonable competitiveness for Latino voters), he will make a strong case for the electability crown and try to get the establishment (especially superdelegates) behind him. Clinton will spin Ohio as home-field advantage for Obama and hold out for April 22 in Pennsylvania. But that is 6 weeks later, and McCain will be running ads for the general election. Dems will want to shut this game down. Besides, Ohio/Texas is a lot of delegates. If either candidate is within shouting distance of the nomination, there will be tremendous pressure for superdelegates to line up and end it. Obama's trump card is hope that the electability scenario peels off Clinton's superdelegates. Clinton's trump is trying to reinstate the Florida and Michigan delegates she won uncontested.
Stay tuned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
