Election Night HQ

Ana Marie Cox, the alter ego of the Wonkette, blogs for Swampland on Time.com, where she provides a unique, irreverent perspective on the campaign trail.

AMC’s SwampCast on Wednesday, February 13, was titled: “McCain: By the Numbers”, as her analysis zeroed in on the exit poll numbers from Senator McCain’s trio of victories on Tuesday…

A very good, thoughtful SwampCast on these primaries…

1) Three.

McCain’s trio of victories in the Chesapeake/Potomac primaries.

2) 2%.

The number of points ahead by which the exit polls showed Huck.

3) 11%.

The number of points by which McCain ultimately beat Huck.

The race wasn’t called till relatively late in the evening, despite the fact that McCain won relatively easily. At the time, I attributed it to the fact that the McCain-friendly DC suburbs turned in their returns late, but it seems that a major factor in the delayed call was that Huck appeared to do better in the exit polls, which are incorporated in the decision to call a state…

A good question, per exit polls, although, on the whole, I think they’re reliable…

4) 32%.

Percentage of conservatives that McCain won in VA

5) 43%

Likewise, the numbers of conservatives McCain won in MD.

I disagree w/ AMC to some extent when she says that “the states aren’t that different”. Virginia, although trending Democratic, is considerably more conservative than Maryland (if for no other reason that no Democrat has carried Virginia in a presidential campaign since 1956, and Maryland has not voted for a Republican presidential candidate, conversely, since 1984.)

I agree that there are some similarities, but on the whole, I don’t think it’s surprising that McCain won more self-ID’d conservatives in MD than he did in VA - Huck has more of a natural constituency in VA.

6) 3 out of 4 church attendance categories in which McCain either won or tied Huck.

You can contact Election Night HQ at publisher@electionnighthq.com.  Please sign the Guestbook on the right-side column.  In addition, if you are from overseas, we particularly welcome your interest in the U.S. election process.   Please send us an e-mail, if you have any questions about Senator McCain in particular and the U.S. election process in general, and about how you found the site.

Ana Marie Cox, the alter ego of the Wonkette, blogs for Swampland on Time.com, where she provides a unique, irreverent perspective on the campaign trail.

AMC has offered us today, an alternative to the prevailing conventional wisdom - i.e., that Senator McCain’s only hope of victory in November is the possibility of running against Hillary Clinton.    But perhaps the greatest insight comes with regard to the hard numbers.  During this cycle, Democrats have cast vastly more votes in primaries and caucuses than Republicans - but does that fact necessarily mean a victory in November?

Here are some highlights from AMC’s post:

Conventional wisdom has it that McCain’s only hope to win in the general election is for Hillary to undemocratically wrest the nomination from Obama, which would depress Democratic turnout in the general and provide McCain with an unpopular opponent. A Obama nomination would have too much emotional momentum, too much excitement, and contrast all-too-favorably against McCain’s angry-old-man candidacy. Just look at the turnout! Democrats are heading to the polls in twice the numbers of Republicans in many states, and that’s due to the historic nature of the contest — an enthusiasm inextricably attached to Obama, and that will undoubtedly carry over into the fall. What’s more, the conservative base hates McCain and would just as soon stay home than vote for “Amnesty John.”

I am familiar with this argument because I have espoused it.

But conventional wisdom has turned out to look pretty stupid this entire cycle, so I paid attention when a Republican adviser called to make a counter argument. Allow me to paraphrase. First of all, he argued, Republicans are not going to stay home. A core group may not like McCain, but the guy has favorability ratings within the GOP in the high 80s; the people that don’t like him, well, they REALLY don’t like Democrats. And they HATE the press; the more the media tells them how divided they are, the more likely they’ll show up just to stick it to the MSM. But that’s not how McCain will win a general anyway. He’ll win a general against Obama because independents will wind up coming back to him. They’ll come back to him because Obama is an orthodox liberal Democrat who has been able to run as someone who is “above politics” because, compared to Clinton’s partisan-vote-grubbing, he looks noble and pure…

David Freddoso has pulled together turnout data going back over 20 years and it turns out that Democrats are, in general, more enthusiastic than Republicans about their primaries — and it hasn’t helped them in general elections…

My adviser pal’s theory has almost nothing to do with policy or debating actual issues — it’s almost entirely a function of narrative and character. One could argue that’s how Obama has gotten this far himself.

In any case, presented for the sake of an alternate take.

I found Ana’s conversation w/ her friend the Republican advisor to be particularly interesting, as a way to push back against that very CW - since I have a McCain-focused site.

However, I’ll be the contrarian and push back against the argument on the turnout issue:

My view would be that primary/caucus participation depends most heavily on whether the campaigns are *competitive* - not which side has more enthusiasm or more attractive candidates. In 1988, to use the example Freddoso uses - I speculate that the reason more Democrats voted than Republicans, was that the first President Bush took the nomination over Bob Dole relatively quickly (he had it effectively won by Super Tuesday). In contrast, it took longer for Dukakis to drive out all of his opponents - and thus more Democrats voted…

You can contact Election Night HQ at publisher@electionnighthq.com.  Please sign the Guestbook on the right-side column.  In addition, if you are from overseas, we particularly welcome your interest in the U.S. election process.   Please send us an e-mail, if you have any questions about Senator McCain in particular and the U.S. election process in general, and about how you found the site.

Clarence Claus, one of our friends at Race42008.com, was an avid supporter of Mitt Romney.  Clarence has now made an exceptionally eloquent case for Senator McCain in the general election.  You can read the full text of John McCain for President at Race42008.com…. here are some highlights:

… Some people are supporting John McCain because he is a Republican. Others are supporting him out of dislike for the Clintons and disagreement with Obama’s ultra-liberal philosophy. I am supporting him for neither of those reasons. On the birthday of America’s greatest President, Abraham Lincoln, I am announcing my support of John McCain, not in spite of, but because of the fact I am a conservative ideologue.

Prior to John McCain’s support for campaign finance reform and his run for President in 2000, nobody questioned his conservative credentials. During the 80s he was actually considered one of the more conservative members of the Republican caucus. He was a strong advocate for a defense build-up which was helpful to winning the Cold War. He voted for Ronald Reagan twice which was two more times than his harshest critic, Rush Limbaugh, did…

In the late 90s and for most of this decade, John McCain has sometimes had a different opinion on certain issues than that of most conservatives. Sometimes I have agreed with him. Other times I have not. However, a tried and true cliche is that if two people agree on every single issue, one of them is not thinking.

John McCain cares about many of the same issues I care about. He thinks it is immoral to pass on an enormous debt to future generations. If Hillary Clinton is the nominee, she will say that we had a surplus when her husband was President, and we do not have one now. John McCain will come right back and say he agrees with her. He will say that that is why he has led the fight against pork barrel spending and has angered many of his colleagues. He believes many of his colleagues in Congress have tarnished the Republican party’s reputation by putting their own interests to secure money for their states and Congressional districts over the interests of future generations to not be saddled with debt. While the deficit will undoubtedly go down under either Hillary Clinton or John McCain, the key difference is Clinton will do it just as her husband did, by simply raising taxes on wealthy Americans, while McCain will reduce the deficit by reducing wasteful spending.

Senator McCain has also made it a priority to track down Osama Bin Laden and bring him to justice. If he is successful, that will be pleasing news to all Americans, especially those who lost friends or family on 9/11.

This election will be the first since 1972 where both party’s nominees have served in Congress either currently or previously. This means both nominees will have voting records. In a way, this makes it easier for the public to decide. People will have close to nine months to compare the voting record of John McCain to that of Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. If everyone in the country who plans to vote spends some time looking up how these people have voted in the Senate over the years, John McCain will win in a landslide. Unfortunately, many people do not look at candidates’ records and simply rely on what the traditional media or talk radio tells them about these people. My advice to everyone who cares about the future of this country is to not go by conventional wisdom, perception, or the way in which the media portrays these candidates but to look more at voting records, biographical sketches, and stated issue positions of both party’s nominees…

Barring extreme circumstances such as the selection of a running mate I find abhorrent or a catastrophic revelation, on Tuesday November 4, I will proudly cast my vote for the Republican nominee and the next President of the United States, American hero and conservative Republican John McCain, and all voters who genuinely care about the future of conservatism in America will do the same.

You can contact Election Night HQ at publisher@electionnighthq.com.  Please sign the Guestbook on the right-side column.  In addition, if you are from overseas, we particularly welcome your interest in the U.S. election process.   Please send us an e-mail, if you have any questions about Senator McCain in particular and the U.S. election process in general, and about how you found the site. 

The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder has posted his speculation on the “McCain Veepstakes”:

Just to be irritating, here’s a list of potential vice presidents for John McCain. Some of the names are based on informed speculation about who McCain likes and what he wants to see in a ticket-mate; others are just guesses.

Are they in any particular order? Maybe…

1. Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R-MN)
2. Gov. John Huntsman (R-UT)
3. Sen. John Thune (R-SD)
4. Ex-Sen. Fred Thompson
5. Ex-Sen. George Allen
6. Gov. Bobby Jindall (R-LA)
7. Mike Huckabee
8. Gov. Charlie Crist (R-FL)
9. Mitt Romney

Who else? 

My two cents on Marc’s list (as he lists them). I’ll note that there are standard ticket-balancing principles involved. McCain is old, from the Southwest, and has been in the Senate (and before that, the House) for a quarter of a century. Accordingly, it would be desirable to find a VP who offset some of those factors.

1. Tim Pawlenty

- endorsed McCain early.
- young, from a potential swing state (Minnesota will be in play w/ McCain as the nominee, even though no Republican has carried it since 1972).
- a governor w/ no DC experience.

2. Huntsman

- Although Huntsman is a governor, he’s not only from the West but from the most Republican state in the country. Can’t imagine why he’d be on it.

3. Thune - same as 2), but w/ the added negative of also being from the Senate.

4. Fred - has been friends w/ McCain for a long time, and was his national co-chair in 2000. As he is a favorite of the conservative establishment, is personable, and could shore up Southern support, he’d be on the short list. The real question would be whether his decision to run against McCain might have doomed him.

5. Crist

Crist is governor of the most important swing state, Florida. His support of McCain the weekend prior to the primary may have vaulted him over Mitt. However, it might look too much like a smoke-filled room deal to put him on the ticket.

6. Jindal

Would be a daring choice, and would balance the ticket well. But it’s a tough row to hoe, pitching that Jindal is sufficiently old and experienced to serve as VP.

7) Huck

The smart money says it’s Huck - I’m not sure I agree, but he would not only balance the ticket but probably bring along his base. Plus, in a race against HRC, he might hold Arkansas.

Candidates with an absolute zero chance of being on the ticket (at least to me):

Mitt, George Allen.

Update: Ambinder has released his second list - “Some Other McCain Veepstakes Names”…  my take, in turn….

My two cents on Marc’s second-wave list of McCain VP candidates, in the order he listed:

As I did with Part I of the list: I’ll reiterate that there are standard ticket-balancing principles involved. McCain is old, from the Southwest, and has been in the Senate (and before that, the House) for a quarter of a century. Accordingly, it would be desirable to find a VP who offset some of those factors.

Submitted by readers:

Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK)
Ex-Rep. Rob Portman
Ex-Rep. John Kasich
Sen. KBH (R-TX)
Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC)
Ex-Gov. John Englder (R-MI)
Fred Smith (Fedex CEO, war hero)
Rudy Giuliani
Gov. Haley Barbour (R-MS)

1) Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK)

Palin has a bright future, is young, female, a governor and from another region. It would parry HRC to some extent, if she is the Democratic nominee. However, she is young (double-edged sword) and the experience question would be immediately raised. There’s also the problem that she comes from a very red state that McCain will carry easily.

The two former Reps from Ohio:

Ex-Rep. Rob Portman

Not well known enough nationally to make a difference.

Ex-Rep. John Kasich

Likewise. Also, House members have been elected from too narrow a political base to help the ticket much.

Of course, Ohio is one of the two most critical swing states, but they just don’t bring enough to the table.

Sen. KBH (R-TX)

Female and well-respected. Downside: retiring from the Senate and has no outsider credentials, from a state McCain already will have.

Gov. Mark Sanford (R-SC)

SC is already deep red; Sanford had a chance to endorse McCain in the primary and didn’t do so.

Ex-Gov. John Engler (R-MI)

Too polarizing. He would not guarantee Michigan, either.

Fred Smith (Fedex CEO, war hero)

Too unconventional. Plus, McCain is, of course, already a war hero, so he has the veteran/military angle already covered.

Rudy Giuliani

He rarely seems to appear on the pundits’ speculation list (this one excluded, obviously.)

My own speculation as to why he’s rarely mentioned:

1) McCain has enough problems with movement conservatives to begin with. Granted, enough of them went to Rudy over the course of the last year…. but that might be a little too much.

2) I disagree with the idea that Rudy would be of decisive value in the Northeast. Would he HELP? Absolutely. But it was unlikely that Rudy would have carried Rhode Island, Connecticut, or New York even if he were on the TOP of the ticket, let alone the bottom of it.

3) Rudy would be too old to run for president after McCain, if the ticket were elected - and that might be a reason why Rudy might turn it down.

Nonetheless, it would be a ticket great on security credentials, geographical balance, legislative/executive balance, and the two are genuinely friends. But I don’t think it will happen.

Gov. Haley Barbour (R-MS)

Although currently a governor, Barbour’s status as former RNC chair make him too much of a DC insider - and his state is already safe for McCain, anyhow.

You can contact Election Night HQ at publisher@electionnighthq.com.  Please sign the Guestbook on the right-side column.  In addition, if you are from overseas, we particularly welcome your interest in the U.S. election process.   Please send us an e-mail, if you have any questions about Senator McCain in particular and the U.S. election process in general, and about how you found the site.

Ana Marie Cox, the alter ego of the Wonkette, blogs for Swampland on Time.com.  In her distinctive SwampCasts, she provides a unique, irreverent perspective on the campaign trail.

Yesterday, AMC provided us, as she put it, “new vocabulary words” in the aftermath of Super Tuesday, in SwampCast - Vocabulary Lesson…  After you watch the SwampCast, here are my two cents…

My two cents, on AMC’s five new vocabulary words… I think this sort of glossary SwampCast is very cool, and hope for subsequent vocabulary ones:

1) “establishment”

I concur that the idea that Obama has somehow become the Democratic establishment candidate. is not even remotely true.

2) “superdelegates”

It seems to me that the superdelegate provisions are an insurance policy, in case a candidate grossly unacceptable to the “establishment” were to come close to the nomination. Which raises the interesting question of why they don’t exist on the Republican side. (Unless there is an inherent belief on the Republican side that Republicans would never be interested in nominatingsomeone so repugnant to the establishment, hence no need for such a provision.)

3) “self-funding”

HRC - I would agree w/ AMC that HRC’s narrower, disproportionately maxed-out donor base leads to the need to self-fund.

Mitt - this phrase has been much more bandied about on the GOP side, because of his ability to do so. Much of the speculation on the GOP side has been on the question of how much longer he is willing to do this…

4) “suicide voter”/”suicide Republicans”

worth noting: McCain’s statement that he wants them to “calm down” reflects his recognition of the phenomenon…

5) “Potomac primary”

Jonathan Martin at The Politico has opined that the phrase “Chesapeake primary” is more geographically comprehensive.

I can’t disagree with that, but since the Potomac is an integral part of DC, whereas the Chesapeake isn’t, I think “Potomac” is better. (Plus, it’s alliterative.)

You can contact Election Night HQ at publisher@electionnighthq.com.  Please sign the Guestbook on the right-side column.  In addition, if you are from overseas, we particularly welcome your interest in the U.S. election process.   Please send us an e-mail, if you have any questions about Senator McCain in particular and the U.S. election process in general, and about how you found the site.