I have been gone awhile with the hectic schedule of the Holidays. I hope to get things back up to speed over the next week. Here is a great place to start. Not only looking back over the past year, but looking back over the past two years of the campaign. Whether it is a sad statement or a great statement I am not sure. I lived and breath everyone one of these moments.
Watch CBS Videos Online
Monday, December 29, 2008
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Monday, December 22, 2008
Next Up....
As we wrap 2008's high and low lights. It is time to start looking toward the year to come. The first big event on the calender after the hangover's clear is the Inauguration. Original size estimates were reaching fro 4 -5 mill. Now it appears to be scaling back to 1 - 3 mill. This info. is courtesy of the the following. I found this quote to be interesting considering our buses are definitely being chartered here in MO. West of the Mississippi.
Washington Post
"The D.C. government recently conducted a telephone and Internet survey of charter bus companies east of the Mississippi River, which concluded that about half of their 23,000 vehicles are booked for the inauguration, Tangherlini said. Estimated number of passengers: 500,000."
Friday, December 19, 2008
Monday, December 15, 2008
Sunday, December 14, 2008
What does CHANGE look like
The Columbia Daily Tribune covered the "Change Today" meeting last week. All in all it was an accurate piece. The reality was there was some of the tension present that was reported.
http://www.columbiatribune.com/2008/Dec/20081214News006.asp
What was missing from the piece and I do not fault the reporter was the positive energy that developed in the break out groups outside of the Policy group. The major instance is the work being done by the Charity / Community Service Group.
In the six weeks since the election this band of people who have worked so hard to change the politics in Washington have also turned their attention to changing the local community for the better. There has been a call to volunteers to assist in the annual "Everybody Eats" thanksgiving day meal hosted by Almeta Crayton of Columbia, a gift drive was organized, coordinated and executed for the Voluntary Action Center vacmo.org. This drive included the work of over a dozen volunteers and collected over a $1,000.00 in gift cards for the areas underprivileged for Holiday gifts. Now the Charity / Community Service group is turning their attention to assisting in the area of home heating cost and weatherproofing.
As a person who has been involved in this process from early on I can state that there may have been some missteps in communication along the way. That being said, we are volunteers with true intentions of making something positive of this moment in time. We may not be the best at setting a meeting agenda, but just look at what we accomplished when we put our energy toward a shared goal. Regarding the tension in the meeting, to be blunt the vast majority of tension originated from people who were not necessarily active in the Obama Campaign for Change. These were people more likely part of the established Democratic county organization. There has been tension with this group ever since the Obama campaign came to town and established itself independently of the county party. From my understanding this is an issue every four years and was probably even worse this time around because the Obama camp was so successful in fundraising and gathering volunteers that it was able to establish, hold onto and far exceed the efforts of the County party.
I can also tell you that out of the many many volunteers that I have worked with and talked to that they were not interesting in working within the county Democratic Party structure. Many of them were first time voters whether young or old who were motivated by the promise of Obama solely. A number of these volunteers where disillusioned with the Democratic party for years having voted for Nader previously and were drawn back in by the promise of Obama. A number of independents felt the same. Not to mention the traditional Dems who while having been a lifelong Dem was pulled that extra step to get active because of President elect Obama.
My sense was that some of the tension was based on the fact that the local party was fighting for its control. I sense and this is nothing more than speculation that some were more motivated by securing the base of power in the local political scene than affecting change in the community.
http://www.columbiatribune.com/2008/Dec/20081214News006.asp
What was missing from the piece and I do not fault the reporter was the positive energy that developed in the break out groups outside of the Policy group. The major instance is the work being done by the Charity / Community Service Group.
In the six weeks since the election this band of people who have worked so hard to change the politics in Washington have also turned their attention to changing the local community for the better. There has been a call to volunteers to assist in the annual "Everybody Eats" thanksgiving day meal hosted by Almeta Crayton of Columbia, a gift drive was organized, coordinated and executed for the Voluntary Action Center vacmo.org. This drive included the work of over a dozen volunteers and collected over a $1,000.00 in gift cards for the areas underprivileged for Holiday gifts. Now the Charity / Community Service group is turning their attention to assisting in the area of home heating cost and weatherproofing.
As a person who has been involved in this process from early on I can state that there may have been some missteps in communication along the way. That being said, we are volunteers with true intentions of making something positive of this moment in time. We may not be the best at setting a meeting agenda, but just look at what we accomplished when we put our energy toward a shared goal. Regarding the tension in the meeting, to be blunt the vast majority of tension originated from people who were not necessarily active in the Obama Campaign for Change. These were people more likely part of the established Democratic county organization. There has been tension with this group ever since the Obama campaign came to town and established itself independently of the county party. From my understanding this is an issue every four years and was probably even worse this time around because the Obama camp was so successful in fundraising and gathering volunteers that it was able to establish, hold onto and far exceed the efforts of the County party.
I can also tell you that out of the many many volunteers that I have worked with and talked to that they were not interesting in working within the county Democratic Party structure. Many of them were first time voters whether young or old who were motivated by the promise of Obama solely. A number of these volunteers where disillusioned with the Democratic party for years having voted for Nader previously and were drawn back in by the promise of Obama. A number of independents felt the same. Not to mention the traditional Dems who while having been a lifelong Dem was pulled that extra step to get active because of President elect Obama.
My sense was that some of the tension was based on the fact that the local party was fighting for its control. I sense and this is nothing more than speculation that some were more motivated by securing the base of power in the local political scene than affecting change in the community.
Friday, December 12, 2008
The hits just just keep on coming
Click on the "Start Reading" button to access. The New York Times "Top Ideas" of 2008.
Start Reading.
Start Reading.
Continuing with the Top 10
Continuing the theme of "year in review" I present to you the Top 10 Worst Predictions of 2008.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4569&print=1
I would have to say that I am most excited about No. 7 being wrong.
Seeing William Kristol wrong on No. 1 and Charles Krauthammer wrong on No. 9 is reassuring as well.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=4569&print=1
I would have to say that I am most excited about No. 7 being wrong.
"These events have the potential to fundamentally alter matter and destroy our planet.”
Seeing William Kristol wrong on No. 1 and Charles Krauthammer wrong on No. 9 is reassuring as well.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Top 10 of Everything
As corny as this may sound I have always and still look forward to the variuos year end reviews. Time mag. is out with their Top 10 of Everything. With this having been a Presidential election year fortunately it is heavy with politics. Even more fortunately it is heavy with alot of other stuff as well.
http://www.time.com/time/specials/2008/top10
While we are at it this is a site displaying daily offering of the best of LIFE mag. pictures.
http://bestoflife.tumblr.com/
http://www.time.com/time/specials/2008/top10
While we are at it this is a site displaying daily offering of the best of LIFE mag. pictures.
http://bestoflife.tumblr.com/
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Who Knew?
A couple of thoughts. I know very little about Peter Schiff and this video was edited to show the highlights of his commentary. That being said, one has to appreciate the prescience of his forecasting. Secondly the arrogance of the other commentators is horrific. Admittedly this is television and such brashness makes for good tv. As a result in the end it works to make Schiff come off all that much more of a level headed adult vs. an optimistic cheerleader.
Also thinking in retrospect how many people intuitively knew he was right but chose to accept the more optimistic path. I take no glee in the fact that the economy is in the toilet, as matter of fact it is hitting too close to home for comfort. That being said it is interesting watching so many Fox News personnel be so arrogant and so wrong. Especially Arthur Laffer. He is the gentleman who established the Laffer Curve http://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/laffercurve.asp?viewed=1. The Laffer Curve is the basis for the "trickle down" economics philosophy of Reagen and Bush. It would be more gratifying watching these lowlights of his ,if it weren't for so many people suffering.
Also thinking in retrospect how many people intuitively knew he was right but chose to accept the more optimistic path. I take no glee in the fact that the economy is in the toilet, as matter of fact it is hitting too close to home for comfort. That being said it is interesting watching so many Fox News personnel be so arrogant and so wrong. Especially Arthur Laffer. He is the gentleman who established the Laffer Curve http://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/laffercurve.asp?viewed=1. The Laffer Curve is the basis for the "trickle down" economics philosophy of Reagen and Bush. It would be more gratifying watching these lowlights of his ,if it weren't for so many people suffering.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Won't get fooled again, Part Deux
I have addressed the attempt to deligitimize the Obama election by John Ziegler through his project Howobamagotelected.com. Nate Silver has called him out and made him answer a number of questions. A couple of notes, first Ziegler is a talk radio personality and has a number of traits that work well in that medium, such as publicity through confrontation. While Silver is doing a good job of coronering Ziegler from an Objective position, Zieglers audience isn't necessarily moved by the objective. Secondly, Silver made an initial mistake in his haste to call out the Ziegler survey. He used the term as a push poll. That may not have been the most appropriate term. Ziegler is trying to use that faux pas as a way to undermine the other very objective criticisms Silver is making.
Ziegler is out with a second poll to "answer the left" although this may be a marketing way to keep the story fresh. The crosstabs of the new poll by Wilson Research is here http://www.w-r-s.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/ziegler_news-coverage-survey_xtabs2_081125.pdf
from perusing their blog they appear to be a rightish anti media organization.
You can also see Silver and Ziegler debate on Breitbart.tv here
I have taken a few minutes to go over the crosstabs and a number of my previous suspicsions seem to hold up. http://mysteryj.blogspot.com/2008/11/wont-be-fooled-again.html
The biggest point is that the more recent a story is the greater the chance the voter got it correct. The best example of this were the questions pertaining to Sarah Palin all three questions were stories that broke within the last 6 - 7 weeks of the campaign. More interesting, and one won't see this promoted by Ziegler, There was great similarity between Obama voters and McCain voters.
Pregnant daughter Obama voters 94% McCain voters 94%
150K Clothes Obama voters 82% McCain voters 82%
Russia from House Obama voters 83% McCain voters 75%
All events became news relatively late in the cycle. Doesn't appear to matter who the voter voted for. Now note the 8 % difference between McCain and Obama voters. This appears to be abou the midrange level of difference when the question in unflattering to one side or the other.
McCain Houses Obama voters 77% McCAin voters 70%
McCain / Keating Obama voters 49% McCAin voters 42%
Two notes 1) see the 7% difference between Obama voters and McCain voters on these questions that are negative toward McCain. Similiar to the 8% the Palin question above.
More striking notice there is a 27% difference regardless of the voters on the two questions. The first question was an event that occurred nearly 20 years ago the other in mid August this year. The 70 - 77% correct rates are comparable to the response rates of the Palin questions all of which occurred in the same time frame.
Questions on Biden
Obama tested Obama voters 50% McCain 60%
Plaigerism Obama voters 27% McCain 33%
Again two notes questions negative toward Biden. McCain voters get it correct by 7 - 10 % more than Obama voters. Very consistent with questions regarding Palin and McCain in reverse. Also note the 23% and 27% difference in correct responses on the current question versus the older question.
The questions on Obama are a little bit more hazy. However there is one clear distinction. Regarding the question of "spreading the wealth"
Obama voters 81% McCain voters 87%
Again we are looking at a 6 point spread with the candidates supporters slightly underperforming. This statement came out in the last few weeks of the campaing. Questions re: Obama dating from earlier in the year and a decade past had correct responses much lower. With the exception the Bill Ayers question which has its own issues that can be addressed seperately.
The results of these two surveys may infact be interesting, but probably not what the author intended or will promote. First voters on these particular questions tend to do about 8% better on questions that frame the opposing candidate in a negative light. One can speculate that negative information is more readily remembered when it reinforces an image or narrative that is already accepted. I am not sure one can speculate much. The secondly clearly indicates that these voters both Obama and McCain had much better recall regarding incidents that are more current.
I am not certain either of these conclusions can be considered to earth shattering, interesting yes.
Ziegler is out with a second poll to "answer the left" although this may be a marketing way to keep the story fresh. The crosstabs of the new poll by Wilson Research is here http://www.w-r-s.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/ziegler_news-coverage-survey_xtabs2_081125.pdf
from perusing their blog they appear to be a rightish anti media organization.
You can also see Silver and Ziegler debate on Breitbart.tv here
I have taken a few minutes to go over the crosstabs and a number of my previous suspicsions seem to hold up. http://mysteryj.blogspot.com/2008/11/wont-be-fooled-again.html
The biggest point is that the more recent a story is the greater the chance the voter got it correct. The best example of this were the questions pertaining to Sarah Palin all three questions were stories that broke within the last 6 - 7 weeks of the campaign. More interesting, and one won't see this promoted by Ziegler, There was great similarity between Obama voters and McCain voters.
Pregnant daughter Obama voters 94% McCain voters 94%
150K Clothes Obama voters 82% McCain voters 82%
Russia from House Obama voters 83% McCain voters 75%
All events became news relatively late in the cycle. Doesn't appear to matter who the voter voted for. Now note the 8 % difference between McCain and Obama voters. This appears to be abou the midrange level of difference when the question in unflattering to one side or the other.
McCain Houses Obama voters 77% McCAin voters 70%
McCain / Keating Obama voters 49% McCAin voters 42%
Two notes 1) see the 7% difference between Obama voters and McCain voters on these questions that are negative toward McCain. Similiar to the 8% the Palin question above.
More striking notice there is a 27% difference regardless of the voters on the two questions. The first question was an event that occurred nearly 20 years ago the other in mid August this year. The 70 - 77% correct rates are comparable to the response rates of the Palin questions all of which occurred in the same time frame.
Questions on Biden
Obama tested Obama voters 50% McCain 60%
Plaigerism Obama voters 27% McCain 33%
Again two notes questions negative toward Biden. McCain voters get it correct by 7 - 10 % more than Obama voters. Very consistent with questions regarding Palin and McCain in reverse. Also note the 23% and 27% difference in correct responses on the current question versus the older question.
The questions on Obama are a little bit more hazy. However there is one clear distinction. Regarding the question of "spreading the wealth"
Obama voters 81% McCain voters 87%
Again we are looking at a 6 point spread with the candidates supporters slightly underperforming. This statement came out in the last few weeks of the campaing. Questions re: Obama dating from earlier in the year and a decade past had correct responses much lower. With the exception the Bill Ayers question which has its own issues that can be addressed seperately.
The results of these two surveys may infact be interesting, but probably not what the author intended or will promote. First voters on these particular questions tend to do about 8% better on questions that frame the opposing candidate in a negative light. One can speculate that negative information is more readily remembered when it reinforces an image or narrative that is already accepted. I am not sure one can speculate much. The secondly clearly indicates that these voters both Obama and McCain had much better recall regarding incidents that are more current.
I am not certain either of these conclusions can be considered to earth shattering, interesting yes.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
60, not so important
I have spent a fair amount of time discussing the Obama Administration planning on governing with more than just a Democratic caucus. I have mentioned it here http://mysteryj.blogspot.com/2008/12/ga-runoff.html and here http://mysteryj.blogspot.com/2008/11/liebermans-demo-what.html and elsewhere. I have even been called out by others over at Dailykos as to who are the moderates than I have been speaking of.
Well our good buddy Nate (ok, I don't really know him) breaks down who lies in this broad middle ground that will be necessary for passing the agenda that the Obama Administration will be laying out.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/12/who-are-swing-senators.html
He does a great job of itemizing the various Senators and their relative standings. These are probably going to be the names we hear about a lot for the next two years, at least from the Senate.
Well our good buddy Nate (ok, I don't really know him) breaks down who lies in this broad middle ground that will be necessary for passing the agenda that the Obama Administration will be laying out.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/12/who-are-swing-senators.html
He does a great job of itemizing the various Senators and their relative standings. These are probably going to be the names we hear about a lot for the next two years, at least from the Senate.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
GA runoff
Saxby Chambliss wins the GA senate runoff. Hopes for 60 senate seats are gone. As far as Obama is concerned this is probably an ok thing. One will notice that President Elect Obama did not put too much of his political capital into this contest. The calculation is that it would have lowered his status to a campaigning politician as opposed to a coalition building President. Also there is probably a good chance that Martin would have lost even with Obama's presence. There was no reason to tarnish or diminish Obama's accomplishment for one Senate seat. I have stated before in reacting to the Lieberman situation that Obama is not simply attempting to govern by keeping the Democratic Congress in lock step. There are a few good reasons why.
You are going to see that on certain areas it is going to be ok for Democratic congress persons to break away from the caucus and represent their constituents which might not always directly align with the Democratic caucus as a whole. This is probably true for a number of southern and rural members of Congress. He will, however, expect very strong support on the majority of the areas that they are in agreement.
Secondly President elect Obama is going to play for the center of the Congress. He is expecting to do big things and he will need support from the moderates on both side of the aisle.
Lastly, if this administration gets no buy in from any of the Republican caucus then there is no shared sense of responsibility. With buy in from certain portions of the Republican Party they will take on ownership to a certain extent. With ownership comes a responsibility to see that the governing is successful.
You are going to see that on certain areas it is going to be ok for Democratic congress persons to break away from the caucus and represent their constituents which might not always directly align with the Democratic caucus as a whole. This is probably true for a number of southern and rural members of Congress. He will, however, expect very strong support on the majority of the areas that they are in agreement.
Secondly President elect Obama is going to play for the center of the Congress. He is expecting to do big things and he will need support from the moderates on both side of the aisle.
Lastly, if this administration gets no buy in from any of the Republican caucus then there is no shared sense of responsibility. With buy in from certain portions of the Republican Party they will take on ownership to a certain extent. With ownership comes a responsibility to see that the governing is successful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
