The Ref's Daily Political Brief
Hillary makes Spanish language flub as she focusses on Super Tuesday states and gets hit hard on African American blogs
- Daschle says President Clinton acting ‘unpresidential’ - The Hill | 1/22/08
- No Habla Español - NYT | 1/22/08
- Dance Off! - NYT | 1/22/08
- Clinton Now Looking Beyond S.C.- W. Post | 1/23/08
- On African American Blogs, Sharp Words for Candidates - W. Post | 1/22/08
- Fred Thompson Quits Presidential Race- AP | 1/22/08
- Thompson Drops Out of Presidential Race - Fox News | 1/22/08
McCain scores in New York both in money and polls - Also, Rush Limbaugh would sooner vote for non-Republican than McCain
- McCain Raises Money in Giuliani's Turf - AP | 1/23/08
- Rush Limbaugh: May Not Support GOP Nominee - Newsmax | 1/22/08
- New York Is All McCain’s, for a Night - NYT | 1/23/08
- McCain Leads in New York - Political Ref | 1/23/08
Critical for their extensive in-state organizations, see who governors are endorsing - Also, candidates focus on the economy
- 23 Governors Endorse Candidates - AP | 1/23/08
- Candidates Rush to Tackle Recession Fears After Fed Takes Drastic Action - Fox News | 1/22/08
- Bush promises quick economic salve - W. Times | 1/23/08
- Candidates Turn Attention to Gyrating Markets and Weakened Economy - NYT | 1/23/08
- Fed Cuts Interest Rate to Stem Panic - W. Post | 1/23/08
- Bush, Lawmakers Are Close to Deal on Stimulus Package - W. Post | 1/23/08
Giuliani cultivates the early vote in Florida and the New York Times delivers left cross to Rudy
- Early Voting Important Factor in 2008 - AP | 1/22/08
- In Matters Big and Small, Crossing Giuliani Had Price - NYT | 1/22/08
Clinton-Obama rumble was huge politically and will probably live on
- Clinton, Obama Crossfire Continues - AP | 1/22/08
- Debate Is a Ratings Hit for CNN - NYT | 1/22/08
- Clinton, Obama Continue Bickering After Rancorous Debate - Fox News | 1/22/08
- Barack vs. Hill: It's War - NY Post | 1/22/08
- Hillary-Obama feud alarms party officials - W. Times | 1/23/08
- Foreign Aid and Chicago Past Disputed in Latest Debate Back-and-Forth - NYT | 1/23/08
Huckabee concedes Florida as his campaign tightens its belt
- Huckabee, Short on Cash, Curtails Effort in Florida - NYT | 1/23/08
- Some Huckabee Aides Forgoing Paychecks - My Way, AP | 1/22/08
- Huckabee Adopts New Southern State Strategy as Funds Get Tight - Fox News | 1/22/08
- Huckabee Gains Black Support - Newsmax | 1/22/08
The Ref's Calls
____________________________________
WATCH FOR ROMNEY BUMP IN FLORIDA
Two groundbreaking developments Tuesday made Mitt Romney the favorite in the Florida primary. First, Mike Huckabee acknowledged that a money shortage has substantially curtailed his effort in Florida. Huckabee has essentially conceded Florida by not advertising in the state and making only "token" stops at airports for campaign events. Huckabee, Short on Cash, Curtails Effort in Florida - NYT. Second, Fred Thompson withdrew from the race.
Romney stands to benefit from Huckabee's acknowledgment that his efforts are nominal in Florida. Huckabee's Florida supporters now know that he will not win the race. Many of his supporters will look for someone else to support because many voters want to vote for a winner. Huckabee's supporters are largely conservative Evangelicals so it makes sense that they will choose among candidates taking the most conservative policy stands, either Thompson or Romney.
Thompson, however, has dropped out of the race. The majority of Huckabee's Florida supporters will, therefore, vote for Romney. Thompson supporters, furthermore, might have voted for Huckabee. Now that Huckabee has acknowledged his efforts are minimal and that he cannot win there, Thompson supporters will not head for Huckabee's camp, but Romney's.
Watch the Florida polls in the coming days with date ranges beginning on January 23rd. One can expect that Romney will pull ahead in these polls as Thompson is dropped from the list and the Huckabee concession settles in the state's political consciousness. The Ref - Jan. 23, 2008
____________________________________
The Republicans can count on a large number of close elections in the coming days. Whenever a close election occurs, a spoiler usually exists. Ron Paul, although in the single digits in most states, will pull voters away from someone.
So exactly who does Ron Paul hurt? First one must determine the type of voter that gravitates toward Ron Paul. One could fairly argue that most Ron Paul supporters are Republicans who hold ultra-conservative foreign policy views typical of pre-World War II Republicans. In other words, they oppose military intervention absent attack. They combine this older conservative foreign policy view with libertarian social and economic views.
No Republican candidate closely resembles Paul in terms of his positions. McCain, Giuliani and Romney have all taken strong stances in favor of the Iraq war. Huckabee is perceived as a person willing to spend money. Numerous other major differences exist. The political positions taken by the major Republican candidates simply would not compel Paul voters to vote for them.
Not all Ron Paul voters, however, are motivated purely by the issues. Some voters gravitate toward renegade type candidates and Ron Paul is their patron saint. These people like to prod the establishment simply for the joy of doing it. If Ron Paul were not running would any of the remaining candidates stand to inherit these renegade voters? Yes, John McCain.
While the percentage of voters motivated to come out for a renegade for the sake of it may be small, perhaps one to two percent of the overall vote in a primary, that may be enough to swing a close election. John McCain very well might owe any close losses to Ron Paul. The Ref - Jan. 22, 2008
____________________________________
Barack Obama shocked many when he said the following of Ronald Reagan: "He tapped into what people were already feeling, which was, ‘We want clarity, we want optimism, we want, you know, a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing.’”
John Edwards apparently filled with shock upon hearing these words as evidenced by his own words. According to the New York Times Edwards said, "“When you think about what Ronald Reagan did to the American people, to the middle class, to the working people . . . (he) created a tax structure that favored the very wealthiest Americans and caused the middle class and working people to struggle every single day.” Edwards Attacks Obama for View of Reagan, NYT, 1/18/08.
Why did Obama shock people when spoke positively of Reagan? Shock resulted because the far left has linked Reagan to all of the perceived evils of corporate America such as greed, racism, sexism and blind American superiority. The words of Edwards demonstrate this link clearly.
Ostensibly Obama aims to truly change the course of this nation. Edwards responded in reactionary fashion. Obama's words manifest a vision that relies less on class and racial antagonism and more on cultivating a shared American identity. Whether that vision survives the campaign and can win in such a hostile Democratic environment, however, remain major questions.
But if Obama genuinely attempts to bridge the divide in action as well as in rhetoric, he represents a potential force that can genuinely shape America's future. Obama must do more than speak the language of optimism to enact this change, but must face down the race and class demagogues that attempt to dominate the Democratic Party. The Ref - Jan. 18, 2008
____________________________________
HARDBALL ATTEMPTS TO CREATE ITS OWN REALITY
Hardball consistently stretches the truth or deliberately states untruths to push its agenda. Chris Matthews has made no secret of his support for Barack Obama or his disgust with Mitt Romney and the entire Republican field with the exception of McCain.
Tonight Hardball's chief correspondent David Schuster, presumably a reporter, described Romney’s reaction to a question from a reporter as an eruption. Romney's reaction resembled nothing like an eruption, but merely a slightly annoyed but calm response. See the video here.
This instance of media bias represents a perfect example of the kind of distortion that makes many of us skeptical of the media. Chris Matthews is a commentator but David Schuster is not. Hardball regularly masks commentary as reporting. It is this practice to which we object. The Ref - Jan. 17, 2008
Also, Chris Matthews Admits He Went Too Far in Criticizing Hillary: Matthews: I Wronged Clinton With Remark - Newsmax, AP | 1/17/08
The Ref Does Not Choose the Following Video Content. To see the Ref's videos, CLICK HERE..