ThinkProgress Logo

Climate Progress

Karl Rove calls it for Obama: 338-200

Yes, you read that right.

Your first — and I’m guessing your last — vist to Rove.com takes you quickly to “Election 2008: State of the Race” and “the final Rove & Co. electoral map of the 2008 election”:

Electoral Map

If When Obama wins, he certainly will owe a double debt of gratitude to Rove for

  1. Helping to destroy the Republican brand through his myopic, megalomaniacal quest for … I have no friggin’ clue.
  2. Training a next generation of less shrewd Rovians, like Steve Schmidt, who ran McCain’s campaign into the ground while destroying the Arizonan’s soul — hey, at least W got to be President for 8 years in return for an eternity in the underworld.

Climate Progress

Pollster.com calls it for Obama: 311-227

One of the two best polling analysis websites called the election for Obama at 5:09 pm Monday:

Tomorrow, Barack Obama will become the first Democratic Presidential candidate since Jimmy Carter in 1976 to win an outright majority of the votes cast on Election Day — and with it a sizeable majority of electoral votes — making him the next President of the United States.

Actually, the other terrific polling analysis website seems to have called it for Obama at 4:47 (see here). But only Pollster.com offers a detailed rationale in their post for a 6% Obama win, one piece of which is:

Read more

Politics

Perino explains Bush’s low ratings: ‘Everybody would like to be popular in high school, some of us just weren’t.’

In today’s White House press briefing, spokesperson Dana Perino struggled to name the President’s major accomplishments in light of tomorrow’s election. “We have learned from mistakes. … So a lot of things have improved,” she said. Perino complained about Bush’s abysmal approval ratings, claiming they are like a high school popularity contest:

And this President was tested by a lot of different issues and I think he’s taken those issues head on, and we can be proud of how we’ve addressed them. Everybody would like to be popular. You can all remember that back in high school, everyone really wanted to be popular. Some of us just weren’t. But that doesn’t mean that you don’t have principles and values that you stay true to. And that’s what this President has done, and it’s what he’s taught a lot of us, including me.

Watch it:

Politics

Laura Bush: ‘It seems like George has been on the ticket this entire time.’

lauramitch.jpgStumping in Kentucky today for Republican congressional candidate Brett Guthrie today, First Lady Laura Bush joked about comparisons between her husband and Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), quipping that “it seems like George has been on the ticket this entire time”:

Bush also joked that she was looking forward to tomorrow’s election “because it seems like George has been on the ticket this entire time” – a clear reference to Democrats’ attempts to link McCain with President Bush.

Bush also praised Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), who didn’t actually attend the rally. McConnell’s camp claimed it was “not due to the low popularity of President Bush.”

Politics

Romney: McCain’s Cap And Trade Plan Would ‘Just Kill Jobs’ In The U.S.

romney-mccain.jpgToday, the right wing — enthusiastically joined by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) — attacked Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) for advocating in a January interview a cap and trade plan that would mandate new coal plants to be built with carbon capture technology. McCain said he wanted to control emissions, but insisted, “I’m not going to let our coal industry go bankrupt.” Palin said Obama has been “talking about bankrupting the coal industry,” and pledged, “John McCain and I, we will not let that happen to the coal industry.”

Now former governor Mitt Romney is using McCain’s attacks against Obama to attack McCain himself. On Glenn Beck’s radio show today, he denounced McCain’s cap and trade program, saying it would “kill jobs” in the U.S. and that he would “endeavor to convince” McCain to change his plans:

BECK: How would you address the cap and trade on the day when everyone’s paying attention to coal?

ROMNEY: Well as you know, there were a number of places in the primary campaign where I disagreed with John McCain, and his cap and trade proposal was one of them. … If you want to negotiate with someone and you feel it’s important to bring down global CO2 emissions then China has to be part of the picture. And if we go out there and put a burden on our own industry and they don’t put a burden on theirs, why you’ll just kill jobs here.

Listen here:

Both McCain and Obama support the development of carbon sequestration technologies; in fact, in the same interview conservatives are now hyperventilating over, Obama said, “This idea of no coal, I think, is an illusion.” What’s more, a green energy-based economy built through an aggressive cap-and-trade program would create millions of jobs and generate billions of dollars for investment into clean energy, as John McCain himself noted just six months ago:

As never before, the market would reward any person or company that seeks to invent, improve, or acquire alternatives to carbon-based energy. … A cap-and-trade policy will send a signal that will be heard and welcomed all across the American economy. Those who want clean coal technology, more wind and solar, nuclear power, biomass and bio-fuels will have their opportunity through a new market that rewards those and other innovations in clean energy.

It can’t be a good sign for McCain that one of his top surrogates has turned McCain’s own campaign lines back against him — on the day before the election, no less.

Politics

Marine calls Murtha ‘some fat little bastard.’

murtha.gifThe right-wing, led by Drudge, is promoting criticisms of Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) made by Iraq war vet Shawn Bryan. Calling Murtha “some fat little bastard,” Bryan — a Marine — asserted that Murtha’s efforts to reveal the cover-up of the Haditha massacres “betrayed” his service. But VetVoice’s RockRichard astutely notes that Bryan is getting worked up over comments that weren’t even directed at him. That’s because Bryan was not a member of the Marines who participated in the Haditha tragedy:

Shawn Bryan served in the 3rd Battalion, 25th Marines in Iraq. That Battalion returned from Iraq in early October of 2005, over a month before the Haditha killings.

Moreover, VetVoice notes that some of Murtha’s harshest critics fail to appreciate that Murtha worked tirelessly in Congress to get more funding for better armor to protect the troops.

Climate Progress

The historic 2008 election drinking game

driking-game.jpg

Of all the drinking games I have ever proposed [Note to self: Do I have a drinking game problem? Nah, I can quit anytime], the one for election day coverage this year is certainly the most likely to leave you unconscious on the floor for the longest period of time:

Take one shot every time you hear the word “historic.”

This can’t miss no matter who wins.

My main concern is that political junkies watching CNN or MSNBC starting in the morning may not make it out to vote at all. PJs, then, might subsitute in beer — unless you are doing GOTV or poll work, in which case start with Red Bull.

If you can really hold your liquor, add another shot every time somebody says “Bradley Effect” — unless of course they are using the term in a positive fashion, as in “McCain’s victory certainly confirms the Bradley effect.” In that case, finish off your bottle and put yourself out on the spot.

I think I will be live blogging the election from the afternoon on at HuffingtonPost.com — more on that tomorrow.

Climate Progress

Gingrich: ‘People Don’t Elect Presidents Who Tell Them To Sacrifice’

GingrichIn a November 1st interview with Newsweek, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich (R-GA) was asked, “Obama said in one of the debates that Americans need to sacrifice and cut back their energy usage. How do you think that’ll fly as part of the solution?” [Note: Obama didn't actually say that.] Gingrich responded:

Just as well as it did with Jimmy Carter. People don’t elect presidents who tell them to sacrifice. They elect presidents who solve problems so they don’t have to sacrifice.

If Gingrich is right, it looks like we won’t have a president for the next four years.

On June 21, 2005, McCain said of his global warming legislation:

Does it involve some sacrifice on the part of the American people? Yes. I have to tell you, every time I talk to young Americans and say, Are you willing to make some sacrifice to prevent the occurrences that we see are happening now, these young Americans are more than willing to do so.

On August 8, 2005, McCain said of the American troops serving in the Iraq war:

We must win. We must prevail. And it may require additional service and sacrifice, tragically.

On April 11, 2007, McCain said of the American troops serving in the Iraq war:

In Iraq, hope is a fragile thing, but all the more admirable for the courage and sacrifice necessary to nurture it.

On July 27, 2008, McCain again said of the American troops involved in the Iraq “surge”:

When the crucial time came as to whether we were going to leave Iraq and lose, or stay and do the very unpopular thing of 30,000 additional troops — asking young Americans to make the sacrifice — he was wrong, I was right.

Gingrich is speaking flat nonsense. The American public are not children who require false coddling and empty promises, but are proud adults who elect people who lead by example. As John F. Kennedy concluded his inaugural address:

Finally, whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the world, ask of us the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God’s work must truly be our own.

Politics

Former IRI President: McCain personally supported grants for mainstream Khalidi group.

Harper’s Ken Silverstein reports today that former International Republican Institute (IRI) President Bruce McColm revealed to him that Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), as chairman of the IRI board, directly supported funding for Professor Rashid Khalidi’s Center for Palestine Research and Studies in the early 1990s. McColm explained to Silverstein:

All our [grant] proposals had to be approved at board meetings with John McCain in attendance and in agreement. John did think highly of these grants. … Ironically, it was Khalidi’s academic background and his known coolness to the PLO that attracted our interest. How strange to see the McCain campaign use Khalidi as a “type of terrorist” with whom Obama hangs around.

Over the last week, the McCain campaign has attempted to smear Khalidi as a radical and link him to Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL).

Yglesias

If Only There Were Options….

In comments, Mixner offered this:

Oh please. What “unambiguous public desire to put the fate of the nation in the hands of progressives?” The mood of the electorate is anti-Republican, not pro-progressive. Most of the new congresscritters the Dems are likely to pick up will be centrist or conservative, not progressive.

Obviously, the two are linked sentiments. But there is a difference. This is why I bring up Bill Clinton’s 43 percent of the vote. The serious analysis I’ve seen almost always indicates that Clinton was the second-choice of most of Ross Perot’s voters, but the fact remains that Ross Perot was their first choice. That was anti-Republican sentiment in action. If Americans are really committed to right-wing principles, but poisoned by Bush against the Republican Party, then we should expect to see an Obama plurality tomorrow night and a strong showing for Bob Barr as center-right voters in a center-right country register their center-right displeasure with the GOP by voting for a non-GOP, non-liberal candidate.

But my guess is that we’ll see Obama get a majority.

And, yes, we’ll also see a lot of instances of conservative Republicans being beaten by relatively moderate Democrats. But we’ll also see some instances of Republicans being beaten by strong progressives. And we’re going to see few-to-no instances of progressive Democrats losing. Compared to 1992 where Democrats actually lost ground in the House and treaded water in the Senate, it’ll be a clear indication on all three levels of government for a shift in a more progressive direction.

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up