ThinkProgress Logo

Politics

Citing ‘High Percentage Of Minority Vote’ In GA, Chambliss Laments Not Getting ‘Our Folks’ Out To Vote

In last week’s election, Georgia Senator Saxby Chambliss (R) received more votes than his Democratic challenger Jim Martin but fell 0.2 percent short of the 50-percent-plus needed under Georgia law to win the election. Both candidates are expected to be headed for a runoff election next month.

Last night on Fox News, when asked why he wasn’t able to “close the deal” with Georgia voters on election day, Chambliss said that because of Barack Obama, there was a “high percentage of minority vote” and that his campaign wasn’t “able to get enough of our folks out” to vote:

COLMES: Why do you think you’ve been unable…[to] close the deal with the people of Georgia in terms of what happened on Election Day?

CHAMBLISS: Well, listen, we have, for the first time in the history the our state, a 30-day advanced vote period, and let’s give the Obama people credit. They did a good job of getting out their vote early.

There was a high percentage of minority vote, and I am tickled to death that as many Georgians as did examined their right to vote. That’s what make our election process the envy of the whole free world, but we weren’t able to get enough of our folks out on Election Day.

Watch it:

Apparently, when Chambliss refers to “our folks,” he’s talking about Georgia’s white voters. He added that it’s going to be a “challenge to get them out in the runoff” but that his campaign “look[s] forward to that challenge.”

In fact, Chambliss has used racially loaded, us-versus-them rhetoric in this campaign before. Just prior to Nov. 4, Chambliss bluntly warned his white base that “the other folks are voting,” adding that the “rush to the polls by African-Americans early” has “got our side energized early, they see what is happening.”

However, it seems that Chambliss’s base wasn’t as energized as he thought.

Economy

Dingell’s Climate Plan Is A Good Start, but Not Good Enough

Our guest blogger is Robert M. Sussman, a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress Action Fund and former Deputy Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. Sussman is now overseeing EPA transition planning for President-elect Barack Obama.

Coal power plantHouse Energy and Commerce Committee Chairmen John Dingell (D-MI) and Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality Chairman Rick Boucher (D-VA) unveiled their long-awaited draft of climate change legislation early last month. Longtime allies of the auto and coal industries, Dingell and Boucher have nevertheless produced a thoughtful and serious effort to grapple with the complexities of creating a cap-and-trade system. As they say in their memo to the full Energy and Commerce Committee, “politically, scientifically, legally and morally, the question has been settled: regulation of greenhouse gases in the U.S. is coming.”

The draft bill has a number of strengths for which Dingell and Boucher deserve credit. It is economy-wide, covering 87 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. It sets a long-term target of reducing emissions by 80 percent of 2005 levels by 2050 that corresponds with prevailing scientific consensus. It contains strong energy efficiency programs. It uses the allowance allocation process both to stimulate low-carbon energy technologies and provide consumers relief from high energy prices. It provides for strict oversight of the carbon markets to prevent manipulation and assure transparency. And it creates a “strategic reserve” of allowances that would be auctioned if allowance prices are too high, but avoids a “safety valve” that would suspend the emission cap if allowance prices exceed a predetermined level.

Despite these positive features, two aspects of the bill—the absence of allowance auctioning in the cap-and-trade program and weak emission reduction targets for 2020—raise serious concerns and should not be the starting point for legislative action in the new Congress. Read more

Yglesias

Credit Crunch: Very Real

There continues to be a semi-popular line of counterintuitive analysis holding that the entire financial markets crisis is some kind of fraud trumped-up by firms who want to get their hands on some of the $700 billion honeypot. For anyone who thinks that, a free trip to a European country with a finance-heavy economy would be instructive. Talk to people in the finance game on this side of the Atlantic and you’ll hear a lot of displeasure with the way European governments are handling their end of the bailout. Long story short, it’s much less of a sweet deal for the firms involved than what Paulson, Bush, and co. have been doing in the United States with much more onerous strings attached. As might be expected, they think a more generous US-style approach would be better.

No reason to take them especially seriously on that. But what you should take seriously is that they very strongly favor the bad deal they’re getting to do deal at all. And that’s because the crisis is very real. The fact that the crisis is real doesn’t mean that special interests won’t try to corrupt the process and get as much as they can. But at the same time, the mere fact that special interests are trying to corrupt the process doesn’t make the underlying issue some kind of fiction. What’s needed is vigilance and good policy, not paranoia and ignorance.

Politics

John Edwards will break his silence today with speech at Indiana University.

Former Democratic presidential nominee John Edwards “will break almost three months of public silence when he speaks at 7 p.m. today” at the Indiana University Auditorium. Edwards will deliver a speech, give his reaction to the election, and answer students’ questions. “The Union Boards’ decision to bring Edwards to speak – which cost $35,000 – has garnered criticism on whether it is appropriate to pay someone to speak who recently admitted his extramarital affair.” (HT: On Politics)

Update

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that Edwards will also be debating Karl Rove at a “mortgage bankers convention” hosted by the Commercial Financial Association. The Chronicle notes Edwards was once a consultant for the New York hedge fund Fortress Investment Group.

Politics

Ingraham Rails Against Schwarzenegger, Tells California: ‘Just Secede Already’

laura.jpgSunday on CNN Late Edition, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA) encouraged his party to “not to get stuck in ideology, in the ideological corners” and instead offer broader solutions to America’s most pressing problems, especially climate change and the health care crisis. “Let’s clean our ocean, let’s clean our water, let’s clean our air, let’s create health care reform, let’s pass the budget, let’s fix the budget deficit and the structural deficit.”

The comments infuriated right-wing radio host Laura Ingraham, who railed against Schwarzenegger yesterday. She said she had “never, never, ever gotten the whole Schwarzenegger thing,” finally declaring California should “secede” from the United States:

INGRAHAM: Arnold Schwarzenegger is embarrassing on so many levels. … Every time we look to moderate to liberal Republicans for answers, we’re disappointed. Not only are we disappointed, we end up getting shafted. [...]

I read this and my blood boils. Left coast? I mean, just secede already, at this point. Okay. Secede already. I can’t take it anymore from California.

Listen here:

The fact that Schwarzenegger also repeated his opposition to the anti-gay amendment, Proposition 8, certainly did him no favors with Ingraham either. In fact, he said the law “falls into the same category” of anti-miscegenation laws from the early 20th century that banned blacks and whites from marrying.

The Schwarzenegger-Ingraham debate reflects the larger struggle within the Republican party. While National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Ensign (R-NV) said last week that the party shouldn’t focus on abortion or anti-gay marriage amendments, Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) insisted the party should double down on the issues, focusing on “a belief in the sanctity of life and the sanctity of marriage.”

Yglesias

The Archipelego

It’s interesting that even when you break down to the granular county level the Republican parts of the country form a largely contiguous bloc while Obamaland is an incredibly fragment archipelego:

countymapredbluer1024_1.png

The non-contiguous McCain-voting counties are almost a trivial portion of the whole. And even Obama’s large contiguous blocs (greater New England, a big Great Lakes region, to belts on the Pacific Coast, several blocs of heavily black counties in the south) are scattered and there are tons and tons of little islands all across the country. The contiguousness or lack thereof has no real significance, of course, but it’s an interesting dramatization of the Democrats’ base in cities and inner suburbs. I wonder if anyone’s familiar with any good work on what accounts for the anomalously progressive views of rural New England. What’s the matter with Maine?

Politics

Brave New Films: Strip Lieberman of his gavel.

Last summer, Brave New Films delivered a petition with 43,000 signatures to congressional leadership with the message, “Lieberman must go.” Today, the project released a new film emphasizing that Lieberman is no progressive. Watch it:

BNF is asking people to call their representatives and Senators and urge them to remove Lieberman from his chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee.

Update

According to Senate sources, President-elect Barack Obama has indicated he would not like to kick Lieberman out of the caucus. But there is no clear indication what Obama might feel about Lieberman losing his chairmanship over the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.


Update

,Hotline’s Blogometer has more on the netroots reactions to Lieberman.

Yglesias

Begun, These Pundit Wars Have Not

I think Ross Douthat is right about this and the much-hyped conservative infighting has actually been extremely tame. I think he’s further correct to say that this is probably a bad thing for the movement. Sometimes it’s helpful to have a good intra-party fight. It doesn’t need to be a fight to the death, but I think something like the Iraq hawk/dove fights of the past several years had a useful impact on progressive politics. The issue was never “resolved” as such and people on both sides of the divide are still in the coalition. But the balance of power was renegotiated, some key players switched sides, and ultimately a standard-bearer with a different kind of record rose to the fore.

I was about to type that those kind of disputes are a sign of strength rather than weakness, but I’m not sure that’s quite right. Rather, the point is just that it’s a helpful exercise that ultimate serves to clarify things and give different elements a chance to rise in prominence rather than just endlessly being stuck with the same old thing. Indeed, I think one problem with Ross’s Grand New Party is that it seemed to lack the vividly drawn intra-party villains that a good intra-party fight requires.

Media

People Like Obama

For reasons I don’t quite understand, winning an election tends to make the winner more popular than he was before. Thus, Barack Obama now has a sky-high seventy percent approval rating and folks are optimistic that he’ll do a good job:

obamapopular.gif

This is, of course, something that could be a problem for a would-be opposition party and, in particular, a source of leverage vis-à-vis Senators (Collins, Snowe, Gregg, Specter, Voinovich, Martinez, Burr, Lugar, Grassley, and possibly Coleman) representing states Obama carried.

But it’s also a reminder of an unusual aspect of the 2008 election, namely that it pitted two very popular candidates against each other. The losing candidate had a favorable rating that hovered around 60 percent all year and the winning candidate hovered around 65 percent. These “up with people” sentiments wound up a bit underrepresented in the political press because a lot of conservative leaders were cool to McCain and because outpourings of enthusiasm for Obama from unusual corners of the landscape were so widespread that sophisticated progressive analysts have all spent months distancing themselves from an atmosphere of hero worship. But actually, people really like Obama and like McCain a lot, too.

Older

Newer

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

Sign Up