ON THE LEFT

Graham Dixon, partner and associate broker for Lambert, Dixon & Tate Real Estate in Rome, is vice chair for campaigns and finance for the Floyd County Democratic Party and has worked as treasurer and advisor on several successful political campaigns. Dixon serves as a Rome/Floyd County planning commissioner and as president of the Greater Rome Board of Realtors.

Presidential/congressional election predictions

Obama/Biden win; House, Senate

will see flood of new Democrats

Unless every major national poll is wrong, next week's presidential election will be won by Senator Barack Obama.   The popular vote may be within a few percentage points between senators Obama and McCain when all is said and done. However, the electoral math is definitely in Senator Obama’s favor.   Senator McCain would have to win all the battleground states and at least one blue state (Pennsylvania, for example) to triumph at this point while Senator Obama has several roads to the magical 270 electoral vote total.

Sometimes it’s about demographics and numbers, and this is definitely one of those times. I predict Senator Obama will garner between 326 and 364 electoral votes. I believe Florida and Missouri are still tossups so it’s difficult to be sure of an exact number at this point. Regardless, 270 is all anyone needs.

The Democratic Party will retain control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Currently, the Democrats hold 233 seats in the House to the GOP’s 202 seats. I anticipate a shift of 25 seats to the Democrats, giving the party a very strong majority of 258 seats to the GOP’s 177.  

In the Senate, I estimate the Democrats will go from their current 49 seats (plus two independents who caucus with them) to a new makeup of 57 Democrats, 41 Republicans and two independents (who presumably will still align with the Democrats). 

Unfortunately for the Democrats and their allies, they will be just one vote shy of being filibuster proof. I imagine any moderate Republican senator in office on Jan. 1 will be heavily courted to switch parties.

Look for sitting GOP senators Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina, Gordon Smith of Oregon, Norm Coleman of Minnesota, John Sununu of New Hampshire and Ted Stevens (newly convicted felon) of Alaska to all be defeated by their Democratic challengers. It also is possible that Jim Martin may defeat Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss.  

Currently, Chambliss has the lead but he’s far more vulnerable than few ever imagined and if you’ve turned on your television recently no doubt you’ve noticed the deluge of ads from both national parties attacking the other's candidate.   For a race that was supposed to be a cakewalk for the incumbent, Martin has given him a run for his money and may yet pull out an upset victory.

Provided Obama and Biden are victorious, both will of course have to resign their Senate seats.  I’m not sure who will get Obama’s seat but I’d look for the governor of Delaware to appoint Attorney General Beau Biden to succeed his father in the Senate. 

Since two Democrats will likely be replaced with two new Democrats, this will not effect the balance of power in the senate.  It will be a first (as far as I know) though for a father and son to hold the offices of vice president and senator at the same time.  

After all of this is over next week. I’ll be waiting to see how long it takes the Sunday morning talk show hosts to start gossiping about who’s gearing up for the next race.   I imagine all the speculation will be about if and when Gov. Sarah Palin, Huckabee and Romney will get into the race for the GOP nomination.  I for one would like at least a short break before we start worrying about 2012.

On McCain vs. Obama, Part III

McCain opens strong but Obama wins

Senator McCain gave his best debate performance thus far Wednesday night and if only the debate had been 30 minutes long, he would have scored big.   For a while there, the John McCain of the 2000 campaign was back and was taking no prisoners.   He was forceful, articulate and connecting well with the audience.  Unfortunately for him, it was not sustainable.

Senator McCain got a great line in early on regarding the comparisons between President Bush and himself when he said, "I’m not President Bush and if you wanted to run against him you should have run four years ago."   His original mention of “Joe the Plumber” also resonated, at first, but after the sixth mention of Joe the appeal was over.   Plumber Joe is a great example of too much of a good thing.

No major blunders from either candidate this debate.  In fact, the only blunder I really noticed (and a minor one at that) was when Senator McCain stated that Senator Obama had never been south of our border.   I’m not sure how Senator McCain missed all the pictures his supporters have passed around of Senator Obama’s trip to his father's homeland of Kenya which lies quite a distance south of all US borders on any map I’ve ever seen. To be fair, I believe Senator McCain meant to say that Senator Obama had never traveled south of our borders into Latin America so I think it was just a misstatement.  

The middle section of the debate was basically a draw between the two senators.  Senator Obama was a bit too professorial and Senator McCain was a bit too reactive to some of the statements.  Had the debate been even an hour, I think Senator McCain probably would have “won”.   When the debate reached it’s final stage and moved into healthcare, Senator Obama took the lead and didn’t lose it again.  

All in all, this one goes to Obama but with strong kudos to McCain.   He needed to outperform his past debate performances and he did.   Senator McCain (or his campaign) stated prior to this debate that he hoped to do at least half as well as Governor Palin did in her debate.  There is no question he did much better than she many times over tonight.   

The real winner tonight was Face the Nation host Bob Schieffer.   He should be given the permanent position of moderator for all presidential debates.   While the first debate of this season was boring and the second just degrees over average, Wednesday night’s debate was truly interesting and Schieffer deserves much of the credit.  I wouldn’t be surprised if some viewers might have been wishing he were on the ballot this year.  

On McCain vs. Obama, Part II

Obama gets the win as both candidates

show signs of life in town hall format

Sen. Barack Obama won round two but he didn’t run away with it.  I’m still waiting for one of those magic moments when either candidate either knocks it out of the house or makes a major misstep.  So far, there have been minor blunders on both sides but nothing big enough to send marginal voters to the other side.

Tuesday night, both candidates did well in the town hall format.   Both provided solid answers (while totally ignoring the rules regarding time) and were remarkably more interesting than in their last match-up.

I keep waiting for a memorable line that will be played back in clips for years to come.   We didn’t see one Tuesday although each candidate got in at least one good zinger.  For McCain, it was stating that one of Obama’s policies was like nailing Jell-o to the wall and for Obama it was stating that McCain’s comment sounded like one of the wheels had fallen off the straight talk express.  Funny quips by both but nothing for the history books.

Obama’s most memorable answer of the evening was related to health care when he talked about his 53-year-old mother dying of cancer in a hospital while fighting with her insurance company over treatment as the disease progressed.  Anyone who’s ever dealt with an insurance company immediately understood exactly what he was talking about.   Personal connections like those can really make a difference for a candidate with swing voters.  

I’ve become a bit addicted to the tracking meter they show on CNN during the debate and Tuesday night they used a group of undecided Ohio voters.   I was most surprised when Senator McCain mentioned eliminating earmarks in response to a question about the financial mess we’re in and the positive rating dropped dramatically among both men and women.   I’m not sure what to make of that reaction and I’d be interested to see some comments from voters about that statement to gauge why it was not received better.   Most people are not in favor of earmarks so it seems like a safe bet to address cutting them.   That one has me puzzled as I’m sure it does the McCain staff as well.

McCain gave an excellent closing that made up for his earlier mention of using a telegraph.  I’m pretty sure he knows they aren’t really used much anymore but it probably would have been best not to mention something so antiquated when one of the major issues he has against him is his age.  

All in all both, did well and both will live to fight another day.   Senator McCain really needed a grand slam but he didn’t get it.   He’s got one more shot, though, and I’m not counting him out just yet.

On the Biden v. Palin debate

Biden shows statesmanship as well as the ability to be a ready part of the team

Last night, Joe Biden proved once again why a 29-year-old was elected to the United States Senate.   Many of the pundits felt he’d talk too much, shove his foot in his mouth or come across as pompous.   Instead, we saw a statesman with the experience to be part of a Presidential administration not just a placeholder in case the worst happens.

I will admit Gov. Sarah Palin also exceeded expectations.  However, after the recent Katie Couric interviews she participated in, it would have been almost impossible for her not too.  I am positive she would be great fun to hang out with and I appreciate her as a role model for young women of today.   The problem is being a great role model and being fun to spend time with does not qualify one to be vice president.

For much of the debate, their performances were just about even. There were no home runs but no major blunders either.  Slightly above mediocrity was the goal and both easily achieved that level and perhaps exceeded it just a bit.  I do think Governor Palin made a minor blunder when she mentioned that she’d only be at this for five weeks.  While that is factually true, it reminded viewers they’ve only known who she is for a very short period of time and she’s nowhere near as experienced as her opponent.  For a campaign that has played the experience card at the top of the ticket this was not a good move.

Biden gained ground on the climate change question while Palin just wants to drill more oil. It perplexes me that most people realize we have an oil supply problem yet they feel if we just drill some more wells that will go away. It would certainly increase the supply of oil to drill more however not by enough to make much of a difference.  In fact many statistics show that in the 10 years it would take to get that oil to the market the international demand would have increased so much that it would make no difference.   We simply have to find alternatives to oil and a candidate who espouses the “Drill baby drill” method as a solution just doesn’t make sense.

The scariest moment of the debate came when the candidates were asked about their perceived role of the vice president.   Palin subscribes to the Cheney doctrine in which the VP is somehow the 101st senator with a major role in the Senate and is actually part of the legislative branch.   A quick read of the Constitution shows that the office is part of the Executive Branch and in reality the only Senate business the VP should be participating is breaking tie votes (which occur rarely) and sitting at the big desk and “presiding” if they so wish to do so. 

I do agree with Governor Palin on one thing above all others.  I respect Joe Biden too.  However, I probably won’t say it five times today like she did in the course of a 90-minute debate last night.  Once would have been fine, twice probably even okay but letting them rip again and again was too much credit to give one’s opponent. Senator Obama got some heat for saying he agreed with John McCain too many times at their debate last week so I was surprised Governor Palin didn’t take a lesson from that.

As far as winning the debate last night, both candidates can probably take credit for that in different ways. Biden outperformed Palin with debating skills; however, her ability to hold her own against someone as talented at Biden while avoiding any major blunders will bolster her support with those who were starting to get a bit concerned about her abilities. I expect the McCain campaign will see a slight boost in the polls just because of this however that effect will not be long lasting.  This election will be about the economy and the Republican nominees aren’t connecting with those most effected by the current economic climate.

On the first McCain-Obama debate

'Undecideds' probably still undecided;

candidates fail to hit one out of the park

In the first debate between the two men vying to be our next president, I was rather hoping for a moment from either side in which the stuff of debate legends are made.  Something akin to Ronald Reagan’s “there you go again” or Gerald Ford’s “there is no Soviet domination of Western Europe”.   Unfortunately, I don’t think many sound bites can be scored from Friday night's match-up.

During the post-debate punditry, the consensus was that this debate was a draw; however, I disagree with that view.  Sen. Barack Obama “won” by holding his own on foreign policy where Sen. John McCain is particularly strong yet gaining just a bit of ground on the economy-related questions.   I tuned into CNN for the debate and they provided an opinion tracker from the audience members throughout the debate (I don’t know if other networks showed this as well) and I was interested to see that Senator McCain maintained a steady flat line during most of his answers on foreign policy while Senator Obama’s meter rose to around the 80 percent approval mark during many of his answers on the subject.   

I have no idea how diversified the audience was so I’m not sure it was a truly scientific poll but the strong approval from those labeled as Independents was very reassuring.

One moment that was very interesting to observe was a reaction from the audience when Senator McCain accused Senator Obama of being naïve.   The experience argument has always been a strong one for McCain so I expected to see a jump in the meter; however, there was a rather steep decline.  I’m not sure if it was because he came across as condescending but it was a very interesting focus group reaction and I have no doubt the McCain campaign staff took special note of it.  I’d be willing to bet he doesn’t use that word the next time they meet.  

I’ll be the first to admit that even while I think Senator Obama “won,” he didn’t hit a home run.   He was fortunate that this debate featured the first half of questions related to the economy, an area in which he usually outpolls Senator McCain, and was able to build up some momentum.   Had the debate originated with foreign policy questions, I believe Senator McCain probably would have been the victor.

On Palin joining the John McCain campaign

Palin choice mutes McCain's 'experience counts' attacks

When I heard that John McCain had selected Sarah Palin for his vice presidential running mate, I thought the text message I received was a joke. To say I was shocked at the choice would be putting it extremely mildly.

I’m probably one of the small group of people in Floyd County who has actually been to the town of Wasilla, Alaska, where she was mayor.   It’s a nice little place somewhere between the size of Cave Spring and Trion (the populations are roughly an eighth of the City of Rome).   

I was in Alaska in the summer of 2007 and Sarah Palin was in her sixth month as governor at the time.   From what I heard form the locals, she seemed to be extremely popular and well liked. I have no doubt that she is a likeable person and perfectly qualified to be governor of Alaska.

What surprised me most about McCain’s choice was that a major effort of his campaign thus far has been to convince the American people that it’s not a good idea to trust Barack Obama with the presidency because of  “lack of experience."   That has actually been a successful issue for him and the choice of Palin just threw his credibility on that issue out the window.

Senator McCain does not think we, as citizens, should trust someone with eight years in the state legislature and 3.5 years in the U.S. Senate but he is willing to trust someone who was the mayor of a town with 6,000 people and 1.75 years of experience in state office to be the president if, God forbid, something should happen to him. That’s almost as offensive as it is ludicrous.  

The logic behind this argument is beyond ridiculous.   Had Senator McCain never mentioned “lack of experience,” the choice of Palin would have been fine.  But in choosing someone who is less experienced than almost any other governor or senator in all the 50 states casts serious doubt on whether or not he really thought the repercussions of this through.

Another issue that may be a problem simply because there are only nine weeks to go is the ability of an unknown like Palin to connect with voters in time.  I’d venture to guess nine out of 10 people have never heard of her.  With 20 weeks, there probably would have been time for many to get to know her but I’m not sure nine weeks is enough.

I will give Senator McCain this, though. He got his “maverick” label back with this one.  It might very well have cost him the White House in the process, though.

On Biden joining the Barack Obama campaign

Biden's choice as VP nominee eliminates Obama's weak points

With three days to go before the convention, I along with most other Democrats was getting pretty anxious to know who are vice presidential nominee would be.   Anyone who’s read my previous columns knows my preference was for Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana.  That being said, Senator Joe Biden also is an excellent choice.   

Senator Biden is one of those candidates who you feel like you know even though you’ve never met him. He’s a frequent guest on the Sunday morning shows and you never have to wonder what he thinks about something.  If the Obama campaign’s goal was to pick a bulldog who could go head-to-head with any contender the GOP throws up, they definitely have that in Biden. I have a feeling the vice presidential debate(s) will be as interesting as the presidential ones this year.  

While I have no firsthand knowledge of what went down in the VP selection process, my suspicion is that the recent issues in Russia sealed the deal for Biden as the best choice.   His 36 years of experience in the Senate and heavy involvement with foreign relations during his years there make him an obvious choice.  

As far as electoral math goes, I do think Biden will benefit Obama in some states. Pennsylvania, Ohio and New Hampshire are all swing states and Biden is a native son of the area.  Hillary Clinton defeated Obama in each during the primaries so a vice presidential nominee who can energize and expand the Democratic base in those states makes a great deal of sense.  

One thing I’m sure of is that he wasn’t chosen to secure Delaware’s three electoral votes.

Choosing Biden accomplished several things for Senator Obama:

>He weakened the argument of his “lack of experience” by adding a partner who has more years in the Senate than John McCain. 

>He secured the Democratic base by picking a longtime stalwart of the party and, at the same time, he found someone who balances the ticket and addresses many of the concerns voters have shown for Obama’s candidacy thus far. 

I’m looking forward to the Obama-Biden ticket.  This coming week in Denver should be one of the most intriguing politics has seen in quite some time.  

What Barack Obama must do to win Nov. 4

Obama's four tools for victory:

Cash, top VP, 'net, grassroots

While Sen. Barack Obama may be the leader in almost every major poll at this point in the election cycle, it will still take a great deal for him to translate those poll numbers into a November victory.  National poll numbers don’t mean a lot when we remember what we have on Nov. 4 is 51 small elections (don’t forget D.C.) and not just one, big national election.  

2008 has been unlike any election year I’ve observed to date.  Our last two presidential races were pretty close in the end but the overall strategy seemed to be the same as in most any other election year. Raise money, buy commercials, fly around to the battleground states and then have some televised debates. This year will be different, though whether the candidates like it or not.

For Senator Obama to win, he first of all needs a great deal of money. Fortunately he proved that he is capable of raising huge sums of money (a record amount in fact) during the primary season. Hopefully he can go back to the well another time and even expand the donor list to former Clinton backers and independents. Since none of the other GOP contenders raised nearly as much money as Senator Clinton, McCain doesn’t have the same opportunity.

Second, he needs a running mate who is strong everywhere he is lacking.  He needs a partner with experience and the “everyday man” posture. I’ve pontificated on the benefits of adding Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana to the ticket in the number two spot before (see past columns) and I still believe he is the best fit. He also is low-key enough not to overshadow the top of the ticket and therefore undermine the credibility of the nominee.

Third, there’s the absolute requirement in this day and age to run a strong Internet campaign.  Websites, blogs and social networking groups (like MySpace and Facebook) have risen up as a must have tool for any candidate to succeed at this level.   When Senator McCain mentioned “the telegraph” in a speech just the other day, I got a big smile on my face.   However, I’m not naïve enough to believe no one on his campaign staff has progressed past their olive-green rotary phone.     

Fourth, grassroots have made a comeback. Spending hundreds of millions on advertising is still very important but now more than ever. the average voter wants to be “touched.”   A phone call, a door knock or even a neighborhood coffee from local Obama supporters (Rome has it’s very own “Obama Mamas” to fill this role) will make a difference in the age where many people are frankly overwhelmed by the 24-hour news coverage and endless cycle of e-mail propaganda.  At some point, it’s just nice to get opinions from a real live friend or neighbor.  

When I look at the electoral maps, there’s many states we can go ahead and safely take our Crayolas to. California is blue, Alabama is red but we do need to break out the purple crayon on a few. Ohio and Pennsylvania pretty much stay purple in each presidential election cycle but there are a few new ones in the category.  New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, Indiana, Missouri and Virginia all get a purple tint for now.    My heart would love to throw Georgia in there, too, but my mind just won’t let me erase the red off it yet.   

When one looks at what it takes to turn purple to blue or to red, all of the issues above come into play. Different strategies will work better or worse state by state, though.    For the more rural, less-populated western states like Nevada, New Mexico and even Colorado, it’s hard to reach voters on a grassroots level as they are so spread out.   Media buys and Internet campaigning work best in these environments. 

The states like Missouri and Virginia have strong population centers in the inner cities and can be affected by a combination of advertising, Internet and grassroots.  

If Senator Obama can get out the vote in those segments of the urban electorate that usually have low participation levels (minority groups and young people primarily), he can shift a state from purple to blue.  Votes come from where people live and densely populated cities are the best place to find people/voters.  Obviously, no candidate can meet every voter or visit every city but a captain in each precinct can organize neighborhood events, door knocking and phone banking.   If Obama won St. Louis and Kansas City. Mo., with a enough of a margin, the entire state could shift to his column along with her 11 electoral votes.

For Indiana, which has gone red in the last two elections, the choice of the very popular Senator Bayh as the vice presidential candidate could swing the state blue.  All the other things mentioned above will be important, too, but this is one state that could potentially swing on just one person’s involvement. 

At the end of the day, it’s going to take a combination of many things for either party’s nominee to get to 270 electoral votes in November.  However, this race could still go either way and whomever runs the best campaign encompassing all of the available tools and strategies will be the next resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.  

First take on the fall elections

This Bud's for you; Ga. could play both ways for Obama

Now that the primary season is behind us (and the embarrassing 10 percent turnout in Floyd County), we can focus on the general election that will no doubt see record turnout as Obama and McCain finally go head-to-head.   

U.S. House: In Georgia’s U.S. House District 11, we have Incumbent Republican Rep. Phil Gingrey facing a challenge by Rome native Bud Gammon.   While Rep. Gingrey is sitting on a massive campaign war chest of over $1.3 million, it will take more than money to beat Mr. Gammon.

Gammon is a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy and an Air Force veteran. He is a retired commercial pilot and a native son of the district (he graduated from East Rome high school in 1969).   While Mr. Gammon is a political unknown, he does have the credibility of his veteran status and the luck of running on the Democratic ticket in a year in which that could be a pretty big plus.   

Many people think of the 11th District as a Cobb County seat; however, the Floyd County portion is a very large chunk. If you add in Polk and Chattooga, Cobb’s portion is dwarfed.   

Gingrey has the edge but I wouldn’t count Gammon out.  If he can raise enough money and get some traction, he’ll cause Gingrey some problems.  Even if Bud doesn’t pull it off this time, he will no doubt make connections and build name recognition for a future run.  

In House District 9, incumbent Nathan Deal is challenged by Democrat Dr. Jeff Scott, an educator from Walker County.   Deal, a former Democrat, has held office since 1993 and was re-elected in 2006 with 77 percent of the vote.  While Scott is an appealing candidate, Deal is a well-funded, powerful incumbent in a safe GOP district. Sometimes demographics settle the race for us and this is one of those cases.  

U.S. Senate: In 2002, when Saxby Chambliss defeated incumbent Sen. Max Cleland, he was relatively unknown and certainly much less of a political force than the former Carter Cabinet secretary and former Georgia Secretary of State.   Today, Senator Chambliss remains relatively unknown to many Georgians as he seems to have mastered staying under the radar and making very few people or groups angry in the mean time.  

July 15th’s primary was a five-man race for the right to challenge Chambliss in November and still requires a runoff election on Aug. 4 to finalize the choice of Democratic nominee.   Dekalb County CEO Vernon Jones and former state representative and 2006 lieutenant governor nominee Jim Martin were the top two vote getters on July 15th so they will duke it out on Aug. 4.  

Regardless of which man takes the Democratic nomination, this is one of the safer seats for a Republican incumbent in the nation.  Georgia is still a conservative state and the freshman senator has avoided controversy well enough to keep his seat.  When you don’t do anything, it’s hard to make anyone mad enough to get rid of you.   

Chambliss has the edge but if the Democratic nominee can raise enough money and make all the right moves we could see an upset here.   

The presidency: Georgia itself may be the greatest toss up of this election cycle.  For a state that has gone GOP in the last three presidential elections, we are actually in play this year for both McCain and Obama.  If you don’t believe me, try watching one of the Sunday morning talk shows and see if any less than three Obama commercials run during the broadcast.  That certainly didn’t happen in 2004.

Democrats: Primaries in the rear view mirror

Highs, lows from phase one of the road to the White House

It’s over! While it was fun making history, and although I’m glad Guam and American Samoa finally got a say in something, I’m very happy we have a nominee in Sen. Barack Obama. Now that the primaries and caucuses are behind us, I thought it would be fun to do some Q&A on what we’ve just been through over the last 16 months to get to where we are today.  

Q: Biggest surprise of 2008 primary season?  

A: Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani tie on this one for me. Both seemed like strong candidates.  After they got rolling, though, Fred just didn’t seem to be that interested (or interesting) and Rudy seemed to self implode. I think Fred is done for good but Rudy probably will be back in some capacity. Governor of New York, maybe?

Q: Biggest flop?

A: Sen. Mike Gravel’s whole campaign. I’m not sure why he ran or what he was hoping to accomplish. I’m also not entirely sure he’s sane.   

Q: Who would have/will made the best first spouse?

A:  Hands down, Michelle Obama.   The whole idea of a first lady with a tongue ring from Mrs. Kucinich just didn’t sit well with me. Cindy McCain also creeps me out a little in a Stepford Wife kind of way.  

Mrs. Obama strikes me as a modern-day Jackie Kennedy.   She seems to have a similar grace to Mrs. Kennedy but with a modern and more feminist attitude more in tune with women of today. She also seems the most like a real person of all the contenders.

Q: Biggest comeback?

A. This one is a toss up. For Republicans, it’s John McCain. For Democrats, Hillary Clinton. No matter how many times the pundits said she was done, she’d go out and win another primary. Only problem is she’s out of states now and there’s no more comebacks available to her.

Q: Worst mistake by a major candidate?

A. John McCain and his comment that staying in Iraq for 100 years would be fine with him. I know he says it was taken out of context and he meant in a limited capacity but he still said it and it’s a slap in the face to the parents and families of servicemen and women who have the potential of being deployed to Iraq over the next 100 years.  

Hillary Clinton’s comment about sniper fire was also pretty bad.  I’m thankful that ,in reality, neither she nor Sinbad were harmed.  

Q: Candidate to watch in 2012?

A. This depends on who wins in November.   If it’s McCain, then Senator Clinton will be the nominee in 2012.  If it’s Obama, the Republicans are going to have to start fresh at the drawing board and get over their predisposition to nominate whomever’s turn it is (i.e. Dole in 1996, McCain in 2008).

Q: Biggest external influence on voters?

A: The economy.  People are hurting. The dollar’s value is in the toilet while jobs are being cut and gas prices are like a noose around the neck of many businesses from trucking to airlines. Discretionary spending by businesses and individuals is non-existent and charitable giving is getting nailed.   

Iraq is a troubling issue but it’s not as personal to the average citizen as having to worry about getting laid off or having ones home foreclosed.  

Q: Best speech or quote?

A: Obama’s “Yes we Can” speech following the New Hampshire Primary.  Afterward, Will I Am of the Black Eyed Peas produced a star-studded video with the speech as a backdrop.  Over 8 million people thus far have viewed it on YouTube.  Here’s the link in case you missed it: Click

Q: What the nominee must do to win in November?

A:  Senator Obama is riding a wave of momentum and he must keep that momentum from collapsing between now and November.  Hopefully, Senator Clinton will soon concede and endorse him.  Additionally, after he chooses his vice presidential running mate, he should get another boost. 

Congratulations to both Senator Obama and Senator McCain.   Neither was favored to win by the establishment or the opinion polls but here they both are. The people of the United States have rarely had such an ability to chart the course of the future of this country. Senators Obama and McCain are nearly polar opposites on most issues so a true choice is available to all our citizens. My hope it they’ll bother to show up in November and make that choice. 

Democrats: Picking an experienced vice president

When it comes to picking a

vice president, Bayh is the guy

When pondering this month's topic, it occurred to me it would be a lot easier if I actually knew who the nominee of my party would be in November. Since I don’t have that luxury, I decided to pick a candidate who makes sense for either Senator Barack Obama or Senator Hillary Clinton. 

Regardless of who tops the ticket, there is a list of names that seem to always be discussed.  Gov. Bill Richardson, former Sen. John Edwards, retired Gen. Wesley Clark, former Sen. Tom Daschle and one of my favorites -- although it probably just wouldn’t work -- is former Georgia Sen. Sam Nunn.   In addition to all these names, there also is the belief by some that whomever comes in a close second place for the top spot should get the VP spot in order to keep the party united for November.  

I am not of the school that believes we need to see a Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton ticket.   Neither candidate has executive office experience that a governor or former governor would possess.  Traditionally, our electorate does not often elect senators to the presidency (the last time was in 1960 with John F. Kennedy).  

Fortunately for the nominees of both major parties this year, the voters don’t have a choice because only incumbent senators will be the nominees from both of the major political parties.  Regardless, governors seem to be more appealing to the electorate than senators for whatever reasons.  

When considering how best to balance out a ticket headed by either Obama or Clinton, experience is a major issue but I believe a possibly even larger issue is the change factor.   With either Clinton or Obama, there will be a fundamental change in the demographics of the person who heads this nation.   In the 231-year history of our democracy, only a white male has held the office of president and while it would be nice to believe that gender and race are no longer issues in our society to do so would be naïve.

That being said, I believe the majority of Americans do not have a problem with either a female or an African American being president.  We have come at least that far with race and gender relations in this nation. However, I also believe that many of those persons would feel a lot better seeing the more traditional figure they associate with the presidency standing beside either Obama or Clinton.

When considering the possible candidates for vice president, there is one man who seems the logical choice.   Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh is not only a man with more experience in the Senate than either Clinton or Obama but he also is a former two-term governor and former Secretary of State in Indiana.  Equally appealing to his executive experience as governor is that he could secure Indiana and it’s 12 electoral votes for the Democratic Party in the general election; something that did not happen in the last two presidential elections.

Senator Bayh is a supporter of Hillary Clinton and a pretty vocal one at that.  However, he has not been anti-Obama and would still be able to be seen as a true believer in the Obama message if tapped by Obama to be his running mate.  

For Clinton, Senator Bayh would soften her image and help her with the voters that just don’t trust her.   While he’s no JFK when it comes to speeches, he’s a likeable guy and most important he comes across as non-threatening which is something Clinton is just incapable of accomplishing with many voters.

For Obama, Senator Bayh would bring his experience from the Senate and the governor's mansion in Indiana.   For the extreme voters out there who honestly believe Obama is either the Anti-Christ or the head of an Islamic plot to dominate our government, some might feel that if someone as middle-of-the-road as Evan Bayh trusts him they should as well.

The person in the vice president slot usually does little to actually change the outcome of a presidential election.  Clinton probably would have been elected without Gore and Reagan without Bush.  In this election, though, the change factor with either Clinton or Obama is so great that seeing a reassuring face in the vice president will likely accomplish a great deal.  Bayh is the guy.

Democrats: State of the Party

Democrats risk losing generation of voters if Hillary is anointed

What a difference a few months make. Less than six months ago, the conventional wisdom would have had Sen. Hillary Clinton and either Sen, Fred Thompson or Mayor Rudy Giuliani as the secured nominee of their respective parties by this date.  

While Fred and Rudy pretty much crashed and burned without winning a single state, Senator Clinton is still fighting and still surprising those same pundits all the time.   However, what was thought to be hers for the asking (the Democratic Presidential Nomination) has been the greatest political battle of the last 50 years and is possibly simply beyond her grasp.

I’ve always felt that Senator Barack Obama would pull off this race but every time I think he’s got it in the bag, Senator Clinton uses that super power only members of the Clinton family seem to possess and grabs victory in another big state. 

While Senator Obama is ahead in pledged delegates and total delegates, Senator Clinton has won some major prizes in California, New York, Texas and Ohio.   She also won Florida and Michigan but nobody really believes that counts so I just can’t give her credit for those. 

I could have won those states, too, if I was the only one on the ballot and I assure you I am NOT qualified to be president of the United States.  If I had a red phone ringing at 3 a.m., I ’d just unplug it and roll over.      

Gov. Mike Huckabee said it well when he stated, “I majored in miracles not math” and I believe that’s what Senator Clinton has adopted as her campaign strategy at this point.   If she can keep the momentum going out of Texas and Ohio and through to Pennsylvania, if she can get some kind of delegate credit for Florida and Michigan, if she can convince enough super delegates to stick with the Clinton machine, etc., etc., etc.,  she can possibly get the nomination she so desperately wants.   However, to paraphrase Governor Huckabee, that’s really going to be more of a miracle than a possible reality.   

At some point, the leadership of the Democratic Party (the super delegates) are going to have to make a decision on what to do with this predicament.

If they chose to support Senator Clinton and give her the nomination, the tsunami of support that has come out of nowhere and propelled Senator Obama from first-term senator to front runner will likely disappeared as fast as it arrived and avoid the process for a very long time, if not forever.   This is potentially the worst possible thing the Democratic Party could do because those voters who would show up to vote for Senator Obama in November would also very likely vote for other Democratic candidates as well and expand Democratic majorities in both houses of congress, state houses and governorships across the country.  

For many years, I’ve heard about the “youth vote” and I use to think that meant 18-25 but now that I’m in my 30s, I’m pretty sure it means like 31-35.   Regardless of the exact age ranges involved, I’ve always felt, as I believe many others have as well, that if we could somehow get the younger members of our society to have some buy-in, we could really accomplish something. 

For years, it seemed that many persons in that post-high school, pre-parent stage of life were convinced they had no chance of effecting society so there was no reason to try.  

For the first time that I can remember, I think we are observing a paradigm shift in that way of thinking.  Not only do those “young voters” feel they can make a difference, they are actually going and voting in order to weigh in and have their voices heard to make that difference. 

For a party that has been struggling for years to get the “youth vote,” now we have it but I’m afraid we risk losing it if we don’t grab on to them and see this process through.  

While the Senator Clinton supporters will dislike me for saying it, I believe that Senator Obama is the reason those voters are finally here and he’s the one that needs to herd them through.  

Senator Clinton and President Clinton have done a great deal for the Democratic Party and we owe them a debt of gratitude. I don’t want to discount their contribution and I don’t want to imply that Senator Clinton would not be a fine candidate capable of beating Senator McCain.

What I do believe, though, is that for the Democratic Party to meet the challenges of this new century, it will take new leadership and new participants. To build a Democratic Party for the 21st century, we don’t need to drive off the new participants in the early morning of that new century.  For the good of the party, and I like to think the entire nation, Senator Obama is the right choice for the Democratic Nomination.  

Super Tuesday aftermath

Clinton/Obama drama could keep going for months

The Clinton and Obama campaigns are starting to remind me of that Energizer bunny.  They just keep going and going and going.  Neither candidate can seem to break ahead of the other nor has either made any serious mistakes to harm their own campaign. It’s kind of like the old fable about the tortoise and the hare racing except this time, it’s tortoise on tortoise or hare on hare.    

Sen. Barack Obama won more total states but Sen. Hillary Clinton won two of the most populous (and therefore delegate rich) with California and New York. After all was said and done, Obama still had more pledged delegates while Clinton still leads in total delegates (she has more super delegates) yet neither have anywhere close to the number of delegates required for the nomination. That may sound familiar because it’s exactly the same situation we were in before millions of voters in 22 states went to the polls Tuesday.

I can say a few things surprised me, though, on both sides.  Although I expected Obama would win Georgia, I never expected him to win by the huge margin that he did. Equally surprising was Senator Clinton’s performance in her home state of New York and next-door neighbor New Jersey.   While she won both comfortably, the margins were much less than I expected. Additionally, I was not surprised Senator Clinton won California; however, I was surprised Senator Obama did not poll better than he did there.   

This race has been a tight contest from day one and will continue to be as the delegates continue to be split basically evenly at the end of each round of contests.   My great fear is that neither candidate will have a majority of delegates without those disqualified from Florida and Michigan being seated at the convention. To do this would obviously take a lawsuit and the last time we had a court decide who the president would be, it didn’t work out so well for us.  

About these early primaries ...

High voter turnout, record donations show change works

On the eve of Super Tuesday, it’s clear that this year's race for the Democratic (and Republican) presidential nomination will make history.   When several states decided to move their primaries or caucuses earlier in the year, the jury was still out on whether or not this would make any real difference toward deciding the final nominee of the party.   It can be said without a doubt that in this campaign cycle, those decisions have made a remarkable difference.

Before the Iowa Caucus last month, the national polls showed Senator Hillary Clinton far ahead of Senator Barack Obama.   One of the most interesting polls showed Senator Clinton leading in South Carolina, a state where Senator Obama later defeated her by a more than two-to-one margin.   As has been the case many times before, Iowa made the difference.   When Senator Obama won Iowa, he did what many pundits said he would not be able to do: win a heavily “white” state.   As soon as that happened, those minority voters who never believed a member of their race could win were shown first-hand that an African American can actually compete in today’s United States.  Once this glass ceiling was shattered, Senator Obama’s candidacy immediately gained a realism that had not truly materialized up until that point.  

A major plus for Senator Obama occurred when the Democratic National Convention stripped both Michigan and Florida of their delegates as punishment for moving up their primaries without permission from the DNC. These are two very large, delegate-rich states with expensive media markets that would have been easier for the front runner (Senator Clinton) to compete in because of her greater war chest.   While Senator Clinton won symbolic victories in both states, Senator Obama still leads with 63 pledged delegates to Senator Clinton’s 48 going into the Super Tuesday battle.   That being said, the experiment of earlier primaries did make the field much more competitive if only from the standpoint that scheduling early primaries took Michigan and Florida off the table. 

Momentum always is a key factor leading into Super Tuesday. It propelled John Kerry to the nomination in 2004 after his surprise win in Iowa and Bill Clinton in 1992 after his second-place finish in New Hampshire.  Because of the split victories early in the process (Senator Clinton taking New Hampshire and Nevada while Senator Obama took Iowa and South Carolina) both are 2-and-2 headed into the major contest this Tuesday with momentum basically neutralized for both candidates.  

Super Tuesday will be the first contest since Senator John Edwards dropped out so there is an unknown factor regarding which candidate will pick up his supporters.  Originally, I was inclined to think Senator Obama would most benefit because of the “anyone but Hillary” mentality that can sometimes be present. However, I’m now seeing signs that perhaps that is not true. I’ve noticed a distinct group of people who are just not comfortable with Senator Obama for a variety of reasons, from lack of experience to racial prejudices or in even some cases things, they have read on the Internet about his closet status as a Muslim.   All that aside, I’d guess Senator Obama will still pick up the majority of Edwards' supporters although I’m inclined to think it won’t be a super majority of them.   

If anyone had said 10 years ago that we would see a former First Lady and an African American both trounce a former vice presidential nominee to become front-runners for the party’s nomination, they would have been laughed off the stage. Not only are we now seeing that very scenario but it also has generated record voter turnouts in primaries and raised almost $200 million in campaign contributions for the top two candidates. This one is one for the record books and as much as I’m enjoying it, it’s rather bittersweet because I’m doubtful we’ll ever see anything this interesting for a very long time.  Gore vs. Bradley in 2000 seems rather lackluster in comparison when I look back on those days.  

In the end, what matters is who can get a majority of delegates secured before the convention.  Now that this is a two-person race (well, former Senator Gravel hasn’t dropped out yet but I think it’s safe to discount his candidacy) the chances of a brokered convention are very slim. What may not be so marginal is the almost inevitability the final standings of each candidate will be so close the victor will be forced to choose their second-place finisher as his or her running mate so not to alienate nearly half the party and fracture the base. Unfortunately Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama may not be what is best for the general election campaign against the Republican nominees.  

The Democrats' South Carolina vote

Obama wins in a blowout but Hillary Clinton far from done

The Democratic Presidential race just keeps getting better and better.  Sen. Barack Obama took Iowa and South Carolina while Sen. Hillary Clinton took New Hampshire and Nevada.   They’re both 2 for 2 (Michigan doesn’t count because the delegates have been disqualified by the DNC) and it’s looking more and more likely that a brokered convention may be a possibility.  

In terms of secured delegates, Obama leads with 57 to Clinton’s 45.   However, very few of the total 4,000-plus delegates have been awarded at this point. Super Tuesday (Feb. 5) will divvy up most of those.

What was most interesting about South Carolina’s results was the enormous margin by which Senator Obama won the day. Obama garnered more than twice the votes of Senator Clinton and three times more than Sen. John Edwards (in his home state no less!)  The states that Clinton has won have been by very small margins and even though she won Nevada, Senator Obama actually got one more delegate because of the way the delegates are allocated by district.   Kinda reminds me of when Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the presidency in 2000.   

While it’s great to get the largest number of votes in a state primary. at the end of the day the entire primary exercise is a race to collect delegates to the National Convention. With Senator Edwards hanging on, he may secure enough delegates to keep either senators Clinton or Obama from a majority going into the convention. If that happens, it’s anybody’s ball game. We could even see a repeat nomination of  either Al Gore or John Kerry. Unlikely but nothing surprises me in this election cycle.  

My gut still says Obama is going to win this thing before the convention but I sure wouldn’t bet any money on it at this point.  Senator Clinton has run an excellent campaign and has been much more successful than I ever thought she would after coming in third place in Iowa.  I forgot something that we would all do well to remember and that’s not to discount the ability of a Clinton to come out ahead regardless of how dire things may look.  

Plan to stay up late on Feb. 5; it’s going to be a long night.

The Georgia Primary

For Georgia Democrats,

Barack Obama's the pick

In 2004, I voted in the Presidential Preference primary because I felt it was my civic responsibility to do so.  By that point in time, it was clear John Kerry would be the nominee of my party but I still felt it was worth the few minutes it took to vote in order to honor the right we have in our country to do so.   Many other persons in the world still fight to the death for the right we as Americans most often take for granted, so five minutes with a touch screen computer was a small price to pay for democracy.

In 2008, however, no one will have to vote out of obligation because we in Georgia should actually have a real opportunity to contribute to the party nomination process.  

As I make that statement, though, it’s important to remember “should” doesn’t necessarily mean, “will”.   A lot of what happens on “Super Tuesday” (when Georgia votes) will be because of what first occurs in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina.   If Sen. Hillary Clinton is victorious in all three the nominations is hers.   If Senators Barack Obama or John Edwards win one or more of those primaries, Georgia will be an integral part of the “Super Tuesday” contest which will almost certainly lock up the nomination for whomever pulls ahead at that point.  

I believe when Georgia Democrats vote on Feb. 5, they should and will choose Sen. Barack Obama.   While both senators Clinton and Edwards would be fine presidents, Senator Obama is a better fit with Georgia voters.  

Georgia Democrats have had a rough time over the last 10 years.  We lost the governorship for the first time since reconstruction as well as the state House and Senate.  We’ve lost almost all the state constitutional offices and both United States senators from our state are now Republicans along with the majority of our U.S. House delegation. We are longing for a win and while we may be the minority in state government for some years to come we do have an opportunity to have a say in electing a Democrat as president.  To accomplish that end we need a strong nominee who is electable nationwide.  Senator Obama is that candidate and I believe most of our voters will see that and appreciate the magnitude of whom we choose in this process.

The fundamental issues in conflict for 2008 are change and experience.  Senator Obama is most identifiable as the change candidate while Senator Clinton has deemed herself the most experienced.   

It has surprised me that Senator Clinton has made her experience the central message of her campaign. For the life of me, I cannot figure out why the press has given her a free pass on that issue.  Senator Clinton has seven years in the US Senate compared to Senator Biden’s 35 years, Senator Dodd’s 17 years and even Senator Gravel’s 12 years.   I by no means want to discount the accomplishments of those seven years of service; however, if a candidate touts experience as the best reason to elect them logic would seem to support the idea that the candidate should in fact be the most experienced in their race.   For all of Senator Clinton’s attributes, she is quite simply not the most experienced of the Democratic candidates.   Some pundits say we should also count her time as First Lady as experience. However, I have little doubt that if Barbara Bush, Nancy Reagan or Rosalyn Carter announced a run for office tomorrow, those same people would vehemently argue that each of those former First Ladies lacked “experience.”  

Regardless of experience, though, I believe that voters are more interested in charting a new direction.  The average person realizes that the president does not move the entire government all on his or her own.  The president can’t single handedly lower taxes, decrease poverty, balance the budget, cut pollution rates or solve Social Security. It takes a coalition of people to do any of these things and I think most voters are smart enough to know that.   While many voters agree with what Senator Clinton, Senator Edwards, Governor Richardson and others say, the person they most feel will have some follow through is Senator Obama.   He came from obscurity two years ago to become a household word today.   That kind of momentum resonates and the time for it to make the most impact is now when Democratic voters are starving for the person most capable of bringing back the promise of the Kennedy or Clinton (Bill) years.   

We recaptured the House the Senate in 2006 and now we want the White House back.  While others in our party may be more qualified on paper Senator Obama has the strongest chance of capturing the most desirable prize in our nation’s government; the Presidency.

On the New Hampshire vote

Hillary's not-so-big win  

Sen. Hillary Clinton's firewall held tonight in New Hampshire where she squeaked out a 2-point victory over Sen. Barack Obama.  With many polls showing double-digit leads for Senator Obama going into today's voting, Senator Clinton has pulled quite an upset victory.   

How did she pull it off?  Honestly, I'm at a loss on that one.   However, my suspicion is that the high poll numbers Senator Obama showed going into today's voting hurt him greatly with Independent voters who would have participated in the Democratic Primary. Believing Obama was safe many likely voted in the GOP primary to support either maverick Senator John McCain or former LibertarianRep. Ron Paul.    

While this is a win, it's probably not enough of a margin to propel her to the nomination.  Sen. John Edwards and Gov. Bill Richardson will lose strength after their poor showings tonight and most of their supporters will likely gravitate to Senator Obama's camp.   Like I've said many times before, Senator Clinton is no one's second choice: voters either love her or hate her, which bodes well for Senator Obama.  If Senator Obama picks up just 60 percent of the support of those two candidates, Senator Clinton is in great peril.   

Nevada just became a lot more important as it falls a week before South Carolina.   A win for Clinton in Nevada will keep her competitive in South Carolina while a loss will hand the southern state to Senator Obama.    

Super Tuesday may be a lot more interesting than any of us have anticipated with state results splitting between the two front runners.   

On the Iowa Caucus aftermath

It’s Obama  

While I am not surprised by Sen. Barack Obama’s  victory in Iowa tonight, I am surprised by his margin of victory.  With 38 percent of the vote going to Senator Obama, he leads both of his closest challengers by eight points; a huge margin in a race like this with three strong front runners. 

With New Hampshire just four days from now, Sen. John Edwards is basically out of money and done for 2008.  Iowa was a must-win for him and he just didn’t pull it off.   I believe his political career is probably over at this point. 

Sen. Hillary Clinton will now begin scrambling to spin her third-place finish tonight and try to somehow score a win in New Hampshire Tuesday.   Maybe she can do it but I doubt it. After all,her husband lost Iowa and New Hampshire, and lived to fight another day.

I believe Senator Obama will edge out a fairly close victory in New Hampshire Tuesday and be fast on the track to the nomination.

A New Hampshire win for Clinton would hurt him and possibly even derail him but tonight he’s proven he’s a viable candidate and those on the fence about his ability to perform will now fall into line.

I’d say look for an Obama/Biden ticket in the near future.  

(Click Here for Dixon's December column on Iowa)

From December/Iowa Caucus, early primaries winner

Who to watch: Barack Obama

When Iowa voters join their friends and neighbors to choose their presidential candidate on Jan. 3, most participants will have either personally met their candidate or will have spoken to them on the telephone at least once.  

“Grassroots” at the presidential campaign level means an entirely different thing in Iowa than we can begin to comprehend in Georgia.

The caucus system also is something very different than anything we in Georgia have ever encountered while voting.   What takes us three minutes with a computer takes an Iowan an entire evening with crowds of people.   This is not a system for the apathetic.   When I think of what caucus going entails, I’m always reminded of the old analogy regarding a ham-and-egg breakfast. The chicken the egg came from was involved but the pig the ham came from was committed.  

Iowans are committed while most of the rest of us are just involved. The national media and Sunday morning pundits have been claiming for weeks now that Sen. Hillary Clinton has all but been anointed as the Democratic nominee.   I disagree with these assessments and I believe Iowans do as well.   While Senator Clinton is certainly as qualified as anyone else running, I don’t believe experience is all that voters are looking for this go around.  

I would never discount Senator Clinton’s accomplishments, of which there are many, but when you get right down to it, a lot of her resume is based on her role in the Clinton (Bill) administration as First Lady. Now more than ever, that may hurt more than it helps.  

Having the son of a former president in office for the last seven years hasn’t worked out that well for us and American voters are inherently suspicious of political dynasties.   I believe voters want a candidate with the experience and skill set to hold the office but, at the same time, the desire for change is extremely strong.  

For all of the senator’s attributes, “change” is not something that comes to mind when thinking of a person who lived in the White House just seven years ago.     

Sen. Barack Obama is the true agent of change in this race. Many in the media have discounted him because he has less experience on the national scene than any of the other top-tier candidates (Clinton, Edwards or Bill Richardson). However, he has managed to distinguish himself as the candidate who may not have the most experience but makes up for it by better filing the mold of what the voters see as a modern leader.   

Additionally, he has met the biggest test of campaign viability, which is fundraising.   According to most recent contribution reports, Senator Obama has raised between 85 and 90 cents to every dollar Senator Clinton has raised.   For any individual to raise 85 to 90 percent of what someone with the last name of Clinton raised is an incredible feat.

The fundamental structure of a caucus also will help Senator Obama and likely former Sen. John Edwards and Governor Richardson as well.   Unless a candidate can win enough support to become “viable” on the first round, a second (and potentially more) round comes into play. 

Senator Clinton has always shared a problem with her husband.   No one is undecided on whether they like her or not so there’s precious little middle ground for her to build upon.   Anyone who didn’t support Senator Clinton in the first round is very unlikely to support her in the second or subsequent rounds. 

In contrast, Obama and Edwards are very likely to see their support rise as lower tier candidates are eliminated and realignment of support occurs.  If Senator Clinton cannot come in first on the initial round, it will be almost impossible to gain ground afterwards.   

Therefore Senator Clinton is truly at a disadvantage to the other candidates in this race.  She must run to win on the first round but many of the other candidates are just running for second place in hopes of building upon that during the realignment stage. 

Any athlete can tell you it’s a lot easier to come in second than first so Clinton has her work cut out for her.  

Clearly the Iowa caucus is just one election and 49 other states will soon follow.   Traditionally, though, the winner of Iowa is usually the front-runner for the rest of the campaign cycle.   If one looks back to 2004, that is exactly what happened when Sen. John Kerry won Iowa even though he was only expected to come in third at best.   After the win, he rode the momentum into New Hampshire and then subsequent states.  

New Hampshire will follow Iowa just a few days later with its primary election.   The dynamics here are, of course, much different than a caucus and it is a system we are familiar with here in Georgia.  

While I believe Senator Clinton is stronger in New Hampshire than Iowa, if she is not the winner in Iowa her support is likely not strong enough to propel her to a win in New Hampshire.   Should she lose both Iowa and New Hampshire, I believe her chances for 2008 are over.  Remember Howard Dean?

South Carolina will hold its primary on Jan. 29. At first glance, many would assume Senator Obama has an instant leg up in that race because of the fact that 50 percent of Democratic primary voters will be African-Americans.   However, Senator Clinton has a great deal of support in the African-American community and South Carolina voters have never elected an African-American candidate statewide. 

If Clinton is running with the momentum of a win in either Iowa or New Hampshire, she could win South Carolina but both Obama and Edwards are running strong and she certainly won’t take it without a fight.  Chances are Obama pulls this one off, too.

If any candidate wins all three or possibly even just two of these races, the nomination will be theirs.   Super Tuesday falls just a week later, on Feb. 5, and building enough momentum (not to mention raising enough money) to compete in those 19 states without having carried the earlier three races will be nearly impossible.  

I may kick myself for this later but my gut says Senator Obama is going to have a very good January.

The topics:

McCain-Obama

round three

-----

McCain-Obama

round two

-----

Biden v. Palin

-----

McCain-Obama

round one

-----

About those

VP candidates

----

A first look at the fall candidates

---

Picking a vice presidential candidate for 2008

---

The State of the Parties: March '08

-----

Super Tuesday aftermatch

-----

Do these early primaries work?

-----

Who won S. Carolina and why

-----

Who should win the Feb. 5 Georgia presidential primary?

ON THE RIGHT

Dr. Adam B. Clemons is a local educator with a doctorate in educational leadership. He also is the owner of ABC Design, a Republican political consulting and advertising firm. He has served in various capacities on federal, state and local GOP campaigns. He lives in Rome with his wife and two children. 

Presidential/congressional election predictions

Not a good night for the GOP but that 'Palin 2012' sticker already is on order

With just a few hours away to crowning someone “president-elect,” it now looks like there is a very strong chance that it will be President-Elect Barak Hussein Obama.

In looking at the electoral map, even if you give McCain the battleground states of Florida, Ohio, Arizona, North Dakota, Indiana and North Carolina, he also has to win Virginia AND Pennsylvania. I think Virginia will probably go for Obama and that gives him the 270 electoral votes needed to win.

It looks like Obama will carry the country with between 270 and 291 votes, with Pennsylvania staying in the blue column.

An Obama presidency does not scare me as much as the possible left lurch of the courts during the next four years. It is highly likely three supremes will retire and while the likely retirees are liberals, having younger judicial activist on the court would prolong the conservatives' battle of turning the court to the right for good.

The good news coming out of an Obama presidency will be 2010. Will America really be out of the war in Iraq by 2010? Will America’s economy be fiscally sound by 2010? Will we be better off in two years? It is very doubtful with someone with as much experience as Jimmy Carter taking the helm. And given how the liberal agenda of the Democratic Congress has been a big flop with the American people (15 percent approval rating on good days), an Obama presidency with 24-7 news coverage along with a Democratic Congress will lead to a new vigor of conservatism in 2010 as in 1994.

2010 will also be a good year because Gov. Sarah Palin will have a chance to get re-elected, beef up her resume, and prepare to clean up Washington in 2012. I’ve already got my “Palin 2012” bumper sticker ordered.

With the record number of Republicans retiring this year, Dems are sure to pick up a few seats in the House and Senate.

There are even a few Republican Senators I would not mind seeing beaten because they are primarily to blame for providing the horrible leadership of the conservative movement. Those Republicans are Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina and Ted “Bridge-to-Nowhere” Stevens of Alaska. These three have asked for more pork for their states, bloated the federal budget and have no idea what being a fiscal conservative really means.

Dems might very well reach 58 to 60 seats in the Senate. There could even be a scenario where Georgia becomes a huge battleground that would test the true colors of the Democratic and Republican parties. If either Jim Martin or Saxby Chambliss fails to go over the 50 percent plus one mark, this race will head into a December run-off. Forces from all over the U.S. would descend on Georgia, even more so if on Nov. 5 there are 59 Democratic senators. Obama himself would probably show up for Martin to try to reach the filibuster proof 60.

But, you better believe that every Republican in the country will try to do all they can to embarrass a President-elect Obama if he stumped for Martin.

For the House, the Dems will probably pick up about 20 seats. The ones to watch are those like Alabama’s 2nd Congressional District. In the 2nd, Democrat Bobby Bright is running away from the Pelosi and Obama crowd, hoping that enough conservative whites will vote for him as well those African Americans who tend to vote straight party Democrat.

Republican Jay Love, someone I personally got to know when I ran a judge’s campaign in 2000 in Montgomery, is trying to hold onto the GOP district. If this seat goes Democratic, the real test will be how so called “Blue Dogs” stand up to the liberals who are in the party’s leadership.

So, I expect 2008 to be a good night for my friends on the other side. We all get a winning season every now and then. Just look at the Alabama football team. As an Auburn alum and Republican, what a year! Ugh!

On McCain vs. Obama, Part III

Finally, the Big Mac attack is served

In the third and final debate of this presidential campaign, we finally saw the Big MAC attack. Time after time, when McCain is down and considered out, he comes out swinging.

First, this debate was the most interesting and informative of all three. I think it is attributed largely to the close proximity of the candidates and moderator Bob Schieffer;s unselfish ability to allow the candidates to talk to each other.

Second, like W’s last debate performance in ’04, McCain made this debate one of a conservative versus a liberal. It was big government knows best versus the ingenuity of the little guy like “Joe the Plumber.” Time after time, Obama’s solutions were more government control on issues like the economy, education and health care. McCain’s solutions were individual choices, less taxes and more freedom.

Third, the expectations game was in full swing coming into this debate. For Obama, it was to look presidential and in control. I think by allowing McCain to bring him off the issue of the economy and making Obama defensive, Obama struck out on these expectations. From his outlandish charge that 100 percent of McCain’s ads have been negative (I remember the night of Obama’s acceptance speech, McCain’s ad praising Obama and saying “congratulations”) to not repudiating John Lewis’ racially charged comments to being Carteresque in his response to why he doesn’t support free-trade with Columbia, Obama failed to be trustworthy and tested.

The expectation for McCain was to continue to fumble around and not really hit at Obama. Though he said he would “whip [Obama’s] you-know-what,” did anybody really believe him? Rush Limbaugh said before the debate that we, conservatives, should “expect to be disappointed” with McCain’s performance in this debate. McCain finally showed the toughness that got him through the Hanoi Hilton.

Fourth, I think the Bush factor was finally laid to rest tonight. The best line of the night was when McCain looked Obama in the eyes and said, “Senator Obama, I am not George Bush.” He then went on to say that Obama should have challenged Bush four years ago. It was the Reagan telling Carter “there you go again” moment that McCain needed.

Lastly, both candidates stated in the closing remarks that this election is about who will we trust to lead us over the next four to eight years. This last debate was the best contrast we have seen in this debate. If McCain can continue to draw the liberal versus conservative distinction, then he brings the country with him to the right and he wins this election. On every issue, including the economy, McCain must state how Obama is a big-spending, ‘spread-the-wealth’ liberal and McCain is a proven reformer who will cut government waste and be a steady hand.

On McCain vs. Obama, Part II

No 'waves' for McCain but straight talk on why experience matters in tough times

Sen. John McCain needed to make head waves in the Bellmont debate. Unfortunately, he did not.

For anyone who has been paying any attention to the campaign up to this point, you heard the same exact thing from both candidates. This campaign has been dragging on for so long that both of the candidates cannot think much beyond what they have been preaching over and over, day after day on the campaign trail.

Here are a few questions they addressed in this debate that caught my attention:

Healthcare is such a complicated issue that it cannot be addressed in just a few minutes and should not be. Before Tuesday’s debate, I watched a rerun of the 1992 debate with the same format that included Perot, Clinton and the older Bush. A question was asked about healthcare in that debate, and oddly enough, Clinton started out his answer the exact same way that Sen. Barak Obama did. They both stated, “As I travel around this country, healthcare is the one issue I get asked about the most.” This affirms that Democrats know this is a fear issue that moves people to their side, and if they promise free healthcare as if it were free candy on Halloween, uninformed voters will eat it up. The problem is, with Obama’s plan, the rest of us get stuck paying for his socialized plan whereas with McCain’s plan, we would get to choose.

Regardless of who is elected, in 16 years, the Democratic nominee will still say that healthcare is the biggest issue. Mark my words that if Obama gets elected, little to nothing would get done about it. Why would Democrats throw away one of their number one issues that moves voters?

I think McCain hit it right on the money when he was asked what Americans would be asked to sacrifice if the economy is still going down hill next year. McCain basically laid it out on the line by stating that earmarks, both good and bad, would mainly have to be sacrificed. Now this is easier for people in like us to comprehend because we saw leaders such as state Sen. Preston Smith recently ask for his earmarks from the state not to be granted to our area. Not because it was politically popular but it was the right thing to do to help our state solve its budget crisis. Every congressman and senator should put aside re-election politics and follow McCain’s lead in not asking for earmarks until this crisis is resolved. While just about all will argue that their earmarks are good for their district, now is the time to make this sacrifice for the good of America as a whole.

The last question I think McCain did well on was what he did not know. While Obama avoided the question with “I’ll talk about what I do know,” McCain’s answer was about the uncertainty of what lies ahead. He gave his best argument for why he needs to be president in this answer than any other time. It basically boiled down to trusting McCain’s experience or riding Obama’s cloud in the sky.

By the way, I hate watching post-debate analysis (reading ones like this are not so bad, right?). They always have cynics, usually the majority of people they interview or have on as “experts,” saying that the candidates were not specific enough. What person in the world can be specific in two, three or even five minutes? Don’t be lazy. If you want to know where they stand on the issues, there are the candidates’ websites that you can visit or the non-partisan issues groups who have information on their websites. We live in 2008; please use what is at our finger tips and quit complaining. If they did talk specifics, 99 percent of the people would say it was too boring, including the ones who say they want specifics.  

After two debates, I do not think the next debate will make any difference in this campaign. I hope I am wrong, but I doubt it.

We are seeing that outside factors are impacting this election much more than the rhetoric of either candidate.

On the Biden v. Palin debate

Debate gives Americans the chance to see, hear the real, unedited Sarah Palin

It was a Sarah! night at the only vice presidential debate for the 2008 campaign season.

Gov. Sarah Palin knocked it out of the park. She showed she can be feisty, progressive and a regular gal who knows how to speak to the heart and soul of America.

For the past four weeks, the liberals in the mainstream media have been feeding what they want America to know about Sarah Palin. The leftist elites on shows like such as The View--minus Elizabeth, of course-- have clawed and cut at Palin because she represents the end of radical feminism in America.

The “expert” analysts of the major news networks have all been writing the obituary of Sarah Palin. At this debate, America got “some straight talk” without edits or cut-and-paste journalism.  America was able to see Governor Palin be the whole Governor Palin.

At the debate, Governor Palin was a true reflection of America. Like Palin, hardworking, average Americans like you and me are always pegged by the liberal elitist as dumb and illogical. And yet, like the always-prevailing American spirit, Governor Palin proved them wrong, showed she has what it takes to be one heartbeat away, and held her own against a professional politician. She related to average Americans by knowing about being a mom, struggling with her husband to raise her kids, running a small business and being concerned about household finances.

She was direct, good on her feet and proved she has good common sense.

Sen. Joe Biden was well prepared and ready to rumble. You could tell he is a professional politician and career senator.

I did find it interesting that Biden seemed to mention Sen. John McCain’s name twice as much as he mentioned his running mate. I was glad to see Governor Palin call Senator Biden out on always talking about the past when Obama-Biden promise “change” for the future. I wish more would have been given to why, if Biden thought McCain was so wrong so many times, did he say he would gladly run with McCain.

Biden reinforced the Obama-Biden promise: more socialism, more transfer of wealth and more surrender at any cost on the war on terror. I just hope Americans can see through it.

My hunch is that McCain gets a bounce out of this as women voters come around to liking a reflection of themselves as possibly being the next VP.

The best news out of this debate is that if McCain wins, we will have an awesome VP.  If he fails, we will have what I presume will be an awesome nominee in 2012 with Sarah Palin at the top of the ticket.

Regardless of your political leanings, all of us who have daughters and granddaughters should be proud of Governor Palin’s outstanding example set at this debate.

On the first McCain-Obama debate

No real winner as McCain-Obama

showdown comes up 'boring'

With the first debate under their belts, I think both John McCain and Barak Obama held their own and there was no clear winner.

On the economy, Obama had no answer for what he would cut in government to handle the outcome of the potential bailout and gave no specifics on his economic plan. McCain was specific in the areas he would not cut and specific in the area he would cut the most, government pork projects. Personally, I was disappointed that neither addressed the weakness of the dollar and their plan to strengthen it. Hopefully the weak dollar will be addressed in the “economic” debate.

On foreign policy, there was no doubt who was the experienced candidate on the issue. And though I do not agree with McCain on every foreign policy issue, he showed he had the judgment and ability to be the Commander-in-Chief on day one. Obama seemed to concur with McCain’s judgment ability as I recorded where he agreed with McCain eight times on fundamental issues.

Obama showed his naivety in threatening strikes in Pakistani territory, trying to use a play on words to disguise his position of not having preconditions on meeting with enemy heads of state, and his misunderstanding of the threat Russia plays on democracies around the world.

Will this debate change the election? No.

Did McCain do what he had to do, which was show up and reinforce his foreign policy expertise? Yes.

Did Obama do what he had to do, which was not make any major blunders and appeal to his “surrender at any cost” base? Yes.

Will more people watch the Palin-Biden debate? I would put money on it.

What two words would the average American use to describe this debate? “Fundamentally” boring.  

On Palin joining the John McCain campaign

McCain hits a bulls eye by picking Sarah Palin as his running mate

Wow! Senator John McCain's selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was an absolute stroke of genius.  

Senator McCain balanced his ticket with someone who has executive experience and a personal story that resonates with every American of humble origins. Her selection confirms that McCain is a true reformer and political maverick.     

To the critics who say she lacks experience, she has been in elected office since 1992, four years earlier than the person at the top of the Democratic ticket. She has executive experience as a mayor, ethics commissioner and Alaska's governor, which again, far outweighs Obama's few years as a federal and state legislator.  

Sarah Palin is someone who has real examples of change rather than a bunch of hot air floating a "Mile High."   As the father of a 3-year-old daughter, I am excited at the prospect of my daughter seeing Sarah Palin as an America leader for the next four, eight, or possibly 16 years, if we are so blessed. How wonderful would that be for my daughter and the millions of other daughters and granddaughters in America!  

Right on the issues of life, energy, reform, and the Second Amendment, Governor Palin has energized the conservative base and will be a VP of whom America can be proud.

What an exciting time to be a conservative and a Republican!

On Biden joining the Barack Obama campaign

Biden will overshadow Obama as

Dems follow Bush-Cheney template

Having lived in Delaware and still having family there, first let me say that I am proud for the First State's historic opportunity to have a chance to be in the spotlight.  

In consideration of his choice, I felt that Obama had the difficult task of filling the "experience" void but hoping not to repeat the Lloyd Bentson problem of '88 when, near the end of the campaign, all the Dems were wishing Bentson was the No. 1 man.

Obama must have felt he needed to follow the Bush/Cheney model of picking a VP with strong foreign policy credentials. This should be reassuring for those Dems who love to hate Bush/Cheney.

Joe Biden has many things going against him. Here are just a few:

>1) Biden (and his hair plugs) will overshadow Obama.

>2) Biden likes to hear himself talk more than Bill Clinton (even if it is not his own speech)

>and 3) Biden likes to flirt with the ladies (reminds me of another recent Dem VP nominee).

I look forward to the liberal fest in Denver. It is always nice to watch a comedy after the Olympics.

What John McCain must do to win Nov. 4

McCain's keys: Bio, the 'base,' new voice, motivation, no 'McBush'

What will it take for John McCain to win in November? Just five simple steps.

First, McCain must run on his biography. Nothing sells like a good story and John McCain has a great story. Women voters especially like to hear biographical pitches and they tend to eat it up even more when the candidate’s spouse tells the story.

Though many know the story of John McCain, people need to be reminded over and over about how he faced the enemy as a POW, never gave up and became a better man because of his devotion to country. Bios beat rhetoric any day.

Second, McCain must galvanize the conservative base. Sure, he was not the first choice of many conservatives but when fiscal and social conservatives realize that McCain is right on the issues that matter, he will win them over. It is a known fact that McCain is not liked by many of his fellow senators, from both parties. That is actually something that should be highlighted more often, particularly the reason why they don’t like him. He hates pork.

He and Sen. Tom Coburn are the two most disliked senators on The Hill because they have stood in the way of pork projects that many congressmen were counting on to win re-election. It was McCain who stood with Coburn in opposing Sen. Ted Stevens’s (R-Alaska) “bridge to nowhere.”

He also can galvanize the base by selecting a social and fiscal conservative as vice president. Though the media has its favorites, I just don’t see McCain picking some of the ones they are floating like Romney or Crist. Watch it be someone we have not really thought about.

Third, McCain has to find his voice. A great speaker McCain is not. He cannot give a good speech unless he is just feeling it. He seems very uneasy when he is giving a speech behind a podium and has to read the teleprompter. I will admit that Obama beats him in the speech category hands down.

I’ve said it before, McCain’s best speech was right after his South Caroline victory. Maybe we will see that same style at the convention but I am not hopeful. Expect to hear “my friends” about 200 times and him only looking at the camera when the delegates are clapping.

Fourth, McCain must use the convention to motivate the givers. Up to this point, McCain has had little time to campaign because he has had to fundraise. This is really OK because it is too early anyway but Obama’s supporters are so motivated that Obama could sneeze and he would get 100,000 get well cards (mostly from the media) and $1.5 million enclosed.

The Republican Party has a great fundraising base. As a matter of fact, the GOP out raises the DNC every year. If McCain can convince those who give to the RNC to also give to him, he will be much better off than Obama.

Fifth, McCain has to separate himself from W. This will be tough especially with the convention coming up. Obama is saying a McCain presidency will just be McBush or Bush’s third term. McCain will not lose the base if he distances himself from Bush.

He would actually get more respect for it from the base.

Early on, McCain made the mistake of changing his position on his opposition to the Bush tax cuts. While he should have been for them all along, he lost a lot of ground with a lot of people when he reversed his position and said he now supports them.

Americans, even Republicans, buy the notion that tax cuts are not a good thing when the government it operating in deficit spending.

I still think McCain wins big in November. I think the debates will help McCain but what is really winning it for him is the e-mail campaign being waged against Obama. Many, many e-mails are floating around out there that has many red-blooded Americans fearful about Obama’s middle name and his dad’s religious influence.  You just cannot poll fear. It is an emotion that skews the polls by 5 to 15 percent.

First take on the fall elections

Gingrey gets it when it comes to politics; governor's mansion next?

I can think of 1.3 million reasons Democrat Bud Gammon should not be running for the U.S. House against Congressman Phil Gingrey. That is the amount Gingrey raised by the end of June.

Astonishingly, almost a million of it came not from the political action groups in Washington or the Republican caucus but from individuals who were personally solicited by Gingrey.

I had a John Bircher friend who not long ago passed away. He was a big Larry McDonald fan and supported one of Gingrey’s primary opponents back in 2002. He told me several times that Gingrey would call him about every three months after Gingrey was elected and ask this Bircher for $1,000. The interesting part is that the Bircher never gave but Gingrey is one of the few politicians who has the guts to ask over and over again, even when told “no.”

I must admit that when I consult with political candidates, I always mention the fundraising machine Gingrey. He is every consultant's ideal candidate. He is hardworking, votes the way that his constituency desires and asks for money every chance he gets.

I will not focus much on Gammon because he has as much chance as the last Democrat who ran against Gingrey, whatever that guy's name was. I honestly thought that if there was a “send a message to Washington” message, it would have been in 2006. But there was none in the 11th district.

Instead, the bigger focus this year should be on what Gingrey decides to do in 2010 and how he prepares for it. With Sonny Perdue on his way out, Gingrey, Casey Cagle, John Oxendine, Lynn Westmoreland, Glenn Richardson and probably a few others are all testing the waters to see if their message resonates with the Republican faithful.

Gingrey would be wise to spend as much as he could on TV ads on Atlanta, Columbus and Chattanooga stations. By spending a million or more on ads in these areas, he could essentially run biographical and ideological ads in these markets to not only appeal to his base in his district but the millions of other Georgians who have no clue as to who Gingrey is (unless they watch C-SPAN). Since he has really nothing to lose and only to gain, and the ability to raise it again if needed, this would be Gingrey’s wisest political move.

As a rock-solid social conservative and fundraising machine, the GOP would have a great nominee in Gingrey. It also would be nice for someone who is very familiar with Northwest Georgia (you can often spot Gingrey’s black SUV with its “Congressman” license plate traveling the streets of Rome, Cedartown and even Summerville) to be our state’s executive. Imagine if we had a Governor Gingrey and a congressman from Floyd or Bartow.

Congressman Nathan Deal also should have little to worry about. His token opponent is the former chair of the Walker County Democrats, a county which now has about as many Democrats in office as Obama’s years in the Senate.

U.S. Senate: With little going on in the last Republican Primary, my wife went over and voted in the Democratic Primary. She asked my opinion as to whom she should vote for in the U.S. Senate race and I told her what I think is basically a valid statement:  Vernon Jones has the best chance of getting beat by U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss and if by some chance a Democrat did win in November, he would probably be the more conservative than Jim Martin. If I am not mistaken, I believe Jones actually endorsed George W. Bush in 2004 over Kerry.

I like Jim Martin’s ads and campaign style but when Buddy Childers ran an ad in the newspaper a week before the primary, I knew for sure Jones was the more conservative choice.

It will be very unlikely that Chambliss gets defeated by Jones or Martin, even if Georgia gets caught up in Obamamania. He has a solid conservative record and has done a good job of getting around the state.

Republicans: Primaries in the rear view mirror

Primary's peaks, valleys; forecast-- a 40-state landslide for McCain

Q: Biggest surprise of the 2008 primary?

A: Though many could argue John McCain’s comeback to reclaim frontrunner status as the biggest surprise of the GOP primary, I would have to go with Mike Huckabee’s come from nowhere to almost nominee. A year ago, no one outside of political pundits had even heard of Huckabee but his charisma and outstanding debate performances shot him up in the polls and made him the candidate of the social conservatives. When Fred Thompson failed to fill the void of “the social conservative” candidate, the preacher from Arkansas proved himself worthy of their votes and possibly a VP spot.

Q: Biggest flop?

A: Fred Thompson. Many conservatives, including myself, had high hopes for the tall Tennessean. Little did we know that he could not perform without a script and that he would campaign at the pace of molasses dripping from a wooden spoon. Some say that he didn’t have that fire in the belly. Some say his wife called the shots and she didn’t know what she was doing. Whatever the reason, Fred could have been the nominee if he had just cared enough to try. As I’ve said before, it is against the conservative ideology to reward laziness.

Q: Who would have made the best first-lady?

A: Ann Romney would probably have fit the role of first lady better than any of the other candidates' wives. She is a strong supporter of at-risk youth, devoted mother and grandmother, and her mannerism would be a welcomed continuation in the Laura Bush mold.

I must also say that Janet Huckabee would have been the most fun to watch first lady. If you followed the primary at all you probably learned early on that Mrs. Huckabee was full of laughter and humor. She was not at all shy at throwing a snowball in her husband’s face or besting him in lassoing a bull-horned bail of hay.

Q. Biggest comeback?

A. It is without a doubt that John McCain is truly like a phoenix. When times have gotten tough for this former POW, he has always buckled down, refocused his attention and risen to the occasion at hand.

Last summer, McCain’s frontrunner status had fallen, his campaign was bankrupt, and it looked like his finest days were behind him. Refocusing, McCain played it smart by dropping out of Iowa and moving his troops back to New Hampshire. South Carolina was McCain’s finest moment and his speech that night was one in which he needs to emulate at the convention. Not only was his victory in South Carolina what clinched the nomination for him, it was the ultimate comeback considering his defeat in the state in 2000.

Q. Worst mistake by a major candidate?

A. Mitt Romney’s negative attacks on Huckabee in Iowa, John McCain in New Hampshire and Florida, and then his allowing Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity to continue the attacks on McCain turned out to be the worst moments of the campaign. Romney’s own flip-flopping on issues of gay-marriage and abortion made him have high negatives. It was unfortunate that his campaign decided to bring up the negatives of Huckabee and McCain along the way. With Huckabee and McCain complimenting each other and playing nice during their front-runner status, Romney’s negativity only hurt his chances to be a VP or the 2012 nominee.

Q. Candidate to watch in 2012?

A. If McCain does not win the general or does not seek re-election, which is a foreign concept in modern-day presidential politics, I would guess that Huckabee and Romney would run again. But I do not think the 2012 race will be limited by any means if there is not a McCain 2012 re-election campaign. I would think Gov. Charlie Crist of Florida, Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and/or Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota would all like to run if they are re-elected by their home states.

Q. Biggest external influence on voters?

A. The Bush factor had the biggest external influence on the GOP primary. The candidates had to straddle the fence between those who support the president’s war effort in Iraq and those who thought a new way (if not complete pull-out) is necessary. The Bush factor also was central to deflating the conservative base. It was Bush who had the “political capital,” to use his words, to make the government more fiscally sound and responsible but he did not lead when he could have.

It also will be interesting to see what role the Bush factor plays in the general election. Though Democrats like to say it will be a Bush third term, most Americans know that McCain is no George W. Bush.

Q. Best speech or quote?

A. "Jesus was too smart to ever run for public office.” – Mike Huckabee in an answer at the Nov. 28 CNN/YouTube debate when asked what position Jesus would take on the death penalty.

Q. What the nominee must do to win in November?

A. Solidify the base by selecting a vice president who has social conservative credentials, stop calling his audience “my friends” at the start of every sentence, stop speaking from the teleprompter and from the heart, and start telling his story to the American people because it is one amazing biography. McCain will win in a landslide with 40 states.

Republicans: McCain's age shapes VP choice

Two governors in the hunt;

would Condi say yes if asked?

This year is looking better and better for the GOP to maintain the White House. Sure, W’s disapproval rating is the highest of any modern president but liberals, moderates, and now conservatives have basically turned a deaf ear to the man who could have been.

First, let me state that Hillary Clinton should put Jeremiah Wright on her ticket. I’m sure she is tickled pink at Wright’s “descriptive not destructive” ego trip. If his actions do not secure Hillary the nomination, I hope the GOP foots his speaking engagements from here on out.

Probably not since Ike’s 1952 selection of Richard Nixon for VP has more attention been paid to whom the GOP will nominate for vice president. History has shown some vice presidents to be non-issues and disposable (i.e., Abe Lincoln’s vice president Hannibal Hamlin). History also has shown that choosing wisely can be politically beneficial (i.e., Bill Clinton’s vice president Al Gore).  But then there is former Vice President Dan Quayle.

John McCain will be 72 if he were to win and be inaugurated as the 44th president. I won’t lie to you, that is old. They say the presidency ages the men who serve by 10 years, so you could theoretically say that in 2012, his body would be the age of an 86-year-old. Now, that being said, his mother is 96 years old and a very active and sharp woman. If he takes after her, McCain may just be the Energizer Bunny.

If elected, McCain will be a great president in the mode of Ronald Reagan and Teddy Roosevelt. There is no doubt in my mind. I would sincerely hope that if he proves to be the fiscal disciplinarian and social conservative he professes to be that he would seek another term in 2012.

But, what if he decides to be a one-term president. Or, what if the vice president has to assume the office during his presidency. Those two “what if’s” are the reasons it will be critical in the minds of the Republican delegates to select a strong McCain VP.

McCain is in a box. He knows that these two “what if’s” exist. He knows that 80 percent of the RNC delegates will not accept any VP nominee who is not a strong anti-abortion, social conservative. He also knows that he needs the conservative base to be excited about his presidency, even if it is excitement for the number two.

McCain’s first choice for VP should be Mike Huckabee. No other candidate is more articulate and solid on social issues than Huckabee. He proved to be a strong candidate who is extremely friendly and puts social conservatism in terms other than just being a Bible-thumping ideology. I doubt McCain will pick him but he should.

As for the other POTUS want-to-be’s, Mitt Romney is out because he proved he has no appeal to social conservatives. Rudy is too liberal. Fred Thompson proved he doesn’t care, plus can you imagine 5-foot-7 McCain standing next to 6-foot-4 Fred. I cannot even remember the other guys.

I expect McCain to pick either South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford or Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal.

Sanford is probably the odds-on-favorite because of his maverick image and his conservative credentials. Elected to Congress in 1994, he term-limited himself (and stuck to his promise) and opposed pork-barrel projects even when they helped his district. He was elected SC’s governor in 2002, and even released pigs into the Republican-led state House of Representatives to protest their pork projects. Unfortunately, guys like Sanford are not too common and usually shy away from entering presidential politics.

I know some of you probably think I am crazy at even mentioning Jindal. He is Indian-American and would only meet the age requirement by two years. He would be 37 on inauguration day. But, consider that the media will be harping on the fact that either Obama will be the first African-American president or Hillary the first female president, McCain needs something besides the fact that he will be the oldest POTUS.

Jindal has an impressive resume. At the age of 24, he was appointed head of Louisiana’s Department of Health and Hospitals, and turned a huge Medicaid financial deficit into a surplus. Later he was elected to Congress and now serves as governor. A fiscal and social conservative, Jindal would appeal to the base as well as many younger voters.

I have not mentioned Condi Rice. I think there is a 99 percent chance she would decline. But I do think she would probably be the only quasi-abortion rights supporter that social conservatives would accept. If McCain was able to get her on the ticket, I think the election would be over at her acceptance speech at the convention.

Republicans: State of the Party

As GOP heals, e-mails are

pummeling 'rock star' Obama

I will admit 2008 isn’t looking that great for the national GOP. We do not have a “rock star” candidate, our candidates have not drawn the crowds that faint at the end of every exclamation or applaud at every sneeze, and we do not have the dollars rolling in like “today may just be the day” day (well, except Ron Paul’s candidacy).

Is the party fractured? I do not think so. After the long party primary, the radio talking heads have calmed down and are beginning to realize that the only thing that really may unite conservatives in the fall is Clinton II. So they have set their sights on Barack Obama with the hope that a few Republicans might swing over and help Clinton in the nomination fight.

As Obama’s RFK-charisma sweeps the media and lefties off their feet, the GOP has really been quietly watching the Clintons squirm and Obama glow. We now have our candidate, John McCain, and everyone is wondering what Mike Huckabee is doing, besides blowing his VP chances.

One of the good things for McCain is that the primary season ended relatively early on our side. Political cartoonist Thomas Nast pinned us correctly as an elephant way back in the late 1800s. Like elephants, Republicans have a good memory, and it takes a long time for us to forgive and forget. A rough Republican primary requires a lot of time for wounds to heal.

Statewide and locally, the GOP is looking good. Nothing would get Georgia’s red-meat conservatives to the polls faster than the name Hillary Rodham Clinton. Clinton’s name alone is worth at least a 10-percent advantage to every Republican on the ballot in Floyd County. Despite that, I must hand it to Floyd GOP chair Martha Bryant for making the local GOP an organized and well-oiled machine.

Obama remains a mystery for Republicans. We know the Clintons; they make for great jokes and successful fundraising letters. I have a feeling that if Obama gets the nomination that the one thing that denies him the White House will be the silent but deadly e-mail campaign.

I recently was in Delaware for a funeral. I was told by two different people on two separate occasions that there is no way they would 1) vote for a Muslim, 2) vote for someone who’s middle name is Hussein, and 3) vote for someone who did not say the pledge. And these were from people who are Democrats in a fairly blue state!

This was the first time I realized the impact the anti-Obama e-mails were having on average Americans.

This is the whisper campaign that every campaign fears. It has not affected liberals because this is stuff they do not care about but think of the millions of moderates and conservatives whose e-mail boxes have been slammed with notes about Obama’s faith, his patriotism, his family, his drug use and on and on. Not one is about his being the most liberal senator in the U.S. Senate.

Though some of the e-mails about Obama have fallacies (I must admit I never correct someone when they tell me about one of these Obama e-mails unless they ask me if it is true), there is little he can do to stop it. Americans are fickle people. We can love a rock star when he is hot but if something terrible happens between Obama’s coronation at the convention and the general election, watch Americans quickly begin to salute Old Fuss & Feathers McCain.

To fully understand this, here are two direct quotes from two non-primary voters in two very different states:

> “He [Obama] is exactly what the terrorist want us to have so that they can have one of their own in the White House”

>“There ain’t no way I’m voting for a Hussein for President.”

Ask yourself, how many e-mails about Obama have you received?

Maybe 2008 isn’t looking so bad after all.

Super Tuesday aftermath

McCain close to nomination;

Huckabee his vice president?

Super Tuesday crowned John McCain the GOP’s Superman, Mike Huckabee the GOP’s Southernman and Mitt Romney the GOP’s Silverman.

What is most interesting out of Tuesday’s vote is what happened in Floyd County, Georgia and the rest of the southern states. All along, the conservative radio personalities were essentially saying a vote for Huckabee was a vote for McCain. Well, little did these pundits realize, many southerners were OK with that scenario and continued to stick with the candidate that most represents their social values – Mike Huckabee. If that gave the state to McCain, he was truly many social conservatives' second choice anyway.

If you look at a map county-by-county in many parts of the country, most Huckabee votes came from rural areas. That is where his base is and that is how George Bush won in 2004. And, that is why Huckabee is setting himself up to be a very logical VP choice for McCain. McCain needs a solid social conservative to lift him up in the rural areas as he takes his case to America’s metropolitan areas where the moderates and independents reside.

Romney had to be extremely disappointed by last night’s defeat in the south, Missouri and California. He won a lot of bronze and silvers Tuesday, and holds a distant silver in delegate count. His message and money could not buy enough social conservative votes to be a force against McCain.

But for Romney, it is now time to hang it up, pull the choke chain on his attack dogs on talk radio and embrace McCain. His name wouldn’t look too bad on our currency as a future Treasury secretary.

Huckabee will stay in until Romney gets out. He has been very frugal in his spending and has had the biggest bang for the buck. After last night’s victories, he will probably have some more money coming in to continue his message of social conservatism and fair taxation.

About these early primaries ...

A rare primary season for GOP has shown some 'true colors'

When I was a kid, Cyndi Lauper had a great song called “True Colors.” Well, I have always told my political clients that during elections, you will always find out the “true colors” of your friends and relatives because they will either support you or act like they don’t know you. For Republicans, the 2008 presidential primary process has allowed everyone’s true colors to shine through.

I predict that John McCain will win the majority of the delegates at stake on Super Tuesday. Romney will win Utah (if he doesn’t, someone should investigate) and probably a few less-populated states like Montana or Alaska. What will be most interesting will be what happens in the South. I personally will vote for Huckabee but I have a feeling McCain will win in the South, too. I just don’t see Romney pulling my fellow evangelicals away from Huckabee.

I’ve stated from the beginning that I would be OK with McCain as the nominee. I’ve been mad at him in the past over his joining Ted Kennedy in drafting amnesty legislation and his leadership in the Gang of 14 who blocked many conservative federal court appointments but the overall McCain I am fine with.

I have been amazed at the talk radio personalities like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham at their sheer hatred of McCain, and how they have come out heavily for Romney. These are the same people who viciously attack Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the Clintons for polarizing America, and only putting the left agenda first, and yet when the possible GOP nominee is a person who has a history of reaching across the aisle, defusing the polarization of American politics, working for what he thinks is for the betterment of the country (I’m not saying it always is), they wail and gnash their teeth.

These folks are showing their true colors. To them, Romney’s “I’m a reformed man” promises are more believable than McCain’s conservative Senate record.

Here is why I am okay with McCain:

1) He has a strong pro-life voting record as a member of the House and Senate.

2) Remember the infamous Alaskan Republican Senator Ted Stevens’ “bridge to nowhere.” It was McCain’s leadership that brought it to an end. McCain has a proven track record of voting against pork-barrel politics. Remember, that is why we lost in 2006, folks. Republicans were spending like there was no tomorrow. McCain will at least straighten that out.

3) I’m not a supporter of any war that is not declared by Congress. But we are in Iraq and we need a leader who is willing to be tough on terror and has the wisdom to implement a more humble foreign policy. No doubt, McCain has that experience.

4) He can beat Clinton or Obama. I have no doubt. Though I wish I could truly say that about the other Republicans, I think McCain is our best hope at retaining the White House considering the lack of popularity of the current occupant.

But I’m still holding out hope for Huckabee (if not for POTUS, at least the vice presidency).

This primary election has been one of the most exciting I have every experienced. I guess as a Republican, it is great to see our party go through the process with no heir apparent. For years we’ve seen the Democrats have these kinds of primaries; I hope we can be just as united once it is all over.

Despite the cry from many media pundits, I believe the current process works. Having Iowa and New Hampshire go first forces many candidates to be on the ground talking with voters. With no major metropolitan area, any reasonable candidate can state their case for the presidency to the average Joe, in person, sometimes three or four times.

With South Carolina and Florida not too far after, we get a bellwether state of the south and a chance for the retirees of America to have their say in Florida. I think having a national primary of sorts, Super Tuesday, is a good follow-up to allow the candidate with the most momentum to basically wrap up the nomination.

It is hard to tell if having earlier primaries is good. It will mean a long 2008, which may be the best thing for the GOP since the nominee-to-be might have some fences to mend. 

The GOP South Carolina vote

McCain's South Carolina win could power him to nomination

John McCain's narrow victory in South Carolina may very well have won him the nomination.  

Why did McCain win in South Carolina? Three big reasons:

>1) The Fred Factor: Fred Thompson ran to the right of and put all of his artillery fire on Mike Huckabee.

>2) Economics: U.S. senators Lindsay Graham (SC) and Tom Coburn (OK) came out heavy for McCain this week. For fiscal conservatives who are tired of runaway, pork-barrel government spending, Graham and Coburn are the deficit-hawks of the Republican Party in the U.S. Senate and they carry a lot of weight. McCain also earned points by bucking the President's call for tax cuts with the McCain call for less government spending.

>3) The Establishment Vote: McCain is slowly winning over the old guard's support, pulling support away from Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani.

*Democrats vote in S. Carolina next week

The Georgia Primary

11 months later, the reasons

I like Mike (Huckabee)

As Georgians watch the political circus unfold in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, we must begin, if we have not already done so, to align ourselves with a candidate.

Here are my thoughts on the GOP candidates, and whom I would encourage you to support on Feb. 5 to be the Republican nominee:

• Rudy Giuliani: Personally, I like the guy. Even for a New Yorker, he seems like someone who genuinely cares about people and would take the time to talk to the cooks in the back if on a political stop at a restaurant, not just those who were in sight of the cameras. But Giuliani’s general election strategy would be catastrophic for the party. Though he says he is the only candidate who would be competitive in blue states, he fails to realize his stance on social issues would kill him in the red states. Evangelicals, including this one, would either vote for a third party candidate or not vote at all. His social stances are in total conflict with the party’s platform.

• Mitt Romney: I’ve said it before and I will say it again, the guy reminds me too much of John Kerry. Romney is willing to say anything to get elected and he has flip-flopped on so many issues that he makes Hillary Clinton look principled. I think Romney and Kerry even share the same Massachusetts hair stylist.

• John McCain: Old Fuss and Feathers lives. I honestly would not be surprised at all if McCain becomes the nominee by out-flanking Romney and Giuliani in New Hampshire and Florida, and becoming the old guard’s alternative to Mike Huckabee, who is not at all their favorite. McCain has always talked a good talk, and though he reminds me a little of Bob Dole, I would be fine but not excited with McCain as our standard-bearer.

• Fred D. Thompson: The D stands for “disappointment.” I had high hopes for good ol’ Fred. A native Southerner with commanding looks and an actor-turned-politician-- he was everything conservatives like me had hoped for in this race. Well, so we thought. We were warned by the media elites that Thompson would not aggressively campaign and that he would just expect the conservatives to rally him to victory. They said the delayed entry into the fray was a prime example but I had faith. I even started watching Law & Order (and fell in love with it) just to get my Thompson fix when he was flirting with a run. Then, in September, he announced with a great, big… dud. Instead of bursting out of the gates with full force and the energy of a modern day campaign, he resorted to the front porch campaign of the Harding-era. To beat the Democratic machine, one must work for the nomination and the office. Republicans have never been ones to reward laziness; it is against our very being.

And so, we are down to two.

• Ron Paul; Fiscally, Ron Paul is my favorite. I believe Dr. Paul, who also serves as a congressman from Texas, is the only politician running who actually believes in following the Constitution literally. I have heard others, including other GOP candidates, scoff at this notion when Dr. Paul suggest it should be followed, as if they believe the Constitution is an outdated suggestion column written by some 18th century Dr. Phils. Following the Constitution, eliminating the Federal Reserve, getting the dollar back on the gold standard, returning to the Washington-Jefferson philosophy of a non-imperial foreign policy, and stopping the nanny-welfare state of our government, all sound great to me. As Cicero once said, “Every good and perfect thing has within itself the seeds of its own destruction through an excess of its virtue.” I believe Ron Paul knows this. Unfortunately for America’s posterity and Dr. Paul, most Americans do not, and President Paul will never happen. Just ask President Goldwater. Knowing a noble but lost cause when I see one, I support Dr. Paul’s efforts but will not vote for him unless a miracle happens in January.

• Mike Huckabee: Eleven months ago, I would never have thought that I would say I will actually vote for Mike Huckabee. I liked Huckabee from the start but never thought he would have a fighting chance. I was certain of this until the Nov. 28 CNN/YouTube Debates. It was during that debate, particularly when a question was asked about what Jesus would do about the death penalty, that Huckabee proved he could handle the liberal elites with a sharp elbow, an infectious grin and the ability to make everyone laugh with his quick wit. Unlike any other candidate, Democrat or Republican, Huckabee has been preaching persuasion almost his whole life. He is the most articulate candidate ever to run for president in the age of television, even more so than President Reagan.  The ability to communicate is essential in today’s day and age -- just ask President Bush. It takes a good communicator to sell conservative public policy.But even I know that preaching persuasion has to be backed with substance. Huckabee has made the Fair Tax the centerpiece of his economic plan. He supports a constitutional amendment to protect the sanctity of life. He is dedicated to making us energy independent by 2016. And he has proven that he will not follow the hard line of neo-cons but will stand on his own two feet when fighting the war on terror.

That is why I am supporting Huckabee and why I think Georgia Republicans should too.

On the New Hampshire vote          

McCain vs. Huckabee

As expected, Old Fuss and Feathers (John McCain) won the GOP New Hampshire Primary. An establishment Republican who is adored by the media, though not to the extent to which Obama is, McCain's victory speech motivated me to... go to sleep. My goodness, the guy just reminds me too much of Bob Dole. He has "establishment" written all over him.  

Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson might as well hang it up. The ballgame is now between Mike Huckabee and McCain, and I still think it is Huckabee's to lose. I think the bigger question out of NH is what happened to Rudy Giuliani. Here is a guy who should have done well in NH, campaigned relatively hard there throughout the year and barely finished fourth.  

The good news for the Huckabee campaign is that he finished a solid third when, a couple of weeks ago, he was almost dead last.

Lastly, I have to mention the Democratic Primary because it, too, helps Huckabee. Ninety percent of the NH Primary coverage for the next few days will be about Hillary's comeback and how the media misread the Obama surge. So, McCain will suffer from a lack of "The Mac is Back" love fest.  

I truly believe Hillary's turning point came on Monday when she choked up when asked about how she handles the toughness of the campaign. My wife and I actually talked about how we sympathized with her, and I'm sure it is tough to run for office as a woman when people want to talk more about what dress you are wearing than where you stand on the issues.

And, I think many NH Democrats sympathized with her, too. If she gets off-script like she did in that moment and campaigns with real passion, she might well become the nominee.

On the Iowa Caucus aftermath          

Huckabee, agent of change

We want Change! That is the message from both Republican and Democratic caucus-goers.

For Republicans, Mike Huckabee was the anti-establishment candidate who motivated not only the evangelical base but also those Republicans who embrace big ideas (i.e., Huckabee's Fair Tax).

The bounce he gets out of Iowa, and playing bass on Jay Leno, will boost him to a solid third or even second place finish in New Hampshire. The only problem Huckabee will have in NH is that many Republicans there are pro-choice (Huckabee is strongly pro-life) and there are no sales or income tax, making the Fair Tax a harder pitch since it would do nothing to offset NH's high property taxes.

I think Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson are done, John McCain will win New Hampshire, Ron Paul will stay afloat with his money, and Rudy Giuliani can keep on staying on vacation in Florida because beating Duncan Hunter hardly gives you momentum.  

For Obama, the knight-in-shining-armor better have some thick armor. Here come the Clinton claws.

Click Here for Clemons' December column on Huckabee)

From December/Iowa Caucus, early primaries winner

No GOP frontrunner after first critical month? Looks that way

Savor this election, folks. Our generation and our children’s generation probably will never see eight Democrats and nine Republicans all running for the White House in the same year. The reason: this election is the first time since 1928 that neither the incumbent president nor the incumbent vice president are seeking the presidency. It will be a while before it happens again.

For politicos like Graham and me (and probably you, if you are reading these columns), it makes for an exciting time to see who just might win the nominations of the two parties.

On Jan. 3, loyalists from both parties will meet, or “caucus,” in each of Iowa’s 1,784 precincts. To state it simply, a caucus is a meeting like a county convention that party loyalist attend on a usually cold, snowy night for about an hour and they discuss party politics, as well as state their preference for the president.

The key for the candidates is to motivate people to go to the caucus and vote for them. That is why you have to have a strong grassroots effort or an appeal that reaches those already going and transcends a strong grassroots effort.

For the GOP, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee has the Christian conservative appeal that transcends his lack of money and ground operations.

Huckabee will win Iowa with a strong 30 percent or more. Why? He is the only candidate who has Christian conservative credentials. Huckabee’s background, politically and personally, resonates well with the party loyalists of Iowa who tend to be strongly pro-life, attend church regularly and believe that Mitt Romney’s Mormon faith is a cult.

Having spent tens of millions of dollars on Iowa (much of it his own), Romney has done a good job of saying he, like Reagan, has realized the wrong policy positions of his past and will be a president of whom conservatives will be proud. But we live in the age of YouTube and old footage from Romney’s debates with Ted Kennedy seems to haunt him.

So, Huckabee will be first and Romney will be a solid second. Rudy Giuliani will come in a distant third but the big story will be who will come in fourth. I think Ron Paul’s money surge and pro-Constitution/anti-establishment message might propel him above John McCain and Fred Thompson for a fourth place finish. If so, that will be a big boost for the Paul campaign. 

With the New Hampshire primary soon following on Jan. 8, Romney will have to win there. New Hampshire is next to Massachusetts and every candidate in previous primaries from Massachusetts has won NH’s primary. New Hampshire is a liberal Republican state and will vote Romney first and Giuliani second. The question will be who will win third place. I think Huckabee will benefit from Iowa enough to solidify the small NH Christian conservative base and will place third in New Hampshire. Paul, who is primarily focused on New Hampshire by spending most of his recent influx of millions there, might just tap into the “live free or die” philosophy of enough independents, libertarians and constructionist Republicans to win a fourth place finish. McCain, if he is still in the race, will come in a close fifth.

Michigan, which follows on the 15th, is Romney’s birth state and is where his father served as governor. This probably will be his biggest test. If Giuliani beats him in Michigan, Romney’s tires may start to deflate. This is where Fred Thompson will have to do well enough to come in third if he wants to stay alive. Huckabee also will have to come in third or second here to keep his momentum.

South Carolina will be a good bellwether state for the south. Though currently Romney, Thompson and Giuliani are tied for first, Huckabee may well have enough Iowa momentum to pull off an upset with the help of the Christian conservative base. This will mainly hurt Thompson. Romney probably will have enough money to buy his way into second or third place, beating out Giuliani. If Thompson finishes fourth in South Carolina, expect him to exit the stage.

Nevada is anyone’s game. Paul has appeal to the “free spirited” westerners but if McCain is still around, expect him to do well here as a “neighboring son.”

Florida is a strong base for Guiliani (doesn’t it seem most Floridians are originally from New York?) But the Jan. 29 date may be too little too late. The real question is who comes in second? Huckabee may if he has a strong showing in the earlier states. Romney may if he still has enough money to compete. Thompson may if he does well in South Carolina and Nevada. My guess is Huckabee.

One scenario for Georgia Republicans could be that at the end of January, we may very well not have a clear frontrunner, making the Feb. 5 Georgia primary very crucial. Another scenario for Georgia Republicans could be that at the end of January, we may very well not have a clear frontrunner and Georgia gets little attention because we are one of many on that Super Tuesday primary.

I think one thing will be true; there will not be a clear frontrunner at the end of January.