Showing posts with label US politics: Election '12. Show all posts
Showing posts with label US politics: Election '12. Show all posts
Friday, November 09, 2012
To my Republican friends and family: Hang in there!
As previously stated, I'm happy and satisfied with the results of the 2012 election. The election was a big victory for me, for Oregon, for the United States, and for the world.
But I'm not just happy because (for the most part) the candidates and issues I supported were successful. I'm also happy that, even in the thick of the election, I didn't allow myself to hate Mitt Romney. (I wish I could say the same about Junior.)
I've said it before and I say it again now: I think Mitt Romney is a decent guy. Yes, he's a plutocrat. Yes, he pandered to racists and misogynists. No, I never considered voting for him. But I'm sure he loves and is loved by his family and friends. And I'm reasonably sure that he is a moral person. He's a Mormon, and by and large, the Mormons I've known in my life are first-rate people. If his ambition caused him to stray, if the heat of battle caused him to throw some below-the-belt punches --well, we've all done it. I certainly have.
In keeping with that sentiment, I'm not going to use this blog to gloat about the victory. Gloating would be cruel, and cruelty is never the answer. On Tuesday, Republicans got a startling slap in the face from the electorate. It hurts when that happens.
Trust me. I know. November 3, 2004, was one of the worst days of my life. For months afterwards I was befuddled and bewildered. Eight years and several successful elections later, I still haven't overcome the bitterness and sense of betrayal I felt on that day.
I know there are conservatives who are feeling that way right now. Some of them are my own friends and family.
Well, I want you to know, friends and family, that I'm not going to rub salt in your wounds. Instead, I want to assure you that you'll get through this. I'm not saying the pain will go away. It won't. But it'll diminish. It'll become just another jagged stitch in your life's tapestry.
Hang in there. If it is not too presumptuous, I'd like to suggest that this defeat offers an opportunity. Reflect, analyze, rethink.
But don't be too hard on yourselves. You're decent folks.
I'd love to see the Republican Party return to its days of greatness. If you can do something to make that happen, it'll make me happy. It would be good for everyone if you did.
Thursday, November 08, 2012
2012 ballot: results
Whew! Another election in the bag. Here's how it went from my perspective:
US President: Barack Obama, Democrat
The national ground game unleashed by the Democrats and the vileness and ignorance of the Republicans propelled President Obama to his second term. The President's victory was bigger and more convincing than the pre-election polls suggested. He won at least 8 of the 10 battleground states (Florida is still undecided). And he won the popular vote by about 3 million votes, denying Republicans their yearned-for outrage.
Representative in Congress, 3rd District: Earl Blumenauer, Democrat
Earl won. No surprise.
Secretary of State: Kate Brown, Democrat
Kate Brown beat Republican Knute Buelher extending the 20 year losing streak of Republicans for state-wide office in Oregon. This state is about as blue as they get.
.
Treasurer: Ted Wheeler
Wheeler won easily.
Attorney General: Ellen Rosenblum, Democrat
Not my favorite candidate, but acceptable. Let's see how she does...
State Representative, 42nd District: Jules Kopel Bailey
Jules ran unopposed. He's a good fit for this district.
Labor Commissioner: Brad Avakian
Six-point win for Mr. Avakian.
Supreme Court, Position 3: Richard Baldwin
Soon-to-be-justice Baldwin won a close race against Nena Cook.
Court of Appeals, Position 6: James Egan
I voted for Tim Volpert. Can't win 'em all, I guess.
Portland Mayor: Charlie Hales
Charlie won by over 30 points. Fast-talking Jefferson Smith got a taste of humble pie. Charlie's election means we will have a seasoned and experienced mayor. That's good. We've got problems that need addressing. And I don't think Jefferson is finished. He'll be back.
Amanda won despite an aggressive campaign to defeat her.
East Multnomah Soil and Water Conservation District, Director at Large: Rick Till
Rick Till kept his position.
East Multnomah Soil and Water Conservation District, Director, Zone 1: Bob Sallinger
Congratulations to Bob Sallinger. He ran unopposed.
Measures
- Measure 77 Revision to responses to catastrophic disasters
Passed.
- Measure 78 Changes terminology in the state Constitution for the three state government branches
Passed.
- Measure 79 Would ban real estate transfer taxes
Passed. Bummer. Advocates for this measure ran effective political ads claiming that, if this measure failed, Oregonians would see an increase in their property taxes. It was misleading, but it worked. Ah, well.
- Measure 80 Would create a cannabis commission to regulate the cultivation and sale of cannabis.
Failed. Bummer. I had hoped to torch a celebratory spliff when this measure passed. But Oregonians rejected it. So, being the soul of law-abiding honor, I dutifully stowed the spliff in my freezer against the day when Oregon will see the error of its ways. (Cough, cough.)
- Measure 81 Bans Columbia River commercial salmon fishing with gillnets by non-tribal persons, allows seine nets instead.
Failed. The task now falls to Governor Kitzhaber and concerned parties to implement an alternative plan.
- Measure 82 Authorizes establishment of privately-owned casinos.
Failed. Miserably. Oregonians aren't ready to turn the state into a giant casino.
- Measure 83 Authorizes Multnomah County casino
Failed. See above.
- Measure 84 Phases out estate and inheritance taxes.
Failed. Oregonians vote not to exempt the plutocrats from civic responsibility.
- Measure 85 Allocates corporate income/excise tax "kicker" refund to additionally fund K through 12 public education
Passed. Good news for public schools.
- 26-143 Forms library district to fund libraries
Passed. Stable funding for libraries!
- 26-144 Portland public school bonds
Yes. Money for schools.
- 26-145 Changes provisions for Fire/Police disability retirement system
Passed.
- 26-146 Restores school arts and music education through limited tax
Passed. Good news. Arts and music are important elements to a well-rounded education.
Wednesday, November 07, 2012
2012 election: Ground game and demographics
Another cycle through the nutty pageant of presidential politics.
President Obama won reelection by a margin of at least 60 electoral votes and by a popular vote margin of approximately 3 million. The President's margin of victory was greater than most pollsters predicted (although Nate Silverman called it perfectly, state for state) and in defiance of the dead-certain conviction of deluded conservatives that they were going to win.
Note: As of this writing, Florida's 29 electoral votes are still up in the air, although President Obama holds a slight lead
.
President Obama and the Democrats did a lot to win this election with their ground game. I saw and took part in the turnout machine right here in Portland, Oregon. It was an impressive display of organization and coordination. And Oregon wasn't even a battleground state! I'm sure the machines in Ohio, Iowa, Virginia, and Florida were even more effective. Labor unions in the Rust Belt states lent their support as well, spurred on by the union-busting efforts of Republican governors in Wisconsin and Ohio. That's the kind of support that the Republicans can't counter, even with all that plutocrat money.
And the Democrats were amply assisted by the the Republican party. Take a look at these numbers:
- 60% of voters under the age of 30 went for Obama
- 93% of black voters went for Obama
- 75% of hispanic voters went for Obama
- 55% of women voters went for Obama
Even as recently as four years ago, Republicans could sustain those kinds of margins and still have a shot at winning a national election. But those days are over. As every pundit, prognosticator, and casual observer will tell you, the demographic makeup of the United States is changing. It's becoming less white. Unless the GOP can find a way to appeal to women, to young people, and to racial minorities, they will never again win the White House.
So as much as this was a victory for the Democrats and their magnificent ground game, it was also a resounding defeat for Tea Party conservatism.
Democrats will come out of this election emboldened. And well they should. The coalition they've built has a bright future ahead of it.
Republicans, on the other hand... I'd like to think that they will use this defeat to grow, to find a way to ditch the frothing racists and the tongues-speakers and the xenophobes in their party. But then again, if they did that, would there be any Republicans left?
Let's enjoy our victory, Democrats. Let's enjoy our victory, progressives. We walloped them. Think they'll learn anything from it?
Tomorrow, I'll post about how my ballot matched up with the results of the election.
Tuesday, November 06, 2012
Election day memories
No advocacy today. There's no point. The die is cast.
Take a little walk down Memory Lane with me. Just to kill some time before the returns come in.
This election is the ninth presidential election in which I've voted. I remember them all.
- 1980 - John Anderson
In the end, although I was tired of President Carter, I couldn't stomach voting for Ronald Reagan. So I cast my ballot for John Anderson, the independent congressman from Illinois. On election night, I watched the returns come in from the living room of my good friend, Rick Means. When Jimmy Carter gave his concession speech, Rick's mom said to me, "He [Carter] would be a good neighbor, but he hasn't been a good president." Now, all these years later, I think she had it right.
- 1984 - Walter Mondale
Right after Reagan's election, I went through a brief interval as a registered Republican. By 1984, I was back on board with the Democrats. I cast my vote in the cafeteria of Pelican Elementary School in Klamath Falls, Oregon. Brother Eric and I may well have been the only two blue votes in that very red precinct.
- 1988 - Michael Dukakis
I'd only just moved to the Portland Metro area when this election went down. The day before the election, I went to a Dukakis rally downtown. There was a big crowd, but folks pretty much knew the gig was up. I watched the returns all alone in my little Lake Oswego apartment. As the red tide covered the map, I got a call from Mom. "You holdin' up alright?" she asked. I can't remember how I replied. Probably something like: "People are stupid."
- 1992 - Bill Clinton
This election occurred in the days when my ex-wife and I were co-habitating in the Vermont Hills neighborhood, a few months before we got married. The polling place was right across the street from our apartment at a local church. After we voted, we talked to an exit pollster from CNN in the church parking lot. This was the first time I voted for the presidential candidate that won. It would be a long time before it happened again.
- 1996 - Ralph Nader
Clinton had this election in the bag, right from the get-go. I voted for Nader to register my wish that the country move farther to the "left," away from unfair trade agreements like NAFTA and the WTO.
- 2000 - Al Gore
I voted for Gore, but I didn't hate Junior. When the Republicans pulled off their coup d'etat in Florida, I was angry, but I still didn't hate him. By 2003, I hated him. I still do. F*ck him..
- 2004 - John Kerry
This election happened in the Year I dropped out.
I awoke that morning certain that John Kerry would win. At about 7pm that evening, I was disabused of that notion. I worked hard to defeat Junior Bush. It was the most devastating defeat I've ever suffered. I will never fully lose the sense of betrayal I felt toward the American people.
- 2008 - Barack Obama
We all remember this one. It was only the second time in my life that I'd voted for the candidate who actually won. Obama has a long list of accomplishments (Affordable Healthcare Act, two Supreme Court Justices, food safety regulations, student loan restructuring, financial reform) as well as some egregious abuses of power. Still better than the alternative.
- 2012 - Barack Obama
Obama is the only candidate I've ever voted for twice. Why? See here. Outcome to be determined.
Monday, November 05, 2012
Eve of the election
In the thick of battle, you rally around your people. So, Portlanders, here we go.
It's too late to drop your ballot in the mail if you want your vote to be counted. You'll have to drop it at an official ballot drop site. Go here to find the nearest.
Nate Silverman's election eve assessment is that President Obama has a 92% chance of winning tomorrow. Romney's been running on fumes since just before Sandy crashed into the East Coast. I'm confident.
Now, it is just a matter of following through. The vaunted Democratic ground game is churning.
No victory is ever complete, progressives. Every step forward leaves behind something we cherish. But we can't ever stop.
Let tomorrow come. Chins up, no matter what happens!
Sunday, November 04, 2012
Gettin' the vote out 2012
| Crowded canvassing headquarters |
Those early organizational efforts are now bearing fruit, as I clearly saw when I took part in a highly-organized canvassing drive this weekend.
Let me tell you, if the drive here in Portland is any indication of the Democratic ground game nationally, President Obama will win going away on Tuesday.
| Mayor Adams rallies the troops |
I'd actually decided earlier the year that I wasn't going to participate in this election as vigorously as I have in the past. But the caller was courteous, so I listened. He gave me the wheres and whens for the drive, but the call came as I was driving home from work. I wasn't in any position to write down the particulars. I explained this. His response? "No problem. We've got your email. I'll send you a reminder." I was impressed.
So, about 2pm on Saturday, I made my way down to the Defend Oregon Headquarters on 6th and Stark to participate in a get-out-the-vote canvassing operation.
| Defend Oregon folks instruct the volunteers |
| Fired up, ready to go |
"We're not collecting ballots," our instructor told us. "We're reminding people that it is time to vote and informing them of ballot collection points in their neighborhoods." Real easy. No message to sell. Just reminding folks to get their ballots in.
| My canvassing partner, Faye, on the right |
I got partnered up with Faye, a woman from my own neighborhood. She's professor emeritus from Portland Sate and quite a personable woman. We drove to the Alameda neighborhood, right in the heart of Northeast Portland.
In 2010, when I volunteered with the Kitzhaber campaign, I learned that the single best predictor of how a person will vote is the neighborhood in which he lives. Well, Alameda is a very blue neighborhood. My canvassing data had me literally knocking on two to five doors on every street block. Obama/Biden campaign signs were everywhere.
| A map with specific addresses to visit |
The reception I received from folks was fairly positive. Several people thanked me for canvassing.
Darkness was coming down fast when we headed back to headquarters. Volunteers ate bread and soup from Old Wive's Tales. (I took a bowl of very rich and hearty split pea. It was the perfect post-canvassing repast.)
All in all, it was a highly-organized, efficient operation.
Democrats have the ground game, folks. Republicans have never been able to match it.
Bring on Tuesday.
Thursday, November 01, 2012
Romney panic?
Mitt... Buddy! Tough times!
For two days, teevee screens broadcast New Jersey Governor and Republican hero Chris Christie's effusive testimonials for the Great Enemy. Quote: "[President Obama] has worked incredibly closely with me since before the storm hit. I think this is our sixth conversation since the weekend, and it’s been a great working relationship to make sure that we’re doing the jobs that people elected us to do. And I cannot thank the President enough for his personal concern and compassion for our state and for the people of our state."
Chris Christie said that! Mitt, buddy, that's gotta hurt. It wasn't three weeks ago you had him out there throwin' pitches for you, and now he's talking about what a great guy the President is.
To make matters worse, the President is getting all that soft coverage doing the "disaster relief" thing. Hell, he doesn't even have to say anything! He just shows up on camera, comforting "victims," like that 47 percent you talked about, and everybody falls all over themselves.
You, on the other hand, can't catch a break. At that fake food collection you staged in Ohio, all people wanted to ask you was did you really mean it when you said you'd dismantle FEMA and send it all back to the states. What the hell? Some kinda nerve, I tell ya.
The Christie thing was so bad that you probably didn't even notice Bloomberg endorsing the President, did you? Well, at least, Christie and Bloomberg knocked Colin Powell's endorsement off the radar. And I think you've still got that guy from Missouri --what's his name? Akin? I think he's still in your corner.
You know how this game goes, Mitt. You're a politician. Endorsements don't persuade. At least not at the presidential level. But they do reveal. When guys like Bloomberg and Christie and even Powell sense that a parade is forming, they run to get out in front of it. You'd do it in their place.
The election is in 5 days and, Mitt, I gotta tell ya, the smart money seems to be moving in the other direction.
And then there's the muttering amongst the crew. Did you see that memo that one of your campaign advisers in Palm Beach County circulated? Another quote, speaking of early turnout: "..the Democrat turnout machine ...is cleaning our clock." Palm Beach County is in Florida, Mitt. The pundits are saying that you must win Ohio, and that's probably true. But if you don't win Florida, Ohio won't even matter.
The polls are close, I grant. But, buddy, as close as they are, you're still behind in most of them. About a week ago, I wondered whether you'd hit your high water mark after the first debate. I don't know how you feel about it but, buddy, it looks to me like I may have been right.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Debate III: Romney's in trouble
Last night's debate at Lynn University in Boca Raton --the final debate of the campaign between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama --was a complete rout in favor of the President. Romney didn't even put up a fight. He mailed it in.
There's no point in trying to examine the merits of each man's foreign policies. Romney presented none. He made no pretense of doing so.
President Obama came out swinging. His answers throughout the debate were aggressive. The "horses and bayonets" remark, for example. He challenged Romney. He needled Romney. He bore down on Romney with an intense and unrelenting gaze. He made Romney seem small. I don't care who you are, when the President of the United States puts the Evil Eye on you, you will be rattled.
But Romney offered no resistance. He hung back. He riffed on a couple favorites out of the Tea Party songbook: "apology tour," "throw Israel under the bus," etcetera. But it lacked substance.
Check this bit from his opening statement:
And — and we’re going to have to recognize that we have to do as the president has done. I congratulate him on — on taking out Osama bin Laden and going after the leadership in al-Qaeda."But we can't kill our way out of this mess?" From a Republican! And what's with the "congratulat[ing] the president?" The Tea Party masses crave outright contempt! But Romney wasn't playing to them. Hold that thought.
But we can’t kill our way out of this mess. We’re going to have to put in place a very comprehensive and robust strategy to help the — the world of Islam and other parts of the world, reject this radical violent extremism, which is — it’s certainly not on the run.
President Obama was at his most intense last night. Driven, unrelenting. He came out for the kill and he carved Romney up good. His command of the facts was indisputable. It was an impressive performance. The contrast in stature between the two men was glaring.
Romney has no foreign policy. That's apparent. It is also apparent that, after his big success in Denver, Romney's played out. He's tapped.
Political analysts sometimes characterize elections as "base" elections. That is, the results of the election hinge on which side gets better turnout from its base, its partisan supporters. Up to now, the 2012 election has been deemed to be a "base" election. And Romney played it that way throughout the primaries.
But Romney's performance at the third debate was different. It seemed aimed to appease moderates --people like the woman at the debate in Long Island who feared a return to the policies of Junior Bush. At this late date, Romney is trying to reach new voters rather than stoke up his base. Might that indicate that Romney believes he can't win as things currently stand?
If that's the case, Romney is in trouble. His performance at this debate --a debate viewed by over 50 million people --clearly demonstrated how unprepared he is to be President of the United States. He tried to seem moderate, but ended up seeming weak. That'll kill enthusiasm from the rednecks. And it sure as hell won't win over any moderates.
I won't be surprised if on election night we learn that Romney hit his high water mark two weeks ago. And that, for Romney, it's all downhill from here.
Monday, October 22, 2012
2012 Ballot
Last night, I promised that by today, October 22, my Multnomah County-issued ballot would be completed and mailed. Today I attest that it is so.
Thanks to the folks at Our Oregon and to the Working Families Party for compiling information that I found useful.
Here's how I voted:
Candidates
US President: Barack Obama, Democrat
Yesterday, I explained my reasoning. I don't even know if reasoning plays into it, frankly. At some level, politics is tribal. You can deny it. But you're lying to yourself if you do.
Representative in Congress, 3rd District: Earl Blumenauer, Democrat
I'm proud to have Earl as my representative in Congress. Earl's ethos reflects that of his constituency. That'll keep you in your job.
Secretary of State: Kate Brown, Democrat
Progressives were running ads against Kate, claiming she over-zealously disqualified signatures on certain ballot initiatives. I say it might not be such a bad idea to set the initiative bar a little higher. (Bill Sizemore, anyone? Kevin Mannix?)
And, Libertarians, don't shriek at me about Oregon's sacred initiative process. I'm as much or more Oregonian than any of you. I take a back seat to no one in advocating for our populism and independence.
.
Treasurer: Ted Wheeler
Wheeler is a Democrat, endorsed by my party, the Working Families Party. That's good enough for me.
Attorney General: Chris Henry, Progressive
Honestly, I don't know anything about Chris Henry, other than that he is a member of the Progressive party, and he's not Ellen Rosenblum. Rosenblum is guaranteed to win and that's fine. It could certainly be worse. But in the primary, it was clear to me that Dwight Holden was the better candidate.
(And isn't Mr. Henry a shy fellow? I couldn't find a photo of him to post.)
State Representative, 42nd District: Jules Kopel Bailey
Jules ran unopposed.
Labor Commissioner: Brad Avakian
Avakian is labor-friendly and seems a likeable fellow.
Supreme Court, Position 3: Richard Baldwin
Appointed by Governor Kitzhaber. That's endorsement enough for me.
Court of Appeals, Position 6: Tim Volpert
Endorsed by Earl Blumenauer and Suzanne Bonamici as well as the Joint Council of Teamsters No. 37.
Portland Mayor: Charlie Hales
I originally supported Charlie's opponent, Jefferson Smith. (Indeed, I endorsed Smith back in April.) Since then, I've had a change of heart. I've met Jefferson Smith several times and he always impresses. He's driven and purposeful. But I always came away from those encounters feeling like I'd been fast-talked. I hope we'll hear from Jefferson again. I think he has a future. In 2012, however, I'm voting for Charlie Hales. His years of experience in City Hall make it more likely he can address the real problems we're facing in the Rose City.
City Commissioner Pos 1: Amanda Fritz
Amanda is a registered nurse and she's got a long list of good endorsements, including that of the Oregon Progressive Party.
East Multnomah Soil and Water Conservation District, Director at Large: Rick Till
According to his blurb in the Oregon Voter's Pamphlet, Rick's got good green values. That works for me.
East Multnomah Soil and Water Conservation District, Director, Zone 1: Bob Sallinger
He ran unopposed. I consider my vote for him a "Go get 'em, tiger" encouragement. And I dig the long, frazzled hair Wave that freak flag high, says I.
Measures
Thanks to the folks at Our Oregon and to the Working Families Party for compiling information that I found useful.
Here's how I voted:
Candidates
US President: Barack Obama, Democrat
Yesterday, I explained my reasoning. I don't even know if reasoning plays into it, frankly. At some level, politics is tribal. You can deny it. But you're lying to yourself if you do.
I'm proud to have Earl as my representative in Congress. Earl's ethos reflects that of his constituency. That'll keep you in your job.
Progressives were running ads against Kate, claiming she over-zealously disqualified signatures on certain ballot initiatives. I say it might not be such a bad idea to set the initiative bar a little higher. (Bill Sizemore, anyone? Kevin Mannix?)
And, Libertarians, don't shriek at me about Oregon's sacred initiative process. I'm as much or more Oregonian than any of you. I take a back seat to no one in advocating for our populism and independence.
.
Treasurer: Ted Wheeler
Wheeler is a Democrat, endorsed by my party, the Working Families Party. That's good enough for me.
Attorney General: Chris Henry, Progressive
Honestly, I don't know anything about Chris Henry, other than that he is a member of the Progressive party, and he's not Ellen Rosenblum. Rosenblum is guaranteed to win and that's fine. It could certainly be worse. But in the primary, it was clear to me that Dwight Holden was the better candidate.
(And isn't Mr. Henry a shy fellow? I couldn't find a photo of him to post.)
State Representative, 42nd District: Jules Kopel Bailey
Jules ran unopposed.
Labor Commissioner: Brad Avakian
Avakian is labor-friendly and seems a likeable fellow.
Supreme Court, Position 3: Richard Baldwin
Appointed by Governor Kitzhaber. That's endorsement enough for me.
Court of Appeals, Position 6: Tim Volpert
Endorsed by Earl Blumenauer and Suzanne Bonamici as well as the Joint Council of Teamsters No. 37.
Portland Mayor: Charlie Hales
I originally supported Charlie's opponent, Jefferson Smith. (Indeed, I endorsed Smith back in April.) Since then, I've had a change of heart. I've met Jefferson Smith several times and he always impresses. He's driven and purposeful. But I always came away from those encounters feeling like I'd been fast-talked. I hope we'll hear from Jefferson again. I think he has a future. In 2012, however, I'm voting for Charlie Hales. His years of experience in City Hall make it more likely he can address the real problems we're facing in the Rose City.
City Commissioner Pos 1: Amanda Fritz
Amanda is a registered nurse and she's got a long list of good endorsements, including that of the Oregon Progressive Party.
East Multnomah Soil and Water Conservation District, Director at Large: Rick Till
According to his blurb in the Oregon Voter's Pamphlet, Rick's got good green values. That works for me.
East Multnomah Soil and Water Conservation District, Director, Zone 1: Bob Sallinger
He ran unopposed. I consider my vote for him a "Go get 'em, tiger" encouragement. And I dig the long, frazzled hair Wave that freak flag high, says I.
Measures
- Measure 77 Revision to responses to catastrophic disasters
Yes. This is a referral by the legislature. It grants a bit more authority to the governor by allowing him to call a special session of the legislature during emergencies. Seems reasonable.
- Measure 78 Changes terminology in the state Constitution for the three state government branches
Yes. Another legislature referral. A house-keeping measure.
- Measure 79 Would ban real estate transfer taxes
No. This measure is being pushed by the real estate industry. It aims to preclude any future real estate transfer taxes. Only one county in the state has such a tax. Lobbyists and the real estate industry spent millions of dollars trying to get this passed. I guess they're trying to inoculate themselves from having to contribute to their communities.
- Measure 80 Would create a cannabis commission to regulate the cultivation and sale of cannabis.
Yes. I'll write more about this in a future post. Meantime, see here or here.
- Measure 81 Bans Columbia River commercial salmon fishing with gillnets by non-tribal persons, allows seine nets instead.
No. Governor Kitzhaber announced a plan to work with state agencies to "stem" the use of gillnets. The governor's plan will be more refined and attuned to the various interests than is this measure.
- Measure 82 Authorizes establishment of privately-owned casinos.
No. The folks behind "The Grange" created a lot of slick, persusasive advertising, but Oregonians saw through it. Notice that those Grange ads aren't running on the squawk-box anymore. The polls have shown this measure and its twin (see below) to be dead in the water.
- Measure 83 Authorizes Multnomah County casino
No. See above. - Measure 84 Phases out estate and inheritance taxes.
No. Plutocratic absolution of responsibility. That's what is behind this measure. Oregon Republicans are a day late and a dollar short, as usual. If they'd put this measure up in 2010, it probably would have passed. I don't think it'll fly now. We'll see. - Measure 85 Allocates corporate income/excise tax "kicker" refund to additionally fund K through 12 public education
Yes. Our schools need funding. I'm tired of tax breaks for corporations while we can't fund sports, arts, music or anything else in our public schools.
- 26-143 Forms library district to fund libraries
Yes. We need stable funding for our libraries.
- 26-144 Portland public school bonds
Yes. More money for schools. It is high time we started investing in our future. What do you want, Portland?
- 26-145 Changes provisions for Fire/Police disability retirement system
Yes. I voted this way because, in the voter's pamphlet there was only one argument in favor and none in opposition.
- 26-146 Restores school arts and music education through limited tax
Yes. I'll put my money where my mouth is. This measure, if passed, will cost Maty and me $70 per year. A small price to pay for exposing kids to arts and music.
Sunday, October 21, 2012
A realist pitch for Obama
My official ballot, issued by the Multnomah County Director of Elections, arrived yesterday with the mail. On the morrow, it'll be filled out, sealed, stamped and on its way back. In a future post, I'll write up where I came down on everything.
Tonight, I want to make a pitch for President Obama.
I'm a realist. I've got a lengthy list of disappointments in the Obama administration.
Right at the top is the way in which the administration has expanded authoritarian, constitutionally-questionable powers to conduct warfare and counter-terrorism operations. Drone assassinations, indefinite detentions, illegal imprisonments --all the stuff initiated by the (Junior) Bush administration in the wake of 911 --it's dangerous and appalling. I had hopes, at one time, that President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder might really get to the bottom of the myriad and obvious crimes of the Bush administration. Today, admitting to such naivete is embarrassing! Not only has the Obama administration failed to hold anyone from the previous administration accountable, but has continued apace with some of its most egregious abuses of power. Frankly, that sucks and is nearly unforgivable.
There was also health care reform. Rather than really reform heath care by making it truly universal and lowering costs by cutting out the health insurance middle men, the administration worked to ensure that the biggest beneficiaries of the Affordable Health Care Act were health insurance companies.
And, of course, in 2010, when Democrats everywhere were facing an angry Tea Party uprising, the President stayed detached. Rather than risk political capital, the Obama administration mostly hung back and let the Red Wave roll. A bitter pill for Democrats who risked everything to further the President's agenda.
These and other issues have tempered my support of the President.
But I'm still voting for him.
His administration really has achieved some progressive goals. Homosexuals can now serve openly in the military. We have two moderate Supreme Court justices, Justice Kagan and Justice Sotomayor, who will influence the Court for many years to come. US troops are out of Iraq. And, for all its faults, the Affordable Care Act is an improvement over what came before, when insurance companies denied claims by citing "pre-existing conditions."
But the biggest reason I'm voting for Obama is this: The Republican party as it exists today is a cancer on the nation.
When you consider how the GOP has insulted and debased this President from the very beginning, it is clear how much the party relies on bigotry and ignorance --the birth certificate "issue," the claims about his heritage, the questioning of his legitimacy despite having won a national election by a decisive margin. There are many racists (as well as misogynists) in the Republican party.
And then there are the plutocrats seeking to absolve themselves of any responsibility toward the country or toward humanity. Romney is one of those. To them, taxes are for the little people. To them, regulations that protect air and water, that prohibit financial swindlers from betting against their clients, do nothing but get in the way of profits.
The fatalistic truth, as I see it, is this: republic leads to empire. Eventually, even these United States will succumb to their own corruption. History confirms it at every turn. So, we're on a one-way street and that's just the way it is. By voting for Obama, I'm voting to slow the transition.
Obama 2012!
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
Debate II: In the end, I'd call it an ass-whipping
The stakes were high tonight. On the cable news talkie shows, the tension was thick as warm springs fog. National polls suggest the race hangs by a thread. Both men were under enormous pressure. But when they entered the hall at Hofstra University in New York, I thought Obama looked more at ease. Romney seemed stiff. To be on that stage at all, you'd have to have nerves of steel, but you could see the tension in each man's face and in the set of his shoulders.
It was a fascinating debate. Both men were aggressive and at the top of their game. Romney's behavior, interrupting the President and moderator Candy Crowley, attempting to control the flow of the debate (as he did so successfully in the first debate), bordered on plain rudeness. But in the end, Obama won not because he is a better orator (although he is) but because Romney has nothing to offer as an alternative.
After watching the debate, my opinion of Candy Crowley improved a thousandfold. You've got to be tough to stand up to two alpha males like those, and she did it. She wouldn't let either man bully her. Impressive.
Throughout the debate and almost without regard to the question being asked, Romney continued to fall back on the same single-note refrain: Lower tax rates to help businesses, which will then hire more people. When more people have jobs, other problems like spiking college tuition costs or unequal pay for women will, through the natural course of events, take care of themselves. Well, call it what you want, but it still adds up to the same thing: Trickle-down economics.
The most laughable moment for me came when Romney attempted to explain how his tax plan will benefit middle-income earners. Quoth he:
"But your rate comes down and the burden also comes down on you for one more reason, and that is every middle-income taxpayer no longer will pay any tax on interest, dividends or capital gains. No tax on your savings. That makes life a lot easier."
I swear, I laughed out loud when I heard that remark. I mean, who the f*ck earns capital gains? (Answer: Romney. And lots of 'em.)
Another slap-your-forehead moment came when Romney, attempting to reassure women that he gives a sh*t about them, related the anecdote about filling his cabinet as Governor of Massachusetts.
"I went to a number of women's groups and said, 'Can you help us find folks,' and they brought us whole binders full of women."
This remark has spawned a lot of jeering on the internet and for good reason. But I was somewhat sympathetic when he followed with this:
"And - and so we - we took a concerted effort to go out and find women..."
That line describes the behavior of myself and my fraternity brothers every weekend throughout my college days.
Throughout the debate, the President called out Romney's Tea Party werewolf. The President pressed his advantage with women by bringing up the Lily Ledbetter bill and Romney's lack of support for it and by pointing out that Romney called for an end to Planned Parenthood funding. The President pressed his advantage with Latinos by pointing out that one of Romney's top advisors is the author of the odious Arizona "Papers, please" legislation. Latinos no les gusta Romney.
Soon thereafter, came this (abridged) exchange on Libya:
Obama: The day after the attack, governor, I stood in the Rose Garden and I told the American people in the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened. That this was an act of terror and I also said that we're going to hunt down those who committed this crime.
Romney: I think interesting the president just said something which - which is that on the day after the attack he went into the Rose Garden and said that this was an act of terror.
Obama: That's what I said.
Romney: I want to make sure we get that for the record because it took the president 14 days before he called the attack in Benghazi an act of terror.
Obama: Get the transcript.
Crowley: He did in fact, sir.
Egg on face, Mitt. You could see by the way Romney pounced that he was going in for the kill. But it flopped. Candy Crowley did an on-the-spot fact check and nailed Romney. Impressive job, Candy.
Romney also got burned when Crowley pointed out that, as governor of Massachusetts, Romney signed an assault weapons ban. You can imagine that revelation gave a few Tea Parties some acid reflux.
When a question came up about outsourcing, Romney tap danced with a cryptic explanation of currency policy. But the question was about outsourcing, Mitt! A weak response made all the weaker when Obama pointed out that media reports called Romney's businesses "pioneers of outsourcing."
But the knock-out punch came with the last question of the evening. "What do you believe is the biggest misperception that the American people have about you as a man and a candidate? Using specific examples, can you take this opportunity to debunk that misperception and set us straight?"
Romney went first: "I care about 100 percent of the American people. I want 100 percent of the American people to have a bright and prosperous future. I care about our kids. I understand what it takes to make a bright and prosperous future for America again. I spent my life in the private sector, not in government. I'm a guy who wants to help with the experience I have, the American people."
First of all, Romney is hardly credible when he claims to have empathy for the lower classes. Nothing in his governance, personality, or lifestyle lend any credence to that idea. And he just doesn't have the charisma to pull off an "I feel your pain" argument. But his biggest mistake was mentioning the "100 percent." You can be sure that he was prepped before the debate to have a response if the President mentioned Romney's disastrous "47 percent" remarks. But because Romney went first, he teed the President up for a big finish.
And I quote: "I believe Governor Romney is a good man. Loves his family, cares about his faith. But I also believe that when he said behind closed doors that 47 percent of the country considered themselves victims who refuse personal responsibility, think about who he was talking about. Folks on Social Security who've worked all their lives. Veterans who've sacrificed for this country. Students who are out there trying to hopefully advance their own dreams, but also this country's dreams. Soldiers who are overseas fighting for us right now. People who are working hard every day, paying payroll tax, gas taxes, but don't make enough income.
And I want to fight for them. That's what I've been doing for the last four years. Because if they succeed, I believe the country succeeds.
When my grandfather fought in World War II and he came back and he got a G.I. Bill and that allowed him to go to college, that wasn't a handout. That was something that advanced the entire country. And I want to make sure that the next generation has those same opportunities. That's why I'm asking for your vote and that's why I'm asking for another four years."
Devastating!
Big Obama win. On to November!
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Big debate tonight
Twenty days to Election Day and the second presidential debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney is scheduled to occur tonight at Hofstra University in New York.
It's a big event.
National polls are all over the place. The two candidates are within one to three points of each other at the national level according to nearly every poll I've seen. President Obama appears to have a slight advantage in the so-called swing states, but with the numbers this close, nothing seems solid. In fact, there are enough polls out there with so many different assessments that you can build a case to show either candidate to be winning or losing. (I rely exclusively on Nate Silverman and the FiveThirtyEight blog. According to Mr. Silverman, at this moment President Obama has a 66% chance of winning the election.)
I took a gander through my blog entries from four years ago to see how things seemed back then. And at this point in the 2008 election cycle, candidate Obama seemed to be cruising to victory over John McCain. Of course, in 2008, the country was reeling from a financial meltdown; an economic crisis that recalled the Great Depression. We were war-weary and disgusted and frightened. President Junior, in his eight blighted years in office, sustained the largest single terrorist attack on our homeland, oversaw the drowning of a major American city, launched two fruitless wars (including the illegal invasion of a sovereign state), and destroyed our economy. In short, he dealt John McCain a sh*t hand. Obama and the Democrats didn't have to do anything to convince people to vote for them. The need for change was evident everywhere you looked.
It's a different story this time around. The bloom has come off the Obama rose. We're still in Afghanistan, over a year after the President promised we'd be out. The expansion of an authoritarian state --begun by Bush --where persons can be imprisoned, tortured, withheld counsel, and even summarily murdered by executive order has continued full-throttle. Unemployment is high. Gas prices are through the roof. No one in the Bush administration has been made to pay for its crimes.
Despite all the soaring rhetoric of 2008, in many ways, President Obama has not delivered. And, in the first debate, when he was given a prime opportunity to defend his record, reassure voters, and explain how he intends to address their concerns, he delivered a lackluster performance. Michael Tomasky, Robert Reich, and other political observers have speculated that the President seemed to lack enthusiasm for a second term.
So, naturally, folks are looking at their alternatives.
But the alternative is Mitt Romney, who has problems of his own. He's a plutocrat; a silver-spoon elite who has not the faintest idea what it is like to have to scramble to cover bills for basic needs (food, clothing, rent, gas). The world of financial hardship, the world most of us live in every day, is a picture-book story to him. Much like Dicken's Marquis St. Evrémonde, he seems to hold the lower classes in contempt.
He's had to compromise himself to satisfy the rabid GOP base and in doing so has alienated women and Hispanics. His prescription for economic recovery is that old Republican chimera: tax cuts for upper incomes. No public investment. No national effort for the common good. As President Clinton said in Charlotte: "If you want a you’re-on-your-own, winner-take-all society, you should support the Republican ticket."
There is a lot riding on the debate tonight. Both men, Obama and Romney, are under enormous pressure. The race to the White House seems balanced on the head of a pin.
Let's see what happens...
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Veep debate: Biden comes through
The 2012 vice-presidential debate tonight in Danville, Kentucky, looked to me like a clear victory for Joe Biden. Others may have seen it differently. I don't doubt that Republicans feel pretty good about Paul Ryan's performance as well. The two men went eyeball to eyeball, each fighting to make himself heard, each interrupting the other. I found it refreshing.
Ryan held his own as far as the theater of politics goes. The problem was that he had to articulate the policies (such as they are) of the Romney/Ryan ticket. Romney policies are not popular. Not even when Paul Ryan tries to explain them.
Biden scored several times. In the abortion exchange, Ryan stated "We don’t think that unelected judges should make this decision; that people, through their elected representatives and reaching a consensus in society through the democratic process, should make this determination."
Got that? Ryan says that state legislatures should legislate women's reproductive health decisions. He and Mitt Romney believes that women's rights should be subject to legislation. We've already had a glimpse of how that might look. Folks, they've got a problem with women voters. I don't think this will help.
Ryan stumbled when he tried to explain the GOP policy vis-a-vis Afghanistan, as well. Quoth he: "And with respect to Afghanistan and the 2014 deadline, we agree with a 2014 transition. But what we also want to do is make sure that we’re not projecting weakness abroad, and that’s what’s happening here."
Huh? He agreed with the Obama administration's goal of a complete withdrawal by 2014. But at the same time, he objected to "projecting weakness." What does that even mean?
While Ryan was tap-dancing around the Romney position, Biden interjected with a booming "We will leave in 2014." I think that rattled Ryan.
Biden, for his part was letting fly with the populist rhetoric. Red meat to this humble egalitarian. And he hit on Romney's catastropic "47 percent" remark several times, including this response to a query posed by a military veteran:
"I would also tell him that the fact that he, this decorated soldier you talked about, fought for his country -- that that should be honored. He should not be thrown into a category of the 47 percent who don’t pay their taxes while he was out there fighting and not having to pay taxes and somehow not taking responsibility."
But the most devastating exchange came when Ryan bemoaned the perceived failure of the 2009 economic stimulus package as $900 billion of debt that produced nothing. Biden pointed out that Ryan himself asked for millions of dollars of stimulus money for his own congressional district. Ryan looked deflated after that exchange.
Back in the bad old days of the Junior Bush administration, I didn't much like Biden. I resented the extent to which he accommodated the neo-conservatives vis-a-vis the illegal invasion of Iraq. As that bitter memory loses its sting, I've had a change of heart toward Biden. His good-nature and avuncular manner reassures, somehow.
But there can be no doubt that Biden hit his biggest and most important goal for the night And that is this: Ever since Obama's poor performance in the first presidential debate, Democrats have been moping around like beaten dogs. Not any more. Biden, with his vox populi rhetoric fired up the Democrats when their spirits were flagging. Watch and see.
Wednesday, October 03, 2012
Debate I: A clear victory for Romney
The following are my initial impressions of the Presidential Debate that occurred between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. I'm writing it from memory, less than an hour after the debate, without referring to notes or transcripts, so take it for what it is worth.
Whatever the veracity or merit of the ideas that Mitt Romney and Barack Obama put forth during the first presidential debate in Denver tonight, what mattered was the presentation. And clearly, Romney's was the better performance.
Mitt Romney came out feisty. He ran roughshod over the format that Jim Lehrer set out at the beginning of the event, taking control of the debate. He showed moxy. He challenged the President aggressively, interrupting him on more than one occasion. At times he seemed to bait the President.
The President, on the other hand, seemed passive. He didn't respond to Romney's aggressiveness. He gave Romney a pass on some questionable assertions. (I'm thinking in particular of Romney's repeated claim that the President cut $719 billion from Medicare. You can read about the veracity of that claim here.) As I watched the President's performance, I experienced a familiar agitation. It was the same frustration I'd felt during the national debate over health care reform, when the administration steadfastly refused to step in and advocate a clear position.
It didn't all go Romney's way. The President never did rise to the bait that Romney continuously dangled. Romney no doubt hoped to elicit an angry response. But the President is a cool customer. Nerves of steel.
Politics is theater. Ideals, facts, policies --none of it matters if you don't have a script and a frontman to sell it. Nine-tenths of the electorate believes what it will believe in spite of any facts, anyway. I'll say this though: this is the first time I've ever seen President Obama under-perform at the theater of politics.
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Romney lamenta el voto hispano
Ayer, candidato republicano Mitt Romney visitó la Universidad de Miami para hablar en un foro organizada por Univision. Según las últimas encuestas, Romney falta el apoyo de hispanos por una relación de 26% versus 63% por Presidente Obama. Se dice que Romney debe ganar el 38% de ese voto para tener alguna esperanza de victoria en noviembre.
Esos numeros son desastres para Romney y para todo el partido republicano. Él necesita ganar los votes hispanos. Pero, probablemente llega demasiado tarde.
Romney y los republicanos tienen un problema. Es el mismo problema que John McCain tuvo en 2008. Es esto: conservadores del partido, los quienes que él necesitó convencer que él era una alternativa aceptable para Rick Santorum o Newt Gingrich, son xenófobos en la mayoría. Con el fin de ganar su apoyo, Romney dijo muchas cosas ofensivas durante las elecciónes primarias.
Por ejemplo, en deciembre del año pasado, Romney dijo que iba a vetar el "Dream Act," lo cual concedería inmunidad de deportación a los jóvenes hispanos los quienes fueran llevados a los EEUU ilegalmente durante infancia. Además, la campaña de Romney incluye Kansas secretario de Estado Kris Kobach como asesor informal. Kobach es el arquitecto de la legislación de inmigración duras (e infame) que está llevando a cabo hoy en Arizona. (Romney, dicho sea de paso, proclamó la legislación ofensiva para ser un "modelo para la nación" durante la primaria.)
En todo, es un otro ejemplo de la ideología corrupta del partido republicano especificamente, y el movimiento conservador, generalmente.
Pués, por lo menos, Romney entiende el hecho hispanos representa el demográfico que crece más rapido en los EEUU. Pero, el conocimiento no es la acción. Romney ya se ha expuesto como una herramienta que está dispuesto a decir cualquier cosa para ser elegido. Él no tiene la fuerza de carácter para enfrentarse a los xenófobos en su partido. Hasta que alguien encuentra que la fuerza, el Partido Republicano está en una marcha de la muerte.
Friday, September 07, 2012
DNC 2012 Day 3: President Obama looks ahead
The 2012 Democratic Convention wrapped up last night, with President Obama providing a tough, forward-looking speech as capstone. The orations delivered by Michelle Obama and President Clinton on the previous two nights set a high bar for the President. But the man is nothing, if not a gifted orator. And he came through.
...when all is said and done— when you pick up that ballot to vote— you will face the clearest choice of any time in a generation. Over the next few years, big decisions will be made in Washington, on jobs and the economy; taxes and deficits; energy and education; war and peace— decisions that will have a huge impact on our lives and our children’s lives for decades to come.
On every issue, the choice you face won’t be just between two candidates or two parties. It will be a choice between two different paths for America.In this statement, the President outlines the rationale I employ in continuing to support him. I'm under no illusions that the Obama administration or the Democrats offer a panacea. But they are night-and-day better than Republicans.
A choice between two fundamentally different visions for the future.
As President Clinton said on the previous night: "If you want a winner-take-all, you’re-on-your-own society, you should support the Republican ticket. But if you want a country of shared opportunities and shared responsibility, a we’re-all-in-this-together society, you should vote for Barack Obama and Joe Biden."
In a world of new threats and new challenges, you can choose leadership that has been tested and proven. Four years ago, I promised to end the war in Iraq. We did. I promised to refocus on the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11. We have. We’ve blunted the Taliban’s momentum in Afghanistan, and in 2014, our longest war will be over. A new tower rises above the New York skyline, al-Qaida is on the path to defeat, and Osama bin Laden is dead.You know this statement had war-mongers like John McCain crunching down on their antacid tabs. All that Republican tough talk about bringing in bin Laden "dead or alive" added up to cotton candy. Enjoy your heartburn, Republicans!
Tonight, we pay tribute to the Americans who still serve in harm’s way. We are forever in debt to a generation whose sacrifice has made this country safer and more respected. We will never forget you. And so long as I’m commander in chief, we will sustain the strongest military the world has ever known. When you take off the uniform, we will serve you as well as you’ve served us— because no one who fights for this country should have to fight for a job, or a roof over their head, or the care that they need when they come home.When one contrasts the President's speech with that delivered by Mitt Romney in Tampa the week before, it is obvious that the President and his speech writers took pains to identify and attack the omissions in the Romney speech. As nearly every political observer has noted, Romney said nary a word about Afghanistan. A glaring omission that, had it been a Democrat who had committed it, would have had the Republicans howling their outrage all over Fox News. This exposes them as the panderers and jingoes that they are.
So now we face a choice. My opponent and his running mate are new to foreign policy, but from all that we’ve seen and heard, they want to take us back to an era of blustering and blundering that cost America so dearly.This remark reminded that Mitt Romney thoroughly bombed on his overseas tour a few weeks back. And it's a damning indictment of the saber-rattling emptiness that served as foreign policy under the guidance of Junior Bush, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, and Condi Rice.
America, I never said this journey would be easy, and I won’t promise that now. Yes, our path is harder— but it leads to a better place. Yes our road is longer— but we travel it together. We don’t turn back. We leave no one behind. We pull each other up. We draw strength from our victories, and we learn from our mistakes, but we keep our eyes fixed on that distant horizon, knowing that providence is with us, and that we are surely blessed to be citizens of the greatest nation on earth.No placation, no excuses. An articulation of guiding principles as we trundle down history's path. Romney offered nothing like this.
Respected friends refuse to vote for President Obama. Not because he's a "socialist" or a "Muslim" as the Tea Party folks shrilly proclaim. Rather, my friends object to the erosion of constitutional rights and the expansion of executive authority under the President's watch. The criticisms are valid and I'm in agreement with them. But Republicans will not curtail executive branch abuses. Indeed, they will only accelerate their implementation.
We're a republic, and republic is a one-way street to empire. The question is this: how are we going to travel down that road? As a free-for-all Ayn Rand Objectivist state? Or as a nation that, for all its faults, carries on in the human tradition? A nation that forges ahead while caring for the weak and vulnerable in its midst?
Easy choice for me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)









