Election wrapups from other blogs

Volokh links to a Newsweek story about the Bush and Kerry campaigns:

In the summer of 2002, his aides had been relieved that no cameras had captured the would-be Democratic nominee, in full cry at a gay fund-raiser on New York’s Fire Island, shouting out, “If Bill Clinton could be the first black president, I can be the first gay president!”

And to a wonderful Telegraph column about American voters:

…you can’t be a redneck in Spain or Italy: when the birthrates are 1.1 and 1.2 children per couple, there are no sisters to shag.

15:29 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

Canterbridgian pugnaciousness

I spotted a Brit on my hallway wearing a Bush/Cheney ‘04 sweatshirt. When I observed that I didn’t often see that sort of thing around here, he explained that it was purely ironic – he was 23 years old, and had never been in a fight. This, he suspected, would be a good way to provoke one. I suggested a Yankees shirt. He explained that he’d been trying to get one, but before he could, they lost the playoffs.

19:30 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

How NOT to run a campaign website

The race for Stark County prosecutor is between

John D. Ferrero, Jr. ( http://keepferrero.com/ )

and

Jeffrey Jakmides ( http://www.geocities.com/jakmides4prosecutor/ )

Geocities? Geocities!? This must be a gag campaign.

I’m tempted to submit this as an Awful Link of the Day.

Update: just did:

Jeffrey Jakmides is running to be prosecutor of Stark County, Ohio against John D. Ferrero, Jr. ( http://keepferrero.com/ ). It’s a Geocities website. It looks like it was designed in 1992. This guy will be responsible for prosecuting murderers, theives, and rapists.
Need I say more? (I ended up voting for the guy with the better website.)

Update 2: The wankers at SA won’t accept Geocities ALODs because of bandwidth issues. Bah.

15:03 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

OMG!!! B3st Da5id Br00k5 column EVAR!

Here.

16:32 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

Did he buy a matching helmet?

Via LGF: for a biased wire service (depending on whom you believe), Reuters’s photographers haven’t been going to much effort to make Sen. Kerry look good:

17:17 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

Protectionism

“We shut the loophole which has American workers actually subsidizing the loss of their own job. They just passed an expansion of that loophole in the last few days: $43 billion of giveaways, including favors to the … people importing … fans from China.” — Sen. John Kerry, October 8

Hmm. Fans like these?

Both of you – I’m sorry. Couldn’t resist.

14:13 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

kerryse.cx

Thanks to Carlos for the link and Yahoo!/AFP for the photo.

01:51 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

No comment

15:45 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

I knew I’d have to hold my nose on Nov. 2…

…but stories like this are making it easier and easier for me to contemplate voting for President Bush.

I’m much less convinced of the President’s will when it comes to vandalizing the Constitution by reaching out to the Christian ultra-right with gay-bashing than I am of Sen. Kerry or Sen. Edwards’s willingness to torpedo the economy by poorly-conceived, sound-bite-motivated trade policy.

Even if the President had the political will to push for the FMA (which I doubt, considering that it took years for him to endorse it without waffling), I’d peg its chances of of passing well below those of Sen. Kerry or Sen. Edwards’s chances of strangling the nascent economic recovery with protectionist trade policy. I’m no fan of the Bush administration’s near-paranoid secrecy, unwillingness to admit mistakes, or (fortunately limited) pandering to the ultraconservative Christian far-Right, but those flaws pale in comparsion to the trade policy and foreign policy of an Edwards or a Kerry.

P.S.: Be sure to tell all of your Edwards-leaning friends to vote Nader!

12:23 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

La Posterite de l’Affaire Kerry

Instapundit points to a blog post that scoops Drudge on the Kerry Affair. I’m not so much interested in the affair itself as the post’s speculation that Karl Rove is behind it:

Pointing an indignant finger at the machinations of Karl Rove, the Bush administration’s strategist who has a penchant for dispersing rumors, many on the Democrat side will claim that Rove is up to his old shenanigans and that the rumors have no basis. What caused McCain to lose in 2000 could inspire Democrats to rally behind Kerry, and lead to a major rift between the parties and brings the race to a closer finish. Theoretical, but plausible.

It appears thoroughly implausible to me. The only reason to bring the race to a closer finish is to tarnish Kerry a bit; to soften him up before the general elections. The strategy runs the grave risk of backfiring and destroying the Kerry candidacy, meaning that John Edwards could face W. in the general election. Edwards is the only candidate who really threatens the Bush base. I can’t imagine that Rove would be willing to risk bringing him into the general election by his rumor-machinations.

19:24 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

Cut to: Kerry, in love beads, smoking a jay

The blogosphere will doubtlessly be all over this Crimson article detailing an interview with the fresh-from-Vietnam John Kerry, just linked from the Drudge Report:

“I’m an internationalist,” Kerry told The Crimson in 1970. “I’d like to see our troops dispersed through the world only at the directive of the United Nations.”

12:18 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

Grautitious Invocation of Godwin’s Law

This is highly unfair, but I couldn’t help but post it:

“Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SS or SA – ordinary citizens don’t need guns, as their having guns doesn’t serve the State.” —Heinrich Himmler

“These weapons are dangerous and designed for one purpose: military assault. We don’t need them on the streets of our cities. We use assault weapons in the army; folks who want to use them should enlist.” —Wesley Clark

23:20 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

And now – the Kerry Kool-Aid!

After browsing his campaign website, my biggest objection to John Kerry is that his material reads like USG campaign posters. His Big-List-‘o-Issues has 28 items on it — compare to 19 for John Edwards. (Edwards, however, has another problem: Google for his name and his campaign website is the fifth link down; two of the links above it are for a “John Edward” — who appears to be some kind of TV psychic. In the Internet-enabled department, Howard Dean he ain’t.) Kerry includes sections for ‘Nurses’, ‘Native Americans’, and ‘GLBT’. Hey, at least he’s mentioning them.

Most of the material is reasonable, but a few warts stand out. First, nearly every ‘issues’ page begins with a denunciation of the Bush tax cuts — sometimes it’s fair, more often, it’s gratuitious. A sampler:

On higher education:

While George Bush gives tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans, students are struggling to find the support they need to succeed.

On health care:

George Bush has chosen to lavish tax cuts upon the wealthiest among us while working Americans struggle to afford health care for their families.

On “Economy & Jobs”:

George W Bush has chosen tax cuts for the wealthy and special favors for the special interests over our economic future.

His health-care page also sneaks in the Canada-import hogwash near the end:

In addition, the Kerry plan will reduce drug costs for everyone by: […] allowing people to buy quality drugs through Canada.

Why do politicos insist on insulting the intelligence of the electorate? Is Canada supposed to be some magical country where research costs ten times less than it does in the U.S.? Kerry’s not really advocating importation; he’s advocating de facto price controls. It’s sneaky, of course. No sane politican would advocate government control over drug prices; if the public isn’t already familiar with the enormous costs of drug development, the resulting media blitz by the drug makers will redress that ignorance very quickly. (Then again, as Derek Lowe noted, the drug lobbyists haven’t been able to find that argument with both hands and a flashlight.)

Stay tuned; I’ll be sure to find something else I don’t like about him.

18:50 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

Swigging the Edwards Kool-Aid

Given the hype that’s been swirling around John Edwards lately, I decided to give the man’s website a little look-see.

His campaign planks regarding the economy are the most persuasive. Especially this proposal, which is the real answer to the protectionist screams we’ve heard from tech workers:

Give High-Tech Workers Opportunity to Retrain to Keep High-Paid Work. While America has begun to lose high-tech jobs, we continue to have the advantage in the market for the most skilled workers. Getting new skills remains critical for all American workers. Through his Training Works initiative, Edwards will offer high-tech workers the opportunity to enter short-term and part-time certificate programs at both community colleges and major research universities.

And this is just plain cool:

Take on government bureaucracies to free up the spectrum for new technologies, including unlicensed devices like Wi-Fi.

In general, I’m impressed that most of the proposals operate via tax incentives of one kind or another.

His foreign policy page is fairly blah — he outlines a bunch of nice ideas, but very few concrete means.

Philip Greenspun tartly observes that whenever federal politicos start flapping their lips about education, they’re probably lying. On a few of his planks, I certainly hope he is: Edwards favors ending legacy admissions. I stand with Dean Hargardon in the belief that a President taking a stand on legacy admissions is akin to the President taking a stand on the size of the strike zone in baseball.

The health care page is the scariest:

Make Prescription Drugs More Affordable: Edwards will […] permit American consumers to reimport drugs from abroad, with strong protections for patient safety; require the Justice Department to investigate drug companies overcharging the government; and establish a commission to study reforms in the drug patent laws that would yield more breakthrough drugs.

While Edwards’s assertion that drug companies blow hundreds of millions of dollars on marketing that they could be spending on R&D is probably accurate, the re-importation provision is a killer. It’s a backdoor for sneaking Canadian drug-price controls into the U.S. Slashing drug company revenues isn’t likely to boost the innovation that Edwards champions — Quick! Name a prominent “breakthrough drug” that came from Canada.

For a multi-millionaire trial lawyer, the tort reform proposal is interesting:

As President, Edwards will pursue seven strategies for lowering health costs: […] 4. Stop frivolous lawsuits and reduce premiums for malpractice insurance.

Then we get into the really disgusting bits:

Protect Social Security. Senator Edwards strongly opposes recent efforts to privatize Social Security, which would jeopardize benefits by risking our Social Security funds in the stock market. Edwards also opposes efforts to raise the retirement age and has called on Congress and the administration to restore fiscal discipline to Washington in order to preserve the Social Security Trust Fund and our commitment to future generations.

If Edwards also proposed legislation that banned Medicare providing from providing seniors with treatments that hadn’t been invented in 1983 (the last time that the retirement age was changed), I’d be all for this. But as it stands, it’s trolling for the oldster vote, it’s pandering to the greedy geezers, it’s intergenerational larceny. If anything stands to slow down America, Europe, and Japan enough for South Asia, Southeast Asia, Latin America, and China to kick us off our respective economic pedestals, it’s the combined weight of our elderly populations. When we spend as much on a single old person as we do on ten children, something is clearly wrong.

All in all, he’s less slimy than Kerry, and more electable than Dean. Unless he really sets his mind to it, he’ll be more fiscally responsible than President Bush. But unlike some people, I can’t confess that I’ve been won over.

22:56 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

The first thing we do, let’s kill all the pundits

I certainly wouldn’t have expected Sen. Kerry to take the top spot in Iowa, but then again, I don’t forecast elections professionally. The Dean sweap predicted by the prognosticators was a whimper compared to the showings by Sens. Kerry and Edwards.

On the plus side, the Kerry win means that this delightful piece isn’t obsolete just yet.

02:41 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

Dick Gephardt’s Economic Package

As Instapundit observed, whereas Howard Dean’s economic package isn’t particularly inspiring, Dick Gephardt’s package is, well, impressive:

00:47 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

Gephardt’s Random Act of Truth

It’s fairly obvious which candidates slept through Econ. 101 in college:

It’s also immoral to have a race to the bottom, to have companies go to Mexico or China to get the cheapest possible labor they can get. It’s exploitation of human beings.

I’ve been in these villages. I’ve seen the people. They live in worse conditions than most farm animals in Iowa. It’s wrong and we’ve got to change it.

(Congressman Dick Gephardt in Monday’s debate)

But in fairness to Rep. Gephardt, I’m willing to bet money that the average Iowa livestock animal gets more in government subsidies than the average Mexican or Chinese factory worker. And he’s absolutely right: we do have to change that. Just not in the way he probably means.

20:31 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

Birds of a feather?

15:22 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004

Two Minutes Hate

John Kerry resembles nothing so much as an actor playing a presidential candidate. Dick Gephardt bashed Kerry for being squeamish about killing Africans with agricultural subsidies. Pundits from all corners have noted that Wesley Clark is a 21st-century George McClellan. John Edwards can’t go ten minutes without reminding his supporters that he worked in a textile mill. (And let’s not forget his views on the PATRIOT Act.)

But then again: Joe Lieberman gets points for voting against the CDA (and for sporting hair like Junichiro Koizumi). I’m still irritated with his Clinton-era moralizing. Howard Dean is the only candidate whose platform is much more novel than “Hey, I’m not Dubya.” Expect his tunnel-vision foreign policy to make the world’s hellholes worse.

(I left out Sharpton, Kucinich, and their ilk. The American people may prefer movie idols to focus-group-watchers as their governors, but they’re not about to hand the presidency to a race-riot inciter or a scary wide-eyed Raël lookalike.)

15:20 EST | permalink | /issues/elections/2004