BECK: But do you agree that Senator Hatch said to me that if we don’t at least have the firewall of the filibuster in the Senate that in many ways America will not survive?
LIEBERMAN: Well, I hope it’s not like that, but I fear.
Lieberman also hinted that next session, he would be supportive of conservative efforts to filibuster progressive legislation. Lieberman said that the filibuster is a “key” to stop such “passions of the moment”:
LIEBERMAN: And I think the filibuster is the key. You know, it gets a bad name, but it was really put there, a 60-vote requirement, to, as somebody said to me when I first came to the Senate, stop the passions of a moment among the people of America from sweeping across the Congress, the House, through the Senate, to a like-minded President and having us do things that will change America for a long time. So the filibuster is one of the important protections we have.
“Protections” from such things as giving kids healthcare, getting our troops out of Iraq, building the new energy infrastructure of the future, you know, “dangerous” things like that.
If anyone’s counting Democratic numbers in the Senate, be sure not to include Lieberman on our side. He’s telling you right here that he’s not. We can make that permanent, you know.
Make my election prediction come out right! This is from Debbie Cook’s campaign, via email:
We have volunteers monitoring precincts across the district, and the results look encouraging. Our voters are showing up and Republicans are just not very excited by Rohrabacher.
We need you to help phone from home now, and until the polls close at 8:00.
We need to personally call every Democrat in the district before 7:30 and get them out to vote.
Can you help?
If you can, please email debbiecookforcongress-at-gmail-dot-com and we’ll send you the simple instructions to call from home.
Joe Shaw Communications Director Debbie Cook for Congress
A Cook victory would be the biggest ideological shift in the entire House of Representatives. She is a Better Democrat who needs your help. Stay for Change and give Debbie Cook a hand. She will make you proud in Washington.
More Than Obama
by digby
I just got off the phone with Darcy Burner. She’s upbeat and feels confident, but it’s going to be close and she needs every possible voter today. If you know anyone in her district you need to call them. If you are in her district don’t think of blowing it off just because the gasbags are calling the election for Obama.
It is very, very difficult to turn a red district blue by unseating an incumbent, but Democrats like Darcy may just get it done this time. But it won’t happen if people fail to vote today.
Here in California I heard from some of my spies (Gloria) that the lines in Debbie Cook’s district were very long and included lots of young people, which is unusual in the precincts I heard about. Maybe we can take down that awful throwback Dana Rohrabacher too.
Cook and Burner are the faces of the new Democratic party. If they can get elected in these western blue state districts that are changing from conservative strongholds into modern, pragmatic progressivism we will see a more progressive country.
This map is floating around the Internets today. Survey USA polled a hypothetical matchup in 2006 between McCain and Obama. McCain took it 510 to 28 in the Electoral College, with Obama only winning Illinois, Hawaii and D.C.
Two years ago John McCain was probably the most popular Republican in politics, and maybe the nation’s most popular politician. It’s important not to forget that. Fed by a media image that portrayed him as almost a comic-book hero, as this noble warrior willing to follow his conscience instead of party labels, he was exalted as the rugged maverick. It’s simply incredible how that image has been completely tarnished by this Presidential campaign. He did it to himself, and because of the incredible engagement online and in the grassroots, the media was finally compelled to follow.
…by the way, I don’t think this is an example of the media being biased, it’s a typical example of them being dumb and myopic, thinking that the most important part of the election story is when THEY can report the returns, not giving voters accurate information of when the polls close in their area. It’s malpractice of the worst kind. They still think this whole thing is for their amusement.
MSNBC continually aired graphics that purported to show “POLL CLOSING[]” times for each state. But in states that cross over time zones, the times listed in the graphics reflected the western-most time zone in the state, in which polls close an hour later than the rest of the state. Thus, people watching MSNBC in the eastern portion of some states could be left with the impression that local polls would be open for an hour after they actually close.
I just want to add to what tristero said below — if the networks call the election early they will not only run the risk of being wrong, they will likely lower turnout in the west. That will affect our congressional and senate races as well as important ballot initiatives.
There is no reason for this bullshit. They tease the results of the news for hours including the all important sporting events. Indeed, there is an old trope that describes it called, “news at eleven.” There is no reason that they can’t hold off calling the election until the polls are closed. None. Considering their egregious performance just eight years ago, I find it mind-boggling that they are talking about doing this.
There is the obvious, of course, and that’s a big deal. Senior citizens who were the sons and daughters of slaves are going to the polls today to vote for the son of a Kenyan for President of the United States. It’s extremely unique, and anomalous for the world. In fact, the US is the most likely place for this to happen. Europe has never had an ethnic minority lead one of their countries (Nicolas Sarkozy is the son of Hungarian immigrants, but that’s not really what we’re talking about), and immigrants are simply not assimilated into the society in the same way. It sounds weird to say it, but this is a uniquely American event.
But believe it or not, I think Adam Nagourney gets this largely right – while the phrase “change politics as we know it” gets thrown around a lot, this election truly has.
It has rewritten the rules on how to reach voters, raise money, organize supporters, manage the news media, track and mold public opinion, and wage — and withstand — political attacks, including many carried by blogs that did not exist four years ago. It has challenged the consensus view of the American electoral battleground, suggesting that Democrats can at a minimum be competitive in states and regions that had long been Republican strongholds.
The size and makeup of the electorate could be changed because of efforts by Democrats to register and turn out new black, Hispanic and young voters. This shift may have long-lasting ramifications for what the parties do to build enduring coalitions, especially if intensive and technologically-driven voter turnout programs succeed in getting more people to the polls. Mr. McCain’s advisers expect a record-shattering turnout of 130 million people, many being brought into the political process for the first time.
“I think we’ll be analyzing this election for years as a seminal, transformative race,” said Mark McKinnon, a senior adviser to President Bush’s campaigns in 2000 and 2004. “The year campaigns leveraged the Internet in ways never imagined. The year we went to warp speed. The year the paradigm got turned upside down and truly became bottom up instead of top down.”
And regardless of whether that is good for Democrats or Republicans (right now, it’s Democrats, but that could change), it’s good for the country. Political engagement is good for America. It’s going to be sorely needed as we meet these enormous challenges, the fallout of the Age of Bush.
What was most different is that, despite the smear campaigns and the attacks, this was quite a substantive election. It was waged on ideological grounds, and while a lot of important issues hardly ever got raised, the core philosophies of conservatives and liberals was fully on display. And so the outcome ought to produce a bigger mandate than in the past. Obama made the argument, and so did McCain. Now the winner can act on it. And hopefully, we will see a citizenry as engaged about governing as they were about the horse race. That is the great challenge for the next President, because only people power will be able to overcome the special interests and the guardians of the status quo.
So go vote. But then on November 5, the work begins.
At least one broadcast network and one Web site said Monday that they could foresee signaling to viewers early Tuesday evening which candidate appeared to have won the presidency, despite the unreliability of some early exit polls in the last presidential election.
A senior vice president of CBS News, Paul Friedman, said the prospects for Barack Obama or John McCain meeting the minimum threshold of electoral votes could be clear as soon as 8 p.m. — before polls in even New York and Rhode Island close, let alone those in Texas and California. At such a moment, determined from a combination of polling data and samples of actual votes, the network could share its preliminary projection with viewers, Mr. Friedman said.
People, this is democratic malpractice, voter suppression. Senate and House races will be affected by this, as will the tally to defeat odious ballot initiatives like Prop Hate in California.
Don’t fall for it! Whatever the preliminary results, whatever you hear, get to the polls and vote as if your single ballot could single-handedly decide Florida in 2000. Why? Because it’s true.
Every single vote for Obama repudiates conservatism. It is not enough for Obama to win. Republicans must lose and lose and lose. Republicans know = and for once, they are right – the election is NOT over. Why? Because it is NEVER over. The fight for 2012 began a long time ago. Assuming we are lucky enough to have an Obama victory tomorrow, the fight to destroy his presidency will begin immediately – in fact, it’s already begun. The single best thing all Americans can do to prevent that from happening is to vote, no matter how long the lines, no matter how the election is called before all the polls are closed, no matter what.
Vote for Obama as if your safety and security depended upon it. Believe me, they do. It is crucial that he receive as many votes as possible.
Dixville Notch, NH, the traditional first town to vote in the Presidential race at 12:01 AM ET, hasn’t voted for a Democrat since Hubert H. Humphrey in 1968.
Here’s your handy dandy, progressive guide to the many ballot propositions courtesy of our friends at the Courage Campaign. There’s a link at the bottom to print this out to take to the polls tomorrow:
2008 California Mobile Voter Guide PROP 1A: High Speed Rail Authorizes $10 billion in bonds to begin construction of a 220 MPH train to connect San Francisco to Los Angeles via San Jose and Fresno. Trains will be powered by renewable electricity and create 160,000 jobs over the next 10 years. SUPPORTING: Sierra Club, CA Democratic Party, CA League of Conservation Voters, CA Labor Federation, Calitics PROP 2: Stop Animal Cruelty Mandates that farm animals such as chickens and pigs are given enough room in their cages to spread their wings, turn and move around, stand up or sit down. SUPPORTING: Sierra Club, CA Democratic Party, CA League of Conservation Voters, Calitics PROP 3: Children’s Hospital Bonds Provides over $900 million in bond funding to renovate and expand children’s hospital facilities around the state. SUPPORTING: CA Democratic Party, Los Angeles Times, Calitics PROP 4: Undermines Teen Safety and Abortion Rights Californians have rejected this proposal twice since 2005, which would undermine a woman’s right to choose. It places young women in serious jeopardy of abuse (or worse) and is part of a strategy to roll back abortion rights for all Californians. OPPOSING: Planned Parenthood, CA Nurses Association, CA Association of School Counselors, SEIU CA, CA Medical Association, CA Democratic Party PROP 5: Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Saves the state over $1 billion a year by providing treatment rather than prison time for those suffering from a drug addiction. SUPPORTING: CA Democratic Party, Cal Labor Fed, League of Women Voters, CA Nurses Association, SEIU CA, Color of Change.org, NAACP PROP 6: Massive prison expansion Forces thousands of juvenile offenders into adult courts, mandates longer prison sentences, and takes billions from the state budget for more prison spending at a time of historic budget deficits. OPPOSING: CA Democratic Party, Cal Labor Fed, Ella Baker Center, ACLU, League of Women Voters, CA Nurses Association, SEIU CA PROP 7: Renewable Power Standard Prop 7 has been a contentious issue. Proponents believe it is a bold and necessary step toward more solar and wind projects by mandating we get 50% of our power from renewable sources by 2025. Opponents believe the measure is poorly written and may cause more harm than good. We are not convinced by either side and invite voters to make their own assessment. PROP 8: Eliminates marriage rights Would revoke marriage rights for same-sex couples and enshrine discrimination in the state constitution, the first time in history that a constitutional amendment would rescind human rights. OPPOSING: Equality California, ACLU, Cal Labor Fed, CA Democratic Party, Anti-Defamation League, California NAACP, CNA, SEIU CA PROP 9: More prison expansion Like Prop 6, this would mandate huge increases in prison spending, by using “victims’ rights” as a cover. California legislation on victims’ rights is already among the nation’s strongest making this proposition unnecessary. OPPOSING: CA Democratic Party, Cal Labor Fed, Ella Baker Center, ACLU, League of Women Voters, SEIU CA, CA Nurses Association PROP 10: T. Boone Bailout Oklahoma oil billionaire and funder of the 2004 Swift Boat ads against John Kerry, T. Boone Pickens, wants to take $5 billion from our stressed budget for his natural gas companies. OPPOSING: Sierra Club, CA League of Conservation Voters, Cal Labor Fed, Union of Concerned Scientists, SEIU CA, CA Nurses Association PROP 11: Biased Redistricting A deeply flawed effort to change how legislative districts are drawn. Though we desperately need redistricting reform, this is not it. Actually favors Republicans (who have 32% of registered voters) over Democrats (with 43%) and Independents (with 19.5%). Undermines voting rights for Californians of color. OPPOSING: CA League of Conservation Voters, Cal Labor Fed, CA Democratic Party, Mobilize the Immigrant Vote, Legislative Black Caucus and Legislative Latino Caucus, La Opinión PROP 12: Veterans’ Homes Bond Renews a home loan program for veterans that dates back to 1922. The bond must be periodically renewed – this would be the 12th renewal. Enables veterans of current wars to get affordable loans. Bond is repaid by veterans themselves. SUPPORTING: CA Democratic Party, Los Angeles Times, Cal Labor Fed, Calitics CLCV – League of Conservation Voters LWV – League of Women Voters EQCA – Equality California Visit http://www.couragecampaign.org/2008voterguide on your PC for more information. A project of the Courage Campaign Issues Committee
No, you’re not high (well, maybe you are…I can’t really see what you’re doing there.) Digby has invited me to make a rare weeknight appearance; she thought it might be fun for me to offer up some suggestions for an election eve movie festival. You know-something to distract ourselves from all the bloviating blowhards (we’ll be seeing and hearing enough of them tomorrow, as we sit aghast in front of our TV monitors). Digby suggested that we apply the vaccination theory-how about some films about…elections?
For movies that delve into the art of the campaign, I’d be partial to screening The Candidate, Primary Colors, or the brilliant documentary, The War Room. For the election movie as paranoid political thriller, how about The Contender and The Manchurian Candidate (1962) as a double bill? (The latter film is worth the price of the rental just to hear Sinatra exclaim, “Doc, that was one swinger of a nightmare!”). If you’re in the mood for a good election satire, it doesn’t get any better than Wag the Dog, Bulworth, Bob Roberts, or arguably the best of the best, the late Robert Altman’s cable mini-series, Tanner ’88. For political allegory, Election definitely tops my list. And although it has a more tangential election theme (election night as a backdrop for a substantial chunk of the film) any excuse to revisit Hal Ashby’s Shampoo gets my vote.
Strangely enough, I think my all-time favorite election film is one that has nothing to do with American politics: Don’s Party, a worthwhile sleeper from Down Under. Breaker Morant director Bruce Beresford folds in one part Shampoo, one partReturn of the Secaucus 7 and sprinkles liberally with Who’s Afraid Of Virgina Woolf. The story is set on Australia’s election night, 1969. Our outgoing host Don and his uptight wife are hosting an “election party” for old college chums at their solidly middle-class suburban home. With the exception of one self-absorbed Casanova, most guests range from the recently divorced to the unhappily married. Ostensibly gathering to watch election results, talk politics and socialize, Don’s party quickly deteriorates into a veritable primer on bad human behavior as the alcohol kicks in. By the end of the night, marriages are on the rocks, friendships nearly broken and people are taking impromptu naked swims in the vacationing neighbor’s pool. Yet, this is not just another wacky party film. It makes some keen observations about mid-life crisis, elitism, politics, and adult relationships along the way. Savagely funny, brilliantly written and well acted. The film’s title is a clever double entendre, n’est-ce pas? So put a shrimp on the barbie, a barb on your tongue, and enjoy.
