Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (8608)	9/19/2003 8:25:58 PM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793691

Some inside politics in USA Today: Recall just gets odder from here A full deck of wild cards still waiting to be played By John Ritter USA TODAY .........* Why are national Democrats rushing to Davis' aid? Clinton stumped for him over two days, Jesse Jackson and Florida Sen. Bob Graham came the next day, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry a day later, and now Gore. The reason: 2004. Presidential candidates Graham and Kerry want money and votes from the nation's most populous state. Democrats want badly to prevent a Republican governor from trying to tip the state to President Bush. ''The presidential wannabes can't come out here to raise money and turn down a request from the governor,'' says Sherry Bebitch Jeffe, a University of Southern California public policy analyst. Davis used rallies at black churches here and in Los Angeles to fire up his core voters, preaching no on recall and no on Proposition 54, a measure that would prohibit the state from collecting race data. He was re-elected last November with 47% of the vote but needs 50% to beat the recall. Democrats make up 44% of the electorate. Blacks are the only voter group with a majority, 66%, that backs the governor. And although 78% of them are Democrats, they made up only 4% of Californians who voted last November. ''He has to solidify his base, but that won't be enough,'' says Henry Brady, a University of California-Berkeley political science professor. ''He's not getting people on the fence.'' * Will court rulings become politicized? Bet on it. Republicans, livid over the recall delay, condemned the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals as an out-of-touch liberal bastion. In a rare move, the full appellate court is considering whether to overturn the three judges' ruling. But if it stands, an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court is certain. And if the justices, in another brouhaha over punch-card voting, reverse the 9th Circuit and return the vote to Oct. 7, Democrats will try to milk lingering bitterness over the 2000 presidential outcome. ''Six months from now what we'll have is frustration, disappointment, confusion -- and the bottom line is, Californians, when in doubt, vote no,'' Jeffe says. Advantage: Davis. * Is next week's televised debate crucial? Schwarzenegger has the most to win or lose. If the actor appears to be on top of the issues, voters he desperately needs -- moderate Democrats and independents -- might begin to take him seriously. If he stumbles, particularly in the face of the policy expertise McClintock demonstrated at the first debate, he may never recover. Schwarzenegger took flak for skipping the first three debates, agreeing only to Wednesday's format in which the candidates get questions in advance. Bustamante ripped him for missing this week's debate in Los Angeles. The lieutenant governor invited McClintock, independent Arianna Huffington and the Green Party's Peter Camejo to join him outside next week's debate site ''and leave Arnold in there with his movie-script answers.'' UC-Berkeley's Cain says: ''This will be Arnold's critical moment, and he has to deliver. From what I've seen, he doesn't choke. I expect him to stride in with confidence and deliver a performance.'' Other wild cards loom. The Republican Davis whipped last November, Bill Simon, hints he may rejoin an extended race. He pulled out last month to avoid splitting Republicans. Davis courted liberals and Latinos lukewarm on the recall when he signed a bill allowing illegal immigrants to get driver's licenses and pledged to sign one expanding the rights of domestic partners. The moderate Davis has disappointed liberals and progressives, and they'll ''try to extort as much as they can out of him,'' Cain says. ''The great irony of the whole recall is Republicans are going after the most Republican Democrat in statewide office right now.'' usatoday.com

To: JohnM who wrote (8608)	9/19/2003 9:36:31 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793691

A cynical note from the "TNR Blog" CONSIDERING THERE ARE 49 DEMOCRATIC SENATORS, COUNT US LUCKY THEY AREN'T ALL RUNNING: Now there are ten Democratic presidential contenders, and a minimum of nine must lose. This means at least nine of the contenders appear to be wasting their own time and everyone else's time, plus wasting millions of dollars. So why do they do it? Recently I put the question to a Renown Political Consultant whose name must be withheld in the interest of the person's future employment prospects. The reply went like this: First, to the extent the candidates are United States senators (four are), caution-contents-under-pressure egotism is the driving factor. It matters not that it has been 43 years since a senator was elected president. All senators consider themselves Great Men -- substitute Women where appropriate--and of equal importance, all senators consider all competing senators Bloated Gasbags. So when Senator A declares for the presidency, 99 other senators instantly think, Him? I'm better than him! Senators endlessly run, and endlessly lose, because they cannot stand the thought that some other senator views himself as more qualified. Second, the Renown Political Consultant went on, a presidential campaign is a lottery ticket. No one knows who will win; "expert" forecasts are almost always wrong. All current Democratic contenders are keenly aware that at this point in 1992, George H. W. Bush looked unbeatable; a year later he lost to a small-state governor with bimbo baggage, while party heavyweights stayed out of the race. So why not buy a ticket? Considering that you yourself do not pay the price of the ticket--your campaign donors do that--why not? Sounds persuasive. I'll add the third reason, general to all the candidates, which is that running for president allows a person to spend the year pretending he or she actually is president. You give speeches every day full of phrases likes, "When I am president of the United States--" Reporters ask your position on issues, and hang on your every word of reply. Not because they care about your reply, rather, they are hoping you will slip up and commit some gaffe they can mock; but at any rate, you experience the sensation of reporters hanging on your every word, just as they do for the actual president. So long as your fundraising holds out, you get to fly around the country issuing orders to obedient staffers, and speaking to audiences about how your administration will rapidly solve all problems and bring peace to the Middle East. You get to somberly say to your advisors, spouse or mistress things like, "Let's convene a panel of experts to advise me on the Tajikistan pipeline issue." Every day you are introduced at least once as "the next president of the United States!" This is all very ego-gratifying and, though strenuous, a nice diversion from actual work. tnr.com