Victory!

In 2004, while speaking on John Kerry’s behalf, former president William Jefferson Clinton said the following:

Now one of Clinton’s laws of politics is this: if one candidate’s trying to scare you, and the other one’s trying to get you to think. If one candidate’s appealing to your fears, and the other one’s appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person that wants you to think and hope.

Well, last night the politics of hope beat out the politics of fear. In the electoral vote, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois won 364 to 163, carrying red and blue states alike. Obama also won 53% to 46% in the popular vote. Now, that might not seem like much of a victory, but compared to past presidential elections, that’s actually a fairly large margin.

Barack Obama spoke about what he would do for America. Creating green jobs. Creating a universal health care system. Repairing the economy. Lowering taxes on the middle and upper classes. Re-uniting with the world. He spoke to our hopes.

On the other hand, John McCain and some of his supporters spent too much time appealing to people’s feats. Muslim. Associates with terrorists. Association with a crazy black preacher. Will raise your taxes. Will turn America into a socialist nation. Too far to the left.

These claims about Obama being a radical leftist are laughable. Yes, his voting record is far to the left. But, he is also a pragmatist. Listen to him speak. Read his plans. Get a sense of the man, and you will see that he is no revolutionary. He is a pragmatist in the mold of FDR.

But, anyway, now it is November 5. Our next president will be Barack Obama. The Supreme Court will be conserative. The Congress Democratic, but the Republicans will be able to filibuster.  These are all facts. Now, it is time to move on into our future. Certainly, there are some crazies out there who will refuse to listen to voices of reason. And there are those who lack the open-mindedness to work with those across the aisle. But for the rest of us, it is time to work together in creating the America of the future.

Howard Dean’s 50-State Strategy

Well, no matter what party your affiliated with, you’ve got to admit that Howard Dean’s 50-state strategy combined with the momentum for change in this country has made this election more interesting and exciting than most.

In 2004, President Bush won Georgia by 17, Indiana by 21, Montana by 20, North Carolina by 12. Arizona by 11, Virginia by 8, and the list goes on. The point is Bush won by large amounts in all of the above red states. But now, all of the above states are contested. Whereas Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania used to dominate election coverage, now they’ve been joined by a whole host of other states.

What this election has done is throw a long list of states – some of which haven’t been contested for decades – into the swing state mix.

It’s exciting if nothing else, and also goes to show that perhaps Howard Dean’s 50-state strategy has had an effect. The strategy was built on making every state competitive for Democrats, rather than simply conceding certain red states to the Republicans year-after-year. Over the past several years, the Democrats have built up their ground game in a number of states once considered unwinnable, and it seems to have helped.

The key difference in the electoral map from 2004 to 2008 is that very few states are blowouts for the GOP now. Yes, there’s still Idaho and Wyoming, where McCain is up by tremendous amounts. But most other red states have tightened at the very least. Even states that McCain will almost definitely carry (South Carolina and South Dakota come to mind) are closer than usual. Yes, master artist Howard Dean has done it. He has turned red into purple.

How the Electoral Map Looks as America Heads to the Voting Booth

To start with, I really ought to be asleep. But, at the same time, I realized that I have an obligation to post one final look at the polls before the election begins. My blog has covered the election, particularly the electoral map polling, for months, and I will cover the electoral map until there is a declared victor.

So, as we head into Election Day, Barack Obama obviously holds a big lead, but how safe is it?

According to Real Clear Politics, Obama

• leads by 7.6 and 7.3 percentage points respectively in Pennsylvania and New Mexico, two states that are really important to an Obama victory.
• Obama leads by 5.5 and 6.2 percentage points respectively in Colorado and Nevada, two states that could clinch the election for Obama.
• Obama leads by 4.3 and 3.2 percentage points respectively in Virginia and Ohio, two states that could turn a tight victory into a solid victory for Obama, and two states that McCain needs.
• Obama leads by 1.8 percentage points in Florida, a state that had been trending Republican.
• He is trailing by less than 2 percent in Indiana, Missouri, and North Carolina. if he can win a few of these states, then that would equal a landslide for the Democrat from Illinois and would signal a dramatic moment in this country’s political history.
• And he is down by less than 5 percent in Montana, North Dakota (according to Yahoo’s Political Dashboard), and Arizona. Wins in these states would give Obama a mandate.

Meanwhile, John McCain in order to win:

• Needs to hold on in Arizona, Indiana, and North Carolina.
• Needs to pull off the upset in Ohio and Florida.
• Needs to win two out of three involving Virginia, Nevada, and Colorado OR 
• Needs to win Pennsylvania.
• Ought to hold on to small but traditionally Republican states like Montana and North Dakota.

The polls though are often wrong, which will keep us all on the edge of our seats as we head into the 2008 Presidential Election.

Life Turns to Death: The Case of Troy Davis

In a recent article for the Atlanta Jounal-Constiution, Jim Wooten argues

Before you buy-in to the Troy Anthony Davis PR campaign, go to the source. Read for yourself the Georgia Supreme Court decision handed down March 17 that dealt with quality of the alleged recantations in the murder of Savannah police officer Mark Allen MacPhail.

The link is: www.gasupreme.us/pdf/s07a1758.pdf. Cut out the spin. Read Justice Harold Melton’s majority opinion.

And I agree with Wooten. In fact, I’d go even further. Read the minority opinion too. That would be the best way of cutting out the spin. And then see what you think.

Personally, I’m concerned with this statement that appears throughout the majority opinion that certain affadavits lack “the type of materiality required to support an extraordinary motion for new trial.” Yes, it is true that the defense must provide good reason for why the case ought to be retried. However, I think the Court is being too rigid here. The majority denies Davis’s case because it supposedly doesn’t meet certain strict standards and because Davis failed to comply with certain beureaucratic details. Fair enough. But who cares about small details like that when we’re talking about life and death.

The minority opinion of the Georgia Supreme Court says,

I believe that this case illustrates that this Court’s approach in extraordinary motions for new trials based on new evidence is overly rigid and fails to show an adequate inquiry into the fundamental question, which is whether or not an innocent person person might have been convicted or even, as in this case, might be put to death.

I couldn’t agree more. The Georgia Supreme Court has stated here that a defandant facing death cannot get a retrial even though there is reason to doubt his guilt. Whatever happened to the maxim of innocent until proven guilty.

In cases of death, I think the burden of proof, during and after trial, must be on the prosecution. All sorts of new evidence has come out since the original trial. As a result, the prosecution should have to prove why the defandant is still guilty beyond reasonable doubt. In the Troy Davis, reasonable doubt remains, and thus Davis must be taken off death row.

The death penalty is a very serious issue. When we put someone to death, we are taking away that person’s most sacred possession: life. We are deciding which Americans are worthy to live and who deserves to die, a power that is usually reserved for a higher power. 

I’m not saying that the death penalty is wrong. But I am saying that we must be very careful with how we use this power. In this case, the Georgia Court and the U.S. Supreme Court are not being careful enough. They are risking putting an innocent man to death.

Obama’s In Control

John McCain was desperate last night. Like a football offense looking for a hole in the defense, he switched from tactic to tactic, looking for a hole.

The senator from Arizona made a lot of cheap attacks. He brought up Bill Ayers and ACORN. But, Senator Obama stood his ground. He explained his connections to these groups clearly, and helped make them non-issues.

Senator McCain attacked on taxes, trying to tie Senator Obama to the decades-long belief that Democrats will always increase taxes on the middle-class. But Obama stood his ground, repeating over and over again that he would actually be cutting taxes for 95% of the population. Factually, that 95% has been disputed; I read today that the number might actually be 81%. However, the one undeniable truth is that Senator Barack Obama would be lowering taxes for the vast majority of Americans.

Senator McCain also attacked Obama for running the most negative ads in history. He was misleadingly trying to suggest that Obama was running the most negative campaign. Here’s the truth: Obama may be running the greatest number of negative ads in history (he’s also probably running the most positive ads in history), but in terms of perecentage of ads that are negative, McCain is running one of the most negative campaigns in recent history. Even a lot of Republicans agree on this point.

The attacks went on and on. Notably, Senator McCain tried to attack Obama’s health care plan by asking Obama how much he would be fining those who chose not to get health care. Obama said zero. McCain ended up looking awfully dumb. Poor McCain. If only he had payed more attention to the Obama-Clinton debates, then he would have known that the main difference between Clinton and Obama’s health care plans is that Obama’s wouldn’t impose fines whereas Clinton’s would. Oh well, McCain’s loss. Obama’s gain.

Overall though, Senator Obama appeared unruffled by all of McCain’s attacks. He looked presidential. By that I mean he was calm in the face of tough opposition. He spoke with reason even when his opponent didn’t. He stayed strong in the face of cheap shots and actual lies, always keeping his voice steady and his points on target. And he managed to make a few poignant lines and attacks of his own. It was an incredible night for Obama. I’m going to say it, and CNN polls confirm it: Obama flat-out won this debate, and in so doing, he probably just clinched the election.

As I thought about the debate later, I realized I am really comfortable with having Obama as my president. I’d want him to be the one facing Putin. I’d want him to be the one tackling our greatest issues. Last night, he showed his intelligence, even temperament, and strength. He showed me why he should be our 44th president.

On the other hand, McCain looked angry. And pathetic with his pandering. Could he mention that plumber anymore? And his ideas were confused. For example, he kept criticizing Obama’s spending plans, and yet McCain offered no clear vision as to how he would cut spending and balance the budget.     

And two other debate notes:

• My compliments to Bob Schieffer for asking excellent, probing questions throughout the debate. 
• Where was Senator McCain’s flag lapel? Obama was wearing one, but I didn’t see one on the Republican. Now, personally I don’t think the lapel is a big deal. But, if indeed McCain wasn’t wearing one and it gets no press, then I think the double standard is a big deal.

Campaign Strategy

Question: Why is John McCain still spending so much time and effort trying to win Pennsylvania? Ohio and Florida are far more important to his campaign. And he has virtually no chance in Pennsylvania anyway, where he’s down by approximately 13 points.

OK, well that’s enoiugh politics for one day.

Goodnight. I love you, America! No saracasm intended.

Reading Between the Lines: Missile Strikes in Pakistan

As I was leafing through yesterday’s edition of the Chicago Tribune, I spotted this interesting line about a United States missile strike in Pakistan.

The latest in a barrage of suspected U.S. missile strikes in Pakistan’s northwest killed five people, but none was believed to be a foreign Al Queda fighter, officials said Sunday. Two drone aircraft were seen above the town of Miran Shah in the North Waziristan tribal region minutes before missiles hit a house, two intelligence officials said.

Now, there are some crucial questions that emerge from this story. For example, five people were killed and yet none was believed to be a “foreign Al Queda fighter.” So, who exactly were those five people? Were they innocent? And if they were innocent, then what? Do we plan on compensating the families? How will this affect the way Pakistanis think of us.  

We’ve heard a lot about potential missile strikes in Pakistan recently, but rarely do we hear about the success rates of such attacks. Perhaps, that should be a part of the discussion.

A Helpful Study Aid for the 2008 Election

Here is a chart I made to help describe this upcoming election. If it helps you see what’s going on more clearly, then great. If not, feel free to ignore it.

It’s essentially just a chart of battleground states though, with a middle point showing where the big 270 electoral vote barrier is.

BATTLEGROUND STATES (10% Difference or Less)	Obama	McCain	Lead
Iowa	51.3	41.8	+ 9.5
Oregon	49.8	40.8	+ 9
New Jersey	50.4	41.8	+ 8.6
Washington	49.8	41.8	+ 8
Wisconsin	50.3	42.8	+ 7.5
New Mexico	49.8	42.5	+ 7.3
Michigan	49.1	42.1	+ 7
Virginia	49.9	45.1	+ 4.8
270 VOTE BARRIER:     OBAMA WINS UNLESS HE LOSES ALL THE BELOW STATES AND ONE OR MORE OF THE ABOVE STATES
Ohio	48.9	44.9	+ 4
Colorado	49.3	45.3	+ 4
Florida	48.3	45.3	+ 3
Nevada	49.6	46.6	+ 3
North Carolina	48.2	47.6	+ .6
Missouri	47.8	47.5	+ .3
Indiana	46.0	48.5	+ 2.5
West Virginia	42.3	48.0	+ 5.7
Georgia	43.5	51.5	+ 8

CHART NOTES

States in Blue represent states Kerry carried in 2004.

States in Red represent states Bush carried in 2004.

Percentages in Blue represent Obama leads according to the most recent RCP polls presented on Yahoo’s Political Dashboard.

Percentages in Red represent McCain leads according to the most recent RCP polls presented on Yahoo’s Political Dashboard.

Further Examination of Troy Davis and the Death Penalty

Guilty or Not, Should Troy Davis Really Get the Death Penalty?

Thus far, most of the conversation, including my post, concerning Troy Davis has revolved around whether or not the evidence in this case is strong enough to support the death penalty. Yet, even if he is guilty (which I doubt), does the crime really merit the death penalty? 

Son of Sam, who killed up to 6 people, was involved in up to 8 shootings, and terrorized the city of New York, has had parole hearings. He could be free right now. Yet, Troy Davis was nearly killed via the death penalty last week for killing one police officer. Is this really fair? I understand that killing a police officer is a terrible thing? But, is it really that much worse than terrorizing a city? And yes, I’m aware that Georgia law is different than New York law. But still. Justice is justice. And we ought to ask ourselves: is this really just?

The Bible is Still Out on the Death Penalty

An eye for an eye. A tooth for a tooth. Yes, yes, I am well aware that the Bible seems to support the death penalty at times. And death penalty advocates love to bring that up. Of course, let’s not forget that we ought not take the word of the Bible literally. Since the Bible says a lot of pretty intense things that don’t necessairily apply very well to modern society. Yet, that aside, these death penalty advocates are also ignoring the fact that the Bible also has some clear anti-death penalty messages. In particular, the Cain and Abel story, when God says “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.” In this passage, God makes clear that men ought not kill other men, since we are all God’s creation. Point is, that the Bible offers a mixed judgment on the death penalty. It’s not as one-sided as some might like to think.

Personally, I am undecided on the death penalty, but as I look at this case, and learn about past cases where the innocent were condemned to die, I find it harder and harder to support the death penalty. Perhaps, it would be best to simply leave matters of life and death up to God.

Political Fun

Post of the Day

I found this post on CNN.com under an article titled “McCain: Palin, the next Clinton.” It’s by a user named “Randy,” a self-described Republican who will be voting Democrat this year.

“This is utter BS. Sarah Palin in the league of Reagan and Clinton? They (Reagan and Clinton) had fought bitter primaries and ended up at the top of the ticket. Palin was a last minute impulse option by the aging and frankly quite indecisive senator McCain. I am a Republican but I’m disgusted with the direction of the country’s foreign policy of unilateralism, endless wars, bad financial decisions, risky choices (in wars and selection of the vice presidential candidate) etc. This is sure harbinger of dark days ahead were McCain to get elected. With friends like this who needs enemies. I am putting my country first and voting Democrat this time.”

I put this up on the website, just to demonstate that putting your country first doesn’t belong exclusively to John McCain and his supporters. Randy offers an awfully persuasive reason why it would be in our country’s best interests to elect Obama.

Funny Quote of the Day:

And here’s a rather hysterical quote from conservative commentator Kathleen Parker. According to CNN’s Cafferty File, Parker would like to root for Palin as a fellow female conservative, but has become rather disenchanted with Palin, after watching Palin’s various stumbles and bad answers these past few weeks. According to Parker, ”If B.S. were currency, Palin could bail out Wall Street herself.” Wow. Enough said, huh?

Living on a Prayer: The Case of Troy Davis

For the past month or so, I have been getting a constant stream of Facebook e-mails about the Troy Davis case, most of which I ignored as I went about my daily routine. But today, I finally took the time to read one of these messages, and I was moved. And so, I searched Troy Davis on the Web, and as I read more and more about the case, I realized that I had to spread the word of what’s going on here.

Basically, we have an African-American man who was sentenced to death row for killing a police officer. According to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, “Davis was convicted with scant physical evidence: no DNA, no fingerprints, no murder weapon.” Lacking physical evidence, the jury ruled that he was guilty based off the testimony of nine witnesses who testified against Davis back in 1991. But now, seven of those nine witnesses have recanted their testimony. And several of them have pointed to a new culprit. And, what about those two witnesses who haven’t recanted their testimony? Well, one of those two is the afore-mentioned “new culprit,” who of course, has an interest in making sure that Davis is the one blamed for the crime. Sounds like a pretty flimsy case, huh?

And yet, Troy Davis might be put to death without taking into account the stunning new developments in this case. It’s clear that the ruling should be re-examined. Certainly, in this great country built on principles of justice and reason, it would be wrong to kill Troy Davis without giving Davis’s story another look. The executiion must be stopped. We cannot kill someone when the evidence is that weak. It is morally wrong, and it would be a disgrace to the American justice system and to our country as a whole. We have put innocent men to death before. Let’s not risk making that same mistake this time.