Wednesday, August 20, 2008 |
|
Rumors on the Internets ... |
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
7:57 AM |
For what it's worth ...
1). I'm hearing that tensions were high recently when veteran actor Robert Duvall was taping a voice-over for a video to be played during the Republican National Convention. Apparently, the veteran actor objected to the direction he was receiving from Republican media guru Fred Davis. According to my sources, Duvall said something along the lines of: "F-you Fred! If Scorsese couldn't give me direction, what the hell makes you think you can?" Though this blow-up is actually recorded on tape, my guess is it's in everyone's best interest for this to not leak out ...
2). A source tells me Secret Service agents were all over the Minnesota State House yesterday. Is this a hint that Tim Pawlenty will get the veep nod? Maybe, or maybe not ...
3). As MSNBC continues to cast itself as the "anti-Fox," the NYT is reporting that liberal Rachel Maddow will replace Dan Abrams.
|
|
|
Tuesday, August 19, 2008 |
|
A Heartbeat Away |
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
5:14 PM |
Family Research Council just sent out this in their daily email:
"Last night, we received disturbing reports that McCain's campaign manager Rick Davis had been making phone calls to state leaders to gauge their reactions to the selection of a pro-abortion running mate. Most signs pointed to former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge. Big problem! Governor Ridge is not only aggressively pro-abortion, supporting measures like the Freedom of Choice Act, which would have overturned most state laws on abortion, while serving as a U.S. Congressman, he was well known for publicly opposing many of President Reagan's policies relating to national defense and siding instead with liberal Democrats. This afternoon Fox News is reporting that officials at the Republican National Committee are knocking down the reports of a pro-abortion running mate for McCain. If so, the Arizona Senator has averted a misstep that would not only have cost him the ground he gained over the past week but probably assured him of defeat this November."
|
|
|
Tuesday, August 19, 2008 |
|
Tom Ridge is Out? |
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
4:30 PM |
According to Fox News:
"As speculation grows around who John McCain will select as his vice presidential running mate next week, Republican National Committee officials said Tuesday that McCain is no longer considering former Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Ridge."
|
|
|
Tuesday, August 19, 2008 |
|
McCain up by 5 in Zogby Poll |
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
12:56 PM |
I'm hearing that a new Reuters/Zogby National poll (that has not yet been released) has McCain up by 5 points. McCain leads Obama by 8 points among likely voters in terms of who can best manage the economy.
Update: This poll is scheduled to be officially released tomorrow morning.
|
|
|
Tuesday, August 19, 2008 |
|
Hobson's Choice: Lieberman or Ridge? |
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
11:51 AM |
As he moves toward making a veep selection, John McCain's head will do battle with his heart. And, by most accounts, his heart appears to be with Joe Lieberman and Tom Ridge. Mind you, neither selection makes sense to me strategically, but anything is possible.
In fact, I just got off the phone with one prominent conservative leader who tells me, "I do think all signs point to Ridge." My source's rationale is that he believes the McCain folks put Ridge on the Sunday Morning talk shows this week specifically to say he would support McCain's positions as vice president. He also notes that Pennsylvania pro-life groups have begun putting out word that Ridge was a fine governor. And he says (as we all know), McCain personally likes Ridge.
Joe Lieberman has three attributes conservatives ought to like: He's a strong supporter of the war on terror, a defender of the culture, and was a vocal critic of Bill Clinton's peccadillos. You could also argue that, unlike Ridge, Lieberman is a safer pick for conservatives because he has zero chance of ever becoming a future GOP nominee. Conversely, Ridge would become the successor. By this logic, given a Hobson's Choice between the two, you might assume conservatives would favor a Lieberman selection.
... But I've found very few conservatives who would make this argument. In fact, I have been astonished to find that most conservatives I talk to do not strongly oppose Tom Ridge. For example, even Tony Perkins -- a prominent social conservaitve who heads the Family Research Council -- has vocally opposed Ridge -- but not in an overly-forceful manner.
The bottom line is that the vast majority of conservatives I've talked to are not overly concerned about a Ridge selection. Some don't believe he is a realistic pick, but the ones who believe he is likely say he will follow the George H.W. Bush model of a loyal VP.
So why do most conservatives favor Ridge over Lieberman? One argument is that modern-day "conservatives" are really more partisan than they are ideological. But a better argument is that most modern-day conservatives are not going to be hung up on a single hot-button issue, even though I would argue it is perhaps the fundamental issue. When looking at their overall records, Ridge would be more likely to lead as a conservative, and I think that's why most of the folks I talked to were somewhat surprisingly favorable to him...
|
|
|
Tuesday, August 19, 2008 |
|
David Brooks on McCain: Don't be a Player Hater ... |
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
9:22 AM |
Since early July, when Steve Schmidt took the reigns of the campaign, John McCain has turned a corner. It started with the "celebrity" ad, and the momentum continued with McCain's excellent performance at Saddleback. Simply put, McCain has won the last month.
Taming the unexpurgated candidate couldn't have been easy, but Schmidt's imposed message discipline has finally allowed McCain to drive a consistent message -- and control the agenda.
Candidates are reluctant to listen "handlers" -- and this is especially true of a candidate who has made it this far by breaking all the rules. It reminds me of a story I read about Ed Rollins, who, when managing Ross Perot's campaign, finally threw his hands in the air in frustration at the unorthodox candidate -- who would go on Larry King Live without bothering to inform his own staff -- and (paraphrasing here) said to Perot: I'm not trying to run a traditional campaign, I'm just trying to run a campaign...
In today's NYT, David Brooks does a good job of charting the recent evolution of McCain's campaign. There is no doubt that the candidate is less like the un-edited McCain of old (I can't remember the last time he was on a blogger call, for example) -- but he is finally winning. As a writer, I personally wish McCain would get back on the phone, but I must confess that if I were advising him, I'd tell him to do precisely what Schmidt is telling him to do.
And as Brooks points out, the change in style has less to do with McCain's desire to run this sort of campaign than it does with the realization that -- in this media environment -- the old McCain style couldn't win. As they say, McCain didn't write the rules, he just abides by them. So I suppose we should refuse to be player-haters and get used to it ...
|
|
|
Tuesday, August 19, 2008 |
|
In Defense of Andrea Mitchell |
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
8:26 AM |
As you probably heard, John McCain's campaign manager sent a tersely-worded missive to NBC News president Steve Capus, complaining about "unsubstantiated, partisan claims" made by NBC's Andrea Mitchell regarding the "cone of silence."
Following is Mitchell's controversial comment from Sunday's "Meet the Press":
"The Obama people must feel that he didn't do quite as well as they might have wanted to in that context, because that — what they're putting out privately is that McCain may not have been in the cone of silence and may have had some ability to overhear what the questions were to Obama.... He seemed so well-prepared." In my estimation, Mitchell acted appropriately. She merely reported that the Obama campaign was making accusations -- which was no doubt true. Analysts (and bloggers, for that matter) are paid to report the behind-the-scenes grumblings of campaigns. But reporting something does not mean you endorse it or believe it.
My guess is the McCain campaign has other reasons for picking this fight. But in regards to this specific incident, I can't see where Mitchell did anything inappropriate ...
|
|
|
Monday, August 18, 2008 |
|
A Cover-Up? Holes in Obama's Bio Emerge |
|
Posted by:
Matt Lewis at
3:42 PM |
Stanley Kurtz sees an Obama cover-up in the making ...
Clearly, Obama’s involvement with the Chicago Annenberg Challenge -- where domestic terrorist Bill Ayers was a founder -- is a topic the journalists (and voters) have a right to look into.
But it now appears there is a concerted effort being made by someone -- possibly Obama, but in any event probably someone with some connection of some sort to him -- to prevent anyone from investigating this too closely.
Interestingly, the Richard J. Daley Library -- named after the infamous Chicago Mayor/political machine boss -- is among the possible organizations that appear to be involved in this effort to cover-up documents relating to Obama's involvement with this organization.
Ultimately, that kind of non-transparency is not acceptable in presidential politics (though it is typical of Obama's style of campaigning).
We know that the Obama campaign is apparently terrified of people enquiring into his background, which would include his involvement with CAC. But when a guy who has only three years’ experience in the US Senate could, in a matter of months, become Commander-in-Chief, it’s not surprising that people would want to look into his resume -- which includes his involvement with civic groups, like CAC. And, in my estimation, that should be facilitated, not hindered.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your Blog Postings:
|
|
Last updated 6 Minutes 14 Seconds Ago
|
|
Last updated 39 Minutes 20 Seconds Ago
|
|
Last updated 42 Minutes 48 Seconds Ago
|
|
Last updated 52 Minutes 37 Seconds Ago
|
|
Last updated 54 Minutes 34 Seconds Ago
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Archives Archives
|
|
| | | |