Today on UpFront Politics

Obama-Edwards Ticket Makes Sense

Scott — Thu, 15 May 2008 12:06:05 -0700

It took awhile, but he finally did it. After waiting nearly three months since he dropped out of the race, former North Carolina Senator John Edwards took the stage in Grand Rapids, Michigan, on Wednesday and took a side.

"The people in America have made their choice," he told a crowd of 12,000 supporters, "and so have I." With that Edwards very well may have sealed his fate as the Vice Presidential nominee- again.

In all likelihood, Edwards was wise to withhold his endorsement. Had it come a month ago, it probably would have been lost in the veritable sea of endorsements flying around before Pennsylvania and Indiana. Certainly, it would have been overshadowed by what most considered a shocker in the Bill Richardson endorsement of Obama. After all, Edwards isn't even a superdelegate.

But Edwards' comment comes at a time of relative quiet, and now, he's thrust right back into the national spotlight as a top contender for the VP slot on Obama's ticket.

For better or worse, the racial tone of the 2008 race for the Democratic nomination has been real, with statewide votes often split down racial lines. In a USA Today interview last week, Hillary Clinton essentially declared herself the poor white man's candidate, and the fact is, she has a point. In putting together a ticket that has any shot of winning, Democrats will need to bring in the Clinton vote. But the hard part will be doing it without Clinton.

That an Obama-Clinton ticket is out of the question is almost a foregone conclusion. Putting the personal nature of the campaign aside, Hillary Clinton is not likely to be a quiet second-in-command. Moreover, Obama would be wary of putting himself in a situation where Bill Clinton- who was the most powerful man in the world just eight years ago- is on the sidelines, but close enough to the action to get involved. Just like any of those who've gone before him, Obama will want his presidency to be his own.

But Edwards essentially accomplishes everything Hillary does. In fact, his appeal in the South and Midwest, coupled with Obama's success among African American voters in the South may very well put Democrats in a position to compete in states beyond the typical Democratic mainstays on the west coast and in New England. Plus, Democrats have never been shy about regional balance on the ticket, and to that extent, Edwards exceeds Clinton in what he brings to the table.

True, the Edwards experiment didn't work so well last time around. But the difference between John Kerry and Barack Obama as candidates is astronomical. Obama carries a far wider appeal nationally than Obama ever did. The fact that the Kerry-Edwards ticket couldn't even carry Edwards' home state of North Carolina is more a reflection of the limited reach of Kerry than of Edwards himself.

The one downside to an Edwards vice presidential candidacy is the experience issue. Neither Obama nor Edwards have more than a single term in the Senate. To that end, it's possible that Obama may opt for a governor like Ted Strickland of Ohio. But still, Edwards' national name recognition, Southern charm, and generally favorable appeal may trump any question of time in office. And having run a national fall campaign before, Edwards may appear to Obama as someone with the experience and know-how to get it right this time around.

Democratic Dream Team: Part Four of Five

Scott — Fri, 28 Mar 2008 15:44:35 -0700

Democratic Dream Team: Part Three of Five
The top Democratic contenders for the positions of Secretary of the Interior, Secretary of the Treasury, and Secretary of Education.
by John Drexel

Part Two of a five-part series. Click here for Part One.
Click here for Part Two.
Click here for Part Three.

We'll be back soon with a new article on UpFrontPolitics.com!

Secretary of the Interior:
Even 45 years after the death of its most notable member, the Kennedy family continues to dominate Democratic politics. And with Ted, the Democrats' lion in winter, advancing in age, the time to pass on the torch is fast approaching. Patrick (the son of Ted, Sr.) and Joe (the eldest son of Bobby) have already had careers in public service. But there's another Kennedy who could have one of his own in the years to come.

20 years ago, no one would have given Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. a chance in the world of carrying forward his family's legacy. Kennedy struggled with substance abuse, and was sentenced to a stint in probation and 1500 hours of community service stemming from a possession charge. But somewhat ironically, it was in that moment that Kennedy's political future may very well have been born.

Kennedy used his mandated community service hours to dive headlong into environmental advocacy. Since getting clean back in the early 1980s, the son of the former Secretary of State has become one of the foremost spokesmen for environmental reform. He is a senior attorney for the National Resources Defense Council, and sits on the board of a number of organizations aimed at cleaning and preserving fresh waterways in the United States. He's also the co-director of the Pace Environmental Litigation Clinic at Pace University, where he has taught since 1987. In addition, Kennedy has made his name known (more than it already is) to the liberal rank-and-file: since 2005, he's been a contributing columnist at the Huffington Post.

For now, Kennedy would be a top choice for the Interior Department job. But even if either Obama or Clinton (whom he split with other members of his family to endorse) choose him, he may have different ideas for himself. In Oprah Winfrey's O magazine, Kennedy wrote that "If Hillary Clinton left the Senate, I might run for that seat." But even if Obama keeps her there, Kennedy could go to neighboring Connecticut in 2010, where close family friend Chris Dodd will be retiring at the expiration of his term.

Secretary of the Treasury:
Jon Corzine makes sense for the Treasury Department post for a lot of reasons. Let's start with his business history.

Corzine was one of the most successful business leaders in America prior to beginning his political career. He was named one of the top 50 tech executives in America by Time magazine in 1997. He began with Goldman Sachs back in 1975, eventually working his way up to corporate ladder, becoming chairman and CEO in 1994. There, he took the company from a private partnership to a worldwide publicly traded company, and one of the most successful on the market at that. Goldman Sachs has been a launching pad for political careers in recent years, pushing the man who succeeded Corzine- Republican Hank Paulsen- to Treasury Secretary under President Bush.

After spending $62 million of his own money to win the open Senate seat in New Jersey in 2000, he became one of the Democratic Party's most reliable votes. He was one of just 23 Senators to vote against the Iraq War Resolution. In 2004, Corzine broke more spending records in a $100 million dollar race for the gubernatorial seat after

Corzine is a Clinton loyalist, having chaired a committee for Bill Clinton during the 90s and taken a major role in Hillary's operation this time around. Should Hillary Clinton successfully overcome both Barack Obama and John McCain, Corzine, now the

Secretary of Education:
Jim Jeffords

Democratic Dream Team: Part Three of Five

Scott — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:30:22 -0700

Democratic Dream Team: Part Three of Five
The top Democratic contenders for the positions of Secretary of Homeland Labor, Secretary of Veterans' Affairs, and Secretary of Commerce.
by John Drexel

Part Two of a five-part series. Click here for Part One.
Click here for Part Two.

Secretary of Labor:
Dick Gephardt was long considered to be a man with aspirations- and potential- for national office. He worked his way up slowly. Having first won his congressional seat in Missouri in 1976, he waited six terms to capture his first party leadership seat. He ran an unsuccessful bid for the Democratic nomination for the White House in 1988, but parlayed his new-found national name recognition into party political office. When he became Majority Leader in 1989, he was at the forefront of national politics. Six years later, the GOP swept into Congress in the "Republican Revolution," successfully unseating Democratic Speaker Tom Foley, the only Democrat who ranked above the Missouri Congressman at the time. From 1995 until 2003, Gephardt was the most prominent Democrat in the House. After Democrats lost seats in the 2002 midterm elections, he passed the torch to Nancy Pelosi and announced his candidacy for the presidency shortly thereafter. Despite a strong early showing, Gephardt failed to get out of the starting blocks, and floundered along with his chief rival for the nomination, Howard Dean.

Throughout the '90s, Dick Gephardt was the face of congressional Democrats. But more importantly, he was the most staunch advocate of organized labor that Congress had seen in years. Along with Minority Whip David Bonior, Gephardt made labor and fair trade a chief focus of the Democratic platform during his tenure.
The Clinton White House made free trade, particularly NAFTA, a top priority, drawing the ire of a number of organized labor groups. However, the Democratic agenda in 2008 has shifted strongly away from free trade, with both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama professing to advocate for fair trade practices if elected. For that reason, Gephardt would be the man to lead the charge.

But with Gephardt's endorsement of Clinton, it may be unlikely that Obama would tap the former Majority Leader for the job. In that case, Bonior- who spent the last year effectively running John Edwards' campaign- would make an equally strong case for the position.

Secretary of Veterans' Affairs:
There aren't many people who don't like Donna Shalala. During her tenure as Secretary of Health and Human Services under President Clinton, she developed a reputation as an easy person to get along with and a fiercely effective Cabinet member.

In 2007, when it became apparent that veterans were being subjected to squalid conditions at Walter Reed Army Hospital in Washington, D.C., President Bush tapped Shalala, along with former GOP presidential candidate Bob Dole, to chair a bipartisan commission to address medical care for veterans returning from service oversees. Their recommendations were well-received, and many of the implemented immediately.

Her experience there, along with her tenure as Secretary of Health and Human Services (she was the only original member of Clinton's cabinet still in office when Clinton left in 2000), make Donna Shalala perfect for the job. The one caveat is that Veterans' Affairs would be considered a step down from her previous position. But Shalala has spent the last 7 years at the University of Miami, where she's had a bit of a rough going. If she's interested in returning to national politics, she'd likely replicate the success that she had during the Clinton years.

If Shalala couldn't be persuaded to take the job, Max Cleland, the Vietnam veteran who became a triple amputee during his military service in Vietnam. Cleland served as a Senator fro Georgia from 1997 to 2002, and was an ally for veterans and the disabled. There is perhaps no one who is as sensitive to the needs of our servicemen than Cleland. Both he and Shalala would be qualified to hold the post.

Secretary of Commerce:
The mission of the Department of Commerce, as defined by the agency itself, is "to foster, promote, and develop the foreign and domestic commerce." That said, we can think of no better person to lead the department than Mayor Shirley Franklin of Atlanta.

Franklin has put together an impressive resume since taking a seat behind the Mayor's desk in 2002, turning a lagging urban metropolis into a booming economic haven. Her pro-growth policies have led to a resurgence of commerce in Atlanta not only for small businesses, but for big business as well. And labor has benefited as well; her efforts have brought countless thousands of jobs to Atlanta and the surrounding Georgian suburbs. In her first few years in office, she gained praise both statewide and nationally for turning around one of the country's worst water and sewer systems to head off federal fines that were bogging down the city's budget, which was already facing a daunting deficit.

In 2006, Franklin led a delegation of city and local officials to China, where she lobbied to secure an airline route to one of the fastest growing economies in the world for Delta Airlines- which has it’s main hub in Atlanta. She’s also proven instrumental in assisting Delta to open routes to cities in Europe, like Copenhagen and Dusseldorf. Her diplomatic efforts have brought hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue to the city and created economic opportunity for its citizens.

Add some of her other stats like a sharp decrease in homelessness during her tenure, and there is no denying that Shirley Franklin is one of the most qualified leaders in the Democratic pool, particularly with respect to the nation’s commercial interests.

The icing on the cake is that Franklin, who earned her stripes working at City Hall during Andrew Young's time in office, is very popular, having won her reelection bid handily in 2006. And she's getting more popular in the Democratic sphere in particular: she received the prestigious "Profiles in Courage Award" from the John F. Kennedy Library in 2005.

There is almost no reason not to choose Franklin for this, or at least some other post in the next Democratic administration. She'll be a top contender whether Obama or Clinton come out on top.

Democratic Dream Team: Part Two of Five

Scott — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:56:09 -0700

Democratic Dream Team: Part Two of Five
The top Democratic contenders for the positions of Secretary of Homeland Security, Secretary of Agriculture, and Secretary of Energy.
by John Drexel

Part Two of a five-part series. Click here for Part One.

Secretary of Homeland Security:
If there is one guy out there who could really- and I mean really- get under the skin of some Republicans on Capitol Hill if he were appointed to the top Homeland Security post, it's Richard A. Clarke.

There is no questioning Clarke's significant experience in the area. His career began in the Department of Defense in 1973. By 1985, he'd moved to the State Department, where he was appointed to serve as the Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence under President Reagan. Under George H.W. Bush, he held the same post, coordinating efforts to build support for the 1991 Gulf War. The Clinton years brought Clarke increased responsibility and security clearance, when he was appointed by the president to serve as the counter-terrorism advisor to the National Security Council. He was the "terrorism czar" under George W. Bush until he retired in 2003, bringing a firestorm of criticism on the Bush White House on his way out.

His 2004 book, Against All Enemies, accused the Bush Administration of gross negligence and ineptitude. He charged that Bush officials failed to take action that may or may not have prevented the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and that the rush to war in Iraq in 2003 greatly hampered counter-terrorism efforts on the home front.

The fact is that in the days following the invasion of Iraq, Richard Clarke was one of the best friends Democrats had. Because of his position and his considerable qualifications, he was amongst the most notable and resounding critics of both Bush and the war.

There are few Democrats who are as experienced and as knowledgeable about terrorism and protecting the homeland than Richard Clarke. But beyond that, Clarke's particular expertise lay in the areas that will be most relevant in the years ahead: terrorism and cyber-security.

Perhaps most importantly, Clarke would not be an incredibly politically divisive pick. Sure, he ticked off a few GOPers when he initially came out in opposition to the Bush White House. But Clarke has more than Demonstrated his own ability to work with Democrats as well as Republicans. He has served- and thrived, professionally- under four American presidents, only one of them a Democrat.

Secretary of Agriculture:
Unless you live in Montana or are an extreme political junkie, you probably haven't heard much about Brian Schweitzer, the remarkably popular Governor of Montana.

Schweitzer represents a state that has not voted for a Democrat just twice (Clinton in '92, Johnson in '64) in the last 50 years. But it's no surprise why the people of Montana, one of the most solidly agricultural states in the Union, thinks Schweitzer is cut out for the job: he's an honest-to-God farmer. He studied agronomy (agricultural economics)- the bread and butter of the Department of Agriculture- at the University of Colorado, and then got his master's degree in soil science from the University of Montana. The man knows agriculture.

And he's no stranger to the Department of Agriculture. During the Clinton administration, Schweitzer was tapped to the agency's Farm Service Committee.

The bottom line in choosing someone to lead this department that oversees one of the United States' most vital industries is that the nominee must be knowledgeable and relevantly experienced. Brian Schweitzer is both of those things.

In looking at other candidates, Schweitzer stands head-and-shoulders above the rest. Montana has two Democratic Senators, so it's unlikely that he's looking forward to a future as a legislator. This is the logical place for Schweitzer.

Of course, others are bound to get a long look. Tom Vilsack, the retired Governor of Iowa, possesses many of the same qualities that Schweitzer does. But rumors have begun to circulate surrounding Vilsack's potential candidacy for Republican Chuck Grassley's Senate Seat in 2010. The same goes for Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius, who might make a great Secretary of Agriculture, but may seek to fill the seat being vacated by Sam Brownback in two years. Additionally, Sebelius may be a candidate for the VP slot of Barack Obama if he's successful in his quest for the Democratic nomination.

Secretary of Energy:
In the tidal wave that hit Republicans in Congress in 2006, one that they didn't see coming was the loss of California's 11th Congressional District. The incumbent there, Richard Pombo, represented what had become a staunchly Republican district since he first won the open seat in 1994.

What hit Pombo like a ton of bricks was little-known engineer Jerry McNerney, a wind energy consultant who played a large part in bringing a large number of windmills to a gusty pass located in the district. Going into election day, the race was rated "Republican leaning" by everyone from the New York Times to CQ Politics. But by the time the dust had settled, a stunned Pombo was left without a job.

One of the biggest criticisms against Pombo arose from a dismal environmental record and low ratings from a number of major environmental groups from California and beyond. Taking his cue, McNerney set to work, getting seated on a number of energy and environment-related committees. Today, he sits on the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, as well as the Energy and Environment subcommittee of the Committee on Science and Technology.

McNerney has drawn praise as one of the hardest working representatives on Capitol Hill. Unlike most of his colleagues, McNerney spends five days a week in Washington, the rigorous routine of coast-to-coast travel notwithstanding.

The only man who can truly bill himself as an expert in renewable energy and energy technology is Jerry McNerney. A lot of legislators have served on energy committees, but McNerney's spent his life in the field. He's got as much if not more expert knowledge on the subject than anyone we can think of.

Having defeated Pombo so narrowly and unexpectedly in 2006, McNerney's reelection bid isn't exactly a cake walk, but most sources are giving him a significant edge. However, whether or not he is reelected to his Congressional seat, McNerney should get a considerable look from the White House for the top post in the Department of Energy.

Democratic Dream Team: Part One of Five

Scott — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:29:19 -0700

(For an introduction and explanation of the criteria used for our 2008 cabinet prospectus, click here.)

Democratic Dream Team: Part One of Five
The top Democratic contenders for the positions of Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, and Attorney General.
By John Drexel

Part One of a Five-Part Series

Secretary of State:
If one criteria is important in selecting the top US diplomatic post, it's experience. And the Democrats who held the post during Bill Clinton's presidency had it: prior to her appointment, Madeline Albright was the UN Ambassador. Warren Christopher had served as Deputy Secretary twelve years earlier.

Undoubtedly, one of the most experienced, and most relevant Democrats in the pool this time around is Senator Joe Biden of Delaware. He's spent just about 36 years in the Senate, and despite three presidential campaigns that have failed to gain the necessary traction, he's one of the most qualified candidates for national office in the party today.

His foreign policy track record is impressive to say the least. He's spent most of his career on the Senate's powerful Foreign Relations Committee, the same committee that he now chairs. There, he's built a reputation for bipartisanship and results, and for that reason has become one of the most respected members of the Senate, held in high esteem by both Democrats and Republicans.

But it was during the Balkan Wars that Biden earned his foreign policy stripes. In somewhat of an unprecedented move, he made repeated trips to Serbia and Bosnia, meeting with controversial leaders and eventually calling international attention to the butchery of Slobodan Milosevic, whom Biden was the first to dub a "war criminal." But more than that, it was Biden who convinced President Bill Clinton to initiate US military intervention in the region aimed at curbing the aggression of Milosevic's troops. Years later, the peace plan that created partitioned ethnic regions- which he was instrumental in forming- still stands.

To date, Biden is the only Democrat-or Republican, for that matter- to release a comprehensive plan for victory in Iraq. His partitioning strategy (not unlike the one he helped implement in Bosnia) won support across the political spectrum, from Bill Richardson to Bill O'Reilly. Today, he is one of the foremost experts in his party on Middle East policy. It's fair to say that in the next four to eight years, that's where the focus of the world will remain. And that's why Joe Biden should be Secretary of State.

And speaking of Bill Richardson, Biden isn't the only candidate for the job. Having been the UN Ambassador as well as the Secretary of Energy, Richardson not only has foreign policy experience, he has federal executive leadership experience as well. He was a member of hostage negotiation teams sent to secure the release of American prisoners in North Korea, Cuba, and China. But his pedigree may make him overqualified for the State Department job. Unlike Biden, Richardson has served as the chief executive of a state. And after a hard-fought presidential campaign (and his refusal to endorse either candidate), he's placed himself in an excellent position to be selected for the VP slot- whether it's Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama who ends up doing the selecting.

Secretary of Defense:
There is perhaps no more decorated, internationally respected military Democrat who is ready for political office today than retired General Wesley Clark. Clark's military record is both impeccable and astounding, and reads like an honor-badge check list: bronze star (3 times), silver star (1), Purple Heart (1), Distinguished Service Medal (2), Legion of Merit (5), Presidential Medal of Freedom (1), Army Commendation Medal (2), and the Meritorious Service Medal (2). He was a senior NATO commander during the war in Bosnia, and the Supreme Allied Commander of NATO in Europe during the war in Kosovo. There are three streets named after General Clark, two in the US and one in Dakovica, presented as a “thank you” from the people of Kosovo for his role in bringing peace to their war-ravaged country. He received the Balkan Peace Award, the Lady Liberty Award for National Security and World Peace, and the Secretary of State’s Open Forum Distinguished Service Award.

Moreover, the American government isn’t the only one jumping at the chance to pin medals on Clark’s chest. And get this, he’s been knighted in no less than six nations: France, UK, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg. And in addition to the knighthoods, these six nations, plus Germany, Portugal, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Albania, Argentina, Croatia, and yes, Canada, have given him medals of honor, valor, and merit.

But Clark is more than a military man; he's also a scholar. He was the valedictorian of his graduating class from West Point. He went on from there to receive a degree from Oxford on a Rhodes Scholarship. While healing from wounds received during combat, he spent more time in the classroom, earning military science degrees from schools across the country.

Clark may end up the vice-presidential nominee, but he's a shoe-in for this post, especially if Clinton (who he's endorsed) becomes the nominee. But if Barack Obama wins the nomination, he may regret throwing his support behind the other candidate. Still, with his career accomplishments, Obama would be remiss not to use Clark in some capacity.

If the nominee looks beyond Clark, there is one additional candidates who deserve a good, hard look. The first is retired Navy SEAL and former Senator Bob Kerrey, who passed up an opportunity to return to the Senate next year. Kerrey lost a limb during Vietnam, earning himself a Medal of Honor. While in the Senate, he was considered an authority on US military operations. But Kerrey, like Clark, has also endorsed Clinton.

Attorney General:
The rumor mill has been hard at work on this one for awhile, but if either Democrat wins the general election, expect John Edwards to take the helm at the Justice Department. Because Edwards served just one term in the Senate, it's unlikely (though not entirely improbable) that he'll take the vice presidential slot on the ticket.

It's a well-known fact that Edwards' rise to political office was born out of his career as a lawyer- and a very good one. He earned massive verdicts and settlements on behalf of his clients in personal injury and product liability cases.

His legal skills came in handy when he reached the Senate: it was Edwards who took the depositions of both Monica Lewinsky and Vernon Jordan during the impeachment trial of Bill Clinton. He served on the Judiciary Committee during his tenure, and co-sponsored an impressive 203 bills while he was in office.

Edwards' considerable skills as a jurist, as well as his national notoriety and popularity, make him a likely pick. And the wheels are already in motion. UpFrontPolitics reported back in February that both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had approached Edwards with an offer for the Attorney General slot. Edwards has been tight-lipped, and perhaps wisely so: with the former North Carolina Senator mum on who he supports, he remains the leading candidate for the AG job- on both sides.

If it's not Edwards, though, there are two others who are bound to get some consideration. The more unlikely of the two is California Attorney General Jerry Brown. He has all the relevant experience in the world, including two terms as governor during the 1970s. Brown is mulling a run for the governor's mansion in California once more, but he may be interested in national post if it were offered to him. The other is Virginia Governor Tim Kaine, who will be termed out as of 2010. Kaine earned a reputation as a fair and generous lawyer, earning recognition from various organizations for his fair housing advocacy.

Vice President...Condi?

Scott — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:15:55 -0700

Vice President...Condi?
McCain may look beyond white Southern governors for his VP pick.
by John Drexel

A lot of names have been flying around with regard to presumptive GOP nominee John McCain's vice presidential pick. But there's one that's been coming up a whole lot in just the last few days that hadn't been getting a whole lot of consideration in the past few weeks: former National Security Advisor and current Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

Much has been made of the necessity for McCain to use his vice presidential slot to patch up some holes in his own Republican armor, particularly to placate hard core conservatives and Evangelicals who have been slow to warm up to the Arizona senator. To that end, several GOPers have been mentioned as potential running mates, including Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty, South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford, and Florida Governor Charlie Crist.

There is a compelling case to be made for any of these three, with Pawlenty being perhaps the most convincing of all. The strict conservative Baptist brings a lot to the table, including executive leadership experience- of which McCain it disadvatageously bereft. But maybe even more importantly, Pawlenty, who is surprisingly popular in his home state, brings Minnesota firmly into the playing field for Republicans, despite the fact that the GOP has won only one presidential contest (1972) there in just about the last 50 years.

For Crist, the possibilities are a little more tangible. Florida has been a thorn in the side of Democrats in recent years. Having the state's chief executive on the ticket could push Florida- along with its huge cache of electoral votes- into the red. For his part, Sanford doesn't come with a mountain of electoral votes, but with the exception of maybe Jon Huntsman in Utah or John Hoeven in North Dakota, he's perhaps the most conservative governor in the Union.

All three contenders represent a solid commitment to the conservative base that all but abandoned McCain in the primaries, leaving him to squeak by on the backs of moderates and independents. But then again, Rice- a conservative stalwart in her own right- accomplishes the same thing.

And when you start adding up all the other benefits of involving Rice, it starts making more and more sense. In one fell swoop, a McCain-Rice ticket cuts into the gender-race politics that have incited a Civil War in the Democratic Party. Plus, she's got the all the executive leadership experience she could possibly need, and unlike Pawlenty, Sanford, and Crist, she's gotten it on the federal level.

Moreover, if George W. Bush has it his way and casualties in Iraq continue to remain considerably lower than they were towards the end of 2007, Rice may leave the Fertile Crescent with her political reputation intact. Sure, selecting Rice essentially binds McCain to the war that she's largely overseen since the departure of Donald Rumsfeld. But McCain has built much of his campaign around support for the war and national security. So could Rice's involvement in the Middle East really hurt McCain that badly if they're essentially preaching from the same book? Probably not.

The one caveat that may have McCain thinking twice before selecting someone like Rice is the George W. Bush factor. With his low approval rating numbers, the coattails of the 43rd president may not be wise ones to latch onto, and selecting Rice might be perceived as reaching back to the past. Remember, it was low approval ratings for the president (along with the war) that contributed heavily to the GOP's defeat in the 2006 midterm election.

Still, Rice could be one of McCain's best possible picks. A gamble, for certain, but one that could pay off richly in the end regardless of who wins the Democratic nomination.

Have you seen this man?

Scott — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 12:43:56 -0700

Under construction. We'll be back with an UpFront article shortly!

GO TIME

Scott — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 13:50:44 -0700

Go Time
What to expect from the Texas Democratic primary.
By John Drexel

Ok, it's finally here. Today is the day. We'll finally find out who the Democratic nominee will be, right? I mean, we were told that Iowa was the deciding state. And if it wasn't Iowa, it was New Hampshire. And if we didn't know anything after New Hampshire, then surely we'd get some kind of idea where things are going on Super Tuesday. Lo and behold, eleven primaries later, this is it- yes, this is it! Right?

Well, maybe.

Amid fears that the protracted primary season will hurt the party's nominee in the long run, Democrats are hoping to emerge from March 4th primaries in Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island, and Vermont with a contender for the big show in November. But between tight polls and Hillary Clinton's recent vow to continue fighting in the sixteen remaining contests after today, it's not looking so likely.

Absent crushing victories for Obama in both Texas and Ohio, the fight won't be over for at least another few weeks. In fact, there are a whole bunch of ways today's elections could effect the overall race. Let's take a look:

Scenario A: Obama beats Clinton convincingly in all four states.

As I said earlier, the only way the race for the Democratic nomination ends tonight is if Barack Obama leaves no questions unanswered- and that means victories of at least six and four points in Texas and Ohio respectively.

If the stars align for the junior Senator from Illinois (and it's not impossible- they have in the past), and he manages to convincingly defeat Clinton in the states Bill dubbed must-wins for his wife, she'll have little ground to stand on in justifying her desire to continue on in the race. Much of what remains of her superdelegate support will defect to Obama in the hopes of ending the inter-party squabbling and move forward against the presumptive GOP nominee, John McCain. And because voters love to support a winner, it's almost inconceivable that she could overcome the momentum of what will then be a 15-state streak for Obama to secure enough delegates to be a viable contender for the nomination.

Scenario B: Clinton comes back (again) and wins Texas and Ohio.

Let's not count her out. Hillary Clinton had her back against the ropes after Iowa and managed to overcome an eight-point opinion poll deficit in New Hampshire, effectively stunning Barack Obama until he could regain traction again in South Carolina. What's to say she can't win now in Texas, where the two are running neck and neck, as well as in Ohio, where she leads Obama by anywhere from two to five points, depending on who you ask?

The fact is that victories in these states- even small ones- will mean gold for the Clinton campaign. She'll certainly have enough delegates to remain competitive, even if she doesn't win enough of them to take the lead. But more than that, it would be disastrous for Obama. Both campaigns have inflated the importance of this race for Clinton. In other words, the Clintons drew a line in the sand and Obama dared her to stand her ground. If she does, she looks pretty good, and she takes a big chunk out of Obama, regardless of the fact that he was heavily favored to lose just a few weeks back.

At the very least, Clinton wins in Texas and Ohio underscore her stature as the "comeback kid" incarnate. It keeps her in the race at least through the Pennsylvania primary in April, and maybe right up to the convention in August.

Scenario C: Obama and Clinton split Texas and Ohio.

It doesn't matter who takes what, though it's more likely that if Obama wins just one, it will be Texas. And if he does, it should be enough of a coup de' gras to bump Clinton from the race...not that she'll go quietly.

Both sides have thrown the burden of victory, so to speak, around the neck of the other candidate. But in reality, it's firmly on Hillary. That's where spin comes in.

Clinton will cling to that one win like it's a life boat from the inevitably sinking ship that is her campaign. If she wins Ohio, her campaign will claim that voters are not ready to see the end of Hillary '08. Plus, let's face it: with proportional allocation, Obama isn't going to snag enough delegates to lock down the nomination by a long shot. And as far as voters in the remaining sixteen states, that spin might work.

Where it won't work is with party leaders. Bill Richardson said it on Sunday: "We have to have a positive campaign after Tuesday. Whoever has the most delegates after Tuesday, a clear lead, should be, in my judgment, the nominee." And while Harry Reid claims not to be worried by the protracted nomination process (which is looking more to outsiders like a Democratic civil war), there are many others who are plenty worried about it. And unfortunately for her, they make up a lot of the ever-important superdelegates, especially those who are as of yet unpledged. In this case, it would be they who eventually sink the (seemingly) Unsinkable Hillary Clinton.

Scenario D: Obama wins in Texas and Ohio, but by small margins.

Because, in a case such as this one, Obama would only win a few more delegates than Clinton, the latter would have very little reason to bail out. She'll still be relatively close in the delegate race, and a big win in Pennsylvania later on could even the score. And while Obama will shout from the mountain tops that, once again, he's 15 for his last 15 primaries, Clinton may try to ride the, "but I was this close" sentiment into April.

But again, this is where the party steps in and throws superdelegates at Obama in the hopes of ending the nomination process. Don't underestimate how badly the DNC wants this primary to be over. If it goes right up to the convention, that gives the eventual nominee just about two months to mount a serious bid for the White House. Compare that to McCain, who, having become the presumptive nominee after Super Tuesday on February 4, will have had nine.

A note about Vermont and Rhode Island

In effect, Rhode Island and Vermont only matter if Clinton wins both and at least one of the others. If she combines a win in either Texas or Ohio with the two in New England, it will probably be convincing enough to keep her in the race. If she wins all four, it will be a resounding call from the rank-and-file that this nomination is far from decided.

In any other case, all eyes will be on the larger states. If Obama takes one and Hillary takes the other, it will be viewed as a wash (which, by definition, it is). If Obama takes both, then their effect will really depend on how he does in Texas and Ohio.

At this point, it's becoming more and more clear that the race for the Democratic nomination is no longer about delegates; it's about perception. Because they are proportionally awarded, what is likely is that one candidate will take about 30 to 50 more delegates than the other wins. Maybe less. But tonight's wins will carry a moral message for the respective campaigns. And depending on how convincing those messages are, it could mean the end to Clinton's, or the continuation of an already-long nomination process.

Texas Showdown: Obama and Clinton Go Head-to-Head

Scott — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 12:17:09 -0700

Texas Showdown: Obama and Clinton Go Head-to-Head
The comparable performances turned in by Obama and Clinton could be bad news for the former First Lady.
by John Drexel

At times contentious and at times collegial, the Democratic debate in Austin, Texas, featured the two remaining contenders for the party's nomination. And just a little more than a week before the next big primaries in the Lone Star State and Ohio, both Democratic contenders had a lot riding on the outcome.

Both sides will likely claim victory in the debate, but neither candidate performed significantly better than the other. And while both Illinois Senator Barack Obama and New York Senator Hillary Clinton were at the best they have been since the election season began, the even-pace could be bad news for Clinton, who needed the victory far more than Obama did.

Overall, the debate should have been Clinton's time to shine. Her criticism of Obama has largely focused on what she calls a lack of substance. A one-on-one gave her an opportunity to highlight her own proposals in detail, drawing a contrast between herself and the Illinois senator, whose oratory style focusing on the more general ideas of hope and change have found popularity among Democratic primary voters. But Obama was able to hold his own, taking time to outline the specifics of his own prospective platform.

Clinton drew loud boos for attacking Obama on the plagiarism issue, telling the crowd that Obama represents "change you can xerox," a play on his campaign slogan, "Change We Can Believe In." If the public response was mixed when Clinton campaign officials first publicized the apparent plagiarism last weekend, it became clear on Thursday night that the maneuver had backfired.

For his part, Obama ducked Clinton's jab. "What we shouldn't be spending time doing is tearing each other down," he responded, to receptive applause. "We should be spending time lifting the country up."

The crowd response to the negative attacks by Clinton- as well as to Obama's decision not to retalliate- may give a glimpse into how the campaigns will conduct themselves over the next few days. Perhaps weary of the ramped up attack rhetoric in the recent weeks, the mood of the debate crowd seemed to overwhelmingly reject the negative tone of the primary race, which has been particularly apparent in the Clinton campaign as it has fallen from frontrunner to underdog. When the two rivals shook hands at the debate's conclusion, the auditorium erupted in a standing ovation.

Clinton may choose to relent on the negative attacks and instead focus on the Texas' large Hispanic population, the same demographic of voters who drove her to one of her biggest victories of the primary season in California.

While the debate had its moments of tension, there were also some glimmers of harmony. Clinton told the crowd that, "No matter what happens in this contest, I am honored to be here with Barack Obama."

In what was arguably the shining moment of her debate performance, Clinton also showed a more vulnerable side when asked what moment in her life had tested her the most. "Everyone here knows I've lived through some crises and some challenging moments in my life," she said, most likely referring to her husband's highly publicized affair with Monica Lewisnky. "But people often ask me, 'How do you do it? ...I just have to shake my head in wonderment, because with all of the challenges that I've had, they are nothing compared to what I see happening in the lives of Americans every single day."

The Texas primary will take place on March 4th, along with contests in Ohio, Vermont, and Rhode Island. According to opinion polling, Clinton holds a strong lead in Ohio, but a very narrow one in Texas.

The last debate before the March 4th primaries will be held on February 26th in Cleveland, Ohio.

Texas: Hillary's Alamo

Scott — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 16:16:57 -0700

Texas: Hillary's Alamo
The significance isn't lost on anyone. Texas may be Hillary's last stand.
by John Drexel

Addressing a crowd at a rally for his wife, Bill Clinton told supporters something they already knew. "If she wins Texas and Ohio," he said, "I think she'll be the nominee. If you don't deliver for her, I don't think she can be." A pretty ominous prediction coming from Hillary's number one backer and the nation's most prominent Democrat.

But all the doom and gloom aside, no one knows this better than Team Hillary. That's why they've brought in the big guns, making one final push to ward off the portent of Barack Obama's cruise to the nomination. Hoping to duplicate the success she had in the California primary, Clinton officials have brought in the man who ran the state campaign, public relations guru Averell "Ace" Smith, to take command of the ground troops in Texas. Smith has predicted not only a win for Clinton, but a substantial one at that. He's promised to cut into Obama's corps of young voters, who've helped drive Obama in his ten consecutive primary contest victories since his near split of the popular vote with Clinton on Super Tuesday.

The coming struggle is strangely reminiscient of another Texas showdown, in which less than 200 men held off an entire Mexican army garrison of some 6,000 troops before ultimately succumbing against an onslaught of attacks. Like the legendary band of Texans who put up the valliant effort, Clinton enters the fight as the underdog- essentially for the first time since she declared her candidacy back in early 2007. Obama is flush with cash, having collected more than double the amount Clinton raised in the days following the Super Tuesday primaries on February 4th. And despite the Clinton team's assertions that she's also seen an influx in campaign cash (they're touting figures showing $15 million in online contributions in the last 15 days), they've been dogged by a string of numbers well in the red. Most notable among them is the report that shows the campaign some $7 million in debt- not counting the $5 million Clinton loaned herself in order to keep pace with Obama.

If Clinton can manage to secure a fate slightly better than the men at the Alamo, she still has a shot at the nomination. Current polls have Clinton ahead of Obama in Texas- albeit slightly- and substantially in Ohio. But Obama has been laying the groundwork for will undoubtedly be a close contest in the Lone Star State on March 4th, closing what was a considerable gap to bring himself within just two points of Clinton. But even with a victory in Texas, Clinton will have an uphill battle for the nomination. Current estimates suggest that she'll need to win 57% of the remaining delegates and superdelegates to clinch the nod and advace into November.

Texas very well may be Clinton's last stand. And if Obama can roll the momentum into a victory there, it will likely be her first- and perhaps last- fall, as well.