Obama Talks Policy, Family... and Football

President-elect and Mrs. Obama were on "60 Minutes" this past Sunday. Barack talked a lot of policy, mostly about the economy but a smidge about Iraq. He was then joined by his wife as they recounted their recent visit to the White House, how the Presidency has changed their family (Best quote ever: "I don't tell my mother-in-law what to do. I'm not stupid. That's why I got elected President, man"), and the important topic of what kind of dog will be terrorizing the White House Press Corps next. Oh, and for all those wondering, he is in favor of establishing a college football playoff system. The interview is a bit long at 40 minutes, but totally worth it:

Watch CBS Videos Online

*UPDATE* This interview drew 24.5 million viewers... the highest ratings for "60 Minutes" since 1999. Damn.

My diary, too?

Dear Diary,
Today I read the contents of the 7-page questionnaire which is required of anyone who wants to work as a higher-up under the Obama administration.
Courtesy of question number 14, it seems I'm going to have to burn you.
Just try and remember the good times (read: those that aren't quite embarrassing enough to warrant Obama's impeachment if they are ever made public).
And tell no one.
Farewell.
With a whole lot of love, but even more ambition,
Marianne

Change.gov : The Office of the President Elect

Keeping with his tradition of awesome web sites and applications, the President Elect has launched a new website for his transition team: Change.gov. Enjoy!

VIDEO RELEASE: Sometimes Even The Other Party Notices

You Can Vote However You Like

I don't think we've come across many Obama McCain raps... especially not from seventh graders. Enjoy a remake of TI's "Whatever You Like". Click the video to get the lyrics :

Can we please put this on the playlist for the election day party?

Yes We Carve

From this NYT Campaign Stops blog post Steven Heller mentions the site Yes We Carve where you submit photos of the Obama-themed pumpkin that you carved.
WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT BE THE MOST AMAZING THING I HAVE SEEN DONE WITH MERE PUMPKINS.

But, it is this video, which is a spoof of this video, which is definitely my favorite.

This is almost enough to make me want to plan a pumpkin carving study break...if it wasn't for that pesky election coming up that we keep having to go to New Hampshire for. Shame, really.
But if any of your decide you want to host one yourself, let them know and they'll add you to the list of BYOP--bring your own pumpkin.

Barack Obama is IRISH!

This comes by way of gchat courtesy of the Harvard College Democrats favorite Boston Irishman, Robert Seaumus O'Shanahan Winikates.

Predictions

Predictions thread! I'll go first.

Obama 338-364 EVs to McCain 174-200 EVs

52% Obama, 45% McCain, 1% Barr, 1% Nader, 1% Other

Senate: 57D, 43R (Warner, Udall, Udall, Shaheen, Hagan, and Merkley). They do not kick Lieberman out of the caucus.

House: Dems +25 from 233-202 to 258-177.

Rabbi Dennis Shulman - upset of the cycle!

Lessons from the Conventions

So I didn't get as much time as I had hoped to blog during the conventions (mainly due to temporary insanity from an overdose of Republicans), but here are a few quick things I observed:

New Media: I expected some differences here, but the Republicans were far more hostile to new media and citizen journalism then the Democrats.  In Denver, the Obama campaign encouraged attendees to text "SCHED" to OBAMA to get the schedule for the day, and a big part of their Thursday program at Invesco was collecting text message signups.  Throughout the day on Thursday, they'd ask the crowd to text the reason they were there, why they support Obama, what issue matters most to them, etc. and have it displayed on the screens around the stadium, basically turning the event into a database building exercise.  All week, attendees were encouraged to visit BarackObama.com and it was a common sight to see delegates and guests using cheap video cameras to record the events and the reactions of the crowd.

In St. Paul, the words "text message" were never heard.  The McCain website was on their signs but never mentioned.  The security policy for the event explicitly banned anyone but credentialed press from bringing in a video camera.  Had I not been using the press credentials one of the people with the IOP bummed off a drunk ABC News producer on Saturday night, none of the videos I did with Campus Voices would have been possible.  Even with those credentials, when I tried to bring in multiple cameras one day, I was stopped by a campaign staffer, who told me the Secret Service had decided that I only had need for one video camera.  When I told her I was bringing in multiple cameras to allow young delegates to videotape their experiences, she said "delegates aren't allowed to do that."  The McCain campaign was so worried about only allowing their officially sanctioned images and stories from the convention to get out that they had the United States Secret Service declare it a security risk for anyone other than credentialed media to bring in a video camera, and from there decide what tools the media needed to do their jobs.  Ignoring the blatant political use of Secret Service protection, this is probably the best example I saw of just how out of touch the Republican party is.

Diversity: I figured the Republican convention would be less diverse than the DNC.  But I couldn't have imagined just how much that was true.  The Democrats have policies requiring diversity in delegations, but the delegates themselves were only 4,000 out of the 40,000 people in Denver for the convention, and the people I saw, delegates, guests, and others, were a diverse representation of the American people.  Not so much in St. Paul.  You could walk around the entire outer hall of the Xcel Center and see maybe one African American and one Hispanic American among the hundreds.  And that doesn't even go into age.  Our goal with Campus Voices was to interview young delegates, and I can't begin to describe how much more difficult that was in St. Paul than in Denver.  The statistic I heard was that 16% of the DNC delegates were under 30, compared with 1.6% of the RNC delegates.

Excitement: At each convention, there was one crucial event that everyone said would define the tone of the week - Hillary Clinton's speech in Denver and Sarah Palin's in St. Paul.  The key difference, though, was that Hillary's speech was only important to really rallying half of the DNC delegates, while every single person at the RNC (except for maybe the Alaska delegation) had some degree of hesitation about the ticket until Palin spoke.  This meant that the Republicans didn't really get going until the very end of the session Wednesday night (Gustav certainly contributed to that as well), while the Democrats were able to take advantage of the full four days.  (One note on the RNC - after Palin proved herself to the delegates to be a conservative standard-bearer, she was by far the star of the convention.  All day Thursday, Palin would get cheers consistently louder than those for McCain.  The only thing cheered louder than Palin was whenever some speaker or video mentioned Ronald Reagan.)

Goals: Interestingly, the goals each campaign had for their conventions were nearly complete opposites.  The Obama campaign used the convention to try and expand the base of the party, prominently featuring Republicans for Obama on both Monday and Thursday nights and making a huge showing of support for Obama in the military.  With his VP pick, Obama chose someone to address his biggest perceived weakness, hopefully reassuring independents and moderate Republicans who were thinking of voting for him that he'd be a strong commander in chief.  The McCain campaign, on the other hand, used their convention entirely to rally their base and unite conservatives behind the ticket.  Nearly every speech (with Joe Lieberman's as the notable exception) was about attacking liberals and the media and reiterating old Republican principles.  The number of times abortion was mentioned was surprisingly high for an issue that so bitterly divides the country.  And with his VP choice, McCain picked someone who initially seemed like she could appeal to Clinton voters, but later revealed herself to be, as one person told me, "Pat Buchanan in a dress."  This really convinces me that McCain's strategy from here out is to try and win exactly the states Bush won in 2004, and maintain a bare majority, while Obama seeks to redraw the map and compete in Virginia, Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico, and even North Carolina.  If the McCain camp really wanted to compete in, say, Michigan, which they describe as a highly targeted swing state, they wouldn't pick one of the most conservative running mates in recent years and spend considerable time at the convention mocking the efforts of inner city residents to organize themselves.

Note to McCain: Fire Your Ad Guy

Ok, so I understand that the "elitist" line of attack utterly collapsed and that McCain needs something else to work with. I know that the McCain feels that Barack's experience seems like an appropriate thing to go after (even though it didn't work for Hillary in the primaries).

That being said, if you're going to spend the money for national ads, you might as well make sure that they are going to be serious. While my comments come with a liberal bias, I can say that this ad was an utter failure. My more conservative mother and I were cracking up at the horrible voice-over. My parents are certainly the type that these Israel ads appeal to (i.e. older Jews), and you don't want even those voters laughing at your apocalyptic ads.

If I were a Republican strategist, I'd be hoping that they didn't put too much money into this one. It reminds me too much of Rudy's failed noun/verb/9-11 strategy. Time to get back to the drawing board.

Obama, McCain Reveal Favorite Songs, and I am Snarky About it.

Obama and McCain recently revealed to Blender magazine their favorite songs:

So What IS on their ipods/Victrolas?

Not a lot of surprises there - McCain's list has a few songs that absolutely dare you to dislike them (who hates As Time Goes By), and Obama's is slightly more interesting, with the upsettingly risque "I'm On Fire", for one.

Now, I was inspired to compile a list of Five Chutzpah Songs. As in, a presidential candidate would have to have cojones visible from Alpha Centauri to pick them, but they do have major stature as songs, so they'd be legit picks for people's top ten.

Presenting: My fantasy Presidential Song Pick List!

Goodnight Saigon - Billy Joel
Of course, it would be even ballsier to tout this song in a campaign against McCain...
Billy Joel Runner-up: Captain Jack

American Idiot - Green Day
I think this one speaks for itself - talk about opening yourself up to "elitist" attacks.

Cocaine - Eric Clapton
Despite that it might have been appropriate for George Bush, probably not the best song to choose.

Born in the USA - Bruce Springsteen
And you can't hide behind the "I only listen to the chorus" idea since Reagan already used that excuse.
Bruce Springsteen runner-up: Murder Incorporated

Down and Out in Paradise - John Mellencamp
Wonderful song that reads like a description of campaign speech examples (Jimmy here had this horrible stuff happen to him... vote for me), showing that America is hardly a pure paradise. I actually would have liked to see this song on one of their lists, since it's so powerful a message, and really relevant to the presidential cause.

There are other songs that would take major chutzpah, but none that I can think of are nearly legit enough, unfortunately...

~M.

Pound it!

In a glorious combination of all things Obama and bro, I give you, courtesy of IvyGate, Brobama.org, a site dedicated to answering the question "What does Barack Obama mean for the common bro?"

I've been wondering that myself. And since I can't actually understand real news sites due to excessive beer intake and high fiving of other bros, I'm stoked that I now have this site to fill the gap left by the "startling lack of apbropriate brocabulary in the mainstream media today."

Thank god some kids up at Dartmouth felt this was just what the world needed. Because it is.

P.S. Anyone else notice the trend to post blogs only during hours when I'm sure we're suppposed to be working? This weekend there was a single post and it consisted entirely of a youtube video and a two word title. Valiant.

P.P.S. Unrelated newsflash: Michael Phelps could not outswim a barracuda.
And why, yes, I am at work. What gave it away?

ET TU, OBAMA?!

So THIS is just in from Mark Halperin: Barack Obama is going to announce his support for tapping the strategic oil reserves.

I am so pissed off right now.

But I will wait until he actually makes the announcement before I rail against him for his latest act of triangulation - and clarify why I can actually denounce him for it after supporting Hillary "I love triangulation!" Clinton.

UPDATE: According to the comments, I left the impression that I was more angry with Obama's reluctract embrace of offshore and strategic drilling than anything else. But that isn't the case. My beef is not with his change in position, per se; while I may disagree with the mechanism of his triangulation, I understand its political implications and the reasons behind it. I even understand why targeted drilling could help ease our dependence on foreign oil, even though I don't think it would do much (especially given the relatively small amount of oil as yet untapped by our nation). No, I am MUCH more pissed off that this is Barack Obama's latest move to the center.

A point of clarification: I am not absurdly liberal. I am somewhat moderate. I worked for Senator Clinton, who isn't absurdly liberal but somewhat moderate. For me, moving to the center isn't always a bad thing. It's necessary for productive compromise, and it ensures, to some degree, that a hard-and-fast branding of a party (like, say, the branding of the Republican Party as out-of-touch and ultra-conservative) remains in the somewhat distant future. President Clinton effectively moved the Democratic Party to the center; and whether we agreed with his mechanisms or not, he  was the first Democratic Presidential candidate to win two terms since FDR.

Triangulation itself, while somewhat dubious, isn't the horrid ideological sacrifice to some make it out to be. It is a means of bridging two divergent ideas with a third that may sound like both, originate from both, or just sound like it originated from both. The Clintons - and yeah, a lot of people hate them for it now - became masters of triangulation - not because it was pleasurable or fun, but because it worked.

The difference, though, is that they didn't run on themes of divergence from triangulation. Obama said, more than once, that Clinton was using the "same old playbook," telling people one thing and craftily doing another. He compared her to Annie Oakley because she appealed to gun owners, and said that she would "say or do anything to get elected." And yeah, maybe that was true. She did emphasize her sensible gun policy to appeal to voters who were otherwise unlikely to support a Democrat for President, and it worked. She did triangulate her positions on some issues, and she won 8 of the last 13 primaries, often by large margins.

The point of this is not to rehash the Democratic primary contest (I promise, I DO support Obama. I do I do I do I DO!). It does, however, put Obama's now-apparent respect for triangulation into perspective. He ran on themes of straight-talk, of change, complete, unfettered change. He wasn't going to accept money from Washington lobbyists, he wasn't going to play with the special interests, he wasn't going to say anything he didn't believe to be true. He was going to transform politics, run as himself, and nothing but: Obama wouldn't be prey to political winds, because he is a New Type of Presidential Candidate - he isn't even a politician!

But what the New Yorker famously uncovered, and what Obama's efforts at triangulation have revealed, is that he isn't so much different. He's a skilled politician, a wunderkind, a skilled communicator that can bridge those gaps between liberal and conservative. It is to his credit that he can do this so effectively, all while wrapping himself in that same mantle of newness and change.

But it is more than disappointing. I actually had hope that we could finally have a new type of President, one devoid of political influence, one who would tell people what they needed to hear. While Obama still does some of that, his changes on so many issues - for me, his support of FISA was most galling - don't live up to his image of the man who will transcend politics-as-usual. 

Speaking of legitimate news...

In case you've been spending too much of your time making pools with your fellow interns on who will get the VP bid, I figured I would pass on a couple things that I stumbled upon in the past couple days, although, admittedly, you might have known about this for a while. But they haven't been blogged about on here recently so I figured what the hell.

First, the ever non-propagandistic and well-fact-checked "BarackBook", a fake pseudo-Facebook profile created for Barack, courtesy of the GOP. With friends like William Ayers (who blatantly displayed unprecedented support when he contributed a whopping $200 to a campaign seven years ago!) who needs to worry about a surge in Iraq? Thanks, guys!

Next, lurking amongst the less reputable sources of information on the internet (we're talking more than a few notches below Wikipedia on the Scale of Things It Is Appropriate to Cite in Your Thesis; see also) for the past few months has been the notion of Obama as the anti-Christ. For your enjoyment, I'll just link to a google search.

But, now, real people who consider themselves politically involved are starting to take this into consideration, if not believe it outright. I have heard of multiple (conservative) people who are starting to buy into this. I'm not sure if this is a result of their TV constantly being tuned to FOX news, their homepage being the Drudge Report, or some other source, but this blatantly ludicrous idea is beginning to make headway outside the realm of the internet.

Finally, the banner-text for an anti-Christ blog for some "proof":

Barack Obama may be the Antichrist, he has risen up out of no where, he mesmerizes crowds, people are gathering in huge numbers, he is likely becoming the next President of the United States. Do not look only to what I say, but look to your Bibles, to passages in John, Daniel, and Revelations.

I always knew Illinois counted as "no where".

A question for my progressive friends

So I see where Daily Kos, and TPM, and everybody else are having some collective midlife crisis over Obama and the FISA thing. "Core Democratic values" and "purism and pragmatism" and "betrayal" and so forth. My question, if there's anybody out there this summer:

Is it weird that I don't give a damn about this? And that I'm much more interested in, say, Obama's use of Sherrod Brown on trade? Am I a bad member of the netroots? I'm really just wondering...