The October Protocol

Easter Island Game Statistics

2008-10-05T11:26:00.003-05:00

JC was a carpenter AND...

2008-09-05T12:00:00.004-05:00

...a community organizer.

Pontius Pilate was the governor.

(hat tip: reader comment on JMart's blog)

Is she a lil' bit country, or a lil' bit rock n' roll?

2008-09-04T00:42:00.011-05:00

Four months ago, the Republican Vice Presidential nominee named her* child after Van Halen.

Wired:

Trig Paxson Van Palin (an homage to the rock band Van Halen) was born in April. With Trig in tow, Palin returned to work a few days later, for a meeting of her energy team.

Four.

Months.

Ago.

It's one thing to have a few posters of a spread-eagled David Lee Roth underneath your bearskin rug, but to include a pun related to the band in your kid's name, that's so...dazed and confused:

EXT. BACK PORCH - NIGHT

Gathered with a few friends and family, BARRICUDA, wearing a VH 1979 World Tour shirt chills outside of AIP convention after-hours party. A joint of Great Alaskan Thunderfuck is passed.

BARRICUDA: (takes hit) I was thinking...(cough, snort) I was thinking of naming one of the kids Van Palen.

LEVI: You mean, like, (giggles) the guy in Dracula.

TODD: Nah, brah, like the band.

WOODERSON: Alright, alright, alright.

CUT TO... PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN TRAIL?!

And we're supposed to believe she is a serious candidate to be a heartbeat away from the Presidency.

But supporters shout, "She's the everywoman, the girl next door."

I don't want my neighbor running for Vice President.

*Yes, while questions still remain regarding Bristol's extended school absence and the slooooowest leak, amniotic or otherwise, since the Edwards love child story, I feel that the absence of further evidence absolves Gov. Palin of suspicion in any baby-switching plot.

McCain-Palin 08: Baby Mama Drama

2008-08-30T09:47:00.007-05:00

This photo was taken on February 5, Super Tuesday, when Sarah Palin was 6 months pregnant (Trig was born on April 18). She looks good, right? Not showing at all . . . at SIX months of her FIFTH pregnancy.

Here's another strange fact:

The governor's water broke during the energy conference but she stayed and gave a 30-minute speech before boarding an Alaska Airlines plane home to deliver the baby.

The flight from Dallas to Juneau takes around 11-12 hours and it's a widely accepted fact in the medical community that time in labor usually decreases with each successive childbirth. Airlines don't usually let you fly without a doctor's note if you are 28-weeks pregnant or more (In Palin's case she was reportedly at 32 weeks) and Section II.7.1 of the FAA Regulations Manual on transportation of patients by airlines states the following:

Obstetrical patients in later stages provide a significant risk of precipitating delivery during flight; pregnancy past 32 weeks should be carefully considered for restriction from flight and those past 36 weeks should be prohibited from flying. An aircraft is not a delivery room.

Palin apparently was not only able to keep her 8 month pregnancy a secret from the airline employees before the 12 hour flight, but also the fact that her water had broken. Of course, the easiest way to keep that secret is if you aren't actually pregnant.

Bristol Palin, Gov. Palin's 17-year old daughter, was out of school for the last 4-5 months of the Governor's pregnancy with mononucleosis.

There appears to be a lot of smoke, but no fire yet, and there may never be, but what makes campaigning in the age of the internet so taxing is that every blogger has a smoke detector. Wasilla, AK, this ain't Governor. Welcome to the national stage, for better or for worse.

In parting, a video for your perusal. Does she look and act 6.5 months pregnant in this video . . . hard to say. She is wearing the same outfit she was wearing on Super Tuesday. Is that her pregnancy suit?

Note: Pictures of Palin during her pregnancy have already been taken down from the Alaskan Government website. Keep an eye on this link to see if it disappears.

John McCain: 50/50 Chance of Surviving First Term

2008-08-18T11:39:00.011-05:00

Should McCain get elected he will be older than the average life expectancy for American white males during his first term.

Note: This is not the average life expectancy for Americans who were tortured for five years in Vietnam. Based on what McCain suffered through, I would guess that expectancy would be lower.

The Protocol loves demographic reductionism.

War in Georgia!? Atlanta burns again?

2008-08-15T19:27:00.010-05:00

Oh. Not THAT Georgia.

Do we have troops there? No...

Oh, okay,

Well, didja hear that NASA produced those new swimsuits that Phelps is wearing?

In a surprising turn of events Americans don't give a shit about conflict abroad.

This is why Obama chose to take his vacation now. He figured accurately that the Olympics would provide him media cover, even in the face of an act of war by our Cold War nemesis.

Even the internets with their ten-thousand tiny microscopes have moved on from the Caucasus to dissect the upcoming Purpose-Driven Debate with Rick Warren. Follow that up with an Obama veep announcement and the denouement of the Games of the XXIX Olympiad and Georgia won't be on our minds. Was this the October surprise the McCain camp had been waiting for? I hope not. There's a reason it's called the October surprise...

because it happens in October...

right before the election...

when everyone and their grandmother is focused on the campaigns.

If Randy Scheunemann had been slowly stroking his Georgia woody since he left his role as Saakashvili's man in Washington in May, I hope he didn't get overly excited when McCain was the only guy left in the room this week.

The foreplay is far from over and the clean-up could be awkward.

The Protocol is never premature in its analytical ejaculations.

21 Edicts for Election Coverage

2008-08-15T11:56:00.005-05:00

All journalists in Beijing have been issued the 21 edicts from the Chinese Governments propaganda unit.

While the American media enjoys freedom of the press and prides itself on ability to speak truth to power, they figured the Chinese were onto something here and issued their own 21 edicts.

What follows is an item-by-item comparison of the 21 Chinese edicts with The 21 edicts for mainstream media election coverage.

1. The telecast of sports events will be live [but] in case of emergencies, no print is allowed to report on it.

1. The telecast of gaffes will be live [but] if McCain has a "senior moment", no print is allowed to report on it.

2. From August 1, most of the previously accessible overseas websites will be unblocked. No coverage is allowed on this development. There's also no need to use stories published overseas on this matter and [website] operators should not provide any superlinks on their pages.

2. From mid-July, most of the previously unacceptable character attacks will be unblocked only for the candidate trailing in the polls. No coverage is allowed on this development.

3. Be careful with religious and ethnic subjects.

3. Be careful with religious and ethnic subjects.

4. Don't make fuss about foreign leaders at the opening ceremony, especially in relation to seat arrangements or their private lives.

4. Don't make fuss about candidates when they travel abroad, especially in relation to crowd arrangements or their ability to inspire.

5. We have to put special emphasis on ethnic equality. Any perceived racist terms as "black athlete" or "white athlete" is not allowed. During the official telecast, we can refer to Taiwan as "Chinese Taipei". In ordinary times, refer to Taiwanese athletes as "those from the precious island Taiwan....." In case of any pro Taiwan-independence related incident inside the venue, you shall follow restrictions listed in item 1.

5. We have to put special emphasis on ethnic equality. Any perceived racist terms as "black politician" or "white politician" is not allowed. During the official telecasts, we can refer to Sen. Obama as "Sen. Barack Obama". In ordinary times, refer to Sen. Obama as "that black man from the precious island Hawaii....." In case of any pro race-baiting related incident inside any venue, you shall dissect it for a minimum of 3 news cycles.

6. For those ethnic Chinese coaches and athletes who come back to Beijing to compete on behalf of other countries, don't play up their "patriotism" since that could backfire with their adopted countries.

6. For those ethnic Scotch-Irish Americans who surface from their hollows to speak on behalf of Appalachia, don't play up their "patriotism" since that could backfire with Americans who believe, "all men are created equal," and other quaint notions expressed in our founding documents.

7. As for the Pro-Tibetan independence and East Turkistan movements, no coverage is allowed. There's also no need to make fuss about our anti-terrorism efforts.

7. As for Darfur and Afghanistan, no coverage is allowed. Please make a fuss about our anti-terrorism efforts.

8. All food saftey issues, such as cancer-causing mineral water, is off-limits.

8. All food safety issues, such as the deadly strain of e coli that develops only in corn and grain-fed cattle and spreads in the confined quarters of our factory farms, are off-limits.

9. In regard to the three protest parks, no interviews and coverage is allowed.

9. In regard to PUMAs protesting in Denver, interviews and coverage is encouraged.

10. No fuss about the rehearsals on August 2,5. No negative comments about the opening ceremony.

10. No fuss about the conventions on August 25-28, and September 1-4. No negative comments about the speaker slots.

11.No mention of the Lai Changxing case.

11.Please mention the Rielle Hunter case.

12.No mention of those who illegally enter China.

12.No mention of our economy's dependence on the labor of those who illegally enter America.

13.On international matters, follow the official line. For instance, follow the official propaganda line on the North Korean nuclear issue; be objective when it comes to the Middle East issue and play it down as much as possible; no fuss about the Darfur question; No fuss about UN reform; be careful with Cuba. If any emergency occurs, please report to the foreign ministry.

13.On international matters, follow the official line. For instance, follow the official propaganda line on the North Korean nuclear issue; be objective when it comes to the Middle East issue and play it down as much as possible; no fuss about the Darfur question; No fuss about UN reform; be careful with Gitmo. If any emergency occurs, please follow the Bush Administration's lead.

14. If anything related to territorial dispute happens, make no fuss about it. Play down the Myanmar issue; play down the Takeshima island dispute.

14. If anything related to territorial dispute happens, make no fuss about it. Play down the Georgia issue; play down failed African nations.

15. Regarding diplomatic ties between China and certain nations, don't do interviews on your own and don't use online stories. Instead, adopt Xinhua stories only. Particularly on the Doha round negotiation, US elections, China-Iran co-operation, China-Aussie co-operation, China-Zimbabwe co-operation, China-Paraguay co-operation.

15. Regarding diplomatic ties between USA and certain nations, don't do interviews on your own and don't use online stories. Instead, adopt AP stories only. Particularly on the Kyoto Protocol, Reasons for going to war in Iraq, USA-Saudi Arabia co-operation, USA-Georgia co-operation, USA-Pakistan co-operation, and our role in the UN.

16.Be very careful with TV ratings, only use domestic body's figures. Play it down when rating goes down.

16.Be very careful with any poll that shows one candidate with a decent lead, only use national polls that are close to tied. The race is always tied or too close to call. Remember to report that honestly.

17. In case of an emergency involving foreign tourists, please follow the official line. If there's no official line, stay away from it.

17. In case of an emergency involving Americans struggling against an act of nature, please follow the official line. If there's no official line, stay away from it.

18. Re possible subway accidents in the capital, please follow the official line.

18. Re possible accidents in the capital, please follow the official line, i.e. accuse Arab terrorists first. Note: If government official becomes primary suspect in an act of terrorism, stay away from it.

19.Be positive on security measures.

19.Be positive on security measures. Always remind Americans to be afraid.

20. Be very careful with stock market coverage during the Games.

20. Be very careful with economics coverage during the election. Americans don't understand basic economics. Try to keep it that way.

21.Properly handle coverage of the Chinese sports delegation:

A.don't criticise the selection process

B.don't overhype gold medals; don't issue predictions on gold medal numbers; don't make fuss about cash rewards for athletes.

C.don't make a fuss about isolated misconducts by athletes.

D.enforce the publicity of our anti-doping measures.

E. put emphasis on government efforts to secure the retirement life of atheletes.

F. keep a cool head on the Chinese performance. Be prepared for possible fluctations in the medal race.

G. refrain from publishing opinion pieces at odds with the official propangada line of the Chinese delegation.

21.Properly handle coverage of the rest of the media:

A.don't criticize speculation in reporting.

B.don't overhype the candidates engaging the issues; don't issue predictions about our country being in a crisis; don't make fuss about cash rewards from lobbyists.

C.Please make a fuss about even the faintest whiff of connection to or actual impropriety by key members of campaign staffs.

D.enforce the publicity of our anti-terrorism policies. Again, terror is everywhere.

E. put emphasis on government efforts to secure the retirement life of Americans. Hide the fact that the previous Administration failed miserably at this goal.

F. keep a cool head on polling performance. Be prepared for possible fluctations in the horse race and report on even the tiniest movement.

G. refrain from fact-checking.

Karl Rove: Electoral Genius?

2008-08-14T10:58:00.003-05:00

Karl Rove's latest strategy memo has been posted on the WSJ Opinion page. Rove highlights Colorado, Virginia, Ohio, and Michigan as the four key battleground states. I don't take issue with this thesis, but the rest of his map is laughably optimistic.

Let's take a look at the article.

If Mr. McCain lost Colorado and Virginia, he would likely have 264 electoral votes (assuming he carried the other states President Bush won in 2004). To win, he would have to pick up a state Democrats are counting on winning, such as Michigan.

Ummm...just because you put it in parentheses Karl, doesn't make the statement disappear. Assuming he wins the Bush states! Really, you're going to slide that in as a given in your analysis. Last time I checked Obama has had significant and consistent polling leads throughout 2008 in both Iowa and New Mexico, two "Bush states." But you'll account for those two states later in the opinion when you run-down the list of competitive states, right?

Other states will see serious competition, including Florida, Pennsylvania, Nevada, New Hampshire, Missouri and Wisconsin.

Oh, okay, you've conceded IA and NM to Obama. Great. So now lets check your addition. Bush won 286 EVs in 2004. Subtract from that Iowa's 7 EVs and New Mexico's 5 EVs and McCain is down to 274 EVs. Now, if we continue with Rove's scenario of Obama winning CO and VA, we need to subtract 9 EVs for CO and 13 EVs for VA. McCain is now at 252 EVs, NOT 264. Even if McCain flipped Michigan the two candidates would be tied at 269 and the tie goes to Obama.

Of course that line of analysis assumes McCain runs the table in MI (Obama +3), OH (Obama +1.1), MT (McCain +1.7), FL (McCain +2), NV (McCain +2), MO (McCain +4.1), and IN (McCain +4.7). (538 numbers in parentheses).

If he does that, wait, he STILL loses.

Rove's analysis here is a joke. He is obviously trading on his reputation as an electoral "genius" to disguise preposterous scenarios as realistic possibilities. The irony is, based on memos like this, this type of unfounded, optimistic report wouldn't cross McCain's desk if Rove were running his campaign.

Can we all stop pretending that Karl Rove, "journalist" will provide the same type of analysis as Karl Rove, campaign manager.

The Protocol would never overlook Iowa. New Mexico? Maybe.

Memo to Obama Campaign & Surrogates

2008-08-06T12:56:00.009-05:00

How not to respond to McCain attack memes:

Claim, as does Bob Herbert, that McCain's "Celebrity" ad deliberately juxtaposed Britney Spears with 'phallic' imagery like the Leaning Tower of Pisa and the Washington Monument to inflame subconscious fears of interracial sex.
Suggest, as does Timothy Noah in Slate, that the WSJ's article on Obama's skinniness is really about his race.
Opine, as does The One himself, that the political party that represents about 50% of the nation "takes pride in being ignorant."

How to respond to McCain attack memes:

Point out that McCain himself now concedes that inflating your tires is a good idea.
Circulate widely the news that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, potential dark-horse McCain VP pick, supports Obama's energy plan. (Question: is she now off the shortlist because she endorsed Obama's plan, or is it the other way around? Discuss.)
Somehow get the most loathed celebrity in America, and the daughter of a major McCain supporter, to release the best political ad of the season so far:
. . . and don't let the McCain camp somehow claim that Ms. Hilton's energy plan is the GOP plan, when in fact it's nearly identical to your own.

The October Protocol will see you at the debates, bitches.

Baseless VP speculation

2008-08-04T15:24:00.006-05:00

Now who knows what this means, but for shits and giggles I typed in the following web addresses today:

www.obamakaine08.com

www.obamasebelius08.com

www.obamaclinton08.com

www.obamabayh08.com

. . . and only one of them links directly to the Democratic Party's website.

If it's true, color me disappointed.

UPDATE: Koan gets totally pwned by his lack of knowledge about who owns website names. Oh well.

The October Protocol is sick of waiting and wants to fucking know already.

Obama and the African-American vote in GA

2008-08-03T14:35:00.002-05:00

Updated to include July numbers.

This line chart reflects the Obama campaign's chances of closing the gap in Georgia based solely on registering and motivating AA voters to turnout in November. The solid orange line indicates the growing number of active registered AA voters in Georgia. The dashed orange line is the projected total of active registered AA voters for each month if 20,000 new AA voters are registered each month until the election (an exceedingly optimistic figure given the trend of the last three months). The red, green, and blue lines indicate the active registered voter thresholds the Obama campaign would have to reach given each of the three turnout scenarios described to the right of the chart. As you can see the dashed orange line falls short of the 90% turnout threshold-the wildly optimistic threshold for Obama.

Roughly 2000 new AA voters were registered in Georgia in the last month, a number far below the previous months' totals and further below what the campaign was targeting. What is becoming increasingly clear in Georgia is that Obama will need a lot more than registering and motivating the AA vote to close the Bush-Kerry '04 gap. Paging Bob Barr...

Further explanation of the numbers provided in the chart is here.

Spending a day learning html in order to produce charts that are web-compatible is encouraged under the Protocol.

Can't wait to hear Souter say "G-spot"

2008-08-02T14:34:00.004-05:00

The Fifth Circuit has denied an en banc rehearing of its February decision striking down the Texas Obscene Device Law, which outlawed dildoes and vibrators in the Lone Star State. The original decision relied on the usual suspects--substantive due process under the 14th Amendment, private intimate conduct, Lawrence v. Texas--to hold that the law heavily burdened Texas citizens who wished to get freaky with the help of a $220 Chrome Juicer.

Eugene Volokh speculates that the Supreme Court will hear Texas's appeal, and guesses it will vote 6-3 in favor of the law's constitutionality. The idea is that some of the moderate justices, specifically Kennedy and Breyer, will conclude that the traditional state's interest in regulating morality (which, according to Texas, includes an interest in "discouraging prurient interests in autonomous sex and the pursuit of sexual gratification unrelated to procreation”) should hold unless it implicates a right "important to most people's lives." Chrome Juicers and Fists of Adonis apparently don't make the cut.

Volokh's co-blogger Dale Carpenter lays out a more comprehensive set of possibilities, and tentatively suggests that the law could be struck down by a Kennedy-led 5-4 majority on either a 'fundamental right' or rational-basis analysis. I agree. Justice Kennedy will be certain to angle for a crucial role in the whatever decision the Court hands down, and I find Volokh's suggestion that Justice Breyer might join with a Scalia- or Roberts-led majority unlikely. And with Kennedy as the swing vote, I just can't see him joining an opinion that would undermine what I'm sure he sees as his legacy: the decision in Lawrence that finally got rid of the notion that a state could ban homosexual conduct between consenting adults. True, that opinion neatly dodged the crucial question of whether 'traditional' (read = sex-regulating) morality could ever suffice as a 'rational basis' for government interference with private sexual behavior. It is possible that once having cemented his spot as the key vote, Kennedy could parse some meaningless distinctions, do a lot of on-the-one-hand equivocating, and muddle his way toward allowing the law to stand.

But after all the grief he's taken from Scalia and the SocialCons for Lawrence, I just don't see him letting Texas come into his Court (and these days, he sure thinks it's his Court) and tell him that, Lawrence not withstanding, they can still tell people how and how not to fuck.

For readers who found the Chrome Juicer too tame, The October Protocol recommends The Marvelous Anchor.

Campaign Appearances: July Update

2008-08-02T14:03:00.012-05:00

We first ran this piece last month and here is the line graph with the July totals included. At first glance the July numbers seem to fit with the earlier numbers - both candidates scaled back the number of domestic appearances this month. A closer inspection reveals that Sen. Obama is dominating Sen. McCain on the summer trail. Obama's excuse for the decline in his July appearance numbers was he was part of a hugely successful week-long CODEL trip to Europe and the Middle East. McCain's excuse was . . . well . . . hey, he's 71, it's summertime, you know what that means . . . GOLF CARTS MUTHAFUCKA!

Despite Obama playing Paris Hilton to hundreds of thousands of German "fans" he still managed to outcampaign McCain back in the states by a 29-18 campaign event margin in July. Must have been all of those Met-RX energy bars, or the Black Forest Berry Honest Tea, or maybe it's his freakishly skinny physique. McCain better be careful in August, he might get lapped by the hardest working man in show business.

The Protocol always travels fast, hard, and low to the ground.

Florida Front Pages

2008-08-02T10:50:00.012-05:00

Yesterday was a big day for the Sunshine State. Both candidates were campaigning in Florida with Sen. Obama visiting the Bay Area and Sen. McCain in Orlando. Sen. Obama was heckled at his town hall meeting in St. Petersberg by members of the International People's Democratic Uhuru Movement, a pan-African Socialist group. (The Obama campaign responded by thanking the group and blasting undecided voters inboxes with a memo titled, "Jesse's not the only one: More lefty black folks that hate me.") Meanwhile, McCain yukked it up with National Urban League in an attempt to cut into Obama's base.

The visits also happened to coincide with a report that Florida is in a recession for the first time in 16 years.

Ambinder speculated about whether today's Florida headlines would focus on economics or race and that a move in one direction would indicate whether the "race card" attack was taking hold.

The Protocol looked at today's front pages of the top five Florida newspapers (by circulation) and is ready to deliver a verdict . . .

St. Petersburg Times circ. 422,410
The Times leads with "Obama open to drilling" with a large picture of him smiling among supporters. The picture of Obama dominates a smaller picture of McCain joking with National Urban League President Marc Morial. With economics front and center particularly Obama's move toward drilling, an issue that the McCain campaign wanted to wedge between the two candidates, this front page is favorable to the Democrat. Papers commonly give favorable coverage to any visiting candidate and that phenomenon is borne out by the contrasting front pages of the St. Pete Times and the Orlando Sentinel. Obama's visit focused on the Bay Area and McCain's centered on Orlando. ADVANTAGE OBAMA

Miami Herald circ. 390,171
The Herald provides equal visual coverage under the headline "Florida Showdown." In the article, however, the body starts with racial issues, hecklers included, and this after a lede that set up the economy before the racial issues ("...offering contrasting fixes for the economy while confronting racial issues"). That subtle mismatch smacks of an editor flipping the body paragraphs before going to press. Burying the economic news after the jump: ADVANTAGE MCCAIN

Orlando Sentinel circ. 341,025
The Sentinel headlines with "MCCAIN: OBAMA NOT BEST PICK FOR BLACKS," and a picture of Sen. McCain and National Urban League President Marc Morial having a good ole time onstage. If a picture is worth 1000 words, then this one is repeating "Playing the race card? Me? John McCain? How could I?" about a hundred times. Again, the soft coverage of McCain could be due to the fact that he was the candidate with a higher profile local visit. ADVANTAGE MCCAIN

South Florida Sun-Sentinel circ. 339,728
The Sun-Sentinel had nothing on the front page about the candidates save for a small photo of McCain at the bottom in the Daily Digest referring to reader mail about his rejected NYT editorial. Above the fold they ran a story on the aforementioned recession. They were the only paper on this list with that story on the front page and the only paper with no front-page story on the candidates. ADVANTAGE OBAMA

Tampa Tribune and Times circ. 309,916
The Tampa Tribune focuses on the battle and gives equal coverage to both candidates. There is no mention of race and the text highlights the main theme of each candidate's visit: Obama's economic stimulus plan and McCain's school vouchers strategy. While the issues and the economy trump race on this page the coverage seems even-handed. NO ADVANTAGE

Sooooo, that's two for Obama and two for McCain with one tie. Looks like both campaigns are getting their message out in equal measure. Keep an eye on those Sunday papers to see if there is any movement toward race or economics.

The Protocol always buries the lede below the fold.

NM Polls: SUSA and Rasmussen in 2008

2008-08-02T09:40:00.003-05:00

All polls surveyed between 490-700 respondents. All Rasmussen polls and the SUSA 6/19 poll were of likely voters. All other SUSA polls were of registered voters. A recent Maricopa Co., AZ poll showed surprising strength for Obama in McCain's home county. If reliably Republican Arizona is showing signs of cracking, I like Obama's chances in purple New Mexico. Obama has a strong ally in Sen. Richardson, and runs well in Santa Fe and on the Reservation. New Mexico appears much safer for the Democrat than Ohio, Michigan, Colorado, and New Hampshire.

Rasmussen in NH

2008-08-02T09:10:00.002-05:00

If there is any traditionally Republican state where McCain's latest attack strategy won't fly, it's New Hampshire. Keep an eye on the movement in the next set of polls from the Granite State.

Rasmussen in CO

2008-08-02T08:44:00.003-05:00

Other polls show Colorado tightening with McCain taking the lead in the latest Quinnipiac poll.

Obama Pryor?

2008-08-01T15:59:00.011-05:00

Also from the NYT article:

In one class on race, he imitated the way clueless white people talked. “Why are your friends at the housing projects shooting each other?” he asked in a mock-innocent voice.

You can also hear his white-people voice when he says "dollar bills" in this now-suddenly-important clip from Springfield, MO on Wednesday.

It's not quite Richard Pryor or Dave Chappelle, but still . . . pretty good.

The October Protocol only speaks in a white-people voice.

Professor Obama

2008-08-01T13:27:00.005-05:00

The NYT ran a long feature Wednesday about the twelve years Barack Obama spent teaching law at the University of Chicago. The paper’s framing of the story is that Obama kept himself aloof from the Chicago faculty, made his political ambitions known, and shrewdly kept his positions on policy questions such as affirmative action and government regulation close to the chest.

“He surfaced all the competing points of view on [controversial quota-queen Lani] Guinier’s proposals with total neutrality and equanimity,” says Prof. David Franklin, sounding a familiar theme about Obama that he excels at dispassionate analysis, with a gift for empathizing with both sides of hot button issues. The flipside to this gift, of course, is that it leaves people heavily invested in academic and intellectual camps wondering whose side he’s really on.

My take on the article's portrait of Obama as a professor, and the insights that can be gleaned from his Constitutional Law exams and answer keys, is that they confirm my view of him as a thoughtful and careful legal mind more interested at getting at the heart of policy disputes than in resolving them. His course materials emphasize the realities of racism, disenfranchisement, and poverty--and the distortions those realities have on a democratic political process--while at the same time acknowledging the failures of heavy-handed attempts to fix them from the top down. One question from a 1996 exam asked students to analyze two hypothetical proposals by a black mayor, in a heavily segregated city split 50-50 between blacks and whites with a significant history of institutional racism in the power structure, to ensure that the awarding of construction contracts and the hiring of firemen better reflect the city's racial composition. Both proposals are facially race-neutral, with the construction proposal skewing toward companies based in low-income neighborhoods and the fireman proposal doing away with a (possibly culturally-biased) written exam.

Obama's answer key to both questions isn't earth-shattering: he's looking for students to analyze the right cases (Aderand, Croson, Washington v. Davis, etc.) and put forth good arguments about the level of scrutiny such proposals would face in court and the likelihood of surviving. What strikes me though is his understanding that it's not enough to believe that the mayor is right, or that his proposals are a good idea--you have to convince a court that the proposals play by the rules the Supreme Court has set down regarding discriminatory intent, narrow tailoring to a compelling state interest, and so forth. He seems keenly aware that knowing your arguments are the right ones is not enough in a sprawling, diverse democracy: you need to take seriously the opposing views, pare the issues down to their cores, search for the common ground, and move from there.

Lawyers are trained to be advocates, to take a goal (my client's best interest) and pursue any and all threads that lead to that goal while ignoring, minimizing, or attacking those that don't. Obama's not an advocate. He's a balancer. He doesn't make a stand and then use whatever arguments happen to be convenient to defend that stand til the crack of doom--he weighs competing sides, acknowledges the impossibility of always being right, and looks for common ground. So when Richard Epstein complains that "he’s always been a thoughtful listener and questioner, but he’s never stepped up to the plate and taken full swings," he means Obama's never planted his flag in the sands of an idea and loaded his guns to defend it, right or wrong.

Which is exactly what voters sick of pig-headed, reflexive partisanship find so refreshing.

By way of reflexive balance, the October Protocol notes the extensive use of the words "I" and "me" in Obama's memos and communications to his law classes.

Culture Wars Part III: The Turd Blossoms Again

2008-07-31T17:31:00.006-05:00

Rick Davis, McCain's campaign manager, and Andrea Mitchell go toe to toe in this remarkable interview.

As Ambinder notes the action starts two and a half minutes in and continues right up till the end.

I wonder if this is the beginning of the end of the media's love affair with Sen. McCain. They've always appreciated his candor and his open-bus policy but this recent string of ads has shown that he, and Davis, are running Karl Rove's third presidential campaign.

The choice to align himself with Bush four years ago was McCain's critical mistake. Had he maintained his maverick persona, channeled the animosity he must have felt toward Bush/Rove and Co. after the South Carolina primary in 2000, he could have remained ever the straight talker, and run as a genuine alternative to the Bush White House. Instead he continues to follow the spirit of the hug by hiring a Rove lackey to run his day-to-day (Steve Schmidt) and allowing his campaign to continue to wage Rove's culture war.

The media has begun to realize that their proud maverick has become a puppet. John McCain might not lead the country like George W. Bush, but he is certainly campaigning like him. That would be a great plan, I mean, GW has won two in a row and if it ain't broke, . . . there must be nothing to fix, right?.

Rasmussen in OH

2008-07-29T20:00:00.003-05:00

The McCain campaign has to be encouraged by this latest poll in what is developing into a must-win state for him.

Rasmussen in NV

2008-07-29T19:43:00.002-05:00

The Breach is back after a two-week vacation. The previously posted state graphs have been updated with the latest data points.

Buckethead, Bumblefoot, and Brain

2008-07-29T16:25:00.012-05:00

Not the title of a Roald Dahl book. Sadly.

An article in last week's NYT led me to contemplate, as I often do, the legacy of Guns n' Roses. Apparently, Axl and whoever else is serving time in what surely is the dreariest gig in rock are releasing a new song--obscurely titled "Shackler's Revenge"--in September, as a track on the Rock Band 2 video game. The announced deal between Microsoft, MTV, and Universal points to the new tactics music labels are using to counter the staggering fall in record sales since music downloading and copying software became widely used. I had always thought that the fun in playing Guitar Hero and games like it was rocking along to songs you already know; now, apparently, it's in paying for and consuming new songs by utterly irrelevant bands. What's next, Chris Brown's Doublemint Gum jingle on Guitar Hero 4?

But . . . Guns n' Roses. Sorry, "Guns n' Roses," which now means Axl Rose and random dudes from Nine Inch Nails, The Replacements, and Axl's hometown. Not to mention Buckethead, Bumblefoot, and Brain--as if dudes with cool nicknames could replace Slash and Izzy. Still working on that fucking record, ten years later.

Guns n' Roses was once the greatest rock n' roll band in the world. Raw, edgy, and punk as fuck in that glam way, back when those two things were really kind of the same thing, they channelled the Stones and Aerosmith but made them dirtier, meaner, smellier. Appetite For Destruction is a nearly flawless punk album--even though Slash and Izzy rip blues riffs that Greg Ginn could never have learned, Axl's snarl was scarier and his tales of the urban underbelly are more gripping than anything Henry Rollins ever barked incoherently into a microphone. Even the power ballad is dark: Slash's bitter solo over the long minor-key coda to "Sweet Child O' Mine" turns the world's shittiest love poem into some kind of nightmare.

Of course, Guns n' Roses then became the worst band in the world--or rather, the exemplar of everything that sucks about rock n' roll. By the time Axl was turning into Brian Wilson by way of Howard Hughes, they'd already released an unforgivably sloppy acoustic half-album (featuring the unforgivably stupid "One In A Million") and perhaps the ultimate paradigm of the over-indulgent, massively pretentious double album: the Use Your Illusions, which sure rocked back in 1991 but sure seem pretty unlistenable now. "Get In The Ring?" Really? Two versions of "Don't Cry"? Those terrible Dylan and McCartney covers? November Fucking Rain? The grungy assholes who ruled the Sunset Strip and out-Motleyed the Crue would have thrown a Jack Daniels bottle at the TV screen and trashed all their gear if they could have seen the embarassments they'd become.

What's sad about it is that by the time Axl famously threatened Kurt Cobain at the 1992 MTV Music Video Awards, he had completed the transformation Cobain himself refused to ever make. A punk kid, hating his shitty Indiana town, getting beaten up by the jocks and robbed by the black dudes, moving to L.A. for his shot at some kind of redemptive rock and roll glory--and then he's Peter Frampton, he's Rod Stewart in the 70s, he's Phil Spector, he's writing suck-my-cock songs and changing his costume every other tune, blowing all his money on pig roasts and music videos and cocaine and firing Slash. Oh, and getting Sebastian Bach to be his spokesman--just like Bob Dylan and Johnny Cash!

FUN TEST: How long you can watch this clip of Axl N' Chumps playing "Welcome to the Jungle" in 2002?

I lasted twenty seconds or so before turning it off in disgust, which puts it right up there on the Unwatchability Index with George W. Bush and 2 Girls 1 Cup.

The October Protocol does not recommend that you spend any time looking for the actual 2Girls1Cup video.

Swingtown, USA: Clearwater, FL

2008-07-15T11:22:00.013-05:00

Welcome:

Clearwater is the county seat of Pinellas County, located on the Pinellas Peninsula between Tampa Bay and the Gulf of Mexico. The town is named after a fresh water spring flowing from near where City Hall is located today. Pinellas is named for the Spanish Punta Pinal, or "Point of Pines."

The city is the smallest of the three principal cities in the Tampa-St. Pete-Clearwater metropolitan area. The Tampa metro area with a population of 2.7 million people is the second largest in Florida and the third largest in the Southeastern US.

By the Numbers:

According to the US Census, the 2006 population estimate for Clearwater was 107,742, down from 108,787 in 2000. The 2006 estimated population for Pinellas County was 924,413, up from 921,482 in 2000. Clearwater is 84% white, and 10% African-American. Persons of Hispanic or Latino descent make up 9% of the population. In 2006, the per capita income for the city was $25,126.

Bush won Pinellas County by 246 votes in 2004: 225,686 to Kerry's 225,460. In Pinellas County's Republican Primary, McCain won 37.5% of the vote, Romney won 30%, Giuliani won 16.5%, Huckabee won 10.5%, and Paul won 4%. In the invalid Democratic Primary Clinton won 52% to Obama's 33%, with Edwards tallying 12%.

Presently in Pinellas County there are 235,960 registered Democrats, 233,708 registered Republicans, and 149,274 voters registered as Other. In 2004, there were 223,544 registered Democrats, 231,652 registered Republicans, and 135,793 registered Other.

Fun Facts!

The area was originally settled in 1835 when Fort Harrison was built overlooking Clearwater Harbor to serve as an outpost for the US Army during the Seminole Wars.

During WWII, Clearwater became a major training base for troops headed to Europe and the Pacific. Most of the hotels in the area served as barracks for the troops and nighttime blackouts were common to confuse potential enemy bombers.

Clearwater Beach is consistently ranked among the top beaches in the nation.

The Belleview Biltmore Resort and Spa, built in 1897, is the oldest occupied wooden building still used for its original purpose. And it has ghosts.

The worldwide "spiritual headquarters" of the Church of Scientology is in Clearwater. This international HQ, founded in the late 70s, is known as Flag Land Base in the official parlance of the pseudo-religion.

Evel Knievel lived in Clearwater when he died and Hulk Hogan maintains an estate in nearby Belleair a beach house in Clearwater Beach.

Your local news source: Clearwater Citizen, Clearwater Gazette

The following chart shows the five smallest vote margins among Pinellas County precincts in the 2004 General Election.

Precincts	Vote Margin (in # of votes)
St. Petersburg 252	Bush +1
Clearwater 503	Kerry +2
Clearwater 603	Bush +2
Pinellas Park 191	Kerry +3
Clearwater 636	Kerry +3

Swingtown, USA is a regular feature on the Protocol where we introduce readers to a city or town from a swing county in a swing state.

Iowa Polling: SUSA and Rasmussen 2008

2008-07-15T01:04:00.004-05:00

SUSA polled registered voters until the June poll, when it polled likely voters. Polls surveyed between 528 and 600 respondents.

All Rasmussen polls surveyed 500 likely voters.

Among the Bush states, Iowa is the most likely to be flipped by Obama. Obama has treated Iowa as his second home in his campaign thus far. It was the key to his primary victory over Sen. Clinton. His consistent lead there reflects the fact that 177 of his 686 campaign appearances (26%) have been in the Hawkeye State. The next closest state in total campaign appearances is New Hampshire with 52.

C'mon Dow, it's all in your head.

2008-07-14T15:40:00.006-05:00

Last week the Dow traded at 52-week lows on its highest volume in two years. It's too bad that stock indices aren't immune to "mental recessions."

Altogether now American investors, "We think we can, we think we can, we think we can, . . . "

Rasmussen in MI

2008-07-14T13:26:00.004-05:00

An encouraging trend for Obama.

Obama v. McCain: Campaign Appearances by Month

2008-07-10T23:56:00.007-05:00

McCain is averaging 34.2 campaign appearances per month since April 2007, while Obama is averaging 45.7 over that same time frame. This difference isn't THAT surprising considering Obama's extended primary vs. Sen. Clinton. Sen. Obama's primary season was four months longer than Sen. McCain's (Feb.-May), and Obama significantly outpaced McCain in appearances during those four months.

McCain's three lowest totals came in July and August of 2007, and March of 2008. The latter month was when he took his trip to Iraq so that can partially explain the lower number. In July of 07 the McCain campaign underwent its first major reshuffling, so those months could've been spent restrategizing. That and it was widely known that his campaign was low on funds, so he could've been husbanding resources during the August vacation period.

Obama's lowest months were April and May 2007, and, interestingly, March 2008. Two of these "low" months included more appearances than McCain's average month, so keep that in perspective. The early slower pace to his campaign schedule could have been attributed to a new campaign finding its bearings (and working with a smaller war chest). The March 08 number is notable since it came during the heart of his intense primary campaign. Perhaps he was taking a break, relatively speaking, after the 30 contests in February, or that less frequent primaries and caucuses meant fewer requirements for appearances.

McCain has the highest single month total, with 63 appearances in January 08, a statistic that supports the "John McCain: 71 years YOUNG" argument. This was the month he essentially clinched the nomination, so his 24 appearances in Florida and 16 each in Michigan and South Carolina make sense. He hasn't made half as many appearances in any month since this high month. He was campaigning much harder in May and June of '07 than he did in those same months in '08. A lot of that '07 work was probably fundraisers and other events to guarantee his fledgling candidacy's survival, but the relative inactivity of his campaign since January, especially recently, could haunt him as the general heats up.

There was less of a need to make appearances after had sewn up the nomination, but that argument makes sense for every month up until June. Both candidates total appearances came down in June but, while for Obama that makes sense, he finally could take a break from the trail after securing the nomination, McCain needed no such break. He had been relaxing and stretching his legs since January. Why didn't his campaign hit its stride in June and taken advantage of the Dems drawn-out fight?

Well, considering that McCain's campaign has undergone another July shake-up (in what is becoming an annual rite of passage), we now know that incompetence is partly to blame. Months that could've been used to define their candidate while the two Dems bloodied each other late into the spring were squandered. I'll be interested to see the trend of those campaign appearance totals as the general heats up in the fall. Will McCain start campaigning on weekends? Is his lower number of appearances somehow related to his age? The high total in January seems to indicate otherwise but perhaps he reacted poorly to those 60+ appearances? He certainly looked terrible on the trail in January, but a lot of that was his poor public speaking skills, which I've read have been coached out of him. While these questions about his age are speculative, McCain can put to bed some of these whispers with a robust slate of appearances in September.

That type of schedule would lend more credence to the argument that his absence on the trail in the spring was a strategic error, and not one of necessity given the Senator's age. Either way, with the depressed value of the Republican brand the McCain campaign has less margin for error than the typical Republican Presidential candidate. With his slow start on the trail in June, that margin may have already been breached.

The Protocol has evidence that Sen. McCain was replaced by a robot on the campaign trail in January.

Obama v. McCain: Top 10 Campaign Stops

2008-07-10T17:56:00.008-05:00

The NYT has a great interactive graphic that shows where the candidates have made appearances since April 2007. The Times defines appearances as speeches, fundraisers, meet and greets, debates, press avails, private events, and assorted other events. The two charts below show the ten cities each candidate has visited most frequently since they started campaigning last spring.

(The Protocol will be delivering more analysis of this data in the coming days...stay tuned.)

OBAMA's TOP 10
Rank	City	No. of Events
1	Des Moines, IA	33
2	Washington, DC	31
3	Chicago, IL	27
4	Las Vegas, NV	17
5	Los Angeles, CA	13
6	Manchester, NH	12
t7	Colombia, SC	10
t7	New York City, NY	10
9	Philadelphia, PA	9
10	Portland, OR	7

McCAIN's TOP 10
Rank	City	No. of Events
1	Washington, DC	19
t2	Manchester, NH	12
t2	New York City, NY	12
t4	Columbia, SC	11
t4	Miami, FL	11
6	Phoenix, AZ	10
t7	Concord, NH	9
t7	Des Moines, IA	9
9	Charleston, SC	8
t10	Chicago, IL	7
t10	Nashua, NH	7
t10	Orlando, FL	7

Rasmussen in NJ

2008-07-10T12:34:00.004-05:00

All polls surveyed 500 likely voters.

Rasmussen in MO

2008-07-10T12:03:00.005-05:00

All polls surveyed 500 likely voters.

Swingtown, USA: Standish, MI

2008-07-10T00:14:00.012-05:00

Welcome:

Standish is the county seat of Arenac County, and is located six miles from Saginaw Bay in Northeast Michigan. The town is named after founding father John D. Standish, who, in the latter half of the 19th century, owned the land that became the town. Arenac means "of or pertaining to a sandy place." (The suffix "-ac" is derived from Ancient Greek and means "pertaining to" and "arena" is Latin for "place strewn with sand.")

By the Numbers:

The town's population in 2000 was 1,581; the county's population was 17,269. Standish is 97% white, less than 1% African-American, and 2% Hispanic or Latino. Arenac County is 95% white, 2% African-American, and 1% Hispanic or Latino. In 2000, the per capita income for the town was $13,608.

Kerry won Arenac County by five votes in 2004: 4,076 to Bush's 4,071. Kerry did well in Deep River Twp. and Omer (the smallest "city" in the state with a pop. of 337), while Bush won Standish, Au Gres, and Sims Township. In Arenac County's Republican Primary, Romney, buoyed by the home state bump, won 35% of the vote, McCain won 34%, Huckabee won 16%, and Paul won 5%. In the disputed Democratic Primary Clinton won 69% to Uncommitted's 28%.

Fun Facts!

Evidence from artifacts found in the area indicate that Arenac County has been inhabited for over 5000 years.

The area was settled by Europeans when two settlers started a sawmill in 1856. The county was founded in 1883 during the lumber boom when it was separated from Bay and Saginaw Counties.

Standish is considered a sportsmen's supply headquarters for those provisioning themselves before going hunting further north, but you don't need to leave Arenac to find outdoor fun. There's plenty of good canoeing on the Rifle and Au Gres Rivers, or you can take aim at small game in the Tittabawassee River State Forest.

Did somebody say "Slots!"? The Saganing Eagles Landing Casino, operated by the Saganing Chippewa tribe, opened in Standish in January of 2008.

The Arenac County fair, in Standish, runs from July 15-19th.

Check out the city's myspace page.

Your local news source: The Bay City Times

The following chart shows the five smallest vote margins among Arenac County precincts in the 2004 General Election.

Precincts	Vote Margin (in # of votes)
Standish City Ward 3-1	Tie
Mason Township	Bush +1
Moffatt Township	Kerry +4
Standish City Ward 1-1	Kerry +12
Au Gres Township	Bush +19

Swingtown, USA is a regular feature on the Protocol where we introduce readers to a city or town from a swing county in a swing state.

No FARCing Shit

2008-07-08T16:28:00.002-05:00

So, to nobody's real surprise, the U.S. military was apparently involved in last week's rescue of American hostages from everybody's favorite group of Colombian narco-terrorists. The story first broke courtesy of Al Giordano's The Field, a source I immediately distrusted because it egged on my natural inclination to find American military skullduggery everywhere without providing a shred of hard evidence. (Note to Al: a link to another blogger on your own semi-paranoid, pro-legalization site--and that to an article quoting a single, anonymous source--does not a convincing argument make.) My latte liberal sensibilities were assuaged, though, once the news of U.S. involvement made it to NPR. Whew! Now I can believe it!

Howver, Giordano's assertion that the raid was staged to help the political fortunes of John McCain struck me as too much of a stretch. Of course it makes perfect sense that the U.S. was involved in the operation, and I could even believe that Colombia's President Alvaro Uribe wants John McCain to win enough to lend a hand, even possibly inventing a FARC laptop clumsily connecting Obama to Hugo Chavez. Why, though, this little bit of stagecraft would help McCain is beyond me--it's not like what's being sold as a Colombian army operation has registered in any meaningful way with the great middle swath of the electorate he needs. Not to mention the fact that calling attention to his positions on trade probably won't help him with the blue-collar quasi-Clintonites he'll need in November.

Tinfoil hats cannot stop the rays of The October Protocol.

The Douchebag likes Pizza

2008-07-08T12:42:00.005-05:00

Dimitri the Douchebag strikes again and this time he's hungry.

Where is my pizza? by Dimitri the Douchebag

Fandalism Free MP3 Hosting

If you missed his first two calls you should listen to them first.

There is no place for rich douchebags within the Protocol

Swingtown, USA: Stroudsburg, PA

2008-07-07T22:01:00.010-05:00

Welcome:

Stroudsburg is the county seat of Monroe County, located in the heart of the Poconos near the New Jersey border. The borough (as they are called in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania) is five miles from the Delaware Water Gap.

By the Numbers:

The borough's population in 2005 was estimated at 6,264, up about 500 people from the 2000 total. Stroudsburg is 87% white, 6% African-American, and 8% of the white population is of Hispanic or Latino descent. In 2000, the per capita income for the borough was $18,965.

Bush won Monroe County by four votes in 2004: 27,971 votes to Kerry's 27,967 votes. While Kerry won Stroudsburg and East Stroudsburg that margin was surpassed by Bush votes in the surrounding townships. In the Democratic Primary, Clinton won 58% of the county vote, with Obama winning the remaining 42%. In the Republican Primary, McCain won 73% of the vote to Paul's 16%, with Huckabee winning 11%.

Fun Facts!

There is a wealth of natural beauty in Monroe County. Explore the Delaware Water Gap from the borough of the same name. Or visit the Poconos, Pennsylvania's most popular tourist attraction, and hike waterfalls, raft the Delaware, or visit a Jewish summer camp.

The county boasts The Crossings Factory Stores, named the number one outlet center in North America for 2000-01 by the Outlet Retail Merchants Association (ORMA). The area is also home to East Stroudsburg University (Goooo Warriors!), and the Pocono Raceway, which hosts two NASCAR events annually.

Your local news source: The Pocono Record

The following chart shows the six smallest vote margins among Monroe County precincts in the 2004 General Election.

Precincts	Vote Margin (in # of votes)
Stroud 7	Kerry +3
Stroud 5	Kerry +14
Middle Smithfield Eastern	Kerry +14
Paradise	Bush +17
Chestnuthill 1	Kerry +22
Pocono 4	Bush +22

Swingtown, USA is a regular feature on the Protocol where we introduce readers to a city or town from a swing county in a swing state.

Rasmussen in PA

2008-07-07T13:22:00.005-05:00

All polls surveyed 500 likely voters.

Swingtown, USA: Springfield, OH

2008-07-07T09:24:00.037-05:00

Welcome:

Springfield, a.k.a. "The Rose City," is the county seat of Clark County in Southwestern Ohio. The city is located on the Mad River and Buck Creek and is named after the spring water that empties into Buck Creek.

By the Numbers:

The city's population in 2006 was estimated at 62,844, down almost 4% from the 2000 total. Springfield is 78% white, and 18% African-American, while Clark County in total is 88% white, and 9% African-American. One percent of the county is of Hispanic or Latino descent.

Clark County broke narrowly for Bush in 2004 with the President winning 51% of the vote. While Kerry won Springfield City, that margin was surpassed by Bush votes in the surrounding townships. In the Democratic Primary, Clinton won 59% of the county vote, with Obama winning 39%, and Edwards winning 2%. In the Republican Primary, McCain won 57% of the vote to Huckabee's 36%, with Paul winning 3%.

Fun Facts!

Springfield is home to Wittenburg University (Goooo Tigers!), and in 2004 was named an "All-American City". In 1902 the first 4-H Club was founded in Springfield Township, and Clark County still hosts the largest county fair in Ohio.

If you're looking to do more than swing some voters when you are in the Springfield area, the Springfield Convention and Visitors Bureau wants you to discover life's simple pleasures, and perhaps have a championship moment.

Your local news source: Springfield News-Sun

The following chart shows the five smallest vote margins among Clark County precincts in the 2004 General Election.

Precincts	Vote Margin (in # of votes)
Moorefield Township Precinct 7	Bush +1
Springfield Township Precinct 10	Bush +2
Moorefield Township Precinct 11	Bush +3
Springfield Township Precinct 3	Bush +11
Springfield City Precinct 27	Bush +12

Swingtown, USA is a regular feature on the Protocol where we introduce readers to a city or town from a swing county in a swing state.

Pay them and they will come

2008-07-05T21:23:00.012-05:00

There's a fairly interesting article in today's NYTimes about employers' reactions to the recent spate of immigration raids.

The article, written by the Times' immigration beat reporter, Julia Preston, dances around an issue that I think has garnered much too little attention: that employers, not workers, bear most of the responsibility for the "problem" of illegal immigration, as they're the ones driving the market forces that make it happen.

One of the most revealing passages appears early in the article:

Though the pushback is coming from both Democrats and Republicans, in many places it is reopening the rift over immigration that troubled the Republican Party last year. Businesses, generally Republican stalwarts, are standing up to others within the party who accuse them of undercutting border enforcement and jeopardizing American jobs by hiring illegal immigrants as cheap labor.

What is strangest about this is that it is the Nativist wing- in standard, MSM terms, the wingnuts- that, ostensibly carry the flag of anger over wage suppression, a legitimate, and, in some ways, liberal position.

I think this issue basically reveals the cynicism and selfishness of the major forces at work in the immigration debate. Employers, terrified of a cost to their bottom line, or even worse, being accused of actively soliciting undocumented employees, want either no enforcement of current laws or some sort of guest-worker program, a solution that would deliver a steady population of docile workers whose very right to stay in the country would depend on their bosses' say-so.

Employers could do the right thing-- campaign for amnesty and drastically increased legal immigration quotas-- but their standard-bearer Chamber of Commerce party, the GOP, just isn't willing to spend that kind of political capital.

As a side note, look how the employers, according to Preston, use the "market" to defend their position:

Mike Gilsdorf, the owner of a 37-year-old landscaping nursery in Littleton, Colo., saw the need for action by businesses last winter when he advertised with the Labor Department, as he does every year, for 40 seasonal workers at market-rate wages to plant, prune and carry his shrubs in the summer heat. Only one local worker responded to the notice, he said, and then did not show up for the job.

and then...

“I can’t replace those people,” the executive said. She said that despite offering competitive wages from $9 to $17 an hour, the company had failed over the years in repeated efforts to attract non-immigrant workers because of the state’s tight technology labor market and because of the nature of the work, exacting and tedious. If the workers were fired or arrested, she said, she could fail to meet her contracts.

What do terms like "market rate" and "competitive wages" mean in this context? Shouldn't "market rate" or "competitive" refer to the price you'd actually have to pay a legally protected employee to do a job? Why do we accept the employers' definition, which seems to be a Platonic notion of what they feel they ought to pay?

More later...

Ain't no one gonna change my Jersey mind

2008-07-05T20:30:00.003-05:00

I love posts like this that expose the hidden architecture of our political system. Who knew it was such a bear to run a modern presidential campaign in Jersey? Or Delaware?

But it does make me a little mad that Nate Silver is always so goddamn smart. Who does he think he is?

Rasmussen in FL

2008-07-02T09:19:00.004-05:00

All polls surveyed 500 likely voters.

A scandal to run with

2008-07-02T09:13:00.005-05:00

You can be a peace-loving freedom warrior, and, because you're a little bit of a lefty, you get thrown on the terror watch list. But support batshit crazy right-wing terrorist death squads and no one really cares. This shit is mind-boggling.

The October Protocol does not fund international terrorist organizations or support the purchase and consumption of conflict bananas.

Question for the Neighbors

2008-07-01T08:01:00.003-05:00

Is 7 a.m. really the best time to be operating your chainsaw?

A fun fact I learned today...

2008-07-01T00:19:00.009-05:00

Over the past couple days, I've been doing preliminary reporting on a couple stories relating to immigration that I'm hoping to write this summer, and I've already stumbled across some harrowing facts about our jalopy of a national immigration system.

Did you know, for instance, that citizens from any country that has seen over 50,000 people immigrate to the U.S. in the last 5 years are forbidden from taking part in our visa lottery? (There are other ways to get in, but the lottery is the only one available to people without family connections, a highly marketable skill, or a documented case for asylum).

Excluded countries include Mexico, Canada, India, China, the Philippines, Korea, Vietnam, Pakistan, Colombia, El Salvador, Jamaica, Haiti, Russia, the UK and Poland, i.e. the world's two largest countries, the entire northern hemisphere, and most of our closest allies.

WTF?

This also means that when people say Mexican construction and agricultural workers should "just get in line," they are asking them to do something that is, in many cases...impossible.

The Court Supreme and the Election

2008-06-30T12:20:00.006-05:00

In the past two weeks, the Supreme Court handed down four decisions that could affect the dynamic and rhetoric of the Obama-McCain matchup. From the landmark Second Amendment ruling in D.C. v. Heller to the less-noticed tweaking of campaign finance law in Davis v. F.E.C., all four rulings broke from the Roberts Court's recent trend and reverted back to the five-to-four, liberal-v.-conservative bloc rulings of the past. Anthony Kennedy cemented his position as the new O'Connor-ite swing vote, Nino Scalia finally got to write a binding manifesto for the conservative movement, and Samuel Alito struck a blow for millionaires everywhere.

All four decisions broke 5-4, with the liberals (Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer) opposing the conservatives (Scalia, Thomas, Roberts, Alito) and with Kennedy swinging liberal twice and conservative twice. In today's political world, of course, the candidates will probably be helped most by the decisions they opposed: nothing strengthens a call for new blood on the Court like giving rights to terrorists or declaring a sacred right to own a gun.

Protocol analysis of the decisions and their possible effects on the election below the fold.

In declining order of importance:

1. D.C. v. Heller
The decision: In a 5-4 opinion by Scalia, the Court for the first time interpreted the Second Amendment to guarantee an individual right to bear arms unlimited by the requirement of a state militia. The federal government cannot ban the ownership of any gun traditionally used for self-defense, and faces an as-yet-unspecified level of scrutiny on any restrictions it seeks to impose. Scalia carefully hedges that certain types of "unusual and dangerous" weapons may be banned, and that restrictions ownership by felons, minors, and the mentally handicapped would be allowed. For all its radical historical importance, the ruling itself is quite narrow: it explicitly leaves unaddressed the question of whether the Second Amendment is incorporated to apply against the states as well as the federal government.

The political fallout: McCain on offense, Obama on effective defense. Gun control has long been a hot button issue for the right, less so for the left. Obama's official position on gun control (stashed away in "Sportsmen" under "Additional Issues" on his website) has been consistent: he supports the individual right interpretation but leaves room for restrictions. He did say that he believed the D.C. handgun law was constitutional. McCain, despite his C+ from the NRA and staggering F- from Gun Owners of America, signed the amicus brief on Heller's behalf and has attacked Obama for flip-flopping on the issue.

Protocol Advantage?: Obama. His position was carefully tailored to blunt the impact of the decision: he knows it's political poison in these United States to oppose a Second Amendment right to bear arms. The decision will likely cement his support among those who fear a full-on right-wing Court under McCain, but his vaguely moderate gun control position won't turn off the great middle.

2. Boumediene v. Bush
The decision: In a 5-4 opinion by Kennedy, the Court held that all detainees held in Guantanamo Bay have the habeas corpus right to be informed of the charges against them and freed if evidence to support their detention is lacking. The Court, and not the Executive branch, is the final arbiter of "enemy combatant" determinations, Congressional legislation to the contrary notwithstanding. Protocol analysis here and here.

The political fallout: McCain responded cautiously at first, but then realized that Boumediene plays directly to his self-portrait as the only candidate serious about the War on "Terror" and called it "one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.” (Probably after an aide read it and found Scalia's gift: "[this decision] will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed.") Obama's statement supporting the decision hit some strong notes--"this is an important step toward reestablishing our credibility as a nation committed to the rule of law, and rejecting a false choice between fighting terrorism and respecting habeas corpus"--which were then promptly undermined by some pure bullshit: "this Administration's position is not tough on terrorism." Really?

Protocol Advantage?: McCain. The hard right, already deeply suspicious of McCain's conservative bona fides, hates Kennedy and sees Boumediene as an unconscionable act of aid and comfort to the nation's enemies. In an election where McCain's success may depend on his ability to turn out the footsoldiers, his promise to appoint more Scalias and Alitos will only seem more vital.

3. Kennedy v. Louisiana
The decision: A 5-4 Court, again led by Kennedy (no relation, we hope), struck down a Lousiana statute allowing the death penalty for child rape. Interpreting the "cruel and unusual" language of the Eighth Amendment, the Court held that the ever-changing meaning of those words currently forbids the death penalty for any crime other than murder. Civilized people rejoiced; bloodthirsty revenge-mongers groused angrily.

The political fallout: Eh. Sad to say, the American public seems to have found its consensus on the death penalty--which Justice Kennedy, with his O'Connor-esque nose for public opinion, conveniently reflected in his decision. Obama made a lurch to the center by stating his public opposition to the holding, presciently warding off any gotcha debate questions along the lines of "so if your daughters were raped, you wouldn't call for the rapist's death, what kind of fuckin man ARE YOU?"

Protocol Advantage? Wash. The death penalty just isn't an issue either side gets too worked up about anymore. Obama's triangulation on the issue leaves him well-protected from those on the right who really really want to kill child rapists (and I mean, who kinda doesn't), and the left won't abandon him over it.

4. Davis v. Federal Election Commission
The decision: In yet another 5-4 opinion, this time by Alito, the Court struck down the Millionaire's Amendment of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance act. The provision allowed the opponent of a candidate who poured his own money into a race to receive extra donations to offset the millionaire's effect. Alito's opinion, mostly on First Amendment grounds, continued the Roberts Court's gutting of McCain's pet project by holding that the government cannot interfere with money-as-speech, even in the context of a public election.

The political fallout: Not a lot. The average voter doesn't get too worked up about complicated pieces of campaign finance reform legislation, and neither McCain nor Obama probably wants to play this up much. McCain's efforts to reform campaign finance outraged the right, who saw the law as an act of rank treason against Republican interests. If the Court had upheld the provision, he might have wanted to use it to play toward the middle's widespread disgust with corrupt politicians--but what's the point in highlighting a right-wing Court's full-on dissing of his law? And Obama won't want to remind voters that McCain made his bones in the public eye largely as a maverick outsider who vowed to clean up the system--and who passed the most comprehensive campaign finance bill since Watergate. Both candidates will probably let this one lie.

Protocol Advantage? Slight McCain--any play this decision will get among voters will only remind them of McCain's credentials as a reformer. The right will be pleased that the provision was struck down, and since they already hate him for the act in the first place, they're not gonna hate him more now.

Millionaires, child molesters, gun owners, and terrorists all have their appointed roles to fill under the October Protocol.

General Bethlehem in The Times

2008-06-30T11:28:00.003-05:00

Paul Villarreal, The Protocol's favorite delusional PUMA general, is at it again, getting his name dropped in the NYT as part of a new generation of freelance dirty tricksters. The Gray Lady soft-pedals his achievements, though, calling them a "harsh series of spots that attack Obama and make some claims that have been widely debunked." He is, in fact, batshit crazy:

My adversaries rightly fear me. They constantly seek to marginalize me and they expend vast amounts of energy trying to get others to ignore me. Because my foes cannot hope to compete with me head-to-head, theirs is a sound strategy and one I have become used to over the years. I imagine Custer, similarly, had a gameplan heading into Little Bighorn. This is how I feel about my opponents' tactics. I don't concern myself much with what they do and instead focus on what I need to execute vis-a-vis my own battle plans.

The labored military metaphors, the sense of destiny and entitlement, the evidence of a somewhat sad life spent dreaming of martial glory . . . you could only make this shit up in one of the worst movies of all time:

GEN. BETHLEHEM

If he wishes to rise above mere thuggery, a military commander must be classically educated. Philosophy, history. Even a sense of the dramatic. (a beat) Do you know what I did before the war? Do you think I was in the army? I sold copying machines. I was a salesman. The talent to lead men and devise and execute a battle plan were locked away inside me. If Nathan Holn hadn't come along, I'd still be selling copying machines. Can you imagine the wasted life? Can you imagine the magnitude of it? But war... War gives men like me a chance.

What's stranger, this clown making the Times or dozens of studio executives watching The Postman and saying, yeah, that's pretty good, audiences will love it? Only The Protocol knows.

The October Protocol hands out hope like candy from its pockets.

Where the Nation-State Fails

2008-06-30T11:11:00.006-05:00

This is a map of the "top" 60 countries in Foreign Policy's Failed States Index for 2008. FP gave countries a 0-10 rating across 12 indicators of instability, with "0" indicating highly stable and "10" indicating highly unstable. Some of the indicators included Demographic Pressures, Refugees and Displaced Persons, Economy, and Human Rights. A country's final score was the aggregate of these 12 ratings. The darker green colors on the map indicate a higher final score and, thus, a greater state failure.

Click the above link for the full chart sortable by each of the 12 indicators.

A chart of the Top 10 scores after the jump:

Top 10	Failed State Score
Somalia	114.2
Sudan	113
Zimbabwe	112.5
Chad	110.9
Iraq	110.6
Dem. Rep. of Congo	106.7
Afghanistan	105.4
Cote d'Ivoire	104.6
Pakistan	103.8
Central African Rep.	103.7

Another perspective on Heller

2008-06-30T01:31:00.013-05:00

In the midst of all the hoopla, I was reminded of a beautifully written essay by Garret Keizer that appeared two years ago in Harper's (which, unfortunately, doesn't make its archives available to the ragtag viewing public).

Keizer makes the progressive argument against gun control, and, coupled with the questionable efficacy of local gun bans, it's one that I find quite convincing. A choice excerpt:

As the living embodiment of progress itself, a progressive is beyond rage, beyond "the politics of yesterday," and certainly beyond anything as retro as a gun. More than I fear fundamentalists who wish to teach religious myths in place of evolution, I fear progressives who wish to teach evolution in place of political science. Or, rather, who forget a central principle of evolutionary thought: that no species completely outgrows its origins.

Like democracy, for example. What is that creature if not the offspring of literacy and ballistics? Once a peasant can shoot down a knight, the writing is on the wall, including the writing that says, "We hold these truths to be self-evident."

...

If the Second Amendment is a dispensable anachronism in the era of school shootings, might not the First, Fourth and Fifth amendments be dispensable anachronisms during a "war on terror"?

Virginia Polls: SUSA and Rasmussen 2008

2008-06-29T13:59:00.005-05:00

Both SUSA and Rasmussen poll between 500-600 voters for each survey. Rasmussen polled likely voters in Virginia, while SUSA polled registered voters. If SUSA's more recent polls in other states are any indication, the next VA poll will also be of likely voters.

Quote of the Day

2008-06-29T01:00:00.005-05:00

With age comes wisdom:

"If I was a kid, I'd be into those shoes with wheels..." - Philip Brooks, my father.

SUSA in Ohio

2008-06-28T12:18:00.005-05:00

More exciting than Missouri, that's for sure. All polls surveyed between 527-629 voters. All were registered voter populations until the June poll which was likely voters.

SUSA in Missouri

2008-06-27T14:22:00.013-05:00

Not a whole lot of change over the course of the year. A lot depends on which way those Undecideds migrate.

(The sample size of most of the polls was between 536-562 voters. The exception is the May 18th poll which sampled 1523 voters. The first four polls surveyed registered voters and the last two surveyed likely voters.)

The Protocol will be keeping tabs on battleground state polling throughout the General Election.

This Week in Polling

2008-06-26T14:00:00.005-05:00

Last week was a tough polling week for Sen. McCain. Rasmussen reported yesterday that from 6/13 to 6/20 on the spectrum of "Safe GOP" to "Safe Dem" they moved 8 states closer to the "Safe Dem" side. (Scroll down past Balance of Power chart for the History of Changes chart.) The only state that moved toward "Safe GOP" was Colorado on 6/20 moving from "Leans Dem" to "Toss Up" and that was merely a retraction of the 6/19 move from "Toss Up" to "Leans Dem."

It's only June (I mean, the Cubs still have the best record in baseball, so we know we have a ways to go till the fall), but look for Team McCain to adopt some changes in strategy.

There is no doubt about the Balance of Power within the Protocol.

Barack Obama: So Deep Summer Tour '08

2008-06-25T20:20:00.009-05:00

According to Ben Smith, Obama will be focusing his resources on campaigning in 18 states; 14 won by Bush in 2004 (AK, CO, FL, GA, IN, IA, MO, MT, NV, NM, NC, ND, OH, and VA) and 4 won by Kerry (MI, NH, PA, and WI). Consider this a memo to McCain from the Obama campaign stating, "Our fundraising jimmy runs deep, so deep, we put the Upper West to sleep." See map below.

In the following map, the more nuanced color gradient from blue to purple to red, reflects the 2004 margins of victory in each of these 18 states. The redder states indicate a larger margin of victory for Bush in 2004. The bluer states . . . well . . . don't look too hard, there aren't any among these 18 states, would've reflected large Kerry victories, while the purple color reflects state contests that were close in 2004.

What these maps show is that Obama's sizable war chest is allowing him to reach into traditionally Republican states and, at the very, very least, force McCain to play defense.

Sure, the usual suspects are on the list (Florida, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania), and changing demographics are pulling new states into play (Colorado, Nevada, and Virginia), but Montana, Indiana, Alaska, and North Dakota, states that Bush won by 20, 21, 25, and 27% respectively, really? . . . that's just an excuse to show off.

Obama (slowly tapping steepled fingers under chin): "David, have the Intermint print me another 10 million Obamabucks, I want to play in Ketchikan."

Plouffe (face buried in Blackberry, trying to sell Florida Election Commission on idea to switch to a caucus for the General, mouths to Obama) "Consider the memo sent."

Hope you like fly fishing, and Buffalo Burgers, Sen. McCain, because Obama and his Scrooge McDuck-like money bags of "Fuck you" cash are dropping into a fly-over zone near you.

The Protocol would like you to know that today was a good day.

Boumediene Part Two: Who do ya trust?

2008-06-25T19:02:00.012-05:00

The Supreme Court held that the writ of habeas corpus applies to all the Gitmo detainees, as they are being imprisoned in territory under sovereign American control. Justices Kennedy and Scalia quibble over the meaning of sovereignty—Cuba technically “owns” the place but the U.S. practically “is the unanswerable boss of it”—but the real issue is this: who do you trust? The executive says, “trust us, Lakhdar Boumediene and his pals are wild-eyed terrorists who want to kill Americans.” Congress says, “we trust the executive to make these determinations, mostly because we’re political cowards.” The Court says, “fuck y’all, we trust ourselves.”

Scalia’s dissent is mostly spittle and spite, but his strongest argument against the decision is his invocation of the political process. In Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2004), both Breyer and Kennedy claimed that the habeas-less military trials erected by the Bush administration were unconstitutional because they lacked express Congressional approval. Boumediene challenged, and overturned, the law Congress then passed to authorize the tribunals. The Court is playing one-on-two here: overturning an interpretation of the Constitution and a system for trying alleged terrorists that was explicitly supported by the only two branches of government that represent the voice of the electorate. [Note: whether or not you agree with Boumediene is probably a function of how you view the word "alleged" in the previous sentence.]

But that’s the point. Every power system needs a failsafe, a loophole, an escape hatch—especially democracies. The politics of Boumediene will focus on the war on terror, the ruling’s implications for Osama bin Laden (if captured, would he have habeas?), and Scalia’s gift to the McCain campaign: “it will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed.” McCain seems to be banking on the idea the footsoldiers of the right will be galvanized by the ‘activist’ Court into enflaming their tepid support for his candidacy. Sure, they might. But the great middle that McCain has set his sights on seems to support giving at least habeas rights to the Gitmo detainees, and won’t be drawn to his candidacy merely because the most-respected branch of government decided to extend the basic protection of American law to a bunch of prisoners in Cuba. Whoever they trust to decide what to do with the Gitmo crowd, it sure ain't the Bush Administration.

This divide between the center and the right, and McCain’s schizophrenic attempts to court both, probably explains his initial responses:

“It obviously concerns me . . . but it is a decision the Supreme Court has made. Now we need to move forward. As you know, I always favored closing of Guantanamo Bay and I still think that we ought to do that.”

And the next day, after having apparently gotten the memo:

"The Supreme Court yesterday rendered a decision which I think is one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.”

You know who to trust.

Boumediene Part One: Who's the king around here?

2008-06-25T18:01:00.007-05:00

Last week’s Supreme Court decision in Boumediene v. Bush has enflamed the passions of both the left and the right. “Oh noes! The out-of control Court has betrayed America in her war on the Islamofascists!” cry the wingers at RedState, shaking with rage and muttering about treason and impeachment. “An all-too slim defense of the Constitution from the fascism of President Bush!”crow the Left at Kos and MyDD. Under the Protocol, as usual, neither and both.

The Bush administration argues that its decisions about who is a terrorist must be trusted. The case revolves around the so-called Algerian Six: a guy in Bosnia with Bin Laden’s phone number and five of his acquaintances. Citizens of Bosnia, they were arrested by Bosnian police after American authorities detected increased chatter following Sept. 11, 2001. The Bosnian Supreme Court ordered him released for lack of evidence; instead, the Bosnian police handed Algerian Six over to the American military, who flew them to Gitmo. The Bush administration has declared them unlawful combatants. They have demanded that the Bush administration charge them with a crime or release them.

Justice Kennedy’s long opinion asks two questions: does the writ of habeas corpus extend to non-citizens held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and if so, are the military tribunals an acceptable substitute? To find out, he narrates the evolution of the writ from a key expression of a king’s power against his rowdy nobles (“show me who you got locked up, damn it, who’s the fuckin king around here?”) to a key check on the sovereign’s power to imprison people without cause (“sorry Mr. Rumsfeld, we ain’t just gonna take your word for it”). This section is only interesting if you swoon at the mention of things like The Case of Three Spanish Sailors, (C.P. 1779). A thrill just ran up my leg.

The key question, according to Kennedy, is really this: is the U.S. “sovereign” over Gitmo? Technically, Cuba owns it, and the U.S. leases it under a 1903 agreement giving it “complete jurisdiction and control.” Traditionally, common-law habeas writs only run to the limits of the sovereign’s territory. Kennedy holds that the U.S. is the de facto sovereign, in the sense that it is answerable to no other power for its actions there. Accordingly, the writ reaches the detainees and since the military tribunals set up by the Executive (and approved by Congress) aren’t an adequate subsititute for habeas protection, Boumediene and his fellow prisoners have the right to demand habeas relief.

In contrast to Chief Justice Roberts’s calm, lawerly dissent arguing that any habeas rights the detainees might have had not been violated anyway, Justice Scalia’s opinion sputters with rage. He briefly and deftly dodges Kennedy’s argument about sovereignty—asserting that the U.S. may be sovereign over Gitmo but Gitmo is not sovereign U.S. territory—and uses that distinction to launch attacks on the motives of the majority and the consequences of the decision. Shorter version: you’re more concerned with judicial supremacy than with American lives, Tony, and this decision will take more of them.

So what now? Kennedy doesn’t really say; in fact, he punts the issue to the lower federal courts. The judicial branch has asserted its review over the Executive’s military tribunals, but Kennedy leaves it up to lower Courts to figure out the scope of the review. Last Friday, the D.C. Circuit exercised its new power and overturned a Gitmo detainee’s designation as an enemy combatant.

The October Protocol is the fuckin king around here.

Hispanic Population as % of State Population

2008-06-25T16:52:00.005-05:00

The map shows what percentage of a given state population is of Hispanic or Latino origin. The darker the shade of green the higher the percentage of Latinos in that state. The table below references the exact percentages for the top 5, and bottom 5 states. (All numbers taken from 2006 estimates.)

Top 5	Hispanic pop. as % of state pop.
New Mexico	44
California	35.9
Texas	35.7
Arizona	29.2
Nevada	24.4

Bottom 5
Kentucky	2
Mississippi	1.8
North Dakota	1.7
Vermont	1.1
Maine	1.0

AA's as percentage of state populations

2008-06-24T22:29:00.015-05:00

The map shows what percentage of a given state population is African-American. The darker the shade of green the higher the percentage of AAs in that state. The table below references the exact percentages for the top 5, bottom 5, and the two swing states with significant AA populations not in the top 5. (All numbers taken from 2006 estimates.)

Top 5	AA pop. as % of state pop.
Mississippi	37.1
Louisiana	31.7
Georgia	29.9
Maryland	29.5
South Carolina	29

Swing States
North Carolina	21.7
Virginia	19.9

Bottom 5
Maine	0.8
North Dakota	0.8
Idaho	0.7
Vermont	0.7
Montana	0.4

There is no map to the source of the Protocol.

Can the AA vote turn Georgia for Obama?

2008-06-24T11:50:00.009-05:00

Updated to include June numbers.

This line chart reflects the Obama campaign's chances of closing the gap in Georgia based solely on registering and motivating AA voters to turnout in November. The solid orange line indicates the growing number of active registered AA voters in Georgia. The dashed orange line is the projected total of active registered AA voters for each month if 20,000 new AA voters are registered each month until the election (an exceedingly optimistic figure given the trend of the last three months). The red, green, and blue lines indicate the active registered voter thresholds the Obama campaign would have to reach given each of the three turnout scenarios described to the right of the chart. As you can see the dashed orange line falls short of the 90% turnout threshold-the wildly optimistic threshold for Obama.

Roughly 2000 new AA voters were registered in Georgia in the last month, a number far below the previous months' totals and further below what the campaign was targeting. What is becoming increasingly clear in Georgia is that Obama will need a lot more than registering and motivating the AA vote to close the Bush-Kerry '04 gap. Paging Bob Barr . . .

Further explanation of the numbers provided in the chart is here.

Spending a day learning html in order to produce charts that are web-compatible is encouraged under the Protocol.

Obama and the African-American vote in Georgia.

2008-06-16T09:51:00.006-05:00

Using President Bush's margin of victory in Georgia in 04 (roughly 550,000 votes) as a baseline, and if we control for the state's population growth over the last four years (9.2%), we can project that Obama will need to close a 600,000 vote gap in November. (This projection assumes that the demographic and political identification breakdown of the increased population is similar to the demographics of the voting population in 04.)

Much has been made of the Obama campaign's voter registration drive, specifically how they are targeting African-Americans. Can the Obama campaign close the gap in Georgia solely through registering and motivating AA voters to come out in November?

The number of AA voters in the 2004 General Election was 820,101. Of that total 88%, or 721,689 AA voters, voted for Kerry and 12%, or 98,412, voted for Bush. In the 2008 Primary, 96.6% of AA primary voters voted Democratic and I would expect the percentage of AA voters voting for Obama would be closer to this 97% than the 88% that voted for Kerry. For these projections I am assuming that 95% of AA voters in November will vote for Obama. If we were to retroactively apply this 95% figure to the 2004 General, Obama running as the Democratic nominee would've received 779,095 votes or 57,407 more votes than Kerry. Additionally, these votes are migrating from the Republican candidate to Obama so they count double when applying them to the 600,000 deficit. So as a result of our prediction that Obama will receive 95% of the AA vote versus Kerry's 88%, the deficit reduces to 485,186. Based on these calculations, 1,264,282 AA voters will need to cast votes for him in November (95% of AA vote in 2004 + 485,186 additional votes), for Obama to close the gap on the strength of AA voters alone.

The most recent voter registration numbers in Georgia (6/1/08) indicate that there are 1,314,755 registered AA voters. This number is 50,473 registered voters more than the Obama campaign's target number, so it closes the rest of the deficit, right? Well, no. The chance that all AA registered voters will actually show up at the polls is slim, but what percentage will? In 2004, 70% of AA registered voters turned out. If 70% turn out in November, the Obama campaign will only reach their target number (1,264,282) if 1,901,176 AAs are registered. Is it possible to register 600,000 new AA voters by November? Recent voter registration trends indicate no. In March, 41,084 new AA voters were registered. In April, that number dipped to 18,574, and in May, it dropped further to 12,840. While these numbers are impressive they fall well short of getting the total number of AA registered active voters to 1.9 million.

A 70% AA active registered voter turnout seems a bit conservative to me. Certainly the Obama candidacy will boost AA turnout to at least 80%, which was the rate at which non-AA active registered voters turned out in 04. If 80% of AA active registered voters turn out to the polls in November, the Obama campaign would need 1,663,529 AAs registered to vote in November to reach his target number of votes (1,264,282). Is 1.66 million registered AAs plausible? There are five months until the election. If the Obama campaign registers 30,000 new AA voters per month (less than March, more than April and May respectively), that would total 150,000 additional AA registered voters. These 150,000 additional voters would bring the AA registered voter total to 1,464,755, still 200,000 voters short.

How many registered voters would the Obama campaign need if 90% of AA registered voters turned out in November - a longshot scenario for sure? He would need 1,478,692 registered voters, or about 13,000 more than he would have if 30,000 new voters were registered each month between now and November.

Keep in mind, this analysis is solely focused on the AA vote. It doesn't consider the possibility of Evangelicals sitting out (as compared to the number that voted for Bush), the Bob Barr/Ron Paul effect (Georgia had the highest percentage of Libertarian voters in 2004 when compared to the other states considered "in play" this election cycle, Barr represented Georgia's 7th Congressional District in Congress for 8 years, and Ron Paul took 3% of the primary vote.), or general disillusionment with the Republican brand. By the same token, this analysis also doesn't account for any Appalachia effect benefitting McCain, or any of the 10 commenters on hillaryis44.com that may live in Georgia.

Realistically turnout among AA active registered voters will probably be near 80%. If the Obama campaign were able to register 30,000 voters per month, then he would still need to close a gap somewhere between 150,000 and 200,000 voters. Keep an eye out for the June registration numbers in Georgia, usually reported here a few days after the month ends. As the summer numbers come in we should have a better idea of whether the Obama voter registration drive is a force to be reckoned with or merely another talking point. Perhaps the aggregate of the above-listed "effects" would close anything within that range. Either way, AA voters have an opportunity to swing a state significantly closer toward Barack Obama, and, possibly, with truly historic voter registration and turnout, could push him over the top.

The Protocol does not discriminate based on race, color or national origin, pursuant to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d.) and Bylaw XII of Protocol Inception Act (III.ii PIA 2008).

Shortlists getting shorter

2008-06-12T15:18:00.006-05:00

Lots of talk about Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal as a possible VP pick for McCain. He’s young, well-spoken, deeply Catholic, and bears a certain big-eared resemblance to another prominent minority in the Presidential race. (Not that these would be reasons McCain is considering him, of course.) In addition to being a six-month governor, he also exorcises demons! (And you know you’re in trouble when the dudes at The Corner aren’t feelin’ it . . . although reliable hack Kathryn Jean Lopez mounts a half-hearted defense.)

And in other removing-themselves-from-a-possible-McCain-administration news, it looks like one judge on the Protocol shortlist probably won’t get picked by a Republican president. If hardcore originalist Douglas Ginsburg got borked for smoking weed, what ever will they do to Alex Kozinski for posting Internet porn? While conducting an obscenity trial, no less?

There may or may not be a hidden porn page on The October Protocol.

What she gonna do?

2008-06-03T13:38:00.008-05:00

Clinton, tonight, that is. Her camp's been sending out mixed signals all day, and the campaigns's message discipline has faltered as of late. (Which makes perfect sense. When the campaign ends, Ed Rendell will still be governor of Pennsylvania and Terry McAuliffe will still be Terry McAuliffe. Harold Ickes and Howard Wolfson are losing prime shots at sick White House status points. It's not hard to guess why they're sending the signals they are.)

Under The Protocol, she's got a couple of options.

1) She concedes and endorses. Most likely to happen if his supposed cache of superdelegates collectively informs her campaign this afternoon or evening. Against the advice of the most loyal, she congratulates Obama and ends the campaign. This last detail is important--she has the Nixonesque need to believe she's making the decision alone, in the best interests of something larger, and against the advice of those who are helplessly loyal.

2) More realistically, she "acknowledges" his lead in the pledged delegate race, but holds up the fallacious parallel of her (disputed) lead in that non-metrical metric, the popular vote. "He's leading in one metric, I am in the other." This will allow her to justify suspending, instead of ending, her campaign, and her non-endorsement of Obama. Sadly, this will mean that she needs an excuse to keep going--fundraising and paying off debt and all that--so she'll probably trot out her appeal of the MI/FL decision to the Credentials Committee and suggest that she's waiting for superdelegates to stab Obama by switching to her at the last minute. (Which, of course, they are technically free to do.)

3) She ignores Obama's passing the threshold, delcares Paul "General Bethlehem" Villarreal (my nickname, not his) her new campaign manager, and declares Stage III of the campaign: All Out War. On to Denver! You'll pry this nomination from my cold dead hands! Did you know Obama is a muslim crackhead who got head from a male hooker in the back of a limousine?

Throwing the coins in accordance with Protocol guidance reveals Option 2 as most likely. It's tough to give up the dream. She'll use any argument she has, no matter how tenuous. It seems obvious to most observers that, should she continue, her chances of wresting the nomination from Obama are tiny while those of torpedoing the party are huge. But ambition and isolation work strange effects on highly public figures whose power plays work out across vast canvasses. To succeed at the level Clinton has succeeded at requires a kind of doublethink, a comfort with cognitive dissonance: you've got to convince yourself first, even if all external indications point against you. I will be the nominee.

Before Clinton concedes to Obama, she'll have to concede to herself.

Fuck the I Ching. The cosmic forces abide by The October Protocol.

CNN, I shake my fist at you

2008-05-29T14:46:00.003-05:00

I just watched a CNN story called "Oil and Terrorism" that pissed me off so much I had to go float in a tank. Apparently, The Terrorists are the sole force behind the skyrocketing prices--by attacking oil pipelines. Cross-cut images of burning oil fields, angry brown men, and ominously upticking gas price meters and you have what passes for a CNN investigative report.

Sure, terrorists attack oil pipelines. But perhaps it's slightly disingenuous to report on this without examining, maybe, I don't know, why terrorists attack pipelines? The piece managed to suggest that terrorists in Nigeria and the Middle East have basically the same reasons for disrupting the flow of oil without asking why it is that oil-rich nations in the Third World have proved such fertile ground for violent guerilla groups. Oh, and note to CNN: it undercuts your credibility to present this kind of studied ignorance ("What could possibly be the connection between oil and terrorism?") when your lead expert analyst is Stephen Leeb, the guy who wrote the book on profiting from oil instability.

Plus, bonus points for working in my two favorite oil memes: "foreign oil" and "our way of life."

Foreign oil as in "when we say the only solution is to reduce America's dependence on foreign oil, that reassures people that the problem lies not in our consumption habits, but rather in our reliance on some other damn country."

And our way of life as in "when we say this threatens our way of life, that will make people think of the Declaration of Independence, the First Amendment, apple pie, and Mom--not of SUV's, conspicuous consumption, NASCAR, and the all-hallowed place of the car in American culture."

Nice job!

The October Protocol is the connection between Oil and Terrorism.

A Love Supreme

2008-05-29T14:31:00.012-05:00

It’s more than just Coltrane’s sickest album. It’s also what I feel for the highest court in the land.

And in light of that love, it’s never too early to start handicapping the candidates’ possible SCOTUS picks!

Supreme Court appointments worm their way into political discourse in strange ways. Generally speaking, voters don’t give a shit: no politician scores huge points by talking about the least accountable branch of government. But to movement soldiers on the Right and the Left, control over the Court is the great prize. In this bizarro campaign season, when both parties are facing the possibility of revolt, partisans of the candidates are using the Court to rally the troops. Unite around Obama or turn the Court over to Scalia and Thomas! Vote for McCain or permanently lose the chance to overturn Roe!

The current age of composition of the Court makes this election particularly crucial. The liberals are older, the conservatives younger: in January 2009, Stevens will be 88, Ginsburg 75, Breyer 70, and Souter 69. Kennedy and Scalia will both be 72, Thomas 60, Alito 58, and Roberts a frisky 53. The next president will likely be able to replace Stevens, Ginsburg, and Souter (who hates being on the Court)—Breyer, Scalia, and Kennedy love being justices, and Thomas will hold on grimly until his seat is plucked from his cold, dead hands. Three seats for the November victor is a legacy worth fighting for: FDR’s picks were radically changing American jurisprudence and society for thirty years after his death, and Reagan’s might end up doing the same.

Yesterday’s NYT spotlights the differences between McCain’s and Obama’s philosophies on SCOTUS appointees. Briefly: McCain has sold his soul to the right and pledges more of Roberts and Alito; Obama wants empathy.

Of course, these handy soundbites greatly simplify things. Let’s not forget that McCain, the champion of campaign finance reform, filed an amicus brief in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life to no avail, as the two justices he claims to want to emulate effectively gutted the Court’s previous upholding of McCain-Feingold. And Obama taught law for ten years at the University of Chicago, hardly a hotbed of empathy-based jurisprudence. Campaign rhetoric is campaign rhetoric: I expect that both candidates would hew closer to the ideological center in their SCOTUS picks.

With that in mind, and without further ado, The October Protocol shortlists.

OBAMA

Sonia Sotomayor: Second Circuit (Clinton); 54 years old; appointed to the Southern District of New York by GHW Bush; would be the first Hispanic justice since Cardozo; reliably liberal; widely considered a front-runner if the Democrat wins.

Diane Wood: Seventh Circuit (Clinton); 58 years old; certified MILF; mentioned as possible pick for Kerry; more moderate than other liberal judges; academic star and respected judge; from Obama’s home circuit.

Merrick Garland: D.C. Circuit (Clinton); 56 years old; oversaw the Oklahoma City and Unabomber investigations for the Clinton DOJ; considered relatively moderate.

Deval Patrick/Jennifer Granholm: Governors of Mass. (52) and Mich. (49), respectively. Obama has floated the idea of nominating a politician in the mold of Earl Warren, former (Republican!) governor of California. Patrick was head of the Civil Rights Division in the Clinton DOJ; Granholm was the Michigan attorney general. Both have the legal chops and the real-world experience to add a shot of pragmatism to a Court made up entirely of former circuit court judges; both are also partisan Democrats, and might only add to the politicization of the Court.

Harold Koh: Dean of Yale Law School; 54 years old; clerked for Blackmun; Ass’t Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor under Clinton; respected author and essayist on human rights and international law; criticized as a partisan Democrat; intellectual heavyweight; would be first Asian-American on the Court.

Other options: Kim Wardlaw (9th Cir.); Leah Ward Sears (Georgia Supreme Court); Cass Sunstein (University of Chicago); Barrington D. Parker (2nd Cir.).

MCCAIN

Michael McConnell: Tenth Circuit (GW Bush); 53 years old; prominent Constitutional scholar; widely cited as a likely pick to replace Rehnquist; proponent of originalism; supports a Constitutional amendment banning abortion—but then again, thinks it’s the only way to do so.

Alex Kozinski: Chief Judge, Ninth Circuit (Reagan); 58 years old; distinguished essayist and legal scholar; idiosyncratic judge with a strong libertarian bent; not an ‘originalist’ like Scalia or ‘batshit crazy’ like Thomas; author of the greatest judicial line ever: “The parties are advised to chill.”

Maureen Mahoney: Appellate lawyer, Latham & Wilkins; 54 years old; deputy Solicitor General under GHW Bush; distinguished advocate; argued for the University of Michigan in favor of its affirmative action program in Grutter v. Bollinger; highly competent attorney in the mode of John Roberts.

J. Michael Luttig: General counsel for Boeing; 54 years old; star of the conservative legal movement who resigned from the Fourth Circuit for a higher-paying job (who does that?); often compared to Scalia in philosophy and temperament; clashed with Bush administration over executive prerogatives in the Jose Padilla case.

Edward Prado: Fifth Circuit (GW Bush); 61 years old; former federal public defender; touted as a moderate option to replace O’Connor; subject of a “Draft Prado” movement for a Latino Supreme Court justice not named Alberto Gonzalez.

Other options: Janice Rogers Brown (D.C. Cir.); Priscilla Owen (5th Cir.); Emilio Garza (5th Cir.); Eugene Volokh (UCLA and The Volokh Conspiracy).

And the doozy:

Richard Posner: Seventh Circuit; 69 years old; widely considered the most brilliant judge in America; immensely prolific scholar and philosopher; self-declared Pragmatist in the mode of Oliver Wendell Holmes; noted proponent of the Law & Economics school; supports both the president’s power to order torture and the legalization of soft drugs; unquestioned intellect and lack of partisan identification make him a lock never to sit on the Supreme Court.

Richard Posner is on the shortlist for Deputy Commander of East Appalachia under The October Protocol.

Maxine Waters, everybody!

2008-05-23T13:06:00.004-05:00

Oops--the Democratic congresswoman catches herself. That sound you hear is Republicans shitting themselves in indignation.

The look on Maxine Waters's face perfectly captures the effects of The October Protocol.

In which David Brooks drops the f-bomb

2008-05-23T12:19:00.007-05:00

Nothing like conservatives arguing about conservatism.

Sullivan thinks it's a pragmatic set of guiding principles, not a collection of policies or remedies. Levin approvingly quotes Burke that it's a preference for 'reform' over 'change'--where 'reform' is basically defined as change that's appropriate. Douthat agrees with Sullivan about the principles but points out that those principles don't necessarily lead directly to agreement on, um, needed policies or remedies. All are responding to George Packer's article "The Fall of Conservatism."

Nobody really remarks that Packer's article isn't actually about the fall of either big- or little-c conservatism--it's about the fall of the Republican party. He details the collapse of the three-legged stool coalition (the hawks, the market fetishists, and the Jesus freaks) and quotes a lot of terrified Republican strategists on the state of the party's brand. (Levin: "The conservative idea factory is not producing as it did." David Brooks: "Republican senators know they're fucked . . . there's a hunger for new policy ideas.") But there's little indication either from the article or from anywhere else that conservatism itself is fading--only that the Republican party has been hobbled by disasters such as Iraq and Katrina, and that voters are sick of Bushian incompetence. Voters don't want to vote out the ideology of Goldwater and Reagan, they want to vote out the clowns who brought us Brownie, Gonzalez, Rumsfeld, Rice, Harriet Miers, and four-dollar gasoline. McCain is plenty conservative; the right hates him because he's not Republican enough. If he wins in November, it will be because he manages to distance himself from the party's failures, not the ideology's.

Conservatism itself--however defined--remains a powerful idea. It's just that its connection to one party is disintegrating as voting groups shift. Whatever 'conservatism' means, it never mapped perfectly onto the hodgepodge of interests represented by the party of Karl Rove: what coherent political philosophy could unite the homophobes and the warmongers, the government-slashers and the corporate welfare queens? Rove solved that program by messaging directly to the factions and ignoring the contradictions, which is why nobody is happy.

Quibbling over semantics is grudgingly permitted under The October Protocol.

California Hearts Lesbian Pilots

2008-05-22T19:27:00.005-05:00

The Ninth Circuit has reinstated a gay Air Force Major's suit against the service for being discharged under "Don't Ask Don't Tell." I'm feelin' it.

The opinion declares that, in light of Lawrence, cases involving sexual orientation must get some level of heightened scrutiny--but not strict scrutiny. Which means that the District Court will get to make one up! I can't wait to see which adjectives they'll decide really nail down the precise meaning of what they're trying to say. "Substantial?" "Compelling?" "Exceedingly persuasive?" Ever since Brennan straight up invented that shit out of whole cloth in Craig v. Boren courts have been contorting themselves to apply "intermediate scrutiny" without making every word in the English language mean the same fucking thing.

What makes the Ninth Circuit opinion super awesome is that it lets us see just how absurd the DADT rules are. The policy states that soldiers can be canned if they "engaged in, attempted to engage in, or solicited another to engage in a homosexual act or act." Fine. Smokin' pole on the base ain't allowed. But the policy allows for lots of exceptions! Like Rule 1(a): "unless such conduct is a departure from the member's usual and customary behavior." Or 1(e): "unless the member does not have propensity or intent to engage in such acts." So, if, like, you have a totally hot one-time tribbing session with this cutie from the other squadron, but you're not really a lesbian, no sweat!

Even better is Rule 2, which says you can be booted from the service for declaring yourself gay or bi. Unless, of course, the military formally finds that you are not, actually, gay. In which case you're set, and get to stay in!

The DADT rules simply clusterfuck the whole status/conduct, identity/activity problem that everybody runs up against when the law gets involved with sexual orientation. The military's complaints about morale, unit cohesion, etc. are the purest bullshit. They can ban all the sexual activity they want on bases or on duty--I don't want the guy at the switch sneakin out for a quick one, either. But this pogrom of identities, of who you are in your own life--Maj. Witt's longterm relationship was investigated based on an anonymous tip--has gotta stop.

Getting gays into the military is Objective 234(b) of The October Protocol.

Pilar Lujan Disenfranchises Seven Voters

2008-05-22T11:12:00.007-05:00

Guam Democratic Party Chair and Superdelegate Pilar Lujan announced her support for Senator Clinton today. This announcement is a reversal or her original stated position as revealed to Micronesia's leading newspaper (since '72) the day before Guam's May 3rd Primary:

Lujan remains uncommitted because she believes that her vote should reflect the will of the majority of Democrats. However, her running mate, Paulino, has publicly endorsed Obama, according to Tenorio.
"Both Hillary and Obama represent the party ideals. As a candidate for the Democratic party chair, I will like my vote to represent the Democratic Party of Guam," Lujan said.

Obama won Guam, barely, by a count of 2264-2257, but the concept of a majority is binary - you either win one or you don't. Obama won the majority and Lujan has now reversed her previously reported position. I suppose we can forgive a Guamanian party official for failing to parse her words carefully, but in the 2008 Democratic Primary, no one escapes scrutiny.

Pilar Lujan, you are in breach of Appendix A of the Protocol.