Progress Illinois

An ad circulating online could be one of the nastiest slams against Barack Obama yet to surface. Run by the conservative National Campaign Fund, it attempts to blame the one-time Illinois state senator -- who supported Chicago's handgun ban and denounced the state's capital punishment procedures -- for three 2001 Chicago murders. The ad then asks: "Can a man so weak in the war on gangs be trusted in the war on terror?" (Video after the jump.)

The allegation of causality in these ads is ludicrous, to say the least. For one, the evidence that capital punishment is a deterrent to violent crime is shaky at best. And in Illinois, the state's death penalty laws were notoriously fraught, which Obama himself helped reform while in the statehouse. Thirteen people were released from death row because evidence had turned up that proved they were innocent or that their convictions had been tainted, leading to a justifiable moratorium that still stands.

Secondly, Chicago's murder rate actually declined while Obama was in Springfield, dropping from 789 homicides per 100,000 residents in 1996 to 448 in 2004. Attributing the drop to Obama's legislative efforts doesn't tell the whole story, of course; but the policies he and his colleagues pushed certainly didn't hurt.

Of course, this ad wasn't designed to present a rigorous analytic argument. It was created by Floyd Brown, the man responsible for the reprehensible "Willie Horton" ad against Michael Dukakis in 1988.

Continue reading »

Barack Obama's campaign is busy registering thousands of new voters in hopes of broadening their political base to communities generally underrepresented in electoral politics. Targeting potential Democratic voters is self-serving, sure, but nobody would argue that improving civic engagement is bad for the nation. Meanwhile, John McCain and his fellow Republican operatives would rather disenfranchise new voters, as the Wall Street Journal's Corey Dade and John D. McKinnon report:

As Barack Obama tries to draw hundreds of thousands of new voters to the polls, Republicans are beginning to scrutinize registrants' eligibility as both sides draw a major battle line over voting rights.

Republicans are moving to examine surges in voter registrations in some states. A Republican lawyers group held a national training session on election law over the weekend that included campaign attorneys for Sen. John McCain and other Republican leaders. One session discussed how party operatives can identify and respond to instances of voter fraud.

Republicans are said to be targeting the voter rolls in the battleground states of Virginia and Pennsylvania, despite no evidence of widespread fraud so far.

Continue reading »

Despite evidence suggesting no major fissure exists, the media is doing its best to keep the conflict between ardent supporters of Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama in the news. Today in The Hill, for example, Bob Cusack reports on disenchanted Democrats who are planning rallies at the Democratic convention in Denver in support of the New York Senator. Yesterday, Daily Herald opinion page editor David Beery jumped into the fray as well:

Eighteen million strong, Hillary Clinton backers have a choice to make as the Democratic convention nears in late August.

Switch allegiance to Barack Obama -- as some have and more undoubtedly will -- and leave Denver as a unified party. Or, keep flirting with the idea of turning their support to the relative moderate on the other side of the ballot: Republican John McCain.

McCain a "relative moderate"? As compared to whom? George Bush, whose polices he has parroted for years? The Christian right, who McCain has bent over backwards to attract? Or maybe Barack Obama, whose stances on the war, health care, and the environment are supported by most Americans?

The PUMA phenomenon is heightened by Berry's characterization of McCain, which reinforces the idea that the Arizona Republican represents a sensible alternative for moderate voters -- even though he's drifted well to the right of the American mainstream on crucial issues facing the country. Whether it's the war, taxes, or his pitiful record on abortion rights (he has voted with the anti-abortion camp in 125 of 130 relevant votes), McCain is no "moderate." Indeed, VoteView ranked him as the eight most conservative member of the 110th Congress.

Still don't believe us? McCain himself acknowledges his conservative bondafides. During a February 7 speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference, McCain said he is "proud to be a conservative" and that his "record in public office taken as a whole is the record of a mainstream conservative."

While polls make for fun tea leaves, we at Progress Illinois have been really interested in the ground game this election cycle. The media can bloviate all they want about vice presidential picks or which ads are most effective, but elections are usually won in the trenches, where activists drum up support for their candidates and turn people out to the polls. Barack Obama bought into this theory and organized his way past the Democratic front-runners in the primaries. This November, he might just do it again.

This weekend post by FiveThirtyEight's Nate Silver illustrates Obama's advantage. Silver compiled a comprehensive estimate of the number of field offices each campaign presently has open in each state and Obama edges John McCain by a massive three-to-one margin: 336-101. The state-by-state analysis is even more shocking:

McCain, who has spent almost nothing on advertising in Florida, is instead very heavily invested on the ground there with 35 offices, perhaps reflecting the fact that Florida has one of the nation's best and most effective state Republican party operations. The other states where McCain has multiple offices open are: Michigan (11), Ohio (9), Minnesota (7), Missouri (7), Wisconsin (6), Virginia (6), Iowa (6) and New Hampshire (3). By contrast, the McCain campaign has just one office open in key states like Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and (somewhat shockingly) Pennsylvania, and no offices open in some second-tier swing states like Indiana and Montana.

Continue reading »

Well, it was bound to happen sooner or later. In fact, Mark Schmitt wrote in May that it was the Republican's "single alternative." Now, after hiring a cavalcade of Rove disciples, John McCain has finally descended into the murky world of "identity politics." With his infamous Britney/Paris ad and the accusation that Obama played the "race card," the GOP campaign has taken to stressing that Obama simply isn't fit to lead this country. He's too cosmopolitan, too out of touch, too divorced from "our experiences," and just too black. New York Magazine's John Heilemann has more:

The racial undertones of this assault are subtle but undeniable, as Obama himself suggested when he asserted last week that his opponents are trying to make voters “scared” of him because he “doesn’t look like the other presidents on the currency.” They’re most glaring in “Troops,” which features footage of Obama sinking a three-pointer in Kuwait, despite the fact that the shot took place at a military base, which undermines the ad’s argument. But the spot’s deeper aim is to foster an unconscious simile: Obama as a blinged-up, camera-hungry, NBA shooting guard, Allen Iverson with a Harvard Law degree. Am I reaching? Consider this: Would the ad have featured footage of Obama on a golf course draining a hole-in-one? “No, it wouldn’t,” laughs a GOP media savant. “The racial angle is the first thing I thought of when I saw that ad. It fits into the celebrity stuff, too.” (For McCain, that impolitic, pro-Obama Ludacris track was manna from hip-hop heaven.)

Heilmann quotes some unnamed Democrats who are chomping at the bit to fight back. Obama's response show's “shades of Swift Boat,” one organizer says. But as The American Prospect's Adam Serwer points out in his smart analysis of McCain's new approach, Obama's race and his hope-based narrative place him in a very tenuous position. Many white people see his campaign as proof that these types of racism no longer exist.

Continue reading »

In a big speech on judicial appointments this past May, John McCain joined fellow conservatives in decrying "activist judges," the left-leaning boogeymen who allegedly decide cases based on their personal beliefs rather than the law. Of course, in the mind of the right-wing, politically-motivated jurisprudence is the sole province of the left. Conservatives, or "strict constructionists" as they like to be called, would never "legislate from the bench."

Not so fast, says University of Chicago law professor Cass Sunstein. In a study of over 20,000 court decisions, Sunstein found that the right boasts their fair share of activists, too. Among the Supreme Court justices most likely to strike down decisions by federal agencies, conservatives Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas top the list, only upholding agency decisions in 52 and 54 percent of cases, respectively. Justice John Paul Stevens, at 71 percent, has the lowest percentage of the four left-leaning justices.

So what does an "activist judge" really mean? Paul Waldman explains.

Continue reading »

Yesterday, at a downtown luncheon headlined by Michelle Obama, NBC5's Carol Marin found a variety of women who strongly supported Barack Obama for president. Even Paula Wolff, a longtime aide to GOP Gov. Jim Thompson, expressed her support for him, saying it was the first time she has supported a Democratic presidential candidate "publicly." But Marin also spent some time chatting with an old friend who expressed a different view of Obama:

A few hours after leaving the "Women for Obama" luncheon, I ran into Sarah, not her real name. I've known her for a few years. A single mom, she free-lances, working as many jobs as she can to support two growing boys. She dreams of a permanent gig with benefits, but it's still just a dream.

A 37-year-old Democrat, she is also a college grad and a news junkie who has watched this campaign like a hawk. She surprised me with her anger Tuesday, saying she's voting for McCain.

To Sarah, Barack Obama is like the organic chicken at lunch. Sleek, elegant, beautifully prepared. Too cool.

Pivoting from this anecdote, Marin points out that while Obama led John McCain 55 percent to 36 percent among women in a July 15 Quinnipiac University poll, "the margin was far smaller among independent women, who preferred Obama by just three points, 45 percent to 42 percent." She also notes an AP/Yahoo News survey which "found that just 12 percent of former Clinton supporters say they are excited about Obama."

But context matters! As Frank Rich reminded us in June, John Kerry only won women voters by three points. Al Gore? Eleven points. That puts Obama's lead in stark perspective, especially considering that he holds a wider advantage among this group than either Kerry (47 to 46 percent) or Gore (50 to 41 percent) did at this stage in 2004 and 2000, respectively.

Continue reading »

In my feature on the Chicago Climate Exchange, I mentioned John McCain's tepid support for cap-and-trade -- a stance that differentiated his campaign from the Bush administration's disgraceful environmental record, even if the GOP nominee was confused about the its mechanics:

John McCain proved his environmental policy chops need tuning when he told reporters in June that he believed in a nationwide cap-and-trade system as long as it did not impose a mandatory cap. Despite the blunder, the Arizona Republican has been on record since 2003 in support of mandatory cap-and-trade and such a proposal -- requiring emissions to drop 60 percent below 1990 levels by mid-century -- sits at the center of his energy plan.

But if elected, will McCain follow through on his promise to protect the environment? Via Matt Yglesias comes this video from McCain economic adviser Steve Forbes. It's far from reassuring:

We know it's not uncommon for the 2008 version of McCain to backtrack on previous positions. But what's the cause of the McCain campaign's waffling in this case? Could a few campaign contributions from oil and gas interests -- over $1 million in the past year -- be playing a role?

It's great that the Tribune's Swamp blog is publicizing John McCain's latest lie about Iraq, in which he falsely credits America's troop surge for the "awakening" of Sunnis in Anbar province. As MSNBC's Keith Olbermann noted last night, the Anbar Awakening in fact began long before the troop increase.

But rather than directly address McCain's revision of history, the Tribune's Mark Silva decided instead to report on MSNBC's segment about McCain's lie. Indeed, Silva refers to Olbermann's statement that McCain got "the basic timeline and history of the surge entirely wrong'' as an "assertion."  And check out the headline:

Why the quotation marks? This isn't a he-said/she-said debate. McCain is wrong -- plain and simple -- and the Tribune should say so in its own words.

Below are a few links laying out why McCain's claim is flat false.

Continue reading »

John McCain says Barack Obama lacks the requisite experience to make sound judgments. It's hard to buy that theory, considering McCain has been wrong on every single decision about Iraq, particularly before 2003. But recently, the Arizona Republican seems to have taken a break from judging ... anything.

Chicago Public Radio highlights his Senate absenteeism:

In the past three months, Obama's missed more than 3 out of every 4 votes in the Senate. No gold star for attendance there, but Obama's numbers blow away those of his campaign rival, John McCain. The Arizona Republican hasn't cast a single Senate vote since early April, which is about 90 straight absences.

A spokesperson for McCain could not be immediately reached for comment. Obama's office stuck to its standard statement, insisting the senator balances his campaign and Senate responsibilities.

I guess we shouldn't complain. Non-votes are better than bad votes.