Thursday, July 31, 2008

Tim Kaine for (Decoy) Vice-President

Selection of a vice-president is a laborious process that requires absolute secrecy to be effective. If ones selection leaks to the press before necessary, the process could be sunk by a round of bad press stories. Therefore the helpful adage is: those who know don’t talk and those who talk don’t know. Recently, vice-presidential hopeful Governor Tim Kaine (D-VA) has been talking quite a bit. What does this mean to the process?

Despite press speculation, the vice presidential process must be coming to a close shortly. The Conventions are a month away and offer the deadline for selecting a VP. As the press gets antsy, they will begin to run cover-stories on every potential VP selection for both candidates. This could be disastrous for a campaign, because you want to control your VP candidate’s biographical story (Campaign 101: if you don’t control your message then you don’t control the outcome). If the press beats you to the punch through a tell-all biography then you may never be able to define your candidate. How then do you keep the press from running said stories? Give them someone to feast upon. Enter Tim Kaine.

The Democratic Governor of Virginia would be a great choice for Vice-President. Virginia has been, like the country as a whole, trending blue for some time. It elected Jim Webb (D) to the Senate in 2006 by a narrow margin and is likely to elect Mark Warner (former Democratic Governor) to fill retiring Republican John Warner’s (no relation) seat in 2008. The only thing Tim Kaine could do to sink his chances at becoming Vice-President are as follows: talk to the press.

Kaine must not be familiar with the strategy, because talking to the press is just what he has been doing. He was quoted by ABC News saying, "There has been a long list. It seems to be getting shorter. And I'm still being mentioned. A lot can change day-to-day. But we'll see." He was quoted by NBC News saying, "It's nice to be speculated about." Then he did a brief tour on the press circuit stopping at the Charlie Rose Show. He was even quoted saying, ""It's flattering to be mentioned. My mom loves it. I still think it's more likely that he'll go in another direction. I don't spend a lot of time thinking about it." While Kaine would still be a great VP candidate, see this Wall Street Journal article, his undisciplined talking to the press has to raise questions inside the Obama campaign. Unless there is another option to explain it all.

Here is a theory: Tim Kaine is being used by the Obama campaign as a decoy candidate. If the press continues to cover Kaine with as much frequency as they are then the Obama campaign is spared the potentially damaging press stories on other candidates under consideration. This allows the Obama camp breathing room to vet their short list. Kaine can still benefit from this role as his national profile is rising dramatically. The press is running stories on his record and what he would bring to the ticket. This could possibly even set up Kaine’s own run at the presidency in the future.

This is not necessarily the case, rather, Kaine may have stepped into this role voluntarily. This is unlikely because Kaine served as a National Co-Chairman of the Obama campaign during the primaries. He knows what he is doing (doesn't he?) Regardless, the Obama camp can thank him for this service while they do background checks on Gov. Kathleen Sibelius (KS), Senator Evan Bayh (IN), and other candidates. I do believe that Kaine ruined his own chance by speaking out, even as he is raising his profile.

As Kaine does the speaking circuit, the Obama campaign is running at submarine depth to avoid detection. Regardless of whom, we will know of Obama’s (and McCain’s) decision – the biggest of their careers - in the next couple of weeks.

- Wyatt

Q&A: Obama's world tour

Q: Barack Obama recently embarked on a trip of Europe and the Middle East. What role does world opinion have on the U.S. presidential election? And, if we can discern so, what is the nature of that global opinion at the moment and does Obama increase his popularity by traveling overseas?

A: This question is really a can of worms because so much affects the US presidential elections that it is very difficult to measure one thing and determine its influence. That being said, a lot has become apparent during Barack Obama’s tour abroad that can be used as an example towards an answer. Based on the public response to his speech in Berlin and the response from foreign leaders to his Iraq plan, it is clear that Obama has rather positive backing abroad, specifically in Europe. To many foreigners Obama represents a fresh, international-minded leader. However, many times what rallies Americans most are not promises to mend friendships abroad or calls for cooperation, but an improved economic situation at home. Whenever evaluating the success of a campaign event it is always important to remember this broad perspective and ask the following question. How do these actions promise to better the lives of the majority of Americans?

Barack Obama has skillfully crafted himself into an internationalist. From his mixed background to his pronunciation of Pakistan, Obama’s campaign moves away from the ultra-American image of the Bush administration, much to the pleasure of foreigners. A recent editorial in the Spanish newspaper El PaĆ­s accurately reflected the view of many Europeans about the prospect of an Obama led Whitehouse.

“There are no doubts about his energy, his contagious truth with which his government will be able to overcome recent adversities. However it is clear that the medusas of power in Washington, which have festered for decades, will meet him with a corrupting strategy, unhappy to see their interests ignored.”


It is clear that many Europeans are hopeful that Obama can bring positive change to the world, but still doubt his effectiveness in the face of the corptocracy.

What is not clear is whether the optimism about Obama in foreign countries translates to positive influence in the US. If Obama relies too much on foreign support he leaves himself open to attacks that he ignores middle class American concerns. We have already witnessed the success of such an attack against the failed administration of Jimmy Carter, later resulting in the sharp decline of the influence of the Democratic Party in the US government. Originally running on a platform of lofty, worldly goals such as human rights, Carter was unable to reverse the economic crisis in the US, the largest problem facing middle class Americans at the time. Such mistakes by democrats during the 1970’s allowed conservatives to craft the elitist image of the Limousine Democrat, a perspective that still exists today, and fundamentally shift the political power in the United States in their favor.

Today, Americans continue to place American problems over global issues. A June 2008 Gallop poll found that the majority of Americans prefer “a candidate whose greatest strength is fixing the economy (56%) rather than one whose greatest strength is protecting the country from terrorism (39%).” From this perspective, too much time and success abroad is a risk for Obama.

Obama has seen unprecedented success during his current trip. The backing of his Iraq plan from Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and positive support from Jordan and various European nations have badly damaged McCain’s war position. Obama is leading in the voter polls and has seemingly displayed his capability to bridge international differences, improve the perception of the United States abroad and bring troops home. However, let us examine our original question. How do these actions promise to better the lives of the majority of Americans? In the face of a weakened dollar, rising oil prices and unaffordable health care, I have to say not very much.

-Tait

Stay tuned for more on this topic.

Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Welcome, friend

This blog was birthed to create a place to mash topics about America's pastime and America's engine. We'll serve different roles on this blog, between discussing the topics we know and asking questions about the ones we don't. On this magical tour, I'll be guiding you through the baseball world while my counterparts will separately tackle politics and 'junk'. Part blog and part Q&A, it's not your average blog. Okay, maybe it is.

I've realized that the Extra Innings package is crack to the already baseball addled mind. The ability to flip back and forth between games with the greatest of ease increases my baseball ADD. But in an enjoyable way.

But all this does is give me the option to either enjoy the best game of the night (in this case, Cubs/Brewers) or feed my fantasy baseball addiction. But that's for another day. Tonight, the Cubs are in line to stretch their lead to four games over the Brew Crew. The games have had a playoff atmosphere and good pitching matchups (although Dempster v Parra isn't the crown jewel of the evening) but these are teams with vastly different profiles. Let's explore together.

Looking behind the won loss record, the Cubs have been the far superior team. They currently have a +118 run differential (runs scores minus runs against) which is the best in the National League by 48 runs. I don't need to tell you; that's silly. The Brewers on the other hand have a +22 run differential. Hmm. It's a simplified way of looking at their results, but baseball prospectus puts the Cubs odds at winning the division at 73%, largely based on their ability to put runs across the plate and keep opponents off the board. The Brewers odds to win the division are 21% (but with 44% odds to claim the wild card).