Politically Purple

I haven’t posted very much recently. I think it is because I got a little burned out on the politics. Sure, I still devour any news that comes out… but I have been keeping an arms length at what has been going on. Call it the Doldrums of Summer… call it Laziness… but I apologize.

 So, over the last month, we have seen this basic story thread. The McCain campaign (I don’t believe that John has control over his own campaign anymore, but that is another post) says or does something completely outlandish. The MSM responds by going crazy, talking about it because… shit, what else do they have to talk about? The Obama Campaign responds back in some way. *Rinse, and Repeat*

 What that has left us with is a situation were polls are stagnanted (+2 - +6 for Obama), and Obama leading in almost all of the truely swing states (PA, OH, MI, CO, NM, WI, MN, IA) and close in others (MT, NV, VA, NC, FL, AK, ND). Obama is trying to look presidential, McCain calls him arrogant.

 I hope McCain’s campaign can bring in their A game after the Conventions, because seriously… I will get to that in a moment.

A Prominent GOP strategist who occasionally works on the McCain Campaign provided these words on the news that Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki has in effect endorsed Obama’s plan for a phased withdrawl of troops within 16 months of a new administration. (link)

This is further inflamed by the a White House Staffer accidently sending the story (which was in Der Spiegel) to the media when they met to send it to internal staff.

The issue with all of this is that it completes a week where events in Afghanistan is heating up, bolstering Obama’s stance onAfghanistan is where we should be focused as well as the change in stance with talking with Iran at all… again, beginning to fall into line with what Obama has been speaking about for over a year.

The McCain campaign has not replied to either the Al-Maliki comments, or the Obama campaigns statement coming out later in the day.

All this, and Obama is traveling the world to bolster his foriegn policy cred… it is almost as if the Bush Administration and the Iraqi leadership are working for an Obama Win in November.

This. Is. Huge. No matter what your stripes are on the candidate, the move to Invesco Stadium, Home of the Denver Broncos, seating 75,000 people, to give the acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention is balsy, and begs a response for the Republican National Convention a few days later.

Obama, by doing this, will pack the stadium with 75,000+ (oh, you know there will be plus) will show the vitality, the drive, and the immense size of his candidacy. This speech will echo for days in the Colorado skies as he jumps into the final strech of the race. Then, a week later, McCain will accept his nomination, but the comparrison will be great, and it will be made by everyone. Imagine the Green Screen, “That’s not change you can believe in” speech McCain made, compare it to Obama Speech made later that night… and then imagine the gulf between the two of them come August.

 The GOP better come up with something, and quickly, in order to counter punch this development.

Tomorrow will mark 4 months until the Presidential General Election. And with this milestone, we start looking at polls a little more seriously now. Why now? Why July?

Polls start to matter in July because they will, now, begin to seriously shape how the campaigns will spend their money. A poll in July is not a Hypothetical “If Barack were to win the nomination,” we have had a month to get used to him being the Candidate, and these numbers reflect that. What does this mean for the McCain? What this poll doesn’t say is that Obama will win Montana. It is still a long shot (at this point) to expect Obama to steal the state from McCain, but with obama spending resources there in the state… it will force McCain and the RNC to play defense.

Lets look at Obama two ad buys in the last month. He has aired his commericials in 18 states, and they include: Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, Georgia, and Indiana. They also have it airing in Colorado, Ohio, Florida, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, New Mexico, and Virginia… all agreed to be the new Swing states of 2008.

All of the states I have put forward (13 of the 18) are in States the GOP won in 2004. This means that Obama is playing heavy offense in order to secure his 270 ECV’s.

 This means that McCain’s campaign must answer back, or risk further erosion of support in this 13 states which represent 140 ECV’s. So far, McCain has only bought ads in Ohio. And has gone on the offensive in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. All three states states McCain is going on the attack with are states that Obama is already playing Defense. (New Hampshire and Iowa are the last ones rounding out the states that Obama is currently buying time with and is considered to be defending).

How long will the McCain camp wait to respond to the two ads Obama has put out in the political hinterlands? After seeing the Rasmussen Montana poll having Obama up by 5%, a Survey USA poll showing Obama up by 1-2% in Indiana, and Obama maintaining leads in Virginia, Colorado, and New Mexico. (which added together would equal 41 ECV’s), McCain cannot remain silent or risk losing by landslide proportions.

 July is when you decide what the playing field is going to be. Obama wants 18-25 states in play, McCain wants 12-15 states in play. If McCain decides to ignore the states Obama targets, it could seal his fate. If he tries to match Obama with ad buys in 25 states, it may spread his resources too thin.

it is a catch 22 for the McCain campaign, and will need to rely on other measure to even the playing field.

According to TMP (link), the Obama campaign is planning for the candidate to visit Alaska later this summer. Saying:

“That is the plan — we are pretty sure he’s going to come at the end of the summer,” Obama’s new Alaska state director, Kat Pustay, told the paper [Anchorage Daily News].”

Yes, that Alaska.

Why is Obama setting his sights on Alaska of all places? First, the latest polling from Rassmussen has McCain up by only 4% points in the state. Obama is pulling 41% of the vote…  that is is compared to Kerry’s 36% in 04, and Gore’s 28% in 2000.  Second, Alaksa has a wide and surprisingly diverse population. Third, it is a young state, both in terms of being a state, and is the third youngest state when it comes to median At (32.3 years old).

Lastly, and maybe most importantly, is Bob Barr. The Alaska Caucus in the Primary only gave McCain 15% of the vote, and even Ron Paul recieved more votes than McCain. Bob Barr is expected to poll somewhat better than average. Nader took 10% of the vote in 2000, Perot got 28% of the vote in 1992. If a conservative third party candidate truely makes a move, it could hurt McCain enough to give Obama the win in that state (Georgia is the only other state where that scenario could take place).

 So Obama has begun contesting the state by sending paid staff there, took out an ad in the state, and now it seems, making a campaing stop in the state.

Fun fact… the last time a Presidential Candidate to visit Alaska during the election was Richard Nixon.

Yesterday, a quote attributed to John McCain’s senior Advisor Charlie Black came out where he says that a Terrorist attack on US soil would definitely help McCain.  Here is the full quote:

 We saw how that might play out early in the campaign, when one good scare, one timely reminder of the chaos lurking in the world, probably saved McCain in New Hampshire, a state he had to win to save his candidacy - this according to McCain’s chief strategist, Charlie Black. The assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December was an “unfortunate event,” says Black. “But his knowledge and ability to talk about it reemphasized that this is the guy who’s ready to be Commander-in-Chief. And it helped us.” As would, Black concedes with startling candor after we raise the issue, another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. “Certainly it would be a big advantage to him,” says Black. (link)

The McCain campaign quickly sent out released distancing itself from the quote, followed up by an apology by Black himself for the quote, saying:

“I deeply regret the comments — they were inappropriate,” Black said outside a McCain fundraiser in Fresno, Calif. today.  ” I recognize that John McCain had devoted his entire life to protecting his country and placing its security before every other consideration.” (link)

The comment was made to Fortune 500, and it is odd that, a magazine with a focus on the financial, on the economy, and the article was basically an overview of McCain Economic agenda, and it starts off with a comment about terrorist attacks. In reviewing the article, it almost seemed clumsy how they tried to tie National Security to the Economy, and while there is truth in the assesment that the economy is a national security issue, it just seemed out of place, and whether it was the McCain campaign that made that distinction or Fortune 500, I am unsure.

What is interesting however is the reaction the McCain camp made. It seemed rehearsed, timely, and coordinated. Fortune 500 has been developing this start for two weeks at the most, and Black is well beyond the stage of making freshman mistakes. The McCain camp knew this was coming, and I wonder, intentionally made the quote to cause a stir.

McCain’s perceived strength is national security.  Despite his gaffes with Sunni/Shia mix-ups and other mis-spoken remarks, he has been able to keep the veneer of a national security candidate. Any opportunity to change the discussion to national security helps him. This comment, about a terroritst attack helping McCain is the truth. The sin in this case was it was spoken out loud… and officially by a member of the campaign.

If there was a Terrorist attack on this nation this election season, it would fundamentally change the way the election would come out. No longer would oil prices, the housing market, the economy, or other domestic issues dominate the race. The new focus would be the attack, and what should America do. Obama is considered weaker on national security, and any effort he would make to pin the blame (rightfully) on the Bush Administration would be seen as politically expedient… especially after him tying Bush and McCain together for months on end. Obama would be in the position of being the leading voice of blame, and try to instill confidence in how he would react to the situation. The election campaign would stop, and in that vacuum, McCain would benefit.

The Obama campaign has started hitting back, and it is not surprising they are doing so. However, this seems to be exactly what the McCain camp wants, sifting the discussion to national security… another week where the focus is not on McCain never operating a computer, or his weaker stances on the Economy (self professed at that).

There has been a lot of talk on whether the latest polls reflect an Obama bounce since Hillary Clinton has left the race. parties of both sides can point to polls to say yes and no on whether he has substainted a credible “bounce” and not a “bump.”

 From 538.com (link), they have discerned a Obama Bounce in states Clinton won a primary in, and a bump in states that Obama won a primary in. The largest evidence has been polls coming out of Wisconsin and Minnesota, seeing a pretty even race both before and after the clinching of the nomination, and between Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Kentucky where Hillary won the primary.

Quinnipiac release three bombshells today. Three of the “Big Four” states that every candidate counts on (Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania) have Obama between 4 and 12 points ahead in polling. Florida, whose demographics have been shifting to the GOP side for over a decade, and where McCain looks like a very strong lock on the state, is showing that (for now), Obama is up by 4%, outside the margin of error.

This is huge. The last polls in Florida was from a month ago, showing McCain up 4% and 10%. This may mean that McCain will need to spend some serious cash in order to keep Florida in the red. (either that or take Charlie Crist as VP).

 The other two states (Ohio and Pennsylvania) are not as surprising, but still very noteworthy. Again, Quinnipiac’s last polling on Ohio in May had McCain up by 4%, only to have Obama leading by 6% now. The fractured primary brought new numbers to the democratic party, but now… the Clinton supporters are, by and large, coming over to Team Obama.

 Pennsylvania has been showing an Obama lead for a while, but this is the first time he has polled above 50% in the state against McCain. The poll has him leading by 12%. This is noteworthy because he lost the state in the primary, and punctuated his “Appalachia problem” and now, he is up by a very significant margin.

 What does this mean?

First, a moment of clear thinking: this is June, not October, and these polls are not going to stay like this. There will be changes.

However.

This changes the game for both sides of the campaign. For Obama, it means that they can play more offense. They will pour money into Ohio and Pennsylvania no doubt, but now, they see blood in the water in Florida, and they can go after it, and know that Pennsylvania (for now) has a slight cushion. But also keep in mind: Obama is playing the 50 state game. There are people on the ground in all 50 states, both paid staff and massive groups of volunteers. The question is not “do we send people there” it is “how many extra people do we send there?” With the volunteer base so large at the moment, Obama can use both a national campaign and a grassroots campaign at the same time. Simply getting the Floridians involved and pushing for GOTV and Voter registration…

 For McCain, this is a case of playing more defense than offense. He has a 17 state campaign going on. He is fighting for all three states, but can he pull resources from another state to shore up support in Florida and Ohio, two states he is playing defense with. Does he let Pennsylvania go? Does he rethink his strategy on the keystone state? Of course, nothing will be decided on a single poll in June, but it has to worry them. If more states start pulling away from the middle, then McCain will be forced to play defense on his endangered states, and using more money.

Speaking of money, get ready for a lot of it being spent this year. Both campaigns are now opting out of Public financing. There are serious questions on McCain’s part in his “in and out” approach to it, but with the FCC under quorum, and no hope of getting Quorum until a new president is decided…. it is almost as if the referee got knocked out during the professional wrestling match and the rules have flown out the window.

After some recent conversations, mostly about politics, I feel the need to write a bit about Gay Pride, and how the definition of Pride in 2008 has fundamentally changed since the Stonewall riots in 1969.

The Gay liberation movement (or the gay rights movement, I prefer) began in earnest on June 28, 1969. There had been people pushing for equal rights before, but Stonewall galvanized the community like none had done before. The Stonewall Inn was a gay establishment that primarily catered black and Hispanic gay men, as well as Drag Queens and Transgendered people. The NYC police raided the place, things got out of hand, and for five days, gay men, lesbians, trannies, and even some straights continues rioting the following nights.

In 1970, there were three anniversary marches in NYC, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. Originally called Gay Liberation marches, these events were held by mostly activists in the gay community. They would be serious and fun at the same time, demanding gay rights while also letting their hair down.   

But even in the 1970’s the “fun” started to outweigh the seriousness of the event. Soon, “Gay Liberation day” as many cities called it, because an excuse to dress up, not dress at all, and be as outrageous as possible in public. It was an act of defiance, saying “We’re here and you can’t shut us up!” The effect was immediate. People often recoiled at the images they saw, the Liberation, became more of a carnival of crazies.

The 1980’s saw a shift in the Parade, AIDS had left its mark, and though not completely destroying the gay male community, it did dampen the celebration. Earnest cries for the government to get involved became the rally cry for the gay pride parade.

However, the march for Pride did not stop. More and more cities started having their gay weekend, their gay pride, or even a full week devoted to the celebration. The 1990’s to today, Gay Pride has taken on a much different meaning. Now, the “fun” has almost extinguished the activist counterpart. Yes, there are groups asking for signatures, and members, yes there is free HIV testing at the events. The clarion call for safer sex still rings, but it seems hallow next to the weekend full of dance clubs nights, a wild parade where we see politicians at the front of the line, trying to get their handshaking quota filled, and get out of there before they are seen with floats of nearly naked men showering. Or the parties where drugs like crystal meth and cocaine are shared liberally. A weekend where Beer sponsors collaborate with travel sponsors, who collaborate with gay bars to hit a demographic that tends to have more disposable income.

What does Dyke march mean to us anyway? What does Silence=Death mean to today’s gay man or lesbian woman? Pride is not this great event where we all come out and share in our victories. Pride has become a commercial event which gets bigger every year, with beer, automobile, and gay wedding sponsors shilling out their wears in an attempt to get more of the coveted gay disposable income.

Pride is much more than a weekend of fun. Pride is something that must continue all year. Be proud of whom you are, and not let something like Sexual Orientation stop you from achieving your dreams, whatever they may be. As pride evolves, it looses it political significance. Pride in NYC, Chicago, Atlanta, LA, SF, Seattle, DC, or any large metro area has lost its soul. What Pride meant back in the 1970’s or the 1980’s is long gone now, replaced by a consumeristic hog that passes itself off as progress.

When I was young, living in rural America, I remember seeing the pride parades on the news. The 10 second of almost naked women and men showing their Pride for their orientation. I never understood it, I never connected to it. I thought to myself, “I am not like them.” Because I didn’t. I couldn’t (and still don’t) see myself on a float, next to naked, in a foam party atmosphere. The shots of the parade didn’t make me feel connected, it made me feel more isolated, because I couldn’t connect with a group of people I thought I had to connect with. I now know that there is so much more to gay life than shoes quick shots meant to excited and offend… but to a young, scared unsure teenage boy, it did nothing to make me feel connected to a greater community.

 I don’t see advancement of equal rights on Pride weekend, I see a marti-gras-esque party no different than Chicago’s St. Patty’s day parade, or NYC Puerto Rican Parade. In that respect, I see nothing wrong with pride, a big ol’ party, where people get drunk and have fun… but let’s not try and make it something that it isn’t, the vanguard of activism for equality rights. It does nothing of the sort.

In effect, Gay pride has no soul.

What is truly important to me, and something that should be trumpeted as progress in the fight for equal rights is Phyllis Lyon and Del Martin. Who were married in 2004 in San Francisco when Mayor Gavin Newsom defied California law and married them. Now, they will get legally married in the State of California today. Together for 55 years, these two women worked tirelessly for gays and lesbians everywhere. The simple act of announcing each other’s love for one another, and having it recognized by the state. That speaks greater volumes for me than nearly naked men on a float will ever do. Showing support for a Parade, to me, is nothing compared to the support of these two women, who sometimes loudly, but oft-times quietly helped shaped the equality argument for women and gay men alike.

So the parade, though something to have fun, and an exciting event, does not hold significant political influence any longer. In the end, it is simply a celebration, and that is ok. I don’t demand it to be anything more. Not for me, not for any presidential candidate, not for anyone. It is simply a parade and some events, and nothing more. Whatever lofty goals the parade had at its inception have long passed into myth and memory.

Over the last couple of weeks. The tone of the gay community towards Obama has taken an interesting turn. In my circle of friends, I was definitely in a minority, being an Obama supporter. Most of my friends were Clinton Supporters and a great many discussions were had. When Obama clinched the Delegates needed for the nomination on June 3rd, there was a perceptual change.

 The Clinton Gays were in shock.

One friend, who only supported Hillary Clinton, because he hates Barack Obama so much. Promptly re-registered as a Republican to show how much he hated Barack Obama. I chalk his reaction to that he was always a Republican, and would vote Republican regardless of voter registration.

A second friend, after several days, decided to vote for Obama in the general, but would withhold actually working towards that victory because of Obama’s thin resume on Gay issues.

My third friend, touting Clinton’s long association with the gay community, basically said, “Hillary has walked in gay pride parades, why not Obama? Does he not support Gay rights?”

 AARRRRRRRGGGGG!

1) To those Hillary supporters who hate Barack Obama: Hillary and Obama’s stances on issues (gay-related or not) are nearly identical. NEARLY IDENTICAL. for a Hillary supporter to say you don’t like Obama because of Issue stances are talking out of their ass.

2) Stop hiding behind this stupid idea of him not supporting the GLBT community. Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, he hasn’t walked in a gay pride parade. yah, I know Hillary has been in Gay Pride parades. BIG FREAKING DEAL. Going to a Pride Parade is not the only way to show support. Sure, in the 1980’s it took balls for a politician to walk in June with the gays and lesbians. But in 2008, it is a commerical whore-fest where you see corporate sponsors, floats with nearly naked men showering, and Dykes on bikes. The Gay Pride Parade is 1/10th activism, and 9/10’s commercial whoring/outrageous costumes.  I HATE pride parades because they mean NOTHING to today’s gay community outside of having a fun day drinking and party’ing. Their meaning has changed from those daring 1970’s and 1980’s years. It is a celebration of being gay, yes, but it is nothing more than a commercial event.

 I want to see Hillary Clinton go to a Gay Pride parade in Iowa, or Wyoming. THEN you can tell me she is doing something Brave and forward.

 Barack Obama has been for Equal rights under the law for a while, both in the Illinois Senate, and the US Senate. He helped co-sponsor ENDA in Illinois, and help get it passed. He is in support of a federal ENDA (including Transgendered people being included) . He is against Gay Marriage… but for Civil Unions, and those civil unions having every right to marriage but the word “marriage” He has spoken about Gay and lesbian issues, he has been in hostile environments talking about GLBT issues. He will not push anti-equality legislation. He wants to end Don’t ask, Don’t tell. He was against the Federal DOMA in 1996, and wants it repealed. To say that he is not for equal rights is to ignore his legislative record. To say that you will not support him for walking in a parade to me, at least, is silly.

*******************************

sigh…

What bothers me is that people forget that equality would be advanced under an Obama Administration, no matter what happens. Whether he iniates legislation, or Congress pushes it forward. It will happen. McCain will not be so progressive with GLBT rights. I will also say that Obama is not god, nor is he perfect. I want gay marriage, and he doesn’t give it to me, I have to accept that. in the grand scheme of things… he will be a more positive influence on my life, my marriage, my income, my friends who serve in Iraq, my commute, my hope in the common purpose of this nation, my community, my lifestyle.

My being gay is not the reason for supporting Obama, it is my belief that America deserves a chance to work together again for a common good, to not be divided by race, gender, sexual orientation, nationality… we are Americans, and we can achieve great things… and I think Obama is the right vehicle to start that again.

Who cares if he walks in a Gay Pride Parade, I want him going down a parade of his own, on January 20, 2009, heading for the Capitol to give the oath of Office.