Monday's Notes

Mainly notes today, but info of use and interest:

1) Re: Sinclair airing 1 hour swift-boat vets anti-kerry video. Since contacting Sinclair's advertisers appears to be working (advertisers are starting to pull out of Sinclair stations), we should keep up the pressure. Monday's New York Times Article on the effect.


UPDATE: The link for Sinclair advertisers I gave last time is no longer up. That's because they've now made a SUPER-EASY email page, where you write your own or use their template and it gets sent to ALL THE ADVERTISERS!!! Please forward this link around:
http://www.grassrootsnation.com/sinclair/

And remember, sell any Sinclair Broadcasting Group (SBGI) stock you have (and tell your mutual funds to do so also). The stock is falling!


2) LINKS OF INTEREST

ANOTHER ELECTORAL VOTE SITE - as detailed as electoral-vote.com but much prettier and has additional information such as "Will Nader be on this state's ballot?" etc.
http://race2004.net/

JON STEWART ON CNN'S CROSSFIRE (Quicktime Video). I previously hailed Jon Stewart as a god. Where can I go from there? In his Crossfire appearence, he was NOT FUNNY AT ALL. He was deadly serious. Though he did call Tucker Carlson a d**k. See Jon SLAM the news media!


NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE on Bush. Wow. I've only read part of it but... scary scary man. PASS the link around!


3) On polls and visiting polling sites.
DO NOT SWEAT THE POLL SITES!

For example, on electoral-vote.com, if there are 3 polls for a state taken during the same period, regardless of if they are independant, republican, or democrat run, he only picks one, based on the middle-date of the poll. So early last week, there was a strong Bush win in OH on that map. This poll was from a GOP firm, that ALWAYS skews to Bush, from Oct 11. 2 other polls showed a Kerry win but were not included since the GOP poll was 1 day more recent. Those other polls simply disappear.

I've already gone through my panic days with these polls. I don't worry about it so much now, cuz it keeps flipping around every few days. Consistent trends are the most important thing.
Also Gallup is at it again. While 5 other major national polls for the same exact dates all show statistical ties (within the margin of error) Gallup puts Bush up 8 points. Gallup is just a mess, since among registered voters they show a tie, but they altered their Likely Voter model yet again to make it a big Bush win. No other organization is doing this.

http://2.004k.com/national/
http://2.004k.com/tracking/

BOTTOM LINE: The bottom line reccomendation is to work the campaign like you were 8 points down (very doable but requires ground work).

Scott

"All your debates are belong to us"

Quick Summary before work:

In a way, I'm actually impressed with people. I was willing to say that it wasn't so bad for Bush, in terms of delivery and style. On content it was horrid, IMO. But, actually, the outside world apparently thinks less of Bush's performance than I do.

Bush's main point in debate #3 seemed to be: "You are all losing jobs overseas because you're dumb and need a better education." He never answered the jobs question, always switched to education.

Kerry was ended up on top for debate #3.
Even the "pundits" agree.
Even the polls agree:


Early post-deabte polls (real ones, not internet ones - Kerry REALLY won big there, but not "scientific")

Kerry Bush
CBS 39% 25% (200 "undecideds")
ABC 42% 41% (38% GOP, 30% DEM)
CNN 52% 39% (36% GOP, 36% DEM)

Even the close one is actually GOP heavy. Real voting has always been at least even or Dem heavy.

On any claims of Kerry "exaaageerating":

We have already destroyed Bush on the Osama comment. The press appears to be latching on to this most obvious lie.

The only worry is the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) statement. It sounded like the only Kerry comment that could essentially be called incorrect....

But:

From the head of the CBC, in 2003:

"...the CBC's requests for meetings with [the Bush administration] have gone unanswered for more than two-and-one-half years..."


From MSNBC:

"Bush did meet with the Congressional Black Caucus during his first two weeks in office — on Jan. 31, 2001 — but Kerry's overall charge was correct: Bush has repeatedly turned down requests to meet with the group since then. Caucus members have complained that not only has Bush refused to meet with them on specific issues, including his plans to attack Iraq, but also the White House often has not even responded to their letters. Bush dropped by a meeting that national security adviser Condoleezza Rice had with the caucus earlier this year."

There was one meeting more recently, when the CBC essentially invaded the White House to demand a meeting right then and there.

OK...Gotta go...till later.

Conservative Network to air Anti-Kerry Film just before election

I go away canvassing in Ohio for a weekend and look what happens:

LA Times article here.

Petition is here:
http://www.stopsinclair.org/
(only been up a few days and over 13,000 have signed)

"The conservative-leaning Sinclair Broadcast Group, whose television outlets reach nearly a quarter of the nation's homes with TV, is ordering its stations to preempt regular programming just days before the Nov. 2 election to air a film that attacks Sen. John F. Kerry's activism against the Vietnam War"

"Sinclair has told its stations — many of them in political swing states such as Ohio and Florida — to air "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal," sources said."

This film was created by, guess who?

Swift Vets and POWs For Truth. The new and expanded Swift Vets for "Truth". This GOP partisan organization is DIRECTLY TIED TO THE BUSH campaign. And every claim they have made to date has been proven as a lie. Every claim. Proven as a lie - either by non-partisan FactCheck.org or the US NAVY itself.

http://www.stopsinclair.org/

(By the way, Sinclair was last in the news when they refused to honor the (then) 700+ killed US soldiers in Iraq by pre-empting a Nightline show listing all of our fallen men and women. Nice guys.)

THAT'S how a REAL liar LIES!

Cheney to Bush: "See, my boy, THAT'S how a REAL liar LIES!"

You can go to factcheck.COM, as Cheney said, if you'd like but... (that's an easy slipup to make)
However, please DO go to the site Cheney meant us to see:

www.factcheck.org

where most of the mangled facts from this debate are indeed covered today.
(Silly fact, Cheney personally met Edwards at least two times before tonight)

But, the most evil lie was made by Cheney:

From today's Washington Post:

Early in the debate, Cheney snapped at Edwards, "The senator has got his facts wrong. I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11." But in numerous interviews, Cheney has skated close to the line in ways that may have certainly left that impression on viewers, usually when he cited the possibility that Mohamed Atta, one of the hijackers on Sept. 11, 2001, met with an Iraqi official -- even after that theory was largely discredited.

The Post cites 3 examples, just a random sample only from interviews on "Meet the Press":

12/9/01: "it's been pretty well confirmed that [Atta] did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack." (Meet the Press)

9/8/02: Atta "did apparently travel to Prague. . . . We have reporting that places him in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer a few months before the attacks on the World Trade Center." (Meet the Press).

2003: Cheney described Iraq as part of "the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

gave it a rest.

I gave writing a rest while I concentrated on other things... Though I did send off two different Letters to the Editor following the debate. Since the chance of one getting published is just about zero, I'll paste them here:

Sen. Kerry will make America more secure.

Now the nation has seen the next President of the United States in action.
Senator John Kerry spoke forcefully and clearly in last night's debate against President Bush.
John Kerry stated he would resolutely defend us against all enemies and would do so making the right choices. Senator Kerry said, consistently, that President Bush's choice to invade Iraq was a colossal error in the War on Terror and that the President's choices were all wrong. Senator Kerry said he has a clear plan for dealing with Iraq while the President had no plan at all. President Bush could defend none of these accusations. Our security lies with a new President, John Kerry.

I followed it up with an attack letter:

Bad commanders should be given desk jobs.

In the debate on September 30th, President Bush was visibly furious that someone could openly – and to his face - question his ability as Commander-in-Chief of the United States. It looked like he felt his sole reason for continuing to be Commander of the US Armed Forces is that he already has the job. How could we possibly change commanders? The President does not seem to realize that when wiser minds prevail in wartime, commanders who show colossal errors in judgment and general incompetence in war – as President Bush has - are routinely removed from battle command. They are given desk jobs pushing pencils, so they can no longer harm anybody. It is time for all of us to show similar wisdom.

What a Difference a Debate Makes...

What a Difference a Debate Makes...one and a half little hours.

I probably don't need to comment on the debate - except that it confirms everything about Kerry's abilities that I've learned over the past 5 months.

The early result, Newsweek poll:

Kerry 47% Bush 45% (with Nader)
Kerry 49% Bush 46% (without Nader)
(Previous Poll K: 45% B: 50%)

Of course, buyer beware, as always. Who knows how this poll was weighted. I am more cautious about believing any poll now, after seeing the Gallup fiasco.

Anyway, it's good press.

[update]
Gallup now has Kerry and Bush tied 49% - 49%. That's a gain of 8 points from their last poll even with their skewed polling methods. Or maybe they fixed their methods.

Anyway, the important thing is it's good press momentum.

News Analysis - Kerry's Iraq views 100% consistent

An analysis by the San Fran Chronicle anylizes all of Kerry's comments on Iraq:

[A]n examination of Kerry's words in more than 200 speeches and statements, comments during candidate forums and answers to reporters' questions does not support the accusation [of flip-flopping]. As foreign policy emerged as a dominant issue in the Democratic primaries and later in the general election, Kerry clung to a nuanced, middle-of-the road -- yet largely consistent -- approach to Iraq ...

[T]aken as a whole, Kerry has offered the same message ever since talk of attacking Iraq became a national conversation more than two years ago.

Which echoes what I wrote in a Letter to the Editor (who knows if it will get accepted):

John Kerry has had one single stance on Iraq: To insure inspections found
any remaining threats to the United States, we should talk tough and carry a
loaded gun.
In his 2002 vote, he handed President Bush the gun and bullets.
He insisted the President fire only if Saddam rebuffed our inspectors. And
only if our strong allies were ready to join in the gunfight.
If the president failed that, Sen. Kerry said he would "be among the first
to speak out."
The President aborted a successful inspection regime.
The President drove our most powerful allies, along with their guns, away.
The President was given a loaded gun and the President misfired, over and
over.
Now our troops suffer for this incompetence.
As he promised, John Kerry has spoken out, again and again, one simple
message:
If you are going to go to war, do it right.
In Iraq, Bush has done everything wrong.