Latest from Raising Kaine

This is pathetic:

Mere hours after Earth Day, House Republicans defeated an amendment from Gov. Tim Kaine that would have strengthened Virginia's environmental standards for new state buildings (Raising Kaine covered the details of the amendment last week).

In the video below, Del. David Toscano explains how the LEED rating system is a "much more stringent and rigorous" approach than the watered-down standards favored by Republicans. The amendment was defeated on a near party-line vote.

Here is the governor's recommendation, the final vote was 44-54 with 2 (Marsden and Shuler) not voting. Apparently, Republicans Clay Athey, William Fralin, Tim Hugo, and Bob Marshall voted yes. Democrats Johnny Joannou, Joseph Johnson, and Roslyn Tyler voted no. What the hell?

I know a lot of you don't like Robert Novak, and neither do I.  Having said that, I think when he's got his analyst hat on he's often right on the money.  For instance, I just received this:

1. Despite her impressive win in Pennsylvania, Sen. Hillary Clinton (N.Y.) still faces a very difficult path to the nomination. It is impossible for her to win more elected delegates than Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.). It is possible that she could yet win a majority of the composite popular primary vote, but probably not without tallying the outlawed Michigan and Florida votes.

I completely agree with this. For the rest of Novak's analysis, please see the "flip."
2. Clinton's more feasible path-though very difficult-is to convince the super-delegates, by winning the remaining primaries, that she has the momentum. The two most important future primaries are North Carolina and Indiana May 6, but North Carolina looks nearly impossible, considering that half of the state's 2.5 million registered voters are African-Americans.

I agree with this too.  If Clinton could somehow win North Carolina, Indiana, and let's say Oregon, I think then she'd have quite a case to make to the superdelegates.  But what are the chances of that happening?

3. That leaves Clinton with the hope that super-delegates will see Obama as a loser against Sen. John McCain (Ariz.). The attacks by her and husband Bill Clinton have been counterproductive, Obama's damage has been self-inflicted-especially the "bitter" speech in San Francisco.

I tend to agree with this as well, although it wasn't "bitter" per se but "cling" (to guns, religion, etc.) that was the comment that really hurt Obama, in my opinion. Also, the fact that he made the comments to a wealthy, liberal San Francisco audience.  The optics simply were not good at all.

4. To avoid such mistakes, Obama appears to be tamping down his rhetoric, as in his defeat statement from Evansville, Ind., that sounded like a victory statement. It also explains his backing out of a North Carolina debate. Obama would like to coast to the nomination.

Interesting if true, but I've seen what can happen when you try to "run out the clock" in basketball and other sports.  Usually, nothing good. We'll see.

5. Obama's difficulties and the prolongation of the Clinton-Obama confrontation have lifted Republicans from their slough of despondence to optimism about the presidential election. The transformation from deep pessimism to overriding optimism is such that McCain is privately warning supporters that once the nomination is decided and supporters of the losing Democratic candidate return to the fold, he will fall behind badly (though, McCain hopes, temporarily).

This is the big question: how badly damaged are the Democrats by this prolonged and bitter nomination contest, and how likely is it that the party can unite again behind its nominee once they are selected? Also, how much time will that take, and will it require a "unity ticket" with Hillary Clinton as running mate or what?  Finally, how much time does the party need to get its act together?  Can it afford to wait until late August/early September to agree on a nominee?  I have strong doubts about that.

Please help me figure this one out:

*On March 26, Jim Gilmore sent out an e-mail solicitation stating that his campaign had at least 2,000 contributors.

*On April 22 -- nearly a month later -- Gilmore's campaign told the Washington Post that it had 1,819 contributors.

So, does anybody know how the number of donors can go DOWN over time?

The debate was held at the Marco Polo Restaurant in downtown Vienna Virginia on April 10th, 2008. Tom Davis kicks it off, then the Democratic and Republican candidates (sans one) take over.

What's on your mind?  Here's what's on my mind: I'm not a big Andrew Lloyd Webber fan, but I'm even less a fan of Jason Castro singing "Memory" from Cats.  As Simon correctly pointed out last night, "It came over as a young guy being forced by your mom and dad at a wedding you didn't want to be."  Ha. :)

P.S. No, I don't watch the show, but I like to check out the YouTube videos.

Recently, there seem to have been a number of 1-line user diaries.  Please see our guidelines on that, but in short:

"No single or two-line diaries.  Diaries this short are comments."

A diary is a place to flesh out your thoughts more than you'd do in a comment. In the future, 1-line diaries will be deleted by an administrator. Thank you all for your cooperation.

Just in case you missed this, it's getting a lot of attention on the right-wing blogs -- Bill O'Reilly and National Review have linked to the story so far.  Here's a snippet of what George McGovern said the other day:

Let me tell you what I would say to John McCain: neither of us is an expert on national defense.  It's true that you went to one of the service academies but you were in the bottom of the class. It's true that you were a pilot in Vietnam, that you were shot down and spent most of the war in prison and we all sympathize with that and honor you for your courage.  But you and I both had these battle experiences, you as a Navy fighter plane, I as an army bomber. I am not going to criticize your war record and your knowledge of national security but I don't want you criticizing mine either.  

If I'd be allowed just one little dig at Senator McCain, since he gave me. I would say, 'John, you were shot down early in the war and spent most of the time in prison. I flew 35 combat missions with a 10-man crew and brought them home safely every time.'

Ouch!  Let the general election campaign begin?

I was very happy to see this article in the Washington Post this morning:

New homes built in Montgomery County would have to meet federal energy efficiency standards under innovative legislation approved yesterday by the County Council over the objections of builders who said that the mandate would drive up costs for consumers.

The measure, meant to reduce energy consumption by 15 to 30 percent, is part of a far-reaching environmental initiative. It includes property tax credits for residents who switch to renewable energy, a requirement that residents disclose utility costs when they sell a home and a plan to get county officials to trade in their government-issued sport-utility vehicles.

"We are attacking literally every source of greenhouse gas that exists and ensuring that our county and our citizens use less energy," said council member Roger Berliner (D-Potomac-Bethesda), lead sponsor of the measures and an energy lawyer.

That's great news, and exactly what other counties should be doing.  For instance, what about Fairfax County, which announced in March 2007 that it was signing on to the Sierra Club's ambitious "Cool Counties" program?  Among other things, Fairfax County pledged to "stop increasing emissions by 2010, and to achieve a 10 percent reduction every five years thereafter through to 2050."

Uh, hello?  It's 2008, and I haven't heard anything in the past year about anything that would "stop increasing emissions by 2010" in Fairfax County. Have I completely missed something here or what? I've talked to people in Fairfax County and they haven't heard of anything either.  Well, guess what, 2010 is just 1 year and 8 months away.  How's Fairfax County planning on stopping the increase in GHG emissions by then?  Or was this just feel-good "greenwashing" by Gerry Connolly and company (leading into a year in which he knew he'd be running for Congress - hmmmm....) all along?  I'm really starting to suspect that might have been the case; if it wasn't, then why haven't we seen actions like Montgomery County is taking?

By the way, not to pick on Fairfax County exclusively, but what has my own county, Arlington, been doing since it also adopted "Cool Counties" last year?  If stuff's been going on, it's certainly been vewy vewy qwiet.  Maybe everyone's off hunting...uh, money to close their massive budget deficits?

It looks like the final results in Pennsylvania will give Hillary Clinton a 10-point margin of victory, 55%-45%. How did the pollsters do in predicting this result? Not too badly, overall. Here are the last poll results and the difference from the final results:

Zogby: +10 Clinton (nailed it!)
Suffolk: +10 Clinton (nailed it!)
Insider Advantage: +7 Clinton (off by 3 points)
Strategic Vision: +7 Clinton (off by 3 points)
Quinnipiac: +7 Clinton (off by 3 points)
Zogby tracking: +6 Clinton (off by 4 points)
SurveyUSA: +6 Clinton (off by 4 points)
Mason-Dixon: +5 Clinton (off by 5 points)
LA Times-Bloomberg: +5 Clinton (off by 5 points)
ARG: +16 Clinton (off by 6 points)

As I said, not bad...except for PPP.

PPP: +3 Obama (off by a whopping 13 points!)

What happened there?  They completely missed this one, not even close.  Ee gads, how embarrassing.

Here are a few shots from this evening's event in Fairfax.  Lowell will be adding more shortly...

UPDATE by Lowell: It was an excellent event for Leslie Byrne, with about 50 people at PJ Skidoos in Fairfax and a lot of energy/enthusiasm for Leslie's candidacy.  FCDC chairman Scott Surovell introduced Chap Petersen, who talked about how people in the 11th CD need a "clean break" from the politics of Tom Davis.  According to Chap, Rep. Davis talked one way in the district but voted a very different way on Capitol Hill, just 15 miles east of Fairfax.  Now, it's time for "Clean Break Byrne," not more of Tom Davis style politics.

Leslie called herself the grassroots and the netroots candidate. She emphasized repeatedly that this is YOUR election, YOUR future on the line.  She said she wouldn't "sell you out," but would fight for better communities for you, your children and your grandchildren.  She compared the race against Gerry Connolly (without mentioning him by name) to the Donna Edwards-Al Wynn race in Maryland (where progressive Democrat Donna Edwards defeated corporate-o-crat Al Wynn in a primary a few weeks ago).  She said that if elected, she will regain her seniority and would use that to get on the transportation committee -- transportation obviously being a huge priority for the 11th CD.  She will do what's right, stand up to special interests, take on the oil companies, "pay to play," the challenge of climate change, and the need to get out of Iraq.  Overall, she clearly offered herself as the candidate of change, reform, and progressivism in the 11th CD.  Go Leslie!

On to Indiana and North Carolina.

That's the takeaway from tonight's early primary results. With 70% in, Clinton is up 54/46. The media's already calling it a "crucial" and "much-needed" win for Hillary and she'll be able to make the case that she's entitled to hang around in the race.

But the estimated delegate count remains close at 37-31. To win the nomination (not just the spin war) Hillary doesn't need close wins - she needs big ones to dramatically cut into Obama's delegate lead. She didn't get one tonight.

Interesting tidbit: On the Republican side, Ron Paul has hauled in 16%.

UPDATE by Lowell 11 pm: With 83% in, it's 55%-45% Clinton. 

UPDATE by Lowell 4/23: With 99% of precincts reporting in, it's Clinton by 10 points, 55%-45%.

This is how dedicated I am to bringing you the full picture of primary coverage: I'm watching Fox News. You're welcome.

This is the Fox News coverage team: Brit Hume, Chris Wallace, Bill Kristol, Fred Barnes and Karl Rove. I am not making this up. Oh, and Juan Williams. Fox News called it for Hillary at 8:45pm. If you wouldn't call it at 8pm, why call it at 8:45pm with just 1% of votes counted? 

This is the big debate on all networks right now: Was Obama was really trying to win Pennsylvania? Seems a little silly - if Obama had given up PA, why would he have outspent Clinton by millions of dollars?

How does it look for Obama to be in Indiana tonight? Smart move to play to future states or does it look like he's already back on his heels after an anticipated a Hillary win in PA?

At the end of the second period, Caps and Flyers now tied at 2-2. Third period will decide the series.

UPDATE 9:06pm: ABC and CNN call it for Hillary. Clinton up 54-46 with 7% in.

UPDATE 9:30pm: 18% in, Clinton up 53-47. AP exit poll:

[O]ne in 10 voting in Tuesday's primary had changed their party registration since the start of 2008 so they would be eligible to vote in the Democratic race. The contest was open only to registered Democrats. About half the party-switchers had been registered Republicans, while the rest had been unaffiliated with either party or were voting for the first time in Pennsylvania.

Most of those new Democrats were mobilized to come out for Obama, and they were nearly one-fifth of Obama's supporters. Even the former Republicans favored Obama over Clinton, largely invalidating rumors that Republicans would vote strategically in the Democratic primary in support of Clinton, hoping she would be easier to defeat in November.

UPDATE 10:03 pm by Lowell: Ugh, this is a bad night.  The Caps just lost in overtime...sigh.

UPDATE 10:06 pm by Lowell: With 51% of precincts reporting, it's Clinton 54%-Obama 46%.

UPDATE 10:20 pm by Lowell: With 66% of precincts reporting, it's Clinton 54%-Obama 46%.

 

 

 

CNN's exit polls indicate voters thought Hillary's attacks on Obama were unfair ... yet the same polls show voters who decided in the last week broke towards Hillary.

There are a couple of sites claiming to have overall exit poll results ... but as Brendan Loy points out, early overall exit polls have been wrong and skewed towards Obama.

There are reports of record high turnout ... but four years ago, the Democratic race had been over for 10 weeks when PA voted.

Did you hear all three candidates appeared on last night's WWE "Monday Night RAW" wrestling show? Here are the clips of Hillary, Obama and McCain. Who will Mean Gene Okerlund endorse?

UPDATE 7:57pm: In the other important contest of the night, the Caps and Flyers are tied at 1-1 at the end of the first.

UPDATE 8:00pm: Polls closed, CNN projects race as "very competitive," not calling the race yet.

UPDATE 8:28pm: Still no official returns. CNN continues to call the race "competitive" ... but that's different than "too close to call," don't you think?

UPDATE 8:45pm: Fox News just called it for Hillary. 

UPDATE 8:51pm: MSNBC calls it for Hillary. 

Less than six hours now until polls close in Pennsylvania. I'm not near a TV so I can't tell you what the Jack Caffertys and the Pat Buchanans are predicting ... and in no way am I upset about that.

Taking a look around the series of tubes, Kos predicts a solid Clinton win. The Politico offers five key points to watch. Pollster.com says the undecideds will decide the winner. Noam Schieber says Hillary closed well. Chris Cillizza walks through the ground rules of the expectations game.

What's the best analysis you've heard so far? Anything you've seen today that's made you change your previous primary prediction?

UPDATE by Lowell (5:22 pm): Philly.com reports "record turnout."

Gerry Connolly's Use of NOW's Logo "Disrespectful" and Misleading to Voters

Virginia NOW President Marj Signer is issuing this statement to the press today:

Candidate Gerry Connolly's use of NOW's logo in a new mailing - which states that Connolly has "always stood with women" - is disrespectful to Virginians who have fought for women's rights and misleading to voters. Virginia NOW members who have fought for the ERA and abortion rights for more than 30 years have no recollection of Connolly being publicly engaged in the women's rights movement in Northern Virginia. We are deeply concerned that voters will think Connolly has the national NOW PAC's endorsement, which he does not.  

The national NOW PAC has endorsed Leslie Byrne in the race for the Democratic nomination in the 11th Congressional District because she has championed women's rights for decades. We know that we can count on Leslie Byrne to fight for fair and equitable economic and social policies for women, men and families as a Member of Congress.

In the mailing, Connolly states he has "always fought for women's rights" and specifies those as the ERA, abortion, and pay equity. A photo showing NOW's logo and placard "Keep Abortion Legal" occupies the top third of the page. Connolly's campaign did not talk to NOW about using the photo.

We welcome Connolly's interest and support and ask that he clarify his record and his current positions so we can work together. We are particularly encouraged by the statement in the mailing that he would support a federal law to ensure abortion rights at the state level if Roe v. Wade is overturned and would like to know more about his plans to do so.

P.S. By the way, note that you read all about this on the blogs, didn't see a word about it in the Washington Post or other corporate media.  Same thing with a gazillion other important stories about Virginia politics, I'd point out.  

Whether it's health insurance, people seeing their neighbors lose their home because of the mortgage crisis, or people horrified by the seemingly neverending war in Iraq, people want change. Frank Wolf, 27 years; I don't think he's gonna bring people that change. He's told the voters of the 10th district, elect him again, he's gonna keep on failing us just as he's been. I'm running to bring about that change.

Go Judy, and let's all say "Farewell Frank!"

P.S. There's also some excellent stuff in here on rail to Dulles (how to do it right, how Frank Wolf has failed us) and on energy/environment (need carbon caps, investment in alternative energy).

The following is a DPVA press release on Jim Gilmore claiming to have wrapped up the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate. Jim Gilmore "simply does not work or play well with others."  You can say that again, Levar!

JIM GILMORE'S SUPPORT: ONLY AN INCH DEEP, AND A MILE FROM REALITY

RICHMOND - Jim Gilmore claims he has secured "a clear majority" of delegates to the May 30th Virginia Republican Convention, and a news release from the Gilmore campaign last night alleged that Republicans "are responding overwhelmingly" and his campaign has been able to "activate a state-wide organization almost overnight."

Oh r-e-a-l-l-y?

Gilmore's own finance reports filed with the FEC reveal that, in the five months since he declared his candidacy for the U.S. Senate, he has received contributions from 394 individuals.

That's right: only 394 individuals. And that's despite nearly non-stop fundraising efforts from one end of Virginia to the other, and Gilmore's frequent and hopeless trips out-of-state to shake-down GOP donors who are not savvy enough to examine Gilmore's sorry track record here in Virginia.

On the other hand, Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Mark Warner's campaign has generated enthusiastic support from more than 8,700 individual contributors who support his solid record of bipartisan, responsible leadership.

More on the "flip"
That's right: 8,700 individuals have contributed to Mark Warner's effort to bring real change to what is so obviously broken in Washington. Let's put it another way: Mark Warner has attracted enthusiastic support from more than 20 times more people than Jim Gilmore.

"What does this shallow support say about the latest desperate candidacy by Jim Gilmore -- a former state Attorney General, a failed Governor, and the fired Chairman of the Republican National Committee?" said Democratic Party of Virginia Executive Director Levar Stoney. "It reveals a widespread recognition that Mr. Gilmore simply does not work or play well with others, including majority Republicans who made the right choice to reject Gilmore's dishonesty and adjourn the 2005 General Assembly without a state budget for the first time in Virginia's proud history. Leaders of Mr. Gilmore's own party were not willing to accept Gilmore's Enron-style budget gimmicks and his pattern of fiscal irresponsibility, and they will not fund this attempt at partisan redemption today."

When he introduced his final budget as Virginia's governor, Jim Gilmore used smoke-and-mirrors -- and even delayed state income tax refunds to Virginia families -- to try to hide the true scope of a revenue downturn that was obvious to everyone. Gilmore deliberately misled Virginians when he informed his newly-elected successor, Mark Warner, and Republican leaders of the General Assembly, that the red ink only totaled about $700 million.

"What mess? There is no mess," Gilmore boasted to reporters, even as his fellow Republicans blasted and ultimately dismissed Gilmore's obvious budget gimmicks and fiscal follies.

In truth, the Gilmore deficit was more than FIVE TIMES worse than the $700 million he publicly claimed. It actually topped $3.8 Billion - and Gilmore's deficit reached $6 Billion -- and put Virginia's best-in-the-nation credit rating at risk.

Soon after Gilmore was run out of Richmond, Governor Mark Warner's spending discipline and smart government reforms turned the tide of red ink and restored Virginia's hard-earned reputation for fiscal integrity. In fact, Mark Warner's bipartisan, responsible and commonsense stewardship of taxpayer dollars resulted in Virginia being named the nation's "Best Managed State" and the "Best State for Business."

"Virginians know Mark Warner, and they trust former Governor Warner to bring people together to responsibly and honestly tackle our toughest challenges," said Stoney. "No one is buying Jim Gilmore's effort to whitewash history, or his increasingly desperate attempts to re-write his real legacy as a reckless and irresponsible fiscal failure."

Nice job by Gov. Kaine getting Virginia on board with this effort:

NEW HAVEN, Connecticut, April 18, 2008 (ENS) - Connecticut Governor M. Jodi Rell today led 20 Democrat and Republican governors from across the country in signing the Governors' Declaration on Climate Change at the 2008 Conference on Climate Change at Yale University.

The Declaration is founded on three principles. First, that a federal-state partnership is critical to success. Second, that state-based climate action plans and programs have paved the way for cost-effective reductions of greenhouse gases and they deserve continued support. And third, that rewarding and encouraging meaningful and mandatory federal and state climate action is key to combating global warming.

This may seem like feel-good showing, but that couldn't be further from the truth. One of the biggest obstacles to climate action is the perception that it's a partisan issue, successfully fed by Big Oil for business reasons and by the likes of Ralph Reed for political reasons. Bipartisan efforts like this, bringing together moderates from Tim Kaine to Kathleen Sebelius to Arnold Schwarzenegger, are critical to demonstrate that climate action isn't a matter of left or right, it's a matter of right and wrong.

Today is Earth Day, but I'm not in a celebratory mood in the least bit when it comes to the environment. To the contrary, I'm much closer to despair. And it's things like this that push me in that direction.

It is now abundantly clear that food-to-fuel mandates are leading to increased environmental damage. First, producing ethanol requires huge amounts of energy -- most of which comes from coal. Second, the production process creates a number of hazardous byproducts, and some production facilities are reportedly dumping these in local water sources.

Third, food-to-fuel mandates are helping drive up the price of agricultural staples, leading to significant changes in land use with major environmental harm. Here in the United States, farmers are pulling land out of the federal conservation program, threatening fragile habitats. Increased agricultural production also means increased fertilizer use. The National Academy of Sciences reported last month that meeting the congressional food-to-fuel mandate by 2022 would lead to a 10 to 19 percent increase in the size of the Gulf of Mexico's "dead zone" -- an area so polluted by fertilizer runoff that no aquatic life can survive there.

Most troubling, though, is that the higher food prices caused in large part by food-to-fuel mandates create incentives for global deforestation, including in the Amazon basin...

What frustrates me so greatly about all this is that WE HAVE KNOWN THESE FACTS FOR YEARS.  I personally have been warning about all of this -- plus the immorality and idiocy of burning food for fuel in a hungry world (we now see food riots and political instability growing across the world) -- for a long time.  Yet nobody seems to listen (if anything, I've been criticized -- by people who, frankly, don't know what the heck they're talking about, certainly didn't work for 17 years at the Energy Information Administration -- for "dissing" those wonderful biofuels).  

Meanwhile, in Washington DC, lobbyists from Big Agriculture -- e.g., ADM, "supermarket to the world" (what a joke) -- is busy telling clueless politicians what they want to hear, that subsidies for corn-based ethanol will give the United States "energy security" (whatever THAT is) and also reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  Neither is, in the least bit, true.  What IS true is that ethanol subsidies are a complete debacle, a huge corporate welfare program for ADM and other Big Ag companies, an environmental disaster, a national security threat, and pretty much everything that's wrong with Washington, DC in a nutshell.

So, on Earth Day, my feeling is this: we are not serious, but instead are flailing around looking for easy, technological fixes for all our problems (so quintessentially American).  But as far as corn-based ethanol is concerned, I agree 100% with Lester Brown of the Earth Policy Institute when he writes, "let us learn the appropriate lessons from this setback, and let us act quickly to mitigate the damage and set upon a new course that holds greater promise for meeting the challenges ahead."

What are the chances of that happening?  Given the power of the Big Ag lobby in Washington, DC, plus absolutely horrendous leadership from both parties on this subject, I'd say "probably not high."  Meanwhile, food riot and political instability continue to grow around the world, we damage the environment, and the price of food skyrockets.  Heckuva job, huh?  Happy Earth Day!  (snark)

Are the Washington Capitals the "comeback kids" or what? Here's what happened last night in Philadelphia.

All season, the Washington Capitals have been counted out. It happened when they started out 6-14-1. It happened when Philadelphia took a three games to one lead in the Eastern Conference quarterfinals last week, and again when the Flyers pushed them to the edge of extinction in Game 6.

Each time, though, Alex Ovechkin and his teammates have stunned their doubters -- and Monday night was no exception. The Capitals scored four straight goals -- Ovechkin notched two of them in the third period -- to win 4-2 and force a seventh and decisive game in this Eastern Conference quarterfinal series.

[...]

Tuesday night at Verizon Center, the Capitals will play the sixth Game 7 in franchise history and attempt to become only the 21st team in the history of the National Hockey League to come all the way back from a three-games-to-one deficit...

So, not only is there some primary going on tonight involving Philadelphia (and a few other places in Pennsylvania), there's also going to be a Game 7 showdown between the Washington Capitals and the Philadelphia Flyers.  Not to compare the importance of a hockey game to the primary in Pennsylvania, of course - we all know the hockey game is much more important!  Ha, just kidding.  I think. :)  Go Caps!