May 10, 2008

Should the Democratic Primary Race drag on?

Obama and HClinton Happy

I was sitting in the Qantas/American Airlines Lounge in Honolulu listening to the continual drone of CNN and the discussion of the diminishing lead in superdelegates she has (as of this post, she is down to a +2 lead). I watched Senator Obama as he stumped in Oregon, I watched Senator Clinton as she painted the end of the race and how the party will "come together and put a Democrat in the White House".

All the pundits put their own spin on the race, and I have my own. I have been a supporter of whomever I think can bring about positive change in America's Future, and my own naval gazing brought about my decision of Senator Obama from a number of paths. But, has the continuing primary battles negatively impacted the potential for the Democrats to take back the White House? I think not, and here is why:

  • First time in a long time - almost all of America participated in this primary election.
    More than anything else, the need for the campaigns to go into each state, position themselves with the local Democrats and build a relationship is the first time in my memory that Democrats were fighting for your votes, rather than expecting them.
  • Helped the 50-State Strategy
    In running almost all of the state primaries in a real race, both candidates have built up expertise in the Districts, gotten a good sense of the voter turnout, and gotten a read for the upcoming General Election. They got to build up the infrastructure and dry-test the machine with the primary contest - which is an overall good IMHO. Last time around, we had to build this infrastructure from the parts already in place and shake off the national-to-state connectivity back then. I remember watching the Broward and Florida State offices being built, deploying and redeploying talent and infrastructure at a time when it was a rush to make it to November. I was not as impressed as I have been with both the Clinton and the Obama Campaign efforts to date in various stages. Obama has truly fine-tuned their volunteer/online connectivity efforts, and it is something that I think the Repubs will have their hands full this time around.
  • Hardened Obama from Repub attacks
    With the grace and aplomb he has shown during the primary, I truly think he will be a much better candidate this time after the attacks and pressure by the strong Clinton machine. Sorry, but when you are attacked by the Repubs for eight years and loathed for the next eight years, you tend to pick up skills in defence and offense. I think the Repubs will see a different candidate this time around.

Is this a good thing?
I think so - tho I worry now about two factors:

  • McCain's time for building an infrastructure and funding
    Reading the WSJ this morning (which I know is only a mouthpiece of the Faux News Corp), there was definitely the discussion of the past three months giving McCain the ability to build his organization in the past three months. This could be a concern, but my earlier point should hopefully demonstrate the difference between a battle-tested organization and an organization "in-wait".
  • The JesusLand Coalition / 72 Hour Plan
    Last time out, we as Democrats did not find the natural connection to the standing infrastructure that is found in the church-going, Republican leaning communities. While Obama has a coalition that has been formed online and with the Black community, I worry about what is the infrastructure that we support that people in the community feel an allegiance to. When church and state combine, our needs are often met in the social realm as well. When politics is the major connection, I wonder - how will we get the supporters to dedicate themselves above and beyond? How will the social reinforcement occur?

This is a question I have been asking myself for a while - and continue to puzzle. There is a stratification of supporters and a need for connection and community. If Obama is able to play his opportunities right with the American people, then we have a winner. More to follow in the coming days.

Tags: , , ,

Posted by Sanford Dickert at 10:16 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Colin Powell's Take on Millenials

Found myself waiting int he Business Lounge of Qantas in Sydney and found this remarkable Powerpoint presentation from Colin Powell (yes, that Colin Powell).

Definitely worth a read.

Tags:

Posted by Sanford Dickert at 9:33 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

April 10, 2008

Chelsea is a woman of class...and style...

Chelsea ClintonA couple of weeks ago, I wrote up a post about my enthusiasm for Senator Obama and my "letter" to Chelsea about not choosing her Mom as my choice for the primaries. This morning, I got an eyeful from all sorts of vitriol seen in the Washington Post article on her coming into her own.

While I might be supporting Senator Obama over Senator Clinton, I have always been supportive of the Clintons, and been nothing but impressed with Chelsea. Back when she was a freshman at Stanford, she was dealing with the insanity of her father's impeachment and the stress that bore on her at that time. She handled it with aplumb and grace that women twice their age could only dream of. In her sophomore year, when she was considerate enough to join me for a lunch, we had such an easy rapport that I felt nothing but awe in this woman who could grace world leaders with a smile, endear reporters and politicians with small talk and enjoy some co-op food with a graduate student who had simply danced with her at the Viennese Ball when an opportunity arose.

And, there is a funny story about the poise this woman had even before coming to Stanford which few have heard.

When I worked for the Stanford Dance Division (doing AV work and talking lessons), I happened to be completing some work on some videos that I needed to deliver to the director of the Dance Division at that time, just before heading out to work. I remember walking down the hallway and passing two very large, black-suited men who were standing in the hallway, but I paid them no mind as I headed to the Director's Room.

I walked into the room, looking for Richard Powers, to hand him the videotapes, and watched as a young woman, who was evidentially asking questions about the program, suddenly stand up and look toward me as if I was an important person. I looked momentarily at her unknowingly and then handed the videotapes to Richard to make sure he had them for the purpose of the day. I left hastily since it was none of my concern, and as I walked down the hall, I began to realize I knew the face of the woman that stood up. Suddenly, I saw the two men, and noticed the tell-tale pig-tail in their ear and walked to one of them and asked, "Was that who I thought it was?"

The Secret Service Agent looked at me and asked, "Who do you think that was?" in a voice that left me thinking i should completely forget who was there. I said, "No one - nevermind." and headed for my car.

As I opened my car door, Richard dashed out after me and said, "Sanford - do you know who that was in Suzie's room?" And I answered, "NO - I have no idea who that was." And headed to work.

Even as a young woman looking to graduate Stillwell and seeking her own path, she was looking afar from her family - taking a program that would be far different than her family before her.

At Stanford, during Rosh Hashana, I would often see her in the Hillel's makeshift services where she was listening and learning about the Jewish faith. She was a sponge for new knowledge and a student of grace and style. As our paths have crossed in other locales, I have been nothing but astounded by her.

As a surrogate, Chelsea Clinton is a powerful advocate for her Mom and the vision her mother holds for America. Let this powerful woman support her Mom, as wives and husbands have helped other their family in the past.

You go Chelsea. Make a difference.

Posted by Sanford Dickert at 10:44 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Wha? Lieberman site wasn't hacked?

Lieberman BlamingSo, I was reading TPM today and found myself chuckling with the Federal probe completed today commenting on the fact that Lieberman's website was not hacked, rather that the takedown of the site during the day before the primary election was due to "misconfiguration". From TPM (by way of the Stanford Advocate):

A federal investigation has concluded that U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman's 2006 re-election campaign was to blame for the crash of its Web site the day before Connecticut's heated Aug. 8 Democratic primary.

The FBI office in New Haven found no evidence supporting the Lieberman campaign's allegations that supporters of primary challenger Ned Lamont of Greenwich were to blame for the Web site crash.

Lieberman, who was fighting for his political life against the anti-Iraq war candidate Lamont, implied that joe2006.com was hacked by Lamont supporters.

"The server that hosted the joe2006.com Web site failed because it was overutilized and misconfigured. There was no evidence of (an) attack," according to the e-mail.

And the shame of it all was the negative publicity and slander on Lamont Internet Director, Tim Tagaris. At least in some circles, he finds some relief.

Hey Tim, I know how you feel.

And, one comment - I think I said something to this effect back in August of 2006 where I assumed the site was overloaded based on the facts form the blogosphere. From that post:

My guess is that the server was having problems because shared servers are reknowned for having limited number of web clients to handle traffic. No amount of bandwidth can address not enough web server processes to handle the enormity of requests.

Tim - more power to you.

Posted by Sanford Dickert at 2:59 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

March 27, 2008

Obama at Cooper Union on 21st Century Market Regulation

Obama at the Great HallIt is interesting that Senator Obama came to Cooper Union this morning, especially since the event itself was not even on the schedule until Monday (four days ago, according to a source) and I later heard that he considered giving the speech on Wall Street instead of Cooper Union, but I think the choice of venue was apt after the obvious parallels I insinuated from the previous post.

I got up quite early to experience the event - showing up at 7am and finding a seat as things were beginning to occur. Volunteers were all a-bustle, security was setting up and men with strange things in their ears pervaded the space. In following up with my former post, I spoke to a number of students around me (please note that the Great Hall was designed over 100 years ago, so if you think airline seats are small....) as well as students on line getting into the event. For the students that made it into the Hall early, they were certainly part of the Millennials crowd Winograd and Hais speak of - enthusiastic about politics, enthusiastic about making a difference, part of the civic realignment generation. But, when I went outside and caught up with the people who were showing up closer to the start of the speech, there was a different tone - one of "checking it out", "interested in the fact that he could be the President", and such. Somewhat different tone, but I am not surprised at the difference since the ones who showed up early had a strong enthusiastic tone, where everyone else was here to "see".

The speech itself
When the Chairman of the Board of Trustees spoke (Ron Drucker) who then introduced Mayor Bloomberg, it could look like an endorsement of Obama for President. But Bloomberg discussed the issues of the day and to maintain an open mind and - at least from my point-of-view - gave other contenders a chance to speak in NYC (and at the Great Hall) on the topic of the economy. And, with a flourish indicative of Mayor Bloomberg ("This morning, we have another gentlemen from Illinois..."), he announced Senator Obama.

You can see Senator Obama's speech after the fold or read the transcript here, but to simplify it, it is in three parts:

  • to address the immediate crisis in the housing market;
  • to create a 21st century regulatory framework, and
  • to pursue a bold opportunity agenda for the American people

Continue reading "Obama at Cooper Union on 21st Century Market Regulation"

Posted by Sanford Dickert at 11:29 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

March 26, 2008

Obama speaking at Cooper Union supports the Millennial theory

Lincoln and Obama speakingYesterday, I got an email from the Cooper mailing list, informing me that he would be coming to Cooper Union to speak in the Cooper Union Dialogue Series (the same one that Mike Bloomberg spoke at). While I do not think that there will be a moderator, I am certain there will be parallels drawn about him speaking here and another Illinois senator speaking close to 150 years earlier.

What was especially interesting was watching a large clot of my students, who have never struck me as politically active, almost rioting in the quest of getting these tickets for the event. The line was especially long, students had been waiting outside to get one of these precious tickets, and the discussion as to why they wanted to be there were along the lines of what Winograd and Hais mentioned in their talk. This is about being part of a "good thing", a person of "vision", and a feeling of something special about coming to the Great Hall once again.

What supported the story was the fact that the students (in Engineering) were aware of the event, will more than likely make up the majority of the students coming, and were rapidly communicating with each other (via text and mobile Facebook) when tickets got scarce. Even after I got my ticket, I was privy to a discussion on the elevator about how important it was to have the ticket (each got only one) and that they were going to "guard it with their lives".

I do not know about you, but I certainly am amazed and impressed with the students here at Cooper. They did themselves proud. I am curious to see how the Senator will do tomorrow.

And, to listen/read about the similarities/history of an Illinois Senator coming to New York and speaking for history, go to the NYTimes podcast here.

Update: According to Elisabeth Benjamin at the Daily News, Mayor Bloomberg will be introducing Obama. Shall be interesting. If the Secret Security allows me, I will live-blog his speech as I attempted to do for Mayor Bloomberg back in October ([1], [2]).

Tags: , ,

Posted by Sanford Dickert at 8:14 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

March 25, 2008

Millennial Makeover: Is there a Lincoln or FDR in the 2008 race?

Lincoln and FDRThis evening, as I finished my work at Cooper, I took a walk over to the Great Hall to listen to Dr. Fred Shapiro introduce Morley Winograd and Michael Hais discuss their new book, "Millennial Makeover: MySpace, YouTube and the Future of American Politics" with a talk asking the question, "Is there a Lincoln or FDR in the 2008 Presidential Race?" Interestingly, the talk seems to have been a combination of the premise of the book creation, as well as an attempt to answer the question posed at the start of the talk. [Suffice it to say, I think they would say Obama is the next Lincoln/FDR - more on this later] But what was most interesting to me was the discussion of the impact of technology and generational demographics and their impact on American history - which goes to the heart of two of my posts ([1], [2]), "Would social networks impact the 2008 election?".

At the time, I answered in the negative.

After last night (and this book), I might have a different point of view...

Impact of Technology and Generational Swings
Note: I have only started to read the book as of yet, but I was entranced with the discussion by both speakers and their premises. I must say that I agree with much of what they said and suggest, though I do not completely agree (yet) with some of the mechanisms.

From the start of the talk, Morley drew the obvious parallels with Lincoln and Obama, Steward (Lincoln's "primary Republican" adversary) and Clinton and the issue of race during the election cycle. [Note: I promise to go into the parallels that exist]. But, what perked my ears and interest was the discussion of generational impact and the advent of technology and the impact it had on campaigns and their hypothesis on how it has, on 40 year cycles (give or take some years) cause a civic realignment in terms of political parties and fundamental populational relationship with government and civic duty.

Winograd and Hais's basic premise is that civic realignment - where they characterize it by the "enhanced party identification and straight-ticket voting, rising voter turnout or stable turnout at high levels, positive attitudes towards politics and political institutions, and a focus on broader societal and economic concerns rather than social issues involving personal morality". [p. 27] They argue that this civic realignment is a predictable phenomena that occurs every forty years in America due primarily to:

  • political coming-of-age of a large dynamic generation, and
  • emergence of a new communication technology

which results in clear changes in:

  • electoral results: major parties change power
  • voting behavior: South going Democratic, after being Republican and back, and
  • public policy: from a laissez faire foreign policy to a force-projection policy in 1932

With this premise, Winograd and Hais posit that this generation - the Millennials - will cause another major civic shift and cause a new outcome in our government that focuses on the societal and economic issues of the day, rather than the divisive issues of our time.

I could short-circuit the discussion with the final statements that:

  • likely winner of the Presidential election: Barack Obama
  • movement of civic involvement in a more responsible fashion: college for public service (as in AmeriCore and Kerry's National Service program)
  • redistribution of wealth from the top 1% to a more even spread
  • acceptance of programs that require group sacrifice, rather than blind ignorance of the hidden cost of inaction

I must say that I am pleased this is being painted, and hope that it does come about - which we will see what happens in the coming months. I believed it as the time with Kerry and Dean (as Winograd and Hais said that the Millennials and the Boomers did vote overwhelmingly for), but the weight of the Millennials were not felt until this year - and this cycle. And for that, I look forward to seeing the outcome.

After the fold, I give a short summary of their premise.

Continue reading "Millennial Makeover: Is there a Lincoln or FDR in the 2008 race?"

Posted by Sanford Dickert at 3:47 AM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)