The much-anticipated launch of a new collaborative line between Italian designer Missoni and Target caused the retailer's website to crash several times Tuesday.
"Target.com is seeing greater item demand than we do on a typical Black Friday, and the excitement for this limited-time designer collection is unprecedented," the store said in a statement. "We are slowly bringing the site back online to ensure we can provide a positive shopping experience to our guests."
By Wednesday, the site was back up and running, but many of the colorful, zigzag designs were out of stock.
Between 7:47 and 8 a.m. ET Tuesday, the Target.com homepage was completely down with a connection timeout error, according to AlertSite, a Web performance monitoring business. For most of Tuesday afternoon and evening, the homepage displayed a courtesy page of the Target dog letting visitors know the site was overloaded.
"We are suddenly extremely popular," the page said.
The fervor wasn't only online. At stores nationwide, customers eager to grab up the colorful zigzag designs began lining up hours before opening. Stores reported selling out of stock within hours as shoppers grabbed up clothing and housewares at deeply discounted prices.
A full-priced knit scarf by the iconic Italian designer runs from $175 to $200 at department stores such as Saks Fifth Avenue and Neiman Marcus. The Missoni for Target collection includes knit dresses and sweaters between $40 and $60. On the pricier side, a women's bike costs $399.99 and a 28-inch piece of roller luggage, $199.99
The reaction comes amid considerable buzz leading up to the public debut of the collaboration. A private launch event September 7 in New York's Times Square was described in media reports as a "madhouse" with celebs such as Emma Roberts, Camilla Belle and Rachel Zoe in attendance.
Actress Jessica Alba tweeted that she "dreamt about the Missoni 4 Target bike last night" and that she hoped her husband was "going to get it 4 me?!?" Singer Jessica Simpson retweeted Alba, saying that she wanted the bike, too: "So cute!"
Target has collaborated with other designers before, from Isaac Mizrahi to Jean Paul Gaultier, but none to this effect. The collection was scheduled to be available from Tuesday through October 22 at Target stores and Target.com. It was unclear how Tuesday's activity would affect future sales.
In the end, it wasn’t even close. In a 58 percent Democratic congressional district, the most Jewish congressional district in the country and one that has not voted for a Republican representative since 1922, Republican political newcomer Bob Turner creamed Democrat David Weprin 54 percent to 46 percent in the special election in New York’s 9th Congressional District. Former New York mayor Ed Koch had called the election a referendum on President Obama’s Israel policy. Democratic assemblyman Dov Hikind crossed party lines to endorse Turner and make a point of his dissatisfaction with Obama.
In May, my colleague Greg Sargent, expressing skepticism about Koch’s predictions of a GOP victory, channeled the conventional Democratic wisdom that “it’s hard to believe that Obama’s Israel stance will really cost him a meaningful level of Jewish support.” Well, now in lieu of unreliable polling (of notoriously difficult-to-determine Jewish opinion) we have concrete electoral returns. The message is clear: Association with Obama, even for a pro-Israel Jewish candidate, is toxic.
There were voters, of course, who likely wanted to send a message on other matters. Obama’ job speech was viewed with a high degree of skepticism, if not dismay, among many voters who simply have heard enough about how billions in government spending will create millions of new jobs. They aren’t buying it, and what’s more, they’ve heard quite enough from the president.
There are many with bragging rights today. The Emergency Committee for Israel, which put out some eye-catching ads linking Weprin to Obama, has shown, as it did in the 2008 election, that it can make a splash. ECI made a strong push in the race, highlighting Obama’s Israel policy in TV ads, billboards and even in an ad on the New York Times home page. Bill Kristol, co-founder and chairman of ECI, told me this morning: “Voters in NY-9 — like millions of others across the nation — supported candidate Obama in 2008 in part because they believed his assurances he’d be a pro-Israel president. He hasn’t been. Last night’s results reflect that fact. His administration’s efforts to distance the U.S. from Israel have done nothing but embolden Israel’s enemies.” He continued, “So President Obama has a problem with the American people, who are pro-Israel. It can’t be solved by political rhetoric or patronizing reassurance. If he wants to be thought the friend of Israel he said he’d be, President Obama has to start behaving as one.”
The Republican Jewish Coalition’s executive director, Matt Brooks, was bursting his buttons. His group had announced in early September an “advocacy campaign, with mail pieces going out in the coming days to every Jewish household in New York’s 9th congressional district. The campaign will call on voters to use the special House election on September 13th as an opportunity to send a clear message to President Obama: Enough is enough on Israel.”
Last night Brooks released this statement: “This Republican win in an overwhelmingly Democrat district is a significant indicator of the problem that President Obama has in the Jewish community. While party leaders scramble to deny and try to stem the erosion of Jewish support for Democrats, the real issue is this President’s policies on Israel, on jobs, and on the economy. Jewish voters are coming to see that Republicans offer real solutions to our economic crisis, are resolute friends of Israel, and represent a way forward to a better future. Bob Turner’s win tonight has huge implications for 2012 races in states with large Jewish communities, such as Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.”
We will see how transferrable the themes of this election are in a presidential race, but one can imagine that nothing short of panic is coursing through the halls of the Democratic National Committee and the veins of Obama’s newly appointed Jewish community outreach director, Ira Forman.
Politico reported: “Even before the polls closed, the recriminations – something short of panic, and considerably more than mere grumbling – had begun. On a high-level campaign conference call Tuesday afternoon, Democratic donors and strategists commiserated over their disappointment in Obama. A source on the call described the mood as ‘awful.’ ‘People feel betrayed, disappointed, furious, disgusted, hopeless,’ said the source.” What is especially significant is that Jewish voters now number among the betrayed, disappointed, furious, disgusted and hopeless.
What if, you know, it’s not simply a “messaging” problem for the Democrats? Might it be that the perfect storm — a rotten economy, an incompetent president and an administration uniquely hostile toward the Jewish state and inept in Middle East policy — might actually separate a chunk of the Jewish electorate from its historic fixation with the Democratic Party? Now that remains to be seen, but the signs are pointing in that direction.
Let’s also not forget that it was a clean sweep for the GOP last night. The Las Vegas Review-Journal reported on the “blowout” 22-point win by the Republican in the Nevada-2 race:
Fed-up Republican voters fueled Mark Amodei’s special election blowout victory Tuesday over Democrat Kate Marshall, keeping the 2nd Congressional District in GOP hands while shaking up President Barack Obama’s supporters.
“The voters of Nevada have sent a message. The message is, it is time to start a change,” Amodei told 200 supporters at the Eldorado Hotel.
As the LVRJ noted, “The two special elections together suggest a deep discontent with Obama’s economic policies as unemployment remains high — 12.9 percent in Nevada — and debt continues to grow. In 2008, Obama won Nevada handily but is considered vulnerable to defeat in the battleground state in 2012.”
And if Jewish voters start voting like other voters, rather than as a group that is reflexively Democratic no matter how that party performs, then we could finally see the emergence of a new sort of politics within the Jewish community, one in which both parties have to compete for and win the Jewish vote. Now, that’d be something.
Republican Bob Turner on Tuesday won the special election in New York's heavily Democratic ninth congressional district - pulling a huge upset that few would have predicted just months ago.
Turner ran against Democrat David Weprin in a heated, summer-long race that ignited Democratic fears of a quiet election morphing into a referendum on the party and President Barack Obama, ahead of next year's elections.
"We've asked the people of this district to send a message to Washington, and I hope they hear it loud and clear," Turner said at his election party in Queens with a packed room, many of them Orthodox Jews.
"Mr. President, you are on the wrong track."
Turner came in with 54% of the vote while Weprin placed second at 46%, with 100% precincts reporting, according to unofficial results from Valerie Vazquez, communications director for the New York City Board of Elections.
Fittingly, in a race largely centered on U.S. policies toward Israel, Turner stood on a stage with Israeli and American flags behind him.
"We lit one candle today, and there's going to be a bonfire pretty soon," Turner said in his victory speech just after midnight.
The district, which covers parts of Brooklyn and Queens, is one of the strongest Jewish districts in the nation. Former Rep. Anthony Weiner vacated the seat in June amid scandal.
Turner, a former cable TV executive, made his first attempt in politics when he challenged Weiner for the seat in November and finished with a stronger-than-usual second place outcome, winning 40% of the vote.
His team hit a major turning point this summer when former New York City Mayor Ed Koch crossed party lines to endorse the Republican.
Koch, a Democratic Jew, hoped his support would send a message to the White House that Jewish Americans were dissatisfied with Obama's policies on Israel - namely the president's position that a future Mideast peace solution requires Israel to return to its pre-1967 borders, with land swaps.
"I like President Obama ... I helped get him elected," Koch said at Turner's election night party. "But he threw Israel under the bus."
His remarks were met by cheers from the crowd, including one man who shouted, "He's a sellout!"
Koch's nod pivoted the race into a relentless competition over who was a stronger supporter of Israel: Turner, a conservative Republican, or Weprin, an orthodox Jew.
Minutes after the election, the Republican Jewish Coalition released a statement in support of Turner.
"Jewish voters are coming to see that Republicans offer real solutions to our economic crisis, are resolute friends of Israel, and represent a way forward to a better future," said executive director Matt Brooks.
He added that the election has "huge implications for 2012 races in states with large Jewish communities, such as Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania."
Back in Washington and in a sign of uncertainty, both parties downplayed expectations earlier Tuesday.
"This is not a district that Republicans have any right to believe that we can win, but we do have a good candidate," said House Speaker John Boehner.
And despite having a 3-to-1 ratio of Democrats to Republicans and a long history of Democratic elected officials, Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York downplayed the district's strong tilt toward the left.
"President Obama won the district by much less than he won the rest of New York City," Schumer said.
"And so, to make the argument that this is a very liberal district and it's a close race, it's just not what the district has been."
Facing a last minute crunch, national Democratic groups poured in hundreds of thousands of dollars in ad buys within the last week, signaling Democratic concerns the race was heading for a neck-and-neck sprint to the finish line.
The final push came as a new Siena Research Institute poll Friday showed Turner with a 6-percentage point lead over Weprin just days before the election.
In addition to Israel, other issues took the spotlight this summer, notably the two candidates' positions on raising the debt ceiling and political issues surrounding the September 11 attacks.
But all ended well for Turner on Tuesday, winning a campaign that now makes him one of two Republican Congressional members in the New York City delegation, with the other being Rep. Michael Grimm of Staten Island.
And while Turner will soon be staking out a new office on Capitol Hill, he may not be there for long.
Due to population loss, New York has to cut two congressional districts and NY9 has widely been speculated to get the ax in a redistricting process set to finalize in 2013.
Texas Rep. Ron Paul proved that he is a leading contender to win Ames straw poll on Saturday by packing the venue with his rowdy sign-waving supporters.
“We have lost our enthusiasm for freedom!” said Paul, who donned a short-sleeved plaid shirt for the occasion.
The audience boomed with applause when the libertarian-leaning candidate blasted the size of the federal government, touted his opposition to abortion and called on government to withdraw American forces from Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Paul said the country functions better "without the federal government down our backs and in our wallets."
The straw poll outcome hinges on how well each campaign can turn out their supporters to the ballot box.
Judging by the size of Paul’s crowd inside the Hilton Coliseum in Ames, which was nearly twice as big as the one that turned out to watch former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, he appears to be on track for a top finish.
Most observers believe Paul will finish in the top three, and could pull off an upset by winning the whole thing.
If you really want to know why voters keep dumping incumbents of both parties and registering an alarming disdain for Washington generally, then go back and watch a scene from last night’s Republican debate in Iowa.
Specifically, fast forward to somewhere around the 48-minute mark, when the moderator, Bret Baier, asked the eight candidates on stage whether any of them would walk away from a “real spending cuts deal” that required one dollar in new tax revenue for every 10 dollars’ worth of reductions. To put this in perspective, Mr. Baier’s hypothetical deal, if it entailed rescinding the Bush-era tax cuts only on Americans earning more than $1 million annually, would yield something like $6 trillion in spending cuts — a lot more than anyone is actually talking about.
Let’s remember that three of the candidates who heard this question were former governors, and two of them, Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty, governed in predominately Democratic states where compromise was an essential part of doing business. Another man standing on stage was a former House speaker who once worked with a Democratic president, however contentiously, to balance the budget and enact long-awaited reform of the welfare system.
And yet every one of the Republican candidates instantly and emphatically raised his or her hand, as if Mr. Baier had just asked whether they liked puppies or whether they had voted for Ronald Reagan. Not a single candidate gave any hint that he or she would even entertain such a totally one-sided compromise.
In other words, all the candidates were essentially saying that they wouldn’t embrace fiscal reform if it included even a penny of additional taxation. No compromise could possibly be favorable enough to earn their support.
Now, to be clear, I don’t believe most of them for a second on this, and neither should you. Maybe, possibly, Herman Cain or Michele Bachmann might actually reject that deal. But a President Romney or a President Jon M. Huntsman Jr. would no sooner spurn such a compromise than he would shave his head on national television.
For anyone serious about governing, it’s a no-brainer. They name bridges and airports for presidents who make deals like that, maybe even in their lifetimes. (Just look at Reagan, who, Democrats never tire of pointing out, signed plenty of tax increases during his tenure.)
But that’s just it — what any independent-minded voter saw in that moment were eight people who were not, in fact, serious about governing. They were serious about pandering to the marginal elements of their party. That’s about it.
If this were merely a Republican phenomenon, the party would be alone in suffering the wrath of the average American voter. But it isn’t. You could have put a lot of Washington Democrats up on that stage, and asked them if they would have accepted $10 in new taxes or new stimulus in exchange for $1 in cuts to Social Security, and you probably would have gotten much the same response: hell, no.
And this is the central disconnect between Washington and the broad center of the country, the source of all that fury you see in the polls. Fewer and fewer Americans engage as activists in either party, which means that primaries are financed and waged primarily by the ideological extremes on either side. Meanwhile, a growing number of American voters identify themselves as independent and demand a government that functions — not by the triumph of one dogmatic doctrine over another, but by the triumph of reason and realism.
We’re not talking about finding the mushy middle on every issue here. We’re talking about knowing a good deal when you see one and having the courage to say so.
President Obama gives every indication that he understands this, but he has not proved himself able to transcend the endemic intransigence in Washington. Voters are not losing faith in Mr. Obama because he was too far left or too centrist on the debt ceiling. They’re losing faith because he got rolled, and they’re still looking for someone — as they were in 2008 — who has the strength and shrewdness to reform the system.
What should give Mr. Obama hope is that no one on stage in Ames looked like much of a reformer, either. At least Mr. Obama seems determined to seek a grand compromise on cuts and revenues that would change the nation’s fiscal trajectory. Remarkably, not a single one of his challengers, no matter how favorable the terms, can yet summon the seriousness to do the same.
From the first Republican presidential debate in two months, to the state fair, which is a must stop for any White House contender, to a crucial GOP straw poll, the campaign spotlight is firmly shining on Iowa the next three days. And after the three days are over, the race for the White House may not be the same.
Thursday night the eight major GOP candidates face off in the first presidential debate since a CNN/WMUR/New Hampshire Union Leader showdown nearly two months ago. There will be a lot on the line at the debate for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, and Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota as it's the first head to head clash for the candidates in Iowa, the state that votes first in the primary and caucus calendar.
Just about all the White House hopefuls are also making stops at the state fair, which is a picture perfect example of retail politics. From taking questions directly from Iowa voters at the famous Soap Box, to walking the fair grounds and shaking hands, to eating fried Twinkies and any kind of meat on a stick, the Iowa State Fair has become a top item on the to-do list for presidential candidates. Romney and former Utah Gov. and former U.S. ambassador to China Jon Huntsman made stops at the fair Thursday, with Romney getting a taste what can be a lively give and take with Iowans.
"You asked your question and now I am going to give my answer. If you don't like my answer then you can vote for someone else. But now it is my turn to give my answer," Romney said to cheers, as he answered a contentious question from a member of the crowd.
Most of the other White House hopefuls, as well as Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who's closer and closer to formally entering the race, and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who's flirting with a run for the nomination, are also showing up at the state fair over the next few days.
And then there's the Ames Straw Poll, which traditionally alters the battle for the Republican nomination. The event, on Saturday on the Iowa State campus in nearby Ames, is part straw poll, part party, and part fundraiser. And for the campaigns, "it's truly an organizational test on all fronts," says Mary Cownie, former communications director for the Iowa GOP. "It's unique because it's an all day event, where all the candidates can come, where all Iowans can go and speak to each of the candidates, and then vote in the straw poll."
The straw poll, which takes place the August before the start of the caucus and primary season, in election cycles without a sitting Republican president running for re-election, was first held in 1979. While there are numerous straw polls in the Hawkeye state, the one in Ames is the main attraction, because it draws voters from across Iowa, and because it attracts the national political press corps.
Here's how the event, which is also known as the Iowa Straw Poll, works: In advance campaigns bid for tent spaces surrounding the Hilton Coliseum, where they set up camp, providing food and entertainment for their supporters. This year Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, who's making his third run for the presidency, shelled out $31,000 for the best piece of real estate, closest to the coliseum. It's the same spot that Romney, who's not taking part in the straw poll this time around, secured four years ago for his first bid for the White House.
The arena is where the candidates speak and where those participating vote. Campaigns are allowed to bus in supporters and pay their $35 entrance fee to allow them to vote in the straw poll. The only rule, those voting must prove they live or go to school in Iowa. Because of this, the event is a good barometer of a campaign's organization and grassroots outreach.
In 2007, just over 14,000 voted, down significantly for the previous straw poll four years earlier. Because of the drop in participation, and because all money raised from the straw poll goes directly to the Iowa GOP, making the gathering a large fundraiser for the party, the event has come in for criticism.
But one thing's for sure, it has an impact on the battle for the nomination. It can boost a candidate, as it did with former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee four years ago, or knock one out, as it did to former Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson in 2007.
The big question this weekend is which candidates will be boosted, and which ones may fall, this time around.
Tim Pawlenty didn’t back off his new Minnesota mean tack Friday morning, doubling down on the criticisms of Michele Bachmann he lobbed during Thursday night’s presidential debate.
“She says, ‘I led the charge against Obamacare.’ Well, we ended up with Obamacare. ‘I led the charge against TARP;’ we ended up with TARP. ‘I led the charge against more government spending;’ we ended up with more government spending,” Pawlenty told POLITICO’s Mike Allen at a Playbook Breakfast in Des Moines.
“Everything she’s led the charge against, she failed to accomplish,” Pawlenty said. “Nobody’s questioning her spine, we’re questioning her lack of results.”
Pawlenty said that regardless of the fact that Bachmann is the only woman in the GOP field, it’s not about gender. It’s about the issues, results, and leading and saving our country.”
The exchange came just hours after Pawlenty and Bachmann engaged in their fiercest and most direct confrontations of the campaign so far, and a day before the critical Ames straw poll that could ultimately make or break Pawlenty’s candidacy.
Pawlenty’s more sharp-edged approach was a break from the June debate, when he awkwardly backed away from earlier criticisms of front-runner Mitt Romney. But Pawlenty said Friday that he’s just answering the questions asked of him.
“No matter which way you calibrate that, a bunch of people are upset one way or the other,” he said. “So you just gotta answer the question.”
He played down a joke he made during the debate that jabbed at Romney’s considerable wealth.
“I was just having some fun with that and pulling Mitt’s chain,” he said.
Pawlenty insisted there’s no personal bad blood between him and Romney.
“I like Mitt,” he said. “We don’t have any personal tension or animosity.”
Asked by POLITICO’s Jonathan Martin whether he’s prepared to slim down his campaign if Ames doesn’t go well and a state-by-state slog emerges, Pawlenty expressed confidence that he’ll make a strong showing at Ames but acknowledged that he may be forced to pare down his campaign if he doesn’t. “We may not have any choice if it went that way.”
“We’re seeing some nice movement in the numbers. I can’t tell you that we’re gonna win it tomorrow or that we need to win it,” he said. “I think it’ll be a good result.”
Pawlenty had harsh words for the so-called congressional super committee charged with finding more than $1 trillion in deficit reduction.
“I think it’s super stupid,” he said to laughter. “We have a Congress and we have a president, do your job.”
Pawlenty dodged several questions about what he thought would have happened if the debt ceiling hadn’t been lifted by the Aug. 2 deadline, but pressed repeatedly, he came down somewhere between the conservative debt-ceiling skeptics and economists who say it would have been disastrous.
“It probably would have been very negative for a while, but it’s very negative right now anyway,” he said.
Pawlenty said his news diet includes The Economist, USA Today while he’s on the road, the Star Tribune in Minnesota and clips from other outlets his campaign staff sends him. But his news consumption habits have changed of late: Pawlenty said he lost his iPad a couple weeks in San Francisco and still hasn’t bought a new one.
On Thursday, Mitt Romney faced the joys and political perils of a frontrunner in the Republican presidential race: at times feeling his supporters' political crush - but also fending off catcalls and heckles by critics.
The spontaneous drama at the Iowa State Fair in Des Moines took several bizarre turns.
In one instance, the candidate declared "corporations are people" - a line surely to become ammunition for political opponents eager to cast Romney as a wealthy corporate raider unfamiliar with the concerns of average Americans.
At times Romney sounded populist themes, at one point saying: "If we're going to turn around the economy … Let's send some citizens to Washington." And yet, in another breath, the former Massachusetts governor defended big business against high taxes.
"Corporations are people, my friend," Romney said. "Everything a corporation earns ultimately goes to people."
Critics in the crowd laughed at Romney for the comment though his intent was unclear.
That hasn't stopped the Democratic National Committee from already seizing on the line.
"It is a shocking admission from a candidate-and a party-that shamelessly puts forward policies to help large corporations and the wealthiest Americans at the expense of the middle class, seniors, and students," DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz said in a statement.
In opening remarks, Romney reiterated familiar slams against President Obama.
"We're led by a man who's a fine fella. But he's out of his depth and doesn't understand how the economy works," Romney said.
It's when Romney ended his speech, and took questions from the audience, that things turned ugly.
Among the first questions shouted at Romney: "Do you support scrapping the Social Security payroll cap so that rich people pay their fair share into the trust fund?"
Romney's response: "You know there was a time in this country that we didn't celebrate attacking people based on their success. And we didn't go after people because they were successful."
Another questioner belted away at Romney.
"Sir, I am on Social Security," he said.
"My wife is on Social Security. You came here to listen to the people. How are you going to strengthen Social Security for the future?"
As the man continued to shout, Romney cut him short.
"You asked your question and now I am going to give my answer. If you don't like my answer then you can vote for someone else," Romney chastised. "But now it is my turn to give my answer."
The man later identified himself as Joe Fagen, a 71-year old former Catholic priest. He is the founder of the liberal community activist group Citizens for Community Improvement. In the past, Fagen has similarly heckled other Republican politicians.
As Romney insisted he would not raise taxes, the exchange became testy not unlike a defining moment in 1980 as then presidential hopeful Ronald Reagan demanded access to a Republican debate and at one point shouted at a moderator, "I am paying for this microphone."
In perhaps the most tense moment of the event, yet another man shouted that Romney should support scrapping the Social Security payroll cap.
"You want to raise taxes? You want to raise taxes," Romney shouted back at the man.
The Ames Straw Poll is a delightful fraud, an amiable hoax, that most people in Iowa don’t care about, but the national media eat up because the event seems so charmingly “Iowan.”
To its credit, there is no man behind the curtain. Its fraudulence is open and above board: It is organized bribery on a grand scale.
Presidential campaigns buy up large blocks of tickets, hand them out, give Iowans free food, free drinks, free fun rides, free music, free T-shirts and free body-painting to show up at the Hilton Coliseum on the campus of Iowa State University.
All that the people are expected to do in return is listen to speeches by Republican presidential candidates. So you can see why people have to be bribed to show up.
Ideally, people would listen to the speeches and then cast ballots for the Republican of their choice. The term “Straw Poll” comes from the British jurist John Selden (1584-1654), who wrote, “Take a straw and throw it up into the Air – you may see by that which way the Wind is.”
But the Wind at Ames blows. And that is because people can cast their ballots hours before the speeches even begin. The campaigns do not expect people to be swayed by the speeches. They expect that once people are bought, they will stay bought.
But the campaigns do not know Iowans. Iowans are fair-minded and good-hearted, and the Ames Straw Poll, which will be held this Saturday, is good fun to them, not serious politics.
Only the media treat it seriously, and only after writing for weeks and weeks about how meaningless it is.
As The Washington Post put it Tuesday, “The results are not very reliable in predicting who will win the Iowa caucuses, the GOP nomination, or ultimately, the presidency.”
Which is 100 percent correct and which is why about 700 members of the media are expected to show up at Ames on Saturday, why network superstars will be among them and why the press is already doing projected weather reports: 81 degrees, partly cloudy, no locusts.
Why do the media care so much about something that means almost nothing?
Because Ames is a Death Star, that’s why. The media want winners and losers very, very early. They do not want to have to pretend that large numbers of candidates are equally important and equally deserving of coverage or inclusion in debates.
So when the media report who does poorly at Ames, those candidates’ money will dry up, the candidates will drop out and the media will feel justified paying attention to only the top tier. (Unless, of course, some of the top tier wisely choose to skip Ames, which some are doing this year.)
“The Grim Reaper is going to be waiting outside the field house in Ames, Iowa,” Pat Buchanan said in August 1999. “I think it’s going to kill off several people.”
t did, including Buchanan, who came in fourth, and left the Republican Party. “Candor compels us to admit that our vaunted two-party system is a snare and a delusion, a fraud upon the nation,” Buchanan thundered after Ames. “Our two parties have become nothing but two wings on the same bird of prey.”
Wow. Imagine what he would have said if he had come in fifth.
But Ames is capable of surprising, which means surprising the media, since the media are the only people with expectations at this point.
In 2007, Mike Huckabee wowed the crowd by saying, “I can’t buy you, I don’t have the money. I can’t even rent you. The straw poll is not about electing a straw man, but giving the people of Iowa a chance to prove they are mature voters and savvy. They are buying the cereal, not just the box.”
Huckabee lost, of course. Mitt Romney had bought many more voters at Ames that year. In fact, Huckabee, while coming in second, didn’t even come in a close second. Romney got 31.5 percent of the vote and Huckabee 18.1 percent.
But Huckabee was savvy enough to write the reporters’ stories for them. “For me to come in second is the story,” Huckabee told the press when the tally was announced. “For me to hold the front-runner under 50 percent is the story.”
And so it became the story. And Huckabee won the Iowa caucuses and the nomination of his party and became the 44th president of the United States. No. Wait. Huckabee won the Iowa caucuses, but lost the nomination to John McCain, who lost the presidency to Barack Obama, who now wonders why he wanted the job in the first place.
So you can see how important straw polls are.
The Democratic Party bans straw polls, dismissing them as a waste of time and money. I have always suspected the party actually bans them, however, because Democrats are afraid they might hold a political event where fun might break out.
In the past, Ames has featured indoor fireworks, Jack Kemp throwing mini-footballs to the crowd, Pat Robertson supporters wearing revolving red lights on their heads and what Americans love most: shopping. In 1999, the best-selling item was a postcard depicting Hillary Clinton in a black leather bra spanking a nude President Bill Clinton who was sprawled across her lap and smiling.
Ames is a spectacle in a spectacle-driven political process. It will be covered live and analyzed live. Ames tells you much more about the media than about the candidates, which is a good thing.
Wisconsin'S Recall Elections Are A Snapshot Of What We'll Face In 2012. The GOP & Tea Party Are NOT Playing! They're Currently Out Organizing Us & Out Spending Democrats, Liberals, Progressives & Independents. If We Don't Unite, Organize, Mobilize & Outspend Them We Can Just Say Good-Bye To Diversity, Good-Bye To Equal Rights, Good-Bye To Opportunities For Everyone & Hello To Rich Vs. Poor With No Middle Class In Between! Don't Stay Home! VOTE OBAMA IN 2012!!
By keeping a majority in the Senate, Republicans retained their monopoly on state government because they also hold the Assembly and governor's office. Tuesday's elections narrowed their majority - at least for now - from 19-14 to a razor-thin 17-16.
Republicans may be able to gain back some of the losses next week, when two Democrats face recall elections.
Democrats had hoped to block the Republican agenda by taking control of the Senate in the recall elections, but the GOP should be able to continue to advance its agenda.
"I think it's a huge victory for us," said John Hogan, director of the Committee to Elect a Republican Senate. "Voters gave us a mandate last fall. . . . They backed us up again (Tuesday). Voters told us loud and clear, 'Stay the course. Things are working.'"
But Democrats claimed victory for the two seats they captured from Republicans.
"We went on their turf and we won on Republican turf," said Mike Tate, chairman of the state Democratic Party. "We will not stop, we will not rest . . . until we recall (Gov.) Scott Walker."
Republican Sens. Dan Kapanke (R-La Crosse) and Randy Hopper (R-Empire) were both defeated by their Democratic challengers, Rep. Jennifer Shilling (D-La Crosse) and Democrat Jessica King of Oshkosh.
"I look forward to going to Madison to stand up for the working families, seniors and students of Oshkosh, Fond du Lac, Blackwolf, Waupun and all across the 18th district," King said in a statement. "Their voices will be once again heard."
Three other Republicans held onto their seats, despite aggressive campaigns put up by their Democratic foes and outside groups backed by unions. Surviving the recalls were Republican Sens. Alberta Darling of River Hills, Sheila Harsdorf of River Falls, Luther Olsen of Ripon and Rob Cowles of Allouez.
Darling was declared the winner over Rep. Sandy Pasch (D-Whitefish Bay) late Tuesday.
Democrats called for the recalls after Walker launched his plan to eliminate most collective bargaining for public workers, and Tuesday's races were seen as a preview of a plan to force a recall of Walker next year.
Tuesday's recalls were launched in March, during the turmoil in Madison over Walker's plan, ultimately successful, to curtail collective bargaining by most public employees. Democrats tried to recall Republicans for that vote, while Republicans tried to recall Democrats for leaving the state for three weeks to block a vote on the issue.
Sen. Dave Hansen (D-Green Bay) was the first to face a recall election, and he easily survived the challenge last month.
Attention now turns to next week's recall elections, against Democratic Sens. Jim Holperin of Conover and Bob Wirch of Pleasant Prairie.
"It's encouraging to see, even though a couple Republicans lost their seats, the recall process holds as a check for those who disrespect their office and not simply do their job and take a vote," said a statement from Holperin's challenger, Kim Simac. "Next week we will recall a senator who was actually derelict in his duty by failing to represent his district when he fled to Illinois."
Turnout levels in Tuesday's elections were substantial, approaching those of last fall's governor's race - a striking testimony to the extreme passions, money and attention these contests have attracted this summer.
In one contest, for the 10th district seat won Tuesday by GOP incumbent Harsdorf, the total vote exceeded that of the race for governor last fall.
Voters were mobilized by massive get-out-the-vote efforts on both sides, and by expensive television and radio advertising campaigns that flooded the airwaves in all six districts. At least five of the elections broke the $3 million spending record, set in 2000, for money spent by all parties in a Senate race.
Expensive campaigns
So far more than $35 million has been spent on the recall races, according to the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, which tracks political money. The spending on the nine races dwarfs the $19.3 million spent in last year's 115 legislative races, and approaches the $37.4 million spent in the race for governor.
The flow of money came as unions saw the recall elections as the best way to halt Walker's agenda and to send a message to other states considering changing their collective bargaining laws. Political observers are watching Wisconsin to see what the results say about the mood of the electorate leading up to next year's elections for president and Congress.
Unions played a huge role for Democrats by spending vast sums of money on advertising, and supplying manpower in all the Senate districts. Conservative groups have parried with their own influx of cash.
But the Democrats' argument in the recalls morphed over time from concerns over collective bargaining to objections to a number of GOP initiatives - most notably cuts to education and tax breaks for the wealthy - and the complaint that the changes were pushed through without enough public discussion.
Republicans countered that argument by insisting that voters - who just last November flipped both houses of the Legislature and the governor's office from blue to red - had sent them to Madison to balance the budget and get control of state spending. "Elections have consequences," was the often-repeated slogan.
The wave of recall elections is unparalleled in the nation's history. Before this year, there had been just four recall elections of Wisconsin lawmakers. Two incumbents were recalled, while two survived the efforts. One of those who won his recall election was Holperin, who was in the Assembly in 1990 when a recall effort was launched because of his stance on Indian fishing rights.
Democrats cried foul over returns that came in late from Waukesha County in the Darling-Pasch matchup. Tate, the party official, alleged Waukesha County Clerk Kathy Nickolaus was "sitting on ballots" and "tampering with the results." Later, though, he said he would not pursue questions of irregularities.
Nickolaus enraged Democrats in April when she discovered votes from Brookfield that helped Supreme Court Justice David Prosser win re-election.
Here's how the races played out:
32nd District: From the beginning of the state Senate recalls that have preoccupied Wisconsin politics for the past five months, Kapanke, 63, had been identified as the Republican most likely to be thrown out of office, and he was Tuesday.
Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca (D-Kenosha) said Shilling's victory was a rebuke to Republicans.
"The people of the 32nd Senate District sent Gov. Walker and his legislative Republicans rubber-stamps a clear message today: they've had enough of the GOP's extreme agenda that favors wealthy special interests and large out-of-state corporations at the expense of Wisconsin's working, middle class families," read a statement Barca issued.
Kapanke's district has been trending increasingly Democratic, including a win by President Barack Obama with 61% of the vote in 2008. .
18th District: Hopper had been considered, with Kapanke, the other most vulnerable of the six Republicans to being defeated.
Voters in his public-employee-heavy district quickly gathered 22,500 signatures to force the recall.
His opponent, lawyer King, had lost by just 163 votes when they faced off for the open seat in 2008. On top of that, Hopper has had to deal with questions about an ugly divorce, where he lives and a state job for his 26-year-old girlfriend.
But Hopper, 45, a radio station owner, said his two years in office had proved that he and Walker have Wisconsin on the right track to fiscal health, and he was confident about his chances.
"It will be close," he said in recent weeks, "but I've always said, 'more important to do my job than keep my job.' "
That turned out to be true. With just three precincts still out, and those in King's home county of Winnebago, she was up by more than 1,100 votes, and the Associated Press called the race for her.
King, 36, a former Oshkosh alderman and deputy mayor, had predicted that the momentum of dissatisfied workers would put her in office.
14th District: Olsen's district came to be considered the Democrats' best chance to pick up a third Republican seat to give them control of the Senate. But Olsen, 60, held on to squeak by his opponent, Rep. Fred Clark (D-Baraboo).
Clark, 52, was the first Democrat Olsen's ever faced in the 16 ½ years he's been in office - an indication of how Republican his district has been over the years.
Still, spending in the race was second only to that in Darling's 8th District, according to the Democracy Campaign, which estimated last week that $5.5 million was spent in total, both by candidates and outside parties.
The largely rural central Wisconsin district stretches from Wisconsin Dells to Waupaca County. It is traditionally considered GOP turf, with Olsen's home of Ripon laying claim as the birthplace of the Republican Party.
Clark's Assembly district is in the southwestern corner of Olsen's Senate district, and until 2008 had been in Republican hands.
Clark and Olsen often told voters during the campaign that they like each other, turning the race into one that pitted a nice guy against a nice guy. In more than a dozen interviews with voters in Portage and Ripon, few were critical of the candidates personally. The voters had clear views on where the two stood and said they planned to vote even though the election was occurring at the height of summer.
8th District: In by far the most expensive recall race, Darling, 67, was the victor in a tight race with Pasch. Mike Tate, chairman of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, had called this seat the "crown jewel" of the recalls, because Darling, as co-chairwoman of the Legislature's Joint Finance Committee, had helped push through Walker's budget initiatives.
Darling raised well over $1 million for the race, the all-time record for a state Senate candidate in Wisconsin, and the nonprofit Wisconsin Democracy Campaign last week estimated $7.9 million had been spent by both candidates, plus all outside groups - nearly triple the $3 million record for spending on a state Senate race.
Besides Darling's key legislative role, the campaign was made more expensive by the higher advertising rates in the Milwaukee television market. Pasch, 57, was first elected to the Legislature in 2008.
2nd Senate District: Cowles easily defeated Nancy Nusbaum, the former De Pere mayor and Brown County executive. From the first, Cowles had been considered the GOP senator safest from being defeated. He was the final senator to have recall signatures filed against him, and a recent report by the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign estimated just $750,000 was spent by all parties on both sides of the race - the smallest amount on any of nine Senate districts with recalls.
Nusbaum, 65, argued that Cowles had changed his political spots to fall into line with Walker's conservative agenda, switching from the moderate image Cowles, 61, had cultivated over 28 years in the Legislature. Cowles said he had not changed and was running on his record as a fiscal conservative who had worked in a bipartisan way on such issues as renewable energy and energy conservation.
Early on, Harsdorf had been considered somewhat vulnerable, but lately she'd been seen as well ahead of Moore, who was making her first run for office.
During the campaign, Moore, 37, of River Falls accused Harsdorf, 55, of betraying working families, public employees, students and seniors. Moore is an English teacher at Ellsworth High School and a member of the Wisconsin Education Association Council, the state's largest teachers union.
Democrats in Wisconsin failed to gain control of the state Senate in Tuesday's recall elections, but both Democrats and Republicans are claiming victory in the struggle, which cast Wisconsin as "ground zero in a national class war, partly over the fate of organized labor."
In the unprecedented recall elections against six Republican state senators, four Republican lawmakers won, leaving the GOP with a slim 17 to 16 majority. Two Democrats face recall elections next week, which could bolster the GOP's weakened control.
The recalls were spurred by vehement anger over Republican Gov. Scott Walker's ultimately-successful effort to curb public employees' union rights. The number of lawmakers facing recall elections in a matter of weeks was unprecedented, and national organizations brought millions of dollars and significant organizational support into the mix.
While the recalls were inspired over union rights, the elections morphed into a referendum against Walker's entire Republican agenda, encompassing issues like school vouchers and health care funding. Meanwhile, the recalls were seen as something of a test for the GOP agenda at the national level -- whether Republican leaders could withstand the blowback from taking on unions, particularly in a key battleground state.
"I think it's a huge victory for us," John Hogan, director of the Committee to Elect a Republican Senate, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. "Voters gave us a mandate last fall... They backed us up again."
Similarly, Republican State Leadership Committee President Chris Jankowski called Tuesday's results a "tremendous victory" with larger implications.
"Tonight's results demonstrate that responsible budgeting measures and job creating policies can prevail over mountains of liberal special interest money from those fighting to maintain the unsustainable status quo," Jankowski said in a statement. "By beating back countless liberal special interest dollars and paid supporters, the strength of responsible Republican ideals is obvious and foreshadows continued Republican victories in 2011, 2012 and beyond."
While labor unions and liberal groups did contribute significantly to the recall effort, the Republican senators were also heavily backed by third party interest groups and the national parties.
Democrats and their backers argued that their impressive mobilization efforts showed that labor unions still have voter support, in spite of the GOP's best efforts to limit their influence. The mere fact that they were able to collect enough signatures quickly enough to put six Republicans up for recall suggests the union-backed liberal movement remains strong, they say.
"Beyond Wisconsin, if we can enjoy a similar 'loss rate' in Republican-held districts (picking up 33 percent of them), Speaker Nancy Pelosi will have a huge majority in 2013," liberal pundit Markos Moulitsas wrote. "We had a message that resonated with large numbers of working people in overwhelmingly white working-class districts that shifted hard against Democrats in 2010. GOP overreach is winning them back for us."
Mike Tate, chairman of the state Democratic Party, told the Journal Sentinel, "We went on their turf and we won on Republican turf."
Republican Sens. Alberta Darling of River Hills, Sheila Harsdorf of River Falls, Rob Cowles of Allouez and Luther Olsen of Ripon all held onto their seats. Democratic state Rep. Jennifer Shilling of La Crosse defeated incumbent Republican Sen. Dan Kapanke, while Democrat Jessica King defeated first-term incumbent Sen. Randy Hopper of Fond du Lac.
While Democrats did make some gains in Republican-held districts, the New York Times' Nate Silver points out that these elections were in swing districts -- districts that voted for Walker in 2010 but for President Obama in 2008.
Furthermore, extrapolating national implications from Tuesday's elections could be a futile exercise, given the extraordinary and unique political circumstances in Wisconsin, where residents protested for weeks over union rights.
Union rights have been a point of contention in other states like Ohio this year, and some Republican governors, like Rick Scott of Florida and Rick Snyder of Michigan, have left some voters grumbling over their agenda.
While national Republican leaders say the outcome in Wisconsin validates the agendas Republican governors have pursued, Walker suggested Tuesday that he was willing to extend an olive branch to Democrats.
"Earlier this evening I reached out to the leadership of both the Republicans and Democrats in the Assembly and State Senate," Walker said in a statement. "I shared with them that I believe we can work together to grow jobs and improve our state. In the days ahead I look forward to working with legislators of all parties to grow jobs for Wisconsin and move our state forward."
Walker could very well have his own fate in mind, since Democrats intend to hold a recall election against him next year.
Welcome to the BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ Blog. (Established 2008)
My name is Laurel. (Author & Publisher)
I Blog with a focus on POLITICS, Business, and occasionally Entertainment.
FACTS ABOUT LAUREL:
Wife,
Mother of a U.S. Soldier,
Sister,
Woman of GOD,
Loyal Friend,
Creative,
Blood-related to a nationally known Charlotte Politician.
Black Female, Intelligent,
Married,
Love to Travel,
Credentialed by the RNC and DNC.
Political Blogger/ Commentator
Grassroots Activist,
PROFESSIONAL STATUS:
Credential Political Blogger/ Commentator,
Registered Independent Voter
Original Native of BROOKLYN, NY
Currently reside in CHARLOTTE, NC
I’m Nice but don’t get it twisted because my Mind is Sharp!
Since You’ve Chosen to Visit and Read the Contents of this Blog by Personal Choice, and of Your Own Free Will,
Please don’t ask me to Compensate you for Expressing individual commentary/ Posted Articles, which are protected by the First Amendment, citing Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Expression.
No Intentionally Malicious Slander, Libel or Defamation of Character content will be published and I will always Credit all Sources.
NOTE TO ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS, APPOINTED OFFICIALS & PUBLIC FIGURES:
Per the Landmark U.S. Supreme Court Case: 1964 case of New York Times v. Sullivan………
The Public has a Right to Criticize the People who Govern them, so the least Protection from Defamation is given to Public Officials. When officials are accused of something that involves their behavior in office, they have to prove all of the above elements of defamation and they must also prove that the defendant acted with “actual malice.” (For a definition of actual malice, see the “History of Defamation and the First Amendment, below.”)
People who aren’t Elected but who are Still Public Figures because they are influential or famous — like Actors, Actresses, Movie Stars, Singers & Entertainers, Journalists, TV Hosts, Bloggers, etc., — also have to Prove that Defamatory statements were made with Actual Malice, in most cases.
To the Associated Press and other Media Organizations:
When I use your Content Links., I’m also citing the Fair Use Doctrine (Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107) for further Copyright permission.
Posts and Links published on Black Political Buzz are not endorsed by Black Political Buzz Blog Author Laurel’s Employer, nor the Employers of other Black Political Buzz employees.
This includes Links, Posts and Comments posted on Black Political Buzz’s Facebook and Twitter account pages.
Comments, Links and Opinions of site visitors are Independently-Owned and not endorsed by Black Political Buzz employees, Blog Author Laurel or Laurel’s Employer.)
(No Personal Offense intended) Please know that Black Political Buzz is not responsible for nor do I endorse Requests for Donations from Third Parties on this Blog.
I will Only Endorse Requests for Donations made on behalf of BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ Blog for Business Purposes & Operating Expenses.
I will also Only Endorse Requests for Donations on behalf of Legitimate Politicians and Legitimate Political Candidates. PERIOD!!
If anyone else or another Organization wishes to post a link to Request Donations, I am NOT endorsing ANY of those Requests!
Unless I receive a personal Request to do so and I have Professionally Confirmed that the Third Party Organization or Charity is indeed a Legitimate Entity.
NOTE: Anyone who chooses to give to any Third Party Organization NOT Endorsed by BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ is doing so at his or her own risk.
BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ does NOT Discriminate against Politicians, Political Candidates, Organizations or Charities based on Race, Color, Nationality, Ethnicity, Gender, Sexual Orientation, Religion, Faith, Disability, Political Affiliation, Creed, Education, Social Status, Age.
This disclaimer applies to ANY and All requests for Donations on this Blog. Thanks for understanding. Again No Personal Offense intended.
For Story Tips….Corrections…….. or Requests for Endorsements:
Please contact me via e-mail: blackpoliticalbuzz@gmail.com
or via my Facebook page: facebook.com/blackpoliticalbuzz
Thanks for stopping by
God Bless
Laurel @BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ
LINKS: POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE & INFORMATIONAL SITES
.jpg)
