Sure, the market is down, but compared to the rest of the nation…
The report calls Seattle “a sturdy market,” saying it has become a “magnet for brainpower industries” and a global gateway.
Huh. I guess this lousy economic stewardship is why the building industry is betting the bank to defeat Gov. Gregoire?
Via the AP:
Al-Qaida supporters suggested in a Web site message this week they would welcome a pre-election terror attack on the U.S. as a way to usher in a McCain presidency.
The message, posted Monday on the password-protected al-Hesbah Web site, said if al-Qaida wants to exhaust the United States militarily and economically, “impetuous” Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain is the better choice because he is more likely to continue the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“This requires presence of an impetuous American leader such as McCain, who pledged to continue the war till the last American soldier,” the message said. “Then, al-Qaida will have to support McCain in the coming elections so that he continues the failing march of his predecessor, Bush.”
So… if there is a terrorist attack in the days before the election, are Americans stupid enough to do exactly what al-Qaida wants, and elect the “impetuous” John McCain?
| Obama | McCain |
| 100.0% probability of winning | 0.0% probability of winning |
| Mean of 368 electoral votes | Mean of 170 electoral votes |
Today’s analysis incorporates a slight change to my algorithm. With exactly two weeks left until the election, I’ve reduced the window for “current polls” from 14 days down to 10 days. (I’ll reduce that down to 7 days when there is one week remaining—these changes were all planned in advance).
With that in mind, Yesterday’s analysis showed Sen. Barack Obama leading Sen. John McCain by 364 to 174 electoral votes. Obama would have won an election held yesterday with near 100% certainty.
Today there were a remarkable 17 new polls covering 14 states released. The new polls (and, perhaps, with an assist from changes to the “current poll” window) give Obama a modest gain in his expected electoral votes.
Now, after 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins 100,000 times. Obama gains four new electoral votes, for an average of 368 to McCain’s 170 electoral votes. Again, in an election held now, Obama would have a 100.0% probability of winning.
Detailed results for this analysis are available at Hominid Views.
Methods are described in the FAQ. The most recent version of this analysis can be found on this page.
The Republican National Committee appears to have spent more than $150,000 to clothe and accessorize vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and her family since her surprise pick by John McCain in late August.
According to financial disclosure records, the accessorizing began in early September and included bills from Saks Fifth Avenue in St. Louis and New York for a combined $49,425.74.
The records also document a couple of big-time shopping trips to Neiman Marcus in Minneapolis, including one $75,062.63 spree in early September.
There’s always been a certain multi-level marketing flavor to the Republican GOP Party. If a lot of their candidates remind you of infomercial hosts, it’s because basically they are. You too can enjoy (success, wealth, esteem, love, real estate fortune) if you too purchase Brand Republican! See, they’ve lifted up an obscure governor and elevated her to unimaginable heights of material plenty. You could be next!
Not that a lot of the hooting and hollering hard right types at her rallies will care. They’re in love, or more accurately (blood) lust, and such passion cannot be constrained by petty concerns over hypocrisy. So she’s standing there extolling the virtues of the “pro-America” parts of the country wearing clothing that costs more than a hundred El Caminos. So what?
She looks marvelous. If only political candidates didn’t have to speak.
Join us at the Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally for an evening of politics under the influence. We start at 8:00 pm at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E., although some of us show up early for dinner.
Tonight’s activities? We’ll be filling out stacks of ballots we got from submitting the names of cartoon characters to ACORN. Then we’ll think about new ways to enact middle class tax cuts socialism in Washington state. We’ll cap-off the evening by having our pictures taken with a terrorist. It’ll be fun! Hope you can make it.
If you find yourself in the Tri-Cities area this evening, check out McCranium for the local Drinking Liberally. Otherwise, check out the Drinking Liberally web site for dates and times of a chapter near you.
The October Elway Poll of 405 registered voters, conducted October 16-19 shows Gov. Chris Gregoire leading Republican challenger Dino Rossi by a 51 to 39 percent margin, up slightly from Elway’s 50-42 September results. The Elway Poll has been unique throughout the year in showing Gregoire with a substantial advantage; most other recent polls have shown the race well within the margin of error.
It is interesting to note that the much anticipated “Obama/Rossi” voter is not materializing in the Elway Poll. Elway found 8% of Obama voters planning to vote for Rossi. But they also found 8% of McCain voters planning to vote for Gregoire. Obama, by the way, was found to be preferred by 55 to 36 percent margin.
And perhaps a very significant observation by Elway in his comments:
“Gregoire has an edge on values among those who care most about those issues. Gregoire is seen as Moderate Liberal. Rossi is seen as conservative. He wasn’t in 2004.”
If that is true, and Rossi goes on to lose, that shift in perception will explain this election in a nutshell. Conservative Republicans simply can’t win statewide if voters understand them to be conservative.
Via Open Left, Democratic consultant Blair Butterworth explains Dave Reichert’s half million dollars in free (ie, illegal) TV advertising, and how this scam works.
According CQ, at $3.2 million thus far, Darcy Burner has raised more money than any other Democratic challenger in the nation. And as has been previously noted, this is not just a netroots thing, as Darcy has substantially more in district and in state individual contributors and contributions than Dave Reichert.
A pretty impressive show of grassroots support.
Washington’s unemployment rate fell to 5.8 percent in September, from a recent high of 6 percent in August, with the majority of job losses coming in the public sector:
More than 11,600 jobs were lost in the government sector in September, with 79 percent of those jobs in local government and 19 percent from state government.
So WA’s unemployment rate is 5.8 percent compared to 6.1 percent nationally (only 4.6 percent in the Seattle metropolitan area), while the state has shown a 1 percent net increase in jobs over the past 12 months, compared to a 0.7 percent decline nationally. And the vast majority of the job losses these days are in the government sector.
So what exactly is Dino Rossi’s complaint about the way Gov. Gregoire is handling our budget and our economy?
Yesterday, I reported that KOMO had given $180,000 worth in TV ad time to Rep. Dave Reichert on credit, an oddity in political advertising.
This morning, Kathy Neukirchen, head of Meida Plus, Rep. Reichert’s media buyer, confirmed for me that KOMO had given Reichert the time on credit, explaining the arrangement to me like this: Her firm gets its TV time for all its clients, political and commercial, on credit. Media Plus is a big local buyer and has an established relationship with the stations. She pays for the time at the end of the month (the practice is called “Net 30”). Her political clients are treated no differently, she says, than her commercial clients.
Neukirchen says Reichert pays her back daily as the ads run, and that Reichert has already paid her for yesterday’s ads and will pay her today for that portion of the rest of the week’s buy.
Burner’s camp says they’ve confirmed that KIRO has also agreed to run Reichert’s ads on credit. The total loaned time between KOMO and KIRO would amount to about $530,000.
KING reportedly turned down Media Plus’s “Net 30” request for the Reichert ad buys. Neukirchen would only say she doesn’t know what the stations have said, but all her contracts are done on credit. [UPDATE: I just talked to Jim Rose, Director of Sales & Marketing at KING, and he says, in fact, KING is extending credit to Neukirchen for the Reichert buys.]
The Burner campaign tells me their lawyers are “exploring legal options” on the matter. Neukirchen’s daily payback arrangement with Reichert, they say, amounts to a loan, and FEC rules do not allow corporations to loan money to candidates. (Nor are they allowed to donate unless it’s through a Political Action Committee. Corporate PAC limits are $10,000 per election cycle.)
FEC spokesman Bob Biersack would not offer any judgement on this particular case, telling me only that the Burner camp was free to file a complaint with the FEC. He did tell me that firms can “loan” money (and he put it in quotes) to campaigns if it’s “part of the general course of business.”
He explained: “If a company is providing services to a campaign and in the normal course it incurs charges and then gets paid in its established billing cycle, that’s the general course of business.”
Neukirchen’s political clients are lucky to benefit from her good standing with local TV. Political campaigns are not typically extended credit: It can create the appearance of favoritism from the media, and more practically speaking (from the stations’ point of view), fast-moving campaigns, which rely on donations, aren’t particularly stable debtors. (Also, given that not every campaign has access to high-end media firms like Media Plus, it’s not fair allow some campaigns to get ads on credit while others don’t have that opportunity.)
When I wrote a similar article during the 2006 election cycle on Mike McGavick’s special credit arrangement with KOMO (which led to a violation at the FEC because McGavick failed to report an in-kind contribution of $120,000 for loaned TV time), longtime GOP media buyer Brad Mott with Ad Ventures, told me, “Almost all political advertising is done on a ‘pay-seven-days-in-advance’ rule. Credit is a problem because if the bill doesn’t get paid, at what point does it become an illegal corporate contribution?”
Reichert’s quickie-loan arrangement with Neukirchen isn’t likely to be captured by FEC reporting. According Biersack at the FEC, any ad time that Reichert arranged after October 15 won’t be reported until 30 days after the election. At that point, according to Neukirchen’s arrangement, Reichert will have paid his obligations. Or at least, the public, which relies on FEC campaign reports to know how campaigns pay their bills, will have to trust that he eventually paid his obligation.
I am waiting to hear back from the Reichert campaign.
If they don’t speak up, I’ll guess we’ll just have to rely on Goldy’s take on the whole thing.
Exactly a month ago, after the Seattle Times editorial board transparently feigned bipartisanship by endorsing Barack Obama, I wrote:
As expected, the Seattle Times editorial board has endorsed Barack Obama for President of the United States, paving the way for endorsements of Republicans Dino Rossi, Rob McKenna, Sam Reed, Allan Martin, Dave Reichert and Cathy McMorris Rodgers, all the while leaving their vaunted bipartisan principles intact. At least, in their own minds.
In fact, with the possible exception of the race for Commissioner of Public Lands, I can’t imagine a single additional closely contested statewide or federal race in WA state in which the Times endorses a Democrat.
I’d be happy to be proven wrong. But I wouldn’t bet on it.
So, how did my predictions turn out? As of today, the Seattle Times has endorsed Republicans Dino Rossi, Rob McKenna, Sam Reed, Allan Martin, Dave Reichert and Cathy McMorris Rodgers, while Democratic challenger Peter Goldmark did indeed get the ed board’s nod for Commissioner of Public Lands. I ran the table.
Of course, the Times will publish meaningless endorsements of Democratic incumbents in the virtually uncontested races for Lt. Governor, Auditor and Insurance Commissioner (nominally Democratic in the case of Owen and Sonntag), but with the exception of Obama and Goldmark, the editors of the self-proclaimed paper of record for one of the bluest cities in America are once again backing a full slate of Republicans for every high profile contested statewide or federal race.
As is their right, I suppose.
But how thoughtful and meaningful are editorial endorsements when they can be so easily predicted a month in advance?
I’d say, not very.
UPDATE:
I want to be clear that I did not attempt to predict the Seattle P-I’s endorsements, because I couldn’t. No doubt the P-I’s ed board tends to lean significantly more liberal than the Times, but they are still media establishment types who overwhelmingly favor incumbents. And, as naive a notion as it is, the P-I seems to genuinely embrace nonpartisanship as a lofty ideal, whereas the Times merely manipulatively embraces it as useful rhetoric.
There’s yet another Republican campaign finance scandal brewing in Washington state, one with the potential to lead to felony charges, and so I eagerly scanned the headlines this morning to see if our dailies had figured out the huge story that was falling into their laps.
As Josh first reported yesterday, Dave Reichert is getting his TV ads on credit, an arrangement that now appears to amount to at least a half a million dollars in illegal loans. And what is the headline the Seattle Times chooses to slap on the story? “Burner loans campaign $140,000 for ads.”
Really? That’s the big story here? Are the Times’ editors that dumb, or are they just incredibly dishonest?
See, Darcy’s short-term bridge loan is legal, and extremely common. It’s nothing but a cashflow maneuver that permits the campaign to continue spending money as fast as it’s raising it without drawing down reserves to zero. Darcy doesn’t have the personal wealth to fund her own campaign, and you can be damn sure she plans to pay herself back.
But Reichert’s media credit card, that’s a clear violation of FEC rules:
If you loan money to a candidate or political committee, you have made a contribution, even if you charge interest on the loan. The outstanding amount of the loan counts against the contribution limits. Loan repayments, therefore, decrease the amount of your contribution.
Nevertheless, if your loan exceeds the limits, it is an illegal contribution, even if it is later repaid in full. Endorsements and guarantees of bank loans are also considered contributions. Endorsers and guarantors are liable for equal portions of a loan unless the agreement states otherwise. You alone, therefore, may not endorse a $10,000 loan to a candidate committee. There must be four other individual endorsers so that each one is liable only for $2,300, the per election limit.
The point of these regulations is obvious; if Reichert can buy advertising on credit, with payment not due until after the election, that means he can pay off 2008 expenditures with money raised for the 2010 cycle… something apparently Reichert did to a much smaller extent last time around. Now Reichert going much deeper into the hole, booking ads worth hundreds of thousands of dollars more than he has cash on hand, or any expectation of raising between now and November. And whether it be from the TV stations or his media buyer, that constitutes a massive campaign contribution far in excess of federal limits.
This is clearly illegal, and the campaign must know it, but like other Republican campaigns in Washington state this year, Reichert has apparently determined that the inevitable fines after the fact are just a part of the cost of winning.
That our local media can’t (or won’t) see this scandal, is truly stunning.
UPDATE:
To be fair to reporter Emily Heffter, she didn’t write the bullshit headline. And to be fair to the Times, at least they attempted to report on the story, even if they haven’t yet recognized its significance. Meanwhile, crickets from the P-I and the TNT.
Via Artistdogboy.
| Obama | McCain |
| 100.0% probability of winning | 0.0% probability of winning |
| Mean of 364 electoral votes | Mean of 174 electoral votes |
Yesterday’s analysis had Sen. Barack Obama leading Sen. John McCain by 360 to 178 electoral votes. If the election had been held yesterday, it almost certainly would have gone to Obama.
Today there were 17 new polls in 13 states released. The polls are something of a mixed bag, but Obama gets the better of ’em.
Now, after 100,000 simulated elections, Obama wins every one.
Obama gains back four electoral votes from yesterday for an average of 364 to McCain’s 174. Once again, an election held now would go for Obama with a near 100% chance.
Detailed results for this analysis are available at Hominid Views.
Methods are described in the FAQ. The most recent version of this analysis can be found on this page.
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!