amyk's Blog

Posted by Brian Montopoli

As Saturday Night Live viewers well know, Tina Fey's much-talked-about impression of GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin has not been kind to the Alaska governor. It may even have played a role in fixing the public perception of the candidate, which, at least until last week's vice presidential debate, has largely been on the decline since she exploded onto the national scene.

Now the Chicago Sun-Times reports that Palin may appear on Saturday Night Live herself, potentially to make fun of Fey's American Express commercials. Bill Zwecker reports that while some McCain staffers want Palin to simply keep joking about Fey's impression on the campaign trail – she wrote "I'm not Tina Fey" on one backer's cell phone – others believe it is important that she appear on the show herself.

Palin would be far from the first candidate to appear on SNL after an unflattering portrayal. Earlier this year, Hillary Clinton appeared on the show standing next to an identically-dressed Amy Poehler, who had mockingly portrayed her, presumably to show she is in on the joke.

----------------------------

So what do you think?  Should Sarah Palin appear on Saturday Night Live?  Why or why not?

An unusual VP debate -- it actually matters

Tue Sep 30, 2008 11:30am EDT

By John Whitesides, Political Correspondent - Analysis

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Vice presidential debates rarely play a role in White House races, but the showdown between Republican Gov. Sarah Palin and Democratic Sen. Joe Biden will be different -- it could matter.

The highly anticipated encounter on Thursday between the verbose Biden and the sheltered Palin will likely draw a larger television audience than last week's first debate between their bosses, presidential rivals Barack Obama and John McCain.

The spotlight will be on Palin, the unknown moose-hunting mom from Alaska whose surprise choice shook up the White House race, made her a political celebrity and raised concerns about her readiness to step into the top job -- the prime function of the vice president.

Since then Palin has been protected from reporters, giving just three interviews and holding no news conferences. It is a strategy that has only intensified the concerns, raised the stakes for her first unscripted performance and made her the butt of late-night comedy jokes.

"Vice presidents normally don't matter, but there is a threshold they must cross to prove they can step in and be president," said Mitchell McKinney, a communications expert at the University of Missouri.

"The bar is low, but if she doesn't cross that threshold it could damage McCain," he said.

On paper, the pairing looks like a mismatch. Biden, 65, the talkative but unpredictable chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is one of the most knowledgeable Democratic foreign policy experts.

He will try to reassure voters who still harbor concerns about the relative lack of experience for Obama, a first-term senator from Illinois who has a slight lead in opinion polls ahead of the November 4 election.

Palin, 44, a self-described hockey mom, has seemed hesitant and heavily coached in her interviews. She must reassure voters who are worried about her being a heartbeat away from the presidency under the 72-year-old McCain, an Arizona senator.

'LOW EXPECTATIONS'

"It will be pretty easy for her to exceed expectations -- they couldn't be any lower," said David Steinberg, a debate coach at the University of Miami in Florida who recently watched tapes of her 2006 debates in the race for governor.

"She was very articulate, certainly competent and assertive," he said. "She was quite good."

The McCain campaign has been quick to attack anyone who criticizes Palin, accusing them of sexism or condescension. Biden will have to walk a fine line in not appearing too assertive with her.

"I don't want to be Joe Biden on debate night. He can't be a bulldog and he can't be a wallflower. He can't be too knowledgeable and he can't be too passive," said pollster John Zogby. "He'll be like the dad up there with his daughter -- and dads never win."

Biden was a forceful debater throughout the long Democratic primary season, when he unsuccessfully battled Obama for the nomination. But Steinberg said Biden was unlikely to challenge Palin directly and would take his case straight to voters.

"He should look at the camera, kind of like McCain did on Friday night, and avoid a direct interchange with her. He'll try to focus the debate on McCain, not her," he said.

But Biden has been mistake prone, most recently when he referred to a televised speech by President Franklin Roosevelt after the stock market crash of 1929 -- four years before Roosevelt took office and long before television became widely available.

"The fear for Democrats is that Joe Biden will slip up and say something he shouldn't and patronize her. That is exactly what they are working to avoid in practice sessions," Steinberg said.

Vice presidential debates rarely produce campaign-changing moments, although they have featured memorable performances. In 1988, Democratic Sen. Lloyd Bentsen delivered his classic one-liner to Republican Sen. Dan Quayle: "You're no Jack Kennedy."

The 1992 debate featured the befuddled performance of independent candidate Ross Perot's running mate, Adm. James Stockdale, who wondered aloud: "Who am I? Why am I here?"

Both candidates are taking breaks from the campaign trail to practice for their encounter. Palin plans two days of debate preparation at McCain's Arizona retreat.

The campaigns have tried to shape expectations, and Obama aides said they had seen tapes of Palin's debates during her run for governor.

"She's a terrific debater. She has performed very well. We expect she'll give a great performance," Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said.

-----------------------------

Are you anxious to watch the debate Thursday?  What are your expectations?

Ben Adler

Fri Sep 19, 6:27 AM ET

Third-party presidential candidates Ralph Nader and Bob Barr will be on nearly all the state ballots on Nov. 4, according to their campaigns and independent tallies, raising the threat they could be spoilers on Election Day and siphon key votes away from Barack Obama and John McCain.

Nader, the left-leaning independent, won more than 2.7 percent of the vote as the Green Party candidate in the 2000 election, when Republican George W. Bush barely squeaked by Democrat Al Gore. Many Democrats blame Nader for taking votes from Gore and tilting the election to Bush.

This campaign season, Nader and Barr together are drawing about 3.3 percent of the vote in recent polls – easily enough to swing the results in a tight race, as the contest is shaping up to be.

“If the race remains close, anything could tip the difference,” said non-partisan pollster Scott Rasmussen. He cautioned, however, that both Nader and Barr were slipping in recent surveys, and could decline even more by Election Day.

“People who are unhappy with a candidate say they will vote for a third party, but they get more dissatisfied with the possibility of helping the greater evil win as the election gets closer,” Rasmussen said.

Nader is on the ballot in 45 states and the District of Columbia, but he missed the ballots in Georgia, Indiana, North Carolina, Oklahoma and voter-rich Texas, all of which are leaning towards McCain, according to recent surveys.

“Nader was prudent,” said Richard Winger, a ballot access expert who is advising the minor party candidates and who provided an authoritative list of the state ballots for November. “He knew what all the laws were and didn’t waste his money on the five that were too hard.”

“I don’t think anyone has gotten on more ballots more quickly from zero,” Nader claimed in an interview with Politico, saying that he did not begin his ballot drive until late May. His four-month drive faced serious hurdles, because unlike the 2000 campaign, Nader does not have the assistance of a political party this year, and his campaign is strapped for funds.

Cynthia McKinney, a former Democratic congresswoman from Georgia, is the Green Party’s candidate in November and is on the ballot in 32 states and the District of Columbia. Chuck Baldwin, the nominee of the Constitution Party, a right-leaning counterpart to the Greens, is on 37 state ballots, according to Winger’s tally.

Nader is on the ballot in two more states this year than in 2000, when he made the cut in 43 states, but his potential Electoral College tally is smaller this time because he did not qualify for the ballot in the mega-state of Texas. Instead, he added smaller states such as Idaho, Wyoming and South Dakota to the places where he will run.

Bob Barr, the former Republican congressman from Georgia who is the Libertarian Party candidate, made the ballot in at least 44 states, according to Winger. Barr did not make the ballot in D.C. or West Virginia, and he is challenging Connecticut’s decision to drop him from the rolls after the state invalidated signatures on his candidate petitions and said that he did not reach the minimum.

Barr also has mounted court challenges to rulings leaving him off the ballots in Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts and Oklahoma.

In Louisiana, Barr asserts, the Secretary of State’s office was closed for a week because of Hurricane Gustav when the petition filing deadline elapsed. In Maine, Barr submitted some petitions a day late, but he claims that deadlines were never rigidly enforced in the past. In Oklahoma, Barr is asking a federal court to hold that the state’s ballot requirements, which are among the toughest in the country, are too onerous, citing as evidence that only the Republican and Democratic candidates qualified for the ballot in 2004 and this year.

On Monday Barr defeated a court challenge from a Republican Party official in Pennsylvania who argued that the Libertarian Party had improperly substituted Barr’s name for another candidate’s who had been submitted earlier. It was the only state where Republicans have challenged him.

Massachusetts blocked Barr from the ballot for a similar reason, and he is contesting that decision as well.

Nader told Politico that he thinks the extended primary season helped divert the Democrats’ attention from his candidacy. He also filed suit against the Democratic National Committee last year for its effort to keep him off ballots in 2004. That, Nader said, and the indictment of Democratic staffers in the Pennsylvania State house for allegedly using state resources to work on the party’s challenge to him may have discouraged Democrats from using similar tactics this time, he said.

Fox trumps Netroots; bloggers rebel

By MIKE ALLEN | 5/1/08 10:30 PM EST  

Barack Obama appearing on Fox. Courtesy Fox News.

The nation’s top Democrats are suddenly rushing to appear on the Fox News Channel, which they once had shunned as enemy territory as the nemesis of liberal bloggers.

The detente with Fox has provoked a backlash from progressive bloggers, who contend the party’s leaders are turning their backs on the base — and lending credibility and legitimacy to the network liberals love to hate — in a quest for a few swing votes.

In a span of eight days, Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY.) and Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean are all taking their seats with the network that calls itself “fair and balanced” but is widely viewed as skewing conservative.

With the party’s presidential contest reduced to hand-to-hand combat, Democrats are turning to the ratings leader among cable news channels in a clear rebuff to the liberal activists known as the Netroots.

Markos Moulitsas, founder of the leading liberal site Daily Kos, told Politico’s Michael Calderone: "Democrats are being idiotic by going on that network.”

Ari Melber, the Net movement correspondent for The Nation, told Politico by phone that progressive activists and the Netroots are “not happy about it.”

“I don’t think that it is tenable to completely neglect or ignore what your base wants,” Melber said.

The Democratic leaders’ new openness to Fox reflects the liberal left’s diminishing power, at least at this point in the political cycle. Once feared by the Democratic candidates, these activists are now viewed at least in part as an impediment to winning the broad swatch of support needed to clinch the nomination.

Goaded in part by a taunting “Obama Watch” clock displayed by Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace, Obama appeared last Sunday after resisting the show’s entreaties throughout the campaign.

Clinton had a civil interview on Wednesday night with primetime host Bill O’Reilly, who has often mocked her husband.

And Dean will appear this weekend on “Fox News Sunday.”

Roger Ailes, the president of Fox News, took the boycott in stride, commenting that more Democrats watch Fox than watch CNN or MSNBC, the channel’s cable news competitors.

Network records show that since the campaign began in January 2007, Clinton has given 13 interviews to Fox News anchors and correspondents and Obama has given 10.

--------------------------

Why do you think these top democrats are choosing to appear on FOX Newschannel?  Is this good or bad for their campaigns? 

What are your FOX Newschannel feelings? 

"You know, so this idea that he’s (Sen. Barack Obama) an elitist – so she’s an elitist, we are elitists. We are. We feel like we know what’s best for the country – just like the Republicans. We’re all elitists, because the people we’re listening to, those are not the real people of the world."    -- Whoopi Goldberg

---------------------------

Found this quote online today and thought it was interesting.  People often think of Republicans as being elitists.  Could the same be said for Democrats in the context Whoopi describes? 

What are your thoughts?

(*by the way.. here's the definition of elitism - The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources. )

Obama's lead over Clinton narrows: McCain Edges out Both

Wed Mar 19, 2008 11:07am EDT

By Steve Holland

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat Barack Obama's big national lead over Hillary Clinton has all but evaporated in the U.S. presidential race, and both Democrats trail Republican John McCain, according a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.

The poll showed Obama had only a statistically insignificant lead of 47 percent to 44 percent over Clinton, down sharply from a 14 point edge he held over her in February when he was riding the tide of 10 straight victories.

Illinois Sen. Obama, who would be America's first black president, has been buffeted by attacks in recent weeks from New York Sen. Clinton over his fitness to serve as commander-in-chief and by a tempest over racially charged sermons given by his Chicago preacher.

The poll showed Arizona Sen. McCain, who has clinched the Republican presidential nomination, is benefiting from the lengthy campaign battle between Obama and Clinton, who are now battling to win Pennsylvania on April 22.

McCain leads 46 percent to 40 percent in a hypothetical matchup against Obama in the November presidential election, according to the poll.

That is a sharp turnaround from the Reuters/Zogby poll from last month, which showed in a head-to-head matchup that Obama would beat McCain 47 percent to 40 percent.

"The last couple of weeks have taken a toll on Obama and in a general election match-up, on both Democrats," said pollster John Zogby.

Matched up against Clinton, McCain leads 48 percent to 40 percent, narrower than his 50 to 38 percent advantage over her in February.

"It's not surprising to me that McCain's on top because there is disarray and confusion on the Democratic side," Zogby said

Among independents, McCain led for the first time in the poll, 46 percent to 36 percent over Obama.

He was behind McCain by 21 percent among white voters.

The March 13-14 poll surveyed 525 likely Democratic primary voters for the matchup between Clinton and Obama. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.

For the matchup between McCain and his Democratic rivals, 1004 likely voters were surveyed. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.2 percentage points.

-------------------------

As you know.. these polls will change a hundred times or more before election day in November.  But I'm curious to hear your thoughts thus far. 

Why do you think McCain beats both Democratic candidates right now?  Once a Democratic nominee is tapped.. will that make a big difference?

OrlandoSentinel.com

CAMPAIGN 2008 Crist says he's OK with Dem do-over

But a spokeswoman says the statement is not an endorsement, because money is tight.

From staff and wire reports

March 3, 2008

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist said Sunday that he would support a repeat of the Democratic presidential primary so the state's delegates can be counted at the party's national convention.

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said he's open to the possibility.

Primary elections are paid for by a state's taxpayers, so the offer from Crist, a Republican, is "very helpful" because money is an issue, Dean said on CNN's Late Edition.

Later Sunday, Crist spokeswoman Erin Isaac told the Orlando Sentinel that though the governor supports seating Florida Democratic delegates at the party's convention this summer, he did not commit the state to paying for a redo of the Jan. 29 primary, declared nonbinding by the Democratic National Committee because the early date violated party rules.

"He supports seating the delegates, but he's not saying how it should happen," Isaac said.

The DNC has suggested that Florida Democrats hold caucuses before mid-June that could be used to decide delegates. But such an event would cost about $4 million, with another primary topping even that price tag.

Florida taxpayers paid for the Jan. 29 election, but with the state budget facing cuts because of the weak economy, state officials have said they would not help underwrite a Democratic do-over.

On Saturday, the bulk of Florida's 210 delegates to the national convention in Denver were named, based on the results of the primary, won by New York Sen. Hillary Clinton.

----------------------------------

Would you like to see to see a re-do of the Democratic primary?   If so, would you want the January 29th results to count or would you want to re-do the entire election from start to finish?

Will you be staying up late tonight as the Super Tuesday results roll in?

Is Super Tuesday YOUR Superbowl? 

Lots of chatter going on today about the candidates. 

Senator Clinton had to bail out of two live interviews in recent days because she was having uncontrollable coughing fits.

Former Senator Bob Dole sent a letter to conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh asking Limbaugh to back off Senator John McCain (Limbaugh doesn't like him).

Barack Obama is laying low today.. hanging out with his family in Chicago.. but he had some serious star power on his side over the weekend when Oprah came out again to talk up her favorite candidate.

And Mitt Romney is fighting with McCain about who's the REAL conservative.

Who will win California? New York? Missouri?

Let the blogging begin!

I'll be heading out to vote shortly.. hoping for a line that's not too long and an election volunteer who can still manage a smile when she hands me my ballot.  I'm also hoping my effort is not in vain; that my vote counts and will be counted.

That being said.  Did you vote today?  How was your expererience?

By GLEN JOHNSON, Associated Press

Barack Obama has won the presidential endorsement of Sen. John Kerry, the Democrats' 2004 nominee who lost to George W. Bush.

Kerry, a senator from Massachusetts, planned to announce his support Thursday at 11 a.m. EST at a rally at the College of Charleston, said a Democrat familiar with Kerry's decision. The 2004 nominee was to argue that Obama can best unite the country and has the potential to create transformational change, the person said.

Kerry lost the South Carolina Democratic primary in 2004 to John Edwards, the former North Carolina senator who now is running third in the 2008 campaign behind Hillary Rodham Clinton and Obama.

Besides any potential help for Obama, Thursday's endorsement was a slap at Edwards, who was Kerry's running mate in the last election. The two had their differences during the campaign over strategy and spending. In post-mortem interviews, Edwards said he would have been more aggressive in challenging the unsubstantiated allegations of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the Vietnam War veterans who questioned Kerry's military record.

Kerry's endorsement also was a jab at Clinton, the New York Democrat who won the New Hampshire primary after a loss to Obama in the Iowa caucuses.

Kerry had withheld his endorsement, hoping to have an impact on the race and avoid the fate of fellow Democrat Al Gore, the 2000 nominee who endorsed Howard Dean in 2004 shortly before the former Vermont governor's campaign imploded. Gore has made no endorsement so far this year.

While Kerry has been close to Clinton's husband, the former president, he was incensed in 2006 when she chided him after Kerry suggested that people who don't go to school "get stuck in Iraq." Aides said Kerry meant to jab at Bush and say "get us stuck in Iraq," and that he didn't appreciate Clinton piling onto the criticism he was already getting for the remark.

Kerry himself had considered running for president in 2008, but that plan fizzled with the botched remark. For many Democrats, his words revived bitter memories of his missteps in 2004, when he lost to Bush.

As for Obama, Kerry gave the young Illinois state senator his first turn in the national spotlight when he chose him to deliver the keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention. Later that year, Obama won election as a U.S. senator.

-------------------------

What do you think about this endorsement?  

Does Kerry have the power to push Obama out ahead as the clear front-runner for the Dems?

Hillary: A genius?

WOLFEBORO, N.H.  — Former President Clinton says his wife is a “world-class genius” when it comes to improving the lives of others.

Clinton stuck mostly to familiar themes in two hour-long appearances Thursday, describing at length what he views as the nation’s biggest challenges. Nearly 15 minutes into his first speech, he added almost as an afterthought that “everything I’m saying here is my wife’s position, not just mine.”

It was his third trip to New Hampshire in little more than a month, and the visit came the day before Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton was to return to the Granite State for two days of campaigning.

Calling the ability to help others the most important quality in a president, Clinton first compared the successes of his administration in creating jobs and other areas to the failures of the Bush administration before finally turning the focus to his wife, a New York senator.

“The reason she ought to be president, over and above her vision and her plans is that she has proven in every position she has ever had in life, whether it was in elected office or not, that she is a world-class genius in making positive changes in other people’s lives,” he said.

Change vs. experience has been a theme of the Democratic presidential race, and Clinton said the two are not mutually exclusive.

Again, he defended himself before praising Hillary Clinton, calling it an oversimplification to say that in 1992, he was the change candidate to George H.W. Bush’s experience.

“When I came here, I was 46, but I was the senior governor in America,” Bill Clinton said. “I had worked hard on the very economic issues I said I’d try work on as president for years and years and years.”

Clinton lauded his wife for her early work for the Children’s Defense Fund, her efforts to improve education in Arkansas when he was the state’s governor and her work in the U.S. Senate, repeatedly and forcefully calling her “an agent of change.”

“She’s got the right vision, big plans and a proven ability to change lives for the better. Experience and change are only opposed in values if you’re so experienced you don’t have any energy left and you can’t cut it, or if your experience is in fighting change,” he said. “But if you know how to do things, and you prove it over a long time that you can make change in other people’s lives, I think that is a pretty strong recommendation.”

-------------------------------------

What do you think of former President Bill Clinton's role in his wife's campaign?  Is he helping or hurting?

Howard Fineman

On the Republican side, meanwhile, the race is shaping up in an even more unexpected way: a contest between two former Northern moderates (Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney) for the right to take on a Southern Baptist preacher, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who believes in the inerrancy of Scripture but not in Darwinian evolution.

This week is the last chance the candidates will gather en masse to confront each other, and in a neutral setting. They are wending their way through ice storms to Iowa, where the Des Moines Register and Iowa Public Television are hosting back-to-back debates.

Here’s where things stand for the major candidates with the most to gain and lose in the debates, in Iowa, and in the early going. Take a good look at the rest of the field. They won’t be around for long.

SEN. BARACK OBAMA

National polls still give Hillary a double-digit lead. Those polls mean nothing. What matters now is not the number but the direction, and Obama is movin’ on up at a rapid pace. Little pieces of evidence matter. In Manchester, N.H., the other day, Democratic Gov. John Lynch showed up at the Obama-Oprah rally, ostensibly to introduce Oprah, but, really to cover his bets politically. The newest polls in the state show why: Obama is tied with Hillary, and people are literally exchanging her lawn signs for his. If he can win Iowa – and it remains a big if – Hillary’s campaign could collapse. New Hampshire would almost surely go his way. The Culinary Workers in Nevada might well endorse him, as could influential South Carolina Democratic Rep. Jim Clyburn. Black Democrats have complained for years that Iowa and New Hampshire are “too white.” But the irony is, South Carolina African-Americans I talked to last weekend want to see if Obama can win white votes before they commit to him. There is no better way of doing that than in Iowa and New Hampshire. And don’t forget something else: he has 150,000 online contributors. He can raise cash fast.

SEN. HILLARY CLINTON

If she is going to argue that Obama is unelectable in the fall – if she is going to argue that the Democrats cannot afford to take the risk on a Southside Chicago street organizer – she had better get to it in the debate this week. But it is a tricky proposition.  In a way, Hillary is trapped by her own do-it-yourself feminist ethos. She should have surrogates out there pounding away at Obama. I haven’t seen them. And her husband, evidently, won’t do it. Why should Bill Clinton tarnish his image as “America’s first black president” by attacking the man who might be the real deal? His circle is beginning to complain, loudly, about how Hillary is running her campaign. That kind of circular firing squad chatter is the first sign of a campaign headed into oblivion.

JOHN EDWARDS

Quite simply, this Iowa debate (and Iowa itself) is his first and last chance. He has placed all his money and bets for years on Iowa, where he is practically a local at this point. He absolutely HAS to win to get the media attention he needs to leverage his effort here into national momentum. He has the best, most cogent and inspiring stump speech, and a good, loyal organization. He could get pummeled by media dynamics. There will be exit polls on caucus night, but they will not be an accurate reflection of the final tallies of caucus delegates – the legally meaningful number – until later. Also, he is strongest in the small western towns, whose disproportionate influence in the delegate tallies (don’t ask) won’t show up in the exits. In other words, he could win but not get credit for it by the time the winners are declared.

MIKE HUCKABEE

He can expect to be under fire from all sides, and his goal has to be to keep smiling and talking and explaining in a genial way. The man has a temper and not the thickest of skins, but he is also a brilliant rhetorical tactician and a stone-cold survivor of some of the roughest local politics in the nation, in Arkansas. As a preacher and then as a novice politician, he said and stood for some controversial things – things that come awfully close to sounding like he wanted to use public office to bring the nation to Christ. Ironically, it’s Mitt Romney who has had to defend his faith, but it’s Huckabee – an ordained minister – who has the real explaining to do. But his competitors probably won’t press that case – too dangerous. Instead, they will focus on immigration, taxes and other less freighted issues. If Huck wins Iowa, he heads straight for South Carolina – the real deal for the GOP – and he will be hard to stop there.

MITT ROMNEY

The bad news for Romney is that he is getting blown out in Iowa, where he spent too much time and money. He and Rudy have to hope that the ol’ prosecutor himself, Fred Thompson, is willing to step up and try to take down Huckabee. Romney’s hopes now rest not in Iowa, but in New Hampshire, where he would have to make his stand. Huckabee is the revenge of history on the GOP. Party strategists built the base on evangelicals in the South. Now they will have to live with the results.

RUDY GIULIANI

He clearly loves Judith Nathan, which is a good thing, because that love might cost him the nomination. The “Tryst Fund” stories came at the worst possible time, and were particularly damaging because they involved the use of police resources by the law-and-order guy. He barely survived a grilling that Tim Russert gave him on “Meet the Press.” Also, terrorism has faded as an issue. The top one now is the economy, which, on the GOP side, is translated into fears about immigration. Rudy is not, shall we say, well positioned on that issue.

--------------------------

Another interesting tidbit today from right here in the Sunshine state..  Giuliani is no longer the leading Republican candidate in Florida.   It's now Huckabee.. followed by Romney.

What are your thoughts on all this movement in the polls?