The Physicst vs ice cream man

It is believed to be Illinois' first election on a Saturday -- a special election to fill the term of former House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert -- probably the second-most closely watched race across the country today after Wyoming's Democratic presidential primary between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

In the 14th Congressional District, Republican dairy magnate Jim Oberweis and Democratic former particle physicist Bill Foster have each spent a million or more of their own money, combined with millions from outside sources.

Both campaigns have thrown "the kitchen sink" at each other. Another example that negative ads work. Much of the outside money have come from the Democratic (Cow, can we trust Bill Foster, Nooooooooo) Republican (Foster, "There isn't a problem that can't be helped by throwing more money at it.") Congressional Committees. The one positive ad seen late in the campaign is Barack Obama's endorsement of Foster.

It would be nice to rely only upon dreamy positive ads in which a candidate is depicted as bring Morning back to America. But these types of ads can be easily ignored by TV viewers or seen as lacking substance. Negative ads that inform the public about an opponent's flaws and controversial stances are hard to ignore.

In essence, negative ads provide more bang for the buck.

But enough of the negative. If you are of our students working on the campaign in the 14th District right in our backyard and running nearly to the Iowa boarder, that's a positive. Blog us and tell us your story. Did you get somebody out to vote? Was it worth you time and effort? What interesting things or people did you see?

Because the election is on a Saturday, some schools, churches and other usual polling places may not be available, so voters will have to visit their county clerk's Web sites to find their new polling places.

Hastert's district has traditionally been Republican, but polls show today's election is a tossup.

"We've got, obviously, some challenges," said Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, who heads the GOP efforts to re-take Congress "We're certainly in the center of Obamamania in Illinois."

Obama and 28 Nobel prize winners have endorsed Foster. Hastert and Republican Presidential nominee John McCain have endorsed Oberweis.

Overtime, But No Sudden Death, in this Ballot Bowl

The 2 Regular Guys at CBS 2 School add more sports metaphors to the historic Democratic horserace:

During any campaign, you often hear examples of horserace journalism as the political news closely resembles the description of two thoroughbreds racing neck-and-neck down the stretch.

But with Hillary's clutch wins in Texas and Ohio, even more descriptive sports metaphors are needed to characterize this historic nomination contest.

Tennis

Polls indicated that Barack Obama was on the edge of beating Hillary in Ohio where she had a double digit lead. With her crucial win there, Hillary essentially held serve in the 4th set establishing Texas as the tie breaker. Her close win in Texas now pushes her match with Obama into an all-decisive 5th set that looks like it might be played at the Democratic National Convention.

NASCAR

After trading paint by countering each other's negative campaign attacks, Barack and Hillary are now racing side-by-side. But with John McCain securing the Republican nomination, their attempt to beat each other allows McCain to coast along in the lead.

Boxing

Since the Super Tuesday primaries last month, Obama has kept Hillary pinned to the ropes with his jabs and left hooks. But it now appears that Hillary is skilled in the art of rope-a-dope. Obama's inability to deliver the knockout punch in Texas and Ohio has given Hillary a chance to respond with some big blows of her own.

Texas Hold 'Em Poker

At the beginning of the Democratic campaign, Barack Obama was dealt decent hand equivalent to a 9 &10 of hearts. Hillary was dealt a very strong pair of Aces. But after the flop in Iowa revealed more hearts for Obama, he took the lead with his flush.

Many analysts have been predicting that Hillary would have to fold her hand, but she was dealt another Ace with her wins in Texas and Ohio.

While Obama is still in the lead, Hillary is now all in. She's fully committed to continuing this contest to the end because the 5th and final card could give her the jackpot…if Lady Luck is on Hillary's side.

VIDEO: CBS 2 School: Sports Analogies To Politics

Tiananmen Square: Democracy Crushed, or Seeded?

Every day Chinese citizens will know significantly less, and maybe care less as well, of the Communist government crushing the student-led pro-democracy protests in 1989 than you WVHS scholars.

Why should they bother, given that so few people in China these days display much interest in politics, let alone in Tiananmen? The messy transition to liberal capitalism experienced by former communist societies elsewhere, particularly Russia, is seen by many as a good reason for abandoning any aggressive pursuit of democracy.

For your assignement, due Wednesday 3/12 in a formal essay (2-3 pages) using the documents attatched here answer the question: Did the Chinese government's response at Tiananmen Square crush Democracy, or put it at a more realistic gradual timetable?

First there are two links to the coverage of Tiananmen in June of 1989:

The BBC on this day also has a short video clip:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/june/4/newsid_2496000/2496277.stm

The New York Times account is here. Remember, few foreign correspondents were there.

http://www.nytimes.com/specials/hongkong/archive/89tiananmen.html

On the 25th anniversary of the event, The Economist had this report:

http://polazzo.stuysu.org/where_are_they_now.htm

And this collection of documents from the U.S. National Security Archive:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB16/index.html

Cleary state you thesis, and back it with citation. Feel free to compare the Chinese transition to the Russian Road to Democracy (and Back?)

Lies, Damned lies and Polling Statistics?

Real Clear Politics http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ reports the average of major polls in Texas and Ohio were breaking towards Hillary Clinton on the eve of the Democratic Primary Contests. Click and check out the charts and graphs under, "Clinton Squeaks Ahead in Texas," and "Late Ohio Polls Break for Hillary."

Will these polls be accurate?

The AP reports that record early voting in Texas -- which might make up anywhere from 1/3 to 1/2 of Texas voters -- might have the election half-over in the Lone Star State. Early reporting might be a good indication in how Texas and the polls will go tonight.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i9EB1bZOa3bSVHoLh75KNClKet6AD8V68GR00

Like the undercount of cell phones in the 2004 presidential election, early voting has been problematic for polling services this campaign.

The most notable of the inaccurate polls predicted Barack Obama as the big winner of the New Hampshire and California primaries.

But the cause of the polling errors might have more to do with the big changes we have seen in these elections rather than big changes in public opinion.

To accurately predict whom voters will support on Election Day, a pollster must first determine who will be a voter. Surveys of “likely voters” typically define likely in many different ways.

Besides asking if a respondent will vote on Election Day, they might also ask a series of filters: Have you voted in the last two elections? Have you ever voted in a primary? Have you ever not voted? So when voter turnout is very high, as it has been this primary season, the poll might prove to be inaccurate because so many unlikely voters actually turn out.

The biggest change that has affected the accuracy of opinion polls seems to be the new phenomenon of early voting.Nearly 1 million Californians used early voting before the Super Tuesday election.

Polls that took a snapshot of popular opinion in the days before the election might not have been able to gauge those opinions that had been cast as votes weeks ago. This is yet another reminder that, while polls are crucial in feeling the pulse of American opinion, the Election Day ballot box still remains the most important and most accurate electoral survey.

Will Illinois take the lead in 17-year-old suffrage?

A movement by teenagers in Berkley, CA is pushing to get 17-year-old the right to vote in local elections. But a proposed Illinois Constitutional Amendment would give them the right to full suffrage, no strings attatched .

State Rep. Lou Lang is following the lead of the WVHS Youth & Government delegation, which twice has proposed a law to give 17-year-olds the right to vote. His proposed state constitutional amendment would make Illinois unique in allowing those age 17 to vote with no strings attached.

"I think we need to include more and more people in the process," said state Rep. Lou Lang, a Skokie Democrat and the amendment's sponsor. "I wanted Illinois to break new ground here."

The proposal comes as the youth vote has emerged with newfound political power this campaign season, particularly in the Democratic contest for president.

The Daily Herald reports that 11 states allow 17-year olds to cast primary ballots if they turn 18 before November's general election. Illinois would give new full-suffrage rights to 17-year-olds.

Here in Illinois, the proposal faces a long road, challenging history, and even if successful, 17-year-olds would not be able to vote in the November election.

First, supporters must garner support from 60 percent of lawmakers before May to get the question on the November ballot. Then Illinois voters would have the final say on the voting age.

It's been a while since the state's voters considered the issue. A 1970 Constitutional Convention in Illinois placed a question on the ballot for voters to decide whether the voting age should be lowered to 18 or remain at 21. Illinois voters chose 21.

A year later, as thousands of drafted teens were fighting and dying in Vietnam, the 26th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution gave 18-year-olds the right to vote in any federal or state election. And that amendment does not bar states from lowering the voting age.

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=141894

In California, teens have been rallying for local voting rights for the last few years.

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.dailycal.org/images/art/07.14.protest.KIM.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.dailycal.org/article.php%3Fid%3D18999&h=490&w=404&sz=64&hl=en&start=2&tbnid=Vg822KhaH7rWNM:&tbnh=130&tbnw=107&prev=/images%3Fq%3D17-year-old%2Bvote%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG

Personally, I have always felt in that revolutionary concept, of "No Taxation without Representation." If you pay taxes, which you are required to if you work and earn a wage, shouldn't you have a right to have a say in who is using your money?

Birds of a Feather Fly High in Russian Election

Two pigeons seen in front of a giant pre-election poster depicting Russian President Vladimir Putin and First Deputy Prime Minister and presidential hopeful Dmitry Medvedev in St. Petersburg, Russia.

After 24 hours of voting across 11 time-zones, Russians handed Dmitry Medvedev an overwhelming victory in the presidential election Sunday despite a lackluster campaign that was more coronation than contest from the moment last December when President Vladimir Putin endorsed him.

Medvedev won 70.1 percent of the vote, according to an exit poll, nearly matching Putin's tally in 2004 and infusing his victory with the kind of numbers he will claim as a genuine mandate. As expected, he crushed the anemic challenges of three opponents who never got to debate him and were drowned out by a deafening media drumbeat that Medvedev was "Putin's choice" and his victory would ensure the continuation of the popular president's policies.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/03/02/ST2008030201044.html

More on the Russian lead up to Sunday's election: First, from my post following Dr. Richard Farkas' presentation at the DuPage Social Studies Conference last March and then from The 2 Regular Guys from CBS 2 School, who contrast the Russian election with our competitive democractic primary and the ultra competitive 14th District Congressional Race, which some of you may get involved on Special Election Day on March 8.

Putin not ready to leave Prime Time

In his update on Russia 2007, Dr. Richard Farkas said he is convinced Vladimir Putin will not seek to change the Russian constitution in DeJure (by law) fashion to stay President.

DeFact(o)s, however, indicate that the leader of “Putin’s Russia” is not ready to leave the Prime Time. In fact, don’t be surprised if the Prime Minister position becomes the most powerful position in the Government.

The Russian constitution adopted, but never ratified, in 1993 limits the directly elected president to two four-year terms, and Putin is term-limited. The Prime Minister, appointed by the President, currently is nothing more than a figurehead. “Prime Time” Putin is all but completely independent of any checks and balances from the State Duma. Here’s the rub: Having already managed the Duma elections to his favor, if the legislature changed the power structure from presidential to parliamentary, Russia would remain stable. And who would be the most viable PM candidate?

According to Farkas, “Out of the spotlight, people would not really have the lens on Putin and there would be no limit on how long he could serve as Prime Minster.”

Brilliant!

More tidbits on Putin’s Russia 2007 edition, from his annual “press conference” in front of 1,200 “fair and balanced” journalists. Internet hacks were banned from attending:

Ø “Feelings of national pride and values have been restored in the Russian people and must be supported (ie: less tolerance, more nationalism)

Ø On being a year away from the March, 2008 presidential election with no candidates having emerged yet, “All potential candidates have jobs and are busy,’’ (Not like the U.S. Senate) Putin said, adding he would not hand-pick a successor.

Ø “The next election will not be acrimonious.” (No DNC or RNC talking points)

The December Duma elections and whatever presidential race shapes up should be very congenial. After all, only 4 of the former 44 political parties have >5% support to run a candidate. Two of those “opposition” parties have been managed by Putin to provide center/right and center/left opposition. All that’s left is Putin’s United Russia, and the old Communist Party.

Then there is Rule of Law Russian style, 2007 (modern democratic centralism?). Here are a couple of new laws passed by the legislature, signed and supported, of course, by the president. At least they can pass meaningful campaign finance reform in Russia:

Ø Civil servants have been banned from getting grants (or fund-raising) from foreign sources. They were already banned from getting donations from domestic sources – those would be bribes.

Ø Banned are public marches two weeks before or after the elections. This law is subject to federal authority enforcement.


Still, despite all of the above, Dr. Farkas does not diagnose a seemingly crashing democracy in Russia caused by pilot error.

“Clearly he has been the most competent Russian leader. Markedly better, and more sober, than Yeltsin. The problems are so monumental that even the best and brightest would have problems,’’ he said.

___________________

Putin Projections

With 0% of the vote reported (Friday), the 2 Regular Guys are projecting Putin as the winner.

Russian are not slated to go to the election polls until Sunday, March 2nd, but even the most novice pundit can predict this outcome.

Facing nominal opposition and securing the endorsement of President Vladamir Putin, Dmitri Medvedev is a sure winner in Russia's fourth presidential election since the breakup of the Soviet Union.

But the real winner will be Vladamir Putin, Russia's outgoing president.

For years, the Russian people have given Putin overwhelming support with more than 70% of Russians approving of his leadership. He would surely get elected to a third term, but Putin is abiding by the Russian Constitution that states no person can serve as president for more than two consecutive terms.

Putin named his successor when he announced that Medvedev was his preferred candidate. This essentially made Medvedev the next Russian president as he will not face any serious opponents and since the government controls the broadcast media which heavily favors President Putin. Some experts predict that with these advantages, Medvedev could win with more than 80% of the vote.

This election in Russia shows us that democracy should be considered as more than just voting.

A full democracy holds competitive elections where the ruling power has a chance to be voted out of office.Our primary elections have modeled this type of healthy democracy where the tough nomination battles have lingered far longer than normal as a testament to a field of strong candidates.

Locally, the fight to win the special election in the 14th Congressional District also shows this type of healthy electoral competition. The Democrat Bill Foster and the Republican Jim Oberweis have waged a high-profile campaign showing that the district vacated by former Speaker Dennis Hastert is no longer dominated by just one party.

Perhaps we will someday see this type of vibrant electoral competition in Russia, but their only election night suspense will be whether Putin's candidate wins 81% or 82% of the vote.

VIDEO: CBS 2 School: Russian Elections

You make the call

We've had a Red Phone Moment in the 2008 Democratic race for President. The New York Daily News has the You Tube versions of both Hillary Clinton's Red Phone Ad released late last week and Barack Obama's response.

A quiet home, a sleeping family, an ominous voice talks about a phone call signalling trouble.

Who do you want to answer it? The idea is scare the people witless. Karl Rove is probably chuckling thinking his influence has taken over the Democrats.

But this ad has its real roots in the 1964 Lyndon Johnson daisy ad against Barry Goldwater in which a shot of little girl picking the petals of a daisy is followed by the mushroom cloud of a nuclear explosion. The message (unspoken) was: "Do you want that nutcake to have his finger on the nuclear trigger?" Walter Mondale ran a famous red phone ad with the same message against Gary Hart in 1984.

Politico has a story on how the Texas primary could influence the general election. If Clinton's ad works and she wins Texas (but Obama is ultimately the nominee) the Republican 527 groups are going to go all out trying to scare people.

View the dualing ads here. Also, one of the keysfor Obama is how fast hs campaign has beenable to respond. The Harball technique of, "Leave No Shot Unanwered," was followed within the 24-hour news cycle.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/03/01/2008-03-01_barack_obama_video_mimics_hillary_clinto.html

You make the call. Is this type of politicl ad effective?

_______________

On the issue of foreign relations, it is interesting to note that of our recent Presidents, not many have had prior job experience:

George W. Bush (No; Gov. of TX)

Bill Clinton (No; Gov. of AK)

George HW Bush (Yes; VP, Ambassador to UN, Member of House of Reps)

Ronald Reagan (No; Gov. of CA)

Jimmy Carter (No; Gov. of GA)

___________________

We are coming off of an era in which voters have looked for Chief Executive experience. Before Carter, one has to go all the way back to FDR to find no prior foreign policy experience. (Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, Ike and Truman all had it). Ironically, FDR was rated No. 1 in the International Relations category of a C-Span survey of Presidential leadership

http://www.americanpresidents.org/survey/historians/international.asp