Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s victory last week in the Pennsylvania presidential primary bought Mrs. Clinton time, but it’s what might fill the time that troubles Democrats: an increasingly sharp dialogue .Will either of those constituencies leave their grievances at home come November? Will large numbers stay home altogether if their history-making candidate loses the nomination? The reassurances, and the warnings, are flying.
Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have all promised a resolution shortly after the last of the primaries in June, and have urged superdelegates to fall in line behind one candidate or the other.
But even as Mr. Dean and others lament the downward tone of the campaign, they say that with the convention in Denver in August, the healing will begin. They dismiss the intramural tensions wrought by the protracted season, citing historical patterns of voters uniting behind the nominee after similarly competitive primaries.
Still, depending on the circumstances (particularly if those circumstances involve the superdelegates overriding the popular vote or the choice of the pledged delegates), the historical comparisons might not hold up. Identity politics, some say, create a deeper schism, and the polarization by race exposed by results in Pennsylvania and elsewhere could indicate a rift that can’t be mended easily.
Certainly the depth of voters’ devotion pulsates on every politics blog, with loyalists in one camp insisting they would never back the other’s candidate. Some threaten to vote for John McCain or a third-party candidate. Whether that is fleeting angst or lasting sentiment remains to be seen.
Michael Dawson, a political science professor at the University of Chicago, posited last week at TheRoot.com that if Mr. Obama is not the nominee: “The Democratic Party will face the Herculean task of trying to mobilize its most loyal constituency — black voters — in the face of deep and widespread black bitterness and active campaigns in the black community encouraging black voters to defect or abstain. You can already hear the angry comparisons. Just like in 2000, the protests will go, an election will have been ‘stolen.’ ”
In an interview, Mr. Dawson elaborated, saying that a Clinton nomination could result in disaffection among black voters. “The sentiment is there and it’s very dangerous,” he said. “I think it doesn’t take any work at all for images of 2000 to become visible again in black discourse” if Mrs. Clinton “takes the nomination away from Obama.”
The racial undertones have been exacerbated by the contentious remarks of former President Bill Clinton toward Mr. Obama. Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina warned last week that Mr. Clinton’s comments had caused an irreparable breach with African-Americans.
Jamal Simmons, an Obama supporter and Democratic analyst, agreed that this election cycle is different. The race-and-gender divide makes for a “treacherous” road ahead, he said. While Mrs. Clinton keeps pointing to her victory in Michigan (where Mr. Obama’s name was not on the ballot), he noted: “She lost every single precinct in the city of Detroit. You cannot win the state of Michigan without African-American voters.”
Democrats including Mr. Simmons were quick to point out, though, that were Mrs. Clinton to be the nominee, she would still benefit from what many consider a change or anger election — the wish of many voters to overturn the Republican hold on the White House after eight years, given the economy and the war in Iraq.
But disenchantment could affect the November vote in states where victory is all about slim margins. There was Ohio, for example, where Senator John Kerry lost to President Bush in 2004, in part because Mr. Bush garnered a sizable portion of black voters when issues like a gay-marriage amendment were on the ballot.
“Democrats can’t win in November without black people,” said James Rucker, executive director for ColorofChange.org, a grassroots online organization that says it has 400,000 minority activists, adding that “party leaders know it and so do everyday black folks.”
Much turns on what the superdelegates decide to do. In a Gallup poll in mid-March, before the Pennsylvania primary, 7 percent of Democrats and Democrat-leaning independent voters said they would not vote at all in November if superdelegates gave the nomination to Mrs. Clinton, and 2 percent indicated a third-party choice. In addition, 11 percent said they would vote for a Republican.
Maren Hensla, director of independent expenditures with Emily’s List, which has campaigned heavily for Mrs. Clinton, acknowledged that some surveys also suggest that women (who voted 2-1 for Mrs. Clinton in Pennsylvania) may drift away if she is not the nominee.
But unlike the split between, say, Jimmy Carter and Senator Edward M. Kennedy in 1980, she said, there is little policy difference between the 2008 Democrats. So perhaps any disaffection among women would not be enduring.
Other Democratic analysts believe the tensions will dissipate once a nominee is chosen. Stephanie Cutter, a campaign spokeswoman for Mr. Kerry in 2004, said the battle lines are “something for the party to pay attention to.” But, she added, “It’s the responsibility of everyone, including Barack and Hillary, to pull the base together.” She said either could do that through endorsements and campaigning, by providing validation of the other.
Page Gardner, head of the Women’s Voices, Women’s Vote Action Fund, senses that the overarching issue of economic worry will persuade people — especially her core target of unmarried women who have begun voting in larger numbers — to overcome any disappointment.
Others also view the November lens as harboring ways of smoothing over differences. William Julius Wilson, a Harvard sociologist, said he believed “there is too much hysteria right now — understandably people are upset.” He predicted that Mr. Obama will win the nomination, and that both Clintons will campaign hard for a Democrat to win the White House, with Mr. Clinton “regaining the affection of black voters.”
Come fall, he said, “The focus will be on McCain, who will be burdened with his association with the president, an economy in deep recession and an unpopular war in Iraq that rages on.”
The high level of discontent toward the Bush administration is readily apparent in surveys of public opinion, which could help Democrats, said Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center. But, given the firm allegiances to Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama, he added: “I think that does put a lot of pressure on the Democratic Party to say this person did not win or lose the nomination on the basis of his or her identity.”
4/2/08
New York Times
Like the Candidates, TV's Political Pundits Show Signs of Diversity 
The historic and long-running presidential campaigns of Senator Barack Obama and Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton have injected issues of race and gender into politics as never before. With campaign coverage center stage on the cable channels, producers and critics are again assessing the diversity among pundits, who talk (and talk) about things like Mr. Obama’s pastor, the Hispanic vote,
Skip to next paragraph
Both MSNBC and CNN this election season have given new prominence to a handful of contributing commentators from varied backgrounds and perspectives: blacks, Hispanics and women. Whether such moves signal real progress in diversifying the punditocracy or merely reflect the needs of a particular news cycle is the question, some media experts say. The most prominent positions on television remain overwhelmingly with those who are white and male, and some critics note how striking that non-inclusion can seem during this election year.
“Whatever progress has been made with contributors and commentators as of late, the cable networks have a long way to go before they look like the American people,” said Karl Frisch, the spokesman for Media Matters for America, a liberal television watchdog group. He added that white men were the hosts of all the major Sunday morning talk shows, the major prime-time cable news programs and — except for Katie Couric, a relative newcomer — the network evening news broadcasts.
But incremental gains should not be dismissed even if more change is needed, said Pamela Newkirk, an associate professor of journalism at New York University and author of “Within the Veil: Black Journalists, White Media” (New York University Press, 2000).
Black commentators under 40 at CNN, like the journalist and radio host Roland S. Martin; Amy Holmes, a conservative strategist and a former senior speechwriter for Bill Frist, Republican of Tennessee, the former Senate majority leader; and Jamal Simmons, a Democratic strategist, Obama supporter and veteran press spokesman with international experience, have been “breakout stars” this election, Professor Newkirk said.
“They bring such a fresh perspective that we are unaccustomed to hearing in the mainstream media,” she said. “Hopefully, the value of having different perspectives will be appreciated beyond this historic campaign.”
The 2008 lineup at CNN also includes Alex Castellanos, a Cuban-born Republican strategist, and Leslie Sanchez, a Mexican-American Republican strategist who has also appeared on Fox News.
Donna Brazile, who is black and a well-known Democratic strategist, is also a regular CNN contributor who was part of the team in 2004.
Their counterparts at MSNBC include Michelle Bernard, a lawyer by training, who is black and conservative; Rachel Maddow, who is white and has a show on the liberal Air America Radio; Eugene H. Robinson, a black columnist for The Washington Post; and Joe Watkins, a Republican strategist who is also black. Last week Harold Ford Jr., a former congressman from
Juan Williams, who is black and a National Public Radio correspondent, is a longtime regular on “Fox News Sunday,” which also uses minority female analysts like Angela McGlowan, a Republican strategist who is black; Michelle Malkin, a conservative Filipino-American journalist; and Linda Chavez, who is Hispanic and held positions in the Reagan administration. A recent addition is Laura Ingraham, a syndicated radio host who is white.
All the commentators appear when the networks need them, but are on television more than guest pundits from the outside. While a few are unknown to general audiences, they all come with extensive résumés that mostly include backgrounds in journalism, politics, academe, nonprofit organizations or business.
“We’re trying to attract a new audience drawn to the broad interest in this campaign,” said Phil Griffin, senior vice president of NBC News and the executive in charge of MSNBC.
When asked how the network finds its commentators, Mr. Griffin said, “It’s word of mouth — someone says, ‘Let’s use this person.’ ” He added, “After the Don Imus situation, we had to reflect and say we’ve got to make a bigger commitment” to diversity.
Jon Klein, the president of CNN’s domestic networks, said he believed that the same historical forces that put Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton on the cusp of the Democratic nomination also meant that more people of color and more women were available as talking heads. The channel did not round them up just because of this election, he said, adding that CNN has a commitment to reflect the country.
“With the advent of the Internet, consumers realized that there are a lot of other voices,” he said. “There are an awful lot of people writing, at think tanks, advising campaigns.”
Barbara Ciara, president of the National Association of Black Journalists, said that all the election coverage on television left “a lot to be desired” when it comes to her members. The black pundits often disappear as quickly as they arrive, she said, and too often talk only about race.
A more saladlike pundit mix has been front and center in the last couple of weeks, she said, because of news developments: Mr. Obama’s speech on race, prompted by the controversy over the remarks of his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.; and Geraldine Ferraro’s assertion that Mr. Obama’s race was a reason for his political success.
Diversity is not just good journalism but also good business, Ms. Ciara and others said.
“It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to understand that a large number of the audience is black, Hispanic and women,” said Al Primo, a television news executive who invented the “Eyewitness News” format decades ago and helped give many black and Hispanic journalists their first breaks. He added, “If you’re a Hispanic-American or an African-American, you don’t want to get a sense that they don’t understand your perspective.”
With hours to fill, political coverage consumes the cable channels. During the week that included Feb. 5 (the day of coast-to-coast nominating contests) CNN’s ratings among viewers 18 to 34 were up 232 percent over the corresponding week in the 2004 election, and, CNN officials said, its audience on that date was 36 percent black and Hispanic. Fox attracted 78 percent more young viewers, and MSNBC was up 400 percent (although from a much smaller base) from the same week during the 2004 election.
Tom Rosenstiel, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, said that cable programs relied more and more on people who can analyze campaign developments, rather than just report them. So television needs more pundits and more kinds of pundits, he said.
“In the past week we have seen a distinct difference in commentary on Rev. Wright from people who have spent time in black churches and those who have not,” said Gwen Ifill, a senior correspondent for “The Newshour With Jim Lehrer” on PBS and moderator of “Washington Week.”
Recently, on CNN, when Mr. Martin butted heads with a guest, Tony Beam, a host of “Christian Worldview Today,” he was able to say that his listeners at his radio station back in
“In any other year, when Geraldine Ferraro said what she did, it would have been people saying, ‘Oh, no, she didn’t mean anything,’ ” added Mr. Martin, a nationally syndicated columnist and author. He predicted a growing appetite for more multidimensional analysis.
Indeed, Ms. Sanchez indicated that she had plenty of television suitors. “I’m everywhere,” she said, adding that in addition to her work for CNN, she had recently been on “Studio B With Shepherd Smith” on Fox discussing the controversy over Mr. Obama’s former pastor, as well as the fight over the primaries in
She and Ms. Bernard of MSNBC, like the other analysts, said they were not confined to speaking about race and gender but did not shy away from them, either.
Ms. Bernard, the president of the Independent Women’s Forum, a right-of-center research and education institution in Washington, recalled chiding Patrick J. Buchanan, the conservative commentator, for calling Mr. Obama “articulate,” saying the term, when used to describe an accomplished black person, often carries the connotation of being unexpected.
Those different voices have injected some new life into the world of talking heads, some critics said.
“We haven’t ever had as much talk about women as voters, except as soccer moms,” said Marie C. Wilson, president of the White House Project, which seeks to advance women in business, politics and media. “Now there’s talk about white women, African-American women, women over 60, and what about Latinos?”
Mark Anthony Neal, who is black and teaches black popular culture at Duke University, said: “There is suddenly a demand for smart Negroes. You’re seeing a lot less of the Jesse Jacksons and the Al Sharptons and more academics and thought-leaders. This is expressly in response to Barack Obama, less so Hillary. Because of the combination of Hillary and Barack, you’re seeing more black women.”
The shift to more interpretation and less reporting calls for greater transparency about who is talking, said Mr. Rosenstiel of the Project for Excellence in Journalism. Often the channels put labels like “
“If these are people you don’t know well, that’s an issue,” Mr. Rosenstiel said. “Just because people aren’t aligned officially, it doesn’t mean that they don’t have allegiances.”
Many of the pundits said they had received an overwhelmingly positive response from viewers. Mr. Martin described getting e-mail messages from junior high school students and being hailed by men who shine shoes.
“Even in this day and age, people have not been exposed to a lot of different kinds of people,” Ms. Bernard said, “so it’s important for us to all be here on TV together, talking about these things that really matter.”
4/15/07
International Herald Tribune
U.S. campaign pros give French counterparts a lesson in spin
The first stop was the Socialist Party headquarters on the Left Bank. After a lengthy presentation by a Royal adviser on her flagship idea of "participatory democracy" (illustrated by a cardboard chart of web connections titled "Ségoland"), David Mercer, a fund-raiser for Hillary Clinton, put up his hand and asked, "How are you going to translate that into votes?"
The spokesman gave an uncertain smile and said he did not believe in opinion polls, which have shown Royal trailing Sarkozy for three months. Jamal Simmons, who worked on Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign, looked puzzled and asked, "But what voter groups are you targeting in the last 10 days? Urban voters? Rural voters? What age groups?"
4/02/07
The Osgood File
Senator Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign has already raised a record 36 million dollars, thanks largely to Bill.
Jamal Simmons, Democratic Strategist: "You can't find a Democrat who has worked in government in the last ten years who is not a former Clinton administration appointee, so a lot of people feel an extraordinary amount of loyalty to him."
1/25/07
CNN
Paula Zahn Now Transcript
09/25/06
GQ MAGAZINE
"You've Been O'Reilly'd!"
Click here for the full text of the GQ Oral History with interviews of Jamal Simmons, Susan Sarandon, Nicholas Kristof, Rev. Al Sharpton and others on their experiences in the hot seat opposite Bill O'Reilly.
09/18/06
Please watch a discussion with Jamal of Senator Obama's political prospects on the CBS Evening News by clicking here. CBS VIDEO
KIRSTEN POWERS KICKS ANN COULTER'S ASS
08/25/06
Kirsten Powers was the co-host of Hannity & Colmes last night when guest ranter Ann Coulter came on to spew her ridiculous right wing demagoguery. Kirsten refused to let her get away with it and Coulter was seen on camera squirming, asking Sean Hannity for help and then leaves the show. You have to click the photo to watch the video on Crooks and Liars to believe it.
RESPONSE TO BILL O'REILLY
08/13/06
Bill O’Reilly and some of his fans have taken after me for not articulating an alternative national security vision for Democrats. As most of you know, “The O’Reilly Factor” is not really the place for thoughtful debate and we did not have one on Friday night. So, Mr. O’Reilly, here is what I attempted to explain in the faulty format of your show:
There are many Democrats who believe that we must pursue the terrorists wherever they are and the war in Iraq is hampering our ability to do so. Because we are bogged down in Iraq, our enemies are emboldened around the world and our friends are ducking for cover. Iran is making trouble in Iraq and Lebanon. North Korea is pursuing its nuclear ambitions and Venezuela is trying to rally Latin America to his brand of anti-Americanism. Meanwhile the U.S. Department of Homeland Security is not spending the funds to secure our hometowns. We need a stronger focus on port security, nuclear security and emergency response. Sooner or later the terrorists will strike again and judging from the response of the U.S. government to Katrina, we are not prepared to handle a massive disaster.
Democrats including Al Gore, Hillary Clinton, Bob Graham, Wesley Clark, Joe Biden and others believe that there are threats to our safety that exist outside of Iraq that must also be addressed. Al Gore is an expert on weapons of mass destruction and knows that spending the resources to secure nuclear material in the former Soviet Republics should be a greater priority. Bob Graham voted against the War in Iraq because he thought there were other threats, including Hezbollah that needed to be handled. During his campaign for the presidency, people tried to belittle his position, asking: “What does Graham want us to do, invade Lebanon?”
Today his position seems prescient.
O’Reilly zeroed in on Al Gore and Hillary Clinton in our interview, both of whom are anti-terrorism hawks, and ignored others like Joe Biden. Biden has the most unique plan to change the math in Iraq and pursue a different strategy. His view is that we should pursue a Bosnia-type strategy that allows three autonomous regions (Sunni, Shiite and Kurd) to come into existence with a central government in Baghdad that exerts influence by allocating the oil wealth. An international force would be used to police the borders between the regions and as a more secure environment takes hold, U.S troops can come home. This may not be a perfect solution, but it is an alternative vision for Iraq.
The take away here is that Democrats would put more attention on protecting Americans at home, pursue alternatives to stabilize Iraq and begin to focus attention on the gathering threats from terrorists wherever they are. Despite the view of O’Reilly and his ilk that pursuing the terrorists means invading countries, there are many tools in the tool box we can use and changing our approach in Iraq is the beginning.
###
