Hillary Clinton Announcement Video!!!

Putting it up here for posterity more than anything! I am, of course, over the moon that she finally announced! Would you believe I just watched it? I could have been a monkey washing a cat and I still would have been all in for her, so seeing the actual video wasn't a huge priority.

For what it's worth though I thought it was extremely well done. It wasn't until 30 seconds into it that I realized the announcement video had started and I wasn't watching a commercial. I actually liked that about it because it felt different from what I was expecting and it was just one of those head on candidate talking to the camera announcements that I'm used to when someone announces over a video. In any case it is, as the kids say, officially on and I am definitely ready for Hillary!

And Now For Something Completely Different: Lucy Flores

No sooner do I blog about the importance of authenticity for women in politics than Lucy Flores pops up on my radar and proves me right.

Flores, a Nevada Assemblywoman and Democratic candidate for Lieutenant Governor, is making headlines for sharing that she had an abortion at age 16 for one of the simplest and most controversial reasons for ending a pregnancy, because she wasn't ready to be a parent.

"I don’t regret it because I am here making a difference, at least in my mind, for many other young ladies and letting them know that there are options and they can do things to not be in the situation I was in, but to prevent.”

Flores is a former gang member and high school dropout who spent time in a juvenile detention facility. She eventually earned her GED, a college degree and a JD and is now poised to become the Governor of Nevada (if she wins her race for Lieutenant Governor and current Governor Sandoval successfully challenges Senator Harry Reid in 2016). As opposed to to so many of the privileged politicians I write about, Flores represents her community in every sense of the word. She understands the issues facing domestic abuse victims, poor families, and at-risk youth because she herself has faced them.

“I’ve never talked about my life, or anything I’ve gone through, or the decisions that I’ve made, just for the purpose of talking about them. They’ve always been for the purpose of trying to achieve something.”

Flores' story is the perfect example of successful authenticity in politics. While the following details of her biography are traditionally the stuff of oppo research legend, they only serve to bolster her candidacy.

"Lucy grew up as one of 13 children in a low-income Hispanic family. Her mother left home when she was nine years old, and she was raised by her father. Lucy got involved with gangs and was sentenced to juvenile detention for stealing a car. She dropped out of high school, and at age 16 she became pregnant and had an abortion because she did not want to be a teenage mother like her sisters. Lucy decided to turn her life around, earned her GED, attended community college, earned a scholarship to the University of Southern California, and graduated from law school at UNLV."

After hearing that frank biography, 59% of potential voters said they would be more likely to vote for Flores, while only 17% said the bio made them less likely to support her. (You can read the details of the poll here.)

On a final note, media and friends of yours truly have occasionally pointed out that Lucy Flores has a reputation for being hard to work with. Really? Find me one prominent female politician who has not had that reputation at one point or another. I'm not saying she isn't, I'm just saying so what? Do you think you get to be a prominent successful woman by being easy to work with? Have you MET society? So, no I am not buying that particular detraction.

Authenticity for the win!

-Nancy


PS. Support authenticity/CampaignSick. Thank you!!

When You Support CampaignSick, It's Actually Going To Fox News

Okay so that would be CRAZY and is absolutely totally not the case, but if the National Republican Congressional Committee has anything to say about it, it's not that far-fetched. The fundraising scheme (and scheme it is) is summed up nicely by Jay Bookman at the Atlantic Journal Constitution.

Kyrsten Sinema is a Democratic congresswoman running for re-election in Arizona. So if you wanted to make a donation to Sinema, you might Google her campaign and find yourself directed to the website http://contribute.sinemaforcongress.com/ .

At the "contribute.sinemaforcongress.com" site, you'd find a large, attractive picture of Sinema, with a large banner reading "Krysten Sinema for Congress" in the same color scheme as her campaign signs, along with a checklist of possible donation amounts.

Except the site is a Republican fundraising site, with contributions going to defeat Sinema. It does say that, in smaller type below the banner: "Make a Contribution Today to Help Defeat Kyrsten Sinema and candidates like her". But by design that single word "defeat" is easy to read past or overlook, and is the only real clue of what's going on. From the URL to the banner headline to the candidate's picture to the candidate's colors, the overwhelming intent of the site is to defraud.

This is pretty freaking gross, you guys and it demonstrates once again both that Republicans don't think their candidates can win on their own merit and that rather than resort to things like more sensible platforms and more likeable candidates, they are all too happy to cheat.

By the way if you still want to support CampaignSick, I promise it will not go to other blogs.

Gallup Finds That A Record Percentage of Americans Identify as Independents

Forty-two percent of Americans, on average, identified as political independents in 2013, the highest Gallup has measured since it began conducting interviews by telephone 25 years ago. Meanwhile, Republican identification fell to 25%, the lowest over that time span. At 31%, Democratic identification is unchanged from the last four years but down from 36% in 2008...

The increased independence adds a greater level of unpredictability to this year's congressional midterm elections. Because U.S. voters are less anchored to the parties than ever before, it's not clear what kind of appeals may be most effective to winning votes. But with Americans increasingly eschewing party labels for themselves, candidates who are less closely aligned to their party or its prevailing doctrine may benefit.

Does anyone see in this study whether they surveyed "voters?" or just "Americans?"

Throwback Friday

"The Susan B. Anthony (SBA) List, which works to elect politicians who oppose abortion rights, argues that an Ohio statute penalizing false political speech prevented it from launching certain ads against then-Rep. Steven Driehaus (D-Ohio) in 2010."

I blogged about this case in 2011 and I clearly didn't feel that badly for Dreihaus, but the principle at stake is fascinating. However, as the article points out, the court will not rule on statute itself only whether SBA List has standing. By the way, pretty sure Susan B. Anthony is rolling in her grave.

Why do we drink? 'Cause it's better than to think.

Political operatives love to drink. In this town, cocktails and shop talk have gotten so they could barely be less extricable. Don't worry, Reid Wilson at the Washington Post was like, "I'm on this" and created the above infographic detailing adult beverage consumption by party affiliation and voter turnout.

At first I thought "this is bullshit," but then I saw that my go-to victory drink, Jameson, is one of the only whiskeys that leans Democratic, whereas my preferred vodka for a dirty martini (my drink after a long, LONG, day at the office) is one of the few Republican leaning vodkas. Also, Republicans, what is up with peppermint schnapps? Talk about poor choices.

Anyway, the findings are actually pretty interesting.

Bottoms up!

Ask An Election Nerd: Party Registration

Round two comes from a friend (also an Ohioan, way to be Buckeye State) about whether she should register with a party. I get asked this question a lot. By asked, I mean someone mentions registering Independent within earshot and they are treated to an unsolicited lecture. Let's see what happens!

Nancy-

I read your blog and I actually have a question. I don't really know how I should register. I was initially registered as Republican, then switched to Democrat, and now I honestly don't want to be associated with either party...so where does that leave me? As an Independent? And then I can't vote in primaries? I loved the first one of these you did because it really broke it down. I bet a lot of other people have this question too.

Love,
Naomi*
(*not her real name)

First let's step back and remember that we do have more than two parties in our country. While registering with the Green Party would preclude you from voting in the Republican or Democratic primaries, it could serve another function. For example, sending a message to your representatives that you agree with the Greens on key issues. For a blog post about my favorite third party, click here. I also feel the need to point out that being an Independent means you are not registered with a political party and should not be confused with being a member of the Independence party, a third party you can read about here.

But since I know none of that's what you were asking about, let's talk about reasons to register as a Democrat or Republican. For me, there are a lot of good reasons to register Dem, which I've posted about in the past. Now that I am thinking of once again hitting the campaign trail (you heard it here first, ladies and gentleman) I have extra incentive. It would be pretty silly of me not to register Democrat if I ever worked a primary again. (For the record, I am a registered Dem.) If you are particularly involved in politics, being a member of a party enables you to participate in Democratic (or Republican) Town Committees and from there state or national conventions. As with the Greens, registering also allows you to express your support for one of the two major parties.

For most people, however, voting in the primary is the real draw. Whether or not you can vote in a primary without registering with a party depends on whether your state's primaries are open or closed. Open, as the name would suggest, means that you can vote in one (never both) party's primary of your choosing. Closed means you can only vote in a primary of the party in which you are registered. There also semi-closed primaries, which means that as an Independent you can vote in either primary, but party registrants have to vote in their own primary. Every state has different rules. In some states one party's primaries may be closed while the other's are semi-closed.

If you live in a state with closed primaries I highly advocate registering with either party, because otherwise you are basically disenfranchising yourself. This is especially true in very red or very blue states where the primary election is more or less the ballgame. It should be noted that this is just my (strong) opinion and that some people argue that showing Washington they are not "buying into" the two party system is more valuable to them than their primary vote. To them I would say, "You know whose opinion politicians realllly care about? People who can't vote for them. Great job. Way to stick it to the man!" (Not!) Again, just my opinion, but you asked for it. (When I was working the Presidential primary, I flipped out on my Dad for being a registered Independent because New York has a closed primary system. That's right, Dad, if you had just registered as a Democrat, John Edwards would be President--now look what you did!)

I happen to know that Ohio has open primaries with a very weird grandfather clause. Basically, you are only supposed to vote in the primary of the party in whose primary you last voted...unless you have truly switched ideology. As you can imagine, this rule is hard to enforce and basically nobody does. So if you, Naomi, want to be an Independent, go for it. You can find out what kind of primaries your state holds here, thanks to FairVote.org.

As for which party to choose, that's up to you. If it were up to me, no one would ever vote Republican, so it wouldn't matter. I would advise you to vote in the primary where you feel the most passionately about the differences between the candidates. For example, if all of the Democrats seem roughly the same, but one of the Republicans is Snidely Whiplash, maybe you want to vote in the Republican primary in order to save Moose and Squirrel. Also, he lives in Canada so I don't think this will be a problem.

Well, if that wasn't helpful, I don't know what is! Tune in next time for Ask An Election Nerd!

Love,
Nancy

Ask An Election Nerd: How Do I Know Who To Vote For?

If you've been disappointed that I haven't written a long blog post in a while, (horribly bad impression of a mafia accent) I got your long blog post right here! Seriously, I almost considered footnoting this thing. Below is a question that was submitted through my tumblr a while ago. I've gotten a couple of these, so I've decided to start an Ask An Election Nerd segment to my blog. If you would like to submit a question, email me at campaignsick@gmail.com, or message me through tumblr. And away we go!

Dear Nancy,

I found your blog because a friend sent me a link to your Ryan Gossling Tumblr.

I am a 20something living in the Midwest in an important state in the world of elections—Ohio. I know people say my vote matters, but I don't know how to sort out who to vote for. Sometimes, I feel like my vote won't matter and that I shouldn't even vote if I don't put in the time to really vet the candidates, which seems nearly impossible.

I just need someone to lay it all out for me and build my confidence in my own personal voting process. Voting is a personal process right? Then why do I feel so crowded? I know I can't be the only one who feels this way. I want to do my civic duty to the best of my ability, I just don't know how.

Signed,
Nikki

Of all the reasons that someone would choose not to vote, this is the easiest for me to understand. When it comes to politics, truth is often in the eye of the beholder. There is a lot of information out there and I use the term "information" loosely. Campaigns, independent expenditures, and any pundit with a microphone are more than happy to tell you the truth as they see it, but even among the best intentioned (and I'm not implying that any of those groups are) there is room for reasonable debate. One thing I do not suggest is taking one of those "who should I vote for" quizzes online like this one, because you never know is behind them.(That may be a perfectly legitimate group, I just don't advise doing so as practice.) By simply choosing which stories to report news outlets are guilty of employing bias, plus there are candidate debates, rumors, gossip, advertising, forwarded emails from opinionated relatives...it is really difficult to know what to believe.

Before we talk about how to choose a candidate, let's briefly discuss why it's important to vote even if you're confused. To begin with, whether we realize it or not, politics affects every one of us. When I was a field organizer I was unfailingly blown away by community members who told me they weren't going to vote because they weren't "political." You mean to tell me you're a doctor and you have no opinion on health care? You're a teacher and you don't care about education? You're religious and you don't care what happens to poor people? You're a woman (or related to one) and you have nothing to say about birth control? I'm not buying it.

Also, and cue the John Philip Sousa music, voting is a big part of what makes this country great. We were the first democracy to work in modern times and since then, the concept has pretty much flourished. Sure it's imperfect, but as Winston Churchill famously said, "Democracy is the worst form of government...except for all the others." Democracy keeps us safe, free from tyranny and exploitation, and able to advance better than any other system and it doesn't work unless people vote. (Churchill also said "the best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter," but that's why we're here.) It's no coincidence that people have died for that very right. I'm not just talking about the Founding Fathers here, I'm including very real and recent examples in the Middle East and Africa. NB: When I talk about voting, I mean in free and fair elections, not ones rigged by a dictator.

So voting, important, got it, you're on board. On to how to choose. The good news is that because there's so much conflicting information, it's okay to pick and choose your sources. It's okay to discount some factors that other people might find important. Maybe you don't care that your candidate has cheated on her husband or about her record on the environment because you like what she has to say about debt reduction. It's also okay to choose someone who doesn't agree with you on everything. The only way to find someone who is lock step with you 100% on every issue is to run for office yourself. It's about finding a candidate who you feel best represents your values.

Below is a list of information narrowing techniques to help make the task of picking a candidate a little more manageable. Some work better for primaries, some for general elections and most can be used in concert with one another. Feel free to pick and choose and don't let the perfect (i.e. knowing EVERYTHING about your candidate which is nearly impossible) be the enemy of the good.

1) Go with your gut. My empirical experience has been, and I'm sure there's research to bear this out, that people usually pick a candidate based on their gut reaction and then come up with reasons to justify their decision later on. Most people have gotten so good at doing this, they don't even realize what they're doing. They'll rattle off a list of reasons why they support Newt Gingrich over Rick Santorum with great sincerity, never acknowledging even to themselves that they got these talking points from emails or discussion boards or NPR after they knew who they were supporting. As an operative this can be maddening. However, we have gut instincts for an evolutionary reason, because they work. As a field organizer, I was infuriated when people told me they weren't supporting John Edwards because 'they just didn't trust him,' but in the end that turned out to be... prescient. Watch a primary debate and the candidates are pretty similar on the issues, though they express themselves differently. Listen to your gut. Who do you trust? Who do you want answering the proverbial red phone at 2am? If you like a candidate and she makes you feel good about spending your vote on her, there's nothing wrong with that, as long as you're up front about it.

2)Call a lifeline. If I have a toothache, I call one of my two good friends who are dentists (or as I call them friendtists.) If I have a legal question (read as: I have been watching Boston Legal), I gchat my sorority sister who is an attorney. I love it when my friends call me for advice about whom to support and I don't think any less of them. This just happens to be my wheelhouse. There is nothing wrong with using a trusted proxy to help you make a decision. On my first campaign in Minnesota, I called my State Senator's campaign manager from the voting booth to ask her whom to support in a school board primary. Even though I didn't know the candidates, I knew my colleague would tell me to support someone who agreed with her boss, who I knew I agreed with on education. If you have a friend who is more politically engaged than you, why not ask her? This strategy may sound simplistic, but if you think about it, why trust a pundit whose motives you cannot be entirely sure of over someone who you personally know and trust? We tend to spend time with people who share our values and who knows us better than our friends?

3)Be a single (or double or triple) issue voter. You will never agree with a candidate on everything, so it's important to prioritize. Even experienced campaign operatives and so called Yellow Dog (as in I would vote for a Golden Retriever before a Republican) Democrats have a litmus test. For instance, I won't work for a candidate who is anti-equal marriage, anti-choice or supports repealing healthcare. I care deeply about other issues, but before I even consider voting for someone, I find out where she stands on those three. If you're a small business owner, you might want to do some research on how the Presidential candidates' economic plans would affect your business. Maybe you also care deeply about the environment. You may want to find out if any of the candidates are endorsed by The Sierra Club or the League of Conservation Voters both of which support candidates based on their stance on environmental issues. Deciding how to vote based on one or two issues doesn't mean you don't care about others, it means that you're voting in line with your own priorities.

4)Party Down. There is a lot of legitimate criticism of our two party system. It certainly creates some strange bedfellows. For example, why does it follow that someone who is anti-choice must also be against government intervention? But the system exists for a reason. If I walked into a voting booth right now and saw two previously unknown candidates, one with a (D) and one with and (R) next to her name, I would vote for the Democrat without a moment's hesitation. I know that the average Democrat is much more likely to agree with me on any given issue than the average Republican, within a margin of error of plus or minus Ed Koch and Joe Lieberman. Even if this particular Democrat disagrees with me on something I care about, on a federal level I know that she is going to caucus with the Democrats and thus help push through at least some legislation that I support, as opposed to a Republican who might help block something, even if she agrees with me, because of pressure from political leadership. (This happens in both parties, although the Republicans are notoriously good at "keeping their people in line.")

5)Identity politics. Just ask my slightly racist grandfather, people tend to vote for people who look like them. Or better yet, check out New York City's voting history. On the one hand, I don't advocate using your race, gender or sexual orientation as the primary means of choosing a candidate (particularly if you're a straight white dude) on the other hand, broadly speaking, people do tend to share values with people who share their culture and minorities are far from adequately represented in our legislatures. Did you know that 17% of Congresspeople are female despite the fact that women make up more than half of our country's voters? Hardly representative for a representative democracy. For this reason alone, all other things being equal, I tend to vote with my vagina (although more difficult since they got rid of the levers on voting machines). But seriously folks, regardless of the issues, there are some very legitimate reasons to vote simply to get more sexual, racial, religious minorities and women into office. The next generation will not aspire to be leaders unless they see people they can relate to in leadership positions. We don't want to send black children the message, "you can be anything you want, it's just reeeeallly unlikely." Finally, the more of any group that is in a governing body, the less their participation is treated as tokenism and their disagreements are seen as discord and the more they can simply legislate.


That my friend, is what you get for asking a good question, a really, really long answer. In conclusion, keep writing to me! I love answering these kind of questions and I hope I answered that one well. Kudos to you, Nikki! The fact that you are curious, pro-active and taking your vote seriously puts you miles above most of the voting population.

Until next time,
Nancy

*Don't Forget! If you would like to submit a question, email campaignsick@gmail.com or message me through my tumblr.