Soren Dayton: What I'm reading

Billion dollar dinner

Michael Donnelly — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 06:11:15 PDT

Now that's inflation!

Zimbabwe Dinner Bill courtesy of Bill Dunkleberg, Chief Economist of NFIB

The Experience Question, Cont.

(author unknown) — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 16:30:55 PDT

Lewis is a Connection to King's 'I Have a Dream' Speech

(author unknown) — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 18:40:00 PDT

Should Biden Share Blame for Foreclosure Crisis?

(author unknown) — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 10:19:40 PDT

Shared by Soren
If lefty bloggers had much honesty they would continue to hit this.

Experts: Many Americans may have lost homes due to a bill championed by Biden.

Bill: McCain Is Wrong On The "Two Great Questions Of This Election"

Greg Sargent — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 19:16:23 PDT

Bill's ability to frame the big choices in a campaign is legendary, so it's worth looking at his speech's framing of the choice in this election:

The choice is clear. The Republicans will nominate a good man who served our country heroically and suffered terribly in Vietnam. He loves our country every bit as much as we all do. As a Senator, he has shown his independence on several issues.
But on the two great questions of this election, how to rebuild the American Dream and how to restore America's leadership in the world, he still embraces the extreme philosophy which has defined his party for more than 25 years, a philosophy we never had a real chance to see in action until 2001, when the Republicans finally gained control of both the White House and Congress. Then we saw what would happen to America if the policies they had talked about for decades were implemented.

Note Bill's formulation on the patriotism question: "He loves our country every bit as much as we all do." That's not a defensive formulation. It's not: "We do love our country as much as he does." Rather, it starts from the premise that Dems are patriotic.

Bill also leads people through what they've heard about McCain -- he's made terrible sacrifices on behalf of his country; he has shown signs of unorthodoxy -- to the conclusion that there are big choices lurking beyond those character issues: What to do about the economy, and how to relate to the rest of the world. Once the character issues are taken off the table, the choice on the bigger issues is clear: Between the party that made a hash of things on these big questions, and the one that has succeeded on them.

RealClearPolitics - HorseRaceBlog - Wisdom from Mike Murphy

(author unknown) — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 16:08:00 PDT

Shared by Soren
I disagree about conventions. First, you need an idea of how to replace it. And then you actually have to implement the rest of the things of the party. That's hard. Conventions are a reasonable body for solving that.

As I've said before, these conventions are antiquated - they are holdovers from an older era. The only reason they happen today is that they are advertisements that the candidate doesn't have to pay for himself. In other words, a clause or two in our inefficient campaign finance laws keeps these things afloat.

Convention Observations: McGovern, Danny Diaz, Carville, and the Food Stand Guy - Michael Barone (usnews.com)

(author unknown) — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 16:07:10 PDT

Shared by Soren
This part about class is important. i need to finish that piece on that.

I ran into former Rep. David Bonior on the floor. He's from Michigan, as I am, and I can remember when he was a state representative from Macomb County in the 1970. He was elected to the U.S. House in 1976 and became House minority whip in 1995. In 2001, Michigan Republicans, then in control of the governorship and the Legislature, drew the lines in such a way that Bonior could not be re-elected. He ran for governor and came in a respectable third in the primary, behind the current governor, Jennifer Granholm, and former Gov. Jim Blanchard. Bonior, who has always been close to labor unions, was chairman of John Edwards's presidential campaign. I expressed my consolations. "We had a great campaign," Bonior said, and described Edwards's disgrace as "a kick in the stomach." He said the 26 Edwards delegates are "virtually all" for Barack Obama. He also told me that a recent poll by Stan Greenberg—who has polled in and written about Macomb County for years—showed McCain ahead by 7 percent, "not bad at this point." I said I had heard that another pollster found Obama up 7 percent in next-door Oakland County. Historically, Oakland was Republican and Macomb Democratic; in 2004, John Kerry narrowly carried Oakland and George W. Bush narrowly won Macomb. Maybe they're both moving in different directions. Bonior said the good arguments for Democrats are change and "class values."

MyDD :: Like a Whole Firm of Mark Penns, Glover Park Seeking to Oppose Energy Bill

(author unknown) — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 16:06:29 PDT

Shared by Soren
This is really interesting. They are going to demonize all of the lobby shops. Who will defend business?

Like a Whole Firm of Mark Penns, Glover Park Seeking to Oppose Energy Bill

by Texas Nate, Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 05:15:04 PM EST

In a move reminiscent of Mark Penn's many shady associations, high powered lobbying shop Glover Park is seeking to land a project working AGAINST the Democratic energy bill. From Tom Edsall in the Huffington Post:

A prominent Washington public relations firm founded by veterans of the Clinton administration is seeking to represent a coalition of energy speculators fighting regulatory legislation currently before the Senate -- legislation sponsored by Democratic leaders and considered crucial to Democratic prospects in the 2008 election -- the Huffington Post has learned.

The Glover Park Group is a finalist in the competition for a lucrative contract representing a consortium of corporations and trade associations that buy and sell oil, gas and other energy commodities. These energy interests are prepared to invest substantial resources to defeat the "Stop Excessive Energy Speculation Act" pending before the Senate.

Nice move guys, real classy.

The DNC logo is a train wreck

(author unknown) — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 09:22:35 PDT

Shared by Soren
hah!

Ok, I can't contain myself. The logo for the Democratic National Convention is a train wreck. The Democrats should be eager to cast off the negative stereotypes that they've accumulated since since Gore lost to Bush in 2000 -- weak on defense issues, wishy-washy, too touchy-feely, disorganized, and unfocused. But this logo does exactly the opposite. The soft gradients and jumbled type only serve to reinforce those negatives.

The colors are washed out. Red, white, and blue in a political context should never fade to pink and baby powder. It looks weak. Red is always a dangerous color to run to a gradient in a logo for that very reason.
And while I'm talking about color, why is the sky a burning red? Has a nuclear bomb just gone off somewhere over the horizon? Has global warming gotten that bad already?
The stars overweight the logo on the left side, making the whole thing feel too asymmetrical. They also remind me of the stars a cartoonist might draw over a character's head to indicate that he's had too much to drink.
The tightly kerned sans-serif type is completely out of phase with all of Obama's materials, which provide for much more air between each character.
The right side of the logo reminds me of Enron's Logo. I don't understand why those large chunks have been taken out of the mountains. Is it supposed to look like a plug or a puzzle piece?
Why is the "0" so much bigger than the "8"? Yes, I'm sure that's the nature of the type they chose, but it looks terrible. This election is about the "8," not the "0"
Why are there mountains anyway? I know they're there to tip the hat to Denver, the convention's host city -- but why? Is this convention being held for Denver or for the country as a whole?

What would a successful logo contain?

Strong, solid colors. Similar to the deep blue on Obama's materials.
Clean, simple type. Go serif to make it different, but not too different.
A horizon that looks like a sunrise, or some other imagery that points us to the future, not a nuclear holocaust. Hell, even some clichéd "21st century digital" bric-a-brack in the background would be better.

Focus Group: "Celeb" Ad Working -- But Not How You Think

(author unknown) — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 15:03:29 PDT

Shared by Soren
this is awesome

Yesterday I noted that Joe Klein had sat in on a focus group of 21 undecided voters and had discovered that character questions were way more important than issues in determining their presidential pick.

It turns out the focus group also tested responses to the "celeb" ad. I emailed Klein to ask him for details on what it showed, and he got back to me with a really interesting response.

For these voters, at least, it was unclear whether the comparison to Paris and Britney was working -- but the focus group did show that the "celeb" hit is effective in setting up the negative message that followed.

"it was fascinating and really depressing," Klein emailed. "The images of Paris and Britney came up too quickly for people to really respond on their dials, but the rally in Berlin set them rolling and it prepped them for the negative message in the last 10 seconds of the ad -- I think it was about drilling."

"So the `celebrity' ad wasn't about the celebrities, it was about the Berlin rally and gas prices," Klein says.

Interestingly, Obama's chief response ad didn't test anywhere near as well as the "celeb" ad itself, Klein says: "Since the focus groupers hadn't really picked up on Paris/Britney, they had no idea what Obama was actually responding to."

So for this handful of voters, at least, in the ads the "celeb" sneer is functioning as a softening up mechanism for the punch that follows. That's probably how the McCain team views the race more broadly, too: The celeb campaign is all about a long-term softening of Obama in advance of the ratcheted-up negative campaign that's coming this fall.

I have no idea whether it will work, but this strikes me as an interesting way of thinking about the McCain team's primary attack line.

Waiting for the Other Shoe to Drop

Barry Ritholtz — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:30:00 PDT

via St. Louis Dispatch

You walk away.com

(author unknown) — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 09:15:05 PDT

Shared by Soren
That NV number is scary for the election

You walk away.com sent us two bits of fascinating data recently. Of the 25 states they currently have clients, the bulk of their clients (88% of their total) are from just 4 states. Nevada, California, Arizona, and Florida. That confirms those four states are the epicenter of the housing crisis. The vast majority of people simply walking away from their homes are from those 4 states. This is also seen in foreclosure dataI reported on August 18.

The next bit of data is something I haven't seen anywhere else and is brilliant. How much of "mail the keys to the bank crowd" are speculators, and how many are people actually living in the home? I expected most were speculators, who are in bad shape, but ultimately have another place to live.

Youwalkway.com tells us what percent have a second address. I've flipped it in this next chart. This chart shows the number of people living in the house they have decided to walk away from. It is depressing.

In California where the bulk of their clients live (59%) 75% actually live in the house they are walking away from and in Nevada it's even more. Only in Florida is the presence of "speculators" a major factor. And that isn't even clear, because it is very common for many to purchase a second home for vacation purposes in Florida. So in this case the presence of an alternative address doesn't necessarily indicate a speculator, but rather a very normal snowbird.

This data is great, it tells us speculators were not the major force behind the housing crisis.

What is You walk away? Folks that help you mail the keys back the bank when it's worth less than you owe. Or your escalating mortgage is more than you can pay.

The person Michelle Obama forgot to thank

Blake Hounshell — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:00:38 PDT

Poll: Obama Slipping In The Three Largest Swing States

Eric Kleefeld — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 07:15:23 PDT

A new round of swing state polls from Quinnipiac reminds us just how high the stakes are at the Democratic convention. Barack Obama's leads in Ohio and Pennsylvania have slipped, leaving with slim leads in both states, while John McCain has taken the lead in Florida.

The numbers, compared to two months ago:

Florida
McCain (R) 47% (+4)
Obama (D) 43% (-4)
Margin of error: ±3%
Ohio
Obama (D) 44% (-4)
McCain (R) 43% (+1)
Margin of error: ±2.8%

Pennsylvania
Obama (D) 49% (-3)
McCain (R) 42% (+2)
Margin of error: ±2.8%

From the pollster's analysis: "Eight weeks ago, Sen. Barack Obama was on top in all three of these key swing states and that would make his election almost a sure thing. Times have changed and the election is now very much a tossup in these states. Sen. Obama needs this convention to give his campaign a jump start."

Late Update: On the other hand, it's worth noting that Obama's lead in Pennsylvania is unchanged since last month, suggesting that he's ahead by a stable margin in a state is historically very close.

Surprise! Income Rises (In 2006 from 2000)

Barry Ritholtz — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 06:30:00 PDT

Today's media pick is from the NYT. For the first time since 2000, the average income actually rose in the US, according to IRS data. I don't think we need to worry about a wage related inflationary spiral, though.

Ubiq-cerpt:™

"Americans enjoyed higher average income in 2006 for the first time since 2000, when the last economic expansion ended, the latest tax data show.

Adjusted gross income reported on tax returns in 2006 averaged $58,029. In 2006 dollars that was an increase of $739, or 1.2 percent, from the $57,289 average in 2000, analysis of Internal Revenue Service data showed.

Total income increased by $619.2 billion or 8.3 percent, all of which went to those making more than $75,000, and 42 percent of which went to the roughly one in 400 taxpayers who made more than $1 million in 2006.

Average income fell sharply in 2001 and in 2002, when it dropped to $51,870, off nearly 10 percent from 2000, tax data show. The average grew slightly in 2003.

Average income grew significantly in 2004, rising $2,291, and again in 2005, when the average increased by $2,210. Income growth continued in 2006, but at a much slower pace, increasing by $1,369 over the 2005 average once inflation is taken into account.

Salaries and wages, by far the largest source of income, nearly returned to the 2000 average in 2006. However, among the highest-paid workers, both total and average wages fell, an indication of how the Internet bubble had concentrated gains among a relatively few workers. The average wage in 2006 was $46,996, down $101, or a fraction of 1 percent, from $47,097 in 2000. Average wages in this decade hit a low of $45,956 in 2003, the I.R.S. data show."

Fascinating period of time -- six years of zero wage gains, while goods and services skyrocketed in price. Ouch!

>

UPDATE: August 27, 2008 6:49am

Three things to note:

1) This is old data, only updated as of 2006;
2) It is, a comment pointed out, average, not median -- a longstanding peeve of ours.
3) The IRS measure is rather different than what we see out of BEA or BLS. The Fed's numbers on family income seem to be the most cleareyed.

Source:
Average U.S. Income Showed First Rise Over 2000
DAVID CAY JOHNSTON
NYT, August 25, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/26/business/economy/26income.html

Before Convention Closes, Dems Already Breaking Platform Promises

Michael Goldfarb — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 00:00:00 PDT

PARTY PEOPLE: KAREN BROWN AND BONNIE TIERNEY, CLINTON AND MCCAIN SUPPORTERS

(author unknown) — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:11:58 PDT

Shared by Soren
Wow.

TAP ran into Karen Brown and Bonnie Tierney on 16th Street in Denver, Colorado. Brown was wearing a Hillary Clinton shirt and a John McCain button. They weren't delegates, but they'd come down from Colorado Springs to bear witness to the convention.

You have a Hillary shirt and a John McCain button.

Karen Brown: She was my first choice. Now I'm going to vote for McCain.

Why?

KB: I don't like Senator Obama. His choices are all wrong. I feel secure with John McCain.

Where do you feel McCain and Hillary have overlap that Obama doesn't?

KB: I feel that Hillary would make me also feel safe as far as terrorism goes while I think Obama would be thinking about it. As he said in an interview, I'll "confront evil." John McCain said I'll "defeat" evil. I feel Hillary would've said the same thing. I want to feel safe here in America.

Who did you vote for in the past few elections?

KB: Bush. I changed from Republican to Democrat for Hillary. Hillary lost, but I'm still a registered Democrat. I'm going to vote for McCain.

Bonnie Tierney: She's a diehard Republican!

Will you also go with McCain?

BT: I am. Thirty-five years I voted Democrat, I'm voting for John McCain. I'd rather have four years of John McCain and the same and have a chance that Hillary will come back and win than have Barack Obama, who talked about change and hope with no substance. I'd just rather have McCain in. I think we have a better chance with McCain on terrorism.

Did you vote for Kerry in 2004?

BT: Yes. I've voted for every Democrat since, well, Nixon when I was 18, but Democrats after that. I'd like to see a McCain-Hillary ticket to tell you the truth. And there's nothing that would please my soul more than to see Obama lose. He's talking about eight years when he hasn't got the four years. When people start nominating Hillary on the floor this week, he may fall off the stage when he sees superdelegates switching to Hillary.

--Ezra Klein

Previous Party People Q&As:
Don Beyer, former Democratic VA gubernatorial candidate
Chris Redfern, Ohio Democratic Party Chair
David Cicilline, Mayor of Providence
Nancy Ruth White, Clinton Delegate
Nancy Keenan, President of NARAL

Trading views

(author unknown) — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:51:46 PDT

Shared by Soren
This is such a serious issue for our country. Why do Dems have to play such cheap, dishonest games with it?

IT wasn’t long ago that trade was a top campaign issue. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were racing to the rhetorical bottom on the issue, each trying to outdo the other’s protectionist nonsense in order to woo blue-collar Democrats in Ohio or Pennsylvania. John McCain remained an unapologetic free trader—perhaps not the most politically expedient position to be in this presidential election—and he freely took shots at the Democrats for their pandering.

And Mr Obama’s was pretty transparent. Just after getting the nomination, he backed away from his trade scepticism, and even during the primaries Austan Goolsbee, a top economic adviser, supposedly allayed the fears of Canadian officials who worried Mr Obama would try to renegotiate NAFTA.

No wonder, then, that trade has slid off the table to make room for Paris, Brittney and Mr McCain’s real estate. It’s probably not a winning issue for Mr McCain, and, judging from Mr Obama’s advisers, he’s not a firebrand foe of free trade. Easy to let the issue fade into the background. But, as Larry Summers reminds us in his column this morning, the next president should look to make some big decisions on international trade.

It has become a cliché to suggest that the world’s institutional approaches to economic co-operation need overhauling to take into account the rising economic clout of emerging markets and the decline in dominance of the group of seven leading industrialised nations (G7). This is correct. The steps taken so far – the initiation of the G-20 during the 1990s and the adjustments of voting shares in international financial institutions – are valuable if insufficient….
The current global policy debate is a cacophony. It is all very well to advocate increased US saving and a cut in the US current account deficit but the process for bringing it about will mean less US demand for foreign products. That will put pressure on jobs and output growth in other countries if no countervailing measures are put in place. Conversely, the return of a stronger dollar without other policy changes will raise US demand for exports but at the price of cutting demand for domestically produced goods and compounding the recession.
These problems will be with us for some time. They may not be at the top of anyone’s agenda right now. But the success of the next administration could depend on its ability to engage with a wider range of global economic stakeholders, on a broader agenda, at a time when disagreements are increasing not just about means but also about ultimate ends.

As the Democratic National Convention gets underway in Denver today, one thing I will look for is what—if anything—the speakers have to say on trade. I can’t expect anything too specific, obviously. In fact, it may be better if the Democrats say little—instead of indulging in the unhelpful trade scepticism they have championed. Still, it would be nice to restart the debate on an issue lots of Americans should, and do, care about.

Organized crime ditching dollars for euros

(author unknown) — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:26:26 PDT

Shared by Soren
First counterfeit goods. Next oil.

It may not be the preferred measure by economists and policy makers, but the Canadian government has noticed an interesting trend among organized crime groups -- they, too, are ditching the dollar:

The weakened US dollar has fallen out of favor with organized crime groups to pay for drug shipments or to settle scores, a Canadian government report said Friday. And if the greenback continues its slide in 2008, as expected, more and more criminals are likely to exchange euros for illicit goods, said Criminal Intelligence Service Canada in its annual report.

The report also cites increasing incidence of "environmental crime" -- groups developing "underground markets for electronic waste and scarce natural resources." If nothing else, Canadian organized crime seems to be ahead of the curve. Money laundering and racketeering sound so 20th century.

CNN Wins Race for Television Coverage

Taegan Goddard — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 06:20:15 PDT

Of all the television news coverage of the Democratic National Convention, CNN wins the prize for dedicating the most resources to covering this event.

Like other networks, CNN has a traditional studio overlooking the stage at Pepsi Center. But they also have mini studios set up on the convention floor. They have even converted a restaurant adjacent to the arena into the "CNN Grill" with additional studios inside. And they're streaming the convention live online. The news network that claims to have the "best political team on television" is literally everywhere.

Four years ago, the major television networks cut back their convention coverage from four days to three days. Further retrenchment was expected this year. However, it's clear the decision by CNN to put so much effort into this convention forced their competitors to reverse course.

Swing State Project:: AK-AL: Club for Growth Endorses Parnell Over Young

Fri, 06 Jun 2008 14:37:14 PDT

The Crypt: Trade critics on the offensive - Politico.com

Thu, 05 Jun 2008 22:29:56 PDT

Obama rejects the world

In Appeal to Angry Clinton Voters, Republican Party Preps ClintonsForMcCain.com | Threat Level from Wired.com

Thu, 05 Jun 2008 14:56:17 PDT

Steve Ballmer Gives Newspapers 10 More Years | Epicenter from Wired.com

Thu, 05 Jun 2008 14:56:01 PDT

Verizon wants to buy Alltel, create incestuous major carrier : Boy Genius Report

Thu, 05 Jun 2008 05:59:05 PDT

wow. Just wow.. "I got laid at my family reunion. ... Twice"

Obama, Propelled by the Net, Wins Democratic Nomination | Threat Level from Wired.com

Wed, 04 Jun 2008 14:33:44 PDT

Why the blogosphere is a threat to US, but not to UK news outlets

Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:33:09 PDT

McCain’s Vulnerabilities Exposed | LCG Election Monitor Blog

Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:31:32 PDT

Driving around Iraq has gotten safer | FP Passport

Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:27:24 PDT

this must be why Barack Obama wasn't going.

Beyond Blogs

Tue, 03 Jun 2008 15:39:18 PDT

MyDD :: SEIU Convention: Anna Burger On The Employee Free Choice Act

Tue, 03 Jun 2008 15:25:58 PDT

SEIU admits Soprano ad is working

Op-Ed Columnist - David Brooks - Confidence in the John McCain and Barack Obama Camps - Op-Ed - NYTimes.com

Tue, 03 Jun 2008 15:19:48 PDT

New Blogging Network Editor Hopes To Transform Social Networking To Social Action | Threat Level from Wired.com

Tue, 03 Jun 2008 15:14:48 PDT

White voters and the Democratic primary | Salon News

Tue, 03 Jun 2008 15:07:03 PDT

Warming Up To The Moderate Christian Conservatives - The Seminal :: Independent Media and Politics

Tue, 03 Jun 2008 15:03:54 PDT