Hillary's Red Phone Moment

Daryl Cagle

The Cold War - What Did We Win?

Joseph Cirincione reviews Richard Rhodes' "Arsenals of Folly: The Making of the Nuclear Arms Race" in the New York Review of Books.

I recommend the entire review but would highlight the sections on "threat inflation."

The exaggeration of foreign threats, however pernicious, is a tactic. The arms buildup it serves is the greater folly. "Threat inflation," Rhodes writes,

was crucial to maintaining the defense budgets of the Cold War.... Fear was part of the program, the psychological response to threat inflation that delivered reliable votes.

The cold war arms race was not, he argues, a natural condition of the US–Soviet rivalry. Those who claimed to act out of patriotism perpetuated the waste of billions of US tax dollars, squandered the possibility of achieving lasting nuclear security, and weakened America's global standing.

The $5.5 trillion spent on nuclear weapons—"enough to buy everything in the United States except for the land," noted Carl Sagan—was money not invested in domestic needs. Rhodes writes:

Far from victory in the Cold War, the superpower nuclear-arms race and the corresponding militarization of the American economy gave us ramshackle cities, broken bridges, failing schools, entrenched poverty, impeded life expectancy, and a menacing and secretive national-security state.

Circinione endorses Obama's plan for transforming nuclear policy but gives credit to Clinton as well.

Barack Obama has promised to lead a global campaign not just to reduce but to eliminate nuclear weapons. Obama has the most developed plan in the campaigns, based in part on work he has done with Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana and a bill he has introduced with Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska. In an October 2007 speech he endorsed a comprehensive plan to control and eliminate nuclear weapons around the world. According to the plan, the US would (1) secure during his first term as president all nuclear materials in the fifty countries that have them; (2) negotiate radical reductions in US and Russian nuclear stockpiles; (3) negotiate a verifiable global ban on the production of fissile materials; (4) create an international nuclear fuel bank; (5) increase funding for the inspections and safeguards done by the IAEA; (6) seek a global ban on all intermediate-range missiles; and (7) lower the current alerts that keep thousands of nuclear warheads ready to launch within fifteen minutes, thus reducing the risk that the weapons would be used by accident or misperception.

The Obama Pattern

Click to enlarge

Nationally, Obama is repeating his pattern from individual primary states. The numbers in the graph above are from the New York Times / CBS poll. More analysis here. The trend seems clear.

In the 43 days from January 13 to February 25, national support for Obama has doubled - from 27% to 54% - while support for Clinton has slipped by 4 percent - from 42% to 38%. Said differently, Obama has turned a 15 point deficit into a 16 point lead.

Obama Can - Clinton Can't

Click to enlarge

Today, Rasmussen Reports that in Colorado, McCain loses to Obama but beats Hillary. The simple message is that today in Colorado Obama Can Win - Clinton Can't Win.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Colorado’s Electoral College votes have ended up in the Republican column for the past three Presidential election, but it has always been competitive. Four years ago, President George W. Bush won the state by less than five percentage points over Senator John Kerry.

It’s not clear which party will claim Colorado and its nine Electoral Votes in 2008.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows that Barack Obama (D) currently holds a seven-point advantage over John McCain (R), 46% to 39%. However, if the Democrats nominate Hillary Clinton, McCain will begin the race with a fourteen point advantage, 49% to 35%. National polling, updated daily, currently shows the same general trend with Obama currently performing better than Clinton in match-ups with McCain.

Sixty percent (60%) of Colorado voters currently have a favorable opinion of Obama while just 36% hold an unfavorable view.

McCain earns favorable reviews from 55% and less flattering assessments from 42%

Clinton is viewed favorably by 44% and unfavorably by 54%.

If this trend holds up, Hillary Clinton will never have a Day 1 on which to be ready.

Crosses - January 28, 2008

Click to enlarge

Cross posted at The Crosses of Lafayette.

Thoughtful Thoughts

In all the speculative analysis I heard tonight in the reporting on Super Tuesday, two thoughts stood out:

1. Richard Norton Smith, the historian, pointed out that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both talk about change but define change differently. Hillary defines change as challenging the last 7 years of the Bush Administration. But Barack Obama defines change as challenging the process by which decisions have been made in Washington for the last 16 years or longer. That's why Obama's message is so much more uplifting.

2. George Will (I know, I can't believe I am citing George Will) pointed out that it will be interesting to see what the Democratic Primary vote in California totals among voters who voted today as opposed to voting early. That tabulation will underscore the state of things on February 5, 2008 - not the the total vote including early votes cast before Edwards dropped out or Obama started to climb.