Hola from Mexico! Anthony Weiner Esta Un Grande Polla!

-Hello from our neighbors to the South - Mexico! Yes. I am compelled to blog from our family vacation where I am brushing up on my 4th Grade Spanish while drinking a tanker of tequila. Donde esta la Bibliotecha? And do they serve margaritas there?

Dave totally stole my initial thought about the anti-Hillary Super PAC, but since he's the padre of this blog I will give him a pass. My muy fabuloso hermano-in-law Brian and I have been devouring the Anthony Weiner story (much to my husband's chagrin: He thinks Weiner should be kicked to the curb and we start talking about important things. Like hockey.), and so I will intellectually contort myself to make this blog, alledgedly about the Invisible Primary, to include the words "sexting," "sociopath" and "dickhead."

Let's look down the road a few ways, the first to 7 weeks from now: This is when the primaries of NY and NJ hit and we get to watch Chris Christie and Anthony Weiner run for the roses. I'm going to go out here on a limb and predict Christie in a slow walk, and Weiner getting his ass handed to him by a group of gleeful NYers who are drooling over the chance to humiliate him at the polls. Yes. This is a risky bet, but it's why they pay me the big bucks to blog. Let's start with Christie and get to the good stuff: Carlos Danger.

Yes, 2013 is gonna be a big year, mostly because one of the front-runners for the GOP is going to win easily. The hilarious thing is that, even though the off-years are state-wides, the pundit class will use such 5-buck words as "harbinger" and "predictive" and "portent" to say Chris Christie is un dealio grande. As they say in Mexico. Which is pronounced "Meh-Hee-Co." I am off topic. But 2013 will set the stage for the 2014 which is where we go next.

Hola and que tal to the "Madam President" list of winners who should be watched. Also, 2014 is muy importante for the GOP who is withering in the House and hanging on in the Senate, and desperately trying to figure out who will show for the Show of 2016: the hard-line Tea Party-backed conservatives who think Richard Murdock and Todd Akin were simply misunderstood, or the establishment Republicans who think Reagan has been hijacked by... everybody. See (and this is where the intellectual contortion comes in handy), the races that lead up to the 2016 presidential will be analyzed in greater detail than any invasion plan Donald Rumsfeld ever had a hand in.

Hand in? Let's get to Weiner! BOOM! So, as Ross Perot would say, here's the deal. Anthony, I was with you. You did the 5 steps of scandal/redemption nicely enough to lead in the polls.  I warned you that not enough time had passed, but you jumped into the NYC Mayoral race and I thought I might be wrong. But then you went un grande loco on me and changed the narrative: You sexted with random women AFTER you resigned in disgrace? AFTER? AFTER?!?!? Son, you lost me. And here is why.

As my muy bonita college roommate Martha once observed: Marriage is hard. It is. And I am NEVER one to think that I can peek inside someone else's relationship and give them advice. Hell, I am smart enough to know that I don't want anyone peeling my own marital onion, mostly because it ain't anyone's bid-ess but my own and life is complicated. BUT. When we make decisions in private, we don't get to call them private when we run for a public office where the sole criteria is... decision making. See, Anthony - had you either kept your fingers in yer gloves or not run for public office, then I'd still be with you. But you didn't. No, a YEAR AFTER you resigned in disgrace you were still sexting random sycophantic women who took the reigns of power from you and promptly sold it to the highest bidder. Allow me to quote from the marvelous "House of Cards:" Everything is about sex, except sex. Sex is about power. And when you are dumb enough to give up the power to some random age-inappropriate random, then you do not get to be mayor of anywhere. Ever. Really.

So to Anthony Weiner, I say this: Go away, por favor. What you have done to poor Huma is reason enough to make certain that you hide your face for a long while. Dragging her up to a press conference in order to make you look pretty is mean and sociopathic. You are a narcissistic ball of yuck and the Democratic Party can do better.

As for Carlos Danger, I want to say: The interwebs auto-correct my last name to Danger. I always thought this was awesome. Now, I am having thoughtos sugundo. If you get an e-mail from me signed "Alison Danger," there is no relation. Por favor.

An Invisible Primary First?

As some of you may have read in the past week, an explicitly anti-Hillary Clinton super PAC called Stop Hillary has been created.  The founders are a classic mix of intense policy demanders comprised of state politicians (mostly from Colorado), former congressional and presidential campaign staffers, and a lobbyist or two.  Included in this cadre is Matt Rhodes who recently helped found the Republican opposition research super PAC America Rising.  How much money Stop Hillary can raise and what resources they can deploy are anyone's guess, but we shouldn't be surprised that something like this has come along.

So here's an honest question (and if you know the answer please let us know): Is this the first time a PAC has formed explicitly to oppose a non-declared candidate in the invisible primary?

We've obviously seen PACs and super PACs affiliated with candidates beat up on each other, as they did in the 2012 invisible primary.  America Rising itself was a delayed response to the Democratic opposition research super PAC American Bridge, but these are groups with broader goals.   Even Citizens United was established decades before it aired its hugely consequential film on Sen. Clinton in the 2008 primary, though most people never heard of it until 2009.  But Stop Hillary seems unique in its singular purpose.  The names speaks volumes, and probably says it all.

While American Bridge was content to confine its work out of the public eye - digging up dirt and embarrassing bits about various Republicans then feeding it to the press - Stop Hillary seems to be fully intent on grabbing as much publicity as they can.  Their first major play will be a video which is set to be released later this week.  I guess their first test is see if anyone notices...

Coffee House Guy, the Money Primary, and the Invisible Primary

Over the past two weeks I was lucky enough to take a bit a of road trip to Oregon and Washington to visit a dear friend and family before the nuttiness of preparing my house for sale and moving up to South Dakota State (Go Jacks!) begins in ernest.  Generally when I'm on the road I don't make a particular point of socializing with random folks, and my first general order is to never blurt out that I'm a political scientist to strangers.  As my colleagues in the profession can attest to, that can elicit a wide variety of responses, the vast majority of which we'd rather not hear.  However, at a moment of weakness in a coffee joint in Park City, I was pinned down with an incriminating pile of manuscripts awaiting editorial action by coffee house guy.

After his finding pretense to engage me, exchanging pleasantries (which I suck at by the way), explaining what I was up to, and my areas of interest, we had a decent little exchange on presidential elections that got me thinking.  Here's the critical bit:

CHG: So who's the odds on favorite for the Republicans?  After all, we know Hillary will be the nominee for the Dems, since she's got all the money.

Me: Obviously it's too early to make an accurate prediction, but I'd look for someone who's got a good reputation amongst Republican governors and perhaps Senators, and can get along with the Tea Party types, evangelicals, and the country club set... maybe someone like Rob Portman, hell even Jeb Bush if he can restore the brand name.

CHG: What about Rand Paul?  He's got a bunch of hardcore supporters and can probably tap into his dad's great fundraising network, and money's the name of the game in the primaries.

Me: Money is one of those things you can't do a thing without, but it's not everything.  And, it can't be flowing in just one direction towards the candidate.  Early on, it's more important that the candidate be raising money for other folks and the parties at various levels.  Both Ron Paul and Howard Dean were raking the money into their campaigns in the early primary seasons and both had their asses handed to them when the voters began to weigh in.  Their opponents had developed networks of office holders and party activists that could open up the taps when the time came.

CHG: Makes sense.

Me: Yeah, I wish I was the one who wrote the book on that...

CHG: So Hillary's not got it in the bag either.

Me: No, but she's got a lot more going for her than money.  Unless something big happens between now and then, as it did in 2007, she'll be well positioned with Democratic office holders and activists for a strong run.  She'll raise money for them and they for her; to say nothing about the pro staff and volunteers she'll pick up in the process.

CHG: What about those 501 groups?

Me: Yeah you're spot on, just another way for the money to be raised and spent between the players.

CHG: Well good talking to you, take it easy bro.

Me: Uh, yeah.  You too, um dude.

***

The money primary and invisible primary are often conflated, but I think we need to carefully separate the concepts, and be very clear about the nuances of money in the process.  All things considered, I'm all for retiring the use of the term "money primary" all together as it obfuscates more than it clarifies.

For starters, the invisible primary clearly involves money, but it's not determinative.  The term "money primary" evokes a candidate centered process, reminiscent of David Broder's famous observation that politicians are essentiallyself-nominated and financed political entrepreneurs.  This feeds into the widely, yet wrongly held belief that money is everything in politics.  Central to the concept of the invisible primary is that the party - broadly conceived - is attempting to triangulate on an acceptable candidate.  It's as much - if not more - about the various constituencies and officials within the party looking for a good nominee as it is self-starters looking to tap into the organizational and financial resources of the party's principle players.

By conceiving of the pre-primary period as simply the money primary, we lose a great deal of what's taking place within the party.  A commonly held belief about Gov Tim Pawlenty's hasty exit after the Iowa straw poll was him losing the money chase.  While his fundraising clearly was falling behind Romney's, we now know that his real trouble was finding bannermen amongst well placed Republicans.  While there's clearly some simultaneity with money and party support going on, history shows us that party support is the critical factor.  And as I suggested to the coffee house guy in Park City, the entrepreneur like Dean in '04, who pads his own pockets nicely, but fails to pad the pockets of others in the invisible primary, will probably take an inglorious early exit.

Slow News Days = IP Expansion

Have you ever noticed that on the days where there is no real news, the crap stuff seeps in more readily? This is not to say that on a good news day there is quality stuff out there, but when the NSA is poking into our business, at least the big three plus the cable news nets pay a modicum of attention to issues that… I don’t know… matter.  

And speaking of the NSA, just a quick story: When my husband deployed to Afghanistan in 2001 I was left behind on Fort Drum, the Army’s 10^th Mountain Division (Climb to Glory!). Since this was the very first “real world” deployment in a long time, even experienced Army wives didn’t know what to do and I was far from qualified to understand anything. I pretty much just stood there and looked confused. Of the precious few pieces of advice I was given: The mail will be slow, “JAG” was not just a bad TV show and you needed them to fill out paperwork, and your phone calls would be monitored. Thus, when we were talking 14 times a day, my sister and I got into the habit of saying “hi” to those we referred to as the ‘men on the phone.’ Sometimes we gave them recipes because we’re friendly like that. So this NSA stuff? Sort of old hat. Hello again, my men-on-the-phone friends! Hope you liked that Yankee Pot Roast recipe we spoke about a decade ago. Somebody remind me to add a salutation now in my outgoing e-mails to the nice people at Verizon and at Fort Meade. Moni and I have a killer salmon recipe for you! Perhaps a poor choice of words….

Now back to the Invisible Primary.

Last week seemed to be all about my gal Hillary, whose activities seemed to be continuously and unimaginatively described as: “Fueling speculation of a 2016 run.”  She rather coquettishly leapt ontoTwitter, describing herself as “wife, mom, lawyer, women & kids advocate, FLOAR, FLOTUS, US Senator, SecState, author, dog owner, hair icon, pantsuit aficionado, glass ceiling cracker, TBD…” and set the Twitter-sphere afire with loads of new followers jumping onto the bandwagon with alarming alacrity. She also spoke at the newly re-named “Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation” where she talked about early childhood education, always a decent issue upon which to campaign (the children is learning).  So she’s getting good press, but all readers of this blog know that the media spotlights are hot things and coverage is capricious. Thus, the news that HRC is slipping a bit in the polls was both newsworthy and unsurprising at the same time.  Ah, media attention: You fickle, fickle lady. The reason for the slip in the polls concerns, of course, the Benghazi affair which conservatives have locked onto like… conservatives onto the Whitewater Affair circa 1993. Huh. Anyhoo, a no less vaunted publication than Commentary has seized this moment to pile on and released this little nugget of joy about Hillary’s piss-poor performance at State, alleging not only did she cock up Benghazi, but under her watch the whole ambassadorial corps was riddled with sex scandals, a different type of cock up if you ask me (zing!). Suffice it to say, Hillary takes the media lead this week in our Invisible Primary, if only because of her seemingly road-block coverage of her Facebook-style “selfie” pictures. Oh, and by the way FLOAR stands for First Lady of Arkansas, so get your head out of the gutter.

Moving on to another relative of another past-POTUS (actually, two past POTUSES. POTI?), a warm welcome back to the IP to Jeb Bush, who spoke last week to the Faith and Freedom Coalition’s annual bacchanal (just kidding!) in Washington. Jeb, trying to get in front on this immigration issue, said the following: “Immigrants are more fertile, and they love families, and they have more intact families, and they bring a younger population. Immigrants create an engine of economic prosperity.” This truly bizarre statement brought out the funny from (never thought I’d say this) Sarah Palin, who remarked to the conference the next day: “I think it’s kind of dangerous territory . . . to want to debate this over one race’s fertility rate over another. And I say this as someone who’s kind of fertile herself.” Basically, Chris Cillizza in the WaPo had a nice piece here about the establishment vs. hard right kerfuffle in the GOP that is worth perusing if you haven’t already. This out-in-front strategy of Jeb’s is fodder for “will he or won’t he” 2016 speculation, but since his mom put the kibosh on it we can move along…

… to Chris Christie, who remains a media darling thanks to a crap-ton of press  he has garnered following the death of NJ Sen. Frank Lautenberg. Calling a special election for October brought mixed reviews, but the Governor barreled through to “slow jam” the news with Jimmy Fallon, share an acclamatory stage with Bill Clinton, and then watch as his Gallup poll numbers rise to make him the most popular IP 2016 contender of the moment. Christie is on top right now as he walks towards his own 2013 gubernatorial re-election bid. He’s stealing a play from Hillary herself from the time that she ran for her Senate re-election in 2006: Raise a truck-load of money, spend bupkis, and keep the campaign cash in your war chest. You know. Just in case another election just happens to come your way. Maybe in 2016?

Oh, who knows. Wait. I know someone who might: Hey, NSA! What do you think?

OK, OK. Go back to keeping us safe for democracy or whatever. Really: I love your work. Have you lost weight? Hope you enjoyed that Yankee Pot Roast.

Big hugs to the men on the phone,

Ali

“We’ve Only Just Begun!” The IP Graduation Speech From Hell

‘Tis the time of year when chestnuts are roasting – not the kind of chestnuts that Bing Crosby sings about in December, but the old kind that gets tossed around graduation speeches like hacky sacks at a Further concert. Yes, these are the worn-out, unimaginative clichés that riddle university campuses, positioned right after the non-denominational prayer, right before the singing of the alma mater, right around the time the frat boys start to get woozy from the wake & bake and the sorority girls realize their shoe selection was unfortunate for a four hour event where most of it is spent standing.

The world is ahead of you.

Look forward, but also look back.

It is not the end, it is the beginning.

Life is a journey.

So true. So, so true. ALSO, so freakin’ stale they make my eyes roll reflexively. Thus, this IP posting will take these hackneyed phrases and put them to good use: to address the conundrum of how to “run” for office when you are not actually “running” for anything. Because you must walk before you run. And you will fly and soar as far as your wings will take you.

Good. Lord.

OK! Cliché Numero Uno: The world is ahead of you.

This one is dedicated to my girl, HRC, whose world now consists of her “transition office,” the nation of Libya, and the ten foot circumference around Sen. Rand Paul’s tuchas. The multi-perspective view of Hillary’s world begins at the same place but ends very differently: She is aiming for the White House using her experience as evidence of greatness, and Sen. Paul is aiming for the White House using her experience as evidence of skullduggery. The fun, of course, is in the spin. She says she done good as Sec State, he says she should be in prison. Potato, potahto. The interesting story to drop recently was that some of the big-wigs from Clinton’s 2008 campaign have begged off another chance at the gold ring, but as anyone who has visited my hometown knows: The place is lousy with big-wigs. And, apparently, locusts. But let’s not get distracted.

Cliché Numero Dos: Look forward, but also look back.

This goes out to IP fave Sen. Marco Rubio who has taken advantage of the IRS kerfuffle to propose an amendment to the upcoming 2013 Farm Bill (?) that punishes IRS officials who violate the constitutional rights of Americans. Sayeth the good Senator: “This IRS scandal has destroyed the American people’s confidence in this government institution and exposed the dangers of a large, unaccountable government operating under a President and administration that routinely intimidate and harass their political opponents.” Holy cats – knocking the administration AND the IRS in one fell swoop? Nice IP play, sir! Well done. Also, and I’m just whiffing here, it seems that throwing stones at the IRS today is sort of like proposing a Fight Club brawl with Olivia, your 6 year old niece. Who is blindfolded. Sorta easy, ain’t it?

Cliché Numero Tres: It is not the end, it is the beginning.

And hellllooooo NYC Mayoral Candidate Anthony Weiner! (You didn’t think I was gonna let this one go, didja?) I only have three things to say here: One, welcome to the race of a lifetime. Hot dog, this is gonna be FUN, even from the cheap seats. Do you think the New York Post just hired four new cover editors? Two, Congressman, I was wrong about Mark Sanford. But you are no Mark Sanford. Three, are you ready for more (much more) of this? I am proud that this video nugget was created by “a former student working in political consulting or advertising or whatever.” His words not mine, because I got clearance to give him a blind-item shout out. But anyway, Anthony, strap yourself in for more of this. Much, much more. And don’t say I didn’t tell you to wait.

Finally, Cliché Numero Quatro:  Life is a journey.

In this case, a journey to Israel. Mazel Tov to Democratic Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley who recently schlepped to the Middle East in order to talk shop with the chosen people, sharpen his Foreign Policy skills, and prove he’s got what it takes to run for the White House. We haven’t spoken about O’Malley in this blog YET but apparently this is an oversight. He went to Iowa (another designated IP destination) and he’s openly talking about 2016. A bold move from a bold man… that no one outside of Maryland has ever heard of. The good news: There’s still time!

And so graduates, faculty, proud parents, and blog readers: Keep reaching for the stars. You are the future, your education is just beginning, believe in your dreams and always remember: You did it. What you did is between you and your conscience, but I’m a liberal so I say go for it.    

Obesity and Political Viability

Much has been made about Chris Christie's recent lap band surgery in the context of the invisible primary; particularly by the class of folk who yell at each other on TV for a living, and even usually-reasonable columnists.  The obvious conclusion by the chattering classes: this was more politically than personally motivated.  The fact of the matter is that political science actually has something to say on this, and we say it based on something more than simple speculation.  Simply put, they don't know what the hell they're yelling and writing about.

This paper reporting experimental research by Miller, Lundgren, Filion, and Thompson has some interesting findings that suggests most overweight candidates don't have to worry too much about their body image management.  In fact, beanpoles like myself, may want to pack on a few extra pounds.  When shown digitally altered pictures of candidates and asked to make evaluations, respondents actually gave more positive feedback to most obese candidates than to non-obese ones.  "Most" is the important qualifier here.  Whilst obese males were systematically advantaged over their non-obese brothers (or in this case twin 'shopped' brothers), respondents had stronger negative emotional reactions to obese female candidates.  Body image is important, but it cuts in different directions for men and women.  Why am I not surprised?

Roping this all back to Gov. Christie, there's no earthly reason why he would undergo this invasive and risky procedure for simple political gain.  Even if he isn't aware of the political science out there, I can't imagine that someone of his personality, with all his political success and popularity would even begin to feel that his weight is an issue.  I for one, take him at his word.  The invisible primary explains a lot of political behavior, but not on this.

It’s a Treadmill! No, it’s a Mobius Loop! The Never-Ending Invisible Primary

It’s the least wonderful time of the academic year when the last assignments are handed in, grades are due, students are weepy, and every single honor society and campus group hosts an awards banquet. Most of us are pie-eyed with fatigue as we ping from exam to meeting to mandatory-fun social event, but the end is nigh and in a few short weeks we get to hit the re-set button and set off for summer. This is one of the selling points of an academic career for those of us optimistic about the future: There is an actual finish line and we get to cross it, once every 14 weeks. Some of us sprint across the tape, hands held high in a Nixonian victory pose and some of us stagger in, limping and wounded. But done is done.

Not so for our friends running in the Invisible Primary, because they are never through campaigning. If 2016 seems like a long way off, set your peepers on 2020 – because that’s when some of these folks will still be running for president. Think about it this way: Mittens ran in 2008 and 2012. Jeeze, Joe Biden ran in 1988 and in 2008, and that’s a looong time in between runs to constantly position yourself as presidential. These folks are in the positioning period right now, shoring up their leaderly legacies, mounting their accomplishments on their walls like the heads of dead hunted animals, all aiming to sell themselves as the big electoral winners.

And so we turn to this week’s most notable IP contenders to see how they are presenting themselves for public consumption.

#1: Ted “Ain’t No Squishie” Cruz: The Texas firebrand jumped to the front of the “Look at Me!” pack with this National Review article announcing his “consideration” of a presidential run. One Cruz associate (Cruzzy? Cruzite? Cruzzociate?) said “Ted won’t be opening an Iowa office anytime soon, but he’s listening.” Let me translate: “TED’S RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT! GIVE HIM MONEY!” Don’t believe me? The dude is going to South Carolina to campaign. The Palmetto State (besides being the home of the newly elected rep from the Philandering Phirst District – but more on that later) is one of the early presidential primary states, thus an important one to win.

Cruz seems to be grabbing our attention thanks to this analysis (or something along these lines) from my student Amazing Antonio: “Ted Cruz is big because Marco Rubio isn’t conservative enough for the wacknuts.” Truly, Cruz seems to be making his mark through the kind of agitator politicking that garners white-hot camera lights and truckloads of attention. The only hitch in the giddy-up for Cruz is that he has about 4 minutes of experience, which tends to piss off the gray beards in the party, but he can easily parlay his 2016 IP action into a Fox News gig (ala Palin & Cain) or use it to move the ball downfield for 2020. See? 2020.

#2: We move now to my boyfriend, Jumpin’ Joe Biden. Veep Bee is apparently mulling over yet another run for the top job, and we know this because… he’s going to South Carolina. Seriously, what on earth does this state have that I do not see? They just elected Mark Sanford. AGAIN! (but more on that later) Anyhoo, VeepBee is headlining a sold-out fundraiser in S.C. on Friday, which means the guy is presenting himself for public consumption. Of course, as everyone knows, the major wrench in his plans is going to be Hillary, whose maybe-maybe-not candidacy led to this absolutely side-slapping observation about a Biden pitch from political strategist Bob Shrum: “Because she’s a Democrat, I can’t say she’s the elephant in the room, but she’s certainly the dominant donkey.” Seriously, I love this stuff. I’m happy you’re in the game, Joe! It allows us to frequently use one of my favorite descriptive words about you: Avuncular.

#3: Finally, on to New Jersey Gov. Chris “Don’t Call Me Avuncular” Christie, who revealed that less than 2 weeks after a dust-up about his weight in February… he had gastric band surgery. Normally, this kind of thing falls under the heading of “Wait… why are we talking about this?” except that everyone was talking about his weight. This then means that doing something about it is some sort of indication that the Gov. is presenting himself for public consumption. Perhaps a poor choice of words. OK. Put another way, this revelation shows that Christie is cognizant of the chatter around him and wants to change the trajectory of the conversation. Mike Huckabee famously lost more than 100 pounds before his 2008 bid for president, and while that didn’t do very much for his electoral results it did sweep away the disparaging remarks and totally change the narrative. And the narrative in the IP is incredibly important.

Other IP players are doing the same sort of reconstruction of the fables (a tip of the hat to R.E.M.) to include Bob McDonnell of Virginia and Bobby Jindal ofLouisiana. Both of the Bobs are facing a wee-bit of trouble as they look ahead, but I think we will have to let that play itself out more before we address it here. See? Something to look forward to.

I would be remiss were I not to briefly discuss Mark Sanford’s SC-1 win last night. In a fun interview with the National Journal I said that his win was more about party politics (S.C.-1 being an R+11 district) than about the people actually liking Sanford – or about Sanford actually hosting a true comeback. I will not disparage the obviously troubled voters of South Carolina, but instead leave it to the genius Andy Borowitz who came up with this headline and this posting on the Borowitz Report: Sanford’s Comeback Gives Hopes to Liars. I leave this posting with the line I came up with yesterday but was not used in the Journal piece: "The Republicans of S.C.-1 were faithful to their party, even if it meant voting for a guy who wasn’t faithful to anybody.”

I really do love this stuff. Even if, at this time of the semester, I am exhaustipated.