Wednesday, June 14, 2017

Slats: A Non-Origin Story

“Hello darkness, my old friend
I've come to talk with you again”

I am oft asked about Slats, my mentor (of sorts).  A recurring theme is, “Why didn’t he make it Big?”  “He could have been a James Carville, a Paul Tully (n.b.: look him up), a Lee Atwater (twisted, evil little freak that he was, he was a Talent); much better than that ghoul Bob Shrum.”  Yes, I have heard it all.  

Over the course of many besotted (in the archaic sense of the word) evenings, and some afternoons, both during and after my tenure at his company, I was able to piece together his arc.

You see, during the course of every conversation in a public place, Slats’ eyes would invariably wander to the nearest woman (or women) that he found attractive. This is hardly an unusual behavior for a heterosexual man of his (or any other) generation.  But it was not the glances there were the issue, it was the pursuit, which dominated a great deal of his time, off hours and on.

An obsession is a thought; a compulsion is an act.  When it came to sex, he possessed both the “O” and the “C” with a fervor that younger men found admirable…and more mature men recognized as problematic.  It became clear, to me at least, that he was pursuing something, and not someone…and that whatever feeling or state of being he sought, he would never catch it.  He believed, as he implied in moments of extreme candor, that his world could be made whole again, if he just met the right Someone (even when he was already married).  In his mind, he was <this> close to finding the One.  That whatever was denied him in the past would be restored. That his pain would be forever salved.

He did (rarely) find someone wonderful, yet he always seemed to bungle it, for reasons which I can scarcely fathom and I guess he may never comprehend…even in his dreams when the lies we tell ourselves are stripped away.

“Because a vision softly creeping
Left its seeds while I was sleeping”

Of course one can never know what it is truly in the mind of another.  Message producer/message recipient…even in ideal situations, there is always static that impedes communication, to say nothing of the unambiguous fuck-ups in both word and deed.  But at some point, perhaps during the late hours during moments of solitude and despair, the idea of More (see: Schopenhauer) festered.  And it, perhaps, drove him.  Political consulting, a former passion of his, became merely a means to an end.  He was good enough, and better than most, when he applied himself.  Yet he was never fully “present” as the Vipassana folks say. Not 100% mindful.

“And the vision that was planted in my brain
Still remains
Within the sound of silence”

And as he got older, I saw more of a feral desperation in his eyes.  An existential angst that was growing more intolerable as he sought to reconcile his fears with his place in the universe.  A fear that he would never be who he was supposed to become.  A fear that he would not only never be content, but that his troubles would become insurmountable.  That the choices he had made were demanding payment in full.  And even when he managed to make a correct decision, a self-destructive impulse would foil his better instincts.  This drove people, good people, away from him.

“In restless dreams I walked alone
Narrow streets of cobblestone”

Of course, he labored in an era where prose and poetry meant more than data analytics.  Campaigns like Fred Harris ’76 were of a time and place, long before the rise of Big Data, back when Pat Caddell was idealistic, and not too far removed from college.  Segmentation overtook the craft.  And even bearing in mind some brutal campaigns in the early days of our Republic, it feels as though campaigning, and governing, have become coarsened.  Perhaps more transparent, but less illuminating.

'Neath the halo of a street lamp
I turned my collar to the cold and damp”

Slats may be a living fossil. A T-Rex in a post-Cretaceous world.  Out of place, out of time. Eyes full of regrets and the “angel’s share” from a single-malt.  He must know, by now, that his number will probably never be called. He persists but with a creeping world-weariness that is veering into nihilism.  A few short years, perhaps, until the Flash and the Void.

“When my eyes were stabbed by the flash of a neon light
That split the night”

Which, of course is why I bring up Slats MacCune, a living tragic figure and monument to another era. His obituary is already written, yet he draws breath.  The only variable is how Act III concludes, and when.  And then applause, and Fin.

“And touched the sound of silence.”








For Those Who Care: A HoCo Campaign 2018 Update

Truth be whispered, what the ancient Greeks called “dusthumía” is attempting to gut-punch this author, repeatedly, this morning.  Not that corres-depondence (I see what I did there) equates to bad writing. This essayist is not inclined to punish the readership with twaddle, Heaven forfend!

Nope, just need to keep pressing some keys.  Besides, fuck the ancient Greeks. Couldn’t even be bothered to develop a rudimentary Metro system. If they did, I reckon Pheidippides would still be alive today.

Campaign News:

County Exec Allan Kittleman announced, to the shock of none and the dismay of several, his bid for re-election.  Meanwhile, a straw man sets up another straw man (See: Greg Fox).  Of course, I shouldn’t be too hard on Mr. Fox.  Depending on who emerges out of CC 5, he might be remembered as the Cincinnatus of West HoCo. But I seem to have shifted to the Romans, so let me get back on track.

CC3 is looking like an embarrassment of riches on the Democratic side, with Christiana Mercer Rigby already in the race and Steve Hunt poised to enter the fray very soon.  Should be an engaging primary in the months ahead.

CC4.  As attentive readers know, this is my home district.  Byron Macfarlane recently announced his candidacy. If a poll was commissioned tomorrow, there is no doubt in my mind that he would be the front-runner in the Democratic field by a healthy double-digit margin.  That is not to say that Deb Jung (the other D in CC 4 who has filed to date) is a slouch, she is not.  That is to say that Byron is well-known with a significant reservoir of support throughout the County in general and in District 4 specifically. 

State’s Attorney:  Rich Gibson.  By a country mile.  His website can be found here: http://richgibson.net/

Of course, the Band Known as Team 13 re-filed together.  Such a lovely place, such a lovely slate (with apologies to Mr. Henley, Mr. Frey, and sure, Mr. Felder). 

So what about D12?  Stay tuned…wait…not yet.

Oh yes, I believe the Columbia Democratic Club is having an important meeting tonight.  To those who ask, “Will you be there?” I reply, “Is there an open bar?”  If there are caipirinhas, I am all in. But I have now drifted from Greece to Rome to California to Brazil, so I should stop here.


Stay tuned, as more will follow (?)

Thursday, June 1, 2017

Fresh Blood: 2020

First, a hand-drawn infographic!


Ok, I may not have captured everyone.  And some were favorite sons (alas, no daughters) in the earlier cycles, but bear with me.

This is a list of all of the Democratic candidates for President since 1952 who 1) lost once and 2) ran again.  A circle means they were the nominee in that cycle.

Some names not on this list: every Democrat elected to the Presidency since 1960 with one exception.

1) John F. Kennedy.  First time presidential candidate in '60.  Tried (unsuccessfully) to get on the national ticket with Stevenson as the VP pick in '56.  Won the nomination and General Election.
2) Jimmy Carter.  First time presidential candidate in '76.  Tried (unsuccessfully) to get on the national ticket with McGovern as the VP pick in '72.  Won the nomination and General Election.
3) Bill Clinton.  First time presidential candidate in '92.  Thought about it in '88 but passed.  Won the nomination and General Election, twice.
4) Barack Obama.  First time presidential candidate in '08.  Won the nomination and General Election, twice.

LBJ is on the list, and he did win on his own in '64 (against Goldwater, not the strongest opponent the GOP could have fielded that cycle).  That said, he lost the bid for the nomination in '60, came to the office only on the passing of JFK, and was clearly in for a tough battle for the nomination in '68 when he famously declared that he would neither seek, nor accept the nomination of the Democratic Party for President.

And of course there were those who lost on a national ticket as a VP or VP candidate and who ran for the Presidency later...and lost again (Muskie in '68 and '72 respectively, Shriver in '72 and '76 respectively, Lieberman in '00 and '04 respectively).  Mondale, of course, won in '76 with Carter (when he passed on the race himself, citing a lack of "fire in the belly") but lost in his own bid in '84.  Al Gore and Joe Biden have already been accounted for in this chart.

So...while the past is not always prologue...I would like to see some new names come to the fore for the Democratic Party in 2020.  History has not been kind to the "not one-and-done" club. You have to admit, we have run (and won with) some excellent first-timers.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Friday, May 26, 2017

Ben Carson’s Personal “Poverty of Spirit”

First, let’s start with what is known.  Dr. Ben Carson is a serial prevaricator.  Everything he utters must first pass through that lens.  Distrust and verify.   The fact that he stands 13th in the line of succession would, normally, be cause for trepidation…but it’s just another day in Trump-occupied America.

So this fabulist who recently said that “poverty to a large extent is also a state of mind” is now helming the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).  And what is going on with the Administration and community development and housing these days? Well, according to Jose DelReal of The Washington Post:

The Trump administration's 2018 budget blueprint, unveiled Tuesday, would cut more than $6 billion from HUD's budget. The cuts would end popular grants that facilitate first-time home ownership and revitalize economically distressed communities, including the Community Development Block Grant. The budget would also cut billions of dollars in funding for public housing support, gutting dollars used to fund big-ticket repairs at public housing developments around the country.


How precisely are these proposals going to help folks get a leg up?  How will denying people living at the margins, from check to check, opportunities for advancement help bring about an “Opportunity Society” that sometime-Trump enthusiast and disgraced former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich used to bloviate about?

Allow me to shift format and go open-letter. Let’s talk Michiganian to Michiganian here, Doc. I know we grew up in different eras and in different circumstances.  But we both know something about being of the working class and having some tough times.  Your family had to rely on food stamps for a while, ours needed government assistance too.  You and I both know that all it takes is one bad break to make a precarious situation far worse.  Your family did well enough where you could get a “new Chrysler” according to one of your books.  Good for you.  Of course, what if someone in your family had come down with a serious illness? What then?  I am guessing you might have wanted a strong safety net in place…just in case.  

Many hard-working folks who live, and not just talk about, the virtues of self-reliance fall through the cracks.  So stop peddling your bullshit about “creating dependency” when you are part of an Administration that seems determined to take a hacksaw and slice off several rungs of the “ladder of opportunity” of which you speak.

Further, how dare your allies cloak your mealy mouthed nonsense under the guise of “faith,” as your sketchy pal Armstrong Williams did.  Side note:  how much money did Williams make promoting No Child Left Behind in that ethically dubious side deal that got him canned?  

So, Doctor, you apparently interpret the book of Genesis literally but what about all of the other Bible verses that talk about helping the poor…in Proverbs?  In Acts? In Matthew? In Luke? In Isaiah? Etc...I may not share your religion, but I do know that picking and choosing which verses to believe and which to ignore is a big “no no” in many Christian denominations.

I don’t know you.  I can’t speak to what is truly in your head or heart.  I can only assess your thinking based on your words and deeds. Based on those, it appears as though the true poverty in spirit can be found within your own soul, Doctor Carson.

Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Tuesday, May 23, 2017

Annapolis Quest: New 2018 MD Gov Poll - a Dissection

From the Desk of S. MacCune: Amateur Harbor Master

A new poll was released regarding the 2018 Maryland Gubernatorial contest – a proverbial “snapshot” of a race which is simultaneously embryonic yet well underway.   Information can be found here:


Now, the regular author of this blog, being a former political pollster (and God knows he doesn’t keep that a secret) is generally loathe to discuss the work of other pollsters.  Any criticisms, well-founded or otherwise, tend to come across as 2000s-era Gore Vidal-esque sneering.  Which is why he asked me to use my fresh yet bleary eyes to cover this critical non-story.  Which is an awesome use of my precious time.  

I know Mr. Considerations leans in the direction of Mr. Jealous, Sen. Madaleno, or Del. McIntosh (with the former two being the most likely to be on the June 2018 primary election ballot as candidates for Governor).  Obviously, my unfettered neutrality is precisely what this blog needs. 

What we don’t know about this survey (yet or possibly ever): Study Design & Methodology

  •      The Sample Size/Margin of Error (as noted in the story)
  •    The Sample Composition (by Party ID, etc…)
  •    The Sample Selection Process (RDD, Voter lists, etc…)
  •    The Data Collection Methodology (telephone (live interviewer), telephone (no live interviewer, IVR, etc…), online, etc…)


What we don’t know about this survey (yet or possibly ever):  Findings

  •     Intensity of Feeling on the Favorable/Unfavorable ratings (Strong/Somewhat)
  •      Gradations on the ballot tests (definitely/probably/lean)
  •      If the ballot tests released are initial/cold ballot tests…or if those numbers followed batteries of questions about the actual/prospective candidates.


What I found interesting is that Gansler, considering his statewide profile, was not *that* much better known compared to some of his likely rivals for the Democratic nomination. 
Does he lead the D field? Sure, just like Ted Kennedy did in early ’84 match-ups for President (he didn’t run that cycle), Joe Lieberman in early ’04 surveys (he ran but finished poorly), and Rudy Giuliani (on the R side) in early ’08 surveys (see note on Lieberman).   It’s a Name ID advantage but it is far from insurmountable.

Among registered D’s, Gansler’s Name ID is +16 over the next closest individual tested (Jealous) but his Favorability rating is only 11 points higher, while his Unfavs are 5 points higher than Jealous.  His Fav/Unfav ratio is just about 5:1, which is decent, but Jealous is at 7:1 Fav/Unfav, while Delaney is @ 10:1 (Baker and Kamenetz are both in the 3:1/4:1 range).

On the ballot test, Gansler at -9 is right around where a Generic D places against Hogan (-10).  Assuming a Margin of Error in the +/- 5% zone, at the 95% level of confidence, Delaney (-13), Baker (-14), Kamenetz (-15), and Jealous (-16) are all within striking distance of Gansler. 

Now, if Gansler were up, tied, or in the low single digits behind Hogan, that would be news.  But he is - at most- only slightly ahead of the peloton.  And most of the course is ahead of the field.

Stay tuned as, etc…





Tuesday, May 16, 2017

Left of Center and Sound of Mind

One benefit of the long slog that is my daily three-hour commute to and from our Nation’s Capital is that I have found additional time to read. At least on the Metro.  Page-turning is oddly frowned upon whilst behind the wheel, thundering down Randolph Road.  Yet another tell-tale sign of incipient fascism.

Of course, the automotive leg of the journey carries with it certain advantages as well.  Observing the flora and fauna that inhabit Arcola Avenue, especially in the spring-time, has a restorative impact.  The other morning, I watched a small fox family traipse across the road before scurrying off into the near-by woods.  All with NPR or Jazz and Justice on in the background, it creates the pleasant illusion of advanced civilization.

If nothing else, it serves as an occasion to not focus on the appalling hypocrisies and moral deficiencies of those “leaders” and others who cower on the Right or Radical Center, as Kevin Phillips might refer to the latter group, with their inability to see that the current occupation of the White House is no Second Coming of Reagan.  Even with his own flaws, which were considerable, our 40th President was north of the Mendoza line when it came to sanity.  Personally, I find that an important attribute in American Presidents, in the nuclear age.  Others may disagree.

So I look forward to cracking upon my latest acquisition, A Struggle for Power: The American Revolution by Theodore Draper, which I picked up yesterday at Second Story Books, near DuPont Circle.  In it, Draper re-evaluates the causes of the Revolutionary War by employing a realpolitik lens that includes, but transcends, ideological yearnings for Liberty and Freedom.  By acknowledging that it was a power struggle due to other, grounded political and economic reasons, he re-frames the rationale for our War of Independence.  I am very much looking forward to delving into it.

On an (unrelated?) note, Progressive HoCo is holding their kick-off meeting on Sunday, May 21.  According to their website (http://www.progressivemaryland.org/progressive_maryland_weekly_memo_for_may_15_21) it will be at: “3 p.m. at the Savage Branch of Howard County Library, 9525 Durness Lane, Laurel 20723. Please contact Dave Bazell at daveb13704@gmail.com for more information.”


Stay tuned, as more will follow.

Tuesday, May 9, 2017

Language Choices and the Democratic Party

So back when I was working for The Other Side, I was amongst those who spent a great deal of time thinking about, and providing counsel on, political language.  One of my signature moves, which will not be immortalized via statue, was advising candidates and organizations to embrace “relief” instead of “reform.”  My rationale was that many voters hear “tax reform” as a “tax shift” which might hose them; whereas relief meant tax cuts and more money in their pockets, which unsurprisingly evoked a positive visceral response.  Plop Plop, Fizz Fizz.  

I bring this up because I was listening to the latest episode of Elevate Maryland, featuring Special Guest Delegate Vanessa Atterbeary (D-MD).  She raised the concern that Democrats just weren’t as proficient at message framing compared to Republicans.  Two points:

1)      She is right.
2)      It is refreshing to hear policymakers speaking candidly, accessibly, and authentically.  It is clear that Delegate Atterbeary has not “gone Annapolis” (note: for residents of the other 49 states, fill in your state capital here).  Far too many people, once elected to public office, start adopting an arcane patois that makes them sound like John Kerry on Quaaludes.   

I have often argued that Democrats, in many swing districts, can win by employing language consistent with a Progressive/Populist positioning.  That pairing, again not everywhere but in many competitive districts, constitutes a functional majority.  This does not mean having to adopt “conservative” stances in order to be considered populist; nor does it mean sounding like a Jill Stein acolyte. It means coming across like a down-to-earth, thoughtful human being who isn’t afraid to fight in the defense of expanding the sphere of liberty for working and middle class folks.

Too often, Democrats get caught up in schismatic foolishness. This happens frequently with parties in the center-left to the left.  It happened with Labour in the UK in the 70s and early 80s, which led to the rise of the SDP on their immediate right and to the pull of the Militant Tendency on their left. Of course, these fractures are more likely to occur because Labor then, and the Democrats now, are Big Tent-oriented.  Beyond that, the widespread adoption of information and communication technology platforms, the existence of a 24-hour news cycle, and the utilization of the Internet and social media, have all served to elevate mass awareness of our internecine squabbles.  This creates branding challenges, but I digress.

My point is this, if the Democratic Party wishes to break the Republican’s precarious grip on swingable center constituencies, they need to articulate a clear and compelling set of animating values and organizing principles. Let’s call it an American Deal (or a Maryland Deal, if you want to focus it locally).  Does it sound like a document that was released in ’94.  Yep.  Did it work?  Hell yeah it did. The difference will be in the content, with the faux populism of the Contract with America replaced by a legitimate People-First orientation of an American Deal.

The first step is to consider the values, the policies that stem from those values, and the optimal language to use when discussing both the values and policies. 

It really isn’t that difficult.

Again, great interview Delegate Atterbeary!  Way to work for the folks in the Fightin’ 13th!

Stay tuned, as more will follow.