Davis/Sparks Video on Ethics and Electability

Lets crunch some numbers (0.00 / 0)

A candidate, in order to win, needs 50% plus 1 vote. According to Gallup, Alabama voters are Conservative - 49%, Moderate - 32%, Liberal - 19%.

What do these numbers mean? Well if a conservative candidate can hold the 49%, all he/she needs is 1/32 or 3% of the moderate vote to win.

On the other hand a liberal candidate may hold all of the 19% but still needs 31/32 of the moderate vote (97%). To get 97% of any group of voters is virtually impossible.

Lets say our liberal candidate gets 2/3 of the moderate vote. That gives him/her the 19% liberal + another 21% from the moderates for a total of 40%. He/she must get the other 10% from conservative voters or in other words they must win 1 in 5 conservatives (20%).

IMHO this means any Democratic candidate is in for a tough row to the Governor's chair, unless the Repubs nominate Roy Moore, who many conservatives will vote against. Further to win, the Democratic candidate will have to be (or at least convince voters) they are moderate tending to conservative or a conservative who is not dogmatic.  

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
Edmund Burke

---

by: Old Prosecutor @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 15:29:50 PM CDT

Here is the rub in your number crunching OP (0.00 / 0)

There is NO LIBERAL CANDIDATE.

The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die.~Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D. MA)

---

by: Redeye @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 16:07:43 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I think the numbers are the reason (0.00 / 0)

It is difficult to envision a scenario where a truly liberal candidate can get to the 50% + 1. A truly liberal candidate would be hard pressed to split the "moderate" vote (16%). That plus the "liberal" vote only gives you 35%. The other 15% would have to come from the "conservative" vote or roughly 31% of the conservative vote.

Tough to see how you get there

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
Edmund Burke

---

by: Old Prosecutor @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 19:37:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well a lot of those self-proclaimed "conservatives" are all in a lather... (4.00 / 2)

.
 . . . about the Wall Street bailout (as I, a Progressive, am too).  If some politician who had a molecule of honesty and integrity coursing through their veins would just up and Say It, we'd have 75% of the Conservatives strongly in favor of a Public Option.  

 The "It"?  This:

 Right now you, or your momma and daddy, or your grandparents, or your aunt or uncle -- some combination of that -- are getting medical treatment at the hospital, clinic or doctor of their, or your, choice through the Medicare Program.  Those are private doctors and hospitals you've chosen that are getting paid by a federally-run insurance program.  The administrative overhead for that is about 4%, more or less.

 The private insurance companies?  Their overhead's around 30%.  I mean, they've got to spend all that money on advertisements and lobbyists and claims adjusters to deny your, or your son's or daughter's, or grandchildrens' medical bill claim, right?

 Now what we need is to put a system in place that allows anyone to opt-in to a federal insurance program like Medicare, if they want to.  If they can get cheaper health insurance and better-than-Medicare service through one of the private companies, more power to 'em, of course.  

 Now the health insurance companies are pitchin' a hissy saying they can't compete with an expanded, Medicare-type program.  Well, then, cut your damn overhead!  If you can't do that, then why should we cry for you and your wasteful ways?  Don't you believe in competition?!

 Now, y'all don't feel too sorry for them, whine-away thought they may -- from 2000 to 2007 the biggest 10 private insurance companies saw their profits go up over 425%!  And they passed that windfall on to their customers, right?!  Right?!  Don't make me laugh!

 And, of course, there are some politicians fighting against that Public Option, too.  Gee, who do you think's butterin' THEIR bread!  And you know and I know that if they had their way they'd get rid of Medicare AND VA Benefits, too, and put your momma or grandma out there trying to get and use private insurance:  more money for the insurance companies means more campaign contributions to the political weasels who made it happen for their fat cat masters!

 At any rate, if you were against all them dollars -- billions and billions -- going to the Wall Street fat cats, then you'd bust a vein knowing what the Health Insurance Boss Hoggs get paid every year to send premiums up, fight like hell to deny legitimate claims and hope against hope that someday Medicare gets repealed!

.

 Something like that.

 Oh, that's right.  It would take a politician with honesty and integrity.  I keep forgetting.

bg
_______________

---

by: BenGoshi @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 20:25:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

At this moment, Davis is well ahead on the ethics issues... (4.00 / 1)

Based on the statements in this clip as well as throughout the campaign so far, Davis has placed more of his chips to develop and speak towards issues of ethics in government.  Sparks's answers last night really did fall flat, leading one to suggest that there might not be any changes made to the way business is conducted. (And also, Davis is right on the money with the administrative leave comments-in other professions, this is used while investigations occur.  Shouldn't we expect the same of politicians?)

If you look at any list of issues that are going to take a prime role in the campaign this next year, ethics comes to the top of the list.  First, look at the stories that have made and are making news above the fold: Don Siegelman's appeals, the double-dipping ban and the Sue Schmidt trial, Larry Langford's pending trial (which will occur this fall unless it is delayed; at this moment it appears that Langford will be convicted, especially with Bill Blount changing his plea to guilty and taking a deal for his testimony).  All these issues damage Democrats.  Add this to the political factors. Bradley Byrne, who at this time appears to be the Republican's front-runner, will base his campaign on ethics, citing his role with the two year college board.  Republican candidates will cite ethics issues to run against Dems, including Siegelman, two-year colleges, and AEA.

For our Democratic candidates to be successful, we must be concrete in our plans to bring about ethics reform in the state.  

---

by: csduke @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 17:51:53 PM CDT

Davis is well positioned on ethics (0.00 / 0)

Not only because he has the strongest reform proposal on the table, but because he is not part of the Montgomery scene which has benefited from the current lax regulations. Sparks may be trying to pick up support from some of the status quo folks who have supposedly been looking for a Davis alternative or he may be thinking of the Siegelman situation. Either way, Davis didn't say officials under indictment should be fired, he said they should be put on administrative leave -- it's still problematic unless those cases are expedited, but it isn't the same as fired.

And I deleted your duplicate comment. Not sure what causes that but it happens sometimes.

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 21:54:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I don't know.. (4.00 / 1)

Sparks has got an old school populist streak in him. Davis is giving the impression of a slick, well-oiled, commercialized machine in operation. When Davis says we shouldn't attack each other, and acts above suspicion, that pisses me off--and apparently Sparks, too. No one wins a campaign by praising his opponent. I'm pretty sure Davis would like Sparks to play nice. If Davis can't take it in the primary, do you think the Republican machine is going to give him a break?

I'll tell you what--I'm hearing Sparks, but Davis is leaving me cold.  

---

by: yellowdog @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 19:38:54 PM CDT

What I'd like to see . . . (4.00 / 1)

.
  . . . is both candidates in public, in front of a large audience, taking turns (alternating paragraph by paragraph) reading this.

  You want to talk about creating an Uncomfortable Vibe in the room...

 BenGoshi
_________________________
 

---

by: BenGoshi @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 20:02:48 PM CDT

Davis has nailed Step 5 (platitudes) (4.00 / 1)

and we all suspect him of Step 7 (comforting conservatives).

I'm saying Sparks has got a lot of room to the "left" and he won almost every county in Alabama. A Republican campaign like Davis is running is not gonna be a winner in the General (when you can actually vote for a Republican), and I don't think Sparks is gonna let him have a pretty little primary.

I am getting the impression that Sparks is a hardcase.

 

---

by: yellowdog @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 20:49:01 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Now I'm not necessarily *endorsing* what you say by . . . (4.00 / 1)

.
. . .  giving you props (or disagreeing, either), but I am giving you props for actually analyzing both candidates using The Formula.  It's kind of a fun (or cringe-making) exercise, isn't it!

Believe me, the closer you get to any candidate, the more you can see these things.

 bg
________________

---

by: BenGoshi @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 21:09:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Are We Watching the Same Self Destruction (4.00 / 1)

Certainly the pitiful campaign Ronnie is waging won't even be worth mentioning if he went up against a Republican in the general.  Davis is running a marathon and the vry sad encounter he had with Ronnie last night only gets him shape.  

The Davis campaign doesn't need my advice, but they should make quick work of Ronnie and move on to a new and real test.  This guy's wheels came off last night and it will only get worse for him as this campaign continues because he is not ready.  His supporters know it witnessing the carnage last night and certainly he should know by now.  Watching the forum last night was like watching Animal Planet with Ronnie being the Antelope.

No, Ronnie is many things but a hardcase he certainly is not.  Davis is too far ahead in both preparation to lead and the development of coherent ideas that ACTUALLY matter!! Davis will eventually deal with Ronnie if he continues to make the vain attempt to go negative.  

Davis is running to be Govenor, Ronnie is running as if he wants to be class president.....

---

by: Takenoprisoners @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 21:26:11 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

On winning 62 of those counties... (4.00 / 1)

He has won many counties in the state running for Agriculture Commissioner, where he recieved the ALFA endorsement in both elections?  (And note, the 2006 election was an off election in Alabama terms, with turnout a little bit lower and a handful of incumbents who did not have strong opponents, including the Agriculture Commisioner race).  Is he able to bring ALFA to the Democratic fold if he were the nominee?  

---

by: csduke @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 22:25:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The question is ... (0.00 / 0)

Do we want ALFA in the Democratic fold? I'm not against having the argument with ALFA -- there may be common ground to find, but it would take some searching for this Democrat.

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 22:38:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

How many counties has Davis ever won? (0.00 / 0)

---

by: yellowdog @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 22:52:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I wonder if Davis ever got an ALFA endorsement? (0.00 / 0)

---

by: yellowdog @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 23:06:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The reason I bring up ALFA... (4.00 / 2)

...is that in relation to the Agriculture Commissioner race, ALFA is a very important, if not the most important endorsement.  If you receive that endorsement and get the support of farmers across the state affiliated with them, you will do very well, likely winning.  I knew a number of farmers who generally vote Republican but were very supportive of Sparks for the Agriculture Commissioner race.  Is their support limited by the office he is seeking?  Would they be willing to cross over to vote for a Democrat?

FTR, yes Artur Davis has received endorsements from ALFA as well.  Generally, they have endorsed him as an incumbent.  The question is if they endorsed him in the 2002 primary?  I bring this up as his electability in the past is not generally dependent on their support.

---

by: csduke @ Thu Aug 20, 2009 at 07:31:13 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

For instance.. (0.00 / 0)

On ethics, Davis proposes immediate "administrative leave," just like what the audience's employer would do to them if they were under suspicion. That is rather Republican in philosophy, don't you think?

Now, the Democrat. Sparks says he is not going to punish people before they are convicted, he believes in "innocence until proven guilty." That is rather Liberal, isn't it? And he goes on to say that he never "fired" an employee in his department for being indicted. Because now you are giving all the authority of the judicial system to the prosecutors and the D.A.s!!! the ones we progressives have been screaming about for years now! Sparks gets it and no one else did?

Sparks may just be a big D Democrat!  

---

by: yellowdog @ Wed Aug 19, 2009 at 21:53:50 PM CDT

The most conservative or "business friendly"... (4.00 / 1)

...approach would likely be to remove someone who was indicted without regard for their conviction.  The use of "administrative leave" leaves in place room for due process, though I agree with Mooncat that we need to be mindful of the speed in handling the case.  

Generally speaking, politicians who are indicted become quite radioactive.  How many distanced themselves from Ted Stevens last fall once he was indicted?  How many people are willing to do business with Larry Langford right now due to his indictment and upcoming trial?

---

by: csduke @ Thu Aug 20, 2009 at 07:35:01 AM CDT

[ Parent ]