Republicans, Rumsfeld, and Known Unknowns

[updated and revised from an earlier, pre-election post]

“[T]here are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don’t know we don’t know.” — Donald Rumsfeld, Press Conference, Feb. 12, 2006

“Look at what Iraq is not doing, OK? They’re not competing with Iran to sponsor terror in the region. They’re not threatening Kuwait. We don’t have to station troops in Saudi Arabia. They’re not trying to restart the nuclear weapon program. All that would be happening under Saddam.” — Jim Talent (R-Mo.), Meet the Press, Oct. 8, 2006

The removal of Donald Rumsfeld today has been widely reported as a response to the Democratic victory in the election last night.  Yet there is another connection between those two events, and it has to do with the logic of the Republican party and its ultimate failure.  Simply put, the electoral defeat of the Republicans and the downfall of Rumsfeld are both signs that there are real limits to what I’ll call the “what if?” theory of the world.

What both Rumsfeld and the Republicans employ is a method of analysis where progress and success can be measured only by comparison to a hypothetical universe, a universe that only they can see.  The point of this line of argument is to push the debate past known facts (“known knowns,” in Rumsfeldian) and into the area of speculation and fictional scenarios –- on the theory that when you can’t argue the facts that are there, you might as well argue the facts that might have been there.

Anyone who has spent any time in the universe of political rhetoric should be familiar with this kind of argument.  It starts by citing a fact — let’s say that I claim that Bush has handled the economy poorly.  The facts for this assertion are simple.  The economy, as measured in the two most basic possible ways, is worse off under Bush than it was under Clinton: the stock market’s steady progression has faltered and job creation has been much slower.  (For a more detailed analysis, see this)

But, the response goes, those measures don’t count (indeed, Republicans did try, without much apparent success, to campaign on the strength of the economy); what matters is what would have happened if things had been different.  You see, all the good things that happened under Clinton were the result of external forces beyond anyone’s control — a chicken could have been president and had those results — and so none of the credit lies with Clinton.  As for Bush?  Well, given the external forces surrounding his term, the economy has performed much better than if he hadn’t been in control; he stewarded us through those rocky times and has brought us back to Clinton-era levels.

The ultimate conclusion is that if Bush had been running things when Clinton was president, the ’90s would have produced the best economy in the history of this country (except, of course, it already was … perhaps it would have been even better) and if Clinton was president instead of Bush, the ’00s would have been a complete economic disaster (hmm … completer?).  But, I have to admit, I can’t prove that Bush wouldn’t have been better and Clinton wouldn’t have been worse.  Gotcha!

This thinking reappeared in other races and in other contexts leading up to the election.  Bob Corker implied that Harold Ford’s opposition to the Patriot Act is dangerous, because it means that he opposes one of the tools necessary to stop terrorism.  His argument relied, in part, on a classic Tiger Repellant argument: the Patriot Act has been in place since 9/11, and because there haven’t been any terrorist attacks since 9/11, it is clear that the Patriot Act is necessary to stop terrorist attacks.  Still, that’s impossible to refute: I can’t say for sure that there wouldn’t have been a terrorist attack had we not put the Patriot Act into place.  Gotcha!

So, too, does the biggest, most important issue in this country — the Iraq War — likewise become a victim of the hypothetical.  Here, every conceivable metric for success is immediately attacked as irrelevant or inconclusive.  American dead: over 2700.  Well, they say, we didn’t go to war to minimize American deaths, we went to help the Iraqis.  Iraqi dead: tens of thousands dead (minimum) and over a million displaced.  Well, we didn’t go to war for Iraq, they say, we went to stop terrorist attacks.  Terrorist attacks: according to the government’s own statistics, attacks have increased dramatically since the beginning of the war (to the point where they are no longer publicly releasing figures).  Here they fall back to their ultimate rationale: we didn’t go to war to stop terrorist attacks now, we went to war to stop terrorist attacks in the future (invoking the familiar and increasingly tenuous connection between A) foreign invasion, B) establishment of democracy, and C) cessation of terrorist-producing conditions).

And it looks like they’ve got me there, too: I can’t measure whether or not the Middle East will produce fewer terrorists twenty years from now and I can’t measure whether the invasion has produced fewer attacks from 2003-2006 in a parallel universe where we didn’t invade.  For that matter, I can’t measure whether Iraq would have eventually developed a nuclear bomb and I can’t measure whether Saddam would have killed/displaced more Iraqis on his own.  Gotcha!

The traditional method of rational argument (marshalling evidence and positing conclusions drawn from that evidence) does not work in the face of imaginary universes; victory through reason is impossible to achieve because they’ve created a place where there are no facts and where there can never be any facts.

Thus, the fight against this is more than just a fight for a particular set of policies (although it is obviously that, as well).  It is a fight for a world where knowledge is based on observable, measurable, empirical evidence, instead of a world where intuitive belief generates its own facts.  A fight for real people’s lives instead of speculative people’s deaths.  A fight for a world where terms like “known unknowns” are relegated back to the category of oxymoron.

And so the connection between the inglorious exit of Donald Rumsfeld, who consistently looked at the Iraq he wanted to see instead of the Iraq that was there, and the defeat of Republicans like Jim Talent, who focused on what Iraq might have been instead of what Iraq has become, is clear.  An American public sick of the disconnect between hypothesis and reality finally used a weapon that the Republicans could not “what if?” their way out of.  In the end, what felled Rumsfeld and the Republicans was the very thing that they built this theory to protect themselves from: the intrusion of an empirical and observable phenomenon with objective results.  An election.

Cheers and Jeers, Election 2006

Tonight was a wild ride and it ain’t over yet. What’s more exciting than seeing your team take it all the way? Doing it in overtime, of course! It’s an emotional roller coaster that goes something like this:

Good
Winning the House
Better
Maybe winning the Senate?
But…
Maybe losing the Senate you started to hope you’d win?

Good
Winning many close races
Better
Winning a few races no one expected
But…
Any incumbent we didn’t get rid of this year is going to be impossible to get any other year

Good
We’re in a good position to build House and Senate majorities in ’08
Better
With a majority of the governorships, gains in secretaries of state, and control of key states, we have the tools to assist the presidential nominee in ’08
But…
Given such a historic day, the victory speeches were pedestrian — where are our inspiring leaders for ’08 and beyond?

Midterm Election Results Open Thread #3

4:56PM: CNN is finally calling PA-08 for Pat Murphy.
3:36PM: CNN has called MT-Sen for Jon Tester!  I hope they have a great party in Big Sky Country tonight, because Jon Tester is truly one of finest new members of Congress this year.  Montana should be proud.
4:20AM: That’s it, I’m going to bed.  With 95% of the precincts reporting, incumbent Democrat Jim Marshall is leading by a sliver in GA-12–700 votes.  That’s pretty hairy, but hopefully he’ll pull through and ensure that 2006 was a bloodless year for House Democrats.  With 100% precincts reporting, it looks like Pat Murphy (D) has edged Mike Fitzpatrick by 1500 votes in PA-08, but CNN hasn’t called the race yet.  In less good news, it looks like Lois Murphy came just short yet again in PA-06, losing to Gerlach by a 3000 vote margin with 100% of precincts reporting (sadly, I expected this to happen)–but CNN hasn’t made a call here yet, either.  CT-02 is definitely headed for recount territory: Democrat Joe Courtney has a 220 vote lead with 97% of precincts reporting.  With 25% in, Burner (D) is behind Reichert by 4 in WA-08.  I have a strong suspicion that it’ll end up around that mark, too.  And with 99% in, Patricia Madrid (D) is 320 votes behind Heather Wilson in NM-01.  It’s hard to believe that we pulled off upsets like KS-02, PA-04, CA-11, and KY-03 and came just short in NM-01.  We’ll see what happens by morning–this is definitely heading for a recount here, as well.  I’m also a little disturbed to see the Montana Senate race coming down to a 1% margin for Tester with 84% in, but I’m told that a recount in Yellowstone county is stalling the tally.  According to McJoan on DailyKos, Tester was leading Yellowstone by around 1200 votes before its totals were pulled so the recount could commence.  So that explains it a bit.

But in any event–hey!  Democrats took back the House of Representatives, and depending on the outcome of MT-Sen, the Senate is poised to flip, too.  (I’m counting VA-Sen as a win, dammit!)  Give yourselves a nice pat on the back.  Just look at how much bluer this map is.  Feels good to see, doesn’t it?

Oh yeah–and this picture of Paul Hodes throwing it down in his victory celebration from NH Union Leader is one of my favorite images of the night:

4:07AM: Put Jerry McNerney and CA-11 on the big board!  Nicely done, team McNerney!
3:41AM: Jerry McNerney (D) has a 6-point lead over Richard Pombo (R) in CA-11 with 79% of precincts reporting.  McNerney hasn’t trailed all night, and I’m expecting him to still lead when this closes.  Woohoo!
2:12AM: Great news–CNN has called MO-Sen for Claire McCaskill!
2:10AM: Aw yeah!  CNN has just called IA-02 for the Democrats!  What a stunner.
1:47AM: Still with 99% of precincts reporting, Loebsack (D) has increased his margin over Leach (R) by 600 to 6000.  It hasn’t been called in Loebsack’s favor yet, but I’m feeling confidant that we can tag IA-02 on the big board soon.
1:39AM: No surprises here–Ed Perlmutter (D) has snatched up CO-07 from the Republicans.
1:35AM: Color TX-22 blue.
1:20AM: In IA-02, Dave Loebsack (D) is edging Jim Leach (R) by 600 votes, with 99% of precincts reporting.  If Loebsack pulls this off, this is second only to Carol Shea-Porter’s stunning upset in NH-01.
1:06AM: Another netroots victory–MN-01 has flipped to Democrat Tim Walz.
12:58AM: With 23% of precincts reporting, Grant (D) is edging Sali by 45-43.
12:43AM: Add NY-19 to the tally!  Wow!
12:36AM: Add WI-08 to the big board!
12:31AM: With 13% of precincts reporting, Larry Grant (D) is edging Bill Sali by a 46-33 margin!  Whoa!  Big time 3rd party vote in ID-01 by disgruntled conservatives.
12:25AM: Here’s something surprising: of all 3 Nebraska House races, the least touted one, NE-02 is the closest right now.  With 30% of precincts reporting, Jim Esch (D) is only down by a 49-51 margin against entrenched incumbent Lee Terry (R).  Go figure.
12:20AM: Wow.  I figured that FL-13 slipped through our fingers a few hours ago, but Jennings is only 400 votes behind.  It’s unclear (to me) how many ballots are left to be counted.  Nevermind.  This one’s been called for the Republicans.
12:15AM: With 97% reporting, John Hall (D) is leading by 51-49.  Wow.
12:08AM: In MN-01, Tim Walz (D) is leading by 6 points with 60% of precincts reporting.

Midterm Election Results Open Thread #1

8:32PM: With 88% in, Yarmuth is holding Northup at 50-49, with a 3000 vote lead.  Keep your fingers crossed.  As I recall, NRCC chair Tom Reynolds said that if Northup lost, he was expecting a very unpleasant night nationwide.
8:24PM: With 9% in, Hodes leads 61-38.
8:17PM: Nice!  Our first catch of the night: IN-08 has been called by the AP in favor of Brad Ellsworth (D) who holds a 62-38 lead with 34% of the vote in.
8:11PM: Keep your eye on IN-07.  Democratic incumbent Julia Carson is not performing well in the early returns: 48-52 in her Republican challenger’s favor with 15% reporting.
8:04PM: With 81% of precincts reporting, Yarmuth (D) is edging Northup by a 50-49 margin and just over 3700 votes.
8:02PM: With 24% of precincts reporting, Webb (D) is edging Allen (R) by 50-49 in the VA-Sen race.
7:57PM: With 16% of precincts reporting, Tom Hayhurst (D) is trailing Rep. Mike Souder (R) by 48-52.  This is a district that delievered somewhere in the ballpark of 68% of its vote to Bush in 2004.
7:54PM: With 9% of precincts reporting, Mike Weaver (D) is edging Rep. Ron Lewis (R) by 51-49 and 500 votes in KY-02.
7:44PM: With 74% of precincts reporting, Yarmuth is up by 51-48 and 3500 votes over Northup.  Wow.  Keeping my fingers crossed here, because a win here would be a great sign of things to come.
7:42PM: With 16% of precincts reporting, the race in IN-09 is tight as ever: 48%-48% between Rep. Mike Sodrel (R) and Baron Hill (D), with Sodrel up by 7 votes.
7:23PM: With 64% of precincts reporting, CNN has Yarmuth back ahead of Northup by a slim 50-49 margin (just over 2500 votes).  An absolute nailbiter.
7:16PM: The AP has called it for Peter Welch (D) in VT-AL.  That was fast.  The GOP had hoped that they could pick one off here.  Tough breaks for them.
7:09PM: With 53% of precincts reporting, Northup is in the lead in KY-03 by a slim margin: 49.6% to 49.%
7:02PM: With 12% of precincts reporting, Brad Ellsworth (D) is edging Rep. John Hostettler (R) by a 70-30 margin in IN-08.  Obviously we’re seeing some heavily Democratic precincts reporting here.
6:58PM: With 37% of precincts reporting, Yarmuth is edging Northup by 51-48.  This would be a major, major upset for Democrats.
6:52PM: In addition to CNN.com (obviously), you can get results for KY-04 here and KY-02 results here.
6:49PM EST: KY-03 results available here.  With 14.9% of precincts reporting, Yarmuth has a 51.1%-47.7% lead over Northup!



Polls have closed in Kentucky and some parts of Indiana, so we should be seeing some results begin to trickle in shortly.  Key races to watch in Kentucky: KY-02 and KY-03.  If John Yarmuth (D) can knock off Republican incumbent Ann Northup, and if State Rep. Mike Weaver (D) can come close to knocking off Rep. Ron Lewis (R), expect a big night.  If Weaver comes out on top, all bets are off.  The other big race in Kentucky is KY-04, where former Rep. Ken Lucas (D) is taking on Rep. Geoff Davis (R) in what is expected to be a close contest in a tight district.  I’m putting more emphasis on KY-03 and John Yarmuth’s performance as a bellwether race, though.

This post will be updated as events unfold.

Turnout Open Thread

Have an update about state or local turnout?  Post it here.  Let’s get a sense of how many voters are turning out in key states.

Connecticut: According to the New Times in Danbury, Connecticut’s Secretary of State is claiming that 70% of eligible voters will turn out this year, topping 2004’s Presidential-level turnout of 56%.  Wowza.  Is this the strength of Ned Lamont’s ground game at work and his outsider appeal energizing disinterested voters?  Or will Lieberman be able to make up the difference by his strength in traditional voting blocs?  We’ll see, but I suspect this one will be tighter than many of the polls have assumed.

Virginia: Turnout may reach historic levels for a midterm election, perhaps with a turnout as high as 65%–which would be a figure double the size of 2002’s turnout.  Turnout looks high in both Fairfax county in Northern Virginia and in Southwestern Virigina, according to CNN.  On balance, I would say that this favors Webb, but it definitely still looks like a nailbiter at this point.

More updates as they come.

Checking In

Well here we go.  It’s been two long years of waiting, but the day of reckoning is finally here.  Will the reportedly high turnout in places like Connecticut and the supposedly strong Democratic turnout in districts like WA-05 and VA-10 carry the day?  I’m not making any predictions; what would be the point of that when the first polls are closing in just a couple of hours?  But I’ll be here all night to watch the big show go down with you.  We’ll be throwing up open threads and updates on keey happenings all night. 

I hope you’ve voted, I hope your friends have voted, I hope your family has voted, I hope your mailman has voted, and I hope they all voted Democratic.  It wouldn’t hurt to double check with them right about now.

And here’s a neat feature that you can use tonight: CNN has set up a tracking tool that logs the results of up to 20 of your favorite races all night.  That will definitely come in handy!

Get to the polls, get out the vote, and hang on tight.  Let’s do this thing, people!

Oh yeah, and just in case you missed it, here is one of the more unfortunate photo shoots imaginable for Republican Rep. Charlie Bass (R-NH):

Voting Experiences Open Thread

Was it good for you?  Was it bad for you?  Were there long lines?  Short lines?  Frozen machines?  Hapless poll clerks?  Not enough ballots?  Or was everything just fine?

Do tell.  If you do have problems at the polls, the DNC has set up a voter protection hotline at 1-888-DEMVOTE.  There are other hotlines at 1-866-OUR VOTE for questions on how to vote and to report problems (the National Campaign for Fair Elections), as well as one set up exclusively for voting machine problems: 1-888-SAV-VOTE.  Don’t let anyone silence your voice today.

Oh, and if Jean Schmidt survives today, I hope she learns a lesson from this incident and becomes a champion of ballot integrity and secure elections.  Sadly, I’m not getting my hopes up:

Predictions 2006 Sen +5-6, Gov +8-9,California

I’m predicting a 5-6 seat Dem pick-up in the Senate with the Rhode Island seat being the Toss-up. I just have this nagging feeling that Chaffee will pull this out (although I hope not). I’ve included % guesses here for the Senate races, bypassed that for the Gubenatorial & California races. I’ve always relied on the Field Poll for California races but they’ve not issued anything new for the “down-the-ticket races so I’ll just go with a plain selection. Though I do not believe Arnie will win by double digits. The closet Statewide races should be Lt. Governor & Secty of State.

Competitive Senate Races

First Wave (+5 gain):
Pennsylvania – Casey 55- 45%
Ohio – Brown 54 – 46%
Virginia – Webb 52 – 48%
New Jersey – Menendez 53 –47%
Missouri – McCaskill 50.5 – 49.5%
Minnesota – Klobuchar 55% – 45%

Montana – Tester 52 – 48%
Maryland – Cardin 51.5 – 48.5%

Second Wave – 33% chance (4) (+1 gain*)

Arizona – Kyl-R 51.5- 48.5%
Connecticut – Lieberman-CFL 44.5 – 44 – 11.5%
Rhode Island – Chaffee-R 50.1 – 49.9% (*too close to call)
Tennessee – Corker-R 52.5 – 47.5%

Senate Gain = 5-6 seats.

Governor Races:

Maine – Baldacci-D
Alabama – Riley-R
Illinois – Blagojevich

Pennsylvania – Rendell-D
Connecticut – Rell
Alaska – Knowles-D
Hawaii – Lingle-R
Maryland – O’Malley-D
New York – Spitzer-D
NY AG – Cuomo – D
New Hampshire – Lynch-D
Iowa – Culver-D
Michigan – Granholm-D
Florida – Davis -D
Kansas – Sebelius-D
Massachusettes – Patrick-D
New Mexico – Richardson-D
Ohio – Strickland-D
Rhode Island – Carcieri-R
Arizona – Napolitano-D
Arkansas – Bebe-D
Georgia – Perdue-R
Colorado – Ritter-D
Minnesota – Hatch-D
Nebraska – Heineman-R
South Dakota – Rounds-R
Oklahoma – Henry-D
Oregon – Kulongski-D
South Carolina – Sanford-R
Tennessee – Bredensen-D
Texas – Perry-R
Vermont – Douglas-R
Wisconsin – Doyle-D
Wyoming – Fuedenthal-D
NY Senate switches to D
Kansas AG – Morrison-D
Ohio Statewide Offices – D Sweep
Governor Gain = 8-9

California State Races:
Dianne Feinstein – D (Chretien-G gets 10%)
Governor – Shwarzenegger-R
Lt. Governor – Garamendi-D
Secty of State – Bowen – D
Atty General – Brown – D
Treasurer – Lockyer-D
Controller – Chiang-D
Insurance Commish – Poizner-R
BOE #1 – Yee-D
St.Sen #8 – Yee-D
State Sen #10 – Corbett-D
Assembly #11 – DeSaulnier-D
Assembly #12 – Ma-D
Assembly #13 – Leno-D
SF prop.”J « Impeach Bush/Cheney – Yes 74.5%
SF Board Dist 4 – Chan-D
SF Board Dist 6 – Daly-D/G

By what margin will Bob Shamansky win?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

866-MYVOTE1: Your Elections Monitoring Resource

We’re going to see a lot of discussion today about problems with voting machines, attempts at voter suppression and intimidation, poll worker confusion and mistakes, and so on.

Here at Common Cause, we’re getting these stories straight from the voters’ mouths.

That’s because we and a number of other organizations are running the 1-866-MYVOTE1 hotline again. We used this in the 2004 elections to show numerous problems with the presidential election that year: long lines, badly trained poll workers, malfunctioning equipment and uneven distribution of machines.

Voters can also call this number to find their polling place as well as to report election problems. Most of the calls we’ve received on this hotline have been for that purpose, although we’ve had significant numbers of calls from people reporting problems in voting.

We want to share these voter stories with all of you, so that you can get reports of problems almost literally as they happen. We’ll also keep you up-to-date on the steps being taken to correct these problems.

Throughout the day, I’ll be updating here with news on problems and the hot spots that are popping up around the country. Check back for the latest stories!

Here are two calls that we received from Wayne County, Michigan:

“Hi, Precinct 13 at Adler Elementary on Fillmore.  The machine that counts the ballots was not operating this morning just after opening.  I left at five minutes to eight; I was there at 7 am, and it was not counting the ballots, so we had to put it in and they assured us it would be hand-counted, but a lot of people were very upset.”

“Uh, the voting machines this morning won’t take the voting cards.  They keep saying error, and like seven or eight of us had to put our ballots to the side while they call in repairs or whatever.”

And we’re receiving reports that voters in Mercer County, PA, are being asked what party they’re affiliated with.  More on that as it comes in…