Obama snags more Republican endorsements

Barack Obama likes to talk about Obamacans –- disaffected Republicans who have pledged their support for his presidential candidacy.

On Tuesday he snagged an especially prominent one -- former GOP Rep. Jim Leach of Iowa.

Leach, who served 15 terms in the House, made his endorsement announcement during a conference call with former Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, who was a Republican while in the Senate but is now an independent. Chafee has supported Obama since the Democratic primaries.

Leach told reporters that he was concerned about the Bush administration's "philosophy of government” and worried that Republican John McCain would be “more of the same.” “I'm convinced that the national interest demands a new approach to our interaction with the world," Leach said.

During the call Leach twice suggested that Obama choose Sen. Chuck Hagel as a running mate. If Hagel, a Nebraska Republican and longtime friend of McCain’s, were to join an Obama ticket, he’d be the biggest-name Obamacan in the country. (A Hagel spokesman, however, told USA Today on Tuesday that the senator won’t be making any endorsements in this election.)

Leach wasn't the only "Republican for Obama" who emerged today. In a development that could help Obama make inroads in Alaska, Obama’s campaign announced that he was also being backed by the Republican mayor of Fairbanks North Star Borough, Jim Whitaker.

Whitaker, who told the Daily News-Miner that he likes Obama's energy policy and believes the Democrat has the stronger "intellectual capacity" of the two candidates, said: "My goal is to let Republicans have a clear understanding that their right to vote should not be restricted by any party affiliation."

Whitaker supported McCain in the 2000 Republican primary.

The Obama campaign, hoping to recruit more Obamacans, says it will soon launch a new website to get Republicans to vote for Obama.

-- Kate Linthicum

Will Georgia war and Kashmir tensions influence U.S. voters?

As if the Russian-Georgian conflict wasn't adding enough tension to the world stage, it looks like the long-running conflict over the Kashmir province on the India-Pakistan border is heating up.

Sheikh Abdul Aziz, an influential separatist leader, was shot and killed by police as he led a march by roughly 100,000 Muslims attempting to breach the border, the Times of London reports. The march was part of an escalation of tensions that began ratcheting up in June, and the killing is likely to add fuel to the fire.

We'll let other blogs dissect the underlying issues and implications of that complicated situation in Kashmir. Its relevance here: With war underway in Georgia, if Kashmir erupts into broader violence, then Americans' political attention could well shift from the economy to increased concerns about foreign policy and U.S. national security.

With the economy as the top issue, Barack Obama has been topping John McCain in polls. But if war and national security move back to the forefront, that could shift the balance among the undecideds and independents and give McCain a chance to reestablish himself among an electorate that already says it is tiring of Obama. And it's the kind of calculation that the McCain insiders apparently have already been contemplating.

No one knows, obviously, what will happen. But the shifting conditions in both places are a reminder that it will likely be future -- and unknowable -- events and actions that will weigh heaviest on how the election turns out. On both sides, the easy votes have been won. The hard votes are, in many cases, those who aren't even paying attention yet. And who knows what fears or ambitions will push them which way?

-- Scott Martelle

Photo credit: Mukhtar Khan / Associated Press

Barack Obama to John McCain: 'Oh yeah, well you're a celebrity, too!'

As they say in sports coverage, let's go to the tape.

First, of course, we have the John McCain ad trying to make Barack Obama look all light and fluffy by linking him to some Hollywood party girls. "Passing fad" is the not-so-subliminal message here.

And now we have Obama's ad response. The theme here -- "Takes one to know one."

The risk for Obama is that the ad's hard-edged tone contrasts with his attempt to portray himself as a different kind of politician. There's a thin line between ads that point out policy differences, and a negative ad. This one is negative. And with a race that will likely be decided by a sliver of voters who base decisions on immeasurable things -- the folks who would rather have a beer with George Bush than Al Gore or John Kerry -- Obama's decision to throw rocks could come back to haunt him. Or, it could be the kind of tactic that persuades people that he is, indeed, "the one."

And you folks thought politics was a science.

-- Scott Martelle

Voters grade Barack Obama and John McCain

The folks at the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press released a poll Thursday tracking the "passion gap" between Barack Obama and John McCain, which we already told you about.

But there's an interesting tidbit buried deep within the poll results that should have some bells going off inside McCain headquarters. Or maybe they were already going off, and that's part of the reason Rick Davis ceded some campaign turf to Steve Schmidt.

The finding has to do with measuring how the candidates are making the sale. Obama -- doing all right. McCain -- well, let's let the Pew folks tell it:

A solid majority (56%) give the Obama campaign letter grades of A or B for the job he is doing to convince the American public to vote for him, while only 32% say the same of the McCain campaign. More than a third (35%) offer a grade of C to McCain's campaign so far, and nearly as many (30%) say the campaign has earned a D or F.

The grades voters give to the Obama campaign for the job it is doing convincing them to vote for him are the highest measured for any candidate over the past four election cycles. In June 2004, for example, just 39% gave Bush's efforts an A or B; even fewer gave high grades to Kerry's campaign (31%). In contrast, McCain's middling grades are slightly lower than those awarded to Bush in both 2000 and 2004. McCain's campaign does garner higher grades than the 1996 Dole campaign, which only 22% graded highly.

In this regard, the 2008 campaign has the largest disparity in high grades for the Democratic and Republican candidates over the past four election cycles (24 points). The gap between the grades for Obama and McCain is even larger than for Bill Clinton and Bob Dole in July 1996; at that time, 37% gave Clinton an A or B, while just 22% gave top grades to Dole.

The differences in the ratings of the two presidential campaigns are reflected in the opinions of their partisans. Nearly eight-in-ten Democratic voters (79%) give the Obama campaign letter grades of A or B for the job he is doing to convince the American public to vote for him, and a smaller majority of Republican voters (54%) give high marks to the McCain campaign. More independents give A or B grades to the Obama campaign than to the McCain campaign (49% v. 31%). In addition, while more than a third of Republicans (35%) give high grades to Obama, just 16% of Democrats give high grades to McCain.

McCain was asked about the poll Thursday -- specifically the bit about voters being more excited about Obama at this stage than they are about him. His response goes a long way toward explaining another finding from that poll: "Relatively few voters" think the candidates have been too negative. But at the same time, McCain's comment indicates that his focus is on the war in Iraq and national security when polls show most of the country is more concerned with the economy -- whining or not.

Said McCain: "I admire and respect the campaign that Sen. Obama has run. He has done a fine job in motivating many, many people. I am confident that as we go through this campaign that I will convince the majority of voters in this country that I am the person to lead this nation through very difficult times. ... Sen. Obama didn’t support the surge, wanted us to pull out, said that it would fail. I supported it when it was the toughest thing to do. I believe that my record on national security and keeping this country safe is there, and the American people will examine our records, and I believe that I will win."

-- Scott Martelle

Top photo: Democrat Barack Obama. Credit: Jae C. Hong / Associated Press

Bottom photo: Republican John McCain. Credit: Carolyn Kaster / Associated Press 

Some progressives casting a wary eye on Barack Obama

Part of every presidential campaign is the post-primary shuffle. That's when the Republican nominee tries to show centrist voters that he isn't really as conservative as he made himself out to be to win his party's base, and the presumptive Democratic nominee similarly tries to pull himself in from the left.

The Swamp notes this morning that the perception among some progressives that Barack Obama is leaving the left for the center has given rise to an unusual way of tethering the candidate to their issues. They're putting their money on the table, hoping to raise $1 million in an "escrow" fund that Obama can't tap until he displays "progressive leadership" on issues.

The issue that sparked the mini-revolt was Obama's support for giving wiretapping immunity to the phone companies under the recent FISA vote, something he had earlier said he would oppose. In a memo to fellow progressives, Bob Fertik, president of Democrats.com, said he still backs Obama but thinks the candidate could use a little wake-up call from the folks who played a significant role in securing him the nomination.

We're asking you to put some of the money you plan to give Obama "in escrow" until he demonstrates progressive leadership on the issues we care about, like warrantless wiretapping.

We are absolutely not trying to hurt Obama -- we'll give him our money at some point. We're just asking for a little R-E-S-P-E-C-T like Aretha Franklin sang about.

We can get Obama's respect because needs our money -- he turned down $85 million in taxpayer dollars because he believes small donors like us will contribute $300 million. And now is the best time to use our modest leverage, before the campaign goes all-out after the convention.

-- Scott Martelle

Photo: Francine Orr /Los Angeles Times

New GOP group to target Barack Obama in ad campaign

The Republican National Committee has spun off its own independent expenditure committee and plans an initial $3 million ad buy targeting Barack Obama in Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, Politico reports.

Why the separate group?

Brad Todd, who will run the effort, blamed Obama in a statement to Politico:

"Following Barack Obama's decision to become the only major party presidential candidate in history to not adhere to campaign spending caps, the Republican National Committee has begun an independent expenditure campaign in accordance with FEC regulations."

Under federal law there are no limits on how much the group can spend, though it cannot coordinate efforts with John McCain's campaign or the RNC. Still, both have helped to raise some of the funds that will launch the new effort.

So now we know where the RNC will be funneling some of its cash advantage over the Democratic National Committee to try to compensate for the record-breaking fundraising Obama has enjoyed. And the decision to target those Rust-Belt states underscores the GOP view that Obama is vulnerable in that part of the nation. Three of the four -- Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin -- went Democratic in the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections.

Lot of white working-class men and women in those states, which account for 68 electoral votes.

-- Scott Martelle

L.A. Times/Bloomberg poll results released later today

A recent Newsweek poll, showing Barack Obama with a 15-percentage-point lead over John McCain, left many of the folks closely watching the presidential race scratching their heads.

With other polls showing a closer race, did the Newsweek survey accurately detect a somewhat delayed Obama "bounce" following the official end of Hillary Clinton's campaign? Or did the magazine get it wrong?

A just-completed L.A. Times/Bloomberg national poll may help clarify the confusion. We cannot reveal the precise figures quite yet; for the results, check LATimes.com about 5 p.m. EDT (2 p.m. PDT) today.

The survey not only asked registered voters their preferences in the head-to-head race between McCain and Obama but, in a second question, specifically included Ralph Nader and Bob Barr as choices to try to determine how their presidential candidacies might affect November's main event.

The poll also gauged voter attitudes toward Obama and McCain on a raft of issues and characteristics, including which has the right experience to be president and which has more honesty and integrity. And one of the poll's most dramatic findings concerned differing enthusiasm levels among their backers.

-- Don Frederick

Ticket video chat: Matt Welch on 'McCain: Myth of a Maverick' -- II

This is Part II of The Ticket's first video chat series, an eight-part conversation with author Matt Welch on his new book, "John McCain: The Myth of a Maverick."

The book is not a biography but an exploration of the McCain persona, an intriguing combination of independence, military discipline and rebellion, with a strong whiff of bad boy. In this video episode Welch, a former L.A. Times writer, describes how he came to discover much about McCain through the serial confessions the senator makes about himself throughout his own books. And what that revealed about the Republican nominee's personal way of thinking.

Part I of this conversation with Welch can be seen by clicking here. Other parts will be published on The Ticket in coming days.

-- Andrew Malcolm

Ron Paul fans, Ralph Nader wants your attention

Ron Paul backers, do not despair. You have a new suitor: Ralph Nader.

In the wake of the decision by the 72-year-old Paul to, via his website, officially declare an end to his presidential quest, the 74-year-old Nader showed a political agility that has not always marked his many, many runs for the White House. Today, he released the following statement:

"Ron Paul was a lightning rod for millions of Americans against the war in Iraq and for the protection of personal liberties that the two major parties have turned their back on -- by continuing to support the illegal criminal war and the PATRIOT Act.

"Now that Dr. Paul has formally withdrawn his candidacy for the G.O.P. nomination and is no longer seeking the Presidency, there is a clear choice for those who want to support a candidate who will stand up against the war and stand up for personal liberties and privacy that have been trampled by the notorious, misnamed, PATRIOT Act.

"The people want the next President to immediately withdraw our soldiers and corporate mercenaries from Iraq in the safest manner possible.

"I would veto any attempt to extend the so-called PATRIOT Act or anything else that came across my desk that was designed to circumvent the civil liberties of the American People.

The PATRIOT Act grants excessive power to the government to abuse civil liberties through wiretaps, monitoring internet usage, authorized 'sneak and peek' of our homes, and forces libraries to turn over records of the books read by their patrons -- and those abuses of power have been used repeatedly by Bush and his Justice Department.

We need more politicians, like Dr. Paul, who are not afraid to stand up for our civil liberties."

Nader isn't quite as assertive on another of Paul's prime issues, the Federal Reserve Board.

Paul, much to the delight of many of his supporters, has pushed for wiping the board off the face of the earth; Nader's focus has been on prodding it to do its job with greater vigilance and more openly.

-- Don Frederick

Photo: Nick Wass / Associated Press

Top of the Ticket, the start of Year Two

On this, the first anniversary of our Top of the Ticket blog, we are reminded of the mercurial, unpredictable nature of U.S. politics -- part of what makes what we do so fascinating.

Our goal -- one of us on the East Coast and the other on the far more important or at least less humid West Coast -- was to write about Campaign '08 virtually around the clock.

Our second-ever posting, 12 months ago today, previewed an upcoming L.A. Times/Bloomberg Poll; later in the day, we detailed the results of the nationwide survey. The findings were in line with other polls of the time.

In the Republican presidential race, which then seemed the most likely to last deep into the primary season, Rudy Giuliani was perched in first place. His lead wasn't overwhelming, but it was strong enough that he appeared certain to remain a major contender.

His liberal record on social issues loomed as an obvious liability within his party, but his tough-on-terrorism message was attracting substantial support from moderates and GOP-leaning independents.

His major headache among rivals last June was an as-yet-undeclared candidate who was riding a wave as the great conservative hope -- Fred Thompson. He ran a strong second in the poll.

Lagging far behind were John McCain and Mitt Romney, each barely with double-digit support. In our preview posting, we were especially scornful of McCain, noting sarcastically (and foolishly, as it turned out) that in the poll, he found himself "in heated competition with the 'Don't Know' category."

Meriting no mention from us was Mike Huckabee, one of several back-of-the-pack candidates barely earning any support across the country.

The Democratic race, at that point, seemed so much more cut-and-dried.

Hillary Clinton was the clear front-runner; Barack Obama was just as clearly ...