Here's a lesson for people running for office: don't start spouting off statistics during radio or television interviews unless you're sure about them - especially if you're discussing white hot subjects like race and abortion.

Wow. Paul Hackett makes an ass of himself on national cable television with an angry, unhinged, ad hominem attack. Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid must be patting themselves on the back for forcing this guy out of the Ohio Senate race.

Stephen Bainbridge argues that "Democrats need to talk about the war, while Republicans need to talk about something else." Kevin Drum generally agrees, though from a slightly different angle.

Give Mark Warner points for this much: He really wants to court the Internet crowd. I just got this in from his PAC, Forward Together:

GOVERNOR MARK WARNER GOES VIRTUAL
IN "SECOND LIFE"
~First American political figure to hold an event in the virtual world~

Alexandria, Virginia-- Imagine a world where politicians tell the truth, focus on the future, and work together with their fellow citizens to solve problems. Forward Together PAC is working everyday to make that a reality. And it isn't stopping at the boundaries of physical space. Tomorrow Governor Warner will become the first American political leader to engage in the online virtual world, Second Life.

Governor Warner, in the shape of an animated avatar, will enter into Second Life this Thursday afternoon (August 31st) at 3:30 p.m. Eastern to announce the first-ever virtual-world town hall on American politics later this fall. The Governor will conduct a brief interview with Second Life's embedded reporter, Hamlet Au, and officially launch Forward Together PAC's new Second Life group.

"Since I left the Virginia governor's office this year, I've traveled across the country to 24 states helping solutions-oriented candidates campaign for congressional and statehouse races," said Governor Warner. "In Second Life, distances and time differences vanish. It will allow us to reach people through a whole new medium."

"Social technologies can be great tools for political change, and virtual worlds like Second Life might be the next tool for engaging people in the real world democratic process," said Governor Warner. "We want to use Second Life to continue the conversation about the direction of our country. My avatar is also pretty funny looking. That alone makes it worth checking out."

For those interested, here's the Web page for Second Life. What you might notice right off the bat is that the virtual world is full of a lot of avatars of busty women in bikinis. This is clearly the political medium of the future.

Should be interesting.

Today Stan Greenberg and Matt Hogan of Democracy Corps released a strategy memo for 2006 built around the results of a post-election survey (pdf) from the 2005 Virginia Governor's race. Dem Corps interviewed 2,300 Virginians last fall, including 600 registered voters who did not turn out to vote. Here are the key findings:

* Failure to mobilize the Republican base doomed Kilgore. The demoralization of Bush voters and lack of enthusiasm for Kilgore seriously hindered the Republican candidate's chances, underscoring the dangers of taking the base for granted.

* Non-voters were disillusioned with Bush, unimpressed by Kilgore. Those who voted in 2004 but not in 2005 overwhelmingly supported Bush over Kerry, but mounting frustration with Bush and a lack of fondness for Kilgore prevented them from turning out. While many incumbents will be better received by voters than Kilgore, the impact of the disillusionment with Bush highlights why it is so important for progressives to tie incumbents to Bush.

* Positive agenda was crucial to winning over swing voters. While Kilgore alienated voters with his attacks on Kaine's position on the death penalty, Kaine reaped the benefits by focusing on education, an issue that was of particular importance to both his base and swing voters.

* Republicans voter outreach program is not to be underestimated. Although Kilgore's turnout effort came up short, his campaign was much more effective at contacting both base and swing voters, as well as those who were still undecided in the final days of the campaign.

* Essential to have sufficient resources for the final few weeks of the campaign. Nearly one in five voters did not to decide who to vote for until the last few days of the campaign and 40 percent held off until October.

Regarding this last point, see Perry Bacon, Jr. in Time.com. Democrats clearly have the edge in enthusiasm and the political wind at their backs, but Republicans have a slight edge in money and a generally superior ground game. Whether that will be enough to save the GOP majority or simply mitigate the size of the Dem wave in November remains to be seen. As I said the other day, the second half of the game doesn't even start until next Tuesday.

But of course. Senator Stevens may want to reconsider his comment that the Internet is "not a truck" because when bloggers get done with him I suspect he's going to feel like he was hit by one.

It should come as no surprise that former Iranian president Mohammad Khatami would be coming here for the annual UN anniversary celebration. And granting him a visa to do so is also no surprise. And, unfortunately, there is also no surprise in Harvard is offering Khatami a forum to spread his "message," or for our worst former president, Jimmy Carter, to be offering to meet with Khatami.

Khatami was Iran's president from 1997 to 2005, part of the time the mullahcracy was diddling the EU in the now-years-long nuclear kabuki dance. The White House - according to a Washington Post report - says that Khatami is free to meet and speak freely while visiting America. Mr. Carter has no standing to deal with Iran, so what harm can he do? Maybe the same he did in the Der Spiegel and Daily Telegraph interviews earlier this month.

Of Iran, Carter has specific memories. His presidency foundered on the 1979 Tehran hostage crisis. Perhaps he and Khatami can have a meaningful discussion. One that is, as the Post report cites a source saying, "poignant." It is a comfort to know that Carter's talk with Khatami won't be part of the "serious" talks Iran suggests it will have with us.

For a long time, the rosiest polls for John McCain regarding the 2008 GOP primary were coming from the Cook Political Report. Not anymore.

Previously, a Cook Political Report/RT Strategies Poll (June 1-4, 2006) had found McCain up as follows (among Republicans and leaners):

McCain - 29%

Giuliani - 24%

Romney - 8%

Field WITHOUT Giuliani:

McCain - 37%
Romney - 10%
Gingrich - 9%

Now, the same poll, taken August 25-27, finds Rudy solidly in the lead:

Giuliani - 32%

McCain - 20%

Gingrich - 10%

Field WITHOUT Giuliani:

McCain - 30%
Gingrich - 14%
Frist - 11%

"Thinking about Rudy Giuliani, some people say he really cleaned up NYC as Mayor and made it a safer place, and then he showed real courage as a leader after the attack on the WTC. Other people say that his views on some issues -- because he is pro-choice on abortion, and supports gun control and gay rights -- make it hard for them to support him for Pres."

Which Is Closer To Your View? (GOPers only): Now vs. 2/26

GOPers should nominate Giuliani for pres.: 56% vs. 50%
GOPers should not nominate Giuliani for pres.: 38% vs. 43%

Note that the last question there is very important -- how do Republicans line up when pushed on Giuliani's supposedly candidacy-sinking social views? Answer: They still support him. And despite the constant refrain that the more Republicans learn about Rudy the more they'll recoil, his numbers actually seem to be getting better with time.

GiulianiBlog has more analysis of the results and the full cross tabs. Giuliani's supporters, it seems from the cross tabs, are more conservative and more pro-Bush than McCain's, who are, unsurprisingly, fairly liberal.

Rudy might not run. Or there might be other reasons he won't win. But the idea that he's unacceptable to the conservative base is refuted again and again and again by the polls and the facts on the ground in states like South Carolina.

A clip from Bush's interview last night with NBC's Brian Williams in New Orleans:

The highlight is when Bush seems to describe his reading list as "epileptic." (Of course he meant "eclectic" -- he kind of starts with one word and ends with the other.)

As always, send nominations to:

ryan-at-realclearpolitics.com

God help the poor, piggy senator behind the "secret hold" on S.2590.

Whoever this Porky Pig lawmaker is, you can take it to the bank that he/she isn't getting much sleep these days. And, if this senator is sleeping (with the help of handfuls of Ambien no doubt), they're likely dreaming of a way out of the wretched mess they created for themselves.

Here's a question: Why in the world would any above-board lawmaker attempt to shelve this pork transparency legislation?

What's so scary about a little old website that would allow voters to see where their own hard-earned tax dollars are going? What the heck are they so afraid of?

It's great to see the power of the blogosphere on this one. Both sides have come together calling for an end to the earmark madness. As Martha is apt to saying, "This is a good thing."

From Glenn Reynolds of both Porkbusters and Instapundit (who deserves credit for spearheading this whole thing) to the fiscally responsible Club for Growth's Andy Roth, all the way across the political spectrum to the lefties over at Daily Kos, bloggers have spoken in one unified voice and have issued their edict: NO MORE PORK.

It isn't everyday that you see virtually unanimous agreement from the left and right. But, when you do, whenever both sides of our polarized, political divide rally together against an "as-yet" unidentified lawmaker; whenever red and blue voters join hands and turn purple in a common cause, well, you've just got to know that they're on to something.

After all, this is our money lawmakers are playing around with, not theirs. Much of Washington seems to have forgotten this fact, which is why cancerous pork-barrel earmarking skyrocketed to around 13,000 earmarks this year, costing taxpayers $64 billion dollars. It is also the reason why some shady senator sees fit to put a secret hold on valuable legislation that would help clean up this earmark nightmare.

When you consider the resounding success of President Bush's tax cuts, and all the money that's been pouring into the Treasury as a result, you've got to shake your head in disbelief and think: Had their been some fiscal accountability in Congress this year, some tightening of the budget belt, we'd be in a far better budgetary position.

God help this poor lawmaker. Porky may get roasted.