Monday, November 05, 2007 - Posts
-
sponsorship
Rudy Giuliani seems to have a lot of trouble admitting he
messed up. In a radio ad released last week, he said that the chances of surviving
cancer “under socialized medicine” in England
are 44 percent, compared to 82 percent in the U.S. But those statistics have been strongly disputed.
First, Dr. David Gratzer, the author of the City
Journal article Giuliani drew the numbers from and an adviser to the
Giuliani campaign, acknowledged
that they were outdated and “crude.” Then his
source for the numbers, a health research organization called The Commonwealth
Fund, accused Gratzer of misusing the data. In other words, no one was willing
to stand behind the numbers. Both the Washington
Post’s Fact Checker and PolitiFact.com, two watchdogs for the lies, damned
lies, and statistics of the 2008 presidential candidates, roundly rejected
Rudy’s statement.
At the time, the Giuliani campaign itself issued a
not-quite-defense of the statistic: “The citation is an article in a highly respected
intellectual journal written by an expert at a highly respected think tank
which the mayor read because he is an intellectually engaged human being.” But
on Friday, Giuliani reiterated his support for the numbers as “absolutely
accurate,” if a little dated: “Even if you want to quibble about
the statistics, you find me the person who leaves the United States and goes to England for prostate cancer
treatment, and I'd like to meet that person,” he said.
Rudy does have defenders other than himself. The Cato Institute’s Michael Tanner argues in National Review today that Giuliani’s
numbers are problematic, but that his overall point stands. “Beyond
the debate over numerical minutiae,” Tanner writes, “the basic fact is that Britain’s
system of socialized medicine is bad for your health.”
But then why use such murky numbers? As Tanner himself notes, the stats on non-prostate cancers support his point much better. It
illustrates a larger point about Giuliani that Slate’s John Dickerson
has made before: that his greatest strength is his willingness to make highly questionable statements with
utter conviction. It’s an approach that has gotten Rudy in trouble before,
like when he said he’d pay for tax cuts with
more tax cuts. But getting in trouble with fact-checkers is different from
getting in trouble with Republican voters. From the perspective of the polls, what
he says seems less important than how loudly and how often he says it.
-
sponsorship
Forget about Ron Paul's polling numbers, these days it's more fun to forecast his fund-raising numbers. In the past two weeks, he aired his first ads in New Hampshire, raised his national media profile, and, as of today, raised more money online in a single day than any other candidate this election cycle.
Paul's indefatigable grassroots supporters are "moneybombing" the campaign today, partly to pay homage to Guy Fawkes, the bomber-with-a-cause featured in V for Vendetta, and partly just because they felt like it. As of this writing, Paul has already raised $2.5 million. That's more than Mike Huckabee, Tom Tancredo, and Duncan Hunter raised in the 3rd quarter, combined. To understand the magnitude of today's donations, see the chart from RonPaulGraphs.com below:
Much of this was organized by Paul's slightly anarchic grassroots network. Trevor Lyman, who started the central moneybomb Web site, told me he started the process without informing the campaign. (He eventually warned them that their servers would be getting a huge influx.) "It's very organic," he said about the grassroots system, "and anybody at any point can have an idea that resonates with people." Lyman told me he floated the Nov. 5 moneybomb idea to the crew at RonPaulForums.com, who then inspired him to make the Web site. Originally, the plan was to get 100,000 people to donate $100 each, giving Paul $10 million. But Lyman admits they probably won't hit that total.
Paul, meanwhile, is enjoying the attention. His spokesman told me that he thinks the moneybomb is a "real neat idea." If thousands of people gave me millions of dollars, I'd think it was pretty neat, too. A reality check to temper the Paul masses: It's not all about the Benjamins. The campaign still needs voters to show up at the polls.
UPDATE 6:20 p.m.: Paul has surpassed $3.1 million, which breaks Mitt Romney's one day total (online and in-person) fundraising record for this cycle.
UPDATE Nov. 6, 9:53 a.m.: The campaign raised $4.3 million yesterday, according to spokesman Jesse Benton.
-
sponsorship
Barack Obama went on Saturday Night Live this weekend, an appearance that, along with his move-busting stunt on Ellen, people are calling his “saxophone moment.” But it also highlighted a problem (for others, if not for him) that still persists: It’s nearly impossible to make fun of Barack Obama.
The skit takes place at a Halloween party. Amy Poehler stood in for Hillary (dressed as a bride), Horatio Sans did a great sycophantic Bill Richardson (dressed as Al Gore), and Darrell Hammond reprised his role as Bill Clinton (dressed as “Mystery” from The Pickup Artist). Obama played himself, dressing for Halloween as himself, which allowed him to get in a half-joke about authenticity: “I have nothing to hide. I enjoy being myself.”
The moment was funny, but it also drew attention to the fact that no one currently on SNL could do a Barack Obama impression. (Something tells me Kenan Thompson isn’t quite right for it.) And anyway, what do you make fun of? His ears? His aloofness? The closest anyone has come so far has been Robert Smiegel’s animated "TV Fun House," which depicts Obama and the other presidential candidates confessing their secrets on Oprah. “I’ve made drugs myself,” brags Chris Dodd, only to be one-upped by Obama: “I’m high right now.” But when it comes to impersonations, he’s seemingly immune.
Needless to say, mocking politicians has never been a problem for SNL before. Here are a few morsels:
- A debate between George W. Bush (Will Ferrell) and Al Gore (Darrell Hammond)
- Darrell Hammond’s Gore after he won the Noble Peace Prize
- Will Ferrell as George W. Bush on voting (spot sponsored by ACT)
- Norm McDonald’s Bob Dole meets the real Bob Dole (transcript)
- Hammond addresses the nation as Fred Thompson (yanked)
- Dana Carvey’s George Bush Sr. announcing the first war in Iraq
- Carvey does George W. Bush
- Seth Meyers’ John Kerry congratulates Will Forte’s George W. Bush on his victory
P.S.—NBC’s diligent policing of YouTube makes old SNL skits ridiculously hard to find. Send others if you got 'em.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?