Rep. Pete Stark (L) and Jim Greer (R).

John Avlon
CNN Contributor

As a heated wingnut summer heads to a close, we look at a new GOP “socialist” attack on President Obama for speaking to school children, a ‘brain dead’ attack on Democratic centrists and, in a bonus round, a callous conspiracy theory just in time for the 8th anniversary of 9/11.

President Obama is slated to give a speech to America’s school children next Tuesday on the subject of taking personal responsibility for their success in school.

Last time I checked, personal responsibility and socialism were opposite concepts, but that didn’t stop Florida GOP Chair Jim Greer from firing off an unhinged press release.

Keep reading...

John Avlon
Special to CNN

President Obama's decision to address a joint session of Congress on Wednesday is a gutsy gamble - a recognition that the health care reform debate has gone off the rails and needs to be recentered.

At stake is the credibility of one of the president's core campaign appeals to the American people - that he could be a bridge builder who would heal the hyper-partisanship that defined domestic politics during the Bush years.

After a fractious summer, expect the president to call for common ground and try to elevate the debate. He should point out, rightly, that health care reform has been pursued since Harry Truman and that never has such a broad coalition supported reform that decreases costs and increases access.

Keep Reading...

Leon Panetta's nomination to lead the CIA is under scrutiny primarily because he lacks intelligence experience.

John P.Avlon
AC360° Contributor

Leon Panetta is an unexpected pick to head the CIA, but he just might be the right man to restore Americans' confidence and internal morale in the organization. Panetta is known for his personal integrity as a California Congressman, fiscal responsibility as OMB director, and his management ability as Bill Clinton's best chief of staff. He views U.S. policy in a holistic manner, and he won't approach the CIA as a personal fiefdom – an approach which has dogged past presidents.

We are, of course, at war – and it might have been preferable to have an experienced intelligence hand at the helm, as Senator Diane Feinstein said in her terse statement after being blindsided by the nomination trial-balloon. But the experienced John Brennan – Obama's campaign intelligence advisor and considered the favorite for the job – was forced out of contention after netroot activists questioned whether he was insufficiently opposed to Bush-era policies like rendition. And the major mistakes which have bedeviled the CIA in the past – such as failing to anticipate the fall of the Soviet Union or the attacks of September 11th – have occurred with internal experts at the helm.

While the CIA Director occupies a mythic place in the minds of Americans due to decades of spy movies, the real intelligence director of the USA is now the Director of National Intelligence. The CIA director reports to him. And Obama's nomination for DNI, retired Admiral Dennis Blair, has won wide applause for his hands-on experience as a CIA liaison, leader of anti-terrorism efforts in Southeast Asia, and chief of the Navy's Pacific Command after 9/11.

There is a stubborn stereotype in American politics that Democrats' somehow take our national security less seriously than Republicans. After our country was politically polarized in a time of war by the Bush administration, the Obama administration has selected a serious and hawkish national security team which will be led by National Security Advisor Jim Jones (a retired Marine General) and Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair. Leon Panetta is someone well suited to helping integrate the culture of the CIA into the overall national security infrastructure – a key responsibility for the next director. He deserves an open-minded hearing on the hill, and his record of national service should grant him the benefit of the doubt. A fumble on Panetta's announcement is no reason his appointment could not prove to be a touchdown.

Editor's Note: John P. Avlon is author of “Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics.”

John P. Avlon
AC360° Contributor

Predictions for 2009:

1) Pop-Culture President: America hasn't seen a truly pop-culture president since the Kennedy Camelot years – and after the historic unpopularity of President Bush in his second term, the shift to the Obama phenomenon in the White House is likely to be especially jarring for the GOP. Obama's actions won't just be covered in Time or Newsweek, they'll be covered in People and Rolling Stone as well. That's a good thing in terms of getting more Americans civically engaged. But it will be a key reason that any Republican attempts to pursue a simply obstructionist "No-Bama" strategy will fail. Obama's approval ratings won't remain sky-high for the course of his presidency, but he will connect personally with the American people in a way that Bush never did.

2) The New New Deal: The first action out of the Obama administration will be a $700 billion stimulus and infrastructure investment plan to jumpstart the economy – the largest public works project since the New Deal. The Obama administration can any mitigate any "big-government-boondoggle" stigma by transparently tracking expenditures on-line at sites like www.USAspending.gov. But the appetite for bailout dollars will continue, with more companies and industries looking for their share. An epidemic of towns and cities declaring bankruptcy in 2009 – following the lead of Vallejo, California – will force states across the nation to beg Washington for a bailout of their own, or see their bonds reduced to junk and deficits balloon.

3) Taxpayer Bailout Backlash: By the end of 2009, taxpayer bailout backlash will be in full swing. Right now, everyone in Congress is a born-again Keynesian – there doesn't seem to be a deficit-hawk left in DC. But as our debt and deficit piles up, the common sense fiscal responsibility of the American people will kick in. Our politics over the past decade have ignored the concept of generational responsibility, but the bill is coming due. The baby boomers' retirement and consequent escalating entitlement spending will only compound the economic perfect storm. The Obama administration can and should anticipate this backlash, otherwise it could lay the foundation for the Republicans' eventual return. Neither party has moral authority on fiscal responsibility any more – who gains hold of this jump ball will help determine the shape of our politics for years to come.

John P. Avlon is author of "Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics."

John P. Avlon
AC360° Contributor

Today, Barack Obama will unveil his national security team – featuring Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Secretary of Defense Bob Gates, and National Security Advisor Jim Jones.

This is something of a centrist dream team, the latest sign of a confident, pragmatic president-elect who is fulfilling promises to appoint a 'Team of Rivals" while defying opposition campaign attempts to paint him as naïvely liberal.

Obama understands that Democrats have suffered from a deficit of confidence when it comes to national security and the economy. His cabinet appointments to date are designed to increase confidence on these fronts. Obama is showing himself to be cut from the same cloth as JFK: liberal on domestic policy, strong on foreign policy and the economy.

Hilary Clinton's appointment will gain the most attention from the media. She is a political star in her own right, possessing a global brand that will instantly add to her credibility in this office. But of course she was also Obama's most challenging rival in the 2008 campaign and his confidence in bringing her into his camp shows that he is the rare politician who is above petty interpersonal politics. Conservatives can take some comfort in this unlikely champion – because on most foreign policy issues she was decidedly to the right of the president-elect, especially when it came to Iraq and Iran.

But the real news of today's press conference is the reappointment of President Bush's Secretary of Defense Bob Gates and the nomination of retired Marine General Jim Jones to be National Security Advisor.

By keeping on the current president's much praised successor to the divisive Donald Rumsfeld, President-elect Obama is showing he understands the importance of continuity when our country is currently engaged in two wars. It is an unprecedented step most closely paralleled by JFK's decision to keep Eisenhower's Director of the CIA, Allen Dulles in place back in 1960.

The nomination of General Jones is no less an impressive reach across the aisle. Widely respected as a former NATO commander under President Bush, General Jones was also a supporter of John McCain. By bringing him into the West Wing to be the most senior advisor on national security issues to the president, Obama is showing that this is not a Potemkin Village attempt at creating the appearance of bipartisan cooperation. His is a substantive centrism with a multi-dimensional approach to America's foreign policy: winning the wider war on terror, engaging our allies, and dealing with 21st century security issues from Africa to energy independence.

Reasonable Republicans should feel an enormous degree of confidence with these appointments. As retiring Senator John Warner [R-VA] said, "The triumvirate of Gates, Clinton and Jones to lead Obama's 'national security team' instills great confidence at home and abroad and further strengthens the growing respect for the president-elect's courage and ability to exercise sound judgment in selecting the 'best and the brightest' to implement our nation's security policies."

Instead, it is the far left net-roots who are expressing the most anger about these appointments. Despite Obama's consistently centrist rhetoric throughout the course of his campaign and political career, many wanted to believe they were electing someone who would entirely repudiate the foreign policy of the Bush era.

Instead we are seeing something more like the transition from Presidents Truman to Eisenhower, responsible continuation of broad policy from a different perspective – recognizing that just because president's change, the preeminent foreign policy challenges of our time do not.

Taken together with the centrist economic appointments of Treasury Secretary-designate Tim Geithner, chief in-house economic advisor Larry Summers, as well as Paul Volcker and Austan Goolsbee, Obama is validating the confidence that moderate and independent voters placed in him on Election Day.

Gallup polls now show that nearly 70% of Americans believe that Obama will make a good president, well ahead of his Election Day support. He is forming the broadest possible problem-solving coalition for his administration. That's why from a centrist perspective, Barack Obama's cabinet appointments to date earn an A+.

Editor's note: John P. Avlon is the author of Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics

President-elect Obama notes in his latest weekly address that the Thanksgiving holiday was established by President Abraham Lincoln during a time of great division and turmoil in the country.

 
John Avlon
AC360 Contributor

Editor's Note: John P. Avlon is the author of Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics.

It's bizarro world in America post-election-we feel hopeful about our politics and fearful about the markets.

It's the opposite of what we've come accustomed to in recent years, times when if the economy's grooving than all other factors fade away-even war itself-or as it was ten years ago, when the internet bubble happily distracted us from the Monica-mess.

But right now we're enjoying a bit of bliss after a 22-month build-up, and President-elect Obama is basking in approval ratings well ahead of his final vote-total...

Read more...

John P. Avlon
Author, Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics

Today is President-elect Obama's first press conference. In some ways, it's the most consequential press conference of his administration, because as the old saying goes, you never get a second chance to make a first impression.

President-elect Bill Clinton's first press conference proved disastrous enough to derail the first years of his presidency. A planted question by a conservative reporter about gays in the military was framed as a litmus test on Clinton's trustworthiness and willingness to fulfill campaign promises. Clinton couldn't resist taking the bait and talked about it at length, giving it the appearence of a new administration priority.

As one of Clinton's advisors later said, "It sent precisely the wrong message. I'm not saying he shouldn't have taken that position, but as the first thing he did? It was exactly the sort of 'liberal elitist' issue that we'd been trying to submerge throughout the campaign. It sent a signal that he was going to govern differently from the way he campaigned – as an old Democrat."

A similar risk exists for Barack Obama. He won largely because he inspired people to believe in a post-partisan approach to problem solving, as a rejection of the hyper-partisanship of the Bush era. Now is the time to add substance to that centrist style by reaffirming his pledge to appoint a bipartisan cabinet and prioritize policies that can unite the country around the administration like energy independence, rather than getting distracted by divisive liberal special interest issues like 'card-check" or the so‑called "fairness doctrine."

Obama's first appointment of Congressman Rahm Emanuel to be Chief of Staff sends a message that he does not want to repeat the mistakes of the past. Emanuel was a veteran of Bill Clinton's transition and has learned the lessons that led to the 1994 Republican revolution. Announcing the reappointment of Secretary of Defense Gates would be a good way to build that bridge to the center on the basis of a responsible transition to a new administration led by a president who understands the need to balance idealism with realism.

President-elect Barack Obama looks out into the crowd after his acceptance speech at Grant Park in Chicago

John P. Avlon
AC360° Contributor

First things first: Today is a great day for America. We have a new President of the United States. Behind that remarkable fact are the statistical trends and milestones that made Barack Obama's election possible. So take a second to study the numbers so you can sound smarter in election-related conversation, or just get some perspective to further appreciate this moment.

By winning 52 percent of the popular vote, Barack Obama joined the ranks of FDR and LBJ in being the only Democratic presidents to get more than 51 percent of the popular vote in the past 100 years. Woodrow Wilson, Harry Truman, John F. Kennedy, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton never cleared that hurdle. That's an achievement in itself.

In many ways, last night was a step towards realignment. A few days ago I posted an analysis of six swing counties that could determine the election's outcome. Barack Obama carried each and every one by a margin close to 10 points. Obama won the swing voters in the swing counties in the swing states that he needed to win this election. 

Amid record turnout, Obama was able to build a broad coalition reminiscent of Bobby Kennedy's mythic 1968 campaign. He appealed especially to students, voters under 40, African-Americans and Latinos. He split middle class voters with McCain but won moderates by 60 percent and independents by a 5 point margin. And while his victory is not a liberal ideological mandate, it is a mandate for a change away from the polarized politics of our recent past. 

American's hope and faith have been invested not just in the figure of Barack Obama but in his essential message of transcending old divides in our politics between left and right, black and white, red states and blue states. 

The fact that Obama, as the first African-American nominee, was able to win the swing states and put red states in play including those in the South, such as Virginia and (it looks like) North Carolina demonstrates the historic success of his election outreach. The Democrat's 50-state strategy has broadened and changed the electoral map. Now those shifts must be reinforced.

It's said that you campaign in poetry but govern in prose.  Now begins the time for President-elect Obama to begin making cabinet appointments and announcing policy priorities that reinforce the inclusive and essentially centrist nature of his realigning victory.

John P. Avlon
AC360° Contributor

It means a new beginning for America, the restoration of the American Dream, the conquering of old divides between left and right and black and white.

John P. Avlon
AC360° contributor

We cover politics as a horse race, but at the end of the day politics is history in the present tense. Today is a pivotal point in our nation's history. Here's how to watch tonight's election:

Early returns will tell us whether this is a blowout or tighter than expected. Three early states offer the best indication: Pennsylvania, Virginia and Florida.

If Barack Obama wins all three there's almost no scenario under which he could not be elected the 44th President of the United States. But if McCain flips Pennsylvania, get ready for a very long night.

Two other early states to watch are Indiana and North Carolina – if Obama is able to wrestle these states out of the conservative column for the first time in decades, it is a realigning landslide.

Yes, the only poll that matters is on Election Day. But denial is not just a river in Egypt and the tone of the race in the last several days has been unmistakable. Barack Obama has been fighting on red state Republican territory. He has Republicans on the defense running desperate ads and last minute attacks. Still not convinced? John McCain is in his home state of Arizona today. Obama is campaigning in Indiana. In politics, as in sports, the best defense is a good offense.

Barack Obama has many paths to victory. John McCain has only one – running the table. McCain is a gambler, but his campaign has been beset by organizational problems which may be compounded on Election Day with the ground game disparity between the two campaigns. Some staffers on McCain's campaign have been trying to run a ground game that is reminiscent of the Bush/Cheney 2004 campaign, an entirely different circumstance, an entirely changed electorate.

Here's another number to look at: 52 – as in 52% of the vote. No Democrat since LBJ has hit that number. We are a center-right nation, but if Barack Obama reaches or exceeds that thresh-hold it would represent a real mandate – not a mandate for liberal ideology, but a mandate for change.

Bottom line – savor this day as an American citizen. It has been a great and historic and occasionally heroic election. And that is as good as it gets.

John McCain holds a campaign rally in Ohio on Friday, part of a two-day bus tour through the crucial swing state.

John P. Avlon
AC360° contributor

"All elections are about how independent voters break," attests Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center. And with less than 4 days left in election '08, all eyes are on these swing voters in the swing states – they hold the key to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in their hands.

But where do they live – what are the swing counties in the swing states and how have those areas been trending? Armed with 20 years of presidential election data, I set out to nerd-ishly answer that question and found the top 6 swing counties in the top 6 swing states. Each of these states have multiple counties with close votes – I've chosen the swing county with the most votes. Think of it as an election night cheat sheet, moving from east to west, as the polls close and the next president gets elected.

Florida – Pinellas County:

With the scars of 2000 still fresh in Democrats' minds, Florida remains the biggest swing state, with 2.3 million independent voters and 27 electoral votes – equal to Virginia, New Hampshire, Nevada and New Mexico combined.

There are 3 counties in the sunshine state where Bush and Kerry split the vote 49/49 – Monroe, Orange and Pinellas. But the largest of these is Pinellas, which split the vote 225,686 to 225,460 – giving a 226 vote edge to Kerry. By comparison, across Tampa Bay, CentCom's home of Hillsborough County went 53 to 46 percent for Bush. Gore won Pinellas by 4% in 2000, and Clinton cleaned up with a 9-point lead in '96. But when Perot ran in 1992, he got 24%, leaving Bush 1 and Clinton almost tied at 37% each. It was a fall from grace for Poppy, who beat Dukakis by 14% just 4 years before. Pinellas has been represented by Republican Bill Young since 1970, making him the most senior GOP member of the House. The verdict: even with the aging population of St. Pete and its popular pragmatic conservative mayor Rick Baker, the county's been moving away from the GOP tortoise-like for the past 20 years. With Florida housing prices in free-fall and the Tampa Bay Rays losing the World Series to the Phillies, there is little patience for the status quo in St. Pete: it's advantage Obama.

Virginia – Prince William County:

The fact that the Old Dominion is even on this list of swing states is remarkable. That it's taken the place of Michigan, whose Macomb County has been the subject of countless studies of Reagan Democrats, is a bad sign for the McCain campaign. The Obama campaign had the audacity of hope to target Virginia early, beginning voter registration drives before the primary, which he won decisively, beating Hillary by 2 to 1 among self-identified Independents (VA does not register voters by party). The prime swing county in Virginia is Prince William, on the southern edge of Northern Virginia – or, "communist country" as McCain's brother described it. This is the battlefront where north meets south, white meets black and increasingly Latino. It's the 9th wealthiest county in the country, with a population of 360,000, in a state that hasn't voted Democrat since LBJ. It's still got a lot of military folks, but college students now outnumber white senior citizens 2 to 1. And while Bush carried Prince William County by 52% in 2000 and 53% in 2004, it's swung toward Democratic Governor Tim Kaine and Senator Jim Webb in '05 and '06. With the second highest number of new voters registered in the state, and the down-ticket bump from radical centrist Mark Warner should help Obama narrowly win this Civil War battleground. Advantage: Obama.

Pennsylvania – Northampton County:

McCain has been playing hard for Pennsylvania and is closing the gap enough so that Governor Ed Rendell asked the Obama team to come back and campaign. No Republican has won the Keystone State since 1988, but it's been reliably close. Conservative Senator Rick Santorum was tossed out in '06 in favor of centrist Democrat Bob Casey. Philadelphia votes reliably Democrat and the western part of the state tends Republican. The fighting ground is the Philly suburbs and exburbs, where neighboring Monroe and Northampton counties are. Monroe split its vote 49.6 to 49.6 in 2004, giving Bush a 4 vote edge when all was counted. The more populous Northampton gave Kerry a 1% and 1,000 vote edge. Gore won Northampton by 5.5% and Clinton with 9% in '96. But Perot got 20% in '92 and Bush 1 beat the Duke by 4 points in 1988. Represented by centrist Republican Charlie Dent in the 15th District, seems to have been trending Republican. This is a rare bright swing county for the GOP – advantage McCain.

Ohio – Stark County:

No Republican has won the White House without winning Ohio. It's the heartland, "the home of presidents" from Hayes to Harding. It's littered with swing districts from the Mahoning Valley to Hamilton to Montgomery County. It's also the home of the Football Hall of Fame, in Canton, and it's there in Stark County that we find the biggest swing county with the narrowest margins in the Buckeye State (and the home county of Karl Rove's second favorite president, William McKinley). In 2000, it barely broke for Kerry, 50.5 to 49% – 95k to 93k. But Bush beat Gore there by 1% in 2000. Clinton carried it by 8% in '96 and 5 in '92, but Poppy clobbered Dukakis by 11% in 1988. It's in the 16th District of Ohio, represented by Republican Ralph Regula since the Nixon landslide of 1972. But in 2006, Governor Ted Strickland and Senator Sherrod Brown won the county with 64% and 57% respectively. With manufacturing feeling an even deeper squeeze with the economic freefall, and declining GOP margins, it's advantage Obama.

Missouri – Jefferson County:

Home of Harry Truman, the "Show Me" state is a center-right bell-weather in the center of the country. Democrats put a lot into it in 2004 only to come up short as Republican Congressman Roy Blunt's son was elected governor. Now the junior Blunt is not running for re-election, and the state is a true toss-up. The RealClear Politics poll of polls gives Obama a .2% advantage – the closest in the nation. In 2000, Missouri's Clay County symbolized the nation, when a single vote split Bush v. Gore – 39,083 to 39,084. In 2004, three counties split the Bush/Kerry vote 49/49 – Boone, Pemiscot and Jefferson – and the largest of these is Jefferson, on the outskirts of St. Louis. Back in 1980, it was the geographic center of the country in terms of population. It is also the most conservative county in the state's 3rd District, represented by Dick Gephardt for decades and now by the son of a former governor and senator, Russ Carnahan.
In 2004, Bush won the county closely, 46,624 to 46,057. The county edged 2% for Gore in 2000 and 12% for Clinton in '96. But in 1992 it gave then-President Bush one his worst defeats with 28% of the vote, down from 51% four years earlier. Carnahan will likely run ahead of Obama in 2008, but this will be a squeeker – it's a toss-up.

Colorado – Arapahoe County:

Well, it's come to this – a western conservative ticket fighting for the Rocky Mountain State. The reason? Independent voters passed Republicans and Democrats as the leading registration in Colorado earlier this summer. There are now over 1 million independents, up from 645,000 in 1992, making 34.6% of the total vote.

This shift helped bring in a Democratic governor and senator in recent years. And the key swing district to watch is Arapahoe – southeast of Denver, where liberal Congresswoman Diana Degette's district slams up against the departing conservative Tom Tancredo's. Historically Republican-leaning going back to Wilkie in 1940, Arapahoe is a now the chief battleground county in this battleground-state. While the population has grown nearly 10% since the 2000 census, the GOP has been losing its registration edge, down from 37% in 2004 (when Bush won the county) to 33% today, while Democrats increased from 29% to 34% – the remaining third is independent. "The upscale neighborhoods and the surburbanite folks with a good education who used to be the backbone of the Republican Party are now moving toward the Democrats and so are their children," says Colorado College political science professor Bob Loevy. "You are seeing that in Arapahoe."

So is there an overall trend that's evident in looking at these swing counties in swing states across the nation? Yes, they've been trending steadily less Republican since the GOP high-water mark of Reagan's 49-state win in 1984. Clinton's centrism swayed them while Bush has divided them.

There is evidence of a slow-moving realignment. And this should be troubling for Republicans because the less rural and more populated these areas get, the more diverse and urban they become, the less likely they are to vote Republican. That is not to say that an excessively liberal congress would not push them back toward the GOP, especially on tax-and-spend issues, but it does say that the Sarah Palin formulation of basing the future on appeals to white, small town America is a long-term loser.

John P. Avlon
Author, Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics

This Halloween, you can buy Obama and McCain zombie masks showing the candidates bloodied and bruised, ghoulish and un-human – just the way their opponents like to imagine them.

In recent weeks, things have gotten ugly on the campaign trail. Desperate, angry and running out of time, partisans on the right and left have become increasingly bitter and polarized. They're trying to scare you into voting against the other guy out of fear. After all, hate is a cheap and easy recruiting tool. But it's going to make uniting the country that much more difficult for the next president.

On one side of the aisle it starts with the repeated claims on the stump that Obama is a "socialist" who "pals around with terrorists." But this stokes unhinged anger among supporters both within and without the campaign.

So Virginia GOP Chairman Jeff Frederick tried to fire up volunteers by comparing Obama to Osama bin Laden, saying "both have friends that bombed the Pentagon." The Chairwoman of Otero County Republican women's group in New Mexico, Marcia Stirman, wrote a letter to the editor of a local paper in which she called Obama "a Muslim socialist" and then clarified "I believe Muslims are our enemies."

And McCain's Buchanan County, VA chair, Bobby May was forced to resign after he published an article describing "The clarified platform of Barack Hussein Obama," which included the second amendment applying only to "gang-bangers" and "Islamo-fascist terrorists," abortion "anywhere, any time for anyone for any reason up to 9 months," "free drugs for Obama's inner city political base" "mandatory Black Liberation Theology courses taught in all churches" and hiring the rapper Ludacris to paint the White House black. The kicker: Obama wants to "change liberty and freedom to socialism and communism."

These statements by party officials (quickly condemned by the McCain campaign) then bubble up in unconnected online "issue ads" like one on Drudge which stated that Obama wants to give illegal aliens drivers licenses and then put the candidate's face next to Mohammed Atta's. Then there are the anonymous email chains, saying that Obama is a communist Manchurian candidate and even the anti-Christ.

So after drinking this toxic brew, it's perhaps no surprise that outside a Palin rally in Johnstown, PA earlier this month, amateur camera crews caught crowds yelling out "Osama Obama," "the only difference between Obama and Osama is the BS," "Hussein Mohammed Obama," "Al Qaeda for Obama," and one guy with a Curious George doll with a Obama bumper sticker on its head, who said to the camera "This is little Hussein. Little Hussein wanted to see truth and good Americans," while his companion laughed just off-screen.

So how does all this anger translate? Violence – real, imagined or attempted. McCain volunteer Ashley Todd claimed that she had been attacked at an ATM near Pittsburgh by a six-foot tall, 200-pound black man who saw her McCain bumper sticker, stole $60 and carved a "B" in her face, saying "you are going to be a Barack supporter." After briefly becoming a conservative cause celebre, Todd admitted it was a hoax. An Ohio man shot and wounded a teenager who tried to take a McCain sign off his lawn. In North Carolina, a 75-pound bear cub was found shot to death and then covered with Obama signs. And earlier this week, ATF agents stopped a neo-Nazi skinhead plot to assassinate Obama.

Of course, this unhinged anger is not exclusive to the right. In her international concert tour, Madonna has been juxtaposing images of McCain and Palin with Hitler and Idi Amin. This follows on the Bush=Hitler signs from left-wing activists in the last election. Last week, an effigy of Sarah Palin was hung outside a house in West Hollywood without much anger from the neighbors. If an Obama effigy had been hung it would have rightly been called a mock lynching (which, as I was writing this column, appeared on the campus of U. Kentucky). In New York's Union Square, there are posters of a possessed-looking Palin dripping blue blood out of her mouth.

Both Halloween and Election Day will soon be over, and then it will be time to clean up the mess that's left. We'll need to heal the wounds and unite the nation around the next president to meet the challenges we face. So let's take a deep breath and regain some perspective – we need to be bigger and better than this fear-based trick-or-treat politics.

CNN's Candy Crowley reports the Obama campaign is pulling out the stops, including an infomercial, in the final days.

John P. Avlon
Author, Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics

Yes, Barack Obama broke his promise to take tax-payer matching funds. And he raised almost three times more in the month of September than McCain did in the entire primary campaign. The only thing that stops the disparity from being democracy-disturbing is that his average donation is less than $100 – at least that's a grass-roots funding movement.

Last night, he put that money into a half-hour closing argument that was unprecedented not only in scope and cost, but in the way it straddled biography, detailed policy, and spoke to real people's lives – culminating with a live campaign shot in Florida.

Opening with video of Kansas wheat fields and music that echoed the "John Adams" miniseries, the film weaved together all the key themes of his campaign. Most important was the return to the post-partisan, problem-solver tone by which he introduced himself to the American people. The testimonies were from centrist leaders of the Democratic Party – Ohio Governor Ted Strickland, Kansas Governor Katherine Sebelius and Virginia Governor Tim Kaine. These are the leaders of the party he is going to need to depend on to stop Congressional democrats from defining his administration, if he should win on Tuesday.

It was a return to the sense of fresh possibilities and the gut check resonance which has been the most important and the least quantifiable elements of his rise. No, he does not look like all the other presidents we've had to date, but his story is quintessentially American for the 21st century. His intelligence is clear, but it's his temperament that seems preternaturally presidential. He has proven throughout his campaign to be cool – "no drama Obama" – while caring about the problems which everyday Americans face.

He is our least experienced presidential nominee since Lincoln, and if he wins he will need to rely on that other lanky Illinois lawyer's elevation of character, not only his own but those around him, to succeed in the difficult times ahead. He will need to form a "Team-of-Rivals"-style cabinet, one that includes Republicans as well.

In recent weeks, the tone of campaign partisans on the ground has grown increasingly ugly. That is not consistent with either candidate. John McCain is an honorable man, and if he loses, it will be because he got caught in an anti-Bush backlash, ironic because he's fought its play-to-the-base approach in the past. Win or lose, he is a profile in courage who deserves to be honored.

But Election Day is still five days away, and Obama is right to caution his supporters not to get over-confident. The only poll that matters is at the ballot box. But last night's half-hour film was as strong and artful a closing statement as can be made for his historic campaign.

And whoever wins, let's hope they always keep in mind this lesson from the past 20-month campaign – the American people want their next president to move us not left or right, but forward.

John Avlon
Author, Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics

Back when this presidential election began, John Edwards was criticized by many conservatives for using the slogan "Two Americas." It was a vision of America divided between the haves and the have-nots – evidence, many said, of Democrats' instincts toward divisive class warfare.

But recently Republican surrogates have begun using their own equally divisive framing device: "real America".

A McCain adviser argued for their electoral edge in Virginia by saying their candidate would do well in "real Virginia" rather than northern parts of the state – unconsciously echoing former Virginia senator George Allen's infamous "Macaca" moment captured on YouTube when he invited a dark-skinned volunteer for the Webb campaign to visit the "real world of Virginia."

Then Sarah Palin got in the act: "We believe that the best of America is in these small towns that we get to visit, and in these wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard working very patriotic, um, very, um, pro-America areas of this great nation." So if real America is pro-American, than there is an unreal America – by implication, the urban areas where most Americans now live – which is somehow inherently anti-American.

Minnesota congresswoman Michele Bachmann helpfully tied it all together by saying that Obama "may have anti-American views" and calling for the media to investigate other Democrats with "anti-American" views in congress. [This would presumably require their removal from office, not just because they would be serving an institution they do not support, but because they all take an oath of office to uphold the constitution].

This is ugly and it has to stop. These may be just slips of the tongue, but they are evidence of an attitude that is just as divisive as John Edwards' "Two Americas" riff. It is an extension of the same analysis – an America that is fundamentally divided and mutually incomprehensible, by values if not economics. And it reinforces the subterranean attacks against Obama, questioning not just his patriotism but his essential American-ness.

As Colin Powell said this past weekend, "We've got to stop this kind of nonsense and pull ourselves together and remember that our great strength is in our unity and our diversity."

Dividing our politics into Real Americans and anti-Americans is not just insulting – especially to those urban Americans who were attacked on 9/11 – it draws on nativist and tribalist instincts that do not reflect the best of America, but the worst.

America is great in large part because patriotism and nationalism are not the same thing. We are not a tribal culture, we are a melting pot – being a fully evolved American requires transcending our tribalism.

Dividing America does not represent the politics that John McCain has fought for all his career. And it is not smart politics for the Republican Party in the long-run. Because the base that they are playing to is parts of the country that are less populated and less diverse. That is not betting on the future of America- it's betting on the past.

John Avlon
Author, Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics

This is big – rarely do endorsements matter – but Colin Powell's announcement that he is endorsing Barack Obama for president was a bombshell that will reverberate throughout the last 16 days of this race.

It is not the unprecedented sight of an incumbent administration's former Secretary of State crossing party lines to endorse the opposition's nominee. It is not just that Powell's record of military and government service lends credibility to a candidate whose lack of executive experience and military service is a subject of doubt for many undecideds.

It is that Colin Powell has unparalleled credibility with Independent voters, and his performance on "Meet the Press" today reaffirmed why. He is thoughtful and measured, he puts patriotism and principle ahead of partisanship.

He, like many independents, has wrestled between support for Obama and McCain. He respects them both. He honors McCain's personal and political courage over decades of service. But what ultimately helped push him over to Obama was the selection of Sarah Palin and the negative and divisive tone of the play-to-the-base attacks from the Republican operatives surrounding McCain.

Today, Powell reaffirmed his leadership of the "common sense center" in American politics. Obama will need to keep faith with this constituency to win this election and be the truly "transformational leader" that Powell sees in him.

John P. Avlon
Author, Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics

At last night's Al Smith Dinner in New York, John McCain and Barack Obama sat at the same table. Each gave funny, self-effacing speeches that reaffirmed what it is often too easy to forget in the final month of presidential politics – that our opponents are not our enemies.

Activists from the far left and far right take pride in forgetting that. I know you've seen them on TV in what I call the "Split-Scream" – the screen divided in two, left and right, surrogates screaming predictable talking points past each-other, sucking up all the oxygen in the conversation, refusing to acknowledge any imperfections on their side or any virtue in their opponents.

They are the reason American politics feels more polarized than the American people actually are. They are the reason the moderate majority feels alienated and politically homeless.

Their anger and absolutism does not represent the best of America – and what's ironic in this election is that it does not even reflect the candidate they profess to support.

Barack Obama and John McCain rose to their nominations in large part because they ran against the polarizing, play-to-the-base establishment of their respective parties.

John McCain built a career in the senate based on principled independence, frequently infuriating right wing leadership of his Republican party. He has opposed Karl Rove's play-to-the-base tactics in the past and he has a long record of forging bipartisan coalitions – and as he says, "the scars to prove it."

Barack Obama incredible rise to the nomination was built on his belief that "there are no red states, there are no blue states, there are just the United States of America." He has consistently condemned the broken hyper-partisan politics of Washington. Obama did not run as a candidate from the far left preaching mutual incomprehensibility of politics or race. Instead, he ran as a reflection of who he is, and who we are in the 21st century – a bridge builder who can transcend the tired old divides of left and right and black and white.

The split-screamers deny the rest of us a civil dialogue. Hate can be a cheap and easy recruiting tool for political parties, but it is always playing with fire because hate ultimately leads to violence.

This is too important an election – and too important a time in our history – to divide our country in order to conquer the White House. We can have real differences on policy and direction. We should have a spirited debate. But the angry spirit of intolerance and mutual incomprehensibility which seeps in when the folks on the Split-Scream start yelling at each other should make the moderate majority of Americans angry – not turn off their TV sets in disgust, but straighten their civic backbones, and demand something better.

John P. Avlon
Author, Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics

The McCain campaign's latest round of attacks on Senator Obama's association with Weather Underground founder Bill Ayers represents an unwelcome return to a constant distraction in American politics over the last 40 years – reigniting the culture debates of the 1960s.

The baby-boom generation's coming of age was tumultuous and at times violent. The counterculture chaos and at times outright anti-Americanism of the far left led directly to the election of Richard Nixon in 1968 and the ascendance of the conservative movement that has won seven out of ten presidential elections over the past 40 years.

It's no surprise then when things get desperate the Republican Party tries to re-litigate the 1960s, sticking a knife in the cultural divide to reopen the wounds and air old grievances.

There was a time when this was appropriate: At the height of the cold war the conflicts between the far left and the right seemed at times central to determining our future as a free and independent nation. In the Presidential election of 2004, it was perhaps inevitable that the competing baby-boomers George W. Bush and John Kerry would escalate that debate seeing as how they were on opposite sides of that generational divide,

But the nomination of Barack Obama promised a break with the politics of the past. Born in 1961, he is not a product of those fights – and that is in part why he's been able to campaign as a candidate of change: not just racial, but generational. Senator McCain, for his part, is part of a pre-baby boom generation that came of age in the 1950s, not the 1960s.

These two men represent different philosophies of governing, but they have in the main been united by a desire to elevate our political discourse and take it in a more honorable direction outside of the gutter fights which have divided us for too long.

With our nation at war on two fronts, facing unprecedented global fiscal crisis, diverting attention to a despicable 1960s domestic terrorist who Obama has not seen or spoken to since being elected to congress, deserves to be seen for what it is – an attempt to distract us by reigniting cultural wars which long ago lost their ability to illuminate. They have become all heat and no light, and we need to move past them if we are to move forward as a nation.

Program Note:
It's the showdown everyone's been waiting for.
Sarah Palin and Joe Biden face off on the issues.
Join the best political team on television for your front row seat!

Debate Night in America: Vice Presidential Debate
Tonight, beginning 8p ET
 
 
 __________________________________________________________________________________

John P. Avlon
Author, Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics

Is Sarah Palin ready for Prime-Time?

That's the question Americans will be looking to answer tonight at the first and only Vice-Presidential debate in St. Louis.

Rarely are VP debates consequential – the first rule is "do no harm" to the top of the ticket.

But the combination of one of the least nationally-known picks in history, paired with the oldest nominee in history, has Americans paying uncommon attention to the person who could be one chicken-bone away from the presidency.

Sarah Palin has had a rough post-honeymoon period by any measure. She deserves credit for shaking up the race, energizing the Republican base, and getting independents to give McCain another look. Her courage in taking on the corrupt Alaska Republican machine is real. And her convention speech was an instant classic (written by Matthew Scully, a former Bush speechwriter and book-length defender of vegetarianism – an odd pairing with the now famous Moose-hunter).

But well-written scripts can only carry you so far, and the ensuing financial crisis has made Palin's newfound celebrity look small. The McCain campaign's decision to try and shield her from the press corps backfired by making it look like they had something to hide from the American people.

The problems began when some of her conservative policy positions began to kick in – like opposing abortion even in the cases of rape and incest. The anger from left, including many feminists, gave way to unhinged attacks on the internet. It became clear that instead of helping McCain build a bridge to independent voters, Palin was becoming a polarizing figure in the culture wars herself. An early September Newsweek poll found that 24% of American women found that Palin's selection made them less likely to vote for Senator McCain – an unusually high number for a number two on the ticket.

And when she sat down for television interviews, well, that's when the real problems started. She was unsteady, rarely going more than an inch deep into issues, trying to stick to her policy script, and at times tap-dancing as fast as she could to get through the question.

Saturday Night Live – the original "not ready for prime time players" – developed a devastating instant classic of their own when Tina Fey simply used the circuitous lines of Palin's logic from the infamous Katie Couric interview as the SNL script itself. Satire doesn't get any purer than that.

The American people are smart and it takes them a while to make up their mind. But the verdict on Sarah Palin is increasingly unkind. Even willful one-time supporters like conservative columnist Kathleen Parker went from feelings of pride to shaking their heads to throwing up their hands, writing "Like so many women, I've been pulling for Palin, wishing her the best, hoping she will perform brilliantly. I've also noticed that I watch her interviews with the held breath of an anxious parent, my finger poised over the mute button in case it gets too painful. Unfortunately, it often does. My cringe reflex is exhausted."

Amid all this, there is some good news for Palin fans – debate performances are almost always judged against expectations. And at this point, it is almost impossible for Governor Palin to not exceed expectations. This bad patch of press could actually work in her favor because she is in fact a formidable politician who can turn the table on her critics by disarming them. Remember, America loves to root for an underdog.

John P. Avlon
Author, Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics

After a historically bad day on Wall Street, the underlying economic anxiety of this election has taken on new intensity.

Historians will write that the Bush administration went in with Enron and out with Lehman.

Some economists believe that second quarter results form voters' perceptions of the economy – but bad news has dripping out for so long, that it has almost faded into the background, like a movie theme separate from the action on screen.

That should change after today – when the liquidation and sale of two of America's pre-eminent investment banks added urgency to what Allan Greenspan has already called a "once in a century financial crisis."

After yesterday, there is no false comfort to be found in 'dead cat' bounces. The American economy will be fine in the long-run. But right now we are in a seismic financial crisis – and as in every crisis there may be opportunity to be found.

Elections are won by the candidate who connects with moderates and the middle class – and even after a wasted week focused on the manufactured scandal of "lipstick on a pig"— wallet-issues motivate voters like nothing else.

It is in economic hard times that demagogues rise to the top in democracies – and in economic easy times, we elect Warren G. Harding or tolerate a presidential impeachment over an affair with an intern while sustaining 60+ approval ratings.

But one of Bill Clinton's lasting gifts to the Democratic Party is that he removed economics from the Republican column as an area of core competence.

Barack Obama has benefited from the Democrats' newfound perceptional strength on economic issues, consistently polling ahead of John McCain when it comes to the economy.

He should take another page from the Arkansas Traveler's playbook and promise to "focus on the economy like a laser beam." And then convene an economic forum of prominent advisors and supporters from across the spectrum – such as economic advisors Austin Goolsby and Paul Volcker, Alan Greenspan, Robert Rubin, and politically neutral NYC Mayor Bloomberg.

It's a time to trumpet his middle class tax cut – a groundbreaking policy for a Democratic candidate that allows him to avoid the liberal "tax and spend" label while offering real relief for working families. The independent Tax Policy Center estimates that his plan offers greater savings than McCain's plan for families making less than $112,000 a year and would save tax-paying families making less than $66,000 up to three times as much.

And Obama's got to make it clear that he doesn't buy into dictates from the neo-protectionist wing of the Democratic Party, because trying to wall ourselves off from the global economy isn't going to make our situation any better or recovery come any faster – in fact, just the opposite.

McCain has a tougher time because he's got to back up his defense of the economy as "fundamentally strong" while also promising reform. It's an extension of his so-far successful post-convention pivot to be both the Republican nominee and the candidate of change.

And in this case, there is an element of truth. McCain is at heart a Teddy Roosevelt-style trust-buster and regulator. He is a steadfast defender of international free-trade, but has no ideological belief in the inherent morality of unregulated free-markets. At the same time, as some of his conservative detractors during the primary pointed out, McCain has admitted that economics aren't his strong suit. And the Bush administration combined with Tom Delay's unprecedented pork-barrel congress to squander much of the GOPs remaining credibility as responsible stewards of our economy.

The McCain campaign's best move is to put the focus on "who can get us out of this mess?" – not on "how did we get into this mess?"

Obama needs to appear problem-solving and presidential – diagnosing the Bush-era economic mistakes while front-loading pocketbook solutions that will ease the middle-class squeeze which pre-dates this market turmoil.

When the dust settles, we can examine whether this is an economic crisis impacting investment banks or an investment bank crisis impacting the economy. But today, a combination of compassion and action are needed.

2008 has already been a historic high-stakes, high drama election – and with an epic economic tailspin 50 days out, "Issue #1" just got more urgent in even more voters' minds.

Editor's Note:
We are devoting many posts today to the anniversary of 9/11, with first-hand accounts, insight, and commentary dedicated to that day seven years ago that changed our world.
_____________________________________________________

John P. Avlon
Author, Independent Nation: How Centrists Can Change American Politics

A brief posting on the 7th anniversary of the attacks of September 11, 2001.

Congratulations to both Senator Obama and Senator McCain for putting politics aside to attend the memorial service at Ground Zero together.

This day is much bigger than politics. It must not be a partisan remembrance, just as winning the wider war on terror cannot be a partisan goal – it is an American responsibility.

Terrorists did not care on September 11 whether their targets were Republicans, Democrats or Independents. All that mattered was that they were Americans. And in the more than 20 terrorist attacks stopped at home and abroad since then, differences of domestic political affiliation remain irrelevant and absurd in our enemies' eyes.

Through the invasion of Iraq, and much of the 2004 campaign, the Bush administration did make this wider war on terror a source of partisan debate and partisan division. This has been unhelpful in our larger mission as a nation

And if Democrats should win this election, one bright spot which may emerge is a recognition that this war against us is not optional – if ignored it will not go away. Democrats have just as much responsibility as Republicans to win this wider war against Jihadism. It is inseparable with the larger constitutional responsibility of protecting the American people.

There is reason to hope that some of the polarization that has accompanied this era will end, or at least heal with the end of the Bush administration. Both candidate favor closing Guantanamo and ending torture – some of the most divisive elements of this wider war. But the wake up call of September 11th which spurred wider awareness of the conflict with Jihadism, must be beyond partisanship.

The urgency of this anniversary may have faded for some – but not for me and not for millions of Americans who will always carry the scars of that day. We can now remember without reliving it. But forgetting is a form of historic amnesia that disrespects the dead and weakens our resolve to learn from that searing experience.

And so as we remember the nearly 3,000 lives who were lost seven years ago, especially in this election year, let's try to rededicate ourselves to the spirit of unity which emerged immediately after the attacks – in recognition that what we share as Americans far outweighs those things which divide us.