Does it matter that Obama’s rejecting public funds?
Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Barack Obama has become the first major-party candidate to opt out of public financing since Watergate.
It's no big surprise. When it comes to fund-raising, Obama is a virtual ATM machine. Candidates who take public financing get about $85 million to spend in the 2 months before the general election. But, if Obama can tap into the 1.5 million donors who contributed to him during the primaries along with Hillary Clinton's donors, some predict he could raise as much as $500 million – which would put him at a tremendous advantage over John McCain, who says he'll take public financing.
Experts say Obama could use this money to run a national ad campaign similar to marketing drives run by companies like McDonald's and Nike. He'll also be able to compete in Republican states, where the GOP rarely gets competition.
The downside for Obama is he's opened himself up to charges of hypocrisy. Last year he vowed to work with the Republican nominee to "preserve a publicly financed general election." And he's now drawing fire from both friends and foes for this change of heart.
McCain lashed out at Obama, saying he's gone back on his word. Although campaign finance isn't a top issue for voters, the McCain camp is pouncing on this as an issue of trust as well as evidence that Obama doesn't really represent a new kind of politics.
Watchdog groups are also disappointed with Obama's decision, and Senator Russ Feingold, who has co-sponsored legislation with Obama to change the public finance system – is calling his decision "a mistake."
Here’s my question to you: How much does it matter that Barack Obama is opting out of public campaign financing?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Drilling for oil in Alaska & offshore the answer to high gas prices?
[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/06/18/art.signal.hill1.gi.jpg caption=" "]
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Can you tell it's an election year? After a moratorium against drilling for oil in Alaska and off the coast of the U.S. for the last 27 years, suddenly the politicians are saying "to hell with the environment and the tourism industries in places like Florida… let's drill for oil now!"
Funny how gas hits four dollars and politicians throw their principles out the window. President Bush and John McCain both favor drilling as though it will take the place of a coherent energy policy. If exploration started today, some experts predict it could take ten years before you could pump the oil from the coastal areas and Alaska into your car as gasoline.
The economic implications for states like Florida – that rely heavily on tourism – are immense. In the event of a leak or a spill, the entire coastline could be ruined. Remember the Exxon Valdez.
The political implications for John McCain's chances of being the next president are also large. If coastal drilling happens in California, McCain can forget about it. Californians are among the most environmentally conscious folks in the country and are staunchly opposed to drilling for oil off their coast.
Florida could react the same way. Clean beaches are vital to the state's economy. But suddenly Florida's governor, Charlie Crist, who some think is salivating at the chance to be McCain's V.P., is all in favor. Until yesterday he was opposed.
Critics of the idea point out that the oil companies currently have 68 million acres under offshore lease that are not being developed. But critics be damned… full speed ahead. It's an election year and the voters are mad about gas prices.
Here’s my question to you: Is drilling for oil in Alaska and off the coast the answer to high gas prices?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
How can Clinton & Obama unite the party?
(PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are set to appear together next week in Washington – side-by-side – for the first time since the long and sometimes nasty primary battle came to an end. It's an important moment, since some Democrats are still bitter about the way it ended.
The two will meet to try to get some of Clinton's top contributors to support Obama. Some of Clinton's supporters say that fund-raisers have complained because they don't think their concerns were being heard during meetings with the Obama camp. The donors apparently want to make sure Obama knows he needs to help Clinton pay down her campaign debt – estimated at more than $20 million – if he wants their support.
Other Clinton backers steamed that Obama hired ousted Clinton campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle to be the chief of staff for his eventual vice presidential nominee.
And, more tensions boiled up yesterday at an Obama rally when former Clinton supporter and Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm mentioned Clinton's name, and drew loud boos from the crowd. Obama shut that down and made very clear to the 20,000 people at the rally that Senator Clinton deserves respect.
Aides say Obama and Clinton have not met or spoken since that private meeting in Washington a couple weeks back, but the campaigns are reportedly cooperating as Obama gears up for the general election. One Clinton fundraiser suggests there's no rift and it will just take some time to heal from the primary.
Here’s my question to you: What do Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama need to do in their first joint appearance to unite the party?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
How clear is it where McCain stands on the issues?
Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
If John McCain doesn't stop changing his position on the issues, he threatens to make John Kerry look like an amateur.
In order for McCain to win in November, he has to appeal to both the traditional Republican base and to independents. Dana Milbank in the Washington Post says it's a delicate dance, and if McCain's not careful "he's liable to break a hip." Of course any doctor will tell you a broken hip can be very difficult to recover from.
On Iraq, the economy, guns and God, McCain is to the right. On immigration, campaign finance reform and global warming, he's to the left. It's all very reminiscent of John Kerry back in 2004.
McCain went after Barack Obama yesterday, for proposing a windfall profits tax on oil companies. A month ago McCain said he was willing to consider a windfall tax on the oil companies.
What about offshore drilling? During his last presidential run, McCain was against it. Now he's for it, saying the states should decide if they want to drill for oil off the coast. This could cost him big time in states like California and Florida which are extremely environmentally conscious.
Then there are the Bush tax cuts. McCain was against them – twice – but now he's for them.
McCain has also called for the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay to be closed down and torture banned. But last week he criticized the Supreme Court's ruling that detainees there should have access to U.S. courts – calling it "one of the worst decisions in the history of this country."
Here’s my question to you: How clear is it where John McCain stands on the issues?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Americans fed up with all 3 branches of govt.
(PHOTO CREDIT: AP)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Here's a pretty depressing statistic: Fewer than half of Americans approve of the job performance of all 3 branches of the federal government – President Bush, Congress and the Supreme Court.
A new Gallup poll puts President Bush's approval rating near an all-time low of 30%, with some other polls showing his approval rating even lower. The all-time low for any president was 22% for Harry Truman in 1952.
Congress' approval stands at a pathetic 19%, just a point better than last month's 18%... which was the worst rating ever. Congress usually gets the lowest rating of all 3 branches of government, and with good reason.
As for the Supreme Court,48% of those surveyed say they approve of the job of the high court. That's significantly higher than the president or Congress. But it's still less than half, and the court has only measured a lower approval rating one other time.
It's no surprise that Republicans rate President Bush much higher than Democrats or Independents... and Democrats give Congress slightly better marks than do Republicans.
But taken together these numbers show how fed up the American people are with the way Washington is currently operating. It's not good news for incumbents in Congress who are up for re-election – that's all the members of the House and one-third of the members of the Senate. And, Barack Obama and John McCain better take note; whichever candidate better understands what needs fixing down there in Washington will probably be the next president.
Here’s my question to you: All three branches of government are near historical low approval ratings. What will that mean for the election?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Winning over independents
(PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Independent voters are crucial in presidential elections. You can bet John McCain and Barack Obama will do everything in their power to get their support.
A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that McCain and Obama are even among independents – which suggests a shift towards McCain in the past month.
When it comes to the issues, independents see McCain as more credible on fighting terrorism and they're split evenly on who is the stronger leader and who is better on the war in Iraq. However, 62% of independents polled say the Iraq war is "not worth fighting."
Obama has a double-digit advantage among independents on many domestic issues including: the economy – which is the nation's No. 1 issue, gas prices, health care, global warming, and women's issues.
In recent elections, Democratic and Republican voters have overwhelmingly supported their party's candidate. But this time around those identifying themselves as Democrats far outnumber Republicans, which could spell trouble for McCain. It means he will have to attract a larger percentage of independent votes in order to win.
A couple of other factors working against McCain in this poll: people are more unhappy than ever with the direction this country is going. 84% say we're seriously on the wrong track. Also, when asked which party they favor for Congress in the fall, 52% say Democrat, only 37% say Republican.
Here’s my question to you: What will John McCain and Barack Obama have to do to win over independents?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Republican Chuck Hagel a good choice for Obama V.P.?
Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Barack Obama has already made history in this campaign, but what if he does it one more time by picking a Republican as his V.P.?
Salon.com reports about the buzz surrounding GOP Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska as a potential choice for Obama. Hagel admittedly is a long shot for the job. Just imagine the symbolism: Obama could truly hit home the message that he's serious about changing the way Washington works by running with a Republican.
And there's no better Republican for him to run with than Chuck Hagel. Hagel is retiring at the end of his term. He has been very tough on President Bush when it comes to the war in Iraq. Last year, Hagel said that Bush was "not accountable anymore" and that "before this is over, you might see calls for his impeachment." Hagel was also recently critical of his longtime friend, John McCain... particularly some of McCain's comments about Iran. Hagel said he thinks McCain "is smarter than some of the things he is saying."
The article points out that although many tout Hagel as a moderate Republican who's willing to reach across the aisle, he's still a conservative. And there's the rub. Former Sen. Bob Kerrey, a Democrat and friend of Hagel's, says it would be hard to imagine his party backing someone who's anti-choice, anti-civil rights for gays and anti-gun control, adding "It's not impossible, but it's bumping right up on the edge."
For his part, Hagel has yet to endorse John McCain. It's been reported that Hagel's wife gave Obama $500 in February. And, in a CNN interview last month, Hagel himself laughed off a question about being Obama's running mate, but he didn't rule it out saying he's "going to try and find some honest work."
Here’s my question to you: What message would it send if Barack Obama picked Republican Chuck Hagel as V.P.?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Your relationship with credit cards?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Buy now, pay later... seems to be the American way.
A new Gallup poll takes a look at Americans' habits when it comes to their credit cards. When asked how they pay their credit card bills each month, 43% of those surveyed say they always pay the full amount. 17% say they usually do. 25% say they usually leave a balance, and 12% say they usually pay the minimum amount due. Only 1% pay less than the minimum. Credit-card holders have an average of about 4 cards.
When it comes to those who carry a balance, 30% say they have a balance of more than $2,000. 19% have a balance of more than $5,000, and 9% say more than $10,000.
The good news is people might be getting a little smarter about using their plastic. In April, the Fed said consumers actually used their credit cards less. And the poll found that the percentage of people who say they leave a balance or make the minimum payment on their credit cards has actually gone down over the past few years.
This suggests that the shaky economy has more people thinking twice before whipping out their charge card. But it's also a difficult situation for millions of people trying to figure out how to make ends meet. Just today the government reported the cost of living rose for Americans last month. Inflation increased 4.2%, led by surging energy costs.
Here’s my question to you: How would you describe your relationship with your credit cards?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Historians: little chance for McCain in Nov.
Click the Play Button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Don't bet on John McCain being the next president… that's the message coming from several presidential scholars.
The Politico reports these historians paint a bleak picture for the Republican candidate. They also say Barack Obama has the best chance of any Democrat perhaps since FDR beat Herbert Hoover in 1932.
The historians say it should be "an overwhelming Democratic victory," noting McCain is facing one of the worst political environments for the party in power since World War II.
There's also this: only twice in the 20th century did the candidate from the same party as a two-term president go on to win the White House. The last time was in 1988, when President Bush's father replaced Ronald Reagan... but Reagan was twice as popular as the current president is now.
But McCain does have some advantages, including the fact that a lot of people don't see him as a traditional Republican. Also, McCain could appeal more to moderates than Obama. If the public ends up seeing the Democrat as "far left." And, McCain might benefit from leftover divisions in the Democratic Party from the primary.
Meanwhile, a new Gallup poll suggests the American people agree with these historians: 52% of those surveyed think Obama will win, regardless of who they support. 41% say McCain.
And the world is weighing in too: a Pew poll – of 25,000 people in 24 countries – found that in all but two nations, people put more faith in Obama than in McCain to "do the right thing" when it comes to world affairs. One of the two exceptions: the United States.
Here’s my question to you: Many historians doubt John McCain stands much of a chance in November. How can he change their minds?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Bush reportedly wants bin Laden captured before leaving office
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
President Bush has reportedly ordered a final attempt to capture Osama bin Laden before he leaves office.
The Times of London reports that the president has enlisted British special forces to help get the job done. Sources in both Washington and London confirm to the newspaper that a renewed hunt is under way. One source says: "If President Bush can say he killed Saddam Hussein and captured bin Laden, he can claim to have left the world a safer place."
British special forces have been participating in U.S. operations to catch the terrorist leader in northern Pakistan, but it's the first time they're crossing into Afghanistan regularly.
Of course, no one knows where Osama bin Laden is. He has eluded capture for almost seven years now. Some experts think he's in the tribal areas of northwest Pakistan. One Pentagon source says that U.S. forces are trying to push al Qaeda in Pakistan toward the Afghan border, where they'd have a better shot at catching him.
But, the increase in U.S. military action is not sitting well with the Pakistanis. Last week, they were outraged about what they claimed was an airstrike on a border post with Afghanistan that killed 11 of its troops. The U.S. says it's still "not exactly clear" what happened.
Here’s my question to you: President Bush wants Osama bin Laden captured before leaving office. How important is it at this point?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments