Filling Gaps in the White House Website, Part 61

The president recently did interviews with network correspondents. The White House website includes no transcripts.

Diane Sawyer of ABC:

DIANE SAWYER: Looking at each end of the spectrum of possibilities, if Gadhafi ends up in a villa some place in Zimbabwe with no war crimes trial, is that OK with you?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well -- you know, that's not going to be my decision alone. I will tell you, though that -- the first step is for Gadhafi to send a signal that he understands -- the Libyan people -- don't want him ruling anymore. That 40 years of tyranny is enough. And -- you know, once he makes that decision -- I think the international community will come together, and make a determination -- as to what -- the most appropriate -- way of facilitating him stepping down will be. I certainly will be supportive of him -- being removed from power. And -- we're going to have to examine what our options are after that.

Erica Hill of CBS:

Hill: The supreme allied commander for NATO said today that there are flickers of al Qaeda and Hezbollah amongst these rebels. How do we know what their end goal is? And how do we know they won't, in fact, turn on the U.S. and on our allies?

Mr. Obama: Well, first of all, I think it's important to note that the people that we've met with have been fully vetted, so we have a clear sense of who they are, and so far they're saying the right things, and most of them are professionals, lawyers, doctors, people who appear to be credible. That doesn't mean that all the people, among all the people who opposed Qaddafi there might not be elements that are unfriendly to the United States and our interests.

That's why I think it's important for us not to jump in with both feet but to carefully consider: What are the goals of the opposition? What kind of transition do they want to bring about inside of Libya? Because our main concern here is the Libyan people as well as stability in the region.

Brian Williams of NBC:

BRIAN WILLIAMS:
Due respect, Mr. President, watching the reportings of our two correspondents in Libya. What it appears the rebels need is military equipment. Some of their equipment dates back to World War II. Are you ruling out U.S. military hardware assistance?

PRESIDENT OBAMA:
I'm not ruling it out. But I'm also not ruling it in. We're still making an assessment partly about what Khadaffy's forces are going to be doing. Keep in mind, we've been at this now for nine days. And the degree to which we've degraded Khadaffy's forces in those nine days has been significant.

Operations to protect civilians continue to take out Khadaffy's forces, his tanks, his artillery on the ground, and that will continue for some time. And so one of the questions that we want to answer is: do we start getting to a stage where Khadaffy's forces are sufficiently degraded, where it may not be necessary to arm opposition groups.

But we're not taking anything off the table at this point. Our primary military goal is to protect civilian populations and to set up the no-fly zone. Our primary strategic goal is for Khadaffy to step down so that the Libyan people have an opportunity to live a decent life.

Redistricting and Uncertainty

Rhodes Cook writes at Crystal Ball:

It is conventional wisdom these days that congressional district lines in most places are drawn to protect incumbents of both parties. But if that is the case, the cartographers in many states last time out did not do a very good job. More House incumbents were beaten under the current lines than in any other period since the 1970s. And for good measure, more House incumbents were defeated in the 2010 election (54) than in any other general election since 1948. The chart below compares the number of defeated House incumbents by decade. Post-redistricting elections that end with a “2″ are not included, since incumbents then can often find themselves pitted against each other. Totals are restricted to the four general elections that follow, when the district lines traditionally undergo little or no change.

...

The current redistricting process is different from the last one in a variety of ways. Republican gubernatorial and state legislative gains last fall put the GOP in a much stronger position in many states to push through maps of their choosing.

On the other hand, for the first time in more than four decades, the federal Justice Department is in the hands of the Democrats at redistricting time. That puts them in position to review redistricting plans from states required to seek federal approval under the Voting Rights Act, many of which are in the South where Republicans hold sway.

And then there is the voter-approved commission in California empowered to draw more competitive congressional districts, as well as a voter-approved constitutional amendment in Florida that declares that districts “may not be drawn to favor or disfavor an incumbent or political party.”

Yet no matter which mode of redistricting is employed, the handiwork of the cartographers will continue to be challenged over the next decade by changing demographics, the ups and downs of the economy and an ever-evolving political environment. In short, safe congressional seats will always be with us, but probably not as many as their most ambitious creators would want.

Reid Wilson writes at National Journal:

In California and Florida, two states new to nonpartisan redistricting, the uncertainty factor should be a major concern. The process in both states isn’t expected to lead to major changes in the partisan makeup of each delegation, but party officials in Washington are making sure that incumbents get a clear message: Just because a district stays in one party’s hands doesn’t mean it will be represented by the same member.

“We’re telling our delegations that they don’t draw the maps,” said Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., who is the redistricting point man for the National Republican Congressional Committee.

“We would like to think that every member could come in and draw a perfect district for them. The one thing that we know for sure [is], unless you live in North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, or Montana, you’re going to have a different district,” Westmoreland said.

And things are up in the Iowa air, as Aaron Blake writes for The Washington Post:

Iowa’s nonpartisan redistricting commission threw an early wrench into the state’s redistricting process Thursday, proposing a map that would put Republican Reps. Tom Latham and Steve King into the same district, while also drawing Democratic Reps. Bruce Braley and Dave Loebsack into the same district.

The state is dropping from five districts to four districts due to slower-than-average population growth over the last decade, meaning that it was a foregone conclusion that two incumbents would be drawn into the same district.

But instead of making minor changes, the proposal is a wholesale re-drawing of the congressional map and pairs up two sets of incumbents, while leaving Rep. Leonard Boswell (D) in his own district and creating an open seat in the southeastern corner of the state – where the potential candidates include former Iowa first lady Christie Vilsack (D).

This map is not the final plan, however, as the state legislature and governor have to sign off on it first. Republicans, in particular, might bristle at the idea that Latham and King would be in the same district. Latham moved to his current home in Ames in 2001 to avoid just such a scenario.

Dem Losers Blame Obama & Pelosi

At Politico, Richard E. Cohen reports:

"Moderates and independents who leaned toward Obama didn’t come out because they saw a continuing polarization. Health reform was only supported by Democrats. So, the message from Washington was that Obama was getting his way,” said former Rep. Dan Maffei (D-N.Y.), who has become a senior fellow with Third Way, the centrist Democratic group.

...

Former Rep. Glenn Nye (D-Va.) blamed Pelosi’s liberal agenda for his more decisive 10-point loss. “A winning political strategy is to take issues that are popular with the center. Democratic leadership brought too many votes that weren’t going to be enacted. It was a ‘choose and lose’ approach,” said Nye, now a senior fellow with the German Marshall Fund.

American Crossroads and The List

At Roll Call, Stuart Rothenberg reports on discussions about the RNC's extensive voter files:

Multiple Republican sources said that a number of prominent GOP strategists and operatives are trying to persuade the RNC’s leadership to end the party’s monopoly of the list by creating an arrangement whereby a new, non-party group could have access to the list in exchange for improving it.

Among those Republicans said to be pushing for the move are former Republican National Committee Chairman Mike Duncan, former White House Political Director Karl Rove and Barry Jackson, a top aide to Speaker John Boehner (Ohio).

Duncan, who is chairman of the board of American Crossroads, one of the non-party groups credited with helping Republicans win the House last year, adamantly opposed the move when he chaired the RNC but now favors it. Rove is also heavily involved in American Crossroads.

Numerous former RNC staffers described the voter file as the committee’s “greatest asset” and argued that by giving up control of the file, which the RNC shares with state parties, the committee would be agreeing to diminish its power dramatically.

Others downplayed the risk, arguing that the RNC must never and will never “give up the list” but can allow private entities access to it. The more the list is used, they argued, the more it would be “refreshed.” And, they added, only the parties can pay for federal get-out-the-vote efforts, thereby guaranteeing the RNC an important role in campaigns.

Social Issues Redux

At The New York Times, Jeff Zeleny reports:

Here in Iowa, whose caucuses next winter will open the campaign, social and religious conservatives are pressing the likely candidates on issues like same-sex marriage and abortion rather than on jobs, the budget deficit and other economic concerns that leaders of both parties expect to dominate the general election.

The development provides opportunities for candidates like Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota and former Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, who have a following among social conservatives. But it could make Iowa even more difficult territory for, among others, Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, who has yet to visit the state this year.

More broadly, some Republicans say, it could muddle the party’s message as it seeks to defeat President Obama.

“We look like Camp Christian out here,” said Doug Gross, a Republican activist and former nominee for governor. “If Iowa becomes some extraneous right-wing outpost, you have to question whether it is going to be a good place to vet your presidential candidates.”

As Zeleny also reported, different approaches were on display at the state's Conservative Principles Conference:

Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi urged Republicans to keep a tight focus on the policies of the Obama administration, the state of the economy and the size of government.

“It is absolutely critical that we elect a new president,” Mr. Barbour said. “I think the best way — perhaps the only way — is for us to make sure the 2012 campaign is focused on policy. The American people agree with us on policy.”

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who took the stage after Mr. Barbour, offered a different view, ranking values above the economy and national security in his three-point list of what the next presidential campaign should be about.

“Some people may say we should stay away from values, stay away from social issues,” Mr. Gingrich said. “I’m here to tell you that if you don’t start with values, if you don’t start by saying who we are as Americans, the rest of it doesn’t matter.”

Mr. Gingrich drew applause when he suggested that students “in every class in K-12 and in every tax-paid college” should learn the words of the Founding Fathers that “we are endowed by our creator.”

Unimpressed with Rudy

Fergus Cullen writes at the Manchester Union-Leader:

Rudy Giuliani visited Manchester last week to repay political debts, reconnect with past supporters and muse about running for President again. He ate some crow, acknowledging that not paying more attention to New Hampshire last time was a mistake.

Admitting the problem is the first step in recovery, but confession doesn't excuse how bad a campaign Giuliani waged in New Hampshire four years ago. America's Mayor, respected by all for the job he did in New York, let his supporters down and wasted $58 million to win a single delegate, from Nevada. Let Giuliani be a lesson to all future candidates in what not to do.

Giuliani's was the Potemkin Village of presidential campaigns: What looked like a campaign was just a facade for the cameras and national media. It was artifice, disrespectful of the process and the voters. Perhaps this is what campaigns in New York City are, where everything plays out on TV and in the tabloids, where no grassroots grow in the concrete jungle.

In the course of the last campaign, during which I was state Republican Party chairman, I must have met Rudy Giuliani a half-dozen times. But for Giuliani, it was always the first time; he gave no indication of recognizing me. Getting to know individual voters was unimportant. In contrast, McCain and other candidates routinely picked me out of crowds. Mitt Romney even did so at a South Carolina event asking, "Fergus, what are you doing here?"

Huck's On First

At Politico, Andy Barr notes:

In the latest Gallup Poll released Friday, he’s the Republican leader, ahead of 16 other presidential prospects. Regardless of what’s being polled, who’s doing the polling or how the question is asked, among Republicans Huckabee typically finishes on top.

Who is best liked? Mike Huckabee.

Whom do Fox News viewers favor? Mike Huckabee.

Who does the South want to be president? Mike Huckabee.

Poll the early primary states, and the former Arkansas governor is winning. Match up any of the 2012 contenders with President Barack Obama, and Huckabee usually runs strongest.