Actually it was probably up before, it just had a different URL:
Hull, who has seldom bothered to vote at all in his life, sent out a mailing citing such votes to suggest they show Obama is weak on issues that his progressive base holds dear.
Do they?
“Anyone who says that a `present’ vote necessarily reflects that someone is ducking an issue doesn’t understand the first thing about legislative strategy,” said Pam Sutherland, Planned Parenthood’s chief lobbyist in Springfield. “People who work down here and know how things get done are hearing these accusations and saying, `huh?'”
In practical terms, a “present” vote is as good as a “no” vote because the law requires a bill to win the votes of a majority of the lawmakers in either body, not simply a majority of those voting.
If “present” sounds wimpy, that’s because it sometimes is. In many cases, according to Paul Green, head of Roosevelt University’s School of Public Policy and a longtime student of Illinois’ byzantine legislative process, lawmakers who anticipate a tough re-election challenge will vote “present” on a controversial bill they oppose so as not to give their prospective opponents a good club to bash them with.
Obama, however, was in a safe district and never faced a serious challenge for his legislative seat. He had no need to shy from hard-line stands on gun control and abortion rights. He actually took such stands frequently and is now highly praised by advocates for both causes.
Why would he then vote “present” instead of a resounding “no” on certain bills advanced by lawmakers opposed to abortion rights?
“To provide cover for other Democrats who were shaky on the issue in an effort to convince them not to vote `yes,'” Sutherland said. “The idea is to recruit a group to vote `present’ that includes legislators who are clearly right with the issue.”
Sutherland said this tactic makes the “present” vote look less like a hedge or a cop-out and more like a constitutional concern or other high-minded qualm.
Actually there were constitutional concerns with all of these bills on top of other issues.
Second, using Blair Hull and Maria Pappas’ oppo is weak. 😉
Is this really a surprise?
Blair Hull’s head people were brought onto Hillary’s campaign to be, as one newspaper put it, “Obama Killers.”
Mike Henry was the key one – he of the infamous Iowa memo, right?
“Blair Hull’s head people were brought onto Hillary’s campaign to be, as one newspaper put it, “Obama Killers.””
Because they did such a fine job of it last time.
It appeared to me that hitting people in the shin and not doing any damage was a general theme, not an individual event for Hull