This is important for two reasons, first because it shows that the Pirates can galvanize the youth vote outside Berlin, and second because Saarland is a more rural state lacking a major population center (the largest city has only 175,000 people). Hence, it was arguably the toughest territory in Germany for a party that caters to urbanites and lists file-sharing as it’s top issue. Now, they have not only won seats in the Saar, but also pulled ahead of the Greens – a major national party. Furthermore, they took 7.4% of the vote when polls showed them barely squeaking by the 5% threshold to win seats. That’s a fantastic performance, and if the Pirates can win seats in the Saar, they can win anywhere in Germany.

The Pirates are also expected to score seats in May’s elections in the states of Schleswig-Holstein (another rural area) and North Rhine-Westphalia (Germany’s second largest state). If they complete the trifecta, there is every reason to expect that the Pirates will storm the German federal parliament when the nation votes next year. That would have massive implications for Germany and Europe, signaling that the Internet-based ideology of Piratism is a force to be reckoned with.

*Jasmin Maurer portrait and Pirate Party logo liscenced under Creative Commons – attribution information may be found here and here. 

Two bigs stories emerged out of yesterday’s New Democratic Party leadership election in Canada. First, Thomas Mulcair of Quebec is the new leader of the New Democrats. Second, for the first time in the Internet Age, an online vote in a major country has been disrupted by hackers, as the convention was delayed by hours due to “denial of service” attacks on the voting website.

As for Mulcair, he was generally seen as the best choice politically – in that he is from Quebec, a province where the NDP had a massive breakthrough last year. Polls showed that the other leadership candidates would likely lose the party’s shaky grip on Quebec, where it has shallow roots despite now holding most of the parliamentary seats in the province. However, while he likely will hold Quebec, there are serious questions about his committments to the party’s ideology and culture, as he has only been active in the party for about six years and seems more interested in a broader ”progressive” vision than the NDP’s historic committment to an obliquely Social Democratic program. Many party stalwarts (including former leader Ed Broadbent) are disturbed by Mulcair’s election, and he will have a lot of work to do in order to gain the trust of the party’s traditional base among farmers and union workers in English Canada. In fact, it’s not a stretch to say that he faces the exact same dilemma as Mitt Romney – just on the opposite end of the spectrum.

Still, at least in the short term, the NDP picked the candidate who presents the biggest threat to the Conservative government – so Mulcair should be watched closely.

Well there may be some fireworks in the Canadian NDP leadership convention after all.Thomas Mulcair, the party’s top man in the province of Quebec, came in as the unquestioned frontrunner – but he used his twenty minute presentation to produce a gut-wrenchingly awkward performance. He entered behind a lavish procession of drummers, useed the vast majority of his time for introductions, and had to rush his own speech. To top it all off, the graphics behind him beyond amateurish (complete with stretched photgraphs of Mulcair’s head). The whole spectacle generated a very negative reaction from the press, and seemed to turn off the delegates as well.

In contrast, many of the other candidates gave minimalistic presentations and good speeches. The best was by Nathan Cullen, the British Columbian dark horse who was already surfing a wave of momentum – but 29 year-old Manitoba MP Niki Ashton also turned in a stunning performance, as did largely unknown Nova Scotia pharmacist Martin Singh. It seemed to be a day for the dark horses, as early frontrunners Brian Topp, Paul Dewar, and Peggy Nash failed to connect.

However, it should b remembered that the majority of votes in this contest were cast before convention. 70-90% of the electorate voted early, so it is entirely possible that Mulcair will still win. Still, those who saved their votes for convention day got quite an eyeful, and they could change the course of the race. Based on the turnout numbers I’ve seen, I’m expecting the number of convention day voters to be on the high end of predictions. First ballot results come out tomorrow at 10 AM Eastern, so buckle up for a wild ride to the finish.

After weathering a long, cold winter of campaigning, Canadian socialits are marching hundreds of frozen miles to their leadership spawning ground. There, seven aspiring leaders will hatch, but only one will survive to adulthood – leading the social democratic cause for the next four years as the “Dippers” head back to the sea to replenish their resources. They will return in three years, when the new leader will try to win a new nestkng ground in the Prime Minister’s of ttoice.

Penguin jokes aside, the New Democratic Party of Canada really is picking a new leader in Toronto, where seven candidates will make their pitch to the party convention today. Tomorrow, one of those candidates will be voted leader of the party – and that’s important for the U.S.

Canada is our largest trading partner, and this election will determine whether the NDP will be a legitimate threat to form government in the years to come. If they make the right choice, the protectionist, anti-NAFTA NDP could take power for the first time in history – and that could have a major effect on the economy in both countries. If they make the wrong choice, polls show that they could fall from their new perch as Canada’s second party and slip into third behind the Liberal Party.

Most people think that they will make the “right move” politically by electing Thomas Mulcair – their top man in Quebec and a major engineer of the NDP’s miraculous 2011 rise from 1 parliamentary seat in Quebec to 59. However, many in the party’s left wing old guard are terrified of the more centrist Mulcair – leaving a small opening for the candidates Peggy Nash, Paul Dewar, and Nathan Cullen (and yes, Canadian readers, I am leaving early front runner Brian Topp off the “viable list” … frankly I think Niki Ashton has a better shot at being leader than Brian at this point)

11:59: Just so this post has a proper ending, Romney pulled it out in Ohio – but not by much. He escaped a major catastrophe by the skin of his teeth and had to settle for a minor one. Santorum won by surprisingly large margins in Tennessee and North Dakota – and obviously pulled down Oklahoma as expected. Romney did win Massachusetts, Vermont, Idaho, and Virginia – and may yet add Alaska, which is not reporting yet. Gingrich won his home state and thereby stayed above his self-appointed dropout threshold, but I think we’re going to see a lot of calls for him to get out tomorrow. Next, the race heads South as we swing through Kansas, Alabama, Mississippi, and back through Missouri for their second turn in the spotlight (this one will actually count). That is a really hard stretch for Romney, especially if the bottom falls out of Gingrich’s remaining support. Whatever side you’re on, tonight shows that this is going to be a long race.

10:32: Santorum still holding to that lead but the big counties are only 40% in and a lot of Santorum’s areas are finishing their counts. Romney wins Idaho, Santorum wins ND.

10:05: Romney closing fast in Ohio. Santorum’s official lead down to 1.5% and Romney’s internal people are telling the media they’re ahead.

9:53: Finally getting results from Cleveland and Cincy. Brace for impact.

9:25: Santorum is blowing out everybody in North Dakota with 4% in. He’s got 52%. Paul second with 21%. So he’s got at least 3. He’s also built up a 12,000 vote lead in Ohio, but still no non -absentee votes from Cleveland or Cincy.

9:13: Santorum has a 2% lead in Ohio. HOWEVER, Romney has a lot of votes in Cleveland and Cincinnati and both of those have only counted absentees.

8:28: Fox News says Ohio is 42-36 Romney with 7% in. Standard breakdown with Romney taking cities and Santorum taking the rural vote. Romney seems to be getting bigger margins in his areas than Santorum is in his.

8:14: Early Tennesee results are really positive for Santorum but it’s less than 1% in. Still, he’s doing well in rural TN. Romney up 40-37 in OH, also less than 1% counted. Also, Paul did NOT get 91% in Salem City, VA with 100% in  - must’ve been a glitch or something. Romney actually won there.

7:52: Salem City County, VA does NOT like Mitt Romney. 91.8% for Ron Paul with 100% counted.

7:41: Ron Paul has 43% in Virginia as a pure anti-Romney protest. Nice to know that the base is consolidating behind Mitt…*snicker*

7:17: Welcome to the biggest night of the presidential primary calendar. The race for the GOP nomination may end tonight…or not. I’m not hazarding predictions for the close states tonight (I have a few guesses but not ready to call it), but I am excited to see how it plays out. For those keeping score at home: here’s a quick rundown of what to watch for as results come in from Ohio, Tennessee, Georgia, Idaho, Massachusetts, Vermont, Oklahoma, Virginia, North Dakota, and Alaska.

Barring surprises, there are really only two states that matter – Ohio and Tennessee. Both are big and both are close. Ohio is a two way battle between Romney and Santorum. Santorum lost a big lead the after he lost Michigan, but the two are still close to even – and Santorum should have a big edge among absentee voters (which is the opposite of the Michigan scenario). Tennessee could be even uglier – the polls show a three way tie between Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich. Most of the rest are supposedly foregone conclusions.  Romney will win Idaho, Massacusetts, and Vermont in a rout. Santorum should win Oklahoma easily, and Gingrich will win his home state of Georgia. Romney gets a win with an asterisk in Virginia because Santorum and Newt aren’t on the ballot. Lastly you have Alaska and North Dakota, neither has been polled because they are so small – so we may or may not have some action there. I’ve seen them penciled in for Romney (a good guess, particularly for Alaska), but that’s mostly just assumption based on national numbers. Ron Paul could be strong in both, as they are small caucus states. Paul’s supposed ability to hijack caucuses has so far fail to materialize, but Alaska had a huge Ron Paul vote in 2008, so it may be his best shot at winning something this year. North Dakota is also culturally similar to it’s neighbor Minnesota, so I’ve heard speculation that it may be kind to Santorum. We’ll just have to wait and see.

Also – for the sake of full disclosure – I am also watching the first night of American Idol…so I will not be held liable for any random comments I make about that show.

I don’t do this very often, but I don’t generally suffer people who insult my friends – so I feel compelled to say a few words regarding Bob McConnell. Bob ran a good race for Congress in 2010, overperformed expectations by a mile, and came tantalizingly close to knocking off establishment favorite Scott Tipton in the GOP primary. I’m incredibly proud to have been a part of his campaign, and while we may have lost the race, I gained two great friends in Bob and his wife Phyllis. Unfortunately, many of the wounds from that race never healed – Bob has sadly left the Republican Party as a result of the treatment he received from the party apparatus, and apparently some of the people who opposed him are still publishing absurdist attacks on his character. This brings me to why I am writing today against a screed put up at “Colorado Peak Politics” asserting that Bob is somehow using independent congressional candidate Tisha Casida a ”puppet” in some sort of nefarious plot against Tipton. This is rubbish – Bob is supporting Tisha Casida in a very public effort to take out Tipton, and last time I checked that’s 100% ethical.

I count Bob as a friend and I can tell you for a fact that he’s not into puppetry or other political machinations – he hates that crap.  The man is nothing if not a straight shooter, and he’s got an almost Breitbartian spirit about him. Ergo, he’s more than happy to punch his enemies in the face, but he doesn’t stab them in the back. Yes, he has endorsed Ms. Casida for Congress and is actively promoting her insurgent campaign, which is not at all surprising coming from him – but he had nothing to do with recruiting her to run. I know because I’ve emailed with Bob and Phyllis about Casida on several occasions and remember when they were first getting to know her.

Let me be very clear, I do not support Ms. Casida’s bid for Congress. For one, I’m a loyal Republican in all but the most extreme circumstances. Secondly, while Casida seems like a genuinely nice person,  I have some severe disagreements with her platform. I plan on supporting the Republican nominee in this race, and right now I have no reason to believe that nominee will be anyone other than Congressman Scott Tipton. However, I will not stand by while the people at Colorado Peak Politics impugn the character of a deeply honest and altruistic man who got involved in politics because he cared about the country (and in return for his altruism was run out of politics on a rail by the party bigwigs – whom he rightly scared the living daylights out of). This sort of gutter politics is the primary reason that most people like Bob stay away from political life in the first place, and it’s got to stop.

You can say a lot of things about Bob McConnell, but one thing you cannot call him is a schemer or a back room deal-cutter. If Bob ever did find himself in a smoke-filled room, watching politicos sip Scotch as they plotted a coup, he’d probably start flipping over tables and breaking glasses in a fit of righteous indignation.

I’d hate to tarnish Bob’s cowboy credentials with cheesy science fiction references - but to paraphrase Firefly’s Captain Malcolm Reynolds - if Bob McConnell ever wanted to kill you, you’d be awake, you’d be facing him, and you’d be armed. Enough said.

I can’t claim to have known or worked with the late great Andrew Breitbart – I met him once, saw him speak multiple times, and once (through intermediaries) managed to get him to post a video of a candidate I was promoting. That might be a little more than most people, but it ain’t much. Still, the man helped shape the Internet political world, and without that world I never would have achieved what I’ve achieved in my life. So, as a product of the blogosphere, I guess you could say that I am one of many “children of Breitbart”.

Most people got to know Breitbart’s name in the last few years as he became a media figure – but that really doesn’t get at the depth of his influence. Long before Wiener-gate or the ACORN-videos, Brietbart got his start as Matt Drudge’s sidekick in the 1990s. He helped build the Drudge Report into what it is today, and that site changed the way conservatives relate to the Internet. After that, he was one of the original brains behind Huffington Post – a site that changes how LEFTISTS relate to the the Internet and arguably replaced DailyKos as the leading left wing voice online. Andrew Breitbart was one of the leading behind-the-scenes masterminds of online political reporting as we know it today, and without his influence, I would bet that very few of the current conservative news outlets would be around today. Even sites unconnected with Breitbart – places like like HotAir and The Daily Caller – show Breitbart fingerprints in that they were influenced by the designs and strategies of Drudge and HuffPo.  Then, Breitbart made his second mark, moving out of the shadows to pioneer new ways of citizen investigative journalism through his network of “Big” sites, and in the process exposing the world the the eccentric personality and tactics that made him a conservative superstar and a hate figure to the left.

What made him polarizing was that – firstly - he made no bones about his goals. He wanted to rip the American left off it’s self-constructed pedestal and expose it for what he thought it was: a shallow, hate-based, intellectually baseless ideology that labelled any dissenter as racist and treated African-Americans like intellectual plantation slaves. You can quibble with that definition, but that’s genuinely what Breitbart thought he was dealing with - and when you’re dealing with something that evil, you don’t try to contain it, you go after it with a chainsaw before it kills somebody. Breitbart both went after it and bluntly told anyone who would listen WHY he was going after it – and frankly his arguments were both devastating and persuasive.

Secondly, people hated him because he knew what he was doing and got results. He was an incredibly shrewd and aggressive tactician, and in just a few years of public work he took down both ACORN and Anthony Weiner. He also got a long way toward remaking the news business as he thought it should operate.

The most common critique of Breitbart’s investigative antics is that they were biased and hence couldn’t be called journalism. Breitbart scoffed at this criticism and openly embraced his biased point of view, because in his mind, the claim of ”unbiased” reporting by the media was a cancer on the discourse. No one is truly unbiased, and to Andrew Breitbart, claiming one’s own biases as “objective news” was the height of hypocrisy. If he were running the world, we’d be getting our news from multiple outlets who openly embrace their bias – left, right, or otherwise – so that people got full disclosure with all of their information. Guess what, thanks to him we now live in that world - largely because he helped build BOTH the primary right-wing out-let (Drudge) AND the primary left-wing outlet (HuffPo). Then the “Big” sites took it to another level by adding the element of investigative journalism, a model which has since been copied (and professionalized) by the Daily Caller. The old ”unbiased” media may still exist, but most people realize that the emperor has no clothes, and we are growing progressively closer to Breitbart’s dream of a world where all news comes with open disclosure of the author’s bias. THAT may have been his greatest achievement.

You can say what you want about Breitbart – and if you hate his guts he’d probably retweet you - but at least approach the man for what he was. First, he was a media visionary who impacted how you consume news – whether you get it from rightist or leftist sources, thank Breitbart for the fact that those sources exist. Second, he was a patriot who was motivated entirely by the idea of combating racism. Anyone who asked Breitbart what drove him to do what he did got the same answer – he was appalled by the way leftists treated African-Americans, and equally appalled by the blanket use of the racist label to eliminate voices who wanted a colorblind society. At his most base level, Andrew Breitbart was an anti-racist who wanted to stop an ideology that demeaned and insulted black people (and whites of good faith). Disagree with that perception of leftism if you want, but the basic motivation behind it is among the most noble goals that a human being can have.

Rest in peace, Andrew. You will be sorely missed.

10:16: Santorum is giving an amazing speech. Too bad it’s a concession.

9:57: So Romney is up about 40-36. Probably about where it’s going to end up, maybe a little more widening.

9:32: Looking at the breakdowns here and I’m not seeing where Santorum finds 10,000 votes. Romney is KILLING him in Detroit (including suburbs/exurbs), and has some rural counties up North. Santorum is winning big in some areas (Grand Rapids) but not as big as he needs to to swing against the big population centers.

9:23: 25% done. Romney’s up by 3%. Interesting footnote in that Romney’s got about a 10,000 vote lead – he’s leading by 6,000 in Detroit and 2,000 in Ann Arbor. Rest of the state is pretty much balancing out.

9:10: Alright, now we’ve got some action. 15% in, Romney has opened up a 3% lead.

8:57: Romney doing really well in Wayne County (Detroit), and winning a few counties in the Northeast corner of the state.

8:39: Pretty much a dead tie in Michigan with 3% in Looks like Romney’s results are better closer to Detroit, Santorum wins more as you move North. Politico’s livestream saying Romney’s people think they have a widening lead in exit polls. We’ll see if they’re right.

8:28 PM: Well here goes nothing. Not hearing much yet, although people are saying exit polls look good for Romney in Michigan tonight. Time will tell.

If you’ve been watching the Australian mess, you should know that ex-Prime Minister Kevin Rudd gets his shot at deposing current PM Julia Gillard as Labor Party leader on “Monday at 10:00 AM”. However, if you don’t do time conversions, I would remind you that 10:00 AM on Monday in Canberra is 6:00 PM on Sunday in Washington, DC. Hence, Australophiles here in the states are hereby reminded to synchronize their watches. RUDDMAS IS UPON US!

It’s highly unlikely that Rudd will win, but this is likely merely the first act of a political crisis that many people think will ultimately cost Gillard her job. I may try to put up a few blogs and tweets - along with the Oscars, which at about the same time, but I’ll be away from my computer, so it may not be wall to wall coverage (granted, I’m not sure I have any readers interested in wall to wall Australia coverage, so maybe it’s a good thing that I cant!)

If you don’t watch any other foreign political story this year – watch what happens in Australia next week. It’s going to be hilarious. The leftist Labor Party government is set to self-immolate, as it’s two most powerful leaders are turning turn on each other and shredding their credibility in the process. There may be a new Prime Minister in a few days, but the person who REALLY benefits from this is conservative Opposition Leader Tony Abbott – who is going to wallop Labor in an election if the infighting keeps up.

For those who don’t know Australia, here’s the rundown. Labor Prime Minister Julia Gillard got her job two years ago, when party bosses decided that her predecessor, Kevin Rudd, was about to lose an election to Abbott. So, they drafted Gillard – then Rudd’s deputy – to knife him in the back by ousting him as Labor Party leader (in Australia, the Prime Minister is the leader of the largest party in Parliament, so if his party’s Members of Parliament oust him as party leader, he loses the PM job to the new leader.) However, instead of quitting politics, Rudd stuck around, positioning himself as Foreign Minister in Gillard’s government and quietly building support to take back his old job.

Two years later, Gillard is now the unpopular Prime Minister, and Rudd is looking to knife her in the back the same as she did to him – causing a total media circus in the process.  But that’s just the start of it. To make matters more ridiculous, somebody threw a Molotov cocktail onto the speculation by leaking an expletive-filled outtake reel of then-PM Rudd trying to record a taped message in Chinese (which he speaks, but apparently not well enough to avoid stumbling over himself and dropping f-bombs). Apparently, the idea was to embarrass Rudd and remind the party of why they dumped him. Of course, a lot of people think this leak came from Gillard’s people, but she denies it, and franky I wouldn’t be surprised if Rudd did it to himelf. It sets him up perfectly as a victim, right before he goes after Gillard.

So, who’s going to win? Who knows?

Rudd is highly unpopular among many Labor Members of Parliament – who he ruled with an iron grip as PM, and who now speak of him the same way GOP congressmen talk about Newt Gingrich. Many Labor MP’s are so anti-Rudd that the media is having to repeat their quotes using the words “blank” or “blanking”, and they’ve been very clear that they HATED working under the man. Yet, somehow, he seems to have gotten a sizable chunk of the caucus behind him, somewhere between 30% and 45% according to reports and media estimations (although Gillard’s people say he has less). That may or many not be enough to get Rudd his job back – but losing the support of a third of her members may discredit Prime Minister Gillard and force the election of a compromise candidate as the new Prime Minister. In fact, the list of potential compromise candidates is getting a lot of attention in the Aussie media.

I’ve just scratched the surface of all the crazy intrigue surrounding this civil war – and I’ll probably be tracking it closely. But for now, just keep one eye on Oz, and expect things to blow up in about a week.