It is perhaps fitting that today on Earth Day, new polling released by the news group CM& in Colombia confirms the continuing upward trend for Antanas Mockus, the candidate of the Partido Verde, the Colombian Green party.

The polling points to a statistical tie between Juan Manuel Santos of the officialist pro-Uribe party and Mockus in the first round election now just 38 days away. Santos now commands a one point lead, 35 to 34 percent, well within the margin of error. Noemí Sanín, the Conservative party standard bearer, placed third with just 12 percent down seven points in the last two weeks. Mockus, on the other hand, has surged from nine percent just a month ago and gaining 12 points in the last two weeks alone. All other candidates polled in low single digits.

With no candidate securing the 50 percent plus 1 required to claim the presidency in the first round, a second round run-off would be held on June 20th. The CM& poll indicates that in a second round Mockus, the son of Lithuanian immigrants and the two time former progressive  mayor of Bogotá, would comfortably beat Santos, a scion of one of Colombia's most powerful families and a former Defense Minister in the Uribe Administration, 50 percent to 44 percent.

Should Mockus prevail, it would be the first time that a Green party anywhere in the world has taken power. That in itself is remarkable but consider that the Partido Verde was formed only in October of last year. Its rise has been meteoric and it is transforming Colombian politics. While Colombian elections have long been raucous and colourful, the Greens are breaking new ground running a people-powered campaign with a "I'm voting for Antanas, ask me why" convert a friend program and holding campaign rallies on bicycles.

Other developments include a lawsuit by Colombians living abroad to re-open the voter registeration period. Colombians in Colombia can register to vote up to 12 days prior to the May 30th election but Colombians living abroad were required to register by December 31, 2009 before the all the full field was even selected. Only some 400,000 of the 4.5 millions Colombians living abroad have registered. The legal challenge began by Colombians using the social network Facebook. While the challenge is a grassroots effort, it has gained the support of the Mockus campaign.

The use of Facebook by the Greens is also something to behold and certainly unprecedented in Colombian politics. A month ago the Partido Verde page had 30,000 fans, today it has over 320,000. Beyond the official page, other Facebook groups are being created seemingly daily to support the Mockus candidacy.

As I reflect on this election, I'll say this. I'll turn 50 this year and I have voted in every election since turning 18. I have voted for candidates that I believe in but those never seem to win and I have voted for candidates who I supported but who don't necessarily share the totality of my values. I have twice voted for Alvaro Uribe believing that defeating the FARC was the country's most urgent necessity. I am appreciative of what Uribe has accomplished on the security front but I am also appalled by the lapses. When the Colombian army lures innocent young men to their deaths in order to claim a bounty for passing them off as FARC guerrillas, that's unacceptable. When the Colombian state intercepts the private communications of citizens, that's unacceptable. When the Colombian state turns a blind eye to paramilitarism and corruption, that's unacceptable. When 2.5 million Colombians become refugees in their own country, that's unacceptable. When another million Colombians are forced to live in exile, that's unacceptable. When in the past decade Colombia's economic success failed to close the social inequality gap, that's unacceptable. It is beyond gratifying that so many other Colombians share these views.

If Mockus does win, I think I am liable to die from a heart attack in shock of actually for once having a candidate I totally believe in win. It's the most amazing feeling in the world to see one's country grab a historic moment and run with it. I've never prouder of being a Colombian than I am now and I am thankful that I have lived this long to see the country come of age and embrace progressive values so wholeheartedly and with such enthusiasm.

I will have a profile of Antanas Mockus later in the week. He really is something special.

I have written a bit on what I call "progressive populism" -- the trend we have seen in the country that, like its conservative cousin, comes from a deeply seated anti-elite and anti-establishment sentiment, but which is unique in that its manifestations are less anti-government than opposed to powerful interests. As seen in Oregon earlier this year, this trend led to the first income tax increase approved by voters in 80 years, one directed at the wealthy and at corporations. Now word comes from SurveyUSA, via Swing State Project, that voters in Washington are exhibiting the same kind of progressive populism in a strong way:

A proposed initiative would create an income tax in Washington state on people making $200,000 per year and on couples making twice that. It would also cut the state's portion of the property tax by 20%, and end the business and occupation tax for small businesses. Do you support? Or do you oppose? This proposed initiative?

Support: 66 percent
Oppose: 27 percent

This measure, which would increase revenue while not raising taxes on the middle class, earns strong support across the board from the Washington electorate -- not only from Democrats (75 percent of whom support the initiative) but also from Independents (63 percent support) and even Republicans (57 percent support). Remarkably, the initiative draws support even from self-described Conservatives, who support the measure by a 50 percent to 45 percent margin.

I have said it before -- including in the halls of the West Wing: Progressive populism works. If the Democrats hope to be tap into some of the clear unhappiness of the electorate, rather than letting that discontent sweep them out of office, they would be well served to read these numbers and learn that while voters are definitively in an anti-establishment mood, they are not necessarily in an anti-government one, and, what's more, their unease about the current economic climate might actually compel progressive, rather than conservative, change if framed effectively.

Today is the 40th anniversary of the first Earth Day. What are you doing to celebrate?

I spent last Saturday helping man the Repower America booth at Earth Day Omaha, an amazing celebration in Elmwood Park with dozens of great booths, amazing live music (folk, rock, and Tuvan throat singers!), and literally thousands of people roaming around. On Tuesday, I phone-banked for Repower's Clean Energy Revolution campaign to encourage Omahans to call Senator Ben Nelson and ask him to support clean energy and climate legislation. Today, the day itself, I'm making my own call to Senator Nelson's office, taking my glass bottles to the recycles, going for a hike in Iowa's Hitchcock Nature Center, and throwing a cloth bag in the car for a stop at the grocery store on the way home.

None of us are perfect. I'm going to said nature preserve alone in a van that gets 22mpg, I'm taking that cloth bag to a chain grocery store rather than a farmer's market, and I had brauts for launch. But we can all take a few steps, and finding a short trail near home and calling your Senator are two such steps. The Sierra Club is also asking folks to take a pledge to take one of five other simple actions: biking/walking instead of driving, taking a reusable bag to the store, plant a tree, make an organic meal, or write a letter about a green issue. (Make the pledge and you're entered into a drawing to win a trip to Hawaii.)

Al Gore's Repower America has set up a Senate hotline where you can call, enter in your zip code, and be connected to one of your Senators: 1-877-55-REPOWER (or 1-877-557-3769). Which Senator are you calling, and what else are you doing for Earth Day?

There's more...

I've never written much about PA-Sen because, unlike most of the Netroots, I've been inclined to support Arlen Specter. No more.

Specter has added his name to those of Johnny Isaakson and the Swift Boat Veterans for "Truth." He went lower than low this week, airing a new ad that attacks primary opponent Rep. Joe Sestak's service as a retired three-star Admiral.

Like many veterans, Dr. Sestak (he's also got a PhD) is too modest to list his decorations on either his Congressional webpage or his campaign biography, but per Wikipedia he has earned the Defense Distinguished Service Medal, the Defense Superior Service Medal, two Legion of Merit awards, two Meritorious Service Medals, the Joint Service Commendation Medal, three Navy Commendation Medals, and the Navy Achievement Medal. According to Specter, however, the only thing you need to know about Sestak's Naval career is that he was removed from one of his assignments for creating a "poor command climate." That claim only gets a couple seconds' mention in Specter's new ad, but it's also the very first thing in the ad and is accompanied by your stock grainy photo, ripped headline, and spooky voice. I'm not going to dignify the disgraceful spot by posting it here, but you can watch it on YouTube.

I am shocked that Specter would be stupid enough to think he could get away with this kind of unpatriotic smear campaign in a Democratic primary. I was supporting Specter, but now I'm going to donate $20 to Admiral Sestak's campaign.

Credit to Vote Vets for bringing this shameful attack on a dedicated American serviceman to my attention via a press release posted on their Facebook page.

The largest progressive group of veterans in America with over 100,000 members, VoteVets.org PAC, today slammed Arlen Specter for his latest ad attacking Congressman Joseph Sestak's service to America in the Navy, and called on Specter to prove his charges, or pull the ad.

Jon Soltz, Iraq War veteran, graduate student at the University of Pittsburgh, and Chairman of VoteVets.org said, "This ad is even beneath Snarlin' Arlen Specter, and he should be ashamed of himself for attacking a man who spent most of his adult life in military service.  It's the kind of low, slimy swift-boat tactics used by the extreme right-wing against veterans, and it's shameful that Specter would adopt those right-wing tactics." 

"This ad makes charges about Sestak's service based on unattributed hearsay contained in a single article, that offers no evidence in support of the charge. Baselessly attacking a veteran's service has no place in our politics, or our nation. Specter should pull this ad immediately," he added.

Josh Marshall writes:

So on the one side you have Harry Reid, a key architect of comprehensive Health Care Reform, the product of decades of activism, in all its messiness and policy complexity.

And on the other you have Sue Lowden, who thinks bartering livestock and other commodities for health care services from doctors is a way to rein in spiraling health care costs. (If you think that's an exaggeration, take a minute and watch this video.) There's no end of comedic possibilities thinking through the logistical and logical difficulties of managing co-pays and long-term care and drug costs in chickens and other barter payment. But step back and give it a serious look and ... well, this is this woman's take on confronting medical inflation. It's funny and also sad. But as a contrast it's stark and painful.

There is no doubt in my mind that this is going to be a tough race for the Majority Leader, Harry Reid. Any way you slice it, the odds aren't great that he wins another term in the Senate. Anti-incumbent sentiments are running deep within the electorate this cycle, and Reid is hands down the most prominent incumbent in the country this year to be facing a competitive race.

And yet. Sue Lowden, the candidate who was supposed to be it for the Republicans, has made herself a laughingstock in just a few short days. When I first heard her talking about bartering for healthcare, I assumed that she had just mistaken the word for bargaining down prices, which seems to be one of the positions taken by Republicans these days (not all that dissimilarly to how Democratic Congressman Hank Johnson said Guam might physically tip over when he presumably meant that it would hit its metaphorical tipping point). But, as noted by JMM, Lowden appears to be fully embracing the idea that Americans should be bringing chickens to their doctors. 

Voters can stomach a lot of statements from candidates (one need not think too long to remember instances of candidates getting elected despite having said some pretty remarkable things). But this might be one of those comments -- especially when repeated by the candidate herself -- that makes voters think twice. At the least, Lowden's bartering position takes the Nevada Senate race out of the realm of campaigns solely about the incumbent to one in which voters will actually consider the plusses and minuses of both candidates -- one who delivered on the promise of healthcare for 31 million Americans while reducing the long-term deficit by more than $1 trillion, the other a candidate who thinks Americans should pay their doctors in livestock. And that simply is not good news for Lowden and the Republicans.

The second debate is coming up today, focused on foreign policy, here's a good overview. The neocons here in the states have awoken to the possibility that Nick Clegg is destroying their dreams of a conservative re-birth in the UK.

See the neocon melt-down on dispay at NRO, on The Weekly Standard, and Am Con Mag. Andrew Sullivan with the point that "Clegg is pretty much in the Euro-mainstream on Israel. Which is to say: about as anti-neocon as you can get." He wonders if Clegg couldn't win this outright the way things are moving. Can that happen?  Depends on what  "outright" means. A majority of the vote?  Yes, but of Parliament?  Very unlikely.

As for the Tories themselves, they enter full denial, and point toward Labour as the loser. This is a funny sort of opps article, about some Lib Dem debate notes that were left in a cab. Another broadside toward Clegg, who takes it in stride. They've ignored the Lib Dems forever, now attack attack attack!!! Should be a very interesting debate today; time for a bit of pundit advice. The debate is at 8 pm in the UK, so 3 pm est.

By now you’ve no doubt heard of Jack Conway. He’s the young, articulate, and progressive Attorney General for the state of Kentucky, and he’s running for Senate in the Democratic primary against Dan Mongiardo, the state’s conservative, allegedly corrupt Lieutenant Governor. The Conway campaign has taken off in recent weeks, going from 18 points down to 3 points down externally and ahead internally.

Conway, part of the MyDD “Going on Offense” Act Blue page, was able to give us an interview last Friday afternoon. He promised 15 minutes and graciously talked to me for 30. Our interview was pretty wide ranging. He began with a Howard Dean-esque quote, stating that it's time Democrats act like Democrats. We talked about electoral strategy, Wall Street reform, filibuster reform, health insurance reform, energy and climate legislation, coal mining, his successful record as Attorney General, and more. Here are some key quotes:

On LGBT rights: “Admiral Mullen had it right when he said to Congress that it’s wrong to ask someone to lie about who they are to defend their country…  I look forward to casting a vote to end Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

On health care and the tea parties: “I try to be responsible here. The folks in the tea party crowd wanted Attorneys General to file a lawsuit without merit. I thought traditionally Republicans loved to rail against meritless lawsuits… I sort of say to them, look, don’t take my word for it; take the word of Ronald Reagan’s former Solicitor General, who said his copy of the Constitution doesn’t contain the right not to be insured.”

On mining reform: “It seems like we’ve gotten into a system where the ability of the mining companies to [delay and appeal] and fail to take remedial action outweighs the safety of the miner… My concern is that some of these mines put profits before the safety of the miners, and when that happens, inspectors need to have the ability to shut the mine down.”

On Netroots support: “You are keeping some of the wind at our backs right now, and a Senate seat is a Senate seat is a Senate seat, whether it’s in New Hampshire or Missouri or Kentucky… It’s the work of volunteers and the Netroots that sustains us, and we’re going to win this thing.”

The full interview is below the fold. I consider Jack Conway one of the brightest and most articulate politicians I’ve ever spoken with, right up there with Barack Obama and Cory Booker, so I hope you’ll read the full interview and consider supporting his campaign.

There's more...

I wanted to make sure word got out on this competition.

Democracy for America is again organizing the DFA Netroots Nation Scholarship Competition for Netroots Nation 2010.

I was lucky enough to attend NN'09 as a Democracy for America Scholar, and I'm still learning from the experience!

In addition to making it possible for me to attend Netroots Nation in the first place and getting to meet the people who are Democracy for America, as DFA Scholars we were well taken care of. From the latest information on fun and "extra-curricular" events to a behind-the-scenes look at convention activity, it was a one of a kind opportunity.

I encourage everyone interested in attending NN'10 in Las Vegas to apply.

From the scholarship application page:

We're looking to send 40 progressive activists to Netroots Nation with compelling stories, who are active online and offline, and who will thrive from their Netroots Nation experience. Our goal is to find people who will expand the Netroots Nation community with fresh ideas and energy.

DFA members and netroots activists from across the country will have the opportunity to help choose who we send to the convention by voting for those candidates they think offer the most compelling stories. Scholars will be chosen in three rounds and the top three applicants with the most votes in each round will automatically win a scholarship. So, if you're applying, be sure to get out the vote for yourself by asking your family, friends and coworkers to vote for you in this year's competition. All other scholarships will be chosen at the discretion of the selection committee. The selection committee is comprised of the Executive Director of DFA, the Executive Director of Netroots Nation, former DFA Netroots Nation Scholars, and several specifically selected prominent bloggers.

A DFA scholarship covers the cost of one all-access pass to Netroots Nation 2010 and hotel accomodations for one. The deadline is April 30th, so submit your application soon!

Earlier this year, the conservative majority on the Supreme Court handed down the Citizens United decision wiping out restrictions on corporate expenditures in American elections -- a decision that could open up the door to foreign money flowing into campaigns in this country. As it turns out, according to a Quinnipiac poll out today, voters are not at all happy with the decision.

Voters disapprove 79 - 14 percent of the Supreme Court's January ruling removing limits on the amount corporations and unions could spend attacking or boosting political candidates, with consistently strong opposition across the political spectrum.

These numbers largely jibe with data released earlier this year by Pew, which found 68 percent of Americans disapproving of the decision, while just 17 percent approved. With margins like these, it is not out of the realm of possibility that a constitutional amendment seeking to overturn the decision is out of the question.

But looking more broadly, it is interesting to see the damage the decision has inflicted on the Court. Just last summer, Quinnipiac found the Supreme Court to have a +40 net approval rating, with 62 percent of the country rating the high court positively and just 22 percent rating it negatively. Today, however, the Court's rating has fallen dramatically to just +16 (49 percent approve / 33 percent disapprove) -- a statistically significant fall for the institution. It turns out that conservative judicial activism isn't actually popular with Americans.

Enjoy.

• Independent film and activism meet in jamesboyce's 3-2-1 and the Social Change Film Forum at Harvard.


• Inoljt is Assessing the National Mood: A Special Election in Florida and its Implications.


• Heather Taylor-Miesle NRDC Action Fund has a shocker: Sarah Palin's Right: You Should Run on Energy.


• Kendrickmeek follows that with Six Things You Need to Know About This Election (FL-Sen).


• Condemnation of Arizona's anti-immigrant bill goes national. (Restore Fairness)


• The Media Consortium's Weekly Audit: How Deregulation Fueled Goldman Sachs’ Scam.


• And an "honorable rescue mention" to this very brief, but thoughtful observation from snolan: picking the anniversary of the biggest domestic terrorism act as your day to march for gun rights should exclude you from being able to ever own a gun.

What else is out there?