|
="Willets Point":1uzbppp7]I have this feeling that the first black president and/or first woman president will be a Republican.[:1uzbppp7]
Condi Rice could kill both those birds with one stone.
And if Oprah Winfrey were to run, I have to wonder if anyone could beat her.
|
Nymr83
Jan 25 2007 09:12 AM
|
|
| ="sharpie":mhbc3qhg]Al Sharpton has also indicated that he will probably run. |
mhbc3qhg]
Is that the "we hate cops and wish to incite race riots" party?
|
metsmarathon
Jan 25 2007 09:17 AM
|
|
if hillary runs, i fear it will only lead to rampant misogyny on my part.
i'd end up having to knock senseless any woman who claimed to consider hillary to be worthy of their vote because she's a woman. i'd start off by suggesting they imagine their reaction to my telling them that i was voting against her because she's a woman (and consequently for a man because he is a man), and then asking them for reasons why it is any different.
this will, of course, lead to me having no friends, particularly those who are women, except for my wife, who i think agrees with me.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 25 2007 09:19 AM
|
|
| ="sharpie":2feg1pu0]I agree about Hillary but not so sure about McCain. His tendency to lose his temper and alienate groups may be his undoing. I really don't have a good idea of who else would get that nomination, however. Giuliani is even more prickly and his pro-choice, anti-gun stance may kill him in the primaries. I don't know enough about how Brownback or Romney come off to assess them. |
2feg1pu0]
I'm not sure about McCain either, it's just where I'm putting my money. I think the Democratic electorate having lost two in a row, will have more tolerance for ideological impurity.
I guess Brownback is the ideological purest (fuckin' ugly term, isn't it?) guy in the Republican field, not having the flip-flopper tag that Romney has. He''s from the Kansas, and (I'm pretty sure) every Republican candidate since Dewey in 1948 has been from West of the Mississippi. His Catholicness is what it is, but maybe it broadens his base and is (perhaps?) less suspicious than Romney's Mormon-ness among the evangelical wing.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 25 2007 09:25 AM
|
|
I'm pretty confident that whichever party wins, our next president will be better than our current one.
Brownback may be the exception to that though. He's probably the candidate I'd least like to see win the White House.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 25 2007 09:27 AM
|
|
Take a long. hard. look. at Tancredo.
Sharpton also, while you're at it.
I'm voting for Anna Benson. She's a woman.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 25 2007 09:30 AM
|
|
I admit I know nothing about Tancredo. I'll take a look at him.
I guess I'm not taking Sharpton seriously as a candidate. If he ever started getting any traction, Tawana Brawley would be his Willie Horton.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 25 2007 09:39 AM
|
|
Tancredo is the John Rocker of this election.
He pretty much bears a huge responsibility for the immigration reform agenda, and he's dragged along a lot of the house as well as the administration by threatening that he has an anti-immigration block in all their districts ready to toss them out. He's perhaps undone 10-15 years of the party's progress with Hispanic-American voters.
He's running as a single-issue candidate and we'll all get a chance to see how repugnant he can be before he bows out and claims victory by forcing immigration reform onto the platform of whomever comes out on top.
|
Johnny Dickshot
Jan 25 2007 09:50 AM
|
|
Plus he represents a state that's made great strides becoming the national capital of gruesome shoot-em-ups and large shopping malls.
|
Willets Point
Jan 25 2007 10:20 AM
|
|
Has there been a gruesome shoot-em up inside a large shopping mall in Colorado? That sounds like the plot of an upcoming Bruce Willis film.
|
TheOldMole
Jan 25 2007 10:34 AM
|
|
There was one up here, in Kingston. Well, it wasn't exactly the Mall of America, and no one got killed.
|
metirish
Jan 25 2007 11:18 AM
|
|
I can find no proof of this but my landlord tells me that Frederick Douglass was the first and only Black President,he became president after Lincoln was killed because they couldn't find Andrew Johnson,he was President for only four hours..
I'm reading about Douglass and he certainly was a very interesting man.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 25 2007 11:22 AM
|
|
I think your landlord needs to start paying closer attention during Black History Month.
|
sharpie
Jan 25 2007 11:35 AM
|
|
| ]I can find no proof of this but my landlord tells me that Frederick Douglass was the first and only Black President,he became president after Lincoln was killed because they couldn't find Andrew Johnson,he was President for only four hours.. |
Not so. This from Wikipedia:
On the night of April 14, 1865, President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated at Ford's Theater in Washington, DC by John Wilkes Booth. Booth's original plan included targeting Vice President Johnson and Secretary of State William Seward, and toppling the United States government. Seward, several members of his family and a servant would be attacked and badly wounded by Lewis Powell in his home.
Johnson was unguarded and alone in his room at the Kirkwook Hotel in Washington, DC. His would-be assassin, George Atzerodt, rented the room directly above Johnson's. However, after getting drunk at the hotel saloon, Atzerodt decided against the attempt, and would end up wandering the streets of Washington before ending up at the house of a cousin in Germantown, MD, where he was captured. Atzerodt was hung along with fellow conspirators Mary Surratt, David Herold and Lewis Powell.
Johnson was sworn in as President of the United States on April 15, 1865, upon the death of Lincoln that morning. He was the first Vice President to succeed to the U.S. Presidency upon the assassination of a President and the third to succeed upon the death of a President.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 25 2007 12:18 PM
|
|
Would Seward have been third in line for the presidency? Today the Secretary of State is fourth, after the Vice President and the Speaker of the House, but maybe it was different then.
Prominent abolitionists are nowhere on the list, I don't think.
I should review the succession clause in the Constitution. I'm curious to see how many people would have to die simultaneously in order for me to become president.
|
metirish
Jan 25 2007 12:28 PM
|
|
My landlord tells me that Douglass was secertary of the interior back then,third in line .
|
Edgy DC
Jan 25 2007 12:47 PM
|
|
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_of_the_interior" target="blank">Another page</a> in that wikipeia thingie tells me John Palmer Usher was the Interior Secretary. I also doubt that the Interior Secretary would have been next in line, ahead of the Secretaries of War or the Treasury.
I don't know if your landlord is ready to hear it, but Douglass was a monumental fellow, and there's no need to inflate his legacy.
All you visiting DC, stop by the Frederick Douglas House sometime. Southeast gets too little of DC's tourism attention.
|
sharpie
Jan 25 2007 01:12 PM
|
|
Andrew Johnson ditched John Palmer Usher to go with James Harlan for Interior pretty quickly after he became President.
Frederick Douglass was one of our greatest Americans but never held a formal governmental post, much less President.
I'd like to hear Duncan Hunter or Tony Tancredo's position on all of this.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 25 2007 01:15 PM
|
|
I think Tancredo is on record as saying that slaves were willing to do the jobs that free people didn't want to do.
|
Willets Point
Jan 25 2007 01:20 PM
|
|
I love it when Crane Pool threads go on big ass tangents.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 25 2007 01:28 PM
|
|
| ="sharpie":3pbftho4]Frederick Douglass was one of our greatest Americans but never held a formal governmental post, much less President. |
3pbftho4]
Well, he had posts.--- consul-general to Haiti, chargé d'affaires for Saint Domingue --- but he certainly wasn't a cabinet Secretary.
|
metirish
Jan 25 2007 01:31 PM
|
|
Douglass gets props in Belfast......
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 25 2007 01:33 PM
|
|
They should add Johnny Stephenson to that mural.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 25 2007 01:36 PM
|
|
I'm going to disagree with Frederick on both halves of that statement, but I imagine the case was pretty strong in his own time.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 25 2007 01:39 PM
|
|
Well, he did make that quote before the Holocaust. But even at that point, there were many contenders for most oppressed religion.
Blacks in America were pretty oppressed on account of race. I'd think Frederick Douglass would know a little about that.
Strange quote. I wonder when and why (and if) he really said that.
|
metirish
Jan 25 2007 02:00 PM
|
|
I wonder that too Yancy,he did live in Ireland for a time and became friends with Daniel O'Connell the great Irish Nationalist,himself a very interesting person.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_O%27Connell
|
Willets Point
Jan 25 2007 02:06 PM
|
|
O'Connell lost a lot of support from Irish-Americans for his abolitionist stance. He was a very admirable person.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 25 2007 02:12 PM
|
|
My guess is that the first half of the statement, at least in part, refers to the New York City Draft Riots, which are largely mis-named, as the anti-Goverment passion of many of the Irish immigrants quickly turned into an anti-Black massacre.
|
metirish
Jan 25 2007 02:21 PM
|
|
Douglass landed in Ireland at the start of the famine,1845,the draft riots were in July 1863.....could Douglass be talking about Irish slave masters?
I should edit this to say that Douglass could have siad that quote years after leaving Ireland and long after the riots.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 25 2007 02:37 PM
|
|
Yabbut, apparently, the statement comes from <a href="http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/index.asp?document=774" target="blank">this speech</a> in 1883.
|
metirish
Jan 25 2007 02:41 PM
|
|
Great find,thanks Edgy...
|
Nymr83
Jan 25 2007 03:44 PM
|
|
this thread will go off track many, many times between now and 2008, it look like the CPF has joined everyone else in getting an "early start" on the 2008 election.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 25 2007 08:49 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 25 2007 09:06 PM
|
|
Sure. The race always makes better copy than what they actually do. 110th Congress? First led by a woman? Bah. Let's see some blood.
<a href="http://www.gothamist.com/archives/2006/05/24/hillary_hates_m.php" target="blank">Remember</a>.
|
Willets Point
Jan 25 2007 09:02 PM
|
|
Looks like Mr. Met is grabbing his crotch as a gesture toward Sen. Clinton.
I guess this is a good time to point out Mr. Met's close friendship with the Secretary of State.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 30 2007 11:26 AM
|
|
President Bush was interviewed on NPR yesterday by Juan Williams. Here's what he said:
| ="George W. Bush":3qy8b4gu]"There is distrust in Washington. I am surprised, frankly, at the amount of distrust<br>that exists in this town. And I'm sorry it's the case, and I'll work hard to try to elevate it." |
3qy8b4gu]
I think he has! Nice job, Mr. President!
|
Johnny Dickshot
Jan 31 2007 02:14 PM
|
|
Biden. Dishes.
]
Biden Unbound: Lays Into
Clinton, Obama, Edwards
Loquacious Senator, Democratic Candidate on Hillary: ‘Four of 10 Is the Max You Can Get?’ Edwards ‘Doesn’t Know What He’s Talking About’
By Jason Horowitz
Senator Joseph Biden doesn’t think highly of the Iraq policies of some of the other Democrats who are running for President.
To hear him tell it, Hillary Clinton’s position is calibrated, confusing and “a very bad idea.â€
|
Edgy DC
Jan 31 2007 02:21 PM
|
|
Didn't his first candidacy get hampered by accusations that he plagiarized in law school?
|
metirish
Jan 31 2007 02:24 PM
|
|
I like Biden a lot,Ceasar Borja Jr.right now is putting them all to shame,he's a remarkable young man.
|
Frayed Knot
Jan 31 2007 02:25 PM
|
|
One of Biden's problems the last time he ran was that he gave a speech that turned out to have been lifted - almost word by word IIRC - from a British politician Neil (Kinnok?). And it didn't help that Kinnock was head of the out-of-power Labour Party at the time back in the pre-Blair era when that party still had more pronounced Socialist slant.
That long ago faux pas aside, Biden's entry leaps him to the top of my pile on the Dem side.
|
Johnny Dickshot
Jan 31 2007 02:42 PM
|
|
I remember a Newsweek factchecker calling our skool paper offices in 88 having been unable to confirm whether Biden actually won some award he said he'd won for being an outstanding history student. as I recall, whoever fielded that request was unable to confirm either.
Nonetheless, a Fightin' Blue Hen running for prez. Bigger nooz than Pierre duPont!
|
Edgy DC
Jan 31 2007 02:46 PM
|
|
Yeah, well, he may have to go through a Manhattan Jasper to get there.
No easy task.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 31 2007 02:52 PM
|
|
I think Biden's a good candidate. I just hope he is able to get traction in the race. If your name isn't Hillary or Barak, it might be hard to get the attention of voters in the Democratic primaries.
If he gets the nomination, Biden will be a lock to get those crucial Delaware electoral votes.
|
Johnny Dickshot
Jan 31 2007 03:00 PM
|
|
Those 3 votes were big becuase they usually indicate a bellwether -- tho I think that was untrue in the last 2 elections...
|
soupcan
Jan 31 2007 03:05 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 31 2007 03:06 PM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":2blncm0t]Didn't his first candidacy get hampered by accusations that he plagiarized in law school? |
2blncm0t]
Always the first thing that comes to mind when I hear his name.
And Johnny if I'm not mistaken - and I don't think I am - Biden's an Orangeman.
OE: Blue Hen it is. Syracuse Law grad.
|
Sandgnat
Jan 31 2007 03:05 PM
|
|
I thought Biden's campaing was derailed because he had a brain tumor. No?
He's not getting my vote. Among various other reasons, he voted in favor of giving illegal aliens social security benefits.
Is there anyone out there who can run who has any sort of common sense? Is that too much to ask?
|
soupcan
Jan 31 2007 03:07 PM
|
|
| ="Sandgnat":1j8xn8ly]I thought Biden's campaing was derailed because he had a brain tumor. No? |
1j8xn8ly]
You're thinking Paul Tsongas maybe?
|
Willets Point
Jan 31 2007 03:08 PM
|
|
Old joke:
| ]Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, Gary Hart, and Joe Biden are on a boat. It begins to sink. Carter immediately leaps to his feet and says, "Save the women and children!" Nixon replies, "Fuck the women and children." Hart says, "Have we got time?" and Biden says, "Have we got time?" |
|
Nymr83
Jan 31 2007 04:54 PM
|
|
I think Biden's plan is stupid, but I'd like to thank him for having one. Theres nothing worse than the clowns who criticize the president with no ideas of their own (other than the idea that saying "i hate bush" is good for their poll numbers)
|
Frayed Knot
Jan 31 2007 09:20 PM
|
|
="soupcan":138zc3vp]| ="Sandgnat":138zc3vp]I thought Biden's campaing was derailed because he had a brain tumor. No? |
138zc3vp]
You're thinking Paul Tsongas maybe? |
138zc3vp]
Or (Penn - R) Sen. Arlen Specter
Biden's only "head surgery" was the hair implants he had done years ago.
The plugs alone looked bad enough - espeically while it was still a work in progress - but the fact that the whole thing was an odd orange color certainly didn't help.
|
metirish
Jan 31 2007 09:22 PM
|
|
Joe Biden is in "trouble" over remarks he made about Obama recently,somthing along the lines of he's articulate,clean and well spoken...I can't find the vid but apparently is was all ove the net soon after Biden declared he was running.
|
Frayed Knot
Jan 31 2007 09:28 PM
|
|
See the Biden article above:
Mr. Biden is equally skeptical—albeit in a slightly more backhanded way—about Mr. Obama. “I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” he said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”
If he's going to get "in trouble" over that it's going to be strictly a media-inspired furor from Obama cheerleaders.
|
metirish
Jan 31 2007 09:33 PM
|
|
I agree FK,it was on every newscast I watched tonight...Biden had to address it after that.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 01 2007 04:48 AM
|
|
I don't follow this stuff too closely, but I think "articulate" is one of those red flag words.
White people are less likely to be called "articulate" because (to the bigot) they're expected to be. But when a black person is "articulate" it's something worth noting.
I've seen that applied to athletes a lot. I guess it's a weird sign of progress that it's now being applied to presidential candidates.
Biden should have known better than to use that word. He does have some 'splainin' to do.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 01 2007 06:06 AM
|
|
Parse it differently, and maybe stick a comma or a dash in there, and its less odious.
“I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American --- who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,â€
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 01 2007 06:17 AM
|
|
Maybe he meant clean-shaven.
Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton both have facial hair, which seems to be something of a taboo in presidential politics.
|
metirish
Feb 01 2007 06:35 AM
|
|
Well Obama is not nice-looking like our Lee....and I think I was wrong about it being in video format....
|
MFS62
Feb 01 2007 07:24 AM
|
|
In an "oops" statement, Biden said he meant it as a "fresh new face in politics".
Later
|
DocTee
Feb 01 2007 07:27 AM
|
|
| ]Maybe he meant clean-shaven.
Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton both have facial hair, which seems to be something of a taboo in presidential politics. |
Banal trivia in anticipation of President's Day:
Lincoln and TR were the only notable Presidents with facial hair. Gilded Age presidents-- Grant, Hayes, Garfield, Arthur, Cleveland, Harrison, and Cleveland again---all sported beards as if they were trying to remind voters of Lincoln, but they were essentially bearded failures.
Ah, I need to get out more.
|
metirish
Feb 01 2007 07:30 AM
|
|
Gore sported a full Grissly Adams after he got "beat",similar to the one Saddam sported when he got caught.
|
Frayed Knot
Feb 01 2007 07:46 AM
|
|
What Biden is trying to say is that the media have already declared the favorites based on purely superficial characteristics rather than issues and on that he is, of course, correct.
That CNN commentator Lou Dobbs has already declared Biden's candidacy dead on account of this "flap" pretty much plays into Biden's point IMO.
|
Nymr83
Feb 01 2007 07:52 AM
|
|
thats a good indication that Dobbs/CNN backs someone else and wants to trash Biden's candidacy.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 01 2007 07:52 AM
|
|
The gilded age presidents --- the ones between the Civil War and World War I --- fascinate me.
<ul><li>They were disproportionately fat, perhaps as a symbol of the nation's prosperity.</li>
<li>They were disproportionately Ohioans, and I can only speculate why that is.</li>
<li>They were several in a row veterans of the Civil War, and perhaps out of a grudge for England taking steps to recognize the Confederacy, relations with England suffered until the Great War.</li>
<li>They made it a tough time to be an Indian.</li></ul>We need us a fat midwestern poofy-mustached ineffectual but appealing isolationist president with a huge bathtub NOW!!!!. Bully!
|
metirish
Feb 01 2007 07:55 AM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":eegr6hcl]thats a good indication that Dobbs/CNN backs someone else and wants to trash Biden's candidacy. |
eegr6hcl]
I've noticed over the last year + that CNN has copied FOX News in that it has it's anchors give opinion rather than just report the news,Dobbs being the main man for that.
|
Frayed Knot
Feb 01 2007 08:00 AM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":2qqist74]thats a good indication that Dobbs/CNN backs someone else and wants to trash Biden's candidacy. |
2qqist74]
I'm not sure Dobbs is being that nefarious. To me it's more like he's showing how "prevailing wisdom" supports the notion that the candidate will be chosen on the basis of superficial "oops" moments (like the many who still believe that Dukakis lost solely because he looked silly in a tank) and that he's caught up in the competition to declare winners & losers 20-some months in advance.
|
Sandgnat
Feb 01 2007 08:04 AM
|
|
| ="Nymr83"]I think Biden's plan is stupid, but I'd like to thank him for having one. Theres nothing worse than the clowns who criticize the president with no ideas of their own (other than the idea that saying "i hate bush" is good for their poll numbers) |
HERE HERE!
|
Sandgnat
Feb 01 2007 08:10 AM
|
|
="Frayed Knot"]="soupcan"]| ="Sandgnat"]I thought Biden's campaing was derailed because he had a brain tumor. No? |
You're thinking Paul Tsongas maybe? |
Or (Penn - R) Sen. Arlen Specter
Biden's only "head surgery" was the hair implants he had done years ago.
The plugs alone looked bad enough - espeically while it was still a work in progress - but the fact that the whole thing was an odd orange color certainly didn't help. |
http://www.newszap.com/articles/2006/12 ... /dsn02.txt
| ]Sen. Biden, entering his 35th year in the Senate, has endured the questions about whether he would return to the chamber after major brain surgery.
In February 1988, the Delaware senator suffered two aneurysms that ultimately would keep him out of politics for seven months and fueled "all kinds of speculation whether I was alive, dead or a vegetable."
|
If Biden were elected in '08, that make two brain damaged Presidents in a row.
|
metirish
Feb 01 2007 08:29 AM
|
|
Biden certainly says some dumb things.....
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sM19YOqs7hU"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sM19YOqs7hU" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
|
Edgy DC
Feb 01 2007 08:38 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Feb 01 2007 10:09 AM
|
|
The problem with Dobbs is the self-fulfilling nature of such pronouncements. An opionion-maker declares "the people" won't accept this guy because his voice is pushy or he drives a Saab (although the opionion maker is above such superficialities), well then the alleged problem is exacerbated, because who wants to vote for a guy nobody else is going to vote for?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 01 2007 08:45 AM
|
|
Regarding irish's YouTube clip:
Holy crap. I've heard Biden speak intelligently back when I used to listen to Imus. But he sure can speak stupid, too. What was he thinking with that crack about 7-Eleven and Dunkin Donuts?
Good grief.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 01 2007 08:56 AM
|
|
What impressed me about Biden was seeing this fatigued outburst from him.
<blockquote>"There's a reason why we sign these treaties: To protect my son in the military. That's why we have these treaties -- so when Americans are captured, They Are Not Tortured."</blockquote>I went looking for that quote, and, in finding it, I remembered why I didn't like him. In response to Alberto Gonzales, who describes the provisions of the Geneva Convention as "quaint":
<blockquote>"I think he's a pretty solid guy...If you had said to me six months ago I can have Gonzales or Ashcroft, it wouldn't have been a hard choice."</blockquote>Now, I don't know if Biden's opinion came before or after Gonzales' statement (it's from a blog, and one that mis-spells Gonzales' name), but sometimes Biden strikes me as a guy with the courage of his convictions (he takes responsibility for his Iraq vote, speaks about it as "our" foreign policy blunder, and how "we" have ot fix it), but other times, not so much.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 01 2007 09:05 AM
|
|
All of this flap is throwing a smokescreen over the real story and that's that Huckabee is in, making him, I think, the first presidential candidate who has authored a diet book:
<img src="http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0446578061.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg">
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 01 2007 09:33 AM
|
|
Strange that Huckabee was born in the same town as Bill Clinton, and ended up also getting the gig as governor of Arkansas.
Is the White House next? Followed by some hot intern action and an impeachment?
|
Willets Point
Feb 01 2007 09:58 AM
|
|
Well, Clinton certainly never wrote a diet book. Or dieted.
|
iramets
Feb 01 2007 10:07 AM
|
|
What's Huckabee's stance on getting head from Jews?
|
soupcan
Feb 01 2007 10:51 AM
|
|
|
metirish
Feb 05 2007 12:27 PM
|
|
Great ,if Rudy thinks he can run on 9/11 he's mistaken,I can see a whole can-o-worms opeing up with his past.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 05 2007 12:43 PM
|
|
Which part of his past will that be?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 05 2007 12:48 PM
|
|
I read where they're most concerned with his martial problems and his having lived for a while with a gay couple with whom he was friends.
Democrats may be "soft on terror" but Rudy is "soft on gays."
|
metirish
Feb 05 2007 12:49 PM
|
|
His ties to Bernard Kerik for one,his messy divorce..all of this will be open to question.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 05 2007 01:01 PM
|
|
The only way that his dovorce is a problem is if his wife makes it one. I hope she finds it in her interest to not make it one.
Soft on gays may hurt his primary vote among some. But how big a can of worms is that? "I don't hate gays enough. If you don't like it, don't vote for me." I don't imagine him using tortured spin to reframe it. And who is hateful enough to attack him for it? Fringier candidates like Tancredo maybe, but I think even Brownback and Romney will avoid running as the hate police.
I guess Kerik will be an issue, though "ties" sounds secretive and nefarious. He was his boss and will have to answer for that.
|
iramets
Feb 05 2007 01:07 PM
|
|
He was much more than Kerik's boss. He was Kerik's biggest booster and character-witness. Unless you think you think Kerik could have pulled some of his shit without Rudy's tacit approval, it's going to be a WTC-sized problem for his campaign.
|
sharpie
Feb 05 2007 01:08 PM
|
|
I think this is good news for the likes of Brownback or Romney -- McCain and Giuliani's voters are pretty similar -- if one of the far-right candidates can establish himself as the candidate for that constituency he could do awfully well in the primaries.
|
metirish
Feb 05 2007 01:13 PM
|
|
Yeah "ties" sounds shady....not only was Giuliani his boss when Mayor but Kerik was employed by Giuliani Partners, a consulting firm formed by Giuliani,Kerik was also CEO of Giuliani-Kerik an affiliate of Giuliani Partners,he resigned both jobs in 04,Kerik has been in trouble with the the Bronx DA for some shady dealings with a construction(mob) firm....all of this of course might not have any efect on Giuliani but I bet people that get paid to dig deep will,IMO I thnk Giuliani would make a great dictator and a shitty president.
|
Willets Point
Feb 05 2007 01:15 PM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":2x1dgzak] I hope she finds it in her interest to not make it one.
|
2x1dgzak]
You sound so mafioso when you put it that way.
|
soupcan
Feb 05 2007 01:28 PM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":3pcurr37]The only way that his dovorce is a problem is if his wife makes it one. I hope she finds it in her interest to not make it one. |
3pcurr37]
The bitter Ms.Hanover was his second wife.
Rudy may also have to answer a question or two about his first wife, who by the way, was also his cousin.
|
sharpie
Feb 05 2007 01:30 PM
|
|
If elected, he would be the nation's first thrice married President. Reagan was the first divorcee.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 05 2007 01:33 PM
|
|
I do, don't I.
Yeah, I guess untangling himself from Kerik could be his Whitewater. I probably don't appreciate how far along New York's issues are with Kerik. A childhood friend of mine got suboenaed on the investigation, but I don't kow where it's at.
|
metirish
Feb 05 2007 01:53 PM
|
|
Kerik ended up paying a hefty fine, $221,000,he pleaded guilty to two ethics violations,it's a bit shady,basically Kerik accepted a "gift" from a NJ construction firm that was trying to do business with the city,but by all accounts Kerik is doing great these days.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 05 2007 01:56 PM
|
|
If nothing else, his pro-choice position might doom him among Republican primary voters.
I don't recall his position on gay marriage. I seem to think he's in favor, at least of civil unions, but I may be wrong.
|
metirish
Feb 05 2007 01:58 PM
|
|
I think Rudy is all for helping the gays....
|
Nymr83
Feb 05 2007 02:02 PM
|
|
i think Rudy will get creamed in the primaries...even though he might fair better than anyone else if we simply held an election with all the "declared" candidates names on the ballot (and then had a run-off)
|
sharpie
Feb 05 2007 02:23 PM
|
|
If a pro-choice Democrat and Giuliani were each running, would that spur a third party movement?
|
Nymr83
Feb 05 2007 02:46 PM
|
|
| ="sharpie":k69jamhp]If a pro-choice Democrat and Giuliani were each running, would that spur a third party movement? |
k69jamhp]
i'm not sure, i hope not. 3rd party candidates with our electoral system serve no purpose other than to syphon votes away from someone...usually the person the voter would have voted for if not for the 3rd party candidate...
|
Edgy DC
Feb 05 2007 02:56 PM
|
|
I disagree. I think third-party alternatives are a good and important thing.
|
Willets Point
Feb 05 2007 02:59 PM
|
|
I'm all for 4th and 5th and 6th and so on parties as well. Actually, just ditch the parties and run as individuals.
|
sharpie
Feb 05 2007 03:01 PM
|
|
Oftimes third party candidates attract voters that would otherwise be non-voters.
|
Nymr83
Feb 05 2007 03:24 PM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":3bjdnrao]I disagree. I think third-party alternatives are a good and important thing. |
3bjdnrao]
3rd parties might serve useful purposes, like attracting enough support to have their views (particularly on narrow issues) folded into one of the main parties. But the candidates of 3rd parties do more harm than good from the perspective of the people who vote for them (if you voted for Nader but liked Gore better than Bush you actually should have voted for Gore once you determined that Nader's candidacy wasn't actually viable)
|
Nymr83
Feb 05 2007 03:26 PM
|
|
| ="Willets Point":3vw977wo]I'm all for 4th and 5th and 6th and so on parties as well. Actually, just ditch the parties and run as individuals. |
3vw977wo]
i agree, but thats not the system we have, and in the system we have you are better off picking from the lesser of two evils even if you don't like either candidate.
|
Sandgnat
Feb 06 2007 09:24 AM
3rd party candidates
|
|
Anyone familiar with this:
[url:294oaw34]http://www.unity08.com[/url:294oaw34]
|
sharpie
Feb 06 2007 09:27 AM
|
|
The problem with any "unity" ticket is that no matter what kind of promises candidates make, the President is the President and the Vice President has no constitutional role. The constitution does not permit switching mid-term as they sometimes do in Parliamentary countries (I believe it happened in Israel about 10-15 years ago).
|
Edgy DC
Feb 06 2007 09:49 AM
|
|
="Nymr83":2f7c20ym]| ="Edgy DC":2f7c20ym]I disagree. I think third-party alternatives are a good and important thing. |
2f7c20ym]
3rd parties might serve useful purposes, like attracting enough support to have their views (particularly on narrow issues) folded into one of the main parties. But the candidates of 3rd parties do more harm than good from the perspective of the people who vote for them (if you voted for Nader but liked Gore better than Bush you actually should have voted for Gore once you determined that Nader's candidacy wasn't actually viable) |
2f7c20ym]
Perot's agenda was so fully adopted by both major parties that the balanced budget he championed is probably the most defining legacy (certainly domestically) of the Clinton/Gingrich years.
Yeah, that doesn't hold true for Ralphh Nader, but (1) I bet athe other two parties started taking calls from his supporters when they previously hadn't, and (2) Al Gore, having lost lacking the courage to run on a green platform (or having embraced the pragmatism not to) has now seen fit to return to that agenda in his polital afterlife and has advanced it considerably.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 06 2007 09:51 AM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":hvdgkjbf]i agree, but thats not the system we have, and in the system we have you are better off picking from the lesser of two evils even if you don't like either candidate. |
hvdgkjbf]
I vote against evil.
|
Vic Sage
Feb 06 2007 11:30 AM
|
|
No one vote swings a presidential election. Not even in Florida. Not even in Daly's Chicago. Anyone who thinks their one vote is "meaningful" in THAT way, is delusional.
so if your one vote doesn't affect an election, what good is it? Its good because its an opportunity to express your own political worldview about who we should be as a people. Because so many waste this opportunity by voting for "the lesser of 2 evils", we therefore continue to be subject to such mediocre options.
If people voted their aspirations instead of their fears, we would increase the likelihood of electing people worthy of election, instead of electing someone who is simply less evil.
Naive and idealistic? Throwing away my vote? No. Its totally pragmatic. It's those who are so naive as to believe their one single solitary vote will turn an election and so vote for the "lesser of 2 evils" who are truly wasting their votes and damning us to continued downward cycle of mediocre leadership.
vote your aspirations and good things will happen.
spread the word.
|
Willets Point
Feb 06 2007 12:01 PM
|
|
Awesome, Vic. Thanks for putting it so eloquently.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 06 2007 12:07 PM
|
|
Vic's post was so good I wore a diaper so I wouldn't have to stop and pee in the middle of it.
|
soupcan
Feb 06 2007 12:09 PM
|
|
VOTE YOUR ASPIRATIONS 2008!
You go Vic.
|
Willets Point
Feb 06 2007 12:10 PM
|
|
Even better, Don't vote for an ass, vote your aspirations!
|
Edgy DC
Feb 13 2007 07:21 AM
|
|
| Johnny Dickshot Plus he represents a state that's made great strides becoming the national capital of gruesome shoot-em-ups and large shopping malls. |
Utah making a move.
|
Frayed Knot
Feb 13 2007 07:36 AM
|
|
[url=http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/13/romney.announce/index.html:3mdeors1]Mitt Happens[/url:3mdeors1]
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 13 2007 07:37 AM
|
|
|
Vic's post was so good I wore a diaper so I wouldn't have to stop and pee in the middle of it. |
I wonder if the astro-nut reads these pages.
|
Johnny Dickshot
Feb 13 2007 07:42 AM
|
|
| ="Frayed Knot":1ce53gj5][url=http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/13/romney.announce/index.html:1ce53gj5]Mitt Happens[/url:1ce53gj5] |
1ce53gj5]
He's gonna get killed.
|
sharpie
Feb 13 2007 08:05 AM
|
|
I don't know about that. Some candidate from the far right will emerge and he seems more likely than Brownback. He's the most Bush-like of all the candidates: to the right on all positions, from an old political family, was a governor, has a sports connection, looks like a politician.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 13 2007 08:12 AM
|
|
I think Brownback's a better bet, but I guess the two of them get the early matchup.
I tells ye, Republican nominees come from west of the Mississippi. That'll be true forever until its not.
|
sharpie
Feb 13 2007 08:14 AM
|
|
Romney's playing up his Michigan west-of-the-Mississippi roots.
|
MFS62
Feb 13 2007 08:16 AM
|
|
Famous sales and motivational guru Zig Ziglar once said that people will spejnd more time, effort and money moving away from pain than moving toward pleasure. The phrase has since been quoted in many sales training courses.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zig_Ziglar
Is that what some have been saying about voting for the lesser of two evils; voting for someone you are more comfortable with?
Later
|
Vic Sage
Feb 13 2007 08:35 AM
|
|
|
...Is that what some have been saying about voting for the lesser of two evils; voting for someone you are more comfortable with? |
No, its about voting for someone you're less uncomfortable with.
|
Vic Sage
Feb 13 2007 08:41 AM
|
|
So, Romney kicked off his campaign from the Henry Ford museum, eh?
How completely tone deaf he is. Ford was a notorious and outspoken anti-semite.
Way to go, Mitt! Good start!
I guess he's just playing to his base.
|
MFS62
Feb 13 2007 08:57 AM
|
|
| So, Romney kicked off his campaign from the Henry Ford museum, eh?
How completely tone deaf he is. Ford was a notorious and outspoken anti-semite.
Way to go, Mitt! Good start!
I guess he's just playing to his base. |
Isn't he a Mormon?
I wonder. If he wins, at his swearing in ceremony, will he put his hand on the Book of Mormon or the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (which Henry Ford once distributed?
Vic, you're not alone in your comment. I heard on the radio this morning that Jewish organizations are decrying his choice of location for his announcement.
Later
|
Nymr83
Feb 13 2007 09:03 AM
|
|
that wasn't a very bright move. even less bright was his spokesperson's defense/explanation of why he chose that spot rather than simply saying he was sorry if he offended anyone and moving on.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 13 2007 09:08 AM
|
|
| I tells ye, Republican nominees come from west of the Mississippi. That'll be true forever until its not. |
When was the last nominee from east of the Mississippi? I'll make a quick guess of Dewey in 1948.
Actually, Bush 41 was a New Englander.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 13 2007 09:11 AM
|
|
Well, I'm not talking nativity, or else Romney qualifies.
By my count, Dewey's the last standard-bearer from the east.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 23 2007 09:02 AM
|
|
Tom Vilasick drops out.
Did I mention how crazy the primaries are getting, with everybody sneaking their primary up?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 23 2007 09:22 AM
|
|
And I just learned the other day that former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel is also a candidate for the Democrats.
I had never even heard of him (when did Alaska elect a Democrat? They're one of the reddest states) and had never seen him on any of the lists of candidates.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 23 2007 09:24 AM
|
|
Yeah, and Romney's from Massachusetts. Don't put much stock into the red/blue thing.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 23 2007 09:28 AM
|
|
True.
|
Farmer Ted
Feb 23 2007 11:16 AM
|
|
Gravel's a former cab-driving Columbia grad.
|
Nymr83
Feb 23 2007 05:10 PM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":1768h8gh]Tom Vilasick drops out.
Did I mention how crazy the primaries are getting, with everybody sneaking their primary up? |
1768h8gh]
you can't really blame them, if you were New York or California why should you let tiny New Hampshire or South Carolina (essentially) pick the nominees for both parties? use your giant number of votes to swing the election towards the candidates your citizens' favor early on.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 23 2007 05:29 PM
|
|
But why should congress allow a presidential election to be decided this way? All this supposedly important war resoluting is going on and all these influential senators are off on the road grandstanding, rather than here in DC working 19 months before the election. As it gets longer, it naturally gets more expensive --- eliiminating from the field relatively cash-poor, but no less legitimate, voices (Vilasick, perhaps) --- and dragged out until everybody hates both surviving candidates by November 2008.
|
Nymr83
Feb 23 2007 06:28 PM
|
|
what would you have congress do about it? even if they (who is they anyway? Reid?) could force McCain, Hillary, and Obama to spend some qulity time in Washington theres nothing that would accomplish other than to give those people less campaign time than Rudy, Romney, Edwards and anyone else who presently holds no office.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 23 2007 07:01 PM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":2cbxavz4]what would you have congress do about it? |
2cbxavz4]
Fix the primary dates.
|
Nymr83
Feb 23 2007 07:24 PM
|
|
i'm unsure as to their constitutional authority to do so, and i'd bet Bush would have a big fat veto waiting for that bill even if they tried.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 23 2007 07:45 PM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":m178qu11]i'm unsure as to their constitutional authority to do so, |
m178qu11]
Well, we can speculate or we can read the US Constitution.
<blockquote><i>Article II, Section I, Paragraph IV:</i> The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.</blockquote>| ="Nymr83":m178qu11]and i'd bet Bush would have a big fat veto waiting for that bill even if they tried., |
m178qu11]
Why?
|
OlerudOwned
Feb 23 2007 07:57 PM
|
|
I was really pulling for Vilsack and his creepy futuristic totalitarian logo.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 23 2007 08:03 PM
|
|
Boy, I mis-spelled that guy's name.
|
Nymr83
Feb 23 2007 08:43 PM
|
|
="Edgy DC":2oire3q9]| ="Nymr83":2oire3q9]i'm unsure as to their constitutional authority to do so, |
2oire3q9]
Well, we can speculate or we can read the US Constitution.
<blockquote><i>Article II, Section I, Paragraph IV:</i> The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.</blockquote> |
2oire3q9]
Congress can choose the day on which the electors for the electoral college are chosen, ie election day, and the day on which those electors get together and formally vote. i see no authority as to primaries.
Besides, getting back to the original point, I don't see this election cycle slowing down regardless of when the primaries are.
|
Edgy DC
Feb 23 2007 09:51 PM
|
|
Great. You don't see it. Fine.
|
Frayed Knot
Mar 01 2007 08:27 AM
|
|
I vote for strange article.
It's tough to tell at times what exactly is being said by the campaign and what is the author's spin on what's being said. Also the part about how many medals France won at the SLC Olympics is not only pointless but trending towards bizarre.
|
Edgy DC
Mar 08 2007 02:44 PM
|
|
David Broder agrees wtih me, for similar reasons too.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01586.html
California has since moved to up move their primary to February 5.
Check out the proposal by Mo Udall at the end. Who could argue with that?
|
sharpie
Mar 08 2007 02:54 PM
|
|
Mo Udall was a smart guy. That is the best idea I've heard for spacing primaries.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Mar 08 2007 02:57 PM
|
|
Here it is:
| ]Long ago, the late Mo Udall, the canny congressman from Arizona who finished second to Jimmy Carter in the 1976 primaries, proposed the best solution I've ever heard.
He urged the parties to adopt a simple rule: Any state could hold a nonbinding contest any day it wants, but delegates to the national conventions would be seated only if elected on the first Tuesday of March, April, May or June. That way you would get spacing between the events to allow for serious examination of the choices and, probably, a mixture of results that would keep the race open until the end. |
It does sound like a good idea. More states would probably opt for March, and fewest for June, but it would be a step in the right direction.
|
Edgy DC
Mar 08 2007 05:08 PM
|
|
Well, if this can be hammed through, they can alternate. Divide the states up into four groups each containing approximately 25% of the electoral votes than alternate. Block One can be in March in 2008, Block Two in 2012, etc.
|
Nymr83
Mar 08 2007 05:27 PM
|
|
smart idea though it may be, i still don't think it is constitutional.
[url:hqjwxwrk]http://www.thegreenpapers.com/Vox/?20031121-0[/url:hqjwxwrk]
find me a credible article that makes a constittuional argument for it and i'm of course open to changing my mind....but just saying its a good idea doesnt change its constituionality (kinda like how it would be a great idea to ban civilian gun ownership...whoops pretend i didnt say that, now they'll never nominate me for anything...)
|
Benjamin Grimm
Mar 12 2007 12:41 PM
|
|
The current Republican field of candidates, according to the Christian Science Monitor:
| ]Officially declared:
Former Gov. Mitt Romney, Mass.
Former Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, N.Y.
Sen. Sam Brownback, Kan.
Rep. Duncan Hunter, Calif.
Rep. Ron Paul, Texas
Announced:
Sen. John McCain, Ariz.
Former Gov. Mike Huckabee, Ark.
Former Gov. Jim Gilmore, Va.
Former Gov. Tommy Thompson, Wis.
Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colo.
Potential candidates:
Former Sen. Fred Thompson, Tenn.
Sen. Chuck Hagel, Neb.
Former Rep. Newt Gingrich, Ga. |
|
Nymr83
Mar 12 2007 01:29 PM
|
|
Arthur Branch is running for president? what the heck, i loved our last actor in the white house.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Mar 12 2007 01:48 PM
|
|
How old were you in 1989 when Reagan left office?
|
Nymr83
Mar 12 2007 02:16 PM
|
|
young, i love what he did in retrospect. i'm waiting for the "who is arthur branch?" post...
|
Frayed Knot
Mar 12 2007 02:18 PM
|
|
Chuck Hegel - who I like at least on a superficial level - announced today that he's not announcing anything yet. He said he'll decide later in the year.
On the one hand it's refreshing that at least one person doesn't feel compelled to jump into the fray almost 24 months in advance. On the other it could put him way behind in the money game to the point where not only will he be out of it but that all future hopefuls will feel that they need to commit to a 2+ year long campaign or not run at all.
|
Frayed Knot
Mar 12 2007 02:20 PM
|
|
"i'm waiting for the "who is arthur branch?" "
I'm guessing that it's a character Fred Thompson played in something or other.
|
Nymr83
Mar 12 2007 02:22 PM
|
|
i think everyone on the R side execpt Giuliani, Romney, and McCain are essentially either "running" for vice president or for future elections just by trying to get some recognition now. i think the only person outside the race who probably has the donation earning-power and name recognition to seriously get into the race is Newt Gingrich. he has a cool name, and we all know most voters are dumb enough to vote for a guy with a cool name without knowing anything else.
|
Nymr83
Mar 12 2007 02:23 PM
|
|
| ="Frayed Knot"]"i'm waiting for the "who is arthur branch?" "
I'm guessing that it's a character Fred Thompson played in something or other. |
the district attorney on "Law & Order"
found a funny quote from him on imdb too... "After two years in Washington, I often long for the realism and sincerity of Hollywood."
|
Benjamin Grimm
Mar 12 2007 02:36 PM
|
|
I suspect that these guys who say, "Maybe I'll enter the race later on" are keeping their options open in case there's such widespread dissatisfaction with th current field that there will be an opening for them to enter on the cheap. (Of course, it could never be cheap, but if you enter late you'll have saved all the money you would have spent up to that point, and you may be able to scoop up the supporters of the candidates who have bowed out or who aren't getting anywhere.)
|
Nymr83
Mar 12 2007 02:39 PM
|
|
they're also keeping their names in the news... as long as they have reporters asking them every day if they are in or out they get free press....once they are in they need to spend money to keep getting that press by actually doing things (giving speeches, touring the country, etc)
|
metirish
Mar 12 2007 02:40 PM
|
|
Didn't Newt admit to having an affair while impeaching Clinton for having one?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Mar 12 2007 02:43 PM
|
|
Well, he admitted to the affair.
And remember, the official reason for the impeachment wasn't the affair, but the obstruction of justice caused by his denials of the affair.
Newt can argue that he wasn't impeaching for infidelity, which he also was guilty of, but for suverting the justice system.
|
Nymr83
Mar 12 2007 02:51 PM
|
|
Unfortunately, adultery is not only no longer a crime but doesnt even seem to raise eyebrows anymore. Clinton can do whatever he wants in private (though the boss-employee aspect of it may have given her a civil suit in our lawsuit happy age) its just the lying that got him in trouble. the same thing happened to scooter libby, there wasnt even a crime committed (plame wasnt protected by the applicable law and Armitage and Novak both admitted to the grand jury that they revealed her identity yet neither was charged) yet he was convicted for lying to the investigators.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Mar 12 2007 03:00 PM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":2r42mmg8]Unfortunately, adultery is not only no longer a crime but doesnt even seem to raise eyebrows anymore. |
2r42mmg8]
Does your "unfortunately" apply to the eyebrows, or do you really think adultery should be a crime?
|
Nymr83
Mar 12 2007 03:07 PM
|
|
the eyebrows mostly... though i think adultery, while it shouldnt be a crime, should be treated more seriously especially in civil courts where a cheating spouse can still walk away with alimony and/or custody of children, a situation i find appalling.
|
metirish
Mar 22 2007 07:28 AM
|
|
Turns out that a staffer from the company used to create and maintain Obama's website created the Clinton youtube Ad....
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6h3G-lMZxjo"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6h3G-lMZxjo" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
|
MFS62
Mar 22 2007 07:55 AM
|
|
| ="Yancy Street Gang":3mygq8gm] And remember, the official reason for the impeachment wasn't the affair, but the obstruction of justice caused by his denials of the affair.
|
3mygq8gm]
I forget where I read this explanation, written by a Law Professor. I paraphrase:
Clinton's statement in question was "I did not have sex with that woman".
It was not a denial, in the technical legal sense. Let me explain.
Clinton has a Law Degree. One thing taught in Law School is that once a decision has been rendered in a prior case, it establishes legal precedent unless overturned on appeal by a higher court.
Clinton HAD sex with "another woman" and that had been argued/ decided in the Clinton/ Paula Jones case (prior to the Lewinski episode). During that case, the Judge issued a definition of "(having) sex". It did not contain stimulation with a cigar or receiving oral sex, just giving it. That established legal precedent, in a case with which Clinton was all too familiar.
So, when he was asked "Did you have sex with that woman?", by now-established legal definition, his answer was true. If he had been asked if the woman had sex with him, he could not have given a "no" answer, he would have been telling a lie.
The other side of the coin was, if he had said "yes", it would have been contradictory to a prior court ruling, and subjected him to contempt of court charges. He was between a rock and a hard place (no pun intended).
I don't condone what he did, but he was technically and legally correct when he gave that answer.
Later
|
sharpie
Mar 22 2007 10:06 AM
|
|
John Edwards suspends his campaign after tests show his wife's cancer has come back.
Sorry for Mrs. Edwards, obviously, but I'm also sorry he won't be out there campaigning (can't believe this isn't tantamount to dropping out) as he articulates some issues which need articulating.
|
Edgy DC
Mar 22 2007 10:13 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Mar 22 2007 04:28 PM
|
|
| ="MFS62":36tem1ek]Clinton's statement in question was "I did not have sex with that woman".
It was not a denial, in the technical legal sense. Let me explain. ...
I don't condone what he did, but he was technically and legally correct when he gave that answer. |
36tem1ek]
I don't think you need to explain anything to anybody. HIs "technically and legally true" lie to reporters is not, in fact, the "statement in question," but whether he lied under oath, solicited perjury, obstructed justice, etc.
|
metirish
Mar 22 2007 10:41 AM
|
|
| ="sharpie":32mzahu8]John Edwards suspends his campaign after tests show his wife's cancer has come back.
Sorry for Mrs. Edwards, obviously, but I'm also sorry he won't be out there campaigning (can't believe this isn't tantamount to dropping out) as he articulates some issues which need articulating. |
32mzahu8]
I agree,Edwards spoke very well on social issues,especially for the poor,great that he's taking care of his wife though.
EDIT -
"The campaign goes on," John Edwards said at a news conference outside the couple's home, contradicting earlier media reports to the contrary.
John Edwards said tests this week had shown his wife, Elizabeth, had cancer in a rib on her right side. He said the cancer is treatable but not curable.
"We are very optimistic about this," he said, noting that the tumor is small in size and has a "relatively minimal presence."
|
sharpie
Mar 22 2007 12:54 PM
|
|
Well, the early reports were wrong as Irish notes. Good.
|
Nymr83
Mar 22 2007 03:39 PM
|
|
not an edwards fan, but i'm glad the prognosis on his wife is looking brighter than initially reported.
|
Edgy DC
Mar 22 2007 09:05 PM
|
|
I confess I'm very cynical about this.
|
TheOldMole
Mar 23 2007 07:34 AM
|
|
In what way? You think the Edwards family is faking it?
|
Edgy DC
Mar 23 2007 07:45 AM
|
|
No way.
I suspect that Ms. Edwards, always described as her husband's greatest asset, has found a way to make lemons into lemonade. Despite coming out of the 2004 race the strongest, he had no profile in this two-gorilla primary until yesterday. In the last two months, he'd been polling behind non-candidate Al Gore.
|
Rotblatt
Mar 23 2007 07:58 AM
|
|
| ]I confess I'm very cynical about this. |
Wow, really? I'd be interested if you'd care to elaborate at all.
I think it's pretty brave of them to continue on, but ultimately, I supsect he'll drop out of the race by the end of the year. Unless he somehow vaults ahead of Hilary & Obama, or if her cancer goes into remission. If that's even possible at this point . . .
In terms of the announcement and its timing, well, they wanted to control the story, which makes sense to me. And if they truly wanted to milk this for political points, they'd have kept it under wraps in the hopes it wouldn't come out until shortly before the first primary. It would have been a big gamble
At any rate, I think it's pretty darn tragic, especially given their personal history. Although I will confess to a moment of, "Didn't this happen on Battlestar Gallactica?" If she starts getting prophetic visions, I'll start a write-in campaign for her. And then I'll throw out my toaster. Just in case.
|
Edgy DC
Mar 23 2007 08:06 AM
|
|
I guess "very" should be "a little." The only elaboration I have is above. He had a very low profile and now he has a higher one, particularly among women.
I don't mean to suggest he does or doesn't deserve it.
|
Rotblatt
Mar 23 2007 08:36 AM
|
|
| ]I guess "very" should be "a little." The only elaboration I have is above. He had a very low profile and now he has a higher one, particularly among women.
I don't mean to suggest he does or doesn't deserve it. |
Fair enough. There's no question it's going to up his favorability rating and help get his name out there. I'm pretty sure if you asked him, though, he'd rather have a cancer-free wife than a bump in the polls. Which is why I think he'll probably end up dropping out of the race once she starts to feel the effects of the cancer and/or the treatment. He used some language last night along the lines of, "While my wife feels fine, I don't see any point in stopping my campaign," which leaves him a pretty huge escape hole.
|
Edgy DC
Mar 23 2007 08:48 AM
|
|
| ="Rotblatt":q9fw8g51] I'm pretty sure if you asked him, though, he'd rather have a cancer-free wife than a bump in the polls. |
q9fw8g51]
No doubt.
|
Edgy DC
Mar 24 2007 10:46 AM
|
|
He's speaking at a candidates health care forum now. Everything is "why we" are running while the camera stays on her.
He talks at length about "us," and then adds "but, you know, far too much attention is being focused on us; there are millions...."
|
Willets Point
Apr 25 2007 02:41 PM
|
|
Just in case you haven't heard, John McCain announced his candidacy.
|
metirish
May 11 2007 07:01 AM
|
|
Why can't a candidate support a womans right to abortion but also have the view that it is morally wrong?
For many abortion is more than a legal issue and not as simple as " you're either for it or against it"..." you can't have it both ways"....
I would really like to see a debate where the issue is debated in an intelligent manner ,where a candidate can really elaborate on his or her views,and not think that maybe they are confusing the electorate with thoughtful answers.
|
Nymr83
May 11 2007 11:44 AM
|
|
i think abortion is 100% wrong, i think the constitution in no way shape or form protects it, and i think its up to state legislatures to legislate on such things without interference from the unelected judges in washington.
but alot of states, and new york is one of them, would legalize abortion even if the disgusting precedent of roe v wade was overturned, and that would be legal and there wouldnt be a whole lot you could do about it.
|
Nymr83
May 11 2007 11:46 AM
|
|
oh and did everyone see what mr. bigot Sharpton said about Romney? essentially he said that Mormons don't believe in God and then he backtracked away from it to cover his ass. I don't think Al Sharpton really believes in God, I think he became a "reverend" because he saw it as the best means of self-promotion, just like everything else he does.
|
Willets Point
May 11 2007 11:51 AM
|
|
I think we get it now. You hate Al Sharpton. Further repetition not necessary.
|
Nymr83
May 11 2007 11:53 AM
|
|
this is the '08 presidential election thread. he insulted a candidate in said election. my post is relevant to the topic, so get over it.
|
Willets Point
May 11 2007 12:13 PM
|
|
Relevance doesn't make you look any less manic obsessive due to your daily output of 2-3 frothing anti-Sharpton posts.
|
Benjamin Grimm
May 11 2007 12:20 PM
|
|
Yeah, but how does Namor feel about Corey Ragsdale?
|
Willets Point
May 11 2007 01:24 PM
|
|
<a href="http://improbable.com/2007/05/11/who-will-win-the-2008-us-presidential-election/">Who will win the 2008 election</a>.
|
Nymr83
May 11 2007 01:46 PM
|
|
i'm kinda suprised about Thompson, I'd think the other Thompson is more electable. Clark doesn't suprise me at all, he's the only democrat who doesn't make me cringe at the thought of his being commander-in-chief of the armed forces. thats not to say i like him, but he's stomachable, which is more than i can say for hillary/obama/edwards, and when we're talking about the general election instead of the primary being stomachable to people who aren't members of your party is the best trait you can have.
|
metirish
May 11 2007 02:18 PM
|
|
|
Frayed Knot
May 11 2007 02:45 PM
|
|
Abortion is one of those issues that the press covers the hell out of ... and yet still manages to do it very poorly.
Mostly what they like to do is pit the two extremes against each other and therefore have focused almost exclusively on Roe v Wade to the point where I'd be willing to bet that most Americans are under the impression that if RvW were repealed tomorrow that all abortions in this country would cease the next day. Educating the public that such a move would instead revert the lawmaking procedure back to lawmakers seems beyond their grasp - especially since it's much easier to cubbyhole the candidates into the 100% for or 100% against camps.
|
Nymr83
May 11 2007 02:54 PM
|
|
because the extremists on both sides don't want that message getting out there. the pro-abortion side wants to scare people into thinking that Roe is all that stands between them and a complete ban on abortions while the pro-life side wants people to believe that if they could just overturn Roe life would be protected everywhere.
I just hate Roe as a federalism issue that goes beyond the underlying abortion debate. Overturning Roe would be a great victory for federalism, and if the voters of the state of New York wish to allow abortion (and i believe such a law is on the books already, pre-dating Roe) thats a decision i won't like personally, but not one that i will believe to be in any way illegal or twisting the constituion.
|
Nymr83
May 11 2007 02:55 PM
|
|
by the way metirish, i just tried clicking on that picture you posted thinking it was some kind of YouTube joke :(
|
Frayed Knot
May 12 2007 06:02 AM
|
|
"because the extremists on both sides don't want that message getting out there"
Sure, but you expect the extremes on both sides to only want their message out; it doesn't mean the mainstream press has to blindly feed into it. But they usually do, rarely taking the trouble of presenting it as a federalists vs state issue, or as a judicial vs legislative one, because [pick any or all of the following];
- they're lazy
- they themselves hold tight to one side to the point where they can't look at it as anything other than good vs evil
- they like having a hand in 'creating' the controversy that's stirred by pigeon-holing potential a candidate into one camp or the other.
|
Nymr83
May 12 2007 11:37 AM
|
|
your 2nd and 3rd explanations are probably both partly true, most media outlets are pretty biased one way or the other. and nothing makes them happier than creating controversy (ie news) on which they can then report.
|
Nymr83
May 12 2007 03:20 PM
|
|
Senator Brownback fails to suck Favre's dick while speaking in Wisconsin, drawing boos from a crowd that didn't like his analogies using Manning.
[url:1txdrpaz]http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2868485[/url:1txdrpaz]
|
Benjamin Grimm
May 17 2007 08:13 AM
|
|
My wife got another e-mail from the Clinton campaign, this from Hillary's manager Patti Solis Doyle:
| ]
Dear Mrs. Yancy,
Hillary needs your help. We've been working on an important issue -- the kind that can make or break a campaign. And your input is absolutely critical to ensuring that we make the right decision.
That's right -- we're picking our campaign song.
We've got a great selection up in an interactive poll on our website, with artists like Shania Twain, U2, KT Tunstall, the Dixie Chicks, and more. Visit the site, listen to the songs, and make your choice. Or you can suggest one of your own.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/campaignsong
Thanks for participating. And don't miss Hillary's announcement of the song contest on YouTube -- you won't want to miss it. Trust me.
|
I wonder how many people are going to suggest "Stand By Your Man"?
|
Nymr83
May 17 2007 11:34 AM
|
|
lol
|
Rotblatt
May 17 2007 11:46 AM
|
|
| ]Dear Mrs. Yancy,
Hillary needs your help. We've been working on an important issue -- the kind that can make or break a campaign. And your input is absolutely critical to ensuring that we make the right decision.
That's right -- we're picking our campaign song.
We've got a great selection up in an interactive poll on our website, with artists like Shania Twain, U2, KT Tunstall, the Dixie Chicks, and more. Visit the site, listen to the songs, and make your choice. Or you can suggest one of your own.
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/campaignsong
Thanks for participating. And don't miss Hillary's announcement of the song contest on YouTube -- you won't want to miss it. Trust me. |
Seriously, dude? She's fucking polling people--publicly!--for her campaign song?
Does she have morons running her campaign for her, or what? I wonder who will be the first candidate to start making wry comments about how he picked his song by himself . . . Probably a Republican, but Edwards might get in there first .
|
metirish
Jun 20 2007 09:30 AM
|
|
And the winning song is.......
http://hillaryclinton.com/?splash=1
Soprano's spoof.
Mike Bloomberg has left the GOP and is now not affiliated with either party,will he run as a third party candidate?
|
Edgy DC
Jun 20 2007 09:32 AM
|
|
Trying to steal publicity from a popular phenomenon is cheap and pretty much not worth linking to. She oughta do the macarena.
|
seawolf17
Jun 20 2007 09:41 AM
|
|
Could you imagine a Giuliani/Clinton/Bloomberg race in 2008? I think the New York media's collective heads would explode.
Me, I'd vote for Bloomberg.
|
metirish
Jun 20 2007 09:46 AM
|
|
| ="seawolf17":3pkyy847]Could you imagine a Giuliani/Clinton/Bloomberg race in 2008? I think the New York media's collective heads would explode.
Me, I'd vote for Bloomberg. |
3pkyy847]
I'd vote for Bloomberg without hesitation,I think he's one of those rare politicians that is in fact not partisan ,of course that could change quickly but I really like him and believe that he would be an outstanding president.
|
Willets Point
Jun 20 2007 09:55 AM
|
|
The media is one thing. I'll however cringe at the inevitable complaints from the South and the Heartland about NEW YORK ELITISTS TAKING OVER AND WANTING TO CONTROL ALL OF US TRUE AMERICANS!!!! It'll be one non-stop bitchfest.
|
sharpie
Jun 20 2007 10:10 AM
|
|
Bloomberg has no chance whatsoever at being President especially in a year when two other New Yorkers are running. I think he's been a very good mayor (certainly IMO the best mayor of recent times but that isn't saying much as I thought Koch, Dinkins and Giuliani were all miserable mayors) but a New York Jewish bachelor who doesn't have much on the folksiness meter is not gonna play in red states. All he would do is siphon votes from the Democrat. Perot managed to pick up blue-collar votes which Bloomberg wouldn't. He's a friend of Hillary Clinton's and I seriously doubt he would run against her, plus policywise he is no different than the major Democratic candidates.
|
Kid Carsey
Jun 20 2007 10:52 AM
|
|
<img src="http://www.kcmets.com/Pictures/jay_satan.jpg" align="right" width="200">I think the clip is clever and pretty amusing - how many millions of people
will likely visit that site in the next week or so? Poor Bill does come of a
tad emasculated though, no?
Have to go clear my cookies, cache, monitor, and mouse NOW!!!
|
Willets Point
Jun 20 2007 10:53 AM
|
|
You need to exorcise them of Jay Satanic possession as well.
|
Edgy DC
Jun 20 2007 10:58 AM
|
|
| ="sharpie":mhlvst8i]Bloomberg has no chance whatsoever at being President especially in a year when two other New Yorkers are running. |
mhlvst8i]
I've got Giuliani. Who is the second?
|
seawolf17
Jun 20 2007 11:08 AM
|
|
He has to update his banner, though.
|
iramets
Jun 20 2007 12:15 PM
|
|
Just what we need: another arrogant, smug, pig-ignorant cretin who boasts endlessly about knowing how to achieve victory without having provided actual evidence of a victory since the year 2000.
|
Edgy DC
Jun 29 2007 08:25 AM
|
|
the lead from the AP story on last night's debate:
<blockquote>A historically diverse field of Democratic presidential candidates -- a woman, a black, an Hispanic and five whites -- denounced an hours-old Supreme Court affirmative action ruling Thursday night and said the nation's slow march to racial unity is far from over.</blockquote>How is that historically diverse?
It's not even particularly accurate.
|
metirish
Jun 29 2007 08:39 AM
|
|
I read something about this,H Clinton made some comment about the strides we have made,just look up here and see how diverse we are kinda thing...I guess Bill Richardson is the Latino,or is it because he's from New Mexico?
|
Edgy DC
Jun 29 2007 09:08 AM
|
|
No, he's Latino. I guess he's the ace in the whole that makes the field somehow more diverse than say, the 2004 Democratic field or the 2000 Republican one.
People, though, jeez, as if just standing up there is an accomplishment.
News: women and blacks have been running for president for a pretty long time.
I was going out to dinner with a group last night, and one asked if we could eat in a bar-room with a TV, so she could watch the debate while we're eating. Thankfully we didn't, but I crossed her off the list of future roommates.
|
metirish
Jun 29 2007 09:51 AM
|
|
You know,it's great that she wanted to watch the debate,just wish the debates were better ,I watched it for a bit,got to see Joe Biden implore young Black men that wearing a condom was not un-manly,I like Biden quite a bit.
|
Edgy DC
Jun 29 2007 10:14 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jun 29 2007 10:47 AM
|
|
I think they're pretty awful. Not debates at all really. They more resemble joint press conferences. Even the zingers are carefully staged and generally delviered in an embarrassing manner.
If anything of substance comes out, it's easy enough to find in the transcript the next day.
The best reason to watch the debates is to see the peripheral candidates desperately trying to distinguish themselves, and saying perhaps riskier and riskier things as the debate season progresses and the media focuses more and more on the frontrunners.
As the frontrunners' campaign war chests continue to bloat, the only exposure the cash-poor fringe players get is the alloted three minutes of debate time they're begrudged. And, no matter how hard they try --- be they eloquent or clumsy, mean or enearing --- they get comicaly ignored.
Paragraph 28 of AP's 28-paragraph story:
<blockquote>Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich and former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel also took part in the debate.</blockquote>Ouch.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jun 29 2007 10:43 AM
|
|
I agree about the worthlessness of debates. And speaking of worthless debates, isn't John Edwards supposed to debate Ann Coulter some time soon?
|
Willets Point
Jun 29 2007 10:48 AM
|
|
Mrs. Kucinich should be on the stage for all debates.
|
Frayed Knot
Jun 29 2007 11:05 AM
|
|
Not only does that AP story claim that the slate of candidates is historically diverse (it isn't) but I sense an implication that they're railing agianst a decision made by a bunch of grumpy, old white men - even though the SC is about as diverse as the group complaining about their ruling.
|
Edgy DC
Jun 29 2007 11:13 AM
|
|
It doesn't just claim that. It's their freaking lead.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jul 10 2007 09:21 AM
|
|
Another e-mail from the Hillary Clinton campaign:
| ]
Dear Mrs. Yancy,
I really need your help.
On July 23, Hillary will participate in a debate sponsored by YouTube and CNN. All of the candidates will make a 30-second video that will play at some time during the debate.
My job in the campaign is to make the videos and the ads, and I have a great team of really creative people helping me. But when we sat down to figure out what our 30-second video for the debate should be, we decided pretty quickly to give you the assignment instead.
You know why you support Hillary. You know why this country is ready for change. You know why she's ready to lead.
All you need to do is put it in a video of 30 seconds or less, and you may be featured during the CNN/YouTube debate on July 23.
Are you ready to help?
Just create your video, upload it to YouTube by next Tuesday, July 17, and then fill out this form on our website to let us know about your submission:
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/youtube
Thanks so much for your help. I'm really looking forward to seeing your videos!
Sincerely,
Mandy Grunwald
Media Adviser/Director of Advertising
Hillary for President |
|
metirish
Aug 03 2007 08:56 AM
|
|
Any good feeling I had for Obama have all but gone,IMO he's naive when it comes to foreign issues,certainly he sounds more confident when taking questions on domestic affairs but not nearly as much on questions regarding foreign leaders that we don't have relationships with and some that we do.
|
Edgy DC
Aug 03 2007 09:00 AM
|
|
Naive is Clinton's word for it. I never had good feelings, but his poo-pooing of issues of genocide, while certainly done for rhetorical purposes, is pretty horrifying.
|
Nymr83
Aug 03 2007 10:40 AM
|
|
needless to say i never liked obama and i'm glad he's exposed himself as incapable of being president, he's also made hillary look really good by comparison
|
Edgy DC
Aug 03 2007 10:56 PM
|
|
Tony Tancredo, a candidacy beyond the realm of entertaining seriously:
<blockquote>“If it is up to me, we are going to explain that an attack on this homeland of that nature would be followed by an attack on the holy sites in Mecca and Medina,” Tancredo said. “That is the only thing I can think of that might deter somebody from doing what they would otherwise do. If I am wrong, fine, tell me, and I would be happy to do something else. But you had better find a deterrent, or you will find an attack.”</blockquote>You're wrong. Please do something else.
|
Nymr83
Aug 03 2007 11:24 PM
|
|
I find that fringe candidates tend to say stupid things knowing thats about all they can do to get noticed. You won't be hearing anything out of Tancredo after the first few primaries.
|
Edgy DC
Aug 04 2007 08:30 AM
|
|
Yeah, but
(1) he sure knows how to make a good headline to recruit teenagers to the anti-American cause.
(2) he had enough juice to build a coalition to derail bipartisan immigration reform, turning immigration into a new Social Security, an issue that's more important broken than solved, because it's an issue to attack people on, divide people on, and run a fringe campaign on. But it's largely blamed as the issue that has derailed the fundraising of John McCain's legitimate campaign.
|
Edgy DC
Aug 12 2007 09:55 AM
|
|
Mike Huckabee on bass, ladies and gentlemen.
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/3o1cNQ92W5w"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/3o1cNQ92W5w" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
|
DocTee
Aug 12 2007 10:54 AM
|
|
One more reason whyIowa is irrelevant: Romney and Huckabee run 1-2 in the straw poll there.
|
Valadius
Aug 12 2007 05:58 PM
|
|
Let me be very clear:
1. Right now, I'm fully behind Obama.
2. I will not vote for Hillary Clinton in 2008 under any circumstances.
Stop for a moment and think: if Hillary Clinton were to win two terms in 2008 and 2012, that would mean that two families - a father and son and a husband and wife - would have held the presidency for 28 consecutive years.
Is that really where we want to go in this country? I thought that one of the wonderful things about being an American was that anyone could go to sleep at night as a child and dream of becoming President of the United States, and be able to pursue that dream as an adult. I refuse to turn the presidency into a hereditary office. This is not a monarchy or an oligarchy, this is a democratic republic, where the people rule, not an aristocracy.
|
Edgy DC
Aug 12 2007 05:58 PM
|
|
| ="DocTee":3qtnhi5y]One more reason whyIowa is irrelevant: Romney and Huckabee run 1-2 in the straw poll there. |
3qtnhi5y]
They were the top two contestants, with Giuliani and McCain not participating.
I think that may call into doubt the relevance of straw polls in general and that one in particular, but I wouldn't give up on the Iowa Caucus in general.
|
Edgy DC
Aug 13 2007 07:13 AM
|
|
Tommy Thompson, citing the same poll, pulls out.
His was a stammering campaign, setting an awesome pace for the number of clarifications issued on boneheaded statements --- and he's got some wierd bedfellows we would have heard more and more about as his campaign persisted --- but a Republican running as a health care reformer might have been interesting.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Aug 13 2007 07:38 AM
|
|
| ="Valadius"]Stop for a moment and think: if Hillary Clinton were to win two terms in 2008 and 2012, that would mean that two families - a father and son and a husband and wife - would have held the presidency for 28 consecutive years.
|
If you don't want to vote for Hillary, that's fine. But the identity of the previous three presidents isn't really a reason to vote for or against anybody in 2008.
|
Edgy DC
Aug 13 2007 07:44 AM
|
|
I am no fan of Bill Clinton. I also think that "first black president" bunk is so risible that it hurts. But he's about as far from an aristocrat as any president in recent memory. Probably since Lincoln. If he's not proof "that anyone could go to sleep at night as a child and dream of becoming President of the United States, and be able to pursue that dream as an adult," I don't know who is.
|
Willets Point
Aug 13 2007 07:52 AM
|
|
="Yancy Street Gang"]| ="Valadius"]Stop for a moment and think: if Hillary Clinton were to win two terms in 2008 and 2012, that would mean that two families - a father and son and a husband and wife - would have held the presidency for 28 consecutive years.
|
If you don't want to vote for Hillary, that's fine. But the identity of the previous three presidents isn't really a reason to vote for or against anybody in 2008. |
That and Hillary Clinton has no chance in hell of ever being elected President. That she's their preferred candidate now is basically the Democrats conceding 2008 to the GOP. Their total incompetence in Congress has all but assured that they'll lose their majorities in 2008 as well.
|
Nymr83
Aug 28 2007 09:05 PM
|
|
[url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070828/pl_nm/cuba_castro_usa_dc_2;_ylt=AtnsKmCjRwSB0YDd705yO5sE1vAI:2bipt6mh]an endorsement that nobody wants[/url:2bipt6mh], Castro says Clinton/Obama ticket will win...
|
cooby
Aug 29 2007 04:54 PM
|
|
="Willets Point"]="Yancy Street Gang"]| ="Valadius"]Stop for a moment and think: if Hillary Clinton were to win two terms in 2008 and 2012, that would mean that two families - a father and son and a husband and wife - would have held the presidency for 28 consecutive years.
|
If you don't want to vote for Hillary, that's fine. But the identity of the previous three presidents isn't really a reason to vote for or against anybody in 2008. |
That and Hillary Clinton has no chance in hell of ever being elected President. That she's their preferred candidate now is basically the Democrats conceding 2008 to the GOP. Their total incompetence in Congress has all but assured that they'll lose their majorities in 2008 as well. |
She's got my vote.
I know he can't be reelected but I swear if that mouth breather Bush ever gets anywhere near the White House again I'll move to Canada.
|
Kid Carsey
Aug 29 2007 05:12 PM
|
|
Yeah, we need one that breathes through her gills instead!
|
Frayed Knot
Aug 29 2007 07:29 PM
|
|
I'm betting the pct of those threats promising to 'leave the country if "X" is elected' that are actually carried out is real small.
|
Kid Carsey
Aug 29 2007 07:33 PM
|
|
I fell off the 'no Hillary on the internet' wagon ... my sponsor is going to
give me a good piece of her mind if she finds out.
|
DocTee
Aug 29 2007 08:21 PM
|
|
FK: | ]I'm betting the pct of those threats promising to 'leave the country if "X" is elected' that are actually carried out is real small. |
I'm betting the pct of those who take those statements seriously is even smaller
|
Willets Point
Aug 29 2007 08:50 PM
|
|
="DocTee"]FK: | ]I'm betting the pct of those threats promising to 'leave the country if "X" is elected' that are actually carried out is real small. |
I'm betting the pct of those who take those statements seriously is even smaller |
It's actually kind of hard to get citizenship in another nation, convert all your assets into another currency, et al.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Sep 06 2007 10:10 AM
|
|
My wife was invited to have lunch with Hillary and Bill.
I wonder, would this be sandwiches at Quizno's, or one of those thousand-dollar-a-plate things?
|
Nymr83
Sep 06 2007 10:21 AM
|
|
i'm thinking thousand dollars a plate and sitting so far from hillary that she'll need binoculars to see her (not that thats a bad thing.)
its bad enough i have to vote for politicians, i wouldn't want to eat with them
|
Edgy DC
Sep 21 2007 10:13 AM
|
|
Hillary Clinton = Mike Piazza
<blockquote>WASHINGTON (CNN) – Sen. Hillary Clinton's sexuality is not the most pressing issue on the presidential campaign trail, but it is likely to get a fair amount of attention on a lazy Friday in the nation’s capital.
The Advocate asked Clinton about past rumors that she is gay.
The New York Democrat tells “The Advocate” that she is not a lesbian, according to a story in Friday’s edition of The New York Daily News.
"It's not true, but it is something that I have no control over," Clinton tells the magazine in a story set for publication next week.
“People will say what they want to say," she added.</blockquote>
|
Willets Point
Sep 21 2007 10:17 AM
|
|
Watch as " it is something that I have no control over" is played back as the soundbite under "Clinton is a Nympholesbian!" In your less reputable news sources of course.
|
Nymr83
Sep 21 2007 10:19 AM
|
|
yeah thats a pretty easy to misuse soundbite, she should have said "stupid rumors spread by the story-hungry press are something i have no control over" ...calling the media stupid probably isn't wise for politicians (or ballplayers) but its pretty damn true alot of the time.
|
Nymr83
Sep 29 2007 12:19 PM
|
|
Gingrich todays says he officially won't run.
|
Nymr83
Oct 09 2007 09:52 PM
|
|
| ]...Romney initially conceded that [Guiliani cut taxes a bunch of times], but quickly criticized his rival for once filing a court challenge to a law that gave President Clinton the right to veto spending items line by line. "I'm in favor of the line-item veto," he said, adding he exercised it 844 times while governor of Massachusetts.... |
I favor the line-item veto too, for governors. But Romney seems to be ignoring the fact that for the president it isn't constitutional and THAT is why a suit needed to be filed (even if Giuliani did it to stop NY from losing federal money, thats HIS job as the mayor of NY.)
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 10 2007 07:28 AM
|
|
Romney doesn't seem big on the Constitution.
In last night's debate, he said he'd consult his attorneys before going to war, rather than Congress. Ron Paul jumped all over him for that.
|
Vic Sage
Oct 10 2007 07:57 AM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":3dnwa2in]Gingrich todays says he officially won't run. |
3dnwa2in]
that's great. i guess i won't run either, then. who else agrees not to run? show of hands....
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 10 2007 08:03 AM
|
|
Count me in! I mean, out!
|
dgwphotography
Oct 10 2007 08:29 AM
|
|
I'm still fact finding.
|
Nymr83
Oct 10 2007 10:22 AM
|
|
| ="Yancy Street Gang":3dmdkjk2]Romney doesn't seem big on the Constitution.
In last night's debate, he said he'd consult his attorneys before going to war, rather than Congress. Ron Paul jumped all over him for that. |
3dmdkjk2]
Ron Paul won't win, its kind of a shame because anyone who wants to abolish the IRS is a good guy.
|
sharpie
Oct 10 2007 10:46 AM
|
|
While outta town last weekend on North Carolina's Outer Banks I saw more Ron Paul campaign material than anyone else (actually John Edwards was the only other candidate I saw anything for).
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 10 2007 11:20 AM
|
|
I've been noticing a surprising amount of Ron Paul signs and bumper stickers.
The signs are especially surprising because the Pennsylvania primary is a LONG way off. There's a good chance that Paul will be out of the race before anyone in Pennsylvania has a chance to vote for him.
He does seem to be experiencing a minor groundswell though. Even the mostly liberal audience that Bill Maher gets seems to like him. (And that's almost certainly because Bill Maher likes him.)
|
sharpie
Oct 18 2007 08:26 AM
|
|
Sam Brownback to throw in the towel tomorrow in Topeka.
|
Vic Sage
Oct 18 2007 09:53 AM
|
|
| ="Yancy Street Gang":338yiq4r]He does seem to be experiencing a minor groundswell though. Even the mostly liberal audience that Bill Maher gets seems to like him. (And that's almost certainly because Bill Maher likes him.) |
338yiq4r]
that's only because the only thing they know about him is (a) he's the only Republican openly against the war, and (b) he's a straight talker.
Maher has a strong streak of libertarianism (which i share), but only up to a point. Maher does agree that there needs to be a federal government, and that citizens need to pay taxes to support it (sorry, 83). He wants it to focus on military defense and defense of the environment, for example, but stay out of people's personal lives, and stop using religious rationales for its public policies. Paul, on the other hand, is a strict "state's rights" libertarian, who is fine with government limitations on liberty, as long as they occur on the state level, rather than the federal level.
Paul has voted against federal funding of joint adoption by unmarried couples, including same-sex adoption. Paul calls himself "an unshakable foe of abortion, advocating the overturn of Roe v. Wade, and affirms states' rights to determine the legality of abortion. In 2005 and 2007, Paul introduced the Sanctity of Life Act, which would define human life as beginning from conception, removing abortion from federal jurisdiction and effectively negating Roe v. Wade. Paul has also introduced a Constitutional amendment with similar intent. Such laws would permit states to declare abortion to be murder and to outlaw new fetal stem cell research and some contraception and fertility treatments
Also in 2005 and 2007, Paul introduced the We the People Act, which would forbid all federal courts from hearing cases on abortion, same-sex marriage, sexual practices, and government display of religious symbols, texts, and images. The Act would make federal court decisions on those subjects non-binding as precedent in state courts, and would forbid federal courts from spending money to enforce their judgments.
Paul supports elimination of most federal government agencies, such as the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Emergency Management Administration, and the Interstate Commerce Commission, calling them unnecessary bureaucracies.
He opposes gun control. He favors withdrawal from NATO and the United Nations, supports free trade but not NAFTA or the World Trade Organization. He supports ending welfare benefits for illegal aliens, opposes birthright citizenship and amnesty, and he voted for the Secure Fence Act of 2006.
He is a principled and honorable man, and people resond to that about him. But his positions would undermine the national government's ability to guarantee the civil liberties he is so strident in protecting, and the country could fracture into 50 separate nations, with no national identity beyond "leave me alone". Lincoln told the southern states they couldn't keep their slaves, and they've never really gotten over it. "states rights" is just the banner for "we can be as stupid, venal, evil, petty and bigoted as we want, and we don't want no northerners tellin us we can't."
As Maher has often said, he believes government is capable of doing good in people's lives. He says of the Republicans that they're in a win-win sitation because they claim that government sucks, and when they get elected, they prove it by fucking up, and then say, "see? we told you!".
So i think Maher responds favorably to Paul's anti-war stance and his down home kind of honest decency, without really exploring what Paul is all about. I responded the same way, frankly, before i looked into Paul's record a little more closely.
The emancipation proclamation, the New Deal, entry into WWII, the G.I. bill, integration, the civil rights act and voting rights act... these are all things Paul's philosophy would oppose. And that's ok with some people, but it ain't ok with me.
|
Edgy DC
Oct 18 2007 10:00 AM
|
|
So your secessionist stance is behind you?
|
Vic Sage
Oct 18 2007 10:29 AM
|
|
I have a wide stance.
|
metirish
Oct 18 2007 10:31 AM
|
|
| ="Vic Sage"]I have a wide stance. |
|
Nymr83
Oct 22 2007 07:46 PM
|
|
Chuck Norris endorses Mike Huckabee
[url:19w2egpi]http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58255[/url:19w2egpi]
|
metirish
Oct 23 2007 02:33 PM
|
|
| ]
Giuliani commits baseball blasphemy: He's rooting for Red Sox
October 23, 2007
BOSTON --In an act of baseball blasphemy, Yankee die-hard Rudy Giuliani said Tuesday he's pulling for the Boston Red Sox to win the World Series over the Colorado Rockies.
"I'm rooting for the Red Sox," the Republican presidential contender said in response to a question, sparking applause at the Boston restaurant where he was picking up a local endorsement.
"I'm an American League fan, and I go with the American League team, maybe with the exception of the Mets," he said. "Maybe that would be the one time I wouldn't because I'm loyal to New York."
Giuliani's Yankees lost in the first round of the playoffs, then lost their manager when Giuliani's friend, Joe Torre, refused to accept a pay cut and walked away. Giuliani said the Yankees had "a great season."
The former New York City mayor said his declaration of temporary Red Sox loyalty was "not just because I'm here in Massachusetts."
"In Colorado, in the next week or two, you will see, I will have the courage to tell the people of Colorado the same thing, that I am rooting for the Red Sox in the World Series," he said.
Indeed, if Giuliani was pandering, he miscalculated.
In the last presidential election, Colorado went with Republican President Bush, and recent history shows Massachusetts voters would sooner adopt Manhattan clam chowder as the state's official food than vote Republican in 2008.
Of course, just to the north is New Hampshire -- home to many Red Sox fans -- and the nation's first primary.
© Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
|
|
metsmarathon
Oct 23 2007 02:50 PM
|
|
dumb.
if he claims to be an american league guy, then he's rooting for the right team.
if i claimed to be a national league guy, then i'd've been rooting for the right team even when the braves made it to the world series, or the cardinals last year.
plus, his rooting for the red sox only reinforces my theory reflected glory, whereby one should root up the chain of your defeat, minimizing the levels between your team and the ultimate champion, and reflecting the maximum possible amount of glory upon your preferred squad.
for the mets, that always means the NL team. as a yankee hater, that also means the NL team, and that the al representative is the red sox only bolsters that argument, as the closest the yankees can come to the title is two levels removed. if the rockies win, then they are three levels removed. were the indians the ultimate champion, then the yankees would have been only one level removed, and could have laid claim to being the approximate equal to the nl representative.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 23 2007 02:57 PM
|
|
The problem with your theory is that glory doesn't reflect.
If you don't like the Cardinals, then there's no reason to root for them in the 1985 World Series.
|
Valadius
Oct 23 2007 03:26 PM
|
|
He's an imbecile. Reminds me of Hillary wearing the MFY cap.
|
sharpie
Oct 23 2007 03:44 PM
|
|
I guess Tancredo and McCain are for the Rockies and Romney and Dodd (and now Giuliani) are for the Sox. We the public need to know the rooting interests of all of these candidates so that we might make an informed decision.
|
Edgy DC
Oct 23 2007 06:15 PM
|
|
I think Tancredo is for whichever team has the fewer immigrants.
|
Nymr83
Oct 23 2007 09:20 PM
|
|
fewer illegal immigrants
so when are candidates going to start dropping like flies? i guess after they poll single digits in the first few primaries?
|
Edgy DC
Oct 23 2007 09:32 PM
|
|
Please don't try and parse Tancredo's message for me. He's a hateful clown.
|
sharpie
Oct 24 2007 07:02 AM
|
|
| ]so when are candidates going to start dropping like flies? i guess after they poll single digits in the first few primaries? |
Seems that most people don't even know they exist.
| ]41: Percentage of Americans who, when asked to name a Republican running for president, couldn't.
Eighty-one percent of American polled by the Pew Research Center could name at least one Democrat running for president. And if you need one more sign that the Republicans are just a little obsessed with Hillary Clinton, here you go: When asked to name a Democratic candidate, 78 percent of Republicans named Clinton, but only 57 percent of Republicans could name their own front-runner, Rudy Giuliani
Overall, sixty-two percent of Americans could volunteer the name of Barack Obama. Twenty-eight percent remembered that John Edwards is running, but no other Democrat cracked the double-digit barrier.
Asked to name any GOP candidates in the race, 45 percent of Americans named Giuliani; 30 percent said Mitt Romney; 27 percent ID'd Fred Thompson; and 24 percent mentioned John McCain. Only eight percent of Americans volunteered the name of Mike Huckabee. Seven percent did the same for Ron Paul. |
|
Kid Carsey
Oct 24 2007 07:03 AM
|
|
*pause*
I've been reflecting on last October and how much was promised and since
delivered by the good men and women voted into office last November.
The sweeping changes, the wrongs righted, the atrocities reversed ... and
so much more to look forward to in the coming months and years for fu-
ture generations.
Don't stop thinking about tomorrow ... Brother Bill, can we get some sax!!!
Hillary, grab something to blow on!!!
*/pause*
|
Edgy DC
Oct 24 2007 07:10 AM
|
|
Hey, cool. No need for digging to put the lie to Tancredo's distinction. He's doing it for me in today's <i>Times</i>.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/24/us/po ... tml?ref=us
<blockquote><b>Candidate Calls for Raid on Immigration Bill Event
By JULIA PRESTON
Published: October 24, 2007</b>
Representative Tom Tancredo of Colorado, a Republican presidential candidate whose fierce opposition to illegal immigration is the center of his campaign, contacted the immigration service yesterday demanding that agents raid a senator’s news conference.
The afternoon event on Capitol Hill was held by Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois and the leading sponsor of a bill that would give legal status to illegal immigrants who are high school graduates, if they attend college or serve in the United States military for two years. The bill is scheduled to come up for an important procedural vote in the Senate this morning.
Mr. Tancredo announced yesterday morning that he had contacted Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the federal agency, calling for the arrest of illegal immigrants he said would attend the news conference.
“If we can’t enforce our laws inside the building where American laws are made, where can we enforce them?” Mr. Tancredo said in a statement.
Participating in the news conference were three immigrant students who would benefit if Mr. Durbin’s legislation passed; two were born in Germany, and one was from Costa Rica. All were in the United States on temporary legal status, said Joe Shoemaker, Mr. Durbin’s spokesman.
Mr. Shoemaker said the senator was surprised and offended by Mr. Tancredo’s effort.
“Congressman, have you no shame?” Mr. Durbin said in a statement, indirectly comparing Mr. Tancredo to Senator Joseph McCarthy and his anti-communist hearings in the 1950s.
A spokeswoman for the immigration agency, Kelly Nantel, confirmed that officials had received a letter from Mr. Tancredo and were reviewing it. She said the agency took no action yesterday.</blockquote>
|
Nymr83
Oct 24 2007 11:10 AM
|
|
so another congressman is inviting admitted lawbreakers to a press conference and anouncing "here are my friends the lawbreakers, haha they wont be arrested because our laws arent enforced" and you think Tancredo is the bad guy?
i'd support a bill giving citizenship to any able-bodied and able-minded individual willing and able to serve in the military. but that doesnt change the present legality of such a person and its insulting that someone would be invited to the capital when they are known to be breaking the law. maybe you feel otherwise because you dont like immigration laws, but if Tancredo invited someone who was openly breaking a law you DID like to the capital should that person not be arrested?
|
Edgy DC
Oct 24 2007 11:18 AM
|
|
No, I think Tancredo is a career ass. Having a publicity stunt blow up in his face is the latest example. It just conveniently answers your distinction.
Why would you defend him? Just read about him. His career is full of betrayal and bufoonery. He started his career attacking career politicians propped up by PACs and there's no better example of a Congressman willing to front for a PAC. He started his career campaigning for term limits and happily broke his pledge because another PAC needed him more than the term limits ones did.
There is no "the bad guy."
Please don't turn this on me with stupid hypotheticals. I'm kind of sick of you arguing that way.
|
Nymr83
Oct 24 2007 11:24 AM
|
|
i'm defending his position on immigration, i wouldnt vote for him in the primary.
its not a "stupid hypothetical" its pointing out exactly what i said, that i think you'd only care about lawbreakers being arrested when you dont like the law in question.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 24 2007 11:42 AM
|
|
Meanwhile, Rudy's Red Sox rooting was front-page fodder for both tabloids this morning.
The <i>Daily News</i> has a big headline saying "TRAITOR!" with a goofy photo of Guiliani beneath the text.
There also seems to be a fire burning somewhere in California, but that's only of secondary importance. Somehow it managed to get a fraction of the front page.
|
Edgy DC
Oct 24 2007 11:48 AM
|
|
| ="Nymr83"]iits not a "stupid hypothetical" |
Yes, it is. You presume to assign positions to me when you have no idea. Stick to what you know.
Then you frame the facts of the article exactly wrong. Did you read it?
| ]All were in the United States on temporary legal status, said Joe Shoemaker, Mr. Durbin’s spokesman. |
| ]so another congressman is inviting admitted lawbreakers to a press conference and anouncing "here are my friends the lawbreakers, haha they wont be arrested because our laws arent enforced" |
Are you even talking about the same situation? With your brutal punctuation and syntax, it's hard to tell.
The last time you picked a ridiculous fight with me I answered your stupid hypotheticals, but you left --- I don't know --- a half dozen unanswered questions, despite my repeating them.
It's a waste of time, to start with, plus I have ot put up with all your patronizing sarcasm. Then I'm supposed to indulge you as you reframe the issue and tapdance around me with some jive-ass hypothetical where you cherry-pick, distort, or outright fabricate facts, and put positions on me I haven't professed. And I'm suppposed to entertain you and play along while you think you're trapping me in some sort of rhetorical corner? No. Entertain yourself somewhere else.
|
Nymr83
Oct 24 2007 03:24 PM
|
|
so whats the deal with clinton and all these fake donors in chinatown? she isnt raising enough money without these shenanigans?
|
Nymr83
Oct 24 2007 03:43 PM
|
|
i'm scratching my head at that one.
come on KC, take a shot at hillary, you know you want to! (in my spare time i stand outside AA meetings with beer)
|
Kid Carsey
Oct 24 2007 05:11 PM
|
|
I miss Mets baseball in the evenings.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 15 2007 10:18 AM
|
|
<a href="http://ultimatemets.com/profile.php?PlayerCode=3E35" target="_new">Look who used to be a Mets farmhand!</a>
|
Edgy DC
Nov 15 2007 10:33 AM
|
|
Better winning percentage than he'll get in the primaries.
|
Nymr83
Nov 18 2007 08:02 PM
|
|
[url:14nvxz9h]http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312107,00.html[/url:14nvxz9h]
Norris did a TV ad with Huckabee now,
on youtube:
[url:14nvxz9h]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjYv2YW6azE[/url:14nvxz9h]
|
sharpie
Nov 19 2007 09:01 AM
|
|
Who cares that Chuck Norris endorses Mike Huckabee? Or any actor endorsing a politician? Does it change one vote? I remember when Al Haig ran for President in 1992 and Billy Dee Williams was a supporter and Haig dragged him all over the place. Didn't matter. Remember Madonna endorsing Wes Clark? Didn't matter either.
|
Fman99
Nov 19 2007 09:42 AM
|
|
| ="sharpie":397t5b02]Who cares that Chuck Norris endorses Mike Huckabee? Or any actor endorsing a politician? Does it change one vote? I remember when Al Haig ran for President in 1992 and Billy Dee Williams was a supporter and Haig dragged him all over the place. Didn't matter. Remember Madonna endorsing Wes Clark? Didn't matter either. |
397t5b02]
I will vote for whomever Chuck Norris tells me to vote for. Who knows what he could do if I disobey him. I mean, have you seen Walker, Texas Ranger?
|
A Boy Named Seo
Nov 19 2007 09:45 AM
|
|
Credit for an attempt at funny at least, and not using that opportunity for an attack ad. It's tough for anyone not named Guiliani, Romney, Thompson, Clinton, Obama, or Edwards to really get any face-time. It's kind of a clever way to get people to notice when the media on either side doesn't make much of an effort to cover everyone in the race.
Bill Richardson's done a few nice ads where he tried to use humor to introduce himself and his record to peeps. And his Western themed ad when he ran for Governor was pretty great. More of that, less of Tancredo and terrorist mall attack ads.
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tjOuL5qwNIc&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tjOuL5qwNIc&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/UcpGd626n9w&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/UcpGd626n9w&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/X0juSJ-y9xg&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/X0juSJ-y9xg&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 19 2007 09:57 AM
|
|
| ="Fman99":mgv4xrcj] I mean, have you seen Walker, Texas Ranger? |
mgv4xrcj]
Nope.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 19 2007 10:03 AM
|
|
Loser.
|
Valadius
Nov 19 2007 10:24 AM
|
|
I always think of this whenever I think of Walker, Texas Ranger:
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9NMwEPf63js&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9NMwEPf63js&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
|
metirish
Nov 19 2007 11:07 AM
|
|
Seo they're pretty good, funny stuff.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 21 2007 07:19 AM
|
|
| ="sharpie"]Who cares that Chuck Norris endorses Mike Huckabee? Or any actor endorsing a politician? Does it change one vote? I remember when Al Haig ran for President in 1992 and Billy Dee Williams was a supporter and Haig dragged him all over the place. Didn't matter. Remember Madonna endorsing Wes Clark? Didn't matter either. |
I can't believe you underestimated Texas Walker Ranger. Governor Huckaby has been on fire in Iowa since this endorsement:
http://www.hedgehogreport.com/polls2008.php?state=IA
This isn't a bullshit endorsement from the National Federation of Teachers or Walter Mondale. It's Chuck Fucking Norris!
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 21 2007 07:22 AM
|
|
I really think the 2000 Presidential race was turned around by Oprah Winfrey. (Probably to her regret.)
Bush consistently trailed Gore in the polls until he appeared on <i>Oprah</i> and kissed her on the cheek. It's at that point that his numbers started to improve and he ended up (sorta) winning the election.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 30 2007 12:32 PM
|
|
Hillary Clinton's New Hampshire headquarters under siege now by a man with a bomb holding hostages.
The world looks more like <i>Robocop</i> every single day.
|
Valadius
Nov 30 2007 12:59 PM
|
|
Obama's office, which is four doors down, has been evacuated, as has Edwards' office, which is located a few buildings away.
|
Nymr83
Nov 30 2007 02:59 PM
|
|
they're saying the guy is mentally ill, told his son to watch the news today, reports that he doesnt have a bomb but has flares taped to his chest (that could easily appear to be a bomb)
|
Edgy DC
Dec 04 2007 07:33 AM
|
|
The Huckabee/Norris ticket rockets on --- kicking ass in Iowa and second nationwide.
|
Nymr83
Dec 04 2007 01:23 PM
|
|
i think he is waiting for a strategic moment to anounce Norris as his actual VP choice. if you can't raise $$ with the big boys (and girl) you need new ways to get publicity.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Dec 17 2007 12:23 PM
|
|
Joe Lieberman endorses John McCain.
I wonder how that makes Christopher Dodd feel?
I know there's no obligation to endorse your same-state Senate colleague, but it does kind of come across as a bit of a dis.
Dodd, though, is going nowhere fast. Not even an endorsement from Oprah would help. (Maybe he should try saying that Hillary and Obama think that Jesus and Satan are brothers.)
|
Nymr83
Dec 17 2007 12:30 PM
|
|
Was Dodd one of the (many) Democrats who turned their backs on Lieberman and endorsed whats-his-name in the general election after he beat Lieberman in the primary? if so Lieberman has every reason not to give him the time of day much less an endorsement.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Dec 17 2007 12:35 PM
|
|
I think maybe he did.
Good point.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 17 2007 12:45 PM
|
|
Dodd's campaign is anchored on ending our presence in Iraq. Joe Lieberman favors continuing it, so, home state aside, they aren't a good match.
What is going to happen now --- bank on it --- is speculation about McCain and Lieberman running together on a unity ticket. It's unlikely to happen, but people will need something to write about. It may be one of the better scenarios for a Republiican victory.
It'll help McCain's numbers. The kind of endorsements that actuallly help are the ones that have a plot.
|
Nymr83
Dec 17 2007 01:07 PM
|
|
| ]What is going to happen now --- bank on it --- is speculation about McCain and Lieberman running together on a unity ticket. It's unlikely to happen, but people will need something to write about. It may be one of the better scenarios for a Republiican victory. |
just like sportswriters, if theres nothing to report, make something up.
|
sharpie
Dec 17 2007 01:14 PM
|
|
Dodd did endorse Lamont, though he endorsed Lieberman in the primary. Lamont has, however, returned the favor and endorsed Dodd for whatever that's worth.
|
Nymr83
Dec 17 2007 01:21 PM
|
|
| ]Lamont has, however, returned the favor and endorsed Dodd for whatever that's worth. |
next to nothing i'd imagine, that ranks right up there with the endorsement of Rick Lazio.
|
sharpie
Dec 17 2007 01:39 PM
|
|
Lamont has prolly contributed a lot and has apparently been campaigning out in Iowa -- which I'm sure the Iowans appreciate.
I wouldn't be surprised if McCain comes charging back to the head of the pack in the GOP race -- the other candidates don't seem to have what it takes.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 18 2007 09:46 PM
|
|
John McCain would be the first, and presumably last, US president born in the Panama Canal Zone, and, therefore, only just barely qualifies under the "natural born citizen" clause. I imagine he would be the only president born in any non-state territory (nominee Barry Goldwater was born in Arizona before it had become a US state), and the only president born in territory that has since been ceded by the United States.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 18 2007 09:58 PM
|
|
Janet Huckabee's maiden name is, interestingly enough, McCain. She also has a <a href="http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendid=196754703" target="blank">MySpace page</a>:
Janet Huckabee's Interests
General
Music country
Movies Men of Honor, Rudy, and Remember the Titans
Television 24, Grey’s Anatomy, ER, and any news program Mike is on
Books The Holy Bible and New Madrid Run
Heroes My mother-- Pat Stephens
Janet Huckabee's Details
Status: Married
Here for: Networking, Friends
Orientation: Straight
Hometown: Hope, Arkansas
Body type: Average
Ethnicity: White / Caucasian
Religion: Protestant
Zodiac Sign: Cancer
Smoke / Drink: No / No
Children: Proud parent
Education: College graduate
|
Edgy DC
Dec 18 2007 10:01 PM
|
|
Ron Paul's first job when he was able to drive was delivering milk. One of his customers was Honus Freaking Wagner.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 18 2007 10:08 PM
|
|
Tom Tancredo got out of Vietnam Era service, receiving a 1-Y deferment when he reported during his physical that he had been treated for depression during high school.
|
Nymr83
Dec 18 2007 10:13 PM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":17k24fpg]Ron Paul's first job when he was able to drive was delivering milk. One of his customers was Honus Freaking Wagner. |
17k24fpg]
where did you find that? wow
|
Edgy DC
Dec 18 2007 10:46 PM
|
|
Wowkipedia.
|
Nymr83
Dec 18 2007 11:19 PM
|
|
that place is addicting. staying out of edit wars tries my patience.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Dec 19 2007 07:24 AM
|
|
Did Janet Huckabee really name her child "Proud Parent?"
|
Willets Point
Dec 19 2007 08:31 AM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":3dkffn1g]John McCain would be the first, and presumably last, US president born in the Panama Canal Zone, and, therefore, only just barely qualifies under the "natural born citizen" clause. I imagine he would be the only president born in any non-state territory (nominee Barry Goldwater was born in Arizona before it had become a US state), and the only president born in territory that has since been ceded by the United States. |
3dkffn1g]
Until Carlos Delgado is elected President.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Dec 19 2007 08:37 AM
|
|
Ron Gardenhire, born in Germany, would be eligible, wouldn't he?
He wasn't born in the United States, but he was a citizen from the moment of his birth.
|
sharpie
Dec 19 2007 09:00 AM
|
|
Unless he was born at the embassy or on a military base, no.
|
Frayed Knot
Dec 19 2007 09:02 AM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":1yzhrohd]Ron Gardenhire, born in Germany, would be eligible, wouldn't he?
He wasn't born in the United States, but he was a citizen from the moment of his birth. |
1yzhrohd]
The way I've always understood it is that a citizen at the time of one's birth is a "natural born" American and that that could come via being born in the USA or being born to American citizen parents.
The last time this came up was when Mitt Romney's father Geroge briefly ran for Prez. He had been born in Mexico although to American citizen parents and there were those who questioned whether he was eligible. Seeing as how he dropped out of the race early there was never a legal decision specifically on his case.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 19 2007 09:05 AM
|
|
The Consitutional clause of "natural born citizen" is just vague enough to need a few challenges before it's become clear what we all meant when we voted on it. Goldwater might have been the case, but it didn't come to that. It might well have had McCain been born outside the Zone. Fortunately, nobody's been so miserly as to produce a challenge. He's the grandson of an admiral and the son of another admiral. His father was commanding forces in Vietnam while he was a POW being tortured at the Hanoi Hilton. What kind of gall would it take to suggest that you're more American than he is because you were born in Lindenhurst or somewhere?
But those issues need to be settled. Does the child of a servicemember stationed abroad get disqualified if he or she is born abroad? Does it make a difference if he or she is born on a base hospital or the host country's hospital? Does it matter if the spouse is not a US citiizen but the child is registered as one ASAP?
There's some talk about a Consitutional amendment clarifying the issue, but I imagine it won't come until some candidate forces it. The irony is that many of these cases of confusing entanglements come in familiies who have clearly expressed their citizenship in their service abroad.
I have this wonderful family in my church. The father is a 6'7" state department employee. His wife is British and they raised their four children largely during an extended posting in Zambia. The kids are precocious and really really tall. The oldest girl is 12 and as tall as I am, wearing a men's size 11 Air Jordan.
One of the clients in my dinner program, Mr. Smith, loves to tease little girls, so I have to keep an eye on him. Daughter number two (ten year old) was volunteering with us on Thanksgiving, giving out desserts. Mr. Smith quickly recognized her smarts and was grilling her on her future. "You gonna be a lawyer someday? I bet you gonna be a lawyer!"
She glared at him and didn't answer, so he pressed on. "You so smart. I bet you gonna be president."
"I was born in England. I'm not allowed to be president."
He ships out for Baghdad next month, leaving his wife and kids behind, and his kids can't be presidents because they aren't American enough. Broke my little heart.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Dec 19 2007 09:23 AM
|
|
I'm surprised that there's any lack of clarity here.
If I, as a civilian, travel to Europe with my pregnant wife, and she happens to give birth prematurely in a parador in Spain, in what is clearly Spanish territory, that baby can STILL grow up to be President because he or she was a U.S. citizen from the moment of birth. Hence the term, "natural born."
George Washington wasn't born in the United States. He was born in British territory. So was Adams and Jefferson and Madison and Monroe and the next several presidents as well.
Ron Gardenhire wasn't "naturalized" he's always been a citizen. The clause in the Constitution regards a candidate's status at birth, not the location of the birth.
Gardenhire for President!
|
Nymr83
Dec 19 2007 09:34 AM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm"]
George Washington wasn't born in the United States. He was born in British territory. So was Adams and Jefferson and Madison and Monroe and the next several presidents as well.
|
"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution..."
Whatever definition you want to give naturalized (and I agree with the broader one) those presidents are not evidence of its meaning.
Congress has deemed the foreign-born children of Americans to be "natural born." But can they override whatever meaning the constituion had and if the law were repealed would these people still qualify if the constitution had originally meant them to?
|
Edgy DC
Dec 19 2007 09:55 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 19 2007 01:21 PM
|
|
I'm sorry about your potential premature Spanish surprise, but the Constitution is still ambiguous regarding her rights to reach the office.
She's probably good to go, but the courts have never clarified the matter. Romney's father would have served us well if he forced us to seriously examine the issue.
|
Willets Point
Dec 19 2007 10:02 AM
|
|
Hell, Mitt Romney was a trailblazer when he ran for governor of a state where he wasn't a resident, so the Romney family is pretty good at testing popular electoral assumptions.
|
Centerfield
Dec 19 2007 10:21 AM
|
|
I always thought that meant if your mom had a C-section, you couldn't be president.
|
dgwphotography
Dec 19 2007 01:01 PM
|
|
| ="Centerfield":39eukr4o]I always thought that meant if your mom had a C-section, you couldn't be president. |
39eukr4o]
this is what happens when you first get off of post-enhancing drugs...
|
Vic Sage
Dec 19 2007 01:44 PM
|
|
they should let Shwartzenegger run but force him to get tested for steroids first.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Dec 19 2007 02:04 PM
|
|
I got curious.
This is from usconstitution.net:
http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html
| ]
Natural-born citizen
Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?
The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.
Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"
* Anyone born inside the United States
* Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
* Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
* Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
* Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
* Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
* Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
* A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.
Many parts of the world have law to provide them with special status, to allow children born in those places to be considered natural-born. This allows families with a long history of working in these areas without ever returning to the U.S. to be considered natural-born. For example, the Panama Canal Zone had been in U.S. possession for a full century, and some families lived there for generations. 8 USC 1403 handles the Zone specifically, stating that anyone born in the Zone on or after 2/26/1904, to at least one citizen-parent, is a natural-born citizen. Similar law is in place to handle the acquisition of territories, such as Puerto Rico, Alaska, and Hawaii. |
|
Edgy DC
Dec 19 2007 02:08 PM
|
|
Well, consititution.net definitely supports your daughter's claim.
|
Valadius
Dec 19 2007 02:09 PM
|
|
A tragic note - Dennis Kucinich's younger brother, Perry, was found dead at his home by another brother, Larry.
|
Frayed Knot
Dec 19 2007 02:15 PM
|
|
| ="Willets Point":3kbahc6n]Hell, Mitt Romney was a trailblazer when he ran for governor of a state where he wasn't a resident, so the Romney family is pretty good at testing popular electoral assumptions. |
3kbahc6n]
Bobby Kennedy did that with a NY Senate seat long before Mitt, and even before Hillary.
|
dgwphotography
Dec 19 2007 02:24 PM
|
|
Yes, but it's ok as long as there's a (D) next to your name...
|
sharpie
Dec 19 2007 03:23 PM
|
|
Romney had an (R) next to his name.
A related incident was Dick Cheney, a Texas resident at the time, paying taxes and voting there, running with GWB in 2000. The Constitution forbids Presidents and VPs from the same state being on a ticket so Cheney who still had a hunting place in Wyoming claimed that state as his home state even though he no longer lived there. It went unchallenged although some felt it could have been at the time. Had folks in the Democratic party known what Cheney would have become they would probably have thought differently at that non-challenge.
|
Nymr83
Dec 19 2007 03:43 PM
|
|
thats not technically true. what it says is "The electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves"
"themselves" means the electors not the president and vice president. this would mean that the electors from Texas would have had to not vote for Cheney. Bush-Lieberman anyone?
edit-i don't know why i bother looking things up when i can just visit wikipedia...
| ]The Twelfth Amendment does not directly preclude the election of a President and Vice President from the same state, as is often alleged. Nevertheless, running mates conventionally come from different states to prevent situations wherein electors of the state in question are forced to vote for a candidate from a different party or state merely on the grounds of residency. The issue arose during the 2000 presidential election contested by George W. Bush (alongside running-mate Dick Cheney) and Al Gore (alongside Joe Lieberman). It was alleged that Cheney and Bush were both inhabitants of Texas, and that the Texas electors could therefore not cast their ballots for both. Bush's residency was unquestioned, as he was governor of Texas at the time. Cheney had lived and was registered to vote in Texas, but a few months before the election changed his official residency to Wyoming, the state where he had grown up, and for which he had, many years earlier, served as the U.S. Representative. A lawsuit alleging that Cheney remained an inhabitant of Texas was brought, but it was dismissed by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas. |
|
Nymr83
Dec 19 2007 03:57 PM
|
|
| ]Republican presidential candidate Tom Tancredo plans to drop out of the race during an announcement Thursday afternoon in Des Moines, Iowa |
its always good when the fringe candidates drop because the next poll will tell you who that 1 or 2 percent is going to go to.
the Republican field is still pretty open though- Giuliani, McCain, Huckabee, & Romney are serious candidates, Thompson is on the fringe, its time for Paul, Keyes, and Hunter to go.
on the Democrat side i think its really down to hillary and Obama, though Edwards shouldn't run away just yet. Biden, Richardson, Dodd, and Kucinich should get out, am i forgetting anyone?
|
Valadius
Dec 19 2007 04:14 PM
|
|
You forgot Gravel on the Democratic side. And I'd venture to say that Richardson has enough support to stay in the race (about 8%). Also, I don't see Paul getting out, not when he's going to be the Republican fundraising leader for the 4th quarter. Also, Thompson is doing well enough in the South to be a contender. Although you haven't heard much about it, Biden's had a small rise in support.
|
sharpie
Dec 19 2007 04:20 PM
|
|
I don't think it's necesarry for anyone to go until after at least some votes have been cast. If Dodd, Gravel, Keyes et al want to spend their time running for President, so be it. Pretty soon it will get way too expensive and that will necessarily weed out candidates.
|
dgwphotography
Dec 19 2007 06:15 PM
|
|
| ="sharpie":2xbiwr78]Romney had an (R) next to his name.
|
2xbiwr78]
I know that. I was pointing out Willets ignoring the same thing regarding RFK and Hillary.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 20 2007 06:26 AM
|
|
Well, to be fair, another distinction is that they ran for Senate from states they didn't reside in, while he ran to govern one.
|
DocTee
Dec 20 2007 08:18 AM
|
|
New poll out here in California:
Among likely GOP voters, Rudy leads at 25% (the same he polled in August). In second? Mike Huckabee with 17% (up from his dismal August showing of 1%).
That's making up some electoral ground pretty fast.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 20 2007 08:24 AM
|
|
Chuck.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 20 2007 08:31 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 20 2007 09:01 AM
|
|
Joe Biden's wife and infant daughter were killed in a wreck shortly after he was elected to the Senate in 1972. He was sworn into office at the hospital bedside of his young sons who were also seriously injured.
His son Beau, having fully recovered, is scheduled to deploy for Iraq next year, at which time he'll join McCain and Duncan Hunter among candidates who've had sons serve in the Iraq War.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Dec 20 2007 08:40 AM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":bh0worte]Joe Biden's wife and infant daughter were killed in a wreck shortly after he was elected to the Senate in 1972. He was sworn into office at the hospital bedside of his young sons who were also seriously injured. |
bh0worte]
I only learned about that a few months ago. How horrible.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 20 2007 09:03 AM
|
|
He began commuting from Wilmington to DC while his sons were recovering. He's been doing it ever since.
Caeser Rodney only did it once!
|
Edgy DC
Dec 20 2007 09:22 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 20 2007 10:20 AM
|
|
Green Party Candidates:
Jared Ball, independent journalist; radio host (WPFW 89.3 FM Pacifica Radio in Washington, DC), hip-hop scholar, assistant professor of communications studies at Morgan State University in Baltimore, Maryland
http://www.jaredball.com
Elaine Brown, 2005 Green candidate for Mayor of Brunswick, Georgia; former leader of the Black Panther Party; organizer of Mothers Advocating Juvenile Justice and National Alliance for Radical Prison Reform
http://www.elainebrown.org
Jesse Johnson, 2006 US Senate candidate and 2004 gubernatorial candidate for the Mountain Party in West Virginia (now affiliate state party of the Green Party of the United States); filmmaker
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMxgYnmdHfg
Cynthia McKinney, former member of the US House of Representatives (Georgia), 1993 to 2003, 2005 to 2007; former member of the Georgia House of Representatives, 1988-1992
http://www.runcynthiarun.org
Kent Mesplay, 2004 candidate for the Green presidential nomination; former president of Turtle Island Institute; environmental engineer, alternative energy activist; California Green organizer
http://www.mesplay.org
Ralph Nader, 1996 and 2000 Green candidate for President; 2004 independent candidate for President; consumer advocate (Howie Hawkins of the Green Party of New York State has consented to serve as a 'placeholder' candidate until Mr. Nader announces his intentions for the 2008 election)
http://www.draftnader.org
Kat Swift, Texas Green organizer; former Campus Greens leader; activist with Clean Money San Antonio and San Antonio Democracy Now
http://www.bexargreens.org/katforprez
I was wondering what the Natural Law Party had planned. I visited their site and found a list of 2002 candidates, and a link for "Become a Candidate!" I'm going to guess that their moment has passed.
On the other hand, the National Liberal Party doesn't even appear to have a website any longer.
The Reform Party seems to be planning to draft their candidate also, rather than run them against one another. Interestingly, Ralph Nader is one of the dudes pictured on their front page.
|
Nymr83
Dec 20 2007 10:16 AM
|
|
Jared Ball - "hip-hop scholar"? somehow that doesn't sound to me like a qualification for ANY elected office
Elaine Brown - black panther? you're out.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 20 2007 10:21 AM
|
|
Yeah, it does sound like folks with a different agenda are using the Green Party as their vehicle, doesn't it?
|
Edgy DC
Dec 20 2007 10:44 AM
|
|
Where's the site with the big honking map?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Dec 20 2007 10:47 AM
|
|
In future years, when I find myself wondering why guys like Dodd and Kucinich and Hunter hang in there on the fringes for so long even though they're not getting any traction, I'll remind myself of Mike Huckabee in the 2008 primaries.
I'm sure this has happened before, but I can't think of any examples of a back-of-the-pack candidate surging like this and becoming one of the leading contenders.
|
HahnSolo
Dec 20 2007 10:50 AM
|
|
Good site Irish. Thanks for the link.
Amazing if you click on the charts for just about any state you can see the unbelievable upswing Huckabee has had.
And Hilary seems to have a comfortable lead everywhere but Iowa. Would an Iowa loss really hurt her that much?
Footnote: I mentioned to somebody how much Huckabee has surged in the polls and he told me to forget it, that this country will never elect a man named Huckabee president.
|
metirish
Dec 20 2007 10:54 AM
|
|
I remember watching Huckabee on "Real Time with Bill Maher" a few times over the past year or more and thinking he was a good interview,had some interesting thoughts but that would be it for him. Great for him that people are hearing his message, I guess they are ,right?
You're very welcome Solo.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 20 2007 10:56 AM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":2b93s8ac]In future years, when I find myself wondering why guys like Dodd and Kucinich and Hunter hang in there on the fringes for so long even though they're not getting any traction, I'll remind myself of Mike Huckabee in the 2008 primaries.
I'm sure this has happened before, but I can't think of any examples of a back-of-the-pack candidate surging like this and becoming one of the leading contenders. |
2b93s8ac]
Wesley Clark for about 5 minutes in 2003.
|
themetfairy
Dec 20 2007 10:56 AM
|
|
Huckabee is also arguably a beneficiary of [url=http://www.wikiality.com/The_Colbert_Bump:wv0uc0s7]the Colbert Bump[/url:wv0uc0s7].
|
metirish
Dec 20 2007 11:02 AM
|
|
Do the Evolution, I thought he answered this question pretty well considering how loaded it is.
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/sXajXz4DF1w&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/sXajXz4DF1w&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
|
Edgy DC
Dec 20 2007 11:10 AM
|
|
Yahoos screaming "yahoo!" as their hero gets smug is a really depressing TV phenomenon.
That candidates subject themselves to it --- particularly those who are expressing dislike with the process of the "debates" -- is even moreso.
|
Nymr83
Dec 20 2007 08:29 PM
|
|
| ]I'm sure this has happened before, but I can't think of any examples of a back-of-the-pack candidate surging like this and becoming one of the leading contenders. |
Wasn't Bill Clinton not the frontrunner or close to it at the beginning of the '92 election cycle?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Dec 21 2007 05:04 AM
|
|
I don't recall there being much of a front runner at all in 1992. It was just a bunch of nobodies who dared to challenge a sitting president who was enjoying war-time popularity.
I remember thinking, are ANY of these guys going to be able to win the nomination?
|
Edgy DC
Dec 21 2007 06:39 AM
Edited 3 time(s), most recently on Dec 21 2007 07:02 AM
|
|
I remember working at a publishing house that set and published a bunch of college papers. All these student columnists from different schools were trying to get themselves up for Tsongas, but none of them could spell his name.
The general theme was that they just weren't feeling him. They wouldn't come out and say it, but the truth is they didn't think he was dreamy enough.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 21 2007 06:45 AM
|
|
I was barely paying attention in 92 myselfbut seemed to me that Clinton burst to the forefront as an almost direct result of the Genifer Flowers scandal. It made everyone aware of him and he was off the races.
|
MFS62
Dec 21 2007 07:34 AM
|
|
| ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":1azy7391]I was barely paying attention in 92 myselfbut seemed to me that Clinton burst to the forefront as an almost direct result of the Genifer Flowers scandal. It made everyone aware of him and he was off the races. |
1azy7391]
Its has been written that Americans will condemn the sin but forgive the sinner.
But in the case of "fooling around", it reminds me of a book I read probably 50 years ago. The memory is sketchy, but I'll try to convey the gist of the story. A Presidential nominee dies suddenly, and the country saw the head of the political party crying as he gave the speech announcing the candidate's death.
America was taken by the image of this kindly old man. There was no time to convene another convention (IIRC), and none of the other nominees had been really attractive to the voters. So, by acclimation, the party moved to ask the "nice old man" to run. And he did. (Wayyy before we ever heard the term "Q factor")
It was found that the old man had been a travelling salesman in his younger days, and had left many broken hearts ( and fatherless children) all over the country. But he won. Americans loved him, and he was forgiven.
Anyone recall reading that book?
later
|
DocTee
Dec 21 2007 07:48 AM
|
|
| ]The general theme was that they just weren't feeling him |
Then they, like Ken Davidoff, should be disenfranchised.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Dec 21 2007 07:51 AM
|
|
Well, if they WERE feeling him, they should confine that to airport restrooms.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 04 2008 08:33 AM
|
|
Dodd and Biden are out.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jan 04 2008 08:36 AM
|
|
Maybe Joe can be Bam's veep.
Tho, who needs those 3 Delaware electoral votes.
|
metirish
Jan 04 2008 08:41 AM
|
|
Sorry to see Joe go, I'll always have this though.
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/OIT3jUrNTX0&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/OIT3jUrNTX0&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
|
AG/DC
Jan 04 2008 09:10 AM
|
|
Wow.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jan 04 2008 09:19 AM
|
|
Thank you. Come again.
|
Willets Point
Jan 04 2008 02:35 PM
|
|
If I were still able to archive I probably close this thread now and start one dedicated to the primaries. But since I can't this thread will continue to grow monstrously large. Mwahahahahaha.
|
smg58
Jan 04 2008 02:53 PM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":27zp1tsx]Wasn't Bill Clinton not the frontrunner or close to it at the beginning of the '92 election cycle? |
27zp1tsx]
He was, more or less, the frontrunner from early on because he had the most of the higher-ups in the party behind him and a huge fundraising advantage. A couple of early losses to Paul Tsongas didn't change that.
You'd have to go back to Carter in 1976 to find a true upstart getting the party's nomination.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 04 2008 03:03 PM
|
|
| ="Willets Point":wab9rh28]If I were still able to archive I probably close this thread now and start one dedicated to the primaries. But since I can't this thread will continue to grow monstrously large. Mwahahahahaha. |
wab9rh28]
That's another item on my to do list.
|
MFS62
Jan 04 2008 05:17 PM
|
|
| ="Willets Point":3fdr9z7r]If I were still able to archive I probably close this thread now and start one dedicated to the primaries. But since I can't this thread will continue to grow monstrously large. Mwahahahahaha. |
3fdr9z7r]
Bbbbuuutttt, this wasn't a primary. It was a caucus. So you still have until next week to start the primary thread.
Later
|
Nymr83
Jan 04 2008 07:48 PM
|
|
i like caucuses, being able to vote for the guy you really want and then throw your support behind someone else when that guy doesn't have much support is a good thing.
|
metirish
Jan 08 2008 07:02 AM
|
|
Silly quiz time.
<a href="http://wnyw.4wmt.com/cmm/" target="_blank"><img src="http://wnyw.4wmt.com/cmm/images/FindYourMatch.jpg"></a>
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 08 2008 07:23 AM
|
|
| ="metirish":244m1a77]Silly quiz time.
<a href="http://wnyw.4wmt.com/cmm/" target="_blank"><img src="http://wnyw.4wmt.com/cmm/images/FindYourMatch.jpg"></a> |
244m1a77]
My results:
Edwards 35%
Clinton 28%
Kucinich 28%
McCain 28%
Obama 28%
Richardson 23%
Gravel 20%
Paul 20%
Giuliani 15%
Romney 15%
Thompson 10%
Huckabee 8%
Hunter 5%
|
metirish
Jan 08 2008 07:24 AM
|
|
Kinda funny and a bit creepy.
[url=http://www.slate.com/id/2181495/nav/tap3/:a5zi71ss]The Baby Primary[/url:a5zi71ss]
|
Willets Point
Jan 08 2008 07:32 AM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":1rykywee]i like caucuses, being able to vote for the guy you really want and then throw your support behind someone else when that guy doesn't have much support is a good thing. |
1rykywee]
<a href="http://www.instantrunoff.com/">It works in general elections too</a>.
|
metirish
Jan 08 2008 07:43 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 08 2008 07:44 AM
|
|
My results,
Dennis Kucinich - 80%
Hillary Clinton - 75%
Mike Gravel - 70%
Brack Obama - 63%
John Edwards - 58%
Bill Richardson - 55%
Ron Paul - 33%
John McCain - 28%
Rudy Giuliani - 25%
Fred Thompson - 23%
Mitt Romney - 20%
Mike Huckabee - 15%
Duncan Hunter - 10%
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jan 08 2008 07:44 AM
|
|
Clinton 48%
Gravel 48%
Kucinich 43%
Obama 43%
Paul 40%
Edwards 35%
Richardson 33%
Giuliani 28%
McCain 20%
Thomson 18%
Romney 15%
Huckabee 13%
Hunter 5%
|
AG/DC
Jan 08 2008 07:54 AM
|
|
I grumble about bounces that winners of one primary get in the next. Think for yourself, people. Don't let Iowa tell you what to do.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jan 08 2008 08:22 AM
|
|
| ="metirish":1u2ta7tg]Kinda funny and a bit creepy.
[url=http://www.slate.com/id/2181495/nav/tap3/:1u2ta7tg]The Baby Primary[/url:1u2ta7tg] |
1u2ta7tg]
I kinda enjoyed that.
|
Vic Sage
Jan 08 2008 08:34 AM
|
|
Apparently, Mike Gravel is my guy.
|
TransMonk
Jan 08 2008 08:35 AM
|
|
That FOX News Matchmaker is scary.
I trust it's results as much as I trust a Frank Luntz focus group.
|
DocTee
Jan 08 2008 08:39 AM
|
|
Clinton
Edwards
Obama
Anxiously awaiting NYMR's post
|
metirish
Jan 08 2008 08:47 AM
|
|
| ="DocTee":9z6zowdn]Clinton
Edwards
Obama
Anxiously awaiting NYMR's post |
9z6zowdn]
I think that will be good for quility control.
|
HahnSolo
Jan 08 2008 09:47 AM
|
|
Giuliani, McCain, Edwards, and Romney in a near dead heat. How the hell did that happen.
edit: in fact, 10 candidates are all within 5% points. Oh, well, I guess I can't lose.
|
Valadius
Jan 08 2008 09:55 AM
|
|
Obama and McCain win Dixville Notch. Hillary didn't get a single vote.
|
AG/DC
Jan 08 2008 09:59 AM
|
|
My boss in New Hampshire was leaning toward Richardson and got all caught up in the Obama wave and voted for Obama this morning.
He liked the symbolism. I hate presidents as symbols. I vote for nerds.
|
Willets Point
Jan 08 2008 10:06 AM
|
|
83% Kucinich - no surprise
75% Clinton - Clinton seems about as opposite as Kucinich as any Democrat so I don't get this.
70% Gravel - who?
65% Obama
63% Edwards - I actually like Edwards more than Obama due to his anti-povery and anti-corporate platform, but Fox didn't ask me about that
50% Richardson
40% Paul - must be the opposition to the war, I can't imagine anything else
23% McCain - thought he'd be higher
20% Giuliani - no questions about baseball or he'd be even lower
18% Thompson
15% Huckabee
13% Romney - "Retiring Republican MA Governor?" He's been out of office for a year!
5% Hunter - who?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 08 2008 10:11 AM
|
|
Hunter is coming in last for all of us.
I know nothing about him, and it doesn't look like I'm going to need to learn anything about him.
But it makes me wonder what his positions are, that we all seem opposed to them?
|
metirish
Jan 08 2008 10:15 AM
|
|
I'd never heard of him before this.
|
sharpie
Jan 08 2008 10:20 AM
|
|
Clinton, Kucinich, Obama win for me.
Duncan Hunter got a 0% from me. I guess I really hate Duncan Hunter and everything he stands for.
|
sharpie
Jan 08 2008 10:45 AM
|
|
Ann Coulter has endorsed him. I feel pretty good about giving him a 0%.
|
Methead
Jan 08 2008 11:15 AM
|
|
Clinton 68%
Obama 60%
Kucinich 58%
Gravel 55%
Richardson 50%
Edwards 48%
Paul 40%
McCain 23%
Giuliani 18%
Huckabee 15%
Thompson 15%
Hunter 5%
Romney 5%
The big surprise to me here is that Hillary finished first. I'm a little surprised Edwards didn't score higher with me.
I knew Romney and I had nothing in common.
|
Vic Sage
Jan 08 2008 03:14 PM
|
|
Mike Gravel - 63%
Dennis Kucinich - 63%
Hillary Clinton - 60%
Brack Obama - 48%
Bill Richardson - 48%
John Edwards - 45%
Ron Paul - 40%
Rudy Giuliani - 23%
John McCain - 18%
Mike Huckabee - 15%
Fred Thompson - 10%
Mitt Romney - 8%
Duncan Hunter - 5%
If either Gravel or Kucinich makes it onto the NY primary ballot, they've got my vote.
|
AG/DC
Jan 08 2008 09:14 PM
|
|
CNN says Clinton and McCain.
She should've gotten choked up earlier.
|
Nymr83
Jan 08 2008 09:43 PM
|
|
| ="DocTee":f0c2m3y5]
Anxiously awaiting NYMR's post |
f0c2m3y5]
ask and ye shall receive!
Hunter... who? i guess i hould have found out more about him before writing him off
Thompson... yeah i knew i liked him
Romney
Huckabee
Giuliani
McCain ... suprised he's not higher, i know he took a big hit on campaign finances with me but this highlights the problem with this toy, it wont let you take into account that you feel more strongly about some issues than others.
Paul... byebye IRS!
Richardson... really?
Edwards
Gravel
Obama... honesty alone get him ahead of the other dems for me
The Wicked Witch... how'd you get out of last? i'll have to re-take this.
Kucinich
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 09 2008 06:17 AM
|
|
So Hunter finishes last for everyone else, but first for Namor.
Based on his first two choices, it looks like he'd like a Hunter-Thompson ticket. (Where have I heard that name before?)
I'd guess, though, that they (along with Gravel) will be the next guys to drop out of the race.
|
metsmarathon
Jan 09 2008 06:56 AM
|
|
edwards 48%
richardson 45%
mccain 43%
kucinich 38%
romney 38%
giuliani 35%
gravel 35%
obama 35%
clinton 33%
thompson 33%
hunter 23%
paul 20%
huckabee 15%
that doesn't leave much room for nuanced response does it?
"replace us troops with un troops in iraq" could i really answer that with something akin to "no, not ever"? of course i'd like to see us troops leave iraq in favor of a more multinational force. the difference between all the candidates (well, maybe some republicans would never ever want to see a handover, in any amount, to the un) is in the timing, the immediacy, and the process.
also, i really wish there was an creationism = science question, just for fun.
|
AG/DC
Jan 09 2008 07:09 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 09 2008 08:18 AM
|
|
Is the president in charge of UN forces?
|
metirish
Jan 09 2008 08:14 AM
|
|
| ="AG/DC"]Is the president in charge of UN forces. |
Good point.
I really think Rudy is starting to over use 9/11, just a bit though...
| ]
Rudy Giuliani cries '9/11' on tears
Wednesday, January 9th 2008, 4:00 AM
Rudy Giuliani was asked Tuesday about Hillary Clinton's misty-eyed moment the day before and his answer was ... 9/11.
"This is not something I would judge anybody on, one way or the other," Giuliani said when asked on MSNBC if he had ever teared up in public.
"And the reality is, if you look at me, Sept. 11 - the funerals, the memorial services - there were times in which it was impossible not to feel the emotion."
The line came just days after he said of his sixth-place finish in Iowa: "None of this worries me - Sept. 11, there were times I was worried."
|
|
sharpie
Jan 09 2008 08:16 AM
|
|
Giuliani is starting to become a parody of himself.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 09 2008 08:37 AM
|
|
He really is. He has to tone down the 9/11 stuff.
I never did understand how his September 11 experience makes him a terrorism fighter. He was a composed and eloquent victim. He has no terrorism <i>prevention</i> credentials at all.
|
AG/DC
Jan 09 2008 09:13 AM
|
|
Candidates hitting singular notes:
Obama: "Change, change, changety, change."
Edwards: "Don't tell me about change. I'll tell you about change. Change? I invented the word."
Clinton: "Experience, doer, not a dreamer."
Giuliani: "It happened in September. It started out such a nice day."
Paul: "Withdraw. My God. Now."
Tancredo: "It's such a big border. Folks are pouring in! And nobody cares! And... you might be one of them!"
|
sharpie
Jan 09 2008 09:24 AM
|
|
When I hear campaigns saying "We Want Change" I think of nickels, dimes and quarters. At one point during the debate last Sattiday one of the candidates (I think HRC) said something about "making change" which made me think of giving her a dollar and then she gives me back four quarters.
|
metirish
Jan 09 2008 09:25 AM
|
|
I watched this with some interest late into the night and was not impressed that Obama looked a bit shell shocked giving his concession speech, dude it's one night and you didn't lose the nomination so chin up .
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 09 2008 09:27 AM
|
|
Obama is very fortunate that people are associated him with positive change, even though most of them would be hard pressed to say exactly what kind of changes Obama is promising.
Gary Hart got some (but not as much) traction with "new ideas" back in 1984.
|
AG/DC
Jan 09 2008 09:29 AM
|
|
I hear about change and status quo and abstractions like that and I want to start hollerin'. Talk about something tangible NOW!!!!
I particularly wanted to punt Edwards for hitting the status quo note so hard. He left the Senate to run for president for four years and that somehow makes him more qualified.
|
soupcan
Jan 09 2008 10:23 AM
|
|
Appears to be a lot of liberal Dems hanging out at the 'Pool.
Here's how I fell -
45% Bill Richardson - How's a Latino get a name like 'Richardson'?
38% Barack Obama - I like him, but I keep seeing Jimmy Carter when I look at him (not neccesarily a bad thing...)
35% Hillary Clinton - Well I am a Democrat and I'm less liberal than I used to be.
35% John Edwards - Very handsome man.
35% Rudy Giuliani - A joke. Besides the fact that a black man or a woman will be POTUS before an Eye-talian with as etnic sounding a name as his.
33% John McCain - I wouldn't be incredibly disappointed.
30% Dennis Kucinich - Came in first on a different one of these polls I did that was a bit more detailed
28% Mitt Romney - He thinks Jesus needs to be more involved in my life. I disagree.
23% Mike Gravel - Doesn't he own the quarry where Fred Flintstone works?
18% Fred Thompson - Law & Order LOL.
15% Duncan Hunter - Huh?
15% Ron Paul - Saw him on the Tonight Show on Monday - he was very likeable and threw a coupla jabs at Rudy.
10% Mike Huckabee - The Biggest Loser
|
Farmer Ted
Jan 09 2008 12:11 PM
|
|
Watched the debates in NH the other night. The Mrs. and I were in agreement that Romney came across as the most intelligent guy on either stage. But he also came across as the school know-it-all. Does anyone still tuck sweaters in their pants? Queer Eye needs to track that man down. I'm glad I don't have to vote in a primary yet because I'm still fenced.
|
soupcan
Jan 09 2008 12:12 PM
|
|
(untucks sweater)
|
OlerudOwned
Jan 09 2008 06:18 PM
|
|
Results from the goofy little matchmaker:
63% - Dennis Kucinich. Such a shame that he's got no chance, I like the dude. Hot wife, too.
60% - Hillary Clinton. Alright.
55% - Mike Gravel. [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rZdAB4V_j8:2pa2ow5v]Batty, but that's not a bad thing.[/url:2pa2ow5v]
53% - Barack Obama. Alright.
53% - Bill Richardson. Wouldn't mind him as a VP.
50% - John Edwards. Mill mill mill mill mill mill mill ok we get it.
30% - Ron Paul. The concept of Ron Paul seems a lot better than actual Ron Paul, if that makes sense.
28% - Rudy Giuliani. Ack.
18% - John McCain. I don't mind [url=http://wonkette.com/politics/campaigns/the-next-two-years-are-already-unbearable-214762.php:2pa2ow5v]WALNUTS![/url:2pa2ow5v]
8% - Huckabee, Romney, Thompson. No, no ,no.
3% - Duncan Hunter - Hahaha.
|
Nymr83
Jan 09 2008 07:13 PM
|
|
AP says Richardson is calling it quits, probably figures he should get out now and start sucking up for VP. too bad, that question game called him my top democrat
|
MFS62
Jan 09 2008 07:17 PM
|
|
80% -John Edwards
60% - Bill Richardson
50% Dennis Kucinich
50% Barack Obama
45% Hillary Clinton
45% Mike Gravel
43% John McCain
38% Rudy Giuliani
28% Mitt Romney
25% Ron Paul
25% Fred Thompson
18% Duncan Hunter
13% Mike Huckabee
I kinda' suspected.
Later
|
metsguyinmichigan
Jan 10 2008 07:53 AM
|
|
With the Michigan primary next week, the GOP candidates are coming here.
One of the fun parts of my job is that I get to help out with the campaign coverage, which I really enjoy.
I was able to cover Mitt Romney at three stops yesterday and a Huckabee rally Saturday.
Romney was impressive. He gives very detailed answers. Drew some decent crowds. I'm curious to see how Huckabee compares on Sunday.
McCain is coming back on Monday.
None of the Dems are coming, given the issues with their primary. Disappointed about that, because I like to meet folks from both parties.
|
MFS62
Jan 10 2008 09:26 PM
|
|
Anyone hear tonight's Republican debate?
If I heard correctly, most, if not all, of the candidates invoked the name of Ronald Ragan.
Not one of them mentioned dubya by name. Only two - Huckabee and Thompson used the term "The President".
Sounds like they're trampling all over themselves to distance themselves from him.
Later
|
Nymr83
Jan 15 2008 09:25 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jan 15 2008 10:36 PM
|
|
Romney 39% Mccain 30% Huckabee 16% in Michigan.
Clinton was the only democrat on the ballot and got 57% compared to 38% for "uncommitted."
Michigan was stripped of its delegates by the Democratic Party for daring to believe it could set its own primary date and make itself as important as New Hampshire or South Carolina. How dare they.
|
AG/DC
Jan 15 2008 10:05 PM
|
|
Is this any way to elect a president?
|
Rockin' Doc
Jan 16 2008 07:42 AM
|
|
I don't keep up with all the political news, particularly this early in the election year, but why was Hillary the only candidate on the Michigan primary ballot?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 16 2008 07:51 AM
|
|
Because of a dispute between the national Democratic party and the state party. The nationals didn't approve of Michigan scheduling its primary earlier than usual and as a result ruled that no delegates would be awarded. Obama and Edwards withdrew from the ballot, but Hillary didn't.
|
AG/DC
Jan 16 2008 07:57 AM
|
|
| ="Rockin' Doc":11gq9hr9]I don't keep up with all the political news, particularly this early in the election year... |
11gq9hr9]
Not that I blame you, but the primaries are almost effectively done.
|
Nymr83
Jan 16 2008 12:19 PM
|
|
what do you mean "effectively done?" the republican race still looks wide open and the democrats are in a legit 2 candidate race.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 16 2008 12:21 PM
|
|
Because in six weeks that won't be the case. And that'll still be early in the year comparatively.
I didn't say, "effectively done." I said, "almost effectively done."
|
Nymr83
Jan 16 2008 12:27 PM
|
|
you're on the wrong name!
|
Edgy DC
Jan 16 2008 12:31 PM
|
|
Whatev. I had some adminnin' to do and EDC is my admin hat.
|
Willets Point
Jan 16 2008 02:12 PM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":2ltmadqi]Whatev. I had some adminnin' to do and EDC is my admin hat. |
2ltmadqi]
Wait, are you posting under another handle now?!
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 16 2008 02:18 PM
|
|
He also posts as "SteveJRogers"
|
AG/DC
Jan 16 2008 02:19 PM
|
|
It's more like three weeks, isn't it?
|
Nymr83
Jan 19 2008 03:01 PM
|
|
Clinton and Romney are projected to have won Nevada today, I don't see any South Carolina numbers yet.
|
Willets Point
Jan 19 2008 08:51 PM
|
|
Edgy/AG is going to love this:
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gEaS-K3j3M8&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gEaS-K3j3M8&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
|
Rockin' Doc
Jan 19 2008 09:39 PM
|
|
And I sometiomes think that most of us here have too much time on our hands. That video really must have taken some time to piece together. Good find Willets.
|
AG/DC
Jan 19 2008 10:45 PM
|
|
Sadly, I think it didn't take as much time as all that.
Get a new buzzword. All they're doing is making me want to cling to my sweet beleaguered Bushie.
|
Nymr83
Jan 19 2008 11:30 PM
|
|
McCain takes South Carolina, a state he lost to Bush in 2000, by 3% from the former southern governor Mike Huckabee, who probably lost too many votes to Thompson.
Hunter is bailing out, but its still crowded
|
DocTee
Jan 22 2008 12:42 PM
|
|
Fred Thompson, out.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 22 2008 12:45 PM
|
|
Not surprised. He had said that South Carolina was his line in the sand.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jan 22 2008 01:06 PM
|
|
| ="DocTee":1irinang]Fred Thompson, out. |
1irinang]'
He sucked in "Law & Order" too. I'd vote for Diane Weist as my DA.
|
metirish
Jan 22 2008 01:17 PM
|
|
="John Cougar Lunchbucket":2uxwvwf0]| ="DocTee":2uxwvwf0]Fred Thompson, out. |
2uxwvwf0]'
He sucked in "Law & Order" too. I'd vote for Diane Wiest as my DA. |
2uxwvwf0]
Definitely more convincing in "Die Hard 2 "
|
Willets Point
Jan 22 2008 01:56 PM
|
|
| ="DocTee"]Fred Thompson, out. |
NTTAWWT.
As an aside, I used to mow the lawn for Dianne Weist.
|
DocTee
Jan 24 2008 02:37 PM
|
|
Dennis Kucinich, out.
|
Willets Point
Jan 24 2008 03:40 PM
|
|
| ="DocTee":2yt6luks]Dennis Kucinich, out. |
2yt6luks]
Shit. Now who am I going to vote for?
Unless you mean he's gay which I won't believe because his wife is totally hot.
|
seawolf17
Jan 24 2008 05:07 PM
|
|
="Willets Point":2lf4vp42]| ="DocTee":2lf4vp42]Dennis Kucinich, out. |
2lf4vp42]
Shit. Now who am I going to vote for?
Unless you mean he's gay which I won't believe because his wife is totally hot. |
2lf4vp42]
Have we addressed the Daily Show clip where one of the reporters -- I don't remember which -- interviews her and asks what she thinks about potentially being a FLILF?
|
AG/DC
Jan 24 2008 05:54 PM
|
|
Vote for him anyhow.
|
MFS62
Jan 26 2008 11:14 AM
|
|
MSNBC has a team in Columbia, SC today to cover the Democratic Primary. This morning they broadcast from a place called The Lizzard's Thicket. I've eaten there several times. Real down home cookin'. My wife thinks it has the best cornbread she ever ate.
If you want to take the political pulse of the locals in New Jeresy, you go to a diner. If you want to do the same in Columbia, you couldn't pick a better place.
Later
|
Willets Point
Jan 26 2008 07:29 PM
|
|
During the New Hampshire primaries, NPR kept interviewing people at the Tilt'n Diner which is my favorite place to stop after a day of hiking in the White Mountains.
|
Nymr83
Jan 27 2008 08:13 PM
|
|
Yet another "candidate calculator"
[url:2d4wzf4i]http://www.vajoe.com/candidate_calculator.html[/url:2d4wzf4i]
this one says i should vote for Romney, least compatible candidate was Kucinich.
|
metirish
Jan 27 2008 08:23 PM
|
|
Romney was 'Bottom of the barrel" for me just above Duncan Hunter.
Mike Gravel was a 100% match followed closely by Kucinich.
|
sharpie
Jan 28 2008 07:02 AM
|
|
Kucinich tops, Hunter bottom. Each of these scorers have Hunter as my bottom candidate. The top 4 candidates it had for me, Kucinich, Gravel, Dodd and Biden have all dropped out.
|
MFS62
Jan 28 2008 07:07 AM
|
|
Obama, Hilary, Gravel, Kucinich.
Later
|
seawolf17
Jan 28 2008 07:15 AM
|
|
Gravel, Kucinich, Biden, Dodd.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jan 28 2008 07:21 AM
|
|
I'm a Gravel man, again.
|
metsmarathon
Jan 28 2008 08:29 AM
|
|
rudy / gravel / cox / huckabee
|
sharpie
Jan 28 2008 08:36 AM
|
|
Never heard of Cox before. I guess his candidacy went nowhere.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 28 2008 08:38 AM
|
|
I think that site is a push poll for Gravel.
|
metirish
Jan 28 2008 09:01 AM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":m4hfnu4a]I think that site is a push poll for Gravel. |
m4hfnu4a]
I don't think so because I just voted the oppisite of what I believe and Fred Thompson was the match followed closely by Romney and Tancredo.
My "bottom of the barrel" were Gravel, Kucinich.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 28 2008 09:24 AM
|
|
I got a tie between Kucinich and Obama.
Then came Clinton, Edwards, Dodd, Biden.
My top Republican was Giuliani, then Huckabee. Of the Republicans still in the race, McCain (the one I like best) finished last. My rock bottom four were Brownback, Thompson, Hunter, and Tancredo.
One thing that these calculators don't factor in is the fact that we don't only vote issues, we also vote personalities. We vote personalities MORE than we vote issues, unfortunately. But it's not wrong to base part of your vote on personality. Even if a candidate agrees with you on a particular issue such as stem cells or border fences, he won't necessarily be able to enact his policy. We also vote on who we trust to best handle the unexpected. When we elect a president, we have no idea what the next four years will bring.
|
soupcan
Jan 28 2008 09:42 AM
|
|
I got Clinton.
Then Kucinich, O'Bama and Dodd.
Bottom 'O the Barrel was Ron Paul.
|
Willets Point
Jan 28 2008 09:59 AM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":3vgh8bf6]
One thing that these calculators don't factor in is the fact that we don't only vote issues, we also vote personalities. We vote personalities MORE than we vote issues, unfortunately. But it's not wrong to base part of your vote on personality. Even if a candidate agrees with you on a particular issue such as stem cells or border fences, he won't necessarily be able to enact his policy. We also vote on who we trust to best handle the unexpected. When we elect a president, we have no idea what the next four years will bring. |
3vgh8bf6]
There's also the personality issue of whether or not you feel you can trust the candidate to actually stand up for the issues they claim to. For example, a quiz may find that Hillary Clinton's campaign promises meet my ideals but I know that she like her weenie husband will shift to the right and jump, beg, and roll-over to corporate interests at the first opportunity to strengthen her power.
|
Vic Sage
Jan 28 2008 10:07 AM
|
|
top:
Kucinich - 81.08%
Gravel - 72.97%
Biden, Clinton, Edwards, Obama - 70.27%
Bottom:
Thompson - 10.81%
Romney, Hunter - 16.22%
Brownback -18.92%
highest ranked republican: Ron Paul - 48.65%
I'm going to write in Eugene McCarthy...
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jan 29 2008 07:26 AM
|
|
Today's Post front page, noting Kennedy's endoresement of Obama reads
BAMALOT
beating the News' take on the Clinton's disappointment:
SHAF-TED
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 29 2008 07:43 AM
|
|
I did like the banner on the bottom of the News' front page today:
WILL IT BE GOOD-BYE RUDY TUESDAY?
|
AG/DC
Jan 29 2008 07:44 AM
|
|
"We need change in Washington. That's why I'm standing here pleased to accept the endorsement of the man who has been Senator since 1962."
I listened to that rally in the car last night. It was like he was implicitly proclaiming himself the new JFK. He mentioned that his Dad came to America with a grant from the Kennedy Foundation --- which is kind of cool in that, without the grant, Obama wouldn't exist --- but he delivered the story as if JFK himself had signed off on the grant.
In Moments of Notable Hyperbole, the NOW New York chapter released a statement claiming, "women have just experienced the ultimate betrayal."
|
sharpie
Jan 29 2008 08:00 AM
|
|
Caroline Kennedy, in her NYT op-ed, explicitly linked Obama to JFK.
|
metirish
Jan 29 2008 08:12 AM
|
|
More than anything though I think Obama is closer to Kennedy in beliefs than Clinton, it was quite a stirring moment watching Kennedy pass that torch( if you believe in that).
|
AG/DC
Jan 29 2008 08:20 AM
|
|
Don't. Unstirred.
Cynical. Snarky. Hulk smash.
|
Willets Point
Jan 29 2008 08:31 AM
|
|
I guess we call him O'Bama now.
|
DocTee
Jan 29 2008 08:41 AM
|
|
| ]I guess we call him O'Bama now |
Yes, yes we can:
[url]http://2008obama.blogspot.com/2007/03/barack-obama-has-irish-heritage-too.html[/url]
|
Valadius
Jan 29 2008 10:24 AM
|
|
Obama picks up the support of Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of his mother's home state of Kansas.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 29 2008 10:27 AM
|
|
If we're to believe Kansas' reputation, there are about eight Democrats in that state. (And one of them is the governor!)
|
Edgy DC
Jan 29 2008 11:12 AM
|
|
| ="Valadius":apjnzncb]Obama picks up the support of Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of his mother's home state of Kansas. |
apjnzncb]
<a href="http://www.gilliusinc.com/dropsoap.html" target="blank">Here</a>'s something else she apparently endorses.
|
Frayed Knot
Jan 29 2008 11:21 AM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":3nufkagt]If we're to believe Kansas' reputation, there are about eight Democrats in that state. (And one of them is the governor!) |
3nufkagt]
Kind of like Massachusetts.
They had a string of Republican Governors even though they havent sent an elephant to Congress in decades or voted that way in a national election in who knows how long.
|
soupcan
Jan 29 2008 12:11 PM
|
|
="DocTee"]| ]I guess we call him O'Bama now |
Yes, yes we can:
[url]http://2008obama.blogspot.com/2007/03/barack-obama-has-irish-heritage-too.html[/url] |
That's bullshit. I so made that up. Thieves.
|
Valadius
Jan 29 2008 01:00 PM
|
|
="Edgy DC":7r07cu6j]| ="Valadius":7r07cu6j]Obama picks up the support of Gov. Kathleen Sebelius of his mother's home state of Kansas. |
7r07cu6j]
<a href="http://www.gilliusinc.com/dropsoap.html" target="blank">Here</a>'s something else she apparently endorses. |
7r07cu6j]
What the hell? I do hope this is a joke.
|
metsmarathon
Jan 29 2008 01:31 PM
|
|
those shirts are freakin' hideous. that the son of a supporter has designed and intends to sell them should be more embarrassing to the presidential hopeful than that lame game.
|
Valadius
Jan 29 2008 01:51 PM
|
|
It's her son. He's an idiot. What is she supposed to do? It's got nothing to do with her.
|
AG/DC
Jan 29 2008 01:57 PM
|
|
| ]The governor's spokeswoman, Nicole Corcoran, said both parents "are very proud of their son John's creativity and talent." |
If it was my son, that might have said more.
|
Valadius
Jan 29 2008 03:38 PM
|
|
Seriously, what's she supposed to say? Publicly excoriating your son would be a horrible thing to do.
|
bmfc1
Jan 29 2008 06:59 PM
|
|
Huckabee on his loss in Florida: "Even the Cardinals have a bad inning now and again but they know how to win championships." Shut up.
|
AG/DC
Jan 29 2008 07:08 PM
|
|
| ="Valadius":2pwnckrk]Seriously, what's she supposed to say? Publicly excoriating your son would be a horrible thing to do. |
2pwnckrk]
You're the one who called him an idiot.
|
Nymr83
Jan 29 2008 07:44 PM
|
|
McCain beats Romney in Florida, Giuliani 3rd and moving backwards. I don't see any reason for him to NOT wait one more week and see how "super tuesday" goes, but he's toast. The only advantage to bailing out now would be if he prefers to see McCain beat Romney (since McCain will likely receive a higher percentage of what would have been Giuliani votes.)
Clinton "wins" 51%-31% over Obama, but wasn't she the only one to actually "campaign" down there?
Oh and of course Hillary is calling for the delegates from Florida and Michigan (which she won as the only one campaigning) to be restored.
|
Nymr83
Jan 30 2008 12:34 AM
|
|
| ]Rudy Giuliani , his presidential campaign in tatters, is going to abandon his presidential race and endorse John McCain after a distant third-place loss in Florida, Republican sources told FOX News late Tuesday.
Neither campaign will confirm or deny plans for an endorsement of the Republican front-runner by his friend, the former New York City mayor, but other GOP sources say it is being arranged for Wednesday.
|
|
AG/DC
Jan 30 2008 07:10 AM
|
|
That should be good for an attorney general appointment.
|
AG/DC
Jan 30 2008 07:25 AM
|
|
That's interesting. He still had enough support to swing various primaries.
Will the Democratic race get uglier or not without him?
|
Willets Point
Jan 30 2008 07:58 AM
|
|
2yymx3sd]
Shit. Couldn't he hold out until Super Tuesday at least?
|
sharpie
Jan 30 2008 08:07 AM
|
|
What would be the point? He got 18% in South Carolina, a state he won four years ago.
|
Willets Point
Jan 30 2008 08:13 AM
|
|
| ="sharpie":od9jfe8o]What would be the point? He got 18% in South Carolina, a state he won four years ago. |
od9jfe8o]
To give me someone to vote for who I find halfway decent since Kucinich already dropped out. I guess I'm a Mike Gravel man now.
|
sharpie
Jan 30 2008 08:15 AM
|
|
Vote for him anyway. Or Kucinich.
|
Nymr83
Feb 09 2008 09:01 PM
|
|
Obama wins Caucuses in Nebraska, Washington and the Virgin Islands and Louisiana's primary election.
Obama has 998 delegates to Clinton's 1,055. it takes 2,025 to win the nomination.
|
AG/DC
Feb 11 2008 09:45 AM
|
|
Ours will be a closed primary. So I'm sitting out.
But does anybody else vote on these jive ballots where you have to draw in the shaft of an arrow. Every time they hand me a ballot, it feels like something left over from Roman times.
http://www.dcboee.org/nws/news_frame.as ... eases&hl=t
|
sharpie
Feb 11 2008 10:03 AM
|
|
I'm surprised that the Statehood Green party has so many candidates.
|
Willets Point
Feb 11 2008 11:07 AM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":1dogcua7]
But does anybody else vote on these jive ballots where you have to draw in the shaft of an arrow. |
1dogcua7]
Voted on those every year in my old town, but in Boston I voted on a ballot with ovals that reminded me of the SAT's.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 11 2008 11:21 AM
|
|
I've only voted in New York and in Pennsylvania, and in both places it's lever-pulling.
The only time I ever marked paper was in 2004 when I voted by absentee ballot.
|
AG/DC
Feb 11 2008 11:45 AM
|
|
| ="sharpie"]I'm surprised that the Statehood Green party has so many candidates. |
In a town that's only 10% Republican, Statehood Green is a viable alternative. It was born from a pragmatic alliance. The Green Party had the organzation and the numbers, but the Statehood party had a long-time councilmmember. I think she was elected as a Democrat and converted while on the council.
Living next door to the park where all the grass roots rallies take place, I always get to witness the moment the wind flies out of the sails of the attendees, when some partycrat stands up and tries to angrily tie the angendas together.
<ul><li>"And the issue of global warming is all tied up in the issue of DC statehood!</li>
<li>"And the disgusting racist drive to go to war relates in an important way to the issue of DC statehood!</li>
<li>"And as we sit here and demand freedom for our brother Mumia, I can't help but think how much our cause has in common with the cause for DC statehood!</li></ul> Many at the rallies are caught by suprise, but even the most pro-statehood veterans just roll their eyes with a "here we go again." One friend of mine --- with a beer or two in him --- waited for a silent moment and screamed, "No, it's not! Thank you! Next!"
Our lack of voting rights is really pathetic, but I lived a few doors down from the chairman of the party on Lamont Street (see <a href="http://cranepoolforum.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=2204&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0&sid=303237228e983ae2f74dc1981d4b5186" target="blank">A Propos of Jill Carroll</a>) and he was notorious for the level of voter fraud he exercised. His dog Packy was registered as "Packy Lamont." It was such an open secret that the neightbors finally blew the whistle on him. And, yes, they did also find a fraudulent "Hugh G. Rection" registered when they investigated.
|
AG/DC
Feb 13 2008 08:45 AM
|
|
Democrats voting in the DC primary yesterday: 113,157
Republicans: 5,711
|
Nymr83
Feb 15 2008 08:10 PM
|
|
Hillary, taking a swipe at Obama, says people face a choice between "speeches and solutions." I think she's right, only she is the one who is giving meaningless speeches and has no clear policy beyond "win the election." I don't support Obama's positions, but I fully believe that he believes in those positions and, unlike Hillary, won't lie about what he thinks to get elected.
|
AG/DC
Feb 15 2008 08:51 PM
|
|
I don't see him putting out postions at all. I'm getting nebulous stuff about change and and status quo.
She may indeed be willing to say or do anything to get elected. He's doing a great job saying nothing from my seat.
|
Frayed Knot
Feb 16 2008 05:52 AM
|
|
Craig Crawford, a reporter who's seen & heard on various news and cable shows, said the other day that his mention of Obama's general lack of substance and specifics was met by admonishment by some within his business for straying from the party line. It seems that, at least for the time being, the insider media view wants Obama to be seen as "new", "exciting", "inspiring", etc. and to say anything contradictory to that is the equivilent of tossing a turd in the puchbowl.
Meanwhile, if you want some much more strident 'Obama has no clothes' comments you need to be listening to the other Clinton. He really teed off a day or two ago.
|
AG/DC
Feb 16 2008 07:13 AM
|
|
Present.
|
TransMonk
Feb 18 2008 12:38 PM
|
|
Wisconsin's primary is tomorrow and it looks like it's going to matter more than any of us thought it would 3 months ago on the Democratic side.
Our family is going to go watch Hillary tonight. Ms. Monk and Monk Jr. saw Obama last Tuesday as well. I'm 95% sure I'll give my vote to Obama tomorrow, but I am willing to listen to Hillary in person before I go 100%. My wife is still truly undecided, but at least she's listening closely to both sides, which I suppose is better than blindly casting a vote in the end.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 18 2008 12:59 PM
|
|
Trivia time:
Unless something unexpected happens, November's election will be between two sitting U.S. Senators.
I wonder if that's ever happened before? The majority of elections either feature a sitting President or a sitting VP, so there's usually no room for two Senators to get into the race. In my lifetime, the only sitting Senators to run for President were (unless I'm overlooking someone) Kerry in 2004, McGovern in 1972, and Goldwater in 1964. (Dole in 1996 could have been included in this list, but he resigned from the Senate once he got the nomination.)
|
Gwreck
Feb 18 2008 01:28 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":7evm94oe]Trivia time:
Unless something unexpected happens, November's election will be between two sitting U.S. Senators.
I wonder if that's ever happened before? |
7evm94oe]
Nope.
New trivia question:
Who was the last two-term incumbent Vice-President (before Cheney) who did not run for President?
|
Frayed Knot
Feb 18 2008 01:39 PM
|
|
Last election with neither a sitting Prez or Veep was 1952 when retired General Eisenhower ran against Senator Stevenson
1956 - Prez Ike runs for re-election
1960 - VP Nixon runs for his own term
1964 - Prez Johnson run for his first full term
1968 - Veep Humphry runs
1972 - Prez Nixon runs for 2nd term
1976 - Prez Ford runs for a full term
1980 - Prez Carter runs for re-election
1984 - Prez Reagan runs for re-election
1988 - Veep GHW Bush runs for his own term
1992 - Prez GHW Bush runs for re-election
1996 - Prez Clinton runs for re-election
2000 - Veep Gore runs for own term
2004 - Prez GW Bush runs for re-election
|
Nymr83
Feb 18 2008 02:31 PM
|
|
| ]
Who was the last two-term incumbent Vice-President (before Cheney) who did not run for President? |
its actually been awhile as far as i can tell, Thomas Marshall made a brief run for president before he was Woodrow Wilson's VP but not afterwards. Before Marshall there hadn't been a two-term VP since Calhoun was re-elected VP in 1828 (with a different president, he was vp under both the junior Adams and Jackson.) Calhoun, like Marshall, had run for president before being vp.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Feb 18 2008 06:39 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":ubn621ya]Trivia time:
Unless something unexpected happens, November's election will be between two sitting U.S. Senators.
I wonder if that's ever happened before? The majority of elections either feature a sitting President or a sitting VP, so there's usually no room for two Senators to get into the race. In my lifetime, the only sitting Senators to run for President were (unless I'm overlooking someone) Kerry in 2004, McGovern in 1972, and Goldwater in 1964. (Dole in 1996 could have been included in this list, but he resigned from the Senate once he got the nomination.) |
ubn621ya]
Don't forget Sen. Mondale in 1984 -- though after a 49-state butt-kicking it's easy to forget!
|
AG/DC
Feb 18 2008 07:38 PM
|
|
Mondale was done sitting, though, and was Former VP Walter Mondale by 1984.
|
Nymr83
Feb 18 2008 07:43 PM
|
|
Your mention of Dole brings up an interesting point, would any of the candidates resign from the senate if nominated?
John McCain seems to me the most likely. At his age he has accomplished alot and it wouldn't be a bad time to retire if he loses the presidency.
Despite there being a Democrat in the governor's mansion in Arizona, state law requires his appointed replacement be of the same party (I don't know how that works exactly, could any democrat switch their official affiliation and take his spot by appointment?)
|
SteveJRogers
Feb 18 2008 07:56 PM
|
|
I could see Clinton stepping down as it is clear this was her goal all along when she first ran for senate. And then just completely focus her efforts on 2012, even if Obama wins the election in November.
|
AG/DC
Feb 18 2008 07:58 PM
|
|
Dole was astrong underdog at that time. I think it was a gesture to show his seriousness, Senate Majority Leader being a serious job and all.
I would have appreciated if he set up a more distinguished successor than Trent Lott.
|
Frayed Knot
Feb 18 2008 08:07 PM
|
|
| ="SteveJRogers":3rsenvmj]I could see Clinton stepping down as it is clear this was her goal all along when she first ran for senate. And then just completely focus her efforts on 2012, even if Obama wins the election in November. |
3rsenvmj]
There is no way in hell Clinton resigns if/when she gets the nomination.
Lieberman not only didn't resign when he was running for VP, but he stayed on the ballot for his own Senate seat which, unlike the big ticket, he won. He is currently in the midst of serving out that term.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 18 2008 08:40 PM
|
|
I agree that McCain might. Clinton and Obama wouldn't. They have too many years of Senating that they can still do.
|
Gwreck
Feb 18 2008 09:34 PM
|
|
="Nymr83"]| ]
Who was the last two-term incumbent Vice-President (before Cheney) who did not run for President? |
its actually been awhile as far as i can tell, Thomas Marshall made a brief run for president before he was Woodrow Wilson's VP but not afterwards. |
Correct.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Feb 18 2008 11:15 PM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":29y4y0fv]Mondale was done sitting, though, and was Former VP Walter Mondale by 1984. |
29y4y0fv]
Of course. My bad.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Feb 18 2008 11:19 PM
|
|
="Frayed Knot":2r5157rj]| ="SteveJRogers":2r5157rj]I could see Clinton stepping down as it is clear this was her goal all along when she first ran for senate. And then just completely focus her efforts on 2012, even if Obama wins the election in November. |
2r5157rj]
There is no way in hell Clinton resigns if/when she gets the nomination.
Lieberman not only didn't resign when he was running for VP, but he stayed on the ballot for his own Senate seat which, unlike the big ticket, he won. He is currently in the midst of serving out that term. |
2r5157rj]
I think Lloyd Bensten did that, too, back in 1988.
|
Willets Point
Feb 19 2008 06:00 AM
|
|
| ="Frayed Knot":3i4g23tm]
Lieberman not only didn't resign when he was running for VP, but he stayed on the ballot for his own Senate seat which, unlike the big ticket, he won. He is currently in the midst of serving out that term. |
3i4g23tm]
Actually, Lieberman finished that term in 2006 and was elected again as an Independent candidate that year. It was kind of a big story at the time.
|
seawolf17
Feb 19 2008 07:38 AM
|
|
McCain seems to proud to retire an election loser, but he is rather old.
Why would Clinton resign? That'd be insane.
|
AG/DC
Feb 20 2008 08:20 AM
|
|
Charges of plagiarism.
Deval Patrick in 2006:
<blockquote>"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." Just words—just words! "We have nothing to fear but fear itself." Just words! "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." Just words! "I have a dream." Just words!</blockquote>Barack Obama in 2008:
<blockquote>Don't tell me words don't matter. "I have a dream." Just words? "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." Just words? "We have nothing to fear but fear itself"—just words? Just speeches?</blockquote>I think the larger issue is the disingenous way he reframes the criticism of himself. None of those quotes are from campaign speeches or debates. The criticism of him is that he's campaigning without laying out an actual platform, not that his words are meaningless.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 20 2008 08:27 AM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":27d1nvgx]I think the larger issue is the disingenous way he reframes the criticism of himself. None of those quotes are from campaign speeches or debates. The criticism of him is that he's campaigning without laying out an actual platform, not that his words are meaningless. |
27d1nvgx]
Obama shouldn't be making a case that words matter. He should be making a case that he does in fact have substance.
Since he's not taking that approach, he's essentially conceding the "substance" to Hillary (and McCain) and asking us to elect him because he speaks pretty.
Bizarre.
|
Valadius
Feb 20 2008 09:26 AM
|
|
If you watched his speech last night, you would have seen substance. A HELL of a lot of substance. He has a ton of policy proposals. It's only that the media soundbites are of his inspiring words. Seriously, watch his speeches. Go to his website. He has plenty of substance.
|
AG/DC
Feb 20 2008 09:32 AM
|
|
I've watched plenty of his speeches and debates and read the transcripts, thanks.
I've found them plenty disappointing. Are you suggesting I've only exposed myself to soundbites?
|
A Boy Named Seo
Feb 20 2008 11:46 AM
|
|
What's so muddled about Obama?
|
Farmer Ted
Feb 20 2008 11:52 AM
|
|
I'd still like to know how Jeri Ryan's sealed divorce documents got leaked.
|
Nymr83
Feb 20 2008 12:25 PM
|
|
| ="Farmer Ted":dp8lutyn]I'd still like to know how Jeri Ryan's sealed divorce documents got leaked. |
dp8lutyn]
i don't know, but i was very upset to learn that seven of nine was not turned on by the kinky sex acts that her husband allegedly wished her to engage in.
|
A Boy Named Seo
Feb 24 2008 08:44 AM
|
|
Huckabee turned up on SNL yesterday and was pretty funny, I think.
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hac-UHi56Xc&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hac-UHi56Xc&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
|
MFS62
Feb 24 2008 09:02 AM
|
|
Ralph Nader just announced that he will run for the Presidency again in 2008.
And he admitted that he is older than McCain.
Later
|
Nymr83
Feb 24 2008 09:21 AM
|
|
good, let him sap votes away from the democrat.
|
Valadius
Feb 24 2008 10:03 AM
|
|
Dammit Ralph, no one likes you anymore. Give it up already!
|
Mendoza Line
Feb 24 2008 11:44 AM
|
|
| ="Nymr":qlx408ix]good, let him sap votes away from the democrat. |
qlx408ix]
"Sap" was just the right word to use when discussing Nader.
I like to think he'll be ignored this time. He'd do a great job as a mayor cleaning up some corrupt municipal government. President of the United States and "leader of the free world", maybe not so much.
|
AG/DC
Feb 24 2008 12:07 PM
|
|
| ="Valadius":1veeovir]Dammit Ralph, no one likes you anymore. Give it up already! |
1veeovir]
Plenty of people like him.
|
seawolf17
Feb 25 2008 07:28 AM
|
|
I'll vote for Nader.
|
AG/DC
Feb 25 2008 07:30 AM
|
|
There's one.
|
sharpie
Feb 25 2008 10:34 AM
|
|
He didn't do much when he ran last time, can't imagine that he'd do better in '08.
|
Nymr83
Feb 25 2008 10:39 AM
|
|
assuming for the sake of argument that clinton wins the nomination, he would have i would think a better chance of leeching votes from her than he did with john kerry. his anti-establishment arguments would, imo, go nowhere against obama
|
AG/DC
Feb 25 2008 10:43 AM
|
|
| ="sharpie":13h0vvjs]He didn't do much when he ran last time, can't imagine that he'd do better in '08. |
13h0vvjs]
He succeds by shifting the agenda of those he runs against.
|
Vic Sage
Feb 25 2008 10:54 AM
|
|
exactly.
here's 1 more Nader vote.
|
Willets Point
Feb 25 2008 11:18 AM
|
|
I might vote for him. It's not like I live in a swing state.
|
sharpie
Feb 25 2008 11:41 AM
|
|
My prediction is that some right-wing third party candidate will rack up considerably more votes than Nader. I mean Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and James Dobson are going to vote for someone.
|
Nymr83
Feb 29 2008 05:33 PM
|
|
Hillary is talking about challenging the primary election procedures in Texas. I don't know the details but his just reeks of sore-loser bullshit (Obama is ahead in Texas polling where Hillary once held a large lead.) Whats wrong with the system that wasn't wrong 6 months ago when there was time to fix it?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 29 2008 06:24 PM
|
|
For her sake, Hillary should think about losing gracefully. She can run again in '12 if McCain wins this year, or in '16 if Obama wins. In 2016 she'll be 68, not too old to take another crack at it.
But if she goes down in flames she'll be doing serious damage to her future chances.
|
Rockin' Doc
Feb 29 2008 08:38 PM
|
|
Ben Grimm - <i>"For her sake, Hillary should think about losing gracefully. She can run again in '12 if McCain wins this year, or in '16 if Obama wins. In 2016 she'll be 68, not too old to take another crack at it.
But if she goes down in flames she'll be doing serious damage to her future chances."</i>
Give 'em hell Hillary.
|
Frayed Knot
Mar 01 2008 05:13 AM
|
|
I think Hillary and her camp have been so knocked for a loop when the road to her nomination wasn't the smoothly paved road they expected that they've had to change their game plans this "late" in the contest.
The NYTimes noted the other day that friends of hers have noticed that her use of the phrases like "when I'm President" have recently disappeared from her sentences and I'm not sure it ever occured to many in her orbit that this wouldn't happen.
|
AG/DC
Mar 01 2008 01:25 PM
|
|
I don't think she's about to win or lose gracefully, but I don't see any reason to quit now.
|
Kong76
Mar 01 2008 01:43 PM
|
|
She's got about an 80% pulse right now and it's dropping.
I'm glad I don't have children, because they won't be safe unless she's
the new prez according to her last ditch commercial effort to raise her
pulse and extend the race.
|
Frayed Knot
Mar 01 2008 04:22 PM
|
|
| ="AG/DC"]I don't think she's about to win or lose gracefully, but I don't see any reason to quit now. |
No reason to quit now. It's still reasonably close and, despite the current giddy feeling in the media, momentum in politics, like in baseball, works wonders right up until the moment it doesn't.
It's just that *IF* she does go on to lose, the fact that this has been on her agenda for so long combined with the sense in her camp of not only inevitibility but, in some views, of entitlement, losing is going to be a bitter pill. And if these late challenges to rules and whiny complaints of 'why do I always get the first questions' and 'everybody's picking on me' are any indication, a graceful exit might not be her first instinct even though I suspect Bill will be able to talk her out of burning her bridges once it's finally over.
Teddy K. not exactly going down smiling to Jimmy C. was the last one of those I can recall although I remember it as a fairly minor case of pouting.
|
Willets Point
Mar 03 2008 02:28 PM
|
|
Too bad the primaries are so antagonistic. Clinton would make a great VP candidate on many levels. Mind you, I still don't like her politics, but just looking at it objectively an Obama-Clinton ticket would have a wide appeal.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Mar 03 2008 02:50 PM
|
|
I don't think a Bam-Hill ticket is at all out of the question. They're not battling as nasty as say Reagan and Bush I were as candidates before they teamed up.
|
Nymr83
Mar 03 2008 02:59 PM
|
|
is she willing to be #2 though? i think theres a larger than life ego to overcome first.
|
SteveJRogers
Mar 03 2008 03:57 PM
|
|
Would it shock anyone if she decided to just show up at the convention anyway and try to turn delegates, or get herself on some third party ticket?
|
sharpie
Mar 03 2008 03:59 PM
|
|
What do mean, surprise someone by showing up at the convention? Of course she will be at the convention.
There is no chance whatsoever that she runs as a third party candidate.
|
Nymr83
Mar 03 2008 04:01 PM
|
|
a 3rd party thing would be shocking to me, yes. she's practical enough to know that running in the general election if she is not the democratic candidate only serves to fracture the party and annoint mccain before the election even happens.
|
Vic Sage
Mar 03 2008 04:10 PM
|
|
the Clintons are creatures of Democratic Party politics. its absurd to suggest she'd try for a 3rd party candidacy.
|
AG/DC
Mar 03 2008 05:43 PM
|
|
If she comes up short, I think she'd be honored to be invited to be vice president.
When the presidency is out of reach, it's a rare ego that gets an invitation to be vice president and tells the presidential nominee to stick it.
What is disappointing to me is all this talk about should she withdraw after this primary, should she withdraw before this primary, should she campaign for the second slot, should she gracefully endorse himself, is it ungraceful to keep running, as if the Obamanation is a fait accompli.
Let the process play out. Let people cast their votes. What's wrong with that?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Mar 03 2008 07:13 PM
|
|
Well, for my part in this, I don't say it's ungraceful to keep running.
It's just ungraceful (or should that be ungracious?) for her to go grasping at every straw, such as trying to claim Michigan delegates after the fact, or challenge the Texas rules.
|
AG/DC
Mar 04 2008 08:02 PM
|
|
McCain clinches.
Obama takes Vermont. Clinton counters with Rhode Island and looks strong in Ohio. Texas up in the air.
I'm rooting for her. Not voting for her, but I'm rooting, at least tonight.
|
Nymr83
Mar 04 2008 08:26 PM
|
|
me too. a divided democratic party that doesn't have a nominee until the convention is good news for my guy.
|
Valadius
Mar 04 2008 09:45 PM
|
|
I'm extremely pissed off tonight.
|
AG/DC
Mar 04 2008 09:47 PM
|
|
At who?
|
Nymr83
Mar 04 2008 09:47 PM
|
|
The most recent numbers i've seen or Texas is Hillary up 958,000 to 923,000 with 52% of precincts reporting... thats a much bigger lead than it seems, right?
|
Valadius
Mar 04 2008 09:49 PM
|
|
At the Clinton campaign for being scumbags and going ridiculously negative. Debate on the issues. Don't start launching 5 attacks a day on the other candidate and frightening voters in Rovian fashion with "vote for me or the terrorists will murder your sleeping children" ads.
|
Nymr83
Mar 04 2008 09:54 PM
|
|
Huckabee dropped out today, he never really "went negative" on McCain, just as Richardson (for example) never went negative on Hillary. Why? because campaigns go negative when they are close, and remain cordial when the winner is known or assumed.
|
AG/DC
Mar 04 2008 09:59 PM
|
|
1) Rove didn't invent negative campaining by a long shot. Everybody has to stop using him as a bogeyman. Try Lee Atwater. Try James Carville.
2) Obama has used negative campaigning left and right while acting above the fray. In fact, complaining that the other side is using negative campaigning is negative campaigning.
The red phone ad was nothing. The "going negative" maneuver of Clinton's demonstrating that Obama had wanted to be president since childhood was in fact in response to Obama going negative by stating that, unlike some in the campaign, he hadn't angling for the White House for decades.
Has she been mean-spirited and cynical? Yes and yes. Please don't believe your guy when he says he hasn't.
|
Nymr83
Mar 04 2008 11:03 PM
|
|
who DID invent negative campaigning? probably whoever invented democracy. But who "started it" when it comes to presidential candidates themselves talking dirty? In Lincoln's time they sat on their asses and awaited the results, it was undignified for the candidates themselves to get involved.
|
Nymr83
Mar 04 2008 11:18 PM
|
|
They are now calling Texas for Hillary (bet you won't hear that in November.) The race goes on.
|
AG/DC
Mar 05 2008 06:09 AM
|
|
I'll be curious to see how many Republicans crossed lines and voted for her. I doubt a lot, but it would sure make a nice sub-plot.
|
sharpie
Mar 05 2008 06:49 AM
|
|
I think the voters wanted to make sure that Ben Grimm's vote next month counted.
|
metirish
Mar 05 2008 07:02 AM
|
|
I must say that this made for some great TV viewing last night, MSNBC for me is the place to watch all the goings on.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Mar 05 2008 07:22 AM
|
|
| ="sharpie":1x1bonec]I think the voters wanted to make sure that Ben Grimm's vote next month counted. |
1x1bonec]
Thanks, but I'm registered independent, so I won't be eligible to vote in the primary.
I will be subjected to seven weeks of ads, though. Good thing I rarely watch television commercials!
As for negative campaigning, it goes back a loooong way. As I recall (although I wasn't around back then) the 1800 race between Adams and Jefferson got pretty nasty.
|
AG/DC
Mar 05 2008 07:33 AM
|
|
But comparing somebody's tactics to Karl Rove is more powerful than comparing his tactics to a figure from some 19th century race, because we all think we know Karl Rove and we all know we're supposed to disapprove of him. So to be likened to him is some powerful guilt by association.
And to liken your opponent to him certainly is strategically, deliberately, and cynically going negative.
|
sharpie
Mar 05 2008 07:34 AM
|
|
The "red telephone" ad was a re-do of a Mondale campaign ad. Why aren't those tactics called Mondalian (or whoever his campaign manager was -- probably not something you want to put on your resume).
|
metirish
Mar 05 2008 07:39 AM
|
|
It irks me no end that my office mate talks like Clinton invented negative campaigning.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Mar 05 2008 07:57 AM
|
|
| ="sharpie":z08kgi4j]The "red telephone" ad was a re-do of a Mondale campaign ad. Why aren't those tactics called Mondalian (or whoever his campaign manager was -- probably not something you want to put on your resume). |
z08kgi4j]
It actually harkens back to a commercial from the Johnson-Goldwater campaign of 1964 which featured a little girl and a mushroom cloud.
The funny thing about the "red phone" ad is that it plays more to McCain's perceived strength than to Clinton's.
I bet that even a lot of Democratic voters saw that commercial and thought that John McCain is the guy you want answering that 3 a.m. call. (He'd probably be awake anyway at that hour in order to pee.)
|
AG/DC
Mar 05 2008 07:59 AM
|
|
That would make a good campaign ad.
|
Willets Point
Mar 05 2008 08:01 AM
|
|
It would be like the cop's dad in <i>Crash</i>. McCain crouched over the toilet groaning in pain. The phone rings. "What!" exclaims McCain. "Bomb the @#%*! out of them!!!"
|
AG/DC
Mar 05 2008 08:02 AM
|
|
Look at the vicious little monster destroy that flower.
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zyVn9k6d1og"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zyVn9k6d1og" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
|
metirish
Mar 05 2008 08:06 AM
|
|
| ="Willets Point":1qvs89uo]It would be like the cop's dad in <i>Crash</i>. McCain crouched over the toilet groaning in pain. The phone rings. "What!" exclaims McCain. "Bomb the @#%*! out of them!!!" |
1qvs89uo]
Very funny.
|
Willets Point
Mar 05 2008 11:48 AM
|
|
Here's a simple mathematical equation for the Democratic Party:
Hillary Clinton + nomination = President John McCain.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Mar 05 2008 11:55 AM
|
|
I think that's probably true. Obama's no sure thing either, though.
Right now my hunch is that McCain will become number 44.
|
Nymr83
Mar 05 2008 12:01 PM
|
|
| ="Willets Point":13kdgryo]Here's a simple mathematical equation for the Democratic Party:
Hillary Clinton + nomination = President John McCain. |
13kdgryo]
now thats my kind of math.
|
AG/DC
Mar 12 2008 08:06 PM
|
|
So, come forward and collect your winnings if you bet that Geraldine Freaking Ferraro would rise from the grave and put the finishing touch on Hillary Clinton's campaign.
|
Valadius
Mar 21 2008 02:02 AM
|
|
Richardson for Obama.
|
AG/DC
Mar 21 2008 07:10 AM
|
|
Pennsylvania, I guess, is the test of how many points Jeremiah Wright can knock off of somebody, vs. how many Geraldine Ferraro can give back.
|
sharpie
Mar 21 2008 07:15 AM
|
|
Jeremiah Wright trumped Geraldine Ferraro big time.
|
seawolf17
Mar 21 2008 07:18 AM
|
|
| ="Valadius":1rq6hjtm]Richardson for Obama. |
1rq6hjtm]
I wouldn't make that trade. Richardson is old and jowly, plus he has that huge contract with New Mexico through 2010 that you'd have to pay off.
|
metirish
Mar 21 2008 07:19 AM
|
|
I'm expecting Jeremiah Wright to have a show on conspiracy's after all this, maybe on the Sci-Fi channel.
|
AG/DC
Mar 21 2008 07:20 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Mar 26 2008 07:24 AM
|
|
Well sure, but is it enough this late in the game to swing matters.
Folks have been sitting on this guy a long time. Near-mainstream outlets like Slate have publicized him, plus one columnist here and another there, but it took this long to hit the tipping point where it becaeme a big enough story to force Obama to respond.
And, yeah, he was noble and princely and nuanced in his speech, and forced many Americans to look at the parts of racism we still have to confront, but there's some head scratchers in the there also when you parse it out.
|
Valadius
Mar 25 2008 09:30 PM
|
|
Hillary caught in a lie over Bosnia trip:
<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/It6JN7ALF7Y&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/It6JN7ALF7Y&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
|
AG/DC
Mar 25 2008 09:37 PM
|
|
I think it could stand without the production values.
|
Nymr83
Mar 26 2008 12:20 AM
|
|
yes the star wars music is unnecessary. show the clip of what actually happened with a voiceover of what she said happened, the truth speaks louder than corny music and quotes from newspapers.
|
Frayed Knot
Mar 26 2008 07:12 AM
|
|
Besides, it's not a lie, it's a mis-statement.
Personally I can't tell you how many times I've confused strolling across a tarmac and being handed a flower and read a poem by a young local girl with sprinting under gunfire into a waiting armored car.
|
Farmer Ted
Mar 26 2008 07:28 AM
|
|
Living in PA and starting to see the ads plus the Billy Clinton tour is coming this way tomorrow. I really hate the campaign stuff. Battle Royale, please, and let's move on.
|
soupcan
Mar 26 2008 07:33 AM
|
|
| ="metirish":18yn4bqn]"I believe (s)he misremembers" |
18yn4bqn]
|
Vic Sage
Mar 26 2008 09:30 AM
|
|
My daughter has to write an essay on who she would vote for (she's 10, in 5th grade). I want her to do some research on the candidates.
Can anybody recommend a website that objectively describes and compares the candidates' positions on various issues, in a way that would be clear to a 10-year old?
i've looked around a little but i haven't found anything i really like for this purpose.
|
themetfairy
Mar 26 2008 09:43 AM
|
|
Vic - I don't know if these will have exactly what she needs, but they are good, vetted research sites or links to sites that are good for kids -
[url=http://www.ala.org/gwstemplate.cfm?section=greatwebsites&template=/cfapps/gws/default.cfm:3bw6jnzx]ALA Great Websites For Kids[/url:3bw6jnzx]
[url=http://www.kids.gov/:3bw6jnzx]Kids.gov[/url:3bw6jnzx]
[url=http://www.factmonster.com/:3bw6jnzx]Fact Monster[/url:3bw6jnzx]
[url=http://www.kidsclick.org/:3bw6jnzx]KidsClick[/url:3bw6jnzx]
|
themetfairy
Mar 26 2008 09:52 AM
|
|
Vic - [url=http://www.factmonster.com/us/government/presidential-election-campaign-2008.html:1m9ntcpt]This link from Fact Monster[/url:1m9ntcpt] looks good for her.
|
Nymr83
Mar 26 2008 10:24 AM
|
|
| ="themetfairy":1197kjd8]Vic - [url=http://www.factmonster.com/us/government/presidential-election-campaign-2008.html:1197kjd8]This link from Fact Monster[/url:1197kjd8] looks good for her. |
1197kjd8]
that site is overly praising of hillary and by comparison critical of the other two candidates (i didnt bother reading whatever it had to say about ron paul)
|
Nymr83
Mar 31 2008 01:01 AM
|
|
|
AG/DC
Mar 31 2008 05:56 AM
|
|
Who is little Ms. Vic getting behind?
|
Vic Sage
Mar 31 2008 10:37 AM
|
|
she started out for Hilary, because she's a "girl". but now i think she's leaning to Obama.
"Dad, you mean she voted for the war?"
"Yep."
"Oh."
|
Benjamin Grimm
Apr 03 2008 11:32 AM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm on March 5":16m1taxs]
I bet that even a lot of Democratic voters saw that commercial and thought that John McCain is the guy you want answering that 3 a.m. call. (He'd probably be awake anyway at that hour in order to pee.) |
16m1taxs]
Bill Maher stole my joke! (On March 21!)
|
cooby
Apr 21 2008 06:00 PM
|
|
Whoever calls me the most times tonight is not get voted for tomorrow
|
Nymr83
Apr 21 2008 06:05 PM
|
|
I think that should be Pennsylvania's state motto for this week.
Both Democrats, and McCain as well, have given lip service to the environment. How many trees would it save if unsolicited political mailings were banned? save a tree, spam by email!
|
cooby
Apr 22 2008 07:57 PM
|
|
Not happy with primary results.
|
Nymr83
Apr 22 2008 08:35 PM
|
|
| ="cooby":14en00wd]Not happy with primary results. |
14en00wd]
very happy with Democratic primary fight.
|
Frayed Knot
Apr 23 2008 07:14 AM
|
|
Conventional wisdom* had it that Hillary needed an 8-point or better win to keep the game in play -- and managed to swing a 10 so the circus continues on.
My dream is to not have this thing decided until there are fist-fights on the floor of the convention.
* meaning that someone came up with that number off the top of their head which the remainder of the media horde then ran with as if an etched in stone fact.
|
AG/DC
Apr 23 2008 07:38 AM
|
|
I love seeing this continue on also, as I disliked all the tut-tutting that members of the Obama camp were doing a month ago, claiming that Clinton should withdraw because she couldn't win outright (neither could Obama), insinuating that she was kind of embarrassing herself.
I get in a slapping mood when I read or hear opinions trying to throw the race to Obama because of the energy and excitement he's brought to the race. Huh? The numbers are what they are. Leave the intangibles to Jeter.
What I fear is potential social unrest that could happen when some prophet of rage starts claiming that blacks have been disenfranchised because "their" candidate has been robbed --- or will be robbed --- of his rightful nomination because it gets decided by the superdelegates. (Elites!)
My boss, a partisan and a conspiracy theorist (and a pain in the ass to work for), is fronting the bizzarre theory that this race is going to Clinton because the superdelegates came to her as a group back in the Lewinsky day and promised to throw this nomination to her if she would stand by her man.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Apr 23 2008 07:51 AM
|
|
That IS a bizarre theory. Especially since many of the superdelegates have that status because they're currently in office somewhere. And many of them probably weren't in office back in 1998, and those who WERE in office in 1998 had no way of being sure they'd still be in office in 2008.
And that's only one of the many reasons that it's a nutty theory.
I was at a Hillary rally last week at my local high school. I was there out of curiosity, and because Bill was going to speak. I'm not a true believer, so I felt like I was at a ballgame in some other city, where I didn't care who won or lost. Hillary staffers came around trying to pressure us into volunteering. For my wife and her friend, they kept trying to wheedle their noes into yeses. My "no" was apparently a bit firmer, since they quickly moved on.
Clinton, as is his wont, was very late in arriving. I was hungry and tired of standing in the crowd, so I bailed before he got there. My daughter, though, stuck around and got to see a former president in the flesh. I think the memory will stick with her.
|
AG/DC
Apr 23 2008 07:56 AM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":3iyniuuv]That IS a bizarre theory. Especially since many of the superdelegates have that status because they're currently in office somewhere. And many of them probably weren't in office back in 1998, and those who WERE in office in 1998 had no way of being sure they'd still be in office in 2008.
And that's only one of the many reasons that it's a nutty theory. |
3iyniuuv]
That's who gives me my marching orders. Is it any wonder I'm fiercely unproductive?
The funny thing is that she would be fiercely defending Clinton from that nonsense in an Obama-free environment.
Chelsea and Mom look like they've survived a paint-gun war.
<img src="http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/POLITICS/04/22/pa.primary/t1land.hillary.wed.03.ap.jpg">
|
Fman99
Apr 23 2008 08:55 AM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":2bg9q0s7]That IS a bizarre theory. Especially since many of the superdelegates have that status because they're currently in office somewhere. And many of them probably weren't in office back in 1998, and those who WERE in office in 1998 had no way of being sure they'd still be in office in 2008.
And that's only one of the many reasons that it's a nutty theory.
I was at a Hillary rally last week at my local high school. I was there out of curiosity, and because Bill was going to speak. I'm not a true believer, so I felt like I was at a ballgame in some other city, where I didn't care who won or lost. Hillary staffers came around trying to pressure us into volunteering. For my wife and her friend, they kept trying to wheedle their noes into yeses. My "no" was apparently a bit firmer, since they quickly moved on.
Clinton, as is his wont, was very late in arriving. I was hungry and tired of standing in the crowd, so I bailed before he got there. My daughter, though, stuck around and got to see a former president in the flesh. I think the memory will stick with her. |
2bg9q0s7]
Using the phrased "in the flesh" and "Bill Clinton" in the same posting? Look out.
|
MFS62
Apr 23 2008 10:23 AM
|
|
Here's a theory for ya'.
Last night on WABC radio in New York, the anchor for the coverage of the primary was Curtis Sliwa. (Couldn't tell on radio if he was wearing his red beret).
He said the reason Hilary won was because Rush Limbaugh had urged Pennsylvania Republicans to cross party lines and vote for her, in order to throw the Democratic party into "chaos" (he used that word). And, according to him, over 100,000 did that.
I don't listen to Rush. Is that true?
Later
|
Valadius
Apr 23 2008 10:30 AM
|
|
It is true. Rush Limbaugh has something called "Operation Chaos" going, where he's urging his listeners to vote for Clinton in the Democratic primary to prolong this thing. It had an effect in Texas.
|
seawolf17
Apr 23 2008 10:32 AM
|
|
I saw a study that said the effect was "negligable" in Texas, but in a race this close, I don't think anything's really negligable. It's actually pretty funny, I think.
|
Nymr83
Apr 23 2008 11:38 AM
|
|
| ="Valadius":3e9r2811]It is true. Rush Limbaugh has something called "Operation Chaos" going, where he's urging his listeners to vote for Clinton in the Democratic primary to prolong this thing. It had an effect in Texas. |
3e9r2811]
the Democrats did the same thing earlier in the race to try and keep Huckabee alive as long as possible. Change the primary system or quit bitching.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Apr 23 2008 11:41 AM
|
|
Who was bitching?
|
seawolf17
Apr 23 2008 11:43 AM
|
|
I think some in the party are probably bitching.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Apr 23 2008 11:56 AM
|
|
Rush may have influenced a few Hillary voters, but as stated above, I'm sure the overall effect was negligible.
And if he's claiming that he has more of an impact than he actually does, that's just Rush being Rush.
Nobody should be taking him seriously. Anyone complaining about his effect on the Pennsylvania results should get over it.
|
sharpie
Apr 23 2008 11:56 AM
|
|
I can't imagine Limbaugh's shenanigans amounted to many votes. My brother, a longtime Republican in Pennsylvania, surprised me by switching in order to vote for Obama. So there was one switcher who didn't do the Limbaugh thing.
|
Frayed Knot
Apr 23 2008 11:57 AM
|
|
This sort of stuff goes on all the time, both having voters cross lines if the state allows it or simply rooting for whoever is losing to win so the process gets prolonged. Also some Repubs think (and many Dems fear) that Hillary will be the easier to beat in November.
The only think unique about what Rush is doing is that he has a louder megaphone than most.
|
seawolf17
Apr 23 2008 12:27 PM
|
|
That Trax avatar is spooky.
|
Rockin' Doc
Apr 23 2008 04:25 PM
|
|
The weird thing about the Trax avatar is it takes so long to get your posts submitted when your at theat level.
|
Nymr83
Apr 23 2008 05:39 PM
|
|
| ="Rockin' Doc":szsmam77]The weird thing about the Trax avatar is it takes so long to get your posts submitted when your at theat level. |
szsmam77]
wait til you try it with other posters on base.
|
AG/DC
Apr 24 2008 11:22 AM
Edited 2 time(s), most recently on May 05 2008 04:43 PM
|
|
So, the continuing slugfest of the deomocratic candidates continues to play into the opposition's hands, even as it provides for great theater for mostly disinterested parties like myself. I'd call it a great exercise in democracy if it wasn't apparently destined to be decided by an undemocratic body of superdelegates.
Whoever loses in such a process is destined to come away with a seriously disillusioned base, weakening the survivor in the general election. They both know this, but how can either be expected to abandon their historic candidacy while so close? So I'm going to help.
How much more obvious does it have to be that a unified Clinton/Obama ticket is the best way to win here? But even then, Clinton, as the elder candidate, the more experienced candidate, and the one who has already served in an unofficial vice-presidenty role, is the logical choice for the top of the ticket, with Obama still seriously electable at the end of her run. But if Obama takes the offer now, he looks like a sellout, particularly after deriding the notion two months ago when things looked good for him.
So, the answer is, pick an agreed-upon upcoming state --- Indiana perhaps --- and call it the coin. Whoever wins that gets the top of the ticket, the loser gets the bottom, and everybody goes home calling the fight fair. If you don't want to screw them out of the work they've done in North Carolina, give the win to whomever gets the most votes between the two states.
OK, that won't work, because Clinton leads by only a few points in Indiana, and Obama by more in North Carolina, but pick a winner-take-all contest and stick to it.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Apr 24 2008 11:26 AM
|
|
Guam. May 3.
Let that be the decider.
|
AG/DC
Apr 24 2008 11:36 AM
|
|
Word.
Bone up on your Chamorro, Hilary.
|
AG/DC
May 03 2008 10:12 PM
|
|
Guam:
Sen. Barack Obama --- 2,264 votes
Sen. Hillary Clinton --- 2,257 votes
Obama "wins" by seven votes, but each candidate picks up two delegates.
That's tight.
|
Benjamin Grimm
May 04 2008 05:52 AM
|
|
I bet if either one of them had actually gone to Guam for a campaign stop, he/she would have gotten all four delegates.
|
Nymr83
May 05 2008 02:49 PM
|
|
i wonder which states are historically under-visited during the election? i'm guessing very few candidates go to Alaska, maybe Montana?
|
sharpie
May 05 2008 02:54 PM
|
|
When Nixon ran in '60 he made a point to campaign in every state and was criticized for wasting valuable late-campaign time for his trip to Alaska.
George W Bush has not visited Vermont during his Presidency, the only state not visited. I remember Bill Clinton visited some state toward the very end so that each state would have been visited during his Presidency. Bush will prolly find some excuse to visit Vermont.
|
Benjamin Grimm
May 05 2008 03:11 PM
|
|
That last state Clinton visited was Nebraska.
In presidential elections, Hawaii votes reliably Democratic, and Alaska votes reliably Republican. Generally, candidates don't bother campaigning in either state.
|
Willets Point
May 05 2008 04:49 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":1dp7hva7]. Generally, candidates don't bother campaigning in either state. |
1dp7hva7]
Which is freakin' lame. They should change it from President of the United States to President for Big Corporations and a Few Valuable Swing States.
|
DocTee
May 05 2008 05:20 PM
|
|
I think it's possible to win the White House by only carrying a dozen (or so) states. It's also why most candidates come from populous or swing states, since they can conceivably carry those for their party.
|
sharpie
May 06 2008 07:22 AM
|
|
You could win the White House by carrying eleven states: California (55), Texas (34), New York (31), Florida (27), Illinois (21), Pennsylvania (21), Ohio (20), Michigan (17), New Jersey (15), North Carolina (15) and Georgia (15) would give you 271 electoral votes.
Those, of course, are a pretty disparate bunch of states. A platform could be: eliminate taxes in the eleven biggest states and pass the burden on to the other 39.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
May 06 2008 07:36 AM
|
|
| ="sharpie":2d3hb7d6]You could win the White House by carrying eleven states: California (55), Texas (34), New York (31), Florida (27), Illinois (21), Pennsylvania (21), Ohio (20), Michigan (17), New Jersey (15), North Carolina (15) and Georgia (15) would give you 271 electoral votes.
Those, of course, are a pretty disparate bunch of states. A platform could be: eliminate taxes in the eleven biggest states and pass the burden on to the other 39. |
2d3hb7d6]
When I'm president I facilitate secession for Florida and Texas and make sure this never happens.
|
Frayed Knot
May 06 2008 08:04 AM
|
|
Of course, seeing as how those eleven states have ~57% of the country's population, if you carry them all there's a pretty good chance you're going to carry the overall popular vote too.
Either that or there's some really weird splits going on.
|
Benjamin Grimm
May 06 2008 08:16 AM
|
|
| ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":3lvu5dw8]When I'm president I facilitate secession for Florida and Texas and make sure this never happens. |
3lvu5dw8]
Sign me up for that one!
|
HahnSolo
May 06 2008 10:40 AM
|
|
| ="sharpie":3ebf9nsz]You could win the White House by carrying eleven states: California (55), Texas (34), New York (31), Florida (27), Illinois (21), Pennsylvania (21), Ohio (20), Michigan (17), New Jersey (15), North Carolina (15) and Georgia (15) would give you 271 electoral votes.
Those, of course, are a pretty disparate bunch of states. A platform could be: eliminate taxes in the eleven biggest states and pass the burden on to the other 39. |
3ebf9nsz]
Question: The electoral numbers, if I have this right, equal the same number of our congressmen and senators combined. Why not, instead of automatically giving the entire state to the person who wins the overall state vote, break it out by awarding the winners of congressional districts? Then, the winner of the state would get the two points for the senators.
So instead of a Democrat automatically getting 55 points for California, there would be some competition in Republican leaning districts. Maybe the Republican candidate steals 10 points there. It might also allow candidates who do not spend a lot of their campaign in certain states to visit those states now.
|
Benjamin Grimm
May 06 2008 10:51 AM
|
|
I think there are two states that do that, but they're smaller states with fewer votes. (I think Maine is one of them.)
There's a move to do just what you're suggesting in California. It's backed by Republicans, of course. There are enough Republican-leaning districts in California that, if the new system was put in place, it would pull a lot of electoral votes from the Democrats and make it much harder for them to win the presidency.
The California initiative doesn't seem to be going anywhere. And by now it's probably too late for it to go into effect for 2008 anyway.
It's a good idea, though, but if implemented it should really be for all 50 states. If you're going to do California, then you should do Texas and Ohio and Florida and New York and Pennsylvania.
It would require candidates to campaign everywhere, rather than focus on a few swing states. That may be a pain in the ass for the candidates, but that's their problem, not mine.
|
sharpie
May 06 2008 10:51 AM
|
|
Maine and Nebraska do it that way but not once have those two states split on congressional lines.
The only way it would be fair is if every state did it that way. A major fundraiser for Giuliani tried to get that on the ballot in California and failed. If, say, California and Texas did it together that might make it more palatable. Better to scrap the electoral college than to tinker around the edges I say.
|
metirish
May 06 2008 11:14 AM
|
|
Gotta love politics.
|
Valadius
May 06 2008 06:12 PM
|
|
Barack Obama already projected to win North Carolina, the biggest state left.
|
AG/DC
May 07 2008 05:44 AM
|
|
And Hillariandana. No surprises there.
Now we're going to see the first-ever bare-knuckle brawl for West Virginia. Strap yourselves in.
|
metirish
May 07 2008 07:04 AM
|
|
Can Clinton really win this thing , if not shouldn't she get out now?
|
AG/DC
May 07 2008 07:12 AM
|
|
Yes, she can. No, she shouldn't.
|
Benjamin Grimm
May 07 2008 07:15 AM
|
|
| ="metirish":3cvrmahv]Can Clinton really win this thing , if not shouldn't she get out now? |
3cvrmahv]
It seems more and more unlikely, but it the outcome should be more clear in about four weeks. The difference between getting out now and getting out four weeks from now isn't going to make much difference about whether or not the party gets "united" in time for November.
|
metirish
May 07 2008 07:19 AM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":2gli3zay]Yes, she can. No, she shouldn't. |
2gli3zay]
I f I was that way inclined I would bet you a few beers on who will win , I guess it will go to the convention.
|
Willets Point
May 07 2008 07:38 AM
|
|
The ruling honchos of the Democratic Party really want Clinton on the ticket and will see to it regardless of the fact that she has no chance of winning a general election.
|
AG/DC
May 07 2008 08:00 AM
|
|
Oh, I don't necessarily think she will win, and I don't share Willets' suspicion of an undefeatable conspiracy. I just don't think it's over, but, yeah, I think her connections help her.
I don't think the ruling honchos are a monolithic bunch. Ted Kennedy has endorsed Obama. Nancy Pelosi has been widely understood to be in favor of Obama, but has elected to withold an endorsement until he has it locked up. Chris Dodd, Dick Durbin, Russ Feingold, John Kerry, Tom Daschle from the Senate. In the House there's the like of Chris Murphy, Jim Moran, Patrick Kennedy. That's a heck of a bloc.
|
Rockin' Doc
May 07 2008 10:31 AM
|
|
AG/DC - <i>"Now we're going to see the first-ever bare-knuckle brawl for West Virginia. Strap yourselves in."</i>
Back home in West Virginia, they're actually partial to mud rasslin'. In a no holds barred, free for all, I think Hillary can take Barack. I know I wouldn't want to wrestle her.
|
Valadius
May 07 2008 03:51 PM
|
|
No, she can't.
It's over. Finished. Finito. She would have to win something like 68% of the delegates in the remaining states to come out with a pledged delegate lead, which is impossible due to the proportional rules governing Democratic primaries.
Her superdelegate lead is down to about a dozen from about a hundred back in February, and insiders say that they good majority of undeclared superdelegates are for Obama.
Even if she could do the impossible, do you really think the Democratic Party wants to piss off the African-American community, and do you really think the party honchos want to alienate my generation when they have this golden opportunity to lock them up for life?
So it's over. We're just delaying the inevitable.
|
AG/DC
May 07 2008 08:31 PM
|
|
Alienate your generation? Come on.
Pick one. Is it over or do you not want to be alienated by your candidate losing?
Either one wins or the other does. Why be afraid of that? Are you really saying that, if she wins, your party should discard the result because your generation would leave and black Americans would leave with you?
|
Valadius
May 08 2008 07:56 AM
|
|
The point is that she CAN'T win now. It's simply impossible without overturning the will of the people.
|
AG/DC
May 08 2008 08:04 AM
|
|
You wrote the opposite in paragraph four.
|
Willets Point
May 08 2008 08:32 AM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":1acwlr1o]Alienate your generation? Come on.
Pick one. Is it over or do you not want to be alienated by your candidate losing?
Either one wins or the other does. Why be afraid of that? Are you really saying that, if she wins, your party should discard the result because your generation would leave and black Americans would leave with you? |
1acwlr1o]
Actually, I think Valdius has a good point and that your response is rather condescending. The issue here is one of Letter of the Law versus Spirit of the Law. If Clinton can convince, conjole, or intimidate enough superdelegates she can in the letter of the law win the nomination. The spirit of the law however is that the nominee selected should reflect the will of the voting public. And in this case Obama has won the majority of the voters and states. Obama's message of hope and appealing to the people has resonated with many voters including young adults and progressive who the Democratic party have failed to attract in recent years. Should the superdelegates push Clinton ahead of Obama it will send a message that the Democrats are pursuing politics as usual and alienate young voters, progressives, and African-Americans who will vote for third parties or just not vote at all.
Personally, I think the Democrats <i>will</i> nominate Clinton, not because of some conspiracy (another condescending post by the way), but because they will make the appeal that the only "success" the Democrats have had in national politics in the past 30 years is Bill Clinton's two terms. Unfortunately, Mr. Clinton's presidency was built on the DLC platform of Republican Lite, appealing to corporate entitlements and turning against the traditional Democratic values of being the voice of the People. Since many progressive voters will be alienated and since conservative voters will prefer McCain to Clinton (who is despised and reviled among conservatives), I think she stands no chance in the general election.
|
AG/DC
May 08 2008 08:39 AM
|
|
Valadius is the only one who has said anything about jettisoning the will of the voitng public.
|
AG/DC
May 08 2008 08:49 AM
|
|
Beleive me, I'm not rooting for Hilary. I'm rooting for whatever most resembles a fair process.
Valadius is also the only one brandishing the superdelegate vote as a trump card.
|
AG/DC
May 08 2008 09:13 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on May 12 2008 11:16 PM
|
|
| ="Willets Point":3u9032mu]Personally, I think the Democrats <i>will</i> nominate Clinton, not because of some conspiracy (another condescending post by the way)... |
3u9032mu]
Isn't that a fair way to describe your scenario?
"The ruling honchos of the Democratic Party really want Clinton on the ticket and will see to it regardless of the fact that she has no chance of winning a general election."
A secret plan by a few, trying to undermine the rules.
I certainly think it's plausible and I don't mean to condescend. I'm just not as certain as you are how things are going to shake out.
|
Benjamin Grimm
May 08 2008 09:26 AM
|
|
George McGovern has called for Hillary to drop out.
No word yet from Adlai Stevenson or Hubert Humphrey.
|
Willets Point
May 08 2008 09:37 AM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":4dqm0ynr]Isn't that a fair way to deseribe your scenario? |
4dqm0ynr]
No because by invoking conspiracy theory you dismiss everything I write as the ramblings of a crackpot. It also denies that the Democratic Leadership Council is a very real, very powerful, very influential, and very not-covert entity within the Democratic Party.
|
AG/DC
May 08 2008 09:43 AM
|
|
I don't dismiss it at all. Nor do I call you names. Politics is filled with conspirators. I actually say it's plausible. I just don't think it's inevitable.
|
Willets Point
May 08 2008 09:45 AM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":2gb584pr]Politics is filled with conspirators.. |
2gb584pr]
That is true in a general sense. "Conspiracy" is a pretty loaded term though which is why I objected to it. Thanks for clarifying.
|
AG/DC
May 08 2008 10:04 AM
|
|
Sorry, then. I'll unload. Or I'll at least prefix crackpot when I mean crackpot.
My supervisor, as I've reported, also thinks Hilary will win despite the will of the people. She believes a deal was made back in the nineties with the superdeleagates, for her to stand by her man in exchange for the body's support in 2008.
That is a crackpot conspiracy.
|
Nymr83
May 08 2008 03:55 PM
|
|
is it "despite the will of the people" if she wins because she manages to reinstate the Florida results (where all names were on the ballot but didnt campaign) or the Michigan results (where only she was on the ballot)?
the way things look now i'd think reinstating the votes of those 2 states, the way they were cast and not in some kind of proportionate scheme, is her only shot.
|
AG/DC
May 08 2008 05:52 PM
|
|
The DNC says no. From a different perspective, they can be looked at as the conspiracy of the elite that is throwing out votes.
I hate the notion that certain states will always be able to get first crack at these candidates and derail or empower their candidacies. That's the main reason I'm happy and supportive in seeing this carry on. Folks are getting votes that count where they never did before. Isn't that good?
|
AG/DC
May 12 2008 12:21 PM
|
|
Bob Barr hops in as the Libertarian candidate.
If he gets money, and he could (heck, maybe Ron Paul will send him his reserve), he could weaken McCain and throw a state or two to Hillarack.
|
Nymr83
May 12 2008 02:42 PM
|
|
Nader is still in this thing right? It would be cool if he and Barr each screw over the democrat and mccain in one state
|
Vic Sage
May 12 2008 03:19 PM
|
|
Isn't Bob Barr a French elephant from some lame children's books?
|
Willets Point
May 12 2008 03:45 PM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":3p81ura3]Nader is still in this thing right? It would be cool if he and Barr each screw over the democrat and mccain in one state |
3p81ura3]
By "screw over" you mean democratic elections with candidates from more than two parties (which act like one).
|
Valadius
May 14 2008 05:29 PM
|
|
John Edwards just gave his long-awaited endorsement to Barack Obama.
|
MFS62
May 14 2008 05:45 PM
|
|
| ="Vic Sage":1pef74gs]Isn't Bob Barr a French elephant from some lame children's books? |
1pef74gs]
Nice.
Later
|
Willets Point
May 14 2008 07:50 PM
|
|
| ="Valadius":wb4vfuhc]John Edwards just gave his long-awaited endorsement to Barack Obama. |
wb4vfuhc]
Really going out on a limb selecting a candidate to endorse this early in the primary process, Johnny boy.
|
metsguyinmichigan
May 14 2008 07:50 PM
|
|
| ="Valadius":wfi7x2j8]John Edwards just gave his long-awaited endorsement to Barack Obama. |
wfi7x2j8]
And right here in Grand Rapids, too! A bit late, though. I think he's picking the Red Sox to win the 2007 World Series, too.
|
Nymr83
May 14 2008 10:07 PM
|
|
i dont know whats "long-awaited" about it. i don't know whats relevant about it at this stage either.
|
AG/DC
May 21 2008 12:05 PM
|
|
Zogby's getting goofy.
| ]Obama led McCain among independents, 47 percent to 35 percent, and led among some groups of voters who have backed Clinton during their Democratic primary battle, including Catholics, Jews, union households and voters making less than $35,000 a year.
McCain led among whites, NASCAR fans, and elderly voters. McCain led with voters who believed the United States was on the right track, and Obama led with the much higher percentage of voters who believed it was on the wrong track. |
|
Benjamin Grimm
May 21 2008 12:31 PM
|
|
| ]McCain led with voters who believed the United States was on the right track, and Obama led with the much higher percentage of voters who believed it was on the wrong track. |
Nothing at all surprising about that.
|
Willets Point
May 21 2008 12:35 PM
|
|
| ]McCain led with voters who believed the United States was on the right track, and Obama led with the much higher percentage of voters who believed it was on the wrong track. |
Who ranks higher with railroad enthusiasts?
|
AG/DC
May 21 2008 12:41 PM
|
|
Nothing surprising about the NASCAR thing, except, like railroad enthusiasts, who gives a fig? Do you really expect Obama to better tailor his message to meet the NASCAR demographic. His challenge is with Bible Belt whites that largely overlaps the NASCAR afficianados. No need to be cute in isolating them, though.
I bet Obama is beating him among Whole Foods shoppers.
|
Nymr83
May 21 2008 01:50 PM
|
|
that is a really dumb category.
|
sharpie
May 21 2008 01:51 PM
|
|
It's the Whole Foods shopping NASCAR enthusiast I'm interested in.
|
Willets Point
May 21 2008 01:53 PM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":1ea4yzdw]I bet Obama is beating him among Whole Foods shoppers. |
1ea4yzdw]
What about Trader Joe's?
|
Benjamin Grimm
May 21 2008 01:54 PM
|
|
Who do the liberal elite educated wealthy East Coast secular humanists prefer?
|
Willets Point
May 21 2008 01:56 PM
|
|
And gay Pirates' fans who drink sweetened ice tea?
|
MFS62
May 21 2008 01:58 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":2wzy1y7j]Who do the liberal elite educated wealthy East Coast secular humanists prefer? |
2wzy1y7j]
Ed Koch?
Later
|
Nymr83
May 21 2008 04:22 PM
|
|
I am very interested in the candidate preferences of the fans of each major sports team.
I also want to know how Democrat and Republican Yank-me fans differ on the question of whether Hillary is a "true yankee fan."
|
MFS62
May 21 2008 04:39 PM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":2y4q1bud]I am very interested in the candidate preferences of the fans of each major sports team.
I also want to know how Democrat and Republican Yank-me fans differ on the question of whether Hillary is a "true yankee fan." |
2y4q1bud]
We won't know until we see which logo is on the plaque at Cooperstown.
Later
|
Nymr83
May 26 2008 03:15 PM
|
|
Good article on how dumb non-stories get beaten to death
[url:2646nh4t]http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10604.html[/url:2646nh4t]
|
metirish
May 30 2008 09:50 AM
|
|
Some of these are quite good.
[url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/2042446/US-election-2008-humour-Hillary-Clinton-and-Barack-Obama.html:2hnqqyek]US election 2008 humour[/url:2hnqqyek]
|
AG/DC
May 30 2008 09:57 AM
|
|
Eh.
I find most humorists (and most opposition) are so quick to distort the actual message of these guys that it ends up encouraging them to say nothing of substance at all.
|
AG/DC
Jun 03 2008 02:37 PM
|
|
So, the ruling honchos rather than over-ride the will of the people to give Hillary the nomination, go ahead and deny the people of Michigan and Florida their democratic will, torpedoing her last hope.
The main thing the ruling honchos seem to want, to me, is a win in November.
|
Nymr83
Jun 03 2008 03:09 PM
|
|
#20, the hillary nutcracker, is the only one i found funny
|
sharpie
Jun 03 2008 03:27 PM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":3ihigfoi]
The main thing the ruling honchos seem to want, to me, is a win in November. |
3ihigfoi]
Isn't that the mission of ruling honchos?
|
AG/DC
Jun 03 2008 05:27 PM
|
|
More or less, I think so.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Jul 16 2008 12:19 PM
|
|
<div><object id='A313580' quality='high' data='http://aka.zero.jibjab.com/client/zero/ClientZero_EmbedViewer.swf?external_make_id=6bRCmPnkhFj2MwPo&service=sendables.jibjab.com' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' wmode='transparent' height='319' width='425'><param name='wmode' value='transparent'></param><param name='movie' value='http://aka.zero.jibjab.com/client/zero/ClientZero_EmbedViewer.swf?external_make_id=6bRCmPnkhFj2MwPo&service=sendables.jibjab.com'></param><param name='scaleMode' value='showAll'></param><param name='quality' value='high'></param><param name='allowNetworking' value='all'></param><param name='allowFullScreen' value='true'><param name='FlashVars' value='external_make_id=6bRCmPnkhFj2MwPo&service=sendables.jibjab.com'></param><param name='allowScriptAccess' value='always'></param></object><div>Send a JibJab Sendables® <a href='http://sendables.jibjab.com/sendables'>eCard</a> Today!</div></div><img src="http://counters.gigya.com/wildfire/CIMP/bT*xJmx*PTEyMTYyMzIyNDQzNDUmcHQ9MTIxNjIzMjI1MDc3MSZwPTE5MTEzMSZkPSZuPSZnPTI=.jpg">
|
Nymr83
Jul 26 2008 12:19 PM
|
|
I think we can cross Edwards off of Obama's running mate list.
He was caught by tabloid reporters in a hotel, allegedly visiting his mistress and unacknowledged child... not the kind of distraction a campaign needs.
|
AG/DC
Jul 26 2008 01:03 PM
|
|
He was off earlier anyhow. The real story is how hard folks are trying to ignore this story.
LA Times:
<blockquote>Hey bloggers,
There has been a little buzz surrounding John Edwards and his alleged affair. Because the only source has been the National Enquirer we have decided not to cover the rumors or salacious speculations. So I am asking you all not to blog about this topic until further notified.
If you have any questions or are ever in need of story ideas that would best fit your blog, please don't hesitate to ask
Keep rockin,
Tony</blockquote>
|
Valadius
Jul 26 2008 03:46 PM
|
|
It's the National Fucking Enquirer. Next you'll tell me Batboy slept with the Queen of the Molepeople.
|
AG/DC
Jul 26 2008 03:52 PM
|
|
I didn't tell you anything about anybody except the LA Times.
|
SteveJRogers
Jul 27 2008 01:53 PM
|
|
| ="AG/DC"]He was off earlier anyhow. The real story is how hard folks are trying to ignore this story.
LA Times:
<blockquote>Hey bloggers,
There has been a little buzz surrounding John Edwards and his alleged affair. Because the only source has been the National Enquirer we have decided not to cover the rumors or salacious speculations. So I am asking you all not to blog about this topic until further notified.
If you have any questions or are ever in need of story ideas that would best fit your blog, please don't hesitate to ask
Keep rockin,
Tony</blockquote> |
Got to love though how the mainstream media were all over the Rush Limbaugh stories that were first broken in the Enquirer.
And now "one of their own" is caught by them it goes into Operation Shutdown.
|
Nymr83
Jul 27 2008 01:59 PM
|
|
thats just the way the liberal-biased media works. If this had been a Republican nobody at a newspaper would ever be saying "your attention please, this is a non-story don't write about it"
|
sharpie
Jul 27 2008 07:53 PM
|
|
Gary Hart was a Democrat. Bill Clinton/Gennifer Flowers -- tabloid story too.
NY Times reports on some pretty unusual contact between McCain and a staffer 8 years ago and everyone jumps down their throat so maybe they are gunshy now but the whole liberal media theory is bull.
|
Nymr83
Jul 27 2008 08:09 PM
|
|
whats bull is pretending that the NY Times isn't extremely biased.
as for Clinton thats the kind of story that you just can't ignore. but Edwards, not currently holding an elected office, they ignore. had it been a republican in the same spot they wouldnt have ignored it.
|
sharpie
Jul 28 2008 09:08 AM
|
|
Maybe because the National Enquirer "proof" is so very sketchy it hasn't been widely reported.
Unlike, say, Larry Craig, where there was a police report to go on or Gennifer Flowers where she was willing to talk and there were tapes or Gary Hart where he challenged the press to follow him (plus those Monkey Business photos). Maybe the press is just doing a good job and not printing sleaze unless there is something more than unnamed sources. Someone else has claimed paternity of that child.
|
AG/DC
Jul 28 2008 09:34 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jul 28 2008 09:37 AM
|
|
It's not just the "proof" that they're ignoring. The idea that the guy who ran for VP four years ago (and many would say he won), and finished a respectable third in a dramatic primary this year, was escorted shaken and ashen-faced from a hotel late at night where he was cowering from the harassment of scandal-sheet tabloid photographers --- that's a story in itself. But they have elected to ignore it, and I'm guessing they've elcted to do that lest that story suggest that where there's smoke there's fire.
And saying that doesn't mean I'm telling you that Batboy slept with the Queen of the Molepeople.
|
themetfairy
Jul 28 2008 09:34 AM
|
|
Whether you're a Democrat or Republican, you can let your Kippah do the talking for you -
[url=http://www.vanitykippah.com/:23d7o2tx]The 2008 Presidential Kippah Collection[/url:23d7o2tx]
|
Nymr83
Jul 28 2008 11:07 AM
|
|
| ] was escorted shaken and ashen-faced from a hotel late at night where he was cowering from the harassment of scandal-sheet tabloid photographers --- that's a story in itself |
some stories with that angle would be good too, because the press does harass celebrities and rarely gets called on it because the other press cover their asses.
|
TheOldMole
Jul 28 2008 02:29 PM
|
|
| ]thats just the way the liberal-biased media works. If this had been a Republican nobody at a newspaper would ever be saying "your attention please, this is a non-story don't write about it" |
Well, the NY Times never did run a Larry Craig men's room story.
|
Nymr83
Aug 08 2008 01:33 PM
|
|
Edwards now admits affair but denies the child.
Major bullet dodged by Democrats here.
Which Republican primary candidate do you think had the biggest skeleton in the closet that we are now far less likely to learn about?
I guess Giuliani is the obvious choice, those his problem wouldn't have had to be new skeletons and much as publicizing of things that were already known by anyone who cared to look.
Something about Tancredo makes me thing he had secrets, i bet he had an affair with an illegal immigrant, or maybe a bunch of Mexicans did some landscaping for him before he turned them in to INS to avoid paying...
|
AG/DC
Aug 08 2008 02:16 PM
|
|
These guys have got to learn to say "no comment."
|
Nymr83
Aug 08 2008 02:21 PM
|
|
"no comment" equates to "i did whatever you think i did" in the court of public opinion when t comes to politicians. they've brought it upon themselves as a profession.
|
AG/DC
Aug 09 2008 12:38 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Aug 09 2008 04:25 PM
|
|
Which is fine. If folks want to believe he slept around, let them. Less of a sin for a politician than lying to his supporters' faces and actively and falsely disparaging the ones doing the reporting.
Look how far W.'s "no comment" on drugs got him.
Hey, maybe Batboy did with the Queen of the Molepeople.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Aug 09 2008 02:18 PM
|
|
The cover-up always makes it worse.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Aug 10 2008 07:27 PM
|
|
"no comment" = confession
Bat boy rocks!
|
AG/DC
Aug 10 2008 08:40 PM
|
|
No comment = whatever. No comment = I'm going to control my story.
It's success for George Bush cannot be overstated. Compare to the embarassment of Bill Clinton's dissembling and word twisting over the far lesser indiscretion of pot.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Aug 10 2008 09:02 PM
|
|
When I'm interviewing someone and they tell me "no comment," I think they're hiding something and I keep digging.
That said, there's a way to say "no comment" without actually using those words. It's those words that create the suspicion.
If someone tells me "no comment," my next question always is "Why not?"
|
Nymr83
Aug 10 2008 10:03 PM
|
|
| ]It's success for George Bush cannot be overstated. Compare to the embarassment of Bill Clinton's dissembling and word twisting over the far lesser indiscretion of pot. |
why couldnt clinton just say "i did it" obama has, ny governor david paterson has, and i dont see it even getting mentioned much less hurting either of them. clinton created the story by "lawyering" his answer to the question instead of admitting or denying it.
|
AG/DC
Aug 10 2008 10:08 PM
|
|
Having an affair isn't the disgrace that lying about it to everyone is, that apparently paying off the woman and appearing to continue to lie are. That's a sad private matter that is now public.
If you ask and he says "That's not what I want to talk about," your story is "Edgy Refuses to Discuss Alleged Affair" and that's that. It lasts one day, and you're a sleazeball journalist for continuing to dig around what's essentially a private matter.
Who cares if you consider it an admission? Readers are more mature and more cynical than they're given credit for. Sex? Whatever. Soliciting sex in public? Denying a child? Paying shut-up money to the mistress to stay quiet? Using your position to keep her quiet? Driving her into the water and swimming away? These are things where you're going to get in trouble.
Now Obama has to move as far away from him as possible, Edwards is off the speaker list in Denver, and "the cause of his career" he so nobly spoke of is damaged because one more vain politician not only had to get some, but had to lie maintain his pristine image at the same time.
Would anybody care about Monica Lewinsky if Bill Clinton had just taken the fifth? They knew, more or less, he was a skirtchaser when they elected him twice.
Ask anybody in my family and they don't care that Roger Clemens took steroids. I do, because I care about baseball in a deeper sense and dislike his career. They shrug. But lying through his teeth until his self-image is so deeply on the line that he lies to Congress? Serious stuff.
|
seawolf17
Aug 21 2008 07:24 AM
|
|
What I love is how much the candidates are just [url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080821/pl_politico/12685:4rley5gg]regular guys[/url:4rley5gg].
|
AG/DC
Aug 21 2008 07:28 AM
|
|
I'm a little concerned about McCain fading a bit cognitively.
|
MFS62
Aug 21 2008 07:30 AM
|
|
| ="seawolf17":2ik2i83m]What I love is how much the candidates are just [url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080821/pl_politico/12685:2ik2i83m]regular guys[/url:2ik2i83m]. |
2ik2i83m]
I wonder how many other things he doesn't remember.
Later
|
AG/DC
Aug 22 2008 10:25 AM
|
|
<a href="http://www.thelopezfamilyonline.com/play.php?first=Steve J.&last=Rogers" target="blank">Grass roots democracy</a> is where it's at.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Aug 22 2008 10:32 AM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":1244vozr]I'm a little concerned about McCain fading a bit cognitively. |
1244vozr]
No, that's agism!
Rich people own a lot of houses, many of them for investments. My dad runs a security firm for gated communities in Florida. There are big houses that are used for maybe a couple weeks a year. Then after a while they just sell them.
If they had asked McCain how many houses he actually spends time in, I suspect he would have had a ready answer.
One cool aside: Hank Aaron and Mike Schmidt live in developments Dad oversees.
|
AG/DC
Aug 22 2008 10:39 AM
|
|
I agree that the question is barely relevant. "I've done well and I can't recite a list of all my assets on the spot" is a perfectly adequate answer. He shouldn't be asked to apologize for his wealth. No candidate should.
His inability to field it gracefully is a small part of the reason I think he's not 100% cognitively.
|
Nymr83
Aug 22 2008 12:23 PM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":3obwzceq]<a href="http://www.thelopezfamilyonline.com/play.php?first=Steve J.&last=Rogers" target="blank">Grass roots democracy</a> is where it's at. |
3obwzceq]
Sorry Steve (and Hillary), but I don't vote for Yankee fans.
|
AG/DC
Aug 28 2008 08:08 AM
|
|
This sort of thing is what I'm talking about.
http://www.time.com/time/politics/artic ... 09,00.html
His advisors are far more doctrinaire than he's ever been and his campaign has clearly hammeered into him to stay on message.
I grow nasueous when I hear Obama and others of the "new politics" link him to Bush and try and make them indistinguishable, because that sort of guilt by association (which must work) is as characteristic of old politics as anything.
But McCain, like Bush, seems to be prone to an ideoloigical hijack from advisors with a far broader agenda than his own, and campaign handlers who would rather him stay on message and be thought a fool than speak broadly and frankly and risk proving it.
The latter may have been necessary with Bush eight years ago due to his lack of national experience, but it seems to have grown more necessary with McCain now because he gets caught looking confused when speaking ex tempore.
|
Frayed Knot
Aug 28 2008 08:22 AM
|
|
I'll give Obama credit for this: When the Chicago resident was asked which baseball team he preferred (in an interview w/ESPN's Stuart Scott) he didn't give the politcal, 'Oh I like them both equally' bullshit answer.
He emphatically stated that he's down with the Southside Sox.
|
sharpie
Aug 28 2008 08:51 AM
|
|
Diamondbacks and White Sox could each make the World Series.
Red Sox won it when Kerry ran. Not that it helped him.
|
Frayed Knot
Aug 29 2008 06:14 AM
|
|
Letterman's Top Ten Pickup Lines Overheard at the Democratic Convention
10 - Wanna form a more perfect union?
9 - Something's rising and it's not the national debt
8 - I'm stiffer than John Kerry
7 - Let's go someplace and release our delegates
6 - Care to join the wife and me for a little 'bipartisanship'?
5 - I'll make you scream like Howard Dean
4 - Now that's what I call a stimulus package
3 - I'm gonna Barack your world
2 - Wanna pretend we're Republicans and have gay bathroom sex?
1 - Hi, I'm John Edwards
|
TheOldMole
Aug 29 2008 07:39 AM
|
|
| ]Diamondbacks ... could ... make the World Series. |
Bite your tongue.
|
Nymr83
Sep 05 2008 01:55 PM
|
|
Not Smart:
Georgia congressman called Obama "uppity", claims not to have understood the racial overtones and just meant he was haughty. oh yeah, i believe that.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Sep 05 2008 01:58 PM
|
|
Ouch! Major faux pas.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Sep 05 2008 02:01 PM
|
|
I should add that political correctness has made it hard to talk about Obama. People really have to parse their words carefully. (Remember Biden got in trouble for "clean" and "articulate.")
Of the late night comedians, I only watch Letterman, but I have noticed that there are virtually no Obama jokes. (And the McCain jokes are just about his age, as if he were 97 instead of 72.)
I don't suspect that Leno and Conan and the others are doing many Obama jokes either. (For the time being they can all feed on Sarah Palin.) But if Obama gets elected they'll have to figure out how to joke about him. Otherwise it will be quite a dry spell coming after 16 material-rich years of Clinton and Bush.
|
AG/DC
Sep 05 2008 02:02 PM
|
|
Well, that cancels out the rooting-for-the-hurricane thing. Probably more than cancels it out.
Dumpkus.
|
Nymr83
Sep 05 2008 02:08 PM
|
|
I only watch Conan O'Brien with any regularity and i can't remember him ever making fun of Obama and the McCain jokes have been limited to the occassioal age joke (perhaps more jokes about McCain would have led to more people asking where the Obama material is.)
I don't think Biden should have gotten any flak for his remarks in that instance, I do think that Senator Westmoreland's (is he related to the general?) comment is almost straining to find the 'incorrect' word, i mean who the heck ever says "uppity"?
Edgy- i don't think you can cancel out 'rooting for a hurricane" unless maybe you started rooting for an earthquake, a terror attack, or the yankees.
|
AG/DC
Sep 05 2008 02:10 PM
|
|
I'm not saying it's an equal sin, only saying the damage from the faux pas may be equal.
|
Nymr83
Sep 05 2008 02:11 PM
|
|
yeah i just wanted to throw that yankees thing in there
|
Benjamin Grimm
Sep 05 2008 02:12 PM
|
|
I think I missed "rooting for a hurricane."
Who said that? Was it someone hoping that the Republicans would get a second black eye like they did from Katrina?
|
AG/DC
Sep 05 2008 02:28 PM
|
|
Dan Fowler.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/TrBus8ORR78&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/TrBus8ORR78&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
|
Nymr83
Sep 11 2008 01:29 AM
|
|
an interesting wall street journal piece by Karl Rove, saying that candidates who waste their time attacking the other party's VP candidate instead of the top of the ticket have ended up losing
[url:g6php9la]http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122108935141721343.html?mod=todays_columnists[/url:g6php9la]
i tend to agree with the underlying premise- by spending too much time comparing himself to palin ("i'm more experienced than her" etc) obama gives off the impression that he knows he is no match for mccain.
and thats leaving aside Rove's opinion, or even the objective truth if there is one, about who is likely to come out on top in a comparison between obama and palin. you lose that fight even if you win it.
|
Vic Sage
Sep 11 2008 10:28 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Sep 11 2008 10:40 AM
|
|
i am extremely pessimistic about the election this year.
In an era where Republican leadership has presided over 8 years of an expansion of intrusive policing at home, a misguided and unpopular war abroad, ever increasing debt and unemployment, and rampant political corruption and incompetence, one might think the Democrats would've had a cake walk into the white house in 08.
But the Republicans smartly nominated their one member who could run as an "outsider" despite 30 years in our national legislature; whose support of Bush's war is now viewed as politically heroic (because of its unpopularity) rather than a symptom of his wrongheadedness; whose cynical move to the right, evidenced by his VP choice and reversal of many previously held positions during the campaign, is overlooked because he is a "man of principle" who has challenged his own party on many issues (immigration, campaign finance); whose upperclass disconnection from middle-class concerns (how many houses does he have?) and lack of interest or insight into economic issues is utterly overlooked by those who would like to protect their dream of being rich rather than face the reality that they're not.
He chooses a VP candidate who, as a former beauty queen and tv sports reporter, is entirely unqualified to be president, despite his own age and medical history; who abused power to enforce loyalty, supported porkbarrel until she was noticed doing so, seems to have real problems with both the "free speech" and "separation of church/state" prongs of the First Amendment, and self-righeously demanded the privacy for her daughter to make a choice that, were she to be prez, she would attempt to deny even to rape victims. But because she's a woman, she has been successful in playing Hilary's "victim" card, and have turned the blogosphere's attacks on her into a badge of honor that has consolidated support.
The irony is that supporters like James Dobson, who have spent a career telling working women to stay home and raise their children, supported by a party comfortable with that kind of "family values" rhetoric under their big tent, now indignantly attack anyone who questions the values of a parent who has such young children with such particularly special needs to take on such an all-consuming obligation as becoming VP (or possibly the presidency). Frankly, i don't think its a sexist question, and i would ask it of any candidate, male or female, who had kids that young, why they were putting their personal ambition and thirst for power over the needs of their kids. And, in this case, Executive leadership of the US is not just "any job", and a Down's Syndrome child is not just any kind of kid. But its not even a point you can make today without arousing even the normally level-headed AG/DC, much less the more rabid elements on the right.
And against these candidates, what have the Democrats done? They nominate an inexperienced African-American with a foreign-sounding name, who is long on rhetoric and charisma and short on accomplishment and specifics. And does he join with the other primary candidate, a woman with a huge following amongst those constituencies with whom Obama has vulnerabilities (women and white working class) who garnered nearly the same number of votes as he did during the primaries? No, he picks a small-state white male senator whose extensive experience and foreign affairs acumen only serve to highlight OBama's lack of same.
The Left's blogosphere attacks on Palin have made her a martyr that has energized the evangelical right, while McCain's bio and maverick reputation intrigues the undecideds in the middle.
But the biggest miscalculation of the Democrats is the discounting of the inherent racism in this country... a nation built on genocide of the indiginous population, African slave labor to build its agrarian strength, and exploitation of immigrant populations to build its transportation and industrial infrastructure, all for the benefit of a white ango-saxon propertied class. We've come a long way, but not far enough in large swaths of this country, where I simply do not believe there are enough white people ready to vote for a black man who is clearly smarter than they are.
I wish i was wrong about that, but i don't think i am. I don't think the polls will reflect it, ether, but when people step into the booth and pull that curtain closed behind them, i suspect they will vote their fears and not their aspirations.
And we will once again get the kind of government we deserve.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Sep 11 2008 10:32 AM
|
|
Home run.
|
AG/DC
Sep 11 2008 10:47 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Sep 23 2008 09:26 PM
|
|
1) It's illegal for employers to ask that and has never been an issue that the Democrats have put, or would allow to be put, on Patty Murray or Mary Landrieu, and (2) the explicit assumption that a thirst for power is what motivates her is the sort of misguided contempt that has continuously allowed the Republicans to use moral jui jitsu and throw the Democrats off balance even when they're on top.
Challenge her as an unprepared candidate and you're clearly doing fine. Change the rules of what is and isn't sexist in order to attack her, and the party is in trouble. You can blame it on the racism of others all you want. It's clearly out there, but the party has to look at itself.
We all see this surprising bump that has happened since the end of the Republican convention. People didn't just become racists last week.
|
Mendoza Line
Sep 11 2008 11:54 AM
|
|
| ]1) It's illegal for employers to ask that and has never been an issue for that the Democrats have put, or would allow to be put, on Patty Murray or Mary Landrieu, and (2) the explicit assumption that a thirst for power is what motivates her is the sort of misguided contempt that has continueously allowed the Republicans to use moral jui jitsu and throw the Democrats off balance even when they're on top. |
This puts it perfectly. I want to gag every time I read some dumbazz statement about how Palin is unqualified because (a) she's got her hands full as a mother of five with (b) a special needs child and (c) a pregnant teenage daughter.
I agree that Palin shouldn't be VP, but that has nothing to do with her momness or her hotness. She favors teaching creationism in the schools, extended drilling for fossil fuels in Alaska and elsewhere, and a long-term military presence in places where we don't belong. I don't agree with any of these positions. Therefore, I'm voting against her. If she supported policies that I support, I'd vote for her.
The Palin-bashing has already come back to bite Democrats in the butt, and it's going to continue to do so from now until November.
| ]supported porkbarrel until she was noticed doing so |
I don't really have a problem with this. There's no obligation to unilaterally minimize the aid you're getting from the federal government even if you oppose federal spending as a whole. If she broke a specific rule, that's different, but she's free to play by the same rules as other governors.
I strongly oppose the DH rule. I strongly favor the Mets using a DH when they're playing under AL rules.
|
AG/DC
Sep 11 2008 11:59 AM
|
|
| ]Frankly, i don't think its a sexist question, and i would ask it of any candidate, male or female, who had kids that young, why they were putting their personal ambition and thirst for power over the needs of their kids. |
I don't believe this for a minute. Thanks for working me into your blog.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Sep 11 2008 12:10 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Sep 11 2008 01:03 PM
|
|
"She favors teaching creationism in the schools, "
I have to play fact-checker on this one. She doesn't. But that hasn't stopped many cable talking heads from saying so.
"He chooses a VP candidate who, as a former beauty queen and tv sports reporter, is entirely unqualified to be president,"
Vic's comments are heartfelt and well-thought out, but he also paints the worst possible scenario in spots where he doesn't have to. It's not fair to dismiss Palin as a former beauty queen and tv sports reporter. I think her "beauty queen" days were representing the podunk Alaskan town she was living in as a high schooler, and her TV sports job was brief and right out of college.
It's as if someone had said, "Mets Guy, a former summer intern for the Amityville Record and and teen columnist for the Massapequa Post...." and leave out the 20 years of working for decent-sized papers.
That also would be like someone on the right dismissing Obama as a former drunk and drug-abuser, which is how he has described himself in his late teens in his memoirs. If someone on the right did that, the left would be howling.
If you want to diminish her experience as governor of a state with an $11 billion budget, that's fair game. But the high school stuff?
If you had said, "picked the governor of the state with the fewest people..." you would have made a point and as a reader I would have moved on. But as written, I stopped and mentally said, 'Wait a minute!' and the value of the point was lost.
As someone (attempting) to cover this stuff objectively, every day Obama spends defending himself for calling Palin a pig -- or not -- is a day he has wasted. You avoid that by not saying things that can be turned against you. The pithy soundbite he was trying to make wasn't worth it. And it's not like that line came off the top of his head. Nothing said on the stump isn't planned and rehearsed.
There's plenty of ammo out there. But when you -- and Obama -- go for the cheap zingers and the high school stuff, that's a self-inflicted wound.
|
Vic Sage
Sep 11 2008 12:44 PM
|
|
="AG/DC"]| ]Frankly, i don't think its a sexist question, and i would ask it of any candidate, male or female, who had kids that young, why they were putting their personal ambition and thirst for power over the needs of their kids. |
I don't believe this for a minute. Thanks for working me into your blog. |
you don't believe what, exactly?
1) That i don't think its a sexist question?
2) That i would ask it of any candidate?
3) That such a person is necessarily putting their ambition ahead of their kids' needs?
4) That its a legal, much less a relevant question?
As for (1) and (2), i don't care if you believe it.
As for (3), i don't know if she is or not, but its a question i would like her to answer, not you.
As for (4), there are necessary legal safeguards to protect people from discrimination in the workplace (including the hiring process), because of the inherent inequality of power between an employee and an employer. But the media asking questions for the benefit of voters is not the same thing. And applying for a job and asking for voters to grant her co-leadership of the free world are not the same thing.
Again, the issue i was addressing was NOT whether or not these things disqualify her to run for office in any way, but the irony of the Right's "ju jitsu" on any critique in this area, when they have been the party that has typically opposed any legislation that advances equal rights for women (and minoriites, and gays, and the disabled), and whose right-wing attack dogs, like Dobson, have historically declared a woman's place to be in the home.
yes, i get that you think that when Democrats, the party of the ERA amendment, and the authors of most of the civil rights legislation and other legislation protecting women's rights (including privacy rights), dare to question Lady Mooseburger on these issues, it can ONLY be out of cynical impulse that undermines their values. But then isn't the Republican "moral outrage" defense the same thing?
And the nasty moral outrage with which you berated our friends soupcan and cookie mom for even raising these questions was so uncharacteristic of you, it made me wince. Unlike you, i wouldn't accuse you of being cynical in your expressed views, but, neverless, they were alot more patient with your tone than i would have been.
With regard to the racism, i said that i didn't believe it would ever be reflected in polls... just in votes, and McCain's post-convention bump has nothing to do with it. It is about what i've also already stated... the attacks on Palin martyred her, and made this nobody into the darling of the right.
As to the porkbarrel issue, sure that's the way it works. But then don't run on a ticket with a crusader attacking porkbarrel. "Look out, D.C., change is coming!"
Oh, puhleez.
|
AG/DC
Sep 11 2008 12:50 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Sep 23 2008 09:28 PM
|
|
I don't believe that you would ask it of any candidate, male or female, who had kids that young, why they were putting their personal ambition and thirst for power over the needs of their kids. You would ask it of Bobby Kennedy? You would ask it of young Joe Biden?
If you don't care whether I buy it, fine. But you wrote an essay of persuasion. I know anti-Republican voices would never do that to a Democratic canddiate becasue they haven't.
When Patty Murray first joined the Senate, the argument a thousand times was that being a mother of young children would make her a better senator.
| ="Vic Sage"]As for (3), i don't know if she is or not, but its a question i would like her to answer, not you. |
Above, you preesent it as self-evident that she is.
|
Vic Sage
Sep 11 2008 01:29 PM
|
|
I'm not a journalist, and i don't even play one on the internet like you do, but lets both play the "factchecking" game.
| ]I think her "beauty queen" days were representing the podunk Alaskan town she was living in as a high schooler, |
According to the bio on wikipedia, she started college in 1983, and the beauty contest was in 1984. ergo, NOT a "high schooler".
| ]If you want to diminish her experience as governor of a state with an $11 billion budget, |
she signed off on a$6.6B state operating budget in 2006, not $11 billion.
| ]It's as if someone had said, "Mets Guy, a former summer intern for the Amityville Record and and teen columnist for the Massapequa Post...." and leave out the 20 years of working for decent-sized papers. |
yeah, but the problem here is that she doesn't have 20 years working for decent sized papers. She has 6 years as the mayor/manager of a town of less than 7000, and less than 2 years as a governor of one of the least populated places on earth... one with no state sales tax or income tax, funded by oil money and federal subsidies, with a budget smaller than that of some major cities, much less other states.
By purposely omitting those 2 positions from her resume, i wasn't pretending she didn't have "executive experience", i was stating my view of their worth. It's not like she has some impressive CV that i've overlooked. That was sort of my point.
| ]That also would be like someone on the right dismissing Obama as a former drunk and drug-abuser, which is how he has described himself in his late teens in his memoirs. If someone on the right did that, the left would be howling. |
If they started attacking him for things he actually said and did, instead of things like being an islamic terrorist, it would be a welcome change of tactics.
| ]As someone (attempting) to cover this stuff objectively, every day Obama spends defending himself for calling Palin a pig -- or not -- is a day he has wasted. You avoid that by not saying things that can be turned against you |
anything he says can be turned against him by a campaign determined to keep the focus off the last 8 years.
| ]There's plenty of ammo out there. But when you -- and Obama -- go for the cheap zingers and the high school stuff, that's a self-inflicted wound |
Well, you're an "objective journalist" (a pompous contradiction in terms, if ever there was one). Go and shoot the ammo, and don't concern yourself too much with my wounds... self-inflicted or otherwise. |
|
metsguyinmichigan
Sep 11 2008 01:52 PM
|
|
Well, Vic. You got me. I should have said she was a college sophomore instead of a high-schooler. That's what I get for talking off the top of my head. I would have been more thorough in a story instead of a forum post. My bad. Doesn't change my point, though.
If you had used this from your second post -- She has 6 years as the mayor/manager of a town of less than 7000, and less than 2 years as a governor of one of the least populated places on earth... one with no state sales tax or income tax, funded by oil money and federal subsidies, with a budget smaller than that of some major cities, much less other states.
-- in the first one, you would have made a defendable argument.
But you're wrong on the budget, at least for fiscal 2008-09. Source: On September 5, journalists Mike and Tim Bradner published a report on the Palin Candidacy in their trade journal, the Alaska Legislative Digest. Mike is a former Speaker of the House in the Alaska State Legislature, and Tim once worked for British Petroleum. They know the state well. Here are some excerpts from their report:...
"Remember we are a state with just under 700,000 population and this year had a budget of over $11 billion."
Then: "anything he says can be turned against him by a campaign determined to keep the focus off the last 8 years."
Absolutely true. You make it harder for them, though, but NOT saying things that can make it look like you just called her a pig. A smart pol doesn't leave the gun laying on the coffee table then complains when he get shot by it.
Well, you're an "objective journalist" (a pompous contradiction in terms, if ever there was one).
A lot of us try to be objective. We're not all the cable talking heads. I was looking at your post, and the pig gaffe, from an analyitical persepctive rather than a partisan one.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Sep 11 2008 01:56 PM
|
|
McCain used the same "lipstick on a pig" thing when talking about Hillary. It takes a lot of audacity to twist Obama's words when he did the very same thing only a few months ago.
(Full disclosure: I did the same back in <a href="http://archives.cranepoolforum.net/1000/f2_t1086.shtml" target="_new">April of 2006</a> in our Hurricane Katrina thread. I'd like to think that it wasn't as trite way back then, but I'm probably wrong.)
|
metsguyinmichigan
Sep 11 2008 02:03 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":1xkmcbpf]McCain used the same "lipstick on a pig" thing when talking about Hillary. It takes a lot of audacity to twist Obama's words when he did the very same thing only a few months ago.
(Full disclosure: I did the same back in <a href="http://archives.cranepoolforum.net/1000/f2_t1086.shtml" target="_new">April of 2006</a> in our Hurricane Katrina thread. I'd like to think that it wasn't as trite way back then, but I'm probably wrong.) |
1xkmcbpf]
Absolutely. The difference that McCain did it a while ago, and Obama did it a week after the lipstick on the pit bull line became a big deal and linked to Palin. He could have made the same point without using the line. Now the message he had is totally lost because he's defending whether or not he called her pig. Going for a cheap chuckle hurt him.
|
Nymr83
Sep 11 2008 02:05 PM
|
|
it was obvious when mccain said it that he was reffering to the "hillary-care" plan as a "pig" and not to hillary clinton herself.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Sep 11 2008 02:11 PM
|
|
It was equally obvious that Obama wasn't talking about Palin. He was talking about how the McCain-Palin campain is saying that they're different from Bush when, Obama says, they're very much the same. Both candidates used the phrase in pretty much the same way.
|
Nymr83
Sep 11 2008 02:14 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":8k2udhhi]It was equally obvious that Obama wasn't talking about Palin. He was talking about how the McCain-Palin campain is saying that they're different from Bush when, Obama says, they're very much the same. Both candidates used the phrase in pretty much the same way. |
8k2udhhi]
i didnt hear exactly what obama said and you havent seen me criticize him for it.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Sep 11 2008 02:19 PM
|
|
And you didn't hear me say that you had.
|
Mendoza Line
Sep 11 2008 04:12 PM
|
|
| ]"She favors teaching creationism in the schools, "
I have to play fact-checker on this one. She doesn't. But that hasn't stopped many cable talking heads from saying so.
|
[url=http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections/story/8347904p-8243554c.html]Here's[/url] the article that the talking heads seem to use as their source.
Yes, she later pulled back slightly from her original unambiguous statement in favor of teaching creationism in the schools. However, given the original statement and this quote (admittedly, it's from the Alaska Republican Party, not Palin herself), I'm less than convinced.
| ="The Republican Party of Alaska platform, in its section on education"]We support giving Creation Science equal representation with other theories of the origin of life. If evolution is taught, it should be presented as only a theory.
|
|
AG/DC
Sep 25 2008 01:58 PM
|
|
| ="Vic Sage":3pbrjyk7]And the nasty moral outrage with which you berated our friends soupcan and cookie mom for even raising these questions was so uncharacteristic of you, it made me wince. Unlike you, i wouldn't accuse you of being cynical in your expressed views, but, neverless, they were alot more patient with your tone than i would have been. |
3pbrjyk7]
What's wrong with my tone?
When have you ever cared about tone? You love harsh tone.
|
metirish
Sep 25 2008 04:57 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Sep 25 2008 05:22 PM
|
|
Question - What will this bailout mean to us taxpayers if it gets passed....right now it's stalled after a day of talks.
|
Willets Point
Sep 25 2008 05:17 PM
|
|
| ="metirish":34ryjxyq]Question - What will this bailout mean to us taxpayers if it gets passes....right now it's stalled after a day of talks. |
34ryjxyq]
It means we're going to owe a lot more money to China.
|
AG/DC
Sep 26 2008 09:56 PM
|
|
The word "fundamental" is coming out a lot.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Sep 29 2008 09:35 PM
|
|
|
Willets Point
Oct 02 2008 09:23 AM
|
|
Sarah Palin is the <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2201342/pagenum/all/">new joelman</a>.
|
AG/DC
Oct 02 2008 09:42 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 02 2008 10:00 AM
|
|
The sentences comng out of both candidates mouths during that first debate were insanely undiagrammable.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Oct 02 2008 09:54 AM
|
|
Tonite's debate will be the highest-rated show of the Fall Season
|
Farmer Ted
Oct 02 2008 10:22 AM
|
|
Gwen Ifill: Governor, how exactly do you field dress a moose?
Palin: Get your big ass on stage and I'll show you.
Saw a coupla politicos on CNN last night who said this is going to be the most boring VP debate ever. Only 90 seconds to answer questions, Moose Hunter will be on script and Hair Plug Boy will be biting his tongue.
I'll be watching baseball and Psych on tivo.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 02 2008 10:31 AM
Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Oct 02 2008 11:25 AM
|
|
I helped cover the Obama rally in Grand Rapids today. I'll throw some photos up later.
Rallies are fun. I thought Obama was a little flat today. Somethimes the energy at these events just crackles, and this time, not so much. Might be because of the time -- 9:30 a.m. --- and the way the stage was set up, which gave the vast majority of the crowd poor sightlines.
I've never seen so many people selling t-shirts and hats at an event like this.
I got pretty close, some nice photos.
|
Gwreck
Oct 02 2008 10:55 AM
|
|
Springsteen will be performing at Obama's rallies on Saturday (Philly), Sunday (Columbus) and Monday (Ypsilanti, MI).
|
AG/DC
Oct 02 2008 11:26 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 02 2008 11:28 AM
|
|
We got a about 20 or so boxes of clothes donated to the poor last week. I don't run that part of the show, but the woman who did was on her way out the door and I grabbed a few guys and offered to help.
She scratched her head as we unloaded, wondering how long it would take to sort the clothes.
I guessed that it wouldn't take any time at all, as these were likely matching shirts --- probably from a failed rock tour or a failed presidential campaign. She fretted a bit so I bet her that if I cracked open a box, and pulled out one shirt, it would say "Mike Huckabee for president."
She took the bet, I cracked open the box, grabbed a shirt and read, "Mitt Romney for President." We called it a draw.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 02 2008 11:26 AM
|
|
| ="Gwreck":304dan78]Springsteen will be performing at Obama's rallies on Saturday (Philly), Sunday (Columbus) and Monday (Ypsilanti, MI). |
304dan78]
Yeah, there was some grumbling from the locals that Ypsi was getting the Boss and we weren't.
That would have crackled.
|
metirish
Oct 02 2008 11:29 AM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":269gpftx]We got a about 20 or so boxes of clothes donated to the poor last week. I don't run that part of the show, but the woman who did was on her way out the door and I grabbed a few guys and offered to help.
She scratched her head as we unloaded, wondering how long it would take to sort the clothes.
I guessed that it wouldn't take anything at all, as these were likely matching shirts --- probably from a failed rock tour or a failed presidential campaign. She fretted a bit so I bet her that if I cracked open a box, and pulled out one shirt, it would say "Mike Huckabee for president."
She took the bet, I cracked open the box, grabbed a shirt and read, "Mitt Romney for President." We called it a draw. |
269gpftx]
That's funny stuff , sounds like this has happened before.
|
HahnSolo
Oct 02 2008 11:53 AM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":2fwdy8qe]We got a about 20 or so boxes of clothes donated to the poor last week. I don't run that part of the show, but the woman who did was on her way out the door and I grabbed a few guys and offered to help.
She scratched her head as we unloaded, wondering how long it would take to sort the clothes.
I guessed that it wouldn't take any time at all, as these were likely matching shirts --- probably from a failed rock tour or a failed presidential campaign. She fretted a bit so I bet her that if I cracked open a box, and pulled out one shirt, it would say "Mike Huckabee for president."
She took the bet, I cracked open the box, grabbed a shirt and read, "Mitt Romney for President." We called it a draw. |
2fwdy8qe]
Was there another box with "New York Mets 2008 NL East Champions" shirts?
|
metirish
Oct 02 2008 11:54 AM
|
|
| ]
Was there another box with "New York Mets 2008 NL East Champions" shirts? |
Jesus that's funny....
|
Farmer Ted
Oct 02 2008 12:06 PM
|
|
They send the losers (but winners) shirts to Africa. Given the Mormon missions, I'm sure there are a lot of Mitt shirts in 3rd world countries.
MIAMI — In some parts of the world, the Seattle Seahawks are the reigning Super Bowl champions, the Buffalo Bills are the last great football dynasty and Tom Brady is some frustrated quarterback from New England who can never win it all.
Minutes after the end of the Super Bowl, every player on the winning team will get a cap. The loser’s logo could end up on heads in Uganda.
The Super Bowl will end about 10 p.m. Sunday, and by 10:01 every player on the winning team — along with coaches, executives, family members and ball boys — could be outfitted in colorful T-shirts and caps proclaiming them champions.
The other set of championship gear — the 288 T-shirts and caps made for the team that did not win — will be hidden behind a locked door at Dolphin Stadium. By order of the National Football League, those items are never to appear on television or on eBay. They are never even to be seen on American soil.
They will be shipped Monday morning to a warehouse in Sewickley, Pa., near Pittsburgh, where they will become property of World Vision, a relief organization that will package the clothing in wooden boxes and send it to a developing nation, usually in Africa.
This way, the N.F.L. can help one of its charities and avoid traumatizing one of its teams.
“Where these items go, the people don’t have electricity or running water,” said Jeff Fields, a corporate relations officer for World Vision. “They wouldn’t know who won the Super Bowl. They wouldn’t even know about football.”
The gear is flown, along with school and medical supplies, into a major city. It is then driven to one of the villages where World Vision staff members work. They distribute the shirts and caps at a community center, about two per family.
Beth Colleton, the N.F.L.’s director for community ventures, worked for a month at a World Vision service area in Ethiopia. One day, she saw a boy in the village wearing a Green Bay Packers 1998 Super Bowl champions T-shirt.
Ms. Colleton might have been the only person in the village to do a double take. The Denver Broncos were the 1998 Super Bowl champions.
After she returned home, she watched a documentary about Romanian orphans. One of them was wearing a Buffalo Bills Super Bowl champions T-shirt. “I almost fell out of my chair,” she said.
The Bills, losers of four consecutive Super Bowls in the 1990s, at least have a following in Romania. Some of their Super Bowl champions T-shirts were relegated to a trash heap in Tampa, Fla.
In the final seconds of the 1991 Super Bowl at Tampa Stadium, Buffalo place-kicker Scott Norwood lined up for a potential 47-yard game-winning field goal against the Giants. Eddie White, a Reebok vice president, ran onto the field with an armful of Bills championship shirts.
He had to position himself to get a shirt to Buffalo’s best players after the field goal was converted. But Norwood’s kick drifted right, and Mr. White did a 180-degree turn, sprinting from the field and tossing the shirts in the closest trash bin.
He talked about such moments as if he were a coach deconstructing a memorable fourth-down play. “We need to have a game plan just like the teams do,” he said.
Ten days ago, Reebok printed 288 championship T-shirts and caps each for the Indianapolis Colts and for the Chicago Bears, participants in this year’s Super Bowl. The gear was driven by van to Dolphin Stadium on Monday and presented to the N.F.L.
“Don’t worry,” Mr. White said. “It’s protected as well as Elizabeth Taylor’s diamonds.”
He is referring, of course, to $20 T-shirts and $30 caps. But to players and coaches, these are cotton-and-polyester trophies, the first of many tangible rewards they receive upon winning the Super Bowl.
When Green Bay beat New England in the 1997 Super Bowl, and the defensive coordinator Fritz Shurmur saw his shirt and cap for the first time, he started to cry. “I’ve waited my whole life for that shirt and that hat,” he said.
Distribution is a science. Twelve employees from Reebok and the N.F.L. huddle midway through the fourth quarter and handicap the game. If the score is lopsided, they stalk the sideline of the winning team, keeping the boxes out of sight.
But if the game is close, half the group goes to one side and half goes to the other. Each employee is assigned a star player to outfit. If the Colts win, for instance, someone immediately has to get a shirt and cap to quarterback Peyton Manning. If the Bears win, someone has to find linebacker Brian Urlacher.
This can be a difficult job, dodging joyous 300-pound linemen. But the advertising potential is priceless. Once the scoreboard clock hits 00:00, clothing manufacturers around the country start churning out championship merchandise. If Manning is seen wearing a T-shirt Sunday night, it will be flying off shelves in Indianapolis by Monday.
For the past 20 years, the shirts and caps have become as much a part of championship games as the coaches’ Gatorade showers. At the end of the World Series, the N.B.A. finals and the Final Four, all the winners get to celebrate in fresh threads.
The losers, meanwhile, trudge back to their locker room in sweaty jerseys. Major League Baseball destroys the clothing that was made for its runners-up. The N.B.A. donates it to an overseas charity. And the N.F.L. sends it to a place far away.
There, and only there, the losers get to be winners.
|
soupcan
Oct 02 2008 12:15 PM
|
|
LOVE Sarah Silverman.
I'd do anything for that hairy Jewess.
|
AG/DC
Oct 02 2008 12:23 PM
|
|
The big item among Salvadoran immigrants when I first moved to town were Van Halen "For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge" shirts. I initially wondered at the connection before doing the math. Native-born folks know enough to avoid such shirts, or wear them inside out if they must. The foreign-born are either oblivious, uncaring, or both.
|
Farmer Ted
Oct 02 2008 12:49 PM
|
|
Obama: As I speak in front of this empty building that used to be (insert bank name here)...
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 02 2008 01:16 PM
|
|
Recent polls show Obama widening his leads in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida too.
I predict that he'll have a 7-point lead in the national polls when it's 17 days before Election Day.
|
soupcan
Oct 02 2008 01:32 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm"]Recent polls show Obama widening his leads in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida too. |
Thank YOU Sarah Silverman!
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 02 2008 01:36 PM
|
|
| ="Farmer Ted":14a1ilht]Obama: As I speak in front of this empty building that used to be (insert bank name here)... |
14a1ilht]
Actually, Grand Rapids is doing OK. And he was on the plaza surrounded by governmental buildings (easy to secure) so they were all full.
Now, if he was in Detroit, there would be plenty of empty buildings to choose from.
Our political reporters have been trying to confirm the politico report about pulling out of Michigan. Campaign has not confirmed that.
|
themetfairy
Oct 02 2008 01:42 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":12gt2kn8]Recent polls show Obama widening his leads in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida too.
I predict that he'll have a 7-point lead in the national polls when it's 17 days before Election Day. |
12gt2kn8]
Ouch!
|
Nymr83
Oct 02 2008 03:40 PM
|
|
Sarah Silverman is an idiot. And she's fucking Matt Damon.
[url:f4uce3q7]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLG3S5WzHig[/url:f4uce3q7]
edit- i guess i should mention that this video is not "work-safe" for anyone who is reading fom work.
|
Nymr83
Oct 02 2008 07:25 PM
|
|
VP debate so far- neither of them want to even try and answer the question being asked.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Oct 02 2008 07:28 PM
|
|
they both suck so much.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 02 2008 07:29 PM
|
|
I'm watching with my 16-year-old son who just took a debate class in school. He's horrified. I had to explain the difference between a real debate and these dueling press conferences.
|
Kong76
Oct 02 2008 07:32 PM
|
|
Let's just hope whoever is Prez doesn't die prematurely.
|
AG/DC
Oct 02 2008 07:37 PM
|
|
Their energy platforms are pretty damn similar. Move on.
|
AG/DC
Oct 02 2008 07:39 PM
|
|
Wow, their platform on civil rights for gays is pretty damn similar. Move on.
|
Nymr83
Oct 02 2008 07:51 PM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":3dfbf4qi]Their energy platforms are pretty damn similar. Move on. |
3dfbf4qi]
Funny, they weren't 6th months ago. Oh, right, the primaries are over, time for everyone to move back towards the "middle."
|
Kong76
Oct 02 2008 07:53 PM
|
|
Is it me, or are they actually saying things since my last post?
OE: I edited in a question mark in case someone responds before I edit.
Gotta watch these things. We watch everything.
|
Nymr83
Oct 02 2008 07:55 PM
|
|
| ="KC"]Is it me, or are they actually saying things since my last post. |
it has gotten better.
well, I trust Biden on Israel, but I'm still totally unconvinced that he speaks for the man he said wasn't ready to be president.
and thats really the problem with this debate, neither of them can really completely speak for the guy on the top of the ticket.
|
Nymr83
Oct 02 2008 07:56 PM
|
|
Heres a good question about nukes, lets see who dodges.
edit- Palin dodged, Joe?
edit2- Joe skips it entirely and instead talks about something else.
just when they were doing better.
|
Nymr83
Oct 02 2008 08:08 PM
|
|
Biden COMPLETELY dodged the question of how he would differ from Obama if he were to become president.
NEXT...
she dodged too, i'm going to play video games theres nothing to learn here.
|
soupcan
Oct 02 2008 08:22 PM
|
|
I've had enough of people in the White House saying 'nuke-u-lar'.
|
AG/DC
Oct 02 2008 09:18 PM
|
|
Did Carter say nookyoolar? Recalling the seventies, it just seemed to be the way folks said it back then.
|
Nymr83
Oct 03 2008 05:36 PM
|
|
Nice. I'd be doing the same damn thing if the Mets were in the playoffs and I had to work.
|
cooby
Oct 03 2008 05:51 PM
|
|
My son and his girfriend have signed up to work the phones at the local Obama headquarters
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 07 2008 08:01 AM
|
|
Garry Shandling on the how Joe Biden prepared for the Vice Presidential debate:
| ]I think he watched tapes of how Johnny Carson used to deal with Charo. |
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Oct 07 2008 08:05 AM
|
|
O could land a killshot tonight, pundits say.
|
Vic Sage
Oct 07 2008 08:33 AM
|
|
As the economic tsunami continues to turn the electoral map blue, McCain's desperation leads him to campaign in the style he foreswore. I think he'll go for the jugular at the debate and lose any shred of remaining credibility he still clings to, as the noble, principled warrior who puts "country first". And it will avail him naught, since B.O. is a jujistsu master and his teflon hide will remain impervious to Jonny Mac's pointless flailing.
Of course, i have a deep distrust of the polls in this particular election, so I won't be confident in a Democratic victory until the actual swearing-in ceremony.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 07 2008 08:42 AM
|
|
| ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":2ss1zx5u]O could land a killshot tonight, pundits say. |
2ss1zx5u]
Pundits are in the tank for O. Polls are all over the place, and some show McCain has come closer since the VP debate.
Political strategists tell me that unless he's well over 50 percent in the polls, assume nothing.
|
sharpie
Oct 07 2008 08:42 AM
|
|
"Going for the jugular" seems like an incredibly bad option for McCain. He can let his surrogates and Sarah Palin do that for him but his appeal to independents is that of the "principled guy." He may not be able to win either way but that would surely be a losing proposition.
|
batmagadanleadoff
Oct 07 2008 08:47 AM
|
|
| ="metsguyinmichigan":38sjd672]Political strategists tell me that unless he's well over 50 percent in the polls, assume nothing. |
38sjd672]
I'm going with Vic. I'll believe it when the guy's being sworn in three months from now. We've become sort of a dictatorship.
|
batmagadanleadoff
Oct 07 2008 08:51 AM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":26javgfh]and thats really the problem with this [VP] debate, neither of them can really completely speak for the guy on the top of the ticket. |
26javgfh]
I thought Palin did well in the Ms. America Vice President Contest. She's for world peace and happiness.
(Today I broke a promise to myself that I'd never post on the political thread. Maybe it's because the Mets are done.)
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 07 2008 09:00 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 07 2008 09:19 AM
|
|
I think these next few weeks are going to be horrible -- from both sides. I expect to see race thrown out there even more than it has, agism, too.
This is when campaigns get sloppy and bad things happen. I'm expecting a bunch of last-minute media-assisted bombs.
I'll be so glad when its over.
On the fun side, if you saw a story about Walgreens pulling robotic Obama, McCain and Hillary dolls off the shelves, that was my mine. AP picked it up and it went all over the place. One of those quirky stories that had legs.
|
AG/DC
Oct 07 2008 09:05 AM
|
|
It could be ugly from here on in. But I think anything that happens after tonight will be death throes. Obama will have every chance to finish the job tonight. I don't underestimate the tenaciousness of a war hero, but McCain is desperate, and he's made enough foolish errors when he was on better ground.
On the other hand, if his numbers drop after tonight, he may choose to reclaim his campagin and at least go out with dignity. Mondale and Dole did, more or less, when history was against them.
|
Vic Sage
Oct 07 2008 10:01 AM
|
|
I don't think it's "age-ism" to point out that it is especially critical for a presidential candidate in his 70s, with health issues in his past, to pick a VP running mate who has the necessary skills to run the country... but instead, McCain picked an Alaskan MILF.
It might be age-ism, however, to suggest the selection was a result of his addled mind lurching into inevitable dementia. Speaking of dementia, Reagan was already showing signs of Altzheimers when elected to a second term, so i think a little ageism might have been appropriate at that point.
|
Vic Sage
Oct 07 2008 10:04 AM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":2gthrviz]It could be ugly from here on in. But I think anything that happens after tonight will be death throes. Obama will have every chance to finish the job tonight. I don't underestimate the tenaciousness of a war hero, but McCain is desperate, and he's made enough foolish errors when he was on better ground.
On the other hand, if his numbers drop after tonight, he may choose to reclaim his campagin and at least go out with dignity. Mondale and Dole did, more or less, when history was against them. |
2gthrviz]
If we were talking about McCain, vintage 2004, I could see that. But he lost his dignity (not to mention his credibility as a "maverick") when he sold his principles to the Religious Right in order to win the nomination this go round. So I think he's going to go out swinging, snarling and sneering til the bitter end.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Oct 07 2008 11:17 AM
|
|
| ="metsguyinmichigan":12247kew]
On the fun side, if you saw a story about Walgreens pulling robotic Obama, McCain and Hillary dolls off the shelves, that was my mine. AP picked it up and it went all over the place. One of those quirky stories that had legs. |
12247kew]
"The Senator from Illinois gets down and funky!"
|
metirish
Oct 07 2008 11:37 AM
|
|
| ="Vic Sage":30ggchjg]I don't think it's "age-ism" to point out that it is especially critical for a presidential candidate in his 70s, with health issues in his past, to pick a VP running mate who has the necessary skills to run the country... but instead, McCain picked an Alaskan MILF.
It might be age-ism, however, to suggest the selection was a result of his addled mind lurching into inevitable dementia. Speaking of dementia, Reagan was already showing signs of Altzheimers when elected to a second term, so i think a little ageism might have been appropriate at that point. |
30ggchjg]
When the Mets were in Arizona this season Burkhardt was chatting with McCain and asked him who his favorite player is/was , he answered Ted Williams , said he saw him play when he was a young man. It struck me then that McCain is quite old .
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 07 2008 11:41 AM
|
|
At least he didn't say Cap Anson!
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 07 2008 11:43 AM
|
|
="John Cougar Lunchbucket":3i51h6wn]| ="metsguyinmichigan":3i51h6wn]
On the fun side, if you saw a story about Walgreens pulling robotic Obama, McCain and Hillary dolls off the shelves, that was my mine. AP picked it up and it went all over the place. One of those quirky stories that had legs. |
3i51h6wn]
"The Senator from Illinois gets down and funky!" |
3i51h6wn]
That's the one!!! Oh, and the lyrics to the Hillary song are just horrible. The story appeared in the Taiwan Times.
I can work weeks on a project story and have it make some local ripples and no more. Yet a 10-inch brite goes around the world.
|
AG/DC
Oct 07 2008 11:48 AM
|
|
="Vic Sage":3lnjy7cs]| ="AG/DC":3lnjy7cs]It could be ugly from here on in. But I think anything that happens after tonight will be death throes. Obama will have every chance to finish the job tonight. I don't underestimate the tenaciousness of a war hero, but McCain is desperate, and he's made enough foolish errors when he was on better ground.
On the other hand, if his numbers drop after tonight, he may choose to reclaim his campagin and at least go out with dignity. Mondale and Dole did, more or less, when history was against them. |
3lnjy7cs]
If we were talking about McCain, vintage 2004, I could see that. But he lost his dignity (not to mention his credibility as a "maverick") when he sold his principles to the Religious Right in order to win the nomination this go round. So I think he's going to go out swinging, snarling and sneering til the bitter end. |
3lnjy7cs]
I'm just speculating in that second paragraph. It's clear my money is on the first.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 07 2008 11:49 AM
|
|
| ="Vic Sage":orxnszlo]I don't think it's "age-ism" to point out that it is especially critical for a presidential candidate in his 70s, with health issues in his past, to pick a VP running mate who has the necessary skills to run the country... but instead, McCain picked an Alaskan MILF.
It might be age-ism, however, to suggest the selection was a result of his addled mind lurching into inevitable dementia. Speaking of dementia, Reagan was already showing signs of Altzheimers when elected to a second term, so i think a little ageism might have been appropriate at that point. |
orxnszlo]
Vic, to dismiss a governor as an "Alaskan MILF" is sexist. As I've said before, you can pick apart her record as a governor and a mayor and you can have a discussion. "but instead McCain picked a governor with little expericence." works fine.
But when you belittle her based on her looks, you neither win the argument nor make a case for your candidate.
If someone looked at the person at the top of your ticket and dismissed him as a "South Side stud" you'd be livid.
|
metirish
Oct 07 2008 11:54 AM
|
|
="metsguyinmichigan":3hb8p1mw]| ="Vic Sage":3hb8p1mw]I don't think it's "age-ism" to point out that it is especially critical for a presidential candidate in his 70s, with health issues in his past, to pick a VP running mate who has the necessary skills to run the country... but instead, McCain picked an Alaskan MILF.
It might be age-ism, however, to suggest the selection was a result of his addled mind lurching into inevitable dementia. Speaking of dementia, Reagan was already showing signs of Altzheimers when elected to a second term, so i think a little ageism might have been appropriate at that point. |
3hb8p1mw]
Vic, to dismiss a governor as an "Alaskan MILF" is sexist. As I've said before, you can pick apart her record as a governor and a mayor and you can have a discussion. "but instead McCain picked a governor with little expericence." works fine.
But when you belittle her based on her looks, you neither win the argument nor make a case for your candidate.
If someone looked at the person at the top of your ticket and dismissed him as a "South Side stud" you'd be livid. |
3hb8p1mw]
I have a tough time picturing Vic getting livid over that.
|
AG/DC
Oct 07 2008 12:33 PM
|
|
The MiLF thing is probably just folks having fun.
|
cooby
Oct 07 2008 12:36 PM
|
|
One of our neighbors has a sign that says "Women for McCain". I hope they're kidding.
They MUST be kidding.
|
Nymr83
Oct 07 2008 07:25 PM
|
|
because all women must be on board with the far-left agenda?
|
AG/DC
Oct 07 2008 08:28 PM
|
|
A whole lot of sameness in foreign policy.
|
AG/DC
Oct 07 2008 08:32 PM
|
|
B.O. avoiding the oddball last question by re-framing it.
|
AG/DC
Oct 07 2008 08:37 PM
|
|
And J.McC. not really covering the "how will you learn it?" part.
I like town halls.
|
Nymr83
Oct 07 2008 08:47 PM
|
|
I like Town hall style debates in general, but Brokaw really fucked this one up with his own questions and by picking some pretty boring and repetitive ones. I didn't hear anything I didn't already know tonight.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Oct 07 2008 08:48 PM
|
|
This looked like a complete mismatch to me.
|
Nymr83
Oct 07 2008 08:49 PM
|
|
| ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":3rykl6cy]This looked like a complete mismatch to me. |
3rykl6cy]
I thought so too, but I doubt we mean it the same way. I wonder what people who werent committed to a candidate going in think?
|
AG/DC
Oct 07 2008 09:42 PM
|
|
Obama said "fundamental difference" first.
McCain said "Main Street" first.
|
HahnSolo
Oct 08 2008 07:22 AM
|
|
90 minutes I won't get back. Didn't hear much new that I hadn't before. I would also add that if this type of debate was supposed to be McCain's strength, he came nowhere close to hitting it out of the park.
And did anybody catch CNN's post-debate coverage? Anyone who says NFL studio shows have too many people would have been dumbfounded. Anderson Cooper was talking to a panel of 12 (12!) in studio. Plus they had someone on the debate site itself, and Soledad O'Brien (looking hot, btw) in Ohio with a group of people. So 15 people were there telling us we saw nothing new. Thanks.
|
metirish
Oct 08 2008 07:25 AM
|
|
Whatever about the debate the hairstyles in that town were vintage. Did anyone else see the guy right behind Brokaw with the Beatles style mop-top but to the 10th power.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 08 2008 07:25 AM
|
|
Soledad O'Brien is a homey of mine, from Smithtown, NY. (But not the same high school. She went to East and I went to West.)
|
Frayed Knot
Oct 08 2008 07:43 AM
|
|
| ="HahnSolo":2utloybr]And did anybody catch CNN's post-debate coverage? Anyone who says NFL studio shows have too many people would have been dumbfounded. Anderson Cooper was talking to a panel of 12 (12!) in studio. Plus they had someone on the debate site itself, and Soledad O'Brien (looking hot, btw) in Ohio with a group of people. So 15 people were there telling us we saw nothing new. Thanks. |
2utloybr]
I think the cable news orgs are a lot like the sports shows; they each rush out to hire a bunch of "name" players in the field (like recently retired jocks/office-holders and temporarily sidelined coaches/aides) just so their competitors won't get them. They then quickly realize that these hires really don't have unique skills to set them apart from the previous group of names they took on so they have to pretty much invent things for them to do until they become just another set of lost voices in the wilderness.
|
Gwreck
Oct 08 2008 07:57 AM
|
|
I agree that I didn't hear any particularly novel content in the debate, but on presentation I think McCain looked significantly stronger. I thought his answers came out more easily while he looked more comfortable and personable.
|
Farmer Ted
Oct 08 2008 08:08 AM
|
|
Having moderated or judged about a dozen or so collegiate debates (doesn't make me an expert but I've seen some good BS fly around the room for sure), this was hands down the poorest managed debate I've ever seen. Horrible. I couldn't even accurately score this if I had to. It wasn't genuine as this format promotes and requires. McCain hurried half of his answers. Obama stuttered and talked in generalizations. Both seemed startled that the questions required stump speech answers and not deep thought. Tom Broke-Jaw did a dis-service to the voters. I give this a PUSH and am glad there's one more as a do-over.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 08 2008 08:14 AM
|
|
What's the format of the next debate going to be? Is it going to be like one of those shows on Nickelodeon where there's always the threat of green slime splashing down from above?
|
AG/DC
Oct 08 2008 08:29 AM
|
|
What I like about the town hall format is that something about wandering around the room and looking in different faces instead of just looking at the moderator or the opponent allows people to find their way through an answer and sew more coherent sentence structures together.
I still think McCain is doomed, but he didn't die last night. He didn't launch a comeback either, though.
I saw him working the room afterwards without fully being able to bend his damn elbows and I flashed on Bob Dole '96 and wondered if he just looks too much like a broken man to give even the few voters who might be swinging his way the subliminal edge.
If you're a betting man, you can get pretty rich by just voting the taller guy each time.
|
sharpie
Oct 08 2008 08:31 AM
|
|
The next one is one where they sit at a table with Bob Schieffer in the middle.
|
soupcan
Oct 08 2008 08:33 AM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":1fqzeso5]If you're a betting man, you can get pretty rich by just voting the taller guy each time. |
1fqzeso5]
Isn't Kerry like 9' taller than Bush or is that just my perception?
|
AG/DC
Oct 08 2008 08:41 AM
|
|
Yeah, it's a pattern, not a guarantee. Kerry is about 6'3" and Bushie about 5'11".
It's a powerful factor, but it doesn't act independent of other factors. If Bill Bradley was in a general election, the height factor would be offset to an extent by the bald factor and the multiple chins factor.
I'm thinking Bushie is our first sub-six-footer since... Truman?
http://www.ringophone.com/tallornot.asp ... TallorNot2
|
Farmer Ted
Oct 08 2008 09:05 AM
|
|
Although they'll be sitting at the next debate, the format (I believe) will be the same as the first. When judging those formats, I like to score with a boxing-type calculation, which isn't uncommon. Who won what question based on style, substance, command and who won the most questions (rounds)? What we can't gather is audience reaction. Although a judge should be focused on the candidates, it's not unusual to observe some subtle crowd responses and keep that in the back your head. We don't see that on TV although the bug-eyed lady in the blue sweater seemed to be in almost every shot last night. The first debate had eight substantive questions. I had it 4-3 McCain with one question at a draw. If pressed on that push round, 5-3 McCain. Like I said earlier, the second debate was junk and the Commission on Presidential Debates should apologize.
I didn't see the entire VP debate but hope to grade that one, too.
|
Vic Sage
Oct 08 2008 09:10 AM
|
|
At least they kept the focus on policy differences, and McCain didn't veer off into personal attacks.
He's wise to leave that strategy to his Alaskan MILF.
MILF, MILF, MILF, MILF.
I'll say it again.
MILF.
|
Farmer Ted
Oct 08 2008 09:36 AM
|
|
Personal attacks never work in a debate. Obama is trying a deflection technique which brings up a third person as the attack dog (i.e., "you agreed with Bush") but doesn't work as effectively if he came up with a phrasing such as "Your good friend and colleague Senator Hatch even disagrees with that."
I haven't seen a candidate with the first response end an answer with a question (i.e., "So, no, I won't raise taxes on the middle class unlike my opponent. By the way, Senator, what were those two $100 million earmarks you requested last year?"). Those imbedded retort questions seem a bit off topic but can be circled back to the topic at hand. Typically the opponent will fumble through an answer trying to think about two things at a time and usually comes across as flustered and incoherent. Only a trained debater (which both don't seem to be) can juggle those.
I'd like to know who is coaching these guys. Not a good job.
|
metirish
Oct 08 2008 09:41 AM
|
|
McCain's "My Friends" to me couldn't sound more insincere if he tried. I agree that Brokaw did a bad job , these debates have too many rules I think , some more follow up would be better. I liked when McCain got testy about Obama wanting to follow up on a Pakistan question. But that was about as hot as it got.
|
soupcan
Oct 08 2008 10:11 AM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":1025u6mb]I'm thinking Bushie is our first sub-six-footer since... Truman? |
1025u6mb]
Jimmy Carter - 5'9"
Dwight Eisenhower - 5'9"
|
Nymr83
Oct 08 2008 10:27 AM
|
|
I'm kinda suprised that Bush is 5'11. I'd have guessed 5'8 or so.
who was our tallest president? Lincoln?
|
AG/DC
Oct 08 2008 10:33 AM
|
|
Bush has been shirinking.
Good question. I would guess LBJ (though he hunched) as Lincoln's main competitor, but <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heights_of_United_States_Presidents_and_presidential_candidates" target="blank">wikipedia</a> says you're right.
I'm guessing Washington and Jefferson, though, cut more impressive figures for their time.
OE: that source has Jimmuh Carter at 5'9", but the one above has him at 6'0".
|
Willets Point
Oct 08 2008 11:19 AM
|
|
James Madison, at 5' 4" was known as "Little Jamey" by the people of his time. Charles Cotesworth Pickney must've been a midget.
|
AG/DC
Oct 08 2008 11:25 AM
|
|
Pickney:
<img src="http://www.constitution.org/img/charles_cotesworth_pinckney.jpg">
|
Willets Point
Oct 08 2008 11:38 AM
|
|
Damn. What a huge head. Maybe he was a dwarf.
|
metirish
Oct 08 2008 11:44 AM
|
|
Maybe I am going crazy but when I saw the picture above it reminded me of Napoleon.
|
AG/DC
Oct 08 2008 11:59 AM
|
|
When the Sydney Morning Herald is leading with a headline like
Obama fans dare hope dreams will come true, I can't see how McCain stands a chance.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 08 2008 12:08 PM
|
|
Well, the same paper (or others like it) might very well have had a similar headline about the Chicago Cubs a week or so ago.
|
AG/DC
Oct 08 2008 12:17 PM
Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Oct 08 2008 12:22 PM
|
|
The guy is is a dream. McCain is speed bump on the road to history at this point.
He's had two good weeks in this whole campaign. Yes, something could happen. Paulson could make some seemingly minor changes in treasury policy, leading to a two-week rally on Wall Street, recession over, followed by the leaking by Paulson of an e-mail showing that the seemingly minor changes were all McCain's idea.
A video could be unearthed of Obama praising militant Islam and cursing Jesus and Mary. He could be outed as a Holocaust denyer.
But it's Obama's to lose. And he seems too smart to lose it.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 08 2008 12:27 PM
|
|
| ="Vic Sage":2w80gzb9]At least they kept the focus on policy differences, and McCain didn't veer off into personal attacks.
He's wise to leave that strategy to his Alaskan MILF.
MILF, MILF, MILF, MILF.
I'll say it again.
MILF. |
2w80gzb9]
Says more about you than her. ;)
And shame on me for taking the bait.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 08 2008 12:29 PM
|
|
I pretty much agree with you, now that you've added that "unexpected event" caveat.
Things are definitely trending in Obama's direction, and time is running short. ("The days are dwindling down to a precious few." I don't know who originally said that, but when I read that line I hear Bob Murphy's voice in my head.)
I've been checking in daily with http://electoral-vote.com and it does demonstrate that things are looking fairly grim for McCain.
I do expect Obama to win the election, unless the bullpen falls apart or Ryan Howard endorses McCain.
|
metirish
Oct 08 2008 12:39 PM
|
|
I'm half expecting to see Bin Laden captured in the wilds of Alaska in the next few weeks , captured by Palin of course.
|
AG/DC
Oct 08 2008 12:41 PM
|
|
Maxwell Anderson in <i>Knickerbocker Holiday</i>. The lines were also sung by an aging statesman realizing his time is passing --- though he was trying to woo a young woman by plying sympathy from her.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 08 2008 12:43 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":h9v01gk9]I pretty much agree with you, now that you've added that "unexpected event" caveat.
Things are definitely trending in Obama's direction, and time is running short. ("The days are dwindling down to a precious few." I don't know who originally said that, but when I read that line I hear Bob Murphy's voice in my head.)
I've been checking in daily with http://electoral-vote.com and it does demonstrate that things are looking fairly grim for McCain.
I do expect Obama to win the election, unless the bullpen falls apart or Ryan Howard endorses McCain. |
h9v01gk9]
A couple things to keep in mind. The national polls are tightening, and McCain is trailing 2 to 3 points behind, withinn the margin of error. That's the Zogby and Rasmussen types, the people that aren't polling for CNN or the other networks. Ignore those.
So that's the margin of error. Then you have the Bradley effect, where a black candidate's actually tally is around five points lower than how he polled.
I think Kerry was further ahead of Bush at this point in 2004. It's still a horse race.
Next debate is at Hofstra! I'd love to be able to cover that. I covered on debate, a GOP primary in 2000 here in Grand Rapids at Calvin College. There were about six candidates, so it was even more dragged out than these. But it was fun to see all those guys in one place. Ignore the post-debate spins sessions. Those comments are written even before the debate starts.
|
AG/DC
Oct 08 2008 12:48 PM
|
|
<p align="center"><img src="http://www.pattiannbrowne.com/db1/00005/pattiannbrowne.com/_uimages/CNBCtanjkt.jpg">
John McCain catches Osama Bin Laden.
With his teeth.
In Barack Obama's bedroom.
Film at eleven.</p>
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 08 2008 01:05 PM
|
|
| ="metsguyinmichigan":1vxebp5t]
A couple things to keep in mind. The national polls are tightening...
|
1vxebp5t]
Are they? In the state-by-state polls, Obama is pulling away in Pennsylvania and Michigan and his lead in Virginia has been growing. I haven't been looking too closely at all the numbers, but the overwhelming "sense" that I'm getting is that Obama leads by about 6 and it's growing. I could be wrong though.
| ="metsguyinmichigan":1vxebp5t]I think Kerry was further ahead of Bush at this point in 2004. It's still a horse race.
|
1vxebp5t]
I didn't think so, but I checked at electoral-vote.com and on this date in 2004, Kerry was "surging" and projected to 280 electoral votes. (Obama currently projects to 349.)
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 08 2008 01:06 PM
|
|
Nice try, Edgy. But here's how that story would be reported:
McCain interupts Obama-Bin Laden meeting, injects politics into diplomatic process. Obama quote: "Change. McCain biting Bin Laden is the same, tired policies of George W. Bush that we've endured for eight years. Change."
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 08 2008 01:11 PM
|
|
="Benjamin Grimm":12wx8wkn]| ="metsguyinmichigan":12wx8wkn]
A couple things to keep in mind. The national polls are tightening...
|
12wx8wkn]
Are they? In the state-by-state polls, Obama is pulling away in Pennsylvania and Michigan and his lead in Virginia has been growing. I haven't been looking too closely at all the numbers, but the overwhelming "sense" that I'm getting is that Obama leads by about 6 and it's growing. I could be wrong though.
| ="metsguyinmichigan":12wx8wkn]I think Kerry was further ahead of Bush at this point in 2004. It's still a horse race.
|
12wx8wkn]
I didn't think so, but I checked at electoral-vote.com and on this date in 2004, Kerry was "surging" and projected to 280 electoral votes. (Obama currently projects to 349.) |
12wx8wkn]
I stand corrected on the Kerry comparison. Good research!
Michigan and Pennsylvania are blue states. Ohio, Virginia and Florida are probaby better indicators, and McCain is trailing in close races in all three.
I'm not saying Obama isn't ahead or won't win, but it's not over. And remember the Bradley effect.
Here's the Zogby story:
The telephone tracking poll shows neither candidate with a clear advantage in the national horserace
UTICA, New York - The race for President of the United States remains far too close to call between Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain as both candidates head toward the finish line, a recent Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby daily tracking telephone polls shows.
The survey, including a three-day sample of 1,220 likely voters collected over the previous three days - approximately 400 per day from Oct. 5-7, 2008 - shows that Obama holds a slight advantage amounting to 1.9 percentage points over McCain. This represents a bit of a recovery by McCain, who had been sliding in some polls before his running mate, Sarah Palin, put in a strong performance in her one and only debate performance last Thursday.
|
Willets Point
Oct 08 2008 01:12 PM
|
|
There is no doubt in my mind that McCain will be the next president.
|
sharpie
Oct 08 2008 01:15 PM
|
|
Gallup Poll released today has Obama up by 11%.
The Bradley Effect is probably mitigated somewhat by the Cellphone Effect, wherein Obama's best demographic group doesn't have land lines and so are outside polling.
|
AG/DC
Oct 08 2008 01:16 PM
|
|
I don't want either of these guys, but am resigned to the ievitiblity of one of them and the likelihood of the Democratic one. But I'm really rooting against any Bradley Effect.
I'm willing to bet my couch against Willets' fine Brownsville Collection Top Quality Leather Sleeper on Obama.
|
Willets Point
Oct 08 2008 01:19 PM
|
|
I have no room for furniture. I'll bet you a Euro. No, I don't want no steenkin' devalued dollars.
|
sharpie
Oct 08 2008 01:21 PM
|
|
Here's a post from fivethirtyeight.com (Nate Silver of Baseball Prospectus' site) which touches on recent polling and the Bradley Effect:
What is Obama's Ceiling?
This post is going to seem slightly less relevant now that Gallup has come in showing an 11-point lead for Obama. But the other five daily tracking polls (yes, there are now that many trackers) all showed movement toward John McCain.
Between the Gallup result and Obama's very strong state polling, I am inclined to think that this particular ebb in the tracking polls is mostly statistical noise. That notwithstanding, it's worth considering Chris Bowers' point at Open Left. What, realistically, is Obama's ceiling in this election?
The better a candidate's standing in the polls, the harder it ought to be pick up additional support. In part, this is simply because the more voters that you have in your column, the fewer there are available to convert. But this is still a highly partisan country, we tend to have close elections, and things certainly aren't going to be any easier for a black candidate.
If Obama is ahead by something like 7-8 points ahead nationally, that means that he has persuaded just about all of the persuadables, and he's left looking to covert people like those in Ben Smith's anecdote.
An Obama supporter, who canvassed for the candidate in the working-class, white Philadelphia neighborhood of Fishtown recently, sends over an account that, in various forms, I've heard a lot in recent weeks.
"What's crazy is this," he writes. "I was blown away by the outright racism, but these folks are f***ing undecided. They would call him a n----r and mention how they don't know what to do because of the economy."
If those sorts of people are the undecideds -- and when Obama is winning Pennsylvania by 12 points or something, that's probably what we're looking at -- then Obama really is scraping the bottom of the barrel. Further gains are going to be difficult to come by, which means that his polls are more likely to go down than to continue going up. (Indeed, our model assumes that the race will tighten some).
Then again, when six out of ten Americans thinks we're headed for a depression, perhaps the ordinary rules go out the window.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 08 2008 01:21 PM
|
|
Willets is doing the Yankee championship thing, I think.
|
Farmer Ted
Oct 08 2008 01:43 PM
|
|
My brother is a union man in Ohio, just south of Columbus. It's pretty well known in his shop that if you answer the phone and it's a presidential survey, you answer Obama. Not "I don't know". Not "I'm still thinking about it". But Obama. Some union heads, ALLEGEDLY, have been making fake polling calls to those in the shop to see how they would answer. No one has answered with anything but Obama so it's not known if Jimmy Hoffa comes to visit on the job site if you do. A few guys from his shop were plucked to hold up signs at the Springsteen gig for Obama at OSU. Time and a half for those folks? No, double time, a $100 cash bonus, and a $25 gas card. Campaign donations hard at work.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Oct 08 2008 01:49 PM
|
|
Live music is better bumper stickers should be issued
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 08 2008 01:54 PM
|
|
States that Bush won in 2004 that are currently leaning Obama:
CO FL IA MO NV NM OH VA
Some of these leads are very narrow, especially in Missouri. The only one of them where Obama has a comfortable lead is Iowa, but the 7 electoral votes from Iowa alone wouldn't be enough to swing the election.
There are currently no Kerry states leaning towards McCain.
Again, this is all from electoral-vote.com, which I see as the Baseball Prospectus of the presidential campaign.
The webmaster there, although a Democrat supporter, seems to be trying to be objective with how he measures the poll results. I don't know enough about this stuff to evaluate his (or her) judgment, but it's an interesting site and it's the best way that I've found to track how the election is unfolding.
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Oct 08 2008 01:58 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 08 2008 02:00 PM
|
|
Sharpie beat me to mentioning Nate Silver's excellent [url=http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/:2utu1l8p]538.com[/url:2utu1l8p], which I've been checking at least once daily. The picture's looking mighty grim for McCain on Silver's map. While things can change, this is the same guy who designed PECOTA, which, among other things, picked the Rays to win 90 games this year.
He was on Colbert last night, if anyone wants to catch the rerun at 8:30.
edit- that's Silver on Colbert, not McCain.
|
metirish
Oct 08 2008 01:58 PM
|
|
The words were barely out of McCain's mouth and the shirts are made.
My friends this is American ingenuity at work.
http://www.thatone08.com/
|
AG/DC
Oct 08 2008 02:25 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 08 2008 09:15 PM
|
|
I'm OK with the "that one" reference. He seemed be framing people's choice as this one versus that one.
It's kind of a not-so-great tradition that this campaign is advancing --- going over the top to take insult on behalf your candidate, who's too dignified to object himself, you understand.
|
Vic Sage
Oct 08 2008 03:20 PM
|
|
"That one" is a generational thing, i think. I remember my mom and dad would use it teasingly of each other, when they were complaining about each other. "that one", my mom would say, when my dad spent any money on himself, "sure, its his America". And he would say "that one, she's such a nag."
|
soupcan
Oct 08 2008 09:10 PM
|
|
"Who's 'she'? The cat's mother?"
That's what my mom used to say. Made no fucking sense to me at all.
|
AG/DC
Oct 09 2008 11:55 AM
|
|
I just got invited to a fundraiser featuring Obamartinis.
Pass.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 09 2008 12:04 PM
|
|
We were invited to some kind of gathering at Jill Biden's childhood friend's house. Mrs. Biden was going to be there, as was TV's Kate Walsh of Grey's Anatomy and Private Practice.
As lovely as Kate Walsh is, we weren't tempted to go.
|
Kong76
Oct 09 2008 12:08 PM
|
|
soup: "Who's 'she'? The cat's mother?"
That's what my mom used to say. Made no fucking sense to me at all<<<
Wow, I haven't thought about this in decades, but I had an elderly neighbor
growing up who was very grandmotherly to me and she used to say, "what
do ____ think [they're, you're, she's, etc.] the cat's get all?"
|
AG/DC
Oct 09 2008 06:11 PM
|
|
I've got to say, McCain's debate examples of the excesses of earmarks or pork --- a few million here to study the DNA of bears and a few million there for a planetarium projector --- don't seem like the worst uses of government money at all.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 09 2008 06:38 PM
|
|
The bear DNA thing recently ended up proving that the grizzly population had rebounded, which allowed for land to be opened up for development, which pleased Republican developers in the Rocky Mountain states.
|
AG/DC
Oct 09 2008 07:01 PM
|
|
His greater point holds --- that, if these things have merit, they should stand on it rather than be folded into another bill to pull in the votes of Senator Gimme. But (1) he didn't say what sort of bills they were folded into, so we can't judge how appropriate or inappropriate they were, and (2) he laid them out as if they were risible on face value. It's not hard to see how a planetarium projector can serve the public good.
Meanwhile, if you don't agree with me that the guy has lost his fight, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/08/AR2008100802926.html">George Will</a> says as much in <i>The Washington Post</i> today.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 09 2008 08:41 PM
|
|
Will was in Grand Rapids to be the keynote speaker at an event here -- I got to hang near him while he snacked down on the appetizer buffet -- and the biz reporter who interviewed him said he let loose on a tirade about McCain that was stunning because of how strong it was. I realize that Will is much further to the right than McCain is, but it was rough.
BTW, he liked the cheese and crackers.
|
cooby
Oct 14 2008 07:47 AM
|
|
If Governor Rendell calls me one more time I'm going to scream in his ear.
|
metirish
Oct 14 2008 07:56 AM
|
|
It won't be long now until it's over , I really can't wait.
|
AG/DC
Oct 14 2008 08:07 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 14 2008 09:05 PM
|
|
| ="metsguyinmichigan":2hh0gohw]Will was in Grand Rapids to be the keynote speaker at an event here -- I got to hang near him while he snacked down on the appetizer buffet -- and the biz reporter who interviewed him said he let loose on a tirade about McCain that was stunning because of how strong it was. I realize that Will is much further to the right than McCain is, but it was rough.
BTW, he liked the cheese and crackers. |
2hh0gohw]
I don't know if it's "futher to the right" that distinguishes him from McCain (though he is). Will goes back to a time when "neo-Conservative" was a tag that only touched on certain principles (don't ask me to tick them off) and transended party. His best friend in the senate was Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who also wore the neocon tag before it became possible to exist as a Democrat with such a label.
|
metirish
Oct 14 2008 04:40 PM
|
|
Did anyone else see Palin dropping the puck at the Flyers home opener Saturday? , a terrible idea to expose a public figure on the stump to a sports crowd.No matter how high they turned up the music the boos could not be drowned out.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qxjqUjKCkcM&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qxjqUjKCkcM&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 14 2008 04:54 PM
|
|
I had never seen a ceremonial puck drop before. It just seems odd.
They don't do ceremonial jump balls in basketball, do they? And I'm pretty sure they don't do ceremonial kickoffs in football.
|
G-Fafif
Oct 14 2008 05:04 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":cb39x9u3]I had never seen a ceremonial puck drop before. It just seems odd.
They don't do ceremonial jump balls in basketball, do they? And I'm pretty sure they don't do ceremonial kickoffs in football. |
cb39x9u3]
On Halloween night, 1986, the New Jersey Nets had a ceremonial jump ball to tip off their season. The reason I remember it is the honorary "refs" were Darryl Strawberry and Roger McDowell of the recently crowned World Champion New York Mets. I recall the Knicks, opening their season a few nights later, had several more World Champion New York Mets for a similar ritual.
I don't know that there's an elegant way for someone to drop a puck.
|
metsmarathon
Oct 14 2008 05:48 PM
|
|
who the hell is "hockey mom"?
and really, doesn't dropping the puck kinda sound like a canadian euphamism for dropping a deuce*?
*credit: mrs.marathon
|
themetfairy
Oct 14 2008 05:58 PM
|
|
| ="metsmarathon":2zy1nqve]who the hell is "hockey mom"?
|
2zy1nqve]
A soccer mom with fewer teeth?
|
metirish
Oct 14 2008 06:13 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":hz4yqal1]I had never seen a ceremonial puck drop before. It just seems odd.
They don't do ceremonial jump balls in basketball, do they? And I'm pretty sure they don't do ceremonial kickoffs in football. |
hz4yqal1]
I suppose it's like the ceremonial first pitch , and just as lame really.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 14 2008 06:25 PM
|
|
President Bush is coming to Grand Rapids on Wednesday. I drew airport duty again, so I'll get to see him fairly closely. Air Force One is very impressive. I'll post some pics.
|
Farmer Ted
Oct 15 2008 12:07 PM
|
|
My friend was at the Palin hockey puck game. Said the crowd was actually respectful and approving, other than a full section of fans decked out in Obama gear booing loudly. That section pretty much left after the first period. He later found out that the boo-birds were mainly from the teachers union. My friend caught a good glimpse of her and said "she's very do-able, but I'm voting blue." At least he's honest.
|
G-Fafif
Oct 15 2008 03:41 PM
|
|
Many complaints at the local post office in advance of the debate tonight. Not about politics, but that it's screwing up traffic on nearby parkways.
Hofstra University: Inconveniencing Long Islanders since earlier today.
|
SteveJRogers
Oct 15 2008 07:52 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":qyat3x4s]And I'm pretty sure they don't do ceremonial kickoffs in football. |
qyat3x4s]
They do ceremonial coin flips though.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Oct 15 2008 08:37 PM
|
|
McCain clearly landed more shots tonight but was more full of shit than I even I expected.
|
Kong76
Oct 15 2008 08:43 PM
|
|
I think they're both full of crap, that's what they're supposed to be full of.
I watched more of it than I wanted to. I enjoy watching the other guy in
the split picture than the actual guy talking.
|
AG/DC
Oct 15 2008 08:44 PM
|
|
McCain's bouts of dyslexia have killed him in each of these debates.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 15 2008 08:52 PM
|
|
Had fun covering the out-going guy today. Got fairly close. Air Force One is so impressive to see regardless of who is the president.
|
Nymr83
Oct 15 2008 09:03 PM
|
|
nice pictures (i'm assuming you took them)
i'm really not all that impressed by air force one, its just a commercial airliner with a paint job.
|
metirish
Oct 16 2008 07:18 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 16 2008 01:26 PM
|
|
| ="KC"]I think they're both full of crap, that's what they're supposed to be full of.
I watched more of it than I wanted to. I enjoy watching the other guy in
the split picture than the actual guy talking. |
McCain at times looked like "The Joker" with that plastered smile of his.
I like sarcasm as much as anyone but with McCain his came across as small and mean and unpresidential , not what I want to see from a candidate. Obama was clam throughout. I suppose with him leading he did what he needed to do and not make any gaffes .
This is Joe the plumber
|
MFS62
Oct 16 2008 07:37 AM
|
|
Joe the plumber?
Who says plumbers are smart, informed voters?
To be a plumber you only have to know three things:
Steam goes up
Shit goes down
Payday is Friday
Later
|
AG/DC
Oct 16 2008 07:47 AM
|
|
It wasn't about him being a smart, informed voter.
|
sharpie
Oct 16 2008 07:51 AM
|
|
The first time McCain invoked Joe the Plumber it worked but after a short while it became gimmicky. His scoffing at the health of the mother in the abortion question was pretty bad. Overall, I think he did well for the first half of the debate but wilted after his punches failed to land. I can't imagine this debate changing anyone's mind.
|
metirish
Oct 16 2008 08:05 AM
|
|
| ]
Paddy Power pays out early on Obama victory
CHARLIE TAYLOR
The general public may still be weighing up who came off best in the concluding US presidential debate last night but Irish bookmaker Paddy Power today said it is to pay out early on Barack Obama becoming president.
The bookmaker said this morning it is to pay out in excess of €1 million to punters who have bet on the Illinois senator taking over the world's top job in three weeks time.
More than 10,000 bets have been placed on the 2008 presidential election with Paddy Power in Ireland, with the majority placed in support of Mr Obama over the past 12 months.
Mr Obama was a massive 50/1 with Paddy Power to be the next US president back in May of 2005. One inspired punter who will be celebrating today had a long range wager of €50 at these odds which has led to a return of €2,550.
The largest single bet placed on Mr Obama was €100,000 in June at odds of 1-2 which has led to returns of whopping 150,000 today.
“We declare this race well and truly over and congratulate all those who backed Obama, your winnings await you. Although the Senator seemed a little off sorts in last nights final debate we believe he has done more than enough to get him across the line on November 4th. The overall betting trend has shown one way traffic for Obama since the start of the summer and punters seemed to have called it 100 per cent correct.
In January, Paddy Power paid out over €50,000 to punters who backed the senator to be nominated as the Democratic Party candidate, seven months before the party's convention took place.
The bookmaker said is to continues to offer betting on the election outcome right up to and including November 4th. It said that one of its most popular bets currently on offer is predicting the winning margin of the successful nominee.
© 2008 irishtimes.com |
|
HahnSolo
Oct 16 2008 09:33 AM
|
|
What a great name for an Irish bookie.
|
Farmer Ted
Oct 16 2008 10:47 AM
|
|
McCain was more authoritative in the 3rd debate. Noticed that Obama had the same demeanor for all three sessions, pretty stable. McCain was so eager to answer that he sometimes stumbled on words. Obama continued his trend of stutters (umm, uhh). He has this tendancy to start his response with "delay statements" which is a way for him to stall until he has gathered his thoughts (i.e., "let me answer that question" or "I'd be happy to respond"). Those are picked apart by judges, but would only be a 1/10 deduction if it were figure skating. McCain would lose 1/10 for his facial expressions. Odd that there wasn't as much split-screen as the first two debates. There was no over the shoulder shot from McCain to Obama and was probably worked out by the campaign to avoid that shot due to McCain's surgery on his left cheek area.
I don't have my notes but I recall my scoring. Like many pundits, McCain seemed to come out strong. I had him taking the first four questions. Fifth question a push. Sixth and seventh to Obama although I think McCain gained a "personal point" for discussing his part as an adaptive father. The eighth to McCain merely out of the fact that Obama agreed with McCain four times during that dialogue. Agreeing is not an option in a debate as there is always a nuance you disagree with. Had he worded it like "McCain and I have some similar views in this respect, however...). Instead he said I agree, I agree, I agree.
The closing statement is a push as it is simply a stump speech, both didn't hurt themselves.
McCain 5-2-2. Obama is now running against Joe the Plumber, too. The McCain campaign was smart to throw his name out there as an example but Joe may have been overused over the course of the 90 minutes.
Bob Shieffer did a good job and stayed out of the way but interrupted a few times which isn't cool, especially as the candidates were in stride. It's not Face the Nation.
|
Kong76
Oct 16 2008 11:35 AM
|
|
MFS: To be a plumber you only have to know three things:
Steam goes up
Shit goes down
Payday is Friday<<<
Actually, four things ... don't chew your fingernails.
|
soupcan
Oct 16 2008 12:19 PM
|
|
<embed src="http://services.brightcove.com/services/viewer/federated_f8/271557392" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" flashVars="videoId=1842856410&playerId=271557392&viewerSecureGatewayURL=https://console.brightcove.com/services/amfgateway&servicesURL=http://services.brightcove.com/services&cdnURL=http://admin.brightcove.com&domain=embed&autoStart=false&" base="http://admin.brightcove.com" name="flashObj" width="486" height="412" seamlesstabbing="false" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" swLiveConnect="true" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed>
|
soupcan
Oct 16 2008 12:21 PM
|
|
[url=http://palinaspresident.com:17vwpoex]Palin as President[/url:17vwpoex]
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 16 2008 12:45 PM
|
|
That's really funny. I can only imagine how much time it took to do that. There must be 30 little clickables in there.
|
Farmer Ted
Oct 16 2008 01:13 PM
|
|
wolf kills. ha.
|
metirish
Oct 16 2008 01:17 PM
|
|
Lots of funny stuff in there .
|
MFS62
Oct 17 2008 10:52 AM
|
|
I like the Canadian system. By law, there are only 5 weeks of campaigning prior to the elections.
I've already run out of my bullshit tolerance pills.
Later
|
Mendoza Line
Oct 17 2008 11:48 AM
|
|
| ="metirish":1t7ieemb]Obama was clam throughout. |
1t7ieemb]
It took me a day to realize this was a typo. I thought "clam" was some kind of Irish slang, and I was trying to figure out what it meant.
|
AG/DC
Oct 17 2008 05:00 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 17 2008 07:22 PM
|
|
HP: "Hi, I'm Hayden Panettiere, and I'm hot enough that I know I have your attention for 30 seconds."
AG/DC: (Madly clicking window closed.)
I'm sorry, I think I had more than enough satire in this campaign about 12 months ago.
This was the beginning to a review of W. in the <i>Post</i> today.
<blockquote>"W.," the title of Oliver Stone's new biopic of President Bush, most obviously refers to the subject's middle initial and frequent nickname, but it could just as easily stand for "Why?"
Why this movie -- a rushed, wildly uneven, tonally jumbled caricature -- and why now? Why, when Americans and citizens around the globe are still coming to terms with the implications of so many Bush policies, would they want to pay money at the box office to see what amounts to an extended "Saturday Night Live" skit?</blockquote>Is there any doubt that he timed it to help swing the election (which won't be necessary, anyhow)?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 17 2008 07:17 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm on October 2":3402gj75]I predict that he (Obama) will have a 7-point lead in the national polls when it's 17 days before Election Day. |
3402gj75]
Wow, this is very nearly accurate. I'm sure that tomorrow morning, when we hit the 17-day mark, there will be at least a few polls showing a 7-point margin.
|
metirish
Oct 17 2008 08:05 PM
|
|
You're not the average Joe that's for sure.
|
Elster88
Oct 17 2008 09:27 PM
|
|
| ="AG/DC"]HP: "Hi, I'm Hayden Panettiere, and I'm hot enough that I know I have your attention for 30 seconds."
AG/DC: (Madly clicking window closed.)
I'm sorry, I think I had more than enough satire in this campaign about 12 months ago.
This was the beginning to a review of W. in the <i>Post</i> today.
<blockquote>"W.," the title of Oliver Stone's new biopic of President Bush, most obviously refers to the subject's middle initial and frequent nickname, but it could just as easily stand for "Why?"
Why this movie -- a rushed, wildly uneven, tonally jumbled caricature -- and why now? Why, when Americans and citizens around the globe are still coming to terms with the implications of so many Bush policies, would they want to pay money at the box office to see what amounts to an extended "Saturday Night Live" skit?</blockquote>Is there any doubt that he timed it to help swing the election (which won't be necessary, anyhow)? |
Have you seen this movie? I'm thinking about seeing it.
|
soupcan
Oct 17 2008 09:41 PM
|
|
I went to see 'W.' tonight and it was sold out!
Saw 'Appaloosa' instead. I loves me a good shoot-em-up!
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 17 2008 10:09 PM
|
|
I have no interest in seeing Oliver Stone's propaganda.
I'm in St. Louis for an education writer's conference this weekend. We're at a hotel across the street from the Arch. Obama's having a rally there tomorrow, and there was a debate over whether they should pause the conference so people could walk over and listen.
|
Nymr83
Oct 18 2008 12:45 AM
|
|
i have no interest in anything from Oliver Stone, but leaving that aside i find a movie about a sitting president to be in poor taste.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 18 2008 04:42 AM
|
|
I'm not interested in <I>W</i> either. From the clips I've seen it looks cartoony, like everyone's doing a caricature. And I don't need Oliver Stone to remind me about how awful Bush has been. I've been paying attention for the last eight years.
|
metirish
Oct 18 2008 05:50 AM
|
|
From some of the reviews I have read they are saying that Stone went pretty much down the middle with Bush , IOW it's not the slam piece that you might expect.
Having said that you couldn't pay me to watch this.
|
themetfairy
Oct 18 2008 06:21 AM
|
|
Saw W last night. Irish is right. It's not a slam piece. It is kind of shallow, though - it doesn't really offer any insight, and it's not compelling.
|
Gwreck
Oct 18 2008 10:54 AM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":30qpc6vk]i find a movie about a sitting president to be in poor taste. |
30qpc6vk]
How so?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 18 2008 10:57 AM
|
|
I don't see it as "poor taste." It's probably better to make the movie after some time has passed, and perspective has been gained, but it's not tasteless.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 18 2008 10:58 AM
|
|
="Benjamin Grimm":15vaf7va]| ="Benjamin Grimm on October 2":15vaf7va]I predict that he (Obama) will have a 7-point lead in the national polls when it's 17 days before Election Day. |
15vaf7va]
Wow, this is very nearly accurate. I'm sure that tomorrow morning, when we hit the 17-day mark, there will be at least a few polls showing a 7-point margin. |
15vaf7va]
And the actual number, based on averages of polls on electoral-vote.com is 6.3 points with 17 days to go.
|
seawolf17
Oct 18 2008 01:59 PM
|
|
We met this guy on campus today who was stumping for votes. Robert was impressed; I thought he came across a little flat.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 18 2008 02:30 PM
|
|
We met the same guy last month on the walkway from the LIRR to Shea Stadium!
|
metirish
Oct 18 2008 03:08 PM
|
|
So we go from "Joe the Plumber" to "Robert the Baby". I'm sure Robert is licensed for that buggy though.
|
AG/DC
Oct 18 2008 08:03 PM
|
|
Seriously, isn't it amazing that McCain has to come crawling back to Letterman?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 18 2008 08:20 PM
|
|
I watched that interview this morning. I was thinking, this guy could be the next President of the United States, and he's groveling before a talk show host.
|
metirish
Oct 18 2008 08:23 PM
|
|
Palin on SNL tonight.
|
Willets Point
Oct 18 2008 09:22 PM
|
|
|
themetfairy
Oct 18 2008 09:31 PM
|
|
|
dgwphotography
Oct 19 2008 05:26 AM
|
|
<object width="512" height="296"><param name="movie" value="http://www.hulu.com/embed/5A0fjyxX-fzK9MtI7N6dgQ"></param><embed src="http://www.hulu.com/embed/5A0fjyxX-fzK9MtI7N6dgQ" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="512" height="296"></embed></object>
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 19 2008 07:05 AM
|
|
According to electoral-vote.com this morning, Obama has leads of 10 points or more in states that total 264 electoral votes.
He leads by 7 in Virginia (13) and 6 in Colorado (9).
He also leads by 4 in Missouri (11), Nevada (5), and Florida (27), 3 in Ohio (20) and by 1 in North Carolina (15).
McCain has to reverse the lead in all seven of those states to win. If he takes 6 of the 7, and Nevada is the one that Obama retains, then we get a 269-269 tie.
|
MFS62
Oct 19 2008 10:00 AM
|
|
On Meet The Press this morning, Gen. Colin Powell supported Obama.
Later
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Oct 19 2008 12:57 PM
|
|
| ="MFS62"]On Meet The Press this morning, Gen. Colin Powell supported Obama.
Later |
That's gotta hurt.
|
Kong76
Oct 19 2008 12:58 PM
|
|
When the people on the fence chew on that for a few minutes and realize
just how big an endorsement that is (for reasons already outlined in many
places) Obama can just coast the next few weeks and make sure he does
nothing to screw up and it's over.
Over probably by a lot.
|
themetfairy
Oct 19 2008 03:18 PM
|
|
Scary and disturbing people at a Palin rally in Pennsylvania last week -
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/lPg0VCg4AEQ&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/lPg0VCg4AEQ&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
|
dgwphotography
Oct 19 2008 05:06 PM
|
|
Yep - Republicans have all of the scary and disturbing people:
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nQalRPQ8stI&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nQalRPQ8stI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
|
themetfairy
Oct 19 2008 05:26 PM
|
|
Yeah - the booing was definitely way worse than the viewpoints espoused in that video's captions. Claiming that terrorists and infidels would be more welcome by the "liberal elite" than "patriots" isn't divisive or scary.
The creators of that piece are definitely living in a glass house.
|
Kong76
Oct 19 2008 05:42 PM
|
|
7 to 6 that'll be the end of that.
|
dgwphotography
Oct 19 2008 05:46 PM
|
|
yep as bad as assault:
As Libertarian, I'm surprised you aren't frightened by what some of his followers do to quiet dissenting views...
|
themetfairy
Oct 19 2008 05:59 PM
|
|
I obviously don't condone that person's violence.
But it's significant that, in the face of a group of people who were obviously looking to agitate and cause an uproar, the worst reaction you saw from most people was some booing and upraised fingers. For the most part, the "liberal elite" voiced their dissent peacefully. And if they hadn't, the video would certainly have featured that prominently.
Compare that to the language of the Palin supporters and the language of the captions in the video you posted. The Upper West Siders obviously didn't approve of the McCain marchers, but the language of hate by those whom the McCain/Palin ticket are actively supporting is frightening.
|
Farmer Ted
Oct 19 2008 06:31 PM
|
|
Highest rated SNL show in 14 years. Is she that popular or people looking for a train wreck?
|
metirish
Oct 19 2008 06:34 PM
|
|
I didn't see it ,what did she do on the show?
SNL ratings have sky rocketed this season.
|
Kong76
Oct 19 2008 06:34 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 19 2008 06:37 PM
|
|
7 to 6 this will end after parting shots.
(I was too quick on the trigger)
OE: (and then too slow)
|
themetfairy
Oct 19 2008 06:36 PM
|
|
SNL's political skits have driven up the ratings tremendously this year. They're even having some prime time political/Weekend Update specials.
Tina Fey as Sarah Palin has been brilliant. I'm sure people were curious about how the two would be together, just like they enjoyed Hilary Clinton sharing the screen with Amy Pohler.
|
themetfairy
Oct 19 2008 06:39 PM
|
|
| ="metirish":1qvdr7yh]I didn't see it ,what did she do on the show?
SNL ratings have sky rocketed this season. |
1qvdr7yh]
Check out the Hulu link Iubitul posted on the top of the screen. Plus she appeared in the Weekend Update.
|
themetfairy
Oct 19 2008 06:49 PM
|
|
Last season's Clinton with Pohler-as-Clinton piece -
<object type="application/x-shockwave-flash" data="http://widgets.nbc.com/o/4727a250e66f9723/48fbd515d04efa7d/4741e3c5156499a7/c554ded2/-cpid/afd82b64ad31d420" id="W4727a250e66f972348fbd515d04efa7d" width="384" height="283"><param name="movie" value="http://widgets.nbc.com/o/4727a250e66f9723/48fbd515d04efa7d/4741e3c5156499a7/c554ded2/-cpid/afd82b64ad31d420"><param name="wmode" value="transparent"><param name="allowNetworking" value="all"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></object>
|
AG/DC
Oct 19 2008 07:35 PM
|
|
I've seen people beaten up for being in the wrong party often enough.
Both sides.
There's enough wackos everywhere. I've got a guy across the street adorning himself with Obama and Che Guevara side by side. I don't want to tell you the number of yucks I've met who believe that the administraton engineered the attacks in 2001. I've also heard enough horrendous shit about Obama to be concerned that he won't live to see the end of his first term.
Cast your vote, but don't ask me to judge these guys by the worst of their supporters. In a two (plus)-party system, assholes scarcely have any place else to go.
|
Willets Point
Oct 19 2008 07:53 PM
|
|
| ="AG/DC":kg3cd510]
Cast your vote, but don't ask me to judge these guys by the worst of their supporters. In a two (plus)-party system, assholes scarcely have any place else to go. |
kg3cd510]
Maybe we need an Asshole Party? On second thought they'd probably take control of the government pretty swiftly.
|
themetfairy
Oct 19 2008 09:10 PM
|
|
The Weekend Update/Palin Rap segment -
<object width="512" height="296"><param name="movie" value="http://www.hulu.com/embed/N1MZWg4abBA9eOIE4HhstQ"></param><embed src="http://www.hulu.com/embed/N1MZWg4abBA9eOIE4HhstQ" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="512" height="296"></embed></object>
|
Frayed Knot
Oct 19 2008 09:26 PM
|
|
The modern day SNL is of the opinion that a good makeup job and/or a decent impression of, and/or a guest appearence by a politico makes the skit funny.
They're mistaken.
|
Willets Point
Oct 20 2008 08:44 AM
Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Oct 20 2008 08:53 AM
|
|
Well, the original SNL just had Chevy Chase falling down a lot and made no effort to actually make him look like Gerald Ford. So at least the makeup/costumes have improved if the level of political satire has not. Also, politicians have made cameos on the show since the very firs season, including President Ford <a href="http://snltranscripts.jt.org/75/75q.phtml"> himself</a>.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 20 2008 08:47 AM
|
|
I haven't watched SNL in decades, but I have watched the Tina Fey sketches online, and they've been very funny. (Maybe I'm biased, because I have a not-so-secret crush on Tina Fey.) I loved the line from the debate sketch where she says that she believes that marriage is "a sacred contract between unwilling teenagers."
The most recent sketch, though, with the real Sarah, and Lorne Michaels, and Alec Baldwin, was pretty weak. I think the whole thing may have run its course.
|
AG/DC
Oct 20 2008 09:00 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Oct 20 2008 11:16 AM
|
|
Seemed like an awful low blow to me.
My mother --- Repbulican in name only --- called me to lambast Palin because her son spent most of his junior hockey career on the bench because he was a "bad sport." What the heck? She wouldn't vote for McCain if there was a gun to her head, but why indulge this shit?
|
Frayed Knot
Oct 20 2008 11:11 AM
|
|
| ="Willets Point":22483rvm]Well, the original SNL just had Chevy Chase falling down a lot and made no effort to actually make him look like Gerald Ford. So at least the makeup/costumes have improved if the level of political satire has not. Also, politicians have made cameos on the show since the very firs season, including President Ford <a href="http://snltranscripts.jt.org/75/75q.phtml"> himself</a>. |
22483rvm]
I never liked Chase either; not his fall-down act nor his Weekend Update smugness.
The problem is that the modern cast has adopted his model to follow rather than Akroyd's much better Carter/Nixon impressions or the Akroyd/Curtain WE anchor model. They were smart enough to realize that laughing at your own jokes ruined the effect of straight men/women delivering funny lines.
My complaint has nothing to do with Palin or Fey (who I like) but is more about the idea that they seem to think that putting up a political impression is required and therfore just doing it is enough and whether or not there's some kind of substance behind it is optional.
|
AG/DC
Oct 20 2008 12:09 PM
|
|
|
Willets Point
Oct 20 2008 12:32 PM
|
|
Well said.
This is my favorite SNL presidential impersonation, although its pure silliness.
<object width="512" height="296"><param name="movie" value="http://www.hulu.com/embed/BZjij71PfWmbAFuE5wMVTQ"></param><embed src="http://www.hulu.com/embed/BZjij71PfWmbAFuE5wMVTQ" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="512" height="296"></embed></object>
|
Fman99
Oct 20 2008 01:49 PM
|
|
I think the town that Sarah Palin was mayor of in Alaska was location of the diner where Clark Kent got beat up in Superman II, after he traded in his super powers for some poonaner and a trucker-induced ass whooping.
|
Valadius
Oct 20 2008 02:29 PM
|
|
Barack Obama was introduced in Tampa today by members of the American League Champion Tampa Bay Rays, including David Price and Cliff Floyd.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 20 2008 02:31 PM
|
|
He had said he was rooting for the Phillies, but he may want to consider a switch; Florida is a much closer race right now than Pennsylvania is.
|
Willets Point
Oct 20 2008 05:10 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":jpat3usb]He had said he was rooting for the Phillies, but he may want to consider a switch; Florida is a much closer race right now than Pennsylvania is. |
jpat3usb]
The World Series of Swing States.
|
MFS62
Oct 21 2008 06:47 AM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm"]He had said he was rooting for the Phillies, but he may want to consider a switch; Florida is a much closer race right now than Pennsylvania is. |
He'd better be careful. He might be accused of doing a flip flop.
Later
|
bmfc1
Oct 21 2008 06:54 AM
|
|
| ="Valadius":2hexfi2e]Barack Obama was introduced in Tampa today by members of the American League Champion Tampa Bay Rays, including David Price and Cliff Floyd. |
2hexfi2e]
A slight Mets connection, according to the [u:2hexfi2e]Daily News[/u:2hexfi2e]:
Price was joined at the rally by teammates Fernando Perez, Jonny Gomes, Carl Crawford, Edwin Jackson and Cliff Floyd, all of whom were recruited by the wife of former Met Chris Woodward, who was in the area campaigning for Obama.
http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseb ... is_wo.html
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Oct 21 2008 07:13 AM
|
|
Figures. Woody's wife is one of them socialist Canadian hollywood types!
|
Farmer Ted
Oct 22 2008 02:58 PM
|
|
I'd like to send an ole attaboy shout out to the pollsters. One poll has BO up by 18, another has this thing dead freaking even. Bunch of fucking schmucks. No one learned from 2000?
|
Nymr83
Oct 22 2008 03:11 PM
|
|
both of those polls seem completely out of whack (and almost equally so in opposite directions) with what most polls are showing.
realclearpolitics.com's averaging of the polls has Obama +6.8
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 23 2008 11:03 AM
|
|
Someone in my neighborhood has a Nixon-Agnew sign on their front lawn.
|
soupcan
Oct 23 2008 01:59 PM
|
|
<object width="464" height="388" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000"><param name="movie" value="http://www2.funnyordie.com/public/flash/fodplayer.swf"><param name="flashvars" value="key=cc65ed650d"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"><embed width="464" height="388" flashvars="key=cc65ed650d" allowfullscreen="true" quality="high" src="http://www2.funnyordie.com/public/flash/fodplayer.swf" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></object><div>
|
AG/DC
Oct 23 2008 02:09 PM
|
|
Funny as a crutch, Rich.
|
soupcan
Oct 23 2008 02:26 PM
|
|
Well I just thought it was neat to see them all as the old characters is all.
|
Mendoza Line
Oct 23 2008 02:34 PM
|
|
| ]I'd like to send an ole attaboy shout out to the pollsters. One poll has BO up by 18, another has this thing dead freaking even. |
www.fivethirtyeight.com has a very nice and very brief analysis of (at least one) poll that has this thing dead freaking even. That poll shows McCain winning 74% of the 18-24 demographic, which just ain't so.
|
Farmer Ted
Oct 23 2008 02:45 PM
|
|
Two polls for Nevada, for example. McCain up by 7 in one, Obama up by 6 in the other.
According to one article syesterday, BO has spent $21 million on polling. For his sake, they better be more accurate than pollster clowns on the street.
|
Nymr83
Oct 23 2008 03:44 PM
|
|
PA might not be looking good for McCain but I'm glad to see that Murtha's comments have gotten him in trouble, he is now down to polling even in his re-election bid after calling his constituents racists for not supporting Obama.
|
sharpie
Oct 23 2008 03:53 PM
|
|
Hard to figure what Murtha was thinking.
|
Nymr83
Oct 23 2008 03:57 PM
|
|
| ="sharpie":pbt41ign]Hard to figure what Murtha was thinking. |
pbt41ign]
"I'm tired of this job but my wife is gonna kill me if i retire, I know! I'll lose the election on purpose!"
|
AG/DC
Oct 23 2008 05:00 PM
|
|
I don't think it's that hard. It's not like he's the first guy to call it racism if Obama isn't polling well in a niche. He just forgot for a deadly moment that the niche he was calling out was one he had to answer to.
The guy had probably skated to re-election so often that he forgot he was even running.
|
Nymr83
Oct 24 2008 03:00 PM
|
|
Did anyone else see that some rightwing blog dug up a paper copy of the "New Party's" newspaper from 1996 (the New Party is an Illinois socialist party) which shows Obama to have been a member of the party (he ran for state senate on a fusion ticket of the Democrats and this socialist group)
I'm not asking you to believe some wingnut's blog, just look at the original newspaper article and judge for yourself.
[url:1uas3q35]http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/10/08/will-msm-report-obama-membership-socialist-new-party[/url:1uas3q35]
|
MFS62
Oct 24 2008 03:52 PM
|
|
And, I was a member of an organization from 1965-1967 that killed people. It was called the U.S. Army. But that doesn't automatically make me a killer.
Later
|
Valadius
Oct 24 2008 04:10 PM
|
|
Bravo, MFS.
|
Nymr83
Oct 25 2008 03:12 AM
|
|
being a member of a party doesnt make you a member of that party? thats more like saying being in the army doesn't make you an ex-soldier
|
Valadius
Oct 25 2008 10:55 AM
|
|
Running on a party's ticket doesn't make you a member of that party, especially when small third parties are concerned. Look at New York and its multitude of third parties (Conservative, Working Families, etc.) that nominate people from the two major parties to run on their tickets. This is a non-story.
|
Nymr83
Oct 25 2008 11:34 AM
|
|
| ="Valadius":291crrut]Running on a party's ticket doesn't make you a member of that party, especially when small third parties are concerned. Look at New York and its multitude of third parties (Conservative, Working Families, etc.) that nominate people from the two major parties to run on their tickets. This is a non-story. |
291crrut]
New York is rather unique in that respect. You are still seekig hte endorsement of those parties, if you're opposed to their views you don't let them run your name. And finally read the thing for yourself, in order to be on the New Party's line you had to agree to their principles and sign a contract with them. But you are blind to anything that doesn't make Obama look like the messiah, so why bother.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 25 2008 11:47 AM
|
|
If people don't care that he hangs with terrorists, they're not going to care that he also hangs with socialists.
People don't know what socialism is, but they know it's bad. They do know what terrorism is, and they hate it more.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 25 2008 01:04 PM
|
|
| ="Valadius":3t4qbrzu]Running on a party's ticket doesn't make you a member of that party, especially when small third parties are concerned. Look at New York and its multitude of third parties (Conservative, Working Families, etc.) that nominate people from the two major parties to run on their tickets. This is a non-story. |
3t4qbrzu]
I think it kind of does, Val.
But you're right about New York and its minor parties.
|
Valadius
Oct 25 2008 01:09 PM
|
|
The Constitution Party of Montana is running Ron Paul as their presidential candidate over his wishes. So there is precedent for people running on party lines they don't wish to run on.
I read the article you linked to, and it is seriously stretching reality. They sound more like an organization than an actual political party. It says he was endorsed by this group, but the claims of him being a member are, I think, part of what small, unimportant groups love to do: exaggerate associations with prominent people. When you are a small political party, you endorse somebody from a larger political party and then tout that person as a member of your group. That's how it works. And the "source" at the end of the article simply isn't accurate - Obama was NEVER Alice Palmer's chief of staff.
There is a fundamental difference between this and Todd Palin's AIP membership - Todd Palin was a REGISTERED AIP member. That is, registered with the State of Alaska as being a member of the Alaska Independence Party. This group simply latched onto Democratic politicians and claimed them as members.
|
Nymr83
Oct 25 2008 01:38 PM
|
|
| ="Valadius"]The Constitution Party of Montana is running Ron Paul as their presidential candidate over his wishes. So there is precedent for people running on party lines they don't wish to run on.
|
that is not the case with the NY minor parties, and more to the point is not the case with Obama and this party
| ]There is a fundamental difference between this and Todd Palin's AIP membership - Todd Palin was a REGISTERED AIP member. That is, registered with the State of Alaska as being a member of the Alaska Independence Party. This group simply latched onto Democratic politicians and claimed them as members. |
Wrong (as usual.) The "fundamental difference" is that Todd Palin isn't even a candidate for office, but the liberally biased media feels the need to run stories about his politicall associations while ignoring Obama's.
|
metirish
Oct 25 2008 07:35 PM
|
|
A dance off
<object width="464" height="392"><param name="movie" value="http://embed.break.com/NTkyNjQ4"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://embed.break.com/NTkyNjQ4" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="464" height="392"></embed></object><br><font><a href="http://www.break.com/index/unbelievable-mccain-vs-obama-dance-off.html">Unbelievable McCain Vs. Obama Dance-Off</a> - Watch more <a href="http://www.break.com/">free videos</a></font>
|
TheOldMole
Oct 25 2008 08:56 PM
|
|
I love it.
|
Valadius
Oct 25 2008 09:14 PM
|
|
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/65I0HNvTDH4&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/65I0HNvTDH4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
|
Willets Point
Oct 25 2008 09:25 PM
|
|
You bastard, you Rickrolled us!
|
AG/DC
Oct 27 2008 02:54 PM
|
|
Ted Stevens, guilty on all charges.
I didn't think they'd get a conviction.
|
Nymr83
Oct 27 2008 02:57 PM
|
|
Did anyone see that a skinhead plot to kill Obama was foiled?
|
AG/DC
Oct 27 2008 05:14 PM
|
|
The most disturbing part is that this ring was broken up by sheriffs' deputies in Crockett County, Tenn, and not federal authorities.
I'm generally completely un-afraid of the Klan, because I've long assumed (perhaps foolishly) that the FBI has them infiltrated to the point where they are paying 40% of the dues.
It's the mom-and-pop domestic terrorist outfits that scare me -- like the guys who went after Oklahoma City.
|
themetfairy
Oct 28 2008 08:28 AM
|
|
I saw this posted on the [url=http://blogs.herald.com/dave_barrys_blog/:10i180wb]Dave Barry Blog[/url:10i180wb], and it's just cracking me up -
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/utrPhEjA8vs&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/utrPhEjA8vs&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
|
Valadius
Oct 28 2008 01:37 PM
|
|
One reason the Japanese love Obama so much is because there's a place in Japan called Obama.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 28 2008 01:37 PM
|
|
That's the same reason Americans love Lincoln and Washington.
|
seawolf17
Oct 28 2008 01:51 PM
|
|
Hey, that's why JFK was elected... because everyone had such high regard for the airport.
|
Nymr83
Oct 28 2008 02:08 PM
|
|
| ="seawolf17":2ak3kaqf]Hey, that's why JFK was elected... because everyone had such high regard for the airport. |
2ak3kaqf]
I think I have a higher regard for the Staten Island Landfill than I do for our area airports.
|
Edgy DC
Oct 29 2008 08:04 AM
|
|
“If the World Series runs until election day, the networks will run the first one-half inning and project the winner.” --- Lindsey Nelson
|
Willets Point
Oct 29 2008 09:06 AM
|
|
="Nymr83":2msxdrtq]| ="seawolf17":2msxdrtq]Hey, that's why JFK was elected... because everyone had such high regard for the airport. |
2msxdrtq]
I think I have a higher regard for the Staten Island Landfill than I do for our area airports. |
2msxdrtq]
John Freshkills, Republican for Senate, has one vote.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 30 2008 09:47 AM
|
|
Just interviewed Dick Morris. He's in town mostly to talk about teachers unions, but of course he talked about the election a little. He said it's a 50-50 race now, but expect a short-lived bump for Obama for the infomercial.
His best line: I would never sell life insurance to anyone who picks Hillary Clinton as a vice president.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 30 2008 09:50 AM
|
|
I really can't see how it's 50-50.
It seems like it's a lot of false optimism on the part of McCain rooters. The electoral map seems so heavily tilted towards Obama.
I'm by no means overconfident. I was around for the 2007 Mets season, after all. So while anything can happen, at this point there's no way McCain has a 50% chance of winning.
|
Edgy DC
Oct 30 2008 09:50 AM
|
|
I'm not sure I get it. I mean, I guess he's saying that Obama would've been endangered by bringing her on the ticket, but, well, he's endangered anyhow.
He worked for eight years for Hillary's hub --- who in a way included her as part of the package, if not the ticket --- so it's sort of disingenuous.
Plus he kinda shared classified info with his hooker, so...
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 30 2008 10:05 AM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":2o7h5fl8]I'm not sure I get it. I mean, I guess he's saying that Obama would've been endangered by bringing her on the ticket, but, well, he's endangered anyhow.
He worked for eight years for Hillary's hub --- who in a way included her as part of the package, if not the ticket --- so it's sort of disingenuous.
Plus he kinda shared classified info with his hooker, so... |
2o7h5fl8]
He was joking -- that Hillary would slay him if she was VP because she's that power-hungry.
He told some funny stories about Bill Clinton, and had praise for him -- but not Hillary.
He said when Bill Clinton was governor, they had a meeting in his office, needed to use the rest room and Clinton pointed him the one in his office. Morris got in, closed the door, and on the other side of the door was a life-sized poster of Dolly Parton in a bikini.
I'm not saying I agree or disagree with him, just reporting what he told me.
|
metirish
Oct 30 2008 10:12 AM
|
|
You Report , We Decide
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 30 2008 10:14 AM
|
|
Headline currently on MSNBC.com:
| ]McCain takes
his stump to
Defiance, Ohio |
Like, eww?
|
Edgy DC
Oct 30 2008 10:16 AM
|
|
Sure, but he also claims in his book that Bill Clinton tackled him in the Arkansas Governor's mansion and tried to pummel him, and it was Hillary who pulled the big guy off and apologized for her husband afterwards.
|
sharpie
Oct 30 2008 10:29 AM
|
|
The thing about Dick Morris is that he is always wrong. About everything. He's also written two books and made a short film about the evils of Hillary and how she is unstoppable. I guess those books aren't moving too many copies these days.
|
Farmer Ted
Oct 30 2008 12:26 PM
|
|
Saw Sarah two nights ago at a rally, caught Bill Clinton yesterday stumping for O.
Sarah read off the teleprompter, at times you could tell, other times it was fluid. I dunno what kind of workout program she's on, but it was looking good from 50 feet away. As the guy in Knocked Up said, "tight."
Bill has this way of pulling you into his thought process but can't hold you like he used to. A bit of a rambler nowadays. Not tight.
Palin outdrew #42, 7,500 to 1,000. Bill had no opening act. Sarah had Hank Williams, Jr.
A good number of students wearing Obama buttons in the audience for Sarah, but they kept their cool and were polite.
|
Valadius
Oct 30 2008 01:20 PM
|
|
Dick Morris is a moron. An absolute moron. Have you seen his presidential prediction maps? He predicts Obama will win Tennessee and Arkansas, and says Louisiana is a toss-up. Anybody who follows the polls knows that that's absolutely ludicrous.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 30 2008 01:23 PM
|
|
Wait, he has Obama winning Tennessee and Arkansas, and he says the race is 50-50?
If Obama wins those states, he has a giant landslide. Or is Morris also saying states like New Jersey and Massachusetts will go for McCain?
|
metsguyinmichigan
Oct 30 2008 01:36 PM
|
|
Well, he didn't say anything like that this morning. Didn't get into a state-by-state thing.
Colorful interview. Lots of hyperbole.
I called the teachers union president for reaction, and he laughed most of the time.
I don't know if his strength is predicting, pre say, but explaining what is happening and why.
|
Edgy DC
Oct 30 2008 01:37 PM
|
|
I have little respect for Dick Morris, but interpreting polls is what made him what he is. He's probably got too much of a stake to be trusted very far, but he knows more about polls than you or I.
|
sharpie
Oct 30 2008 01:41 PM
|
|
I remember in 2000 the day before the election he said Bush would win California. He lost by 1,300,000 votes.
|
Nymr83
Oct 30 2008 02:50 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":1cu0ncdk]Wait, he has Obama winning Tennessee and Arkansas, and he says the race is 50-50?
If Obama wins those states, he has a giant landslide. Or is Morris also saying states like New Jersey and Massachusetts will go for McCain? |
1cu0ncdk]
If Obama wins TEN and ARK he'll have a landslide equivalent to Reagan's re-election
|
Nymr83
Oct 31 2008 03:33 PM
|
|
I'd like to call BULLSHIT on Senator Stevens who seems to think he "doesn't have a black mark" on himself because his appeals aren't done yet. You've been convicted, thats a "black mark," it will be removed if your convictions are overturned on appeal, but right now you should really resign.
|
sharpie
Oct 31 2008 03:43 PM
|
|
Agree with Nymr on Stevens. He's not helping his party out much, either. If he had resigned then the GOP could say "vote for Ted anyway and we can have Sarah Palin appoint a new Senator." This way, they just lose the seat.
|
Nymr83
Oct 31 2008 04:22 PM
|
|
If he had resigned months ago there may even have been a competitive election, but back then nobody but him could say if he had really broken the law.
right now i want him to resign not because of the election or for the party but on principle because he was convicted of a felony while in office.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Oct 31 2008 06:23 PM
|
|
| ="sharpie":2jyv4ion]Agree with Nymr on Stevens. He's not helping his party out much, either. If he had resigned then the GOP could say "vote for Ted anyway and we can have Sarah Palin appoint a new Senator." This way, they just lose the seat. |
2jyv4ion]
I read that in Alaska, the governor doesn't appoint the replacement. They have to have a special election.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 01 2008 03:38 PM
|
|
Obama on a Dick Cheney endorsement from Vice Preesident Cheney. "I'd like to congratulate Sen. McCain on this endorsement because, he really earned it. That endorsement didn't come easy."
Ouch, sister.
|
Valadius
Nov 01 2008 06:39 PM
|
|
John Boehner, at a bar in front of college co-eds: Obama is "a chicken-shit".
[url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081101/ap_on_el_pr/boehner_obama_insult;_ylt=AlUnXAu7RUYdtZW1ptK_M0uyFz4D:2zfls8qc]Link[/url:2zfls8qc]
|
Gwreck
Nov 01 2008 09:31 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":2iuclgu4]I read that in Alaska, the governor doesn't appoint the replacement. They have to have a special election. |
2iuclgu4]
Indeed.
An election that Sarah Palin could win, if she wanted to run.
|
themetfairy
Nov 02 2008 07:01 PM
|
|
<object width="512" height="296"><param name="movie" value="http://www.hulu.com/embed/Vb-lZJQM4tb9hOWwX_lCxw"></param><embed src="http://www.hulu.com/embed/Vb-lZJQM4tb9hOWwX_lCxw" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="512" height="296"></embed></object>
|
Willets Point
Nov 02 2008 07:14 PM
|
|
Learning from Bob Dole and Al Gore that it might help if people knew you could be funny before the election.
|
metirish
Nov 02 2008 07:25 PM
|
|
Sarah Palin prank Call With "Sarkozy"
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QbEwKcs-7Hc&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QbEwKcs-7Hc&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
| ]
Joke on Palin again as she falls for fake Sarkozy call
Maybe Sarah Palin should have caught on when the caller purporting to be Nicolas Sarkozy told her he could see Belgium from the Elysée Palace.
But the Republicans' vice-presidential candidate remained blissfully unaware during the six-minute conversation with a Montreal comedian that she was the victim of a prank - even after the fake Sarkozy said his wife, Carla Bruni, was hot in bed, and slipped in a line in French about how fun it was to kill baby seals.
The caller, Marc-Antoine Audette, was one half of a comedic duo called the Masked Avengers. Audette described his call with Palin as his greatest triumph.
The prank on one of the most heavily protected personalities in US politics was an instant internet sensation in the final hours of the presidential campaign.
It also overshadowed what John McCain had orchestrated as his comedic moment - an appearance on Saturday Night Live with his wife, Cindy. McCain used his turn to try to make light of Obama's dominance of television advertising, saying his campaign only had the money to appear on the shopping channel - where his wife displayed campaign jewellery.
"I'm a true maverick - a Republican without money," he joked. He went on to lay out a number of strategies for trying to overcome Barack Obama's lead including one he called "Sad Grandpa".
"That's where I get on TV and go, 'Come on, Obama's gonna have plenty of chances to be president. It's my turn'," he said. But instead, it was Palin who got the most laughs - albeit inadvertently. The telephone call got off to an auspicious start.
Palin, evidently thrilled to take what she had been told by aides was a call from the French leader, told the faux Sarkozy within a matter of seconds that she loved him. She did her best to keep that love alive, even when the conversation took an increasingly bizarre turn. When her caller pointed out the two have a lot in common "except from my house I can see Belgium", Palin cheerfully responded: "Well, see, we're right next door to different countries that we all need to be working with."
When her caller mentioned his love of hunting, Palin instantly invited him on a hunting trip. "We can have a lot of fun together while we're getting work done. We could kill two birds with one stone," she said. "Exactly," the caller responded. "We could go try hunting by helicopter like you did."
He added in French that the pair could also go out and kill baby seals. Switching to English the caller added: "I just love killing those animals. Mmm, mmm, take away life, that is so fun." The exchange was littered with other clues. The fake Sarkozy mentioned an adviser called Johnny Hallyday who was in contact with the McCain campaign. Palin, who has made much of her contacts with Canadian officials in her negotiations over an oil pipeline through Alaska, might well have been expected to catch on when the caller got the name of Canada's prime minister wrong, substituting that of a singer.
Or when he added that Bruni was jealous of Palin. But the vice-presidential candidate evidently missed those cues - or at least was too polite to raise objections even when her caller extravagantly praised a porn film about her.
In interviews at the weekend, Audette said it had taken five days to get clearance from Palin's communications team as well as the Secret Service for the phone call.
"I wanted to see how she was on an intellectual level," he told the Canadian Press. "You can see that she's, well, not really brilliant."
|
|
themetfairy
Nov 03 2008 03:51 PM
|
|
If you go to Starbucks tomorrow and tell them that you voted, [url=http://www.starbucks.com/default.asp:2xtv3dvq]they'll give you a free cup of coffee![/url:2xtv3dvq]
(You're on your honor to vote first and THEN collect your free java!)
|
Edgy DC
Nov 03 2008 05:09 PM
|
|
Predictions seem to be saying this has gotten closer as the wire has approached, though still tough to come up with a victory scenario for McCain. I don't blame them, as these things do tend to narrow at the end.
I don't care. I think it'll be just the opposite, and Obama will win it running away.
|
Willets Point
Nov 03 2008 06:44 PM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":2etyda51]
I don't care. I think it'll be just the opposite, and Obama will win it running away. |
2etyda51]
Do we have a bet on that?
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 03 2008 07:47 PM
|
|
Ignore any and all exit poll information!
I'm going to be one of the people asking questions for stories -- not an official poller -- and it's rare that someone will talk to you.
Actually it's not very fun. I feel it's very invasive. We don't pressure people or anything, but I don't like doing it.
|
Nymr83
Nov 03 2008 08:01 PM
|
|
I think there are places where exit polling, or at least releasing the results of it on election day, is illegal because of the effect that inaccurate polling has on people who havent yet voted. probably a 1st amendment issue here in the U.S. but not a bad idea.
|
A Boy Named Seo
Nov 03 2008 08:50 PM
|
|
Nate Silver from 538 was on Olbermann tonight and said the same about exit polling: ignore all of it. He said it's not scientific at all and completely unsophisticated.
Wait for actual poll numbers and let the TV peeps screw up what those numbers mean instead.
|
Kong76
Nov 04 2008 04:05 AM
|
|
Polls are open NOW!!!
I don't think anyone really knows what's gonna happen. Really, would any-
one be surprised if Obama wins in a landslide or if we turn on the news to-
morrow and there is still a state or two with vote counting issues and this
could go on until Thursday. Either way, I hope it's all clean and both sides
have no vote counting beefs when it's said and done.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 04 2008 04:20 AM
|
|
I agree with that last sentiment.
Meanwhile, Obama draws first blood with a 15-6 victory in Dixville Notch, New Hampshire.
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Nov 04 2008 06:48 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 04 2008 04:30 PM
|
|
| ="KC":1ryspu7f]I don't think anyone really knows what's gonna happen. Really, would any-
one be surprised if Obama wins in a landslide or if we turn on the news to-
morrow and there is still a state or two with vote counting issues and this
could go on until Thursday. Either way, I hope it's all clean and both sides
have no vote counting beefs when it's said and done. |
1ryspu7f]
I'd be very surprised if this thing isn't over by 9PM EST. If Obama takes Virginia, which closes its polls at 7, it's basically over for McCain.
Not saying that in a partisan way, mind you- but McCain really needs to win Virginia to have a chance and he's not polling well there.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 04 2008 06:54 AM
|
|
The earliest poll-closing is in Indiana. (5 p.m.) The polls have been going back and forth there, but I think McCain will end up getting the most Hoosier votes.
But if we get an early Obama call for Indiana, McCain is doomed.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 04 2008 08:17 AM
|
|
McCain is doomed. No ifs about it.
Our polling place was a police boys and girls club. The line snaked around the block, then we got inside, and jaws fell when they saw it snaking around the gymnasium. I'm certain the guys in front of me --- despite being close to my age --- never voted before and I'm certain there are millions more like them. Add in the folks who are registered but rarely find themselves motivated to get out there, and there's just this huge population that's turning out that's going to crack open polling formulae.
|
seawolf17
Nov 04 2008 08:18 AM
|
|
Good to see all those Nader supporters turning out in force. This is the year, people!
|
Willets Point
Nov 04 2008 08:34 AM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC"]McCain is doomed. No ifs about it.
Our polling place was a police boys and girls club. The line snaked around the block, then we got inside, and jaws fell when they saw it snaking around the gymnasium. I'm certain the guys in front of me --- despite being close to my age --- never voted before and I'm certain there are millions more like them. Add in the folks who are registered but rarely find themselves motivated to get out there, and there's just this huge population that's turning out that's going to crack open polling formulae. |
Wow that's so inspiring to see the District of Columbia finally coming out for the Democratic Party.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 04 2008 08:40 AM
|
|
Well, if our usual numbers of going 89% Democratic bump up to 96%, and that's reflected in any way across the country, it'll be thundering. Considering that movement is more dramatic in the middle, it's telling that this is what it looks like on the far end of the spectrum.
Oh, and DC voter rights NOW!!!
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 04 2008 08:42 AM
|
|
I was surprised to see that in one of those small New Hampshire towns that vote early, two of the 17 people wrote in Ron Paul.
Now, if you were in one of those two towns, and you knew your results would be broadcast around the country, why would you do that?
|
metirish
Nov 04 2008 08:43 AM
|
|
Everyone is talking about a record turnout , what % of voters would it take for it to be a record?
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 04 2008 08:44 AM
|
|
="Vince Coleman Firecracker":2jnmthg8]| ="KC":2jnmthg8]Really, would anyone be surprised if .... we turn on the news to-
morrow and there is still a state or two with vote counting issues and this
could go on until Thursday. |
2jnmthg8]
I'd be very surprised if this thing isn't over by 9PM EST. If Obama takes Virginia, which closes its polls at 7, it's basically over for McCain.
Not saying that in a partisan way, mind you- but McCain really needs to win Virginia to have a chance and he's not polling well there. |
2jnmthg8]
But if he gets Pennsylvania, that would balance out Virginia.
I think this will be a long night.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 04 2008 08:51 AM
|
|
| ="metsguyinmichigan":vs2p18xw]I was surprised to see that in one of those small New Hampshire towns that vote early, two of the 17 people wrote in Ron Paul.
Now, if you were in one of those two towns, and you knew your results would be broadcast around the country, why would you do that? |
vs2p18xw]
It's a libertarian town. They always have a subset of folks who go for lib ticket.
|
dgwphotography
Nov 04 2008 08:52 AM
|
|
| ="metsguyinmichigan":1y3cj6j7]
I think this will be a long night. |
1y3cj6j7]
I'm going to keep all of the news broadcasts off, play with my kids, watch TiVo, and find out what happened in the morning...
|
Frayed Knot
Nov 04 2008 09:06 AM
|
|
| ="metsguyinmichigan":2106epdm]I was surprised to see that in one of those small New Hampshire towns that vote early, two of the 17 people wrote in Ron Paul.
Now, if you were in one of those two towns, and you knew your results would be broadcast around the country, why would you do that? |
2106epdm]
Why not?
Voting sends a message and a public airing of it sends a bigger one.
Assuming you like Ron Paul enough to vote for him then what's wrong with publicizing that?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 04 2008 09:16 AM
|
|
Exactly.
And I think Pennsylvania will go for Obama. My prediction: Obama 338, McCain 200. Concession some time between 11 and 12 Eastern time.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 04 2008 09:17 AM
|
|
Well, I finished my coffee.
I really don't like coffee, but it was free.
I think I'll find something else to drink to get the taste out of my mouth.
|
themetfairy
Nov 04 2008 09:21 AM
|
|
I wish there was a Starbucks near my house. The closest one is in the opposite direction of where I'm heading this afternoon. It doesn't seem worth it to waste gas in order to get a free cup of coffee.
Maybe I'll just brew myself another latte later and call it a day.
|
seawolf17
Nov 04 2008 09:26 AM
|
|
="Frayed Knot":r911o4e8]| ="metsguyinmichigan":r911o4e8]I was surprised to see that in one of those small New Hampshire towns that vote early, two of the 17 people wrote in Ron Paul.
Now, if you were in one of those two towns, and you knew your results would be broadcast around the country, why would you do that? |
r911o4e8]
Why not?
Voting sends a message and a public airing of it sends a bigger one.
Assuming you like Ron Paul enough to vote for him then what's wrong with publicizing that? |
r911o4e8]
That's exactly why you do that. If I could broadcast my Ralph Nader vote, I would. (Wait, I just did.) It's called democracy.
|
Willets Point
Nov 04 2008 09:35 AM
|
|
|
Vic Sage
Nov 04 2008 09:35 AM
|
|
I always vote for the guy named "Ralph"...
|
Edgy DC
Nov 04 2008 09:56 AM
|
|
| ="metsguyinmichigan":3uoytui9]I think this will be a long night. |
3uoytui9]
It'll be over before you get home from work. I've already written McCain's concession speech for him.
|
SteveJRogers
Nov 04 2008 10:03 AM
|
|
| ="Vic Sage":ap7qnkjd]I always vote for the guy named "Ralph"... |
ap7qnkjd]
Mr. Nader wasn't on the ballot where I voted. Either an NY state thing, or a Westchester County thing. McCain actually was on the independent ticket.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 04 2008 10:05 AM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":2fny02yn]
It'll be over before you get home from work. I've already written McCain's concession speech for him. |
2fny02yn]
Just be sure it doesn't start with "My fellow prisoners..."
|
seawolf17
Nov 04 2008 10:08 AM
|
|
="SteveJRogers":2mmumz3m]| ="Vic Sage":2mmumz3m]I always vote for the guy named "Ralph"... |
2mmumz3m]
Mr. Nader wasn't on the ballot where I voted. Either an NY state thing, or a Westchester County thing. McCain actually was on the independent ticket. |
2mmumz3m]
He was there, just off to the right in a separate column for some reason. (At least that's where he was on the old machines we used in our district.)
|
Edgy DC
Nov 04 2008 10:10 AM
|
|
="Benjamin Grimm"]| ="Edgy DC"]
It'll be over before you get home from work. I've already written McCain's concession speech for him. |
Just be sure it doesn't start with "My fellow prisoners..." |
The start rambles a lot about the price of tomatoes and lottery policies, but he wanted it that way. It concludes like this.
<blockquote>"My friends, we're looking at a Jackie Robinson moment. And though I firmly believe, along with Governor Palin and our millions of wonderful dedicated supporters, that we are on the right side of the issues, today it seems that we're on the wrong side of history.
No, no, don't boo my friends. I remember in 1947, even the fans of the Giants knew that history was going forward in Brooklyn, and they took time to applaud their rivals. And now this country has to go forward, to face the numerous challenges, and I congratulate Senator and Mrs. Obama, and Senator Biden too. And much as I wanted otherwise, as hard as you all worked for, tomorrow it'll be President-Elect Obama.
I hear, you, but please understand, this is not the time. Governor Palin and I have long-criticized Senator Obama's associations --- no, no, my friends, I won't have my campaign end this way.... We've long criticized Senator Obama's associations, but now, you, me, Governor Palin, everybody out there watching on TV, we are all his associations. Let's show him what good associations can be. Let's work together on the issues that concern all of us. Let's restore the American Dream for all Americans.
It's been said a lot, and demonstrated too rarely, there is more that unites us and divides us. If you learned nothing else during the debate, there are a number of issues that Senator Obama and I agreed on. I want him to know that he can call on me when he needs me. He can call on all of us, because, my friends, we are good honest Americans who want the best for our children and are willing to work together to reach that point.
It's been an honor to campaign with you, to campaign for you. Cindy and I will miss you and never forget you. I may be the present of the Republican party, but I see to well that I will soon be the past, and being out among you all, I can see the future of this party has never been brighter. The future of this country has never been brighter.
And now I return from the election campaign to the many campaigns of the Senate --- the hard day-to-day work to guarantee freedom, security, and opportunity for all Americans. And you my friends have always been my partners in this. But my thoughts turn to the bravest of our partners, the men and women, the great Americans, serving overseas, risking their lives every day, for the freedom, security, and opportunity which make our nation great. Can we have a round of applause for them right NOW please?!
And I will work with my fellow members of Congress, and I will work with our next president --- PLEASE, my friends --- I will work to make sure their brave service, and the ultimate sacrifice of their brothers and sisters in arms will not be in vain. The honor they've brought this country will NOT BE IN VAIN, and it will NOT BE FORGOTTEN.
Cindy and I think of them now and keep them in our prayers, and I think of them as I close this campaign with the words my father and grandfather were so proud to say: GOD BLESS AMERICA!</blockquote>
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Nov 04 2008 10:15 AM
|
|
| ="metsguyinmichigan":3censee6]But if he gets Pennsylvania, that would balance out Virginia.
I think this will be a long night. |
3censee6]
McCain's not taking Pennsylvania, especially if he's losing in Virginia. I'll stake a Coke on that one.
|
Willets Point
Nov 04 2008 10:21 AM
|
|
Yeah, Virginia, a state in which a felon named Oliver North came within a few votes of becoming Senator because people thought he was a good Christian is not going to go for Obama. Sorry, but Virginia's in the red. McCain will also get Colorado, New Mexico, Indiana, and Florida. I'm thinking Pennsylvania will be close, maybe they'll be counting votes late there this year.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 04 2008 10:24 AM
|
|
I have McCain winning these states, for 200 electoral votes:
AK, AZ, UT, ID, WY, MT, ND, SD, NE, KS, OK, TX, LA, AR, MO, MS, AL, TN, KY, IN, WV, GA, SC, NC
|
Farmer Ted
Nov 04 2008 10:29 AM
|
|
McCain holds the Bush states other than Iowa (McCain is down on ethanol), picks up PA and NH. Obama wins the popular vote by 4 million, loses the electoral vote.
Mayhem ensues.
|
Nymr83
Nov 04 2008 11:02 AM
|
|
Our greatest president may have been one who lost the popular vote.
Thats the system and while I wouldn't mind seeing a change its not right to complain about it when those are the rules the candidates were playing by. It would be akin to losing 10-9 in a football game and saying "field goals should have been worth 4 points each."
|
Willets Point
Nov 04 2008 11:04 AM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC"] I've already written McCain's concession speech for him. |
Before you send out that speech, take a long hard look at this photograph:
|
Edgy DC
Nov 04 2008 11:06 AM
|
|
Why? I'm not reporting news. I'm predicting it, like everybody else.
|
Nymr83
Nov 04 2008 11:06 AM
|
|
I love that picture, the media obviously had not learned their lesson in 2000.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 04 2008 11:07 AM
|
|
="Willets Point"]| ="Edgy DC"] I've already written McCain's concession speech for him. |
Before you send out that speech, take a long hard look at this photograph:
|
What is Truman stading in front of, blocking the view of part of him?
|
Willets Point
Nov 04 2008 11:12 AM
|
|
="metsguyinmichigan":j5r0cxxk]| ="Willets Point":j5r0cxxk]
What is Truman stading in front of, blocking the view of part of him? |
j5r0cxxk] |
j5r0cxxk]
He's on the platform at the back of a train, so that's part of the train.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 04 2008 11:15 AM
|
|
="seawolf17":fm9u3wvq]="Frayed Knot":fm9u3wvq]| ="metsguyinmichigan":fm9u3wvq]I was surprised to see that in one of those small New Hampshire towns that vote early, two of the 17 people wrote in Ron Paul.
Now, if you were in one of those two towns, and you knew your results would be broadcast around the country, why would you do that? |
fm9u3wvq]
Why not?
Voting sends a message and a public airing of it sends a bigger one.
Assuming you like Ron Paul enough to vote for him then what's wrong with publicizing that? |
fm9u3wvq]
That's exactly why you do that. If I could broadcast my Ralph Nader vote, I would. (Wait, I just did.) It's called democracy. |
fm9u3wvq]
But Nader's on the ballot. I get that. The more votes he gets, the better it establishes a potential third party at some point.
But I don't get writing in someone for president. Don't see how that helps anyone.
Might as well write in Mr. Met. He's appearing at the debates anyway. :)
|
Edgy DC
Nov 04 2008 11:31 AM
|
|
I wrote in. It helps me. It helps every candidate on the ballot know they haven't won you.
|
Gwreck
Nov 04 2008 11:50 AM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":1u7msxvd]Our greatest president may have been one who lost the popular vote. |
1u7msxvd]
Lincoln didn't win a majority in 1860 but he was the leader in the popular vote.
Or were you thinking of someone else?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 04 2008 11:52 AM
|
|
I sure hope he doesn't mean W.
|
Nymr83
Nov 04 2008 11:55 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 04 2008 11:56 AM
|
|
I meant Lincoln.
|
Willets Point
Nov 04 2008 11:55 AM
|
|
="Gwreck":3prlumtb]| ="Nymr83":3prlumtb]Our greatest president may have been one who lost the popular vote. |
3prlumtb]
Lincoln didn't win a majority in 1860 but he was the leader in the popular vote.
Or were you thinking of someone else? |
3prlumtb]
George W. Bush of course.
|
A Boy Named Seo
Nov 04 2008 03:36 PM
|
|
I should've written in Lando.
<object width="464" height="388" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000"><param name="movie" value="http://player.ordienetworks.com/flash/fodplayer.swf?c79e63ac"><param name="flashvars" value="key=a863be2b6f"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"><embed width="464" height="388" flashvars="key=a863be2b6f" allowfullscreen="true" quality="high" src="http://player.ordienetworks.com/flash/fodplayer.swf?c79e63ac" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></object><div>See more <a href="http://www.funnyordie.com/">funny videos</a> at Funny or Die</div>
|
Kong76
Nov 04 2008 03:41 PM
|
|
="Vince Coleman Firecracker":1pkm2115]| ="KC":1pkm2115]Really, would anyone be surprised if .... we turn on the news to-
morrow and there is still a state or two with vote counting issues and this
could go on until Thursday. |
1pkm2115]
I'd be very surprised if this thing isn't over by 9PM EST. If Obama takes Virginia, which closes its polls at 7, it's basically over for McCain.
Not saying that in a partisan way, mind you- but McCain really needs to win Virginia to have a chance and he's not polling well there. |
1pkm2115]
Quote me or don't quote me. It was a two part statement and the first part
agreed with your take and someone lazy and not going back doesn't know
that it was an either/or statement and you left out my either.
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Nov 04 2008 04:29 PM
|
|
| ="KC":38r9p0ls]Quote me or don't quote me. It was a two part statement and the first part
agreed with your take and someone lazy and not going back doesn't know
that it was an either/or statement and you left out my either. |
38r9p0ls]
Sorry, KC- you're absolutely right. I cut your quote because I would only be surprised if the one half of your either/or happens, but my quote doesn't represent what you said. I'll edit it rightaways.
My apologies.
|
Nymr83
Nov 04 2008 05:47 PM
|
|
FOX News and CNN have both called KY and VT. FOX called WV at least 15 minutes ago for McCain but CNN has yet to follow suit, if that means they are being more cautious I appreciate it, but I'd like to see if it means they'll be calling states for Obama before FOX does too.
On Edit- Foxnews.com now also has Delaware for Obama. I'm thinking that since FOX News was one of the few networks not to get caught with their pants down in 2000 that they are just generally a little less guarded than the others tonight.
|
themetfairy
Nov 04 2008 05:58 PM
|
|
[url=http://www.miamiherald.com/living/columnists/dave-barry/story/756596.html:3e55t1v4]Dave Barry's Election Analysis[/url:3e55t1v4]
|
Kong76
Nov 04 2008 05:59 PM
|
|
AP's had that for awhile ... please, get a grip on who is doing what and why.
Everyone enjoy the evening, I'm off to watch a few of the last episodes of
season one of Deadwood!
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 04 2008 06:00 PM
|
|
MSNBC so far has called three states: VT for Obama and KY and SC for McCain,
|
Kong76
Nov 04 2008 06:00 PM
|
|
Answering nymr above, homey don't do Dave Barry.
|
metirish
Nov 04 2008 06:01 PM
|
|
NBC calls PA for Obama....NH for Obama
|
Nymr83
Nov 04 2008 06:26 PM
|
|
PA being called for Obama by everyone but FOX News and CNN, i havent heard CNN's reasoning but FOX's is that they don't have a single actually result from PA, its all based on exit polls.
|
A Boy Named Seo
Nov 04 2008 06:30 PM
|
|
FOX just called PA, too. CNN said they wanted to be conservative and wait til later rather than fuck up.
My words, not theirs.
|
Nymr83
Nov 04 2008 06:40 PM
|
|
CNN just called it as well. Thats leaves McCain with almost no margin for error and Florida is already looking bad.
|
Nymr83
Nov 04 2008 07:19 PM
|
|
Ohio for Obama, that clinches it unless McCain picks up a Kerry state, his best bet of the ones not yet called would be Michigan but thats obviously unlikely.
I'm out of here for the night.
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Nov 04 2008 07:33 PM
|
|
With Ohio, that's a wrap. It also looks like Virginia, Florida, and North Carolina will go blue. Big night for Obama, as expected.
edit- maybe not Virginia.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 04 2008 07:50 PM
|
|
Yeah, maybe not Virginia. And I'm not sure what's going on in Indiana.
|
Gwreck
Nov 04 2008 07:53 PM
|
|
Add CA, OR, WA and HI -- the bluest of the blue -- to what Obama already has, and you have 272.
|
metirish
Nov 04 2008 08:30 PM
|
|
Not to sound like a loser here but I really feel the historic aspect of this night , I also feel tired and am hoping they call it by eleven.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 04 2008 08:37 PM
|
|
The three West Coast states and Hawaii will be called for Obama immediately at 11, I predict.
And that will bring Obama up to 284 Electoral Votes.
|
metirish
Nov 04 2008 08:51 PM
|
|
FOX projecting Virginia for Obama.
|
A Boy Named Seo
Nov 04 2008 08:59 PM
|
|
I'm kinda hot for Rachel Maddow. Does that make me gay?
|
metirish
Nov 04 2008 09:00 PM
|
|
NBC calls the whole thing for Obama...
A new day has come.
|
A Boy Named Seo
Nov 04 2008 09:06 PM
|
|
Wow. We're going to have a black President.
And I think (and hope) a good President, too.
Good job on both, America.
|
themetfairy
Nov 04 2008 09:19 PM
|
|
Wow. Just wow.
McCain is conceding.
|
metirish
Nov 04 2008 09:20 PM
|
|
And his supporters are booing at the mention of President Elect Obama's name.
|
themetfairy
Nov 04 2008 09:23 PM
|
|
McCain is showing way more class in defeat than he did during the campaign.
|
metirish
Nov 04 2008 09:24 PM
|
|
| ="themetfairy":2rcwrhs2]McCain is showing way more class in defeat than he did during the campaign. |
2rcwrhs2]
I was thinking the same thing , very gracious in defeat and generous in praise of Obama.
|
Zvon
Nov 04 2008 09:28 PM
|
|
| ="themetfairy"]Wow. Just wow.
McCain is conceding. |
Yea, watching this.
I agree,..lottsa class showing here.
Was watching Indecsion'08 on CC for the last hour and I have to say that was hilarious.
|
A Boy Named Seo
Nov 04 2008 09:30 PM
|
|
I liked that McCain guy a lot. Super nice. Wish he woulda run 4 prez.
|
TransMonk
Nov 04 2008 09:57 PM
|
|
| ="A Boy Named Seo":luwwjiyi]I liked that McCain guy a lot. Super nice. Wish he woulda run 4 prez. |
luwwjiyi]
I wouldn't have minded him in 2000...hmmm.
|
A Boy Named Seo
Nov 04 2008 10:12 PM
|
|
Damn, G, this is a good speech. I got them goose bumps.
Let's fix shit NOW!!!!
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Nov 04 2008 11:20 PM
|
|
Indiana and NC will go blue, barring anything weird. MO might also. And if friggin Montana is gonna be up in the air at one o'clock in the morning, the Republicans may have to go back to the drawing board for 2012.
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Nov 05 2008 03:56 AM
|
|
Check out Nate Silver's projection vs the results:
Not too bad. He only missed Indiana, which he had as a toss-up.
|
metirish
Nov 05 2008 04:33 AM
|
|
| ="Vince Coleman Firecracker"]Check out Nate Silver's projection vs the results:
Not too bad. He only missed Indiana, which he had as a toss-up. |
I thought he was pretty good throughout when I would see him on Countdown.
|
Rockin' Doc
Nov 05 2008 05:20 AM
|
|
Obama will sweep into the White House with the Democrats firmly in control of both houses of Congress. As a candidate, Obama called for change and promised it was coming if he were elected. It will be interesting to see how much things really change in Washington in the next four years.
|
themetfairy
Nov 05 2008 06:32 AM
|
|
| ="Zvon"]
Was watching Indecsion'08 on CC for the last hour and I have to say that was hilarious. |
Yes - Stewart and Colbert were great, as usual.
Earlier in the day, Comedy Central had a Daily Show/Colbert marathon, along with a scroll that had messages like, "One out of five Americans think that four out of five Americans think that they're SOOOO damn smart!"
As compared to the holograms and touch maps on the other channels, Comedy Central was a pretty good option.
|
seawolf17
Nov 05 2008 06:36 AM
|
|
I'm okay with the way things went last night (Obama, Shays going down, Tim Bishop in our district), but I'm stunned that CA's Prop 8 looks like it'll pass.
Very disappointing.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 05 2008 07:10 AM
|
|
| ="A Boy Named Seo":3tuk45vv]I should've written in Lando.
<object width="464" height="388" classid="clsid:d27cdb6e-ae6d-11cf-96b8-444553540000"><param name="movie" value="http://player.ordienetworks.com/flash/fodplayer.swf?c79e63ac"><param name="flashvars" value="key=a863be2b6f"><param name="allowfullscreen" value="true"><embed width="464" height="388" flashvars="key=a863be2b6f" allowfullscreen="true" quality="high" src="http://player.ordienetworks.com/flash/fodplayer.swf?c79e63ac" type="application/x-shockwave-flash"></embed></object><div>See more <a href="http://www.funnyordie.com/">funny videos</a> at Funny or Die</div> |
3tuk45vv]
They couldn't find a more futuristic backdrop than a DC metro station?
|
metirish
Nov 05 2008 07:17 AM
|
|
From the Irish Times.
| ]
The Taoiseach also formally invited US president-elect Obama to visit Ireland and his ancestral home in County Offaly where local Church of Ireland rector Stephen Neill recently found evidence that Mr Obama’s fourth great-grandfather was a shoemaker in the village of Moneygall. |
Oh boy.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 05 2008 07:21 AM
|
|
"Moneygall" is something Chris Buckley made up.
|
Willets Point
Nov 05 2008 07:23 AM
|
|
| ="Rockin' Doc":1bip8r3u]Obama will sweep into the White House with the Democrats firmly in control of both houses of Congress. As a candidate, Obama called for change and promised it was coming if he were elected. It will be interesting to see how much things really change in Washington in the next four years. |
1bip8r3u]
I hope Americans don't rest on their laurels and think that Obama is going to take care of everything. Americans, especially liberals, need to lean on him and make sure he comes through on his promise of hope and change.
I wish I could feel the excitement that many people feel about Obama's win, but I've been disappointed by the Democratic party far too many times. At the very least Obama should be better than Bush so he's got that going for him.
|
Willets Point
Nov 05 2008 07:25 AM
|
|
PS - I'd like concede defeat in the McCain states contest but Grimm still has the thread locked. I'm still amazed that McCain didn't win. The last 8 years have made me think the typical American actually likes the things McCain/Bush stand for.
|
batmagadanleadoff
Nov 05 2008 07:36 AM
|
|
| ="Willets Point":19eyx99k]I wish I could feel the excitement that many people feel about Obama's win, but I've been disappointed by the Democratic party far too many times. At the very least Obama should be better than Bush so he's got that going for him. |
19eyx99k]
Obama obviously hasn't even been sworn in, yet as it is, he's already preserved womens' right to an abortion. It is not likely that 88 year old liberal Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens will continue to serve beyond the next Presidential term. A McCain victory would have eventually shifted the balance of ideology in the U.S. Supreme Court decidedly to the right.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Nov 05 2008 07:46 AM
|
|
| ="Willets Point":30hvvsp0]PS - I'd like concede defeat in the McCain states contest but Grimm still has the thread locked. I'm still amazed that McCain didn't win. The last 8 years have made me think the typical American actually likes the things McCain/Bush stand for. |
30hvvsp0]
That's how 04 made me feel. But I have to say, I was very CAHNfident that Bam was gonna take this one, my only concern was whether it'd be close enough to cause some controversy. But overall this election felt a lot like Bush I's fall in 1992. You just got a palpable sense that the country was weary and ready to move on.
Yahoos in my hood last night were up partying in the streets and broadcasting O's speech with speakers out the windows.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 05 2008 07:51 AM
|
|
I have faith in the polls. Perhaps more than I should, but last night, at least, that faith was justified.
All the talk from the McCain campaign and its followers about "tightening" and "dead heat" did, I confess, make me a little nervous. I wondered if they knew something that I didn't, or if they were deluding themselves, or putting on a false optimism. (I suspect it was a combination of the last two possibilities.) But the polls were so overwhelmingly in Obama's favor, I was pretty confident that he would win. Even if they were off, he'd likely end up with a close win instead of a big one, but in the end, they were pretty darn accurate.
|
Willets Point
Nov 05 2008 07:57 AM
|
|
| ="John Cougar Lunchbucket":2bx4wudr]. But overall this election felt a lot like Bush I's fall in 1992. You just got a palpable sense that the country was weary and ready to move on. |
2bx4wudr]
Yeah, that's just the thing. In 1992 I let myself get swept up in the hope and "Don't Stop Thinking about tomorrow" and then the 90's turned out to be so...complacent. Big companies got bigger and richer but they did it with downsizing and cutting benefits. The Republican revolution swept the country with "The Contract of America". The Rush Limbaugh show and Fox News took over the airwaves. Clinton himself supported DOMA and the welfare reform act, that stupid "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy and bombed an aspirin factory to send a message. And then he was stupid enough to have an affair in the oval office. I really didn't think any of that crap would happen in 1992. Well, the affair maybe, but I thought he'd be smart enough to control his urges when the world was watching.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 05 2008 08:06 AM
|
|
I don't get it. I guess it keeps your heart away from your head when you don't have a horse, but this all seemed the most obvious thing in the world.
|
Willets Point
Nov 05 2008 08:16 AM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":16pcatal]I don't get it. I guess it keeps your heart away from your head when you don't have a horse, but this all seemed the most obvious thing in the world. |
16pcatal]
What don't you get? You don't see how a very liberal person can be disappointed by the Democratic Party the past 20 years?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 05 2008 08:19 AM
|
|
True, the Clinton years didn't go the way he and most of his supporters probably wanted them to go. A lot of that is his fault, but he was also hampered by an unfriendly Congress for six of his eight years. (And the Democratic Congress he had in his first two years wasn't as accommodating as he would have liked either. I think they falsely thought that they were at the beginning of a Democratic era, and Congress wanted to assert its supremacy over the Presidency.)
And I'm not at all certain that Obama will get more than two years of a Democratic Congress.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 05 2008 08:23 AM
|
|
="Willets Point":1oqicb23]| ="Edgy DC":1oqicb23]I don't get it. I guess it keeps your heart away from your head when you don't have a horse, but this all seemed the most obvious thing in the world. |
1oqicb23]
What don't you get? You don't see how a very liberal person can be disappointed by the Democratic Party the past 20 years? |
1oqicb23]
I think it's clear there in my second sentence. I don't see how the outcome wasn't apparent to all.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 05 2008 08:27 AM
|
|
In Minnesota, Norm Coleman appears to have beaten Al Franken by 571 lousy votes. Close enough for a recount.
|
Vic Sage
Nov 05 2008 08:31 AM
|
|
Damn. i was rooting for Al.
|
Gwreck
Nov 05 2008 08:35 AM
|
|
| ="batmagadanleadoff":3dc2tdpz]It is not likely that 88 year old liberal Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens will continue to serve beyond the next Presidential term. |
3dc2tdpz]
For what it's worth, I expect Souter and/or Ginsburg to retire at the end of the 2009 term. Stevens will probably wait a year or two.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 05 2008 08:38 AM
|
|
First order of business for President-elect Obama:
Get someone to measure the drapes.
Actually, he should go to Hawaii and bury his grandma. The transition can wait for a couple of days.
|
HahnSolo
Nov 05 2008 08:40 AM
|
|
="Gwreck":2o7kdasl]| ="batmagadanleadoff":2o7kdasl]It is not likely that 88 year old liberal Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens will continue to serve beyond the next Presidential term. |
2o7kdasl]
For what it's worth, I expect Souter and/or Ginsburg to retire at the end of the 2009 term. Stevens will probably wait a year or two. |
2o7kdasl]
I wonder what the average service time is on the Supreme Court. It seems to me like Souter and Ginsberg just got nominated.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 05 2008 09:28 AM
|
|
Did Ted Stevens end up winning in Alaska? Looked like it last time I checked but couldn't find final results.
If so, he's going to have to leave at some point when he's sentenced. Would not surprise me if Palin wins that special election to replace him. That keeps her in Washington, raising money and enjoying a higher profile than she would have as governor.
I think my profession is the big loser today. Aside from the financial issues that are causing so much trouble with it, I think the coverage of this campaign was poor and leaned one way, though maybe not as far as some will paint it as leaning. Not our finest hour.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 05 2008 09:33 AM
|
|
With 96% of precincts reporting, he leds by fewer than 4,000 votes with 40,000 absentee ballots to go.
I think he's going to get a re-trial. The case will probably out-live him.
|
batmagadanleadoff
Nov 05 2008 09:47 AM
|
|
="HahnSolo":uwqfmas3]="Gwreck":uwqfmas3]| ="batmagadanleadoff":uwqfmas3]It is not likely that 88 year old liberal Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens will continue to serve beyond the next Presidential term. |
uwqfmas3]
For what it's worth, I expect Souter and/or Ginsburg to retire at the end of the 2009 term. Stevens will probably wait a year or two. |
uwqfmas3]
I wonder what the average service time is on the Supreme Court. It seems to me like Souter and Ginsberg just got nominated. |
uwqfmas3]
Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life. Souter, a liberal, was a Bush I nominee, and as far as the Republicans are concerned, a terrible miscalculation. Ginsburg was Clinton's first nominee.
Despite the unpredictability inherent in guessing when a S.C Justice might step down, it's safe to say that the liberal element of the current bench is very advanced in age. As the next President, McCain might have been able to shift the Court slightly to the right, though, perhaps, not drastically -- although a 5-4 victory counts as much as a 7-2 or a unanimous vote.
I don't know that McCain would've been able to succesfully nominate hard-core conservatives like Alito, given the current composition of the Senate.
|
A Boy Named Seo
Nov 05 2008 10:18 AM
|
|
| ="seawolf17":2tm2qtun]I'm okay with the way things went last night (Obama, Shays going down, Tim Bishop in our district), but I'm stunned that CA's Prop 8 looks like it'll pass.
Very disappointing. |
2tm2qtun]
I can't believe Prop 8 passed, either. It's seems even worse than just keeping gays and lesbians from marrying. This is something they've been able to do in California the last handful of months and we're taking that away from them.
Seems so shitty.
|
Willets Point
Nov 05 2008 10:27 AM
|
|
Apparently it cannot be applied retroactively so same sex couples already married in California will retain their marital status. Also since it takes about a month to certify an election, the county clerks wills still issue marriage licenses for a little while longer.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 05 2008 11:56 AM
|
|
One thing I didn't think I'd see: Colin Powell choking up.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/TNuZxLJy7Z0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/TNuZxLJy7Z0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
|
Edgy DC
Nov 05 2008 12:09 PM
|
|
DowJones, oddly enough, way down.
|
Gwreck
Nov 05 2008 12:55 PM
|
|
| ="batmagadanleadoff":3nug4arw]Despite the unpredictability inherent in guessing when a S.C Justice might step down, it's safe to say that the liberal element of the current bench is very advanced in age. As the next President, McCain might have been able to shift the Court slightly to the right, though, perhaps, not drastically -- although a 5-4 victory counts as much as a 7-2 or a unanimous vote. |
3nug4arw]
Stevens is 88;
Ginsburg 75
Scalia 72
Kennedy 72
Breyer 70
Souter 69
Thomas 60
Alito 58
Roberts 53
Had McCain had the opportunity to replace Stevens and/or Ginsburg -- even with "moderate" conservatives, the ideological shift of the court would have been massive, even if only one justice was replaced.
Obama will have no such opportunity. There is no chance that Thomas, Roberts or Alito leave the court in the forseeable future, and I doubt that Scalia or Kennedy are in any hurry to retire.
For what it's worth, the ages of the most recent justices to leave the court:
Douglas 77
Burger 79
Powell 81
Brennan 84
Marshall 83
White 76
Blackmun 86
O'Connor 75
Rehnquist 81 (died)
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 05 2008 01:22 PM
|
|
Bush's two court appointments -- particularly with Roberts as chief -- might end up being where his impact is felt the strongest and longest.
McCain, had he been elected, would never have been able to get someone like Roberts or Alieto through a Democratic Congress.
There are stories here about Michigan's Gov. Jennifer Granholm on the short list for a Supreme Court seat. But I don't see it, as she was a huge Hillary backer, and you tend not to see governor-types appointed. Her one-term stint as Michigan attorney general doesn't exactly qualify her.
|
sharpie
Nov 05 2008 01:29 PM
|
|
From Obama's time at Harvard Law and University of Chicago he probably knows plenty of Supreme Court candidates and it would be unlikely that any politician would be tapped. Media always likes to speculate about them as these are people we all know about unlike some 4th Circuit judge.
|
Valadius
Nov 05 2008 01:30 PM
|
|
What a night.
I watched the election returns at the College Democrats party at George Washington University. When Pennsylvania got called, it was nuts. When Ohio got called, it was pandemonium. And when Virginia and then the presidency got called, it was absolute chaos. A loud roar of screams the likes of which I'll never hear again, everyone hugging everyone else, people crying, it was unbelievable. After the speech, I went to join the crowd that had gathered at the White House. For posterity's sake, let me describe the scene: it was as if we had overthrown a dictator. Cars honking their horns, people hanging out of windows and sunroofs on their cars yelling and screaming, continuing well past three in the morning. A long, unbroken line of college students marching down Pennsylvania Avenue towards the White House, chanting "Obama" and "Yes We Did". Thousands of people gathered at the White House, 90% of them college students, chanting "USA" and singing the Star-Spangled Banner. People were waving American flags. The myth of the dirty America-hating hippie liberals is dead. My generation is a new liberal generation that believes in this country's promise. And look what we did.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 05 2008 01:40 PM
|
|
Me=old man yelling "go to bed"
|
metirish
Nov 05 2008 01:40 PM
|
|
Sounds like a great night Val , I'm jealous .
| ]
it was as if we had overthrown a dictator. |
funny
|
Gwreck
Nov 05 2008 01:51 PM
|
|
| ="metsguyinmichigan":14slegkh]Bush's two court appointments -- particularly with Roberts as chief -- might end up being where his impact is felt the strongest and longest. |
14slegkh]
Disagree. Roberts as chief is about as close to a carbon copy of Rehnquist as Bush could've hoped for. The change was replacing the moderate O'Connor (who leaned left on certain issues and leaned right on others) with a far-right conservative (Alito).
From what I've read, [url=http://www.fjc.gov/servlet/tGetInfo?jid=2243:14slegkh]Sonia Sotomayor[/url:14slegkh] is frequently referenced in the media as a possible Obama nomination. Props to anyone who knows her link to baseball (without having to google to find it).
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 05 2008 01:54 PM
|
|
I think what Michigan meant is that Roberts could serve on the Court for thirty or more years. It doesn't matter how much alike or different he is from his predecessor; the point is that he'll be around for a long time.
|
sharpie
Nov 05 2008 01:55 PM
|
|
Ended the baseball lockout.
|
Gwreck
Nov 05 2008 04:47 PM
|
|
Basically. She issued the preliminary injunction which stopped baseball from using replacement players, which in turn led to the end of the '94 strike.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 05 2008 07:35 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":1x2y5w81]I think what Michigan meant is that Roberts could serve on the Court for thirty or more years. It doesn't matter how much alike or different he is from his predecessor; the point is that he'll be around for a long time. |
1x2y5w81]
Yup! That's what I meant, and should have said more clearly.
|
Valadius
Nov 05 2008 08:34 PM
|
|
Me and about a thousand other people singing the Star-Spangled Banner at the White House, sometime between 1:30 and 3:00 AM:
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DEfS1xNQBuU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DEfS1xNQBuU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
|
MFS62
Nov 06 2008 06:38 AM
|
|
Mister Nice Guy that I am, I'd like to bring some comfort to the losers.
So, what can be more comforting than comfort food?
This comfort food should ease the pain , especially for all those Southerners who voted for McCain:
*********************************************************
This fried crow recipe makes enough for about 8 people.
1. Ingredients:
2 frying crows, about 2 1/2 to 3 pounds each, cut into serving pieces
2 cups all-purpose flour
1 teaspoon salt
1/2 teaspoon ground black pepper
1 cup milk
vegetable shortening for frying
1 tablespoon bacon drippings
Preparation:
Wash crow and pat dry.
In a heavy brown paper bag or large food storage bag, combine the flour and salt and pepper; shake to blend well. Pour the milk into a wide shallow bowl.
Heat 2 to 3 inches of shortening in a deep heavy skillet over medium heat, or electric fry pan set at 375° F. Add the bacon grease.
When a drop of water spatters when it hits the hot oil, dip some of the crow pieces into the milk then place in the bag and shake to coat evenly.
Arrange the crow pieces in the fat, making sure not to overcrowd.
Fry the crow until outside is golden brown and crisp, about 15 to 20 minutes, turning once to brown both sides.
Reduce heat to 350° F and fry until cooked through golden brown, about 15 minutes longer.
Turn once.
Drain crow on brown paper or paper towels, adding a little more shortening and bacon grease if necessary, setting or regulating the temperature as for the first batch.
Transfer the crow to a large platter for serving.
Serves 8.
*******************************************************
Later
|
themetfairy
Nov 06 2008 07:04 AM
|
|
This is not the time for anyone to tell anyone else to eat crow.
Senator McCain was gracious in defeat. President Elect Obama was eloquent in victory.
Supporters of both sides should follow the candidates' leads. This is the time for Americans to work together, not to be divisive.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 06 2008 07:20 AM
|
|
Yeah, that crow post is a bit lacking in class. Something I'd expect from a Phillies fan.
|
HahnSolo
Nov 06 2008 07:43 AM
|
|
If I believed a Phillies fan could actually write more than one sentence at a time.
|
Frayed Knot
Nov 06 2008 07:44 AM
|
|
Also, how is it accurate?
Isn't "eating crow" a reference to those who have to face the music after incessantly bragging about a victory that turned out not to happen?
But, aside from the usual "we have every confidence in our candidate" stuff that everyone says every time, what suddenly deserves a healthy portion of crow?
And the part about "southerners" brings up the same stuff that cropped up 4 years ago when some here, unhappy about the results of that one (don't recall any crow servings then btw), began trashing all those horrible people from those horrible states that no one in their right minds would even visit much less live in who don't know enough to vote the right way.
Good thing us northerners aren't prejudiced like those in the south.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 06 2008 07:46 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 06 2008 07:51 AM
|
|
Mr. Robbins of Margate did. Besides, that isn't typing. It's cutting and pasting.
It's also bad usage. Eating crow means the humiliation of having to admit you're factually wrong after insisting on your rightness. It's not brought to bear on the minority opinion in the aftermath of an election.
(OE: Frayed Knot beat me.)
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Nov 06 2008 07:49 AM
|
|
It's also dangerous to eat a pie full of black birds. I heard that a maid lost her nose.
|
MFS62
Nov 06 2008 07:59 AM
|
|
Points well taken.
I've been called many things in my life. But if what I did makes anyone think that I might be a Phillies fan, then I truly regret it.
But I feel so strongly about payback for that inbound mud that was slung by the hard right during the campaign that I'd still like to take a printout of that recipe, tape it to a brick, and shove it up Sean Hannity's ample arse.
Later
|
metirish
Nov 06 2008 08:25 AM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Nov 06 2008 08:29 AM
|
|
I happened on Sean Hannity's show last night , he had Joe the Plumber on , Hannity just ranted on about what he think will happen and Joe just sat there shaking his head in disgust. Joe BTW has launched a website
http://secureourdream.com/
Hannity has taken to calling his show "The conservative resistance"
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 06 2008 08:27 AM
|
|
It's time for Joe's fifteen minutes to end.
|
Frayed Knot
Nov 06 2008 08:41 AM
|
|
Then offer the serving of crow to Hannity if he's your designated boogeyman as opposed to an entire section of the country and all the people in it.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 06 2008 08:42 AM
|
|
Hannity is, of course, from New York.
|
Willets Point
Nov 06 2008 08:54 AM
|
|
I'm disappointed that no one started an "Obama Wins!!!!!!!!!!!" thread.
|
Vic Sage
Nov 06 2008 08:58 AM
|
|
| ="Frayed Knot":18jk5crr]... And the part about "southerners" brings up the same stuff that cropped up 4 years ago when some here, unhappy about the results of that one (don't recall any crow servings then btw), began trashing all those horrible people from those horrible states that no one in their right minds would even visit much less live in who don't know enough to vote the right way.
Good thing us northerners aren't prejudiced like those in the south. |
18jk5crr]
But if you've been awake the last 4 years, you'll notice we were right.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 06 2008 09:09 AM
|
|
Come on.
| ]But the biggest miscalculation of the Democrats is the discounting of the inherent racism in this country... a nation built on genocide of the indiginous population, African slave labor to build its agrarian strength, and exploitation of immigrant populations to build its transportation and industrial infrastructure, all for the benefit of a white ango-saxon propertied class. We've come a long way, but not far enough in large swaths of this country, where I simply do not believe there are enough white people ready to vote for a black man who is clearly smarter than they are.
I wish i was wrong about that, but i don't think i am. I don't think the polls will reflect it, ether, but when people step into the booth and pull that curtain closed behind them, i suspect they will vote their fears and not their aspirations.
And we will once again get the kind of government we deserve. |
|
Vic Sage
Nov 06 2008 09:14 AM
|
|
="Edgy DC"]Come on.
| ]But the biggest miscalculation of the Democrats is the discounting of the inherent racism in this country... a nation built on genocide of the indiginous population, African slave labor to build its agrarian strength, and exploitation of immigrant populations to build its transportation and industrial infrastructure, all for the benefit of a white ango-saxon propertied class. We've come a long way, but not far enough in large swaths of this country, where I simply do not believe there are enough white people ready to vote for a black man who is clearly smarter than they are.
I wish i was wrong about that, but i don't think i am. I don't think the polls will reflect it, ether, but when people step into the booth and pull that curtain closed behind them, i suspect they will vote their fears and not their aspirations.
And we will once again get the kind of government we deserve. |
|
I'm delighted to have been proven wrong. But that isn't the post that FK is talking about. I believe he was referencing my whimsical `04 musing about a new Federation of North American States.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 06 2008 09:20 AM
|
|
It was whimsical?
OK.
|
Vic Sage
Nov 06 2008 09:26 AM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":2mjqeixp]It was whimsical?
OK. |
2mjqeixp]
no, you're right. i was serious about secession.
jeezus, Ed.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 06 2008 09:41 AM
|
|
There's a big broad space between serious and whimsy.
I'd really, for instance, rather not read another crack about how people from the south have sex with sheep.
|
Willets Point
Nov 06 2008 09:56 AM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":3cqyq3ta]I'd really, for instance, rather not read another crack about how people from the south have sex with sheep. |
3cqyq3ta]
When I lived in the South that comment was usually made about the Scottish.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 06 2008 09:58 AM
|
|
Southerners dis the Scottish?
Why? Are there many Scots around in the South?
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Nov 06 2008 10:04 AM
|
|
="Willets Point":3n688hd5]| ="Edgy DC":3n688hd5]I'd really, for instance, rather not read another crack about how people from the south have sex with sheep. |
3n688hd5]
When I lived in the South that comment was usually made about the Scottish. |
3n688hd5]
Yeah, I've never heard that about southerners. It's always about the Scottish (Scotch?):
Why do Scotsmen wear kilts?
'Cuz sheep can hear zippers.
|
metirish
Nov 06 2008 10:20 AM
|
|
Heard it plenty about people from Mayo and Donegal.
Donegal , where men are men and sheep are nervous.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 06 2008 10:22 AM
|
|
I think in the South, according to the most beloved stereotype, men are supposed to sleep with their sisters.
Boy, is this thread off on a tangent!
|
Willets Point
Nov 06 2008 10:33 AM
|
|
Those jokes were reserved for West Virginia.
I sense a sheep shagging split.
|
dgwphotography
Nov 06 2008 11:46 AM
|
|
| ="themetfairy":qazyptyy]
Supporters of both sides should follow the candidates' leads. This is the time for Americans to work together, not to be divisive. |
qazyptyy]
while I agree with the sentiment, I don't think we saw much of that, with the exception of immediately after 9/11, during the last 8 years...
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 06 2008 11:47 AM
|
|
In a desparate attempt to chenge the subject from Southern sheep, I offer this from a blog written by a former colleague, who has retired and became kind of a local media watchdog.
His link:
http://freefromeditors.blogspot.com/
Usually he's focused on local issues, but I thought he did a nice job with this, and he wouldn't mind me posting it here. And it changes the subject, which apparently is a good thing....
Here it is:
Finally, an end to the ads and phone calls. The house is strangely quiet as the robo calls fade into history. My wife is a school teacher and on the list for every Democrat phone list in existence.
I know that John McCain, a personal hero of mine, lost. I did not vote for him, and in the spirit of full disclosure, I did not vote for Barack Obama either. My honest belief is that the real culprit and problem in our country is the complicity of both major political parties.
Every four years we have this dance where they pretend to be different, but end up with the same old partisanship and the victors spend the next four years rewarding their districts with "bridges to nowhere."
The real loser in this election was the media. Between Fox News on the right and MSNBC on the left we ended up not with real political vetting, but cheerleading for one candidate or the other.
I heard Chris Mathews say he got a "tingle" down his leg when he heard Barack Obama speak. There were stories of other reporters wearing Obama t-shirts to rallies. It was clear from the beginning (don't ask me, ask Hillary Clinton and Saturday Night Live) that the media was in the tank for one guy.
That is over the line. It used to be sacrosanct that newsrooms were supposed to be neutral. Reporters were supposed to be down the line neutral, even if their personal beliefs were for one side or the other.
From my experience, most reporters lean to the left, or at least to the Democrat Party. There are few reporters on the right in most U.S. newsrooms. Not a criticism, just a fact. During my career I never talked politics in the newsroom and rarely out of it. My politics are all over the map anyway, but I always believed as a reporter it was important that no one really know where I stood on political issues.
After Al Gore lost in 2000 we had some in the Flint Journal newsroom who were openly despondent over the loss. They spent endless hours following the court battles and loudly expressing their opinions.
These are the same folks who were covering races involving Democrats and Republicans. But when an outdoor writer was assigned to cover a gun rights issue, many expressed the opinion that he could not be "impartial" because he was a hunter. The hypocrisy is blatant.
One of the editors at the paper routinely visited on the phone with Democrat operatives and sources, sometimes offering advice. Again, totally over the line.
I understand that at some point during the recent campaign the editor had to remind his staff in an e-mail they were to try and remain impartial and avoid campaign pins and yard signs.
It was true again in 2004. So the idea that reporters are somehow neutral, impartial observers is simply bogus. It is also lamentable. Hopefully, the fawning attention of Barack Obama will at least turn back to some honest reflection and introspection on their role in keeping tabs on the new administration.
On Monday, the paper took a hit for an anti-Obama news wrapper sponsored by the NRA. On Wednesday it led the paper with a headline that had Obama's name in red-white and blue. I just don't remember any other President who had his name run in a headline like that.
Readers and viewers have to trust that the information they are getting is even-handed and fair. As an insider for 30 years I can tell you that is bogus.
My hope and prayer is that the news media will take a long hard look at how it covered this campaign and reform itself, but I'm not sure that will happen.
At one point Barack Obama (see this You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws) seemed to indicate he believed there were 57 or 59 states. That was beyond any gaffe uttered by Dan Quayle, even the famous plural potato spelling (a word many reporters have trouble with) and yet, little or nothing came of that on left leaning news organizations or Saturday Night Live.
Look, clearly Sarah Palin was not ready to be President. She was the governor of a small state, something like having a President from Arkansas, but the treatment of her inexperience, compared to that of the relative inexperience of Barack Obama is startling. Joe Biden makes a gaffe a minute and I don't have room here to list all the You Tube versions, but "the three letter word J-O-B-S," comes to mind. We'll see if my favorite programs "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report," or Keith Olbermann find the same enthusiasm for making fun of Biden as they did of McCain and Palin.
In the meantime, while the media made sure that Obama got the velvet glove treatment, third party candidates like Ralph Nader, Bob Barr and others were completely ignored. That was deliberate too. In 2000, the press realized that Nader bled off enough votes to ruin Gore's chances and they weren't going to let that happen again.
You can be biased in both what you report and what you don't report.
I know a lot of my former colleagues will not agree with me on this issue, but down deep where their journalism ethics live, they may see my point.
McCain and Palin got a thorough vetting, Barack Obama did not. And the fault lies at the feet of a complicit media. Even with equally tough treatment, Obama may have won, but now we'll never know.
It is my hope that the media will now resume the work it should have been doing all along and get back to being neutral observers and not cheerleaders. The country needs an impartial tough press, no matter where personal allegiances lie.
President Obama deserves everyone's support and he has mine. Is he up for the job? I really don't know, because the media really didn't question any of his "change" statements or his excessive promises. He raised more than a half a billion dollars from who knows? His broken promise to use public financing was very troubling.
Let's hope that in the future third party voices will be heard and included. It's really the only way to break the stranglehold on entitlements and perks that are currently supported by a corrupt two party system.
I'm still glad the calls and ads have stopped. Feel free to tell me where I'm wrong. [url][/url]
|
seawolf17
Nov 06 2008 12:04 PM
|
|
| ="metsguyinmichigan's colleague":3s1wefrr]Let's hope that in the future third party voices will be heard and included. It's really the only way to break the stranglehold on entitlements and perks that are currently supported by a corrupt two party system. |
3s1wefrr]
/slow clap
|
dgwphotography
Nov 06 2008 12:09 PM
|
|
That is a very good thing - thanks for posting that.
|
Gwreck
Nov 06 2008 12:24 PM
|
|
The spirit of the piece is well intentioned but the silly jabs significantly reduce its effectiveness, ie.
1. The suggestion that the media and SNL deliberately avoided an Obama gaffe;
2. The purported equivalence of electing a governor from Alaska to electing a governor from Arkansas (gee, I wonder who he meant with that reference!);
3. The wholly unsupported comment about Obama raising his money from "who knows?"
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 06 2008 12:30 PM
|
|
Yes. While both Palin and Obama are light on experience, Obama showed intelligence and Palin didn't.
And that's a pretty key difference.
|
Frayed Knot
Nov 06 2008 12:38 PM
|
|
| ]I believe [FK] was referencing my whimsical `04 musing about a new Federation of North American States. |
No, I wasn't referring to any one post in particular - and don't remember that one anyway.
It's more about a trend that developed in a post-election thread 4 years back and a bit here again now where entire sections of the country are derided as being unworthy for favoring the party us enlightened northeasterners consider devisive and prejudicial.
Irony can be so ironic.
|
metirish
Nov 06 2008 12:46 PM
|
|
Whatever about media bias I read that and I think the author is biased towards McCain and trying to hide it in a story about media bias.
But I guess it's all about perception.
|
A Boy Named Seo
Nov 06 2008 01:44 PM
|
|
I totally got the same vibe as irish. I read that and thought of this line from Singles:
"I think that, A) you have an act, and that, B) not having an act is your act."
And what up with this?
| ]McCain and Palin got a thorough vetting, Barack Obama did not. And the fault lies at the feet of a complicit media. Even with equally tough treatment, Obama may have won, but now we'll never know. |
Running for president for 2 years is not enough time for the public or the complicit media (or even your friend) to check this guy out? Even I know about the Muslim school he went to and the terrorists he palled around with, and I'm drunk or stoned half the time.
|
dgwphotography
Nov 06 2008 01:47 PM
|
|
| ="metirish"]Whatever about media bias I read that and I think the author is biased towards McCain and trying to hide it in a story about media bias.
But I guess it's all about perception. |
| ]I know that John McCain, a personal hero of mine, lost. I did not vote for him, and in the spirit of full disclosure, I did not vote for Barack Obama either. My honest belief is that the real culprit and problem in our country is the complicity of both major political parties. |
Yep - really hiding it there.
|
Nymr83
Nov 06 2008 01:47 PM
|
|
| ] We'll see if my favorite programs "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report," or Keith Olbermann find the same enthusiasm for making fun of Biden as they did of McCain and Palin |
I think you'll see ALOT of jokes about Biden on SNL and other places once they are sworn in, because they still won't want to make fun of their candidate Obama and Biden presents a hell of an easy target.
|
A Boy Named Seo
Nov 06 2008 01:53 PM
|
|
I think the biggest problem SNL is gonna have is that Fred Armison isn't funny at all when he does Obama (some might argue that he ain't so funny the rest of the time either). The Biden character was a little better, but not by much. Tiny Fey would've been in the cat-bird's seat at the negotiation table had McCain/Palin won.
|
metirish
Nov 06 2008 01:53 PM
|
|
="Iubitul"]| ="metirish"]Whatever about media bias I read that and I think the author is biased towards McCain and trying to hide it in a story about media bias.
But I guess it's all about perception. |
| ]I know that John McCain, a personal hero of mine, lost. I did not vote for him, and in the spirit of full disclosure, I did not vote for Barack Obama either. My honest belief is that the real culprit and problem in our country is the complicity of both major political parties. |
Yep - really hiding it there. |
No need to highlight it , I saw it when I read the piece.
|
Vic Sage
Nov 06 2008 01:57 PM
|
|
| ]My honest belief is that the real culprit and problem in our country is the complicity of both major political parties. |
bingo. That's one of the reasons i voted for Nader. Also, because his name is "Ralph".
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Nov 06 2008 02:31 PM
|
|
| ="Nymr83":2k6aihar]I think you'll see ALOT of jokes about Biden on SNL and other places once they are sworn in, because they still won't want to make fun of their candidate Obama and Biden presents a hell of an easy target. |
2k6aihar]
I think you're right. Biden should be good for a gaffe a week, but he has big shoes to fill in the "veep-as-comedic-target" department.
SNL, back to irrelevance.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 06 2008 02:35 PM
|
|
They were well on their way, I think. (Not that I watch.)
I did see all of the Tina Fey sketches on line. The second and third (Katie Couric and then the debate) were pretty darn funny. After that, though, each one got lamer than the one before. They ran that parody into the ground.
But I still love Tina Fey. The material she was given just got worse and worse.
|
TransMonk
Nov 06 2008 02:36 PM
|
|
An honest question for those that voted for Nader:
Is voting for Nader just trying to send a message? Or do his supporters truly believe that he can a) ever be elected and b) ever get anything done were he to be elected with the two party legislative branch?
I'll be as happy as anyone if the two party system ever goes away, but I also think it will take decades of fighting from the ground up (third party state officials, governors, representatives and senators) before anyone will ever come close to competing for President from a third party.
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Nov 06 2008 02:42 PM
|
|
| ="TransMonk":38f8x6vh]I also think it will take decades of fighting from the ground up (third party state officials, governors, representatives and senators) before anyone will ever come close to competing for President from a third party. |
38f8x6vh]
Unless a former president or someone else with a high political profile accepts a third-party nomination. Bull-Moose 1912!
|
seawolf17
Nov 06 2008 02:45 PM
|
|
| ="TransMonk":1w0c8lc1]An honest question for those that voted for Nader:
Is voting for Nader just trying to send a message? Or do his supporters truly believe that he can a) ever be elected and b) ever get anything done were he to be elected with the two party legislative branch?
I'll be as happy as anyone if the two party system ever goes away, but I also think it will take decades of fighting from the ground up (third party state officials, governors, representatives and senators) before anyone will ever come close to competing for President from a third party. |
1w0c8lc1]
More "message" than anything else. You're right; it needs to start smaller, which is why I was thrilled when he ran Green; I voted the Green ticket that year in hopes that they could become a valid third party, and work progressively from the ground up.
I agree with just about everything I've read from Nader. The two major parties are all blather to me; they're ideologically similar in too many ways and too beholden to big business and moneyed interests. That's not me; that's not what I believe in. I voted what I believed, even though I didn't have any realistic designs on a victory.
All the issues aren't black and white; there are gradations, and the two-party system can't possibly hope to cover it all. There are lots of other ways to make democracy work without it being held hostage by these specific parties.
You're right; it'll take decades of change. But why not start now?
|
Edgy DC
Nov 06 2008 02:54 PM
|
|
I don't think it'll take decades to change.
|
Kong76
Nov 06 2008 02:56 PM
|
|
It's been decades since this and sooner or later you're gonna listen to
Ralph Nader ....
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DW4YtX0Ylp8&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DW4YtX0Ylp8&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
I'm stuck in punk rock time continuum some days.
|
dgwphotography
Nov 06 2008 02:57 PM
|
|
| ="seawolf17":cez3p3yr]
All the issues aren't black and white; there are gradations, and the two-party system can't possibly hope to cover it all. There are lots of other ways to make democracy work without it being held hostage by these specific parties.
You're right; it'll take decades of change. But why not start now? |
cez3p3yr]
Well said.
|
Frayed Knot
Nov 06 2008 03:05 PM
|
|
The best message a minor party vote sends is the one that says 'I'm not only taking the trouble to vote but I'm taking the trouble to NOT vote for you (or for him)'
|
TransMonk
Nov 06 2008 03:08 PM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":3faxu7tn]I don't think it'll take decades to change. |
3faxu7tn]
Why? Or maybe closer to the issue, how?
Again, I'm not disputing that the change is needed but I guess my question was more asking where Nader supporters see the movement for third-party integration is at this point.
In my mind, the movement is still in the "great idea" stage rather than the "here's the next step stage" and until my view of that changes, I can't bring myself to vote for a Presidential candidate that has no chance of winning. I suppose that makes me part of the problem...but that's why I'm asking.
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Nov 06 2008 03:09 PM
|
|
I also think that voting for a third party can influence the main two. It becomes a matter of if you want my vote, you'll have to change this. Don't know how effective it is.
|
HahnSolo
Nov 06 2008 03:11 PM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":1bjlfds1]I don't think it'll take decades to change. |
1bjlfds1]
Ross Perot in '92 showed that a 3rd party candidate can drum up support. And he was a bit of a nut job. With a certifiably crazy running mate.
I wonder if, with a 2008 version of Perot running and the economic crisis hit, that that could have pushed that candidate over the top. Probably not, but I think it shows you can have a perfect storm of events that could, could, get a 3rd-party candidate elected.
|
TransMonk
Nov 06 2008 03:20 PM
|
|
| ="HahnSolo":214w306u]
Ross Perot in '92 showed that a 3rd party candidate can drum up support. And he was a bit of a nut job. With a certifiably crazy running mate.
I wonder if, with a 2008 version of Perot running and the economic crisis hit, that that could have pushed that candidate over the top. Probably not, but I think it shows you can have a perfect storm of events that could, could, get a 3rd-party candidate elected. |
214w306u]
But, let's say a Perot-esque candidate did win a close election in a perfect storm that you provide. Would he be able to get anything done working in a two-party system? Maybe, more would get done...but I would have to think the alliances already in place would be fairly resistant to too much "change". I'm not sure a perfect storm event and even the situation that VCF provides above would really "change" our system for the longterm towards getting rid of the 2 parties.
|
sharpie
Nov 06 2008 03:27 PM
|
|
Jesse Ventura won the governorship of Minnesota as a third party candidate and managed to get virtually nothing done for four years as neither party particularly wanted to help him out.
Unless a third party started fielding candidates for the senate and the house it just seems so fruitless. Even when they do, however, as the Libertarian Party and to a lesser extent the Green Party has, they have been unable to win anything more than the occasional city council seat.
I think the system is what it is and any pining for third parties ain't going to happen unless that third party is a real spinoff of the two majors. If, say, the family values Republicans split from the slash taxes Republicans then maybe in a perfect storm sort of world a viable candidate would emerge, but even that seems far-fetched.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 06 2008 03:35 PM
Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Nov 06 2008 04:11 PM
|
|
Disagree. This is 2008. The Draft Palin movement started with a 22-year-old blogger. Howard Dean, just by being first in the race, got a generation of internet-saavy anybody-but-Bush-supporters behind him and re-invented fundraising for democrats that made the unthinkable (Democrats out-raising Repubs) thinkable and, four years later, happen.
New communities are born every day, new ways of connecting every few months. These movements will continue to take the establishment by surprise. Many the establishment will absorb. But sooner or later they'll either be too late or come upon a movement confident enough to resist absorption.
|
OlerudOwned
Nov 06 2008 04:01 PM
|
|
="HahnSolo":tsykmtg3]| ="Edgy DC":tsykmtg3]I don't think it'll take decades to change. |
tsykmtg3]
Ross Perot in '92 showed that a 3rd party candidate can drum up support. And he was a bit of a nut job. With a certifiably crazy running mate.
I wonder if, with a 2008 version of Perot running and the economic crisis hit, that that could have pushed that candidate over the top. Probably not, but I think it shows you can have a perfect storm of events that could, could, get a 3rd-party candidate elected. |
tsykmtg3]
Probably not, yeah, but it certainly makes me curious to see what would have happened if Bloomberg decided to run.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 06 2008 04:07 PM
|
|
="HahnSolo":h7brk8io]| ="Edgy DC":h7brk8io]I don't think it'll take decades to change. |
h7brk8io]
Ross Perot in '92 showed that a 3rd party candidate can drum up support. And he was a bit of a nut job. With a certifiably crazy running mate.
I wonder if, with a 2008 version of Perot running and the economic crisis hit, that that could have pushed that candidate over the top. Probably not, but I think it shows you can have a perfect storm of events that could, could, get a 3rd-party candidate elected. |
h7brk8io]
A third-party candidate doesn't have to get elected. The lesson of Ross Perot is that he put enough fear into both parties in 1992 that they each largely adopted his agenda by the middle of the decade and defecits disappeared.
|
sharpie
Nov 06 2008 04:09 PM
|
|
I still think that the successful movements will be within the parties not outside of it. Your Dean example leading 4 years later to Obama is a good one.
The money factor is also a big one. Unless you have a Ross Perot who is willing to spend millions and millions of his own money to fund his campaign, this new movement is still going to have to go up against the established parties.
This year the younger generation took over the Democratic Party. It was pretty exciting and created a whole new generation of young people who identify themselves as Democrats. I think the remaking of the established parties is what we're likely to see and that is a good thing.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 06 2008 04:17 PM
|
|
High school students are using the internet to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for causes in ways the lot of us can scarcely follow. Certainly the Green Party, with so many Americans holding their agenda dearest to their hearts, can raise megabucks, nominate some sincere candidates instead of opportunist creeps like Cynthia McKinney and steal some Congressional races in enclave districts.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 06 2008 06:15 PM
|
|
The problem with a third party is that if one comes up with an idea or point that people start to really rally around, one or both of the others will just co-opt the idea, claim ownership and crush you through the advantage in cash and organization.
Instead, I think you'll have factions that in the past might have gone off and formed third parties, but instead take over the existing parties from within. One could argue that the conservatives rose up and took over the GOP in the 1980s.
Jesse Ventura was a missed opportunity, because he seemed to start off well them screwed it up, running off with the XFL and other nonsense. A third party finally gets a big time opportunity and pisses it away.
|
Nymr83
Nov 06 2008 06:37 PM
|
|
| ]The problem with a third party is that if one comes up with an idea or point that people start to really rally around, one or both of the others will just co-opt the idea, claim ownership and crush you through the advantage in cash and organization |
thats only a "problem" if you are involved in a 3rd party for personal gain or fame. if you actually care about the ideas you are putting forth you should be happy to see them adopted by a major party.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 07 2008 07:45 AM
|
|
I hope Bush doesn't pardon Clemens on his way out the door.
|
Vic Sage
Nov 07 2008 09:20 AM
|
|
| ]I can't bring myself to vote for a Presidential candidate that has no chance of winning. I suppose that makes me part of the problem...but that's why I'm asking. |
An individual's act of voting for president is almost entirely a symbolic act. No national election (or even State election of which i am aware) has ever ever ever been decided by a single vote. Nearly every other political activity we engage in (raising or donating money, volunteering, having political discussions on a sports bulletin board) has more impact on an election than the single vote we each get to cast.
Which begs the question: in the face of the mathematical fact of the practically meaningless impact of my single vote in an election with over 120 million votes cast (living in a state where Obama won by around 2 million votes), why should i vote at all?
Because in excercising my franchise, i express my individual will, my opinion about what is best for the country. It is a symbolic act. The only real question is what do i want this act of self-expression to symbolize.
"The myth of the wasted vote" -- it is a common refrain for those who denigrate voters who opt for a 3rd party candidate that such a voter has "wasted" their vote. But tell me this... what is a greater waste? when your individual vote is mathematically irrelevant, should you vote for someone who you don't believe in (the "lesser of 2 evils"), or for someone in whom you do believe? I think its the greatest waste of our time, our rights, our franchise, to vote for anyone other than in whom you do believe.. to vote your aspirations, not your fears.. because if you vote for the lesser of 2 evils, you are (as Edgy once said) supporting the evil of 2 lessers. To vote for a candidate that can win is as meaningless (statistically speaking) as voting for one that can't, so why not use your vote more productively.
For me, it's not just about 3rd parties, or sending a message (although its partly about that, too); this year, it was about voting for someone who i've known in public life for decades, whose work i wholeheartedly support, over one candidate with whom i disagree on nearly everything (McCain) and one who has been sold to me as a product, about whom i really know very little, and who has no significant track record for me to assess.
If we can get to a place in this country where we don't vote for the lesser of 2 evils, or the guy who is the least objectionable who we think can actually win, to a point where everybody votes in every election for the person they really want to see in that office, then we'll have a true republic governed by qualified people who represent the will of the majority, with respect for the views of the minority.
It's a utopian ideal, i know, but since voting is an expression of the self, that's the self i'd prefer to express (despite my reputation for cynicism), rather than having some misguided notion of my single vote's influence on the election, or party loyalty, or familial obligation, or habit, or some notion of racial, religious or ethnic identiy determine my vote.
but that's just me.
|
metirish
Nov 07 2008 11:07 AM
|
|
fancy a wager ?
Paddy Power bookies in Ireland have these odds.
| ]
Obama bets
BOOKMAKERS Paddy Power have installed Sarah Palin as their 3-1 favourite to win the Republican nomination in 2012.
Betting is also available on who President-elect Obama will choose as secretary of state. Top ranking American diplomat, Richard Holbrooke, is Paddy Power’s 9-4 favourite, with Anthony Lake and Richard Lugar sharing the 7-2 second-favourites tag. Other bets include:
What will happen first under President Obama?
2-5 Full troop withdrawal from Iraq.
6-1 Capture/death of Osama Bin Laden.
7-1 Full national recognition of same sex marriage.
12-1 Full troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.
12-1 Legalisation of marijuana nationally.
50-1 First moonwalk confirmed to be a fake by President Obama.
100-1 Complete ban on privately owned guns.
500-1 Discovery of aliens on Mars.
1000-1 Elvis found in the White House basement.
First country Obama visits as president?
3-1 Britain
10-3 France
4-1 Afghanistan
5-1 Iraq
6-1 China
7-1Germany
8-1 Kenya
10-1 Israel
14-1 Japan
20-1 Russia
22-1 Pakistan
33-1 Spain
33-1 Cuba
40-1 Rep of Ireland
When will President Obama visit Ireland?
25-1 2009
10-1 2010
7-2 2011
6-1 2012
1-2 Won’t visit Ireland during his first term.
First-term specials:
10-1 Obama to become a father again during his first term.
33-1 Obama to be impeached during first term.
|
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 07 2008 11:13 AM
|
|
These odds should be much higher:
50-1 First moonwalk confirmed to be a fake by President Obama.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 07 2008 11:17 AM
|
|
Paddy Power is insane.
|
soupcan
Nov 07 2008 11:29 AM
|
|
'Bam's Chief of Staff could make some serious do-re-mi on these if he chooses to.
|
Nymr83
Nov 07 2008 12:01 PM
|
|
| ]100-1 Complete ban on privately owned guns. |
apparently whatever dope wrote these odds isn't an American and has never spent any time here, at least not outside of major NY/CA cities.
I'm kinda interested in which country he'll visit first.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 07 2008 12:08 PM
|
|
My guess is England.
|
soupcan
Nov 07 2008 12:22 PM
|
|
$5 says Pakistan!
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Nov 07 2008 12:25 PM
|
|
Pakistan's a good one, but I think it'll be Afghanistan first, then Pakistan (probably on the same trip).
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 07 2008 12:30 PM
|
|
Kenya. He's going to Kenya. Or Miami.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 07 2008 12:44 PM
|
|
These are both unlikely:
2-5 Full troop withdrawal from Iraq.
6-1 Capture/death of Osama Bin Laden.
And these won't happen at all in the next four years: (Well, the Afghanistan thing might, but the others certainly won't.)
7-1 Full national recognition of same sex marriage.
12-1 Full troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.
12-1 Legalisation of marijuana nationally.
50-1 First moonwalk confirmed to be a fake by President Obama.
100-1 Complete ban on privately owned guns.
500-1 Discovery of aliens on Mars.
1000-1 Elvis found in the White House basement.
|
Willets Point
Nov 07 2008 12:45 PM
|
|
| ]First country Obama visits as president? |
United States.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Nov 07 2008 12:46 PM
|
|
| ]6-1 Capture/death of Osama Bin Laden |
I like this happening on inauguration day, as I sort of remembered Reagan and the Iran hostage release were orchestrated that way.
|
Frayed Knot
Nov 07 2008 01:21 PM
|
|
| ]First country Obama visits as president? |
Africa
|
HahnSolo
Nov 07 2008 02:08 PM
|
|
What will happen first under President Obama?
None of the above is the clear winner here. If I had to pick one, it would be Bin Laden
|
soupcan
Nov 07 2008 02:18 PM
|
|
="Frayed Knot"]| ]First country Obama visits as president? |
Africa |
Good one.
|
Nymr83
Nov 07 2008 02:38 PM
|
|
="soupcan"]="Frayed Knot"]| ]First country Obama visits as president? |
Africa |
Good one. |
Maybe he'll get lost trying to visit all 57 states.
|
Gwreck
Nov 07 2008 02:49 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm"]And these won't happen at all in the next four years: (Well, the Afghanistan thing might, but the others certainly won't.)
7-1 Full national recognition of same sex marriage. |
I suppose the definition of "full national recognition" is perhaps fluid but ---
If the right legal challenge got put in front of the Supreme Court, I suspect that -- even with no change to the composition of the court -- the court would rule the "Defense of Marriage Act" unconstitutional, and could also rule that state bans of same-sex marriage are unconstitutional.
Especially with what's happened in California recently, I wouldn't be shocked to see the question come before the court.
|
Nymr83
Nov 07 2008 05:09 PM
|
|
the gay-rights people have been pretty careful NOT to raise federal questions in CA and elsewhere because they dont want to go near the supreme court.
I doubt the court is liberal enough to re-write the constitution to force the states to perform gay marriages, but if they rule DOMA unconstitutional (which it very well may be) then the states become forced to accept marriages performed in other states.
|
Gwreck
Nov 09 2008 02:00 PM
|
|
The courts wouldn't be re-writing the US Constitution in a same-sex marriage case; they would be ruling on the constitutionality of amendments to state constitutions. Big difference.
Chances were probably better when O'Connor was on the court, but if you look at Kennedy's past opinions in Romer v. Evans and Lawrence v. Texas (Kennedy wrote the majority opinion in both, 6-3 cases where he and O'Connor sided with Stevens/Souter/Ginsburg/Breyer) I wouldn't be surprised if he took the lead again in preventing the sort of discrimination against homosexuals that took place in California last week.
|
Kong76
Nov 09 2008 02:11 PM
|
|
I only pop in here and there in this thread ... did Willets finally bet anyone?
|
Nymr83
Nov 09 2008 06:49 PM
|
|
| ]The courts wouldn't be re-writing the US Constitution in a same-sex marriage case; they would be ruling on the constitutionality of amendments to state constitutions. Big difference. |
no difference. if they're invalidating an amendment to a state constitution they can do so only on federal constitutional grounds, which would in this case mean adding things that aren't there to the U.S. constitution
| ] Chances were probably better when O'Connor was on the court, but if you look at Kennedy's past opinions in Romer v. Evans and Lawrence v. Texas (Kennedy wrote the majority opinion in both, 6-3 cases where he and O'Connor sided with Stevens/Souter/Ginsburg/Breyer) I wouldn't be surprised if he took the lead again in preventing the sort of discrimination against homosexuals that took place in California last week. |
I'm not familiar with Romer, the biggest difference between this (potential) case and Lawrence is the difference between telling the state government that it can't punish something and tellig the state government that it must affirmatively take some action, a huge difference.
I hope Californians will in the next election pass something to allow civil unions, but i'm still glad they overturned the arrogant CA court that thought it was their job to decide these issues.
|
Gwreck
Nov 09 2008 09:27 PM
|
|
Romer was the case where Colorado passed a constitutional amendment prohibiting the state from treating sexual orientation as a class protected against discrimination in the manner that race, religion, gender, etc. are.
It was struck down as noted above in a 6-3 ruling.
| ]which would in this case mean adding things that aren't there to the U.S. constitution |
Only if your copy is missing Amendment 14, Article 1.
|
Nymr83
Nov 10 2008 07:55 AM
|
|
thats a pretty absurd interpretation of the 14th amendment but whatever, i'm done here.
|
batmagadanleadoff
Nov 10 2008 08:33 AM
|
|
| ="Gwreck"]The courts wouldn't be re-writing the US Constitution in a same-sex marriage case; they would be ruling on the constitutionality of amendments to state constitutions. Big difference. |
Correct. As you know, re-writing the Constitution (amending it, really) is left to the Legislature. Of course, the Supreme Court can and does, re-interpret the Constitution, adding or taking away meaning, sometimes drastically so.
By the way, the statute at issue in the Romer case never passed any sort of judicial muster. The statute was deemed unconstitutional by every single lower Court that had the authority to rule on the statute. In Romer, the State was the appellant every step of the way.
In fact, the statute was never employed. Opponents to the statute quickly obtained an injunction pending judicial review.
|
themetfairy
Nov 11 2008 01:09 PM
|
|
This amusing item was in today's [url=http://blogs.herald.com/dave_barrys_blog/]Dave Barry Blog[/url] -
| ]As you may know, I am a veteran member of the world-famous Lawn Rangers precision lawnmower drill team, whose members march every year at the Broom Corn festival in Arcola, Ill., as well as various other events, depending on...are scheduling....The Lawn Rangers perform highly sophisticated semi-synchronized maneuvers with lawnmowers, brooms, and toilet plungers. Membership in this crack unit is a great honor, bestowed only on whoever shows up....
Today I received an email from Lawn Rangers co-founder Pat Monahan, with a photograph taken in 2003 when the Rangers marched in the Chicago St. Patrick's Day parade. Joining them on this occasion was an up-and-coming Illinois state senator, seen here participating in the rigorous rookie-training program: |
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 14 2008 10:34 AM
|
|
Obama will meet with McCain on Monday.
Inspired by Nate Silver, I ran 10,000 simulations of this meeting, and there's an 11.4 per cent chance that McCain gets offered the Department of Homeland Security.
|
metirish
Nov 14 2008 12:13 PM
|
|
Obama had a meeting today with Hillary Clinton , all the speculation is Obama offering Clinton secretary of state.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 14 2008 12:15 PM
|
|
He's probably asking her about how she went about choosing a school for Chelsea.
|
Valadius
Nov 14 2008 12:40 PM
|
|
This one's for Irish.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/4Xkw8ip43Vk&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/4Xkw8ip43Vk&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 14 2008 01:00 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":jsbilq4c]Obama will meet with McCain on Monday.
Inspired by Nate Silver, I ran 10,000 simulations of this meeting, and there's an 11.4 per cent chance that McCain gets offered the Department of Homeland Security. |
jsbilq4c]
Shades of "West Wing," when Jimmy Smits offered Alan Alda the secretary of state spot.
BTW, if Obama does as you suggest, it is a brilliant move.
|
bmfc1
Nov 14 2008 01:08 PM
|
|
My son said the same thing last week. So much of the final season of WW has been mirrored this year. Santos was based on Obama and Vinick was based on McCain--but the election wasn't as close as on TV and, thankfully, nothing happened to Joe Biden!
|
Willets Point
Nov 14 2008 02:25 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":3jwhjk4j]Obama will meet with McCain on Monday.
Inspired by Nate Silver, I ran 10,000 simulations of this meeting, and there's an 11.4 per cent chance that McCain gets offered the Department of Homeland Security. |
3jwhjk4j]
Would this allow Janet Napolitano to appoint a Democrat to the Senate?
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 14 2008 02:36 PM
|
|
I think Arizona has a law that says the governor has to appoint a new Senator from the same party as the one that's being replaced.
Not sure of that though.
|
Nymr83
Nov 14 2008 02:41 PM
|
|
i don't know Arizona law, and of course he'd have to accept to make it relevant.
Also, it turns out Alaska law is more complicated than we thought. The voters by referendum said the governor can't appoint a replacement, but the legislature earlier passed a law authorizing it, and go ahead and give the 17th amendment a nice literal meaning... this could be a court fight if stevens wins and palin wants to try and appoint an interim guy.
part of the 17th Amendment (italics mine):
| ]When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of each State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct. |
|
sharpie
Nov 14 2008 02:58 PM
|
|
It now appears as if Begich will win the Alaska seat making our knowledge of Alaska law irrelevant.
Pretty sure Ben is right about Arizona law as it came up in the unlikely event that McCain might have actually won the Presidential race.
|
Nymr83
Nov 14 2008 03:18 PM
|
|
too bad, that would have made a really fun court case.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 14 2008 04:47 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Mar 13 2009 09:35 PM
|
|
So a cool transition team move would be to negotiate an agreement with the the outgoing administration --- we promise perpetuate X programs if you don't scorch the earth on the way out the door.
|
Willets Point
Nov 14 2008 06:10 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":216c0htg]I think Arizona has a law that says the governor has to appoint a new Senator from the same party as the one that's being replaced.
|
216c0htg]
Seems like an odd provision in that party affiliation is not a life long thing. How long does the candidate have to be a member of the GOP? Can they sign someone up that day?
|
sharpie
Nov 15 2008 07:07 AM
|
|
I know that in some states the party will submit three names and then the Governor gets to pick.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 15 2008 07:40 AM
|
|
I think it's respectful of the will of the paeople that, if a guy leaves by a cabinet appointment or an act of nature, to appoint his designated successor.
If a guy leaves in disgrace --- a removal or resignation under indictment or investigation --- all bets are off.
|
Willets Point
Nov 15 2008 11:47 AM
|
|
I think the best way to represent the will of the people is a special election and I'm surprised all the states don't do it that way.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 15 2008 12:59 PM
|
|
That can be hard to do under short notice. Often, the appointment is only until the next November and they have a special election then.
|
Valadius
Nov 18 2008 08:23 PM
|
|
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/li7SRUX2Y7Q&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/li7SRUX2Y7Q&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
|
MFS62
Nov 20 2008 07:30 AM
|
|
If you go to MLB.com through this Friday, you can get 30% off all purchases, including an Obama Mets shirt.
Later
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 20 2008 07:37 AM
|
|
I think I'll pass.
What uniform number do they give him? 44?
|
MFS62
Nov 20 2008 07:51 AM
|
|
Yes, and I was wondering why.
What do you know that made you guess that number?
Later
|
Willets Point
Nov 20 2008 07:56 AM
|
|
44th President.
|
metirish
Nov 20 2008 08:01 AM
|
|
Why would they have an Obama Mets shirt and who would buy it?
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Nov 20 2008 08:09 AM
|
|
Are you kidding? Obama is the hottest property in all of marketing. Today I believe was the first cover of the Daily News that did not include a picture of Obama since the election.
Advertising Age recently awarded Obama as its "Marketer of the Year"
MLB went after a t-shirt maker who earlier this year was making Obama t-shirts in the style of classic mlb jerseys
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 20 2008 08:12 AM
|
|
It's so that, when Gary, Keith, and Ron talk politics in the SNY booth, Bill Webb can cut to a shot of an overweight white guy in the stands wearing an XL Obama jersey.
|
metirish
Nov 20 2008 08:12 AM
|
|
Yeah I get that he's hot and with good reason , I saw something this morning on the news showing how many current magazines featured him on the cover , still I don't know why a Mets fan would want one of those shirts , he is a White Sox fan so if I were one I could perhaps understand.
|
Willets Point
Nov 20 2008 08:22 AM
|
|
| ="metirish":pnqx8gf4]Why would they have an Obama Mets shirt and who would buy it? |
pnqx8gf4]
<a href="http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/MetsFans4Obama">These people</a>.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 20 2008 08:24 AM
|
|
A mets fan swould want one because millions want an Obama shirt and millions want a Mets shirt and there's a lot of money in the overlap.
<table height="358" width="550" background="http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/askville/3861910_8420810_mywrite/venn_diagram.gif"><tr><td align="center" width="33%">Mets<br>Fans</td><td align="center" width="33%"><font size="7" color="green">$$</td><td align="center" width="33%">Obama<br>Fans</td></tr></table>
|
Edgy DC
Nov 20 2008 08:43 AM
|
|
Obama shirts:
<img src="http://rdr.zazzle.com/img/imt-prd/isz-m/pd-235287690245471565/tl-obama_shirt.jpg" height="300"> <img src="http://www.designverb.com/wp-content/images/2008/08/Badass.Obama.shirt.jpg" height="300"> <img src="http://www.troundup.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/obama-shirt-5.jpg" height="300"> <img src="http://www.treehugger.com/obama-shirt-3.jpg" height="300"> <img src="http://video1.washingtontimes.com/bellantoni/787365059207_0_ALB.jpg" height="300"> <img src="http://images.cafepress.com/product/82753416v6_350x350_Front_Color-LightPink.jpg" height="300"> <img src="http://www.epltalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/west-ham-united-barack-obama.jpg" height="300"> <img src="http://keitholbermannisevil.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/barack-obama-baseball-t-shirt.jpg" height="300"> <img src="http://www.uncrate.com/men/images/2008/08/barack-obama-t-shirts.jpg" height="300"> <img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v88/araia/rockobama.gif" height="300"> <img src="http://www.democraticstuff.com/v/vspfiles/photos/PO29657-2T.jpg" height="300">
|
Farmer Ted
Nov 20 2008 08:49 AM
|
|
You can put all that merchandise next to your pet rocks and shrinky dinks (i.e., worthless junk you could never sell on ebay).
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 20 2008 08:58 AM
|
|
<a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-1975-PET-ROCK-IN-BOX-W-CARE-INSTRUCTIONS_W0QQitemZ120333841809QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item120333841809&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1205|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A1318">This Pet Rock from 1975</a> currently has 8 bids and the price is at $22.77.
|
Willets Point
Nov 20 2008 09:00 AM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":izscwj6c]<a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-1975-PET-ROCK-IN-BOX-W-CARE-INSTRUCTIONS_W0QQitemZ120333841809QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item120333841809&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1205|66%3A2|65%3A12|39%3A1|240%3A1318">This Pet Rock from 1975</a> currently has 8 bids and the price is at $22.77. |
izscwj6c]
That's because they took it out of its original packaging.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Nov 20 2008 09:23 AM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":28hh0alw]A mets fan swould want one because millions want an Obama shirt and millions want a Mets shirt and there's a lot of money in the overlap.
<table height="358" width="550" background="http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/askville/3861910_8420810_mywrite/venn_diagram.gif"><tr><td align="center" width="33%">Mets<br>Fans</td><td align="center" width="33%"><font size="7" color="green">$$</td><td align="center" width="33%">Obama<br>Fans</td></tr></table> |
28hh0alw]
Awesome
|
Willets Point
Nov 20 2008 09:35 AM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":2h6gb3tf]Obama shirts:
|
2h6gb3tf]
And those are just the ones that Edgy owns.
|
Rockin' Doc
Nov 20 2008 10:58 AM
|
|
I just hope that Obama is still this hot and popular when November 2009 rolls around.
|
Frayed Knot
Nov 20 2008 11:09 AM
|
|
Meanwhile, Missouri has just gotten around to saying that McCain is the winner of that state -- a fact which doesn't change things as far as the election goes but it does ruin the Show-Me state's half-century plus record of always voting with the winner in national elections.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Nov 20 2008 11:59 AM
|
|
I can't remember this from last time around, but do the President-elect's Cabinet appointees get ratified by the Senate before the new administration takes over on January 20, or does it wait until after Inauguration Day?
I would think it should wait at least until after the electors vote and the election results are ratified by the Senate. Right now, I don't see how Obama really has any standing to officially nominate anyone yet.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 20 2008 12:14 PM
|
|
I think all the nominations are voted on in January.
I can't find a photo of that Obama/Mets shirt anywhere on the Mets website. Can anybody direct me?
|
sharpie
Nov 20 2008 01:07 PM
|
|
Nominations are generally voted on after January 1 and before January 20. New congresspersons take office on the first so there is that 19-day gap.
Also, Missouri voted for Stevenson the second time he ran against Eisenhower -- their last time not being a bandwagon state.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 20 2008 02:27 PM
|
|
Cool things can happen during that gap between the Congressional turnover and the presidential turnover. Hillary Clinton became a senator when she was still a first lady, so Chelsea was in power as the Official Hostess of the White House for almost three weeks. That's a cool thing to have on a résumé.
It had nothing to do with the presidential turnover, but Chuck Schumer in 1998 got to grumpily vote against impeachment and then grumpily vote against conviction.
I think McCain should have a Missouri victory rally.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 21 2008 03:36 PM
|
|
Got a leak:
O b a m a k i d s t o a t t e n d S i d w e l l F r i e n d s , C h e l s e a ' s S c h o o l .
|
Valadius
Nov 21 2008 04:13 PM
|
|
In other news, Sarah Palin pardons a turkey and then holds an interview in front of a backdrop of turkeys being slaughtered.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/92I6-M2vAbQ&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/92I6-M2vAbQ&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
|
Edgy DC
Nov 21 2008 04:14 PM
|
|
Let her go.
My huge scoop lasted about twenty minutes.
|
Nymr83
Nov 21 2008 04:32 PM
|
|
kinda making me hungry, too bad the turkeys werent being shechted.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 21 2008 07:13 PM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":38s3cd7g]Got a leak:
O b a m a k i d s t o a t t e n d S i d w e l l F r i e n d s , C h e l s e a ' s S c h o o l . |
38s3cd7g]
Damn good scoop, Edgy! Impressive.
Can't blame Palin for that. The guy doing the slaughtering clearly knew she was being interviewed because he kept stopping to look.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 21 2008 09:28 PM
|
|
Obama's press secretary spilled it 20 minutes after I did.
Washington International School seemed like the better match.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Nov 21 2008 10:04 PM
|
|
What's Obama's stand on vouchers? I bet there are a lot of families with kids in the DC public schools who would love to have that same opportunity, but don't have the money.
|
Edgy DC
Nov 21 2008 10:38 PM
|
|
DC has a voucher program. The top amount available is $7,500. It's pretty generous, but it won't get you into Sidwell.
|
metirish
Dec 04 2008 11:23 AM
|
|
[url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/04/barack-obama-citizenship-supreme-court:2p73b80w]Supreme Court to consider taking up lawsuit challenging Obama's citizenship[/url:2p73b80w]
|
soupcan
Dec 04 2008 11:37 AM
|
|
"The US Supreme Court will consider whether to take up a lawsuit challenging President-elect Barack Obama's US citizenship on Friday..."
No they won't.
The U.S. Supreme Court hears less then 4% of the cases that they are petitioned to hear. I'll make a bold prediction and say that this willl fall into that discarded 96%.
|
Valadius
Dec 04 2008 01:51 PM
|
|
It's Clarence Thomas being a moron, as usual.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 04 2008 01:55 PM
|
|
What is Clarence Thomas being a moron as usual?
|
Valadius
Dec 04 2008 02:01 PM
|
|
Their consideration of this ridiculous case. It's Thomas that gave the ok.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 04 2008 02:13 PM
|
|
It happens.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Dec 04 2008 03:21 PM
|
|
| ="Valadius":18pvynxh]Their consideration of this ridiculous case. It's Thomas that gave the ok. |
18pvynxh]
Well, you can take it head on, put an end to it and move on, or you can allow it to fester and let the conspiracy theories grow.
If he's got nothing to hide, then let the sun shine on it. Hawaii sealed his birth certificate, which makes people wonder.
|
Valadius
Dec 04 2008 04:10 PM
|
|
It's an incredibly stupid case. It should have been dismissed ages ago. He was born in Hawaii, which had been a state for two years in 1961. Then there's the question of his father's nationality. We've had a bunch of presidents with non-American-born parents, including Jackson, Jefferson, and Wilson. The whole damn thing is ludicrous on its face.
|
Nymr83
Dec 04 2008 04:16 PM
|
|
I think you're just being your normal partisan self, you wouldn't say a word if someone were challenging a Republican's citizenship, residency, etc.
It is the court's JOB to determine if there is anything to this claim, if there isn't (which you'd have to think is the case because wouldn't Hillary have used it every chance she got in the primaries?) it'll go away like thousands of other dumb claims, but its not the court's fault that someone brought it.
|
sharpie
Dec 04 2008 04:20 PM
|
|
McCain was born in the Canal Zone -- that was challenged and justly dismissed just as this should be.
Cheney and Bush were both living and voting in Texas. That was challenged and dismissed although I'm not sure so justly but it was.
People should just get over this stuff.
|
Valadius
Dec 04 2008 04:26 PM
|
|
I just think cases like this clog up the system - same with that stupid judge who sued his dry-cleaners for $50 million+ over a pair of pants. It's not being partisan, it's the fact that this is frivolous. We need some kind of tort reform to cut down on frivolous cases eating up valuable court time.
|
Nymr83
Dec 04 2008 04:36 PM
|
|
| ="Valadius":3lqxbddl]I just think cases like this clog up the system - same with that stupid judge who sued his dry-cleaners for $50 million+ over a pair of pants. It's not being partisan, it's the fact that this is frivolous. We need some kind of tort reform to cut down on frivolous cases eating up valuable court time. |
3lqxbddl]
yes the cases are stupid and shame on the idiots bringing them not hte courts that (usually) dismiss them.
you want tort reform? vote against that shmuck Sheldon Silver who is on the payroll of the largest tort firm in NY and continuously uses his position to prevent it from being voted on.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 04 2008 05:46 PM
|
|
You want tort reform, you're coming between the Trial Lawyers Association and the party they just helped put in power.
But this isn't about tort reform, it's about Clarence Thomas being a moron. The lawsuit isn't seeking a cheap payday, it's seeking to get the presidential election result thrown out, so lets not cloud the issue.
|
Valadius
Dec 04 2008 06:29 PM
|
|
If I lived in New York, in Silver's district, I would vote against him in the primary, just because he sucks in general.
|
G-Fafif
Dec 05 2008 05:03 AM
|
|
This isn't, says [url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#28060240:1qv203lv]Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley[/url:1qv203lv], about the birth certificate as it is that President-Elect Obama's father held British citizenship.
Next, we'll be exhuming Vince Foster and he can spill the beans at last at how Hillary Clinton had him murdered.
Geez.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 05 2008 06:24 AM
|
|
I don't think there's anything to this.
Neither do I think Countdown with Keith Olberman is a fair hearing.
|
Willets Point
Dec 05 2008 08:05 AM
|
|
| ="Valadius":3h9td3s8]It's Clarence Thomas being a moron, as usual. |
3h9td3s8]
<a href="http://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2008/12/05/without-hysterics-the-obama-eligibility-issue/">This post</a> suggests that Thomas may be trying to put the kibosh on anti-Obama conspiracists.
|
G-Fafif
Dec 05 2008 12:32 PM
|
|
Michael Medved, writing in USA Today, [url=http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2008/12/will-talk-radio.html]yearns[/url], sorta, for the good old days of relentlessly attacking a new Democratic administration but understands, kinda, that today's climate is different.
| ]Will talk radio get wake-up call?
Appealing to the right-wing fringe is no way to build a political movement.
By Michael Medved
The multibillion-dollar talk radio industry faces existential challenges and dramatic opportunities in the upcoming Age of Obama. Depending on responses from leading conservative talkers, this rude, raucous indispensable medium will either rise to new heights of mainstream influence, profit and credibility, or else collapse as a declining vehicle for an increasingly angry and alienated fringe.
For more than a decade, I've hosted a nationally syndicated political talk show. Like all radio veterans, I cherish the notion that the last time a young Democrat took over the White House with gauzy visions of change, it produced a "Golden Age" for right-wing talk.
Bill Clinton arrived in 1993 with some of the same messianic gifts as Barack Obama's — and similarly solid Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress. The aging, cautious GOP congressional leaders of that earlier epoch offered no dynamic counterweight to the sweeping ambitions of the new administration. When the influential conservative journal National Review anointed "The Leader of the Opposition," it featured a cover caricature of a popular hero who had never run for office: Rush Limbaugh.
Government in exile
In fact, the dawn of Clintonism brought spectacular growth to conservative talkers on national and local radio. With no Republican power base in the federal bureaucracy, dispirited conservatives turned to talk radio as a sort of government in exile. Deploying wit, passion and ferocious focus, Rush (and his many followers and imitators) rallied GOP loyalists to fight back against the Clinton agenda, from gays in the military to Hillary's health care scheme. Within two years, Republicans came roaring back to capture GOP control of both houses of Congress and pointedly acknowledged the role of radio — naming Rush the "Majority Maker" and making him an honorary member of their caucus.
Today's titans of talk naturally dream of repeating this revival, but even if Obamatrons offer targets for ridicule every bit as juicy as Clintonistas, it won't be easy to recapture the potent magic of the 1990s. Most obviously, the rapid development of cable TV and the Internet has given the public innumerable new options for debate and information. During Clinton's era, conservative talk radio offered the inevitable destination for political junkies who cared deeply about the fate of the new administration. Today, many leading TV comics and commentators lean unabashedly to the left, while progressive websites rival popular right-wing sources online.
This fragmentation of the mass audience has led many talk shows to cultivate a niche audience rather than the Republican mainstream. In the aftermath of stinging GOP defeat in November, radio crackles with blame-game arguments intended to divide "real conservatives" from unworthy moderate imposters — as if the GOP could become the first party in history to expand an already shrunken base by purging its membership.
During the Clinton years, Rush seldom concentrated fire on fellow Republicans, understanding that even imperfect GOPers in Congress contributed precious votes to historic majorities. In the general election battle of '92, Limbaugh backed President George H.W. Bush, despite charges the GOP incumbent was a weak-kneed "country club Republican."
Increasingly, interests of commercial talk radio in a fractured market diverge from the needs of a viable national movement. A radio show (locally or nationally) that draws just 5% of the available audience can achieve notable success in ratings and revenue, but a conservatism that connects with only a disgruntled, paranoid 5% of the public will wither and die.
Yes, the nation expects (and deserves) tough partisan battles in the years ahead, but it matters greatly who's viewed as initiator of the conflict. George W. Bush suffered throughout his presidency from perceptions that he never delivered on his "uniter not divider"rhetoric and that he and Karl Rove, not the Democrats, introduced the toxic atmosphere into Washington.
In the long run
If Obama repeats some of Clinton's mistakes and launches his administration with polarizing initiatives, then talk radio will fight back with appropriately fierce determination. That's particularly true if he tries to impose the "Fairness Doctrine" — empowering government bureaucrats to clamp down on controversial opinions by requiring federally defined "balance," thereby threatening the very existence of talk radio and politically engaged broadcast TV.
But if the new president makes credible efforts to govern from the center, then talk radio can't afford long-term marginalization as a sulking, sniping, angry irrelevancy. It makes no sense to react with pre-emptive rage (and an odd obsession over Obama's birth certificate) to a president-elect who has remained pointedly vague on policy.
During the recent campaign, talk radio looked far less formidable than it did during its glory years. The GOP candidates most relentlessly bashed by leading talkers (John McCain and Mike Huckabee) became the two top vote-getters among Republicans, and the McCain-Palin ticket got 90% of GOP votes despite reluctant support from most prominent hosts.
Talk radio led the opposition to the Clinton juggernaut (and flourished mightily in the process) as a mass audience medium that appealed simultaneously to all dissenters from the Democratic drive for domination. The great power of the medium involved its ability to change minds — but that requires drawing significant numbers of listeners who don't already agree with you.
Some radio stars view media debate as a form of warfare, though the ultimate purpose of war involves the total destruction of the enemy. The most effective broadcasters in the Obama Era won't try to destroy anybody. But we should make an impassioned effort to convince everybody.
Michael Medved, a member of USA TODAY's board of contributors, hosts a daily radio show broadcast on more than 200 stations. He is author of the new bestseller The 10 Big Lies About America. |
|
G-Fafif
Dec 05 2008 12:37 PM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC"]Neither do I think Countdown with Keith Olberman is a fair hearing. |
Citation was about the guest, more than the host, specifically Turley's insights on the matter at hand. He doesn't do the Howard Fineman/Margaret Carlson, "oh yes, Keith, absolutely, we'll expand on your storyline and laugh in the appropriate places" dance that tends to undermine the show's credibility.
|
Willets Point
Dec 05 2008 12:43 PM
|
|
| ]conservative talk radio offered the inevitable destination for political junkies who cared deeply about the fate of the new administration. |
What an odd sentence. As if the only people who "cared deeply" about politics were right-wing ideologues.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 06 2008 08:20 PM
|
|
Well Andrew Cuomo's chances don't look as good now that speculation has shifted to his ex-cousin in law Caroline Kennedy.
I may need a bath.
|
Frayed Knot
Dec 07 2008 06:44 AM
|
|
Because lord knows we don't want to find ourselves in a situation a couple years from now without a Kennedy in the Senate. That would not only be tragic but quite possibly unconstituational.
Or just maybe we could reverse the recent trend of treating senate seats as entry-level positions in gov't for celebrity names.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 09 2008 10:49 AM
|
|
Well, the suit gets turned down as expected.
In fairness to the plaintiff, though his suit was groundless, he also contended that McCain was ineligible to be prezzy.
|
Nymr83
Jan 07 2009 06:49 AM
|
|
Obama's new car.
|
Rockin' Doc
Jan 07 2009 10:56 AM
|
|
As crazy as the world has become, I think I'd opt for this if I were him.
<img src="http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/east_europe/poland/exhibition/military_parade_15_august_2008/pictures/Polish_Army_Poland_Military_Parade_15_August_2008_001.jpg" width=" 525">
|
Benjamin Grimm
Jan 07 2009 11:31 AM
|
|
<img src="http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/g-cvr-090107-presidents2-9a.grid-4x3.jpg">
|
Edgy DC
Jan 07 2009 11:35 AM
|
|
That's the incredible shrinking president on the right.
|
Frayed Knot
Jan 07 2009 12:24 PM
|
|
A far cry from the SNL "Two Mile Island" sketch* when he was the 80 ft tall colossal President.
* quite possibly that show's Best - Sketch - Ever.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 07 2009 01:03 PM
|
|
Ross Denton: I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Yes, I'm sorry I have to cut this press conference short, but now I'd like to hand the stage over to the Two Mile players! They're a pro-nuclear mime troope, and they're going to perform a little skit for you, kids!
Two Mile Player #1: "I'm energy! Everybody wants me!"
Two Mile Player #2: "I'm a short-sighted consumer! I'm against nuclear energy! But I still want my stereo, and my electric guitar!"
|
SteveJRogers
Jan 07 2009 05:56 PM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm":2s7fhl8v]<img src="http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/g-cvr-090107-presidents2-9a.grid-4x3.jpg"> |
2s7fhl8v]
Bush Sr is one week away from being the only ex-president to live out the entirety of his son's years in office.
|
metsmarathon
Jan 07 2009 06:09 PM
|
|
of course, he was only the second to live during, and possibly attend, his son's inauguration.
|
G-Fafif
Jan 07 2009 06:09 PM
|
|
| ="Edgy DC":2zb2bh5i]Ross Denton: I'm sorry, I'm sorry. Yes, I'm sorry I have to cut this press conference short, but now I'd like to hand the stage over to the Two Mile players! They're a pro-nuclear mime troope, and they're going to perform a little skit for you, kids!
Two Mile Player #1: "I'm energy! Everybody wants me!"
Two Mile Player #2: "I'm a short-sighted consumer! I'm against nuclear energy! But I still want my stereo, and my electric guitar!" |
2zb2bh5i]
And they were mimes who talked and couldn't explain it away when called on it. Quite possibly the greatest single sketch in "SNL" history.
|
SteveJRogers
Jan 07 2009 06:22 PM
|
|
| ="metsmarathon":7tyfizw4]of course, he was only the second to live during, and possibly attend, his son's inauguration. |
7tyfizw4]
I know that, I was just throwing out a pointless tidbit.
|
Frayed Knot
Jan 07 2009 06:41 PM
|
|
Baba Wawa: "We're wooking wive at Two Mile Island where wumors are wunning wapid that the President has been exposed to wethal wevels of wadiation. The pwess conference is about to begin ... wet's wisten in"
Newsman: "Is it true that the radiation has caused the President to grow to 90 feet tall?"
Prez Spokesman (Richard Benjamin)" "No, absolutely not. There's no truth to that at all"
Newsman: "Is he 80 feet tall?"
Spokesman: "No comment"
|
|
