My Friends, Your 2008 United States Presidential (General) Election Thread

AP breaks down the battlegrounds...

Dem Pickup Opportunities - Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Virginia
GOP Pickup Opportunities - Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin
Obama Wild-Cards - Georgia, North Carolina
Clinton Wild-Cards - Arkansas, West Virginia
GOP Wild-Cards - Washington, Maine, New Jersey, Delaware
Obama Longshots - Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana
Clinton Longshot - Kentucky
McCain Longshot - California

My friends, my friends, my friends, my friends.

shouldn't we have appended (part one)?

btw my predict: Hil race to the convention fucks up the party, O gets the nom, spends a couple months reuniting the party and in the process gets the country on his side, GE looks mad close but in the end O makes it happen

for reference: http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/

this year will get even uglier

def

for a second i thought that the starting of this thread meant hills had thrown in the towel. british obama lover does not like to be deceived like this.

Obama's going to walk it 'cause he's the best looking.

And tall, too.

i rather sleep with obama than hillary. smoother skin is wot duz it.

Nice suits, good haircut, slim, great smile. What a dish! Vs Hilary with the awful pant-suits and McCain with the gay jumpers. Well... he's a shoe-in, obvs.

2 months til gabbnerd starts 2012 speculation thread

we know you and Jon Tasini have got that shit locked, doc

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/191563.php

Thank you, Howard Dean

My Friends, is Texas maybe in play?

my prediction is that McCain wins whether Clinton concedes tomorrow or at the convention, and everybody is all bummed and wonders what happened when we all felt so good back in May

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=689AukWhqdk

God bless you Ian

http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/71473364.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF193875DCB1DD8387ABB70A8DA7CE01D52AAA40A659CEC4C8CB6

Will McCain restart shit with Russia?

my prediction is that McCain wins whether Clinton concedes tomorrow or at the convention, and everybody is all bummed and wonders what happened when we all felt so good back in May

Yup. No way to bring back Mitt Romney at this point, I suppose.

J0hn otm prob

FWIW, tho, HRC had no chance against McCain. Obama has a chance.

There is no way McCain will win, just looking at it electorally. You handwringers need to just quit it, this a Democrat year.

Wait what's the reason an aging racist warmonger who clings to the disastrous policies of an unpopular president and alienates half of his own party is going to take in it a walk again? I hate to sound naive, and I realize that the aging racist warmonger demographic is rather large in America, but Obama (even Clinton for that matter, really) gives me a little... uh, hope.

xp

TIME FOR WORK:

http://blogplatoon.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/clooney_obama.jpg

for reference - http://www.opinionjournal.com/ecc/calculator.htm

obama gonna take down that elephant thing hardcore damn!

yes, Obama can win without Ohio and Florida, if he gets Virginia, but he's gotta hold all the Kerry states (i.e. not lose anywhere in New England), and take IA or NM back

not lose anywhere in New England

or the mid-Atlantic

o plz obamas gonna pwn that weird old man so hard

responding to Hatch on the other thread

is Webb the guy if he helps in VA and appeal in the Alabama part of PA? we don't have to worry about losing the Senate.

oh wait, we've got another thread for that

Your 2008 Vice Presidential Candidate Speculation Thread

start a Cabinet speculation thread, Christ

or a deck-chairs-on-Titanic

sorry that the primaries are over, morbs

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/07/mccain.conservatives/index.html

McCain promises to fight "evil"

How will age affect the race? FWIW, I looked up age cohorts by state, and found the following (2000 data). Against national percentages of 39.8 and 12.4 for the 18-44 and over-64 demographics (diff of 27.4), these are the states at the age extremes:

Youngest States
Alaska - 41.6, 5.7 (35.9 diff)
Utah - 42.3, 8.5 (33.8 diff)
Georgia - 42.6, 9.6 (33 diff)
Colorado - 42.6, 9.7 (32.9 diff)
Texas - 41.6, 9.9 (31.7 diff)
Virginia - 41.2, 11.2 (30 diff)
Nevada - 40.5, 11 (29.5 diff)
North Carolina - 41.1, 12 (29.1 diff)
Washington - 40.3, 11.2 (29.1 diff)

Note how the list has both major states the Obama campaign talks about swinging (Colorado, Virginia), what seems to be a solid blue state that has given Clinton trouble (Washington), and Obama reach states out of Clinton's grasp (North Carolina, Georgia).

Oldest States
Florida - 36.9, 17.6 (19.3 diff)
West Virginia - 37.2, 15.3 (21.9 diff)
Pennsylvania - 37.5, 15.6 (21.9 diff)
Maine - 37.2, 14.4 (22.8 diff)
Iowa - 37.8, 14.9 (22.9 diff)
South Dakota - 37.6, 14.3 (23.3 diff)
Arkansas - 37.9, 14 (23.9 diff)
North Dakota - 38.6, 14.7 (23.9 diff)

Note how the list contains notable states the Clinton campaign would try to swing (Florida, Arkansas), what seems to be a solid blue state that has given Obama trouble (Pennsylvania), and a Clinton reach state out of Obama's grasp (West Virginia).

Not to be determinist or anything.

James Pinkerton surprisingly confident about McCain's chances against Obama in the General Election. He says:

• Obama will be perceived as a “Skinny Al Sharpton”
• Obama is an affiliate of Bill Ayers, a member of the violent Weather Underground
• Obama’s affiliation with Rev. Wright won’t go away and will greatly damage him
• “The left basically can’t conceive that people would vote on their moral, political, patriotic assumptions, at the expense of their economic conditions or . . . [at the expense] of what might happen to the polar bears and penguins. And so their top ranks are endlessly mystified and infuriated as to how this happens. And they conclude that religion and culture and tradition and Rush Limbaugh have bamboozled people into voting against their proper class interests. And the Obama campaign epitomizes that analysis and it will lead to a comeuppance in November.”

Based on this, and the issues (mentioned elsewhere in the segment) about Obama’s personal affiliations – that will, according to Pinkerton, be on the voter’s minds, even if they aren’t on Democrats’ minds – will sink Obama. In all, as you might expect (given his party affiliation), Pinkerton believes that Obama will lose 40 states, and the GE.

I don’t think he’s right. But there’s something to his analysis, especially the last bullet point, for some over-confident Democrats to carefully consider.

I think it's all bullshit, Republican policy is pretty far from 'proper class interests.'

Near the top of this thread is a list of "GOP pickup opportunities" that includes Oregon. I'd say that is one very highly remote opportunity. Oregon will not swing to McCain in 2008.

Oregon voted for Kerry over Bush in 2004 by a comfortable margin and in 2008 new Democratic registrations have been soaring while Republican registrations have been noticably declining. No easy pickings for McCain here.

Near the top of this thread is a list of "GOP pickup opportunities" that includes Oregon. I'd say that is one very highly remote opportunity. Oregon will not swing to McCain in 2008.

polls consistently show Obama beating McCain there, but many have suggested Hillary could lose it

http://www.pollster.com/08-OR-Pres-GE-MvC.php

o plz obamas gonna pwn that weird old man so hard

it's when people talk like this that I feel most certain we'll be enjoying President McCain come '09

OTM. It reminds me of how confident some Democrats were in 2004, right up to election day. Come that night, there was shock and disbelief, and posts like this (from liberal blogger and a v. smart Law Prof. who calls himself Publius):

I'm going to bed. Maybe I'll be surprised. Maybe these magical provisional ballots will win Ohio. I don't know. Here's what I do know. Bush is up 130K in Ohio with 80% of precincts reporting. I suspect the networks will call it soon. Bush will win.

I have little to say. The things I want to say are things that I will inevitably regret saying. So I won't say them. Obviously, this is devastating. And no, I don't take much solace in the fact that Iraq and our economy will be so screwed up that the Dems will really win big time in 2008.

I'm not sure when I'll post again. I need time to gather my thoughts. Again, anything I say right now I will certainly come to regret. I will say this - I'm not so much angry as I am sad. I'm sad for the world. I'm sad for our environment that is about to be raped for four more years. I'm sad about the implications that rewarding such political behavior will have on the future of American politics. I'm sad about everything. I'm also just stunned. It's hard to be a political commentator when you can't even comprehend 52% of your countrymen. I honestly don't understand them. I don't understand why people support this man, this administration, and this record. It seems so foreign to me. I suppose this guy was more right than I realized (from the Suskind article):

___________________________________________

And for those who don't get it? That was explained to me in late 2002 by Mark McKinnon, a longtime senior media adviser to Bush, who now runs his own consulting firm and helps the president. He started by challenging me. ''You think he's an idiot, don't you?'' I said, no, I didn't. ''No, you do, all of you do, up and down the West Coast, the East Coast, a few blocks in southern Manhattan called Wall Street. Let me clue you in. We don't care. You see, you're outnumbered 2 to 1 by folks in the big, wide middle of America, busy working people who don't read The New York Times or Washington Post or The L.A. Times. And you know what they like? They like the way he walks and the way he points, the way he exudes confidence. They have faith in him. And when you attack him for his malaprops, his jumbled syntax, it's good for us. Because you know what those folks don't like? They don't like you!'' In this instance, the final ''you,'' of course, meant the entire reality-based community.

Let's hope his prediction -- that "Iraq and our economy will be so screwed up that the Dems will really win big time in 2008" -- is right (he was certainly right on the facts; Iraq/economy are screwed-up).

it's cool guys, jhøshea isn't running Obama's campaign.

One of the criticisms in George F. Will's otherwise mostly favorable review of Perlstein's Nixonland is that Perlstein doesn't take conservative ideas seriously:

"Having cast the Nixon story as a psychodrama, Perlstein has no need to engage the ideas that were crucial to conservatism's remarkably idea-driven ascendancy, ideas like the perils of identity politics and the justice of market allocations of wealth and opportunity."

"Perlstein says Nixon's legacy is the 'notion that there are two kinds of Americans.' On one side of the barricades are 'values voters' and other conservatives who are infuriated by the disdain of amoral elites conservatives consider (in the brilliantly ironic phrase that Perlstein appropriated from Kevin Phillips) a 'toryhood of change' determined to supervise their lives. On the other side are Hofstadterian liberals who feel threatened by these nincompoops who have been made paranoid by their status anxieties."

On the front page of the Times today, there was an article about how Obama courted many different interest groups to create the appearance of unity and to gain a foothold in Chicago politics. The article suggests that he's basically a pragmatist and that it's hard to pin him down to any substantive policy position. People who have known him in politics say that it is hard to say what his core beliefs are.

Maybe it's disingenuous or pointless to ask a politician to profess his true beliefs. It's sort of like asking someone if he loves you when the answer to the question has consequences.

Identity politics recognizes that different groups have different interests, but I don't think it necessarily implies a lack of social cohesion if the groups share fundamental values and have at least some common interests and if there is a well-established infrastructure for social, political, and civic engagement so that groups do not splinter off endlessly but can engage which each other and form alliances.

I'm wondering if the differences in Clinton's and Obama's health care proposals can be attributed to Obama's tendency to leave more things to the market. My hunch is that Obama is closer to Bill Clinton on economic policy, although he also seems to support broader social programs than Hillary Clinton.

Can't Obama just run on some telegenic, mushy, feel-good "healing" ticket like Bill in '92?

I thought that was what he was doing?

http://content.cartoonbox.slate.com/?feature=dd9b32bc1e438e39e463a93d096bac74

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/religion/stories/012108dntexcaldwellobama.5d89b5.html

this is the guy who officiated Jenna's wedding

nice

http://cache.trafficmp.com/adv/m0/22/2008-05-09/yps_redlobster_survey_ismccaintooold_300x250_Yahoo.gif

http://cache.trafficmp.com/adv/m0/22/2008-05-09/yps_redlobster_survey_ismccaintooold_300x250_Yahoo.gif

lol if you voted no you just might love a dinner at red lobster

Obama on Hamas and The Jews.

Suzy gets the honors, but it's a nice one today.

Eazy, someone already lobbed the poll onto the proper thread about primary competition.

DAMN Alfred that's good.

He doesn't promise to renounce the flow of aid to Israel, but whatever – in America you can't run as an atheist either.

The Greeks had a word for it: LOL

Might split the right wing vote. That'd be nice.

yeah, I don't expect him to have much impact

it's not about impact, it's about lulz

Here's some proper lulz, with added happy pills: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/12/gops-new-slogan-already-b_n_101376.html

Oh man, and for Effexor, the official Most Evil Antidepressant, too.

Promising demographic/map analysis

Brownstein on the white working class vote

New Dems/DLC'ers on the Swing Voter vs Base Drum approaches to winning

Ed Kilgore intro
Robert Creamer breaks down Swing strategy and Base
strategyBill Galston on how Swings choose
Chris Bowers on keeping Swing Strings and Base Drums in harmony
Al From (ooh, get him) on expanding the base
Joan McCarter on the Western question
Ed Kilgore conclusion

Bob Novak: Some U.S. Christians "regard the prospective presidency of Barack Obama in the nature of a biblical plague visited upon a sinful people."

Also,"One experienced, credible activist in Christian politics who would not let his name be used told me that Huckabee, in personal conversation with him, had embraced the concept that an Obama presidency might be what the American people deserve. That fits what has largely been a fringe position among evangelicals: that the pain of an Obama presidency is in keeping with the Bible's prophecy."

The Republican National Committee unveils its line of official clothing for this summer's convention:

http://stmedia.startribune.com/images/440*286/1gop.JPG

AAAAAAAH MEIN EYES1!!!11!

xxxxpost is that all you care about? winning?

I plugged my take on the Obama-McCain polls to date into an Electoral Calculator, assigning to each candidate the states in which they appear to lead, and assigning to neither the states that appear too close to call, with the following results:

Obama - 216 (including Colorado (9) and Iowa (7))
McCain - 244 (including New Hampshire (4))
Too Close to Call - Michigan (17), Nevada (5), New Mexico (5), Ohio (20), Pennsylvania (21), Wisconsin (10)

270 are needed to win. on this model, McCain gets to 269 by hanging on to OH and either NV or NM. he could then go over the top if he takes 1 or more of ME's proportionally-awarded electors, assuming he doesn't lose a corresponding number of NE's proportionally-awarded electors. so basically Obama really has to win OH. the only ways to go over the top without it are to sweep the in-play Southwest, or make it to VA while holding onto at least one Southwestern state, and protecting his rear in the great lakes/upper midwest. even if he took all 3 SW states + VA, he would lose if PA slipped away as well.

Notable states in which Obama has led McCain in a poll - Indiana, Missouri, New Hampshire, Virginia
Notable states in which Obama has been within 5 pts of McCain in a poll - Alaska, Florida, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, Texas
Notable states in which McCain has led Obama in a poll -
Colorado, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Washington
Notable states in which McCain has been within 5 pts of Obama in a poll - Iowa, Oregon

oh, and 269 = tie. tho presumably tie goes to the Dems?

I keep hearing republicans talk of the possibility of a "second Reverend Wright" that will sink Obama's campaign... have they not noticed that the actual Reverend Wright didn't seem to have an effect on anything polls-wise? And both of the attempts to use Obama & Rev Wright to sink the congressional campaigns of democrats in traditionally republican districts failed?

I think this is a bit of a rosy-colored look at Bob Barr. Ultimately, the dude may not mean much, and yes it's not out of the question that he'll help put GA in play at least in the spend-money sense, and yes the guy includes the caveat about his anti-war-ism, but the latter isn't broad enough - I think putting even a small-name libertarian into the mix could take votes away from Obama all across the West. this may not be a good thing for us.

The play for the Jewish vote

The play for the Jesus vote

It's not just the Jesus vote, regular-church attendance also correlates well with demographics that Obama has been having difficulty with. In general, older people tend to attend church more often than younger people. Belief in God correlates inversely with education level. And church attendance is higher in poorer states than richer states. So by going after the Jesus vote, Obama is also helping himself in several areas of weakness.

One interesting caveat to that though is that while belief in God correlates inversely with education level in polls, there is some evidence that regular church attendance correlates positively with education level.

My Friends, Your 2008 United States Presidential Election Calendar by Mark Halperin

Calendars are even better than lists

good job, try here - http://thepage.time.com/this-weeks-the-page-in-time/

so who's McNasty's leading attack dog on the revived gay-marriage issue?

Ain't Arnie is it?

http://lighthousepatriotjournal.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/mitt-romney.jpg

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

this site is extremely awesome

Alex Castellanos breaks down the race

Oregon is simultaneously the most liberal and most conservative state in the country

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/05/oregon-swing-state-or-latte-drinking.html

http://nymag.com/images/2/daily/intel/08/05/16-castellanos-lg.jpg

GOOOOUUUULET

William Kristol identifies three reasons that he has hope for McCain's chances in the fall:

1. Obama's problems with working-class, culturally conservative voters, as evidenced in his 40-point trouncing in West VA.

2. The California Supreme Court's recent decision to uphold gay marriage rights, raising the possibility that gay marriage could have the same effect as it did in the 2004 presidential race - ie., getting traditional values voters to the polls.

3. He thinks that Obama's willingness to negotiate with Ahmadinejad will ultimately hurt him.

McCain Exceptionalism

sorry, I don't pay attention to anything 'William' Kristol says

It is somewhat worrying to think of the parallels to San Francisco and Massachusetts in 2004 in the CA Supreme Court's ruling though. Why do these things always have to happen in presidential election years?

"always"

"hyperbole"

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/electoral_college_history

http://www.thedemocraticstrategist.org/strategist/2008/05/nebraska_as_kingmaker_role_mod.php

I don't want to be in a position where Nebraska has to be relied on to go over the line, but I do think it would be kinda awesome if it gave it to Obama

the return of the Pander Bear to his native habitat

http://thepage.time.com/full-text-of-mccains-remarks-in-miami-florida-2/

http://nukegingrich.files.wordpress.com/2007/12/dukakis_tank.jpg http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/ap/1a3ebf91-6138-42ab-ab5e-413c69564cdf.h2.jpg

most of Cuban exile radio was feverishly awaiting this speech this morning.

feverishly

you said it

Damn, McLame looks to be wearing a bib there.

Mr Veedle speaks!

“(Obama is) our best demagogue since Huey Long or Martin Luther King”.

I ask if he thinks Obama has a similar charisma to that of John F Kennedy, whom Vidal got to know because he was related to his wife, Jackie.

“I never believed in Jack’s charisma,” Vidal says shortly. JFK, he believes, was “one of our worst presidents”; Bobby, his brother, was “a phoney, a little Torquemada”; and their father, Joseph, was “a crook – should have been in jail”.

So much for Camelot. “But Jack had great charm,” he adds. “So has Obama. He’s better educated than Jack. And he’s been a working senator. Jack never went to the office – he wanted the presidency and his father bought it for him.”

There’s no guarantee, of course, that the Democrats will triumph later this year, even if Obama does win the nomination. Does he think Obama can beat John McCain?

His views on the man the Democratic candidate will have to beat are even more brutal than his views on Hillary: “ YOU could beat McCain! I’ve never met anyone in America who has the slightest respect for him. He went to a private school and came bottom of his class. He smashed up his aeroplane and became a prisoner of war, which he is trying to parlay into ‘war hero’.”

In his view, McCain is “a goddamned fool. He was on television talking about mortgages, and it was quite clear he does not know what a mortgage is. His head rattles as he walks”.

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/tv_and_radio/article3952774.ece

link via Kaus, electoral college analysis:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/05/16/270/print.html

I worry about the impact of the (purported) greening of the GOP

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-lockhart/a-republican-climate-revo_b_102886.html

They are astroturfing!

HIS HEAD RATTLES AS HE WALKS!

Priceless.

Obama up in VA, down in NV

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/05/todays-polls-ii-522.html

with Edwards, Obama can get huge margins in VA

http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/05/22/vice-presidential-matchups-virginia/

why o why was webb not included in that survey

has anyone polled a three-way Obama / McCain / Clinton general election yet?

besides me who just polled in my backyard (Obama wins in a landslide of 3/0/0)

with Edwards, Obama can get huge margins in VA

http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/05/22/vice-presidential-matchups-virginia/

-- gabbneb, Thursday, May 22, 2008 2:35 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Link

how many ppl in VA know the other vp candidates?

three-way Obama / McCain / Clinton

Plz don't start this rumor.

you mean a threesome? HOT!

clearly, as I've said before, the other Veeps they picked for Obama are unknowns in many States. Edwards is very much a known quantity, if not quite to the extent of Clinton, say. but surely you recognize that Virginia is one of the states in which his appeal might be strongest.

even against a known-quantity GOP ticket, Edwards gives O a near-10-point win there

2 adjacent headlines on Drudge right now:

Tension between blacks and Jews in Crown Heights, NY escalating to violent levels...
------------------------------------------------------------------
Obama starts search for running mate...

geddit?

thats why he makes the big bucks

every time this gets bumped i find myself hoping clinton has dropped out

I've begun to hear more GOP strategists suggesting this aloud (in ever-so-cautious tones): McCain may have 'blowout' win vs. Obama.

I don't think the GOP strategists are right, but it's a reasonable possibility.

it's reasonable, but the NYT also reports that his campaign is in "disarray":

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/25/us/politics/25mccain.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

so I think the chances of him edging this out are dwindling

Good article. Three things stood out for me in it. First, McCain's idea of a decentralized nat'l campaign operation is stupid. It risks inconsistency, muddling the message, and represents a huge loss of opportunity in terms of branding the candidate. Second, a real challenge in the General Election will be which candidate is better able to paint the other as "just another politician." That is, if McCain convinces swing voters that Obama's rhetoric is just a smokescreen for very orthodox policy notions and very traditional opportunism, then he (McCain) gets a tremendous advantage. By contrast, if Obama is able to convince swing voters that McCain's image as a "maverick" is just a smokescreen for his cozy relationship with lobbyists and political hypocrisy, then he (Obama) gets a tremendous advantage. Third, I don't think McCain has ever been seriously attacked in a national contest against a strong Democratic opponent. Here, he'll be tested as never before (Obama, obv., has been tested by HRC).

Also, this jumped out at me: "The McCain campaign and the Republican National Committee, between them, have $11 million more on hand — about $62 million — than the combined cash-on-hand of Mr. Obama and the Democratic National Committee." I had no idea.

that's because democratic donors have been pouring money into the individual campaigns instead of the party, while republican donors (many of them unenthusiastic about mccain) have been giving to the rnc. once hillary and obama stop splitting the pot, the democrats aren't going to have anything to worry about, fundwise.

and represents a huge loss of opportunity in terms of branding the candidate.

how is that a bad thing? "branding" the candidate is one of the worst things about the extended election - the constant retooling of the message into the just-palatable-enough version, all that rot. How does the "growth"/retailoring of the message not muddle it?

Driving home a simple theme works. So-and-so is the candidate of ''change'' or ''experience,'' for instance, and those notions are reinforced with various, but coordinated, campaign messages. Coordinating the messages is how a candidate avoids muddling.

Not sure if this is what you mean, but yeah, the way U.S. elections are run does dumb-down the issues and the candidates, but that type of campaigning works.

Interesting internal memo to the GOP Congressional Leadership. With respect to the Presidential election, the meat of the coconut is on pages 10 -- 11, where GOP Rep. Tom Davis says Obama hasn't (and maybe can't) "seal the deal" with blue-collar/lunch-bucket/values-voter types. Also, on page 19, Davis reiterates that McCain can help Congressional GOP candidates -- or at least not hurt them -- and returns to his themes about how to win the Presidency (all his suggestions focus on how to capitalize on Obama's preceived weakness with the voter categories mentioned above).

Beyond that, for GOP Congressional candidates, Davis has a few suggestions, all under the notion of re-branding the Republican name: (a) send an energy bill to Congress that gives token consideration to global warming concerns, but really emphasizes more oil-drilling (in an effort to bring down gas prices); (b) demand an immigration reform proposal from Democrats (or, alternatively, criticize Democrats for failing to set forth a proposal); (c) rush out a bill to provide relief to homeowners at risk of foreclosure; (d) embrace globalization and criticize Democrats for protectionist-leanings; (e) "hammer away" at Obama and Democrats for threatening tax hikes; (f) "hammer away" at FISA (the idea is that, in a pinch, people favor safety over privacy and rights, so while no-one hopes a crisis happens, the GOP must make its position clear now); and (g) "stay offensive" on the No. 1 issue -- and the weakest issue for the GOP -- health care (but the memo doesn't say how to stay offensive). Still, overall, Davis' message is that the Republican brand is broken and badly in need of a major overhaul.

I normally wouldn't deign to address a Politico article with headline "GOP strategists mull McCain ‘blowout’" that waits until the 8th paragraph to say "It is virtually impossible to find an established GOP strategist who believes McCain will win in a landslide," but since I've been doing my own analysis, I'l get into it here.

We'll begin with the 2004 results - McCain leads 286 to 252 - and get into the top 15 swing states, as of now, in approximate order of probability of swinging to the other side.

1. Iowa (7 EVs) - This is the State Most Likely to Swing. Bush won it by 2/3 of 1%, or approximately 10,000 votes, a difference smaller than the number of Nader/Green/Libertarian votes. McCain has never broken 44% in a poll here, while Obama, who represents a neighbor, has consistently polled at or near 50. Bush's most recent disapproval is at 66%, including 63% of independents, 61% of over-65s, 60% of men, and 58% of evangelicals. Poblano (fivethirtyeight.com) gives Obama an 81% chance of winning. As the Politico article concedes, Iowa is likely gone blue, tho it could come back into play if McCain picks a VP from an Iowa-oriented region.

2. Colorado (9 EVs) - Bush won by more than 4 points and 100,000 votes. He and Cheney, of course, came from adjacent or nearly adjacent states, but McCain's state shares a corner with Colorado too. This is a State, however, that appears quite receptive to the right kind of Democrat - it's elected a D Senator and D Governor and appears ready to elect a second D Senator. Though ticket-splitting shouldn't be ignored as a factor, McCain has broken 46 here only in a GOP-sponsored poll, while Obama has never gone below that level and been as high as 50. Poblano gives Obama a 69% chance of winning, and the right Veep might push the percentage even higher. It's unclear what role third parties will play - Perot gave it to Clinton in 92 and almost again in 96 when he ran against a neighboring guy. The convention may further boost the Dems (or maybe we're already seeing that effect), or perhaps it will have the reverse impact. I'm not prepared just yet to give it to Obama, but I'm certainly leaning in that direction.

3. New Mexico (5 EVs) - Bush won by fewer than 6,000 votes (less than 1%), smaller than the total for Nader+Greens+Libertarians. Like Bush, McCain is from next door, perhaps even moreso. The polls indicate it's a pure tossup, with both candidates hitting 50. But only Obama has gone over 50, and momentum appears to be moving in his direction. Bush is at 63% disapproval, including 77% of hispanics, 66% of independents and over-65s, 59% of men, and 54% of gun owners. Poblano gives Obama a 65% chance of winning. Both candidates could appeal here with the right veep, but Obama has more and stronger options in that regard. I rate it as a tossup, but expect it go to Obama in the end.

4. New Hampshire (4 EVs) - In 2000, Bush won by 7K (1.25%), when Nader took three times that number, and other third parties matched it, and in 2004, Kerry won by a slightly larger amount when the indie vote was cut by 75%. Clearly, third parties can have some impact here. McCain of course has a special relationship with the state and its independents, and led, even above 50%, in a number of polls in March and April. Obama has recently returned to the lead, however. Poblano gives McCain a 55% chance of winning. This one will be close, and I'm not prepared to give it to either side at the moment, but it looks like it may be moving back in the Dems direction as are a number of states as the primary season draws to a close.

5. Ohio (20 EVs) - Kerry and Edwards cut Gore's 165K and 3.3 points to 120 and 2 points. One of the big tossups, of course, with both candidates hitting 50 since Iowa, though the trend and average favor Obama very slightly. And obviously Bush is very unpopular here, with a 69% disapproval rating, including 68% of men, 63% of over-65s, 61% of gun owners and 51% of evangelicals. While the change dynamic naturally favors O here, he obviously has yet to close the deal, but is very likely to pick a Veep that will help do so. Poblano gives Obama a 51% chance of winning.

6. Michigan (17 EVs) - Kerry won here by 165,000 votes (more than 3%), somewhat down from Gore's 215,000 votes (more than 5%). While Dems have consistently won here, it's a state with significant independent tendencies, as Perot had fairly substantial support. That's reflected in the polling, in which both candidates are regularly stuck in the low 40s, with a high 'other' vote. For now it's a tossup, but I would expect it to stay with Obama, especially in a 'change' year, though third-parties, veeps and turnout may be key - Poblano's turnout models suggest it could get locked down for Obama on demographics, and he gives McCain a 43% chance of winning.

7. Virginia (13 EVs) - Kerry lost by more than 8 points and 250,000 votes. However, the state has gone consistently for more charismatic Dems since Mark Warner came on the scene. The polls have seesawed, with both candidates going above 50, but McCain generally has led, tho Obama is up 7 in the most recent poll. Bush is at 65% disapproval here, including 65% of men, 61% of over-65s, 55% of gun owners, and 54% of evangelicals. McCain will benefit from military ties, while black turnout and ever-increasing growth in NoVA could bring it home for Obama. Poblano gives him a 40% chance of winning. Obviously a place where the Veep may matter a lot.

8. Nevada (5 EVs) - Kerry lost by fewer than 3 points and about 20,000 votes (about twice the indie vote). The polls have seesawed here, but while Obama is the only candidate to hit 50%, things may be moving in McCain's direction. Poblano gives Obama a 39% chance of winning.

8.5 Nebraska's 2nd Congressional District (1 EV) - Because Nebraska allocates some of its delegates by Congressional District winner, Obama may have a chance to pick up at least one electoral vote in the state, likely in the 2nd district, which is basically Omaha and environs (is it possible Obama does especially well here because of Obama/Omaha?). In a March poll, SurveyUSA found Obama leading McCain in both the 2nd and 1st CDs, albeit in the low-to-mid-40s (for reference, Clinton polled in these districts at numbers very similar to the statewide numbers for Kerry and Gore). The situation may well have tightened up since then, but a recent poll put Obama 11 points down statewide, far less than Bush's over-30-point margin in '04, and Kerry outperformed his state average in NE-2 by 11 points. If this weren't Nebraska we're talking about, I might place this one higher.

9. Wisconsin (10 EVs) - Kerry won by fewer than 12,000 votes (little more than 1/3 of 1%), and fewer than either the Nader vote or the non-Nader indie vote. Gore won by even less. And McCain has led a number of polls, including the most recent one. But Dems have won twice here without a candidate from a neighboring state and Obama appears to have a higher ceiling - while McCain has never gone above 48 in a poll, Obama has twice been over 50. Moreover, Bush is at 65% disapproval, including 64% of over-65s, 61% of gun owners and 59% of men (but only 42% of evangelicals). Poblano gives McCain a 35% chance of winning.

10. Pennsylvania (21 EVs) - Kerry won by 1.5% and nearly 150,000 votes, but his numbers were down from post-Clinton Gore's 200,000 (4 points - Nader got half that). State hasn't gone GOP in 20 years vs. State went GOP just 20 years ago. Obama has yet to show real strength here, but only one poll not sponsored by the GOP has shown McCain hitting 47 here, and Obama has led consistently over the last month, indicating that the state's coming home to the Dems. Poblano gives McCain a 34% chance of winning.

11. Indiana (11 EVs) - Gore and Kerry lost by 16&2/3 and 20 points, respectively. A red state, obviously, but it shares a big border with Obama's home state, and he leads McCain in a recent poll. However, McCain has generally led here, and Obama has yet to break 48%. Three months ago, Bush's disapproval was at 57%, including 57% of men and 51% of gun owners. Poblano indicates that it's sensitive to young and black turnout, and gives Obama a 35% chance of winning.

12. Missouri (11 EVs) - Kerry lost by 7 points and 200,000 votes, more than twice Gore's margins. While Obama, like Clinton and Gore, is from a neighboring state and has polled as high as 49%, McCain appeared to be putting the state away over the last three months when he went over 50 several times and kept Obama in the low 40s or worse. Things may be swinging back into contention, however. And Bush is at 68% disapproval, including 68% of gun owners, 67% of over-65s, 66% of men, and 50% of evangelicals. Poblano gives Obama a 24% chance of winning and indicates some mild turnout-sensitivity.

13. North Carolina (15 EVs) - Gore and Kerry both lost by 12-13 points here, despite the former's coming from a neighboring state and the latter's having Edwards. Obama has never broken 47, while McCain has generally been at or above that level, including over 50. Poblano gives Obama only an 18% chance of winning, but indicates that the State could flip with a really big young+black turnout.

14. Florida (27 EVs) - We all know about 2000, when there was a Clinton veep and a conservative-ish Jew on the ticket, but Kerry lost here by 5 points and nearly 400,000 votes, even with Edwards. Obama has never broken 45 in a poll, while McCain has regularly exceeded that level and gone several times to or above 50, and might choose a veep who locks it down. It's been 8 months since Bush was tested here, but he was at 61% disapproval, including 62% of men, 59% of over-55s, and 56% of hispanics. Poblano gives Obama only an 18% chance of winning, but indicates that a best-case young and black turnout could flip it.

15. North Dakota (3 EVs) - A very red state, of course, in which Bush beat Kerry and Gore by more than 25 points. Maybe it doesn't belong here, but the limited polling has yet to put McCain above 44% and indicates a sizable number of undecideds. If the GOP ticket stays Southern, Obama might be the closer-to-home candidate. Poblano gives him a 25% chance of winning and indicates some mild turnout-sensitivity. I would place this higher if it weren't North Dakota.

So let's take the Politico scenario here - sure, it's possible that Obama takes Iowa and Colorado and McCain takes New Hampshire and Michigan, but the probabilities appear to be that if McCain takes New Hampshire, Obama takes New Mexico first, at least tying the EC at 269, and throwing it to the House in the event Obama goes no further (such as winning Ohio or the 1 EV of NE-2). While it appears improbable that McCain would win Michigan and lose Ohio, the probabilities above indicate that it's more likely that Obama wins Ohio than McCain wins Michigan, so in the event the strange did occur, Obama would still win 272-266. The probability of McCain getting any further than these two states, to Wisconsin, is less than the probability of Obama winning Virginia or Nevada.

Let's follow the lead of the article, though, and assume that Michigan and New Hampshire are the prime GOP targets this year. Can you think of one Veep candidate who might help in both places? I can! Hint: he's a mormon. Let's look at SurveyUSA's numbers testing McCain/Romney against Obama/Edwards. While we don't have the results in MI, NH or a number of other states, we know that the Dems take New Mexico, Ohio and Virginia for a 285-253 win that holds even if Romney gives McCain Colorado.

a lot of the ground campaign is gonna be clouds of dust in the Rust Belt and Southwest, but Obama will probably on offense in a number of States in the Southeast and Midwest/Plains as well (perhaps depending on the Veep), while McCain will look to... New Hampshire

I normally wouldn't deign to address a Politico article with headline "GOP strategists mull McCain ‘blowout’" that waits until the 8th paragraph to say "It is virtually impossible to find an established GOP strategist who believes McCain will win in a landslide," but since I've been doing my own analysis

Gab, is this a work-related project or just a matter of personal interest? Just curious.

Yeah, I'd like to respond, but I'd like to know where you're coming from, to see whether what I'd have to say would be worthwhile.

Oh, my question wasn't meant to be pointed. Gabbneb is an attorney like me, and I'd be interested/jealous if his practice area was election law and election litigation.

Oh, I was just interested mainly if this was a repost from some other website, in which case I'd likely do something else.

I=gabbneb, and 'my own analysis'=what follows, obv.

i keep my professional life off-board, but i have never studied or practiced election law

note that if we go solely with the states that appear safe to swing - above 60% chance - Obama gets the Gore states that Kerry lost (IA, NM) back and takes CO, winning 273-265. if we go for states with greater than 51%, McCain gets NH, and ties Obama at 269. if we go for states with greater than 50%, Obama gets OH and wins 293-245, a nearly-50-point Obama 'blowout' by Politico standards.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjYpkvcmog0

this is reprehensible.

Holy fuck, can they get away with that in the US? Isn't there some law about inciting violence or something which applies to broadcasters?

reckon the osama/obama "gaff" was deliberate.

Oh yeah, they've been running with that shit for ages now, but actually saying that it would be good if both were killed...wtf

No, they can't get away with it but unfortunately it hasn't gotten much traction yet. DailyKos is going mental.

ZIONIST CONSPIRACY

3fingerjack1780 (1 minute ago) 0 Reply
This liz trotta woman was a journalism teacher in a jewish school it says on wikipedia. This is smelling more and more like bagels

Meanwhile, Obama needs less than 50 delegates to clinch 2025.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvjRv3Xhy-s

Liz Trotta's very sincere apology for her remarks yesterday.

C'mon guys. Liz Trotta wasn't trying to reference the idea that Obama should be assassinated. She was just talking about assassination and also talking about Obama in the same sentence. But the two really have nothing to do with one another. This is just about how primaries can last a really long time, I'm sure.

She probably feels like some besieged free speech hero. Twunt.

Really, pulling off the Obama/Osama thing AND 'joking' about how you'd like to see them both assassinated in the same sentence while on television was pretty fucking next level shit. I wonder who'll be the first to pull off The Triple Play.

can we kick this motherfucker out of the party already?

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/323743

He's no longer in the Democratic party, is he? Or do you mean in a general sense - take away his party hat and free booze. (Or do you mean the Member of the Tribe party? In which case, I vote for stripping him of MOT privileges.)

just put Lieberman in the line of an RFK analogy, plz

always with the violence, this guy

He's no longer in the Democratic party, is he?

Fuck me, is he even still a Jew? There's just no way he's not aware that Hagee only supports Israel insofar as it forwards his strange evangelical reading of Revelation. Which is to say, Hagee thinks of Israel not as a real-time functioning nation made up of people, but as the queen in a big biblical chess game. The Xtian Zionists have this game all planned already, though, and Israel is a final gambit. Sorry, Jews, you get Left Behind.

This is pretty outrageous.

At this point Lieberman just proves what happens when you roll with schmucks. His stepson the rabbi is supporting Obama.

thx for keeping us updated, kenan

Sorry, Jews, you get Left Behind.

This sounds sadly familiar.

thx for keeping us updated, kenan

-- gabbneb

The ironing.

guise hes just looking for someone to love - only ones wholl tolerate him are various flavors of right wing nutjob - recent connecticut poll said like 60% of those who voted lieberman have buyers remorse poor guy

Joe Lieberman needs a hug.

He needs to catch something and die.

He got jealous when this happened:

http://images.dailykos.com/images/user/426/thehug.jpg

apparently someone's unfamiliar with Hagee's AIPAC ties

Sheesh. It looks like John McCain has a tear rolling down his cheek.

No, that's the big fat scar from his face cancer.

Joe Lieberman, taking IRL trolling to the next level

he's not trolling, tho. he and AIPAC actually think that partnering with these nutbags is good for Israel. it's not impossible there's some self-delusion going on, but i think it's pretty clear they know what these people are about, and are using them anyway.

apparently someone's unfamiliar with Hagee's AIPAC ties

if by 'someone' you mean 'gff' no i am familiar, and it's perfectly legible what lieberman is up to and why. it's still disgusting.

ftr i'm unclear what his functional relationship is to the democratic party right now. his website is curiously silent on the matter.

To the right of McCain, in the red dress...is that Bobbi Flekman?

Robert Sullivan redraws the ten-region map for 2008

http://massinc.typepad.com/beyondredandblue/2007/09/beyond-red-blue.html

if by 'someone' you mean 'gff'

i didn't mean gff

gff, he got beaten in the Dem primary so he had to wangle himself onto the general election ballot as an independent. Technically he's Ind.-CT, but he caucuses with the Dems, for all that's worth. In a dream world the Dems would gain enough seats in the Senate to be able to tell him to fuck off and change party affiliations already.

yeah that much i get, it's the "caucusing with the Dems" bit that i don't really understand, procedurally. does this mean he keeps his seniority and committee posts or something? domestically, lieberman is mostly all right.

does this mean he keeps his seniority and committee posts or something?

I think that's pretty much it, though I don't know for sure. I was just looking at his Wiki entry -- "Lieberman is now officially listed in Senate records for the 110th Congress as an "Independent Democrat"

Kos poll has a small sample, but appears to put NE-2 out of contention

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/24/14112/1608/921/521827

I see that Obama vowed to the Cuban exile community last week that he will keep the embargo intact. ruh roh!

(sorry to being up an ISSUE, back to your demographic geekery and pundit watching)

sorry to being up an ISSUE

you said it

will the anti-Morbs ppl plz admit that Morbs is OTM here

i thought that the cuban community was very divided on the embargo issue? I don't actually know though

also, doesn't this:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20369459/

indicate that he, in fact, wants to change that embargo?

what is morbs otm about?

Obama can afford to pander to the south Florida cuban exile community in this way, because the embargo will already be in place when he enters office, and rescinding it is probably not high on his list of top priorities, he can wait on it and not expend too much capital over this issue.

He can always say later that conditions in Cuba have changed sufficiently to warrant a new look at the embargo. Then, when he shitcans it, his ass will have some coverage.

but where did obama vow to keep the embargo intact?

he's maintaining the trade embargo, but removing all restrictions on travel and remittances to cuba. this goes beyond what Hillary or McCain have said they would do. Morbs doesn't like it because Fidel (who said Obama was the best candidate) doesn't either, prompting an article about Obama's hidden rightie tendencies in one of his favorite rags today.

Changing some travel restrictions for exiles with family still in Cuba, especially when those restrictions have only been put in place under the current administration, is not exactly busting the embargo wide open. Basically, it means he would nibble at the edges of the embargo and leave the rest intact for now.

From the msnbc article:

“It entrenches the regime at this historic time,” Claver-Carone said.

Yeppers. That Castro regime has never really been entrenched up to now.

xp: shove it, Eustace.

NYT the other day:

In a 30-minute speech, interrupted several times by applause, Mr. Obama said that if elected president he would immediately lift the bans on family travel to Cuba and the limits on how much money people can send to their relatives in the communist nation.

“Don’t be confused about this. I will maintain the embargo,” Mr. Obama said. “It provides us with the leverage to present the regime with a clear choice: If you take significant steps toward democracy, beginning with the freeing of all political prisoners, we will take steps to begin normalizing relations.”

I don't qualify for family travel; I wanna go watch beisbol.

and wow, the success of that leverage for the last 48 years...

well at least you aren't self-interested

i know ppl who've been to cuba who don't qualify for family travel

I have been once, but I'm not getting the permit I did last time (at least, not under McNasty or Bammy, apparently).

also, Fidel is a dick: Obama's "rightie" tendencies (popularly known since Bubba as Third Wayism) are not hidden, they're rather naked and will be presented with a flourish for the next 5 months.

Aimless, the travel ban has been in place, for the most part, since 1963. Obama will lift it completely, it seems.

That isn't how I read the quote Morbs posted. It specifically states "family travel".

If Obama lifts all restriction on family travel only that's still changing more than just the restrictions that the Bush admin imposed

O, the glory of Reided and Pelosied expectations...

i thought that the cuban community was very divided on the embargo issue? I don't actually know though

It really isn't -- it's a "generational" divide.

(btw this is really the only issue a certain segment of the exile community cares about, so Obama will likely NOT win Miami-Dade County).

maybe he's going for the votes of farm-staters, many of them conservative Republicans, who want the embargo lifted

Yeah, here you'll hear attacks on Jeff Flake all the time.

Is there anybody here who thinks that embargo is just a terrific thing to have in place? who'll defend it as a good thing? I mean there's gabbs, saying "well he's doing better than all the jokers before him" I guess, but...is it really asking that much of a candidate to say "look, there is no more Soviet Union, there's no point in this Cuban embargo nonsense"

he's not doing better than all the jokers before him - if he's just calling for family travel, that's less than lots of current right-wingers want - he's doing better than the other presidential candidates.

i don't know; maybe some people still feel that the regime hasn't changed enough for the people who live there under fidel's brother. still, did we have an embargo against the soviet union? no, so I don't really get it.

he's basically saying that he's not giving up on FL, but he's not gonna pander like the others to win there

i don't get the 'pandering' thing though...sorry, I'm dense on this subject. how is saying "we are not going to lift the embargo" (mccain/clinton) pandering? Is that pandering to a segment of the exile community? it seems like any position anyone takes on this issue is pandering to some part of that community.

Is there anybody here who thinks that embargo is just a terrific thing to have in place?

John, to the segment of the exile community to which I'm alluding (not my parents, who have officially given up on championing exile causes), the embargo is a symbol: it's the only sign -- the last hope -- that the U.S. still remembers it fucked their country over by enabling Castro, dismissing him, trying to topple him, and then refusing to provide air support for the Bay of Pigs operation. You always read about the ambivalence Iraqis feel towards America; you should talk to a Cuban exile member of a certain generation.

Have you guys read Didion's Miami? It's the best attempt by an outsider to understand exile culture.

It really isn't -- it's a "generational" divide.

-- Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, May 27, 2008 9:21 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

Is it? In my (admittedly tiny tiny antecdotal) sampling of gf and her extended family, there seems to be agreement that the embargo needs to be lifted. In what way is it generational?

"Generational" = age of people asked about embargo; when these people emigrated. The younger ones tend to be less driven by rancor.

Is there anybody here who thinks that embargo is just a terrific thing to have in place? who'll defend it as a good thing? I mean there's gabbs, saying "well he's doing better than all the jokers before him" I guess, but...is it really asking that much of a candidate to say "look, there is no more Soviet Union, there's no point in this Cuban embargo nonsense"

I find Obama’s stance on Cuba a bit irritating and it’s precisely for that reason. If you were to survey people who worked within the foreign policy fields, regardless of political affiliation, age or nationality, I believe most would agree the embargo harms the United States and should be dismantled sooner than latter. It is bizarre to me that Obama, while appearing somewhat naïve, has actually given the non-political sects of foreign policy wonks a voice, yet on an issue with near-apparent consensus he has taken the political route.

It also hinders his argument of drastic policy change since, more often than not, our relationship with Cuba is held as an example of American arrogance whenever a negation goes sour. It may seem to many that a change in this relationship is a relatively small issue but I believe it would go a long way to adjusting the global opinion of the United States.

Also, to state the obvious, if Florida did not have 20 odd electoral votes this would be a non-issue and the embargo would be a thing of the distant past. Which is a shame because Obama is the first candidate who can win the general election and outright ignore Florida (on a side note, I hear people often forget that there is precedence for a Democrat winning the general without Florida, Kennedy did in ’60 and Clinton did it ’92 and its likely that Obama will do it ‘08).

You always read about the ambivalence Iraqis feel towards America; you should talk to a Cuban exile member of a certain generation.

Well said.

a friend of mine has written an excellent, serious history of havana that's out now:

http://www.amazon.com/History-Havana-Palgrave-Essential-Histories/dp/1403971072

yes, he has a very unfortunate name

I went walking along the Malecon one morning in March '04, and a young man approached and asked "So is Bush really going to win the election?"

Clinton only won Florida in '96 because he got the late Jorge Mas Canosa's blessing.

apparently john mccain wants to clamp down on nuclear proliferation - bold!

in the same speech, he supported developing new types of nuclear weapons

weapons that will destroy the embargo on Cuba?

Have you guys read Didion's Miami? It's the best attempt by an outsider to understand exile culture.

The Didion book I have gone longest without re-reading, and I was too young to really get it when I first read it.

thanks for the rundown on this and apologies for my pinefox-ism on this issue. it does seem like an issue where no stance will please everyone, so this does make it seem like obama is playing safe; not sure why he would though.

if he throws in the towel on FL is he painting himself into a corner?

What's pinefox-ism?

read the archives Daniel-San

I prefer the questions to the media's presentation of Extreme Right-Wing Cuban Exile Community as this monolithic entity.

deej i dunno but if you see a turtle on a fencepost it didn't get there by itself

If you care about winning Florida, playing it safe consists of fully supporting the embargo like Hillary and McCain. So eating away at the embargo, at the margin, is most certainly not playing it safe.

gabbneb knows better than I do that, with the exception of the Jews in Broward and Palm Beach counties, this is a red state; from outer space the Panhandle looks like a North Korean parade.

read the archives Daniel-San

lol. I shall investigate these ''archives'' of which you speak.

Also voting Dem: international touristland, big international immigrant city, science/engineer-land, and the two college towns

also the one where the Mets play

eating away at the embargo, at the margin, is most certainly not playing it safe.

I respectfully disagree. The severe limits on family travel and sending remittances are designed to placate the most rabid of the anti-Castro exiles, whose votes Obama can safely presume are out of reach. Obama's position is nearer the middle of the road, or, to put it another way, aimed at the fat part of the target where he would seek for votes among those for whom Cuba is a passionate issue.

You seem to think that playing it safe is some kind of dishonorable thing. There is a name for politicians who don't pick their fights carefully: unemployed. Obama has his sights set on a whole different set of issues he wants to tackle.

We all know how evenly divided the USA electorate has been for the past 10 years. There's no sense throwing the election over Cuba. It makes good sense to take a MOR position in re: Florida's one-issue Cuban voters. At least his direction is the correct one, even if minimal and incremental. But daring it is not.

so during a contentious election where the republicans are already trying to brand him as 'too liberal', hes made a safe choice. i think its important for the left to agitate him about this, but i certainly wouldn't expect him to rock the boat on certain issues that will just serve as a rallying point for various demographics to get riled up when the right is having trouble motivating ppl to show up to the voting booth at all. I think playing it safe sometimes is a smart electoral strategy, and id find it hard to believe that obama genuinely believes the embargo should stay.

regardless i think ppl are right to try and push him left on the issue. i just don't think his 'position' on this is particularly meaningful. politix is always compromise

i don't regard playing it safe as dishonorable, the people i'm arguing with do. and taking a nuanced position on cuba is not playing it safe. no one else cares.

In this instance it wouldn't make a whit of difference if he'd supported lifting the embargo: the exile community, convinced he's a liberal, wouldn't have voted for him anyway.

This conviction is based on...?

alfred, you dont think if he took more radical steps it wouldn't be more likely to send more ppl to the polls?

I don't suppose Obama is really looking to "win" the exile community vote so much as not to affront it, and perhaps pick off whatever loose votes might be available.

If the "exile community" really is so monolithic as alfred seems to be suggesting I would be kind of amazed. I expect it's probably a more cohesive voting bloc than Polish Catholics, but less so than the bedrock evangelical right-to-lifers.

deej, the only ones who might respond here to a shift in policy would be the CANF and the young 'uns, and the latter support him anyway.

This conviction is based on...?

I was raised in the exile community.

this discussion has kind of surprised me, I didn't realize how many people didn't know that boomer-aged Cubans remember JFK with utter contempt (and have thus voted against democrats reliably ever since)

Strange. I am a boomer (b. 1954) and I was in first grade when JFK was elected and in fourth grade when he was assassinated. Whatever memory I have of JFK is a memory formed as a small child. Contempt for national politicians over policy matters was not a strong feature of my elementary school years.

Which is not to say you are wrong, only that it is strange to think you are right.

Aimless i never knew you were cuban! also i never knew 1954 was a boomer year, i figured 1950 was sort of the cutoff for that but i've never really thought about it before

My high school class was the largest my high school ever experienced. I was born near the peak in terms of raw numbers. I think you have imagined my claim to cubanismos.

1950 is about the cutoff for the first wave of boomers, but 1954 is about the heart of the boom

I didn't realize how many people didn't know that boomer-aged Cubans remember JFK with utter contempt (and have thus voted against democrats reliably ever since)

unless they're Dems who are willing to pander in a major way, like the Torch. and it's possible nevertheless to move the needle among the cuban community in Florida - Clinton nearly doubled his percentage take in 96 from 92 to 30, while Gore and Kerry fell off 10 points plus from that level. and it's also about the fierceness of the opposition - how many people turn out against, or influence others (ie the younger generation, other hispanics, persuadable south floridians in general - all potential obama voters) not to vote for the dems.

Yeah, baby boom is 1946-1960 or sometimes -1964.

It's slightly reductive (yet partly true) to argue that JFK's "betrayal" through the Bay of Pigs soured my grandparents' generation of exiles on the Dems forever, even if many who were already citizens kept voting for them (LBJ excepted – Goldwater received what little support he got from Cubans) until 1980.

McCrazy's "I will never surrender on Iraq, my friends" soundbite yesterday sounded straight-up Buck Turgidson.

You seem to think that playing it safe is some kind of dishonorable thing. There is a name for politicians who don't pick their fights carefully: unemployed.

There is also a name for politicians who do nothing but play it safe: Democrats.

So did y'all read the David Brooks column 2 weeks ago where he worries that Obama sounds like he's "off in Noam Chomskyland" re the Middle East, then he phones Barry, who proceeds to backpedal and lick his face? Cockburn deals with it here:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080609/cockburn

Obama's sin had been to say that "it's time to engage in diplomatic efforts to help build a new Lebanese consensus," focusing on electoral reform, an end to a corrupt patronage system and the promotion of an equitable economy.

So anguished was Brooks by these dread prospects that he phoned Obama, who promptly furnished answers resoundingly mollifying the columnist's suspicions. According to Brooks, Obama confided to him that "in some ways he'd be tougher than the Bush Administration," doing more, to take one specific example, to arm the Lebanese military. (This schedules a bloodbath in Lebanon in Year One or Two of the Obama administration.) Obama's bottom line to Brooks was straight-up Caesarism: "The (US) generals are light-years ahead of the civilians. They are trying to get the job done rather than look tough."

Let our prayers be for incompetent emperors who talk tough but screw up.

SurveyUSA has McCain up 4 against Obama, and McCain/Romney beats Obama/Edwards (the best-performing Dem team measured) by 3

The absolute numbers are still very low here, indicating lots of undecideds, but are still worrying - McCain/Romney go as high as 47, and the Dems go as low as 27. Even with the best-known Veeps (Clinton, Edwards and Gore), Obama doesn't rise above 40 points. Strangely, to me, the rate of undecidedness is highest among 18-35s and people who almost never attend church, both presumably natural Obama voters. Obama's biggest problem appears to be men, who start at 48 for Obama and rise to 58. Dude needs more testosterone here, apparently.

Note, however, as I said above, that if McCain/Romney won Michigan and New Hampshire, Obama would still win by taking Colorado, Iowa, New Mexico and Ohio. SUSA has indicated that Obama/Edwards would do just that in the latter three states, by comfortable to wide margins. We're still waiting on Colorado.

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/05/21/politics/fromtheroad/entry4116567.shtml

Fuck you Hillary. No really, fuck you. Go to hell.

Yes, it’s important that Obama isn’t defined as some sort of radical Islamic black nationalist boogeyman. But the real fight is over the definition of McCain. If McCain gets painted as “more of the same,” then the fundamentals will kick in and Obama’s “definition” will become largely irrelevant.

Obama's biggest problem appears to be men, who start at 48 for Obama and rise to 58. Dude needs more testosterone here, apparently.

This is why I like Webb (and dislike Edwards).

i think choosing a renown sexist after beating hrc is a good way not to unify the dem party

I've heard that criticism. Haven't fully digested it yet. I see where it's coming from, tho.

Webb has testosterone?

i don't think he's a sexist

I mean, I guess that article is kind of sexist, but women still aren't allowed in certain sections of the millitary so...

Webb has testosterone?

Yeah.

He'd do wonders for Obama, I think. BTW, I'm surprised Gabbneb says Obama's poll numbers are "worrying." I thought he was fairly high on Obama's GE prospects.

according to SUSA Obama is winning in several 'swing states' (OH, PA, VA, IA, etc.), regardless of who McCain picks as veep, so if we're going to pay any mind to polls at this point I'm fairly confident

Hasn't there been talk that McCain's ceiling seems to be around 45%, during a period where the Democratic candidates were so preoccupied with each other that they barely mentioned McCain? If he's topping out at that figure before the opposition even begins to define him, he may be vulnerable. Mind you, I still believe McCain will win, but Obama makes me (cautiously) hopeful.

why do you think MCCain will win? Are you just being a pessimist or do you have an actual reason? Because I don't see how that can happen...

unless they steal the election/intentionally disenfranchise minority voters again/put wedge issues on the ballot to bring out the fundies.....

His background, mostly (POW), and the fact that he's a tough foreign policy hawk. He's also got a profile that has a long history of being elected (white, older man). And -- unlike the other GOP primary contenders -- he can distance himself just enough from Bush and the traditional (and discredited) Republican brand. Indeed, as the GOP author noted in the "Memo to the Congressional GOP Leadership" that I posted a few days ago, McCain may win by distancing himself from the rest of the party (playing up his "maverick" image, which will resonate with a lot of voters).

Later I'll try to dig up some of the articles about the GE that better articulate my concerns (I'm overtired, so less clear than I'd like to be).

McCain is so fucked just on a primal image level.

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/3/2008/05/bushchestbump.jpg

^^^ History is not going to be gentle to us.

yikes obama putting a little too much pressure on me first thing in the morning

http://i31.tinypic.com/dr4kqr.jpg

Epic-MRA confirms that McCain leads Obama in the low 40s in Michigan, but has McCain/Clinton easily beating Obama/Romney, and at least percentage-wise the unity ticket gives all the undecideds who fall to a major party to the Dems. So it appears that Obama has real work to do to close the deal here, and may well do best to pick a known quantity, but that the people he has to close the deal with are more willing to vote Dem than Rep.

Sorry I wasn't able to circle back yesterday to post some of those links I alluded to above. Coincidentally, after my last post, I saw an analysis of the GE in the Obsidian Wings multi-author blog. This post is from Publius, a Law Professor whose writings I admire (both on Obsidian Wings and his prior blog, Legal Fiction). Here, I don't agree with all his conclusions -- e.g., I think Obama has "fundamentals" issues to deal with, too -- but his main point, that the "McCain metanarrative that will be the key 'battleground state' of the 2008 election," is OTM, and brings into play the other points I was making above.

Tonight at the "All Things Digital" conference sponsored by the Wall Street Journal, Rupert Murdoch -- Chairman of News Corp, new WSJ owner, and longtime torchbearer for conservative politics -- said this about Barack Obama: "He is a rock star. It's fantastic. I love what he is saying about education." "I don't think he will win Florida.....but he will win in Ohio and the election". "I am anxious to meet him." "I want to see if he will walk the walk."

let's hope he's better at picking winners than he was in getting behind Hil

Having the owner of the WSJ and Fox Network not hate you is a plus.

http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/610zZZinNNL.jpg

This has been on the cards for MONTHS thanks to the ever-popular 'my kids convinced me' meme. Lis Murdoch had a benefit here last week for arts and media types and I am sure Dad noticed, y'know?

so who does Bam appoint to the FCC then?

http://z.about.com/d/folkmusic/1/5/a/6/BobDylanLP.jpg

a group for James Murdoch?

http://www.phillesh.net/philzonepages/friends_stuff/setlists/20080204/dead-20080204-16-wavy_obama.jpg

Deadheads: The Audacity of Dope

ann coulter is going to have to make a decision here

Having the owner of the WSJ and Fox Network not hate you is a plus badge of honor.

pretty sure murdoch is just snuggling up to/kissing the ass of power

Novak breaks down the map, giving McCain a 270-268 win as of today, based on holding the 2004 results constant except for Colorado and Iowa, which swing to Obama.

Comments include:
- in Ohio, 'bitter' puts Obama on the defensive even while the State is moving Dem-ward, but McCain will have to work to win over anti-trade social conservatives
- while MI-OH-PA will be the biggest battlefield, the election may be won in NM, which leans GOP if Richardson "does not play a large role"
- New Hampshire, which turns on how well McCain gets tied to Bush, may be less likely to swing to McCain than Michigan, where gun-owning union members don't like either candidate, and Bob Barr might give it to Obama
- Nevada could be McCain's weakest state after IA and CO, and Barr could play a role
- it's not impossible for McCain to lose OH or NV, but win PA (and, Novak implies sotto voce, he can't win without it in that case)
- Obama looks pretty solid in Wisconsin (he doesn't bring up Pawlenty)
- Missouri will be a base-drum turnout fight between the cities and sticks, and McCain could lose if he doesn't throw a big bone to the right
- McCain might not suffer as much in NoVA as more conservative Republicans (he confronts Warner only as a ballot-mate, not a ticket-mate)
- North Carolina is off the table, but Indiana and Florida are not (tho it may not be long for the latter)
- Delaware, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota and Oregon are not locked down
- VT is full of liberal hippies

McCain's popularity seems much stronger than the GOP's popularity. Why is that?

It's a semi-rhetorical question. Obviously, it's very possible that McCain has enjoyed the benefit of being the GOP primary winner long before the Democratic primary winner is chosen. But that's hardly the only plausible explanation (I've suggested other possible explanations upthread). And yeah, it's far too early to get overly-concerned with polls and electoral maps.

lolz Novak

Novak was the fucker who shat copiously upon Valerie Plame's CIA career. He's just a conduit for whatever propaganda the conservative right wants to spread.

Sure it goes without saying that he's putting a bit of a thumb on the scale for his side - handing ties in New Mexico and.Ohio to the GOP for basically no reason at all and suggesting that MO is closer than it probably is, for instance. But to the extent after Plame and his memoirs he still acts as a loudspeaker for Rove, eg, he's not gonna create completely false expectations, and I think the analysis is mostly otm when I control for a bit of bias.

McCain's popularity seems much stronger than the GOP's popularity. Why is that?

Individual politicians are almost always more popular than parties or institutions as a whole. It's easier to like a person than a thing. Unless they're Larry Craig or something.

I respect your committment to assuming McCain will win, Daniel. I assume it's at least partially superstition and I can get behind that.

Partially. It also has something to do with McCain (by contrast, if Romney or Huckabee was the GOP candidate, I think they'd get smashed).

Plus, as much as it may sound this way, I'm not totally convinced McCain will win. I would be if HRC were the nominee. I give Obama a chance, and for that, I'm cautiously optimistic.

Sorry, I meant to say that I'm cautiously "hopeful," not particularly "optimistic."

Fundamentals algorithm says Dem win is virtual certainty, at least to the extent McCain is identified with the incumbent party

Sure, but this part -- "at least to the extent McCain is identified with the incumbent party" -- is the whole ballgame, so to speak.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/05/30/ferraro-reagan-dems-see-obama-playing-race-card-find-it-frightening/

someone tell her to stfu

believe her, Gerry knows how to get the votes of Reagan Democrats (in 1 state outta 50).

OTM. AGGRESSIVE GERRY IS AGGRESSIVE

http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/05/30/art.ferraro05.gi.jpg

ferraro is turning into fucking archie bunker; time for clinton to distance herself (as if anyone cares about HRC now anyway, but still).

Obama and the farm vote

I've been explaining the plains states' votes for Obama in part on the fact that it's hard for a farmer to blame economic woes on race

http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/06/01/a-closer-look-at-nebraska/

Edwards gives Obama 1 EV (in CD-1, not CD-2), and Hagel gives him the State, for 4 EVs

About the plains states: it's partly what you say, gabbneb, but I think it's largely the war. Compare:

NY population (2006): 19 million
NY Iraq war casualties so far (wounded and dead): 1,595

KS population (2006): 2.7 million
KS Iraq war casualties so far: 436

So that's about 12,000 NYers per NY Iraq war casualty, and about 6,000 Kansas per KS Iraq war casualty. That's not to disparage anyone from NY's perception of the war, but to say that things look different out here. It's hard not to know someone who hasn't served in this war, and when you know them, you hear how things are, and some of the folks you know end up wounded or dead.

Unfortunately there are enough folks here who think that Iraq is a good cause that this doesn't swing them to vote Dem. Yet. But for those who were open to voting Dem, Clinton was a nonstarter because of her vote and support for the war.

to the extent the war makes a difference among plains staters vis-a-vis NY'ers, I think it has a lot more to do with longstanding isolationist tendencies in the middle part of the country

I don't think isolationism is at all the main thing, unless you think you can be an isolationist and still sign up for voluntary military service at a time when you know you're likely to serve in a war.

One thing that's important about war opposition here is that it's now a mainstream local view, not something artificially imported from the coasts. Because whatever international isolationism there might be here, there is definitely coastal isolationism (e.g. when right after I moved here from the bay area I sneeringly got called a treehugger by a student (I guess he's right but not based on what I'd said)).

I'm very interested in Obama's responses to reports like Lawrence Wright's in last week's New Yorker and one in last Friday's WaPo, i.e. the continuing dissolution of Al Qaeda and the warring factions within what's left of the organization.

I'm surprised McCain hasn't made more of them.

I'm very interested in Obama's responses to reports like Lawrence Wright's in last week's New Yorker and one in last Friday's WaPo, i.e. the continuing dissolution of Al Qaeda and the warring factions within what's left of the organization.

Wasn't it not long ago that an authoritative report (maybe a Gov't report) came out concluding that Al Qaeda had regrouped and was even stronger -- organizationally -- than it was just before 09.11.01?

According to these articles, fund raisers on NPR and PBS for these organizations is down.

fund raisers on NPR and PBS for these organizations (i.e., Al Qaeda?) is down.

I know I'm misreading this, likely because I'm a congenital idiot.

I meant "al Qaeda and like-minded organizations" in my botched joke, but yeah.

Yes, AP ran a story a year ago next week that cited unnamed intelligence analysts that al-Qaeda was stronger than the year previous. Most people took these reports with a grain of salt and I, personally, agree with Mr. Wright’s New Yorker piece that al-Qaeda has become almost pathetic as far as organization is concerned. Even the meme from the last year or two that al-Qaeda has transformed into a media organization has recently been widely discredited.

No, no. The problem isn't with your sense of humor, Alfred, it's with mine (or my lack thereof).

Chertoff: AQ has grown stronger in the past year

I haven't read the New Yorker article, but assume for the sake of argument that there is a certain segment of AQ followers who are turning away from the group and that they are losing their media-savvy-ness and intellectual battles. Do we have any evidence that any of that seriously damages whatever operational capability they may otherwise have?

I'm surprised McCain hasn't made more of them.

Maybe because, politically, McCain has a fine line to walk. If Al Qaeda is a shell of it's former self and therefore far less of a threat, the "mission is accomplished," so to speak, and the case for his candidacy may suffer. He has to keep people at least somewhat scared of imminent foreign threats in order to be at his most effective.

yeah, that's gonna be his message, but it's gonna play out on domestic policy more than foreign - he's gonna be better for your job because he's more devoted to the real america

his veep and surrogates will take care of the pointy-headed stuff

If Al Qaeda is a shell of it's former self and therefore far less of a threat, the "mission is accomplished," so to speak, and the case for his candidacy may suffer.

Wouldn't be the opposite -- the vindication of lockin' up terrorists and spreading freedom and democracy hither and thither?

A bit of both, I think. The Bush Admin. played it in a similar way.

has Obama won the Drudge primary?

Democracy Corps strategy memo

http://cdn.news.aol.com/aolnews_photos/06/01/20070223184209990007

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/06/03/speculation_of_the_day.html#disqus_thread

EXCLUSIVE: MCCAIN SPEECH TONIGHT: THE GENERAL ELECTION BEGINS
Tue Jun 03 2008 17:04:27 ET

John McCain will launch his general election campaign against Barack Obama tonight at 9:00 in New Orleans, Louisiana. In a speech that will praise Senator Clinton for her "tenacity and courage," McCain will recognize Obama as the Democratic party's presumptive nominee.

EXCERPT:

You will hear from my opponent’s campaign in every speech, every interview, every press release that I’m running for President Bush’s third term. You will hear every policy of the President described as the Bush-McCain policy. Why does Senator Obama believe it’s so important to repeat that idea over and over again? Because he knows it’s very difficult to get Americans to believe something they know is false. So he tries to drum it into your minds by constantly repeating it rather than debate honestly the very different directions he and I would take the country. But the American people didn’t get to know me yesterday, as they are just getting to know Senator Obama. They know I have a long record of bipartisan problem solving. They’ve seen me put our country before any President -- before any party -- before any special interest -- before my own interest. They might think me an imperfect servant of our country, which I surely am. But I am her servant first, last and always. ….

I disagreed strongly with the Bush administration’s mismanagement of the war in Iraq. I called for the change in strategy that is now, at last, succeeding where the previous strategy had failed miserably. I was criticized for doing so by Republicans. I was criticized by Democrats. I was criticized by the press. But I don’t answer to them. I answer to you. And I would be ashamed to admit I knew what had to be done in Iraq to spare us from a defeat that would endanger us for years, but I kept quiet because it was too politically hard for me to do. No ambition is more important to me than the security of the country I have defended all my adult life.

Senator Obama opposed the new strategy, and, after promising not to, voted to deny funds to the soldiers who have done a brilliant and brave job of carrying it out. Yet in the last year we have seen the success of that plan as violence has fallen to a four year low; Sunni insurgents have joined us in the fight against al Qaeda; the Iraqi Army has taken the lead in places once lost to Sunni and Shia extremists; and the Iraqi Government has begun to make progress toward political reconciliation.

None of this progress would have happened had we not changed course over a year ago. And all of this progress would be lost if Senator Obama had his way and began to withdraw our forces from Iraq without concern for conditions on the ground and the advice of commanders in the field. Americans ought to be concerned about the judgment of a presidential candidate who says he’s ready to talk, in person and without conditions, with tyrants from Havana to Pyongyang, but hasn’t traveled to Iraq to meet with General Petraeus, and see for himself the progress he threatens to reverse.

Developing...

that speech reads pretty well!

Until the last graf, it could almost be read by Obama.

Yeah. McCain's -- by far -- the toughest GE matchup for Democrats.

And McCain's tone -- as opposed to HRC's -- is a much more effective strategy against Obama (where HRC had a confrontational demeanor; McCain has a folksy, "humble pie" demeanor, but is still seen as a very "strong leader").

yeah i hope everyone can pretty plainly see that mccain is gonna sop up a pretty significant amount of hillary's base

Bill Kristol agrees, which should worry us ("bipartisan foreign policy," etc).

There are actually no disputes of that nature...with the exception of Iraq this time. Obama's not for cutting the defense budget; Obama's not for pulling troops back from our forward positions around the world, with the exception of Iraq. Obama and McCain don't actually differ, at least on paper, even on Iran, where they're arguing about whether they would talk to [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad or not -- and I think that's an important dispute. Still, at the end of the day, Obama doesn't say he would rule out the use of force. McCain certainly is committed as he said this morning to trying to increase economic pressure on Iran, which Obama has also talked about,"

i am so not worried about what Bill Kristol thinks

Yeah. McCain's -- by far -- the toughest GE matchup for Democrats.
Bill Kristol agrees, which should worry us

ok you know what I'm just going to have to not post or read this thread either. I know neither of you guys are actually total fucking morons but damn.

Clearly the RNC are dead serious about really trying to beat the Dems this time around because they just hired the Giuliani campaign manager (Florida or bust!) to do their November GOTV program. Oh yes. They really mean business.

ok you know what I'm just going to have to not post or read this thread either. I know neither of you guys are actually total fucking morons but damn.

When Kristol purrs agreeably about foreign policy positions, it makes me suspicious, or don't you read the Times either?

Tom I'll be very, very happy if you turn out to have been right all along.

Me too. Tom, which of the other GOP candidates -- e.g., Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee and so forth -- do you think posed a greater threat than McCain to win the General Election?

uh mccain is actually a really beautiful contrast to obama

clearly the GOP is trying to set up mccain as a fallguy so that they can take power in 2012 amirite

or yeah maybe they just dont give a shit, im sure its one of those two

xps

Maybe Tom thought that Abu Ghraib, rising casualties in Iraq, and a president given to charming malapropisms was enough to buoy Kerry into office.

McCain wants Obama to go to Iraq solely because he doesn't want to be the only one pictured walking around in a gay, sweater, bulletproof, Dukakis, khaki, vest

When Kristol purrs agreeably about foreign policy positions, it makes me suspicious, or don't you read the Times either?

I read the Times. I wouldn't even think about reading Kristol.

I read the Times. I wouldn't even think about reading Kristol.

I read the Times. I read Kristol as a joke.

which of the other GOP candidates -- e.g., Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee and so forth -- do you think posed a greater threat than McCain to win the General Election?

Not any one of them individually, but when they all combined to form Conservative Voltron...

xp: WALKING AROUND IN A GAY???????

not to be all Pollyanna but when you guys are like "oh fuck McCain is gonna win", remember there's a long time to go and most importantly you can get out and work on this shit, talk to people, try to convince them. It's not like this shit is determined just by who you pick. I know that there will be a lot of people working their asses off for Obama and I think this is going to make a difference.

I know. I think Obama has a chance to win. I just think McCain is a strong GOP nominee in this climate, where say a Romney or Huckabee would have been slaughtered in the GE.

Well no shit. They got slaughtered in the PRIMARIES.

Right, which is why I posed my question to Tom.

By the way, this needs tweaking:

I know neither of you guys are actually total fucking morons but damn.

Fixed, at least as to me. I'm only a moron most of the time. Alfred isn't a moron at all.

he liked paul mccartney's "press", so he's a moron there, but most of the time he's OTM

JUST TELL ME TO PRESS

Classic Obama speech on the way.

great image

http://xs128.xs.to/xs128/08233/o371.png

"Hey whatchya doing there on the threshold of histoy?"
"Just waiting."

Great!!!
I'm glad to watch Barack Obama reaching the next step of becoming President.
I hope Mrs Clinton accept her role as vice president.

felix, Germany,

america: sup o??

big o: coolin, man.

america: what up w/u & that threshold

big o: coolin. u kno.

this speech is unreal. the mccain speech. it is an argument for complete status quo ("change on our own time in our own way") and it fucking reads like he's talking to five-year-olds. unbelievable. i am now someone who yells at the tv.

& if mccain's head popped open right now and there was an alien piloting him a la men in black i would not be surprised AT ALL.

"america is just getting to know senator obama [mr. burns snicker]" WTF

he's a big winner.

Ahahahaha Tom, I feel that if we push McCain as 'big weiner' we might be getting even closer through the magic of my mom's chief insult for snivelly men...

Goddamnit for the seventeenth time "That's not change we can believe in"...

@YGS exactly! That snicker repeated itself several times! He sounds so gay when he does that.

Oh! And there's the 18th "that's not change we can believe in"... this guy. What a fucking moron.

yeah mccain speech is on fox news right now and it is fucking atrociously poor & poorly delivered

i just changed my mind about this guy being a contendah

The thing is: I fear there are actually people who dig those atrocius speeches...

well obv there are millions of them, but my point is after witnessing that i now agree he doesnt have a chance in hell of out-politicking obama

i just changed my mind about this guy being a contendah

-- deeznuts, Tuesday, June 3, 2008 8:06 PM (11 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

c'mon homie

are you sure you aren't posting from June 3, 2007?

dude did you see his speech?? its was hobbling awkward old man patheticness

yes and that is definitely going to knock him out of contention

deeznuts solves mccain for the dems

fucking harold ford jr is on msnbc concern-trolling obama. fuck that guy.

yeah but that's how he always sounds. that's why I'm like anybody who thinks he has a chance in this GE must have just not been paying that much attention to his actual public appearances

xpost

Fuuuuuck, I just walked in from mowing the yard and Jeffrey Toobin is saying "OMG DID YOU SEE McCAIN'S SPEECH?? THAT WAS THE WORST MOST PATHETIC SPEECH I EVER SAW!!!"

I gotta see this!

multi xposts

yeah because being a bad public speaker definitely hampered gwb

yeah et u were right dude

j0rdan thing is that totally wrecks every advantage he has over obama outside of being a republican, & being a republican is no longer an advantage xp

I hear ya deeznuts. It's incomprehensible to me how this guy can even be a nominee. Aliens taking over the earth would seriously surprise me less than this senile sorry old man being chosen president. But then again, 'I'm European', that's what it is right?

ps. Guy on CNN saying now: "What about that McCain speech? That was awful! Just awful! One of the worst speeches he ever gave!" OTFM.

gwb was a bad public speaker but he could at least communicate his childlike ideas. McCain just sounds confused all the time.

also gwb's democratic opponents for the office weren't exactly exciting to listen to either

true dat

yeah. Obama is the "charisma" candidate in this election x1000

deez is not making an invalid point but mccain's public speaking is not deading his candidacy sorry

I'm afraid you're right J0rdan. It's troubling that a large mass of people doesn't seem to care about that. But missing that point, missing the point of charisma and *ugh* change and presentation, is what's gonna make McCain lose this race. Ah well, he can always run again in 4 years, 8 years...

CNN brings teh lulz: : "I gotta give credit to the McCain campaign: They put a room of people together where McCain was the youngest!"

lol that's awful

I think homie is arguing that his charisma deficit, especially next to GLOBAMA, is gonna be an issue. Ideology doesn't decide this shit, personality does, and O is mad personable next to the cryptkeeper.

xp to j0

where do i shot a transcript?

hoos like the last ten posts of yours are mad self-caricature

coolin. u kno.

Clinton giving in, congratulating Obama, calling it 'an honour' to have been racing against him, calling him 'a dear friend' etc.

lollll that cnn zing is so awesome

yeah h00s thats what im saying - j0rdan seems to be a believer in the invincible republican media machine when as far as i can tell every single advantage theyve held over the past 10 years has been neutralized in the past 2

I think homie is arguing that his charisma deficit, especially next to GLOBAMA, is gonna be an issue. Ideology doesn't decide this shit, personality does, and O is mad personable next to the cryptkeeper.

sorry i refuse to believe that ppl are going to defect from mccain because he is giving crappy speeches that you can only see on fox news

Nah man I'm talking about the debates and Town Hall shit they're gonna be dealing with in the fall. That's where you'll see them together and where Big Mac will look doddering by comparison.

did she just say "stay the course"

obama isn't exactly the hottest debater either...

Ya she did Catsupppp

well i'm completely exhausted yet unable to sleep - weirdo jetlag backlash in effect - and i like what i'm hearing

it seems like a mistake for mccain to repeat all the language obama's been using - it ain't a great start to the g.e. to repeat the frames your opponent has given you, even if you're rejectening them

mccain's message isn't half-bad - it's you can't trust obama because he's just another politician out for his own glory, while i'marealamurrican you can trust with your job future - but the delivery may well make him look like just another politician

Welcome jetlagged man! Best place to be right now, this thread here :)

The delivery wasn't even worthy of a politician!

xpost

experience dont matter if U DED

Oh, it's HORRIBLE that McCain is just repeating Obama's points. That's how you lose an election. He's putting himself on the defenseive. That's how Dukakis lost!

lol @ cnn putting delegate count under hillary

every single advantage theyve held over the past 10 years has been neutralized in the past 2

is this based on, like, poll results, or your reading of the public sentiment, or something equally unreliable?

-- deeznuts

joeks

i don't have cable!

my unreliable reading of public sentiment

last election's results, media is no longer hyperaware of perceived left-wing bias but in fact the opposite (do you think CNN wouldve had the balls to pull this shit 4 years ago??), public still anti-iraq war, george w bush, regret, i could go on

obama isn't exactly the hottest debater either...

I think Obama will be a better debater against McCain. First, he learns well. He was better in later debates against HRC, and I expect he'll continue to learn. Second, and this is obv. a guess, but I think HRC had Obama nervous/off-his-game a bit when they debated. McCain will present a much different -- much easier -- challenge in debates.

Can you imagine John Kerry doing what Hillary did and mention green buildings and fuel-cell cars and energy independence in the beginning of her speech? Like it's the future of America? Shit done changed.

</hoos>

o yeah & the economy is about to fuckin collapse that cant hurt either

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/080603EconDailyGraph2_jhnbtfg.gif

there arent red states, or blue states, there are states full of people who realize the economy has gone to shit

Obama just had a good line against McCain - "I honor his many accomplishments, even if he refuses to recognize mine."

He's doing that Nas thing with Hillary and McCain: "I wish you success/Even if you wish me the opposite."

TUFF DIPLOMIN

O MAN OBAMA JUST KILLED DID U GUYS SEE THAT

He knows that gas is a tangible thing and Iraq is a kind of intangible thing.

this dude is going populist fullbore & i love it

i am genuinely excited about the prospect of a candidate that actually gives a shit about environmental/ecological issues.

This crowd vs. McCain's green screen.

OH MY FUCKING GOD.

o yeah & the economy is about to fuckin collapse that cant hurt either

-- deeznuts,

certainly won't provide plenty of fodder to the 'losing' party come 2010/12, either

wait what green screen

i am listening to the radio

lol totally eazy

the contrast b/w these speeches could not be greater

'religion as a wedge & patriotism as bludgeon' wow

tru milo but lets enjoy this right now

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/images/mccain-mtsdspeech2-blog.jpg

BEST FINISH EVAR!!

rahrharhraharharh!#Rfriubriuerbfiwu;uebw;fiubEW:FIUBEW:IU

:o

lol, jho

lol i was clapping at the end

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/images/mccain-mtsdspeech2-blog.jpg

"I will paint ANY car for $79.95!"

McCain b podcastin

http://www.ldap.com/1/commentary/wahl/20070731_kc.jpg

The fist-bump with Michelle was the awesomest thing ever.

Are all these commentators on Slate's The Fray talking about how they are defecting from the Democratic party just Republicans trying to sow discord? Or is this trend of voting against the Democratic party cause Hillary lost for real? (Is the sin of neglecting the popular vote IN YOUR DREAM WORLD really a more egregious sin than... ya know... war???)

Americans have extremely short memories. They'll get over it by November.

But they are angry now because Americans think that if they don't get their way that democracy failed.

Whopping Obama speech! McCain looks like a deranged sports figure behind that green wall.

@Eppy: Yah the fist bump was awesome!

major lol @ eazy's pic

But something like this has to be some kind of Republican posturing, right?

"This is one Democrat that will be voting for McCain come November even if Hillary is offered the V.P. I think it is very telling how miserably he has performed over the past few weeks. Why haven't the Democratic Superdelegates already gone to Obama in droves ? Could it be there is a A LOT of nervousness , even among the left wing activists, that Obama is going to be a hard, if not IMPOSSIBLE , sell in the Gerneral Election ? This country is NEVER going to elect Barrack Hussein Osama as President. The Democrats have given the Republicans the White House !"

There's like, a hundred posts like that on the Fray right now.

it's slate. i mean, what else can you say?

Did you read the coverage of the rules committee meeting?

Is the sin of neglecting the popular vote IN YOUR DREAM WORLD really a more egregious sin than... ya know... war???

i wonder how many people realize that direct democracy in this country is pretty rare (and when it happens it's a disaster). i'll take the representative version.

All sorts of that shit.

Fist bump photo plz?

Amen..Time will prove this to be a very sad day in the history of the Greatest "Democratic" Nation.

This "Obama" hysteria is all too familiar with those who remember Hitler and the Hollocost...the misled German population was "fooled" also!

The first time in my 67 years that I have actually shed a tear to hear that our Democratic Party has endorsed this man that we know very little about.

have a very bad "gut feeling" about this!

We need a "New Democrat" party!!

Sad in my old age..this could be my last Presidential vote..and I have no one to vote for now! However, I WILL vote against Obama!

I too am a life long Democrat, but it is clear to all who have eyes, the popular vote means NOTHING to the Delegates. I WILL vote Republican to keep Obama out. I never thought I would hear myself admit that, but I am, today is different. Unfortunately, there's no one else worthy of my vote now. I agree with you whole heartedly, and hope you are right, but I just don't see it happening. I hope I'm wrong!

This is crazy fairy tale land bullshit.

agents of the red orchestra dude

This "Obama" hysteria is all too familiar with those who remember Hitler and the Hollocost...the misled German population was "fooled" also!

Oh COME ON!

The Hollocost.

ya srsly!

don't be repostin 'the fray' here, dudes

CNN: "The deranged narcisism of the Clintons" is what keeps Hillary 'in the race'.

Total crowd in St Paul: 32,000. 15,000 of these were OUTSIDE.

I know, insane!

Gabbneb, I'm just trying to wrap my mind around the existence of these people.

Tho, I do have to say; I love that Fray commentators learned to use quotation marks around words from, like, Family Circus. Why exactly do the words "Obama," "fooled," "gut feeling," and "New Democrat" require quotation marks? Is it cause Prince Caspian uses quotation marks with those words?

mordy they dont exist

theyre republican trolls most likely

I'm just now watching McCain's "prebuttal" speech, which TPM says is “already legendarily” pathetic. I don't think it was so bad. It wasn't riveting. McCain isn't riveting. But in some ways, it was savvy, e.g., complimenting HRC and making a real pitch for her supporters, distancing himself -- to the extent he can -- from the Bush Admin., promising a new direction (promising "change"), playing up his "reformer" and "maverick" status. To be clear, the speech was hardly great. He was too defensive. He stumbled from time to time (and those stumbles were especially cringe-worthy (to me, at least)). One joke (about Obama not criticizing special interests that support Obama) fell horribly flat. He isn’t an impressive speechmaker. He repeatedly struck the same tired, failed themes that HRC tried to use (unsuccessfully) against Obama. But it wasn't as bad as I've read, and I suspect it will play pretty well with a wide constituency of voters.

And -- mercifully -- he kept the "My friends" thing to a minimum tonight.

I'm now going to hunt down video of the Obama speech. Any video links are appreciated.

I spent most of the evening watching All About Eve, so I'm glad to catch up and learn relatively good news.

Haha. Well, consider the source (me) and you'll feel better.

Oh, you mean everyone upthread. They're probably right.

I spent most of the evening watching All About Eve, so I'm glad to catch up and learn relatively good news.

-- Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, June 3, 2008 11:44 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

you spent the evening watching a fresh young upstart take down an aging, self-obsessed hag?

Can't for this election to be filmed as Showgirls 2008.

Can't WAIT etc.

I don't want to see McCain showing any leg.

you spent the evening watching a fresh young upstart take down an aging, self-obsessed hag?

"You can always put that award where your heart ought to be."

"I'm just a kazoo with sparkles."

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f6/Bette_Davis_in_All_About_Eve_trailer.jpg/200px-Bette_Davis_in_All_About_Eve_trailer.jpg

http://news.aol.com/newsbloggers/media/2008/04/hillary_shot.jpg

WHERE IS FIST BUMP PHOTO.

Dammit. Innernet and cable went out at my house, had to retreat to bar to get signal(and d/l new lego indy demo). Haven't seen any of the 3 speeches yet, will try to grab obama's on YT. Bar is full of ultimate frisbee teams. Please send help.

Say, should we set a post limit for each of these threads? There's going to be quite a few of them. Start numbering them, switch to a new one once we pass 4K, etc...

I'm now going to hunt down video of the Obama speech. Any video links are appreciated.

-- Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, June 4, 2008 3:39 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Link

Any luck on this?

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20080604/capt.73da5a111c0f4255b4211ce0b2658ae4.obama_2008_primary_mnmg101.jpg?sig=Q_iJY0P41GCIXDTu95gDPg--

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20080604/capt.240a510d64364325bbff5d6ee9ccd100.obama_2008_primary_mncc211.jpg?sig=90kuZumLlO4T6Z06r2V3Iw--

Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Barack Obama D-Ill., center, is covered in hands as supporters surround him after his primary election night speech in St Paul, Minn. Tuesday, June 3, 2008.
(AP Photo/Chris Carlson)

my moms was there

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20080604/capt.7ceb3dd97e704c0baa68f35c6bb6e67f.obama_2008_primary_mncc223.jpg?sig=JI8B2IIm3mWkSrjO11Nk1w--

Can't find a fist bump photo yet. Just postin' this to say the future First Lady looks lovely tonight.

Drudge currently has these up:

http://static.sky.com/images/pictures/1685035.jpg

http://static.sky.com/images/pictures/1685039.jpg

http://static.sky.com/images/pictures/1685034.jpg

Hell, it's been a decade; anybody ever wonder why no one's started implemented anti-drudge-hotlinking blocks yet?

FOUND IT(sorta)

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/nm/20080604/2008_06_03t230301_450x318_us_usa_politics.jpg?sig=FstHePMft_rzG5TU4cEShQ--

I've caught pretty much all of the Hillary & Barry Show, but It's been ages since I sat through a McCain speech. So charming! The 2012 argument finally makes sense, at least regarding the more insidious Rovian-types in his party. Letting America feel good about a black president gives them a nice window to heal their wounds and play saviour-in-waiting, not that it will necessarily work.

This election should be Obama's to lose, but McCain will easily win more pity votes.

obama's speech is <a href="http://www.barackobama.com/index.php";>here</a>

Hillary won SD by 10% tonight, and, haha, Ron Paul got 17% in the GOP race. (Huck got 7%)

In other news, with 70% reporting, Obama is winning MT by 57-41.

For lolz, Romney won this state back in mid-Feb with 38%, and Mccain getting only 22%, a full 3% behind Ron Paul.

Gunna be a long 5 months.

Here too

That speech was really, really really good.

reverse angle:

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20080604/capt.8e676223c5e24040909553b4cc2ed1ee.obama_2008_primary_mncc203.jpg?sig=ewFN4Jlb5RX0Cd6Mn9AOkw--

awesome

....how many times does he say 'thank you' at the beginning of that speech, what the hell

Michelle put up the hard knucks first, and I momentarily thought he was gonna leave her hanging.

fist bump vid, spotted by goons:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=AcWfr_RBHbg

just to make sure certain things aren't left behind:

http://i25.tinypic.com/33ng4yx.gif

http://i28.tinypic.com/2h2e13k.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v134/tracerhand/aniObamaFTW.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v134/tracerhand/aniObamaFTW.gif

IT WAS A GOOD DAY

also, I don't recall McCain getting an full above-the-fold spread from those pinko nutjobs on CNN.com when he won... just sayin.

I'm now going to hunt down video of the Obama speech. Any video links are appreciated.

-- Daniel, Esq., Wednesday, June 4, 2008 3:39 AM (1 hour ago)

____________________________________

Any luck on this?

-- BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Wednesday, 4 June 2008

Yes (it's now up on TPM). Sorry for the delayed response.

the fist bump rules! jeez. we've come a long way, baby

RESPECK KNUCKLES AHOY:

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a81/kos102/2008/Obama/so-cool.jpg

lol

"Senator Hillary Clinton has made history in this campaign not just because she’s a woman who has done what no woman has done before, but because she’s a leader who inspires millions of Americans with her strength, her courage, and her commitment to the causes that brought us here tonight."

God, politics is a vile, vile, shit-eating circus.

sorry about your loss, morbs

....how many times does he say 'thank you' at the beginning of that speech, what the hell

When I saw him in person, he said it like 20 times.

oh my God the giggles in that McCain speech are so fucking loathsome

they sound like a gabbneb post

I spent most of the evening watching All About Eve, so I'm glad tocatch up and learn relatively good news.

-- Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Tuesday, June 3, 2008 11:44 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

you spent the evening watching a fresh young upstart take down an aging, self-obsessed hag?

That doesn't parse; Eve seems to be the lesbian in that film.

I'm genuinely curious: is there any logical reason why Clinton hasn't conceded yet?

She's implicitly threatening to make trouble for Obama at the convention and/or not delivering her constituency to him as leverage. The question is leverage for what, a spot on Obama's ticket (as VP), Obama retiring her campaign debts, a spot in his cabinet?

What a sleazy, slimy scumbag.

Maybe she just wants a cruller.

didja say "cruller" or "club"?

http://j-walkblog.com/old/images/hillaryc.jpg

hahaha!

I know he's far too class to do this but there is a large part of me that wants Obama to issue the following statement:

LADY, IF YOU HAVE TO ASK...

I wish that it wouldn't be damaging for him to never mention or acknowledge Clinton again. Because that's what I want.

from M Dowd today:

“It’s never going to end,” sighed one Democrat who has been advising Hillary. “We’re just moving to a new phase.”...

Clintonologists know that Hillary is up to something, but they aren’t sure what. Theory No. 1 is that it’s the Cassandra “I told you so” gambit: She believes intensely that he’s too black, too weak and too elitist — with all his salmon and organic tea and steamed broccoli — to beat her pal John McCain. But she has to pretend she’ll do “whatever it takes,” even accept the vice presidency, a job she’s already had and doesn’t want again, so that nobody will blame her when he loses on Nov. 4. Then she can power on to 2012.

Theory No. 2 is that it’s a “Bad stuff happens” maneuver, exemplified in her gaffe about the R.F.K. assassination, that she figures that at least if she moves a few blocks from Embassy Row to the Naval Observatory, she’ll be a heartbeat away from the job she’s always wanted....

She has told some Democrats recently that she wanted Obama to agree to allow a roll call vote, like days of yore, so that the delegates of states she won would cast the first ballot for her at the convention. She said she wanted that for her daughter.

Obama supporters are worried that it’s a trick and she’ll somehow snatch away the nomination....

i'd forgotten, john, that you join morbs in the anti-hope, wishin 'n hopin for the dem implosion party. let me extend my condolences to you as well.

I'm genuinely curious: is there any logical reason why Clinton hasn't conceded yet?

how many times does it have to be said - she doesn't want to look like a loser

She said she wanted that for her daughter.

She's going nowhere. She'll get a big cabinet post reforming healthcare or something. But he'd have to be utterly insane to get pushed into offering her VP. Can you imagine the "pussy-whipped" meme he'd instantly get hit with.

i'd forgotten, john, that you join morbs in the anti-hope, wishin 'n hopin for the dem implosion party. l

yeah that's not actually it at all but trying to get you to understand stuff is like explaining chemistry to a pony

how many times does it have to be said - she doesn't want to look like a loser

That's why I emphasized "logical". I get why she's failing to concede from a personal, emotional, irrational standpoint. I was just trying to figure out if there was a logical reason why she hasn't called it quits.

And I'm not sure that I'd call holding out for the VP spot a logical reason, because I really don't think it's going to happen.

xp: hi5!

yeah that's not actually it at all but trying to get you to understand stuff is like explaining chemistry to a pony

hillarys power is waning by the second - she better get what she can while she can and then fall in line

im not really sure what she can get tho. vp is out of the question. not sure why she would want a cabinet post. that leaves what? a senate leadership position or the supreme court? putting such a highly political figure on the scotus seems like a really horrible and outlandish idea. so the senate then - is anyone gonna move over so she can get her spot?

this is looking sort of intractable.

explaining chemistry to a pony is colorful and magical and has an awesome theme song

if you take my gimlet stare as giggles, you don't understand much. but i appreciate your personal attacks.

stop letting my personal attacks stand in the way of you explaining the secret workings of politics to unenlightened souls like myself g

stop letting yr personal attacks stand in the way of yr knowing or 'explaining' anything

giving up & looking like a loser >>>>>>> looking delusional in "I've won if you only count the people who voted for me!" unicorn land

yeah the only explanation I was referring to is my own position, which isn't actually that nuances or hard to get, but since it doesn't fit your moronic narrative you write your own thus: i'd forgotten, john, that you join morbs in the anti-hope, wishin 'n hopin for the dem implosion party. How that's not a "personal attack" - intentionally casting my position in a way you know isn't even remotely true - it'd be a mystery if you hadn't kinda outed yrself as The Guy Who Can Divine The Truth Behind What People Say in every other post

unicorn land vs. pony land

no, it is my firm belief that that is true

Q.E.D.

as long as yr gonna talk about my gigglin posts

that's not a personal attack, of course, just yr well-informed, erudite observation

kiu guys

lol

I've always made it clear I want both piggy parties to implode simultaneously, along w/ Jud Ap*t*w.

wtf is this shit? did mccain's fucking loathesome speech really remind you of a dude on the internet you don't like? or are you just taking a swipe at a dude on the internet you don't like for some other reason?

what language is this thread in?

sandyvaginese

MY FREINDS

meanwhile, was Bam referring to some really specific thing when he said McNasty "doesn't respect" his accomplishments?

Maybe the entire speech he had given an hour before?

well, I made it my biz to turn that off after 20 seconds, and I hope O was similarly preoccupied.

I'm sure he didn't watch it at all, but that his speechwriters did.

Since we all are talking about our mothers at some point or another, my moms pointed out last night that Obama's people are staying pretty anonymous -- no Rove, no Carville out in front.

David Axelrod, who does message/strategy, is very out in front. David Plouffe, who does organization, has gotten a bit less attention than many organizers (per O's shout-out last night), but that may be a function of Obama's novelty and the primary stage. He'll get some more.

Couple of weeks ago I was talking to guy at Tate Modern re. Shepard Fairey O posters/Elizabeth Peyton young Kerry painting (we decided this was so indie it HURT). We could not decide on who to render Hilz art (Clintons like Chihuly therefore clearly appalling taste) but for McCain we settled quickly on Julian Opie because his style would fit WALNUTS! to a T. Imagine:

http://www.artfund.org/images/artwork/4989_C.jpg

O at AIPAC meeting is killing HRC with kindness until she fucks off, looks like.

OK, well, that's Moms, in the heartland.

I can't think of a specific accomplishment of Obama's that McCain hasn't respected, but there is a whole history of McCain making sort of snide remarks about Obama, like here or here.

McCain has a problem with snide that could damage him with the floating voter.

My mom lives in the midwest and the word 'heartland' reminds her of bread with too many additives. She instantly wondered if David Axelrod was related to the Axelrods in our town about two seconds after she first saw him on television.

OK so not only has Obama gone to Aipac, lookee which of his pals took him there!

http://thepage.time.com/2008/06/04/rahm-chooses/

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/06/04/cooper.brazile.boo.cnn

lol

and oh yeah how bout that rahm emanuel, what courage the man's got

i see that courage consists of supporting hillary

people falling into line is never pretty i guess

i didn't think it was possible, but the tone of all of this has gotten so much worse. the more quotes i read of hillary's people demanding obama to come kiss the ring, the more exasperated i get.

I sort of want him to invite her people to kiss his ring but that wouldn't be productive.

there were like five invisible quote marks in that post

which word would not include a closed quote?

"I"

"I really wanted to write a happy piece tonight." (about HRC's speech)

whatever - there have been candidates garnering far fewer votes than hillary who never conceded at all. people need to quit whining about it

I agree that people are making too much of it, but those candidates, you know, quietly slipped off the stage and made no demands on the winner.

http://hillaryclintonnews.blogspot.com/

she wants to where from us?

http://hillaryclintonnews.blogspot.com/2008/06/hillary-wants-to-here-from-you-what.html

the Lincoln-Douglas thing may take off

lol

Shane32801 said...

I am from Orlando also and I am completely disgusted by last nights outcome.
Fight for VP Hillary, you deserve it and have earned it.
Stay in this race and take it to Denver if Obama doesn't pick you for VP.

I you have my support 100%.
June 4, 2008 7:13 AM

Shane32801

http://streetknowledge.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/rush-limbaugh_oxycontin.jpg

Hillary just gave a speech in South Dakota which she is projected to win.

nice grammar

"Jimmy Carter is Dead To Me."

there have been candidates garnering far fewer votes than hillary who never conceded at all.

Isn't this part of why it's uniquely appalling? When has it ever happened at the end of a two-candidate race?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/03/obama-to-head-to-appalach_n_105031.html

I never caught this clip of Larry David when he appeared on Hardball:

http://blog.prospect.org/blog/ezraklein/scarymccaincrop.jpg

they both look like the head of that decapitated android from Alien

this is why it was so key for the Clinton people to hold the line at conceding that any 'Uncommitted' MI votes were Obama votes - it's the only way they for them to win the popular vote

http://www.serenadawn.com/Alien-Ash-Destroyed-1.JPG

worst bukkake ever

dan, are you in a mood today?

this thread peaked with the fist-bump, it's been downhill ever since

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/06/04/obama_takes_lieberman_aside.html

It sounds like the LBJ Talk Posture.

It does!

'Cept LBJ would be poking you in the sternum the whole time.

http://gridskipper.com/assets/resources/2007/01/0clownfe.jpg

Ew.

NSFW.

ok i just saw mccain's speech from last night and, like, whoa

it made me realize i may have never actually sat through a whole speech of his before. saying "my friends" is the least of his problems.

i) he talked about obama a LOT - shouldn't he be acting more like a front-runner?

ii) his smile is TERRIBLE - gwb is a bad speaker but at least when he smiles inappropriately it seems goofily, crazily, genuine; mccain looks like he has a smile "switch" that he throws

iii) what's the background on the bit where he says obama supports tariffs that hurt american farmers?

iv) "honor" is just as effectively vapid a catch phrase as "change" is, but i don't see mccain's military past and foreign policy "experience" trumping obama's domestic agenda, and even less so several months from now

iv.2) mccain's explanation of how he'll fix health care was almost admirable in its pure flimflammery, but even that had more detail than anything else he mentioned; it sounded as though he'd just try naming a list of "issues" and counting on his audience to fill in the blanks with whatever policies they thought they preferred, and sort of attribute those thoughts to mccain

a perf like that one makes me think "dole" and has me seriously considering tombot's wingnut conspiracy theory seriously for the first time

yeah i thot dole-clinton 96 too

i didnt realize et had a conspiracy theory, but that kinda explains milo's 'a bad economy is a good economy for them' post

but really its way too fucking high stakes to be believable. loose change level bs

ABC News: HRC will likely drop out on Friday.

hydrating babies

That is all.

YEAH! i dozed off for a second and was like what in holy hell is this man talking about

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v134/tracerhand/ThankyouHillary.jpg

daaaamn

I don't know why you people are still posting when Alfred just won the internet

Can't wait for the first George Stephanopoulos-hosted debate of the general.

wait what hydrating babies? where?

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26692&page=1

\(o_0)/

the lede of Alfred's ABC news article isn't even grammatically correct

It looks like a classic case of editorial prissiness and meddling.

even if it were, it's phrased very strangely - it claims to know she's made the decision - which as J0hn says is the $64,000 question - yet rather than say "Hillary Clinton has decided to concede her nomination bid" - which would be the top line of ANY story that contained that fact at this point - it takes the decision as given, and instead makes the rather useless and obvious point that the decision "ends a long, often bitter battle" with Obama. of course it could all simply be bad writing but somethin seems off

xpost if the editors were being prissy one would hope thhey could at least fix the grammar!

also note that aside from that first sentence, nothing else in the article even mentions her decision to end it, much less back up the assertion with a source

"We pledged to support her to the end," Representative Charles B. Rangel, a New York Democrat who has been a patron of Mrs. Clinton since she first ran for the Senate, said in an interview "Our problem is not being able to determine when the hell the end is."

ha!

luv rangel so much

The masses want change, so they'll vote for Obama, and the country will become more socialistic for the next 4 years. Also, I can't help but feel that BHObama is a frontman, a puppet if you will, for some one or some group who is actually pulling the strings and calling the shots. BHObama gives great speeches. And because he's black, he's a polical novelty. (I've got nothing against his race or anybody elses.) But really, what does he have to offer America? He's done nothing. He talks a lot, but he hasn't done squat. I worry that his handlers, (whoever is telling him what to do and paying his way), will really mess up America by promoting all kinds of liberal, anti-God, anti-freedom, rotten to the core laws and directives. Thank goodness that we know that good will win out in the end. In the end, we have to trust in God and the goodness of the American people.

Posted by:
DJ in AZ 8:33 PM

BHObama?

right-wing comments sections make me want to Vote From The Rooftops :-/

Oh, wait, BH = his first initials. Yet another lesson in thinking before I speak.

hey guys i think j0hn was talking about the clown assfucking that other guy

fyi

Looks like HRC will back the fuck off on Saturday, not Friday according to BBC.

People on Dem blogs suggested it was bad taste to do it on RFK RIP day. I have no idea if anyone at hillaryclinton.com noticed.

hoos yes that makes much more sense

nytimes says "Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton will endorse Senator Barack Obama on Saturday, bringing a close to her 17-month campaign for the White House, aides said."

now that's a lede

fucking hell we just made the mistake of going to a Hebrew language meetup.com group. Of course someone wound up bringing up Obama, and of course the group was split down the middle, and of course the McCain voters seemed to fear their imminent annihilation should Obama win and of course this made them very excitable. I'm kind of glad my Hebrew is not that good.

A great piece on the pluses and minuses of Montana's governor as VP. Well worth reading: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/06/on-brian-schweitzer-as-vp.html

Very interesting. Schweitzer's been in the back of my mind since he won his Governor seat in 2004 and got a fair amount of tv coverage at the time. He seems an unconventional pick, but I don't think his appeal is strictly Western. Given exposure, I think he'd play well with a bunch of the Hillary supporters people say Obama can't ever get.

Coupla years ago, ActBlue(i think) ran this great contest where you were entered into a drawing if you contributed. The winner won a fishing trip w/ Gov Sweitzer(and his dog). The gov's office provided the boat, gear, and license; you had to provide your own bolo tie*.

(*)presumably.

Brian Schweitzer's been a rising star for a few years. The NYT did a lengthy profile on him in 2006. In some ways, his appeal is similar to George Bush's (back before Bush became wildly unpopular): Schweitzer wears "blue jeans and cowboy boots and a beaded bolo tie"; he has "folksy charm and true-grit swagger"; he "shot guns, rode horses, took his dog to work and decimated his opponents with off-the-cuff one-liners heavy on the bull-and-horse metaphors." You get the idea. It's been a long time since I read the full article, but I remember that this early passage struck me:

He didn’t act like a Democrat, in other words, and to many Democrats, reeling from consecutive losses to Bush, that seemed like a pretty good thing.

* * * *

Schweitzer has seized the heartland imagery generally monopolized by Republicans. “Schweitzer is the antithesis of the Democrat stereotype,” Markos Moulitsas Zuniga, of dailykos.com, the partisan Democratic blog, told me. “Too many Democrats look like targets for the school bully. Schweitzer is a tough guy. And people like guys who will bar-fight their way across a state.”

His brand of populism may be appealing to voters, although he skewers libertarian/right on a lot of issues (against gun control, for the death penalty, for lowering taxes). I think he's worth a long look from Obama, especially if -- for reasons that make me even more upset with HRC's tactics in this primary -- Jim Webb is no longer considered a viable VP candidate. Anyway, the NYT piece on Schweitzer is good.

the same reasons that make Jim Webb "no longer viable" also make Brian Schweitzer "no longer viable" - bluntly, there are three of them, two shaped like olives and the third like a pickle

I think at this point it's a stare down between the parties on veep genders:
If Obama picks an otherwise perfectly qualified white dude first, McCain can pick a woman and shit all over him; Obama has to wait John out and make damn sure he picks somebody with a cock or he's going to screw himself
Basically I love this country and everybody in it which is why I really regret being born in time for the next two decades

fucked up my pronouns there but if you don't understand what I was getting at then oh well fuck you

I am staunchly (cynically) unconvinced that the lack of pickle is the key to winning anything around this place.

yeah well it'll sure look like some fucking change we can believe in when Barack Hayzeus Obama picks a white guy who can win bar fights for veep and prcoeeds to be one-upped by a fucking old POW in the "progressive" stakes. It would be typically donkey, though

my tinfoil hat mccain-is-fall-guy-joke theory only works inasmuch as the democratic party can manage to continue their high-wire act and not fall back into post-reagan-business-as-usual

on that point, actually, mccain picking another white fucker like romney or huckabee before obama selects his veep would be another point in favor of fall guy status

I mean seriously just hold the parade in august

and prcoeeds to be one-upped by a fucking old POW in the "progressive" stakes

McCain is telecasting that that's what he wants Obama to do -- one of his biggest beefs last night was that Obama was advocating lol change by going back to the 60's and 70's! Which of course is sub-baloney as an argument -- head cheese, really -- but I think more than anything it's meant to call up a mental image of Jimmie Walker in Good Times or the like. Check it out -- a black guy from the 70's!

He needs a guy who can whin rhetorical fights, even beter than he can. He's all restraint, maybe he'll go for a little "You're no Jack Kennedy" action in the veep debates?