Been a bit busy lately, so it’s past time for a new US elections thread. Since Super Tuesday we’ve had an anticipated string of Barack Obama victories from caucuses in Nebraska, Washington and Maine and a primary in Louisiana, along with a narrow win for John McCain in Washington and probably meaningless victories for Mike Huckabee in Kansas and Louisiana. Tomorrow US time we have both parties holding primaries in Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
US primaries open thread
Copyright © 2008 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey.com.au. All Rights Reserved.
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media and business.
Editor: Jonathan Green.
Publishers: Eric Beecher, Diana Gribble.
Level 7, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000. Ph: 1800 985 502 Fax: (03) 8623 9975
1,263 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 18 19 [20] 21 22 … 26 » Show All
Welcome back Adam …at least we will get some competition here for us Pro O
In your absence ,
“Rain” has been Hillary’s most ardent supporter
Whilst he ‘right’ largely sit in the grandstands terrified to articulate a defence of ‘howardism’
Foreign Policy , where is Obama so left of Hillary or do you support Hillary’s hawish ME policy in favour of Israel & keeping Iran , Hamas , Syria out of the loop whilst US supporting despotic Arab despots who control the oil ?
Ron,
Do any Empires last forever – no, but so what?
Do they benefit the conquered – well, that’s not the purpose of them, though it can sometimes happen as an incidental consequence.
Was the British Empire a good thing? Perhaps not, but it must have been one of the “least worst” empires in history.
I now await the predictable avalanche of examples of British Imperial perfidy …
Diogenes,robert bollard
Does leadership rate much in ferguson’s assumption of creating/maintaining empire
or is it assumed as a byproduct of empire
Ron,
Re the defence of Howardism – there’s plenty of it out there, just not on this blog – have a look at News Limited.
Ron # 950. Nor do they benefit the conquerors (or at least not the lower classes within). Marx said (specifically regarding Britain and Ireland and the way in which anti-Irish racism divided the British labour movement): “A nation that enslaves another can never itself be free.”
This can be seen in the way in which the use of terror and torture against brown foreigners leads to the use of same against brown immigrants and before you know it white working class people are being banged up without trial. More specifically it is shown in the interconnection between the foreign policy of the US state and its domestic problems. Can they afford their military/economic complex and give their citizens free health care? No way!
asanque @ 903,
All well and good but the super-dels could still beat Obama (if he loses Ohio and Texas)
It’s looking increasingly unlikely, though.
Adam-I’m sure you would approve of his Keynes’ statement
“When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?”
Your post raises a few questions.
1. Is Obama really that “left-wing”? His policies seem very similar to Hillary’s from my reading and his heath-care policy is to the right of Hillary’s.
2. The question about electability will be answered later but current polls still have Obama 4 points ahead of Macca and Clinton 1 point behind.
3. The lemmings story is an urban myth. Lemmings do NOT commit suicide. A Disney doco maker pushed them over the cliff to get footage for “White Wilderness”.
4. The Latinos in last weeks primaries voted 55% in favour of Obama.
gusface- I haven’t read the British one “Empire”. His references to the British Empire don’t differentiate the leader much at all and they do seem to be part of the Machine. He does think leadership, or lack of it, is important in the American Empire. He’s particularly harsh on Bill Clinton’s reluctance to intervene in the horrors of Kosovo, Rwanda and Bosnia.
Funny, but last time I looked the national polls have Obama beating Mccain and McCain beating Clinton.
Must be another paradigm shift, or all those ‘ignorant loathing lefties’ lapping lattes have infiltrated the working class suburbs of America and put something in the drinking water: tincture of hope.
“It’s as if Labor had decided not to elect Rudd leader in 2006, but instead chose Geoff Clark.”
That’s very funny Adam, it’s good to have you back, but I’m tired and have to hit the sack. Be saving a little slap for you and your interesting in-depth analysis till tomorrow arvo when the luxury of leisure web-time will once again become available.
There’s been a dearth of decent right wing opinion since you’ve been away, we lefties gave been running amok! Just like Obama.
G’night gang.
Oh, and the last time I looked about 60% of Americans want the troops out of Iraq, and about 110% think the country is going down the toilet.
Hmmm, looks like good campaigning turf for a bomb totting septuagenarian who wants to not only bomb Iran, but keep troops in Iraq for a century.
Yep, those Dems are on a hiding to nothing with Obama!
Kosovo, Rwanda and Bosnia ?
where was the US benefit there say the US
Robert , the value of Empires’ can be summed up by saying “Darfur’ vs ‘Bagdad’
both victims of US strategic priorites
hi Kr
quick hypothetical
the us econonmy goes down the toilet ,what happens to those previously happy for obamarama,in oz the talk of the economy pulled back some ofthe sheeple,
also in times of crisis fear warmongering etc the tendency is for the “tried and trusted’ ,howard used this to good effect.
are these risks as such or not relevant owing to the big Mo gained by obama
Gusface , a meltdown of the US economy may initially be a plus for the Repugs
& particularly for Macca as he can say my vote told you so
both hillary & Obama have DIFFERENT strengths to combat that ‘charge’
but Howard tried that & if the opponent represents responsible fiscal change , then the ‘change’ candidate can win as Rudd did.
Adam @ 949 & KR
A forthhright and refreshing apology Adam. A copy should be sent immediatlely to one B Nelson for his instruction.
KR is right – The head-to-head pollls have said and continue to say that Obama has the best show against McCain nationally. Adam you says this will change because of the Geoff Clark factor. This is an interesting concept, to say the least, and rather amusing. I assume this means that there might be skeletons in Obama’s cupboard yet to be revealed.
This is saying it’s better to have a candidate with a heap of past scandals who divides the nation than a cleanskin with greater popularity, because it is possible that the cleanskin might have a dirty secret in their past that will wreck their chances.
Well, that just don’t make no sense. (to borrow a line from “Oh Brother Where Art Thou”).
And it is not just the ‘liberal’ press that is going for Obama. An article posted earlier today by someone points out that the the conservative media that supported Clinton to date is fast switching to Obama.
965 – ‘you say’ not ‘you says’ – I’se back up in them thar hills with mah banjo and Governor Huckleberry. Dang – just lost another tooth …
j/v yes re Polls…Obama has around a 4% lead over Macca whilst Macca & Hillary % ’s are so close its within the margin of error
My only caution is they are 3 way Polls which can be distorted re the Democrat support until one Nominee is decided
…….then the Polls will move significantly one way or the other
#949
Adam Says:
Thing about predictions – especially here – chances are your will be held to account.
I know this just strait bait – and yes – I’m bitting. But, I figure if I can turn you then I’ve done the world a small favor. We are talking experience here – so lets to a toe to toe comparison of experience – and for me – Hillary’s pillow talk with Bill does not cut mustard. Do a drill down on actual real measures that had impact. Convince me with facts that Hillary is the candidate for this time. I’ve already posted my thoughts on this subject – so its over to you. Please post a concrete articulation explaining the rationale. If you have a good case it will influence my opinion.
I agree that Obama has had an easier ride in the press. I figure part of this is is because he has been the underdog and as such he is making the story and that sells papers. On the other hand – I also think that Obama has a lot less baggage – but beyond this Obama is doing something new (and potentially dangerous). He is saying that the status quo is not ok. You know the guy in the bur that tells you how it can’t change, yes he’s drunk – and he’s speaking his mind. He’s been listening to politicization for multiple decades – same stuff – same drivel – same results – same landscape – same tomorrow. Throw into this an American community that are ashamed of their recent years – a community that was once proud to stand up and say “I’m American”. How many Americans abroad do you know that are willing to do this today?
I have a problem here. Its in two parts – firstly I don;t belive that you can brand the Latino community in this way. Virgina told you that. I’m assuming you have checked the Virgina exit polls?
Another view is that the Democratic electorate are simply say no to more of the same. While many democrats hold Bill close to their harts (and I myself stood up for Bill in Kansas although I did criticize his less than effect appreciation of a good cigar), well Hilliary is not Bill, but Hillary seems to be comfortable in Bill shoes – and while may of us watched the proceedings, many of us felt a little uncomfortable about Bill’s dealings with this and that. And now Hillary is replicating much of the same. The thing is – Obama is a chance for a break from the past – and oh doesn’t everyone search for this after the horror of recent years?
Maybe its all done and dusted but nobody has told you.
There you go – we have something we both believe in.
Oh – I just love that movie!
Ron 967- Yes, point taken. Still, I’d rather be Obama with better numbers than Clinton against McCain. Wouldn’t the fact that despised-by-Republicans-Clinton is still in the race for the Democrats distort the poll towards McCain for both of the Dem candidates? When Clinton is out her more negative pull is removed. Or is that a rationalisation?
Davidoff 969 – Great movie isn’t it – I have it in my small collection. The latest Coen Bros is also very good if you haven’t seen it- ‘No Country For Old Men’ – western themes set in modern drug culture plus a great pschopath.
#971
Looking at the reviews – ‘No Country For Old Men’ is on my watch list.
Goodnight all
Davidoff
what Adam has UNDER estimated is
the massive Obama ground network in each Primary that is converting votes from disenchanted Democrat voters
who see Hillary as part of the ‘establishment’ AND
who is perceived as thinking more about what Bill (read the US) owes her power desires rather than a belief committment in what policys she is proposing
and it is the anti ‘establishment’ change message he’ll sell against Macca
being the US is not respected internationally , has failed in Iraq and domestically nothing changes for the average citizen because ‘Washington’ have no vested interest in changing from its pork barrelling suppporters
OK well that was a fairly predictable bunch of responses. I’m not going to argue about it with y’all, we will wait and see what we see.
On lemmimgs, Wikipedia says: “Driven by strong biological urges, they will migrate in large groups when population density becomes too great. On occasion, and particularly in the case of the Norway lemmings in Scandinavia, large migrating groups will reach a cliff overlooking the ocean. They will stop until the urge to press on causes them to jump off the cliff and start swimming, sometimes to exhaustion and death. Lemmings are also often pushed into the sea as more and more lemmings arrive at the shore.” So there.
Diogenes refers to: “Bill Clinton’s reluctance to intervene in the horrors of Kosovo, Rwanda and Bosnia.”
* Rwanda: The UN was in charge, and their force had a Security Council mandate to act, but failed to do so. They just stood by and watched (as they did in Srebrenica as I recall). If anyone deserves to be on trial over Rwanda it is Kofi Annan, whose criminal behaviour over Rwanda has never been properly explained. Personally I suspect he was in the pay of the French.
* Kosovo: Clinton bombed Belgrade to force Milosevic out of Kosovo, remember? A very successful piece of unilateralist imperialist aggression, for which the Kosovars are extremely grateful. How much thanks did he get for it from anyone else?
* Bosnia was clearly a European responsibility, and the US did intervene in 1995 when it was obvious that the Europeans had failed (as per usual) to deal with a European problem that really had nothing to do with the US at all.
Y’all need to make up your minds whether you are in favour of unilateral US action in cases like these or not. When the US tries to act through NATO or the UN, or suggests that the extremely wealthy EU ought to be able to deal with messes in its own back yard, it gets attacked for failing to act. When it does act unilaterally, as in Haiti or Somalia, it gets accused of wicked imperialism.
Bye for now.
#975
Adam
I noticed that you haven’t address several questions from myself and others. I’m confident that your not enrolled enrolled in Camp Clinton ‘ducking and weaving’ 101 and that a part of you is asking yourself what the reality is – after all – why else would you be here?
I find it interesting how right wingers can possibly deride left wingers with a straight face given the state of the world in the last 8 years. The right wingers have had their chance and have stuffed up the world in more ways than one.
I for one am glad that the most left wing candidate is having a shot.
It seems that in relation to statistics, you are doing a Dennis Shanahan and predicting a result which the figures just do not point to.
Ultimately, we will find out which one of us is correct.
I believed your analysis on Obama was wrong previously and I stand by my claims.
It will be another interesting year
For the record, I’m against any country acting to invade another country unilaterally. The UN is not perfect, but it should the first forum for these types of matters to be resolved.
It is so about time that the normalization algorithms actually cough up with the reality.
http://www.pollster.com/08-US-Dem-Pres-Primary.php
For those tragics like me pouring over Polls & stats & trends ONLY:
(apologies for the length of the Stats but you can make your own value judgements individually on them this way & criticise where you disagree)
Current as of now:
Clinton Obama
Primarys 1009 1143
Super 233 157
Total 1242 1300
Analysis of all remaining Primarys with current Polling data indicates:
IF Hillary wins Texas , Ohio & Penn. even by by 59/41 which really is unlikely
and then calculating the varying Delegates each then win in the other 15 Primarys to be held which also have varying Poll %’s for each Primary :
The final total delegates just from Primarys will be Clinton/Obama 1580/1647
(adding on the existing pledged Superdelegates its Clinton/Obama 1813/1804)
requiring the remaining 406 unpledged Superdelegates to decide the Nominee.
A theoretical 50/50 Superdelegates split of the 406 almost leaves a tie.
For HRC to win the Nominee , EVEN AFTER HRC winning the 3 big States 59/41,
she must rely on Superdelegates picking the LOSING Primary delegate candidate
BUT LOGICALLY the majority of Superdelegates will favor the Candidate who will have the most Delegates won from Primarys being Obama (making him Nominee)
EVEN MORE BAD STATS NEWS FOR HRC:
Superdelegates:
since January , Obama has won 60% of the subsequent endorsements made
and this trend has been evident week by week for the last successive weeks ,
suggesting Obama will continue to win a greater % of them progressively
(leaving even less of the current 406 unpledged Superdelegates at the end for Hillary to rely on)
Big State Primarys:
The 59/41 for all 3 states I’ve used above is grossly over weighted for HRC.
Would expect the 3 State’s Polls to dramatically ‘narrow’
Conclusion
HRC on these figures will wish to fight on as of now , but
assume after the 4/3/08 Texas & Ohio Primarys , she will be leaned on to concede.
wow – my 981 post is in moderation – this is my first time ever!
William – feel free to correct the typos.
17 days till the end of the Bush/Clinton criminal cartel.
4/3 Billary concedes.
Adding to my level of non-controversial posts, since Super-Tuesday, …
Obama has 16 more
Clinton has 3 less
.. and if you didn’t know already, I talking superdelegates
Adam #975
You praised Clinton’s “unilateralist imperialist aggression” in Kosovo CORRECTLY
but then blame the UN for Rwanda RATHER than say US “unilateralist imperialist aggression” should have been used in Rwanda ..ditto Bosnia..ditto Sudan (Darfur)
IF it was right for one (Kosovo) then its right for all 4……..(or wrong for all 4)
and where does US “unilateralist imperialist aggression” to invade Iraq fit
The first part of your article on Kosevo was fine but consistency then arose
#949 – Adam – “The Repubs just cannot believe their luck” – been saying that all along. All you have to do is to look at the glee on the face of the Faknews comentators. They can’t stop smiling. These dreamers just so glad that they have a Kumbaya candidate.
957 @ Diogenes Says:
Such is life.
Your (Adam’s) post raises a few questions.
“1. Is Obama really that “left-wing”? His policies seem very similar to Hillary’s from my reading and his heath-care policy is to the right of Hillary’s.”
.
Hey Diogenes, I do agree with you on this one! (There, you see? some common ground, at last! LOL) Its the only point I do disagree with Adam on, a couple of his points I could quibble with, but not enough to worry about, overall I agree with Adam, ” strongly”, in the sense of the survey questionnaire category.
.
Obama is Republican-Lite, and so there will end up being a Republican POTUS either way from November. Could be enormous fun and entertaining to watch the dynamics of two right-wingers trying to out-do each other
.
And the entertainment factor is one of the two things the US does best in my view – one of their major cultural contributions/exports to the Free World. Have you seen Noam Chomsky on the media manipulation industry in the old doco “Manufacturing Consent”? Whether I agree with ethically or not, is so beside the point — but I do admire the extraordinary skill with which it is done by the USA.
.
The other great US cultural contribution is their range of spirits, eg scotch, bourbons etc – Jack Daniels, Jim Beam…*yum*. (Must have been all that Prohibition perfecting the recipes!)
.
Anyway, for those who may be interested or not, I’m now back in the RW and work-grind, contributing in a very small and boring way to developing components of Oz health system economics and related statistical analysis slogs, and for fun, finally catching up with Season 3 of Battlestar Galactica, the 4400, Star Trek re-runs on the Sci-Fi channel, amongst other forms of US-inspired cultural entertainment, so wont be around much.
.
Cheers!
As our football season is just starting, Obama is peaking too soon!!
The Finnigans , yes I acknowledge you’ve been saying it all along
but understand your reason was the US would not presently elect a black POTUS & current Primary’s white results 4 him won’t transalate in a real election
The strength of Obama’s Primary ‘white’ vote weakens your case but your case re the secrecy of the ballot box for the real election is unprovable either way (which is I why I’ve always responded I hope you are wrong re human racism)
Adam’s case is different because he says ‘black’ is NOT the problem but rather
‘Obama is the most left-wing and least experienced candidate Democr. can find’
Obama’s “experience” is 11 years State & Federal Senate to Hillarys 7 years Fed.
so that argument is not compelling
Obama’s the most left-wing …I’ve asked him to quantify this vs. Hillary
What a naughty man Adam is! Trying to get out of the lemmings mass suicide slip-up by selectively quoting Wiki. I’m very disappointed. This is the bit he left out of Wikipedia about lemmings.
“The myth of lemming mass suicide is long-standing and has been popularized by a number of factors. In 1955, Carl Barks drew an Uncle Scrooge adventure comic with the title: The Lemming with the Locket. This comic, which was inspired by a 1954 National Geographic article, showed massive numbers of lemmings jumping over Norwegian cliffs. The suicide myth was further propagated by Walt Disney documentary White Wilderness in 1958 which includes footage of lemmings migrating and running head-long over a ledge. An investigation in 1983 by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s Brian Vallee, showed that the Disney film makers faked the entire sequence using imported lemmings (bought from Inuit children), a snow covered turntable on which a few dozen lemmings were forced to run, and literally throwing lemmings into the sea to show the alleged suicides. This myth is also witnessed in a German film – The Little Polar Bear (Lars, the polar bear)–in which a group of despondent lemmings are frequently jumping off various ledges.”
Shenanigans in Brooklyn.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/nyregion/16vote.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin
Adam, as he has recently, completely misses the point about Obama. People are voting for a president, not appointing a CEO: experience is often not the top criteria. Obama has the ability to connect with a wide range of demographic groups – and as in the Virginia primaries – is breaking through into Clinton’s base in a big way. If he’s such a raving liberal, why in the hell is he sweeping traditionally conservative states in the primaries? He so drove up Democratic primary turnout in at least a couple of these states that I’ve seen more than a few commentators suggesting that they could be in play in the general election. Moreover, he’s handled everything that’s been thrown at him so far brilliantly: I think he’s going to be very hard to swiftboat.
Running with Clinton, on the other hand, would be downright stupid. It’s just about impossible to understand how much the right hates her. She’d drive up Republican turnout drastically, drive down turnout on the left (who hates her nearly as fiercely), and she’s always had a major problem with a major demographic: white men. She’s also guaranteed a pretty hostile ride from the press, which Obama won’t have. Faced up against McCain, a huge swathe of that group are going to go for him, so nominating her is practically handing the general election to the Republicans.
#989 – Ron – I will the happiest person if Obama is POTUS. But I just cannot see a black man is elected in the US at this point of history. More to the point, allowed him to be elected.
Adam- I completely agree with your comments on US unilateralism. When I mentioned Bosnia, Rwanda and Kosovo, I was putting forward Niall Ferguson’s viewpoint. The topic of policing rogue states is almost impossible to get a satisfactory answer to so genocide is still tolerated by the international community.
On Kosovo, I have a surgeon friend who went there and operated on injured combatants in a cave just behind the front lines for six months. I’m not kidding! He met Kofi Annan while there and raised the issue of some bureaucratic red tape which was preventing the UN from helping injured children get treatment. He was most surprised that Kofi Annan showed no interest at all in the plight of the Kosovar children and wouldn’t lift a finger. Annan had a few photos with the media and left.
Harry ‘Snapper’ Organs
Harry see what I mean , always stick with the Ladies on this blog like Jen , Vera & Liz……and now Rebecca’s excellent piece #992 proves it again my friend.
Yep The Finnigans share the hope…sometimes human nature can happily surprise us or disappoint
Speaking as a girl ‘n all -
I think what some of the crunching numbers types like Adam forget is that people vote for reasons often beyond the political.
In Obama’s case he represents hope and a new order after years of neoconservatism .Hillary is undeniable cuaght up in this paradigm.
So, correct or not, people are willing to take a chance for change. They may end up regretting it, but like all human relationships they begin with a belief that it will work.
992
Rebecca
You make some good points, and for all that nonsense about ‘experience’ that the Clinton camp keeps banging on about, well, I have two words about that : Kevin Rudd.
We’ve just seen the ‘inexperienced’ politician take the role of Prime Minister, lead the country and look like a natural in his first days in the role. Not only that, but he’s forced Nelson into compromises and bipartisan positions that only 4 months ago would have been unimaginable. (In the process he also makes Howard look like what he in fact always was, a small and mean little man who clung to power without having any idea of how to use it positively).
Watching Kevin Rudd do an “Obama” should give everyone the idea of what is possible when a capable person changes the paradigm.
Now, let’s hope Obama gets a chance to do a Kevin Rudd!
jen, at least we should be consoled by the fact that we have been upgraded!
Previoulsy we were all ILL, (ignorant loathing lefties) but now, to quote Adam we are:
The elite commentariat (people like you)
…which is a step up, eh? LOL
I do so much prefer the sarcastic ‘elite’ to ‘ignorant’, even if it is only a backhanded remark (yes, another one!).
But should we expect an apology? Nah, not until President Obama decrees that all psephologists must do 1,000 hours of communtiy service, helping the ‘elite commentariat’ overcome the trauma and stress of being called ‘ignorant loathing lefties’! LOL
There is another point to consider. The argument has been well made over the past (almost) decade about the Rove-Republican machine and its mobilisation of the Chiristian right as a means to bring home its candidate/s. People that didn’t previously vote were voting for the Republicans in large numbers, and this gave Bush and other Republicans large numbers of votes and infuriated Democrats. Gays, abortion and other what we would call wedge issues have been used as a matter of course while Rove and his cronies sat atop their castle. Rove began to refer to the new Republican hegemony, and argued that the Democrats would not be back in power anytime in the near future. The last congressional elections and the change in personel and public opinion made a fool of him.
My point is that no matter how he tries, McCain will not be able to energise this base. He is not the champion of these people, but a non-believer – just another politician. The equation has changed – you cannot assume that the Republicans start where they were four or eight years ago. McCain has more work to do than either Democrat, and is not going to be able to work with the recent historical structures that his party has used to gain power. This bloc will not turn out for him and he will need to try to gain ground in the centre, while having a lunatic sidekick talking to these people, while selling a war that no one wants, and trying to make everyone feel safe. He will be talking out of both sides of his mouth and it will not wash.
With this in mind, arguments about Obama’s lack of electability are just garbage. He will take the Democrats, and the centre. The right will not vote for McCain in anything like the numbers that it turned out for Bush.
Friends of Hillary, like it or not, you’re watching the making of the Democrats answer to Reagan. Hillary just can’t compete with that. Obama will carry the nomination, and be next President.
Rain at 987
Clinton is far more right wing then Obama. This is from her closet support for the Iraq war to a far more imperialistic foreign policy.
Further even Ann Coulter prefers her to McCain.
I rest my case.
Pages: « 1 … 18 19 [20] 21 22 … 26 » Show All