The last significant presidential primaries until March 4 will be held tomorrow our time: primaries in Wisconsin and Washington for both parties, plus caucuses in Hawaii for the Democrats. Discuss them at your leisure here.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Washington, Wisconsin, Hawaii
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
868 Comments
new thread haha
good idea
Correct me if I’m wrong – but wasn’t Washington done and dusted back on the 9 February? The immediate subject is the 19 February events in Wisconsin and Hawaii.
ahh – but carcases versus primaries
Can anyone explain what is actually happening here with respect to the Washington caucuses that were held back on the 9 Feb, and the primaries that are to held later today? I confess – I’m confused.
After a little digging …
Working on the platform that the Republican nomination is done and dusted – the only thing that matters here is the Wisconsin and Hawaii numbers. My projection is a win by Obama is both states. I figure Hawaii may be smaller margin but a win all the same and Wisconsin will be a re-run of Happy Days (as in the cool guy wins the day).
Your not getting confused with Washington state as opposed to DC ? Im not sure which one is on…not following closely enough!
Yes Aussieguru, Washington is a state on the west coast, Washington DC is in the east. But both are completed.
davidoff, I would expect it to be the other way around – Obama lived in Hawaii until moving to California to attend Occidental College. He has the home ground advantage and will win at least 65-70% of the vote there. I’d expect him to win Wisconsin with a figure closer to 50-55%.
Further ahead, polling in Texas is showing a real narrowing. CNN poll puts it Clinton 50%, Obama 48% (a statistical tie). Not good for Clinton.
yes the Fonz is back
Tomorrow’s primarys , more ‘happy days’ for the big O
Wisconsin believe Obama 54/46
Hawaii believe Obama 60/40 but on such a small sample %’s are meaningless
After the last primary last week & in the middle of “champers”
I predicted the massive Clinton Texas & Ohio Poll leads were a delusion
& predicted Ohio Clinton 52/48 and Texas Clinton 52/49
….oh where is that ‘narrowing’
Of the five leading polls listed in realclearpolitics, only one has Clinton ahead, and that poll is over a week old.
Anyway, their average now has Obama 2% in front for the nomination. Looks like his momentum is still going.
10 Ron, think some of the polls have been updated.
http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/
The only way these states make any difference at all is if Clinton wins one. Nobody is expecting her to, hell she left Wisconsin early (which is the only state she could realistically cause an upset.)
It’s the expectations game: everyone expects Obama to win, so if he doesn’t it is going to hurt like hell.
On a more interesting note… in Texas the RPC average has gone from 40-50.3% (Clinton’s way) on the weekend to 42-50.3, thanks to a new CNN poll which put the result at 50-48. I’m assuming CNN doesn’t include ‘undecideds’ in their polling or something?
Either way, it is starting to tighten, and this is within the past week when Clinton has been campaigning there and he hasn’t.
Steve, those results have to be the least useful opinion polls I’ve ever seen!
There are two polls for Wisconsin:
40 / 53
49 / 43
i.e, one easy win to Obama and one easy win to Clinton. Useless.
There’s got to be a better way of doing these polls!
Is it possible for Clinton to win Hawaii?
No polls there at all, and just because Obama was born there, can there be an expectation of an easy victory?
This link gives a brief wrap up of the races to come:
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2008/2/17/more-on-a-hillary-comback.html
The end of conservatism
http://www.newsweek.com/id/112770
#8
Meng Tan
Washington (the state up on the top-left with that city named Seattle) has both caucus and primaries for both Democrats and Republicans. The caucus were held back on the 9 February and the primaries are held today.
http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#WA
But are a meaningless exercise as the caucuses decided the delegates. Why would anyone bother to vote?
(where today is today their time which is tomorrow our time)
#19
Am asking myself the same question – and this has to be coming out of the public purse – you have to wonder.
I thought I read somewere that Obama was born in the other non-contiguous state.
15 Rates analysis, it gets worse Rasmussen thinks one in four may change their mind.
Re:Ron 11 –
Our seer also predicted Obama would win California and that Howard would win in November.
Two conservatives, Romney and Huckabee, cuts each other’s throat,s allowing McCain to steal some narrow victories in winner-take-all states. Thus, more by good luck than good management, the Republicans have picked their most viable candidate.
Meanwhile the Democrats are maintaining a long tradition by threatening to pluck defeat from the jaws of victory, even down to the Florida and Michigan schemozzles.
Bonjour Bludgeurs, first let me express deep and ongoing gratitude to William of the West for providing us with a brand spanking new thread.
Dept. of Relevance Deprivation, Land of the Free, Monday:
After the fashion of world’s best practice YentFests, as their handlers weep, wail, gnash teeth and rend their garments, the sad and sorry saga of Schmuckens and The Huckster continues unrequited and unabated.
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/patoliphant;_ylt=Ajyg65VQd1EArfHbvOIJKwMl6ysC
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/bensargent;_ylt=Ajz1AzqOaYIehAd_Hd9csSFN_b4F
Asanque at 16, Hillary has about as much chance of winning Hawaii as, say, an earnest and inexperienced amateur vulcanoligist would have had of corking Krakatoa circa 1883.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krakatoa
N.B. Dr. Carr has emboldened me with regard to citing wiki as an authoritative source.
Perhaps Hillary like Keating pre-1996 got bogged down in appealing to individual interest groups and trying to add up a 50%+1 coalition, Obama has followed Howard’s pre-1996 approach of a broad appeal.
Phil: I suspect many of Huckabee’s voters would prefer McCain to Romney, even although Huckabee is now picking up hard-core McCain haters. neither McCain nor Huckabee are part of the ‘conservative movement’.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/us-election/obama-accused-of-pinching-speech/2008/02/19/1203190784928.html
Lucky none of them used Hewitt’s patented “C’mon!”
EC, how dare you disparage the twenty-first century’s democratic repository of ‘facts’.
My money’s on Obama for both. Momentum will count for states that rarely have a say on the nomination this far into the process.
Clinton once again has dropped herself into no-man’s land with this speech business.
‘The New Republic’s Noam Scheiber notes that “you can’t listen to a Clinton speech without hearing multiple riffs she’s filched from other candidates.” Back in November, he flagged her Obama lines, which ranged from hope and unity to sharing her aspiration to be a President not only for blue states, but the entire United States. In Iowa, Clinton pilfered Obama’s catch phrase “fired up and ready to go,” and lately she has also sounded like John McCain — they both tout a slogan about being “read to lead on Day One,” whatever that means.’
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?bid=45&pid=286865
She draw’s attention to Obama’s strength and her weakness, and gives his claim to be above squabbling more water.
Anyone know what’s giong in NY?
There’s a bunch of websites and news stories suggesting that Obama was robbed in New York and may actually have won the delegate count there. Aparantly in something like 80 disctrcits Obama recorded 0 votes. Including many very black districts.
Is this an internet consiracy or a real developing story?
Anyone know what’s going on?
You should take it up with Harry H rates analyst!
Who’s Harry H?
conspiracy theorist rates analyst
Very good ESJ. From the NYTimes below:
‘City election officials this week said that their formal review of the results, which will not be completed for weeks, had confirmed some major discrepancies between the vote totals reported publicly — and unofficially — on primary night and the actual tally on hundreds of voting machines across the city.
In the Harlem district, for instance, where the primary night returns suggested a 141 to 0 sweep by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, the vote now stands at 261 to 136. In an even more heavily black district in Brooklyn — where the vote on primary night was recorded as 118 to 0 for Mrs. Clinton — she now barely leads, 118 to 116.
The history of New York elections has been punctuated by episodes of confusion, incompetence and even occasional corruption. And election officials and lawyers for both Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton agree that it is not uncommon for mistakes to be made by weary inspectors rushing on election night to transcribe columns of numbers that are delivered first to the police and then to the news media.
That said, in a presidential campaign in which every vote at the Democratic National Convention may count, a swing of even a couple of hundred votes in New York might help Mr. Obama gain a few additional delegates.’
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/nyregion/16vote.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin.
I think that what this will do is put pressure on NY SDs like Charles Rangel, who have come out in support of Hillary, to respect their constituents when results from their areas swing to Obama’s column. It’s probably just confusion rather than anything too sinister, but it’s another distraction that Clinton doesn’t need right now.
Pancho,
And the counting in New Mexico was finalised in the last couple of days and California is apparently still counting – a couple of hundred votes does not a conspiracy make.
Obama is accused of plagiarism. It was the BGs who sang that “It’s only words, and words are all I have to take your heart away”.
Barack Obama’s lofty oratory landed him in trouble yesterday when a particularly memorable speech in Wisconsin turned out to be just a little too memorable – some observers recalled it all too well from the 2006 campaign of Massachussetts Governor Deval Patrick.
http://timesonline.typepad.com/uselections/2008/02/barack-obamas-l.html
38 – Old news.
Also Patrick Duval had already authorised Obama on his passages.
Obama release on Clinton’s language where she has plagiarised off him:
http://thepage.time.com/obama-release-on-clintons-languge/
Another link to the above issue:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/the-wolfson-plagiarism-at_b_87209.html?load=1&page=15#comments
ESJ, I should have used an emoticon.
I actually found your interjection slightly amusing.
I’m with you in any case – I think it is more confusion than conspiracy, but will be seen as a Clinton campaign hiccup.
There were also voting anomalies in New Hampshire, but that never eventuated into much of a story. I suspect as much in this case in NYC as well.
Is that what I am reduced to “interjector” Pancho? Not even a member of the Bludger community?
How very Thatcherite of you Pancho?
I’ve just put togethera little graph depicting the inevitability of the bound-delegate race.
This is no time to be indulging in sentimental notions like ’society’.
just testing …
45 – Davidoff – What presumptions have you made for the races to come?
yes get on yer bike pancho
#48
My current numbers (which I used in the graph) are as follows (a positive number is the number of points advantage for Obama over Clinton).
Hawaii, 4
Wisconsin, 20
Ohio, -8
Rhode Isl., -10
Texas, 4
Vermont, 20
Wyoming, 20
Mississippi, 24
Penn., -5
Guam, 11
Indiana, 7
N. Carolina, 8
W. Virginia, -12
Kentucky, -14
Oregon, 5
Montana, 11
S. Dakota, 15
Puerto Rico, -9
So Davidoff assuming full PR you are assuming Obama will win Wisconsin tomorrow 60-40% based on a 20 delegate lead amongst 92 delegates to be elected is that correct?>
50 – Davidoff
Interesting numbers. On what basis did you determine the positive/negative points advantage for each state?
It seems fairly optimistic Obama wise. By that I mean it doesn’t appear to reflect the recent poll averages for the states I have seen.
#51
The numbers mean that I assuming Obama will win Wisconsin 60-40%. There are 74 pledged delegates Wisconsin which I’m estimating would break out 44/30 (but the delegate calculations are not precise as in reality there are lots of rules that I’m ignoring).
Is it 74 or 92, realclearpolitics lists both figures on its site.
#52
asanque
It’s just my own crystal ball gazing, watching polls, their trends, the end results, the movement of undecided voters, and trends in overestimated Clinton support, plus I’m throwing into that a lot of skepticism about the Latino block which IMO is not the function to watch – as opposed to new immigrants compared to long time present enthnic communities (which is much more relevant in places like Texas). And into all of this I’m throwing in factors such as rate of decay inside Camp Clinton while also monitoring the energy level inside Obamaland.
I have been reading about the way that delegates are apportioned in Texas. It is all pretty confusing, but in short, it seems that Democratic delegates are given to districts proportionally to their turnout in the 2004 Presidential election. So even if Clinton manages to mobilise large numbers of Hispanic voters who have not voted before, this will not be reflected in her delegate count. On the other hand, inner city areas and college populations in Austin etc, will be generously awarded.
davidoff,
We could all quibble but I doubt if the consensus would be much different (overall) from your predictions.
Where I’m not fully convinced is in the theory that the super-dels will automatically follow the popular vote winner. For the sake of the Dems you would hope so, but Hillary is nothing if not determined, and she and Bill combined would be, frankly, a bit scary to deal with for the average super-del.
#54
Wisconsin has 74 pledged and 18 unpledged delegates (total 92).
I believe that 1968 was the last time that superdelegates voted against the popular vote. SDs from individual states have then voted contrary to their state results, but even in 84, when their was last controversy, Mondale had won the popular vote before the SDs locked in behind him. It would be a huge break with convention for SDs to vote against whoever has the most delegates and popular votes.
An SD break would probably require a change of party name.
#57
Dyno,
The only thing relevant about the pledged delegate count will be the magnitude – if its something like Obama by 10 then the superdelegates can safely ignore it and just vote who they think should win. But if the number of pledged delegates is up around 100 or more I’m guessing a lot of superdelegates will tipping their hats to the winner to ensure that the result is a self evident delivery of the people’s vote.
#59
most pledged delegates
most delegates including superdelegates who have come out
most votes across the country
most states
there. oops. I’m a their/there guy now two.
Finnigan Plural at 38 sez:
Well, at least his handlers had the smarts not to choose the Bee Gee’s “Spicks & Specks”.
Miffed Eddy at 44 bleats:
“Is that what I am reduced to “interjector” Pancho? Not even a member of the Bludger community?”
Eddy, Eddy, we accept you, we accept you, one of us, one of us…..
Besides, this site needs all the “Trained Historians” it can get!
What was the Oscar Wilde quote about clubs EC?
Historians require training – PhDs. That is why the likes of Windschuttle and Irving are best referred to as ‘writers’ in spite of their pretensions. I know this is irrelevant to the point being made, just my reflexive response.
#53 – davidoff Says: “The numbers mean that I assuming Obama will win Wisconsin 60-40%”. Why stop there? Why not assume that Obama will win by 99-1% because I saw the latest poll done on 16/2/08 is Hillary 49% and Obama 43%.
I wouldn’t put much store in the ARG poll.
They have Clinton leading Obama 49% to 43% for Feb 15-16 yet the figures reverse for 17-18 Feb: Obama 52% Clinton 42%.
I can’t imagine the figures are so volatile.
http://americanresearchgroup.com/
67- The Finnigans
The second latest poll is Hillary 49% and Obama 43%
The latest poll is Hillary 40% and Obama 53%.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/wi/wisconsin_democratic_primary-270.html
Then again, I don’t think he’ll win Wisconsin by 20 points either.
#69 – Not questioning the actual poll numbers, just the basis of the assumption. Otherwise, it is meaningless.
What rubbish. Anyone can appropriately reflect on history without having a Phd beside their name.
#67
The Finnigans
I figure that would be just plain silly – but if you want to go there – be my guest. By the way my excuse is that I’m just answering some questions with my opinion on my expectation of the race as things stand (see my #55 post for the rationale). So, what’s your excuse?
No 17
What Zakaria fails to acknowledge in his decree on the “end of conservatism” is the obvious contradiction between public perceptions on government spending and international interference.
On the one hand, he comments that the people are largely indifferent toward tax cuts and would prefer the funds were better spent, yet on the other, there is virulent support by Republicans on heinously expensive foreign policy.
Part of the reason why the USA has such a ridiculous budget deficit is due to its aggressive foreign policy and Ron Paul has advocated several times that this why the Republican party “has lost its way” – reckless and incompetent spending.
Background info on the Wisconsin primary and the Hawaii caucus:
Wisconsin: polls open from 7:00 AM (10 PM tonight) to 8:00 PM (12 MD tomorrow). For the Democrats race the polls are open for Democrats, Republicans and Independents and new voters can register at the polls (which is all good for Obama’s fired up ready to go constituency).
Hawaii the caucus opens at 6.30 PM (3.30 PM tomorrow) and begin at 7.00 PM (4.00 PM tomorrow). New voters can register at their caucus location and Republicans and Independents can change their registration at the location.
#72 – My excuse? Apologia Pro Vita Sua
And anyone can reflect on economics, but it doesn’t make them an economist. My point is not that only PhDs can ‘reflect’ on history, as you put it GP, but that organisations such as the Australian Historical Association (and its equivalents internationally) recognise a PhD as the appropriate training for a ‘professional’ historian.
So you can have ‘trained historians’, and by this definition the likes of Windschuttle fall short. But this is marginalia and I don’t mean to be stoking ‘history wars’, sorry all.
Hey Diogenes,
Fidel has “retired” I bet he is already in the freezer, its not looking good for you, first Biggs now Fidel and of course the cardinal – the chickens will come home to roost in good order.
LOL ESJ!!
FYI
Between 01:17 AM (East Coast) and 03:32 AM (in the wee small hours of the night) – a period of about 2 hours and 15 mins. the Obama campaign received 87 donations.
davidoff,
That was probably Ron emailing a donation 87 times on his nursing homes computer.
No 80
He must be experiencing a rather profligate retirement, I dare say ESJ!
Probably raided his jars of 1 and 2 cent pieces hidden under the bed. No sign of him today because he has been busy counting them GP.
The state has been supporting him so long that it is surprising that he has found the initiative to do some real work! Dear me…
LOL GP!
“What was the Oscar Wilde quote about clubs EC?”
OK, Eddy, but only because you’ve been a good boy.
“There’s many a man walking the streets of London with the arse out of his pants through not leading with the right bower when clubs are trumps”
ESJ- I believe the quote you were thinking of was by Groucho Marx as follows “Please accept my resignation. I don’t want to belong to any club that will accept me as a member.” And Fidel was on the top of my list too. The game is still afoot (and Billy Graham’s my trump card).
I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.
Groucho Marx
You get to say snap! Dio.
Notice the respite wards staff let the two tweedys out today for a hens party
and there was Davidoff patiently answering their blurred questions from the recess’s of their insomnia.
looks like the dearys now have been locked up for the night for their own protection………such a waste of my tax payers money
Don’t any of you Obama huggers have a problem with him not talking about the issues whatsoever, isn’t it wrong to simply run on rhetoric?
I didn’t like Clinton’s antics early on but Obama is running on Rhetoric…and if he wins many moderate Democrats who backed her just may think about voting for McCain…
Panch #76. The point about Windschuttle is not that he doesn’t have a PHD necessarily. There has been some excellent history done by people without one. The point is more that his approach reveals a complete ignorance (or perhaps more a wilful defiance) of rigorous historiographic method. It’s possible to do history without a PHD, but in Keithy boy’s case it’s clear that some training would have helped.
In any case, as a Marxist historian of Tasmanian Aboriginal descent, I (funnily enough) don’t like Windschuttle very much. But even though my PhD has just been passed and he hasn’t got one, his lack of formal qualifications is the least of my concerns about him.
which policys are you happy with with Macca as opposed to Rudy
Well, further proof, if any was needed, that Glen can read the big print on the front of newspapers.
Pity, but that seems to be about all he reads.
KR , have been talking about you on the other thread my friend
409
Scorpio Says:
February 19th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
Kirribilli Removals
You certainly have a way with words KR.
Very well put.
411
Ron Says:
February 19th, 2008 at 11:57 pm
Scorpio
thats because he has time on his hands since he moved John & Janet , but that may change with his new superhornet removalist fleet having potential business
Gee, what a surprise coming from an exponent of Marxism, an economic and social theory totally dismissed by most rational thinkers.
and you are the arbitrator of who is a rational thinker and/or who are ?
and your comment in #73 in the 2nd paragraph where you see a contradiction
but there is not one…..fine rational thinking you’ve displayed there
That was a devastating critique of Marxism GP. I’ll have to rethink my ideas. I never knew “most rational people” dismissed it. In any case you don’t have to be a Marxist to realise that Windschuttle is a fruitcake. I was merely pointing out the fact that I’m a member of every demographic he hates. I might even add, for the record, that I was born in the Old Canberra Hospital, now the site of the National Museum that the right-wing culture warriors hate so much.
Make the case, and I just might agree with you.
Presumably people doesn’t equal Republicans – especially this year when the Repugs are so on the nose.
Mate, when a Marxist can give me a legitimate and logical explanation concerning the labour theory of value, perhaps I’d be less inclined to dismiss Marxism. Thus far, I’ve not read anything that isn’t beyond absurd.
unfortunately ‘Polling’ is not an exact science.
For a variety of reasons a ‘motherhood’ question is likely to draw a wrongly weighted response in favor of the greater good than SOME pollees
personally believe
Polling in Australia has ALWAYS shown between tax cuts & public spending, pollees pick the later….but the Pollies generally ignore this Poll result and offer the former being tax cuts rather than public spending as their prime election offer.
For all the reasons you are no doubt aware , the US citizen generally & Republican policy in particular has had the military & the protection of US soil by fighting the enemy away from US soil as a strong article of faith.
Be it the Soviets or the Iranians nuke threat or Saddam WMB’s or the Terror threat , or the need to protect ‘oil’ US allies or defend Israel the Republican voter sees these issues as first priority worth the money & cost. Even Hillary Clinton (but not Edwards) , until Obama attacked her ‘left’ flank generally supported this priority.
Whilstever the US is not seen to be dramatically losing US lives that support remains (particlularly Republican) and so my view to the comment “yet on the other, there is virulent support by Republicans on heinously expensive foreign policy” is not surprising
The degree of spending excess & if its economically justified raises different issues
No 100
Interesting argument. However, I think you’ll agree, at least in the Australian context, that there is always a constant contradiction. When polls seek opinion on whether Australians pay too much tax, the response is always in the positive. Yet given the choice between public spending and tax cuts, the answer is always in favour of public spending (as you mentioned).
In the US, I’m not so sure how long the argument for foreign intervention can be maintained given the increasing fragility of the US economy and the incredible expense necessary in protecting US interests overseas. I don’t see why the US can’t simply take a more diplomatic approach rather than “policing the world” as Mr Paul would argue. It is pretty well settled that the oil revenue from Iraq won’t recover the immense cost of the ongoing war. So, what’s the point, other than to save face or “honour” as Mr Huckabee contends.
Camp Clinton have updated their website with a message “Help Get Out The Vote” with links to actions in Wisconsin and Hawaii. The respective links go to info about polling places and so forth. An interesting difference between Camp Clinton and Obamaland is the focus – Camp Clinton is focused on providing directions for voters whereas Obamaland is about the grassroots campaign and everything that can do for “you” – the voter. It’s an interesting difference and as much as I hate to say this (because of all sorts of personal reasons) – Hillary may be into the Happy Days feeling (looking back to the epic adventures of Bill and his cigars) as opposed to Obama looking more towards that 70’s show demographic – younger, brighter, smarter.
But if that’s true, I have a problem. Glen – please advice – I posted info on the policy position of Obama some weeks ago (comprehensive and detailed reading material on the campaign site) but if you need additional video aids just let me know and I’ll look into providing the appropriate community assistance (assuming you meet the necessary criteria).
Believe JWH’s $34 billion tax cuts offer was as I believe inconsistentwith the published polls but consistent with what most voters actually would prefer given the choice.
In the 3 days prior to Rudd’s response I argued with those who believed Rudd should spend the bulk of the $34 billion on public spending to be a guarantee of the ALP’s election loss. Presumably Rudd took the same view as JWH & promised similar tax cuts also.
Had JWH theoretically gone for public spending (but would never done so) , Rudd still would have gone for tax cuts as the voter puller
My view re no contradiction is based on the political realtys of winning votes with tax cuts contradicting pollee’s claimed but not real preference for public spending.
Whereas my view re no contradiction with US foreign (’public’) spending being preferred by Republican voters & generally by many other US voters is uniquely
a result of US voters perception that the number one priority is forward defence
over any other use of Federal funds. But for Australia it would be a contradiction
Hello Davidoff
“Hillary may be into the Happy Days feeling”
No my sense is the Fonz is with obama although not demographically
Wisconsin believe Obama 54/46
Hawaii believe Obama 60/40 but on such a small sample %’s are meaningless
earlier predictions remain:
Ohio Clinton 52/48 and Texas Clinton 52/49
although haven’t seem any Polls supporting me yet but there is “momentum” time
what’s your predictions
My predications are at the top of the prev. page
Hawaii, 4 (52/48 for Obama)
Wisconsin, 20 (60/40 for Obama)
And, yes – I know this is going against every poll out there but if I’m right I’ll be on a plaque in the League of Super Heroes – and what more can a mortal ask for?
On Texas – 52/48 for Obama (and yes – I know every poll is saying I’m silly by I still figure that the Obama on-the-ground organization can win this one – and I also think US polling is too fixated on race). On Ohio – I’m giving that one to Camp Clinton by 8 points (56/54).
In anticipation of my desire that your figures are closer than mine, I’ve now engraved your name on that plaque in the League of Super Heroes
and welded on a champers bottle……already duly empty
I say anon for another day
So Obama is a copycat. When you put yourself on the pedestal as the prince of words, they should be yours. If not, at least say so. Can we be cynical of his words from now on? Yes, we can.
America 2008: Jim Crow gets Heave-Ho; Barber Shop and Salon To Open on Same Street.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21063
Has Hillary been audited? Is she under Cruise control?
You be the judge!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3enFIPvnFg
GP – You’ll probably hate it more if you’ve come across it, but in a case of ‘know thine enemy’, have a look at EP Thompson’s The Making of the English Working Class . This was cultural Marxism in response to what I think that you are arguing. It was widely accepted in US academy and his methods adapted to the US situation by Herbert Gutman and his followers. Borrowed from wiki:
“I am seeking to rescue the poor stockinger, the Luddite cropper, the “obsolete” hand-loom weaver, the “utopian” artisan, and even the deluded follower of Joanna Southcott, from the enormous condescension of posterity.”
Thompson attempts to add a humanist element to social history, being critical of those who turn the people of the working class into an inhuman statistical bloc.’
Finnegans, just a question, in the case of an Obama v. McCain race, who are you backing?
Here’s a site about the superdelegates; one for the tragics:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Superdelegate_Transparency_Project
…enjoy!
The campaign is getting ’swifty’. Check out Swift Kids for Truth through here: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2008/02/the_new_swiftboating_swift_kid.html. Hilarious. Also pretty clever politically in the way it will disarm the actual Swifties (or at least make them rebrand themselves).
#111 Well spotted Pancho – that’s precisely the bloke what inspires me. I have that quote in giant font blue=tacked above my computer at Uni.
108 – The Finnegans
That argument has already been debunked twice in a variety of articles by a number of people in the previous thread. Why do you persist in criticism that is clearly biased and one sided.
Crunch Time For Cookie Clinton: Bets All Choc-Chips On No-Limit Texas Hold ‘Em.
Obi Calls Her: The Kid’s Got Milk
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/02/19/clinton_bets_everything_on_texas_ohio.html
asanque – I’m not entirely sure of the lingo, but I think it is called ‘trolling’, usually engaged in by either the ignorant or those being paid to do so.
Politico seems to have access to some early exit polls that point to a big win for Obama.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/
Also, a new poll (SurveyUSA) in Ohio has halved Hillary’s lead: Clinton 52, Obama 43 (was 17 points in the last poll).
the new kid on the block holds the most chips
the aging pro’s time is almost done……”change” has been called
2 weeks to go now until the end of the Bush/Clinton reign.
Hillary is left to her only predictable tactic of attack against Obama.
it won’t work.
when you are old,tired and unliked you can’t attack the young,energised and LIKED.
Iraq…the undoing of Bush/Clinton.
Musharref’s party accepts defeat
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/20/world/asia/20pakistan.html?em&ex=1203570000&en=ed943a1f4667ee2a&ei=5087
No doubt they’ll give Clinton the run next time 4 years into President McCain.
Jasmine if you think John McCain and the Republican Party can beat Barack Obama and the Democratic Party in November 2008 i have some swampland to sell you.
Risky call david…!
I think I’ll predict Hawaii 64-36 and Wisconsin 56-44 to Obama.
Interesting today that electoral vote posted a couple of new polls for Texas at 50-48 and 50-45 respectively for Clinton – statistical tie. Yet the RCP average has barely shifted (42.6-50.2). That average more often that not turns out to be right, so it will be interesting to see how that shifts in the coming days.
I would suggest that by the start of next week, the gap in most polls will be no more than 5. Interesting times.
The election is over eight months away. Comments like that are ridiculous – you want to see what happens to the Democratic Party if nobody drops out, and McCain gets a three-six month head start in the race?
Max from a week ago:
Wisconsin believe Obama 54/46
Hawaii believe Obama 60/40 but on such a small sample %’s are meaningless
Predictions from a week ago remain:
Ohio Clinton 52/48 and Texas Clinton 52/49
Fortunately for me , the Polls do not NOW make my prediction as far out. My swampland was on Obama over Clinton with watering rights.
Max , do you think the O & Mc swiftboats on both sides will cancel each out
Max @ 126
that is why Hillary will be conceding shortly after March 4 when it is clear that Obama’s pledged delegate and overall vote lead is too much for Supers to overturn.
and btw..in the leadup to Nov, conditions are only gonna get better for the Democrats.
HarryH agree re with Clinton….Texas ‘high noon’ approachs at the corral
does your swampland have watering rights also ?
my question to Max was wrongly cut & pasted. My question is do you think the Mc swiftboats will cancel the O momentum for change & Mc’s age 100 years Iraq views
(because Mc or his supporters will look to undermine the O’s acceptability)
Ooh-aaah! Somebody’s getting done like a dinner in WI. Stand-by for the mother of all dummy spits.
“….preliminary exit poll information from the Wisconsin Democratic primary.
Key highlights:”
“Women: Obama 51%, Clinton 49%
Change vs. experience, 52% to 24%.
Just 17% are first time voters
Families with income under 50,000: Obama 51%, Clinton 49%
Independents: Obama 63%, Clinton 34%
Seniors: Clinton 60%, Obama 39%
Top quality – experience: Clinton 95%, Obama 5%
Union households: Clinton 50%, Obama 49%
Update: Mike Allen has more: “Democratic officials with access to exit polls say Sen. Obama looks like he’s headed for a huge win in today’s Wisconsin primary. The polls could turn out to be off, as they have in the past. But the officials’ revelation reflects the chatter in the campaigns in advance of the 9 p.m. Eastern poll closing… Obama encroached deeply into three of Clinton’s core groups of voters — women, those with no college degree and those with lower incomes — while giving up none of his own.”
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/02/19/exit_polls.html
Ron,
I am personally of the opinion that McCain is having little to no effect on the Democratic Primary race (besides the fact he is there and the unofficial nominee already.) I think he knows this too, because he has been relatively silent in recent days (apart from rambling about campaign funds, which I don’t fully understand yet, but I’ll get there.)
The ‘100 year’ comment was taken completely out of context by the media. Yes it hurt him, but in the end apart from those who are really anti-war, it won’t matter too much. The public know he supports ’staying the course’ and he is happy with that. How he will differ from Bush will become clearer over the next six months, and will obviously affect his campaign.
Iraq will be a key point in any general election campaign. But it won’t be the ‘be all and end all’ point that many Democrats were hoping it would be – this is not a re-run of the 2006 midterms.
I think the Obama momentum as we know it will halt the very moment Clinton concedes (assuming she does). It will be a completely different ball game then. At the moment, momentum is key because it wins him primaries and promotes the air of inevitability. But nobody cares about momentum in this stage of the general election, they want it in six months time (or when you are down by a big margin.) Inevitable is useful in a primary, not so much in a general.
So, I’m not sure if that answered your question, but it is my general train of thought.
As for in two weeks… I think Clinton will win Ohio. The lead is too great, and while it will narrow there probably won’t be enough time for him to cut it down (barring a defining endorsement). Texas should be around the 47-47 range come polling day, within the margin of error. It is going to come down to undecideds, which Obama usually wins, but again, it is too close to call – it’s going to be a matter of a handful of votes. Which means it will be a delegate tie, but the media don’t care about that – the message will either be Clinton hung on or the firewall collapsed under pressure. Simple as that.
Fox has called Wisconsin for McCain… at least 35 seconds after polls closed.
“Clinton targets PLEDGED delegates”… worth a read…
http://www.politico.com/rogersimon/
yes you did answer my question thx Max.
Your political projections for Ohio & Texas are in the geneal ballpark of my Poll predictions on the day for both Ohio & Texas as the narrowing occurs
For the Nov Election , my sense is Iraq will be a bigger issue than the Republicans will wish a the Deomocrats will make it so & link McCain’s existing ’stay the course’ to it. The question of whatever was the context of McCain’s 100 year statement is likely to be lost but rather for middle voters its a stance of Republican’s remaining for a long time for what seems to be another Vietnam type war. I see the issue as a major plus for the Democrats
The Obama momentum I referred to is a yearning for ‘change’ from both the Clinton & Bush era’s & methods of policy & their outcomes which I feel will be a Nov. factor
What may change the dynamics is the increasing liklihood of further dramatic economic downturn. Also a subtext of Obama’s race can not be ignored as a negative for him when the actual presidency is on the line.
Alot can change in 7 months given a political week is a long time , but believe the Obama bandwaggon’s team will be hard to stop & I’m on the waggon
CNN has called Wisconsin for Obama. Lead is 54/45 with 1% of precincts counted
Comparatively large under 45s and under 30s turnouts in Wisconsin, according to the CNN exit poll. This could be a good return for Obama. Will Hillary acknowledge it if she gets another thrashing?
Pancho , one effect of the continued Obama momentum is some voters in subsequent Primarys may not wish to appear to be out of step with inevitability
Of course she won’t:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/02/19/clinton_defiant_after_wisconsi.html
‘Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has gotten good over the last few weeks at fleeing a primary state she has just lost and trying to turn the page.
This time around, she did not even wait for the results to come in.
Instead, on Tuesday night, Clinton announced that she would give a “major address” in Manhattan on Wednesday morning and delivered what aides described as a “preview” here. It seemed clearly designed to be a pre-emptive strike against the news that Clinton had lost yet another primary race…
Clinton, who has lost more than a half-dozen primaries since Feb. 5, once again did not congratulate her rival as his victory in Wisconsin became official. She did not even acknowledge that voting had taken place that day, instead thanking the high school marching band.’
#104
On Wisconsin Ron said
With 23% counted Obama 56/43 and CNN calling it for Obama – Ron – I believe congratulations are in order!
Those numbers don’t appear to be shifting. 56-43 with 33% reporting. Should be between a 10 and 15 point win despite Hillary’s campaigning for the week in Wisconsin and the tricks of the last few days. Which I believe will translate as about a further dozen candidate lead to Obama.
Dig this!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/19/networks-interrupt-clinto_n_87485.html
They will be livid. Awaiting a Mark Penn response in 10, 9, 8…
Another Clinton clayton’s concession speech. For someone who professes to be the leader she seems to be trailing quite a lot.
Now that Obama is eating into her demographics, Texas and Ohio are looking less likely to be the rocket boosters she needs to even catch up, let alone overtake.
She’s now on borrowed time.
Expect the fangs to emerge and the fearsome stuff to start leaping off the TV screens.
Pass the popcorn, this is my favourite bit…
141
Enemy Combatant
Another Hallmark moment! LOL
(She bought time on cable, Hallmark I think it was, and just as she was wrapping up to her live audience, the station cut her off and went back to scheduled programming.)
#143
KR
But it gets worse than that – in a couple of hours Chelsey’s week of legwork comes under the microscope.
s/Chelsey/Chelsea
Wisconsin holding at 56/43 at 50% of the count.
Wisconsin 57/42 at 63% of the count.
Obama always seems to pull further ahead later in the count….
Is there a demographic reason for his?
Like African americans, who vote overwhelming for Obama, live in more densely populated areas which leads to lkarger booths which take longer to count. Hence, Obama gains in the later booths.
Or it could be a new voter phenomenon altering the expected size of booths. Though they should have a better handle on this by now.
RA I would have thought that the city booths would come in later too (though I have nothing to back me up on this) and Obama’s college blocs and younger people would tend to be there.
I remember reading that polling booths were staying open for 2 or 3 hours after the deadline to handle the people already in the line by the deadline.
Zino, I noticed that they were ‘pimping’ Chelsea at some colleges and trying to turn the youthful from their folly of following the hologram of hope.
Guess it didn’t quite come off, eh?
(I watched her on a clip, and I must say, she’s a very ordinary speaker. If that’s their ’secret weapon’ against Obama, he’s got little to worry about! LOL)
Yeah, great turnout for the Dems. Last time I checked Obama had two and a half times the number of votes of McCain with about 40% counted for each party.
If this is what November looks like, the Republicans can kiss their ass goodbye, and kiss the Dem’s donkey hello! LOL
A fun one is the Clinton v All Republican Comers count. Clinton has won again!!
Though with the Republican race all but decided, the incentive for Republicans to turn out is minimal.
Looks like Obama is headed towards 60/40 or pretty close.
The exit polling is going to be a good read!
We’ll get to see that white folks won’t vote for the dark guy I suppose (not!).
#152
But keep in mind that Chelsea coverage in Hawaii has been celebrity style – registration starts in about 30 mins.
All aboard the hope train! *toots*
Hillary Clinton to the ABC affiliate in Honolulu on the plagiarism charge:
I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t think Obama will beat the Republican machine – you seem to forget how good they are. I’m not even sure Hilary would but I’d much prefer to see it her giving it a go.
He is not an outsider, as he has painted himself, he is just an inexperienced insider and I’m betting the Repub’s can paint this better than Hilary. Change is pretty easy to make a fright campaign from, ask Latham, and hope doesn’t pay the mortgage.
But it is a long way away Obama has to get it first. I just think hope and change are going to be pretty easy to beat with experience and fear. I know democrats and far left wingers who want an American version of Bob Brown in the white house think anyone can win, but I don’t think they will.
Didn’t the person who used the digusting ‘pimping’ phrase get sacked or suspended? I guess we have to expect this kind of disgusting attack not just from the right who have made it an artform but from the immoral left as well.
CNN : 58/41, 77% count.
Her campaign has been one bit of buffoonery after another of late. It was an incredibly dangerous tactic to focus the commentariat on language and speech for a start (through conference calls issued by her campaign), now she is flat out lying about it. And the reporters who took the calls will know this and call her out on it. She’s not about winning at the moment, but trying to see the other guy lose. The Democratic Party is allowing a couple of their great statespeople to sully themselves at the moment.
The Republican machine has spent the last decade mobilising the Christian Right. They will not be able to get this bloc to fall in behind McCain. So while they can attack Obama, as far as this lot is concerned, the Republicans don’t have a candidate for them to turn out for.
So then both Obama and McCain fight for the middle. Smears won’t neccesarily help here, particularly directed towards a likable candidate.
well it has got so ugly , one wonders how many Superdelegates can resist jumping on aboard before Texas to force a concession
159
jasmine
yeah, the Clinton’s went ballistic when some talking head used ‘pimping’, and if they’d said nothing it would have disappeared into the ether in a millisecond.
But to prove how dogged they are, to all sleights, they went on the attack, and once again reminded the world of what the Clinton years were really like.
Smart, eh?
So, the word is now part of the poltical lexicon, is loaded with meaning, and is a delightful term for the dubious way politicians exploit their family members to ‘humanise’ them.
Yep, they’re pimping Chelsea, but it ain’t doing them much good by the look of it.
(Remember, they used to keep her well shielded, but now that mommy is losing it, they’ve dragged her up onto the stage, then given her the microphone and then her own audiences)
Interesting that the Washington (state) primaries are quite close Obama 49.5% to Clinton 47.4 (40% counted). Yes, this primary means nothing as all the delegates were decided in the Caucuses – still not sure why they have a primary.
Jasmine,
Congress has an approval rating of 19%…that’s getting down near Brendan Nelson territory.
That is why Obama is beating Hillary.
That is why he will beat the 73yo, warmongering Washington veteran.
So, it’s a safe bet that if Obi starts tooling around in a pink cadillac convertible and walking funny his campaign could become seriously imperilled.
Apart from that, The Kid’s lookin’ good!
You’ve added two years to McCain’s age there, Harry (one if you’re projecting to November).
Have i william?
my apologies to Mr McCain.
That is why Oboma will beat the 71yo warmongering, Washington veteran.
Why are Republican Washintonians still votonig for Romney?
I mean, I can understand if he’s still on the ticket for beauracratic reasons, but that is an awful lot of protest votes against McCain.
And who would said protestees vote for in November?
Has anyone done the figures on who would be in front now if the Dems had a first-past-the-post winner-take-all process like the GOP?
Apparently pre-poll voting starts in TX today…
#171 – GG – according to my tally Hillary 1317 and Obama 1215 (including Wisconson and Hawaii)
Oh, and seeing as I posted on Clinton going after pledged delegates earlier, I should mention their denial…
Clinton Spokesperson Rules Out Pursuit Of Obama’s Pledged Delegates
By Greg Sargent – February 19, 2008, 10:55AM
Hillary spokesperson Phil Singer is adamantly denying a report this morning in The Politico quoting an anonymous campaign official suggesting that the Clinton campaign will pursue Obama’s pledged delegates. Singer sends me this:
We have not, are not and will not pursue the pledged delegates of Barack Obama. It’s now time for the Obama campaign to be clear about their intentions.
Is Hawaii closing now? Am I calculating right?
173 – Thanks Fin
#175
Your calculations are correct.
First a couple of lines from satirist Lenny Bruce’s early 60’s routine , “How To Relax Your Coloured Friends At Parties”:
(spoken onstage to a black actor)
“That Joe Louis was a helluva fighter, he knew when to get in there, then get the hell out again which is a lot more than I can say for a lot of you n*ggers!……..”
“That Bojangles, Chr*st could he tapdance!”
And now this lead balloon today from Camp Hillary:
“Those remarks, however, paled in comparison to the criticisms launched by Clinton’s introductory speaker, Machinists Union President Tom Buffenbarger. As Ken Vogel reported for Politico, Buffenbarger “compared Obama with ‘Janus, the two-faced god’ of Roman mythology. He called him ’silver tongued’ and a ‘thespian’ and ‘the man in love with the microphone.’”
“He’s not just a trained thespian, he’s a terrific shadow boxer. You know the type. Outside the ring, he pretends he can float like a butterfly and sting like a bee,” he said. “But Barack Obama is no Muhammad Ali. He took a walk every time there was a tough vote in the Illinois state Senate. He took a walk more than 130 times. That’s what a shadow boxer does. All the right moves, all the right combinations, all the right footwork, but he never steps into the ring. He walks away from the fight.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/19/clinton-calls-to-congratu_n_87492.html
This kind of crap will blowback major on her campaign. The Kid is anything but a black political palooka. After Bubba’s racist boo-boos last week which haemorrhaged black support from HRC’s camp, we can only assume that Team Billary just doesn’t get it.
I mean 2008 America. She’s finished, caput, irrelevant. History, actually.
Careful, they might hear you.
“Michelle Obama’s comments under fire – By Jill Lawrence, USA TODAY – Michelle Obama, wife of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, is taking heat for saying Monday at a Milwaukee rally that “for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country — and not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change.”
While I have nothing against Senator Obama, it will be interesting to see what Rove pulls out of his sleeve if/when Obama becomes the nominee. He’s run out against Clinton – been going at both of them for a decade or more.
So you just don’t think women have a place in politics is that it? The involvement of Hilary’s daughter in the democratic process needs to be expressed as sexual exploitation and then you need to muck around in the republican sleeze of the Clinton years.
There really isn’t anything I can say expect the republican dirt machine has a place for you to help McCain rip Obama to shreds during the election. I hope the voters don’t fall for it but I wont be surprised if they did AGAIN.
180 Matthew
Maybe Obama visited Scores………….BOO!!!!!!!!!
Jasmine you sound like a fan of Hillary Clinton. fair enough. thats great.
you also sound afraid that the nasty Repugs will rip Obama apart.
People were saying the vaunted Clinton machine will rip him apart.
Fret not….Obama will comfortably beat McCain….comfortably.
and after electing a Black candidate this time….don’t worry, a womans turn will come.
Yet another nail in the Billary coffin. Latest Texas poll shows her 50/48. She’s gonna lose Texas for sure. Damn that Giuliani big state strategy. Or perhaps she’ll say Texas doesn’t really count anyway because it’s party a caucus vote.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/18/cnn-texas-poll-dead-heat-among-democrats/
Just a follow-up on the donation rate on Obama’s site that I mentioned yesterday – in the last 24 hours: 21,272 donations, bringing the total number of donations since the start of the year to 480,059.
#104
Ron
Seems so – Milwaukee voted 64/35 in favor of Obama.
A week ago for Texas, Clinton was 57/43 and I said then Obama’s massive 10 zip likely Primary winning momentum would make Texas 4/3/08 Clinton 51/49
and that she would concede on 3/3/08 the day before on polls or the day of
SURELY her numbers men are saying get out NOW with some grace
as those Texas figures may end up even uglier
Ron #187,
Four montha ago, people were urging McCain to “get out with grace”. His campaign was bankrupt, and he was under severe personal attack by his opponents. Pehaps Hillary is hoping for a similar comeback.
Matthew,
4 months ago the voting hadn’t started.
now they’re nearly over.
and they tell a story.
the comebacks have happened. McCain and Obama.
188
Mathew Cole
You may be right MC, but she’ll have to wait until she’s 71 at this rate!
I’m so appalled that all those white folks won’t vote for the dark guy, though! LOL
Now, who said Obama couldn’t win in white states with primaries?
Remind me again? Was it Hillary? Jesse Jackson? Who was it…?
Hawaii (8% of the count)
Obama 77%
Clinton 23%
Davidoff – Congratulations on coming so close on your Wisconsin estimate.
You deserve the plaque in the League of Super Heroes in my book
yeah, well done Zino, ya blitzing the polls.
Crikey this Obama is on fire, and re-writing the textbooks. It’s going to be something else when he takes the Oval Office and sets up an administration of capable people with principles rather than toadies and neocons.
As for the straight talking McCain, just look at the numbers voting in WI today.
Obama had almost three times as many people cast a vote for him. Tell me how McCain is going to beat that? (yeah, they’re not turning out, blah de blah because they are not even interested enough to turn out, that’s why)
Come November, and the whole Rovian Republican Reich will be dust.
Hawaii (26% of the count)
Obama 74%
Clinton 26%
CNN. Hawaii. OB 74/26 with 26% reporting
asanque, KR – thanks but I figure Ron will taking line honors for the Hawaii projection if initial results are anything to go by.
So Obama’s only 74% now? It’s the narrowing! Clinton will win for sure!
It’s the big Kahuna wipeout for Hillary! LOL
(Kahuna is a Hawaiian word, defined in the Pukui & Elbert Dictionary as “Priest, sorcerer, magician, wizard, minister, expert in any profession.” )
To be fair on the republicans there’s not much incentive to come out and vote given that that nomination is sewn up. In-fact many republicans voted in the Democratic race.
Kirri Kahuna, we all get such a special thrill when you get mildly didactic on our arses.
200
Enemy Combatant
And you sir, did a great service to quotations by informing us ignorant loathing lefties about the proper use of the right bower! (loved it, by the way!)
199
Claude
And a lot of independents by the look of it.
Hawaii (51% of the count)
Obama 76%
Clinton 23%
After 9th straight loss, drubbing, shellacking, thumping by Obama, Hillary is only 62 behind (according to CNN). Hillary at 1239 and Obama at 1301. Meanwhile, there is still 1594 delegates to be fought for. Bring it ON!! It’s certainly more exciting than the GOP dead men walking contest.
State – Date – No of delegates
Rhode Is. – 4/03 – 32
Vermont– 4/03 – 23
Texas – 4/03 – 228
Ohio – 4/03 – 161
Wyoming – 8/03 – 18
Mississipi – 11/03 – 40
Pennsylvania – 22/04 – 188
Guam – 3/05 – 9
Indiana – 6/05 – 84
North Carolina – 6/05 – 134
West Virginia – 13/05 – 39
Kentuckey – 20/05 – 60
Oregon – 20/05 – 65
Montana – 3/06 – 24
South Dakota – 3/06 – 23
Puerto Rico – 7/06 – 63
Total – 1191
Plus the Superdelegates left: 403
Grand Total: 1594.
Camp Clinton supports are not happy!
Hawaii (71% of the count)
Obama 75%
Clinton 24%
Hillary has gained a point – is that a narrowing?
It certainly looks like Hillary’s campaign has had the biscuit. Her cornerstone constituencies are succumbing to Obama’s appeals and he is now so far in front in the delegate count that Hillary has no real chance of catching him. The contest for the Democratic nomination has been prolonged and close-fought but this will work to Obama’s favour. He will be able to say he has put himself before all the voters and won fair and square.
Hillary – much as she wants the gig – will soon have to concede in the best interests of all she has espoused and fought for, not to mention for the sake of her own reputation.
And once nominated, Obama will become unstoppable.
206
davidoff
Imagine, if you will, Hillary in a Hawaiian shirt, nodding, nodding, and telling the crowd that she’s ready on day one!
I think today’s result will have wiped the plastic smile off her face too. This is it for Hillary Clinton, so stand back, if my hunch is right, she’ll be ready to start tearing off heads.
Pass the popcorn…I’m enjoying this…
Finnigans has donned Glen’s silks and is riding that dead horse all the way to the line.
The Finnegans, it’s actually ten losses. And the counts range from about a 60 lead to Obama on CNN, to the Washington Post’s lead of 126 for Obama (1423-1297). AP is showing a lead of 74 (1319-1245).
None of these numbers account for WI and HI delegates, so you can add a 20 lead to Obama in each case. I admire your tenacious support, but your candidate is gone, no matter how much you want to spin here.
Oh gosh – is that dirt I see in the rear-view mirror?
http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/4766
Gosh!
Davidoff , my friend you are 2% closer to Obama’s vote in Wisconsin
than I & have deservingly won the Fonz prize for bringing us ‘Happy Days’
unqualified congratulations.
surely your fridge isn’t empty as we speak
as for EC #200 , I can find no polling on that word
207
blindoptimist
Hillary concede?
Are we talking about the same Hillary?
You know, the one married to Bill Clinton! Shredded, in public, a conga line of his bimbos, snarled at Kenneth Starr, seen off various collegues with vicious knee-capping, and waited these last few years as Senator for New York while plotting to get back into the Whitehouse and line up voodoo dolls of all the creeps that crossed her on the great Health Care Plan that died still borne????
That Hillary?
Something odd on the CNN count for Hawaii – total count figure has moved backwards from 71 to 68%. Current numbers are:
Obama 76%
Clinton 24%
Nah, the poor guy is meth addled, and his memory is shot. It wasn’t Obama he was doing the business with, it was Pastor Ted, and on a few occasions a threesome with Republican Senator Larry (wide stance) Craig.
#209 #210
“And the first one now
Will later be last”
It is now for Obama to lose, so we will see.
last post was in reply to:
211
davidoff
#211 – davidoff – No, it’s the swiftboat PT-109 coming around the corner skipped by JFK.
Evening all. Seems that Obama supporters and most of Hawaii are delusional.
Likely to be plenty more stuff along the lines of this column from latest Washingotn Post. Try this bit:
“The Obama Delusion” by Robert J Samuelson
“… The contrast between his broad rhetoric and his narrow agenda is stark, and yet the media — preoccupied with the political “horse race” — have treated his invocation of “change” as a serious idea rather than a shallow campaign slogan. He seems to have hypnotized much of the media and the public with his eloquence and the symbolism of his life story. The result is a mass delusion that Obama is forthrightly engaging the nation’s major problems when, so far, he isn’t. ”
Should we break out the lithium to banish our florid delusions?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/19/AR2008021902336.html
Sure boss. I’ll give you a grovelling apology if Clinton gets across the line. Do you have the confidence to offer the same?
Clinton supporters are now getting inot rationalization mode – apparently its the Republicans coming out to vote, switching party allegiance, and voting for Obama in order to kill off the potential insurmountable opposition that would be posed by Hilary Clinton.
Finn , Clinton can not mathematically win because of the proportion allocation of delegates
Last week I went through all 18 Primary to come & left Clintons THEN massive Poll leads unchanged
Texas 59/41 , Ohio 59/41 West Virginia 56/44 , Kentucky 57/43 & Pennsa. 59/41
and with a 50/50 split of unpledged Superdelegates…produces a tie
I then opened the champers as those huge Clinton leads were unrealistic.
Meaning Clinton needs a MAJORITY of Superdelegates to support her vs. a guy whose won the most votes, the most States and the most “Primary” delegates
#220 – There is nothing to apologize. It’s only a game. There are more important things in life than this tupid political game.
The sun is still shining, the leaves are swaying, the birds are singing, my family they are all healthy and happy (hope yours is ditto). I still sing, dance and eat well. So who gives a f^^^^ about Hillary or Obama.
Samuelson’s argument is weak. In the middle of the piece he states:
‘Whatever one thinks of these ideas, they’re standard goody-bag politics: something for everyone. They’re so similar to many Clinton proposals that her campaign put out a news release accusing Obama of plagiarizing.’
So which is it? Obama has nothing while Hillary is of substance, or he has the same agenda as her?
The policy difference that is popularly notable between them has to do with the war. It is understood that Obama will extricate the US from Iraq within 18 months, while Hillary believes in military interventionism and will follow a populist course of action.
Asides this their ’substance’ is pretty similar. Their policies are similar. Many of their respective advisors had previously worked together (in the Clinton administration no less). And they won’t diverge before one gets the nod.
addition: Clinton needs a MAJORITY of still unpledged Superdelegates
Piers moonlighting at the Cleveland Leader i see Davidoff!!!!
I understand it’s a game. That’s why I wanted to put something on the table.
But that’s ok in any case, my point is made.
#227 – I have already pledged and put it on the table that I will donate to WB $50 if Hillary wins, $20 if Obama wins and my tears if “Dead man” McCain wins.
219
jaundiced view
I read that article earlier and noted that the guy first says that when he met Obama he was impressed. But hey, now that he’s the leader in the Dem race, well, let’s see, he’s not offering a cure for cancer, or world peace, and hey, can the guy please explain, in one sound byte or less, how he intends to fix entropy?
I mean, entropy! If he cannot explain to the voters how to overcome entropy then he’s just another bit of political fluff, and we all need that, eh?
It’s gunna finish the universe, eventually, and this Obama guy doesn’t say one word about it! I mean, can you believe that?
The Finnegans 228 – fair play to you. I’m done being a smartarse.
#230 – It’s alright comrade, now that Castro has retired.
JV
I liked this comment, at the end of a US blogger’s post:
Neither Clinton nor Obama can just wave a magic wand and say “let’s make this specific thing happen”. There are checks and balances in our system that prevents that.
However, POTUS is a bully pulpit which, in the right hands, can move Congress in the right direction on all of these. Obama can do that. Hillary can’t. That’s reason #1 I’ll vote for him.
Reason #2 is that he’s the reason voting is up this year. More people are involved. For the first time in my memory (I’m 52) I’ll be voting for someone instead of against someone.
…says it all really.
224 Pancho & 229 KR – Agree – Samuelson seems to be trying to say, ‘Obama speaks better than Clinton about the same policies, therefore Clinton deserves support.’
It’s really just an all out attack on Obama’s strong suit – one of a heap of them coming his way, all the way to November.
The Finnegans , you are still a paid up ship member & welcome at all times ,
it seems some have confused your support for Obama over Clinton but doubts of Obama withstanding the McCain swiftboats as support for Clinton
…hell the other night was first accused as a Communist and later a neocon such is the misunderstandings bloging brings
see my #220 , its the Democratic system of proportional voting that gives the 2nd place getter the mirage of being able to catch up when prportionally he
can not
Did someone seriously suggest that Hillary will surrender BEFORE Texas and Ohio????!!! Huh???
We are talking about Hillary CLINTON and not EDMUND Hillary aren’t we?? Cos…the latter has already checked out of course. The former, however, won’t be surrendering anytime soon. She may get redder in the face, increasingly shrill and irrational in her attacks on the young guy; maniacally dangerous towards anyone nearby who even LOOKS like they want her to give up.
But Hillary hoist the white flag BEFORE Texas?? C’mon…let her have her very own Alamo.
Well Ron,
I still don’t buy your “3rd of March” theory but I must admit the 5th of March is looking more and more possible.
Do you think she’ll ask for Secretary of State?
FG @ 235,
Agree.
Her whole life’s success or failure (as she would see it) are now to be decided in the next 13 days of campaigning. She won’t be giving up now. But she might give up if she gets slammed in O+T.
#234 – My rationale has always been that Obama is a naughty boy because it should be lady first and I dont want to see the good dies young. Some lunatic in the US probably already mumbling to himself or herself that no n**g** is going to be my president. Get my drift?
Finnigans,
I think the scenario you refer to has been thought of by many.
Let’s hope the Secret Service are on their game.
can some one enlighten me pls
1) are all the remaining states based on a proportioning of delegates
ie is 52/48 really much of a difference for democratic primaries
2) will either democratic candidate be able to win any southern states?
if yes who and which states will they win in the presidental election
238
The Finnigans
Yes we do, and so does he, and so does everyone who admires his courage to be the first person of colour to stand for POTUS with a serious chance to get it.
Would you?
Dyno,
if she concedes on the 5th, she’ll get any post she wants.
if she holds on,throwing mud all the way to the convention, she’ll get nothin.
KR @ 232 – Yes, and now the enthusiastic new voters turning out for Obama are being painted as delusional members a a new cult, with the cult leader Obama portrayed as a preening souffle whose performance is all smoke and mirrors.
This they hope to contrast beside plain-talking Hillary, the solid experienced technician ready with the tool box to get down to real work for the people.
I’d do the same thing if I was running Hillary’s campaign (shudder)
If Obama gets the nomination McCain’s people will run the same line I daresay
#239 – It’s probably the lunatic from the SS!!! Remember Indira Gandhi. She was killed by her own personal bodyguard.
HH @ 242,
Pretty much agree except that he wouldn’t give her VP (makes Bill too close to things) and I don’t think she’d take it anyway.
Strutting around the world as SoS might be to her taste though.
I think the opportunity for her to be SoS will have sailed by 5 March. And I’m not entirely sure if Obama would want team Clinton in that role – you’d think it would be cause for major friction.
Dyno,
yes i agree about no VP.
The looney Right are a pretty dispirited bunch at the moment….and its only gonna get worse for them come November and beyond.
It will be McCain and Obama courting the middle and independant ground at the election then ignoring the loonies after.
The looney Right commentariat will be shrieking and squwarking but less and less will be listening.
How about throwing them some red meat and nominating Hillary for the Supreme Court when one of them falls off the perch and makes ESJ or Diogenes happy.
It would be good to see Edwards on the court.
243
jaundiced view
McCain has obviously concluded that Obama will be in the other corner come November so he’s made a couple of quite geriatric swings. Talk about shadow boxing! LOL
McCain would have loved Hillary, but Obama represents some huge challenges, not the least is the youth, vitality and the little issue of Iraq. At least Macca could say that Hillary voted for it, but there’s no such luck with Obama.
It’s not hard to realise that McCain is now out of step with the majority who want out of Iraq, and Obama will skewer him on that issue alone.
Meanwhile, oil is $100/barrel, the financial markets are in meltdown, the housing market’s been hit by a typhoon, and they are staring at a recession which may the biggest thing since the Depression.
Let’s see Macca talk that up! LOL
( It’s not a comparison that should be made flippantly, but 911 was nothing compared with the financial destruction that the Republicans have overseen. The Islamic bogey is NOT the biggest threat to the USA, it’s the unregulated markets and shysters who’ve been allowed to corrupt Washington to look away while they raped/plundered and pillaged)
I know all you folks are totally in love with Barack Hussein Obama (and get used to seeing a lot of his full name come the campaign), and that nothing I say will change any of your minds, but here are two articles that OUGHT to do so:
* http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/02/mccains_experience_presents_ge.html
* http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/02/the_obama_delusion.html
Samuelson’s comments are particularly to the point: behind the fairy-floss rhetoric, Obama is a standard left-liberal Democrat, with no original policies on anything. He has had a dream run so far, because the mainstream liberal media loves him just as much as y’all here do. It makes them all feel so VIRTUOUS to be supporting a black candidate. But this will end come the campaign. The conservative media have been concentrating on the McCain v Conservatives race, but now they will turn their attention on Obama, and it won’t be pretty. Remember what they did to Dukakis and Kerry, and they were General Patton campared to Obama.
Marie Cocco (first link) makes the interesting point that Obama has had it easy so far because he’s been running against a woman, whose experience and independent status are easily diminished (as y’all here have done) by saying that all she’s really been is Mrs Bill. That won’t cut it against McCain. Many of the older white working class voters who have supported Clinton in the primaries will identify strongly with McCain’s CV in the main race.
It’s also becoming clear that Michelle Obama is going to be a serious liability. He may have transcended the standard Black American posture of Permanent Aggrievement (mainly because he’s not really a Black American, but rather a Kenyan-American raised in multicultural Hawaii), but she has definitely not. Her statement that she has never had any pride in the US until Hussein ran for President will go down a treat in the swing states.
That’s all for tonight. I might make it my role here to deliver a Nightly Reality Dose, just so y’all don’t get too incestuous in your furious agreement that Hussein is the Messiah.
Please do, Adam. I for one have keenly felt your absence lately.
Adam “Her statement that she has never had any pride in the US until Hussein ran for President will go down a treat in the swing states.”
If you read the quote you will see she said she has never been as proud as she now is – not that she has never been proud. Take another look and don’t just read the spin.
Adam,
Agree that Michelle’s statement was a really silly one, if eerily similar to any number of statements about Australia we all heard before and after 24 November.
An easy comment to attack, and Cindy McCain (who is almost certainly the smallest liability of any of the remaining spouses) sure didn’t miss.
I think McCain will be quite hard to beat for either Democrat candidate (and I also think he’d have been a half-decent President if he’d got the nomination in 2000 – he would have beaten Gore in my view). But in terms of Democrat chances in November, I’d be inclined (in the absence of any truly hard evidence) to believe the polls (head-to-head vs McCain) which give Obama a clear edge over Clinton on the question of who can best win.
I don’t think Obama is the Messiah, but I’m sorry, Clinton is a very uninspiring candidate.
CNN Hawaii Count: 100%
Obama 76%
Clinton 24%
251 Adam – I always welcome your contributions whether I agree with you or not, so go ahead and pour the cold water each day. But we did canvass the Samuelson article a short while ago (see above) and essentially came to the conclusion that his argument is lacking in logic, weak and partisan! It’s just an attack on Obama’s strengths, and these are to be expected all the way through. No real surprise in it.
Darryl @ 253,
According to the NY Times – an avowedly Clinton paper, but I don’t suppose they’d knowingly misquote someone – the quote was:
“For the first time in my adult lifetime I am really proud of my country.”
With Barack Obama taking Wisconsin and Hawaii decisively, is it the end of Hilary Clinton’s bid to be the first woman President? Will the rush to Obama roll through Ohio and Texas? Can Clinton’s supporters slow his bandwagon? For the views of two pro-Clinton commentators visit my blog post ‘Democrats of a Certain Age’.
#251 – I told them the swiftboat PT-109 is heading the Obama way.
Darryl, no, she said: “”What we’ve learned over this year is that hope is making a comeback. It is making a comeback and let me tell you something, for the first time in my adult lifetime, I’m really proud of my country. And not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change. And I have been desperate to see our country moving in that direction and just not feeling so alone in my frustration and disappointment. I’ve seen people who are hungry to be unified around some basic common issues, and it’s made me proud. And I feel privileged to be a part of even witnessing this, traveling around states all over this country and being reminded that there is more that unites us than divides us…”
yes KR, that Hillary. She will have to concede soon after Texas and Ohio. The delegate gap will be too wide to bridge and she will be given the choice: concede with dignity or see the super delegates march on masse to Obama and face rejection. It will be hard, but she will have to wear it IMHO.
Finnigans
very dry
(though sorry to say old chap/py) that i was persuaded to support obama after investigating the tactics etc of the campaign,following others posters concerns
i think once the manson,cult mantra hit the streets ,hilary was all but conceding
whether obama will beat mccain is a moot point at this stage
See the ‘really proud’. not equivalent to none before. At least that what it says to me.
Not sure that the Obama coke and gay sex claim should be dismissed so lightly. Remember that in 2004 the forces of darkness managed to convince many into believing that the candidate who took 3 hits in Vietnam was in ‘truth’ a coward and turn the real coward into a hero.
And as they say in American politics ‘the worse thing that can happen to a candidate is to be caught with a dead girl or a live boy.’ This guy may not qualify as a boy, but he could soon be swiftboated into being one.
McCain may have beaten Gore pre Iraq and pre his 70’s but he won’t beat Obama post Iraq and in his mid 70’s.
Don’t forget that everytime Johnny raises his experience the Dems will be reminding peeps that he will be 76 nearing the end of his term.
Johnny “bomb bomb” McCain will be looking and sounding every year of his age by election day….
Half of his own voters don’t even like him….and he aint gonna have the Great Satan(a Clinton) to scare them to the polls.
Latest Betfair odds:
- Obama $1.95 (firmed a lot in recent days as you’d expect)
- McCain $3.10 (out considerably from just a week ago, presumably on the view that Obama’s going to get the nomination)
- Clinton $6.80 (was favourite before Super Tuesday, and a week ago something like $4.00)
And, as a curiosity, guess who the next two are: Bloomberg at $80 and Gore at $95.
Adam, I think you have a point, but at the same time, I also the Republicans are going to find it very hard to slur Obama. He has that teflon look about him. The point is, the poeple who like Obama want to believe in a “better America”. Attempts to slur Obama will be felt by voters as attempts to humiliate them and their to sully their desire for something better.
The Clintons have tried to some degree to use attack politics on Obama. It has only reinforced his vote. It is not going to be so easy….
First, we are told, in no uncertain terms that Hillary Clinton will win, and Iowa was just a bunch of silly white folks too embarrassed to say they that really wanted to vote for a white person. (They had two to choose from!)
Next, we were told, in no uncertain terms, that Hillary Clinton would win on Feb 5th, because Obama could only really muster black votes in primary states like South Carolina. So after Feb 5th, Obama was out of the race.
Next we were told that Obama’s hologram of hope only appealed to the young, the black, and the intellectually challenged, so the next round of states would start to show his lack of appeal to ‘real’ Democrats ie poor, uneducated and union members. Oh, and there wouldn’t be Hispanics voting for the dark guy, no, ‘coz that does not happen in the USA.
Now, we are told that Obama would lose to McCain because of his wife! (Oh, does that mean he’ll get the nomination then?)
And silly us, ‘ignorant loathing lefties’, who obvioulsy think Obama is the messiah, when, shock, horror, he’s just another ‘liberal’. OMG, who ever would have guessed?
And to make matter worse, the ladies over 65 in their zimmer frames would most likely vote for McCain rather than Obama if they can’t get the ’sister’ of their choice!
Crikey, us ‘ignorant loathing lefties’ have a thing or two to learn about US politics, eh?
This is fun…pass the popcorn!
You’re getting a bit carried away, KR. I’d be happy to see Obama win, but McCain will take a fair bit of beating and this needs to be realistically acknowledged.
And one specific point, in all honesty, Michelle Obama’s comment today was enough to make any Obama supporter cringe.
Good god KR…you’ll be looking like Russ Hinze on steroids if you keep stuffing yourself with that popcorn!
269
Dyno
Oh, she must be a Muslim too! LOL
Do you seriously think that come November every voter will go to the polls and vote for a 72yr old war monger because Michelle Obama expressed herself poorly?
Come November, the average American will be wondering how far down the S-bend their country has gone, and if they’ll ever get it back.
270
Ferny Grover
good point Ferny, I’ll have to get the Lite Popcorn!
Where are the “Queensberry Rules” !!!!!
I am set for the ‘duel’ ….take my 10 spaces ….and turn around to fire
but Dr adam has fired first …wounding me but not fatally
I am about to fire the winning shop ….but alas …..woosh he is gone….again
Lite popcorn all round KR. My shout!
#270 – FG – KR looks like Russ Hinze on steroids with a sore jaw from all the LOLs.
271 KR,
Talk about putting words in my mouth! – of course I don’t think that. As for the Muslim thing, that’s straight out of your brain, not mine, I hadn’t thought of it that way at all.
It’s a long campaign, Americans are very patriotic people (on the whole), and comments like Michelle O’s will be used to help build a picture of Obama that may not be attractive to the average American.
274
Ferny Grover
It’s gotta be the greatest show on earth, and there’s nothing like watching the favourite get done (especially when you’ve put your hard earned on the outsider!)
And just for you Finn2, LOL!
Adam, the fact is that Hillary aint the best candidate (as judged by state after state of Dem voters, and increasingly the party machine), and she will lose the Dems nomination (if you don’t think she has already). I get the feeling that you’re sniping because because you’ve been wrong about this one from the top.
276
Dyno
Irony alert! Irony alert!
The media love this stuff, it fills the vast vacuous spaces, but the reality is it’s tomorrow’s fish wrapper.
278
Pancho
Whoa there Pancho! LOL
Since Dr. “Dracula” Adam will make his nightly visit and fang us with his “Nightly Reality Dose”. I will response accordingly by keeping a nightly “PT109 Swiftboat File” on Barack Hussein “the Messiah” Obama. I told you this is more exciting than the GOP “Dead men walking” campaign. starting with:
1. On national TV, Patrick calls plagiarism charge against Obama ‘extravagant’
2. Michelle Obama, wife of Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, is taking heat for saying Monday at a Milwaukee rally that “for the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country — and not just because Barack has done well, but because I think people are hungry for change.”
3. The Obama Delusion. By Robert Samuelson – WASHINGTON — It’s hard not to be dazzled by Barack Obama. At the 2004 Democratic convention, he visited with Newsweek reporters and editors, including me. I came away deeply impressed by his intelligence, his forceful language and his apparent willingness to take positions that seemed to rise above narrow partisanship. Obama has become the Democratic presidential front-runner, precisely because countless millions have formed a similar opinion. It is, I now think, mistaken. As a journalist, I harbor serious doubt about each of the likely nominees. But with Sens. Hillary Clinton and John McCain, I feel that I’m dealing with known quantities. They’ve been in the public arena for years; their views, values and temperaments have received enormous scrutiny. By contrast, newcomer Obama is largely a stage presence defined mostly by his powerful rhetoric. The trouble, at least for me, is the huge and deceptive gap between his captivating oratory and his actual views.
4. Fresh Face Won’t Be Enough vs. McCain – By Marie Cocco – WASHINGTON — The thematic backdrop of the Democratic nomination contest thus far is the triumph of hope over experience. It has carried Barack Obama, a freshman senator whose principal experience in public office has been as an Illinois state legislator, to a down-to-the-wire matchup with Hillary Clinton, whose experience includes eight years as first lady and seven years in the Senate. A hidden reason the lopsided Obama/Clinton experience argument has so far been won by Obama is that she’s a woman, and so her own experience can be easily dismissed. Obama himself tried this tack in December, when he likened Clinton’s unprecedented foreign travels as first lady to having “tea” in the “ambassador’s house.” In fact, Clinton traveled to refugee camps, impoverished villages, remote health clinics and other venues far less comfortable than any embassy.
5. Barack Obama now faces a new challenge – one that is sure to be much more scandalous than anything he’s seen so far. If the allegations are to be believed, it’s also a scandal that his campaign has tried to cover up. A Minnesota man has come forth, claiming that he took cocaine in 1999 with Obama, the then-Illinois legislator, and participated in homosexual acts with him.
6. Obama’s high-flown, inspirational rhetoric often feeds into the impression of a political campaign veering into the realms of religion – never more so than when he declared in a victory speech that “we are the ones we’ve been waiting for.” The line is the title of a 2006 Alice Walker book, but some saw it as
another sign of the emerging Cult of Obama. “Obamaphilia has gotten creepy,” wrote a ro-Obama Los Angeles Times columnist, Joel Stein. “The best we Obamaphiles can do is to refrain from embarrassing ourselves.”
As for Michelle’s ‘moment’ – I get the feeling that Obama’s MO is the best indication that a helluva lot of American’s agree with her. They’re a nation desperately looking for reasons to be proud and the pride-deprived are flocking to BHO for someone to believe in.
Her comments won’t hurt him. They’ll be forgotten in a week. At the moment, I’m guessing a lot of Americans know exactly what she means.
Hey, I reckon that’s straight bat defence to ‘Black American posture of Permanent Aggrievement’ (try something by David Hollinger for a more nuanced reading) and ‘Hussein is the Messiah.’
sorry , missed your post on first croll Mick
240
Mick Quinlivan Says:
February 20th, 2008 at 9:19 pm
can some one enlighten me pls
1) are all the remaining states based on a proportioning of delegates
ie is 52/48 really much of a difference for democratic primaries
2) will either democratic candidate be able to win any southern states?
if yes who and which states will they win in the presidental election
1/ yes
2/ The Democrats hold NO , I repeat NO Southern States at all !
Further the Deocrats hold NO Mid west States
There are plenty to chose from** especially with Obama generating high white black turnouts as voting is not compulsory. Will nominate States when the distortion of having 3 way polls is removed.
** The Democrats hold 4 of the 6 biggest States already incl the biggest 2
Mick
yes proportional for all
but No 52/48 results therefore are mathematically useless to Clinton
FG @ 282,
Not independents, they’ll be peeved, and they’re the ones Obama has to get in November.
Some time before March 4 Michelle will do an interview with a major media organisation in which she’ll practically sing “The Star-Spangled Banner”, just so everyone knows she’s a patriot.
283
Pancho
Agree, it has a certain ‘air’ to it, that comment.
(I was being jocular, by the way. Reminding Adam that he’s been wrong is rather, er, how should we put it delicately? Rather forthright, and from what I’ve seen, tantamount to gross personal insult. Let’s not forget afterall, we are but ‘ignorant loathing lefties’, or ‘elite commentariat’. Take ya pick! LOL).
Not all of us have the fine distinction of being infallable, alas.
For all of you West Wing fans …
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8567.html
So to the State that gave us the Alamo …of Davy Crockett & Jim Bowie
but no glorious defeat awaits the Lady from the Big Apple
Adam at 251 – You really are doing no favours to your reputation by relying on rhetoric rather then statistics to get your point across.
I don’t mind you delivering a “reality dose”, but really, are those articles the best you can come up with?
And the issue with Michelle Obama is just another meaningless non-issue that will be forgotten by the next news cycle.
asanque , what are you complaining about. I’m still in the meadows with my ‘duel’ pistol , my opponent has fanished and I can only see fox’s to fire at
Finnigans @ 281 Re point 5
Wonder why ‘Minnesota man’ who came forth hasn’t come forth earlier?
Most likely he will turn out to be the in-patient of a Republican psychiatrist who sent him out into the streets with this bombshell placed in his memory.
If he’s legit, then:
The first coke-snorting black bisexual President? I think Amercans are ready
The big danger with Obama is, of course, that having trumpeted hope and change and a better world, any failure to deliver will see dissilusionment, hopelessness and cynicism entrenched for a generation.
He better have the best of the best policy and economic advisers surgically stitched to his side for the duration.
samuelson is such a bore. his article is about how important and cool and wise he really is. most people won’t read past the first sentence, and rightly so.
#292
Actuall its old news – it was a youtube video posted something like a couple of months ago (not absolutely sure about the date) and was largely ignored. What is suprising here is the the story has been picked up by an Ohio newspaper – and for me the news is more about the credibility of the newspaper than anything else.
Ferny, you wouldn’t have to deliver much to really outperform the Bush years….and the slackest Congress since Hoover. I would rather try and fail than never try at all, at least once every second decade…
293 Ferny G –
Could you cc that memo to Mr K Rudd, and Mr W Swan, Canberra, for their attention?
Davidoff 295 – Thought so, it doesn’t quite ring true does it?
Ferny @ 293
isn’t that what politics is all about.
giving everyone hope…maintaining it as long as possible….then disappointing a lot….then getting voted out for the next in line.
two night ago,
“Obama was the most left wing candidate the Democrats could find”
now
“Obama is a standard left-liberal Democrat”
Changing the goal posts is fine , but chose one option and say why and I’m happy to give a response
And if not we’ll all move on as there are other debaters here for us to debate with & light heartedly blog with & against
JV
That’s the line of the day:
The first coke-snorting black bisexual President? I think Amercans are ready
Ferny, politicians are born to disappoint, that is what they do. But we vote for the next one, because that is what WE do!
(But seriously, if Obama’s campaign is any guide, and hey, that’s the yardstick here, then this guy can move people and make things happen. Compare Clinton, for one second, and it’s pretty clear why he’s winning. Now, imagine that in the Whitehouse. Hillary’s going to be playing with her voodoo dolls and re-staging the 1990’s and everyone who knows her knows that. Obama is going to have a crack at doing it better, and so far, he’s got a majority of Democrats thinking he can.)
Hope > Fear > Practicality
That is why Obama will win.
Blindoptimist, believe me I’m as blind an optimist as you – and I believe in Obama’s audacity of hope – but at some point Obama’s powerful rhetoric is going to have to be laced with more substance or the calls that he is an inspiring flake will only get louder.
I don’t think for a moment that the calls would be true – but they will begin to gain traction. A frightened and insecure nation going through economic meltdown will want to know that the black man in the white house can steer them through the storm.
Ferny 302
as opposed to the octagenerian who himself claims he doesn’t know much about the economy???
After Mr. Obama’s victory in Iowa, the campaign collected $2.8 million online. But it was the two days after Mr. Obama’s stunning loss to Mrs. Clinton in New Hampshire that campaign officials point to as when they began to realize they were in for an extraordinary month.
On the evening of the primary, Mr. Obama’s finance staff settled in to watch the results from their cubicles. When the television networks called the race for Mrs. Clinton, their spirits sagged. But Ms. Burdick was staring at her laptop, watching a graph showing how much money was coming into the Obama campaign over the Internet. Within minutes, it was shooting upward.
“This is crazy,” Ms. Burdick said, calling over to two of her colleagues sitting near her.
Within three hours, the campaign had cleared $500,000. In the morning, when Ms. Burdick checked again, the campaign had raised $750,000. Over the course of two days, Mr. Obama collected $4.4 million online.
…says it all really.
That’s people power and their memory of Hillary Clinton in the Whitehouse.
So, remind me again, who said Hillary Clinton was going to win the nomination?
HA! Harry H and KR – you are exposed as a pair of cynics!!
As for me…well…I was kinda hoping that just this once…we might see a President who actually delivers what he promises.
JV…the memo is on it’s way.
Ferny at 302
For the economy, all you need to do is look at the campaigns.
Clinton was almost bankrupt after Super Tuesday, but for injecting $5 million of her own money.
McCain was close to bankrupt last November.
Obama is raking in money.
That’s a section from an article in today’s NYTImes by the way.
Interesting bit of behaviour, eh? Money pours in when candidate loses in New Hampshire.
Says it all, really.
90% of Obama’s donations are in denominations under $100. A majority of Clinton’s are over $1000, for what those numbers are worth.
Interesting discussion guys.
With the article about a fresh face not being enough and the whole experience debate thing also saying that he is short on substance so he will clearly lose. Sounds familiar. Isn’t that the gist of what was said about a certain Kevin Rudd? It presents you with a good angle for an argument. They have done a good job but they are the past and I am the future. This avoids the negativity.
I do agree Obama has many vulnerabilities that could damage him. Particularly his branding as a far left liberal. If he wins the nomination he will need a good choice for vp. Though i think their importance is often exaggerate it provides a good opportunity to a couple of things. To heal the rift with Hillary backers and have a far more conservative running mate (from a red state). The point being to soften the blow of liberal criticism.
There are a number of well suited candidates for an Obama Vp. In my opinion Senator Evan Bayh is by far the best. Clinton backer, former Secretary of State/governor of Indiana and he is only 52. This would allow him to position himself much closer to the centre, reduce the age argument and heal the rift with Clinton backers. Also would have great native son goodness for Indiana having won this red state for the senate with 61.6 % of the vote.
305
Ferny Grover
Cynic? Moi?
nah, I’m a proud ‘ignorant loathing lefty’ mate, and despite getting the official upgrade to ‘elite commentator’, I think I’ll leave that to my betters! LOL
Scotty what about the dream VP “Al” ?
My reply to Adam’s “reality dose” is my own “reality dose”. Adam’s approach is imho symptomatic of his expertise as a psephologist and watcher of the minute and everday rhythms of the political entrails that normally dump their end product on us poor citizenry. In short, he can’t see the wood for the trees.
To shift analogies (which is a good way to defend oneself in advance against the charge of mixing metaphors) he is like a psephological version of a British general – always fighting the last war rather than the one that’s happening. In 2004 Bush had done enough to piss off a broad spectrum of US society to enable the Dems to mobilise an increased turnout. But Iraq wasn’t yet on the nose…enough. Rove did his swift-boat thing, gay marriage was waved before the twitching nostrils of the fundamentalist wolf pack and the Repugs got their base to vote in sufficient numbers that only a little bit of fraud in Ohio was necessary to secure a win.
Since then Iraq has gone down the toilet and, regardless of the noise they make about the “success” of the surge, it remains unpopular. Katrina was, from talks I’ve had with politically active people in the States, even more important. And don’t forget the recession. The ground has shifted and silly games about swift boats and lies about cocaine sniffing can’t change the fact that the base of the left has grown and the base of the right has shrunk.
This has presented the Repugs with a dilemma. If they ran with a right-wing candidate like Huckabee that would get the God-botherers out, but (unlike in 2004) that wouldn’t be sufficient. So they run with someone who is perceived as a centrist – McCain. Problem is this upsets their base. The fundies might not vote for him, so he has to make concessions to them. But he’s caught in a classic pincer as that hurts his ability to win the middle ground who are now much more important than they were in 2004 due to the left-ward shift in the electorate.
Enter the supposed “danger” of swift-boating. Swift-boating is useless for mobilising the middle ground. It’s a classic Rovian tactic for mobilising the base. But for every fundy it persuades to vote who might have otherwise not because they hate McCain there are two or three swing voters who will be repelled back to Obama by the crudity of it. This is not 2004. This is post Iraq post Katrina politics.
As an aside Adam (if you’re reading) thanks for the German electoral maps from the Weimar. I’m about to teach a bunch of would-be PE teachers about the collapse of the Weimar Republis and I need all the help I can get.
Ferny, I agree the time will come when Obama will have to add more substance to his campaign. But the same sorts of things were said about Rudd, Blair, Clinton (WJ) and even Bush in 2000. Obama is doing brilliantly so far: he is getting people to take a good look at him, evoking support and defining the terms of the campaign. The detail can come later. Right now he has to position himself as someone who can win….and isn’t he doing that superbly.
Blindoptimist…..indeed he is. Superbly.
312
Robert Bollard
Good post.
The Rovian Republican Reich is kaput, and McCain cannot straddle all the horses that have broken out.
Obama may lose some rusted on Clinton supporters, but he’ll gain many more disaffected Republicans and Independents, while generating a small army of fresh voters.
Paradigm shifts are hard to spot, even when they’re on top of you, so don’t be too harsh.
Hillary worst tactical mistake was to arrogantly think she HAD the Democrat Nomination & was campaqigning for the presidency obver a year ago by courting the ‘right’ including Murdoch
which left her ‘left” flank open for Obama to fill
I agree with robert , mcCain will fail for the same reason
to get out the ‘fundo’s ‘ in big numbers to vote he’ll talk the neocon voice ,
and like Hillary lose the very segment (but a different segment)that is crucial to winning
as I’ve said before my only concern is the sub text of ‘black’
Are there any published results from Washington?
#304
KR
I just punched a couple of numbers dealing with the donation rate on the Obama campaign. Based on a review of numbers between 7:59 am and 8:03 am, Obama received 28 donations – that’s basically one donation every 28 seconds. Projecting ahead that means that Obama will break through the 500,000 donation barrier for 2008 sometime in the next 10 hours (almost two weeks ahead of their 4 March target).
Turning ,
Washington
McCain 49%
Huck 22%
Romney 20% still on the ballot
From the London Times on BHO’s victory speech today:
“His speech began in the middle of Mrs Clinton’s own address in Youngstown, Ohio, prompting TV stations to abandon coverage of her in favour of Mr Obama. This was immediately seen as a sign that his campaign is now ready to “big foot” his formerly frontrunning rival. ”
and he begins to address the accusations of shallowness -
“Mr Obama responded in his own speech, saying change “will take more than big rallies, it’s going to require more than rousing speeches, it will also require more than policy papers and positions and websites, it is going to require something more”.
He added: “The problem that we face in America today is not a lack of good ideas. It’s that Washington has become a place where good ideas go to die.”
and on Hillary…
“Mrs Clinton is running out of options. There’s a growing sense that she may now choose to go aggressively negative. She is under pressure from some in her campaign to step up the attacks on Mr Obama, especially over his inexperience …
Until now the danger has been that negative attacks could backfire. That is a risk that will probably now have to be taken, even if it damages the Democratic party as a whole. The Clintons have only a matter of days to save their lifelong aspirations. They will not give them up without a fight.”
Ah, here they are.
http://vote.wa.gov/elections/wei/results.aspx
CNN wasn’t telling for some reason.
Thanks Ron, meant the Democrats.
Adam, our keenly missed “Reality Dose Night Nurse” suggests:
“Remember what they (military industrial complex friendly msm) did to Dukakis and Kerry, and they were General Patton campared to Obama.”
Oh, were they just?
You are referring, of course, to that memorable shot of Dukakis, skull helmetted with upper toso protruding from tank turret in the ‘88 campaign. My, how The Mixter cut a manly profile. Dead-set Regular Jarhead, alright. “General Patton compared to Obama”. Just as you say.
http://www.digitaljournalist.org/issue0309/lm10.html
Can’t for the life of me figure why the media at that time described Dukakis as a “clown”. Can you?
“On the 7 P.M. version of the show, Mr. Dukakis rumbled across the plains of Michigan as Sam Donaldson asked who was in the tank. General Patton? No. General Abrams? No. Why, Mr. Donaldson exclaimed, it’s the Governor of Massachusetts(Dukakis).”
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DEFDE163FF935A2575AC0A96E948260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
And that tired old cheap “Hussein” meme is last years Matty Drudge and Bill O’Reilly. Do you really believe Team Obama havn’t got a strategy to blow that one off? After winning 10 primaries on the trot?
The kind of voters that The Kid is mobilising, have had a gutful of the invasion and occupation of Iraq and want out pronto. Johnny “Bomb Bomb” Iran is a reflex warmonger, indelibly tainted by his association with The Deciderer-In-Chief. Right wing US blogsites are fine as far as they go, however, their Big Picture appraisal is sullied by vested interst.
Obama isn’t Beltway connected up the wazoo like HRC and McCain are. He’ll bring his own fresh team to 1600 Penn. and D.C., and that Doc, is why the voters of America are coming out in unprecedented numbers to support him. The punters want CHANGE (just like they wanted change here last November).
Kerry didn’t have the stones or the smarts to meet the swiftboaters head on. That’s the main reason he went down, although Diebold recieptless computer “ballots” played a crucial part in Kerry’s losing OHIO.
No matter which way the Sep MSM try to smear BHO, he’s a once in a generation candidate who is surging to victory on a zeitgeist finely attuned to the truth that there is nothing as powerful as a an idea whose time has come.
Looking forward to your in depth analysis tomorrow. Sleep tight.
Ferny
the article
“The Clintons have only a matter of days to save their lifelong aspirations”
but I gave them to 3/3/08 ?
318
davidoff
He raised $36m in January and just blitzed the other candidates, and this month he’s laid straight wins on the table since Super Tuesday, and he’s closing in on Texas and Ohio.
Hillary must be having nightmares.
Ron: What has ben most heartening about this primary contest has been the white vote after Bill Clinton (”the first black president”!) threw his subtle little racial grenades into the South Carolina primary. He wanted to win the white vote at the cost of losing the black vote by painting Obama as a Jesse Jackson clone. It didn’t work. Already by super Tuesday, white man voted for Obama in greater numbers and while it has taken a while for white women to vote for him that has clearly more to do with gender than race.
If the forces of darkness try to play the race card I suspect this will only serve to mobilise more of the growing potential “hope” base. When you look at how few people vote in US elections you can begin to understand the importance of Rove’s strategy. Obama is the person, in the current climate, to do a reverse-Rove on the Republicans. Just like reverse-spin in cricket and just as devastating.
This is a good summary of the Clinton campaign so far.
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/richard_adams/2008/02/lost_in_wisconsin.html
Although it did miss a number of other key flaws in the Clinton campaign.
Such as pretending caucus states don’t matter and trying to advocate Michigan delegates despite an earlier pledge not to campaign and to accept the DNC decision.
You did indeed Ron and who knows – you may just be proved right.
On the issue of “swiftboating”, have you all noticed how quickly Obama has come back every single time the Clinton’s have gone negative on him.
Swiftboating will have minimal impact this election.
Obama will thrash McCain.
323
Enemy Combatant
You’re not called Enemy Combatant for nothing, are you? LOL
Robert Bollard, sorry, we crossed. we make several over-lapping points.
Great line in Jon Stewart’s show, with the black commentator telling Jon that a “brother won in Maine. Jon, have you been to Maine? They think Lutherans are coloured!”
Classic.
‘S’OK Comrade. Trained our artillery on the same target. Waste of shells, possibly, but it made a nice bang.
Washington went 68-31 to Obama at the caucus and 50-47 to Obama on the primary vote. If that isn’t an argument against the secret ballot I don’t know what is.
#334
TurningWorm
I’m not drawing anything from the Washington primary because it adds nothing in terms of delegates. Why would anyone bother to vote in an event that does absolutely nothing to impact the race one way or another?
yes Robert you are right.
My concern with the ‘black’ sub text was not concisely expressed.It is not that it will be used as inevitably it will be subtlely & not that there will be initial general backlash but rather how the Obama team tacticly respond with a long term theme to those that do wish to vote for Obama
Intersting that at one stage (not sure if since reversed) that the black ladies also gave a higher proportional vote than the black males and I woinder whether your comment of Bill being previously regarded so highly by all black voters may have taken longer to rub of the ladies than the males
to Clinton
EC & Robert,
both posts were superb.
Robert you articulated the base turnout capabilities perfectly. I’ve been trying to make that point but i don’t think so eloquently.
the ground has shifted.
Ron
Just how literal should I be taking you here?
apologies my friend Davidoff
just as well ESJ is NOT here , otherwise he would be in a sweat or
would that be ‘generic person’ ?
For a view of a moment in the unfolding democratic revolution that is sweeping the USofA – the following is an account of the Hawaii vote – a case of chaos, confusion, pride, and a an indication of things to come.
http://notthemajorityopinion.blogspot.com/2008/02/hawaii-democratic-primary-it-has-never.html
Thanks, HarryH.
Bet Johnny Bomb-Bomb would love to have a surge like the one Obi’s having.
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN2032989820080220?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true
read the post, indeed it is a revolution
Just like Howard is having nightmares about Rudd out -howarding Howard ,
Karl Rove will be having mightmares about Obama 9increaing voter turnout)
out roving rove
the Nov turnouts may be amazing …and all probably Obama votes
About half an hour ago I mentioned that Obama was pulling in one donation every 28 seconds. As morning break over on the East coast – the donation rate has increased to one donation every 4 seconds. The are just 7,416 seconds away from breaking the 500,000 ceiling (for the arithmetically challenged – that’s just over 2 hours away).
That is masive dollars given its mostly small..meaning massive volunteers 4 Nov ?
Well we can asssume that money will be for the McCain battle as the die is cast for Hillary I suppose
You may not have noticed but Obama seems to have won a further net 20 delgeates today meaning Clinton’s BEST State (Ohio) would need to be won
by Clinton by 57/43 to offset todays losses
Perhaps Clinton is not listening to the political numbers guys
and i’ve predicted she’ll get nowhere near 57/43
..my thoughts a week ago were 52/48 and I’m stuck with that depite the polls saying otherwise
but the narrowing will come !
Something that is going on under the radar is the Camp Obama program. Basically the Obama team are training volunteers – but its not just about the election – its about engaging and sustaining a grassroots movement that will continue beyond the election and into the way America deals with political activism in the decades to come. If you want to see real change in action – well its happening right now.
#347
and I’m still projecting a win in Texas
Obama just cracked though the 500k ceiling – donations this year just hit 500,375.
yes an insight into great planning
Many US articles have mentioned in passing the huge volunteer network Obama has had in most Primary’s & superior to Clintons.
Given her years head start &Head office onside this would be normally surprising
but it just is an another indicator of the winning hope & change chord Obama
has struck
yes i remeber you went
for Obama in Texas ..Obama 52/48 & Ohio Clinton 54/46
with mine Texas Clinton 51/49 and Ohio Clinton 52/48 and
Clinton concession 3/3/ or 4/3
Think most Polls are showing us both out but there is time
This is getting silly …
Obama donations rack up another 1,000 donations in less than an hour – the count is 501,126.
This is so much more than an ATM.
#s schmumbers time for an…
ILL update, KR spew notwithsatanding; and what with ‘grassy knoll’ bootcamp iin full swing…
The Zimmer is full of crap. Yeehah. Well, hush ma mouth, sweet Adeline.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/18/1151/75637/476/458209
Hilly (& Silly Willy) Da Job!
http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorblog/051
Hussein ‘the surge’
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN2032989820080220
Adam, its a bugger I know but, how’s that Kirkuk to Haifa pipeline going? You must be so busy…
This is not going to script or mock wisdom, borders on ‘interesting’.
David Plouffe said:
(reposting)
David Plouffe said:
Plouffe says that Hillary needs to win Ohio and Texas by over 20 points each in order to begin to erase Obama’s lead in pledged dels right now. Even the campaign’s worst case scenario for March 4th, Plouffe says, leaves Obama with a lead in the range of 150 pledged dels.
Plouffe further points out that there are 560 total pledged dels in all the contests after March 4th, meaning that the Clinton campaign will have to win roughly three-fourths of those to erode Obama’s lead significantly remain in the game.
Plouffe’s bottom line:
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/obama_campaign_hillary_has_vir.php
For the record, with 100% of the vote counted in Wisconsin the final numbers are:
Obama: 58.8
Clinton: 41.2
I figure thats a reasonable win.
Even the US commentators have started to realize the mathematics make
HRC finished !
David Plouffe said:
It’s virtually impossible for Hillary to catch up at this point.
345
Ron Says:
February 21st, 2008 at 1:23 am
You may not have noticed but Obama seems to have won a further net 20 delegates today meaning Clinton’s BEST State (Ohio) would need to be won
by Clinton by 57/43 to offset todays losses !
Perhaps Clinton is not listening to the political numbers guys
AND
Clinton despite the current Polls has no hope of getting anywhere near 57/43
Perhaps her pride or stubborn or her ambition is getting in the way of her chance NOW of leaving with some grace rather than humilation
#357
Ron
Now things are getting interesting – we are into the kill zone.
William – we need a new thread “Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas, and Vermont”!
P.S. Donation count up more than 2,000 in the last 20 minutes.
The latest Hillary fact center.
http://www.delegatehub.com/
Go figure …
Intrade – last price: Obama 81.6, Clinton 19.2.
Ouch…
On the superdelegate watch … Clinton looses 2, Obama gains 3.
perhaps the new US Thread could be called: “Shame Hillary , Shame”
Clinton by continuing when mathematic logic says she can’t win risks tearing the Party apart and turning off ‘clinton’ supporters from supporting Obama against McCain.
Further it wastes valuable Democrats time & resources on an internal battle whilst McCain is really free to build voter support where he needs it unchallenged
Her case to the Superdelegates is:
I’ve lost the most votes in Primarys , I’ve lost the most States , I’e lost the most delegates won from Primarys. BUT IF 50% of you unpledged guys switch to me I can tie
(Oh , I forgot to mention I can only tie IF we continue this bloody contest through to June AND IF I still can hold my unrealistic Poll stats for the future big States)
Shame
This morning, for the first time, Obama is just over 4% ahead of Clinton in the RCP poll average for winning the nomination.
That Big Mo is now about to blow her away.
Just look at what 7 years of the most goddamn awful Republican rule can do!
I know the naysayers just love to catch Obama supporters getting all biblical and messianic, but what a spectacle, it’s truly astonishing what this guy is doing. Obama inscribed the word change on a stone, stuck it in his slingshot and he’s slaying the dynastic Goliath and he’s sure putting the fear of god into the crusty old McCain.
When he fells the Republican party in November, his victory will be of biblical dimensions, and the whole sorry epoch of the wretched Bush administration will be swept away.
Bring it on.
Mornin’ Special K and Bludgers all.
The Imbecile’s Approval Hits Record Lows. That’s right folks, the Lowest Evah!!
Sure to provide a huge boost to McCain’s chances.
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/election2008/ig/Election-Funny-Pictures/McCain-Bush-Hug.htm
Can’t wait for our esteemed “ Reality Dose Night Nurse” to shoot the lights out of my faulty reasoning on this one.
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/02/20/bush_approval_hits_record_low.html
And to think that we all had to wait for this moment in the campaign to arrive before being treated to the Machiavellian genius of Bubba Clinton.
“”If she wins Texas and Ohio I think she will be the nominee; if you don’t then I don’t think she can.”
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/02/20/bonus_quote_of_the_day.html
365
Enemy Combatant
19%!
Wow, Dubbya ought to give Horatio Hornet some advice, he could double his numbers with some help! LOL
Macca has some weight in his saddlebags, eh?
Turn away now if you are anti-Obama.
Likely posted before, but I found these comments interesting:
1. Obama’s 2002 speech on Iraq (Reflected my view of the 2002 war, but with far more foresight)
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/obama_campaign_hillary_has_vir.php#comment-2609633
2. List of accomplishments of Obama v Clinton
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/obama_campaign_hillary_has_vir.php#comment-2609714
Here’s a good mash up of the exit polling in Wisconsin:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/02/how_obama_won_wisconsin.html
…and it concludes that Obama has now got Big Mo, is tearing off large chunks of Clinton’s expected voters, and if this continues to Texas, well, she’s in serious trouble.
Who would have guessed, eh?
Regarding the supposed Texas/Ohio knockout blow for Hilary, it never ceases to amaze me (who failed Match in Year 11) how innumerate so many commentators are. There are 228 delegates in Texas. If Hillary carries the state by 10 percentage points (ie. 55/45) she would be expected to claw back in the delegate count by 22 or 23 delegates. Obama gained an extra 12 delegates in Minnesotta and in tiny little Hawaii scored a wipeout to win an extra 8. If Hillary only wins Texas by 5% (which is her current average poll lead in the state according to RCP), then her gain should only be 11 or 12 delegates. If her current more generous poll lead in Ohio is maintained (around 13%), that would win her an extra 19 delegates. Note for the slower students I am not talking about total delegates won but the difference between the total she will win and the total Obama wins.
In short, as the polls currently stand, she will claw back 31 delegates in these two states leaving Obama with a pledged lead of 120. Given that the remaining states are at best likely to split evenly between the two candidates (in fact I’m pretty certain that Obama will win more delegates from the other states than her) that’s a piddling claw back.
You then add in the fact that the poll trend in both Ohio and Texas is towards Obama and we have two weeks of narrowing to go. You then add in the fact that the polls have generally underestimated Obama’s vote. The only exceptions were New Hampshire and California. In the case of California I’m not even sure that it was an underestimation of Clinton’s vote – rather a failure to account for the 40% of Californian voters who voted early before the narrowing in the last two weeks before Super Tuesday.
This last phenomenon can’t happen in Texas for two reasons. 1: pre-polling only started in Texas this week, when Hillary’s lead had already narrowed significantly; 2: a good proportion of the Texas vote will be caucuses which (apart from the fact that the caucuses favour Obama) have no pre-polling.
I know what I’m saying won’t be new to most of you – but I thought it worthwhile to spell this all out.
As for Bubba saying that if she wins Texas and Ohio she has the nomination, if he really believes that the bloke is as big a dill as Dubya and no wonder the US is in a mess.
The Ugly American bypasses the “subtleties” of the dog-whistle and launches into a full-blown Hound Holler! As one noted on a couple of previous comments, most Seps are sick and tired of this crap and it’s going to have a similar reaction to the one catalysised by Hell’s Shillsters Downunder when they tried to smear Tin-Tin last year.
In other words, a Bigtime Blowback reaction.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/20/bill-oreilly-i-dont-w_n_87616.html
I guess Billo’s next initiative will be to break out The Klan!
That should read “failed Maths in Year 11″. My other great achievement was listing “profreading” under the “Demonstrated Skills and Abilities” section of a resume.
370
Enemy Combatant
‘lynching party’??
On the one hand he says let’s give her the benefit of the doubt, and on the other he throws in ‘lynching party’?
That’ll go down well, huh?
369
Robert Bollard
Essentially, as you point out, she cannot win from here, at least not by getting the most votes or delegates. Of course if you cannot win ‘fair’ doesn’t mean you can’t win; just look at GW Bush’s ‘win’ in Florida.
Interesting times, to be sure.
Unfortunately Robert, the delegates are not split using a fair proportional system.
They are split into Sentate districts in Texas and then proportionately split there.
Since these districts are mostly of 4 delegates, you need a 75-25 win before you take an advantage in delegates.
To examplify, imagine a nationwide Australian Senate vote of 55-45. This would produce 3-3 in each state for a draw.
Unfair, yes. Makes it harder for Clinton to take control? Yes.
Yep, Kirri, these swine play dity and they play for keeps.
Little wonder the MSM feel threatened by blogs exposing their propaganda, scything their market share and neutering their influence. Here’s a comment from the HuffPo article On Billo’s smear that’s Orwellianly instructive.
“The interesting thing about the quote from Michelle Obama is that Fox News REMOVED one word from the soundbite. They removed the word, “really.” Her correct words were: “Hope is making a comeback and, let me tell you, for the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country. Not just because Barack is doing well, but I think people are hungry for change.”
When the word, “really” was deliberately removed, the context was (I repeat) deliberately changed. She also emphasized the word, “proud.” She’s really PROUD of her country.
Michelle Obama spoke lovingly about feelings of pride not only for her husband, but also for this wonderful country.
And that’s a problem? Being proud of one’s country is problematic? Please! Someone tell me how that’s a problem. The only problem I find is that a television show that calls itself a news organization purposely falsified a statement made by the wife of a candidate running for President of the United States. That’s the problem we should be discussing!
Please spread THAT word.
Best to all, Ani “
Maureen Dowd chimes in with corroboration:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/20/opinion/20dowd.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
It’s over for Hillary
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/02/its_over.html
So, the pieces are set. The final board is ready. The last great assault is about to begin.
Obama has a 174 lead in pledged delegates. Around 121 in total delegates. Money, sponsors, momentum and a lead in all areas.
But he is taking on the final gasp of the Clinton machine. This will be the fortnight in which all hell breaks lose. Not only that, but he is fighting off the Republican nominee at the same time. He needs to not only defend himself from the left, but also combat the right, without losing the middle independent ground. Not exactly an east feat.
And it doesn’t matter what the numbers say: if Clinton can win the two big states, even if it is by a percentage point each, she will have the required mandate to stay in the race and wreck havoc.
I’m a tad nervous now. But hey, it’s going to be an enthralling two weeks. Make the most of it, because after this we get to twiddle out thumbs for a few months while the main candidates focus on simply not screwing up.
#377
Max
Well said (and mirrors my own sentiments too).
A WEEK AGO I POSTED & my colleague Davidofff agreed
(and have posted many times since) ,
that mathematical logic says Hillary can not , can not win.
the race was over over a week ago.
If Dr. Adam & his supporters do not understand the Democrats proportional allocation of Delegates by State & the odd /even distribution of districts , then
he like Clinton are simply delaying a concession
Yes , an overwhelming majority of uncommitted Supersdelegates would deliver a theoretical Clinton win , but that is now her ONLY chance of winning ,
but political logic says this is 100% no chance
Methinks the superdelegate’s phones must be in melt-down. I wonder how persuasive the Clinton’s can be?
…or whether it even matters now?
I think that the Clintons will be soulsearching. Their careers are not finished, and they need the party to advance them. Bill may still harbour designs for a UN post. Hillary will want to keep her options open for positions in a new administration, the Senate, or even as the 2012 candidate. If they go too crazy they will find themselves alienated from the base that they will need.
There’s also a chance the 2012 election is reasonably competitive.
President Obama should be fine, but if it’s President McCain, the 80 year old (by 2016) then mabe the democrats could get up. He may not even run.
One-termers are rare, but they crop up more often when one party has 12 years of presidency.
Damned straight, Ferny.
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/bensargent;_ylt=AsehRAQLQWt8dqpbX5ZaeMRX_b4F
Echoing Davidoff, well analysed Max at 377, but short of an assassain’s (s’)bullet(s), I’m reckon The Kid and his Team can’t handle anything tossed at him. It’s a Rip Van Winkel and a P.T. Barnum thing. “You can’t fool all the people all of the Time.”
Is Huckster the Schmuckster a fool for love orwot?
“Last time I saw him alive
He was standin’ up on the bride’s side
Yelling his objections at the groom
The blushing bride was my bestfriend
She turned around and to him said
Yes you were my only sunshine then” (Sandy Rogers)
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/robertariail;_ylt=ApdrYXKLqJZRDBuXnXRcTDLe.sgF
Johnny Bomb-Bomb: Once a tortured POW, but now a candidate courtin’ the Jack Bauer vote. Yessuh!!
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/mikeluckovich;_ylt=Asf6pAqb5ZIOx89em1L7sTBR_b4F
that’s “can handle anything tossed at him”
Howard stayed too long and destroyed whatever was left of his “legacy”
Will Clinton do the same …and reek damage on her Party as per Howard
And in the bedroom poor Bill will hear ‘you owe me’
New York Times tips a bucket on McCain and his ethics.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Just some playing around to create possible scenario wherein Hillary Clinton can recapture the margin (at least bring things back to 0 before the end of the game).
Negative numbers reflect the spread advantage Clinton.
I guess its possible – but we would need to classify it as a very long shot.
While everyone is absorbed in the Clinton/Obama contest,
it seems that McCain may have some skeletons ,as per this NYT article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Will be interesting once the serious trawling starts.
387,
Steve,
SNAP!!
A well prepared piece on the Huffington Post by Brent Budowsky calling on Hillary to withdraw.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brent-budowsky/hillary-clinton-should-wi_b_87686.html
It has taken a while for the message to sink in, Davidoff, but reality is slowly beginning to seep in. These sort of articles are starting to take on a life of their own.
Bill lays the groundwork for a concession:
‘Even former president Clinton, pressing voters to turn out for his wife’s campaign, acknowledged the stakes for her on March 4. “If she wins Texas and Ohio, I think she will be the nominee,” he told supporters in Beaumont, Tex., according to ABC News. “If you don’t deliver for her, I don’t think she can be. It’s all on you.”‘
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/02/20/ST2008022002981.html?hpid=topnews
Pancho- It’s the same thing Howard and Giuliani did. If you don’t vote for me, I’m going to kill myself (politically). Please don’t make me do it! You don’t want to be responsible for this for the rest of your life do you?? You really do love me. Give me another chance!
You’ll notice all those phrases have the word “me” in them. It didn’t work for them and it won’t work for Billary.
While Hillary may very well be swept away in the collective desire for new beginnings, it would be a shame if her enormous talent, intellect and experience were lost to a future Dem government.
Whether or not this happens will depend to a large degree on herself and how she responds to her current position. If she soldiers on when defeat is obvious and thus damages the Dem presidential capmpaign, the Party will not want her.
If she makes the hard decision to withdraw (and let’s not underestimate how hard such a decision would be for a Clinton) then a grateful party may offer her a senior position where her skills will be utilised. This will NOT include VP, but may well involve a cabinet position or an ambassadors post.
For that to happen, I suspect she will have to withdraw soon after March 4. Her chances of any involvement in an Obama government will diminish with each day beyond that.
Does she have that kind of character? Dunno. Someone pass KR the popcorn lite.
Ferny-excellent post. Couldn’t have put it better. The “attack dog” tactics at the moment don’t bode all that well for a graceful, timely exit though.
Thanks Dio. I suspect she will only crank up the cranky between now and 4 March in the hope of maximising her vote in TX and OH. So don’t expect too much to change before then.
Beyond that, when the dust has settled and the carcasses are counted, she will have to draw on her character and make a call. The choice may well be between becoming a great cabinet member (Sec of State or AG, perhaps) – or a great failure.
Obama campaign urges Clinton to concede
Source: UK Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/20/uselections2008.usa1?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront
Revelations of Johnny Bomb-Bomb swanning around with a lobbyiste nearly half his age will infuriate the very fundies whose support he now needs so deperately. It was a dumb, macho, hubristic play, reminiscent of Jack Abramoff or Tom DeLay regardless of weather Johnny and the lobbyiste became platinum members of the Mile High Club or not.
One thing in politics you can’t buy is luck, and while Team Billary have been chucked ten consecutive snake’s eyes, and the NYT has carpetted Bomb-Bomb on a wife-cheatin’ morals rap, Obi just keeps rollin’ sevens!
And don’t the Seps just love a winner! Come to think of it, it’s THE defining essence of SeppoKulcha.
Go Kid.
Hold the been
#395 Ferny
I think you’ve summed up both Hillary’s & The Party’s position well
The Party does presently have a huge reservoir of goodwill towards Hillary & imdeed for Bill. The effort she has made and the pride & ego makes the decision immense.
IF her close ’supporters’ are also egging her on , perhaps ONLY an Elder Statesman Al Gore type may convince her that her interests & the Party’s both lie now in a concession now.
I have never & still do not understand her belief in the “Big State” strategy either to win the Nomination nor in representing justification for it
389
megan
It’s good to see the NYT’s hasn’t lost the art of baiting a hook!
Putting the lobbyist/fluff story first, it was an excellent bait to get the reader to revise the history of the Keating 5 scandal, which, as we should all know, saw McCain come mighty close to getting serioulsy whacked. (He missed out on gaol time, unlike his wife’s investment partner):
When Lincoln went bankrupt in 1989 — one of the biggest collapses of the savings and loan crisis, costing taxpayers $3.4 billion — the Keating Five became infamous. The scandal sent Mr. Keating to prison and ended the careers of three senators, who were censured in 1991 for intervening. Mr. McCain, who had been a less aggressive advocate for Mr. Keating than the others, was reprimanded only for “poor judgment” and was re-elected the next year.
Some people involved think Mr. McCain got off too lightly. William Black, one of the banking regulators the senator met with, argued that Mrs. McCain’s investment with Mr. Keating created an obvious conflict of interest for her husband. (Mr. McCain had said a prenuptial agreement divided the couple’s assets.) He should not be able to “put this behind him,” Mr. Black said. “It sullied his integrity.”
…now, that’s a really good story, the bit of fluff is just the bait.
A look inside the respective balance sheets for January …
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8613.html
Ron – problem is, Gore hates Clinton (and vice-versa). That advice would not be accepted.
…and would probably only spur her on. I think the heavyweights need to get behind Obama and make her realise her position is untenable, rather than confronting her, while giving her a way to concede.
Dean and Kerry don’t like her either, so they can’t play authority.
Pancho you are completely right re Gore , which is why I added Al Gore type as
I was struggling to think of someone …I ruled out Teddy for the same reason
and suggestions of an elder statesman Pancho.???..apart from Dr Adam
Hell, if she wants she could try and run as an independent, maybe with Liberman as her VP!
Smile – or Ralph Nader!
unfortunately I worry the longer Hillary fights on , the more it hurts the Party & by extension Obama’s future campaign against McCain
If she is NOT given a credible way out , she may well do a “Howard’
fight on KNOWING you’ll lose , but protecting you ‘dignity’
ie.” I do not want to be remembered as a quiter”
I’m sure Obama would write her an inspiring concession speech!
so mine is inadequate Ferny ?
Pancho and Ron: You both seem to be having trouble identifying even one senior Dem figure who likes Hillary. Therein may lie her problem.
The trouble, of course, is that Hillary emphatically believes that she is the best person to beat the GOP and to lead the US.
That belief has driven her for years, has guided every decision she has made since Bill left office and is the fuel that will keep her going in this race.
What she has yet to come to terms with is that intense self-belief is not enough – and she hasn’t convinced enough voters to share her belief – a somewhat inconvenient prerequisite for election.
So she can choose to fail or choose to serve in a different capacity. But she has to choose soon and she is not yet ready to face that reality. She still believes she can win.
I know this is not Cricket, but what the heck. ANDREW Symonds is worth $1.47m whereas poor Punter Ponting is only worth a pathetic $463K. Effing Symonds should get down on his bended knees and thank Harbhajan for calling him a monkey. They love their monkey over there in the Hanoman land.
Good to see the Zimmer has a Redbone – Diddy-Wah-Diddy moment…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-IvHBdgALA&feature=related
Can anyone with a bit of a broader knowledge on US elections explain, in relatively simple terms, what all this talk about public funding is?
I haven’t get grasped US campaign finance, but it seems to be a recurring issue.
Finn: I still don’t think he was called a monkey at all. It was all a misunderstanding because of the Indian accent. Symonds – Simian – it all sounds the same in Hindi!
But I agree – there’s no way Andrew Simian is worth that amount of money.
Oh geez…
think you’ve defined her well Ferny
guess when she sees the last Polls for Texas & Ohio on 3/3/08 , reality may start kicking in
Harbhajan WAS smiling after he got off and thought he had the last laugh over ‘Roy’ … no dout Roy will remond him about he who laughs last ?
#417 – FG – Goodness gracious me, sorry can’t blog the Indian accent
There is aready news on the formation of a heavyweight team to settle things before the convention.
Based on stuff I’ve read the team seems to composed of:
Al Gore,
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
Senator Joseph Biden
Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico
John Edwards
Apparently – they are talking with each other (also know as plotting and scheming with best interests of you, me, the population over the water, and one of the candidates).
seen on an apparently right leaning blog , so presumably none of you lot will have seen it:
Hillarymandias
I met a pollster from an antique land,
Who said–”Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand, one in Texas…., one near Canton,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose brow, and wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The electorate that mocked them, and the press that fed;
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
My name is Hillarymandias,
Look on my resume and campaign fundraising, ye fellow Democrats, and despair!
Nothing else remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away. Heh.
Posted by: BumperStickerist
davidoff – if even half of that team moves with a public endorsement, she will surely have to hang up her slingshot.
Ron – heavyweights who might have been in Hillary’s corner not long ago would be Richardson and Bayh I’d think, but even they’d be gone now, surely.
JR ….was the Egpytian guy Ozimandios also a Democrat
From Camp Clinton on the events of the last 24 hours:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21memo.html?ref=politics
in the USA is their a distinction between ‘narrowing & a dead end ?
Nah…had to be a Repug. The sneer of cold command sounds like Cheney. Shelley loved attacking conservative politicians – “The Masque of Anarchy” is good for that. But my favourite is this one from Byron, when a Tory politician topped himself:
“History will ne’er survey
A nobler grave than this.
Here lie the bones of Castlereagh.
Stop traveller!
And piss.”
#425
Oh yes, absolutely – the distinction is sometimes referred to as ’spin’, although I should point out that that term has some negative connotations.
420 davidoff- frankly, I’d want more than those five behind me if I was going into Billary’s office to tap her on the shoulder. It’s a shame the really big politicians lie Arnie and Jessie “The Body” Ventura are Repugs. As they say “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.”
ah yes davidoff…my thought did turn to ’spin’ ,
the language ….a slight crack in the fortress perhaps
So which election campaign was worse (i.e. filled with tactical blunders)
Clinton’s or Howard’s?
Asanque
Clinton’s by a mile
Her campaign started 6 years ago & her worst mistake was to court the ‘right’
including voting ‘conditionally for the Iraq invasion
then subsequently failing to unambiguously repudiating it plus
‘black’ attack , ‘big state’ strategy , deserted her ‘left’ wing allowing O in,
poor volunteer setup in Primarys vs BO , didn’t soften her image
whereas Howard was never going to win
what do you reckon
American missile blasts rogue satellite. Who are they trying to kid? They are testing anti satellite ballistic missile. I can just imagine now Maxwell Smart saying to the Pentagon Hoons: “Listen Chief, we should try the “rogue satellite” trick, that should fool them”. It must have sent shiver down the spine of the Russian and Chinese, especially those low hanging comm. satellites.
#430
asanque
Its an interesting question …
Howard largely in denial on the question of his ability to lead the part to another victory. Clinton in what seems to be a denial of the exit strategy. The two scenarios are common in that the denial subject leads to damage (as already mentioned Ron and Ferny Grover).. I figure we won’t know the answer to the question until its over – there is still time for a drama moment but time and money is running out – and we still don’t know if the exit will be elegant or acrimoniousness.
#432
Its Oh so the West Wing – no, don’t talk about the Shuttle – It’s a secret!
I believe Clinton’s campaign was worse also.
Howard was never favourite after Rudd was elected, whereas Clinton was favourite for most of the early stages of democratic candidacy.
They both came up with some absolute shockers in tactics.
Howard’s tactics were entirely negative.
Clinton’s tactics including the ‘big state’ tactic backfired abysmally and was one of the worst tactical blunders I have ever seen.
Comparatively, Hillary would be salivating for a few 52/48 split decisions in any of the states.
I’m actually surprised Howard did as well as he did given the tactical blunders of the Liberal campaign.
However, Hillary wins the worse tactics merely by failing to keep 20% poll leads over a few months.
#435
But to Howard’s credit – he kept us on the edge of our seats right up until the convention and I don’t think Hillary will be able to pull of the same story.
My Nightly “PT109 JFK Boat File” for Mr. Obama:
Obama peaked too soon? Media Start Falling Out of Love With Obama?
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&refer=columnist_carlson&sid=a58EAq_aGD.Q
………..On primary day, David Brooks of the New York Times, a conservative columnist who doesn’t hate liberals, diagnosed Obama Comedown Syndrome, which manifests itself with unexplained pangs of sympathy for Clinton as “another fading First Wife thrown away for the first available Trophy Messiah.”
………… Paul Krugman, also of the Times, fearing he’d been too subtle in his criticism of Obama, went ballistic over the Illinois senator’s rhetoric. “I won’t try for fake evenhandedness here,” he wrote. The Obama campaign is dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality.”
……………… `Name some of his legislative accomplishments,” he demanded of a shell-shocked Watson, who was making his national TV debut. “Name any. What has he done, sir?”
……………………… Over at ABC, “Nightline” anchor Terry Moran picked up the mantle with a piece called “Obamania,” a phenomenon as “baffling” to adults as “Beatlemania,” he said. He described “impassioned fans” screaming and tearing their clothes. Is this a political movement or a personality cult?”
But there’s more:
“McCain’s ties to female lobbyist in question – Former aides claim his actions unnerved advisers
….. Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself — instructing staff members to block the woman’s access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him, several people involved in the campaign said on the condition of anonymity”.
Except this PT109 headed the wrong way. It was heading for the War Hero and romantic, one John McCain. Waiting impatiently for the nightly fang from Dr. “Dracula” Adam.
Agreed Asanque , concentrating on ‘big states’ WITH deserting her ‘left’ block allowed any opponent to go for small States where HRC was really not there and as well to sell a ‘left’ message there which those Democrat voters liked & which HRC seemingly had deserted…their sums on delegates numbers terrible
The earlier ‘right’ courting including supporting Iraq assumed she already was the Democrat Nominee. Imagine Rudd before challenging Beasley sprouting dry neocon opinions (expecting those views to help win voters in a Ferderal Election)if he was Labor leader) & expecting the Labor caucus to then elect him
makes you wonder about how astute some ‘advisors’ are & indeed their client ?
Maybe the Clintons can fly you over from the nursing home to advise ron, you really are very perceptive
I’m just amazed that McCain is still capable of having an affair! Kinda makes gettin old seem not so bad after all.
And in breaking news, US Presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, has said:
@@##!! **(((%% **%%@ %*@@! $&%%@! ***&&^&* ‘
***&*** &&%%**ING BARAK **&&^**! OBAMA!!!
Golly Gee Wilikers, wonder what our “Reality Dose Night Nurse” will make of these figures?
President – WINNER Cbet
OBAMA, Barack 1.68
MCCAIN, John 2.90
CLINTON, Hillary 4.50
Probably just another minor aberration in the market.
“Nothing to see here, folks. Please move it right along.
Sir, there’s no need to stare, please keep moving. Thank you, Sir. We’re only here to protect and serve”.
And so EC,
Where the odds in January wrong and the February now right, maybe the March odds will be right?
It’s all about perception the way the game is played in this league, Eddy. But as you asked politely, here’s a tip, sunshine.
Any price is a good price about a winner.
And so, Eddy, with The Bludger as beneficiary, I offer you the following wager. If McCain becomes POTUS come November, I’ll top up William’s blog to the tune of 100 AUD. If Obama becomes POTUS, you donate 50 AUD to William’s blog.
If HRC or anyone else becomes POTUS in Nov 2008, neither of us fork out.
How say ye, sir?
Thats Labor staffer money EC you want to bet for, what about making it interesting:
McCain you pay $10,000 AUD, Obama wins $5,000 AUD to a public benevolent institution of the winners choosing and if its Hilary $2,000 AUD from each of us.
That’s about the most transparent trick in the book, Edward. When you’re not willing to put your money where your mouth is, you talk about ‘making it interesting’, safe in the knowledge that noone is going to call you on the idiotic figures you bandy about.
Truly courageous.
Hot ’bout a zillion for McCain, billion for Obama and 100 mil each for Hilary? Proceeds to this website, obviously.
Charlie,
Well I think if you are a real punter you will bet real money. The point is any of the blaggards on this blog who are convinced BHO is the messiah do cut out at about a $100.
Ah, Bilbo Bagman strikes again! LOL
No sign of GP?
That’s the problem with people like you, Eddy, you believe it’s ALL about the money.
But at least Kerry “What’s your net worth I’ll toss you for it” Packer had generousity of spirit, a human quality of which you appear to be singularly devoid.
William , if you’ll kindly indulge me, this is my reply to Eddy.
CHIGURH
…What’s the most you’ve ever lost
on a coin toss?
PROPRIETOR
Sir?
CHIGURH
The most. You ever lost. On a coin
toss.
PROPRIETOR
I don’t know. I couldn’t say.
Chigurh is digging in his pocket. A quarter: he tosses it.
He slaps it onto his forearm but keeps it covered.
CHIGURH
Call it.
PROPRIETOR
Call it?
CHIGURH
Yes.
PROPRIETOR
For what?
CHIGURH
Just call it.
PROPRIETOR
Well — we need to know what it is
we’re callin’ for here.
CHIGURH
You need to call it. I can’t call it
for you. It wouldn’t be fair. It
wouldn’t even be right.
PROPRIETOR
I didn’t put nothin’ up.
CHIGURH
Yes you did. You been putting it up
your whole life. You just didn’t
know it. You know what date is on
this coin?
PROPRIETOR
No.
CHIGURH
Nineteen fifty-eight. It’s been
traveling twenty-two years to get
here. And now it’s here. And it’s
either heads or tails, and you have
to say. Call it.
A long beat.
PROPRIETOR
Look… I got to know what I stand
to win.
CHIGURH
Everything.
PROPRIETOR
How’s that?
CHIGURH
You stand to win everything. Call
it.
PROPRIETOR
All right. Heads then.
Chigurh takes his hand away from the coin and turns his arm
to look at it.
CHIGURH
Well done.
He hands it across.
CHIGURH
…Don’t put it in your pocket.
PROPRIETOR
Sir?
CHIGURH
Don’t put it in your pocket. It’s
your lucky quarter.
PROPRIETOR
…Where you want me to put it?
CHIGURH
Anywhere not in your pocket. Or it’ll
get mixed in with the others and
become just a coin. Which it is.
He turns and goes.
The proprietor watches him.
—————————————————-
from the screenplay: No Country For Old Men by Joel and Etan Coen.
Thanks, William, I’ll top up the kick 50 AUD after “The Birth Of Soul” on ABC.
Did he also got from Sam Cooke 1964? yes, he did.
A Change Is Gonna Come by Sam Cooke, 1964
I was born by the river in a little tent
Oh and just like the river I’ve been running ever since
It’s been a long, a long time coming
But I know a change gonna come, oh yes it will
It’s been too hard living but I’m afraid to die
Cause I don’t know what’s up there beyond the sky
It’s been a long, a long time coming
But I know a change gonna come, oh yes it will
I go to the movie and I go downtown
somebody keep telling me don’t hang around
It’s been a long, a long time coming
But I know a change gonna come, oh yes it will
Then I go to my brother
And I say brother help me please
But he winds up knocking me
Back down on my knees
Ohhhhhhhhh…..
There been times that I thought I couldn’t last
Oh EC and what qualifies you to judge me?
people in respite have already been judged
In the interest of balance I suppose; live from the back trailer @ camp Clinton Silly Willy, whistling dixie sidles up to Hilly and says…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ReQSCi24S8&feature=related
PS any stas on Paris Texas?
Ron you are absolutely right it must be horrible for you, do they still do the kero baths?
Not on Texas codger but well Nationally on the Electoral colleges , the latest is Obama wins by 21 electoral college votes whereas McCain would defeat Hillary in a landslide…leads by 151 electoral college votes
am amazed the uncommitted Superdelegates have not pulled up shop on hillary based on Hillary lading them to a catosphe ?
Dat be stats…what’s a kero bath? With dogs or without?
although you are permanently in respite ESJ , your delusions are accepted by staff as consistent with your condition. Perhaps codger being an ‘expert’ can help you decide about the dogs option
whatever gets you through the night ron is alright by me
its OK deary, I’ll ask the nurses to sedate you shortly.
William, re last line @451. Done!
Ron @ 457,
Where does that come from?
The figures that is …
Note Finnegans #452 that Sam Cooke came from Chicago, South Side, just like Obama.
Meanwhile, not nuts just very angry perhaps; gosh that’s a relief.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/21/2169335.htm?section=justin
Ron flattery will get you everywhere; ex pert, sad but true, alas…
Dyno ,
http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/
Superdelegates really should be showing Hillarythis & saying she would not win the Presidency against mcCain even if she was the Nominee
Obama wins Democrats Abroad.
Obama: 65%
Clinton 32%
Don’t ever run for POTUS unless your ready for the downside…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/20/AR2008022002933.html
Some updates stats scraped from the Obama site – earlier I posted some info about the rate of donations to the Obama campaign. Since then the mathematics have changed in that the numbers I’m scrapping are numbers of independent donors. After the campaign crashed though the 500,000 contributions since the begging of the year – the new goal is to break though the one million different contributors barrier (and given that they were already up to about 900k its not that big a stretch). Watching numbers overnight during a period of 15 hours (coving the US sleep period), I counted 12,974 new contributors. That’s something like one new campaign contributor every 4.2 seconds.
Since my last post on this subject (a little more than 24 hours ago) – the Obama campaign have harvested an additional 35,888 new campaign contributors.
Over on Camp Clinton – Hillary is pushing for funds as well – the argument is to “level the playing field” and offset the advantage that Obama has over the Clinton campaign on expenditure on TV, radio, and internet advertising. From this platform she’s focusing on $5 donations – but the unspoken message is the establishment of the exit mechanisms. On or shortly after the 4 March I’m predicting that Hillary will deliver the line “I’m sorry, but he just out-spent us” and thousands of Hillary campaigners will talk away asking how is it fair that someone can win just because they have more money.
Some shenanigans appear to be playing out with pledged delegates claiming the Clinton Crew are pushing them to change their pledged elegance. I saw rumors of this yesterday and emphatic denials shortly afterwards from Camp Clinton but the following post from someone in Vagas seems to suggest that perhaps desperate times may be calling for desperate measures.
From what I can see this remains unverified – i.e. just smoke, no flames.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/20/11348/1018/256/460439
#471 – davidoff – what is your estimate for the final PDs count?
That’s a pretty emphatic F.U. to a triangulating warmonger from American voters with an eye to how “the rest of the world” views Sep City Central.
KR, were you a particpant?
RCP has some new polling data for Texas & Ohio
Texas (ABC/Washington Post) Clinton 48, Obama 47
Texas (Rasmussen) Clinton 47, Obama 44
Ohio (ABC/Washington Post) Clinton 50, Obama 43
Texas still appears to be line ball, Ohio, the margin tightens, but Clinton would still have to be favored.
The other interesting poll (Diageo/Hotline Poll) in possible match-ups in November:
General Election Match Ups
Obama 48 – McCain 40
Obama 49 – Huckabee 38
Clinton 40 – McCain 48
Clinton 49 – Huckabee 39
There’s a message for democratic super delegates right there.
But Claude you don’t realise that Obama will crumble before the attacks of the swiftboaters who will uncover the facts about his cocaine sessions with communist Muslims. Clinton however is squeaky clean and will deal with their lies with the tactical acumen she’s displayed in the primary race.
RB with an early contender for post of the day
It must be pretty worrying to the Clintons that the gap continues to close given Hillary has been in Texas for the last week, whereas Obama is just beginning to campaign there.
#472
The Finnigans
#472
The Finnigans
Obama 1691
Clinton 1536
as Hillary passed her 2002 vote for an Iraq invasion , her Democrat heartland switched off their Hillary belief credibility zone & parked her in probation hoping but not expecting a Democrat true believer and then he arose and the MORE OFTEN those heard the big O the more that switch from the Hillary probation zone.
All Democrats who went to the probation zone had stopped listening to Hillary & were simple waiting hoping for something better.
Is it any wonder that all of her & Bills & the swiftboats) criticisms fall on deaf ears. Howard had the same problem
The current Clinton strategy appears to be talking down prospects so that a win in either or both Texas/Ohio will be painted as a come back victory…
Obama should win more delegates than Clinton in Texas. With the strange setup they have there, most of the delegates come from Obama areas. Plus 1/3 of the delegates come from caucuses.
In Ohio, Clinton is still leading in the latest poll, but having the Teamsters Union now backing Obama must worry her greatly. They have 60,000 members in Ohio and provide great help in manning the decks and maximizing votes.
i still say concession on 5/3
yea ,
I basically agree with Davidoff of Obama 1691 & Clinton 1536
on Primary delegates.
My BEST scenario for HRC is Obama 1647 & Clinton 1580
This would only occur IF Hillary’s remaining best 6 States held their former massive Poll leads she had
Ohio , Texas , Pennsalvania , West Virginia , Kentucky & Peurto Rico however
the first two have since narrowed anyway…..so its concession time perhaps
There is an article over on Politico which is focusing on Clinton consulting costs – but if you read through to the end you get to this:
However – it is interesting to note that while overall funding levels are actually about the same, the actual style of campaign execution is very different when taking into consideration the grassroots activism. On Hillary’s blog supporters are are shouting out ‘Don’t worry, we can turn this around, I live in Houston, I could call someone.’, meanwhile over in Obamaland the level of organization, training, social and campaign support is just an order of magnitude better.
Newspaper post Primary commentary from a number of Primarys have indicated Obama’s grass root Volunteer network have swamped HRC’s in getting voters out
which is staggering given HRC has had years to set up State State stuctures
Jesus, we all knew the polls would narrow but I didn’t expect them to narrow this quickly.
Pretty much every poll has Texas as a statistical tie, and Ohio in single digit margins.
Now, if only I could fully understand the Texas voting system…
Austin debate shortly. It will be interesting to see if there’s an obvious change of direction from Hillary.
CNN Clinton/Obama debate starts in about 3 mins. If anyone is watching live I’d be interested in getting some info on how it plays out.
489
davidoff
Well, Hillary has just turned into the Alien mother monster and has ripped off the heads of the interviewers, the audience, and Obama (dressed as Rippley) has said some words about change while taking aim with a flame-thrower bazooka thingy and the TV set is in flames, and the gantry lights just fell, and oh my god….
….Hillary is tearing-up, and nodding! She’s doing that noddy thing, saliva dripping, and she’s lost it, she’s lost it, she thinks she’s still in New Hampshire!!
your health would be improved Max by not knowing the Texas voting system.
Only the Americans could bypass a simple ststem in favor of a quite complex system that few voters understand) supposedly in the name of making it ‘fairer’ !
Or, you can have the less colourful version:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/live-blogging-the-texas-showdown/index.html?hp
..live blog on NYTImes. THey’ll get the salient points in print pretty quick.
(Speaking of the NYT, the McCain story has the right fulminating and/or trying to hose it down. Great to see the ’straight talking’ McCain talking his way out of that! LOL)
#490
ROTFLOL
Great – in that case it should make the news tonight!
#492
Thanks KR – perfect.
488
Claude Says:
February 22nd, 2008 at 11:55 am
Austin debate shortly. It will be interesting to see if there’s an obvious change of direction from Hillary.
Claude whilst its mathematically too late for Hillary to win the Nominee , its interesting she made the same mistake as Howard facing the “new” Rudd factor
She has fought shadows instead of identifying substantive policy differences that voters may be interested in and run against Obama on those. No candidate of any Party has a mortgage on 100% of all good policy ideas.
despite Media’s “the winner take all’ reporting
whereas Obama like Rudd identified HIS differences and has controlled the issues
Tq Davidoff for – Obama 1691 & Clinton 1536. How do you think the SDs will break in % term? At the moment, it looks like Hillary is about 60% and Obama 40%.
As far as the debate is concerned, I have never been impressed by Obama. He always looks up and has that “I am more superior” look. He does much better when making a speech and he looks across the audience.
#497
Over the last week there has been a gentle trickle of superdelegates moving to Obama, some defecting from Clinton. Before talking about splits – I think the Texas Ohio competitions set the stage for an intervention by the party to ensure that this race does not go all the way to Denver. But even if it did, I think Obama would carry the majority of supperdelegates simply because of the political damage each one faces back with respective electorates. That damage factor will push superdelegates to go with the state vote, or, the majority of pledged delegates. But all the same – I figure the storyline will be written well before then.
Taking a dig at both sides …
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/dayart/20080221/Cartoon20080221.gif
The Finnegans, re Obama’s speaking posture – he generally talks from autocue screens. That is why you see him looking to two specific points to the left and right of the camera pointing at his face.
‘By the way, Obama holds a lead of nearly 1 million votes — that’s 1 million– in the popular vote, according to the Web site Real Clear Politics. Of course, that doesn’t really count — ask Al Gore– but it’s worth noting. If you throw in Florida and even Michigan — where his name wasn’t on the ballot — Obama still leads by 300,000 votes.’
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/21/AR2008022102712.html?hpid=topnews
‘If your candidacy is going to be about words, they should be your own words,” said Clinton. “Lifting whole passages is not change you can believe in, it’s change you can Xerox.”
That line, obviously prepared in advance of tonight’s debate, fell flat. The crowd went silent and then a smattering of boos rang out. Obama shook his head and muttered to himself.’
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/
Just before Super Tuesday the Austin-American Statesman newspaper in Texas endorsed Obama over Clinton (and McCain for the GOP). Here’s their salient point of comparison between BHO and HRC:
“Obama presents a view of governing that is inclusive and relies on Americans to work with their government to solve sobering problems at home and abroad. Obama’s familiar refrain on the campaign trail is, “Yes, we can.”
By contrast, Clinton promotes a self-centered governing style that drives home what she would do as president. She asks little of Americans and discourages opposing views. Clinton has moved from her position as first lady that it “takes a village” to solve problems to it takes only Hillary (and maybe Bill).
Those contrasts offer a clear choice: Barack Obama. His optimism, unifying vision and ability to inspire are the kind of healing balm the country needs at this moment in history.”
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/editorial/entries/2008/02/02/time_is_right_for_his_unifying.html
#502
Pancho:
Here is a youtube of the moment. With the context and challenge established by Obama in his response to the question the Clinton’s rebutal was not what one would call ‘a punch-line moment’.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHkcyxIqpvk
‘Hillary Clinton, after what came across more like a valedictory statement than a rallying cry, turned to the man who so soundly defeated her in this week’s Wisconsin primary and said, “No matter what happens… I am honored to be here with Barack Obama. I am absolutely honored.”
The statement, with which she closed Thursday night’s 19th Democratic presidential debate, was so heartfelt, so sincere, that Obama put one arm around his opponent’s shoulder and reached a hand across the table to warmly shake her hand.
It was an oddly disarming moment that belonged to the New York senator but not in the way that she or her supporters could have wanted.
Clinton seemed to surrender, graciously.
Obama seemed to accept that surrender, equally graciously.’
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?bid=45&pid=288820
According to Davidoff, his estimate for the final count of the PDs is Obama 1691 & Clinton 1536. That’s 155 PDs in Obama’s favour. At the moment the SDs is running about 60% Hillary and 40% Obama. Let assume this stays as is, then Hillary will get 477 of 795 and Obama 318. What you get will be Obama: 2009 and Hillary: 2013. Your argument will be that Hillary will not get 60%, but we can only go by what is now, as nobody knows. This is not counting the delegates (PD and SD) of Michigan and Florida.
So if you accept Davidoff’s final estimate. It ain’t over yet for Hill. not quite “Clinton seemed to surrender, graciously as #505″. The fat lady has not started singing as yet.
Said before, this is more exciting than watching the GOP dead men walking contest. Especially after the PT109 Swiftboard missed Obama and hit hottie McCain instead. Bring it on.
The Finnegans, it’s over. Hillary plucked her low hanging fruit early, whn she had SDs pledging support to her at a rate of about 5 to 1. Now, by your count, it’s 60:40 and several of her previous supporters have defected. She will lose PDs, and she will lose SDs. From Eugene Robinson, in a typically astute and hilarious column:
‘just about every analyst who has done the math predicts that unless Obama makes some huge blunder, it’s highly unlikely that Clinton can catch up in pledged delegates. It is also unlikely that the superdelegates will dare to overturn the verdict of the primaries and caucuses.’
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/21/AR2008022102159.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
This finish is going to be marginally more exciting than last years AFL Grand Final. And I’m from Sydney.
#507 – Expect the unexpected.
SDs graph:
http://bp1.blogger.com/_qJGvnOCBQcA/R7zs5DGXndI/AAAAAAAAAE0/8KE0fGoLH28/s1600-h/image001.gif
from this blog: http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html.
That gap is closing week by week.
From a quick look around the media world, it looks like the following two messages will get played tomorrow:
- Xerox paper
- ‘agree to disagree’ and the ‘heartfelt moment’ at the end of the debate (possibly two issues, but I tend to put them together.)
So who wins the debate? Nobody, in my opinion. Clinton will get hurt from the footage of her being booed, but she ensured the message is out there and if it sticks, it will harm Obama.
But none of this will do anything whatsoever in terms of vote changing. That sort of comment is the type McCain would want to drop seven months from the general, in the hope he can build similar stories around it. Clinton dropping it two weeks before her last stand is useless.
So, a draw. One debate to go.
508, this ain’t the Huckabee camp. I prefer to follow numbers and rational analysis.
‘When the nominating contests got under way in January, about a quarter of the Democratic superdelegates were believed to be committed; the Clinton campaign claimed about a 120-delegate lead. That margin is shrinking daily: Sen. Clinton counts 258 superdelegates, and the Obama campaign had “179 and climbing” yesterday morning, a spokesman.
…Among the latest Clinton defectors is state Sen. Dana Redd in New Jersey, who this week cited Sen. Obama’s winning streak. A few previously uncommitted delegates also have pledged to Sen. Obama in recent days, including DNC members Margaret Xifaras of Massachusetts, a state that Sen. Clinton won on Super Tuesday, and Jason Rae of Wisconsin yesterday, along with Wisconsin’s Reps. Steve Kagen and Ron Kind.’
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120364277250284713.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
506
The Finnigans
True – but I hasten to mention that for the life of me – I sure I heard someone clearing their throat, and in the background a muffled noise reminiscent of the members of a brass band seating themselves as they prepare for the main event.
#512 – That sounds to me like a scene from the Music Man… There was love all around, but I never heard it singing, no I never heard it at all, till there was Obama. Kumbaya My Lord, Kumbaya. Like a erection, it feels good.
#513 – typo “like a election…..”
#514 – more typo “like an election” or was it the other one. I am confused now, either way, it feels good.
Two posts on the debate over on the Huffington Post that are worth reading.
The first article by Thomas de Zengotita is short and to the point – summarizing everything with the closing moment. The second article by R.J. Eskow is more of an assessment of the role and impact of the debate in the overall campaign.
Someone please take that medication away from him!
What we saw in the final moments in that debate is why Hillary Clinton is the next President of the United States. Her strength, her life experience, her compassion. She’s tested and ready. It was the moment she retook the reins of this race and showed women and men why she is the best choice.
There’s spin and then there’s spin.
517
davidoff
I believe that’s the medical condition you get from spam!
This weekend I’m expecting to see headlines announcing the “1 Million Obama contributors and rising” (maybe Saturday, possibly Sunday). Currently the number is 957,129. You really have to give the campaign credit here – the continued process of setting targets, delivering an environment for engagement, enabling the citizen, etc. etc.
KR, think I remember you saying that you are enrolled/entitled to vote in the Sep elections. Did you vote in the O/S Dem primary that came in 3 to 1 for Obi?
And if so where and what was the procedure at the point of ballot, and by what method: paper and pencil, chad machine, Diebold/Sequoia paper trail-less computer?
I’m rather curious, because one place where the result went against the pre-polls for Obi was N.H., and the Dems in charge had Diebold computers “tally” that result.
Do you know what the procedure is for voters in Oz?
Looking around the plant, its interesting to note a shift in sentiments. Preceding the debate there was a certain feel atmosphere surrounding Hillary, best summed up with the words from great KR himself:
Now, my theory is that the polarization we have been seeing out there on the web re. Clinton versus Obama (a.k.a Alien versus Predator) is largely grounded in the subjects of (a) fair play – or specifically how unjust it is when Camp Clinton use negative attacks against someone who we all know is the next messiah (b) Obama eloquent rhetoric and and the 20,000 people chanting “Yes We Can” and the truth that that’s just not policy, its not substance, its smoke and mirrors but its electrifying and there’s nothing you can do about it.
But then we take a look at the debate – Hillary didn’t look like the Alien’s mother and Obama wasn’t dressed up as Rippley (but maybe Mark Penn really is that scientist up on the side wrapped in secretions – calling to the new generation alien child). Basically you had two professionals doing their respective stuff – and you would have to be a real cynic not to give credit on both sides. Is this a moment of change? I guess we will see for ourselves in the next few days.
KR,
Interesting to read that if Obama is nominated,McCain’s media mastermind,Mark McKinnon will stop working for McCain.
http://www.alternet.org/election08/77346/
Boy,doesn’t that send a message?
As you say,pass the popcorn!
521
Enemy Combatant
Sorry EC, you must have me confused with some other Bludger.
523
megan
Yes indeedy, I heard about that some days back and was pretty amazed. For the attack dog of the Rovian Republican Reich to draw the line at mauling Obama speaks volumes.
Make mine Lite Popcorn, please Megan!
522
davidoff
And here was me thinking my little satire might just happen in front of the cameras! Damn, no such luck!
Apparently, like Jekyll and Hyde, Clinton’s campaign advisers have been torn between the two extremes of nasty and nice, but knowing if she bares her fangs the public just might get turned off.
Poor Hillary, her inner Alien just had to be kept out in the green room, and she did a good job of being a human being with Obama. Of course it won’t change anything about the nomination, but at least she’ll still be human in the morning.
megan
Remember the other day I said the NYTimes had baited the hook, so as to re-hash the Keating Five scandal which McCain was central to?
Well, today, this blog entry:
I think this is a fine story. Sheesh. I’m very surprised about the outburst of reactionary comments here. I had a day to think about this story, and it all seems very relevant to the campaign. If you’ve been following “The Long Run”series, you will have noticed that none of the portrayals are all that flattering. I’m glad they published this article, because now I actually know something about McCain. I am only 22, and never knew about the Keating thing, nor about Iseman. So thank you NYT.
…bingo! And I’ll bet more than half the readers didn’t either. The rightwing is in meltdown, but that’s only what one would expect, eh?
Kirri, I’m a bit blog fogged today; great to see you blazing away brilliantly. Still, remembering Johnny Dean 04, somebody’s gotta let Hillary boosters know that in cyberspace, everyone can hear you scream.
526,
KR,
Ah, what is it again about chickens coming home to roost?
Delicious!
Betfair latest:
Obama 1.84
McCain 3.15
Hillary 8.00
Those fizzer attack lines from Clinton have a potential double blow: she hasn’t hurt Obama and (more important in my opinion) she may have demonstrated she wont be able to skillfully deliver up prepared attacks upon McCain…
perhaps alittle too late smile attacking his credibility
on the other hand some blogers have demonised Hillary but they are from the same Party & most of Obama’s policys existed pre Obama and Hillary was part of their formulation
The question is surely now turning to – what are the Republicans going to throw at Obama? Sex scandal? Drugs? Corruption? Being a Muslim? Soft on crime?…
527
Enemy Combatant
Good one! LOL
It was a good act, but yes, underneath she was screaming.
Looks like she intends to hold it in and hope Obama is caught doing coke with some gangsta rappers and some skanky ho’s (from Chicago, of course) and it gets posted on youtube.
Failing that, the lady looks lost.
it will be a dual attack I think Smile. The swiftboats will sub text ‘black’ and his alleged ‘left radicalism’ and he wants to spend & make the US more in debt to China.
….all of these are ‘fear’ messgaes aimed at the centre swing/independent voter
‘Fear’ is by far a more potent political weapon than ‘hope’
McCain will stay above this and attack Obama on his economic creditentials where Obama has no proven National record & McCain has some & with the US heading into recession , middle voters will listen.
McCain will also attack obama ’s lack of experience at a National level
particularly foreign policy
What Obama can not do to MCain what he’s done to Clinton
…attack his credibility
I’ve left out obama’s couter attacks
The really interesting thing about the republicans is that their own version of shock and awe has worked on the democrats. They have managed to demonise the Clintons to such an extent that the dems are seemingly convinced Hillary cannot win.
Look at the decline of all great empires there is always someone who comes along selling snake-oil and temporarily mesmerises, in the US case it looks like Obama will play that role. You can find similar examples in Byzantine,ottaman and roman history.
The sad thing is he will let John McCain in. This is a man whose daddy and granddaddy were US Admirals and who really truly believes in the whole military “honour” business, ie they lost Vietnam because they didnt go in hard enough. Imagine giving someone like that nukes.
I have seen too many June leads become losses in November. If you doubt that just look at a selection of headlines from RCP – essentially all echo the Obama is a phony line.
You dont need to go overboard to swift someone – just enough to raise doubt. McCain will hold the solid republican south, and be strong in the west. Hence the battleground will be the midwest -ie Ohio, Missouri etc. As has been referred to in the MSM the republicans wont be looking to win in the NYT but in the conservative freak show – ie Drudge report, newsmax etc.
And so Ron, what are the spin doctors going to try and link as the superficial fluff story and the underlying negative message?
I’m guessing it will be (a possibly partially admitted) drug story with a “doesn’t have control” message so that Obama is made to look like a risk to put in control: a risk for defence, a risk for the economy, a risk for ‘family values’.
“Look at the decline of all great empires there is always someone who comes along selling snake-oil and temporarily mesmerises, in the US case it looks like Obama will play that role. You can find similar examples in Byzantine,ottaman and roman history.”
This, ESJ, is rubbish and you know it!!! Seriously, pull the other one.
no its actually correct smile. read your history.
I studied history at University and my well-honed bullshitometer is ringing off the scale at your post.
So what smile, I am not particularly interested in your university studies sad to say!
Frankly, I don’t give 2 hoots. But trying to throw out some line that during “the decline of all great empires there is always someone who comes along selling snake-oil and temporarily mesmerises” is childish.
Au Contraire mon comrade. I got the feeling that she is preparing for the concession. The Xerox joke was a weak flapping thing. Mostly the debate was subdued and she finished on a peculiarly conciliatory note (albeit with a phrase borrowed from John Edwards!). The poll average has Texas as a 2% ball game. Extrapolate that trend over the remaining week and a bit and she will lose it. Ohio is narrowing into single digit territory. She must know this. Arrogance, hubris even, born-to-rule petulance et al notwithstanding she must have reached the point where she knows she’s lost. Note that none of her fans here are continuing the “she can win” arguments but are resorting to “she should have won” arguments.
If Obama were McGovern, then the big bosses of the party would allow her to seat the Florida delegates and the Michigan delegates and the Atlantis delegates and some weird bloke from South Carolina with a proxy from Jefferson Davis.
But Obama isn’t McGovern. He has a better chance of winning than Clinton. So there’s no way they will allow her to ensure the election is won by pissing in the faces of the primary voters. All she has is a small lead in super delegates locked in early in the game when everyone thought she was a shoe in and a bunch of minor pollies wanted to suck up to the preseident elect early. She won’t get any more.
She has to wait for Ohio and Texas to vote for form’s sake. But I won’t think she’ll wait long after that for a concession.
That post waas directed at KR #533.
I watched the Democratic Debate in Austin Texas via CNN. Thought it was pretty even. Hillary did very well, though her low blow concerning plagiarised speeches didn’t go down well.
I do believe Obama is a little to fleeting in his understanding of how real world politics actually works, especially in the white house. His seemingly naive belief that he will be able simply ignore lobbyists is absurd. Although, I did like his plans on increasing government transparency especially with respect to the federal budget.
ESJ #538. I am a historian and what you said is crap. Bring on the examples from Byzantium or the Ottomans and I’ll refute you. Otherwise I say: “piffle”.
Suspect smile they are alittle more sophesticated to use the drug line in the main swiftboats domain after all Bill’s indiscretions had no swiftboat effect
‘Hussein’ may get a run , certainly the ‘black’ will subtlely and the young ‘left radica voodo economics l’ and Hillary’s ‘copying words ‘ and that heis a great talker/speaker but not a doer except for the extreme left
is that enough for the centre voter or watr off a ducks back to them ?
RB, yes, like I said, in a more colourful way, she knows she’s lost it, would like to scream, but cannot, and her only hope is Obama doing coke on youtube.
We look to be in complete agreement, and all that is to be decided is the date of her concession.
Personally, I think she’ll hold on as long as possible, and hope Obama shoots an own goal, but she may be heavied into calling it off earlier.
We’ll see, eh?
RB @ 542,
Not sure when was the last time I agreed with a Marxist, but I’m starting to think you are right. The reports of the debate seemed to indicate that she’s decided a dignified loss is preferable to a screaming match where she loses anyway. Also agree that she has to do 4 March for form’s sake, to appease her rusted-on supporters if nothing else, but once that’s out of the way, she’ll probably quit, and will be able to do so without looking like a “quitter”.
As I said a couple of days ago, my bet is she’ll pitch for a plum job in the Obama administration (minor hurdle remaining: Obama will still to have beat McCain for this to happen).
Said it before and I’ll say it again. Swiftboating mobilises the base – it doesn’t win the middle ground. The Democrat base has expanded massively and the Repugs have shrunk. So whatever they run against Obama, it won’t work (unless they really find out that he’s a paedophile or a cousin of Bin Laden or something
).
Megan,
Crack out the popcorn, and read this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/opinion/22brooks.html?hp
…for it gives a wonderous insight into Camp McCain, and boy oh boy, don’t it look like one hell of a messy place.
The NYT article’s like a handgrenade lobbed over the wall, and now everyone in Camp McCain is pointing the finger for the culprit(s).
This is fascinating.
#542 Robert , can only agree with all your points
a further stat that she & the Democrat power brokers know is that the NATIONAL polling of Clinton vs McCain & Obama vs McCain showing Obama with a 5% or so points lead is completely misleading & hides Hillary’s unelectorbility
by individual State right now on an electoral College basis , McCain crushs Clinton in a landslide whereas Obama has an effective one medium size State lead over McCain
on this basis alone , if she does not concede 4/3/08 , I think she will be given no choice…the uncommitted Supers knowing the above will blast her out then
any views ?
Yes of course you are a historian Robert Bollard one who also appears to reports / gathers facts from the proverbial cab driver.
I also dont see what qualifies you as the “marker” but if you want to educate yourself I suggest reading John Julius Norwich’s 3 part history of byzantium – there are about half a dozen examples.
Dyno – its like a League of Rights pamphlet said that I once had waived in my face by a racist weirdo: “Dialectics: the Marxist Tool for World Domination”. We Marxists know what will happen because we’re in league with the illuminati and the Jews who run Wall Street (and the Pope of course). We had the outcome sewed up long ago.
“if you want to educate yourself I suggest reading John Julius Norwich’s 3 part history of byzantium – there are about half a dozen examples.”
So… there are about half a dozen examples of “someone who comes along selling snake-oil and temporarily mesmerises”… Where in the requisite 1/2 dozen is Obama? Does there need to be 5 more before the empire topples? Is Reagan included in the historically-determinist list? My goodness.
You cant be a historical determinist and a whig contemporaneously Smile.
*Chortle*
With that I will depart in good humor. Good night chaps. Sleep thee well.
14 days in a long time in blogosphere
I cracked the champers & predicted a 3/3/08 Hillary concession based on stats and was accused of Hubris by some & jumping the gun by others. Davidoff also thought it was over.
Now there seems to be unaminous agreement of Hillarys concession including most Media except from Hillary. Amazing how momentum changes the dynamics
There was Baracopus Non-porphrygite Obamapoulos who swayed the masses in the hippodrome in Constantinople with his slippery oratory, until of course someone pointed olut that he wasn’t born to the purple. There was the barbarian mercenary Kevin Rudd, a Varangian mercenary who hypnotised the easily swayed masses with his bland appearance of competence during the disastrous reign of John Wedgeotous (of course the leader of the Praetorian Guard – one Edward St John prevented his coup). I give you those two example Edward but “1/2 dozen”?
Said it before and I’ll say it again. Swiftboating mobilises the base – it doesn’t win the middle ground.
Don’t agree Robert if its done cleverly…a subject for a debate at another time
“You cant be a historical determinist and a whig contemporaneously”
No quite, but it appears (yet again, ho hum) that you can be a pompous git who talks out of his posterior orifice while making a complete ass of yourself.
God you’re a boring old fart Teddy, always abusive, (probably pissed?) and always keen to wave ya learnin’ around so us plebs can be impressed.
What a wanker, go back to Byzantium.
Actually, it’s also an established historical fact that in the dying days of empires, pompous would-be patricians make vague statements regarding the prevalence of people what talk nice but have little substance in order to win petty arguments on websites. They will back this up with reference to three volume histories which they suspect no-one will have the time to read in the few seconds between each post.
I know this because I read it in a book once. You should read it too Edward.
Frankly you guys are wasting good material on a ‘baiter’
SERIOUSLY , would not the best retort in future be no retort ?
he will FINALLY get frustrated at bloging at unresponded shadows
Forget Byzantium, it’s what’s happening in the region now (largely thanks to the great snake oil salesman GWBush) that’s of more concern:
‘ Iraqi Kurdish troops on Thursday encircled Turkish soldiers in northern Iraq and threatened to open fire in the most serious standoff between the two nation’s forces since Turkey threatened late last year to go after guerrillas from the Kurdistan Workers Party sheltering in Iraq. The standoff began when Turkish troops in tanks and armored vehicles left one of five bases they’ve had in Iraq since 1997 and moved to control two main roads in Dohuk province, Iraqi officials said. ‘
(McClatchy)
So a US ally, Turkey, is now sending troops into northern Iraq.
We’ve had enough snake oil, we don’t need to read ancient history for any more.
Robert B
ever read the “illuminati trilogy”
immanetization of the eschaton
look Kirribilli , he has probably been sedated by the nurses by now & is in blogosphere heaven as we speak…ignore the ‘baiting’
Just having fun Ron. BTW, must dash I just heard there’s a cabby can give me a hot tip on the decline of the Ottomans.
KR 560 -
Try harder!
561 RB
Try harder!
Ron 562
Kisses to you too!
Me? I will just keep telling the truth!
well before you get that cab Robert , in case I break my own advice in the future & not wishing to do a plagarism..can I save up your #558 blog in case I’m frustrated with ESJ in future ??????????????????????????????
565
Ron
‘baiting’? He’s just a smelly old bit of fish gut, but all he gets here is a backhander.
Remember, he’s a tory troll, serial abuser, makes false accusations and we love his scintillating observations on ancient history, as they’re so incredibly relevent.
Who needs clowns when Teddy’s here?
Interesting tale of Victoria Woodhull, first woman to run for US presidency.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAWwoodhullV.htm
gusface Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 12:45 am
Robert B
ever read the “illuminati trilogy”
immanetization of the eschaton
let us know Gusface ?
Authors
roberts shea, robert anton wilson
(was banned i think?)
acid fuelled conspiracy trilogy that spawned/fuelled quite a few contemporary conspiracy theories.
good read as beneath the satire is a real message of how we as a society are beholden to images as opposed to actuality
semi timothy leary style with a bit of dylan thomas to boot.
569 KR,
It hurts to lose hey KR? Try harder peanutboy
ps
ron
one of the books was called “leviathan”
still available Gusface in all ‘good’ book stores as if yes I’ll look for it ?
One of the subjects I’m teaching this semester is World History. That means I’m certified as knowing everything that happened in history. So ESJ, I warn you, I know every deep dark secret you possess. Oh dear, is that all? Oh well…
Yes, Ron, you may use my musings on Byzantine history. BTW the Byzantines were beaten by the Muslims partly because the latter were more tolerant (ie they didn’t persecute the most productive provinces of their empire because they held unorthodox views regarding the trinity). What lesson is learned from this for the latter day rulers of empires? Vote for John McCain and war without end?
Good night.
Ron
was not available last times i was in goulds (newtown syd)
but that was 8 yrs ago
Mrs g collect books as hobby from garage sales etc
some beauties i can tell you
573
Edward StJohn
Lose what?
You’re barking Teddy, completely barking.
Robert
the osmans had caf
thx to you both , will try to locate
ron
“but it takes a real Beatnik to give lectures on morality to the grey alien.’
http://www.rawilson.com/about.shtml
No Robert the rot set in at the Battle of Manzikert in 1071 I believe.
“He came back several times in the next few weeks, and the sign remained. It was as he suspected: in a rigid hierarchy, nobody questions orders that seem to come from above, and those at the very top are so isolated from the actual work situation that they never see what is going on below. It was the chains of communication, not the means of production, that determined a social process.. Nothing signed “THE MGT.” would ever be challenged; the Midget could always pass himself off as the Management.
http://www.rawilson.com/illuminatus.shtml
the grey alien related to the microscope
see what you mean Gusface…looking forward to a read
the grey alien related to the microscope
see what you mean Gusface…looking forward to a read
and goodnight…very helpful
ron
may i suggest getting the 1986 or so editions
later copies are appropriately sanitized
550,
KR,
Wow, another leak in the good ship McCain……and so deftly written by the golden pen of David Brooks.
Once the cracks start, the sinking just seems inevitable somehow doesn’t it?
Ofcourse, I have been known to be wrong,but…!!
A little taste of things to come?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDg19STeVqs
Apparently there are a couple of new polls out on the Texas match-up (no links yet) – but one from ARG suggesting Obama 48/42 for Obama with a +-4 margin or error. The other poll from Decision Analyst predicts 57/43 for Obama with a +-3 point MOE.
On in the morning news – an interview with Hillary reaching into the subject of Florida and Michigan with Hillary qualifying her agreement with the DNC (limiting it to ‘I agreed not to campaign’ but ‘I didn’t agree not to seat the delegates’).
http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/polldancing/2008/02/hillary-seat-michigan-florida-delegates.php
#589
The ARG and Decision Analyst polls I mentioned earlier seem to be inconsistent with data published by ARG – however – I do have a quote and a link to the Decision Anslysis results.
http://www.decisionanalyst.com/publ_data/2008/obama.dai
Here is the confirmation of the ARG Texas poll – 48/42 advantage Obama.
http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/pres08/txdem8-702.html
ARG polling for Vermont taken over February 20-21.
Obama: 60%
Clinton: 34%
http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/pres08/vtdem8-702.html
ARG polling for Rhode Island taken over February 20-21.
Obama: 40%
Clinton: 52%
http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/pres08/ridem8-702.html
CLEVELAND, OH – Superdelegate Sonny Nardi, President of Teamsters’ Local 416, today endorsed Barack Obama for President, citing his 20-year record of standing up to special interests and fighting for economic fairness.
That brings the super-delegate count to:
Obama: 171.5
Clinton: 238.0
Advantage Clinton 66.5.
Will be interesting to see where the Iseman thing goes.
My hunch is nowhere much, unless there are further revelations.
As for the Brooks article, I wish I could get paid to produce a few hundred words per day in which (in this example) the only hard fact is that there are two colleagues who don’t like each other!
Betfair latest:
Obama 1.86
McCain 3.05
Hillary 8.40
Hillary fading fast (even from 12 hours ago).
McCain in a bit (maybe the market figuring that the Iseman “scandal” is running out of puff?)
What Brooks exposed in Camp McCain is interesting, but the salient point is that McCain has denied certain accusations, which if evidence comes to light that cotnradicts him, well, he is, in one short word, history.
(And I ain’t talking about Byzantium. We already have one clown that inhabits a byzantine world of gratuitous insults and pompous gittory.)
KR @ 598,
“History” is an exaggeration, but yes, it will hurt him if it turns out the accusations are true. Plenty of politicians have survived worse, though.
Late Polls Hillary draws level with Obama Nationally , reverse momentum.
So this will be her message to the ‘Superdele’s’ at the Alamo.
But a detailed look at the State by State colleges still shows Hillary would lose in a landslide to McCain whilst Obama has a slight lead over McCain
Would you think this should be the SOLE basis on which a Superdele decides.
obviously I’m missing something here cause the Supers haven’t stampeded to O
New AP survey indicates that Clinton’s SD lead is now only 60:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/22/ap-survey-superdelegates_n_88048.html
“Clinton still leads among superdelegates _ 241 to 181, according to the AP survey. But her total is down two in the past two weeks, while Obama’s is up 25. Since the primaries started, at least three Clinton superdelegates have switched to Obama, including Rep. David Scott of Georgia, who changed his endorsement after Obama won 80 percent of the primary vote in Scott’s district. At least two other Clinton backers have switched to undecided.”
New York Times is also reporting on the Clinton aim to seat Florida and Michigan delegates.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/clinton-plans-to-press-for-florida-and-michigan-delegates.
but then I do have a vested interest here in a quick concession
Having publicly committed the big O had statistically won 2 weeks ago with Hillary to concede on 3/3/08 , blogosphere rumours abound of ESJ & Generic Person organizing a Blogosphere ‘burning at the stake’ for me & my barbarian colleagues should Hillary win
complete us pledging & worshipping the great JWT’s memory….a wicked penalty
Did I mention my Teflon underwear?
No 603
I don’t mind Hillary winning, though I’d prefer Ron Paul. But the republicans never had a chance in this forthcoming election.
No Ron. ESJ wouldn’t burn you at the stake. However, given his penchant for all things Byzantine, he might follow the example of Justinian (viz Count Belisarius) and have you blinded if your proven correct.
now I am worried , hope you haven’t given him an idea
Did I mention my impact resistant spectacles?
GP- I was thinking about your comments on the Garnaut pace of economic change. As more of these reports come out with inevitably worsening predictions (every major report has been more pessimistic than the last) won’t there be a tipping point when Governments are forced to do something quick and stampede to building nuclear power stations (when the electorates fear of climate change outweighs their fear of nuclear energy)? Nuclear power seems the “easiest” and “fastest” way to reduce emissions. I wouldn’t mind having a few shares in the nuclear industry over the next ten years.
BTW Anyone who thinks GP and Glen are the same person is seriously deluded.
No 609
At the risk of rekindling the nuclear debate, I do think that the arguments against nuclear energy are hysterical, much the same as the argument advocating that there will be unbelievably disastrous climate change in the next 50 years.
With some prudent planning on waste disposal, nuclear can be viable and is increasingly viable internationally. Look at China: they simply don’t have the time to wait for the breakthroughs in renewable technology – nuclear is a proven technology that will safely allow China’s economic expansion to continue.
your Teflon underwear will certainly add colour to the occasion
Nuclear is so 20th century, Geothermal is the future, chaps.
An interesting article linked from RealClearPolitics on this idea that Obama is a new Dukakis.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1715282,00.html
I have a theory that I thought I might post here for reaction.
If I were in the Clinton camp, what I would be suggesting right now is that Clinton, either by her own words or through an official statement, say that if she loses both Ohio and Texas on March 4 she will drop out of the race.
Such a statement would be purely a stunt, given she is stating what everyone already believes to be the obvious. But it would do the following:
1. Have her forever seen as the one gracious enough to let history take it’s course. At the moment, her dropping out at the end of the next primary would forever be portrayed as her getting her arse kicked and losing. This way, it would play more as ‘her sticking to her word and stepping down rather than fight to the death.’ Saves her name.
2. It would spark her hardcore supporters into action. Probably too little too late, but donations would pour in, and every single supporter desperate for her to win would put in that last gasp of energy, as their saviour has now admitted that her end is nigh. Could be enough. But it’s doubtful.
3. If her intention was set, then by releasing this statement she could potentially still fight on if she won one of the big states but lost the other.
Thoughts?
#613
Problem is …
1. she need to win big in both states to stay in the race
2. if she looses in either Texas or Ohio she is done and dusted
I figure a better proposition would be for Hillary to make a public position statement backing up what Bill suggested … i.e. a loss in either state spells the end of the race.
610 GP- There are an increasing number of left-leaning or indeed hard-left experts who agree nuclear power is an important part of the solution to climate change. Tim Flannery is a proponent as is James Lovelock and a few prominent environmentalists, who have now been excommunicated by their church.
I’m not sure how important climate change is in the US elections. From what I can see, Obama and Clinton are fairly similar, with McCain being very open to nuclear power. Interestingly, both Clinton and Obama are proposing a target of 80% reduction in CO2 by 2050, significantly more than Rudd’s, but I won’t go there again!
No 615
We can argue over targets and so forth, but the reality is that politicians are not going to sacrifice the productive capacity of the economy and destroy millions of livelihoods to satisfy a target.
612 TW- My wife tells me that geothermal is too site-specific and unable to be exported, so it is not a serious solution (SA is in an ideal spot though).
The climate change argument might be very important in the US because of Al Gore and his endorsement. I imagine that when the Nobel Prize winner endorses the Democrat candidate, he will consider their environmental policy as crucial to his decision.
BTW I’d like to add that I think Al Gore’s doco An Inconvenient Truth was seriously scientifically flawed and it’s arguments were so full of holes you could drive a fleet of trucks through them. Politicians don’t understand science, they just read the executive summary.
Throwing a little context into the discussion on yesterday’s primary debate…
Which leads me to wonder which primary debate was the highest-rating?
David, the problem with that is that she has nowhere to run. Issue a statement that says ‘one more loss and I’m out’ and she can’t back away from it.
Either way, it’s the ‘public statement’ thing I would be interested in, not sending Bill to ramble on about it to a few journalists.
This blog article is perhaps one of the best quotes I’ve seen on the race in terms of being clear and to the point.
your purpose Max is fine…as you say imagine we were Hillary’s advisors NOW
Max is offering some grace for you but your reputation toasted
Davidoff is offering some grace for you & a fighting chance but slightly singed
I am offering you ‘legendary’ status in the Democrat Party by conceding NOW
“because you are putting the Party first.”
Why should you…
well you do not accept the mathematics that your delegate chase is doomed,
so the reason is because you will never defeat McCain in a November Election.
An Electoral college map based on ACTUAL current individual State electoral college Polls of Hillary vs McCain gives McCain a landslide (but Obama A lead)
I’d be fired be fired on the spot so would never hear her choice
#617
And lets not forget the generalization that ‘voters’ don’t understand ‘politicians’, they just listen to sound bytes.
But, there is a part of me that isn’t ready to accept these generalizations – even if they are for the most part true. I guess that makes me an idealist!
“an idealist”…….well at lwast you and Max would still be on Hillary’s payroll
I’d be in the dole queue unless ESJ offered me a job writing JWT’s ‘history’
least
Afternoon, Gang, let’s boogie shall we?
Robert B, master of the art of inducing spontaneous belly laughs, loved these two gems:
1) “If Obama were McGovern, then the big bosses of the party would allow her (HRC) to seat the Florida delegates and the Michigan delegates and the Atlantis delegates and some weird bloke from South Carolina with a proxy from Jefferson Davis.”
Big George is still around and is rooting for Obi, pity Unca Duke couldn’t stick around for the history making. Seems there was only so much fear and loathing a bloke could take in BushWorld. Followed Sep campaigns since before ’72, but no political writer ever moved me as much as he. HST wasn’t always right, but on a good day he was electrifyingly funny and insightful.
2) ESJ #538. “I am a historian and what you said is crap. Bring on the examples from Byzantium or the Ottomans and I’ll refute you. Otherwise I say: “piffle”. “
————————————————-
KR to Eddy : “What a wanker, go back to Byzantium” .
Kirri, isn’t that where the “ottaman” empire used to be, where Biggus Dickus and Dipstickitus Maximus were wont to unburden themselves ?
EC
Today Robert has invoked the curse of Justinian (viz Count Belisarius) Byzantine
but it seems this is for ESJ to punish us barbarians
I think in the end that the word ‘legacy’ will come into play soon.
Hillary won’t quit before March 4, and rightly so because a win there would blunt the momentum and give us a ball game again. Now isn’t the time to leave, there’s no point in the ‘what ifs’, the time to consider it is after that date.
Quit on March 4, and history will show that the Clinton era glided to a graceful end. Eight years of President Bill, with an ambitious but unfortunately naive Lady Hillary by his side. This followed by six years of Senator Hillary, growing in confidence and purpose, culminating in an ambitious tilt at the Presidency, being the first women ever in the history of the country to be a real contender. This followed by 4 or 10 more years in the senate, getting things done maybe in the first Democratic Congress/White House in many years, before retiring gracefully to help poor people around the world. The Democratic Party will forever hold them up as heroes.
That will be the legacy of the Clinton’s.
However, I think that if she pushes on after March 4, her reputation will slide by the day. Her legacy will be tarnished, her ability to crack deals on the Hill diminished. She fights on, and the history books will portray her as a power hungry bitch who didn’t know when to give up and potentially irreparably damaged the Democratic candidate. She will, without a shadow of a doubt, be blamed if McCain wins in November. Bill will stay a hero, but she will be the one who cost the Democrats an historic chance of having both houses and the White House at the same time. Nasty.
Which is why I think she will drop out, either way. I also don’t think she wants to damage the Party. Not really.
I think in the end that the word ‘legacy’ will come into play soon.
Hillary won’t quit before March 4, and rightly so because a win there would blunt the momentum and give us a ball game again. Now isn’t the time to leave, there’s no point in the ‘what ifs’, the time to consider it is after that date.
Quit on March 4, and history will show that the Clinton era glided to a graceful end. Eight years of President Bill, with an ambitious but unfortunately naive Lady Hillary by his side. This followed by six years of Senator Hillary, growing in confidence and purpose, culminating in an ambitious tilt at the Presidency, being the first women ever in the history of the country to be a real contender. This followed by 4 or 10 more years in the senate, getting things done maybe in the first Democratic Congress/White House in many years, before retiring gracefully to help poor people around the world. The Democratic Party will forever hold them up as heroes.
That will be the legacy of the Clinton’s.
However, I think that if she pushes on after March 4, her reputation will slide by the day. Her legacy will be tarnished, her ability to crack deals on the Hill diminished. She fights on, and the history books will portray her as a power hungry b**** who didn’t know when to give up and potentially irreparably damaged the Democratic candidate. She will, without a shadow of a doubt, be blamed if McCain wins in November. Bill will stay a hero, but she will be the one who cost the Democrats an historic chance of having both houses and the White House at the same time. Nasty.
Which is why I think she will drop out, either way. I also don’t think she wants to damage the Party. Not really.
#620
Ron
It’s not an option – the commitment has been made – its not some sort of acid transaction with a built in roll-back mechanism. The only options on the table for a conditional concession are relative to the Texas/Ohio contests. Anything less is tantamount to a lie towards her support base – and that’s unreasonable. After all – an exit strategy has to be a win (is some framed and qualified context) for her constituency.
#626
I agree.
Ron,
It wasnt just eyes the Byzantines would cut off.
incorrect grammar, it wasnt the only body part they would extinguish or damage irreperably or cut off.
Hi there fellow Bludgers -
been out of the loop for a few days now, and haven’t had a chance to read all the bck entries so in a nutshell – does Hillary have any real chance or is it pretty much over for her?
(Divergent views welcomed…)
Clearly your point Max of Hillary doing herself enormous ‘damage’ if she continues after 4th March is unquestioned.
This I guess is a question of timing.
Davidoff is right to say the commitment has been made to stand in Texas & Ohio
and her supporters may feel cheated if she didn’t
My assumption is based on a catasophe for Hillary over the next 14 days.
It seems the US Polls continue to under rate Obama’s black vote and the poor white vote and the majority of the undecided’s….all go to Obama.
(as do the majority of late votes)
With Texas already closing to 2/4 points now and Ohio to say 6/8 points, there is the probability based on the above 4 factors that at BEST Clinton will lose Texas & just win Ohio…
but it may even get uglier inwhich case a declaration now of her decision based on Texas/Ohio may subsequently appear increasingly lame with a result humiliating.
#632
Two possible scenarios:
(a) a graceful exit following the Texas and Ohio competitions (with knowledge that the groundwork has been established for this to happen while holding her head up and her supporters weeping but with pride in their hearts)
(b) or – the Alien versus Predator scenario which would involve a battle between Camp Clinton, Obama, the DNC, and the voice of the people and the probability of the destruction of the Clinton’s and the DNC in the process.
ESJ Well they did remove said bodypart on occasions – but not as a punishment. It was standard practice for would-be civil servants, most of whom were eunuchs. I’ve been a public servant twice and am thankful the APS prefers to emasculate its inductees with boredom. EC #624. The Ottomans belong to a somewhat later period than Biggus Dickus and he would have been glad to be shy of them given they also had a propensity to make Eunuchs.
634 davidoff-
would she be so egotistical / deluded to attempt (b)?
Jen, she’s toast and the MSM is beginning to notice it weeks after some of us did. As Obama is a more electable candidate there’s no way that the powers in the Democratic Party will let her win via superdelegates of seating Florida and Michigan. Obama is only trailing her by 60 on the superdelegates now anyway. He’s gained 25 SDs in the last fortnight and she’s lost 2.
I previously thought she’d attempt (b) (refer 634) but now I don’t see it happening.
Reasons (1) she is slipping more than expected and (2) that debate … I think Robert B is right, she was laying the groundwork for a gracious concession after March 4.
Jen
Personally – I don’t think so – but I also think she isn’t thinking for herself so much these days. So much of the actions have that feeling of something directed by the campaign. I guess I’m not too worried about Hillary the person – but I’m not confident in my ability to predict the Clinton campaign machine. I’m could also suggest that Hillary and the campaign machine may be a little too closely tied together – in that even if Hillary wanted out – I’m not entirely convinced that she could exercise that option (but this is pure speculation and nothing substantive that I can point to).
davidoff @ 639,
Interesting theory and one always wonders who is pulling the strings on a number of candidates.
On the other hand, the campaign can’t keep it all going without money.
I now see a concession on 4/5 March unless O+T are surprisingly good (though I haven’t yet put a number to the term “surprisingly good”).
#640
I have to say that the US media is so very annoying in that they are spinning this out for every last drop – and what is worse is that the public over there are buying into the story hook, line and sinker.
#632 – Jen – Evis has not started singing yet, although the ECs here are telling everyone “Elvis has left the building”……… thought I heard softly softly “Are you lonesome tonight?”
Jen
Something else worth looking at at the recent trends on Intrade – and in particular – the impact of 11 consecutive successful wins – a slow but clear migration of superdelegates to Obama – polls suggesting a win in Texas – and a suite of Obama leaning states in the coming months.
Hillary’s trajectory:
http://data.intrade.com/graphing/temp/chart1202269338169206856.png
Obama’s trajectory:
http://data.intrade.com/graphing/temp/chart1202269338169206852.png
One would have to concede that there is a small but not insignificant trend in play here.
#642
The Finnigans
You do you that Elvis left the building back in 1956 and by 1977 most people understood the meaning?
#642
The Finnigans
You do know that Elvis left the building back in 1956 and by 1977 most people understood the meaning?
Thanks PB’s -
my sense is she’s toast too.
Based on poll trends and the big Momentum, can’t see Obama losing now.
Te next Big Q then is – will the US really let a young black man be POTUS???
(saw something in an MSM saying McCain had been doing a lobbyist – any legs to this??).
Umm.. Intrade urls are not persistent.
#646, Jen, jen, jen – “will the US really let a young black man be POTUS???” why taking you so long.
btw: elvis = the fat lady
IMVHO, yes.
Again IMVHO, I can’t imagine it’s anything more that an ego getting some close and personal attention – but the real story is the backroom politics behind the scenes.
Finns -
I get it my friend.
But surely the time may be ripe – they couldn’t vote for the opposition surely. Apart from the fact that he is practically dead, he may have broken a Commandment, and that won’t plaese the Happy Clappers.
So what choice do they have?
What a sham. Hillary surely knows she can not win (as JWH knew at APEC).
Pollies art good with numbers about themselves
But the ‘political thing’ to do is to make concession based on not having big wins in Ohio and/or Texas. Who actually believes this ’spin’ except the most loyal of supporters.
But yes, Hillary will do the ‘political thing’. of course if the Polls go pear shaped for her in the interim as I expect , & Ohio & Texas end up respectively as a small Ciinton win & a Clinton loss….where is the graceful exit except in her mind.
She had her chance for legendary status & as expected spurned it. Given the same Stats in reverse plus the current National stats showing Clinton loses to McCain in a landslide would Obama continue to fight on. Think not
davidoff
- are you saying that the War Hero “did not have sex with that woman” (ah, the irony), or are you saying that they can’t prove it –
and do they need to??
#650
Stay home!
After all, the CIA would class this under the category of plausible deniability.
#652
I’m suggesting a line something along the line of “I could not have had sex with that woman” backed up by a mountain of medical evidence.
654 davidoff-
have you not heard of Viagra??
654- davidoff
have you not heard of Viagra?
But with Hillary’s health care plan … maybe he could!
#650 – Jen – It’s going to get worse. I knew this had to come. Try google “barack obama antichrist”.
I’ve been moderated!
and all I did was mention a perfectly legal pharmaceutical.
Sometimes William is so harsh.
It’s OK-
Released from the Gulag.
I don’t “moderate” people. Comments go into moderation if they include certain words, without any action on my part.
659
jen Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 5:33 pm
I’ve been moderated!
and all I did was mention a perfectly legal pharmaceutical.
Sometimes William is so harsh.
thats why we need a Blogosphere Appeals Court to adjudicate Williams harsh decisions
#659
Jen
I thought it was implicit!
LOL
At least since jen you’ve logged in , the US election discussion has gone up market….despite Williams judical decision without Appeal
Apologies Wiliam.
But why would that V word be moderated when the other one might get through?(haven’t tried it yet I must admit).
Hi Ron -
glad to have raised the tone. (have to say that is not something I’m usually credited with.)
#664
Ron
Your suggesting that William should lower the standard if Jen is logged in?
Shame on you!
Info from inside Camp Clinton:
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/02/hillary_advisers_privately_rea.php
668
Davidoff-
” ‘Too Late’,she cried.”
665
jen Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Apologies Wiliam.
But why would that V word be moderated when the other one might get through?(haven’t tried it yet I must admit).
This is EXACTLY WHY a Blogosphere Appeals Court is needed ,
perhaps made of three esteemed blogers.
Clearly that excludes me , however you Jen would be a worthy President of same
Stone the bloody(Jim) crows! Have a squiz at this:
TX: Obi, 57 HRC 43
http://www.decisionanalyst.com/publ_data/2008/obama.dai
Seems them Coen boys wuz right all along.
Texas is definately No Country for Old(er) (wo)Men.
Sorry, Monica and Jen it’s a cheap shot I know, but after those figures, momentarily stunned, it just slipped out.
Mr. Chigurh made me do it!
Cheers Ron,
although perhaps you overestimate my censoring abilities.
I’d let everything through except Glen , GP and ESJ, so that would reduce this site to a bunch of centrists and lefties. And then what would we talk about?
#672
Enemy Combatant
There is also the ARG poll.
http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/pres08/txdem8-702.html
ah , but we still talk about them in loving terms so to speak Jen ,
its just we’d miss their reasoned responses
672 – EC
If I was Hillary
I’d have ‘done r-u-n-n-o-f-t’.
The Donor & the Insider:
” IF blah blah blah….then she can at least begin to close Obama’s lead in pledged delegates to within somewhat more manageable numbers.”
…..and then ?
a ’spin’ upon a ’spin’ within a ’spin’ gives us what Davidoff
Works for me – but you have a point – with Glen , GP and ESJ you loose the option of feeling superior and without that how are you going to move those screaming lefties over to the centre?
s/with/without
A fairytale?
Here is an article I liked – getting into (in a real way) the Clinton Obama dilemma. The article is basically about recent events (phone calls and stuff) around William Blaine Richardson III AKA Bill Richardson (one of the Democrat presidential candidates who withdrew from the race).
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/23/us/politics/23richardson.html?ref=politics
davidoff at 672, even if one “splits the difference” The Kid still comes out in front by 7 points. I’m not a stats-whiz or a pseph-head but the two sample sizes were roughly the same. One claims 90% confidence, the other 95% confidence.
What is a known known (geez I don’t miss that bastard) is that the trend big picture-wise shows Obi baby is coming home like, well an expression I used a couple of weeks back, a runaway train!
#682
Yep – my view as well. Given polling trends over in the States – I’m using these as trend indicators and that’s all. The ARG poll just adds to the feeling that things are a changing. The Texas polls seem to be doing what I expected – but I’m still worried somewhat about Ohio. There is not a lot of info out there but I’m wondering if I have overestimated Hillary’s lead.
she’s toast.
she’s so blunt – *blush*
sorry davidoff,
but I’m not one to mince words.
Unlike some of our worth opponents who talk nothing but mince.
I’m ok with the idea of ‘toast’ – thing is I’m not at all sure how the entire transition from stale bread to toast will be managed in a way we would refer to as competent and complete taking into account the full suite of heath and occupational safety regulations.
The Polls for reasons stated previuosly continue to under estimate Obama’s vote
in my opinion.
There was movement at the station & Texas was gone & Ohio slipping
and there is more time to make it uglier
davidoff- If you look at those figures, it’s the independents who will kill Billary off in Texas and there are lots of them coz there’s no point voting in the moot Repug primary. As many of us have said, Texas is going to Billary’s Alamo.
Two political pundits are sitting under a shady tree, leaning back against the trunk. Each pundit peels a banana, examines it meaningfully, takes a bite and commences to munch. The steady rhythm of mastication is broken with the following exchange.
First Pundit: Seems The Kid sure has got some momentum goin’ for him, Chuck.
Second Pundit: You know, Dave, it’s not JUST about the momentum……(chomp, chomp) for me……(further chomping)….. it goes WAY beyond that.
(Apologies to Gary Larsen.)
672
Enemy Combatant Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Texas: Obama, 57 HRC 43
http://www.decisionanalyst.com/publ_data/2008/obama.dai
Not sure anyone would take that 57/43 Poll seriously.
Thats not to say Obama won’t win Texas but 57/43 now is fairytale stuff
EC -
and then John Goodman, cleverly disguised as Dan T, rips off a branch and smashes one of them in the face, and then runs off with the votes.
and ‘chads’
yes, Ron, those figures have an aura of FantasyLand about them, but we really musn’t forget that at the end of the day, in the fullness of time, the reality is, that it’s Americans we’re dealing with here. Texan and Ohioan Americans.
Some of whom I’d like to quickly mention are amongst of my very best friends. You bet!
Jen, Dan T? Even had a quick wiki-google and drew a blank.
yes Enemy , and the irony is that Texas will sink Hillary’s campaign
and yet neither Hillary or Obama have any hope at all of winning Texas in Nov.
EC-
O Brother Where Art Thou.
Thank you, ma’am. Been a while, must rent the DVD and have another gander. Charles During is my favourite movie weasel.
That’s Durning, and he was, until Aton Chigurh popped up for a spot of bovver.
Ron @ 685
Who then?
If Texas is really “no country for old man” then maybe Obama will make history and win it off McCain in November.
RB -aka The Taxi Driver
I’l join the ISO if the Democrat nominee wins Texas.
“no country for old man”
not sure if age is a disqualifier but ‘commonsense may not be given the State elects not one Bush but two.
699
jen Says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 8:09 pm
Ron @ 685
Who then?
Actually Jen , #685 was Davidoff post. Not sure either who he was referring to re ‘blush’
However my mythical Grand Dad says
Son be careful of any women that may blush as they’re is either beautiful or smart or both. I await Davidoff’’s response
ESJ – the ISO has more taste than to let you join.
What are we up to RB the fifth or sixth international? Are you a Healeyite?
ESJ- I’m interested in your snake-oil salesman theory at the time of empire collapse. Are you asserting that the charlatan phenomenon is a causation or a correlation with fall of empire?
A sobering article re the effect of years of conservatism against ‘liberal’ government……written about the US system but has echoes here.
http://www.alternet.org/democracy/77498/
“Those who make peaceful evolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable” -John Kennedy
Diogenes,
I think definitely correlation. By the time an empire reaches decline it has consciously chosen to avoid painful changes and retrenchments necessary to save itself, the snake oil salesman comes along speaking in terms of generalities and vague promises that hard choices can be avoided – which is appealing.
In the US context if you look at the factors in Niall Ferguson’s book – who is willing to openly say any of that? Who is willing to say there is imperial overstretch or that higher taxation is necessary?
Empire’s in decline can only be turned around by the class traitor’s along the lines of Nixon in China who can succesfully attack the conservative interests perpuating a failing status quo. A black northern liberal is not going to be able to end the US National Security state or to achieve an increase in taxation dedicated to public investment. A conservative could.
There is a real argument that the only progressive legislation in America in the last forty years was passed by that dark genius Milhouse.
In BHO’s case he is going down the snake oil path with platitudes and generalities but generally these individuals tend to burn brightly for very short periods of time until they are strangled by the conservative interests who support the status quo. Assuming Hilary loses in March that will start almost immediately after Hilary concedes the nomination from the conservative freakshow.
the same vein a black northern liberal could take on the US teacher unions
but ESJ
what about the arab janissaries ala the turkoman invigoration?
you do realise that your post is an oxymoron gusface?
esj
the byzantine USED the janissaries (christian lads converted and castrated)
to do their dirty work
the USA is using arab proxies to fight its battles
historians agree the janissaries gave the turkoman a reinvigorated empire
your serve
ps obama represents on the domestic front a janissary of sorts as he will bring a new and perhaps unique paradigm (the’fresh face”)
the USA as empire has a while to go
Oh Christ, you’re not still going on about this, are you?
delete byzantine insert ottoman (osman)
ESJ- Barbara Tuchman makes a similar point in “The March of Folly” about an Empires poor choices in it’s decline. I can certainly see the attraction of a charlatan under those circumstances but I don’t know enough history to give scholarly examples. Rasputin at the fall of the Romanov dynasty springs to mind as an extreme example. I’m reading “The Fall of the Roman Empire” by Heather next and I’ll keep an eye out for snake-oil salesman.
How it applies to the US is very intriguing. Basically, you are looking for a politician who will make the hard decisions and get away with them. I would argue that Billary was the least able to do both. Obama is unlikely to be too radical as he’ll be looking at eight years and he’s very young. An old codger like Macca is certainly the most likely to want to make big changes in a short amount of time, esp if he’s really only thinking four years to make an impact.
Heathers book is excellent. you seem to have outstanding taste in reading material diogenes.
I agree re McCain, he may actually have enough cover to do some radical things like pull back in Europe, end the Bush tax cuts, close Gitmo but is he just a militarist in pseudo conservative clothing?
Should they be referred to as:
a) Christian jannisaries
b) Arab jannisaries
c) janisaries ?
Check this story out for a bad look:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/23/nyregion/23owe.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
#715 They should be referred to as fare for the pedantry of a piddling ponce.
Lol RB,
Tell me as a marxist have you ever rendered paid labour to anyone other than the State?
Does the Ford Motor Company count?
What was that “being amongst the proletariat” type role RB?
BTW ESJ if you want a CV and a list of my political affliliations you’re wasting your time. I’m sure ASIO already know and are unlikely to pay you good money for them.
No Edward it was a job.
ASIO, LOL How touching, it really is a badge of pride for the ISO and like organisations?
It probably would be more upsetting not to have an ASIO file for you I am guessing.
ESJ
actually old chap
from old georgia way (look on a map circa 1100)
grabbed at ten as tribute
castrated converted
ultimately ended running the ottoman empire
you should do abit of reading-helps the big picture
rb
the ottoman (osman) ran on coffee (caf,kaf)
do i know and do i care ?
Clearly it would be upsetting, given their track record of obsessing over even the mildest of dissenting individuals – radical vicars and grannies against the war etc. In any case, I know I have an ASIO file because I have a relative who had to have an ASIO clearance and was quizzed extensively on whether I had any “influence” over him.
But badge or pride or not I have had few concerns about the efficacy of the spook’s organisation and intelligence as a result of two encounters with them. One was when a couple of my student friends, prominent members of the ISO in the early ’90s, got a cleaning job. They found themselves cleaning a police building that was full of photos of demos and the like and eventually realised they’d been given the keys to Special Branch! The other was a request for a (free!) subscription to a red rag I helped produce. It was from the Papua New Guinean equivalent of ASIO. I know this because they sent the request on letterhead – with a file reference in the top right hand corner!
ah the joys of ’swiftboating’.
Some times it may be crude or confronting or subtle or indeed clever , but it does require “imagination” with the purpose of creating fear but at least doubt
First we need a label, lets say the Castrol oil salesman and we need our imagination to cloud our Castrol oil salesman with precedence to prove he will be a failure.Perhaps Helen (no too pretty) or Nero (no the guitar would not do)
Damn it we cann’t think of anyone specific so lets go for broke and say whole empires have been lead to doom my similar Castrol oil salesmen
That consevative Gough did recognise China & another made that ‘apology’
and so we come to Obama…….the 21st Century’s alleged Castrol oil salesman
Mr Bowe @ 711 (irony!) such shopping language…but concur
Meanwhile, Mochy gives them 6 more months,ffs; let’s see, that would be about the time of err what?
Oh, and an update on where the norty little red knob Zimmer didn’t go shopping…amazing what you can still find despite the great closure & redirect concerto currently underway…
I think these people are Ron (@ 727), somebody just forgot to tell them…
http://www.archive.org/download/JIMMA-IRAQ-NEW200008/ver-jsc-22.WMV
The decline, fall and disintegration of any empire is inevitable and necessary, because that is process and rhythm of life. So the decline of the US Empire is a matter of time. it does not matter a bit how powerful miltary, economically and socially it is. It is only a matter of time.
History has shown there is only one civilisation that has shown itself capable of handling this grand “change management”. This is China. China is the only country that has a continuous “government” for over 3000 years. The term “dynasty” was invented in China to ensure this continuity. In the Chinese language “dynasty” and “tide” sound exactly the same and look very similar, except in “tide” 3 drops of water have been added.
The most famous and powerful Chinese dynaties have been the Tang (AD600) and Ming (AD1300) both lasted about 300 years. So for the Chinese, dynasty is like the tide, it comes and goes. There is high tide, king tide and then there is low tide, low low tide and no tide. There is nothing special about any powerful empire.
The interesting question about what is happening in the USA at the moment is the phenomenon of Obama. He is said to bring hope, will bring the people together, to rejuvenate the declining USA, to restore the power and prestige of the USA etc etc. I am not sure because life always delivers to you the opposite of your expectation. That is my only word of caution.
Top of the mornin’ to yez, Bludgers. Just B4 I take me muvver ta church….
How It Could Have Been:
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/billschorr;_ylt=AhrZ7azkWd8bxP1RHOuu8uAxvTYC
But, As The Plot Thickens; How It Really Is:
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/bensargent;_ylt=AgZXzEDZEvczNXUUE3ReeJpN_b4F
And 70 Years On, Why a New “New Deal” Is On The Cards.
(Unless, of course Uncle Sammy slides into Fascism, which of course couldn’t happen while The Imbecile is in charge. could it?)
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/tomtoles;_ylt=AvOJMxrZW7AXHJ8Gr6×7N8ZT_b4F
And Finnigan Plural, this one’s 4U. (Agreed, btw, The Empire is terminally rooted*)
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/laloalcaraz;_ylt=AoIrm1jShkhPMfDEBegaEZLV.i8C
* idiomatic Australian usage.
In the context of the US Election , swiftboating have labelled Obama as a ’snake oil salesman’…….he’ll be called much worse between now & November.
The suggestion that an Obama inspirational type is a snake oil salesman & this type is pecular to a decline in an Empire or that people in a declining Empire find this type especially appealing is wrong. Its fairly either ordinary ’swiftboating’
Brilliant inspirational type Leaders like Obama whenever they appear on the scene are always appealing to the masses and often gain power whatever stage an Empire or civilisation is at.
The more relevant question for thinking people is has he got the goods.Those that support him believe so and point to his detailed Policys both in numerous speechs & on his site.
Time will tell , although expectations are usually greater than reality outcomes of what really is possible.
As to Empires generally , the Finnegans said it all
The USA as empire is embryonic and ultimately a continuation of the judeo/christian empire-it has still a long time to run
Finnegans
whilst partially taken with your china hypothesis-more apt would be the asia/doaist empire-
i am particularly taken with the Obama phenomenon and am quite eager to draw parallels throughout different empires faced with the “changing of the guard’ as i believe the USA is about to undergo tremendous change if obama is elected.
#732 – “judeo/christian empire”? keep religious out of the debate, it will get us nowhere and reduce everything down to being delusional, especially on a beautiful sunday morning like this.
#733 – keep religion out…..
She appears to be keeping her options open in Texas and Ohio go pear-shaped:
http://thepage.time.com/2008/02/22/morning-show-summary-14/
716
Dyno
Ouch! Standing up the ‘battlers’ for some small bills is a tacky look.
George Mega draws Rudd/Obama analogies here, particularly looking at the demographics of youth: http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/meganomics/index.php/theaustralian/comments/keep_kids_in_the_picture_if_you_want_to_win/
Soldiering on in Camp Clinton
A New York Times article looks at the mood inside the campaign headquarters.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/us/politics/24mood.html?ref=politics
Did someone say ’snake oil’ and ‘empire’ in the same sentence?
Oh, like the whole sorry episode of taking the empire to war in Iraq on the unctious content of doctored intelligence? Oily enough?
Invade the oil fields of Iraq and set up bases in perpettuity? Oily enough?
Corrupt the processes of government and the constitution with the aid of inept and clumsy partisan Republican toadies. Oily enough?
Dance with the devil of born again fundamentalists. Oily enough?
Let Wall Street get the regulators to turn their backs while they buggered the entire financial system, and then, with the Fed’s new boy, jump in with taxpayers money (actually, more borrowed dosh) to bail out the economy. OIly enough?
One could go on all day, but the picture is clear enough. This empire has just had the biggest snake oil salesmen in the business, send the country to the edge of ruin.
My contention is that the next president of the USA will not be in the same mold as this one, and seriously needs not to be. Time to throw out the remaining snake oil bottles and change direction, real fast, or they are sunk.
737
Pancho
I hope Adam doesn’t read it, or else Mega will end up as an ‘ignorant loathing leftie’ too! LOL
KR, ESJ et al.
Snake oil has a bad reputation but its actually quite good for you. Its very high in EPA which is an omega 3 fatty acid. It helps with arthritis, cholesterol etc in much the same way as fish oil does. You can buy snake oil from chinese apothecaries still in some countries.
Whether we agree with each other or not, this blog is absolutely amazing at picking the Zeitgeist. If I was a political journalist, I’d check it every day. I was checking how many googles you get with “George Bush Snake Oil” and it was 119,000. But what was incredible was one of the recent articles on the antiwar site. The title is:
Can Obama Save Us?
Messiah, or snake-oil salesman?
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=12306
BTW Its an excellent, well-argued article.
Intrade – Obama 85 and rising, Clinton 14.9 and dropping.
#742 – i said it before. Once a great satan, always a great satan. obama could turn out to be a greater chief satan, as he cannot afford to offend those off to the right of centre, as the man said: “Will Obama deliver? It’s possible, but I wouldn’t get my hopes up”.
Yes Doc, today’s posts have prescience that could fairly be described as zeitgeist zapping.
*releases hand from it*
Pancho, George M’s article was the best piece of msm journalism by an Aussie on Sep-Oz politics this year by a country mile. Especially these gems.
“It is only when the youth actively engage in the toppling of a government that change is generational in the truest sense of the term. Australia has arguably had two such moments, in 1972 and 2007. The US had it with John F. Kennedy in 1960 and may get it again later this year………….
Obama is playing the anti-establishment card against Clinton. It is not his skin colour v her sex. It is new politics v old. He paints Clinton as part of the US’s BC aristocracy, the houses of Bush and Clinton………..
This is the other thing that throws the grey-hairs. If there is no dollar sign to attach to a young person’s vote, then that vote has no value in the discourse of politics because politicians are generally too dull, and too pragmatic, to think beyond the handout………
Which is why Obama and Rudd are such fascinating case studies. Each practises a form of rock’n’roll. Obama’s stump speech is to politics what Elvis Presley was to music. Elvis was a white boy singing blues and gospel. Obama brings a black man’s poetry to a white man’s game. He is both Martin Luther King and JFK………
Obama happily confessed to smoking pot with a dig at the dissembler-in-chief, Bill Clinton. “When I was a kid I inhaled, frequently, that was the point,” he says. ”
( thereby completely defusing the “issue”)
————————-
And what is it with these rattle-snake handling MSM fundies who lash out at Kid Charisma with the snake-oil salesman bit, when the rest of America’s church-goin’ and clean livin’ folk feel like they wanna be raptured on the spot when Obi launches into his chops.
Messiah? nuh. Rock Star? Bloody oath!! Obi’s a political American Idol.
———————–
KR: [I hope Adam doesn’t read it, or else Mega will end up as an ‘ignorant loathing leftie’ too!]
You ‘ave a vicious tongue in that ‘ead of yours, Kirri, but funnily ennuf, when I dropped me muvver ‘ome from chuch this mornin’ she asked after ‘im real nice like and sed she ‘opes he ‘as the amazin’ grace to say he was wrong and comes back to join in the fun wif all the uvver Bludgers.
EC- I would like to point out that I haven’t said Obama is a snake-oil salesman. I don’t think he is and I’ve been supporting him as any casual perusal of my blogs will show. I was pointing out that it’s amazing how even the terminology of “Messiah” and “snake-oil salesman” are being used in the dialogue about Obama around the blogosphere, independently of PB. This blog is a great example of the Zeitgeist.
745
Enemy Combatant
Ooh, you ain’t wrong about the tongue EC! It’s also connected to a brain, and I find it deeply ironic that when I say, as I did last year, that Obama shares a lot with Rudd (or more precisely, that they find themselves fulfilling very similar roles with a similar modus operandi) I get some gratuitous insults from Dr Adam.
I don’t mind being wrong, but I do resent some puffed up academic who spends his entire life tabulating polling results calling me, and all us other fine bludgers, “ignorant loathing lefties” simply because we express a range of different opinions! LOL
Talk about thin-skinned, hyper-sensitive, and snooty!
By the way, never once I did I see anyone on this blog return the favour and offer anything but their opinions in return, despite the derogatory remarks.
And one more thing, I did not see, nor do I EVER expect to see anything remotely looking like an apology, nor even an admission that he may have been wrong.
Dead wrong, as it turns it out.
I know the type, seen plenty of ‘em.
746- Diogs-
they are copying us. We are the leaders, not just the zeitgeist!
With a few notable exceptions of course.
Well, looks like Obi is almost unbeatable reading the links fellow Bludgers have put up.
I think it is interseting to see some anxiety arising (and I share it) around the idea that he may not actually be able to deliver all that is hoped of him. In truth, I imagine he has no chance of fulfilling some of our high hopes, but if he’s an improvement on the incumbant (and whoTF wouldn’t be), then we are all better off.
KR-
I don’t mind being an ‘ignorant loathing leftie’ as long as I’m right.
Love that.
746
Diogenes
Hang on Diogenes, we don’t need the zeitgeist to tell us anything, that’s why we have experts.
Let me remind you that experts are special people, to whom we all should look…(wait for it… hanging…) up!
If you don’t listen to experts, then well, I’m sorry, but you’ll get what you deserve. So stuff your zeitgeist in the sock drawer, because the zeit is, well frankly, too geist, to be anything but the chatter of the ignorant and ill-informed.
Sorry, mate, ya zeitgeist is mere fodder for newstands by the checkout counter.
748
jen
It’s time (where’ve we heard that, again?) for a breath of fresh air in Washington, and there’s a population that’s gasping for a lungfull of it.
Whatever Obama turns out to be (and sure, there’s plenty of expectations which are impossibly high), he will be a breath of fresh air, and someone who most of America will be proud of and who will get a lot more respect from the rest of the world.
Their country is really in a mess, and he can only begin the process of fixing it, but he’s got a population that overwhelmingly thinks the Republicans have trashed the place and are prepared to try some new ideas.
It’s a good place from which to start.
Here’s a coincidence. Dick Cheney and Barack Obama are related (eighth cousins).
Obama camp responds to revelation: ‘Every family has a black sheep’!!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21340764/
And John Kerry is also George Bush’s eighth cousin as well.
“snake oil salesman” was a swiftboat introduced by my ‘ESJ friend’ to sneer at Obama but he had the audacity to then try and bury it into a history lesson arguing declining Empires in the past have turned to this type
hence my #731 blog
However alot naster swiftboat smears will be directed at Obama in the future
The young and the inspired will take no swiftboat notice and they didn’t when Howard tried it against Rudd. They will out in droves to support Obama but the 45 to 60 group he now only splits he’ll need to respond to some ofthe swiftboats
Diogenes, no slight intended. Please check between the
—————
—————s.
My reference was to MSM fundies, eg. Billo and Drudge et al. using the snake oil sledge. Quite honestly, can’t ever remember anything that you’ve written that I’ve ever wanted to seriously take to task. We’re on the same side here, Doc. We both mention the Messiah/snake oil thing, but the rabid Right have been bangin’ on about it for quite a while now.
The *hand* I refer to in my last opening was my own, as in Darryl Kerrigan in the film The Castle….the classic line that his family used on Darryl when he was getting a bit carried away with himself:
“Get yer hand off it, Darryl”
I was being self-deprecating at my own expense not yours, Doc.
My understaning of the asterisk “quotes”,
eg * does something*
is that it referrred to the person who was commenting. At least that’s the way I understood it worked at sites like LP. So, sorry for any misunderstanding.
———————————
Quote of the Day
“I’m the insurgent — she’s the champ… If you’re the title holder, then you don’t lose it on points. You got to be knocked out.”
– Sen. Barack Obama, quoted by CNN.
Obi’s quote is brilliant. Every one of the 5 phrases “works” for him, especially the first. It deftly snuffs the Obama/Osama bullsh-it, and it neuters the beat-up baloney about his middle name, Hussein.
Sensational!
752
Diogenes
Very old news Dio, but funny as in ’small world’, huh?
Gotta say, Obama is a class act, and as much as Hillary is a great policy wonk, she ain’t got his mojo.
And speaking of swiftboating, looks like Camp McCain is getting a fair share of it at the moment.
Ironic, huh?
KR, you can either call Adam “some puffed up academic who spends his entire life tabulating polling results”, or you can say “never once I did I see anyone on this blog return the favour and offer anything but their opinions in return, despite the derogatory remarks”. Not both.
753
Ron
’sneer’ is so apposite, and goes well with ’snide’. For an ugly little troll that contributes virtually nothing but petty insults and waves his pretend ‘erudition’ around, he’s got a very high opinion of himself, eh?
God knows why, ‘coz he’s just a little creepy stalker on this blog, as we all have seen, over and over.
KR-
Don’t Start!!!
you’ll just bring him out of his hole.
And to be fair to the Great Dr Carr, I think he did apologise somewhere, and admit that he was wrong -but only because the voters were misguided.
KR, how long do we have to wait until your next piece of self-congratulation for being above personal abuse?
KirriR
I have had my disagreements with Adam but I must say you wouldnt even measure up to his jockstrap.
Jen,
Try a little argument for a change. Intolerance does not amount to policy.
Dear Sweet Ron,
Keep the dream alive.
754 ec- No worries. Just checkin’.
On the “snake-oil salesman”, I did a google search for the exact phrase “X is a snake oil salesman” and got the following matches:
Obama 902
Clinton 2 (and both were for Bill not Hillary)
Bush 4
McCain 0
Romney 677
Huckabee 614
Rudd 3
Howard 0
So Obama, Romney and Huckabee score very highly, while Bush, Macca and both Clinton’s are essentially zero. I can see why Huck gets the tag due to his folksy, wacky manner. But characteristics do Obama and Romney have in common to get them the label “snake-oil salesman”?
Kirri -
warned you.
KR – In the words of Bob Dylan:
In the dime stores and bus stations,
People talk of situations,
Read books, repeat quotations,
Draw conclusions on the wall.
Some speak of the future,
My love she speaks softly,
My love winks, she does not bother,
She knows too much to argue or to judge.
761 Diogs-
they both have an ‘o’ and an ‘a’ in their names?
Talking of class acts and appologies – I’m assuming your all familiar with the apology earlier today from Hillary on behalf of Bill’s racial innuendoes back during the South Carolina context:
Clearly, both ESJ and our mate John Howard could take a leaf out of Hillary’s campaign as a lesson in the art of the delivery of a deniable apology for something that may or may-not of happened, intended or otherwise, impacting an audience that may or may not have been listening.
Jen,
You know for someone who lovelingly regaled everyone last year with her personal details in conversation with Adam I did think it was somewhat rich for you to complain about me commenting on your senate photo but you expressed your upset and I happily apologised.
But for someone who is so personally precious you seem to have a fine line in being personally offensive and making patronising comments about others who do not fit into your myopic inner city world view. Almost of your posts has a patronising putdown or adjective.
Like most Greens when you are challenged you get offended and seem to happily go in for the boot when a person (like Adam) is not around.
Get a life Jen
Tell me davidoff what do I have to apologise for?
Oh Eddy -
I think we’ve been over (and over) why I didn’t like you commenting on my appearnace -(ie: what is the relevance to the discussion), but if I have hurt your feelings by being mean then I’m sorry, and I promise I will try and get a life.
BTW – my “personal details” were that I was a senate candidate in Victoria.
Thank you making that well-timed obnoxious comment, ESJ. A welcome opportunity for me to demonstate my even-handedness by slapping you down as well. In particular, it won’t do for you to congratulate yourself for having apologised while simultaneously stoking up the argument again.
759
William Bowe
I love giving it back from whence it’s eminated! LOL
No Jen,
I think you have revealed a bit more than that on this blog and secondly you challenged me on whether I had seen your senate photo.
As to what you post its your business but you might be taken more seriously if you actually were a bit more critical and analytical in your posts.
Take Ron since he has been on this blog he has gone from a strong Howard backer to an Obama backer through the cut and thrust of argument.
But WB, it’s just getting exciting. More exciting than the effing Cricket and Football on at the moment. Oop, Newcastle just scored a fantastic goal.
William as Richard Russell (the leader of the Southern Democrats) said to LBJ when he introduced the Civil Rights Act and I paraphrase , If I have to get a whipping I would want to be from you Lyndon.
762
jen
Thanks jen, I’ll watch out for the usual quality of Teddy Snidely Sneers ‘put downs’, they are amusing little efforts.
#767
ESJ said …
This is difficult, because the more I think about the subject the more I end up in the pro-life pro-choice debate. While I haven’t reached a definitive conclusion – for the moment I’m siding with the pro-choice camp. I guess the important point here at this moment is that if I project forward my current line of thinking it basically is kind of a good outcome for you – in that you don’t need to apologise, but is your mother ready to take the consequence that this line of thought leads to – and that’s pushing back to the pro life camp – because at the end of the day – I don’t really want to give your mother a hard time and I figure individual who stuff up should be accountable for their actions – but that just takes me back to the same debate – was it Eddi, was it Eddi’s mother?
Oop, Lee just LBW Tendulkar
ESJ-
fair enough, but the election here is over and I think I do , on the odd occasion, try and give a comment about why I have particular political views.
They may not always be “highbrow”, but then I’m just a plain old member of society when it gets down to it. (Although, I did give a great speech in Wangaratta on Thursday, even if I say so myself, so I reckon I contribute plenty). And I do like the odd stoush given that like Finns, I can’t stand the bloody cricket. But you’re right ,- memo to self: Get Life.
758
jen
I think you are referring to the post that went (paraphrasing here): I’m sorry, but the Democrats are throwing away their chance to beat McCain.
Or some such thing.
Don’t hold your breath for an apology for being an ‘ignorant loathing leftie’ or better, one of the ‘elite commentariat’ (hmm, sounds like something one of Howard’s Kulture Vultures would say, eh?).
We can let the outcome speak for itself, but let’s not forget the gratuitous insults along the way, for they make the little victories so much more enjoyable! LOL
William,
Fair’s fair, its your blog and you set the rules but I would say that last blog from Davidoff was beyond the pale.
#780
ROTFLOL
Well Kirri,
luckily for him he has Eddy to champion him.
(not sure how he would feel about that actually…)
William? Any response?
ESJ’s right Davidoff, that was an extremely childish comment.
If anyone was offended by anything that was said, whether it was meant or not, or misinterpreted or not, then obviously, I regret that.
Off to the naughty corner with you, davidoff.
785
what about compensation then??
Weak as piss, Davidoff.
William,
If you want to demonstrate your even handedness you will delete that post of Davidoff’s NOW!
784
William Bowe
But quite funny, nevertheless.
There was a similar exchange by some recent Australian politicians where one said the other’s mother had failed to exercise ‘choice’.
No doubt the usual suspect will come up with chapter and verse, asking for a pat on the head.
#789
And there was I thinking it was one of my better posts.
Shame on me!
791 davidoff.
you need to get a life too obviously.
Do we get them cheaper if we buy 2?
ESJ, your right to plead hurt feelings is not all it might be. Besides, it’s too late to make any difference now. And please don’t bark orders at me, whatever the circumstances.
789 [If you want to demonstrate your even handedness you will delete that post of Davidoff’s NOW!]
ESJ when did you develop such a thin skin?
Jen,
I dont believe anybody on this blog has suggested that you should have been aborted as yet.
Ha Ha – its such a hoot isnt it? What a laugh!
Just to annoy everyone, I’m going to back ESJ’s theory vs Ron et al regarding people in failing empires flocking to false prophets (I’m not going anywhere near the current one and I’m not referring to Obama).
I don’t know enough history to back it up that way but there is a lot of psychological research to support it.
It has repeatedly been shown that people under adverse circumstances especially stress act differently to those who are comfortable. They are more likely to:
- make decisions based on less pieces of information
- ignore dissenting information
- refuse to change their opinions
- show increasing irrational behaviour even when the irrational behaviour is what is causing their poor circumstances
- embrace irrational opinions
A common example is from many civilisations who understand the world using religious beliefs. When there is a famine etc, their usual response is to increase the sacrifices, prayers etc to try and turn things around.
Hey Zino, don’t you dare go and ‘get a life’ until November!
I for one get so much information collated in one place, you save me heaps of time pulling in the polls and interesting press articles.
As for the failed tory trolls, they’re nothing short of amusing. They were wrong then, and they’re wrong now.
And they still hang around here trying to prove they aren’t! LOL
Talk about having problems!
796
Diogenes
It’s the old Aztec principle: Kill a few more kids and everything will be alright.
Modern equivalent: Send a few more kids to Iraq, and everything will be alright.
Same result, however.
797 kirri
Does zino have to get a life too?
We might get a really good deal for bulk purchases.
731
Ron Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 11:08 am this morning
In the context of the US Election , swiftboating have labelled Obama as a ’snake oil salesman’…….he’ll be called much worse between now & November.
The suggestion that an Obama inspirational type is a snake oil salesman & this type is PECULAR to a decline in an Empire or that people in a declining Empire find this type especially appealing is wrong. Its faiirly ordinary ’swiftboating’
Brilliant inspirational type Leaders like Obama WHENEVER they appear on the scene are always appealing to the masses and often gain power WHATEVER stage an Empire or civilisation is at.
Ron now says tonight:
The art of ’swiftboating is to meld SOME SELECTIVE historical truth into creating doubt about a political opponent this time Obama and the mising of some history with “snake oil salesman” WAS SWIFT BOATING….an amateurish at that
KR 798- The Aztecs put almost anyone to shame in terms of deaths. Their worst excess was 80,000 human sacrifices in a four day massacre.
801-
well, they ALL need a life so we are talking wholesale prices now.
(memo to self – try and be serious occasionally).
But there are all of these people around me that are pro-choice and it makes the ultimate decision really hard.
William,
I am happy to mix it on this blog with others and give and receive but when things get down to the level of gratuitously offensive a long the lines of davidoff’s comment then its a different ball game.
That comment was just a whole new level of offensive and your actions were unfair in leaving it on.
No intention of barking orders and its your blog but this level is inconsistent with my continued participation. If you choose to run a mutual masturb.ation session for 2 or 3 people on this blog thats your business.
I withdraw.
my #800 blog was based on historical logic and that and my #731 blog this morning remains unchallenged to the swiftboating “snake oil salesman” claim
Zino, a tip of the hat to ya! LOL
Now, what’s this Clinton stuff about the health policy brochure, is she trying to get the fangs out? Or what?
Ron- I’m confused by the term “historical logic”?. Logic requires no evidence and is, in fact, completely abstract being the study of valid arguments. History consists solely of human interpretation of evidence. I am familiar with many forms of logic; inductive, deductive, philosophical, mathematical, modal, syllogistic to name a few. I haven’t come across historical logic before. At best, it could be trying to find a linkage between historical events (which is not logic) but I cant find that in 731 or 800.
As you wish ESJ, but I’m not sure why you’re fetishising comment deletion. I would have deleted the comment if I’d picked up on it earlier, but now there’s no point. I have accurately described the commenter as “extremely childish” and “weak as piss”. That ought to be enough, I think.
“I withdraw.”
Well, Sherlock, what we have here is a clear case of …… “Eddy Interruptus”.
808
William Bowe
The issue is about the possibilities of histrionics, and for someone who’s reknowned on this blog for endless gratuitous and pompous insults (often, although by no means exclusively) directed at yours truly, it’s nothing short of gobsmacking to read a fit of pique so acute that it has cut short the blogging life of yet another troll.
Such is life, always funnier with clowns.
As for davidoff’s little attempt at satire, well, let’s be adult, it wasn’t all that great, but the point was essentially the same one that’s been made over and over and over by numerous bloggers ie ESJ couldn’t help himself.
And the irony? Well, ESJ obliged by ‘terminating’ himself!
Gotta call that funny, or what?
I sort of withdrew for a couple of hours to have dinner with the old cheese and son. It was a very nice Szechuan dinner of hot, very hot stuff. Now let see what we had: Stuffed Crab Claw for entree. Then we had chicken in chilly oil, plus Mopu Tofu and braised Barramundi in Black bean sauce. Topped it off with home made mango pudding with vanilla ice cream.
But i notice that things were also hotted up here in WB’s Boxing Championship. Not too sure who won the bout but there was plenty of hot air and someone did a hara-kiri.
809
EC, that’s too funny for words!
Is that the first case, medically, of ’self-termination’? Maybe a special award should be instigated, a Darwin Award, for timely ‘withdrawal’ and thereby ‘terminating’ one’s blogging existence.
I’m sure Dr Who would have something to say about it, you know, stuffing up the time sequence with such an act, but for our purposes, it is allowed in the blogging universe.
The award could not have gone to a more deserving candidate.
Davidoff made no such “point”. You’ve got to stop reading imaginary redeeming features into idiotic comments made by those you identify as being on your side.
The Finnigans, I can tell you who lost the bout: Davidoff, who followed an inexcusable display of childishness with a pathetic, mealy-mouthed non-apology. He won’t be welcome back unless he makes a proper acknowledgement of his wrongdoing.
WB, i thought that Davidoff was the rationale one. It must be the bad influence of the Removalist.
#814
William – I’ll have you know that Hillary meant every word of it.
I’d call it a KO to davidoff. Unfortunately for the victor it seems that the referee has discovered the horseshoe in his glove after the bout.
813
William Bowe
I just went back and re-read davidoff’s ‘offending’ post, and quite frankly, I can’t see what all the fuss is about.
Essentially, he takes the rhetorical question about ‘apologising’, and runs it backwards to see who should take the blame for ESJ’s chronic behaviour.
It’s obvioulsy tongue in cheek (explain how else it could possibly be read??), and essentially makes the point that ESJ is the way he is, almost despite himself, so perhaps we could blame his mother?
Having seen the behaviour repeated an nauseum, stirring up other posters with often quite nasty and unpleasant little swipes, it’s a pretty harmless post in comparison.
Maybe I’m more used to coarser stuff William, but seriously, it’s pretty tame.
Featuring Soon At A Blog Near You……
The Eddsorcist:
He’s Back!……And He’s Spewing!!
Davidoff has been banned.
I think Edward has gone off to get his own life, and he’ll be back soon to tell us where we can get them.
KR, I’m afraid I don’t suffer from your selective myopia. If the comment came from ESJ and was directed at somebody of the left, you’d have no trouble at all seeing what the problem was.
WB
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo- he’s my friend.
Please, plaese just make him pick up all the papers.
820
William Bowe
For quoting Hillary Clinton????????
‘Tis a pity, he’s not the boor!
In fact, davidoff has given a substantial amount to this thread, has rarely engaged in slagging, and the one time he makes an effort to retaliate, he gets the boot.
Poor decision I think, William, but hey, you is da man.
Court of Appeal needs to convene.
I agree, poor decision.
ESJ is a snide troll who contributes nothing.
Whereas Davidoff has provided numerous insightful posts.
ESJ loves giving it out and trolling but has an extremely thin skin on the return.
No, KR, for being told to apologise when even you had to admit that his “attempt at satire … wasn’t all that great”, and responding yet again like a child.
822
William Bowe
Except for one outstanding difference: davidoff’s post was a tongue in cheek soliloquoy, and NOT a nasty bit of grubby insulting language that we saw endlessly from ESJ.
Your call, but I think as bloggers they are chalk and cheese. One came here ONLY to pick fights on most occassions, while the other never did.
Go back and look at the record, speaks for itself.
Of course, KR – ESJ is pompous, Davidoff writes “soliloquies”.
827
William Bowe
OK, but maybe he felt that what he’d said, being satire, and not outright abuse, did not warrant anything more than a satirical answer.
Hardly seems like a hanging offence.
I don’t recall ever seeing ESJ apologise for any flagrant insults, abuses, lies, and endless nastiness.
Not once.
It’s a question of emphasis. The question ESJ asked of davidoff was:
“Tell me davidoff what do I have to apologise for?”
If davidoffs response was on the “what”, WB’s assessment is correct. If the response was to “I”, KR is correct. I think most people would think the emphasis was on the former rather than the latter.
I’m not going to comment on the right or wrong of anyone being banned but I do wish to add that I think both ESJ and davidoff make worthwhile contributions to this blog and will be disappointed to see either go.
Above all else, Davidoff has been banned for wilfully ignoring my wishes. This site simply can’t work if I allow people to do that.
#823 – Jen, David is OFF. So long, farewell, Auf Wiedersehen, adios, sayonara, aloha, selamat tinggal, zai jian, Au revoir, Salaam, Farvel, Zbohem, Tot ziens, Khairete, Shalom, Slán agat, Ciao, Vale, Aroha nui, F**off
Meanwhile, back at the ranch. Stop the world, i want to get off. Crazy thing is happening here. PT109 Swiftboat was supposed to be aiming at Obama, but its torpedo is heading straight for “sexy Leg” McCain. Please, somebody tells me what is going on here?
“Files and McCain Letter Show Effort to Keep Loophole – WASHINGTON — In late 1998, Senator John McCain sent an unusually blunt letter to the head of the Federal Communications Commission, warning that he would try to overhaul the agency if it closed a broadcast ownership loophole. The letter, and two later ones signed by Mr. McCain, then chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, urged the commission to abandon plans to close a loophole vitally important to Glencairn Ltd., a client of Vicki Iseman, a lobbyist.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/23/us/politics/23lobby.html?bl&ex=1204002000&en=ae0d714ce3b8d3ae&ei=5087
Seems her loophole was a very precious thing to him.
Finns- The NYT vs McCain battle is shaping up as more interesting than the Obama vs Hillary one. The NYT has clearly been sitting on this for a while and released it after Macca got nasty after the affair story. I heard they only ran with the affair story this early because they thought another group (Newsweek I think) was going to use it before them. It would have had more impact later but you’ve got to fight your battles when you find them I suppose.
835
Robert Bollard
Touche! (no pun intended)
Like I said a while back, the swiftboating is coming home to roost. Macca’s not going to be able to claim he’s clean if he keeps getting this stuff brought up, and eventually, he’s going to make a blunder, like denying he spoke to the CEO when in fact, he’s on the record as saying that yes, he in fact spoke to the CEO.
(See Greenwald in Salon for this tantalizing bit of contradiction)
Macca’s going to be the first swiftboat overboard victim?
Here is my nightly PT109 for Obama. (BTW: where is my fellow night rider, Dr. Adam, i miss his nightly fang of reality check).
The week the Obama backlash started – As the Democratic frontrunner racks up one primary victory after another, American newspapers and TV shows have started to pick over his past and ridicule his rhetoric. But will this come too late to restore the fortunes of Hillary Clinton, who needs to win both Ohio and Texas to stay in the race?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/24/barackobama.hillaryclinton
I’m going now to softly weep into my linen ‘kerchief at the demise of some of my favourite bloggers.
well, one anyway.
Interesting article in today’s NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/opinion/24pubed.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Basically, their “public editor” (I guess an ombudsman, but appointed by the paper itself) thinks the NYT’s journalistic ethics were poor in publishing an article cupposedly about McCain’s “carelessness” but where the punter was drawn in by the (unproven) implication that he was getting it on with an attractive blonde 30 years his junior.
Full marks to the NYT for having a “public editor” who can say his/her piece in this way in the paper.
Less than full marks to the NYT for dressing up a fairly blatant (and at this stage, unproven) piece of titillation about a serious POTUS candidate as a “fitness for office” concern.
Fascinating to note that much of the conservative Christian Right (hardly mates of McCain’s) did not react with shock: rather they seem to have taken the line that “the enemy of the NYT is my friend”, and got behind McCain.
Paddypower odds for Repug VP
Mike Huckabee 6 – 4
Charlie Crist 5 – 2
Tim Pawlenty 4 – 1
Mitt Romney 11 – 2
Joe Lieberman 8 – 1
Condoleeza Rice 10 – 1
Chuck Hagel 16 – 1
Rudolph Giuliani 14 – 1
Dick Cheney 20 – 1
John McCain 25 – 1
841
Dyno
But at least it has McCain fighting on a front other than his Democrat adversaries, and it was an excellent way to bring up the Keating Five stuff from the archives.
McCain will be dealing with this for some time, and it always has the possibility of tripping him over.
Pass the popcorn…
Paddypower odds for Dem VP
Hillary Clinton 5 – 4
Barack Obama 5 – 2
John Edwards 5 – 1
Ted Strickland 7 – 1
Bill Richardson 8 – 1
Dennis Kucinich 20 – 1
Ted Kennedy 25 – 1
Bill Clinton 66 – 1
Bill Clinton for VP! There’s gotta be a law against that.
839
The Finnigans
A shopping list of journalist’s barbs?
That’s it?
David Brooks, Krugman?
Oooh, ouch, that wet lettuce must really smart!
(I read these guys, and they’ve got a job to do, ie fill the page, and most times that’s all it is)
Now, when you’ve got something of substance to besmirch the messiah with, get back to us! LOL
#839 -substance? from you
If all you can say about a candidate is that his to good an orator and his fans are a bit scary in their enthusiasm….well. Oh I know there’s also the “substance” thing. This in a nation that twice elected Dubya and was graced by the almighty Quayle (Latin Americans speak latin) as VP.
Got to say Diogenes (you old cynic you) that I loved them VP odds! I love the idea of Cheney being available as a bet. If McCain chose him they would have to consider the alzheimers diagnosis.
I also like the idea of Kucinich as VP. If (God forbid, but it’s a possibility) Obama was shot by some mad cracker then that would deliver the US its most left-wing President ever – with a hot first lady with a tongue stud!
he’s too good an orator…In the immortal words of Michael Palin “I’m sorry In have a cold”.
847
Robert Bollard
Yeah, for a nation that’s had the misfortune to have an speech deficit in the Whitehouse for 7 years, slagging Obama for the audacity to inspire with language does rather come as a surprise, eh what?
If I was an American I’d be in a trance just listening to the possibility of having a POTUS who can not only string together great sentences, but can argue the details of policy, bring out the vote, out campaign the Clinton machine, and still be funny and self-deprecating.
yeah, let’s not waste this opportunity to slag off, eh? LOL
Diogenes, you misunderstand the term historical logic in cushioning ESJ
The fact is ESJ asserted bama was a typical ’snake oil salesman’ , typical of declining Empires & the masses in those declining Empires to whom ’snake oils salesman ‘ appealed. Historically this is nonsense.
For the argument to be LOGICAL , such inspirational leaders (’snake oil salesman”) do not appear at ANY OTHER TIME.
This is also nonsense.
So based on “History” plus “Logic” , ECJ’s argument was doubly nonsense ,
hence the term..historical logic for a double fool.
the fact the ECJ argument was an attempt at ’swiftboating’ made it triply absurd
HELL ! , I’ve now scolled back.
DEFENCE ARGUMENT:
William , ESJ “stalked” Jen a few days ago and MANY Boggers incl. Jen said so.
You did NOT demand an apology from ESJ for what is in non cyberpace a crime
In fact you should have banned him
Finally a day later ESJ made a conditional apology
Had you banned ESJ for the ’stalking’ , he would not have been on this blog for Davidoff to ‘criticise’ him !!! , meaning Dadidoff would still be here and ESJ not
I would argue your non decision to ban ESJ for ’stalking’ is the problem ,
and request you give consideration to this different perspective argument
Let’s not forget, while we’re all mesmerized by the primary race going on over there, that at this precise moment, there’s a financial market’s meltdown of near epic proportions.
Nobody knows where this is going, but it sure as hell isn’t headed for nice sunny ending. Here’s just a taste of the distress:
February 20 – Financial Times (Gillian Tett): “US banks have been quietly borrowing massive amounts of money from the Federal Reserve in recent weeks by using a new measure the Fed introduced two months ago to help ease the credit crunch. The use of the Fed’s Term Auction Facility…saw borrowing of nearly $50bn of one-month funds from the Fed by mid-February. US officials say the trend shows that financial authorities have become far more adept at channelling liquidity into the banking system to alleviate financial stress… However, the move has sparked unease among some analysts about the stress developing in opaque corners of the US banking system and the banks’ growing reliance on indirect forms of government support.”
Meanwhile, the price of commodities, things we use, like food and oil and minerals are screaming through the roof.
On the ground, in the US, there are massive amounts of money tied up in what was thought to be liquid bonds that suddenly have no buyers, and interest rates for the issuers are taking off.
The scale of what is happening is unprecedented in living memory, there is panic in many sectors of the financial markets, and as the gunpowder fuse whips along the ground, everyone who has even a bit of exposure has their fingers in their ears.
The big bang is coming.
And so is the November election.
Pass the popcorn…
Ron, I must have missed Jen asking ESJ to apologise. If she had done so, I would most certainly have insisted that ESJ comply, and banned him if he hadn’t. From what I saw of the “stalking” allegations, Jen seemed to be taking the view that she was big enough to deal with it without requiring my intervention. None of this has any bearing on my decision to ban Davidoff for refusing to do as I asked.
The other thing I find interesting is the comparison with JFK. The substance thing was an issue with JFK and a more relevant thing. What are the differences between the two candidates? JFK was a spoiled rich kid with a semi-mafiosi father who wanted FDR to cut a deal with Hitler. Leave off the womanising thing, which is irrelevant, except to the extent that is appears to have evidenced a born to rule selfishness.
His primary campaign was against Adlai Stevenson who was more genuine liberal. The Kennedy’s had to win over the liberals in the party because of their father and Bobby’s association with McCarthy. JFK’s program in 1960 wasn’t that left wing. He avoided civil rights, tried to pose as more hawkish than Nixon against the Russians (going on about the “missile gap” in the debate) and so on. As to his personal qualifications, he had aq bunch of ghostwritten books a bunch of brilliant speechwriters and he was handsome and young.
The only argument in his favour (apart from being deified by being shot) is that he does apear to have been personally moved by the vicious police attacks in Birmingham a few months before his death and began the shift that would see the Dems embrace civil rights. Before that Bobby was famously telling black activists to “stop all these sit downs and shit and get on with voter registration”.
The point is, I think, that the character of the POTUS is less important than what they represent. I think Obama is personally more impressive than just about any US president since FDR. But then the next most impressive was Jimmy Carter and his presidency was a disaster. What is more important is the fact that – crucially, unlike JFK – his candidacy has not been a big money, media-driven exercise, but a mass mobilisation of a type that the US hasn’t seen since 1948. He doesn’t just say “I’m pretty and eloquent and rich vote for me”. He says: “I’m pretty and eloquent and you can help me change things by donating money and getting active”. The last two words are the most significant thing imho. The central problem of US politics is atomisation and apathy, disengagement etc. To the extent that JFK’s mythology has any reality it is in the way in which he did engage a generation of young Americans and set the stage for the 60s. Obama is engaging organisationally in a more profound way.
William , Jen is a lady …she said she was being ’stalked’…her blogs became increasingly ‘nervous’….other blogers so commented.
Ladies who are stalked are scared …so asking for an Apology would be the furtherest thing for any ’stalked’ persons mind including Jen…..
She did not ask for an apology (she was nervous) but that does not make it
right nor does it make it right that ESJ should have been banned for a crime
in non cyberspace.
In the circumstances the greater crime by 1,000% is the ’stalker’,
NOT a bloger who doesn’t abide by your rulings
If the ’stalker’ was banned , Dadidoff would have had no one to ‘criticise’ and you would have had no one (Davidoff) ignoring your ruling
Appreciate you may not have been aware of all of the above , but NOW that you are aware the equitable circumstances warrant the ban on Davidoff being lifted in the interests of fair play William ??
You’re making an awful lot of presumptions about Jen’s frame of mind, Ron. It was always open to her to email me if she wanted me to do anything. Nor do I think it beyond argument that ESJ is guilty of stalking, unless there’s something else that I’ve missed.
No, because as I’ve said about three times now, Davidoff was banned for wilfully refusing to do as I asked. The behaviour of ESJ has nothing to do with this.
854
Robert Bollard
Nice post.
Did you read Mega in the Woz?
This guy is truly impressive the way he’s got the younger Americans (at first) motivated enough to pay attention and vote. Clinton, although a worthy and experienced polly (as she never tireds of telling them) could not rouse that passion, nor that donation machine, and just has gradually lost her power.
As for JFK, he looked good, as you say, but Obama is not compromised by his family connections and sure isn’t beholden to ‘dark forces’ like the Kennedy’s were. Nor does he have ‘dynastic’ baggage like his opponent. So far, he’s been a phenomena, and with a lot of style.
To be honest KR my main concern is not that they “pay attention and vote” but they discover a capacity for activity that goes beyond placing an x next to someone’s name. But that’s a whole different argument.
Well I really do appreciate you giving me a hearing William.
1/ Its fair of you to argue I’m making my presumptions about Jen’s frame of mind
If my assumtions were right , then at the time she was never going
to ask you to get herself an apology.
BUT having had experience of the subject my desciption of her is the ‘norm’
2/ The person has ‘baited’ numerous blogers & many have responded strongly but you have not demanded an apology of those blogers
SUGGESTION
Davidoff , this is his FIRST offence & he could have been given
(a) 24 hours to apologise otherwise be banned ahter than demanding an apology from an obviously emotionally charged bloger on the spot
(b) been given a FIRM caution with the 2nd offence automatically being a ban
May I suggest after reconsideration , you reluctantly lift the ban but
apply either (a) or (b).
That way you are the very reasonable one and allow blogers to dig their own grave
If Davidoff wants to write to me seeking to make amends, I will give him a sympathetic hearing.
Thx William for your consideration
I wish to put some comments to Davidoff , some of my comments to Davidoff will be not fully agreeing with your decision which I’ve been open & honest in saying here BUT also suggesting to Davidoff that amends should & need to be made.
You cann’t give out address’s of course so can I send my email to
Davidoff via/to you William and would you onforward it to Davidoff ?
Happy to do that, Ron.
Dear Mr Bowe, following this…
765
davidoff Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
Talking of class acts and appologies – I’m assuming your all familiar with the apology earlier today from Hillary on behalf of Bill’s racial innuendoes back during the South Carolina context:
“If anyone was offended by anything that was said, whether it was meant or not, or misinterpreted or not, then obviously, I regret that,”
Clearly, both ESJ and our mate John Howard could take a leaf out of Hillary’s campaign as a lesson in the art of the delivery of a deniable apology for something that may or may-not of happened, intended or otherwise, impacting an audience that may or may not have been listening.
770
William Bowe Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Thank you making that well-timed obnoxious comment, ESJ. A welcome opportunity for me to demonstate my even-handedness by slapping you down as well. In particular, it won’t do for you to congratulate yourself for having apologised while simultaneously stoking up the argument again.
776
davidoff Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
#767
ESJ said …
Tell me davidoff what do I have to apologise for?
This is difficult, because the more I think about the subject the more I end up in the pro-life pro-choice debate. While I haven’t reached a definitive conclusion – for the moment I’m siding with the pro-choice camp. I guess the important point here at this moment is that if I project forward my current line of thinking it basically is kind of a good outcome for you – in that you don’t need to apologise, but is your mother ready to take the consequence that this line of thought leads to – and that’s pushing back to the pro life camp – because at the end of the day – I don’t really want to give your mother a hard time and I figure individual who stuff up should be accountable for their actions – but that just takes me back to the same debate – was it Eddi, was it Eddi’s mother?
793
William Bowe Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 6:53 pm
ESJ, your right to plead hurt feelings is not all it might be. Besides, it’s too late to make any difference now. And please don’t bark orders at me, whatever the circumstances.
804
Edward StJohn Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
William,
I am happy to mix it on this blog with others and give and receive but when things get down to the level of gratuitously offensive a long the lines of davidoff’s comment then its a different ball game.
That comment was just a whole new level of offensive and your actions were unfair in leaving it on.
No intention of barking orders and its your blog but this level is inconsistent with my continued participation. If you choose to run a mutual masturb.ation session for 2 or 3 people on this blog thats your business.
I withdraw.
832
William Bowe Says:
February 24th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
Above all else, Davidoff has been banned for wilfully ignoring my wishes. This site simply can’t work if I allow people to do that.
Bill, I do feel that you have been led down the garden path here somewhat & over reacted; just a tad; ESJ is quite capable of looking after himself; “Zino’ is clearly not as gifted with humor/irony as he/she is with passion, interest and ability with interpretation & analysis.
As others have pointed out, and I do not prosecute their case for one minute, but ESJ’s prosletising on occasion encourages such ‘indiscreminate’ responses .
I personally feel this is a good thing if handled as adults, with a sense of humour and tolerance. It’s what makes this blog, yourself and ‘all’ its contributors a stand out item.
A healthy & long overdue information & brain food for OZ. It is not about right or wrong but what is…now…sure ego etc interrupts but ‘we’ all deal with that…
In short, I think your banning of Davidoff is over the top; yes I understand its your blog Mr Bowe but for god’s sake you tolerate towel head lovers & Adam beaters such as I; & Diogenes quotes Churchill to tolerate me!!! FFS.
Being somewhat to the left of Mao and seriously ILL as KR would have it, I would suggest that you let back ‘Davidoff’ and I would welcome the return of Dr Carr & of course ESJ.
When things settle down I am happy to host the NQ Pollbludgers annual picnic; BUT I get to choose the wine; sorry ESJ.
Must go more towel head sites to find.
Codger, if I ask a commenter to do something, there are only two options available to them: a) do as I ask, b) piss off somewhere else. Failing to do one or the other is the very height of rudeness, and anyone who does so will be immediately banned regardless of the circumstances. That said, being a soft touch, I will usually give them a second chance if they are big enough to express contrition after the event.
Here’s the NYTimes editor answering questions about the McCain story.
It’s worth a look over, since they’ve copped a lot of flak over it, and the issues about McCain’s behaviour versus his rhetoric need airing:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/business/media/21askthenewsroom.html?em&ex=1204002000&en=497a8f417858d664&ei=5087
and thx william for agreeing to my #859-#862 & earlier requests re a 2nd
chance option
I shall contact Davidoff
regards
Ron
Mr. Bowe, the logic of your piss off option is simply overwhelming; totemic…etc
a) do as I ask, b) piss off somewhere else. Failing to do one or the other is the very height of rudeness, and anyone who does so will be immediately banned regardless of the circumstances.
You diminish and do an injustice to the word ‘height’ & by default ‘rudeness’…and more to the point ‘who do you think your kidding’
But I guess the sandwhich boards will march onnnnnnnnnn….but never being rude, gosh just imagine the cosequences…
Makes sense to me, Codger. On that note of crystal clarity, can we please move it over to the new thread.