Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
I didn't know that Obama liked NASCAR.
It's amazingly close. 3 points!And I suppose by going to the Mid-East it brought back thoughts of how much better McCain will be on that issue.And the one thing everyone wants is more fairness in the coverage. How is it possible that the whole country sees exactly what the newspapers and media outlets don't want them to see?The "race" word in the headline coiuld have been even funnier somehow, but maybe one of your readers could come up with an even better headline using that term. Perhaps we should hold a contest.
A July poll (unlike a maypole) of registered voters doesnt has a lot of meaning other than to keep pundits punditing.Considering it is the electoral college that elects the president, the most useful polls will start showing up in September and among likely voters in the swing states.Its still the EC that selects.
McCain's trip doesn't change age.
It's not out of the realm of possibilities. Michael Jackson did it.
But I sense that Obama is in a very dangerous place, right now.With such a thin resume, Obama has used, and now depends, on an air of wonder and invincibility.But the more he is mired in a close race, the more the charm fades.And if people start saying, "He actually could lose this thing" then he is probably a lot worse off then we imagine.With all the hype, he needs a clear break out, but he doesn't seem to be getting that.And then the question is whether he can go up against McCain in face to face debates (which he doesn't seem all that anxious to do.)Very interesting race.
Hunting trip with Cheney doesn't make Whittington duck.
You know, considering that McCain, doing pretty much nothing, is staying competitive with Obama-it makes you wonder what will happen when they go head to head in debate.
Cringe-worthy headline. I keep thinking... doesn't Obama always poll better than he shows? Doesn't this mean McCain is ahead? I don't follow these things all THAT closely so I could be wrong.
Poll shows Obama's trip didn't change climate.
Any of the commentariat know what the current campaigns are doing with respect to debates? I know McCain was looking to do town hall stuff but the Obamaites were balking. Are we going to be treated the spectacle of three lousy debates hosted by three lousy moderators like we get stuck with every four years?
I have an explanation for the polling:The last few weeks I've only paid passing attention to this stuff. I wanted to hear a bit about the "big trip" and other happenings. But, all I found was journalists pontificating about the spectacle of journalists traveling with BHO. Maybe this reporting was just a coincidence with the few times I dipped into the coverage, but I never heard anything about what actually happened after a total investment of a couple hours of my time over a week. Or, maybe this is the way it always is, but normally I consume enough of this stuff, so I actually get to the few bits of actual information.Two bigger points:1) I admit I turn to something else when McCain is the subject. He's not interesting to me. Maybe others feel the same, hence BHO gets more coverage time, for better ratings and readership (and Althouse fodder.)2) I had anecdotally thought that BHO did get more coverage. But, a lot of that is negative coverage. And, it's not just the free-527 stuff that runs on Fox. I've seen stuff in the AP, WaPo, NYT, and cable channels that are anti-BHO. And sometimes even I, as a non-journalist, can pick out factual errors that make BHO look worse than the reality of the subject situation actually supported.And, now there is confirmation:CENTER FOR MEDIA AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS2100 L Street, N.W. * Suite 300 * Washington, D.C. 20037 * 202-223-2942July 28, 2008 Contact: Donald RieckThese results are from the Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA) 2008 Election News Watch Project. They are based on a scientific content analysis of 249 election news stories (7 hours 38 minutes of airtime) that aired on ABC World News Tonight, CBS Evening News, NBC Nightly News, and Fox Special Report (first half hour) from June 8, 2008 to July 21, 2008. Previously we analyzed 2144 stories (43 hrs 30 min airtime) during the primary campaign from December 16, 2007 through June 7, 2008. We report on all on-air evaluations of the candidates by sources and reporters, after excluding comments by the campaigns about each other.MEDIA BASH BARACK (NOT A TYPO)Study Finds Obama Faring Worse On TV News Than McCainBarack Obama is getting more negative coverage than John McCain on TV network evening news shows, reversing Obama’s lead in good press during the primaries, according to a new study by Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA). The study also finds that a majority of both candidates’ coverage is unfavorable for the first time this year. According to CMPA President Dr. S. Robert Lichter, “Obama replaced McCain as the media’s favorite candidate after New Hampshire. But now the networks are voting no on both candidates.”MAJOR FINDINGS:Since the primaries ended, on-air evaluations of Barack Obama have been 72% negative (vs. 28% positive). That’s worse than John McCain’s coverage, which has been 57% negative (vs. 43% positive) during the same time period.This is a major turnaround since McCain and Obama emerged as front-runners in the early primaries. From the New Hampshire primary on January 8 until Hillary Clinton dropped out on June 7, Obama’s coverage was 62% positive (v. 38% negative) on the broadcast networks; by contrast, McCain’s coverage during this period was only 34% positive (v. 66% negative).Obama ran even farther behind McCain on Fox News Channel’s Special Report with 79% negative comments (v. 21% positive), compared to 61% negative comments (v. 39% positive) for McCain since June 8. During the primaries Obama had a slight lead in good press on Fox, with 52% favorable comments (v. 48 % unfavorable), compared to 48% favorable (v. 52% unfavorable) for McCain.
Poll shows Obama's trip didn't change wisecracks.
Well McCain can't go on a trip because he might break his hip.
Clinton slip didn't change lace.
Look at that photo.Barack Obama is making that alpha male arm gesture to show Gordon Brown it’s now okay for him to enter 10 Downing Street.Now that’s a leader!
Has anyone ever seen 1jpb on the comment threads before? At least he/she didn't start out with a gratuitous compliment to our host, but it smells like the comment of someone who is on the campaign payroll.
I require Mark Penn type money.Somehow I don't think they could afford me.
I've seen 1jpb around here before, Peter. (Liked your headline alternatives, BTW)
For the record, if this 7-point lead actually holds until election day, Obama's victory will be considered a small landslide.
For the record, if this 7-point lead actually holds until election day, Obama's victory will be considered a small landslide.That's a pretty big If, since Democrats typically poll well ahead of Republicans -- in the double digits -- in the summer. I think the exception is Gore in 2000. Obama is performing unusually weakly for a Democratic presidential candidate.On the other hand, Obama and other Democrats are probably being pulled down somewhat by their mulish obstinacy on the energy/gas issue. Prices are coming (slowly) down, and once summer is over, they'll probably come down even further, since (as I understand it) gas demand comes down in the Fall. Republicans may be getting an artificial boost out of the gas issue; if so, that's likely to fade away by the time of the election.
Bissage said: Barack Obama is making that alpha male arm gesture to show Gordon Brown it’s now okay for him to enter 10 Downing Street.Hopefully Brown had the good sense not to argue about it, a la Ehud Barak / Yasser Arafat fighting over who would go through the door first at Camp David in 2000 (After you. No, after you. No, you first. No, no, I insist. Well, I insist more than you. If you don't go through the damn door, I will bring a reign of terror down on your country the likes of which you've never seen. OK)
Oh, I agree, Balfegor.
AllenS said..."Poll shows Obama's trip didn't change climate."Surely the AGW crowd would have to argue that the unnecessary carbon footprint created by the trip did change the climate, albeit indirectly and infinitesimally.
Balfegor:I agree - it's not like if you agree to drilling right now we'll have new oil in September. From a pure politics POV, all you have to do is pass a new drilling bill or approve some "off shore drilling safety commission" and you can kick the can down the road. You could sell the proposal to the left as "the sooner we blow through this oil the quicker we'll feel the pressure to find alt fuels."I really wish someone would talk about nuclear and streamlining the process of getting new nuke plants approved. But that's not going to help you win Nevada, so I guess I'll keep waiting...
Obama will be any race you want him to be (except Caucasian cuz they're bad).
Simon--Yeah, I thought of that before I made my wisecrack, but then, when has any Democrat ever be blamed for any unnecessay carbon footprint.Weight of evidence shows Gore's trip didn't change tilt of earth.
God has no Race. He is All Races. He is Post-Racial. He does not Race. He Cannot Race - His Lungs Are Full of Tar and Menthol. Change is What He Insists Upon. Obey! Now, I must avert my eyes from his Hopey Brightness lest my retinas seer.
Watching media coverage lately I actually admire Republicans in a weird adversarial way. They're getting kicked around pretty good, Rove's running from a subpoena, the longest serving Republican going to jail, economy in the shitter, the dollar headed to Zimbabwe-like strength, yet they get the media to listen to them as they change the subject to utter and complete nonsense. Just call the opposition fags and fucking pussies and Democrats have to answer for it. It's the tried and true play - the hitch-and-go - and the media falls for it every time.
adding to g.m.http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0708/Obama_as_Britney.html?showall
I've seen someone calling himself 1jpb many times before, but the person who posted the press release under that name did not use the words "folks" once, and therefore must be an impostor.
Actual CNN headline:"McCain proving his ideas are old, Obama says"
Leave Barack alone!
garage mahal said..."Rove's running from a subpoena, the longest serving Republican going to jail, economy in the shitter"GDP grew in last quarter, most Republicans that I've taked to are very, very happy to see Ted "King of Pork" Stevens getting a long overdue comeuppance, and Rove is being held in contempt of Congress, a crime currently being committed by 91% of the American population.
Who did CNN poll? How many people did they ask this question of and how did they select them. They hardly ever reveal their polling data. Since Obama's race is a 50/50 toss up maybe the polls could change the race.
Count me as a republican leaning voter who thinks Stevens was long overdue for punishment--Good riddance. Hopefully the republican porkers will see the folly of their ways and start getting in line with Tom Coburn
Hopefully the republican porkers will see the folly of their ways and start getting in line with Tom Coburn.Like almost all the Democrats in Congress, almost all the Republicans in Congress have zero interest in that.
Obama said: " he doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills." Well, most Americans don't look like those other presidents. Besides, Alex Hamilton ($10) Bennie Franklin ($100) were not presidents.Poll shows Obama can't make change.
57 states! 8-10 years!
Opinion Research Corporation conducts CNN's polls.
The Stevens indictment is very good news. But as to Rove being subpoenaed by House Democrats, you actually attach significance to that, garage?
I hope that both parties are destroyed, and in their place are two new parties.Those that are in it for themselves only, damn anyone and everyone elsev.Those that are in it for the group first, and that know that a good position that gains wide support is better than a "holier than thou" position that causes internal conflict.There should be an index on each politician, something like solutions/(blame others + attacks), the helps us to see which politicians are actually helping the group.
Has anyone ever seen 1jpb on the comment threads before? At least he/she didn't start out with a gratuitous compliment to our host, but it smells like the comment of someone who is on the campaign payroll.I don't know about that, but he/she is definitely guilty of gratuitous cutting-and-pasting. Now approaching "get your own blog" territory.
But as to Rove being subpoenaed by House Democrats, you actually attach significance to that, garage?It seems the only people who do attach any significance to Karl Rove are liberal democrats. If garage really truly believes that the economy is in the shitter and the dollar is at Zimbabwe levels then he is certainly showing his age, somewhere between 21 and 26.
HoosierEverything is fine, sorry I blew up. The economy is good news for Republicans. I forgot!
Do you have a job, garage? Doing what, may I ask.
Today Obama said that as long as we keep our tires at the right pressure and do regular tune-ups the increased gas mileage will eliminate the need to drill. I kid you not. Keep it up bright boy.
Salamandyr wrote:You know, considering that McCain, doing pretty much nothing, is staying competitive with Obama-it makes you wonder what will happen when they go head to head in debate.Personally, when I saw that the Berlin bump had not even materialised, and in fact, the foreign grandstanding had even antagonised a lot of people......I suddenly felt McCain has bizarrely, but effectively been running the right campaign so far.This kid will self-implode, McCain's camp must be thinking. He's come close so many times. Let him do what he does, and the American public will do the rest.The campaign won't begin until Obama chooses his running mate. Cheers,Victoria
HoosierEverything is fine, sorry I blew up. The economy is good news for Republicans. I forgot!It's called perspective garage, something that too many people including liberals don't seem to have. Economy in the shitter compared to when? Then again considering all your candidate plans on doing is resurrecting Carter policies I suppose it's plausible your characterization may yet come to pass.
Today Obama said that as long as we keep our tires at the right pressure and do regular tune-ups the increased gas mileage will eliminate the need to drill.Well at least not during the 8-10 years of his presidency.
I don't mean to sound like Obama's grandmother but Obama is hitting us up for change in a threatening way. In his speech in Berlin he praised the glory of fallen walls: the end of Communism and apartheid. He went on to preach about the necessity of tearing down the wall between the rich and the poor. Oh, bravo. None of us will be really free until everyone in, say, Chicago has the same living standard as the people of Bangladesh.
The election will be decided when McCain picks his running mate. Many people who will hold their nose and vote for him will never do it if he picks someone like Lindsey Graham.
I don't mean to sound like Obama's grandmotherWhy? Can't you do a 'white person voice'?Cheers,Victoria
Many people who will hold their nose and vote for him will never do it if he picks someone like Lindsey Graham.Ironically, McCain Senate colleague and friend is in the exact same position as John McCain was in 2004. His good friend (some say, his closest Washington friend) John Kerry wanted him as his Veep, not Edwards, but McCain declined.But Graham has the same kind of personal rumours swirling around him, as Charlie Crist did (please note, our Governor recently became engaged...HMMMMMM).They will hold their nose though, if it's Jim Webb.That man has a chip on his Scots-Irish shoulder about as big as Obama's ego.Cheers,Victoria
Good heavens! sorry libs; the long trumpeted recession has not happened; and although slow, the economy continues to expand. That record deficit that was spewn around the media a couple of days ago--gee: when you look at it as reputable economists and not AP reporters, you find that as a percentage of GDP, it isnt so bad after all. And Senator Obama's campaign yet again plays a race card and whines that McCain is doing, gasp, engaging in negative campaigning. Senator Stevens, R, AL, is indicted, but the democrats will not remove Rep Jefferson, D, LA. And the Libs complain about republican corruption. And senator Obama, that new face on the dollar bill, now says keeping your tires inflated will eliminate the need to drill for more oil: there's a winning campaign slogan! The democratic controlled congress' approval ratings are lower than the President's and they still are sitting on energy legislation, hoping that the voters will blame republicans in the fall. Aint going to happen--unless of course, we fail to keep our tires inflated.As bad as the republicans and McCain are, and they are terrible, I'm going with McCain; Obama, Save the world Pelosi, and wierd Harry from Nevada, couldnt find their butts with both hands in the dark and would lie about it if they could.
The election will be decided when McCain picks his running mate. Many people who will hold their nose and vote for him will never do it if he picks someone like Lindsey Graham.Well that will be a deal killer for me. I won't vote for any man who has a female name. That goes for guys named Leslie too. Obama, that new face on the dollar bill, now says keeping your tires inflated will eliminate the need to drill for more oil:Well you're simply missing the big picture Roger. Obama I am sure will be supplying free air for us all coming from the surplus air his speeches generate.
I don't mean to sound like Obama's grandmotherWhy? Can't you do a 'white person voice'?Ok, Victora wins the snarky comeback of the day.
A campaign by definition is about politics, not governing. McCain and Obama have revised their positions on a whole lot of stuff since January and will continue to do so. I think a lot of people, left and right live in an echo chamber -- "If I don't know anyone who thinks we shouldn't have gone into Iraq then it must not be a valid position" or "These Christians are crazy - I don't know a single person who actually believes that foolishness in the Bible." I still don't get why we do this every four years -- for three years we are somewhat realistic about the failures of our system and the people in it -- then comes a Summer Olympics year and all of a sudden we need a superhero to come save us. If Obama is elected, I will still have a mortgage. If McCain is elected, there will still be guys out there plotting terrorist acts. We give these people way too much power over our lives, not necessarily in a policy sense but in a psychological sense. "I'm moving to Canada if Bush wins..." "If Obama wins, black revolutionaries will roam the streets looking for reparations." Meanwhile, in our more rational moments, we know this country is going to be more or less the same regardless. And unfortunately, to return to my rant from yesterday, Oprah and Osteen will have more to do with the state of the populace's think for the forseeable future than either candidate. Obama and McCain are trying to make you more than a voter - they want you to believe that your life depends on them. As much as people talk about the Obama "cult," and there are excesses, make no mistake, McCain wants you to believe that all that is standing between you and Johnny Jihad is McCain The Reluctant Hero, who must crawl out of bed at 3 a.m. to don his armor out of Duty, Honor and Country. He didn't ask for this job, it asked for him. Except McCain's ego is the same size as BO's -- false humility is just as arrogant as extreme arrogance.
The economy is good news for Republicans. I forgot!GDP up 1.9% despite the jump in gas and energy prices. Slight bear market. Not a depression. Not even close to a recession.Really. Garage must be a teenager or younger than 30 to think that THIS is the worst economy ever. Most people today live in unimaginable luxury than ever did in the past in the US. Perspective. Get some.
DBQ, it's not a recession -- it's not even close, I agree. And this is most certainly NOT the worst period in recent living memory in American economic woes. It doesn't even come close to 1992 terms.But I know a lot of people out there who are hurtin' more than usual.It may not be a recession, it may not even feel like one exactly, but the end of decade market correction is certainly making us all feel a little OFF.Look Obama should be winning at this point by 10-15%, hands down.That he isn't tells us all something: A) He's not making a case for a _very_ bad economyB) He's not making a case for himselfTake away bad gas prices in November, and if the Surge keeps Iraq out of the headlines, the guy will lose big.Cheers,Victoria
Really. Garage must be a teenager or younger than 30 to think that THIS is the worst economy ever.Is this the "oh everyone has cellphones now!" retort? I never said it was the worst ever, Straw Queen. Why is it Republicans didn't gain one seat in 2006, and are projected to get another hellacious shellacking again? Theories?
vbs and dbq:"Recession" is one of those words that used to mean one thing (two consecutive quarters of negative growth) that now means something else ("Damn this macaroni is expensive! I haven't had a raise in 2 years. Is everyone in my neighborhood being forclosed?). I am trying to remain objective in my predictions but I still think Obama will win in part because he can actually remember not being wealthy - 20 years ago he was living in a crappy apartment in Chicago hanging out with poor people. There must be some reason why he does not talk about this more.
Here is one guys view:The economy is not really that bad. Everyone is jittery because they hear all the so-called bad news. But those in business that look at their balance sheets and the numbers aren't that concerned.Our biggest problem is inflation, thanks to Greenspan opening the money floodgates for the past 8 years. There are simply too many dollars out there. (One evidence of this is that the price of gas doubled and it hasn't crippled our economy. There are enough dollars to be absorbed.)What about the weak dollar? Except our ego being brused (which is stupid), a weak dollar means our goods are cheaper in the market.Besides, the Chinese and the Japanese are still buying our notes, which means that we're still the best bet around, in their eyes. (This could change fast when inflation starts huring the T-bills, but if they are note holders, the asset loss will be theirs, not ours. Though we may have to pay a lot more to finance our Government debt.)We are still the innovative engine of the world. That isn't changing any time soon.Wall Street has been hurt by Sarbanes-Oxley, and London is now the premier market, though nobody in New York would ever admit it.Our banks were stupid to over-leverage on mortgage securities, but they'll be regulated to limit their max leverage and exposure going forward.So, I'm not so sure what the all the gloom and doom and complaining are about.
Why is it Republicans didn't gain one seat in 2006, and are projected to get another hellacious shellacking again? Theories?Because Republicans forgot who they are and who votes for them. Speaking for myself, I'm sick to death of RINOs and their abandonment of conservative ideas. They might as well be Democrats. If we are going to take a cruise on the Titanic, might as well let the Dems be at the helm.Most of the Republicans in office now need to be taken out behind the woodshed and given a good smacking around.
One clarificatnoi: Wall Street is also being hurt by the American tort and class action machine, which the courts could fix in six months if they would just throw out the hiway-robbery-suits. That also is driving business to London.I would also add that it wasn't just American banks that were hurt by over-borrowing to buy and hold crap mortgage securities. European banks were also hurt pretty hard. And the reason the mortgage mess didn't hurt the economy as bad as some think is because there were a lot of people that made a fortune selling the garbage mortgage securities.As I've said before, they are keeping their mouths shut right now because it isn't good form to brag how much you made selling sewage to some fool, when the fool has discovered his mistake.Sorry about the verbosity.
So Republicans are getting the boot for not being Republican enough. Interesting.
Is this the "oh everyone has cellphones now!" retort?Well for those of us born prior to 1975 cellphones are essentially a luxury and not a vital aspect of our lives thus it is an indicator of what we're prioritizing spending money on. I mean I got along pretty well through 3/4 of my life without one and I daresay I'd be chucking my Razor if that was what was standing between me and this week's groceries.I never said it was the worst ever, Straw Queen. You said economy in the shitter, the dollar headed to Zimbabwe-like strength.So would you care to clarify or was that just rhetorical flourish on your part?
Garage: sorry but I for one am not rising to any bait about republicans. I am a conservative, NOT a republican--the republicans have been even more recalcitrant and less capable of self correctiono that libtards in congress. so I will share no tears for republicans who don't get it, and most, except for a principled few, don't get it.As for your libs--tell me about the 91 percent disapproval rate for the Pelosi/Reid team; tell me about these political whores who are willing to stake their tenure on a strategy that hopes the American Public will not hold dems accountable--yeah--if thats the politics YOU want, and apparently it is, you are a bottom feeder.There arent' but about 5 republicans I would vote for; but there arent any libs I would vote for because their heels are even more hinged.Lets talk principle first and then see which of the scum we have in congress match up--you're going with jefferson, right? I am interested in who you libtards think is a reputable and principled representative--me? Tom Coborn and a few of the blue dog dems come close (Heath Schuler)--tell us YOUR list of principled reps--inquiring minds want to know.
As for your libs--tell me about the 91 percent disapproval rate for the Pelosi/Reid team; tell me about these political whores who are willing to stake their tenure on a strategy that hopes the American Public will not hold dems accountable--yeah--if thats the politics YOU want, and apparently it is, you are a bottom feeder.I suspect the disapproval rating is due to them not doing jack shit about the war primarily. I'm not sure precisely what accountability you're referring to, but if it's holding accountability to the incompetent crooks in the whitehouse right now, I say that's true. They give in to a President with the worst approval rating in recent memory, on a regular basis. As far as good Democrats, not that many, although it looks like that may change a bit for the better. Feingold is very good, and you can take every Dem that voted against the egregious FISA bill as a good Democrat in my view. So that's about 25 or so. So I noticed you didn't, and couldn't answer why the Republican brand is so tarnished, and why they are getting their asses handing to them.
couldn't answer why the Republican brand is so tarnished, and why they are getting their asses handing to them.I already said it. They abandoned conservative principles and began acting like liberals. All the little piggies at the trough. It's hard to tell a Republican from a Democrat when all we get to see is their nasty rear ends while they dig deep into the public feeding trough and spending spending spending. If you think Feingold is good, I've got a bridge to sell you.
come on Garage--you couldn't possibly infer from what I wrote that I am a conservative, and the republicans in congress are not conservative? You arent stupid, and please don't play the stupid card. If you couldnt infer from what I wrote that conservatives are not represented by this current crop or republicans, then there is NO hope for you. why do I even support the republicans in congress? simple, they arent the Reid/Pelosi/Jefferson crooks. Its really a Hobson's choice.There it is to answer your question directly; questions?
"Recession" is one of those words that used to mean one thing (two consecutive quarters of negative growth) that now means something elseRIght. Now it means: "The economy must suck, because the media tells me it does, every day, nonstop."I will be the first to admit that gas prices are high and a gallon of milk is ridic. But that doesn't mean I think we're going to hell in a handbasket.If there's one thing I'm tired of--and I would think other Americans would be too--it's Democrats constantly telling us how horrible everything is. Whether it's the economy, the war, global warming, the message is the same and it's relentless. Even if I did believe it, I certainly wouldn't expect that ANY politician could swoop in and rescue us all; which is basically what democrats are saying about Barack.And politics aside, if Americans think times are that bad, what a bunch of spoiled wimps we've become.
I already said it. They abandoned conservative principles and began acting like liberals.That still doesn't explain why people are now for Democrats instead.If you think Feingold is good, I've got a bridge to sell you.He's one of the very few of a 500 member body who won't sell his country out, and one of the very few that has a understanding of the Constitution, and its meaning.RogerYou seem to be saying that you are not a Republican and chided me for not understanding that, and yet you say you still support Republicans in congress, and are voting for McCain. So lesser of two eveils. Gotcha.
That still doesn't explain why people are now for Democrats instead.Because people in general are stupid and greedy. The Democrats are promising pie in the sky and anything else they can think of to buy votes. Stupid greedy people will listen to any snake oil salesman if he is telling them what they want to hear. Many people who usually vote Republican are going to be sitting this election cycle out and also didn't vote for their local Republican candidates the last go-round or voted for the opposition just to "stick it to 'em". Evidently it still hasn't worked because most of the Republicans in Congress and the House still don't get it.I'm not voting for McCain. This is the first time in 40 years that I won't be casting a vote for President. However, if McCain chooses Sara Palin as his VP I will be voting for her. :-)
That still doesn't explain why people are now for Democrats instead.Well, they aren't. You're assuming they're going to. 2006 was a typical reaction to a lame duck Presidency and, as I understand it, a relatively mild one historically. It's the media that's been telling us how we're all voting Democrat in the fall. This would be the same media that (one year ago) proclaimed Hil(l)ary inevitable.You remember them, right? I'm all for fiscal responsibility, but I can't get behind the social engineering, which means I really can't vote for either party. But I might've been swayed had the "spirit of '94" proven to be genuine (and persistence). Instead, the Reps behaved entirely predictably: principles are fine as long as they don't get in the way of raking the bucks in.This is no surprise to me but had I been a believer, I'd be pissed enough not to vote for them in 2006.Am I still pissed about in 2008? Probably. Really, the question is, who has pissed off the most people. 'cause you know ain't nobody making nobody happy.
[Feingold is] one of the very few that has a understanding of the Constitution...McCain/Feingold blows that assertion all to hell.
That still doesn't explain why people are now for Democrats instead.Probably for the same reason they were overwhelmingly for Republicans in 1994. People were tired of Democrat bs then and now they're tired of GOP bs now. Given time, the pendulum will swing yet again and your beloved party will be out on its ass again too. It's called a political cycle.Keep a few things in mind when you like to tout the 'will of the people' when they support Democrats over GOP. The 'will of the people' also supports offshore drilling too but your party is perfectly content to have $4 gallon gas while we wait 20 years for wind powered cars. Voters want something other than what we have now and that is perfectly understandable. What I and I think other conservatives feel is that your party will only make a bad situation worse.
The economy chit chat from the pro-McCain folks is very interesting.Y'all must be smarter than Frum. Y'all must know more about the economic legacy of Bush (now McCain) policies than Frum.You probably don't know what I'm writing about, it'll be a surprise for you. You must wait (or watch an entire blogginghead) to find the answer yourself. I've anticipated Frum's prediction for a long time, and I'm sure there are folks in Chicago who don't need tips from Frum or me.McCain types please resume your brilliant (as you see it) understanding of historical economic facts. It's a good idea for you to focus on issues, that should really help McCain.
You know I would watch a lot more blogging heads than I do, but luckily they are painting the building next door. I can just watch that dry.
1jpb, please, enlighten us with your predictions.While you are at it, why don't you could tell us how monoline insurers played into the current situation.And why don't you tell us what three major things are driving our inflation?Please. Tell us.
I actually do know a lot more about the source of the credit problems than I know about anything I've ever commented on in the past.I don't want to chit chat about it. But, I got out of a somewhat notable position in this field more than two years ago. So, monoline shmonoline, I can go a lot deeper than that.To try and encompass the whole thing as simply as possible there are four issues: 1) a lack of government regulations and oversight, 2) greed inspired corner cutting, 3) the assumption that things must be OK because otherwise someone somewhere else in the system (of which monolines are a only a part) would be putting on the brakse , and 4) fraud.But, really I'm not in to deep chit chat about this stuff. I'll go nuts if I'm forced to listen to fools talk about things like Schumer caused Indymac, or Freddie and Fannie were the big bad players--sure they have big problems, but they were as saintly as it was, and I never had a more direct relationship with them than say Indymac and many others, so I'm not biased.Regarding inflation: I have a theory, I think that it was inevitable and predictable. As the world becomes more wealthy, the demand for commodities increases, hence the prices increase for those commodities since they're not unlimited. Ground breaking, I know.Of course there are complications. Clearly the dollar is weakening relative to other currencies, this means that we are experiencing price inflation greater than the rest of the world, so we are being effect by forces other than a general rise in commodity prices.Certainly our loose money supply is a part. The drying up of our debt markets makes borrowing money more expensive, hence the seed of inflation. Fortunately the government paper still has a lot of buyers--partially a side effect of trade deficits as we mortgage our nations future, and our creditors pour that money back in, for interest--not a cycle where we are in the driver's seat. Speculators in currency and other markets combined with inconsistent trading regulations across differing market spaces are a factor, though maybe not huge--still don't forget that Soros has shown that folks can have an impact, though I believe that it is hype to say that he broke the Bank of England. And, supposedly the world was going hell because of LTCM a while back--a fine example of genius combined with hubris resulting in disaster.What are your answers to your questions?
I guess I threw down the gauntlet, so I have to pick it up now.Let see:1. Monolines - a small part of the windowdressing scam. "Plus, these things are insured!" Anyone that thought through the monolines would have recognized that the only time you'd need the insurance would be when everyone else needed it too. That wasn't so when monolines were insuring the risk of a regional depression by geographically cross hedging. Funny how you can make so much money insuring one thing, and it doesn’t transfer well.2. Inflation:Reason 1: Greenspan not accounting for the huge amount of cash that had already been pulled out of the equities market before the tech bubble burst. He kept the juice flowing and flowing and flowing.Reason 2: Japan's near zero bank rate for the last n years. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out how to borrow in Japan, convert to dollars, and buy US bonds. The forex conversion is another systemic creation of more dollars, adding to Greenspan’s flood.Reasons 3: China plugging the cash back into dollars and US notes. Same result as 2.BTW, I don't, and I'm sure you don't either, look at econ things in terms of Repub or Dem. Bush was a complete idiot on so vary many things. I have my doubts about the Goldman guys in there too. But what is Obama offering? Higher taxes? Surely you would admit that is a joke.
The historian Will Durant observed that: "A nation is born stoic and dies epicurean." And so our fate.In this next election we are offered two candidates, neither of whom has the great courage and steadfastness of will required to meet the simultaneous threats of jihadism, ruinous spending, and energy demands.One, a feminine cipher selling New Deal snake oil, is the Beatles -if they had never sung anything at all, but were cheered merely for being the Beatles. The other was a hero once, and still understands the requirements of the warrior, yet he is simultaneously feminine, desiring to run the country as an overbearing mother would run her children's lives until they were dead before her.A poor choice, the prom queen versus the mother-in-law. Excuse me if I cannot raise any interest in the nation's final acts; it's too damned depressing.
The economy chit chat from the pro-McCain folks is very interesting.What's interesting is your assumption that any of the conservative commenters on here are pro-McCain. It's more like anyone but Obama. The economy can certainly be better but I don't think raising taxes and substituting increased spending on domestic social engineering projects versus foreign ones is the answer we need either but that's all Obama is offering.Wake me when we have a candidate that understands the concept of fiscal conservatism.
So, monoline shmonoline, I can go a lot deeper than that.So can Titus, with much more honesty and mutual enjoyment.
Hoosier:So what happened in the primary? I mean that seriously, not snark. How did McCain make it to where he is today and Fred, Rudy, Mitt etc. are sitting at home? I like Huckabee, but of course I am not a conservative so...
So what happened in the primary? I mean that seriously, not snark. How did McCain make it to where he is today and Fred, Rudy, Mitt etc. are sitting at home? I like Huckabee, but of course I am not a conservative so... You mean, how did the guy who f**ked with the campaign finance laws win the campaign? Ask McGovern.Some percentage of it was doubtless Open Primary shenanigans as well.
So what happened in the primary? I mean that seriously, not snarkBlue Moon. I have a great deal of respect for you and your postings as I feel you are a very sincere and balanced person. So, here is my take on it.The media manipulated the process. Whether they did it on their own accord or if they were $$persuaded$$ remains to be seen.According to the talking heads, Fred had "no fire in the belly". Personally, I don't really want someone with fire in the belly. This is what Obama has and it scares the crap out of me. Fire in the belly and desire for power. Spare us!! Thompson was (according to the MSM) a tired old man with a floozy wife. In every possible media/debate (there's a laugh and an oxymoron) he was cut out of the process or diminished by being asked stupid and slanted questions. Romney, OMG Mormon!! Evil. Weird religion. You name it they threw it up against the wall. Almost as bad or maybe worse than race baiting. Accusing Romney of all the failings of his religion from hundreds of years ago. Playing on the fears of people just like some are saying that is being done about Obama. Again in these travesties of a debate process hosted by the MSM....he was cut out, diminished, asked asked retarded and slanted questions.I didn't care for Huckabee because of the religiosity that he brought into the campaign. I do find him very entertaining and think he is probably a very sincere person. But who wants a Comedian in Chief. BTW: Something that I think that Obama is leaning dangerously near.When we let the uneducated and biased media run the show....this is what we get. The dregs. The under qualifed. The media literally picked John McCain because they thought he was the weakest candidate for the Republicans. Thompson or Romney or even Huckabee might have had the ability to coalesce the Republican Party. McCain is a devisive and not very popular figure. They (the MSM) picked Obama because he represented a glorified ideal that assuaged their liberal white guilt and I think they have had Clinton fatigue.The caucus system on the Democrat's side allowed and encouraged manipulation and fraud where the popular vote of the participants was overturned by a small group of dedicated sycophants enabling Obama to win delegates where he wasn't the majority vote gainer. The entire system is totally corrupt.
1jpb,Sorry that I falsely accused you of being a drive by commenter. I'm not following the Althouse threads like I did once upon a time.
DBQ, I think some Republican primary voters go with seniority and/or name recognition: whoever lost the last time gets the next turn at the plate. Reagan 76->80, Bush 80->88, Dole 88->96, McCain 00->08. Well, one of four a good choice.
Hoosier:So what happened in the primary? I mean that seriously, not snark. How did McCain make it to where he is today and Fred, Rudy, Mitt etc. are sitting at home?Good question. Personally I think its because there wasn't a real conservative in the entire lineup that the base could get around. Fred maybe but he was a huge disappointment as he could not garner any traction. Maybe because he sat out too long waiting to make up his mind.Rudy certainly wasn't going to energize the conservative base Huckabee appealed to pretty only the evangelical right. Essentially what it boiled down to Moon is that the GOP didn't bother to field a candidate that appealed to the conservative base. Despite what 1jpb things, its not so much that people are switching Democrat its that most conservatives are simply unhappy with their choices. But I don't despair. We had to have four years of Carter to get Reagan.
Garage: you apparently consider the act of voting synonymous with party ID; In your world, that may well be the case. It is not the case in my world. Since I am not registered as a democrat or republican, I have no party alliegence, and vote according to my political interests. If you think that makes me a republican--by all means go for it.
Hoosier said: "Despite what 1jpb thinks, its not so much that people are switching Democrat"I didn't participate in this line of chit chat, you've confused me with other folks. Presumably, all non-McCain folks are somewhat interchangeable from your perspective, and in fact we're probably less unique then we'd like to think. Of course this is a two way street, y'all may also overestimate your own uniqueness. And, I'm sometimes sloppy by lumping all of the non-BHO folks together. Thankfully none of our chit chat matters in any meaningful way, so it's all good. I hope I'm not bursting bubbles, at least I'm not unconsciously looking for surrogate bubbles--too many folks are already doing that.
Post a Comment