comment #1

BurmaShave says ...

But I thought she was inevitable and electable?

comment #2

BNick says ...

Zogby is known for producing polls that could charitably be called "outliers", although he doesn't seem to have a bias in either direction.

The other notable takeaway from this poll is that John McCain is clearly the best matchup for the Republicans against any Democrat, while Mitt Romney is perhaps the worst.

Does anyone else think that both parties are going to do their best to shoot themselves in the foot on January 3rd and 8th?

comment #3

BurmaShave says ...

If it somehow ends up being Obama vs. McCain, the age difference will be a full 25 years. Anybody want to tell me if there's ever been such a gap in the modern era?

comment #4

BNick says ...

Burma, off the top of my head I'd say no since no one under 42 or so has ever run, and no one over 70 has ever run.

Clinton and Bush were 22 years apart in 1992. That strikes me as probably the biggest gap we've had.

But, you know, no matter what your political leanings are, Obama vs. McCain would be a hell of a show. In a good way. But the American people, in their wisdom, are likely to give us Clinton vs. Romney or (I can't believe this could happen) Clinton vs. Huckabee.

comment #5

UnChien says ...

When Guiliani is out of the race, can we still come together once a week around teatime to laugh at this? http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1058/652801385_d0570216ee_o.jpg

comment #6

BNick says ...

By the way, all of you remember the 1992 election, right? When Bill Clinton claimed that experience didn't matter and that being in Washington too long didn't give you the right kind of experience to lead?

Remember that? Just making sure.

comment #7

christian says ...

Zogby is not a reliable pollster.

Obama ain't got it kids. If Andy Sullivan and Stephanie Miller are wooing over his charisma and vacuous policy, that should tell you enough.

Edwards will get the nom.

comment #8

BurmaShave says ...

UnChien, I work for a Defense related company. I can't be laughing so hard at things like that. Thank you though.

"Huckabee, you tricked me!" *melts*

comment #9

BurmaShave says ...

christian, are you mad? Edwards has no chance. He's Jimmy Carter 2.0 with Republican hair. Also, I think you mean swooning.

comment #10

BNick says ...

christian, are you being serious about Edwards?

I think he may win Iowa given his ground game and the fact that his voters have caucused before, but I don't see where he goes from there. He's a distant third in every state after Iowa, and he's accepting public financing which means he can't raise or spend as much in the next few states as Hillary and Barack will be able to.

Interesting scenario: What happens if Edwards wins Iowa and Obama comes in second?

comment #11

christian says ...

You're mad if yo think Obama will get the nom. Edwars just came out first in an insider's poll in Iowa and like Kerry, he'll be last man standing after Clinton/Obama battle royale.

I'm being realistic here, if you think this country is ready to elect a black man or a woman, you have more faith in the electoral than I.

Edwards is from the south and is the most progressive of the MSM declared top tier. Obama misses important votes, kowtows to corporate interests and seems to say nothing very nicely whenever I hear him speak. Like Jeff is subject to shallow perceptions, Obama supporters remind me of teenagers at a Hannah Montana concert.

And I don't trust ANYBODY who Oprah pimps. She gave us Dr. Phil, Rachel Ray, James Frey and sucked up to Bush in 2000 and helped him sucker the nation into Iraq. I'd certaily pull for Obama for VP, but just you folk watch. Kerry came outta nowhere as did Clinton.

comment #12

BNick says ...

Not exactly the most insightful endorsement I've heard of Edwards, christian.

I don't buy the "country isn't ready to elect so-and-so" thing. First off, even if the country isn't ready, the Democratic Party certainly is. And that's who votes in the primaries. You already see Obama's numbers going up among black in places like South Carolina (where he's now tied with Hillary according to RCP), because skeptical black voters who used to think as you do are now starting to be convinced that Obama can win. If he wins Iowa, the skeptical "the rest of the country is racist" crowd will melt away.

Edwards was a much different man in the Senate than he is today. Cowtowing to special interests, voting for the War, striking a moderate pose: these were the hallmarks of Edwards career in the Senate. So he may be the most populist guy in the race today, but I don't see how you can say the guy is being sincere, especially when his sudden change in tone and style were politically necessary in order for him to distinguish himself from the two more exciting candidates.

comment #13

christian says ...

I didn't say Edwards was the best candidate, for me that's Kucinich but the Democrats won't dare run an actual liberal. Instead we get corporatists like Obama and Hillary who suck up as much industry green as possible. At least Edwards has REJECTED the corporate sponsors of O & H. That means something. Or should to actual democrats, who seem more like moderate Republicans these days, just whipped dogs. Even Nader just said that Edwards was the most progressive candidate in years.

I would vote for Obama in a heartbeat if he would actually say something instead of madness suggesting that he'd appoint crook and liar Arnold in a position cabinet. He also said impeachment would be too disruptive. As opposed to the calm Cheney has given the nation. That shows Obama is unfit to be a Democratic leader. Period.

Six months ago, Hillary was inevitable. Today, not so much. Nobody knows nothin'. Even me.

comment #14

christian says ...

And maybe we won't get wretched tales like this if we get a genuine Dem in power:

The family of a 17-year-old girl who died hours after her health insurer reversed its previous decision and said it would pay for a liver transplant planned to sue Cigna HealthCare, their attorney said Friday.

Nataline Sarkisyan died Thursday at about 6 p.m. at the University of California, Los Angeles Medical Center. She had been in a vegetative state for weeks, said her mother, Hilda.

http://www.houmatoday.com/article/20071221/APN/712210601

comment #15

BurmaShave says ...

Arnold, crook and liar? The one who's in a dogfight with the EPA and who just signed universal health care? Jesus, how liberal are you?

comment #16

Sean says ...

"Clinton and Bush were 22 years apart in 1992. That strikes me as probably the biggest gap we've had."

Clinton and Dole were 23 years apart in 1996.

comment #17

christian says ...

How conservative are you? You clearly don't know Arnold's crooked history and how he came into power here. You recall Enron? Ken Lay? They were ripping off California energy markets. Gray Davis knew something was up and asked Bush to put on price caps. Bush the crook refused. Enron was busted, but they had a back-up plan: get Arnold into power to further de-regulate and drop the billions dollar lawsuit. Arnie did both. He lied his way in and continues to do so. The proof exists.

Yes, he really stood up to Bush at the 2004 RNC where he again called us "girlie men." So BFD that Arnold has criticized the Bushies here. The guy will do or say anything to stay in power. Just like his bullshit that he didn't have to raise money cause he has his own -- and now he's the biggest cash raiser in Cal guvn'r history.
He's still a Republican far as I can tell. So Obama looking to validate him further does not inspire confidence.

comment #18

Joe Leydon says ...

From MSNBC: In the NBC/WSJ poll right before the 2004 Iowa caucuses, Dean was at 24%, Clark at 19%, Lieberman at 12%, Gephardt at 11%, and Kerry (the eventual winner) at 7%.

So what great surprises are in store for us?

comment #19

christian says ...

And really, the bigger story is the implosion of the Republican nominees. Romney busted for lying about seeing his dad march with MLK (Romney now says he mant "see" metaphorically. Uh huh.); Huckabee and his incessant release of rapists and murderers (Rush Limbo attacked Huck hard today; and the rapidly dissolving Ghouliani, who was once the supposed front-runner. Those folk have the real problems. Check out Townhall.com for the conservative comedy. So Merry Xmas!

comment #20

D.Z. says ...

Burma: "If it somehow ends up being Obama vs. McCain, the age difference will be a full 25 years. Anybody want to tell me if there's ever been such a gap in the modern era?"

Clinton vs Dole, and Reagan vs everyone else?

"Edwards has no chance. He's Jimmy Carter 2.0 with Republican hair."

Carter did win once, too, you know. Of course, that was because of Watergate; Edwards didn't call Bush on anything until it was convenient.

BNick: "By the way, all of you remember the 1992 election, right? When Bill Clinton claimed that experience didn't matter and that being in Washington too long didn't give you the right kind of experience to lead?"

I remember him promising universal health care, too.

christian: "Edwars just came out first in an insider's poll in Iowa and like Kerry, he'll be last man standing after Clinton/Obama battle royale."

You seem to forget that Edwards lost to Kerry, too. And Kerry only won the nom, because he was the most noticeable in a non-embarrassing way. Edwards is noticeable in a sad way, and I feel for him, too. But he just doesn't have the attitude of a winner, and it shows.

"Edwards is from the south and is the most progressive of the MSM declared top tier."

But that's not what Southerners are interested in when they vote.

"And I don't trust ANYBODY who Oprah pimps. She gave us Dr. Phil, Rachel Ray, James Frey and sucked up to Bush in 2000 and helped him sucker the nation into Iraq."

I trust her more than a guy who actually voted for a war.

"Kerry came outta nowhere as did Clinton."

Clinton tried to get younger people to vote like Obama.

"At least Edwards has REJECTED the corporate sponsors of O & H. That means something."

It still means too little, too late.

"Or should to actual democrats, who seem more like moderate Republicans these days, just whipped dogs."

I definitely agree. Hell, I'd be going for Kucinich, too, if I knew he could win.

"I would vote for Obama in a heartbeat if he would actually say something instead of madness suggesting that he'd appoint crook and liar Arnold in a position cabinet."

Yeah, I hate how Arnie's fucking up my state, too.
But to be fair, he has tried to stand up for better cars, and Bush keeps blocking him. For a Republican, he's very progressive on the environment.

"He also said impeachment would be too disruptive. As opposed to the calm Cheney has given the nation."

Edwards hasn't exactly made impeachment part of his platform, though.

comment #21

Spicer says ...

Hilary's implosion is caused by our politicians (or their advisors) thinking they need to be warm and cuddly and likable. By making elections about personality rather than ideas our politicians are part of the problem. Though I have never met her, I suspect there is a real possibility that Hilary is a cold bitch in real life. To me, that shouldn't matter as long as she is a competent cold bitch. Whenever they try to make her seem warm, it's a horror show. That laugh? "I'm your girl"? I think one of the reasons Ron Paul is doing so well is he knows he has no chance to win so he is being honest with the public. You know where he stands on the issues and for many people that is refreshing. You may disagree with him, but at least you know what he thinks. Romney, Huckabee and Edwards are about as awful as Hilary.

comment #22

BurmaShave says ...

Actually christian I'm a lifelong Democrat, just not so totally out there. The nonsense you're peddling was the only unpalatable part of SMARTEST GUYS IN THE ROOM. Arnold is hardly right wing. He has some stupid positions, but he's a bright man with some progressive ideas as well. Do you know what a Cabinet is? Generally people in a Cabinet are assigned a specific thing, suited to their skills. That's been warped by 7 years of Bush's croneyism, but Obama saying he'd look at guys like Bloomberg and Schwarzenegger doesn't disqualify him, certainly not any more than your hypcritical hedge fund lawyer of a candidate.

He's more despised than McCain and Giuliani combined by the wingnuts. If you had any Republican friends you'd know that.

comment #23

D.Z. says ...

Burma: "The one who's in a dogfight with the EPA and who just signed universal health care?"

It isn't "universal".

comment #24

christian says ...

"The nonsense you're peddling was the only unpalatable part of SMARTEST GUYS IN THE ROOM."

How are the facts nonsense?

"While Bustamante's kicking Enron butt in court, the Davis Administration is simultaneously demanding that George Bush's energy regulators order the $9 billion refund. Don't hold your breath: Bush's Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is headed by a guy proposed by ... Ken Lay.

But Bush's boys on the commission have a problem. The evidence against the electricity barons is rock solid: fraudulent reporting of sales transactions, megawatt "laundering," fake power delivery scheduling and straight out conspiracy (including meetings in hotel rooms). So the Bush commissioners cook up a terrific scheme: charge the companies with conspiracy but offer them, behind closed doors, deals in which they have to pay only 2 cents on each dollar they filched.

Problem: the slap-on-the-wrist refunds won't sail if the governor of California won't play along. Solution: Recall the Governor.

New Problem: the guy most likely to replace Davis is not Mr. Musclehead, but Cruz Bustamante, even a bigger threat to the power companies than Davis. Solution: smear Cruz because -- heaven forbid! -- he took donations from Injuns (instead of Ken Lay).

The pay-off? Once Arnold is governor, he blesses the sweetheart settlements with the power companies. When that happens, Bustamante's court cases are probably lost. There aren't many judges who will let a case go to trial to protect a state if that a governor has already allowed the matter to be "settled" by a regulatory agency."
http://www.alternet.org/story/16902

Guess what the outcome of that 2003 story was?

How can you deny the Enron pillage of California thanks to de-regulation -- a de-regulation that Arnold has continued to support.

You are out there if you think that Arnold is not part of this sleazy story. It's a fact. And again, we've seen this piece of shit cut funding for schools, hospitals, the cops, the works. Girlie Men?

I'm assuming you voted for him because you thought he was so "moderate" -- a mistake that far too many so-called democrats made in California. We got hosed instead.

comment #25

jeffmcm says ...

Shut up, DZ.

comment #26

BurmaShave says ...

Actually I'm here in Virginia, but I encouraged my family out there to vote No on recall and yes to Bustamante. The recall was a perfect storm that many took advantage of, but no conspiracy would ever be led by a man as stupid as Darrel Issa.

comment #27

christian says ...

Well, I'm glad to hear you tried to push against the recall. But it wasn't one man, BS. It was many. And Ken Lay was leading the charge.

I still can't believe California put in this bully twice. Well, I guess after Reagan...

comment #28

BurmaShave says ...

It's all a moot point anyway. Barring a terrorist attack, god forbid, I dont think the GOP really stands a chance this cycle, especially coming out of their surprisingly bloody primary fight. Rob Portman or John Thune, creeps both, will probably be the next Republican president, sometime around 2016.

comment #29

dangovich says ...

The 2008 election is the Democrats to lose. Of course, it was theirs to lose in 2004 and 2000, and look what happened.

Gore's campaign was overmanaged to a ridiculous degree. In the first debate with Bush, he came off as a condescending asshole. In the second, he appeared to be under sedation.

Kerry was a disastrous choice: a positively cadaverous personality who was inexplicably unwilling to counterattack war-dodger Bush and the Swift Boaters.

And now, the door is wide open. The Republican candidates, with the possible exception of McCain, are ridiculous.

In my opinion, there is one way the Dems could lose: nominate Hillary. Not because she's a woman, but because so many people loathe her. She would galvanize the opposition like no other candidate.

comment #30

BNick says ...

Sean, good call on Clinton versus Dole. Totally obvious and I didn't think of it. For some reason I was only thinking of young challengers versus old incumbents and not the other way around.

Burma, I know Rob Portman personally and he's no creep. Quite the opposite. He also strikes me as much too smart to run for President, but he's certainly got the experience to do it.

So, I think you're wrong on that point but kudos for your random political knowledge and bold predictions for 2016. No joke, you must be a junkie like me to throw out Thune and Portman. What about Bobby Jindal? Maybe we even go to the same support groups.

comment #31

BurmaShave says ...

I know Portman a little bit too, and he's a very nice man from everything I've seen. I'm speaking on a superficial level, he's got the same kind of creepy countenance as Mark Warner and Tom Daschle. Too much jogging maybe. But that's silly for me to say.

As for being too smart, he may not have a choice in the matter. If he can succeed in rebuilding the Republican party in Ohio the GOP may cut out the middle man (remember, as goes Ohio, so goes the nation) and force it on him. If he gets elected Governor in '10, watch out.

Jindal is a comer, and he's very young. Obama's performance in a general election would be the canary in the coalmine for him. I fear the increasingly protectionist and xenophobic strain in our country might produce a lot of resenment towards Indians (outsourcing,etc.), but regardless of policy he's one of the smartest guys around. He's going to be a major player for the next 20, 25 years.

PS Don't forget Charlie Crist, if he can find himself a wife.

comment #32

le corbeau says ...

Bobby Jindal? You mean the guy who's going to run against Obama in our first non-white election in 2012?

comment #33

K. Bowen says ...

Count me in the group that thinks Hilary should run as a cold b-word that she likely is. She should be trying to imitate George W. Bush rather than her husband. Like him or hate him, Bush will tell you what he thinks. LIke it or not, you know where his center is. I always thought that was Hilary's strength when compared to Bill. I could always find respect for that. Until it evaporated as this campaign approached.

But if you're a Democrat, you're probably running for four miserable years before getting waxed by David Petraeus, anyway.

comment #34

Spicer says ...

Lewis Black had the best assessment of the Kerry campaign when he spoke of how astonishing it was that the Democrats couldn't find a person who could defeat George Bush. He said it was like a normal person losing in the Special Olympics.

comment #35

christian says ...

Yes, but thanks to Bush friend Diebold, Ohio had plenty of vote shenanigans.

comment #36

le corbeau says ...

Lewis Black had the best assessment of the Kerry campaign when he spoke of how astonishing it was that the Democrats couldn't find a person who could defeat George Bush. He said it was like a normal person losing in the Special Olympics.

Yeah, they say something like that every four years, most of the time.

comment #37

le corbeau says ...

Bush won by over three million votes nationwide. Even if you assume that Kerry really got every single vote in the state of Ohio, that's not enough for him to have won the popular vote nationwide.

What's that? You say Kerry would have won in the electoral college with Ohio's votes? I'm sure you've always respected the results of the electoral college as trumping the popular vote, and have never referred to Gore as the real winner in 2000 then, right?

comment #38

jeffmcm says ...

Just like you're saying now that the winner of the popular vote should be accorded more respect than not.

comment #39

le corbeau says ...

To me, that shouldn't matter as long as she is a competent cold bitch.

Well, that's the question. Here's Democratic economist Brad DeLong:

My two cents' worth--and I think it is the two cents' worth of everybody who worked for the Clinton Administration health care reform effort of 1993-1994--is that Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be kept very far away from the White House for the rest of her life. Heading up health-care reform was the only major administrative job she has ever tried to do. And she was a complete flop at it. She had neither the grasp of policy substance, the managerial skills, nor the political smarts to do the job she was then given. And she wasn't smart enough to realize that she was in over her head and had to get out of the Health Care Czar role quickly.

So when senior members of the economic team said that key senators like Daniel Patrick Moynihan would have this-and-that objection, she told them they were disloyal. When junior members of the economic team told her that the Congressional Budget Office would say such-and-such, she told them (wrongly) that her conversations with CBO head Robert Reischauer had already fixed that. When long-time senior hill staffers told her that she was making a dreadful mistake by fighting with rather than reaching out to John Breaux and Jim Cooper, she told them that they did not understand the wave of popular political support the bill would generate. And when substantive objections were raised to the plan by analysts calculating the moral hazard and adverse selection pressures it would put on the nation's health-care system...

Hillary Rodham Clinton has already flopped as a senior administrative official in the executive branch--the equivalent of an Undersecretary. Perhaps she will make a good senator. But there is no reason to think that she would be anything but an abysmal president.

comment #40

le corbeau says ...

Jeffmcm, the difference is, Kerry was the winner of neither one, except on the Planet Zoomba.

comment #41

jeffmcm says ...

Yeah, but I wasn't making that point.If Kerry had won the electoral college - which was a real possibility - everyone would have been discombobulated.

comment #42

D.Z. says ...

christian: "I'm assuming you voted for him because you thought he was so "moderate" -- a mistake that far too many so-called democrats made in California."

Nope, not me. The only people who voted for him think less taxes to protect themselves from fires in Malibu's a good thing. Anyway, you seem to give Davis too much credit, since he went along with the deregulation even during the blackouts. It wasn't until people started getting trapped in elevators that he dared call out Bush and Enron on his mistake. Arnie might hit below the belt, but he wouldn't have won the recall if Davis was a real leader, and not a sell-out like most of the Dems.

"I still can't believe California put in this bully twice."

The anti-immigration and anti-affirmative action bills didn't clue you in on where we were heading?

dangovich: "Gore's campaign was overmanaged to a ridiculous degree. In the first debate with Bush, he came off as a condescending asshole."

It's called being educated. You should try it sometime.

"In the second, he appeared to be under sedation."

At least he wasn't literally under sedation like Bush.

"In my opinion, there is one way the Dems could lose: nominate Hillary."

They won't lose, no matter who gets nominated. Hillary's not the best you can pick, but she's still better than any of the Republican zombies.

Burma: "I fear the increasingly protectionist and xenophobic strain in our country might produce a lot of resenment towards Indians (outsourcing,etc.),"

Oh, we still like Indians. We just don't like faceless corporations who exploit them along with us.

Spicer: "Lewis Black had the best assessment of the Kerry campaign when he spoke of how astonishing it was that the Democrats couldn't find a person who could defeat George Bush."

They could defeat him. They just were bought by the same lobbyists who kept them from doing so.

Mgmax: "Bush won by over three million votes nationwide."

Well, yeah, assuming they weren't hacked by Diebold or turned away for being black...

"My two cents' worth--and I think it is the two cents' worth of everybody who worked for the Clinton Administration health care reform effort of 1993-1994--is that Hillary Rodham Clinton needs to be kept very far away from the White House for the rest of her life. Heading up health-care reform was the only major administrative job she has ever tried to do. And she was a complete flop at it. She had neither the grasp of policy substance, the managerial skills, nor the political smarts to do the job she was then given. And she wasn't smart enough to realize that she was in over her head and had to get out of the Health Care Czar role quickly."

Yes, why couldn't Hillary have the common sense to let things fester and add 40 million more people to the uninsured line?

"And when substantive objections were raised to the plan by analysts calculating the moral hazard and adverse selection pressures it would put on the nation's health-care system..."

These are likely the same analysts who think that victims of malpractice should be denied their day in court.

comment #43

jeffmcm says ...

"In the first debate with Bush, he came off as a condescending asshole.

It's called being educated. You should try it sometime."

That is what we call unity of form and function - too bad DZ missed the irony.

comment #44

le corbeau says ...

Well, yeah, assuming they weren't hacked by Diebold or turned away for being black...

And today's Illustrating The Point While Missing It award goes to...

comment #45

le corbeau says ...

God, if ever the election choice was clear. Watch Hillary's "I'm your Santa Claus" commercial, and then here's what Fred Thompspn said in Iowa:

AKD: What will you do for the farmers of Bremer County?

FT: (laughs)

AKD: You knew this was coming, right?

FT: I would continue to enjoy the fruits of their labor. I’ve been looking all over Iowa for a bad steak and I can’t find it. Been trying my best. It’s not a matter of what I would do for the farmers. Farmers are not looking for a president to hand them something. Farmers want fair treatment and a chance to prosper in a free economy and that’s what I would help ensure. There’s a lot of programs we’ve got out there, some of which are good programs, some of which are not. And I think that we need to work our way through that and make sure we’re doing what’s good for the country, not just the farmers, not just the people of Iowa, not just the people of Tennessee. But good for the country. A sound policy that makes sense. I think there’s a lot more that we could do for the working farmer in terms of ecological programs and environmental programs - land conservation, soil conservation - that would be fair and it would be beneficial to the nation and to Iowa and to our country. We’re going to have to phase out the corporate welfare system we’ve got, however. There are extremely rich people living in skyscrapers in Manhattan that are receiving subsidy payments. I think that’s wrong. I’d put a stop to that if it was within my power. That still continues in this latest Farm Bill and it’s not right. There ought to be a cutoff at some level and it’s not right ot have millionaires receiving farm subsidies.

comment #46

BurmaShave says ...

I think that's the most he's said in one breath since he chewed out Eastwood in IN THE LINE OF FIRE.

Some actually good ideas though. You're right, the contrast is remarkable.

comment #47

le corbeau says ...

But remember, cutting off corporate welfare would deprive 40 million uninsured Americans of their votes in Iowa, thanks to Enron putting Schwarzenegger in office.

comment #48

le corbeau says ...

Iowa, Ohio, like there's a difference. It's all low-thread-count country.

comment #49

SpinDozer says ...

'The 2008 election is the Democrats to lose.'

Actually, this is no different than '06. The people don't like the Republicans and vote for the opposition. The Democrats benefitted greatly in 2006 but have not delivered the impeachment many people wanted, continue to fund the war, etc. They have no message beyond 'universal socialized insurance' for all. About the time each party has a nominee with enough delegates to seal the nomination, look for a third party candidate to fill the void between what the parties deliver and what the people want. Not saying it's a good thing, but that's what I think will happen.

comment #50

christian says ...

What's striking is that while the righties here love to thrash Hillary, Obama, Edwards, etc., they are deathly silent on the incredible buffet of the potential Republican nominees. So I'd love to hear from Mgmax, DH and Josh on how amazing Romney, Huckabee, etc are going to be for the nation...

The neo-con elite are going nuts over Huckabee's rise and they're finally starting to eat their own. Bon appetit.

comment #51

SpinDozer says ...

'they are deathly silent on the incredible buffet of the potential Republican nominees.'

Quite a stable of unappealing candidates with less to say than even the Democrats. Their one hope is that a 3rd party will split the majority of the country while they get the xenophobe vote in the west & south for a narrow electoral win.

comment #52

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax: "Farmers want fair treatment and a chance to prosper in a free economy and that’s what I would help ensure."

Yeah, they want the same handouts that Thompson and his ilk would deny poor black people who are unable to sell fruit here, because of our tariffs.

"There are extremely rich people living in skyscrapers in Manhattan that are receiving subsidy payments. I think that’s wrong. I’d put a stop to that if it was within my power."

Unless they're Republican or lobbying for us, of course.

comment #53

christian says ...

Oh, and the reason that the woman gang raped by KBR/Halliburton can't sue is because of scumbag Dick Cheney:

At the time of the alleged attack on Jones, KBR was a subsidiary of Halliburton, the behemoth military-contracting and oil-technology firm. (KBR was sold off earlier this year.) So Jones is covered by the Halliburton dispute-resolution program, which was implemented when Cheney was Halliburton's CEO. The system bears the markings of Cheney's obsession with secrecy and executive power. On his watch, Halliburton, in late 1997, made it more difficult for its employees to sue the company for discrimination, sexual harassment, and other workplace-related issues.

comment #54

le corbeau says ...

So I'd love to hear from Mgmax, DH and Josh on how amazing Romney, Huckabee, etc are going to be for the nation...

Purely on experience, the Republican field way outclasses the Democratic one. Romney may be an android, but he's been a highly effective moderate and bipartisan governor; Giuliani is one of the most significant public policy figures of the last 50 years (with all the right enemies as far as most of America is concerned-- so feel free to dig right in and make him more popular); McCain is a longtime leader and lion of the senate; Thompson has everything you want in a vice president (folksy charm, a sharp wit and not too much ambition).

But the Republican electorate just might be insane at the moment, and it may pick an ignorant Southern charlatan instead. My only hope is that Democrats will make the same mistake, and the Huckabee-Edwards debates will be the comedy sensation of the summer.

comment #55

christian says ...

Thanks, Mgmax. But the real comedy was your analysis of these powerhouses. Especially Flip Flop Romney. And thanks also for bringing us that term so we can use it on Mitt.

comment #56

christian says ...

Oh and anybody that Hugh Hewitt gets behind is doomed. His track record speaks for itself...

comment #57

le corbeau says ...

You know, if you are at one extreme, it would probably be wise not to extrapolate from your views to the electorate as a whole. Just in terms of making accurate predictions.

You may not find governor of Massachusetts, CEO and head of the Olympics to be nearly as impressive a job as first term senator and first lady, or first term senator and bestselling author, or one term senator and trial lawyer, but it's entirely possible that many Americans will take a different view than yours.

comment #58

christian says ...

Yes, I fully expect your big-tent party of open minded Christians to rush to vote for a Mormon. That must explain why Huckabee's campaign has stalled so bad. And telling me that being a CEO implies some kind of political greatness just leads me to Bush and Cheney and Ken Lay.

comment #59

SpinDozer says ...

'you are at one extreme'

You mistake personal politics for analytical thought, Mr. 'I still support George W. (dumbshit) Bush'. It is, in fact, yourself that consistantly mistake your own partisan opinions as representative of the electorate. Rememeber 2006?

comment #60

christian says ...

SpinDozer is always like Han Solo flying in at the last minute in STAR WARS.

comment #61

BurmaShave says ...

Let's call the whole thing off.

comment #62

le corbeau says ...

SpinDozer is always like Han Solo flying in at the last minute in STAR WARS

and crashing into Luke, killing them both in a big ball of flame.

comment #63

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax: "Romney may be an android, but he's been a highly effective moderate and bipartisan governor;"

But he won't comment on racism in his religion.

"Giuliani is one of the most significant public policy figures of the last 50 years"

If ignoring warnings and suggestions and having police sodomize and shoot innocent black people can be considered policy, then sure.

"McCain is a longtime leader and lion of the senate;"

That explains why he keeps repeating Republican talking points in spite of his own conscience.

"Thompson has everything you want in a vice president (folksy charm, a sharp wit and not too much ambition)."

If you want a Vice President as dumb as Quayle, sure.

comment #64

le corbeau says ...

But he won't comment on racism in his religion.

No, he won't condemn his religion like you want him to.

having police sodomize and shoot innocent black people

Right, black people should be doing that to each other, like in the Dinkins days. (That wins the Imitating D.Z.'s Tone Prize for today, by the way.)

That explains why he keeps repeating Republican talking points in spite of his own conscience.

Translation: I actually kind of like him, so he can't possibly really believe things that I disagree with.

If you want a Vice President as dumb as Quayle, sure.

Oh come on, you can do better than that. That was SpinDozer-like. How can you keep getting Jeffmcm telling you to shut up if your material doesn't measure up?

comment #65

christian says ...

"and crashing into Luke, killing them both in a big ball of flame"

I don't recall that moment. But the right has been known to fabricate their own versions of the truth...

comment #66

le corbeau says ...

It depends on what the meaning of reality is, Christian.

comment #67

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax: "Right, black people should be doing that to each other, like in the Dinkins days."

Yeah, racist cops are always better than ineffective cops. Just look at Daryl Gates.

"Translation: I actually kind of like him, so he can't possibly really believe things that I disagree with."

No, I don't like him. I think he's the biggest sell-out of his party. If he had any backbone, he'd actually say what he believed, instead of what he thinks is convenient.

"Oh come on, you can do better than that."

A guy who buys Cuban cigars while criticizing Cuban policy seems pretty dumb to me...