comment #1

D.Z. says ...

I doubt Louisana counts, since there are less black people there since a few years ago, for some reason.
Oh, and Mgmax, are you finally going to admit Bush is a liar? http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080210/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush

comment #2

Dave says ...

Jeff, you're cherry-picking.

When your hated flyover rubes vote for Obama, they're great. When they vote for Hillary!, see "Wild Hogs," and drink light beer, you want to throw them into some L.L. Bean gulag.

You can't have it both ways-- either they're uniformally stupid, or they're not.

comment #3

Jay T. says ...

Sounds like too much instant history... you can't make summaries like this when you're still in the middle of it all.

comment #4

Chicago48 says ...

If Obama wins the primary and the presidency he will surely be the Underdog....someone that no one saw coming, a total surprise....a success story that Americans love. Now if he wins it all he has to deliver, or he will be the most hated man in America (like Bush).

I like Hillary, I think she's the most experienced and she knows about campaigning more than the others...but I think the problem is that people are tired of "entitlement" presidents...the sons & wives of past presidents. I would prefer Hillary win the presidency, but she just comes at a time when people are looking for something new. A new direction.

comment #5

mutinyco says ...

Now that both Hillary and Obama are trying to position themselves as the better to take on McCain, what's interesting is their differing approaches.

I think Obama is better at playing to what the Democrats want, while Hillary is playing to what will work better in a national election. And, in part, that's why the race is kind of a stalemate.

The GOP wants to run on national security.

What the Democrats want to hear is that the war was wrong from the beginning and it needs to be brought to an end. And that's what Obama has been saying. Hillary, on the other hand, voted for the war, and although she now says it was wrong, that's not what the Dems want to hear.

However, nationwide, once you factor in conservatives and those with military connections, their feeling is more along the lines of: the war was started for the right reasons, it's just been mishandled and we need to find a way to fix things and start bringing the troops home.

The problem with Obama's position in a national election is: a) Lack of experience, typified by the fact he wasn't even in office just a few years ago when the vote took place; b) By saying the war was wrong all along, he's telling a lot of people that we've fought and died for nothing.

The problem with Hillary is that the GOP can brand her a "flip-flop." However, in response, she can contrast herself with McCain by saying that, like the rest of the country, she's seen how badly it's been managed and how we need a new policy, while he intends to continue Bush's failed and unpopular policy.

It's kind of a quandary for the Dems. Do you support the candidate whose view you truly believe in, or do you pick somebody whose view might play better in the national election.

I think that's why Obama is doing so well. He's running for the Democratic nomination. Hillary, meanwhile, is running for President.

comment #6

T. S. Idiot says ...

Once BO is elected, Wells isn't going to go over the cabinet possibilities, is he?

comment #7

Krazy Eyes says ...

Now if he wins it all he has to deliver, or he will be the most hated man in America (like Bush).

Compared to Bush I think *anyone* could be a great president. At this point does anyone really think Bush's legacy will amount to more than keeping Warren G. Harding company at the bottom of the presidential ranking charts,

Here's what our fearless leader had to say about Obama recently: "I certainly don't know what he believes in. The only foreign policy thing I remember he said was he's going to attack Pakistan and embrace Ahmadinejad." Damn he excudes charm and confidence.

comment #8

D.Z. says ...

mutiny: "Hillary, on the other hand, voted for the war, and although she now says it was wrong,"

She hasn't really said the war was wrong, just that she was "misled" on it.

"However, nationwide, once you factor in conservatives and those with military connections, their feeling is more along the lines of: the war was started for the right reasons, it's just been mishandled and we need to find a way to fix things and start bringing the troops home."

Um, no. Many conservatives are also agreeing that the war was a mistake. Otherwise, they wouldn't have voted Democrat in '06. It's only the apologists who want to come off "independent" who claim the war was mishandled.

"The problem with Obama's position in a national election is: a) Lack of experience,"

We've gone over that already, and the "experience" of his competitors still led to them making the wrong judgment calls.

"the fact he wasn't even in office just a few years ago when the vote took place;"

Except for when he voted against the war as a Senator, but you can continue lying for the Clintons as much as you want.

"b) By saying the war was wrong all along, he's telling a lot of people that we've fought and died for nothing."

Yes, dealing with reality is wrong. Let's pretend
everything is fine and dandy, until the next bridge or levee collapse. Anyway, I guess you haven't been keeping up with polls in which a large majority of Americans say the war "wasn't worth it".

"or do you pick somebody whose view might play better in the national election."

Except that Hillary doesn't have any viewpoints. She's just saying whatever will get her to win, much like McCain.

comment #9

mutinyco says ...

D.Z, it amazes me how much time you spend on being ignorant.

comment #10

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

My congratulations, Mutinyco.

Out of a very rich field of contenders, that may be the best and pithiest summation of D.Z.'s posts yet.

(I'm still trying to figure out what, out of a wide-ranging interview by Bush, was supposed to be the obvious proof that Bush is a "liar." Okay, I'm not really trying that hard.)

comment #11

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax: So McCain is a true conservative in your eyes?

Anyway, Hillary fired her manager. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080210/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_campaign_manager

comment #12

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

I'm a classical liberal, so how would I know?

comment #13

shanana says ...

Actually Multinyco, it seems to me D.Z. is the only one on this board who has a clue as to what is going on in this presidential election. The notion that Obama puts the general election in jeopardy if elected is completely out-of-right-field false. Have you been paying attention to the turnout numbers at the primaries and caucuses? Record turnouts across the nation. Do you honestly believe the turnout is for the McCain-Huckabee-Romney bids? Of course not, it's about Obama and Hillary. Either one is a strong enough candidate to win the general election. Both are stimulating the electorate and not just the base, or a fringe of their base. People who are trying to paint this election as "close" are the ones who need to open their eyes.
Hillary is political machine. The fact that Obama has not only held his own, but actually has risen above the fray, shows that he is a strong political force as well. Can you even imagine John "I'm gonna continue this unpopular war AND lower taxes" McCain in a debate against either of these candidates? It's gonna be a massacre.

comment #14

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Actually, I can imagine John "biting wit and twice as much time in the Senate as Hillary and Obama squared" McCain doing just fine in the debates. He may not say anything YOU agree with, but that's hardly the same as not doing well.

comment #15

nemo says ...

"Once BO is elected, Wells isn't going to go over the cabinet possibilities, is he?"

Once Barack is elected, he's going to appoint Jeff Wells as the first Secretary of the newly-formed Department of Cinema.

comment #16

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax: I agree that he excels in his ability to talk to himself, but he needs to be able to work with others to succeed.

comment #17

nemo says ...

Wasn't Mgmax talking just a few months ago about what an unstoppable force 9iuliani would be in the general election?

comment #18

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Hey, he mighta been, who knows? It was getting there that was the problem.

The point is, there's not much value in posts that basically say "The guy who agrees with me is going to mop the floor with the guy who doesn't." Could be true, but why would I trust you? Both McCain and Obama will be well-spoken, fairly charming candidates with bases they energize, anyone who thinks either guy's a pushover (and there are Republicans who believe Obama's just the flavor of the month and his balloon will burst) is believing their own propaganda.

comment #19

frankbooth says ...

"Biting?" How about "bitter?"

Mccain is one prickly pear, and it's going to be hard for his handlers to keep that aspect of his charm under wraps. Especially if he misses his naps on the campaign trail.

I look forward to the Youtube moments.

comment #20

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax: Please. McCain couldn't even win against a Swiftboating from Bush. His nomination is just the result of moderate Republicans desperately trying to restore their party's image.

comment #21

JohnCope says ...

"Please. McCain couldn't even win against a Swiftboating from Bush. His nomination is just the result of moderate Republicans desperately trying to restore their party's image."

Wha? Is McCain considered a moderate?

Regardless, I suspect that anyone who thinks McCain will be rolled over easily (especially when he knows this is his last shot) is out of their mind.

comment #22

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

D.Z., conservatives don't think conservatism needs an image makeover. Oddly enough, they have this funny belief that victory in Iraq--

http://tinyurl.com/2uroqe

--the ability to conduct useful surveillance of foreign nationals trying to murder vast numbers of us--

http://tinyurl.com/37mbrl

==tax cuts and so on are policies with innate appeal of their own, not ones that have to be dressed up in big-spending paternalism to sell. Maybe we're in an entirely new political era, but all in all, the record of the electorate since 1980 suggests that they just might be on to something.

comment #23

christian says ...

Tax cuts, torture and surveillance.

That's some party platform. I predict GOP landslide.

comment #24

D.Z. says ...

John: "Is McCain considered a moderate?"

Not anymore, but his voters believe otherwise.

"Regardless, I suspect that anyone who thinks McCain will be rolled over easily (especially when he knows this is his last shot) is out of their mind."

I got two words for you: Bob Dole.

Mgmax: "D.Z., conservatives don't think conservatism needs an image makeover. Oddly enough, they have this funny belief that victory in Iraq--"

William Buckley seems to disagree with you on that.

"Diary of an Insurgent In Retreat"

Was that before or after he blew up a lot of people that same day?

"--the ability to conduct useful surveillance of foreign nationals trying to murder vast numbers of us--"

You mean pointless surveillance of innocent Americans.

"==tax cuts and so on are policies with innate appeal of their own, not ones that have to be dressed up in big-spending paternalism to sell."

Except for that "stimulus".

"Maybe we're in an entirely new political era, but all in all, the record of the electorate since 1980 suggests that they just might be on to something."

Yes, but it's probably not legal.

comment #25

Chicago48 says ...

Heads up Hillary now wants to claim the delegates from Florida & Michigan, after the DNC agreed not to include them as delegates. Stealing the Primary?

comment #26

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Tax cuts, torture and surveillance. That's some party platform. I predict GOP landslide.

Given McCain's anti-torture bona fides, I guess he'll just have to run on letting you keep more of your own money, and catching the bad guys before they kill you. Please don't throw me in that briar patch!

comment #27

christian says ...

McCain's clearly in the minority on torture. Letting Cheney be in charge of who gets watched isn't comforting, and I don't mind money going to feed children, or even to take care of veterans.

Into the briar patch.

comment #28

christian says ...

McCain's clearly in the minority on torture. Letting Cheney be in charge of who gets watched isn't comforting, and I don't mind money going to feed children, or even to take care of veterans.

Into the briar patch.

comment #29

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

You mean pointless surveillance of innocent Americans.

If anything stands likely to lose the election for the Democrats, well, after widespread disgust at the Clintons stealing the nomination, it will be that attitude which is so blithely, cluelessly out of touch with the reality that there ARE terrorists in this world, that technology has changed since FISA was passed 30 years ago, and that modernized surveillance has and will save American lives while doing little if any harm to you or anyone you know, unless you actually are talking to a member of al-Qaeda on a regular basis, which since you pretend such groups don't even exist, seems unlikely.

comment #30

christian says ...

"doing little if any harm to you or anyone you know, unless you actually are talking to a member of al-Qaeda on a regular basis,"

And suddenly Mgmax, you have touching, unerring faith in the federal government to make it all right.

comment #31

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

All in all, I'd rather risk the government screwing up my phone service than my quadruple bypass, thank you very much.

comment #32

christian says ...

How about tossing you in jail without a trial?

comment #33

shanana says ...

"All in all, I'd rather risk the government screwing up my phone service than my quadruple bypass, thank you very much."

I don't hear the President or Congress complaining about their health care.

comment #34

nemo says ...

I just got finished going through a month of Blue Cross Blue Shield screwing up a simple prescription for Nexium.

From the time the doctor wrote the prescription to the time Walgreen's finally filled it took me 5 phone calls to the doctor's office, 3 phone calls to BCBS, 4 phone calls to Walgreen's, and 4 abortive visits to Walgreen's. (And that's not counting the multiple phone calls the doctor's office had to make to both BCBS and Walgreen's.) I finally got the prescription on the 5th visit.

I'm not too thrilled with the wonderful competence of private sector health insurance. BCBS and Walgreen's together pulled off the remarkable stunt of making the Department of Motor Vehicles look good.

BCBS is a paper-shuffling bureaucracy, no different from any other paper-shuffling bureaucracy. Bureaucracy is in the nature of the insurance industry. The number one mission for private health insurance is to deny service.

And through my employer I have the best health insurance of anyone I know!

comment #35

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

I don't hear the President or Congress complaining about their health care.

And I'm sure you'll have just as much clout when you pick up the phone to complain.

comment #36

christian says ...

Well, somebody in the federal government is keeping Cheney alive...forever.

comment #37

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

I'm not too thrilled with the wonderful competence of private sector health insurance. BCBS and Walgreen's together pulled off the remarkable stunt of making the Department of Motor Vehicles look good.

I will give you that. My favorite is when you start getting collection calls while they're still figuring what the final bill is. I always yell at them, "You people trained me not to pay the first bill, or even the first ten bills, because you'll keep changing the number for another month. If you can absolutely guarantee me this is the final amount, with your name and employee number attached, I'll pay it."

Still, it takes being a major pain in the ass but you can get accountability from those people, eventually. I'm in no hurry to get rid of the last scrap of it remaining in the system.

comment #38

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax: "technology has changed since FISA was passed 30 years ago, and that modernized surveillance has and will save American lives while doing little if any harm to you or anyone you know, unless you actually are talking to a member of al-Qaeda on a regular basis,"

Tell that to the six people about to be executed for being tortured into being connected to 9/11...

"All in all, I'd rather risk the government screwing up my phone service than my quadruple bypass,"

They're doing both right now...

"And I'm sure you'll have just as much clout when you pick up the phone to complain."

Hey, I demanded CIGNA save Nataline Sarkisyan's life, and they still considered it cheaper to murder her.

comment #39

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

Tell that to the six people about to be executed for being tortured into being connected to 9/11...

I'd like it on the record that D.Z. has proclaimed the innocence, beyond any doubt, of Khalid Sheikh Muhammad and the five other people the government wants to prosecute. That's the base of the party you want to put into power-- a nation of Ramsey Clarks, who never met an "anti-imperialist" fascist murderer they couldn't love and defend.

Hey, I demanded CIGNA save Nataline Sarkisyan's life, and they still considered it cheaper to murder her.

And there's their nuanced understanding of the complex intersection of medical and financial issues-- an insurance company, by not putting a poor risk candidate for a transplant ahead of other, better candidates, "murdered" her. I will feel so much safer knowing that health care decisions are being made on the basis of Daniel Zelter's demagogic hysteria.

comment #40

D.Z. says ...

Mgmax: "I'd like it on the record that D.Z. has proclaimed the innocence, beyond any doubt, of Khalid Sheikh Muhammad and the five other people the government wants to prosecute."

If you were born in a different time, I'd imagine you'd be saying the same thing about Sacco and Vanzetti and the Rosenbergs, too...

"That's the base of the party you want to put into power-- a nation of Ramsey Clarks, who never met an "anti-imperialist" fascist murderer they couldn't love and defend."

That's funny, coming from a guy whose party was the reason Saddam executed so many Kurds in the first place...

"And there's their nuanced understanding of the complex intersection of medical and financial issues-- an insurance company, by not putting a poor risk candidate for a transplant ahead of other, better candidates, "murdered" her."

Yep. They paid for a service which the company could cover, and which could save her life, and the company chose not to do so, even though its job is to protect people against illness. That, right there, contradicts the argument for unregulated capitalism.

"I will feel so much safer knowing that health care decisions are being made on the basis of Daniel Zelter's demagogic hysteria."

Her family would feel safer, anyway...

comment #41

Mgmax, le Corbeau says ...

I would be saying the same thing about Sacco and Vanzetti, since Sacco likely was guilty:

http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1962/4/1962_4_4.shtml

and Julius (though probably not Ethel) was certainly guilty:

http://www.fiftiesweb.com/pop/rosenberg.htm

Good to know you'd have been a useful idiot of killers in any decade.

comment #42

D.Z. says ...

"I would be saying the same thing about Sacco and Vanzetti, since Sacco likely was guilty"

Likely isn't the same as definitely.

"and Julius (though probably not Ethel) was certainly guilty:"

Only if you believe witches can float.

"Good to know you'd have been a useful idiot of killers in any decade."

What are you talking about? I'm not a hawk like you.