Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[DoBotherMe]

It's a free country. I or anyone can form an opinion about someone and then based on that opinion or impression determine whether that someone deserves my vote. I'm also pretty sick of campaign fundraising ... what a waste. So if I or anyone desires to sit out the whole unseemly charade, it's our right to do so. Dana ; )

[alexis]

It's a free country. I or anyone can form an opinion about someone and then based on that opinion or impression determine whether that someone deserves my vote. I'm also pretty sick of campaign fundraising ... what a waste. So if I or anyone desires to sit out the whole unseemly charade, it's our right to do so. Dana ; )

DoBotherMe - Sorry, I didn't make my point well, hope I didn't "Bother You"! Of course it's a free country (well, that's actually a different discussion), and anyone has the right to sit this out.

The point I tried (unsuccessfully) to raise for the sake of discussion is: Unhappy with the whole process? Would changing this be done more effectively by voting, or not voting?  

[PaulieBear]

John McCain to too worried about bashing Barrack. and Barrack is too worried about trying to deflect McCain's comments. niether

[Joost]

I think that if you look at all the 'scandals' related to Obama that the Republicans have dug up so far, it really speaks in Obama's advantage. All the Palin scandals for instance were "Palin did...", "Palin was..." or "Palin got...", while the Obama scandals were all "Obama's pastor did...", "An acquaintance of Obama was..." or "Someone Obama once worked with got..."...

[Geoff]

Remember Joe the plumber, who was McCain's favorite campaign prop a week or so ago? Apparently he's contemplating a career change....  


Joe the Plumber pursued for record deal
By JEFFREY RESSNER | 10/29/08 3:59 PM EDT

Move over, Sanjaya, and tell William Hung the news: Joe the Plumber is being pursued for a major record deal and could come out with a country album as early as Inauguration Day.

[alexis]

Remember Joe the plumber, who was McCain's favorite campaign prop a week or so ago? Apparently he's contemplating a career change....  


Joe the Plumber pursued for record deal
By JEFFREY RESSNER | 10/29/08 3:59 PM EDT

Move over, Sanjaya, and tell William Hung the news: Joe the Plumber is being pursued for a major record deal and could come out with a country album as early as Inauguration Day.

[harihead]

People who don't vote are letting other people decide important aspects of their life-- peace, war, health insurance, education, taxes, etc. If you're happy with this, fine. But there are people lobbying 24/7 to push their views through Washington in direct opposition to what the majority of Americans feel is in their best interest. Every person who doesn't vote gives these people that much more power.

I honestly don't understand why someone would want to throw away their one chance to directly influence the government that shapes so much of their lives.

[An Apple Beatle]

Obama looking mighty good in Florida right now. Looking like someone who can rouse and inspire people.

[Geoff]

Come on, surely they can bash out a single in the next day or so! Look what the Beatles did, a whole ALBUM in a day!! :-)

^  

First single: "Unlicensed Plumber Blues"/"Achy Breaky Heart (Drunken Sod Mix)" -with Sarah Palin

[Geoff]

I honestly don't understand why someone would want to throw away their one chance to directly influence the government that shapes so much of their lives.

But voting requires, or ought to require, a rationally arrived at decision, and anyone who can't even see that there's something really quite important at stake this time much less draw some sort of conclusion about it probably should stay away from the voting booths.  :-/

[alexis]

^  

First single: "Unlicensed Plumber Blues"/"Achy Breaky Heart (Drunken Sod Mix)" -with Sarah Palin

Nice, Geoff  

How about "Taxman - You Know My Name"/"Devil in Her Heart" (with Sarah Palin)

Or "Baby I'm a Rich Man (So Don't Bother Me)"/"You Never Give Me Your Money (You socialist Piggies)" - Backed by John McCain and the Flamers!

[alexis]

Colorado and other states reject voter roll purges!! Go Harihead  

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/31/us/politics/31colorado.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Voter Purge Rejected in Colorado

By DAN FROSCH and IAN URBINA
Published: October 30, 2008
DENVER

[Geoff]

Nice, Geoff  

How about "Taxman - You Know My Name"/"Devil in Her Heart" (with Sarah Palin)

Or "Baby I'm a Rich Man (So Don't Bother Me)"/"You Never Give Me Your Money (You socialist Piggies)" - Backed by John McCain and the Flamers!

I wouldn't be surprised by anything they came up with (well, okay: something tolerable/listenable would be a bloody shock).
 
(beammeup)

[Geoff]

Good point:  


America isn't about to become liberal heaven
Yes, Americans will be voting for Obama and change. But they don't want radicalism, just competence and decency
Gerard Baker
The Times

As America's government prepares to take a sudden and historic leftward turn, this might seem an odd moment to ponder what a conservative country it is.

On Wednesday morning, unless the political equivalent of a giant meteorite hits Earth before then, Democratic supporters in America, in happy union with almost the whole of the civilised world, will be singing hosannas to the new President-elect. They will expect the Obama proto-administration and the expanded Democratic caucus in Congress to press hard to implement quickly their agenda of wealth redistribution; a tougher and broader scope of government regulation; and an enthusiastic embrace of foreign policy multilateralism.

But the new rulers and their allies overseas would be well advised to tone down the rhetoric, play down expectations and rein in their wilder tendencies. The easiest mistake for the world to make would be to start believing the Left's own propaganda: that a vote for Barack Obama and for a Democrat in Congress on Tuesday is a vote to transform the country into a kind of social democratic paradise.

Perhaps the best supporting evidence for this claim is the likely outcome on Tuesday. Though there's no real doubt about who will win, the presidential election still looks like being a closer contest than it has any right to be.

Consider the objective facts of political life in late 2008.

You have the end of a two-term presidency, when the country is always hungry for change. You have an economy that has slipped, with almost exquisite political timing for Democrats, into what looks likely to be a deep recession. You have a global financial crisis the like of which has not been seen in 75 years.

You have deep dissatisfaction with America's standing in the world, widespread (albeit post-hoc) disapproval of the biggest Republican-driven foreign policy event of the past ten years, the decision to go to war in Iraq and something bordering on alarm about the prospects for success in the other continuing war in Afghanistan.

You have a Republican Party that has displayed an unpardonable level of incompetence, inadequacy and venality in the past four years. From the handling of Hurricane Katrina to a steady procession of members of Congress in legal trouble: a rogues' gallery with a record of crimes and misdemeanours ranging from taking bribes to soliciting sex in public toilets. Just this week, in a timely reminder of the toxicity of the Republican brand, Ted Stevens, of Alaska, became the first sitting senator to be convicted on felony charges since 1981.

In the campaign, you have a Democratic candidate who has raised twice as much money as the Republican, a jaw-dropping $650million, enabling him to blanket the country with advertisements and, culminating this week in an extraordinary 30 minutes of nationwide TV on the networks.

You have a fractious and visibly enfeebled Republican campaign that seems to be unable to suppress a disturbing psychological tendency towards self-harm. And, of course, you have media that have managed to exceed themselves in their obeisance towards the left-of-centre candidate, raising to new levels of absurdity their claims of objectivity.

What, in these circumstances, would a scientific model predict as the winning margin for the Democratic presidential candidate: 10, 15, 20 percentage points? In fact, as of yesterday, Mr Obama seemed to have a solid but by no means overwhelming advantage of between 5 and 6 percentage points.

If this were a football game, it would be one played on a field tilted at an angle of about 20 degrees, in which the teams did not change sides at half-time, and in which the one playing downhill had twice as many players on the field as its opponents, who, to make things a little bit more interesting, have bound their goalkeeper hand and foot to one of the goalposts. The final score? 3-2, after extra time.

Or put it another way: it has taken a mismanaged foreign policy that almost lost a war, a botched emergency response that almost lost a city, a Republican Party that almost lost its soul and an economic crisis that almost lost the country's financial system to break the Republican stranglehold on the White House.

The usual objection here is that Mr Obama would be doing much better if there weren't so many racists in America. That, in his own words, too many Americans have been prodded into worrying that he

[alexis]

Good point:  


America isn't about to become liberal heaven
Yes, Americans will be voting for Obama and change. But they don't want radicalism, just competence and decency
Gerard Baker
The Times

As America's government prepares to take a sudden and historic leftward turn, this might seem an odd moment to ponder what a conservative country it is.

On Wednesday morning, unless the political equivalent of a giant meteorite hits Earth before then, Democratic supporters in America, in happy union with almost the whole of the civilised world, will be singing hosannas to the new President-elect. They will expect the Obama proto-administration and the expanded Democratic caucus in Congress to press hard to implement quickly their agenda of wealth redistribution; a tougher and broader scope of government regulation; and an enthusiastic embrace of foreign policy multilateralism.

But the new rulers and their allies overseas would be well advised to tone down the rhetoric, play down expectations and rein in their wilder tendencies. The easiest mistake for the world to make would be to start believing the Left's own propaganda: that a vote for Barack Obama and for a Democrat in Congress on Tuesday is a vote to transform the country into a kind of social democratic paradise.

Perhaps the best supporting evidence for this claim is the likely outcome on Tuesday. Though there's no real doubt about who will win, the presidential election still looks like being a closer contest than it has any right to be.

Consider the objective facts of political life in late 2008.

You have the end of a two-term presidency, when the country is always hungry for change. You have an economy that has slipped, with almost exquisite political timing for Democrats, into what looks likely to be a deep recession. You have a global financial crisis the like of which has not been seen in 75 years.

You have deep dissatisfaction with America's standing in the world, widespread (albeit post-hoc) disapproval of the biggest Republican-driven foreign policy event of the past ten years, the decision to go to war in Iraq and something bordering on alarm about the prospects for success in the other continuing war in Afghanistan.

You have a Republican Party that has displayed an unpardonable level of incompetence, inadequacy and venality in the past four years. From the handling of Hurricane Katrina to a steady procession of members of Congress in legal trouble: a rogues' gallery with a record of crimes and misdemeanours ranging from taking bribes to soliciting sex in public toilets. Just this week, in a timely reminder of the toxicity of the Republican brand, Ted Stevens, of Alaska, became the first sitting senator to be convicted on felony charges since 1981.

In the campaign, you have a Democratic candidate who has raised twice as much money as the Republican, a jaw-dropping $650million, enabling him to blanket the country with advertisements and, culminating this week in an extraordinary 30 minutes of nationwide TV on the networks.

You have a fractious and visibly enfeebled Republican campaign that seems to be unable to suppress a disturbing psychological tendency towards self-harm. And, of course, you have media that have managed to exceed themselves in their obeisance towards the left-of-centre candidate, raising to new levels of absurdity their claims of objectivity.

What, in these circumstances, would a scientific model predict as the winning margin for the Democratic presidential candidate: 10, 15, 20 percentage points? In fact, as of yesterday, Mr Obama seemed to have a solid but by no means overwhelming advantage of between 5 and 6 percentage points.

If this were a football game, it would be one played on a field tilted at an angle of about 20 degrees, in which the teams did not change sides at half-time, and in which the one playing downhill had twice as many players on the field as its opponents, who, to make things a little bit more interesting, have bound their goalkeeper hand and foot to one of the goalposts. The final score? 3-2, after extra time.

Or put it another way: it has taken a mismanaged foreign policy that almost lost a war, a botched emergency response that almost lost a city, a Republican Party that almost lost its soul and an economic crisis that almost lost the country's financial system to break the Republican stranglehold on the White House.

The usual objection here is that Mr Obama would be doing much better if there weren't so many racists in America. That, in his own words, too many Americans have been prodded into worrying that he

[Geoff]

Never understimate the American voter - even giving them the benefit of the doubt of Bush in 2000, they voted Bush in 2004. This race isn't over by any means, and it's very possible that there will be a President McCain on November 5th.

Then, as to the main point of the article - this economic crisis has shown Americans how broken our country is. I believe, that if done competently, we will support a "New Deal" FDR-like approach to major overhaul of government institutions.

I doubt you'll see anything like a "New Deal" restructuring of the government and the economy barring a huge and long lasting rise in unemployment. But an intelligently presented and rolled out agenda might rehabilitate the old idea that government has a useful role in regulating the market economy and in providing services and opportunities to people that aren't adequately supplied by the operation of markets. If President Obama can raise the legitimacy of non-market social institutions (government and otherwise), that will be a significant legacy in itself.  

[Geoff]

I think this is over, assuming the polls are reasonably accurate and that there's no great shift to McCain over the next three days. McCain would have to win all the toss ups plus at least three of the Obama-leaning states (Ohio, Pennsylvania, and one other) in order to win. It's not impossible, but it's not likely, either.  

[alexis]

The Angst of the Obama voter. Does this remind anyone of themselves?

**************************************************************************************
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/01/us/politics/01angst.html?em
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

November 1, 2008
Obama Is Up, and Fans Fear That Jinxes It
By MICHAEL POWELL
In the den of his home in New Hope, Pa., a liberal Democrat sits tap-tapping at his computer.

Jon Downs works the electoral vote maps on Yahoo like a spiritualist shaking his Ouija board. He calibrates and recalibrates: Give Senator John McCain Ohio, Missouri, even Florida. But Virginia and Pennsylvania, those go to Senator Barack Obama. And Vermont, Democrats can count on Vermont, right?

Right.

Almost always, Mr. Downs, 53, ends with Mr. Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, ahead, which should please this confirmed liberal and profound Obama fan. But just as often he feels worried.

[Geoff]

The Angst of the Obama voter. Does this remind anyone of themselves?

Nah. Arrogance suits me far better than angst.  

It's very hard to see how the Republicans pull this one off; something in the range of 325-350 electoral votes for Obama strikes me as being the most likely outcome, and he could easily win by more than that if the high number of early voters is anything to go by. Some speculation from The New Republic:


Today's Polls: Victory Conditions

This is beginning to look like a five-state election. Those states are Virginia, Colorado, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Nevada. Essentially all relevant electoral scenarios involve some combination of these five states.

I should caution that by far the most likely scenario is that Obama wins some relatively decisive victory of anywhere from 3-12 points in the popular vote. If Obama wins the popular vote by anything in this range, he will find plenty of blue territory, accumulating somewhere between 300-400 electoral votes. The electoral math will matter very little.

We can probably assume, however, that IF the national polls tighten significantly (and to reiterate, the likelihood is that they will NOT), McCain will edge out a victory in North Carolina, Florida, Indiana, North Dakota, Montana, Georgia, and Missouri; put those states in the McCain column for the time being. Likewise, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa all appear safe for Obama, even in the case of significant tightening. Put those in the Obama column.

That leaves our five states in play. The victory conditions for Obama involving these five states proceed something as follows:

1. Win Pennsylvania and ANY ONE of Colorado, Virginia, Ohio, or Nevada*
2. Win Ohio and EITHER Colorado OR Virginia.
3. Win Colorado AND Virginia AND Nevada.

(* Nevada produces a 269-269 tie, which would probably be resolved for Obama in the House of Represenatives.)

Now, suppose you think that Colorado is already in the bag for Obama because of his large edge in early voting there. We can then simplify the victory conditions as follows:

1. Win Pennsylvania
2. Win Ohio
3. Win Virginia AND Nevada

That's basically what it comes down to, although I'm sure each campaign would claim that there are a larger number of states in play.

Sorry to get off on such a tangent about this; I wanted to talk, for a change, about something other than whether the POLLS ARE TIGTHENING (!!!) or not. But as to that question, the evidence is again somewhat mixed. Contrary to other recent days, Obama gained ground in the national trackers on average, picking up points in Research 2000, Gallup and Rasmussen. The Zogby that Matt Drudge went on about turned out to be the only poll where he lost ground, while ABC/Post, IPD/TIPP and Hotline held steady.

However, our model does perceive about a point's worth of tightening in the state polls. And the Pennslyvania polls have probably tightened by more than one point, although it is important to note that the four polls that show the state in the mid- single digits (Rasmussen, Mason-Dixon, ARG and Strategic Vision) have all had Republican leans so far this cycle. Pennsylvania is still an extreme long shot for John McCain -- Obama is more likely to win Arizona than McCain the Keystone -- just not quite the long-shot that it had looked like a couple of days ago.

As a final word of warning, proceed cautiously with any polls that were in the field last night. Friday nights are difficult enough to poll, and holidays are difficult enough to poll, but when a Friday night coincides with a holiday (in this case, Halloween), getting an appropriate sample is all but impossible.

[Geoff]

I guess it's angst of a sort....


Hark! I Hear A Celebrity Oracle

REX MURPHY
From Saturday's Globe and Mail
October 31, 2008 at 9:01 PM EDT

Where is Cameron Diaz? Haven't seen and, worse, haven't heard from her in so long a while. Has she been disappeared? Is she in Guantanamo, the Bush-Cheney gulag for dissident celebrities?

A little more than four years ago, on a panel boasting the finest minds the world has known since the days of ancient Athens, when Socrates was tutoring Plato, Ms. Diaz was offering advice on the coming election between George Bush and John Kerry.

The scene was the edification we all know and love as The Oprah Winfrey Show. The grand empath, her Oprahness, had designed a program to stir the youth of America to vote, and crowded onto the couch (besides Ms. Diaz) an almost frightening constellation of intelligence and prestige.

There was Sean Combs, a putty artist of nomenclature, whom you may know as Puff Daddy, P. Diddy, Puffy, Diddy, Daddy Piff or Diddy Puff. The backup intellects for the occasion, doo-woppers for Mr. Diddy's famous Vote or Die campaign, were Christina Aguilera and Drew Barrymore.

Think of it as a symphony of mind.

It was the sylphlike Ms. Diaz who framed the choice between George (Neanderthal, Halliburton, frat boy, Karl Rove puppet, tool of Big Oil, IQ of a lug wrench) Bush and John (elegant) Kerry most lucidly. She issued a warning to the timid and vacant minds of young America, especially to the female half of that monstrous demographic. "If you think rape should be legal, then don't vote!"

And lest that wouldn't hold their attention - the young of America are notoriously detached - the delectable Cassandra who had transfixed the world in There's Something about Mary further cautioned that they "could lose the right to their bodies." Which would be inconvenient.

America didn't listen that day, at least young America didn't. George (amoeba, cretin, theocrat, warmonger) Bush defeated John (sweet) Kerry, rape has been legal in that despoiled country for four years, and millions of young women have had to get government permission to use their bodies for anything - getting out of bed, going to a global warming protest, dropping by Starbucks or attending the MTV awards (where a body is an absolute must - although there's a cover charge on the brain).

We haven't heard from Ms. Diaz this cycle, which is such a shame. Maybe she's just tired. Or taken up macrame;. Speaking Bluetooth to power can drain the old soul. But America is nothing if not the country of renewal. If one oracle vanishes, another leaps from the self-help rack at Barnes and Noble, or from the back pages of the better fashion magazines.

The Cameron Diaz of the 2008 election and, need I say, supporter of Barack (cool, mesmeric, "thrill up my leg," hope, change, new dawn, better dawn, dawn all day) Obama is Erica Jong. Ms. Jong wrote a book called Fear of Flying, which is to literature what Charlie's Angels is to theology.

But Ms. Jong is, make no mistake about it, a seer and guru of Diaz dimensions. She hangs about with an almost equally illustrious crowd, numbering such geopolitical high foreheads as Jane (Hanoi, exercise videos, Ted Turner) Fonda and Naomi (Al Gore's "earth tones" clothing consultant, author of The Treehouse) Wolf as among her fellow thinkers.

Ms. Jong, and God bless her courage, issued a warning this week