Re: The Habit Of Getting It Exactly Right

1

That is a good ad.


Posted by: joeo | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 8:08 PM
horizontal rule
2

Aiee. It's probably effective, and there's nothing wrong, or improper about it.

But it makes my flesh crawl that to sell an ad stating an anti-war position, to a population that massively opposes the war, Obama needs to use a general as a mouthpiece to protect himself from being attacked as a sissy-boy pacifist. I think he's right that it is necessary, but it gives me the creeps.


Posted by: LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 8:17 PM
horizontal rule
3

Kevin Drum also made a fairly solid argument about why the war might not be the specific variety of "massively unpopular" that we think it is.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 8:19 PM
horizontal rule
4

KDrum is right about this. I always suspect that the differences between the candidates' policy preferences pale by comparison with the variance in their ability to get people to cooperate with them instead of hating them. But then I think that I don't know which candidate would be best at the latter, and look for clues toward what the answer is.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 8:49 PM
horizontal rule
5

Obama is your answer, Ned.

Glad to help!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 8:52 PM
horizontal rule
6

Is that facetious? Because I know you're all about the "Fuck electability, that's a fancy word for inevitability, which is bullshit", and this is similar to that.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 8:53 PM
horizontal rule
7

It's not facetious. I saw him speak at the convention in 2004, and I instinctually trust him. If his policies and biography seemed vastly out of line with that, I'd be second-guessing myself, but they aren't, so I'm not. It seems, to me, that my instinctual reaction to him (as compared to the other Dem front-runners) is as valuable a metric as any, for the reasons you (and Drum) have mentioned.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 8:55 PM
horizontal rule
8

How do you show judgment, nebulous as it may seem? Past performance is an indication. I think this is why the issue of the war is so critical. It was a vitally important issue, and we have the performance of most of the candidates to assess. Obama was right - in circumstances where it was brave to be right. Edwards and Clinton were wrong, and only Edwards has the courage to come clean and admit error.

When people ask about why the past is important in assessing what to do *now* in Iraq, I think they miss an important point. Because I think it is pretty critical (and touches on the issue of judgment) to be able to say: "I wouldn't have fucked this up in the first place" - which is some assurance that same candidate won't fuck something else up in the future.


Posted by: McKingford | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 8:58 PM
horizontal rule
9

After a talk at work today the speaker was telling me about some entertaining research showing that people tend to rate those who make similar choices to them as being significantly more intelligent than others.


Posted by: Gonerill | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 9:00 PM
horizontal rule
10

n=1


Posted by: yoyo | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 9:05 PM
horizontal rule
11

people tend to rate those who make similar choices to them as being significantly more intelligent than others

Consistent with other research findings that drivers are more courteous / less aggressive toward other drivers who drive the same make/model of automobile.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 9:28 PM
horizontal rule
12

Obama was right - in circumstances where it was brave to be right.

As an Illinois state legislator? Umm, I'm not sure that was quite as high-pressure a position as Edwards and Clinton were in.


Posted by: marcus | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 9:58 PM
horizontal rule
13

So what would you have had him do, marcus?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:00 PM
horizontal rule
14

You're so irascible in the Dem candidate threads, Sifu. He's just saying that Obama's vote isn't as telling as it seems.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:02 PM
horizontal rule
15

The votes of Clinton and Edwards are, though. Should he just not mention that?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:04 PM
horizontal rule
16

13: I would have had Obama show up to vote against the Kyl-Lieberman Amendment. The fact that he abstained doesn't exactly say fearless in his opposition to the war.


Posted by: Invisible Adjunct | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:09 PM
horizontal rule
17

16: for all my tough talk, yeah.

Edwards on the war: what can I say?

Hillary on the war: wrong times wrong times wrongitty-wrong-wrong-wrong plus coherent-sounding equals sorry am I being sexist, then?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:10 PM
horizontal rule
18

Hey, I hold the Clinton and Edwards votes against them plenty. I just don't credit Obama with being a U.S. Senator with Presidential ambitions who voted against the war, because he wasn't anything like that in 2002-03.

Edwards I believe made up for his vote by taking a very clear stance against the war over the last few years.


Posted by: marcus | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:18 PM
horizontal rule
19

17: I don't see how you're being sexist. Hillary on the war is awful. I'm just not convinced the other two are all that better. Edwards voted for the war but now apologizes. Well, gee. (Edwards would be my first choice, btw, if I had a vote, but I'm not yet inclined to forgive him that vote). Obama didn't vote for the war, but then again, he wasn't yet a US Senator and didn't have to take a stand in a way that really mattered. Last week, he did have an opportunity to take a stand in a way that mattered, and he conveniently abstained. Also, he voted for the renewal of the Patriot Act.

None of the three major candidates will commit to a withdrawal from Iraq before 2013 or thereabouts. It's not clear to me how Edwards and Obama are better than Hillary on this. It looks like, in order to be a major contender, you have to support the occupation of Iraq and you have to be willing to say "we can bomb Iran."


Posted by: Invisible Adjunct | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:20 PM
horizontal rule
20

19: which is why I am publicly throwing my weight behind Richardson, no matter that I don't really like the dude much.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:21 PM
horizontal rule
21

I think you're pretty much right, IA, but Obama did say he would have voted against Kyl-Lieberman, so he's not trying to be coy.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:23 PM
horizontal rule
22

21: But saying he would have voted against the amendment is just not good enough. He's running as the anti-war candidate, for god's sake. He damn well should have turned up to formally register his opposition.

I do like Richardson's plan. Does he have some sort of touchy-feely problem with women, or is that just idle rumour?


Posted by: Invisible Adjunct | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:28 PM
horizontal rule
23

Not idle, I don't think. Also he can't win. But oh well. Gotta go with him.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:31 PM
horizontal rule
24

There are a lot of problems with Richardson, but he's been saying some good stuff. Hopefully he can at least nudge the other candidates in the right direction.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:35 PM
horizontal rule
25

That's what I'm hoping, teo. I don't much want to have to vote for him.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:36 PM
horizontal rule
26

My mom's been saying she might vote for Richardson just for his position on the war. He'll almost certainly win the NM primary if he's still in the race at that point, so it doesn't really matter, but it's an interesting stance.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:38 PM
horizontal rule
27

I agree with your mom, at this point, and it makes me sad.

I really love Obama, but it's a single issue campaign, right now, for me, in that sense.

It sucks.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:41 PM
horizontal rule
28

I'd love it if Richardson could get some traction in the primaries, but it doesn't look like he is. Given that, I wouldn't mind seeing him drop out to run for Domenici's (sp?) Senate seat. It would be good to have another liberal, anti-war vote in the Senate.


Posted by: marcus | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:41 PM
horizontal rule
29

I would be very surprised if Richardson ran for Domenici's seat. Whatever he's gunning for, it isn't Senator.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:43 PM
horizontal rule
30

And he would be anti-war, but not a reliably liberal vote otherwise. He's pretty conservative on a lot of issues.


Posted by: teofilo | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:45 PM
horizontal rule
31

OT: WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:45 PM
horizontal rule
32

I'd be happy to see Richardson as President of the Senate, breaking whatever ties might come along. Any of the majors could do worse.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:55 PM
horizontal rule
33

Richardson aka The Great Pumpkin ain't gonna get the nomination. The best we can hope for is that Obama takes out Hillary.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 10:59 PM
horizontal rule
34

My big worry is that Edwards is carrying the vote of those both racist and misogynist. I fear that racism will beat misogyny; Bitch will be happy, but the country will be fucked.


Posted by: foolishmortal | Link to this comment | 10- 5-07 11:55 PM
horizontal rule
35

34 - The racists and misogynists who vote Democrat put Bill Clinton into office; I can think of many worse outcomes.


Posted by: Hamilton-Lovecraft | Link to this comment | 10- 6-07 12:16 AM
horizontal rule
36

Richardson has been just buffoonish in the debates, though. For a man with his diplomatic career, he lacks dignity grace.


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 10- 6-07 6:11 AM
horizontal rule
37

In case Sifu comes back in the morning: where did Drum make the argument you cite in 3? I'm curious about it.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 10- 6-07 6:11 AM
horizontal rule
38

37: here.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 10- 6-07 9:44 AM
horizontal rule