More importantly - did you win the prize?
I did. And it is awesome. But not as awesome as Obama.
Are you going to share? I'd like the organic honey, if there is any.
Are you going to share?
I will surely blog a book review.
Is it awesomer than Mitt's four secret wives?
Fuck you God, you flaming asshole.
Also, a couple years from now, when President Clinton privatizes Social Security? I will be laughing very hard at Bob McManus. Laughing through my bloody brain-tears.
I very sorry about the primaries continuing for ever and ever and a day, I believe in my man Obama's inevitable victory, but right now it's very important that everyone be warned that organic honey is very good, but "raw, unfiltered organic honey" contains little bits of honeycomb and beewax and totally unidentifiable schmuts, all of which rises to the top of a nice hot cup of tea. Do not buy!
Just don't start crying, OK, Becks? Because that would be unbecoming a front page poster.
Becks, I bet you could parlay this into quite a lucrative little deal with the unfoggedetariat....
13: You don't like it? I buy it for the schmutz.
Becks, I bought Cetaphil and if it works I'll buy you a drink.
Jackmormon hates authenticity.
Seriously, those guys must just be lazy or something. My dad kept hives when we were growing up, and our honey never had that kind of shit floating around in it.
Thanks to 12 I'm laughing now. No Social Security privatization was necessary.
Just don't start crying, OK, Becks? Because that would be unbecoming a front page poster.
No - weep great sobby tears, Becks! It'll show your emotion is genuine and single-handedly win you the election! Donna Brazille told me so herself!
It's healthy, immune-stimulating schmutz.
Schmutz is one thing, but BEESWAx floating in dirty little globules at the top of my herbal tea of an evening? Do not want. Christ, it's like licking candles.
JM, my exceedingly crunchy partner just informed me you're supposed to chew the honeycomb and crunch it down, you wimp.
Heh. Nik-L Nips make me think of Jefferson Twilight.
Skim it off with a spoon? I mean, it's wax. It floats. It should be easy.
Is anyone else watching MSNBC? I can't help but think that Tom Brokaw thinks that Chris Matthews is an enormous tool.
Obama is such a charismatic speaker. Great concession speech, even if he did rip off Cesar Chavez. Por favor.
It should be easy to skim the wax off with a spoon, shouldn't it? Alas, that has not appeared to work well.
Next time I go to the co-op (yes, I have joined the BoBo-in-paradise food co-op to which AWB belongs), I'm just going to have to get the zapatista honey again. The logo is a cute native-Mexican girl wearing a balaclava!
Shit. Shit. Shit. This was not the news I wanted to come home to.
Of course, Cesar probably ripped off Rosie. (The riveter, and not the lesbo t.v. savant.)
32: Do you have a little strainer thing?
But isn't Chris Matthews an enormous tool?
32: Yay! What's your shift? I did mine today, but have to change it before the semester.
36 grossly misrepresents my position in the other thread, for the record.
Matthews and Brokaw were disgustingly fulsome in their McCain tributes.
BECKS YOUR REFLEXIVE MISOGYNY IS SICKENING
I SUPPOSE IT'S NO SURPRISE FROM A SOCCER HOOLIGAN
I have not tried out all of my straining options, it appears. I suppose I should look into you-all's suggestions.
The little girl in the balaclava is awfully cute. A lot cuter than beeswax stuck in one's teeth.
41: you weren't calling people sexist for having little strainer thingies?
40.---Monday mornings. I pack spices and teas!
You know, we've bought organic locally harvested honey at all sorts of farmers markets, and we have never encountered schmutz, let alone honeycomb. I'm often disappointed at how much it resembles commercial honey.
Just don't start crying, OK, Becks?
Becks: too weak and feminine to be commander of the Unfogged militia.
46: I'm in Food Processing too! Email me with your week and maybe I can get a job wrapping cheese with you.
The Zapatista honey is really good, but I'm a sucker for Honey in the Rough, which is thick and sludgy like good honey, but w/o any discernable wax chunks.
I just did it yesterday. I'm A group?
Come to think of it, we have Dwayne the Honey Guy who comes to our farmers market, and the honey we get from him is schmutzless. Different flavors are interesting: Bamboo honey tastes kind of like someone scraped it off a sweaty horse. Most of the rest are good.
51: 1030? I'm leaving Food A 330, which was a really good shift. I'll miss the drama.
Posted in the other thread, but I got to say it again beacuse it's tormenting me: I think Hillary would lose the general to McCain. She's got most of his negatives plus a bunch more.
Women would be the wild card though. Go women!
10:30 indeed! No drama that I've noticed.
I agree, PGD. I am pretty fearful about some of the Clinton / GOP matchups. On top of that, I dislike her policies, and want a non-Clinton in the WH, but I would get a great deal of pleasure out of the woman thing, because I am sexist.
12:Laugh away. There are very strong odds that neither Clinton or Obama will get my vote in November. My vote in Texas may not make a difference, and I demand the right to say:"I don't vote for her." I want Edwards.
I have never voted for a Republican, and want that on my tombstone. But Democrats are not entitled to my vote if they don't enact progressive economic policies.
I voted for a Republican once.
55 is right. One hundred more years!
Related to Rob's link in 59, I would've easily voted for Chafee in 2006, without a single hesitation, if that fucker Langevin got the nomination like the party wanted at the time. I'm pretty sure that plenty of other pro-choice Democrats in Rhode Island would've voted the same way, too.
Yemeni Bin Laden honey used to be available, but probably no more. Al Qaeda at one time controlled the Yemeni honey-distribution network, which reaches down to the village level. Israelis had to find new sources of honey.
We need to have an Unfogged election party at some point. With straw hats and streamers.
All documentation I can find dates from 2001. Apparently the al Qaeda honey threat was quickly extinguished.
63: 2006's was very fun. We should do it again.
Will it start a fight if I say anyone who refuses to vote for the eventual D nominee is a tool?
You know, Super Tuesday is coming up fast but it might be fun to have one then. We could make it a fundraiser for the eventual Democratic candidate. Even if it is Hillary.
The definition of tool would seem to cover somebody who would vote for the Democrats no matter how distasteful the nominee. Just sayin'.
69: given the GOP field, though, I'm willing to say this instance is an exception.
I'm pretty sure that plenty of other pro-choice Democrats in Rhode Island would've voted the same way, too.
"He's pro-choice!" was pretty much the beginning and the end of the pro-Chafee pitch that was made to me. I still voted for the other guy. I'm just glad I live in Kennedy's district so I don't have to vote for Langevin (who, on other issues, isn't that bad).
67, 69: Supreme Motherfucking Court.
Will it start a fight if I say anyone who refuses to vote for the eventual D nominee is a tool?
Probably. Though I'll do my part to ignore you, don't worry.
There's a parallel universe out there where Joe Lieberman is about to get the Democratic nomination, and Lieberman-haters reluctant to vote for Holy Joe in the general are scornfully accused of advocating "the New Naderism."
given the GOP field, though, I'm willing to say this instance is an exception.
This instance, several past instances, and all reasonably foreseeable future instances.
If Clinton ends up the nominee, I'd vote for her solely on the basis of Supreme Court nominees. But I anticipate opposing a goddamned huge amount of an HRC administration's foreign policy.
And that truly sucks. If there's one place the Democratic Party ought to be able to stand in stark opposition to the last seven years, it's foreign policy.
73: Can I get an amen?
75: Joe Lieberman is not the fucking candidate, Stras.
66 and following: Ummm, people do realize that Hillary would be the most liberal President since at least Jimmy Carter? She'd be quite good on domestic policy.
72: Langevin is also pro-flag-burning-amendment, and has supported a bunch of odious "tough on crime" legislation Chafee opposed. I remember coming across all this stuff when the party was backing him for the nomination and feeling utterly betrayed, because the whole point of replacing Chafee was to trade up.
Joe Lieberman is not the fucking candidate, Stras.
Joe Lieberman: objectively anti-fucking.
Joe Lieberman is not the fucking candidate, Stras.
If he were, would you vote for him?
Hillary would be the most liberal President since at least Jimmy Carter
Nope. By every available indication, she's more conservative than her husband.
Ummm, people do realize that Hillary would be the most liberal President since at least Jimmy Carter?
So was her husband. I'm fine with a not-too-liberal President, but I don't think that's going to convince people to the left of me.
By every available indication, she's more conservative than her husband.
Yet perceived to be more liberal. There's a reason I linked to that This American Life piece earlier, people. Listen to it if you want to hear exactly how this will play out.
84: I dunno, honestly. The health care thing *was* her deal (and yeah, it became a mess, but even so). Plus, you know, she's a feminazi.
B, would you vote for Bob Casey if he was the nominee? Or would you feel it was more important to send a message to the Democratic Party that they taking you for granted? Because that's how HRC's record on the war resonates with me.
I don't vote based on the desire to "send a message" to anyone.
84: I disagree. Her husband was pretty conservative.
Supreme Motherfucking Court
Eh, the Democrat will probably win the election anyway, and they'll certainly win Illinois without my vote. Even if Hillary might fail, I'm certain that this is the Democrat's year to take both houses. I also have some faith in Romney and Giuliani's liberal social views preventing some of the most extreme Supreme Court nominations. It's their views on executive power are deeply troubling, but I really only think that Congress can be an effective bulwark against that kind of overreach. Once executive privilege legislation hits the Supreme Court, it's years later and we've probably lost in practice.
83: yup. Still better than any Republican, what with us having the two parties and all.
There was talk somewhere of Bill Ritter as VP for the Dems. And he's pro-life, so it's not necessarily a hypothetical.
Anyhow HRC won't be the nominee, so this is a bit academic.
Any Democrat is better than any Republican. The reason is, if nothing else, judicial nominations. It may not be clear who's electable, but it's clear who the press will never stop hating, which is similar.
I disagree. Her husband was pretty conservative.
His people are her people; it's going to look pretty similar.
98: yes, Ari, you're a bit academic, too.
I also have some faith in Romney and Giuliani's liberal social views preventing some of the most extreme Supreme Court nominations.
I don't understand this.
If Hillary becomes the Democratic Party nominee, I wouldn't be surprised if Bloomberg runs. That's where things could really get fucked for Democrats. He's probably slightly more liberal than her, and with a better opinion on the war. He could actually have really interesting urban education policy, too.
Clinton would be pinned with the ultra-centrists and the Yellow Dog Democrats. How great of a coalition is that?
Apo called me a fucker earlier. But that's just mean.
75 et al: Lieberman's not even a fucking Democrat, and I'm tired of everyone who loses sight of that fact. That said, if my choices in the general were Lieberman and a Republican, I'd take a good hard look at that Republican's stand on the issues, then probably vote for Lieberman.
GOP Delenda Est, Motherfuckers.
93: I would vote for Reid, actually, if he were the nominee.
91:As I said I don't expect my vote in Texas to be meaningful. If it is critical, I'll see.
Re Scotus
Obama will meet with Orrin Hatch and agree on a pro-choice pro-business Justice. Obama has given me no reason to think otherwise.
Obama can't or won't piss Republicans off, on either politics or policy? I don't trust him.
Is Clinton better? Hell no. But that isn't a reason for me to join the Obamarama.
The health care thing *was* her deal
And, even though it was defeated, it was still a profoundly corporate approach to funding the system, that bent over backwards to preserve the insurance companies' role as parasitic profit extractors. Like Bill Clinton, she's a Chamber of Commerce Democrat. Which is fine, they have to be part of the coalition. But it's the rest of the party's turn to be in charge.
Plus, you know, she's a feminazi.
And a lesbian, like all female Democratic officeholders. I get this; honest, I do. But gender aside, she really is on the wrong side of lots and lots of different issues.
105 actually made my skin crawl. Not easy to do, by the way.
102: aw. All I meant is that Obama's still got this.
102: You're alright for a Mexicanacademicfucker.
I also have some faith in Romney and Giuliani's liberal social views preventing some of the most extreme Supreme Court nominations.
Not enough drugs in the world to make me believe this.
"I don't vote based on the desire to "send a message" to anyone"
really? why not? why the hell else would I bother to show up in Massachusetts in 2004? "another popular vote for the Democratic candidate, thankyouverymuch," is a message.
107 gets it right. You should just say that over and over again. Not changing a word, just having some links in reserve as reference.
107: Yeah, I think the corporate shit is what's going to kill national health care. Fuckers. That said, all of the D nominees proposed solutions are all corporatized, because anything that isn't will completely lose them the election.
112: Because one vote in a sea of voting isn't a "message". If you want to send a message, get out there and organize or something. A vote is a choice within a limited realm of choices: you pick the best possible option, and then you do what you can in other ways to send messages that you think your candidate will listen to.
"Of the three viable Democratic contenders, she's the least progressive"
Except on health care, unions, children's and women's issues, choice, and gay rights, probably, and (if it counts) sticking it to the other side. And any actual differences are hard to gauge since she's been running for the general, while Edwards has strategically at least had to occupy the left/populist niche, while Obama has needed to attract independents." ...rilkefan at ObsWi
I get confused by the CDS sometimes.
109: I want you to be right. So tell me why you are?
110: Stop, the flattery is too much.
107: See, I still don't get the animus against her, given that you love the big dog. Shit, I changed my registration to independent b/c of welfare reform. But these days? I'd vote for Bill in a heartbeat, same as I'd vote for Hillary.
117.1: because I always am.
Or, because there's no way for anybody else to know more than I do, so I might as well be. Your vote counts, Obaman!
given that you love the big dog
On a policy level, I don't. I'd grade the Clinton presidency as a C minus at best.
Bill Clinton only looks good because he's sandwiched between Reagan and the Bushes. But President Pauly Shore would look good with those bookends.
How many people here will leave the counry if a Republican wins the election? Or, how many *would* leave the country given the opportunity?
Also, did I use the asterisk properly? I never know. And it keeps me up at night.
Is Clinton better? Hell no. But that isn't a reason for me to join the Obamarama.
Except that Obama would be forced to build an un-DLC coalition, because he can't win the nee-Dixiecrat vote. Similarly, Edwards would have been forced to build an un-DLC coalition b/c they hate "tax & spend" (that is, redistribution) as much as they hate "identity politics." Whatever. Clinton is better than a Republican, and, increasingly, I think she might be the only one who could "succeed."
Pauly Shore is running? What's the maximum I'm allowed to give?
If you want to send a message, get out there and organize or something.
How's that remotely practical for the vast majority of people who have to, you know, work? Or who realize the slim odds of ever producing a successful organization without megaconnections?
I give money to my candidate. I give them all of my primary votes, and if they make it far enough, my general election vote.
If all that fails, I can protest vote. Or I can just leave the country again. If Republicans take Congress, or if Clinton takes office and looks as ineffective as it currently seems, I might as well start applying for those jobs in London instead of the US.
President Pauly Shore would look good
It's WRITE IN time, motherfuckers!
121-122: Exactly, but people love him while they hate Hillary.
123: Yes, you did. Hurrah! Re. leaving the country, I came *back*. In part b/c we wanted to work on the election.
126: My husband works. I worked. We both managed to be politically active. Doing something is better than doing nothing.
123: One of the things that helped tip the balance for leaving the country to go to college was the initial election of Bush a year before my university decision time.
Like Bill Clinton, she's a Chamber of Commerce Democrat.
You insult us. The vast majority of us don't give a shit about scolding individual choices like she is willing to. Also, many of us recognize the needs for a more progressive, substantially simplified tax system to pay for universal health care.
Fuck, war and poor international opinion are bad for business. As are fairly crappy trade legislation proposals. Clinton's trying to be the candidate of the mediocre middle, not some uber-rational corporate overlords.
Becks, would you kindly direct your karma towards Halle Berry's conceiving an irrepressible lust for me? Just for a night or two, then you can have it back.
We both managed to be politically active.
What does this mean? Apart from your husband's canvassing in Nevada, which you've mentioned previously.
126: You were footloose and fancy-free, though, right? It feels harder when you're ancient like me.
HL, you've just reduced my sole issue in this election into one pithy phrase: GOP Delenda Est, Motherfuckers. In a better world, one of the candidates would start campaigning under that slogan.
Stras, why do you fantasize about Hillary's privatizing Social Security, when the Dem candidate who's been making up shit about a Social Security crisis is actually Obama?
Since I expected to spend the night cursing, writing polemics, and having two drinks for the first time in 20 years, I am feeling good. I know people derided Gloria Steinem's obsolete feminism. My generation of feminists must have been frumpy cylons if they smashed the patriarchy that had endured for all human history in only 30 years. In Battlestar Galactica, the human race had to be reduced to 50,000 people before a woman could be president, and she is a hawk, not a dove.
Stras, why do you fantasize about Hillary's privatizing Social Security
Needling Bob's paranoia, Anderson.
when the Dem candidate who's been making up shit about a Social Security crisis is actually Obama?
I wasted half a comment thread on why Obama is not, in fact, actually planning to dismantle Social Security, and how his plan for SS is identical to that of John Edwards and Paul Krugman (despite the bizarre protests of, among others, Paul Krugman). If you want to read my comments on that thread, be my guest; I'm not going to bother rehashing them here. As for Clinton, it bears repeating that she's the only candidate in this race connected to actual attempts to dismantle and/or privatize a large chunk of the social safety net (welfare, Medicare + Choice, etc.). The urge to make Obama into an economic boogeyman here is utterly laughable.
Still got MSNBC on, and the NH exit polls.
Obama won on change, Clinton on experience
On "cares about people like me" Clinton beat Obama by 30+
Gloria Steinem's obsolete feminism
This was the best response I read to that.
138:Fine, stras, but Obama has obviously not made the sale. A lot of us don't trust him.
132: Hrm, for the sake of demonstrating my point I'll overcome being offended by the question. First, I wrote a feminist blog about American politics that had a huge readership and got the attention of most of the "big" bloggers. I did this singlehandedly, and despite the fact that I wasn't living in the states at the time, and had a full-time job, massive depression, and a preschool aged kid. Mr. B. went to Ohio to work in the last general election. I went to political events in D.C. on my own dime and networked with women at Emily's list, PP, and NARAL.
Once we moved back to the states, I went to local meetings: the local democratic women's organizations, city council stuff, school board election speeches. I printed up an assload of flyers, again on my own dime, against our local representative's anti-SCHIP vote and stuck them under people's windshield wipers. I spend a lot of time volunteering at PK's school. Mr. B. is working on the Obama campaign locally, and has been for months now. I'll work on the campaign of whoever gets the general nomination.
Is that enough for you?
she's the only candidate in this race connected to actual attempts to dismantle and/or privatize a large chunk of the social safety net (welfare, Medicare + Choice, etc.).
What was Hillary's connection to Medicare Choice?
139: Bob, where's the "cares about people like me" number from? Because if that's right, there's your story: race. Seriously, do you have a source for that?
So this means I'm politically active, too? Bitchin'!
144:Because if that's right, there's your story: race
Saw it on MSNBC exit polls
And I don't think it is race, I think it is economics & Party identification
In fact, fuck you ari, for being the first to call me a ricist for opposing Obama. Congratulations.
132: Fair enough, that's a lot of work you put into politics. I never really knew how big your blog is, as I've never really read it and only tend to read a couple political blogs.
How does your husband take so much time off work for these campaigns?
You were footloose and fancy-free, though, right? It feels harder when you're ancient like me.
Yeah, and I'm still pretty footloose and fancy-free should I choose. Them's the advantages of youth and singlehood, as well as having old friends in nearly every major economic center in the Northern Hemisphere.
Working for a fairly big corporation can also help. A cool coworker of mine is about to move out to Sydney with his wife after requesting the internal transfer.
Unless you were a NH voter, I don't think Ari could possibly have been referring to you, Bob.
Errr... sorry, I meant 142, not 132.
We're all ricists now.
My friends keep saying I'm one, and they never listen when I insist that the girlfriends they knew were the exceptions.
We must wheat the problem of ricism with every grain of strength we can mustard.
How does your husband take so much time off work for these campaigns?
He doesn't. He does it in his after hours and on weekends. The Vegas trip he did using some vacation time, as well as over the new year's holiday.
B you must be lauded for your superhuman commitment to the cause. Why would you deign to fraternize with suckers such as these?
Sorry, petty.
He doesn't. He does it in his after hours and on weekends.
Huh. What kind of hours are we talking about? I didn't even know that campaigns would take people on for something so part-time.
Here's Yglesias
"As we've seen from the exit polls, she pulled ahead based on strong support from women"
"I should say we're seeing some talk of a "Wilder effect" possibly doing Obama in. I don't buy that. If you look at the breakdown of the results, you'd need to believe that white women, but not white men, are inclined to lie to pollsters about that." ...MY, both quotes
149:In any case, ari is the first here, AFAIK, to blame racism for an Obama loss.
Let me try to make this clear. Party regulars or partisan progressives see economic issues as virulently partisan - see Krugman, Paul. We think we know what Republicans have done, and will do on fiscal policy.
"Make nice with Republicans" makes us grab our wallets, I think with just cause. Okay?
155: I haven't added them up. A fuck of a lot, from my pov. Contact a campaign and ask; fuck yes they want volunteers, and they'll take whatever time you can give.
154: I knew perfectly well that answering that question would open me up to comments like that. Snark away. My point is that most of us commenting here can sure as shit do *something*.
Campaigns will happily take you on to do whatever the fuck you want, Po-Mo. It's not like there's lines of motivated, competent people waiting outside their door to knock on disinterested voters' doors for free.
Or make phone calls, or have people over, or cut turf, or yeah, tons and tons of stuff, man. Mr. B. was working with a woman in Vegas who spent so many hours on the campaign (literally staying in the office until like 4, 5 am) that she got sick. I'm pretty sure she was a volunteer.
Sorry, I was cleaning up the kitchen when I called Bob racist. Which I didn't, of course, as Apo points out. Still, sorry if that's how you took it, Bob. No offense intended.
And actually, I wasn't saying that the New Hampshire voters are racist, either. What I meant was that if that statistic holds up, then that's the story we'll be hearing from the press between now and South Carolina. It's the perfect excuse to begin talking about what otherwise would have been taboo: can we elect an African-American president?
Really, Bob, by "there's your story" I meant there's your media frame. Again, though, sorry.
Let me try to make this clear. Party regulars or partisan progressives see economic issues as virulently partisan - see Krugman, Paul. We think we know what Republicans have done, and will do on fiscal policy.
...which is why they backed the DLC candidate. Are you going to ask me to pull the other finger, bob?
157.2: the tone bothered me, what can I tell you. A residual reflex to "well, I started a blog". Undeserved, surely. Possible symptom of self-hatred.
But fuck all we've managed to accomplish yet, it seems like, on nights like tonight.
I'm talking like McManus (syntactically, in any case); that can't be good.
Dude, I live in Chicago, Obama-central. And my good friends around here include a few people planning on careers in politics as well as general college or grad students with time and the desire. As far as I could tell, it seemed like there are shitloads of dedicated people for the one candidate I'd shill for.
Anyway, I'll admit that I'm just not interested. Not now. I've got work taking up 40-50 hours a week and school taking up another 15-20. And I know how little of a marginal affect my time contribution could possibly have on the election. I mostly feel that, unless I actually helped run a campaign, the election will not be changed one whit at the margin by my actions, and my efforts would probably be best applied to moving somewhere where the electorate agreed with me than trying to make them agree here.
Such are the problems with economic analysis of this shit.
But here's hoping that a couple of the most amazing candidates we've seen in a long while can make it, so that I don't lose all my faith in the American electorate ever doing anything right except by mistake.
For me, Po-Mo, the only reason I've ever done anything is that I decided that if I didn't, and evil triumphed, I'd feel like a chump. YMMV.
I'm talking like McManus (syntactically, in any case); that can't be good.
Heh, tell me about it. My rambling comments of callowness and despair litter these threads. Talking like I speak, only far more cleaned up. Maybe I should be drunk if I didn't have a damn 12 hour day to look forward to tomorrow.
160,161:Yeah, watching MSNBC closet racism & feminist backlash with a soupcon of media hate is what the Kool Kidz are selling.
But I don't expect the economic interpretations to get huge sway in the media, like ever. But the voters, especially informed party members, will vote their pocketbooks.
Soupcon is a word that I only learned to pronounce correctly in my late 20s. Unless I still get it wrong.
"Cares about people like me" sounds like women to me & I don't buy that white women are more racist than white men. Blaming it on race becomes us as ill as blaming Iowa on gender becomes Clinton supporters.
This brought back nasty memories from four years ago, but I gotta say: I don't like the result as far as the candidates but unlike then, I have no reasonable complaint as far as how it happened. As far as I can tell it's some combination of:
(a) record turnout, again
(b) a bunch of late-breaking female voters telling tv commentators peddling sexism and "it's over! He's a shiny winner! She's a losing loser" to go to hell
(c) perfectly justified skepticism over whether Obama is for real
(d) the midwestern candidate had a better organization in the midwest, the northeastern candidate had a better organization in the northeast
And now things are tied. He'll probably get bad press but so did she. I can see resenting it if he never even got a chance, but he has one. It's a good thing if he has to prove he's for real, trustworthy on economic issues, capable of fighting when necessary, just as it's a good thing if her campaign gets a scare. If his supporters give up at the first sign of difficulty, then clearly even THEY don't actually believe in the premise of the campaign, so they can't legitimately complain much about the rest of the country being skeptical.
"Cares about people like me" sounds like women to me & I don't buy that white women are more racist than white men. Blaming it on race becomes us as ill as blaming Iowa on gender becomes Clinton supporters.
I agree. More to the point: who the fuck cares if they voted against him on race? He's either sorted the associated problems out or he hasn't. It's not going to be less relevant going forward. His job is to win votes. Either he can do it or he can't.
And thank you, B, for answering my questions. I did ask them in all sincerity, since it's nice to know what options there are should I ever feel the need to move my political actions beyond voting and donations.
Again, insofar as I wrote something that easily could be misinterpreted as saying that I believe that race was the key variable in voting patterns, my bad. I'm really sorry about that. Because I don't believe it. Actually, I have no idea what I believe. It's way too soon to have an informed opinion. What's weird is how far removed the result is from the polling. But again, I can't account for the discrepency.
Beyond that, though, this will be the third time I'm saying: that's not what I meant. Really, it wasn't.
If Obama can close the deal with the Party, he probably has me. If Obama can bring in enough New Democrats to overwhelm the old grumpy cohort, he probably has me.
I don't hate Obama. I just don't trust him....yet.
Pseuds are funner, Ari. Much freer.
172--understood, I just cross posted.
172:Ok, ari. I'm sorry if I misinterpreted and lost my temper. Emotions will run high this year.
174: So I see.
175: Totally not a problem. Like I said, the fault for the original confusion clearly lies with me. I just don't want to be that guy. At least not yet. I imagine that one of these days I'll be happy to call huge swaths of the electorate racist.
176: And speaking of cross-posting, no need to apologize. My original comment was unclear. All's well now.
Now I just need a good pseudonym. Anyone have a spare?
123: How many people here will leave the counry if a Republican wins the election? Or, how many *would* leave the country given the opportunity?
My wife and I are seriously discussing moving to Amsterdam if a Republican wins. My mom looked shocked when I asked her if she was coming with us, then said yes.
In other news, this anarchosyndicalist rat bastard friend of mine just said "Clinton/Lieberman". Have a nice nightmare.
Who's your favorite president, Ari?
I just don't want to be that guy. At least not yet. I imagine that one of these days I'll be happy to call huge swaths of the electorate racist.
Apo and I will pick up the slack until then.
Straw poll: Would you prefer Clinton/Lieberman, or Syphilitic Goat/Can Of Corn?
Now I just need a good pseudonym. Anyone have a spare?
Both "Spacial Bear" and "El Hombre Muy Magnifico" are still unclaimed. As is "Wry Cooter".
182: pick me, pick me!
Still not convinced it's any kind of deal breaker, tho.
Also, FUCK ELECTABILITY.
Favorite? Lincoln. No doubt. Then FDR. Then it gets tricky. Maybe Washington next. For the usual reason: didn't grasp power with both hands. From there, though, things get really complicated. Least favorite is easier.
And you?
183 has me giggling. And not much else has been funny tonight. So, thanks.
Lyndon's Johnson? Too on the nose, right?
Still not convinced it's any kind of deal breaker, tho.
Also, FUCK ELECTABILITY.
I'm actually feeling much better about Obama's chances in a general in light of these primaries.
The nose is maybe not the appendage that comes to mind.
I mostly feel that, unless I actually helped run a campaign, the election will not be changed one whit at the margin by my actions, and my efforts would probably be best applied to moving somewhere where the electorate agreed with me than trying to make them agree here.
Really? I've always thought that organized labor brought the left, and that the right wing had for ideological reasons, was a large number of people willing to do the grunt work of running a campaign. The campaigns may not need people to stuff envelopes any more, but I'm sure they need folks to man the phones, book hotels and rental cars, coordinate requests of people volunteering or lining up other volunteers, whatever.
And isn't a core part of progressive theory the idea that all the little people working together can stick it to the powerful?
I'll be holding a wake for Edwards on Friday; all are welcome.
My wife and I are seriously discussing moving to Amsterdam if a Republican wins.
Great, more expats driving up housing prices.
More seriously, don't think the Netherlands are entirely isolated from US political developments; we've had rightwing-conservative and centrist-conservative government coalitions roughly since Bush first came to power, with all the diminishing liberalness that brings with it.
My idea of Whut Swung It For Hillary: the Great Crying Scene and accompanying media tuttutting which pissed off a lot of women into voting for her.
102: It is incredible unlikely, but I will give up on Edwards when he does. A crazy year, and a candidate could implode. Petey says if Edwards drops out Clinton wins:the have the same Party diehard base. If Clinton were to implode, I like to think Edwards wins a two-way race against Obama.
I would like to explain 173 in the light of the strong anti-Obama opinions I have expressed.
1) Obama seals the deal with the Party. I was scared, but now I see that Obama will be tested and vetted by the bitter angry party regulars. If enough of the other boomers accept him, and he may need them to get the nomination, I will trust their judgement. A tough crowd.
2) But the America Leftist post by Richard made me rethink the politics. Richard basically said, besides the usual anti-imperialism stuff, that organization & social movements are good in themselves. Movement first policy follows.
If Obama can expand the base, even though the new generational agenda may not completely coincide with mine, it would be close enough in spirit that I would pass the torch and let the kids create the America that they will be living in long after I am dead. Maybe they can stop the wars, foreign and domestic.
And this election is so dynamic & volatile I may change my mind again.
156: Ari may be the first to say "racism," but isn't that what everybody's been hinting at by saying "secret ballot"?
Or maybe I'm just being dense.
There are remarkably few instances of "ClintOWNED!" (or the variant "ClintPWNED!") on the Internet, according to Google.
Here's a Lolcat version using a NYT photo of dejected Barack supporters.
Personally, I'd rather have Barack as president than Hillary, but you make lolcat jpegs with the puns you have, not the puns you might like to have at some future time.
What was Hillary's connection to Medicare Choice?
Responding to a question from PGD from way upthread:
Medicare + Choice - which I think was eventually rebranded "Medicare Advantage" - is distinct from Medicare Part D, the Bush-era corporate-driven prescription drug plan. Medicare + Choice was a late-90s attempt to offer a privatized version of Medicare; it was horribly unpopular. The connection to Hillary Clinton is through her husband and his fellow DLC Dems, obviously, who championed the initiative at the time.
Bill Schneider, CNN ticker
"The economy was the top issue of New Hampshire Democratic primary voters with 39 percent citing it, according to CNN exit polls. Sen. Hillary Clinton was the clear favorite of those voters as 44 percent of them went for her compared to 35 percent who went for Obama.
Clinton also performed well with those voters who said they were falling behind financially. Nearly a third of Democratic primary voters identified themselves in this category and those voters broke for Clinton over Obama by a 10-point margin."
Nick Beaudrot at Cogitamus
"When combined with the exit polls, my read of the situation is that Obama formed the "Bill Bradley Plus Coalition": wealthy liberals, young voters, people of color, and as many middle class ($50,000-$100,000) voters as you can get. He came up a little bit short, primarily among working-class and middle-class urban voters, and didn't have enough people of color in New Hampshire to give him one last little boost."
So if Obama adds just enough blacks in the Southern & more Urban states to take the coalition described above over the top, I am supposed to get excited about a candidate that can't or doesn't want to win "working class & middle-class urban voters?"
Obama formed the "Bill Bradley Plus Coalition"
I am supposed to get excited about a candidate that can't or doesn't want to win "working class & middle-class urban voters?"
What's the logic here, Bob? Because poor people aren't voting for Obama, Obama must not care about poor people? That makes sense; by that logic, all the poor white southerners who routinely vote for the Republican Party clearly understand that tax cuts for the rich, heavy cuts in social services and perpetual war are all in their best interest.
So if Obama adds just enough blacks in the Southern & more Urban states to take the coalition described above over the top, I am supposed to get excited about a candidate that can't or doesn't want to win "working class & middle-class urban voters?"
As opposed to the DLC candidate? Right back at you, bob.
204:apo, the fact that John Edwards has not dropped to Joe Biden land, that given the minimal to negative media Edwards has gotten he still gets over 15% is maybe more data about economic concerns.
But dammit, it makes me crazy, because working-class whites are the demographic most likely to be influenced by "ethnic" concerns, if you know what I mean. And be supporters of the Southern white guy..
Bob, please make up your mind. Are you against Obama because he's secretly a stalking horse for a right-wing economic agenda, or are you against him because he's black and therefore unelectable?
205, 206:I don't care how he does it, I just want Obama to win them over.
That is not a split in the Democratic Party, the exclusion of working class & urban lower middle-class whites, that I can find acceptable. And I am not going to blame the voters, not ages-old Democratic voters.
208:Don't put words in my mouth, stras. Obama being black in no way makes him unelectable.
Because poor people aren't voting for Obama, Obama must not care about poor people?
Plus 'aren't voting' is 'falling a little short', and is only 'exclusion' if you're on crack, just as 'losing among women' is 'actually winning among women in Iowa and losing in NH by a couple percentage points.'
It's a close race at this point!
That is not a split in the Democratic Party, the exclusion of working class & urban lower middle-class whites, that I can find acceptable.
Bob, plenty of primary contests happen this way with a split along class lines. In the general, everyone more or less votes for the nominee. Seriously, this isn't a real concern about Obama.
210: Then seriously, I have no idea what your objection to Obama is.
the fact that John Edwards has not dropped to Joe Biden land, that given the minimal to negative media Edwards has gotten he still gets over 15% is maybe more data about economic concerns.
Exactly. The media has treated this like a two-way race with Edwards and Richardson playing in the consolation game for many months now, and it's amazing that reality still hasn't changed to fit that story.
213:stras, if Obama is an economic populist, the message isn't getting through to the demographic most attracted to economic populism
This is as old as Thomas Frank. The Republicans have been winning the economic populist demographic on social & military issues. The Edwards campaign was based in part on slipping a socially and defense lib past those voters using economic populism.
And, yeah, economic issues are very important to me personally.
Don't tell Obama is just fine on economics. Obama hasn't made that sale.
stras, if Obama is an economic populist, the message isn't getting through to the demographic most attracted to economic populism
Edwards's message hasn't gotten through, either.
Don't tell Obama is just fine on economics. Obama hasn't made that sale.
Obama isn't just fine on economics; where have I made that claim? But he's better than Clinton. This election, like all elections, is about picking the least bad candidate. Of the top three, my least-bad pick is Edwards, but if I can't get Edwards, I'll settle for Obama.
216:Edwards's message hasn't gotten through, either.
Delegate count via DKos:
25 Obama, 24 Clinton, 18 Edwards
It is a little early to give up on Edwards, I think.
There is no demographic attracted to economic populism in actual campaigns as opposed to in theory. The Republican anti-"class war" propaganda has worked extremely well to make people ashamed of such feelings. The closest things are the demographics attracted to anti-intellectualism and uneasiness with immigration.
25 Obama, 24 Clinton, 18 Edwards
Adding in superdelegates, its 183 Clinton, 78 Obama, 52 Edwards, Richardson 19, Kucinich 1. In a race to 2025, that's still a pretty small difference.
217: Bob, I mean that Edwards's message hasn't gotten through to the people it's designed to help: working class urbanites and labor members, who continue to break for Clinton. If you're going to fault Obama on that score, you have to fault Edwards, too.
OT:
Did anyone hear the NPR interview with Obama?
I only heard a snippet, but it seemed unnecessarily and unusually pointed against him.
221: I heard it this morning, and yes, it was awfully combative, especially bringing out Clinton the First's ridiculous talking points against him.
I heard it this morning, and yes, it was awfully combative, especially bringing out Clinton the First's ridiculous talking points against him.
I've heard so many sucking up interviews by Mara Liason to Republicans that I was shocked at how combative NPR was with Obama.
I am ok with combative, but where the heck have you been with combative for the last 8 years?!?!
Adding to that: listening to the interview, I got the distinct impression that we're in for a round of "beat up on Obama, lavish praise on Clinton" from the press, similar to September/October. Because there must always be a Narrative, and while the Narrative constantly changes with events, the Narrative is uncontestable while the Narrative exists.
I was shocked at how combative NPR was with Obama.
I'm not surprised that Clinton appeals to a lot of folks at the bottom of the heap, because she shows a quality that matters a lot when you're there: endurance. Working-class and poor people get handed a lot of crap they can't control at all, and they're often set up as scapegoats by the very people busily exploiting them. The shitstorm thrown at the Clintons from the moment Bill took office is in that regard a very familiar thing, even though the details are different and weird. And she's come through it. She still looks good a lot of the time, and when she looks worn, well, geez, who wouldn't? Her husband's a schmuck when it comes to fidelity despite being good in other ways, but she stuck with him, and you can see how close they still are when they're together and in how they talk about each other. And they've raise a daughter great; she's a credit to them, and she doesn't seem to have had her own will broken at all by the aforementioned shitstorm. All of that matters, particularly to folks for whom it's about all they're going to have in the face of forces far beyond their control.
It'd be great from my point of view if those qualities were connected to much better policies. But I can also understand how someone who's spent their whole life getting screwed may not believe policy is ever going to be that good anyway, and focus instead on the capacity for enduring well.
For myself, after reading folks at Obsidian Wings (including several who've happily been part of that shitflinging themselves in the past) complain that Clinton is a meanie who just doesn't like people like them, I have these moments of hoping for her to win because some years of having their hopes crushed might be good for them. Essentially everything the movement conservative machine says about the rest of the world is projection, so if they've emphasized how (for instance) evul Arabs can only learn by having their wills broken and all hope taken away in humiliating defeat, I assume that this is what it would take to teach them a lesson, too. And of the Democratic candidates, certainly none would be such a personal humiliation to a lot of folks who need humiliating as Clinton.
I won't pretend that I think this is actually a good reason to support her. But I can't quite rule it out as a consideration, either.
227: Definitely one of the reasons I won't cry if Hillary is nominated, even though I have a slight preference for Obama.
how about this one from sully:
"My feelings entirely. My leaning toward Obama has a lot to do with his even temperament,"
This afternoon I opened up yesterday's edition of a mainstream tabloid here in Chile and this is what I saw. Huh.