Re: PA

1

I'm hoping Clinton gets spanked

Sexist Hott.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:27 PM
horizontal rule
2

Fucking racist html.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:29 PM
horizontal rule
3

Nah, it would be sexist if she had hoped that Hillary got spanked.


Posted by: washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:31 PM
horizontal rule
4

The NYT has a neato slider thing on their homepage right now that shows how many of the unpledged superdelegates she'd have to get for varying wins in the remaining contests.


Posted by: Blume | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:31 PM
horizontal rule
5

I voted. I also pestered the security guards, a random woman in the elevator, colleagues, the building receptionest, another random woman in the hallway, two bookstore clerks, a Staples clerk, and assorted other folks to vote. Most of them said they had, or were planning to. Everybody seemed cheerful and excited.

My father says 15 people had voted before him at 7:05 this morning and there was a short line.

My sister says 70 people in her precinct had voted as of 6:30 p.m., but she doesn't know whether that's 70/200 total voters or 70/the smaller number of Republicans only.

There are 800 people registered at my polling place but I voted in the morning and have no reliable numbers on turnout. There was no line when I voted, quite early.

The people I know who can't vote are generally supporting Hillary. (Meaning: Signs in store windows, etc.) Today that included two Asians and a Hispanic.

That doesn't include the Latina I know who is doing GOTV for Obama, the gay white guy doing GOTV for Clinton, the 50-something black lady working for Obama, and the young white girl also out for the guy from Illinois.

In front of City Hall today there was a swath of Obama supporters waving signs and cheering. Across the street was a black guy singing in Spanish for Hillary. All I got was "claro que sí," which loosely translates as "obviously" (the smart choice).


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:32 PM
horizontal rule
6

If she won 62% of the delegates in the remaining contests, she'd still need half of the remaining superdelegates.


Posted by: Blume | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:33 PM
horizontal rule
7

I just hope Obama doesn't get blown out. I'm not going to be able to take endless stories about how Obama "can't win." Anything under double digits I'll consider a massive Obama victory. I'm not sanguine.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:36 PM
horizontal rule
8

Anything under double digits I'll consider a massive Obama victory

Six or seven weeks ago Obama said something like this (minus the "massive").


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:39 PM
horizontal rule
9

Yeah, I also set 10% Hillary as the spread.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:40 PM
horizontal rule
10

What's the over-under?


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:41 PM
horizontal rule
11

100. Would you like to place a wager?


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:43 PM
horizontal rule
12

Obama "can't win."

I believe it's "can't close the deal," which makes him sound like he has a sexual dysfunction.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:43 PM
horizontal rule
13

Over-under should be on turnout, but then it's probably vulnerable to vote-shaving.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:44 PM
horizontal rule
14

How do you know how many people voted before you at the polling place?

It's not like I had to write my name on a list. I just had to sign in the box next to my name in an alphabetically organized folder.

Very desolate polling station at 10AM today. No other voters. Two activists outside with flyers, both about this race. That's it.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:44 PM
horizontal rule
15

How do you know how many people voted before you at the polling place?

Sometimes they call it out to the other poll workers. Usually I just ask. If the official person isn't keeping a count, there's usually a partisan poll watcher who is (because they want to make sure all their people turn out).


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:48 PM
horizontal rule
16

Anything less that 19 means that Sen. Clinton lost ground, ground she needed to hold, over the course of PA. It leaves her with the only argument: 'I won't support O in the general. That's the real reason he can't win.'


Posted by: Napi | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:50 PM
horizontal rule
17

Anyone else surprised at how old PA is? (Second to Florida in proportion.)


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:50 PM
horizontal rule
18

I believe it's "can't close the deal," which makes him sound like he has a sexual dysfunction.

No, it's "can't win," as in "can't win enough white votes to win the general." Endless stories about how people in "the heartland" aren't willing to trust someone Obama X.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:51 PM
horizontal rule
19

Re the article I linked in 14, I like all the references to B/d/ck's "brand of yesterday's thinking" and "There's a danger the district could revert to form by picking someone well-steeped in the old-fashioned political ways of the city".

I am interpreting that as meaning "Yes, they have the same stated policies, but we assure you that this guy is super corrupt, though we can't give you any specifics on that".


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:53 PM
horizontal rule
20

12 read my mind. I should have known that Ogged would be thinking that, too.


Posted by: Becks | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:54 PM
horizontal rule
21

Here you go, Timothybot.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:56 PM
horizontal rule
22

related


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 5:57 PM
horizontal rule
23

Local NPR station is doing a special show on the PA primary starting now.

http://www.wduq.org/audio/index.html


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:05 PM
horizontal rule
24

Whoa, the search in 22 has this post as the second result. I will never understand the Google strategies.


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:05 PM
horizontal rule
25

Re: 17, Pennsylvania is a very old state indeed. It's also an unusually stationary state. People are born here and die here. And people who come here for college often don't stay after graduation.


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:08 PM
horizontal rule
26

Google is on Unfogged like black on Obama.


Posted by: Bave Dee | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:09 PM
horizontal rule
27

Hmm. Now not sure that's funny. I ban myself, for good measure.


Posted by: Bave Dee | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:10 PM
horizontal rule
28

When I ran that search in 22 the first time, this thread wasn't the second result.

I'm not near a tv right now. I assume they haven't called the race.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:10 PM
horizontal rule
29

Well, 8 minutes after the polls closed, teh results are too close to call.

25 gets it right. But I wonder why PA is more so than Ohio and Michigan. Would Ohio also be incredibly old if it weren't for Columbus?


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:11 PM
horizontal rule
30

From the ballpark, all I can say is that not all of the kids are alright.


Posted by: Napi | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:12 PM
horizontal rule
31

It's also an unusually stationary state. People are born here and die here.

The article talks about significant outmigration of young people, though.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:15 PM
horizontal rule
32

Wow, Montgomery County in suburban Phila just flipped to Democratic (voter registration advantage) for the first time since Reconstruction.


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:17 PM
horizontal rule
33

8: He talks about himself in the 3rd person? Creepy.


Posted by: cerebrocrat | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:18 PM
horizontal rule
34

How could I have missed this hard-hitting investigative journamalism?


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:19 PM
horizontal rule
35

Pennsylvania is a very old state indeed. It's also an unusually stationary state

Now that the 90s are here, I am trying to talk Texas into moving three states up and two to the left. Just above Nevada. I think Utah would more comfortable near Dixie anyway. They can keep their mountains.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:24 PM
horizontal rule
36

33: he actually did mention someone named "Barack Obama" in that clinging bitters talk.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:27 PM
horizontal rule
37

State Tetris!


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:27 PM
horizontal rule
38

I need need need this to wrapped up by 9pm. Who are these PA assholes anyway, scheduling their primaries during my exam week?


Posted by: ed bowlinger | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:29 PM
horizontal rule
39

It's Pitt's exam week too. Obama rally last night was in a 2/3 full room.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:32 PM
horizontal rule
40

If CNN's exit polls are any guide, it looks like a 4% win for Clinton.


Posted by: Moby Ape | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:34 PM
horizontal rule
41

38:Okay, too close to call at 8:30 means under ten points at worst for Obama.

Joe Klein on MSNBC just said that Obama, with his huge cash spent Clinton into oblivion. She has no money, and no more fat cats. She will get smashed in NC & Indiana.

So I guess y'all can go to bed and wait for the convention.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:34 PM
horizontal rule
42

It wouldn't be so bad if my classes this semester weren't full of Federalist Society types, with their self-satisfied smug faces, adderall scrips, and their presumptive nominee bullshit.


Posted by: ed bowlinger | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:35 PM
horizontal rule
43

that clinging bitters talk

I like this as a general term. I have to find a way to work it into conversation.


Posted by: cerebrocrat | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:36 PM
horizontal rule
44

I don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet, but bitters are delicious.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:41 PM
horizontal rule
45

presumptive nominee

I hope I've been expressing enough thrilled gratitude the race I'd been expecting -- Hillary and Mitt in cakewalks -- did not materialize. Are you listening, political gods? Thrilled.


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:42 PM
horizontal rule
46

Oh, well, I'm being kicked out of the library. Maybe the race will be called by the time I get home in an hour or so.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:44 PM
horizontal rule
47

I don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet, but bitters are delicious.

Peychaud? Fee's Orange? Peach? I recognize that it's a speech and not a white paper, but come on, man.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:46 PM
horizontal rule
48

Chris Bowers is speculating about an Obama win. Optimist, I presume.

Several reports say that many, many people are switching to the Democratic Party. That's big.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:47 PM
horizontal rule
49

You're asking for it, snark. Just warning you.


Posted by: Blume | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:47 PM
horizontal rule
50

(Not from me. In that you'll get a big ol' earful of Tweetyopinions about bitters, I mean.)


Posted by: Blume | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:50 PM
horizontal rule
51

I looked, for a long time, for a suitable name for this drink:

1 shot gin
1/2 shot Campari
fill grapefruit juice
splash tonic water
dash bitters
garnish burnt orange

I finally settled on "Florida Recount" as the most appropriately bitter thing I could imagine. But I may need to give That Boy's speech some thought. The "Clinging Bitters?" The "Gun Clinger?"


Posted by: cerebrocrat | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:50 PM
horizontal rule
52

For home use, I've only used angostura and peychaud's.


Posted by: washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:51 PM
horizontal rule
53

I need a local friend who wants to play with concocting bitters with me.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:52 PM
horizontal rule
54

Also, I need my fucking bottle of Cynar.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:52 PM
horizontal rule
55

Fox exit polls say Clinton by 6, but Britt Hume says he thinks that may understate Clinton's margin.


Posted by: politicalfootball | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:55 PM
horizontal rule
56

Youk cures the bitters.


Posted by: Napi | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:56 PM
horizontal rule
57

54: You sound bitter.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:56 PM
horizontal rule
58

That sounds delightful, Cerebocrat. I like Campari a lot, but I've never had it with a juice mixer (just neat or with soda).


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:56 PM
horizontal rule
59

The wife likes Angostura, ginger ale and vodka. No cute name.


Posted by: Tassled Loafered Leech | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:57 PM
horizontal rule
60

A former co-worker in Pittsburgh and I had a theory that the Pittsburgh ideal is to buy a house two streets over from your mother and still only be a couple streets over from your in-laws.

More generally, though, it seems that Pittsburgh gets a lot of people who either stay there from birth, or move back after having gone to college somewhere else and spent their twenties somewhere else, because they're ready to have kids. (My mother is already making noises towards this end.) Meaning if you're twenty-five and in Pittsburgh, and not from there, it can be hard to get a date.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:58 PM
horizontal rule
61

I'll donate to you the drink name "Bushy Visor," so named after what a friend of mine mis-heard "Bush adviser" as sometime in 2000. I'm not sure who I was referring to, or even if I was referring to a W or HW adviser. I've used it for a drink in the past, but that drink was disgusting.

On a search, because I was worried about it, I appear to be out of new stories to tell in comments.


Posted by: washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 6:59 PM
horizontal rule
62

One could have an End of Empire party, with Pink Gin, Campari and soda "half half", and of course Gin & Tonic. Dinner jackets and bitterness required.


Posted by: Tassled Loafered Leech | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:00 PM
horizontal rule
63

Pittsburghians have a really strange accent.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:01 PM
horizontal rule
64

A drink named for Britt Hume would pretty much have to involve Midori.

It is pretty tasty, Snarkout. As long as you're down with the clinging bitter. As a bonus, it is great fun to give to your friends who only drink frozen raspberry daquiris, etc.


Posted by: cerebrocrat | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:06 PM
horizontal rule
65

I endorse 52, as well as cerebrocrat's drink. I am enjoying a special primary night Sazerac. I have recently learned that a Southampton with Peychaud's is way awesome. Is Fernet a bitter? It rules.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:06 PM
horizontal rule
66

Yes, they do. I was born and raised there and yet can't really do a good Pittsburgh accent. But boy can I spot one a mile away.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:06 PM
horizontal rule
67

66: hah! I can barely do a Boston accent. Restecp.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:07 PM
horizontal rule
68

Fernet is a bitter in the same sense that Campari is.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:08 PM
horizontal rule
69

Pittsburghians have a really strange accent.

I don't think I know this accent. What makes it strange?


Posted by: Mary Catherine | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:09 PM
horizontal rule
70

69: yes, but what does that mean?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:10 PM
horizontal rule
71

69: It's sort of flat and southern and midwestern, all at the same time. It sounds like a midwestern person faking a southern accent.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:12 PM
horizontal rule
72

70 to 68, sorry.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:12 PM
horizontal rule
73

Does Borsci S. Marzano count as a bitter, or just as a digestive? I had some at the end of a fine meal in Burlington this weekend and need to start looking for it.


Posted by: Nathan Williams | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:13 PM
horizontal rule
74

And, instead of "Ya'll", they say "Yinz".


Posted by: ed bowlinger | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:14 PM
horizontal rule
75

Well, meaning it's bitter and herb-infused, but you can drink it, unlike, say, Angustura bitters. It's a potable bitter, a digestif or amaro.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:15 PM
horizontal rule
76

And, instead of "Ya'll", they say "Yinz".

And they use gumbands anat.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:15 PM
horizontal rule
77

Snark: "You can drink Angustura bitters! It's a thing you drink in the Carribean when you're dying."

SO SORRY. I STAND CORRECTED.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:16 PM
horizontal rule
78

Bowers is no longer talking about an Obama win. NBC-CBS called it for Clinton.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:16 PM
horizontal rule
79

75: but why can't you drink Angostura? Just because there's that little thing on the bottle, right?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:17 PM
horizontal rule
80

SO SORRY. I STAND CORRECTED.

Let this be a lesson to you, Fishmarblebasket.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:17 PM
horizontal rule
81

Snark has my back.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:18 PM
horizontal rule
82

Ok Witt, what is the word on the PA street?


Posted by: will | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:18 PM
horizontal rule
83

75: but why can't you drink Angostura? Just because there's that little thing on the bottle, right?

Because it's super-concentrated and nasty on its own? Mainly the former factor, I think.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:19 PM
horizontal rule
84

Blume and I had some crazy not-on-the-market-yet bitters at a bar the other night. I rely on her to find the link.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:19 PM
horizontal rule
85

83: I would chug Angostura.

Fernet is plenty bitter and herbal, after all.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:20 PM
horizontal rule
86

Also, bitters in the Campari and Fernet genre are relatively low-proof, unlike bitters in the Angostura genre. This, of course, doesn't make the latter group non-potable in itself, but it does make the two groups clearly distinct.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:21 PM
horizontal rule
87

While you all are frivolously discussing mixed drinks, PA's been called for Hillary. 55% to 45% right now, which isn't good, but that will surely change over the course of the night.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:21 PM
horizontal rule
88

While you all are frivolously discussing mixed drinks

Mixed drinks as frivolity? You're just trying to bait Sifu, aren't you?


Posted by: Mary Catherine | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:23 PM
horizontal rule
89

88: Always.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:24 PM
horizontal rule
90

82, see comment 5. But also: Depressing late news from a late Montgomery County voter that only 280/800+ voters in his polling place showed up.


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:24 PM
horizontal rule
91

86: Fernet is 70 proof.

87: 53% to 47% from MSNBC. If you're curious about the eventual result, see my blog post from yesterday, reported from 2 months ago.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:24 PM
horizontal rule
92

For lovers of the clinging bitter, there's also this business of global warming or some shit wrecking worldwide hop yields, with the missing hops' bitterness being made up for by the bitter news that due to their buying power, multinational corporate makers of shitty yellow beer are first in line for the remaining hops ahead of craft brewers. If I weren't lazy, there'd be a link in this comment.


Posted by: cerebrocrat | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:24 PM
horizontal rule
93

Fernet is plenty bitter and herbal, after all.

Angostura is way bitter-er and herbal-er, though! It's extra concentrated essence of bit and herb.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:25 PM
horizontal rule
94

Meanwhile, a Democrat may steal a Congressional special election in a heavily Republican district in Mississippi (exurban Memphis). Strange times.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:25 PM
horizontal rule
95

shitty yellow beer

There's your elitism right there!


Posted by: ed bowlinger | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:26 PM
horizontal rule
96

Angostura is a flavoring; Campari is a drink. (People use Angostura as folk medicine, I think. Anything that tastes like that must be good for you!)


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:26 PM
horizontal rule
97

Herbalz in ya mouth yo where they at they in ya mouth
Herbalz in ya mouth yo where they at they in ya mouth
Herbalz in ya mouth yo where they at they in ya mouth
Weebles wobble but they don't fall down


Posted by: peter | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:27 PM
horizontal rule
98

I got rejected from Sifu's blog. So sad.


Posted by: will | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:27 PM
horizontal rule
99

93: With Peychaud being the concentrated essence of Peches and herb. Excellent with Reunite.


Posted by: cerebrocrat | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:27 PM
horizontal rule
100

94: I was just looking for results on that race.


Posted by: Sir Kraab | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:27 PM
horizontal rule
101

86: Fernet is 70 proof.

FINE!

Angostura's still proofier. Also BIT and HERBier. I'm going to make you eat a bowl of tomato paste soup.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:28 PM
horizontal rule
102

98: say what?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:28 PM
horizontal rule
103

My blog-arms are always wide-open for you, Will.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:29 PM
horizontal rule
104

Sorry, I meant to say "so good" with Reunite.


Posted by: cerebrocrat | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:29 PM
horizontal rule
105

"whoomps.com"?


Posted by: peter | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:29 PM
horizontal rule
106

100 - Here.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:29 PM
horizontal rule
107

101: add some tabasco and you're on.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:30 PM
horizontal rule
108

92: On the plus side, there's a hop farming boom around here. I used to have a hop vine climbing up the south side of the house, and if I ever plan on making more beer, I guess I should plant another.

What with the uncertainty of the PA primary and the Angels threatening with men on first and second with no out, I'm not surprised the talk has turned to drink. You're at Fenway tonight, Nápi?


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:30 PM
horizontal rule
109

So Clinton only won by six points? Just enough to encourage her to stay in in the forlorn hope of stealing the superdelegates, right?

97 is the real winner for quoting Third Bass. If more politicos listened to Third Bass we wouldn't be in the mess we're in.


Posted by: DS | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:31 PM
horizontal rule
110

Reunite on ice,
Reunite is nice,
Reunite/i>

I was always entertained by that slogan.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:31 PM
horizontal rule
111

108: what a game to be at!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:31 PM
horizontal rule
112

Uncertainty?


Posted by: Gabriel | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:31 PM
horizontal rule
113

So Clinton only won by six points? Just enough to encourage her to stay in in the forlorn hope of stealing the superdelegates, right?

97 is the real winner for quoting Third Bass. If more politicos listened to Third Bass we wouldn't be in the mess we're in.


Posted by: DS | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:32 PM
horizontal rule
114

Uncertainty of the margin, Gabriel.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:34 PM
horizontal rule
115

Fixed, peter. No idea how that happened.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:34 PM
horizontal rule
116

I know that you people were wondering what BR and I are doing tomorrow:

Old Crow Medicine Show!!!

On a school night!!

We are such badasses.


Posted by: will | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:36 PM
horizontal rule
117

107: Super! If you prefer, how about a bloody mary composed of a shot of vodka, three tablespoons of tomato paste, and tabasco to fill?

I remember it was a revelation to me when I read something on Looka/Gumbopages that made me realize that the reason the Manhattans I ordered in hotel bars sucked was that the bartenders weren't adding any bitters. Fiends! He also had a good suggestion for a tactful way to prevent this without suggesting that the person taking your order doesn't know how to make drinks: ask for your Manhattan "with an extra dash of bitters." Sadly, I tried this at the place I was staying when I was last in Chicago and the guy eventually had to admit that they had no bitters of any kind. Now that is shameful.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:36 PM
horizontal rule
118

why can't you drink Angostura?

Why can't you drink Moxie? Same difference I think with the Gentian root.


Posted by: md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:39 PM
horizontal rule
119

117: that sounds lovely. Can we add Worcestershire and an oyster?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:40 PM
horizontal rule
120

Then it would be a bloody Caeser, you taxonomy flouter you.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:42 PM
horizontal rule
121

An ice cream truck that comes around (doodly-toot, doodly-toot) every night at 9:30 p.m. is selling drugs, isn't it?


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:42 PM
horizontal rule
122

117: having a real Manhattan is just so transformative.

Also per md I love Moxie, too.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:42 PM
horizontal rule
123

I put bitters on tons of stuff, way beyond cocktails. For example, I put some on my oatmeal in the morning. I put a few drops in soups. The stuff is awesome. I think it's what makes cola taste so good. It improves everything.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:43 PM
horizontal rule
124

120: drink taxonomy: as pernicious as musical genres or academic specialties? In any case every Bloody Mary has fish, at least in the Worcestershire.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:44 PM
horizontal rule
125

Obama fell to the surest predictor in all of sports: if Phildelphia roots for you, you're going to lose. This can only mean bad things for the Flyers, as well.


Posted by: tw | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:44 PM
horizontal rule
126

Woo-hoo, Phils are up 3-1.

Everybody really should go read that Bérubé post that somebody linked in the other thread. Excerpt:

[I]f you're interested in public policies for people with disabilities, the Clinton campaign offers you a series of sane, sound proposals - many of which would benefit people with disabilities, but few of which speak of "disability."
Obama, by contrast, has a separate heading titled "Disabilities." This in itself is remarkable; but it turns out that this isn't just a matter of better web design. Whoever is advising Obama on disability policy is really, really smart.

Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:45 PM
horizontal rule
127

Snark makes a splendid Manhattan. I've utterly given up on ordering perfect Manhattans out in the wild, because the odds are so extremely high that I will be misunderstood. The extra dash of bitters trick works very well, though, in places less debased than that one hotel bar.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:45 PM
horizontal rule
128

OMG OMG


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:46 PM
horizontal rule
129

I love Clamato. Clamato with caffeine? Not sure about that.


Posted by: md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:50 PM
horizontal rule
130

I always think of some old camel-toe/clamato sketch when I hear Clamato. I can't remember what the gimmick was.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:54 PM
horizontal rule
131

So we've determined that white people like bitters?


Posted by: washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:55 PM
horizontal rule
132

I am at the game. Having been given an incredible seat.

It's a cliff hanger, but Jesus needs to have a little more faith in Oki.

What's the geography of the Clinton win? Is it a delegate tie.

Oh, home run Angels. Oki had to give up a run eventually.


Posted by: Napi | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 7:57 PM
horizontal rule
133

Is it a delegate tie.

Pretty much, yeah. Looks like maybe 7 point spread? No more than 10.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:03 PM
horizontal rule
134

127: oh you really ought to visit this bar in Boston. They make a rye manhattan with Peychaud's bitters that is spectacular.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:04 PM
horizontal rule
135

I have nothing but faith in Oki, even after Kotchman's homer (I finished the earlier comment just before the pitching change).

We went to Obama HQ today to pick up our lawn sign and a couple of buttons for the girls, who were very excited. M. speculated that HRC might be okay with an Obama victory, but guessed that she might be in trouble if she weren't magnanimous in defeat. Smart kid.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:05 PM
horizontal rule
136

Where is this supposed "bar in Boston"? Hmm? Hmm?

(Yes, Boston, well-played. Dish!)


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:05 PM
horizontal rule
137

75: but why can't you drink Angostura? Just because there's that little thing on the bottle, right?

You can, but it's legally classified as nonpotable because it would be super nasty to drink straight in amounts over a teaspoon. This is why you can buy it even if you're underage! in the supermarket!

I endorse drinking this:

2-3oz rye
1 tsp simple
2 dashes peach bitters

The thing about Fee's peach bitters is that it's not actually bitter at all.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:06 PM
horizontal rule
138

I've utterly given up on ordering perfect Manhattans out in the wild

Lady, all our Manhattans are perfect!


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:06 PM
horizontal rule
139

132: As of now the map is pretty ugly. I thought he would do better in Philly suburbs. SW PA is what I feared from seeing SE & NE Ohio. Yuck. (Allegheny running 56% HRC w/71% precincts, don't know the distributions of precincts counted within the countiy though.)


Posted by: JP Stormcrow | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:07 PM
horizontal rule
140

Oh, I also endorse Fernet + coke.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:07 PM
horizontal rule
141

A recent discovery: Fernet, calvados, lime, and Peychaud's: mmm!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:09 PM
horizontal rule
142

oh you really ought to visit this bar in Boston

It seems to me this bar has been mentioned here before...

I endorse tonic + peychaud's + a lime.


Posted by: Blume | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:09 PM
horizontal rule
143

141 sounds insane. But I will keep an open mind.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:10 PM
horizontal rule
144

Current drink: Ricard with water: what a funny brownish color!

You people are driving me to drink(ing more).


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:10 PM
horizontal rule
145

The bitters we had the other night.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:12 PM
horizontal rule
146

||

What a drive! Go Pedey! Go Jacoby!

|>


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:16 PM
horizontal rule
147

The Kid Is Alright!


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:16 PM
horizontal rule
148

||

Does anybody know anything about 12v DC motors? I need a couple relatively large, high-torque reversible DC motor and I'd really like to spend less than $50 apiece. Something akin to a scooter or electric wheelchair motor would be ideal if it were well made.

|>


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:20 PM
horizontal rule
149

I am ready to drink on Day One.


Posted by: Becks | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:24 PM
horizontal rule
150

148: Also, some ace bandages and a ball gag.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:25 PM
horizontal rule
151

Something akin to a scooter or electric wheelchair motor would be ideal if it were well made.

You could mug some old people and steal their scooters.


Posted by: Matt F | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:26 PM
horizontal rule
152

148: A motor from an electric winch (the kind that is mounted on the front of a truck) might fit the bill.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:29 PM
horizontal rule
153

132 139

The results by county.


Posted by: James B. Shearer | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:30 PM
horizontal rule
154

152: I think the RPMs on those are too low; I've been looking at them, but I need something that can react pretty quickly. I actually have some motors in storage that are .5HP and pretty well perfect, but I can't find anything similar on eBay.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:31 PM
horizontal rule
155

"RPM", not "RPMs".


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:31 PM
horizontal rule
156

According to reports, Bitchphd's prediction that 100% of Clinton-supporting women of a certain age would express their willingness to vote for Obama over McCain in the general election has turned out to be inaccurate.


Posted by: OPINIONATED SWIFT OLD PEOPLE FOR TRUTH | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:35 PM
horizontal rule
157

It seems to me this bar has been mentioned here before...

Would this be the one near the supposed "original" Dunkin' Donuts?


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:44 PM
horizontal rule
158

157: the very one.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:46 PM
horizontal rule
159

It's an excellent bar. I'm partial to their beers, personally, but I have no complaints with their mixing skills, ingredients, or recipes.


Posted by: Nathan Williams | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:53 PM
horizontal rule
160

156: Hillary(*) and her campaign: one of these things is not pear shaped.

(*) Or if you're not on a first name basis, Clinton44(tm).


Posted by: Econolicious | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 8:53 PM
horizontal rule
161

According to reports, Bitchphd's prediction that 100% of Clinton-supporting women of a certain age would express their willingness to vote for Obama over McCain in the general election has turned out to be inaccurate.

It's a little early in the day to speak of the accuracy or inaccuracy of this prediction, which will not, and cannot, be tested until November.

It's my suspicion that there's a fairly significant gap in the apprehension of political reality between rank-and-file Democrats, on the one hand, and those who blog about them, on the other.

It's also my suspicion that certain men of a certain age like to speak of "women of a certain age" in order to make themselves feel younger than the women of whom they speak, who are actually the same age, more or less, as the men who speak of them. Just a suspicion, mind you. I don't have the stats, or, perhaps more importantly, the pie graphs, to back this up.


Posted by: Mary Catherine | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:15 PM
horizontal rule
162

That Mississippi House runoff is going to a special election. I don't know if that's good or bad for the Democratic candidate.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:16 PM
horizontal rule
163

I first wrote "older women" and thought that sounded insulting. Then I wrote "middle-aged women" and thought that sounded insulting, plus it doesn't include old women. So, I used the euphemism that I have been led to believe women themselves use about such women. But this wasn't right either.


Posted by: OPINIONATED SWIFT OLD PEOPLE FOR TRUTH | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:17 PM
horizontal rule
164

MC Canadienne, you're too young to understand these things.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:19 PM
horizontal rule
165

Mary Catherine, did you say you have pie? Pie might make me feel better. It's about the only thing that will. Or maybe a maple donut.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:20 PM
horizontal rule
166

I heard tonight, from an assemblage of women of arbitrarily less than a certain age, that "women of a certain age" is insulting indeed.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:22 PM
horizontal rule
167

"Femme d'un age certain" works better than the English.

Few know that it implies that because the woman in question's age is certain, either her position or momentum is not.


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:23 PM
horizontal rule
168

Does anyone know how I can find a long comment, filled with sturm and drang, I posted on the night of the Texas primary? I was whining about process stories, narratives, and endless campaigns, if memory serves. (Do you think I could train my memory to serve me pie? If I tip well?)


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:24 PM
horizontal rule
169

Replace age with era. That will make everyone happy!


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:24 PM
horizontal rule
170

I don't even know where to buy bitters around here, and I'm drinking wine from a bag in a box.

55-45 now; maybe it'll tighten a wee bit as Chester Co. comes in (22% currently on NYT).


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:25 PM
horizontal rule
171

168: y'd probably need some kind of specific pithy phrase, but you could also search for the date and your name.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:27 PM
horizontal rule
172

process stories

I remember, after watching a West Wing episode that mentioned this term, searching high and low for a good definition of it. Do you have one lying around, Ari?


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:28 PM
horizontal rule
173

165: As a matter of fact, I do make three kinds of pie: apple; blueberry; and chocolate cream with a whipped cream topping. I don't do donuts, though: that's too much trouble, and why not go to the nearest ye olde doughnut shoppe?


Posted by: Mary Catherine | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:29 PM
horizontal rule
174

Stories that focus on the process of a campaign rather than the issues, ie. stories focusing on electability, on scandals, on the composition of the Democratic convention rules committee. AKA Tweety's favorite stories.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:30 PM
horizontal rule
175

Let me offer some BHO spin. Remember how the BHO campaign had a policy of not paying the volunteer-style people who get out the vote in Philadelphia? And HRC campaign had no such policy? So....yeah.


Posted by: Fatman | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:33 PM
horizontal rule
176

168: I haven't actually read that Texas thread, but this might be what you're looking for.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:33 PM
horizontal rule
177

Let me offer some BHO spin. Remember how the BHO campaign had a policy of not paying the volunteer-style people who get out the vote in Philadelphia? And HRC campaign had no such policy? So....yeah.


Posted by: Fatman | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:33 PM
horizontal rule
178

172: stories which emphasize the mechanics of running a political campaign and the specific details of specific electoral mechanisms that the campaigns will have to deal with over, say, what the candidate is actually saying, or what they might be proposing as a platform.

Is my guess.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:33 PM
horizontal rule
179

I think I found the comment, but either it didn't post at all or it's going to double post.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:36 PM
horizontal rule
180

168: I haven't actually read that Texas thread, but this might be what you're looking for.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:36 PM
horizontal rule
181

172: Stories that focus on the process of a campaign rather than the issues, ie. stories on electability, on scandals, on the composition of the Democratic convention rules committee. These are also known as Tweety's favorite stories.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:36 PM
horizontal rule
182

172: Stories that focus on the process of a campaign rather than the issues, ie. stories on electability, on scandals, on the composition of the Democratic convention rules committee. These are also known as Tweety's favorite stories.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:36 PM
horizontal rule
183

172: Stories that focus on the process of a campaign rather than the issues, ie. stories on electability, on scandals, on the composition of the Democratic convention rules committee. These are also known as Tweety's favorite stories.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:36 PM
horizontal rule
184

172: stories which emphasize the mechanics of running a political campaign and the specific details of specific electoral mechanisms that the campaigns will have to deal with over, say, what the candidate is actually saying, or what they might be proposing as a platform.

Is my guess.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:36 PM
horizontal rule
185

There are stories about policies? I thought I was supposed to go to the candidates' websites to find that stuff out.

Also, I note that 179 is the only comment recently which HASN"T been a double post.


Posted by: Fatman | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:38 PM
horizontal rule
186

What the hell?

Okay if after that there's some crazy ten year old that can send us to the cornfield that's just not okay, okay?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:39 PM
horizontal rule
187

Thanks. Thanks. Thanks. Thanks. Thanks.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:40 PM
horizontal rule
188

Bitch PhD predicts that there may be some racist hawks on the Dem side who will swing to McCain if Obama's the Dem nominee. HOWEVER. Bitch Phd offers up two anecdotal pieces of evidence: first, that all the women Bitch PhD knows who are *strong* Clinton supporters will go to hell before they will vote for McCain, what with their being 60s and 70s-era feminists. Older feminists do not vote for anti-choice hawkish Vietnam vets, people.

Second, my own father, who is always my go-to guy for the low-information voter, has said that he likes "either Clinton or McCain." I've been bothering to try to explain to him why McCain sucks, but again, I guarantee you that come the actual election, he's not going to vote Republican either. A lot of it is just name recognition: once we're down to two actual candidates and the name recognition folks are forced to realize that McCain is pro war and pro Bush tax cuts--and that Obama is a family guy who "actually says some smart things", they'll vote Dem.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:40 PM
horizontal rule
189

I just thought my definition was good enough that it needed saying thrice.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:42 PM
horizontal rule
190

Also: Ari! Did you hear about the hockey riot (or the "hockey riot," or however the authorities are calling it) in Montréal last night? I can't help suspecting that Budge McFarland would not have approved, but of course, he was always old-fashioned and old-school in that way. And anyway, who the hell ever cared what Budge had to say, once he got drafted to the Pittsburgh Penguins?


Posted by: Mary Catherine | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:44 PM
horizontal rule
191

NOTE: Tweety1 is our own Tweety. Tweety2 is Chris Matthews. Ari was talking about Tweety2.

Also, Ari and our Tweety are drunk.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:44 PM
horizontal rule
192

180: I have no idea how you did it, but that's the one. Thanks.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:45 PM
horizontal rule
193

191: that's irrelevant! The blog was being broken.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:45 PM
horizontal rule
194

I guarantee you that come the actual election, he's not going to vote Republican either.

B, threats and intimidation are illegal, even against your own beloved father. And you can't lock him in the basement and vote absentee for him. In this country, even patriarchs have some rights.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:49 PM
horizontal rule
195

Emerson, as ever, is right: I meant Matthews not Jetpack. And Mary Catherine, no, do tell (or link). We have a new puppy. She's been eating up all my time and keeping me up half the night. But cute!


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:53 PM
horizontal rule
196

195: that fucking pretender? I am the one true Tweety. He's, I don't know, Fuckface McShutit.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:54 PM
horizontal rule
197

196: Did you drink an entire bottle of bitters or something?


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:57 PM
horizontal rule
198

194: I am neither threatening nor intimidating the man. He never takes me seriously, anyway.

195: Puppy!!


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:57 PM
horizontal rule
199

192: I found the Texas thread and searched for your name. Longish comments are easy to spot.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:57 PM
horizontal rule
200

I hate the False Tweety so much that when he said some things I agreed with tonight I felt sick. He's the one person in the world who could push me into the Hillary camp.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:58 PM
horizontal rule
201

197: I'm serious! I was Tweety long before he was.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:58 PM
horizontal rule
202

Tonight I learned that [ august Obama advisor who you all respect ] likes Matthews better than Olbermann. I was very disturbed, learning this fact.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:59 PM
horizontal rule
203

While we're on the subject of competitions lasting into the summer, can someone explain why the NBA playoffs so far aren't as compelling as I was told they'd be?


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 9:59 PM
horizontal rule
204

Note that B did not deny locking her beloved father in the basement.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:00 PM
horizontal rule
205

203: Professional basketball sucks? Except for the resurgent Celtics, I mean.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:01 PM
horizontal rule
206

195: Well, my dad told me about "some hooligans" earlier today, and I thought perhaps he was exaggerating. But maybe not, after all.


Posted by: Mary Catherine | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:02 PM
horizontal rule
207

198.2: Yes!


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:02 PM
horizontal rule
208

"Commenter, I commented with Sifu Tweety; I knew Sifu Tweety (no, not in the biblical sense); Sifu Tweety was a fake-internet friend of mine. Commenter, you're no Sifu Tweety."


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:02 PM
horizontal rule
209

205:


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:02 PM
horizontal rule
210

Olbermann is moralistic, which Democrats are not supposed to be. Also, he shows anger, which procedural liberals do not allow.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:05 PM
horizontal rule
211

209: Pithy!

206: Oh, that I heard about. My cousin called as the game was ending. We talked for a while, disparaing the hapless Bruins. Then he called later to say that a car was burning at the end of his block. He seemed unimpressed.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:05 PM
horizontal rule
212

disparaging


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:08 PM
horizontal rule
213

Speaking of disparaging, Ari, how do you feel about Eric getting the nod to guest at Crooked Timber over you?


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:09 PM
horizontal rule
214

Weird. How'd I do that?

I think 209 was something like: "<3 you, you strange Canadian."


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:09 PM
horizontal rule
215

211: those poor hapless saps took you to game 7, Canadian overlords!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:10 PM
horizontal rule
216

213: They asked me first and only went to Eric after I said no.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:11 PM
horizontal rule
217

Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure they did.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:12 PM
horizontal rule
218

No, reeeeeeeaaaaaallllllllly.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:13 PM
horizontal rule
219

May I just say that guest-posting on EoTaW was deeply satisfying.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:14 PM
horizontal rule
220

(Okay, they didn't. And it hurts.)


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:14 PM
horizontal rule
221

219: If you ever step on my lines again, you can count on never being asked back.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:15 PM
horizontal rule
222

I say boycott CT. I will never troll their comment lines again! That will show the motherfuckers!


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:15 PM
horizontal rule
223

221: What's the secret of come-


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:15 PM
horizontal rule
224

Fuck.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:17 PM
horizontal rule
225

224: ?


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:17 PM
horizontal rule
226

-dy, Ari?

Shit, way to fuck it up.

Timing, that's the secret of comedy.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:18 PM
horizontal rule
227

204: I live in California, as does my father. Neither of us *has* a basement.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:19 PM
horizontal rule
228

225: I think everyone's well past me. Looks like a ten point gap. A couple points smaller, and I could have been happy.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:20 PM
horizontal rule
229

I, for one, am confident that Ari could guest-blog at that site at any time he pleased. It's just that, when it comes to blog comment feedback, he still has standards to maintain. Or to pretend to maintain, I guess, which, let's face it, amounts to the same thing.


Posted by: Mary Catherine | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:21 PM
horizontal rule
230

I didn't think there was anything to 194. Until I read 227, that is. "Neighbors all describe Bitch PhD as quiet, someone who kept to herself."


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:21 PM
horizontal rule
231

While we're on the subject of competitions lasting into the summer, can someone explain why the NBA playoffs so far aren't as compelling as I was told they'd be?

When did you start watching? The first couple of days were great.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:22 PM
horizontal rule
232

231: Me.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:22 PM
horizontal rule
233

Sifu didn't really guest-post at EotAW, did he?

He didn't really, right?

Oh ... my head is swimming


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:23 PM
horizontal rule
234

228: Oh. Right. The primary. I thought it would be 8-10 points. Still, I'm bummed. But I've gotten used to hating this race. Plus, we have a puppy. You should really get one: very therapeutic.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:24 PM
horizontal rule
235

My God, B., where did you put your father? You can't just lock him in a closet. They need a basement to roam dementedly in.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:25 PM
horizontal rule
236

Oh ... my head is swimming

ben, you should ask ogged to borrow his snorkel thing while your, um, down there on him.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:25 PM
horizontal rule
237

er, "you're"

dammit.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:26 PM
horizontal rule
238

214: love you? or teabag you?


Posted by: peter | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:26 PM
horizontal rule
239

230: No they don't. Neighbors would describe me as "that woman who we can sometimes hear yelling at her family. Oh, and her yard was always full of crap, and sometimes she'd be outside playing with her son while they were both wearing pajamas."


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:26 PM
horizontal rule
240

235: He's at home in Stockton after having spent the weekend in Reno celebrating his wife's birthday. She wanted to go gambling. He called me at EIGHT IN THE MORNING on Saturday, drunk, to thank me for a book I bought him.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:28 PM
horizontal rule
241

238: are they really so different?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:28 PM
horizontal rule
242

They think that her father's whimpering is some kind of pet.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:28 PM
horizontal rule
243

229: Thanks, but I'm inconsolable. Still, you're very kind.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:29 PM
horizontal rule
244

203, 205: both of you are full of shit and couldn't appreciate a great athletic competition even if your eyelids were pried open "Clockwork Orange" style and you were forced to watch it. The NBA playoffs are great. What about Spurs-Suns game 1 was hard for you to understand? Are you seriously telling me you prefer the NCAA tournament or crap like that?

I'm just about coming around to rooting for Hillary now, on the basis that the American people are too racist to elect Obama president, so what's the point? I only care who becomes President, not for the gallant efforts that lose.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:29 PM
horizontal rule
245

Now that the 90s are here, I am trying to talk Texas into moving three states up and two to the left. Just above Nevada. I think Utah would more comfortable near Dixie anyway. They can keep their mountains.

Screw that. 50's and 60's here lately.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:29 PM
horizontal rule
246

I'd like a pet Whimpering. I'd name it "Herbert Walker".


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:29 PM
horizontal rule
247

John, you should totally meet my dad sometime. You'd be amazed that we're related.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:30 PM
horizontal rule
248

231: I guess I've just been missing the close games. The Philadelphia game was good. But both Houston-Utah and San Antonio-Phoenix are now 2-0.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:30 PM
horizontal rule
249

Notice how defensive B is?

I've heard that hardcore feminists make patriarchs into jerky and serve it at the solstices and equinoxes.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:31 PM
horizontal rule
250

PGD is proving to me -- against all my common sense, and the balance of available evidence -- that there are people upon whom the daffy, last-chance Clinton attacks will work.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:32 PM
horizontal rule
251

No, mostly we roll our eyes behind their backs and try really hard to appreciate their (many) good qualities and not act like assholes just because of a few stupid things.

PGD, weren't you *always* supporting Clinton?


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:32 PM
horizontal rule
252

And how about that Liverpool-Chelsea game? I'm sure all true Americans were watching.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:33 PM
horizontal rule
253

And Calgary just pulled their goalie with 3 minutes to go down two goals to San Jose. That kind of risk-taking plays well in the heartland. OF AMERICA.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:34 PM
horizontal rule
254

B's dad always had said she had no sense of humor, but when she chuckled and picked up the flensing knife he realized that he had been wrong.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:36 PM
horizontal rule
255

PGD, weren't you *always* supporting Clinton?

I was undecided. I think Obama would make a better President, *if* he can be sufficiently popular among the American people. But at some level I didn't believe a half-African intellectual named Barack Obama can even be popular enough to be elected. I've been eager to set aside that opinion, but loss after loss in Ohio, Texas, PA, Cali, have stopped me from doing so. He's just too dependent on outorganizing Hillary in these obscure caucus states.

Admittedly, I've always been anti cult-of-Obama and his obnoxious internet supporters. But Obama himself is much more thoughtful than they are.

Hillary has a ton of well-known flaws, but she's tough, tenacious, and I think she can win people around to respecting her for her strength.

I wish this country was ready for Obama, but I don't think we are.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:40 PM
horizontal rule
256

PGD, you're a parody. Oh well!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:42 PM
horizontal rule
257

255 is the most awesome collection of talking points from the Clinton campaign that I've ever seen. Perfect.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:43 PM
horizontal rule
258

And I hate Jetpack. Who'll never guest post at my blog again. Unless Eric says he can.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:44 PM
horizontal rule
259

Not just Hillary's strength, but her committment to solving the problems of ordinary Americans, which I believe is genuine and heartfelt. It's a shame she's willing to compromise so much else in order to get the chance to do that, her foreign policy is problematic, but what can you do. I've got my fingers crossed that she is sensible in that area but just keeping it a little hidden.

What the fuck, we have to beat McCain. I think Hillary's got the better shot.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:44 PM
horizontal rule
260

Okay, PGD, I'll bite: break down how she wins this thing, based on the math.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:44 PM
horizontal rule
261

Ooh, parts of 259 push the whole thing over the top. It's too much, really.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:45 PM
horizontal rule
262

259 is ultra-lol.

PGD is the deep-cover troll.

I am very proud of you, PGD!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:46 PM
horizontal rule
263

256-257: more bizarre reality warping from enraptured Obama supporters. Since when is "Obama would make a better President" a Hillary talking point? I swear to God, peoples' IQs drop fifty points as soon as they swallow the Obama kool-aid. It's the damndest thing.

I admire the guy, I really do, but if he can't quite close the deal with Democratic voters he won't be able to do it in the general election either.

If there's a President Obama on November 5th, y'all can heap abuse on me for years to come and I'll still be happy.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:48 PM
horizontal rule
264

Oh, I get it: 255 and 259 are like an audition reel to be the man on the street who'll ask a question during the next debate, right? "Senator Obama, you're thoughtful, for a black Muslim, but Senator Clinton feels the pain of ordinary Americans. Can a black Muslim ever really feel the pain of ordinary Americans?"


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:49 PM
horizontal rule
265

Not just Hillary's strength, but her committment to solving the problems of ordinary Americans, which I believe is genuine and heartfelt.

*barf*


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:50 PM
horizontal rule
266

263: I was mostly kidding around with you. But you should take a minute to read your own comment before denying its talking-pointliciousness: .


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:51 PM
horizontal rule
267

See, there was no more content in 265 than in 261, 262, or 264, but I think I added style.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:52 PM
horizontal rule
268

if he can't quite close the deal with Democratic voters he won't be able to do it in the general election either

Let's unpack this. You mean to say "if he can't close a 15-20 point gap more than 10 points in the Democratic primary then he can't beat John McCain in dissimilar elections several months from now", right?

Could you just elaborate how that works?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:52 PM
horizontal rule
269

That's an odd colon there. But I like it. It suggests there's more to come.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:52 PM
horizontal rule
270

268 could have used a "by". And oh, what the fuck: a ":", too.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:54 PM
horizontal rule
271

Now that I think about it, 268 had ought to have been: "if he can't completely close a 15-20 point gap in a Democrati primary then &c &c"


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:55 PM
horizontal rule
272

255, in a non-specific to PGD kind of way, is pretty much why I've mostly tuned out of this race, and nearly to politics in general.

Ever been listening to something on the radio as you drive out of the station's reception range? And after a while, although you're really interested in the show, the noise starts to drive you crazy, and you just turn it off? Like that.


Posted by: cerebrocrat | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:56 PM
horizontal rule
273

but if he can't quite close the deal with Democratic voters he won't be able to do it in the general election either.

Who's ahead in this race again?


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:56 PM
horizontal rule
274

272: especially since we already know who wins.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:57 PM
horizontal rule
275

272: You don't have to turn the radio off. You can just get a puppy. Either that or embrace the coming nuclear winter in Tehran.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:57 PM
horizontal rule
276

Hillary has a ton of well-known flaws, but she's tough, tenacious, and I think she can win people around to respecting her for her strength.

Oh, gawd. She'd be running against a war hero. Yeah, we're the cultists.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:58 PM
horizontal rule
277

Holy fuck, I take it back: Clinton gained 8 delegates.

Guys, did you hear that?

Do you know what that means? 8 delegates.

My god, the man can't win. Racism, my sweet bitch mother, I salute you!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 10:59 PM
horizontal rule
278

The Democrats aren't going to lose Massachusetts and New York any more than they're going to win Texas.

Since when is "Obama would make a better President" a Hillary talking point?

That isn't, but almost everything else in your comment parrots conventional pro-Clinton spin; country isn't ready for a black man to be president (though of course we all are personally), caucus states don't count, what about Ohio, Texas, and Massachusetts.

The Democrats aren't going to lose Massachusetts and New York any more than they're going to win Texas.

(On a woo! note. Woo! PA turnout!)


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:12 PM
horizontal rule
279

on the basis that the American people are too racist to elect Obama president

Well, I've kinda believed this all along. The catch, though, is that I'm dead certain Hillary Clinton couldn't get elected president unless she ran unopposed.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:13 PM
horizontal rule
280

Also: Woo! MS-01 Runoff! Seriously, the only thing worse than being a Democrat right now is being a Republican. Bad times for the bad guys, very bad times.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:14 PM
horizontal rule
281

My question in 260 remains open to PGD or anyone else. Barring some huge gaffe by Obama, why are we still talking about this thing as if it's a contest?


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:17 PM
horizontal rule
282

Most people here were for Edwards originally, right? I wonder how many Edwards supporters are starting to consider what a convention floor fight might look like for their guy. Or for Gore. I know that's not going to happen, of course, but I'm high on puppy cuteness and just gazing into the misty future.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:18 PM
horizontal rule
283

Most people here were for Edwards originally, right?

I think it split Obama-Edwards.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:18 PM
horizontal rule
284

Speaking of Edwards, he was by far the best of the three top Democrats on the Colbert show.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:19 PM
horizontal rule
285

281: A contest. Bowers, of course, has been banging this drum for months. And I've been mocking him for his lack of rhythm. But there's your answer, if you want it.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:20 PM
horizontal rule
286

272 is totally rational, the only reason I don't tune this out is because I have some crazy compulsion to gossip about politics. I mean, nobody really can predict this stuff.

But everybody else's comments are even less rational than mine. Obama just lost by ten percentage points to Hillary Clinton among Democratic voters in a key swing state where he had weeks to go head to head with her. Screw the weird Democratic delegate rules, that have zero to do with the general election. That tells you a lot. He had time in Ohio, time in Texas, time in Pennsylvania, he just couldn't close the gap. He's a brilliant guy, but he's just too out of the mainstream. I don't trust him to win against McCain.

And he's certainly no savior. He's an opportunist -- he saw the chance to take this race and threw the whole thing into chaos to make a grab for the Presidency before he had established sufficient gravitas to make it a sure thing. That's politics for you, but it was a big risk and now it's harming the party.

Look, I totally get that UC Davis history professors and Massachusetts computer scientist/stoners have fallen in love with Obama and are incredibly hostile to anyone who could block the path of their darling. I like Obama too, you read his books he has a superb mind. It would be amazing for someone like that to win the Presidency. But UC Davis history profs and Massachusetts counterculture guys are not the key demographic he has to convince.

And to my mind, questioning Hillary's committment and idealism on domestic policy is a symptom of Obama dementia. Hillary's problem is that she's been beaten down for decades by the force of the Republican reactionary backlash, so she's got some of that Democratic cringe we all can't stand to see. In foreign policy in particular. Obama doesn't, it's true. But Hillary's a fighter, she's committed, she's proven that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

I wish we had somebody else -- I wish we had Gore. But we got what we got. Like I said, I'll be the happiest guy around if Obama wins. I'm just expressing my doubts that he can in a meaningless forum. I'm not contributing any $$ or time to either Hillary or Obama in the primary. Not going to participate in this clusterfuck. I'm keeping my powder dry to give all the $ and volunteer time I can spare to whoever the Democratic nominee is, whether it's Obama or Hillary.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:20 PM
horizontal rule
287

Are other people still having trouble posting comments? The problem seems still to be with Unfogged.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:20 PM
horizontal rule
288

281: Because it's close enough that the case could be made to the superdelegates that Obama is black.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:23 PM
horizontal rule
289

281: what else would you do?

279: holy crap am I excited to prove you wrong. It is, I think, far enough along that I can say that now. Obama is Shaq. Obama is Will Smith. Obama is Michael Jordan.

To deny that is to assume that the American people value the office of the Presidency higher than the office of the Number One Best Ever I Think You'll Agree: they do not.

This much was obvious in 2004, when I heard him speak. Never has a candidate better tapped into the currents of American meadia -- or rather, never has a candidate better understood where those currents outstripped what we all so naively imagine to be our unperturbable opinions. Jackie Robinson paved the way for Arthur Ashe paved the way for Tiger Woods paved the way for Kobe! paved the way for Obama.

He's a rock star.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:23 PM
horizontal rule
290

But everybody else's comments are even less rational than mine.

I believe the proper form is "I'm rubber, you're grits."


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:24 PM
horizontal rule
291

Barring some huge gaffe by Obama, why are we still talking about this thing as if it's a contest?

Yeah, I don't really have an answer to that. If there's no way Obama can lose, then why are we still damaging the party continuing this thing?

I think Dean will bring it to a close in early June by polling the superdelegates. I think that will give sufficient time to recover. I think there is some chance that if the polls swing Hillary's way and she takes Indiana too then she could take a sufficient superdelegate margin.

I was a Gore guy first, then Edwards, now whoever can win. What a mess.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:25 PM
horizontal rule
292

Taling Points:

1) Screw the weird Democratic delegate rules, that have zero to do with the general election

2) He had time in Ohio, time in Texas, time in Pennsylvania, he just couldn't close the gap

3) he's just too out of the mainstream

4) I don't trust him to win against McCain

5) questioning Hillary's committment and idealism on domestic policy is a symptom of Obama dementia

6) But Hillary's a fighter, she's committed, she's proven that beyond a shadow of a doubt

Then I got bored.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:25 PM
horizontal rule
293

Look, I totally get that UC Davis history professors and Massachusetts computer scientist/stoners

Reductionism is lol. Can you tell me how -- given the demographics this year, and how vastly they favor the Democratic nominee -- Obama does worse against McCain than Clinton does?

No! No you can't. You know why? Because you don't know. The truth is, as far as you know, as far as any of us knows, either of them could beat McCain. Everything else is electability horseshit, and I know you know I know how to point out how just fucking stupid it is to be relying on that at this late date.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:26 PM
horizontal rule
294

then why are we still damaging the party continuing this thing?

Who's this "we"?


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:26 PM
horizontal rule
295

I'll be delighted if 289 is true. That was my secret hope all along. Still is.

But if he's such a rock star, why couldn't he beat Hillary Clinton among Democratic voters in Pennsylvania, with like a month to do it? I've been seeing the cracks in the armor.

Who's this "we"?

I'm desparately trying to fend off the lynch mob by positing a shared Democratic identity.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:28 PM
horizontal rule
296

Reductionism is lol

I knew you'd see the light!


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:29 PM
horizontal rule
297

286: Dude, I realize this is probably pointless, but he's harming the party how exactly? By not dropping out when leading? By having a good ground game in caucus states? By being one reason for absolutely huge primary turnout? By running too early in his career and not crashing and burning?


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:29 PM
horizontal rule
298

he just couldn't close the gap

On the other hand, Clinton's the best-known Democratic politician in America running against a black guy named Barack Saddam Hussein Obama bin Laden, and she can't even beat him. So.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:31 PM
horizontal rule
299

295: because.... there's a lot of fucking racists who are nominally Democrats in Pennslyvania? Because... he is running against a tremendously strong candidate with very little daylight on core issues?

Oh, snap, you nailed me: now what the hell does this have to do with John McCain and/or the general election?

What? Nothing?

Then what are we... no, no, do go on.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:31 PM
horizontal rule
300

I totally get that UC Davis history professors and Massachusetts computer scientist/stoners have fallen in love with Obama and are incredibly hostile to anyone who could block the path of their darling.

Also southern California housewives who are semi-famous feminists and accused Clinton partisans and their military vet Navy employee* husbands. (Plus a lot of Mr. B.'s co-workers--which in and of itself would make Obama the better Dem candidate this year.)

*He no longer works for the evil defense contractor; now he's a gubmint employee. Btw.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:32 PM
horizontal rule
301

Heh so tonight I accidentally said "Obama Bin Laden" when talking to [ august academic working for Barack who you all respect ]. I felt like a doofus, I did.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:32 PM
horizontal rule
302

Obama just lost by ten percentage points to Hillary Clinton among Democratic voters in a key swing state where he had weeks to go head to head with her. Screw the weird Democratic delegate rules, that have zero to do with the general election. That tells you a lot. He had time in Ohio, time in Texas, time in Pennsylvania, he just couldn't close the gap. He's a brilliant guy, but he's just too out of the mainstream.

He leads by popular vote, he leads by delgates, and he's raising far more money, both overall and by small donors. This gap talk of yours is insanity.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:33 PM
horizontal rule
303

by positing a shared Democratic identity

I mean that we, as in us, aren't playing any role in "continuing this thing."


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:33 PM
horizontal rule
304

But Hillary's a fighter, she's committed, she's proven that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Ooh, nifty. Gawd knows pluck is all you need in the My Little Pony sweepstakes, so I'm sure it's the same for the Presidential election. Is there an argument in there for HRC? For gawd's sake, her negatives went to 54% recently. That's GWB territory.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:34 PM
horizontal rule
305

302: let's not forget that he's won more states.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:36 PM
horizontal rule
306

Also southern California housewives

And Tobacco Road hockey dads.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:37 PM
horizontal rule
307

I like that when you get SCMT exercised enough he spells things like a 15 year old girl. Gawd! PGD! You are So. Wrong.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:37 PM
horizontal rule
308

Yeah, I don't really have an answer to that. If there's no way Obama can lose, then why are we still damaging the party continuing this thing?
-rimshot-

Because we're Democrats. Well, maybe not "we", and certainly not me, but that's kind of the position we're in. In a contest between all that is good and holy and an unspeakable horror, who would you bet on? Vista didn't spring fully-formed from Gates' forehead; it was a product of the inevitable progression of evil in the world. Vote Obama, but short Good.


Posted by: hypnotizingchickens | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:37 PM
horizontal rule
309

297 nails it. If the tables were turned and Clinton had this lead, Obama would be but a wikipedia entry by now.

The "Obama is hurting the party" meme is a new one by me. Jesus H. Fucking Christ.

Seriously, PGD?


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:37 PM
horizontal rule
310

306: also like everybody.

Oh no! Obama can kiss off self-conscious single beltway policy wonks!

If he loses the TV pundits, that's literally everybody!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:38 PM
horizontal rule
311

302: let's not forget that he's won more states.

Man, those UC Davis history profs and Massachusetts counterculture guys are fucking everywhere.


Posted by: gswift | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:38 PM
horizontal rule
312

I responded to PGD's comments better when Pat Buchanan, in a riposte to Rachel Madow's point that who wins the primary doesn't tell us who wins the general, to cut it with the "Marxist dialectic". He even called Obama "Barack Hussein".


Posted by: Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:38 PM
horizontal rule
313

Whoops, I swooned a little hard for Obama there and knocked out a verb.


Posted by: Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:39 PM
horizontal rule
314

the My Little Pony sweepstakes

Sexist.

Tobacco Road hockey dads.

Speaking of, hockey dad, I think I've gotten you beat on the quitting smoking thing--how long did you go before you fell off the wagon? I haven't had one since Jan 26th, but I admit that as spring hits it's getting harder....


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:40 PM
horizontal rule
315

313: and a "d"! If you were any more sexist, there would be face raping.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:41 PM
horizontal rule
316

314.last: has anybody pointed out that cigarettes -- let's talk about an all natural one, an American Spirit -- are fucking delicious? Mmm, you're in California, you could go outside and smoke one right now.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:42 PM
horizontal rule
317

The "Obama is hurting the party" meme is a new one by me.

Imagine HRC mouthing "L'Ètat, c'est moi," and it makes more sense.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:42 PM
horizontal rule
318

PGD, there's only one point you're making that I want to address directly: understanding how to run a race, meaning, in this case, knowing the rules well enough to accrue delegates, has everything to do with the general election. Put another way, Obama's is the best organized Democratic (and probably Republican) campaign of our lifetime. How you fail to see that his organization will help in the general is beyond me.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:42 PM
horizontal rule
319

Tim always spells it "Gawd", ST.

Gawd knows pluck is all you need in the My Little Pony sweepstakes

That's not even true. You need heart, also. Pluck and heart.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:43 PM
horizontal rule
320

Nice try, Tweety (and fuck you), but American Spirits aren't nearly as delicious as the smokes I gave up. You fail to tempt me.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:43 PM
horizontal rule
321

how long did you go before you fell off the wagon?

Which time?

an all natural one, an American Spirit

I find them too heavy.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:45 PM
horizontal rule
322

To put 318 another way: "haha! Stupid! We all know you're stupid! You can keep talking to us, but every time you say anything it'll be like "stupid stupid stupid stupid" and we won't even hear the words."

Is this for your own good? I don't care, stupid! I don't have to talk to you.

This is for your own good, obviously.

Haha!

Stupid.

Yay Hillary!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:45 PM
horizontal rule
323

Clinton would probably do okay in the general, but I'm worried that she seems to be trying to out McCain McCain. Is Rendell going to be there in November for her?


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:45 PM
horizontal rule
324

What about moxie? That's what you need to win in Biloxi.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:45 PM
horizontal rule
325

Which time?

Last year, after DCon.

I find them too heavy.

Says the man with the double chin and the bacon fetish.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:45 PM
horizontal rule
326

325: says one of the men with the double chin and bacon fetish. So we're clear.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:46 PM
horizontal rule
327

What about moxie? That's what you need to win in Biloxi.

Moxie is good too, and some contests require sass. But not the general election and not the My Little Pony sweepstakes.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:47 PM
horizontal rule
328

one of the men with the double chin

We share it.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:47 PM
horizontal rule
329

326: Right, well, you were all pro-AS, which is in keeping with the double chin and bacon fetish.

I'm pretty sure that sass is inimical to MLP.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:48 PM
horizontal rule
330

328: You share a chin? Because you're too poor to afford crawdads?


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:48 PM
horizontal rule
331

A shared double chin is not truly double. What you guys have there is a quadruple chin.


Posted by: bitchphd | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:49 PM
horizontal rule
332

Of course without euphoria, it'll never play in Peoria.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:49 PM
horizontal rule
333

292: sure, you leave out all the stuff that isn't Hillary talking points and you're left with some Hillary talking points. Doesn't mean they aren't true.

he's harming the party how exactly?

He harmed the party by running too early in his career, Hillary harmed the party by running an incompetent "inevitability" campaign and criticizing Obama in ways that could help the Reps. I don't blame either more than the other.

running against a black guy named Barack Saddam Hussein Obama bin Laden

Being a black multicultural guy who can speak like Obama will get you a solid chunk of the vote in the Democratic primary. But not the general. I've wanted to see Obama prove his ability to take hits on his obvious vulnerabilities and win in spite of it. He's proven a lot of things -- his discipline, his intelligence, his competence -- but he hasn't proven that.

Because you don't know. The truth is, as far as you know, as far as any of us knows, either of them could beat McCain. Everything else is electability horseshit

Oh, I freely admit all that. This is all guesswork at this point. But we all have a lot of instincts about American culture, mine are telling me that Obama cannot win among precisely the voters he needed to take to win in PA, who will be the critical swing group in the general. Like I said, I hope I'm wrong.

I gotta go to sleep, and anyway I clearly don't have anything more to say, but here's a long quote from a piece by Michael Brendan Dougherty:

In Obama, [Republicans] would have an opponent who has never faced a well-funded foe in a tough one-on-one race, never encountered a barrage of negative TV advertising. He might be able to take a political punch well, he may not have a glass jaw. But there is no evidence for it. Obama's one statewide campaign was a romp over Alan Keyes, prompting one wag to remark that Obama's general-election prospects would indeed be excellent if the Republicans nominated Alan Keyes.

Obama has never faced a white opponent who hit hard or low or who struck at the very quality that makes him most appealing to the Left blogosphere, his exoticism. He won't face that test in the primaries: the nearest the Hillary camp might come is former Nebraska senator Bob Kerrey's probably disingenuous claim that he "liked" Obama's name and background and presumed ability to connect with the world's one billion Muslims. Liberal bloggers slammed Kerrey for propagating a vicious "smear," reminding one and all that multicultural good manners and political correctness are still the single factor that unites Democrats.

Republicans would not necessarily share such qualms. What might their campaign look like? You needn't be a political consultant to imagine a pretty effective one. The natural point of approach, of course, would be the name. Can we acknowledge that no contemporary Trollope or Allen Drury seeking to dramatize the emergence of a talented half-African presidential contender would consider burdening his hero with a name that evokes both of America's best-known enemies in the War on Terror? It would be far too over the top for social realism.

As the Democratic presidential nominee, Obama could quickly become known as Barack Hussein Obama. Republican commercials and talk radio would guarantee it. Negative TV spots could be relatively banal, pointing to some liberal highlights from Obama's state legislature record--one very strong pro-abortion vote and another against people who used unregistered guns to protect their homes against intruders would do the trick. And then, a voiceover, intoning something like "Barack Hussein Obama--Right for America?"

A colleague asserts that this would be seen as no more than a childish playground taunt, that by autumn Americans will be so acclimated to Obama's name that no repetition of it could weaken him. I doubt this. The political class, far more cosmopolitan than the rest of the country, has been intrigued with Obama for years. But by this summer, both parties will be playing to a broad electorate, in most cases more than twice the percentage of voters who turn out for a contested early state primary. Compared to primary voters, November voters are lower on the political awareness scale, less educated, less prosperous, less tuned in. Many will be forming an opinion about Barack Obama for the first time during and after the conventions, and branding him could be done comparatively quickly. Democrats in 1988 were astonished at how rapidly Michael Dukakis was "defined" by Willie Horton and how fast the Duke's double-digit lead in national polls evaporated. They of course knew that Dukakis was a competent and tested governor, a proven debater, no slouch on law and order. How could blue-collar voters not see this? Similarly, John Kerry's team found the Swiftboat charges so ludicrous they didn't deign to answer them. But, to the campaign's remorse, many voters found them believable enough. On what basis should we assume that white working-class voters (precisely those most resistant to Obama's electoral appeal thus far) would be completely unmoved by a campaign geared to question Obama's "American-ness"?

.... A great part of Obama's appeal is his blend, his hybridity--a brand in danger of being undermined by his very biography. If Republicans want to link Obama to the kind of black nationalism that would make many of his would-be supporters (and not only them) uneasy, they have only to make Jeremiah Wright and his preachings well known in the months leading up to November. This would be denounced as race-baiting, and may indeed be unfair. My guess is that the present-day Obama has moved beyond the young man searching for ways to be authentically black and is now more in synch with the Ivy League intellectuals who have flocked to his banner than with Afrocentrists of the South Side. But politics is often unfair.

Perhaps the Republicans have so internalized political correctness that it would be unthinkable for them to chip away at Obama's character. But political parties, by their nature, want to win. John McCain has already opined, "Obama wouldn't know the difference between an RPG and a bong," foreshadowing a campaign that emphasizes personality more than issues, terrain hardly favorable to Obama....

Obama's backers seem strangely overprotective of their man, as if they can't conceive how any fair-minded person would not adore him. The few times questions like those raised above have been posted in the comments section of the highbrow progressive blogs, the reaction has been visceral, immediate, strident: it is racist even to mention this stuff, a point pounded home in vitriolic terms. The intense repudiation of Bob Kerrey's rather innocuous observation about Obama's name and background was astonishing, suggesting not confidence but fear that a very tender area was being exposed. It would seem that they too worry that their poetic and exciting candidate may actually be far weaker than the polls show.



Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:50 PM
horizontal rule
334

No, I have it until the end of the year, then I pack it in dry ice and FedEx it to Tweety for 2009.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:50 PM
horizontal rule
335

You share a chin?

They're kind of like the Graeae.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:51 PM
horizontal rule
336

You know what's nice? Fresh drum tobacco. You smell it as you're rolling it. and the first hit tastes a little bit sweet. Now that the spring breeze is coming in, I can't think of anything better than a drag out on my deck. Of course, bitch probably smokes menthols(or used to), and 316 is fucking evil.


Posted by: hypnotizingchickens | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:53 PM
horizontal rule
337

A bit much, PGD.


Posted by: hypnotizingchickens | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:54 PM
horizontal rule
338

I believe bitch smoked nat shermans.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:54 PM
horizontal rule
339

335: I stole your stupid chin, now send me back to my own time, like in the deal!


Posted by: hypnotizingchickens | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:55 PM
horizontal rule
340

338: Well, la-di-da. Let her smoke newports, then.


Posted by: hypnotizingchickens | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:57 PM
horizontal rule
341

running too early in his career

Not to take away from the oh so fun Clinton-Obama discussion, but was this year unusual in having the top Democrats all with less than 10 years in Congress or zero years as a Governor? 2004, 2000, 1996 (for obvious reasons), 1992 all had more experienced candidates. Before then?

Note: I'm not saying experience is automatically the best thing ever - lots of experienced Democrats have lost, or were ruled to have lost - just noting that this year seems odd.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:57 PM
horizontal rule
342

I'm enjoying this beer, along with a Camel Light (new packaging: lots of circles) and the knowledge that PGD has imbibed the trippiest, most mind-bending Kool-Aid ever.


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:58 PM
horizontal rule
343

I was disappointed to see that the Camel redesign is permanent.


Posted by: Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:58 PM
horizontal rule
344

He harmed the party by running too early in his career.

How? Give me something specific, because otherwise it sounds like 'Obama knew, in his heart of hearts, that though he was a relative newcomer, that he had the organizational skills and charisma and luck to succeed, and this constituted a harm to the party, because we never want potential winners to run.'


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:59 PM
horizontal rule
345

California, you could go outside and smoke one right now

The internet tells me that New York is warmer than some parts of coastal California at this moment.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-22-08 11:59 PM
horizontal rule
346

341: It's unusual because the top three all had/have so little experience, yes. But then we get into a chicken and egg thing. Because Dodd and Biden and Richardson were all in the race. So why did they lose? Is there a generational shift playing out in the party? Please let the answer be yes, oh please. (Don't hate me, Bob.)


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:00 AM
horizontal rule
347

Michael Brendan Dougherty

Who writes for The American Conservative. That's the man whose vote I'm counting on if I'm a Democrat. Next up: Charles Krauthammer prefers HRC.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:00 AM
horizontal rule
348

342-3: can I bum a smoke, 'smashers?


Posted by: Stanley | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:01 AM
horizontal rule
349

Is there a generational shift playing out in the party?

This is what I'm thinking, too. Perhaps more troubling is the fact that they never had the media profile of the top three in the lead-up to the race. If pre-election coverage had been different, would they have been taken (more) seriously? It doesn't seem like anyone really gave them a chance in 2007 - except maybe Richardson - although I was paying much less attention back then, so I could be wrong.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:05 AM
horizontal rule
350

We'll drink beer and smoke cigarettes, Stanley—we're no electric Kool-Aid acid test–track Hillary supporters.


Posted by: Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:06 AM
horizontal rule
351

You know, Ari could probably tell you that a candidate whose only experience is law and a partial term as a Senator from Illinois isn't an absolute guarantee of disaster.


Posted by: hypnotizingchickens | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:06 AM
horizontal rule
352

PGD has imbibed the trippiest, most mind-bending Kool-Aid ever.

well, to be honest I was pretty drunk through most of that. Very good dinner party though. I got invited to an archaelogical dig in Israel for next summer.

Bottom line: I'm mad at Obama for not taking Pennsylvania. The general is much closer to a Pennsylvania situation -- one-on-one for lots of time -- than a caucus type thing where organization will let you maneuver into the lead. Oh well.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:08 AM
horizontal rule
353

On the other hand, a lot of the older generation in the party has been endorsing Obama. There was an analysis somewhere pointing out that Obama is doing better with the newest and oldest - measured by time in office, not absolute age - Congressional Democrats and Clinton's been doing better with those in the mid-range.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:08 AM
horizontal rule
354

The inevitable Lincoln reference. Yay. Other conclusions: brokered conventions - not bad!


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:09 AM
horizontal rule
355

351 and 354 both remind me that I have to write a post about a Garry Wills NYRB piece comparing Obama's race speech to Lincoln's Cooper Union address. But first, I have to go to sleep. The puppy will be waking me up in a couple of hours. Good night.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:12 AM
horizontal rule
356

Clinton's been doing better with those in the mid-range.

I think that's basically the Clinton generation of politicians. In some sense, they all came up together.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:14 AM
horizontal rule
357

The general is much closer to a Pennsylvania situation -- one-on-one for lots of time

Yeah, but Jesus, PGD, you're willfully ignoring the fact that the contests feature different contestants and the metrics will be completely different for judging their performance. It's not as though voters are simply asked to vote the primary race and then immediately vote the general—at least, that won't be the case, if either the media or the Party come to their senses and declare Clinton the loser some time before November. In any case, you can't not see the incredible margins of Democratic primary voters compared to Republican primary voters and conclude that something is happening. Democratic voters are more convicted and mobilized for '08 than the Republicans.


Posted by: Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:24 AM
horizontal rule
358

I thought PGD was doing an absolutely brilliant job trolling... but he's serious? Or is he just trolling really well?

Obama should have gained another 15 years or so of experience so he could become a winner. Because convential wisdom coming into this election was that old experienced Senators who have spent years in Washington are basically unbeatable Presidential candidates.

Almost no one gave a damn about John Kerry beyond the fact that he wasn't Bush. But that was a good thing, because if people had actually been really inspired by him they would just be kool-aid drinking cultists who are "strangely overprotective" of their candidate. And why would we want that? How could that possibly be useful for a political party?


Posted by: Barbar | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:46 AM
horizontal rule
359

Is Hillary going to support McCain in the general? If not, and if she's going to campaign for Obama, then nothing about the primary tells us how people are going to vote in the general. Obviously her endorsement isn't going to turn every single voter, but it's going to pretty fundamentally change the dynamic.

If she's boxing herself in so that she can't do so, then all that "fighter" and "committed" means is that she's Nader.


Posted by: Nápi | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:17 AM
horizontal rule
360

Not only will Hillary endorse Obama, there's a very good chance she will be his vice president.


Posted by: politicalfootball | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 6:52 AM
horizontal rule
361

In any case, you can't not see the incredible margins of Democratic primary voters compared to Republican primary voters and conclude that something is happening. Democratic voters are more convicted and mobilized for '08 than the Republicans.

or, Republicans are having a jolly time voting in Dem primaries, since the Republican primary has been over for a long long time: the Limbaugh effect.

also, close to half of the PA Dems who voted for Hillary say they will vote for McCain over Obama if she doesn't get the nomination. that's not something you'd hear from a committed Dem; that's what you hear from someone who doesn't actually care about The Party and is either voting against Obama (the person) or for Hillary (the person). those votes aren't transferable.


Posted by: cleek | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:00 AM
horizontal rule
362

Republicans are having a jolly time voting in Dem primaries, since the Republican primary has been over for a long long time: the Limbaugh effect.

Except that turnout has been like this since the beginning of primary season.

And further that polls have generally shown little to no "Limbaugh effect".


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:04 AM
horizontal rule
363

My suggestion seems uncontroversial. I will assume it's selling drugs.

*lights up 10 PM choco-taco*


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:07 AM
horizontal rule
364

363: don't they all sell drugs?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:09 AM
horizontal rule
365

those votes aren't transferable.

Her voters are old. They may not be available to be transfered in November.

Can you vote absentee if your reason for being absent is death?


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:10 AM
horizontal rule
366

Except that turnout has been like this since the beginning of primary season.

true. but it's not the beginning of the season anymore, the players and dynamics are much much different, and we're into states that haven't had meaningful primaries in decades.

And further that polls have generally shown little to no "Limbaugh effect".

IIRC, there was a poll from Texas showing some tens of thousands of Limbaugh voters who - it wasn't enough to change the outcome, but they were definitely there.

(no, i don't think they make up half of HRC's votes.)


Posted by: cleek | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:27 AM
horizontal rule
367

PA's primary is closed. The turnout's a lot to credit to Republicans-who-all-switched-their-registration-before-the-deadline.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:30 AM
horizontal rule
368

don't they all sell drugs?

Coming from you, Tweety, I can't tell if it's serious. Is the ice cream novelty business an acknowledged front for monging dope?


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:31 AM
horizontal rule
369

true. but it's not the beginning of the season anymore, the players and dynamics are much much different, and we're into states that haven't had meaningful primaries in decades.

And yet, the turnout differential is the same.

What you're saying is that the factors that motivated high turnout in the early states -- exciting candidates, highly motivated Democrats, a deeply unpopular GOP -- are no longer relevant, and the similarly large turnouts in these later states are due to different factors entirely?

I think you have a pretty high bar to clear to justify that.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:31 AM
horizontal rule
370

Maybe that should be "monguing", to get the hard G. Also, "Hard G" was my prison name.


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:34 AM
horizontal rule
371

368: Results 1 - 10 of about 1,750,000 for ice cream man sells drugs


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:34 AM
horizontal rule
372

I thought that was the candy man.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:36 AM
horizontal rule
373

I am so naive. Poop.


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:36 AM
horizontal rule
374

Next you'll tell me those sneakers dangling from power lines aren't just improvised bird feeders.


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:38 AM
horizontal rule
375

374: in fact they are.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:42 AM
horizontal rule
376

In my son's neighborhood the ice cream man was a defrocked priest child-molester.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:43 AM
horizontal rule
377

How do you know how many people voted before you at the polling place?

Everyone in NC, just as an FYI, knows what # voter they are for the day in their precinct.

The Long Version: In NC, as part of the state's efforts to avoid requiring any ID to vote (outside special situations of illegible registration cards, etc.), what we get when we walk in and clearly state our name and address is a form called an Authorization to Vote which we sign to indicate that, yes, we really are whom we say we are and we know lying is bad. We hand that off to someone else who gives us a ballot in exchange. One's ATV is always numbered so that election judges have a running tally during the day of how many ballots should be in the ballot box as part of anti-ballot-stuffing procedures. Ballots, of course, are not numbered or in any other way marked unless it's early voting (all absentee ballots must be retrievable); so, if you're in NC, look at the upper-right-hand corner of your ATV between the registration table and the ballot table and you'll know what # voter you are for the day. It might be slightly off - provisionals, absentees, etc., will not be included in that count - but it does tell you what # "normal" voter you are.


Posted by: Robust McManlyPants | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:44 AM
horizontal rule
378

Those sneakers are sophisticated listening devices for the government to--

I've said too much already.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:46 AM
horizontal rule
379

How do you know how many people voted before you at the polling place?
Everywhere I've voted in MA uses paper ballots and optical-scan machines. When you feed your ballot into the scanner at the polling place, a little counter display on it increments.


Posted by: Nathan Williams | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:47 AM
horizontal rule
380

what we get when we walk in and clearly state our name and address

This induced a delicious moment of imagining a procession of southerners marching into a polling place and proudly drawling their names.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:47 AM
horizontal rule
381

In my son's neighborhood the ice cream man was a defrocked priest child-molester.

Children of defrocked priests beware.


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:48 AM
horizontal rule
382

The Scantron machine you feed your ballot into shows the count on the front of the machine, too. I was one of the first five people through the door on Saturday morning (the second or third day of early voting) at the Durham County Board of Elections, and my ballot was the 805th recorded by that machine.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:48 AM
horizontal rule
383

Also, briefly: during this year's pollworker training the director of elections for the county was going over and emphasizing that we do not turn voters away for any reason. If someone isn't in the book or is marked "inactive" due to repeated returns of mailings or whatever we will, if all else fails to correct their situation, have them vote a provisional. "We do not turn people away, ever," he said for the Nth time and then, "It is a crime in North Carolina to turn someone away who wants to vote. And why did we make it a crime?" He reached over and turned on the overhead projector to show us a transparency which read, in huge letters, "WE ARE NOT FLORIDA."

On the topic of off-spec Manhattans, in Philadelphia in January I ordered a Manhattan and was told that they didn't have sweet vermouth. "How about a 'perfect' Manhattan?" the bartender asked. I challenged him to explain and he said it was a Manhattan with dry vermouth (also, it turned out, no bitters). I gave it a whirl and even I, trained in the trenches of fraternity life, could not manage to choke it down. My experience, with no offense intended to Witt or any of our other fabulous Pennsylvanians, is that Philly bartenders make terrible drinks.


Posted by: Robust McManlyPants | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:52 AM
horizontal rule
384

And yet, the turnout differential is the same.

i'm saying there are different factors involved.

What you're saying is that the factors that motivated high turnout in the early states -- exciting candidates, highly motivated Democrats, a deeply unpopular GOP -- are no longer relevant, and the similarly large turnouts in these later states are due to different factors entirely

the Dems have had consistently larger turnouts (much larger in many states). that would seem like great news to the Dem's chances of winning the White House. but, McCain is still beating both of them in national polling, and has been, for weeks. i take this to mean that the enthusiastic turnout Dems are getting in primaries is tied to their preferred candidate and doesn't seem to transfer to the other Dem candidate. in other words: HRC can draw tens of thousands of new voters to the polls in PA, but should HRC lose the nomination, those are going to be GOP votes. that's what people are telling pollsters, anyway.


Posted by: cleek | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:53 AM
horizontal rule
385

a Manhattan with dry vermouth (also, it turned out, no bitters)

That's fucking disgusting.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:53 AM
horizontal rule
386

A perfect Manhattan is properly made with half of the vermouth sweet and half dry (and, of course, with bitters).


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:54 AM
horizontal rule
387

i take this to mean that the enthusiastic turnout Dems are getting in primaries is tied to their preferred candidate and doesn't seem to transfer to the other Dem candidate

Or it's because the polls include all the voters who didn't vote in either primary, are low information, and haven't heard word one about McCain's weaknesses.

Also:


New Voters

Part of Obama's ability to close the large lead Clinton initially had in Pennsylvania was a concerted voter registration effort - one which paid off for him. Among today's Pennsylvania Democratic voters 14 percent reported that they had newly registered as Democrats. Among these new Democratic voters Obama bested Clinton by 20 points - 59 percent to 39 percent.

These new Democratic voters fit a distinct profile - that of typical Obama supporters. Twenty-eight percent of this group are voters between the ages of 18 and 29. These young voters made up only nine percent of those already registered, and as Democrats. The new voters were also more likely to label themselves as independents. Thirty-six percent of the new voters called themselves independents, compared to only 11 percent of other voters. In addition, one quarter of these voters were from the Philadelphia suburbs, compared to 16 percent overall.

Hillary didn't turn out new voters, Obama did.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:57 AM
horizontal rule
388

"WE ARE NOT FLORIDA."

Awesome.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:57 AM
horizontal rule
389

This induced a delicious moment of imagining a procession of southerners marching into a polling place and proudly drawling their names.

During the partisan primary we also have to state our party affiliation. (When asked what to do if someone says they don't know, the director of elections shrugged and said, 'Well, we kind of just tell them.') Apparently the BoE got a call from a gentleman in 2004 who said, after the primary, "I had to state my name and address and then I had to state my party and I didn't like that." When asked why he didn't like it, he said, "Because my party affiliation is embarrassing."

The Scantron machine you feed your ballot into shows the count on the front of the machine, too.

Indeed! Chief judges are supposed to compare the ATV count with the tabulator count every hour to make sure there aren't discrepancies.

We also, I just want to note, have the best voting machines possible and in Durham County (and many other NC counties, but not all) our HAVA-compliance machines are the best possible choice from a security/reliability perspective.


Posted by: Robust McManlyPants | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:57 AM
horizontal rule
390

Argh. Extend the blockquote another couple paragraphs, and join me in cursing unfogged's comment parsing system.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:57 AM
horizontal rule
391

A perfect Manhattan is properly made with half of the vermouth sweet and half dry (and, of course, with bitters).

As you doubtless know. I speak for the lurkers!


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:58 AM
horizontal rule
392

371.----whoa.


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:01 AM
horizontal rule
393

A perfect Manhattan is properly made with half of the vermouth sweet and half dry (and, of course, with bitters).

Neat! Now that I might try. On the same trip I had a bartender reduced to asking me what went into a Manhattan then bragging that he'd run a bar for ten years. I wanted to pat him on the arm and say, "Sugar, they're not all appletinis."


Posted by: Robust McManlyPants | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:04 AM
horizontal rule
394

333: I've wanted to see Obama prove his ability to take hits on his obvious vulnerabilities and win in spite of it.

The Clinton campaign has played the race-baiting game more subtly than the Republicans would in most respects, but he's weathered the Jeremiah Wright Strategy, which Dougherty rightly mentions as a likely Republican mainstay, quite impressively.

Obama has also demonstrated an early crossover appeal for seemingly unlikely Republican constituencies, like evangelicals in states like Idaho, that's likely to make the inevitable Hussein-baiting a less surefire strategy than it would otherwise be. Clinton, meanwhile, has the mother of all name-recognition problems among this same constituency, namely being a Clinton.

It seems pretty clear which of the candidates the GOP fears facing more, and it isn't Clinton. To judge from her performance in the primaries, nor should it be.

And come on, this stuff about Obama "running too early" is malarkey; if he can put together a credible run at an extraordinary time in American history, where moreover the opposing party has spent the last few years dramatically discrediting itself, he bloody well ought to. Waiting a few years for the financial crises and national humiliation to deepen, wars to worsen and real fascist cult leaders to emerge would have been unwise if not ruinous.


Posted by: DS | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:07 AM
horizontal rule
395

The ice cream man convicted for piracy link reminds me that the fast food restaurants in this neighborhood seem to be popular with the people selling pirated dvds. At least the couple of times I've been in them, I've seen the movie sellers making their rounds. The only other place I've seen them is on the subway.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:08 AM
horizontal rule
396

ask for your Manhattan "with an extra dash of bitters."

I should try asking for a dry martini "with an extra splash of vermouth", perhaps while wearing a plastic jumpsuit to keep the brainsplat off my street clothes.


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:12 AM
horizontal rule
397

while wearing a plastic jumpsuit

Something you should probably be doing in any case.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:14 AM
horizontal rule
398

PGD gets it right, probably. Low-information voters are people who know nothing and should not be voting. If they're the crucial swing vote, then the planet is doomed, but also it means that Obama is doomed.


Posted by: Auto-banned | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:15 AM
horizontal rule
399

Glasgow Ice Cream Wars:

The conflicts, in which vendors raided one another's vans and fired shotguns into one another's windscreens, were more violent than might be expected of turf wars among ice-cream vendors.

Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:15 AM
horizontal rule
400

384: McCain is still beating both of them in national polling, and has been, for weeks.

Wrong.


Posted by: DS | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:15 AM
horizontal rule
401

I love it. Clinton spin: Since Obama cannot put her away, she is the better candidate.

I'll bet those same people think that Memphis is the National champion in basketball.

"Sure, they might have scored more point than me. But since they didn't totally dominate me, I should be declared the winner!!!"


Posted by: Will | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:16 AM
horizontal rule
402

Or it's because the polls include all the voters who didn't vote in either primary, are low information, and haven't heard word one about McCain's weaknesses.

no doubt. and many of those people will be voting in the GE. as will many of the people who tell pollsters they won't vote for the opponent of the Democratic favorite.

Hillary didn't turn out new voters, Obama did.

that's not exactly true, according to what you wrote:

Among these new Democratic voters Obama bested Clinton by 20 points - 59 percent to 39 percent.

even 39% of those new voters is a lot of people.

and let's not forget that 30-some% of Obama voters say they won't vote for Hillary in the GE.


Posted by: cleek | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:16 AM
horizontal rule
403

and let's not forget that 30-some% of Obama voters say they won't vote for Hillary in the GE.

I tend to believe that more than I do when Hillary voters say it, but I still don't particularly believe it. It's been a rancorous primary, and people are going to be pissed, but when it comes to having a chance to vote again ol' Hundred Years War, I think most of them will probably reconsider.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:18 AM
horizontal rule
404

the menace of ice cream men has been addressed before.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:19 AM
horizontal rule
405

400.
i got my numbers from 538


Posted by: cleek | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:20 AM
horizontal rule
406

Low-information voters are people who know nothing and should not be voting.

No, they're people who need to be reached.

High turnout helps Dems, low turnout hurts them. Talking about "people who should not be voting" plays into Republican hands.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:20 AM
horizontal rule
407

Low-information voters are people who know nothing and should not be voting.

No, they're people who need to be reached.

High turnout helps Dems, low turnout hurts them. Talking about "people who should not be voting" plays into Republican hands.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:22 AM
horizontal rule
408

Talking about how Obama is doomed plays into Republican hands. Buying Clinton's spin plays into Republican hands. Basically, paying any attention at all to the Democratic primary from two months ago until the convention plays into Republican hands.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:24 AM
horizontal rule
409

Low-information voters are people who know nothing and should not be voting.

No, they're people who need to be reached.

High turnout helps Dems, low turnout hurts them. Talking about "people who should not be voting" plays into Republican hands.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:26 AM
horizontal rule
410

While doing a Google site search just now, I noticed that the results were in reverse chronological order. Is this standard when searching on blogs? I don't think it used to be.


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:27 AM
horizontal rule
411

Somebody wake up John; I think he fell asleep on the mose again.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:27 AM
horizontal rule
412

If you're falling asleep on the mose, you're not doing it right.


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:28 AM
horizontal rule
413

But if he's such a rock star, why couldn't he beat Hillary Clinton among Democratic voters in Pennsylvania, with like a month to do it? I've been seeing the cracks in the armor.

I think a lot of people just thought "A guaranteed return to the Clinton era? Sounds good to me. And shouldn't this new guy really be the VICE president, so he can inherit it later?"

The second sentence was one of the reasons a HRCist gave for why I should vote for her. I didn't have a response.

Of course I don't know these people personally, but why shouldn't they think that?


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
414

Mose doze pals nap ok, 'pipe.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:30 AM
horizontal rule
415

Nov shmoz ka pop.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:31 AM
horizontal rule
416

Maybe I'm blinded by partisanship, but the NYT report on the Mississippi special election seems mildly slanted Republican.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:34 AM
horizontal rule
417

the results were in reverse chronological order

Not that way for me.


Posted by: ogged | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:41 AM
horizontal rule
418

Basically, paying any attention at all to the Democratic primary from two months ago...

It really has been over for that long. In looking at the delegate math the night before Ohio, I decided Hillary couldn't win the nomination, pretty much the only thing I've been right on.

But I don't think we're handing the Republicans a lot. This process might be dissuading a few to Republicans that would have voted for Obama, but otherwise Obama's demographic weaknesses are valid.

A dynasty, along with its adherents, should not be expected to go peacefully. Once it does go, though, Obama, along with his institutional and popular support, will be freed to focus on the general and a very weak candidate. What negligible lead McCain has in the polls will vaporize quickly.


Posted by: asl | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:43 AM
horizontal rule
419

314: Go Bitch! The renewal of spring does seem to trigger renewed cravings -- whenever you are tempted, think about how totally and inexorably miserable you felt the first few weeks after you quit. Giving in to temptation means putting yourself through that all over again. Yay you for succeeding!


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:48 AM
horizontal rule
420

419 was me


Posted by: Di Kotimy | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:49 AM
horizontal rule
421

A dynasty, along with its adherents, should not be expected to go peacefully. Once it does go, though, Obama, along with his institutional and popular support, will be freed to focus on the general and a very weak candidate. What negligible lead McCain has in the polls will vaporize quickly.

Agreed.

Clinton was expected to waltz through the primary. Obama is an extremely strong candidate, but Clinton has done a great job in spinning it so that she is doing well simply by staying close to Obama.

She is the heavyweight who was supposed to crush all takers. Really does a significant underdog crush the heavyweight.


Posted by: Will | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:49 AM
horizontal rule
422

Well, at least I can take joy from the fact that in my local state senate race, the extremely corrupt electrician's union boss who was heavily favored got beaten by the apparently not corrupt protégé of the extremely corrupt incumbent state senator. Huzzah, I guess.

Also, my district gave 78% of its vote to Obama. That's pretty sweet.


Posted by: Wry Cooter | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:52 AM
horizontal rule
423

Is anyone a tiny bit surprised by this? It's Ohio, but demographically worse for Obama, but he had more time to organize, so he matched his result. Whoop de do. I hoped in the stretch before TX & OH that demographics wouldn't get locked in, but they have. They've both got a pretty strong coalition behind them & increasingly disliking their oppononent who they'll need to win back in the general. If working class voters are really primarily motivated by bread & butter issues Obama should be able to do this; if they're not voting for him because he's black, vaguely foreign, etc., we've got a problem--but she does too, because right now I've gone from "will definitely vote for her, will try to convince myself to do more" to "there is no fucking way I will do more than vote for her & I increasingly don't even want to do that but I'll do it anyway." Mainly, what we need is to focus on McCain. It's now pretty damn clear what the outcome of the various caucuses & elections will be--there are very few states left where I don't feel like I could tell you who's going to win right now, & the ones that are in doubt aren't going to make that much difference--as far as the delegate count goes, a fifteen point swing in Indiana isn't going to suddenly make everything crystal clear for the superdelegates.


Posted by: Katherine | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:56 AM
horizontal rule
424

since Jan 26th

Awesome! I missed this earlier. I haven't since (checks calendar...) 23 February. My big challenge now is that I feel normal again and am not constantly reminded of my virtue by my suffering. It's not a matter of cravings, now; it's a matter of the habitual movements trying to reassert themselves. I realized the other night that I had gotten up from the couch to go outside and... ? I didn't even have any around to smoke and Rah was at work so I couldn't have bummed. It was pure muscle memory and it got me as far as the door.


Posted by: Robust McManlyPants | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:57 AM
horizontal rule
425

"there is no fucking way I will do more than vote for her & I increasingly don't even want to do that but I'll do it anyway."

That's where I am.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:00 AM
horizontal rule
426

425: Yep.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:01 AM
horizontal rule
427

Mainly, what we need is to focus on McCain.

At Obama's rally Monday night he was focused on McCain. Not a word about why Clinton would be a bad president.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:01 AM
horizontal rule
428

(It's regional as much as demographic of course--e.g. Indiana, one of the few states in doubt, is right between Ohio & Illinois).


Posted by: Katherine | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:02 AM
horizontal rule
429

and yeah, Obama keeps on trying to focus on McCain, whereupon Clinton runs an ad about how McCain is more qualified than Obama, issues a press release about Obama's suspicious ties to the Weather Underground, etc. etc. etc. ad infinitum. And guess whether the press is more interested in covering that, or Obama's policy attacks on McCain?


Posted by: Katherine | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:04 AM
horizontal rule
430

427- That's the right move. He needed to try to hold ground in Pennsylvania and focus on Clinton. He should now act as presumptive nominee.


Posted by: asl | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:06 AM
horizontal rule
431

"He harmed the party by running too early in his career, "

To me this reads as "running for the nomination to which Hillary Clinton was entitled." I was desperate for someone to challenge her & thought he was in the best position, so I was very glad when Durbin talked him into it.


Posted by: katherine | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:09 AM
horizontal rule
432

(also, I think the Dem establishment in D.C. is hopelessly corrupt, & is especially good at corrupting Senators with presidential operations, & I'm glad that Obama ran before it sucked the life out of him.)


Posted by: Katherine | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:11 AM
horizontal rule
433

or aspirations


Posted by: Katherine | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:11 AM
horizontal rule
434

430: "Clinton" means "McCain"? Or "right" means "wrong"?

Or...what do you mean?


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:12 AM
horizontal rule
435

Maybe I'm blinded by partisanship, but the NYT report on the Mississippi special election seems mildly slanted Republican.

Describing the Republican who couldn't pick up a plurality (and lost the party-line vote, if you assume that he and Childers would each have picked up the votes of their party-mates who were still on the ballot) as having an advantage going into the runoff does seem kind of wacked. The guy lost by 2000 votes -- how is this a favorable result for him? As opposed to the way my partisan self would have written it, which is that the Democrats have a really strong chance to win in a R+10 district that includes the headquarters of Don fucking Wildmon's organization.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:13 AM
horizontal rule
436

435: well, since it's Mississippi I was presuming that whatever minor candidates prevented a majority from being won are insane right-wingers, who would then vote against Childers in the runoff.

But that might not be right.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:15 AM
horizontal rule
437


That Obama needed to be intramural for Pennsylvania, but now needs to be the presumptive nominee.


Posted by: asl | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:16 AM
horizontal rule
438

But he wasn't intramural. I said he only talked about why McCain was bad, not why HRC was bad.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:17 AM
horizontal rule
439

437 to 434.


Posted by: asl | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:17 AM
horizontal rule
440

423, 429: Hurray! Katherine!

I really am coming around to the idea that demographics is destiny in a lot of these primaries. If people are unfamiliar with Obama, Clinton is more popular, so he's got some easy pickups as he starts campaigning in a state. But there really seems to be a ceiling that can be pretty easily calculated based upon the demographics by age, race (holy crap, it's amazing how the 10-15% black states are so consistant), and how economically hard-up the state is compared to 15-20 years ago.

Sooo... If I were a less lazy man, I'd throw out a few datapoints (probably just ditch something like all Super Tuesday states with fewer than a given number of campaign visits per capita, to control for Obama exposure) then run the regression (though I'd probably need to do a parabolic transformation of the percentage of blacks). I bet I could get an insanely good fit for the eventual Clinton vote.


Posted by: Po-Mo Polymath | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:21 AM
horizontal rule
441

425: In the alternate universe where Hillary comes from still-behind to capture the nom, I will probably vote for her a) on the first woman president thing, which might be decent cred with a daughter at some point, and b) to betray my year-2000 self, who voted for Nader (the longer this thing goes on, the more I remember why).

It's in California, so it's all good.


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:23 AM
horizontal rule
442

I was desperate for someone to challenge her & thought he was in the best position, so I was very glad when Durbin talked him into it.

The one good thing--win, lose, or draw--is that there is now a declared anti-Clinton camp, and it includes people of significant power, and both the young and the old.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:23 AM
horizontal rule
443

441: yeah, that's pretty much where I am, except it's Illinois.


Posted by: Katherine | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:27 AM
horizontal rule
444

I'd probably need to do a parabolic transformation of the percentage of blacks

As if Tuskegee wasn't bad enough. Now you want to do what?


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:27 AM
horizontal rule
445

440 cont.: And then I'd use that regression to just predict the rest of the primaries with greater accuracy than the polls, calculate the final popular vote and approximate pledged delegate totals, then ship off reams of the analysis to all superdelegates. This is how we can wrap it up early!


Posted by: Po-Mo Polymath | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:27 AM
horizontal rule
446

My observations, for what little they're worth:

Maybe I'm a victim of the expectations game, but I'm a little disappointed in Obama for not keeping it closer. He could have cut a point or two off of Hillary's margin of victory by running up the score in Phila., but Hillary kept it pretty close there.

I think Obama can pretty well write off West Virginia now. In the states sthat have voted to date, Obama has broken the 30% mark in just 15 of the 32 counties that border WV, and broken 40% in just seven (none of them in PA). The demographics of WV are even more unfavorable than PA (just as old and much whiter).

Looking back over the VA results, I am starting to be concerned that PGD may have a point. Look at Buchanon County, Virginia. This is must-win territory for the Dems in November--a rare blue county in a purplish state (thanks to the United Mine Workers), the kind of place that could tip the electoral votes of half a dozen states. It doesn't look like they think much of Obama there.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:28 AM
horizontal rule
447

436: The guys who the candidates now in the runoff ran against in the party primary couldn't get their names off the ballot, so there was a second Republican and a second Democrat who each picked up about a percent of the vote (also an independent and a Green). The two Democrats together got more than 50% of the total vote.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:29 AM
horizontal rule
448

442- A very good point, although I think 'anti-Clinton' might be a little strong. And the Democrats really needed a candidate who was right on the war from the start.


Posted by: asl | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:35 AM
horizontal rule
449

Okay, people are totally talking about electability again.

People! You have no idea what the electoral map will look like. You have no idea what states will be in play. You have no idea what counties (counties?!?) are must win.

Not only that, you're comparing apples to fire trucks or noble gasses. These are completely different elections! You don't know why people voted how they did! You aren't experts!

Okay, I'll stop. Have fun ruining everything!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:36 AM
horizontal rule
450

Of course he will lose WV & KY. Probably Puerto Rico too, though I know so little about Puerto Rico politics that I'm less certain of this. He will probably win MT, OR, & NC & SD. I don't know about Indiana or Guam. I would expect that her margins in WV & KY, & his in NC, will exceed her margins in PA & OH.

If the white working class voters are not voting for Obama because they're more familiar w/ Clinton, like her a bit better, trust her a bit more on health care, the economy, the female ones want a woman elected president, etc. Obama should be able to win them back by going after McCain on those issues. If they think he's a dangerously un-American black Muslim militant he's got a problem, but I'll be damned if I'll turn on Obama because he's a dangerously un-American black Muslim militant, or because some white working class voters think so. Even if the press does keep telling me that they, unlike blacks & young voters & people with too much education, are "Real Americans" & only their votes should count.


Posted by: Katherine | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:37 AM
horizontal rule
451

This is must-win territory for the Dems in November

Um, no it's not. The point of the game is to get to 270. I see several ways to get there, most of which look like easier states to take than VA. It might be must win for the HRC coalition, but that's part of the problem with the HRC coalition.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:38 AM
horizontal rule
452

I was very glad when Durbin talked him into it.

I didn't realize Durbin played that role. I really like Durbin.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:39 AM
horizontal rule
453

Okay, people are totally talking about electability again.

People! You have no idea what the electoral map will look like. You have no idea what states will be in play. You have no idea what counties (counties?!?) are must win.

I appreciate the objection but this is an unfair characteirzation.

PGD, for example, in the things I agreed with, was talking about types of voters. Not geographical areas.


Posted by: Auto-banned | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:39 AM
horizontal rule
454

446- Sure, Obama has demographic weaknesses, but Clinton or McCain have weaker. Bejebus, look at McCain's. Where do you start?


Posted by: asl | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:41 AM
horizontal rule
455

If working class voters are really primarily motivated by bread & butter issues Obama should be able to do this

I don't think he can, and I dont think Obama wants them. I think Obama is intent on building a realigning coalition, or the vanguard of one. It will include a lot of Obamacan glibertarians, who will abandon their Islamophobia in exchange for (guess what). War and the glibs was never a good fit anyway.

But the "Obama majority" will change the Democratic Party in ways I won't completely appreciate. and in ways I will.

Look Obama is not and will never be Charlie Rangel or John Dingle, guys I like a whole lot more than Obama, and that's his point. Don't try to tell me he is Rangel plus a pony. If you really want to help, be honest about how he differs from Rangel and Dingle.

Maybe the Democratc Party, in a nation that has about lost its manufacturing base and become a service economy, needs to move away from its working class white demographic. But there is something going on here, and it is a plan.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:47 AM
horizontal rule
456

HRC gives older white people (not like the crowd here, no no no) who distrust a smooth-talking black candidate an alternative to McCain, who I'm pretty confident will be shown to be a loose cannon lacking a moral compass after 1980 or whenever. How strong is the case for this: faced with what they see as two bad choices, many people will not bother to vote. Isn't this the explanation for why young people tend not to vote?


Posted by: lw | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:47 AM
horizontal rule
457

The demographics of WV are even more unfavorable than PA (just as old and much whiter)

Err... actually, super-white states have really come out for Obama thus far. I think it's the economic hardship, education, and age statistics that show West Virginia to be unfavorable to Obama.


Posted by: Po-Mo Polymath | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:48 AM
horizontal rule
458

Uh, I want to apologize for my intemperate tone last night. Since I didn't have any new numbers to add and knew well that Obama had won the Unfogged primary long ago, dropping several column feet of diatribes on his unelectability was out of line.

I live in this really social neighborhood that leads to probably too much drinking on weeknights. It starts with neighbors over the stoop, morphs into neighbors and several bottles of wine on the back patio, and then leads inevitably to intemperate internet commenting.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:50 AM
horizontal rule
459

455:Where did I come up with "Dingle?"

I meant John Conyers.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:52 AM
horizontal rule
460

there is no fucking way I will do more than vote for her & I increasingly don't even want to do that but I'll do it anyway

This does make me sad, though. I like them both.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:52 AM
horizontal rule
461

was talking about types of voters. Not geographical areas.

Actually, so was I, though the phrasing I used suggested otherwise. I was using Buchanon county as a stand-in for the type of voter that a Democrat cannot win without: lives in a culturally conservative environment, but has economic interests in line with the Dem's program and has historically been willing to at least consider voting those interests. Buchanon county is numerically insignificant, but as a union-oriented, blue collar, blue-voting county in the midst of red territory, it is emblematic of a lot of battleground areas in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Indiana, West Virginia, and elsewhere. The fact that Obama didn't break 10% is a matter of concern. Not panic, but concern.

I'm still for Obama and I still don't believe in electability arguments, but I had kind of hoped that he would have found a way to connect with those voter segments by now. Hopefully he will do that when the intraparty competition is over and the focus is on McCain.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:52 AM
horizontal rule
462

458: If the apology is any way directed toward me, it's totally unnecessary (at least on my end -- I can't speak for others). And if I got annoyed by some of your comments, it was only because the result last night stung -- for all of the reasons that Katherine mentions above. Anyway, sorry if I was a jerk.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:53 AM
horizontal rule
463

their military vet Navy employee* husbands. (Plus a lot of Mr. B.'s co-workers--which in and of itself would make Obama the better Dem candidate this year.)

O RLY?

Hmm... excellent. I may have to start annoying family members to proselytize for Obama come the general, and I think one of the best prospects would be my uncle in Virginia who's worked for the Navy ever since ROTC finished paying for his college.


Posted by: Po-Mo Polymath | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:53 AM
horizontal rule
464

429: HRC went hard against McCain in Philly just a week or two ago, Katherine. It was the top headline in the Post-Gazette the next day. It's just not as black & white as you paint it.

I think bob in 455 is making a lot of sense.

Has it been noted that the exit polls showed 16% of whites in PA voted on race, 54% of whom said they'd vote for Barack in November? Another ~30% said they'd stay home. The "Race Chasm" continues to look non-insidious to me.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:54 AM
horizontal rule
465

458: I think there should be a rule that you don't have to apologize to people who made fun of you.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:57 AM
horizontal rule
466

lives in a culturally conservative environment, but has economic interests in line with the Dem's program

Obama's demographic are really really urban. That is not only where the vast majority of voters are, but it is also where the growth will be. Especially as Peak Oil changes the economy.

The factories are not in the cities, or even the suburbs.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:58 AM
horizontal rule
467

464: yeah I kind of agree with 455 too, except I'm psyched to be an Obamacan Glibertarian.

ObaGli 4 lyfe!

ObaGli says Union Mostly!

ObaGli steals our music with pride!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:59 AM
horizontal rule
468

I had kind of hoped that he would have found a way to connect with those voter segments by now

But that really is the fundamental difference between the primaries and the general. Just because he's not getting much of their vote right now doesn't mean he's not connecting with them at some level. It just means that Clinton is connecting better, for reasons ranging from nostalgia for the 90s, preferance for her healthcare plan (had a surprisingly rough discussion with an ex about this last night, actually), desire to see a woman as president, or just seeing her as more experienced probably due to greater time in the spotlight.

Once the primaries are over, it doesn't matter that Clinton may have connected better than Obama, all that matters is that Obama connects better than McCain. And on a lot of these economic issues and the war, I think it would be difficult for him not to. Especially if Clinton can really do a wholehearted endorsement after the nomination is decided, and really emphasize all the policy areas where they've agreed.


Posted by: Po-Mo Polymath | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:00 AM
horizontal rule
469

Buchanon county...is emblematic of a lot of battleground areas in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Indiana, West Virginia, and elsewhere.

Except that it's also in the South.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:00 AM
horizontal rule
470

Just think, though. All over America little girls are saying to their mothers "Mom, when I grow up I want to use unrealistic hypotheticals as a pretext for threatening to obliterate whole Middle Eastern countries!"


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:03 AM
horizontal rule
471

I think bob in 455 is making a lot of sense.

Ah, I remember when I could write something similar with a free heart.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:03 AM
horizontal rule
472

What exactly do Matt & Ezra want?

Can we afford Social Security & Medicare, or at least afford to worry about & protect them, without first providing a whole bunch of productive, well-paying jobs for the under-35 crowd?

Baba Stirling Newberry kinda avoids talking about the New Deal & Great Society programs. His progressivism seems to prioritize new energy, communication, IT jobs.

Get the middle class prosperous again and they will take care of the old, poor, & vulnerable. It may be local and distributed, or otherwise look different than the old welfare state.

I can make arguments for the real Obamism, whatever it might be. But why do I have to be the one to do it? All I get is Clintonopohobia and Obama fannishness, not decent deep analysis.


Posted by: bob mcmanus | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:08 AM
horizontal rule
473

But why do I have to be the one to do it? All I get is Clintonopohobia and Obama fannishness, not decent deep analysis.

Because you're insane and few of us speak Psychedelic.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:11 AM
horizontal rule
474

Except that it's also in the South.

The South is not a monolithic entity. Nor is the North, for that matter. The Dems need to be competitive in the parts of the Midwest (especially in Ohio) that culturally resemble "the South" in meaningful ways.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:12 AM
horizontal rule
475

The Dems need to be competitive in the parts of the Midwest (especially in Ohio) that culturally resemble "the South" in meaningful ways.

Unless they don't.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:13 AM
horizontal rule
476

474-475: Is there any reasonable scenario where the Dems win while losing Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and Indiana? I don't see it, under those circumstances they lose even if they take Florida and Michigan.

So I agree with KR.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:19 AM
horizontal rule
477

476: of course not. Is there any reasonable scenario where Dems win while losing rural counties in Ohio and Pennsylvania? Say, that's different, isn't it?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:23 AM
horizontal rule
478

Based on 2004, Pennsylvania, yes but barely, Ohio, no.

Take PA and Florida and you win, so I guess that's possible.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:26 AM
horizontal rule
479

Unless they don't.

Sure, you can construct scenarios where the Dems win Ohio by racking up a huge surplus of votes in Cuyahoga County, but then you're putting an awful lot of eggs in one basket. The key to building a safe electoral majority is to at least keep it reasonably close in the rural counties of the Midwestern swing states. I'm not saying you need to position the party to contest Alabama (or even Arkansas) to accomplish that. But many of the same same messages that appeal to the median voter in Arkansas (or in Buchanon County, VA) are consistent with appealing to Southern Ohio or Indiana.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:26 AM
horizontal rule
480

478: Based on 2004

I think I see your problem.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:30 AM
horizontal rule
481

Jesus, PGD. That's a modest step better than "OBAMA CANT WIN CALIFORNIA AND TAXACHUSETTS!!!1!", but only a modest one. Is there a way for HRC to win if she can't carry the upper Midwest, Oregon, and Washington? Is there a way for McCain to win if he can't carry Virginia and the Mountain West? If you're talking about Obama losing Pennsylvania to McCain, which no non-partisan polls have shown as likely, you're assuming a worst-case scenario which, strangely, will look like a worst-case scenario. (And when was the last time a Democrat carried Indiana?)


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:32 AM
horizontal rule
482

The Dems need to be competitive in the parts of the Midwest (especially in Ohio) that culturally resemble "the South" in meaningful ways.

That's not the most specific of claims. The Dems need to do well in parts of the West (e.g., Los Angeles) that culturally resemble Iran. I'm not sweating who Ahmedenijad would vote for all that much.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:32 AM
horizontal rule
483

But many of the same same messages that appeal to the median voter in Arkansas (or in Buchanon County, VA) are consistent with appealing to Southern Ohio or Indiana.

Are you kidding me? Look, it's possible that we just want different coalitions.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:36 AM
horizontal rule
484

483: What coalition would you prefer? Because I gotta say that I like the idea of more liberal, younger states such as Virginia and Colorado and other parts of the Mountain West or the Southwest coming into the Democrat column. I find it incredibly hard to care all that much about what the rural elderly think, especially since they seem to be much more socially conservative and well... their seeming economic views can't really be described as more liberal or more conservative, but they're very different from my own.


Posted by: Po-Mo Polymath | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:44 AM
horizontal rule
485

481: Actually, I think I've seen a couple of polls showing McCain beating Obama in PA, including SUSA, who's been on fire this year.

That said, I don't buy it. Kerry won PA comfortably, and it's only gotten bluer since then. McCain is a more attractive R to Pennsylvanians than Bush was, but not by nearly enough. HRC got the bulk of her PA votes from places that are, at this point, pretty solidly blue. If Obama can't do better than HRC in Greene County (where he got 1/4 of ~6,000 votes), that won't hurt him statewide. He'll get 90% in Philly, 75% in Allegheny, and 60+% in the southeast suburbs.

The bottom line is that I'm pretty sanguine about November. This is a big Dem year, people. Don't sweat it so much.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:48 AM
horizontal rule
486

481: Come on, Snarkout, I'm just making the uncontroversial point that the Dems have to take either Pennsylvania, Ohio, or Missouri to be competitive. Important areas of those states have the culturally "Southern" quality KR is talking about. That's totally different than wild predictions about losing base Democratic states.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:49 AM
horizontal rule
487

484: I think we're looking at the same area: Mountain West/Southwest. I don't know what the hell we're calling the deep red arctic tundra of MT, etc.--is that Mountain West?---but I wouldn't mind that, either. I would love to pick up VA, AK, TN, and NC permanently, but I think we have to grow into that rather than let it be the support pole of the entire electoral map plan.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:51 AM
horizontal rule
488

Kerry won PA comfortably

51-49 is comfortable??


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
489

485 - I took a look at Pollster, and you're right; both SUSA and Franklin and Marshall had McCain up (but within the margin of error) in February at the height of crazy-black-preacher-gate. I think Strategic Vision's results can be discounted, since they're a Republican polling outfit that also has McCain beating Clinton in PA.

Look, I'd be delighted if Obama played better in the Rust Belt and Appalachia -- Clinton does, and it's a genuine strength of hers. (And one of the reasons I think she's staying in the race! I think she sees 2004 + Florida + Ohio as the path to victory, and that calculus is easier for her than it is for Obama.) On the other hand, Obama does better in the upper Midwest, the mountain states, and the Pacific Northwest, and like PMP, I think that's a better place to build strength on for the long term.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
490

My feeling is that either Hillary or Obama could win. Democrats are still cringing too much. McCain's numbers are good now, but the campaign hasn't even begun for him. He has tons of weak spots, starting with his identification with Bush and his poor relationship with the insane wings of the party.

Hillary's promoting the idea that Obama can't win, and the media are promoting the idea that the Democrats are hopelessly split. Two unreliable sources there.

Not being able to win a primary against a Democrat in a state doesn't mean not being able to win the general there. The Democrats are stronger than they were in 200 and 2004 in almost every state.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
491

I meant to conclude: there will be a lot more states in play this year that there were then.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:59 AM
horizontal rule
492

Look, it's possible that we just want different coalitions.

I'm not sure the electoral map gives you the luxury of just hand-waving this away. For whatever reason (*cough*oldpeople*cough*), Obama gets crushed by McCain in FL, at least in the polls I've seen. OH is trending bluer, but is nowhere near where PA (or, arguably, was in 2000 either). You're starting to give up an awful lot of electoral votes with a vague promise of putting new red states (populated, apparently, by Bush voters who have nothing in common with rural Ohioans) into play. I'm sanguine in 485 because I can see Obama (or HRC) winning by such a big pop vote margin that the EC takes care of itself. But you don't rack up a margin like that by dismissing the votes of, essentially, everyone who hasn't already voted for Obama (which, sorry, is how a lot of these comments read - Fuck that dumb Johnstown retiree who thinks HRC would be better than Obama!).

We were all worried about FL-style vote fraud in OH in 04, but in the end, Bush won pretty handily. Why? Because he crushed all over the state, and the cities weren't big enough to compensate. You don't have to give over the whole campaign to winning these people, but you need to stay in the game. There are only a handful of states where the urban numbers are so big as to wipe out all rural votes.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:01 AM
horizontal rule
493

He has tons of weak spots, starting with his identification with Bush and his poor relationship with the insane wings of the party.

I thought the MoveOn McSame ad was really good in this regard; I'd love to see Obama beat him to death on his insane foreign policy notions, but I think either Democrat is going to choose to unpeel him on the economy, which is terrible, which is going to be terribler in November, and which he can't even manage to pretend to care about.

And one of the reasons he polls well in NJ and PA is that the media continues to pretend he's really sort of almost pro-choice mostly. Heebie Emerson is right that this period before the nomination is sewn up is probably as easy as it's ever going to look for McCain, and he's still doing no better than a tie.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:02 AM
horizontal rule
494

487: Yeah, I think we're pretty well agreed. Since all political coalitions require compromises, I'd rather shack up with anti-war semi-libertarians than social conservatives who want trade barriers and massive rural subsidies.

And I do mean semi-libertarian. As in, they really want to preserve social and civil liberties, and generally want lower taxes and fiscal responsibility while understanding the need for some social programs like health care. I bet that's a much bigger demographic than the hard-core libertarians who just want no taxes and no governance, who the Republicans can just keep til the empire crashes as far as I care.


Posted by: Po-Mo Polymath | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:04 AM
horizontal rule
495

51-49 is comfortable??

Well, it's 3 percentage points better than he did nationally. I mean, it wasn't so comfortable he didn't need to spend time & $$ here, but there was no real danger of him losing it - his margin was double Bush's in OH, in a smaller state. It was big enough that, if you take out Kerry's second-best county (Allegheny), he still wins PA by more than Bush won OH.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:09 AM
horizontal rule
496

492: I can see where you're getting this impression, but what I've been meaning to say is more:

Fuck that dumb Johnstown retiree who thinks HRC McCain would be better than Obama!

The people who refuse to vote for Obama because of his trade views, or because he won't take think-of-the-children/country stands on issues like video games and flag burning, or because they just think someone who gives good speeches has to be full of shit? Yeah, I feel safe saying "fuck them". The rest will probably be willing to vote for Obama in the general if they really do hold views aligning with the Democrat's platform.


Posted by: Po-Mo Polymath | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:12 AM
horizontal rule
497

they really want to preserve social and civil liberties, and generally want lower taxes and fiscal responsibility while understanding the need for some social programs like health care. I bet that's a much bigger demographic than the hard-core libertarians

So, what, 100,000 of the former vs. 10,000 of the latter?

I don't have a lot of faith in Westerners developing a rational attitude towards the Federal gov't.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:12 AM
horizontal rule
498

493 - Current polling (meaningless, because it's so early, but that's what we have to work with) shows that McCain would beat Clinton and lose to Obama in Wisconsin and Iowa (and the Minnesota is a tie for Clinton), and that Obama would flip Nevada and Colorado but Clinton wouldn't. Similarly, Clinton theoretically loses Washington and Oregon is a tossup. The candidates have strengths in different groups and different places.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:13 AM
horizontal rule
499

I think that there are a number of voters who had previously voted Republican who would vote for Obama over McCain, but McCain over Clinton because she has been demonized so effectively. I mean, if one is going to vote for change, why do Replite?


Posted by: Tassled Loafered Leech | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:20 AM
horizontal rule
500

500!


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:21 AM
horizontal rule
501

in OH in 04, but in the end, Bush won pretty handily. Why? Because he crushed all over the state, and the cities weren't big enough to compensate. You don't have to give over the whole campaign to winning these people, but you need to stay in the game.

Precisely. The key to victory in Ohio (and many other states) is to hold down your opponent's margin of victory in his strongholds, and to run up the score in the big metropolitan areas.

In 2004, Kerry lost 35 of 88 Ohio counties by 24 points or more. If he had held Bush to just 62% of the vote in each of those counties, he would be President today (assuming the GOP didn't find a way to invalidate his votes, but that's a different story).

That's not the most specific of claims.

Specific (though wildly conjectural) claim: If the Dem nominee gets at least 40% of the vote in 80 Ohio counties, he or she will be elected President. If he or she loses any five Ohio counties by 30 points or more (Kerry lost 21 by that margin or greater), McCain will be President.


Posted by: KR | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:24 AM
horizontal rule
502

The rest will probably be willing to vote for Obama in the general if they really do hold views aligning with the Democrat's platform.

The question is whether they will bother to do so if Obama can't "connect" with them. It's a fuzzy term, but I take it that we all get what it means. Americans love not to vote. It doesn't take much to get them to stay home. The turnout yesterday was 80% of the Kerry vote. Obama needs (virtually) all of those people to come back out for him in November. If 20% of those voters stay home because they hear Obama's message as "Fuck the Rurals," then he can lose a blue state.

I don't want to overstate this. I'm a Fuck the South guy myself. But that's why I don't run for office. If Obama wants to win the Presidency, he needs to get at least a few of these voters to come out for him. They live in Iowa and Minnesota, too.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:26 AM
horizontal rule
503

he needs to continue to get at least a few of these voters to come out for him


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:27 AM
horizontal rule
504

It's actually not true that early polling is all we have to work with. There are structural models of US Presidential elections that have better predictive power than polls six months in advance. Those models predict Democratic victory.

From a purely scientific perspective, it's a shame that the Democrats didn't nominate Jeremiah Wright.


Posted by: Walt Someguy | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:33 AM
horizontal rule
505

500: Apostropher, tiring of the ornate and involved nature of works in his previous "Kobe" phase, here returns to the celebratory, minimalist work of his early comments.


Posted by: Po-Mo Polymath | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:37 AM
horizontal rule
506

There are structural models of US Presidential elections that have better predictive power than polls six months in advance. Those models predict Democratic victory.

Yep. No sense thinking about those, though. Better to endlessly dissect the invented preferences of imaginary people in distant places -- that way you can really get a good worry on.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:37 AM
horizontal rule
507

Similarly, Clinton theoretically loses Washington and Oregon is a tossup.

True. As a people, Northwestern dems are idealitic to a fault; Kucinich won something like 15% in Oregon's late May primary in 2004. I strongly suspect that a significant number of Obama voters will stay home if HRC manages to get the nomination. Both OR and WA pride themselves on maverick sensibilities, so likewise, a significant number of voters (misguided, natch) may break toward McCain if he can sustain that brand. I hasten to add that I will hold my nose and vote for Clinton if necessary, even though Samantha Power was right.

Also, "snarkout" makes me think of "ragout," so I pronounce it "snarkoo." It's only just occurred to me that this may be the intended pronunciation.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:38 AM
horizontal rule
508

503: I'm not ruling out that Obama can do it. I'm quite hopeful that he can, actually, largely for the structural reasons that Walt cites in 504, but also because BHO has a proven model for identifying supporters and getting them to the polls. But I won't stop worrying about the outcome until he's up on the dias on January with his hand on the Koran Bible.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:42 AM
horizontal rule
509

Better to endlessly dissect the invented preferences of imaginary people in distant places -- that way you can really get a good worry on.

Too snide, Sifu. I'm not imagining those distant people: I'm kin to a good number of them. And Obama racking up all of 9% of primary vote in a particular place is reasonable cause for concern about which way the other 91% will turn in November. And yes, I worry about those 91% more than I do about the 91% (or so) of Blacks in Philadelphia who voted for Obama, because they are awfully unlikely to turn to McCain, even if their enthusiasm for turning out for Hillary is dampened.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:46 AM
horizontal rule
510

The turnout yesterday was 80% of the Kerry vote.

But the more relevant comparison is that the turnout yesterday was triple the PA primary turnout in 2004. And that there were a lot of new registered Dems, especially compared to new Repubs. That is a very good sign for Obama's chances in PA in a general, where he'll be going against a Republican instead of another Democrat who's closely tied to a solid 90s brand.


Posted by: Po-Mo Polymath | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:48 AM
horizontal rule
511

I'm kin to a good number of them.

Which understandably might lead you to overestimate the importance of them. (I do the same.)


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:50 AM
horizontal rule
512

I mean, by all means worry if you want. Just remember that none of this consists of actual information about the actual behavior of significant numbers of voters in the upcoming election: on that score, we really know nothing, and this is simply a game of Team Fretfulness. Is there reason to be worried? Sure, election hasn't happened yet. Is there reason to be optimistic? Yes. Is there reason to believe anything very much more fine-grained than that? Not really.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:51 AM
horizontal rule
513

511: more biographical information! SCMT is (a) a redneck, who (b) broke up with somebody on Valentine's day: we're tracking you down!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:52 AM
horizontal rule
514

he needs to continue to get at least a few of these voters to come out for him

Feh. I didn't literally mean that he's on track to get zero. Look at KR's Ohio math. Kerry got almost 40% of a lot of rural counties, and lost. Now, there's no reason - other than racism - to think that Obama is inherently worse for rural voters than Kerry. But the point - or the claim, anyway - is that he needs to do a bit better than Kerry, and he doesn't seem on track to do that. And, as I said, there seems to be an attitude around here (and I suspect in parts of his campaign) that he doesn't need to do that.

One of the reasons that Iowa was exciting for Obama was that he did well in such a non-Obama-seeming place. It only seems fair to look again, 40 states later, and see how that's held up. Not as well as I'd like.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:53 AM
horizontal rule
515

Obama is probably more popular than Hillary among the rednecks around here.

Merle Haggard is supporting Hillary. The biggest Hillary-hater around here is a big Merle Haggard fan. I have no idea how he's taking it. He's not the kind of guy you want to push very hard.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:53 AM
horizontal rule
516

513: I meant only that I overestimate the importance of people like me and mine, no geographic implications intended.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:59 AM
horizontal rule
517

I still think that everyone is assuming that 2008 will be pretty much like 2000 and 2004 except that we have different candidates. Even if everything people are saying about Obama's weaknesses are true, there are other things that have changed positively.

I suspect that 90% of the Hillary / Obama voters will end up voting for the Democrat even if it's the wrong one. And in Pennsylvania the Independents weren't in the primary.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:59 AM
horizontal rule
518

But the more relevant comparison is that the turnout yesterday was triple the PA primary turnout in 2004.

That's not a relevant comparison. There was in effect no PA presidential primary in 2004. If people showed up to the polls it was so they could vote in local races, or use a powerless venue to express their love for Howard Dean or Dennis Kucinich. There wasn't even a contested race for the Democratic Senate nomination.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:59 AM
horizontal rule
519

510: I was actually going to mention the tripling first, but decided it would muddy my point.

There are two things about the tripling: the last primary didn't matter for anything (there wasn't even a race for Spector's opponent, and no governor's race), so it doesn't show much. But the other thing is that HRC still won by a lot, which means that Obama didn't create all those new voters, which is the cliche. Even if you give HRC 100% of the 2004 primary voters (absurd, considering Philly), she still got 1/3 of the new voters. More realistically, she probably got close to half the new voters.

The good news is that the exit polling doesn't actually suggest very many of those voters will refuse to vote for Obama in November.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 11:59 AM
horizontal rule
520

But the point - or the claim, anyway - is that he needs to do a bit better than Kerry, and he doesn't seem on track to do that.

Based on a primary election. Nothing that you've said implies in any way that things will be the same in the general.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:00 PM
horizontal rule
521

That's not a relevant comparison. There was in effect no PA presidential primary in 2004. If people showed up to the polls it was so they could vote in local races, or use a powerless venue to express their love for Howard Dean or Dennis Kucinich.

Keep in mind that this also applies to the difference between Democratic and Republican turnouts this primary season (at least since McCain wrapped it up).


Posted by: water moccasin | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:02 PM
horizontal rule
522

Sure, CN pwned me, but s/he's not even a regular*! That doesn't count.

Anyway, bottom line: if Obama can torch the Maverick brand, he wins walking away. That's the only thing (aside from media love, but they're synonymous) McCain has going for him in this election. IMO, most HRC voters who say they'd vote for McCain over Obama are going less from racism than from pro-maverickism. The guy has been sold as a Hollywood movie version of President; it's hardly surprising that a lot of people think he'd be a good choice.

But it shouldn't be hard to show them that he's not all that.

* Unless I'm missing obvious initials, and am further pwned.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:05 PM
horizontal rule
523

Better to endlessly dissect the invented preferences of imaginary people in distant places...

..Too snide, Sifu. I'm not imagining those distant people: I'm kin to a good number of them.

Not snide enough. Continuing from 272, the basic insight accruing from continued levels of education is, as the cliche goes, knowing what one doesn't know. Wine and politics are two frequent topics of conversation strangely resistant to this insight.

Baba Stirling Newberry
Haha.



Posted by: cerebrocrat | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:08 PM
horizontal rule
524

I love Merle Haggard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jrHPjm4qKM


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:09 PM
horizontal rule
525

I'll give 4:1 odds that the Democrat wins the general election. Either that, or we can bet your $25 bottle of whatever crappy red you want against my $100(ish) bottle of Stag's Leap. Anyone interested?

I make this offer because 504 is both funny and right.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:11 PM
horizontal rule
526

Based on a primary election. Nothing that you've said implies in any way that things will be the same in the general.

Well, as you've said approximately 2875 times, we don't have any way to know what will happen in November. But I don't see why the presumption should be that Obama will outperform Kerry in rural areas. They're both effete, out-of-touch, big city liberals. Obama is more charismatic, but he's also black, and not a war hero - presumably that's something like a wash for the rural voters we're discussing. My claim is that we haven't seen any evidence that Obama will outperform Kerry in these places - given 6 weeks and a huge money advantage, he still didn't do very well compared to Clinton in these places. So maybe he still gets all those HRC voters - why not? That's still not doing any better than Kerry did.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:16 PM
horizontal rule
527

I'll give 4:1 odds that the Democrat wins the general election. Either that, or we can bet your $25 bottle of whatever crappy red you want against my $100(ish) bottle of Stag's Leap. Anyone interested?

Oooh, I'm tempted. Not because I believe the Dems will lose (I don't), but because this bet would be a good hedge: the Stag's Leap would be a delightful way to commence the three-day bender I'm going to inflict on myself if McCain is elected.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:16 PM
horizontal rule
528

525: When the hell did Stag's Leap get so good/expensive? I recall it being just out of my price range (that would be ~$20) within the past 5 years - am I wrong, or did they have a great vintage and everyone loves them now? Chateau Ste. Michelle did something similar, albeit far less extreme, in jumping from my favorite $10 wine to being too expensive except for nice meals (~$16).


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:20 PM
horizontal rule
529

delightful way to commence the three-day bender I'm going to inflict on myself if McCain is elected.

Yeah, Ari, could I modify the deal, and get $100 worth of Thunderbird in event of a McCain victory?


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:21 PM
horizontal rule
530

527: Absent the flowering of democracy in Iraq, a massive economic rebound, or another huge terrorist attack, the offer stands until the Democratic convention. (And by the way, only a terrorist attack might happen, and that prospect only worries me because I have no way of knowing how the voters will react. But I won't be surprised if they decide to curl up for a nap in the war hero's lap, allowing him free reign to obliterate whatever country or countries he chooses, not to mention this nation's armed forces, future economic prospects, and remaining standing in the international community.)


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:21 PM
horizontal rule
531

But I don't see why the presumption should be that Obama will outperform Kerry in rural areas.

When you presume, you make a pres of u and me, so in the interest of getting Obama elected instead, maybe we just shouldn't make any baseless presumptions at all?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:22 PM
horizontal rule
532

They're both effete, out-of-touch, big city liberals.

As opposed to the senator from NYC?


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:22 PM
horizontal rule
533

528: A bottle of Stag's Leap hasn't been under $30 in my memory (which, despite having consumed a fair amount of Stag's Leap, extends back to my years tending bar in New Orleans: 1995-1998). But the bottle in question is the good stuff, which, as you note, is held dear by many consumers.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:24 PM
horizontal rule
534

526: My claim is that we haven't seen any evidence that Obama will outperform Kerry in these places - given 6 weeks and a huge money advantage, he still didn't do very well compared to Clinton in these places. So maybe he still gets all those HRC voters - why not? That's still not doing any better than Kerry did.

The flip side to that argument is that there's absolutely no reason to assume that McCain will do as well with any demographic group as Bush did in 2004. Obama could get the exact same number of votes that Kerry did and still beat McCain if Republican turnout is down.


Posted by: My Alter Ego | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:25 PM
horizontal rule
535

Stag's Leap releases bottlings at many different price points.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:25 PM
horizontal rule
536

What is a 1999 Boone's Farm selling for these days?


Posted by: Will | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:29 PM
horizontal rule
537

535: Stag's Leap Country Kwencher is a bargain at $2.99, but I think my favorite flavor is Apple Blossom.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:30 PM
horizontal rule
538

Holy shit of all the jokes I didn't expect to get pwned on.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:31 PM
horizontal rule
539

532 gets it exactly right.

Does Obama have the potential to be portrayed as even more of a foppish dandy than Kerry? Sure, I guess. Does HRC have that potential? Absolutely. In this vote between the both of them, she got more votes from people who would be more comfortable with the status quo as of 10 years ago than with some unknown future.


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:34 PM
horizontal rule
540

532/539: Just to be clear here, I'm not arguing that Hillary is in any sense a stronger candidate in the general election. That is all but unknowable on current facts. I also trust the judgement of the Red State governors and senators who have come out disproportionately for Obama as an indication that BHO will be better for the Dems downballot and better for the 50-state party over the long term.

My concern is that the general election is not the sure thing that it ought to be, given that the most unpopular president in recorded history is the leader of the other party. That the outcome is even in doubt is enough to keep me up at night. I would sleep a lot better if Obama showed more signs of being able to improve on Kerry's performance in rural and blue collar counties. This should not be construed as an "electability argument" or any kind of argument in favor of HRC.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:47 PM
horizontal rule
541

535: OK, got it. Just seemed like a big spread, but if they're comfortable with it....


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:48 PM
horizontal rule
542

532, 539: HRC last night already got nearly as many votes in some rural PA counties as Kerry did in the 2004 election. Unless you're actually trying to argue that people who vote for her in the primary won't vote for her in November, your argument is simply wrong. Rural/blue collar voters who are willing to vote D have proven willing to vote HRC. There is less evidence that they are willing to vote for Obama. That is all.

Also, 540, pretty much, yes.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 12:55 PM
horizontal rule
543

Unless you're actually trying to argue that people who vote for her in the primary won't vote for her in November

No, I'm saying that "effete, out-of-touch, big city liberal" will become the narrative for any Democratic candidate, even if we run a Richard Petty/Toby Keith ticket.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 1:00 PM
horizontal rule
544

543 brings to mind the anti-foppish-Obama ad recently in which Obama's association with Bruce Springsteen was cited as a symptom of Hollyweirdism. Don't remember where I read about that, though. Did it exist?


Posted by: CN | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 1:04 PM
horizontal rule
545

543: I know that's the narrative regardless. But it's not equally effective with all candidates.

Look, I feel as if some of us are saying something fairly obvious - that Obama is not a hit with rural/blue collar voters - and people are sniping, claiming that there's no proof of that, without actually being willing to argue the opposite. So say it or don't: do you really think that Obama is more likely to win the votes of rural/blue collar Americans than A. HRC or B. Kerry?

If you want to claim A, you're ignoring actual data; if you want to claim B, then I think that you need to show some actual reason to think that, not just snark at the very idea of not-B.

If Obama wins the pop vote 55-45 - which I think is fairly likely - then it doesn't matter; but if he wins 50.5 to 49.5 (because the press is so desperately in the tank for McCain, because McCain's brand image is unassailable, because the Sears Tower gets blown up), then I'm not sure he's winning those votes, and he'll need them.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 1:18 PM
horizontal rule
546

that Obama is not a hit with rural/blue collar voters - and people are sniping, claiming that there's no proof of that, without actually being willing to argue the opposite.

Actually, people are saying it's not entirely clear what you're saying. It appears that you're saying Obama must have some people vote for him who do not want to vote for him. We disagree: that he must have their votes to win the general, that "rural/blue collar" is a meaningful cross-state category, and that being uncomfortable with Obama when he's running against X (here, HRC, another Democrat, whatever) is a very similar thing to being uncomfortable with Obama when he's running against Y (McCain, a Republican, whatever).


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 1:25 PM
horizontal rule
547

JRoth, I think you're unduly conflating "rural" and "blue collar" -- I think the evidence is that Obama can do just fine with rural voters (see Nevada, where he almost pulled enough from rural voters to overcome Clinton's strength with Hispanic voters), but blue-collar voters -- particularly in Rust Belt and Appalachian states where blue-collar race relations are likely to be unpleasant -- are more difficult.

And yeah, HRC does better with white blue-collar voters, sure. Why are they magically the super-swing voters now? That's where people's objections are coming from. As I said, HRC polls dramatically worse than BHO in wealthier and more urban states like Iowa, Nevada, and Washington; if you said that the only way the Democrats would be allowed to win was the Kerry states plus Florida and Ohio, obviously Clinton would be a better choice, but that's not how these things shake out.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 1:26 PM
horizontal rule
548

Late to the party, but:
1) Either Obama or Clinton could win in the general, but I think what ends up as 'in play' looks different. Clinton will be trying for the Kerry Map Plus One More strategy; Obama might not be.
2) A question: who is better for the down ticket races? Are primary strategies good predictors of that?

545: Rural and blue collar Rust Belt aren't the same thing. Obama seems to be doing fine with rural voters in other areas (like Nevada.)


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 1:33 PM
horizontal rule
549

I was also going to pile on with the "rural & blue collar is not a voter category exclusive to Ohio and Pennsylvania (and to a lesser extent in Michigan)", but I see that work has been done.

I think Obama probably would take more rural blue collar voters than HRC overall once all his pickups in the red states are counted, and I'm confident he would pick up enough to add to his base for wins in a number of fast growing southwestern, mountain and coastal states.


Posted by: Po-Mo Polymath | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 1:39 PM
horizontal rule
550

Clinton will be trying for the Kerry Map Plus One More strategy; Obama might not be.

I actually agree with this, and find it a pretty compelling reason to support Obama. Hillary is preternaturally cautious, and personally unpopular in places that Obama is not. So I have more faith in Obama to swing for the fences and convert a bunch of red or purple states to blue, or at least to make McCain contest a lot of territory that Hillarly would probably preemptively concede. (If the Dems can't aim for something approaching a realigment after the last eight years, what the hell are they waiting for?).


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 1:46 PM
horizontal rule
551

I was also going to pile on with the "rural & blue collar is not a voter category exclusive to Ohio and Pennsylvania (and to a lesser extent in Michigan)", but I see that work has been done.

Ah, but only those states have the crucial rural & blue collar AND ELDERLY demographic in such force.


Posted by: Fatman | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 1:48 PM
horizontal rule
552

if you said that the only way the Democrats would be allowed to win was the Kerry states plus Florida and Ohio, obviously Clinton would be a better choice, but that's not how these things shake out.

I think I do believe this, and it was the source of my minor tantrum last night. You point to Obama polling better in places like Washington, Iowa, and Nevada -- well, Washington already was a Kerry state, so no gain there, and just adding Iowa and Nevada to the Kerry states wouldn't win the election. I just don't see enough red states where the margin is close enough for Obama to change the game there, so I think of us as still pretty much in the 2004 electoral vote world.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 1:55 PM
horizontal rule
553

Thing is, it's rather weak evidence that he can't win in Ohio or PA, because it's not as though we've traditionally held off declaring the nominee until we have the PA results. So much of this 'PA&OH are the best predictors of the general' idea wouldn't even have made sense four or eight years ago because we'd already settled on the nominee. Why the outsize importance now?


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 2:01 PM
horizontal rule
554

To me the most convincing pro-Obama argument is the number of border and red state leaders who are supporting him. I presume they know something.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 2:05 PM
horizontal rule
555

Yglesias, Drum, Marshall are also pointing out that McCain is running no better than even against Obama and Clinton, and this is during his honeymoon, while the Democrats are beating up on one another.


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 2:07 PM
horizontal rule
556

just adding Iowa and Nevada to the Kerry states wouldn't win the election

Iowa, Nevada, and Colorado would.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 2:08 PM
horizontal rule
557

I just don't see enough red states where the margin is close enough for Obama to change the game there

Colorado, Nevada and Iowa all went to Bush in 2004 but are leaning Obama at the moment (while Clinton would get dusted by McCain in both). He's also got good fighting chances in Virginia and North Carolina, while Clinton would get blown out in both. New Mexico is pretty much a toss-up for either candidate against McCain in current polling.


Posted by: Po-Mo Polymath | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 2:21 PM
horizontal rule
558

Damn you, apo!

That's what happens when I get carried away looking at polling data and electoral college maps.


Posted by: Po-Mo Polymath | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 2:22 PM
horizontal rule
559

Iowa, Nevada, and Colorado would.

Not if he loses PA.

Look, if you take as a given that Obama will carry every Kerry state, then sure it's easy for him to win. Why not assume he'll carry every Clinton II state?

I'm not conflating rural/blue collar voters; I'm talking about the voters who fit in both categories. I don't know if you've noticed, but this thread was started about PA. Which is a place where the voters we're talking about live.

My claim is that Obama appears to have a problem with getting a lot of voters in the rural parts of Rust Belt states excited about him; I think there's a decent amount of established evidence for this. My further claim is that, in a close election (one where McCain isn't getting his ass kicked, and therefore Rs will come out in normal #s), giving up all those voters would be problematic. Seems to me that, in the name of coalition-shifting, y'all are all too ready to concede not only OH (which, bear in mind, sent an extremely liberal Senator to DC in '06 - it's trending blue) but also PA, because to do otherwise might mean saying things that Altoona and Ashtabula would like to hear.

I understand that the battleground states aren't set in stone, and that expanding the battleground redounds to the benefit of the aggressor*. But I also understand that failing to solidify previous gains (turning PA blue, trending OH blue) could have long-term bad consequences.

* In this election; probably not in non-metaphoric battles


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:08 PM
horizontal rule
560

Iowa, Nevada, and Colorado would.

Not if he loses PA.

Look, if you take as a given that Obama will carry every Kerry state, then sure it's easy for him to win. Why not assume he'll carry every Clinton II state?

I'm not conflating rural/blue collar voters; I'm talking about the voters who fit in both categories. I don't know if you've noticed, but this thread was started about PA. Which is a place where the voters we're talking about live.

My claim is that Obama appears to have a problem with getting a lot of voters in the rural parts of Rust Belt states excited about him; I think there's a decent amount of established evidence for this. My further claim is that, in a close election (one where McCain isn't getting his ass kicked, and therefore Rs will come out in normal #s), giving up all those voters would be problematic. Seems to me that, in the name of coalition-shifting, y'all are all too ready to concede not only OH (which, bear in mind, sent an extremely liberal Senator to DC in '06 - it's trending blue) but also PA, because to do otherwise might mean saying things that Altoona and Ashtabula would like to hear.

I understand that the battleground states aren't set in stone, and that expanding the battleground redounds to the benefit of the aggressor*. But I also understand that failing to solidify previous gains (turning PA blue, trending OH blue) could have long-term bad consequences.

* In this election; probably not in non-metaphoric battles


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:08 PM
horizontal rule
561

My claim is that Obama appears to have a problem with getting a lot of voters in the rural parts of Rust Belt states excited about him; I think there's a decent amount of established evidence for this.

Do we know that this is true, or are those voters just more loyal to the Clinton brand?


Posted by: Gabriel | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:12 PM
horizontal rule
562

557: thanks for doing the research. I hadn't really bothered to.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:21 PM
horizontal rule
563

561 may be right, particularly with the economy looking this scary. But the uncertainty expressed by Gabriel is instructive, because we just don't know. Right now, Democratic voters have a choice between a name they know (and that many of them love) and a newcomer, a name they've only barely learned and often can't pronounce. That the newcomer has done this well regardless has to rank among the most surprising political stories in modern (say post WWII) American history. But Obama is still a newcomer for most voters, which means that we have no idea what will happen when he faces off with Old Man McCain rather than Hillary Clinton, a woman whose last name, again, stirs the loins of many Democratic voters.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:30 PM
horizontal rule
564

Seems to me that, in the name of coalition-shifting, y'all are all too ready to concede not only OH (which, bear in mind, sent an extremely liberal Senator to DC in '06 - it's trending blue) but also PA, because to do otherwise might mean saying things that Altoona and Ashtabula would like to hear.

I at least am not thinking of conceding OH or PA, just resisting the idea that every other state but OH and PA is already determined and that Clinton has the best chance to take OH and PA in the general. Not saying Obama needs to write them off, or that Clinton doesn't have a case, just that it's not necessarily the only game in town.

Again, we're acting like it's usual not to have the nominee decided until Pennsylvania has run its primary.


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:37 PM
horizontal rule
565

Just to follow up on #563, all we know is that at this rough point in time, people who vote in the Democratic primary who meet the criteria under discussion appear to prefer HRC to Obama. The ordering might be McCain-HRC-Obama, or HRC-McCain-Obama, or HRC-Obama-McCain. My suspicion is it is the last, and that this will be more true when we get to November. But we don't know, and only one of those three argues for picking HRC (assuming, of course, that we need to win that specific local bloc).


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:39 PM
horizontal rule
566

What happens to older rust belt voters faced with two candidates they hate? (A well-spoken black guy and a formerly-honorable nutjob with no plan for anything). "No-one to vote for" is the reason often given for young voters not turning out. People here don't think of it as the lesser of two evils, but people there will.


Posted by: lw | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:40 PM
horizontal rule
567

What happens to older rust belt voters faced with two candidates they hate? (A well-spoken black guy and a formerly-honorable nutjob with no plan for anything). "No-one to vote for" is the reason often given for young voters not turning out. People here don't think of it as the lesser of two evils, but people there will.


Posted by: lw | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:40 PM
horizontal rule
568

Look, if you take as a given that Obama will carry every Kerry state, then sure it's easy for him to win. Why not assume he'll carry every Clinton II state?

JRoth, the exact same logic works to explain why Clinton can't win, since she's ceding Michigan, Iowa, and Wisconisn -- twice as many electoral votes as Pennsylvania -- to McCain, whereas Obama wins in the current polling. Look at the graphic here. Both candidates have strengths in different demographics and regions, and Ohio doesn't have a secret sauce that makes it more important than the Upper Midwest with its secret hunger for Maverick Sauce.

Look, I don't want either candidate to give up on Ohio. I live here, for one thing. But if someone gave me the choice of a Democratic base whose margin of victory was working-class whites in Ohio or whose margin of victory was professionals and working-class Hispanics in Colorado, Nevada, and New Mexico, I'd choose the latter. Part of this is because I think that Obama's underperformance in Ohio and Pennsylvania has more than a little to do with racial animus, but partially it's demographic; I think population shifts among states is something that can get overlooked -- the Gore states plus New Hampshire would have been a victory in 2000; they aren't in 2008, and they extra-special won't be in 2012. Pennsylvania and Ohio are going to be losing electoral votes, so anything cobbled together that gives up the Sun Belt for the Rust Belt is going to run into problems down the road.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:42 PM
horizontal rule
569

Block that metaphor! Sorry, that worked better before I did some mild editing.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:45 PM
horizontal rule
570

Relevant kos rundown of polls of some states in which Obama appears to perform better than HRC against McCain.


Posted by: SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:48 PM
horizontal rule
571

Pennsylvania and Ohio are going to be losing electoral votes, so anything cobbled together that gives up the Sun Belt for the Rust Belt is going to run into problems down the road.

True, and important. And even more true of Florida, no?

N.B. I am not assuming HRC would necessarily win Florida, or that Obama wouldn't. But that's a state the Dems damn well need to figure out how to keep from drifting permanently into the GOP column.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:49 PM
horizontal rule
572

And even more true of Florida, no?

Yes, and this is a fair rebuttal to my point. (I've stated in the past that I'm highly doubtful that either Democrat can win Florida, although I suspect both will strive mightily and fail, but I'll readily concede that Clinton has an easier shot given her strength with senior citizens.)

This PDF has the gory details -- Florida and Texas gain six Congressional seats; Ohio and New York lose two each; the entire upper midwest loses a seat in every state.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 3:55 PM
horizontal rule
573

since she's ceding Michigan, Iowa, and Wisconisn

I'll admit, I forgot she's running behind in MI - how the hell does that happen? Of course, it's also with 25+% undecideds, so it's not very meaningful. But Wisconsin is a dead heat, and Kerry also lost Iowa. So I'm not sure what HRC is "ceding." I also note that HRC is winning Nevada, which I think some people were claiming was an Obama Special. In fact, the site you point me to shows HRC with 289 EVs, and Obama 269 (270 needed). Explain to me why I'm supposed to think that Obama is the game-changing red state winner?

Anyway, that said, you make a good point - I would love to see a Solid Southwest, and Obama probably gets us there faster than HRC.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 4:10 PM
horizontal rule
574

Florida and Texas gain six Congressional seats

OTOH, Texas is already majority-minority in population, and the electorate will follow within a generation. There's nothing Whitey can do to hold back the tide of demographics. Gerrymandering and incumbency will stretch out the process of flipping Congressional representation, and voter suppression might protect the electoral votes for perhaps one election cycle beyond the statistical inflection point, but eventually Texas is going to go blue. And I hope a demented, anally incontinent Karl Rove clings to life in his assisted living facility just long enough to see it happen.


Posted by: Knecht Ruprecht | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 4:21 PM
horizontal rule
575

An assisted living facility called a "maximum security prison".


Posted by: John Emerson | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 4:25 PM
horizontal rule
576

When wife clerked, she called one jail with a bunch or pro se elderly cons "the home for the wayward elderly."

You know Rove will be complaining about not getting to see when the new moon that marks the start of Ramadan has come, as he only gets to go to the exercise yard in daytime and also when Jeff Fort says it's OK.


Posted by: lw | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 4:35 PM
horizontal rule
577

). Explain to me why I'm supposed to think that Obama is the game-changing red state winner?

That site just shows the results of the last poll in its data set; I pointed to it because it provides a nice visual showing HRC's strength in the rust belt and BHO's in the upper midwest and southwest. (Pollster.com has better head-to-head numbers, but no map.) Obviously, if you assume that the numbers will hold up and HRC will win Florida and Ohio, she's a winner. I said in 489 that I thought this was why she thinks that she should stay in the race -- Kerry states + FL and Ohio is a comfortable win. (And, like I said, I don't think either Obama or Clinton can win Florida.)

I feel like you keep missing my point, so I'm clearly not expressing myself correctly. Hillary does well with seniors, and will do better than Obama in "old states" like Florida, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. Obama does better with white men in their 40s and 50s and will do better than Clinton in states like Wisconsin, Nevada, and Colorado. My problem is that you need to be making apples-to-apples comparisons -- you can't point at Pennsylvania/Ohio/WV and start muttering about doom without looking at the fact that Clinton does markedly worse than Obama in a number of crucial states to hold (WI/MI/MN) and useful ones to flip (IA/CO/NV/VA). Clinton does better than Obama in the two big states that were perceived as Kerry's route to victory; Obama does better in a number of smaller states that Kerry wrote off. Either one has a plausible route to victory, especially against a mediocre candidate like McCain. I think Obama provides more coattails for Democratic Senate candidates, but these electability arguments are pointless at this point.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 4:59 PM
horizontal rule
578

these electability arguments are pointless at this point.

What?!? No!


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:00 PM
horizontal rule
579

What?!? No!

I heard someone insulted Laphroaig two towns over, Sifu.


Posted by: snarkout | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:05 PM
horizontal rule
580

I'm not a big Laphroiag fan. If I'm going to drink a bog, why not do it out in nature?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:07 PM
horizontal rule
581

How about some super-concentrated bog bitters?


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:08 PM
horizontal rule
582

If I'm going to drink a bog, why not do it out in nature?

Does this extend to all Islay malts, or is it specific to Laphroiag? 'Cause hating Lagavulin is all kinds of wrong.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:10 PM
horizontal rule
583

I'm not a big Laphroiag fan. If I'm going to drink a bog, why not do it out in nature?

That's why I prefer Oban. It's more smokey than peaty. And Macallan I like because it's "sweet".


Posted by: Tassled Loafered Leech | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:12 PM
horizontal rule
584

582: only Laphroiag. Shit, you've seen me drink Lagavulin.

581: mmm, peatsplosion.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:16 PM
horizontal rule
585

Shit, you've seen me drink Lagavulin.

Oh, that's right, that's what you were drinking after brunch. I'd repressed that memory, out of sadness at not being able to partake. Woe!


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:18 PM
horizontal rule
586

He waited until after brunch to begin drinking? This is how reputations are ruined.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:23 PM
horizontal rule
587

He waited until after brunch to begin drinking?

I didn't say that, now did I?


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:40 PM
horizontal rule
588

That's why I prefer Oban.

O-Bandaid!


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:41 PM
horizontal rule
589

I didn't say that, now did I?

Oh, that's a relief. This is how reputations are rehabilitated.


Posted by: Ari | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:42 PM
horizontal rule
590

Laphroaig was my first Scotch, and by gum, I like it. I imagine a Glaswegian oil change tastes something the same.

It worked out well to get into the deep end of the pool. I may have a diminished appreciation for subtletly, however.

Ten-year, it's thirty smackers at Trader Joe.


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:42 PM
horizontal rule
591

Ten-year, it's thirty smackers at Trader Joe.

Gah! Nearly every time I leave New York, or even hear about other states, apparently, it renews my aggravation at the bizarre laws which prevent grocery stores from selling essentially any alcoholic beverages except beer and liquor stores from selling beer.


Posted by: washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:48 PM
horizontal rule
592

PA's worse. Grocery stores got nothing, wine and liquor are at the State Liquor Store, and beer is purchased separately from either the Beer Mart or the few bars with package licenses. They'd change it, except no one would be able to provide an example for "monopsony."


Posted by: Wrongshore | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 5:50 PM
horizontal rule
593

Trader Joe's generic single malt isn't half bad either. Speyside, I believe.


Posted by: Tassled Loafered Leech | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 6:07 PM
horizontal rule
594

Lagavulin is my faaaavorite and the freaky Korean liquor store across the street sells it for $65/btl. It is much more than this everywhere else. I am not telling.


Posted by: oudemia | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 6:09 PM
horizontal rule
595

Hillary Clinton, a woman whose last name, again, stirs the loins of many Democratic voters.

Don't even know where to start with this one. As I've said before, I find pants suits quite attractive. And Chelsea is without question hot. But Bill never did anything for me down there.


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 6:34 PM
horizontal rule
596

I don't believe a word of the Chelsea-Clinton-massive-plastic-surgery rumors. Okay, maybe a nose job. But come on. She lost some weight, learned to stand up straight and hide her feelings under a public mask, and wears much more flattering cosmetics.

In the earlier photos, she's wearing a horrible face powder that flattens out her skin; she's also hunched over, making her chin and neck look weird; her smile is this awkward trying-too-hard grin. In the later pictures she's got her adult "game face" on, complete with pricey foundation and a fake half-smile.

Seriously, there are some pictures of me as a teenager that could be compared to some pictures of me now that would CONVINCE some website that I'd OBVIOUSLY had MASSIVE surgical interventions.


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:01 PM
horizontal rule
597

Those all caps words are making me think you had, despite your denials.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:05 PM
horizontal rule
598

There's NO WINNING with some people.


Posted by: Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:10 PM
horizontal rule
599

593: Trader Joe's has hooch where you live? Damn. The one thing that keeps this state from being eat & drink heaven is the liquor control commission, which tightly regulates what you can get and how you can get it with no regard for my desires, nay, my needs. You can't even buy Dutch gin around here anymore.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:18 PM
horizontal rule
600

600


Posted by: read | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:21 PM
horizontal rule
601

Trader Joe's has hooch where you live?

Not only does it have hooch, it's the go-to place for decent cheap booze. You may have heard of "Two-Buck Chuck", no?


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:23 PM
horizontal rule
602

Oh, I meant liquor. Two-Buck Chuck we have. It rhymes with "suck" for a reason.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:34 PM
horizontal rule
603

I've never actually had the stuff. But TJ's does have cheap, decent hard liquor too.


Posted by: Josh | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:37 PM
horizontal rule
604

2 Buck Chuck is pretty bad, but they have a $4.99 Viognier that's pretty great, and their prices on hard liquor are flat awesome.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:39 PM
horizontal rule
605

TJ's is the go-to place for campari and tanqueray 'round here.


Posted by: ben w-lfs-n | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:42 PM
horizontal rule
606

They do have some very good, very cheap beer and wine. I want cheap Campari and Tanqueray, damn it.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 7:45 PM
horizontal rule
607

Tweety thought he was just being funny, but it turns out some things simply cannot be parodied.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:45 PM
horizontal rule
608

607: yeah, uh, yikes.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:52 PM
horizontal rule
609

I agree with 596. Maybe a nose job, but the rest just looks to me like growing up and straightening one's hair (so you don't scare the honkies at the hedge fund.)


Posted by: Cala | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 8:58 PM
horizontal rule
610

by the way, when I said Pennsylvania was predictable--not only was it predictable, it was predicted even before Ohio. That's a link to the Obama spreadsheet from way back when. They got the margin wrong in a bunch of states--in general, he & she both won their respective states by bigger than predicted margins, & this is especially true of his 11-in-a-row streak after Super Tues.--but if I'm remembering right, they have gotten the winner right in every single state except the Maine caucuses. Let's hope that holds up in Indiana.


Posted by: Katherine | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 9:55 PM
horizontal rule
611

Chelsea is without question hot.

Without question?

Although I was pretty excited when TJ's opened in NYC, it's just not the same as going to TJ's in California. And I don't just mean the wonderfully cheap booze, either.


Posted by: cerebrocrat | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:02 PM
horizontal rule
612

Her chin looks pretty different to me. NTTAWWT.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:10 PM
horizontal rule
613

You can't even buy Dutch gin around here anymore.

Genever is so nice. I don't like gin, but I love genever. I don't think I've seen it anywhere in the states, but I've never searched hard.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 04-23-08 10:20 PM
horizontal rule