2008 Primaries Thread

In a workplace context, Obama may have reminded women of under-qualified hotshots who come along and get the big job with less experience because they're cooler and have more rapport with the boss and are, after all, men.

No shit, Sherlock.. :)

That's the thing, Daria. Obama avoids that problem when he stays ultra-sober and serious. But when he doesn't -- as I argue above (and Alfred disagrees with) -- he falls right into this trap of looking like the underqualified cool kid who is succeeding b/c he's ''one of the guys.'' But don't bet on Obama making these mistakes often (if it was a mistake; I see Alfred's point, even if I disagree).

Oh, I know. It's far from over. Probably the Obama-Edwards team up at the debate didn't help either one.. Anything can still happen but I think Obama's got more to worry about now, he's a momentum candidate more than a policy wonk. He'll probably win South Carolina.

its interesting how some discount charisma as unsubstantial and unjustly consequential. while having someone in charge thats sliding by on it alone is obv a dangerous situation - its not a coincidence that all great leaders have it in spades. theres more there than just the shine.

But that's just it, Daniel: Obama's remark (and tone) was too urbane for a fratboy.

It was his interaction with Edwards at HRC's expense and his football reference that really reminded me of a frat-boy. The ''likeable enough'' line did too, but to a lesser extent. What that line did, I think, is make Obama seem snide -- maybe petty -- which doesn't jibe with his image. I do not think he'll make that mistake again (also b/c I think he and HRC will both try to sound like insurgents -- not frontrunners -- for a while).

I really wish you ppl talked about policy instead of all this sports analysis, but I guess that horse left the barn around the final Reagan-Mondale debate...

Open primaries are a really vile thing.

morbs this is the primaries thread i dont want to keep having to tell you

uh ok maybe not like "insurgents", dude.

T/S: Clinton/Obama Vs. McCain/Huckabee

I missed the football reference, but then I actually missed watching all the debates because the Pitt-Jax wild card game that evening was a lot more exciting.

there is no way mcain has the republican nom locked up. its totally wide open. ghouliani is waiting in the weeds. romney is super-rich. huckabee is counting on the blue-collar-comedy endorsement (though there is a larrythecableguy/fred thompson.jpg out there).

under-qualified hotshots who come along and get the big job with less experience because they're cooler and have more rapport with the boss and are, after all, men.

some people call those "interpersonal skills"

http://mizian.com.ne.kr/englishwiz/library/friends/images/carnegie.jpg

Pitt-Jax wild card game that evening was a lot more exciting

Exciting only to the extent that the Jags go on to beat the Patriots.

Yes, but this is a democracy. You can't just win by getting the votes of the dudes in upper management.

See that's why I watched Jax with such interest, I was more worried when they were killing the Steelers in the first half but Garrard didn't play that great and both teams made some really dumb mistakes. It'll be a great match up though.

Just somebody beat the Patriots, plz.

this is the primaries thread

now i gotta figure out who to vote for, lol

Well, Obama informed everyone in the debate that the Redskins lost (I was at a bar on the Hill with a bunch of dejected Skins fans and a bunch of soon-to-be dejected Steelers fans).. hell the biggest headlines in DC papers are STILL "Joe Gibbs retires."

dude's gonna focus on a more interesting sport now?

i forgot to include "the patriarchy" in that list of institutions gabbneb trusts

don't forget "the system" TH

also, "society"

not to mention "they" and "them"

(big xpost) clinton/obama sounds ghastly to me - would obama be used as some kind of hope-envoy?. mcain/huckabee would give the dems a landslide so long as they don't fuck things up.

and Rolling Stone magazine

big ups the RIAA

tracer, didn't you essentially say upthread you don't like the people voting for the democratic nominee? do you support the party bosses making backroom deals? why do you suppose the primary system came about?

no, what i said was that i don't like not having an identifiable party leader. and i don't like having a bloody 1+ years of intramural fighting right before the election. in many - most? - other countries, the parties choose their own leaders. that way, people always know who the leader of your party is, and that person has gotten in the papers on every issue even if their party doesn't hold the presidency.

my perfect system? keep the primaries but hold them one year AFTER the elections rather than one year before. that way the nominee is chosen and decided, and can then lead the opposition effectively for three years up until the next election.

no, what i said was that i don't like not having an identifiable party leader

Tracer doesn't like the separation of powers, but does like party bosses

Here we go again: Diebold rigging claims

http://drunkardslamppost.wordpress.com/2008/01/09/diebold-and-new-hampshire/

i don't like having a bloody 1+ years of intramural fighting right before the election.

im actually starting to appreciate our endless election process as a proving ground for the candidates - it might actually make them better at their jobs

^on crack^

haha, Tracer you expatriate! Pols fall SO far in and out of fashion over 3 years. Plus the Dems change what they (say they) stand for every 6 months.

Hold a national primary 2 months before the election. Put us out of our misery.

our endless election process keeps our candidates (they sure ain't leaders) from doing their putative jobs.

yeah, you know what's wrong with the political season? it just isn't long enough!

thanks for the clarification tracer.

keep the primaries but hold them one year AFTER the elections rather than one year before. that way the nominee is chosen and decided, and can then lead the opposition effectively for three years up until the next election.

thats an interesting idea (way better than morbs'!). i am not personally interested nor do i have anything invested in dem or rep party politics, but yeah surely we can all agree how it works now is flawed esp. w/the compression of primary dates.

The discrepency may just be a matter of demographics: urban voters may like Hillary more than rural voters.

ya think?

so rural voters like obama better?

that's what the exit polls say

HRC's "i found my voice" line is nauseating. it's reasonably clear way of narrativising the rough couple days to her win in NH, but what a gross boomerist way to do it. you're a US senator in your 50s, and you've found your voice? just now?

this is the first time i've halfway agreed with MoDo, what a day...

Hil's like an Aaron Sorkin character!

oh god don't even bring that dipshit up

she invented the television? xp

yeah i don't actually like the executive branch as currently defined much at all, even before bush turned it into a bulldozing machine. it's too much like having a king. i think a famous american once made the same observation.

this is the first time i've halfway agreed with MoDo, what a day...

i know, right?

def the president has waaaaays too much power

lol blame lincoln and fdr RON PAUL RON PAUL RON PAUL