2008 Primaries Thread

throwin' candy out onto the sidewalk, watching little kids run up and grab it, but not in a santa claus way

more like an elmer gantry at the poolhall kinda way

the rezco thing was all in the game!! the trash talking had begun and hillary had that in reserve - politics has always been played this way!

one of bill's innovations/strategies for winning was "rapid response", and the cw on kerry is that he never moved fast enough to repudiate the mosquito swarm of charges and insinuations against him, was always playing defense -- whether the charges were true or not, went the thinking, kerry didn't "fight" back and americans wanted to see someone who could give as good as they got. who knows if that's true but there is something depressingly right-sounding about it. it seems to me that it's been hillary's m.o. for awhile now to answer every charge swiftly and immediately counterattack. the rezco thing doesn't amount to a hill of beans and everyone knows it but it's not a very serious charge in the first place - it was a strictly performative charge, allowing hillary to look strong and resilient and knowledgable about her opponents. you can argue that strategy will alienate more people than it attracts and you could be right but i think that's the gamble she's taking.

shit on these dems

we managed to go from the best class of candidates from over a decade to a triplet of scum shits

in one night

way to show yr stripes, fuckwits

see you in 12. good thing for whoever gets the nom the gop got shit all but a mormon blue

I'M SORRY
I KNOW THAT SHIT WORTHLESS PISS BUCKET BLITTERS WAS THE MOD
BUT COULD ANY OF YOU MENTIONED ONE REAL GOD FUCKING DAMMM SOLUTION TO PAYING PO' FOLKS EMS BILLS?
OR WHATEVER?
I'M SORRY BUT ALL OF YOU GOT P3ZND BY A COUPLE OF FUCKING CNN ANALYSTS
DO YOU KNOW BRETT FAVRE?
BRETT FAVRE ISN'T GOING TO THE SUPER BOWL.
BUT EVERYBODY LOVES HIM.
WHAT'S THAT ABOUT?

FUCK ANGRY ANGRY FUCK

AND SHIT

I sense that El Tomoboto is a bloomberg man.

OTM though, I only saw that Illinois state senate procedural senate which probably had 90% of the watchers reaching for the changers which was probably a good thing because not one of them could give a lucid explanation of their health plans. Best chance in generations to fix healthcare in the US and none of them can give a decent explanation of how they might do it.

i didn't watch the whole thing - or even most of it - but aren't all their answers basically the same?

1) rescind bush's tax cuts on households making more than $200,000/year
2) use that money to insure > 95% of america

3) But definitely not illegal immigrants. If you are brown and not carrying proof of citizenship you must be refused entry to the emergency room.

lol blasted

a cup of tea and splash of cold water does do wonders

"nevada: what really happened in the at-large caucuses?"

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=269

that article is absolutely fantastic, at least the three paragraphs I bothered to read, because it enforces a lovely idea I already had - that once again, any idea, any concept, any inkling that people under thirty had any purpose or design on this election besides holding signs and looking pretty when necessary is, in fact, utterly A WASTE OF TIME because we're ALL TOO BUSY WORKING TO SHOW UP AT THE FUCKING POLLS.

OR DRINKING AWAY OUR LOAN PAYMENTS, PERHAPS THAT WOULD BE A BETTER TURN OF PHRASE

LET'S JUST GET IT ALL OUT

FUCK YOU MOM & DAD, HAVE YOUR WHITE WAR BITCH
WE'LL DIE FOR YOU, THAT'S WHAT YOU ALWAYS WANTED ANYWAY

Hillary nasty.

ehh pretty disappointing to this obama fan. it became amazing to me how disconnected his gifts are: such a classy orator who is so klutzy on his feet? how does that even happen? i was thinking of better retorts to the BS being slung at him, more or less in real time.

http://images.politico.com/global/spinme.jpg

Rodham no longer worried about being likeable, apparently.

Prez McCain shd start writing his inaugural on our Hundred Years' War.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/images/2008/01/22/01125109par89380imagefile.jpg

(Rush made that)

Who cares about being likable?
Obama smiling like John Kerry in that photo. bad sign

You're likeable enough, daria

haha holy shit

This is even more roffly, somehow:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_012108/content/01125109.Par.4584.ImageFile.jpg

"AAAAAAAAAAAAA!"

He looks like he's going to hurl it at someone.

Rush and Michael Moore should have a bullhorn battle royale.

For some reason it's his watch I notice the most.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.parcolmem44.4091.ImageFile.jpg

Not so sharp-looking when he's on the job.

http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/8720/hillaryblackkidax9.jpg

unsurprisingly, i agree with the howler:

Boo hoo hoo hoo hoo hoo hoo! In last night’s debate, Mommy and Daddy started to fight—and all the children started to cry. “Relive the brutal moments,” they caterwaul, as they show us the tape of the tussle. Sorry, but here comes the ultimate insult: They sound just like Patrick Healy.

In fairness, Mommy and Daddy did swap accusations. First, Daddy said Mommy sat on Wal-Mart’s board while he, Daddy, fought the good fight. Moments later, Mommy said Daddy helped slumlord Rezko while she, Mommy, fought the good fight. (Boo hoo hoo hoo hoo, said the kids.) Tomorrow, we’ll discuss the fuller exchange. But for Dems, it’s a good idea to bring Rezko out now, just as it would have been good for Dems—and for Michael Dukakis, a superlative person—to explore that prison furlough program during the 1988 primaries. (You know? The program that kept this decent man from the White House when he didn’t know how to explain it?) One thing is certain: If Obama becomes the Dem nominee (as well he might, and we’ll cheer if he does), the Rezko matter will be beaten within an inch of its life. It would be extremely smart for Democrats to hash this matter out now. But boo hoo hoo hoo hoo hoo hoo! Last night, the children started to cry when they saw Mommy and Daddy fighting. Mommy! Daddy! Stop fighting now! Dick and Jane said through their tears.

P.S. Mommy and Daddy were quite civil throughout the vast bulk of the evening.

the writers strike has really hurt the pundits as well eh

howler also says that if obama wins the nomination, the basic attack is going to be along dukakisian lines rather than kerry/gore lines: not that obama is a flip-flopping liar who will say anything to be president, but that he's weird -- an alien. "why does obama have such a problem with the pledge of allegiance?"

Mitt Romney in SC: "Who let the dogs out? Who Who?"

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/01/21/politics/fromtheroad/entry3734680.shtml

(scroll down for video)

who's Patrick Healy?

NYT political reporter

http://img247.imageshack.us/img247/8720/hillaryblackkidax9.jpg

http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u227/preshit/Funny%20Pics/jealous-fisherman.jpg

I'm not panicking. There are pros and cons to exchanging blows in the primaries. In the end, our front runner needs to come out looking tough and charismatic.

The press has a very narrow view of how the electorate feels about candidates going negative. Going negative can mean a lot of different things in a lot of different contexts, and not all of the consequences are bad.

funny nobody seems to be making much of the toni morrisson/'bill's dancing' thing! definitely made me laff at the time, but obv very dicey and maybe a good example of this 'obama's cool-guy humor that old ppl don't get' meme?

I didn't see the Democratic debate, unfortunately, but this comment, about HRC's generally aggressive approach is all about the meta-narrative seems right. Everything is designed to show that she's the tougher candidate as between her and Obama, and that the toughest candidate is what it will take against the GOP attack machine.

and i have yet to see much hay made of Obama hitting the I LOVE JESUS stuff pretty hard. since we inundate ourselves with all that 'secret muslim' garbage around here that kind of talk really popped out to me as important, but maybe nobody really cares, or wrote it off as 'when in SC' or something

funny nobody seems to be making much of the toni morrisson/'bill's dancing' thing

thank fucking god. so cringeworthy that he let himself get sucked into that

shoulda used the first part of his reponse (Bill had a special rapport with his black constituents blah blah) and left it at that, instead it sounded like Obama wants to check Bill out and see what he's packing

how about some straight-up sexism from france?

http://www.letemps.ch/template/editoriaux.asp?page=1&article=223530

The Issue
By Joelle Kuntz
Le Temps

Thursday 17 January 2008

Neither a woman nor a black man as such will change American policy. Neither race nor gender contain any moral value or specific politics. It's as Democrats, should the presidency befall one or the other of these two candidates, that they will change the hateful orientation of the Bush regime. Representing a current of thought organized for the long term beyond personalities and their characteristics, whoever is elected will be able to give a welcome change in the country's direction. That is Americans' principal expectation: to be done with Bushism. Those who offer the best guarantees for that result will have the best chance.

If the opportunity for choosing between a woman and a black man arouses so much excitement, that's because it brings history into play: a double "premier" that reveals changes within the heart of American society. Neither Clinton nor Obama will change America, but it's a changed America that will elect one or the other.

The campaigns of the woman candidate and the black man candidate, their reception by the public and the reactions they provoke send back powerful images of themselves to voters at this time in history.

Two historic social behaviors are being put to the test: racism and sexism. Which remains the most resistant?

From a rational standpoint, racism has lost all its arguments: no one (outside of the Ku Klux Klan) dares defend any longer the idea of natural inequality between the races and a consequent legitimate inequality in social roles. There's no longer any racist ideology.

The same cannot be said of sexism. If the principle of human equality between the genders is virtually a given, that of equality of roles and functions is not. There remain great currents of thought in defense of the woman at home, mother exclusively, armed with as many statistical and sociological studies as they need to establish their viewpoint.

Rational balance is one thing. But emotional balance is another. Even without any arguments, racism and sexism will endure. In what form? Residual or massive? Which more than the other? We don't know. We explore. We play. Are you Clinton or Obama?

(trans: Leslie Thatcher)

I'm getting kinda annoyed that this is coming down to "old people win again!"

presidency, Oscars, etc

no zombies, no credibility.

cf Real Estate bubble bust may be worse than Dot Com bubble bust

I'm getting kinda annoyed that this is coming down to "old people win again!"

I think I mentioned this upthread, but I remember on the night of the 2004 election -- when, throughout the day, there was so much talk of young peoples' anger at the Bush Admin., and how those new voters would move the country in a progressive direction (and make John Kerry the President) -- that Joe Scarborough said on MSNBC: "I dunno. Looks like the same old voters it's always been." And he was right. So I wouldn't get to excited about a change from "old people win again!" this year.

I was looking at the breakdowns of the New Hampshire dem primary and Obama got 60% of the 18-49 vote. But still lost. Sigh. I guess yeah, same old voters every time, but I'm just so goddamn sick of the baby boomers...