2008 Primaries Thread 2: THE QUICKENING

Mark Pryor is probably more conservative than Giuliani or Bloomberg, a classic blue-dog Democrat. His dad was governor and senator as well. He's popular in the state and is running unopposed for re-election this year. (He's only served one term so far, making the fear of the Republicans not sacrificing anyone even more astonishing.)

Huckabee versus Pryor would've been a close race. They're both social conservatives with a huge populist touch. If Huckabee runs against Blanche Lincoln in 2010, it won't be as close for Huck. He lost a lot of support from local Republicans during the primaries, he'll be quite a bit more faded by then, and everyone just adores our Senator Blanche.

where were you in '72, balls?

Don't answer. seeya.

lol at morbs 'caving in to nixon campaign at a time when liberalism was still powerful/relevant is okey dokey - not caving in to limbaugh/hannity at a time when liberalism is dead/buried is wishy washy' twostep.

You know Morbs if you dropped the sanctimony I imagine a lotta people in this thread might be more receptive to your points. And Dennis Perrin is the worst kind of bombthrower.

that dennis perrin post could be michael savage

Know who McGovern's campaign manager was?

Dr. Morbious, you call yourself "DR MORBIOUS", I'm therefore not going to take anything you say seriously. I picture you wearing a cape and gnashing your teeth behind a mask, punching an iron-gloved fist into the palm of your other gloved hand, so angry about your irrelevance

apologies if you are in fact a Dr. named "Morbious"

MW, Gary Hart.

take "balls" seriously instead.

I picture you wearing a cape and gnashing your teeth behind a mask, punching an iron-gloved fist into the palm of your other gloved hand

Dr. M = MF Doom

i am starting to doubt that dr. c is really a doctor, he is probably one of those internet people who like to call themselves a doctor. probably has aspies.

-- cutty, Wednesday, October 17, 2007 4:23 PM (5 months ago) Bookmark Link

http://elections.foxnews.com/files/2008/03/clinton_pa_031808.jpg

the more relevant question, seems to me, is where were you in 1980, and can anybody tell me what happened to the incumbent, and the incumbent's party

how deeply involved was warren beatty in the mcgovern campaign? i've read stories but figured they were akin to hillary and sinbad facing down mladic.

where were you in '72, balls?

sometimes the answer is in the question ;)

lolz

"Yes, yes -- front, back, on our knees, bent over, sprawled out, switched up, port, stern, aft, the whole fucking thing!"

"Gotcha! Watch the teeth, lube the hands, steady strokes, maintain the rhythm!"

^^ morbs if any ilxor tossed this kind of gay baiting bs your way you'd flip the fuck out

you're an idiot.

no really you would

yeah i kinda took issue with that myself

be honest morbs, if jaymc tossed that yr way you would flip out now, don't be coy. you'd be on chat in like 3 seconds.

"Yes, yes -- front, back, on our knees, bent over, sprawled out, switched up, port, stern, aft, the whole fucking thing!"

"Gotcha! Watch the teeth, lube the hands, steady strokes, maintain the rhythm!"

funny enough this seems to be morbz's policy on dennis perrin

that perrin post is like a bad hip-hop skit

being smug about obama's cult of personality is pretty rich coming from a ron paul endorser

did perrin srsly endorse paul or are we talking morbs who has completely ceased to amaze me

lol i meant perrin but that works for both

http://dennisperrin.blogspot.com/2008/01/pauling.html

loooooool holy shit

Whatever Paul actually believes about minorities and queers is not the real concern here. What bothers liberals, TNR's James Kirchik among them, is that Paul is the only presidential candidate who is seriously running against the state. This includes anti-imperialism and calls to end the Drug War.

this is disingenuous AND nonsensical. Lolz at all those pro-imperialism pro-drug war librulz...

Think the Branch Davidians were paranoid?

http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/050418/050418_waco.h2.jpg

Then vote Hillary or Obama. And sleep tight.

some bold, insightful commentary from tim mcveigh dennis perrin there

from that Perrin post on Paul, proving that ethan is a subliterate lil fuck:

I may not agree with most of his beliefs, nor that of the anti-statist right overall

so another lie, and bye thraid

haven't you said bye like 47 times now

morbs you keep promising to go away but you keep coming back. MORE POLITICS AS USUAL.

lol morbs resorts to the marge schott defense. saw it coming btw.

Word leaked out yesterday evening that Obama was coming to Portland to the hockey arena. Tickets were free and are already gone, of course.

Guardian reporting Hillary generally nowhere to be found when policy relevant to "experience" being reported YET was in WH when Monica happened.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/19/hillaryclinton.uselections20081

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

lol i already have the scheds from 96 on my flash drive

why didn't the press come to you then?!?

bias

anti-hoos

So none of you really care about where Obama's getting his $$$ from, huh? Even if it's the subprime/pre- and post-post-Katrina bandits? I thought his was a NEW politics...

-- Dr Morbius, Wednesday, March 19, 2008 11:48 AM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Link

hes getting it from over 1 million people, including me

yeah, to attempt a serious response to that:

wall street has and will always have a shit ton of money to throw around, and will spend on politics. i can't really do anything about that, i can only control what i do with my own money.

it seems unlikely to me that Obama will do anything for these people because they've given him a lot of money, & having a shitload of tiny donors like me insulates him from needing them too much...hopefully. big donations like that don't come from enthusiasm and belief, like an individual, they are tactical. the minimal chance at some access down the road is worth whatever figure they've given (a pittance, no matter how big it looks).

wall street types are betting people: if they're giving Obama money it means they are betting he's going to win.

^^otm

Today: yet another pretty great speech (on foreign policy)

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/gGBFrl

lol i already have the scheds from 96 on my flash drive

-- BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Wednesday, March 19, 2008 4:07 PM (39 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

whats your sched manana?

Sully links to this American Conservative post that's worth reading. Highlights:

I am more sanguine about Obama’s Wright problem, in part because I was not aggrieved by Rep. Paul’s association with that newsletter business, and because I generally regard most anti-racism crusades as a lot of hyperventilating by professional activists and hacks. It still puzzles me how angry and even hateful words are regarded as virtual stoning offenses, but warmongering is a mainstream, respectable, even “responsible” thing to do. For the most part, the former are awful but do no real harm, while the latter leads to the slaughter of thousands, but it is the former that disqualifies someone while the latter is virtually a requirement to wield executive power.

The telling point is that most of Wright’s critics on the right were primarily offended by his “anti-Americanism,” a term that they deploy so frequently that one wonders if even they know what they mean by it any longer. It was his offenses against their sense of what nationalism requires that have bothered them the most. Meanwhile, the reaction in Middle America generally will often be similar to the one this reader reported: mockery and disbelief. Imagine that you are someone living in the middle of the country and have been lectured to your entire life about the prejudices that you need to overcome, and then you hear that Obama, the great reconciler, has ties to someone who possesses what you have been conditioned your entire life to believe is the absolute worst sort of sentiment, and then add to that the recognition that Obama’s actual politics are far removed from yours and then guess what the response will be to his speech addressing this issue. The very resentments that Obama was explaining in his speech, for which he demonstrated at least some understanding, were inevitably going to be summoned up by any major speech he gave on this question; it is a pity that his supporters cannot make some similar display of understanding. For my part, I have given Obama the benefit of the doubt on this, probably to the annoyance of many of my readers–should the same courtesy not be extended to his critics?

Obama thinks O.J. did it.