2008 Primaries Thread 3: The Rejecting and Denouncening

Point me to a group of people who have become more sympathetic toward President Ahmadinejad since he notched up the rhetoric.

Rural Iranians - i.e., Ahmedinijad's voting base

haha M I was just about to say that... I guess Russia is technically an "ally"?

Venezuelans

Mr. G, as long as the POTUS doesn't waste a lot of time with them, it's more to our advantage especially since s/he would be under no obligation to agree to any of their wackiness. Just talking to them makes us look less like dicks.

Michael, personally, at least on less cynical days I agree with you.

Actually, even on the most cynical of days I would argue that there are a number of states that we should interact with whom we have not in the recent past for whatever but Iran and Venezuela are two that I find to be a hard pill to swallow. However, I’m open to the suggestion but largely skeptical.

The current American stance of ‘wait and see’ is probably the correct strategy for relations with both countries. They will likely both fall apart in the near future as long as the United States does not pursue the carrot or the stick.

The US is actively trying to undermine both Chavez and Ahmadinejad with espionage and by funding their enemies. It's hardly a "wait and see" strategy in either case.

Venezuelans

lol

Just like the rhtoric that we use against Castro has strengthened his hand with Cubans who otherwise know that something's not working there. Patriotism may be the last (or first as some would have it) refuge of a scoundrel, but it's still a powerful force, especially for those that feel aggrieved.

Ahmedinejad's unpopularity has as much to do with rationing and getting rid of gas subsidies as anything.

I've alway assumed that balls was bl0un7, am i wrong?

Yeah, no, that was my guess.

why, is bl0un7 talking to Ahmedinejad?

blount owes all of us his balls for being wrong about McCain

Venezuelans

lol

-- Mr. Goodman, Thursday, March 27, 2008 6:44 PM (28 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

lol they have oil

http://ak.imgfarm.com/images/ap/McCain_2008.sff_UTMA105_20080327174943.jpg

Mitt looks smokin' these days.

O_O

I'm Mitt Romney and the Indoor Tanning Industry Approves of this Message.

Can we have an election that is decided by a ski-off between Mitt and Kerry?

Ladies Love Cool Obama: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRvpwq-szno

Clinton was asked by a questioner in the audience here what she would tell frustrated Democrats who might consider voting for McCain in the general election out of spite.

“Please think through this decision,” Clinton said, laughing and emphasizing the word “please.”

“It is not a wise decision for yourself or your country.”

The crowd applauded loudly.

A Gallup poll released this week indicated that 28 percent of Clinton's supporters would back McCain should the New York senator lose her quest for the Democratic nomination.

That compares to the 19 percent of Obama supporters who say they will favor McCain should Clinton be the party’s nominee.

“First of all, every time you have a vigorous contest like we are having in this primary election people get intense,” she continued. “You know, Sen. Obama has intense support. I have intense support.”

Clinton stressed that there are “significant” differences between her and Obama, but said “those differences pale to the differences between us and Sen. McCain.”

“I intend to do everything I can to make sure we have a unified Democratic party,” she said. “When this contest is over and we have a nominee, we’re going to close ranks, we’re going to be united.”

In any case, it seems to me that with both Venezuela and Iran that we are actually STRENGTHENING the hardline anti-US elements in those countries by refusing to talk to them. Ahmadinejad has actually gained standing, in some senses, from our refusal to talk to him .

-- Hurting 2, Thursday, March 27, 2008 10:26 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Link

^^^ this. the no-negotiating thing is totally childish and often hypocritical.

yeah it rests on this absolute fiction that being kept being given the cold shoulder by the US is this deadly embarrassing thing for a nation. and not, increasingly, a badge of honor.

er being kept

teach me to post after rolling out of bed

guys the bunny stuff gets curiouser, Mr. Bunny was Fred Fielding:

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2008/03/27/PH2008032703297.jpg

ha i was total wondering if those were minor administration figures in the suits - perfect!

wow he does run a shop of loyalists doesn't he

really weird loyalists

http://ak.imgfarm.com/images/ap/McCain_2008.sff_UTMA105_20080327174943.jpg

http://humemes.com/monster.jpg

Stanley Kurtz, clueless as usual:

Conservatives may think the revelations of Obama’s formative radicalism and his relationship with Wright are sure to sink him. While they may ultimately have that effect, the outcome is by no means certain. Contrary to liberal denials, Obama has been damaged by the Wright affair. Yet it’s also true that association with leftist and academic radicalism is no longer disturbing to large segments of the country.

The Democratic left now believes that the United States is ready for a genuinely "progressive," paradigm-changing president. They are not abandoning Obama, and are not even fully capable of seeing how damaging Obama’s background and underlying worldview seem to many (although they are worried enough to try to cover for him). But the country is changing and we can no longer be certain of the impact all these revelations will have. What I do think is obvious at this point is that cultural issues will not be a sideshow in 2008, but very much at the center of things. And if Obama should win, the culture clash of the Clinton and Bush years is sure to go on at full blast.

it’s true that association with rightist and corporate radicalism is no longer disturbing to large segments of the country.

He's not saying merkins want a radlib, Al, he's saying the MCarthyite who are you friends with shit doesn't work anywhere near the way it used to.

Meanwhile, Bob Casey for Obama wau.

Hillary's pastor for president!

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/17066161.html

I know next to nothing about Pennsylvania politics, what effect will the Casey endorsement have on Obama's primary showing?

If it gets enough play, it might cause people to take a second look, but ultimately not much.

I assume from conversations I've had with my family (whom all live in Philadelphia) that for most Dem. primary voters, Casey isn't a huge deal. When they voted for Casey before, it was an anti-Republican vote, and they don't really care that much about him. (That said, I've tried to convince them to go Obama, but my family is probably still wavering towards Hill at this point.)

xposts - i'm not sure if it will affect much (though i don't know anything about PA politics either), though it might help slightly with catholic voters and possibly blue collar, more moderate "casey democrats", as they've been called.

but i think it's significant b/c casey was previously adamantly neutral about taking a stance, not just "undecided", and he's now yet another voice calling for this race to be over soon and for everyone to rally behind the most likely nominee (obama, obv).

so more significant for a possible cascading of supers for obama, rather than primary voters

there's really not any scenario in which i see obama winning PA, in any case. it's nice that at least the media has turned down a little the whole "PA is the new Iowa' bs

your n may not be that great - casey is a name in PA politics and the son probably did substantially better than anohter Dem would have - but that's not going to change the basic demographic alignments that drive the race, even if it's a bit of a surprise in that casey is being a bit of a traitor to his demographic (except for age). few if any endorsements will.

Obama isn't going to win PA, but he could at least draw if he loses by only a few points

Did Pennsylvania vote for Reagan? Was it a bastion of 'Reagan Democrats'?

PA:
2004 Kerry (D) 51% Bush (R) 48.5%
2000 Gore (D) 50.6% Bush (R) 46.4%
1996 Clinton (D) 49.2% Dole (R) 40%
1992 Clinton (D) 45.1% Bush (R) 36.1%
1988 Bush (R) 50.7% Dukakis (D) 48.4%
1984 Reagan (R) 53.3% Mondale (D) 46%
1980 Reagan (R) 49.6% Carter (D) 42.5%
1976 Carter (D) 50.4% Ford (R) 47.7%

(Numbers from CNN)

Reagan basically won everything

PA went for Nixon in 72, but Humphrey in 68

It's teetering right on the edge, huh. That explains some of the Clinton support to me.

Catholics

I wonder what Kurtz means by revelations of Obama’s formative radicalism. I can only guess this is a reference to the fact that his mother was an anthropologist - which, as any Hoover Institute fellow would surely know, is a hot-bed of radical leftism.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3065/2369123904_53f4b54574_o.gif

HELLO MS CLINTON IT IS OVER

http://markhalperin.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/leahy0328.jpg

I wonder what Kurtz means by revelations of Obama’s formative radicalism. I can only guess this is a reference to the fact that his mother was an anthropologist - which, as any Hoover Institute fellow would surely know, is a hot-bed of radical leftism.

According to his autobiography, he read Marx and Foucault! He's a danger to America.

I wonder what Kurtz means by revelations of Obama’s formative radicalism. I can only guess this is a reference to the fact that his mother was an anthropologist - which, as any Hoover Institute fellow would surely know, is a hot-bed of radical leftism.

ha the 'spengler' column i linked to a bajillion posts ago made exactly this case. also, he's controlled by his wife. who hates america. and his pastor. who also, you may note, hates america.