Cutting through the spin
By Steve Benen Thursday Jan 03, 2008 8:12amThere’s no shortage of angles to the results out of Iowa, but let’s briefly go one at a time, taking a look at Spin vs. Reality. Starting with the Dems:
Barack Obama — What Obama fans are saying: Iowa is the spark that will propel Obama to the Democratic nomination. What Obama critics are saying: Iowa’s just one state.
Who’s right? It certainly looks like the fans are, doesn’t it? There’s a lot of campaigning yet to be done, but an amazing eight-point victory — exceeding all expectations — with broad support from every constituency not only makes Obama the frontrunner, it will likely give him a big boost in New Hampshire and South Carolina. And if he wins all three, the race is over. On the flip side, Obama, not Clinton, will now quickly become the center of attacks from all sides. We’ll see if he can handle the heat, though my hunch is he can.
John Edwards — What Edwards fans are saying: We beat Clinton and are alive to fight another day. What Edwards critics are saying: He needed to win Iowa to stay competitive.
Who’s right? A little bit of both, actually. Edwards’ strong second-place showing certainly won’t force him from the race, but it’s going to be difficult to boost fundraising and poll numbers in light of Obama’s big win.
Hillary Clinton — What Clinton fans are saying: It’s only the first round of a multi-round fight. What Clinton critics are saying: Say goodbye to “inevitability.”
Who’s right? Again, both. Clinton isn’t going anywhere; she has the resources to keep the fight going over the long haul, and has solid support in Feb. 5 states. But now, she’s the underdog, and has no obvious avenues to retaking the lead.
Bill Richardson — What Richardson fans are saying: We came in first … among second-tier candidates. What Richardson critics are saying: Dude, you got 2%.
Who’s right? Critics are. If there’s a scenario by which Richardson makes a comeback, I don’t see it.
And then, the Republicans:
Mike Huckabee — What Huckabee fans are saying: Onward and upward, Christian soldiers! What Huckabee critics are saying: Iowa, Schmiowa, he still doesn’t have the resources to compete long-term.
Who’s right? Critics are.
Mitt Romney — What Romney fans are saying: Silver medal! What Romney critics are saying: Didn’t you have a huge lead in Iowa just a few weeks ago?
Who’s right? Critics are, and unless he can eke out a victory in New Hampshire, Romney’s in serious trouble.
Fred Thompson — What Thompson fans are saying: Third place ain’t bad for a guy who doesn’t campaign. What Thompson critics are saying: It’s only a matter of time before Thompson realizes he has to go.
Who’s right? Actually, both. It was a weak third-place showing, which won’t come close to giving him a boost anywhere. But the results probably won’t force him from the race. Yet.
John McCain — What McCain fans are saying: With a weakened Romney, McCain is suddenly the odds-on GOP nominee. What McCain critics are saying: Dude, you came in fourth, losing to a guy who was barely awake the last several months.
Who’s right? Regrettably, the fans are, thanks in large part to an adoring media which can barely contain its pro-McCain glee.
Ron Paul — What Paul fans are saying (probably in all-caps): We tripled Giuliani! What Paul critics are saying: Paul still isn’t going to win anywhere.
Who’s right? Once again, both.
Rudy Giuliani — What Giuliani fans are saying: 9/11! 9/11! 9/11! What Giuliani critics are saying: “Frontrunners” don’t come in a humiliating sixth place, with one-third the support of a libertarian gadfly, in a state where he was once in the lead.
Who’s right? Take a wild guess.
Login or Register to post comments.
21 percent of those who turned out were young people. Good for them!
Over half of those who turned out were first time caucus-ers. Good for them!
I could so handle a Obama/Edwards ticket or a Edwards/Obama ticket. :)
thank you iowa lapdogs!!!!
THE critical issue that changed congress last year WAS the war....Obama won't bring the troops home. He is part of the machine and you made him the leader. Now all he has to do is get Richardson for his VP and he sews up the hispanic vote!
Then this country will be totally divided, the immigration nazis and racists will rip this country apart.
thank you you fucking assholes!
edwards 08
See RP bots, stop spamming already.
But really, F*ckabee?
Unfortunately for us if it is F*ckerbee and Obama in the end then Hucksterbee is going to have a good chance to win given the US's proclivity for racism, however well hidden it is.
Hey, where are all the Ron Paul supporters? Hell, Howard Dean got more votes than him and the turnout was only half of what it was this time back in 04. With any luck he'll get trounced by the hick preacher again and that will be the last time anyone hears of Ron Paul, praise JAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYSUS.
Great read. A very accurate summary of what's ahead.
EAT SHIT, RUDY + HILLARY.
JUST DIE, MIKE.
Actually these results are not the real story. The real story is the more than doubling of the democratic participants since the last election. A true sign that the Democrats are going to decimate the Republicans in the next election. It does not matter who wins the Republican nomination. It is a lost cause. Any democrat will beat them... with probably a bigger margin for victory with Obama, but Clinton would still win....
Until Obama wins in a state where they have real voters he can't be considered a real candidate. Look at all those students bussed in for the voting. They only had to register a couple of hours before they voted, you checked them out. Young voters yeah, who Oprah brought in for this one time thing.
If the young voters show up, for a change, in the other states, then we can say they really are a force. But I doubt it. Oprah made Obama an American Idol and they all latched on to it...what will happen when the real American Idol season starts they will forget all about this one.
Edwards and Hillary are really the two best candidates. Obama will latch on to any topic at the spur of the moment if he thinks that's what the audience wants to hear. I don't understand why the press hasn't asked him more hard questions. Why don't they ask him what happens to him when there is a hard vote up in the senate he missed practically every vote this year. He didn't vote to give our military more time between deployments. he didn't vote when it came time to give our military more health benefits. He didn't vote for a program to give seniors the chance to lower their prescriptions. He told a Chicago Trib reporter that he would bomb Iran, and he bought into the story bush told about Iran having nuclear weapons. BUT he goes out on every campaign run and flames Hillary and Edwards for voting to give bush permission to hunt for WMD in Iraq, and then bush starts a war.
This guy is an opportunist and will be the worst thing that every happens to this country. Maybe in 7 or 8 years he might understand what it is all about and be a real candidate but right now he his American Idol status is the only thing pumping the young crowd up. they are as changeful as they say they want. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IS JUST WHAT THE HELL CHANGE OBAMA WANTS TO BRING ABOUT. He says over and over he is for change but change to what.
Eddie Bear's going to have to say something which clicks with the public sentiment, if he wants to beat Obi Wan Kenobi. It's not that most people disagree with his gripes against corporations or his ideas for saving the country. It's that they've heard them all before on a minor level from Eddie's predecessors. What they want is something which demonstrates what John
I've backed Kucinich from the beginning, not because he could win but because he was the only one bold enough to tell the truth. And the truth is that this country is becoming an armed fortress projecting its military and corporate empire throughout the world, committing philosophical suicide in the process. If Kucinich can't get the nomination, which appears to be a distant dream at this point, then I will back Edwards who is the next best candidate in terms of changing the direction we are going in, in my view. I thought Edwards' speech last night was reminiscent of Bobby Kennedy. Clinton and Obama seemed staged and flat by comparison.
Oh, someone or ones woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. :(
Twice as many Dems turned out in Iowa last night as Repubs.
I didn't hear Obama's speech last night but just now on Washing Journal (c-span) a self described white male called in from the south and said it was one of the all time best speeches he has ever heard. He said it sent chills down his spine. He seemed to have been swayed to Obama by that speech alone.
Now would be a good time to think about Obama's Vice President. I'm thinking he should form a committee to put forth a name for the job. Someone should head the committee. Someone like, oh, say, Hillary Clinton should head the committee to name the Vice President... Yes, yes, Obama should get started right now on this.
Phillip @ 6:
As well as the doubling of the GOP vote by the Democrats. I might start sounding like a broken record here from the other posts, but the big story coming out of last night was that the Republicans lost, big time. They are a splintered, weak electorate that won't have a chance come November. As John Amato accurately pointed out, the Democratic nominee (especially if it's Obama) will most likely be decided by South Carolina, or maybe Nevada if Edwards does well in NH and SC. This will most likely result in an Obama/Edwards or Edwards/Obama ticket which will be a populist/progressive nightmare for the GOP. On the flip side, the GOP nomination most likely won't be decided until Super Tuesday, as Huckabee will flop in NH, leaving the race wide open with viable candidates all throwing punches at each other all the way into Florida and even California.
If the Dems have one thing going for them come November, it will most likely be what the GOP usually trumpets will be their strength: unity and a mobilized base.
Phillip @ 6:
Sorry to nitpick, but decimate doesn't mean what you think it does. Decimation was a Roman commander's punishment against troops that showed cowardice in battle. One in ten was slaughtered by his own compatriots. Decimate means one in ten die, not one in ten live. The word you mean is annihilate, which means to wipe out or totally destroy. However, I agree with your analysis. The near DOUBLING of democratic voters bodes VERY well for the election.
Rudy, Exploring New ‘Territory,’ Claims Decisive Victory in Guam Caucuses
bob @ 4:
They are getting ready to return their previous incarnations as the administration apologist Repug trolls that they once were. If only their talking points memo would get there...
Steve, the truth is that Kucinich has been relegated to the ash-can of history now, partly because he didn't have enough sense to figure out moderate Democrats weren't going to vote for someone lobbying for a "Department of Peace," whatever the hell that was supposed to be. Regardless of how much this administration has overblown bin Laden, the fact remains that the world is a monumentally dangerous place, made more so by folks who think we'll simply have it all go away if we withdraw back to the Shire to curl up in front of a fire, smoking our pipes and eating tea cakes.
Gobama!
I'm sure fired up and I hope Americans are too!
Edwards is the most electable, he blows the GOP out of the water (I know....'in polls'...but there is a lot to it....), he is easily the most direct on energy independence (per Grist Mill & the presidential forum on climate change - all candidates from ALL parties invited, only Edwards, Kucinich, & Clinton bothered to show up) & universal healthcare & ending the Iraq occupation.
If Obama hadn't pimped big coal at that 'debate' in Nevada...I wouldn't be as skeptical of him...but that was a giant step backward....Kucinich said it best "Clean coal is an oxymoron"
That being said...an Obama Edwards ticket would slap the Huckabee McCain ticket into oblivion....bank on that
Fools on the Hill @ 17:
Fired up! Ready to go!
I heard Obama's speach. It didn't resonate with me as much as Edwards speach, "reminiscent of Bobby Kennedy"
One thing I noticed with Obama was the way he pronounced "Ameeericaaa", kinda reminded me of Martin Luther King.
Ok, but why did Richardson cut a deal with Obama?
Thought he was a sure Clinton cabinet guy.
What's going on there?
As far as pHuckabee goes, it's one thing to run a shoestring campaign in a small state, and quite another to try that on a national scale.
Even if the money starts pouring in, the Huckster has only a month until Super Duper Tuesday. That's not enough time to build a campaign organization from the ground up, especially when most of the GOP pros are going to avoid him in order to keep from pissing off the establishment.
Offices, phones, supplies, advertising, schedules, hotels, car rentals, etc, etc.
He will suffer the fate of many an upstart - death by the machine.
pissed off patricia @ 1:
Indeed. It's not as fantastic as Kucinich or Dodd; but this is still an optimistic turn for me!
Anything that's Democratic and not-Clinton is something I can get behind; but Obama I feel actually has some real chops.
Also, although Dick may have done so in a rather less-than-savory fashion; the office of Vice President is no longer just "Sit there and suck up to the Prez"; so whoever gets that spot will actually be very relevant.
All told, certainly a positive result. I'm SO glad to see people my age and younger getting out there to vote. And people say we young folks don't care about the country!
Johnny2Bad @ 21:
From the news reports, almost none of the second round votes switched to the Clagina, preferring Anybody But Clinton.
That doesn't bode well for Ms. Inevitible
Sorry, here's my continuation.
what John Q. is feeling now. Obama's suggestion of diplomacy with rogue states and his call for an exit strategy first is why he's ahead. John, on the other hand, is trying to blame big business for his own mistakes, instead of coming up with solutions to immediate problems. Yes, health care is important, but we're not going to get to that stage until we untangle our way out of Iraq. And no one buys that he'll just leave the country, because if he wanted to, do so he wouldn't have gotten us there in the first place. After all, Nixon promised he'd end the Vietnam war, too.
Obama's more of a realist, and he'll try to get us out in a way which at least doesn't make us look as embarrassing as when we first entered the place. And he'll try to do so in a way which closes the rifts we created with the rest of the world. At best, Eddie Bear will just evacuate and give the Republinazis more ammo against withdrawal and the Dems' war "record". Obama being more willing to own up to our mistake than Edwards is why he's ahead. He doesn't trash the competition by using his "get out of war free" card against them the way his opponents attack his "experience". Instead, he points out where we are and he emphasizes the opportunity for breaking the cycle.
That is the key which Edwards is missing. Edwards still leaves open the possibility for any possible reform he proposes to be undermined and purged in the future, just like Kennedy and Roosevelt before him. Obama at least offers the possibility for tackling the problem from the beginning, rather than just covering it up, and hoping it doesn't return.
I think most people are making way to much of the Obama win in Iowa. Why? The numbers I have seen for Obama, Edwards and Clinton are nearly a 3 way split at 35, 31, 31 percent and this is in what will turn out to be the only state with a non-traditional primary. What happens if Clinton or Edwards wins in New Hampshire? What are the pundits going to say then? This is far from over.
John McCain probably is the "sane" choice for the Republicans- that's how sorry their position is- but doesn't he strike you as the Bob Dole of this election? He certainly reminds me of the Republicans 1996 predicament. Withered, yet respected old senator, with questions of durability plaguing him throughout the campaign. Let's hope for the same results this November.
right wing hater @ 18:
Uh, yeah but you have to remember that we're idiots....Think back:
McGovern
Carter
Mondale
Dukakis
"Most electable" ain't in our lexicon.
Ready to go?
So is Giuliani - video of the Generalissimo at http://www.foxnews-follies.com
steve davis @ 16:
Steve, you sound like you've drank the kool-aid. A dangerous place? Yea, but it's because your plutocracy/elitists insists on meddling in foreign affairs. Get your troops out of the 120+ countries around the world you are occupying and peace WILL result.
End the American Empire!
steve davis @ 16:
Moderate Democrats? Oh, you mean conservatives. The Department of Peace was the original plan proposed by our first president to balance out the Department of War. Attach the name George Washington to the idea and it doesn't sound so ridiculous now does it? Maybe it's not Kucinich who is lacking sense, but those who dismiss his ideas. Kucinich is in line with the majority of Americans. There's nothing wrong at all with his platform. The problem is with the corporate media keeping his message from getting out and blogs which follow suit. So it's not even really about a lack of support from conservatives or moderates, is it? It's with the corporate media that ignores him because they stand to lose everything with a real liberal in office. If people knew who the hell Kucinich was, they'd vote for him. It's democracy that's been relegated to the ash-can of history, and you're part of the reason why. Now there's a harsh truth.
My favorite part of the night - besides Obama's amazing speech - was the sight of Rachel Maddow bitchslapping Tweety as he insisted on bloviating like Fred Thompson on a meth binge, which is to say he was rambling on unintelligibly.
Nobody else tried to interject reality except Rachel, and when she persisted despite his obvious surprised irritation at having his Beltway wisdom questioned, he became petulant and waspish, insisting on getting in the last word, (which was the really odd statement that if Hillary had been a better politician - this was when she was First Lady - "she would have gotten her health care plan through."). His nose was so out of joint, it was hysterical.
Maybe that was why they rarely asked Rachel anything, and when they did, it was narrowly focused and they woudln't allow her to expand on anything. I think she got about 25% of the talking time that Fineman got.
Still, it was fun to watch Tweety's expression when he realized he was being confronted. Goes a long way to explaining the mediocrity that is Hardball.....
It's about time the election is decided by young voters, rather than the over 65 crowd. They need to get out of the way and let a population with new ideas take over rather than continuing to make the same historical mistakes over and over. Obama is the best candidate because that's what he brings to the table.
Also, for whatever reason, he doesn't alientate the reasonable, younger people who may have always considered themselves more republican, but mostly just because that's what their parents were, but who were turned off by Bush and are looking for something new. If Obama can bring a significant number of them over to considering progressive ideas and changing "liberal" from a bad word to something to be proud of he will have done the democratic party a far greater service than putting them in power for the next 4-8 years. He would be ushering in change by reinvigorating progressive thinking.
Hillary is the establishment candidate and the establishment is the problem. The fact is, you can't just continue to hold the high ground on issues and whine that no matter how right you are, things never go your way, which is what I get from a lot of my fellow liberals. You have to change strategy and change the face of the democratic party. That will never happen with Hillary, and probably not with Edwards either. They are too connected to what people have been brainwashed into hating about liberals. If we want to win the election, which I do, then Brack is the way to go.
Finnigan @ 33:
Hear hear!
right wing hater @ 18:
RWH, how 'bout 04? He couldn't beat bush for goodness sake, with help from Kerry...
I'm with you though on an O/E ticket, that would be pretty awesome
Edwards needs money to fight it out to the end. He's taken no corporate funds, which Hillary and Barack are awash in and will continue to receive.
steve davis @ 16:
Excuse me? The world is not made 'more dangerous' by folks who prefer peace to conflict; that occurs at the hands of those who believe they can take the One Ring and make something good out of it through force of will alone.
The moral of LOTR (not that there is one - Tolkien himself said that he detested allegory in all its forms, and was simply telling a rousing good tale) is that there's nothing wrong with what is good and innocent, like the Hobbits who live in ignorance of events to the South. We should, in fact, fight to defend these treasures, but not through the method (or folly) of adopting the enemy's tactics as our own.
bob @ 4:
Remember, 6 out of 10 GOP in Iowa are born again evangelical types who skew against Paul...NH will be different.
"Who’s right? It certainly looks like the fans are, doesn’t it?"
We'll see. Obama has the momentum, but Hillary is capable of coming back. Sadly, Edwards will not be a major force.
Symes @ 15:
They are such a bunch of whiners. I baited them last night with a simple general Fuck YOU to Paulists and THREE of them complained to the sitemonitor that I was mean and just like Fox News because I had no respect for their opinions. Oh, yeah, and I said bad words like fuck. It was pretty funny all in all. Not ONE of them is to be found this morning anywhere on any C&L thread.
Johnny2Bad @ 28:
Carter was elected...
Big John @ 38:
Hey, alright finally a Ronbot! Blow me.
Is it just me or does anyone else suspect ALL them thar "NEW" Democrats were in reality Repugnantklaners re registering at the door to screw Hillary and set up the empty suite for an easy ass whopping com November?
God Steve, I hope you're right about Huckleberry. I actually feel like shit today because that moron won. I know its only one state but I just can't shake this feeling of dread about that guy. I hope you're right and that he flops in other states.
steve davis @ 16:
The world has always been a scary place, 9/11 didnt change that. Are you a rudy supporter? And if you ever took the time to read you might understand that they dont hate us because we are free. You think lying about a war killing thousands of people that is un justified, makes friends in the world. The war was a lie, no crap bush reason you can mumble up can deny the fact the iraq was a big sham.
So fuck you and your fake ass patriotism.
myiq2xu @ 22:
Fuckabee already has huge campaign machinery in every state. To make matters worse, it has been there for decades, and it operates tax-free. His organizing sites are easy to find; they're the ones with the big "t" on top of the building and the easily-led voters inside.
That guy frightens me almost as much as Rudy. He's the exact opposite of what the framers had in mind for president.
Big John @ 38:
Riiiight...
For the obtuse voters
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18991.htm
For Hillary's Amato
http://bvar22.iwarp.com/images/moneychart1.jpg
steve davis @ 16:
Nobody proposes just sitting around, inviting our heads to get chopped of by evil brown cavemen. That's just idiotic. Kucinich's rant about the Department of Peace was more a rant against the military-industrial complex & perpetual war. Read The 50 Year Wound by Derek Leebaert
Actually Department of Peace sounds kind of Orwellian.
My opinion is that the GOP even after being in charge for 7 of the most bloodthirsty, incompetent, corrupt, democracy subverting years in American history is nowhere near as unpopular with 'mainstream' voters as the readership of C&L would like to believe.
My opinion is that an Obama vs. Huckabee or Clinton vs. Huckabee '08 race would most likely see the Democrats have their asses handed to them - AGAIN!
My opinion is that John Edwards is the best strategic choice for defeating the massive GOP campaign & corporate noise machine media in '08. Those of us among the progressive 'already converted' crowd had better start playing this game smarter than the opposition or we WILL see permanent GOP rule in this country.
Think about a Huckabee victory for a few minutes, make a list of what a president Huckabee would likely do to consolidate and solidify the GOP power grab which has taken place over the last 7 years. If that isn't incentive enough for the fractious, undisciplined, gaggle of lefty 'my-kooky-offensive-to-mainstream-America-special-interest-issue-is-more-important-than-anything-else' to pull their heads out of their well-meaning-but-terribly-screwed-up-priority asses, there really is NO hope at all for this country.
As much as we hate racism and believe it is evil and unfair, it is rampant throughout America. If the Dems nominate a candidate that has ZERO chance of carrying ANY confederate states (not that there was ever much chance that the NASCAR & Limbaugh loving set was ever going to vote 'Dem') the election game will be horrifyingly close to a disastrous GOP victory with all the death throes of Democracy in a deeper plunge towards hell on earth and giant strides towards making the 'Left Behind' series a reality.
I like Obama, I think in a world where intellectual merit and the content of ones character alone determined fitness for the office of president he'd be a fine choice. We don't live in that world at all - we live in a world of spectacle and massive incessant efforts to deceive or manipulate people based on their emotions and beliefs - many of which are ugly, racist, ignorant, and hateful. A president is elected not by a rational process of determining the most qualified candidate but by who can manipulate the emotions of the masses best, at least temporarily, so that they bother to leave the house on election day and cast their vote for the 'best candidate'.
We must set aside our differences and look to what common cause(s) unites us. We must resist the inevitable onslaught of corporate media when it attempts to wedge apart 'the people' into fractious, panicky, self righteous, and self defeating political ghettos. Divide and conquer has worked beautifully for the GOP over the last decade allowing a group of people promoting an anti-populist agenda to dominate the US and gorge themselves on blood and treasure worldwide, increasing their power. Until 'the people' realize that the only way to defeat them is to unite and to present a compelling candidate to rouse the 'undecideds' and other voters hypnotized/enthralled by the never ending falsehoods and appeals to emotion that bombard them from the corporate media.
The sleepers must be awakened before it is too late, I think Edwards is the man most likely to succeed.
Eric Almighty @ 46:
What you're talking about is potential, not actual. Romney has a campaign organization in place, with arrangments made for advertising, campaign appearances, phone banks, etc.
Has pHuckabee already filed the necessary papers to be on the ballot in all the S-T states? Do volunteers know where to go and what needs to be done? Do they have offices and/or phone numbers the vlounteers can go to or call? Do they have lists for the phone-bankers? Brochures for the precinct walkers?
What about campaign rallies? When and where? Do they have the necessary permits?
Where will pHuckabee and his
posseentourage stay when they travel? How will they travel?What about the media? Television appearances, buses and hospitality suites for the press poodles? Endorsements? Who is going to explain foreign policy to the pHuckster?
He's not in Arkansas anymore, Toto.
Hello C&Lers.
Eric Almighty - I actually hope (almost pray perhaps) for a Huckabee win. All the polls, and all my discussions with my far too numerous Republican friends suggest he would be blown away in the general.
The only R we need to worry about in the general is McCain. And unfortunately, I think the R's are just now starting to figure that out.
Beneldon @ 11:
No no no... no VP committee headed by Hillary... who would likely pull a Dick Cheney and name herself! NO NO NO!
steve davis @ 16:
Kucinich isn't out of the picture yet. If you had bothered to check out any of the available info on the "Dept of Peace", you would know it is not about "withdrawing to the Shire to curl up in front of a fire". It's a pro-active program to address the problems that lead to conflict, something past administrations have refused to do. It is about preventing war and establishing conditions the encourage peace. It requires planning and action. www.ThePeaceAlliance.org
Bud @ 44:
Take heart, Bud. Outside of evangelicals, what kind of idiot would vote for a man that believes the earth is 6000 years old because the bahbul says so?
Obama wins three tiny states, and you guys call the race over???
LOL! Do me a favor, make a pick for the Derby so I know whom to bet against!
There aren't enough electoral votes in SC, NH, and IA to fill a shoebox. Clinton's got a lot more money in the bank than Obama, and can outlast him on SuperDuper Tuesday.
The caucus comes and goes, and still, there's only one candidate who is advocating not only leaving Iraq, but all the other places where we have troops stationed overseas, and that would be Ron Paul.
Sure, he doesn't advocate any position that allows me to live off the government dole, but I think I can manage. What I don't think ANY of us can afford is the continued support of the statists, and their neo-liberal economics of, "borrow today and pay tomorrow".
But hey, maybe we should just let the children pay for it. That seems to be our first response to most issues.
WMK @ 49:
I'm not going to vote for someone who 'has the best chance of winning' - I'd like to vote for the candidate who is going to clean house and repair the damage done over the past two terms by the Frat Boy-in-Chief.
If that's John Edwards, great. But I'm not going to buy into the 'defeat Huckabee at any cost' only to find we've elected someone who can't actually do the job, including Ms. 'Day One'.
And ultimately, everyone thinks their favorite candidate has the only chance of beating the Rethuglican offering. Doesn't mean I'll be drinking the Ron Paul Kool-Aid, either.
Congrats to Obama. Although I couldn't be happier about Huckabee winning. I'm from the left, but it's nice to see evangelicals voting for a true evangelical and not some phony silver spoon born-again liar. After being conned by recent so-called evangelicals its nice to see them step up and say Huckabee is authentic and one of us. Now lets hope Obama picks Dodd or Kucinich as a running mate and we can sweep away the facists!!
Fuckabee wins Iowa thanks to the evangelical turnout. Those wingnuts are nuts! Fuckabee is the biggest joke of the wingnut crusaders. wow, scary...
No wonder American citizens are seeking political asylum in Sweden.
actor212 @ 55:
Thank you! Exactly. Clinton can place 3rd again in NH (she won't-she'll either win or come in 2nd), and 3rd in SC (she might), and it won't mean a damn thing. Come Feb. 5 it WILL be all over--Hillary will be the nominee. Only somebody who hasn't studied U.S. primary history would say the race is over if BO wins the first 3 contests. Iowa has almost NEVER meant a ticket to the White House...it serves to weed out the 2nd tier, and to insure more corn subsidies, that's about it.
I cannot see any scenario where Obama wins outright. Hillary has California, Florida, New York, et al.
McCain MUST win NH, and the Obama win in Iowa actually may hurt him because the indies there may vote for Obama instead now. But, Romney is so hated I still think McCain pulls it out and goes to the nomination.
Stop believing the usual Iowa hype. It happens every 4 years and means virtually nothing a week (in this case 5 days) later.
Iowa is the best predictor of who will NOT be President. Of the contested caucuses of the past 4 presidents,
GWB is the only president to have won Iowa!
In 1992, Clinton was 4TH,behind uncommitted!
In 1988, GHWB was 3rd behind Pat robertson!
In 1980, the great Ronnie was 2nd behind,oddly enough, GHWB
75% of the time,the winner in Iowa does not win the presidency!
Go Edwards. Barrack is somewhat anti-worker, which is 90% of America!
Swashbuckler @ 41:
Uh, I'm pretty sure that Watergate elected him. Then he got his ass handed to him by Ronnie.
Chuck Norris' mullet put Huck over the top
Alec Timmerman @ 61:
Right. But looks like Labor went with Obama. I just don't get it.
James @ 56:
Alright, another Ronbot loser piping up. Hey! Guess what? NOBODY likes Ron Paul except idiots. Nobody is buying your libertarian bullshit. Fuck off.
Hank @ 60:
I cannot see any scenario where Obama wins outright. Hillary has California, Florida, New York, et al.
Well in that case the Hillary camp must be thrilled. :D So Iowa is more progressive than California, Florida & New York.
OK
jr @ 63:
The mullet of DOOM.
Beneldon @ 11:
Very funny stuff. I don't know where to start on this one so I won't. Geez.
I woke up this morning with my three year old son curled up beside me, sleeping snugly under his blankie, and thought to myself, "Wow! The first president to be elected during his lifetime just might be a smart, visionary, principled person of color." If I wasn't a jaded old fool, I probably would have wept. And Obama is my second choice (after Edwards)!
Fact is, anyone longing for the day this country puts a stop to the ignorance and intolerance perpetrated by the modern Republican party has much to be grateful for in last night's vote. Now, let's keep the momentum going, not let our three exceptional candidates turn too viciously on each other, and keep our comments focused on legitimate policy differences and not personality quirks.
1) Obama won the lion's share of last minute voters.
2) Obama carried the day with voters under 30. I am not sure why.
3) Bread & butter issues didn't seem as important. This shocks me really. And I am confused how people could be for ending the war asap and yet support Obama. Apparently people do not listen to the candidates. Image seemed to carry the day, not substance.
4) Edwards had the best organization on the ground but it was swamped by the number of new entrants.
5) Edwards carried the most important demographic group traditionally, the 45 to 60 age bracket. A silver-lining if there is one for Edwards.
6) Hillary is in a heap of trouble as she only seem to do well with women over 60 but no one should discount the fact that she remains the choice of the Democratic Party establishment. Aside from her husband, look who was on stage with her: Madeline Albright, Wesley Clark and the Mayor of Los Angeles. And despite tonight's results she remains ahead in the delegate count by nearly a hundred delegates. She remains the front runner and has the clout of a vast and well-moneyed political machine.
7) Only three times since Iowa became the first in the nation caucus in 1972 has the winner of the Democratic caucus gone on to win the nomination. However, both of the past two winners have.
8) It is important to remember that the results do not reflect on the Democratic side, the actual raw vote. It is impossible to know how distorted the delegate count is from the popular vote since the Democratic Party does not release the results.
9) I haven't been able to discern what percentage of Huckabee supporters overlooked his Christian credentials and supported him purely on his economic populism. My sense is that those who voted for Huckabee did so largely because he is an Evangelical.
10) The big winner on the Republican side may be John McCain who may find people in New Hampshire and South Carolina taking another look at the Senator from Arizona.
11) While Iowa is a state that tilts Democratic (Governor is a Democrat/one very liberal Democratic Senator/a moderate Republican one/three out of five Congressional seats are Democratic though Iowa does send Rep. Steve King to Congress), the disparity in attendance between the Republican and Democratic caucus is perhaps the most important takeaway from yesterday's caucuses. 220,000 on the Democratic side versus 114,000 on the Republican side. While Iowa permits change on the spot registration in the caucus and such I've heard of a few reports of people changing their registration in order to vote against Hillary, it bodes well for the Democratic Party that the groundswell is on their side.
In terms of my own preference, John Edwards, I am of course disappointed. My belief is though Senator Obama may be sincere in his desire for a new era of bipartisanship, I find it that he is either naive or completely obtuse.
I'm sorry, I could never be on the Senator Obama bandwagon, even if he were the Democratic nominee. He scares the hell out of me for one major reason: He is a religious conservative.
Oh sure, he appears to have a progressive message, but his religious fervor negates all of that. Notice how none of the supposed "main stream media" and even the "vaunted" left leaning blogs are ignoring this fact? Notice how he himself tries not to mention religion a whole lot? It was pretty thick in the beginning, but now he almost appears to be trying to hide it.
In my view, a President Obama would be just as bad for the country as a President Huckabee or a President Romney. I am sure we will start seeing more of Senator Obama's religious conservatism as he heads to South Carolina. Maybe then, everyone will start seeing the light.
It's great being a Democrat this year. We have three very good candidates, and although I have my preferences, I could back any one of them in the general election. Republicans are running around turning over logs looking for anything that can be dressed up to be a nominee.
We can disagree about our candidates but they are all acceptable, and we should keep that in mind. We do not need to self-destuct here, besides it's more fun watching the Repubs explode.
James, I do not think you could make a living without a strong governmental infrastructure. You need good roads to get you to work, you need a quality education, you need a strong stable society. All of this is paid for by the common good. The more you make and the more successful you are, the more you actually use government. A CEO needs an extensive higher education system to provide them workers, so they can make money. A CEO needs a solid national infrastructure of roads to deliver their goods so they can make money. A CEO needs clean water, power,etc. etc. in all of their holdings. You and I just need a goodroad to get to our own job and clean water in our own house. You have not managed yoour lifestyle on your own. You have managed your lifestyle because you worked hard AND we have invested in government. Ron Paul wants to privatize everything! Private enterprise is great for goods, but for the common good profit and care are not compatible. Look at health care, profit determines what kind of care you get and if you live and die, not what your doctor prescribes.It will never be profitable to care for those in need, but that is obscene, and that is Ron Paul.
James @ 56:
bob @ 54:
I shudder to think - but I guess I should have more confidence in the people?
F*ckabee said on Meet the Press that if he won Iowa it would be a miracle. God delievered.
So now the question is, if he doesn't win NH what is God telling him?
1) Go home you loser
2) Dude, it's not like I'm all powerful
3) The party of Satan is strong in NH
Can't wait to see the news shows this Sunday
Johnny2Bad @ 62:
...and Iran gave it to Ronnie (along with greed, fear, and energy...)
Ron Paul won't win the nomination, it's true. However, it's still refreshing seeing someone who actually speaks what's going through his mind. I see alot of complaints here about media not forcing accountability, but as far as I can tell Paul has done more than any democrat candidate to bring the issue to the forefront. Do you really believe any other candidate is doing anything else but shaping his message to the latest focus groups? Kucinich, Gravel, and that's it. There ought to be happiness that there's a candidate that's not cast out of the same mold as the others and actually brings about some real debate, but instead there's just cheap insults.
So ... enjoy your self-asserted superiority, revel in your moral infallibility and get ready for another candidate who says what he has to in order to get elected before selling you and every other citizen out to whoever paid for the campaign.
Wonder how long it takes for the 'Impeach Obama' chant to start after he keeps the war going ...
It looks like Ron Paul finished with 10% of the vote. Does that mean that he gets to debate on FAUX ??
Obama will need motivated youth in large numbers, over and over.... Now that's the tricky part.
"Clinton isn’t going anywhere." She's dead actually. She just doesn't have the good sense to lie down!
bubba @ 79:
Senator Obama can't win in the south. Oh, we would like to think that we are progressive as a nation, but we aren't. Just like the south could never support a Jew for Vice-President (Senator Lieberman in 2000), the south isn't going to an elect an "uppity northern negro". Oh, they will color their true views with other reasons such as gun control, but it will all come down to Senator Obama's color. Now, in the north, it will be his religious conservatism that will turn off the voters, but in the south, it will be race.
Hmmm @ 77:
Well said...congrats to those of us who get ithe big picture flying at 40,000 feet unlike the partisan hacks of all parties...
"Just like the south could never support a Jew for Vice-President (Senator Lieberman in 2000), the south isn’t going to an elect an “uppity northern negro”." sounds like the someone has forgotten there aren't too many black folks in iowa.
Oprah wins again.
I don't care what BOB says or how hatefully he says it, if Ron Paul is still in the race come the Feb. 5th California primary I will vote for him for one reason only. He is the ONLY candidate who I feel is a firm defender of the Constitution.
He is the ONLY candidate I would feel comfortable with on Inauguration Day when he puts his hand on the Bible and SWEARS "to PRESERVE, PROTECT AND DEFEND the Constitution against ALL ENEMIES both foreign AND DOMESTIC."
I want to live in a country where my civil rights are preserved, protected and defended...not legislated out of existence.
You can bad mouth Ron Paul supporters until the sun blinks out. I don't take your nastiness to heart. I will continue to send him money and lobby on his behalf...hoping and praying that he will surge ahead in New Hampshire.
Remember their states' motto BOB: LIVE FREE.....OR DIE
There is no way that Huckabee would have any chance of winning the general election. This country is majorly rebelling against the Christian Right right now........ nobody is going to vote, outside of his small base, for this religious wing nut..... the "Value voters" or religious right's time is over..... it is even over in the Republican party, as it traditional conservative power base of big money and the corporate elite is scared to death that their party has been taken over by these johnny do gooder, hypocritical, religious nuts, and they are fighting to take it back.... Giulani's, Romney's, and McCain's biggest mistakes are that they thought they needed the religious element in their party to win.... what they need are the independents and moderates..... they should have not changed their views to cater to the religious element.... they should have ran away from the religious freaks as fast as they could... Huckabee would be the best candidate for the Democrats to run against..... him and his dog killing (gutted, stoned and hung from a tree) psycho son.... nice parenting from this freak... let him dress like Elmor Fudd and run around talking about creationism and the flat earth all he wants....
WMK @ 49:
A number of Iowans have posted the results for their precincts over on the Huffington Post and it is clear that original split before the viability test was an even 28% split between Obama, Edwards and Clinton. Obama seems to have picked up a lot of support from Dodd, Biden and Kucinich. They also confirm that Obama did well among younger voters and Hillary did well with older voters.
Abbybwood @ 84:
If you're a white male, then you'll be fine. But what about the 65% of the country that isn't?
kravitz @ 83:
Actually, there are quite a few blacks in Iowa. I even worked for the campaign of a black woman who was trying to get the Democratic nomination to run against Congressman Nussle in the 1996 election in the Second District.
Iowa tries to be progressive and considering it was the youth (college) vote that propelled the win for Senator Obama, I wouldn't count on that in the south.
Marge @ 7:
Up yours, you dumb asshole. I'm as real a voter as you are. Just so you don't get the wrong impression, Bite Me.
JTM @ 87:
Oppressed white males for Ron Paul!
Sorry, needed my morning humor.
Manila Ryce @ 31:
I was thinking this when I read the first comments. Thanks, Manila, for articulating it so well.
Marge @ 7:
First I've heard of this and I've been following the race closely? Got a cite maybe?
Phoenix Justice @ 71:
Huh? Any shred of evidence for this statement? From reading his book and ifrom all biographical accounts I get the impression that Obama's upbringing wasn't heavy on religion at all.
Lots of misinformation out there apparently and more to come I'm sure.
Phoenix Justice @ 88:
Quite a few blacks in Iowa? Try 2.5% of the population. Blacks didn't give Obama the victory, it was students. Good for them. This is great news for the Dems if this becomes a national trend and the youth show up, as they did for Nixon in '68. That could mean a new generation of Dem voters. Problem is I'm not sure they'll be so energized when Hillary is the nominee, but I hope so.
Big John @ 82:
Thanks for the heads up Paulettes, now you can go back to your old program of administration apologies and Rove spin.
myiq2xu @ 24:
Are you kidding me here?! Is it really necessary to attack the female candidate by reducing her to her reproductive body parts? I am sure you could come up with some similarly repulsive nicknames for Obama and Richardson referring to their race/ethnicity...but you probably recognize that would be overtly racist. I guess sexism doesn't matter?
If you don't like Sen. Clinton, try attacking her policy, etc., instead of taking a page from the Limbaugh playbook with this gendered bullshit. I am not even a Clinton supporter, but this kind of anti-intellectual ad hominem attack coming from a purported democrat makes me sick to think this is socially-progressive party...
Abbybwood @ 84:
And the Paulettes make a come back, right on time (late in the thread as always).
Bob would not vote for RP.
I liked you guys better as Repug trolls, do we get you back in that incarnation after the election?
SCliberal @ 95:
Relax, it was only a twist in the blogosphere's nickname for BILL CLinton: Clenis. It points out the right-wing's obsession with (Bill)Clinton's sex life. It wasn't a slam on Hillary's gender.
Symes @ 94:
How you derived administration apologies and Rove spin from the above is astounding. Are you that far off the tracks that everything must fit into your view at all costs?
To make things clear, the point was that diversity in views is good, because that encourages debate. Resorting to comments like 'Paulettes' and using 'talking points' like admin apologies and Rove spin is a step in the opposite direction of throttling debate. You've single-handledly demonstrated the exact intolerance and misdirection that you claim to rail against.
Oh look, it's the 'reasoned' response...
"Obama can't win because he's black".
I don't care how much you dress it up, that's what you're saying.
My short take:
http://mwangangi.blogspot.com/2008/01/short-update.html
Obama lost my support after his speech....He developed a Sunday Preacher voice after he won...They "Saaaaaiidddddd" we couldn't do it....lame and contrived. HE KEEPS VOTING TO FUND THE WAR....HE IS A FRAUD!!!!!! Hillary the corporate whore got more than I would have liked.
EDWARDS 08
Great analysis, Steve.
Love that.
"Who’s right? A little bit of both, actually. Edwards’ strong second-place showing certainly won’t force him from the race, but it’s going to be difficult to boost fundraising and poll numbers in light of Obama’s big win."
This is crap!!! Just wait until a straight up vote is conducted. Iowa has some stupid rules that makes you not vote for who you actually want. Obama is Hype...quit funding the war!!!!
Shadowgm @ 57:
I do believe Edwards could do the very important job of repairing the damage wrought by the Bush regime to the US justice, intelligence, and law enforcement communities - returning them to their more traditional roles as the defenders of American principles like rule of law, equality before the law, instruments of just and intelligently informed policy making/enforcement rather than the strong arm appendages/goon squads of a power drunk cadre of malevolent elites.
I believe Edwards could advance progressive agenda items like restoring the credibility of government agencies charged with upholding/defending the public interest in matters of environmental/trade/public health/and business-financial regulations all intended to promote a strong and healthy milieu for all industrious Americans to transact business with the expectation that there are some common ground rules being followed/enforced and that the path to prosperity is not limited only to those who have 'connections' with corrupt crony capitalist power brokers or that any unethical/harmful/larcenous/criminal behavior can be gotten away with just as long as you made the right campaign contributions.
I believe an Edwards administration could reign in the wastrel insanity of the neo-con and militarist mass murderers who have run amok for far too long with very little gained in the way of increased long term US security but vast gains in profits for those positioned to take financial advantage of the bloodletting.
I do think Edwards could get some important things done that desperately need doing if this country is to be pulled back from the brink of totalist fascism or theocracy.
I don't think he will satisfy every axe grinding lefty kook who has convinced themselves that their unpopular minority rights issue or massive society changing spending program has to be accomplished and everyone gets a pony or he is 'no better than a republican' - but there will always be folks without reasonable expectations and absolutist demands who'd rather see GOP rule forever than compromise.
You guys are all crazy if you think Obama can win in the General Election. Putting him in their as the Democatic Candidate will ensure 8 more years of Republican Rule. good luck!
The BIG problem here, is that we are assuming like a bunch of chumps, that the NeoCon mafia isn't fixing this election.
google the following; "Defense Contractor Iowa counts elections" to see who told us who won.
Yeah, tell yourself, what possibly could go wrong with outsourcing our Democracy to a foreign company that makes money when the US goes to war -- and I'm sure their only interest in voting is because they LOVE Democracy.
Considering the Military Industrial Complex, the Banks, Big Money, Big Pharma
General Electorate Ignorance, and interesting partisan hackery. I think Ron Paul did very well.
As Glenn has noted his success heralds important issues being brought to the table.
Phoenix Justice @ 88:
Southerners may not be liking Romney in the Limo versus Huck in a truck.
Phoenix Justice @ 71:
what religious fervor? have you been paying any attention?
You know who really comes out of the caucuses looking like losers? The pundits. Just like bad weathermen (and -women), they were wrong about virtually everything.
Hillary's the front-runner; Giuliani's the front-runner; no, wait, Romney's the front-runner; Fred Thompson smells like a real man; young people won't turn out; hell, *no one* will turn out because the weather will be bad; the caucuses never draw much interest from Iowans anyway; women (and moderates, and registered Democrats) will overwhelmingly go for Clinton, saving her bacon; Edwards is just too far back in the polls to make any kind of showing, and on and on.
Remember all this scheit? Why should anyone listen to a damn thing any of them say at this point? The "conventional wisdom" was all wrong--as it commonly is because it looks backwards to what *has been,* not what "is." MSNBC, Faux, CNN--just turn off the talking heads. They don't know any more than anyone else does.
Just so all you Dem Party faithful hack trolls know, I am not a Republican, have never been a Republican and am a friend of Naomi Klein, I shit you not. I have opinions about 911 that can not be expressed here as the mods well know. I would take a paul or a nader or a chomsky or a kucinich over a clinton or a bush any day.
I just like people who at least pay lip service to the constitution and the rule of law, who think Iraq was wrong. This is something most politicians and neo fascists hacks from the right and the left avoid like the plague.
the fact that you can't respect opinions other than your own along with your ill chosen vocabulary tells me everything I need to know about you.
DW @ 92:
Phoenix Justice @ 71:
Huh? Any shred of evidence for this statement?
Nah, I just pulled it out of my ass. His own words and actions indicate that he is a religious conservative, no matter what the "impression" you got from his book (which by the way, is why politicians write books, to "spin" an impression on the readers).
Hmmm @ 98:
Easy, in case you missed it you being new here and all (or so it would seem):
Rupg trolls abound on EVERY thread, hundreds at a time for years admin apologizing or attacking progressive posters for years.
Then RP bots show up and POOF! No more Repug trolls ANYWHERE, just Paulettes trying to sell progressives a Repug as the only way.
And the Paulettes are using the Repug tactics, strategies and arguments, imagine that!
Keep trying, I ain't buying.
Just how, I ask, can three small States(Iowa, New Hampshire and S. Carolina) with a
combined electoral vote of 16 or 18, be the "final result" as to which Democrat will
get the Prez. nomination. Sounds/seems absurd to me that three Primaries, in these
three States, are being used by the media as exactly WHO will be the nominee?
Am I missing something or do not the other 48 States have any inpact upon the
results???
JTM @ 87:
It drives me crazy how these Ron Paul supporters conveniently forget that Dennis Kucinich has done far more to uphold and defend the Constitution than RP ever has. He has more integrity than RP and more plans to bring America back to the people. His is also not a corporatist, which RP is.
Phoenix Justice @ 111:
Nah, I just pulled it out of my ass. His own words and actions indicate that he is a religious conservative, no matter what the "impression" you got from his book (which by the way, is why politicians write books, to "spin" an impression on the readers).
It isn't Obama's religiousity that bothers me, it's his ties to corporate lobbyists and big money.
Proud American Liberal @ 114:
I have not forgot...Kucinich would be my first choice, but Dems don't seem to agree.
Iowa is suburban white folks -- that is IF you can trust the counting of the votes, which I think is a stretch. It's a small test tube voting situation and there is a lot of money riding on the press for this little place -- much easier to control for people like herr Rove. So Iowa indicates diddley-squat. It only serves as a platform for Media spin.
The IMPORTANT information to get out of Iowa is to see what stations in the press are saying who won. That will tell you who their corporate masters want to win -- not much more. Then you have to ask; "Why do they want Obama to win" or why not. It's kind of like asking; "Why did Kerrey, the most lack-luster Democrat get the stamp of approval from the Media, and then immediately capitulate?" We already have real facts from the 18 month prison slap on election fraud in Ohio to show that the 2004 election was won by Kerrey -- not even counting all the other states that had election fraud that has yet to be proven because no Federal prosecutors are on the job.
>> The media serves 3 purposes now;
1) It is used as propaganda to sell us things. Candidates, cars, and that we can keep spending money without problems.
2) It is used as a platform for corporate entities to communicate. You may wonder who the Republicans or Hillary are trying to impress -- they are interviewing to the corporations while they tip-toe around the people. Anyone for the war is telling GM; "More profits, buddy!" Now, go watch the debates and they will make sense.
3) It is used to dishearten and frighten you. The reason Bush says bald face lies that nobody but the most deluded believe, is because by saying it, he let's everyone know that he is unimpeachable. That they cannot trust information. We thought it was a victory to find out about the torture at Abu Ghraib and GitMo,... but WHO could have had the videos and gotten them out? What purpose does it serve the "good guys" to learn of something and then watch as the investigation goes nowhere and nothing is done about it. Abu Ghraib still tortures. But then again -- what is the point of torture if nobody knows about it? The shopkeeper who was waterboarded doesn't have information. But that we know they can and will torture someone is what is important.
Ask yourself what have we won. Who has gone to jail? What rules has BushCo put in place, knowing full well that the next president gets to use them? They have committed so many crimes that any reasonably honest, open court system would find them guilty enough to never see sunlight again. Are these the sort of people to take risks with their own hide?
We need to push as much as we can to help our favorite Dems win the election -- but I also think people need to understand that it may also be an empty gesture. The 2008 election may already be in the can, and this whole horse race is to make us think we had some effect on the process.
Big John @ 110:
>> Big John,
You come out guns blazing. "Everyone" is not coming down on you. But you seem like you are spoiling for a fight...
... I say this as someone who sees Ron Paul as intellectual refuge for people who think it was the George Bush shtick that failed America, and not is laissez fair market attitude which is the same as Ron Paul's "let the government do nothing" Libertarian stance.
You are far from the only one paying attention to who was for or against the war.
Symes @ 112:
That's a fascinating history lesson for the website. It's also completely unrelated to the issue I put forth, that diversity of opinion is good as a means of encouraging debate.
If you're not buying that, then you're beyond hope. Enjoy your never-changing worldview in all of it's glorious superiority and correctness. Personally I'll take the other road of listening, learning, adapting and growing.
pissed off patricia @ 1:
I agree! Has there been any discussion between the camps as to whether it's possible?
I doesn't sound like any of the front runners are planner on teaming up which to me
is selfish and suicidal. We need all the election power we can get.
I know Hillary would NEVER be Obama's VP and that's her loss.
She's not going to get the nomination.
Big John @ 116:
You mean the Media, that pretends to put Liberals on TV seems to think Kucinich is not our first choice. Of the opinions expressed by MOST people who consider themselves Democrats, Kucinich is MOST in line with what we believe. Hillary and Obama, while they have rhetoric and candy fluff that SOUNDS Democratic, don't really have positions that are in line with what MOST Americans want. We want investigations of corruption, a quick pullout from Iraq, and, oh yeah, end to the drug war and at least all children with health care in this nation. Those are populist platforms which the MEDIA spins as fringe positions for Edwards and Kucinich.
Again, it is the MEDIA that is telling everyone what they think, despite what everyone actually thinks. This used to work, but slowly and surely, everyone is starting to figure out that the News Media is the same group that sells us Dog Food we don't want or need.
Phillip @ 85:
I disagree,
Huckabee will merely adjust his media strategy to win over the non-theo-fascist contingent of GOP voters if he gets the nomination by softening his JESUS!-flat-earther-ban-abortion-anti-evolution/science rhetoric and replacing it with lower taxes, 'we should punish the sub-min-wage earning immigrants' xenophobe buddy bonding head nodding sessions with Lou Dobbs and every hooting monkey over at FoxNews , TERRORISTS are lurking under every trailer and behind every bush, the 'I'm going to SAVE America from the godless socialist labor union slob commie pinko atheist gay-marrying-jew-miscegenationizing blue state coastal liberal effeminate smart-assed yankee traitors!' message will be re-codified into less obvious language and then warmly praised by the MSM in every Huckabee interview as being a man with his finger on the true pulse of American 'values' and 'in touch' with the concerns of mainstream Americans.
The religious right voters already KNOW he's their guy (for real this time). He will have a year to get the 'I have always voted republican because: A) I hate cadillac driving welfare moms B)I hate paying taxes C) I hate the smell of patchouli D) I hate smart-assed egg head scientists and professor-types E) I hate women who aren't submissive F) I hate minorities G) I hate foreigners H) I hate anyone who has it better than me (unionized labor benefits) I) I LOVE Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and agree with everything they say...etcetera...' There is a very large swath of the population whose vote will be ripe for the picking (again) if the GOP & Corporate Media can deftly manipulate the fear and hatred that motivates many to run into the arms of anyone who sells themselves as 'tough' or else successfully vilifies their competitor as 'weak' against whatever fear-du-jour has been ridiculously blown out of all proportion lately (Max Cleland anyone?). Crown that tactic with a bunch of promises to be 'fiscally responsible & keep the tax cuts' and the wall street republicans will flip that elephant lever too.
Basically, I don't think the fact that Huckabee is a bat-shit crazy JESUS nut will wind up hurting him much with the 'GOP for other reasons' voters. The "big money and the corporate elite is scared to death" MORE of any progressive who might start curbing some of their crazy excess or perhaps try and gore one of their oxen (healthcare/energy policy/war) - Huckabee will just start stroking that 'power base' during the regular campaign and they will purr.
I think Edwards might be able to chisel away a few percent of the less rabid above described voter types and that might mean the difference between 'Armageddon Now!' and 'Time for the grown-ups to clean up this mess'.
Hmmm @ 119:
Wrong, it is exactly what I am on about and you are in typical RP troll fashion attempting to sideline it.
So after the election will you go back to being a Repug troll spouting the party line again? Like I said, I liked that better then this faux concerned citizen act.
Symes @ 112:
>> Damn, and I thought I was the only GENIUS who noticed this.
Yeah, Ron Paul is an alternative like Mussolini for Hitler. RP is the same Globalist sink or swim, indentured servitude crap that we had with Bush, minus the paint of religiosity.
The point is, that government is spending our future like a credit card in the hands of a crack addict all on corporate welfare. RP's ideas would merely close the barn after the corporations left the horse at the glue factory -- there isn't much left to steal in this country. You get it?
The ONLY way America can compete is to charge tariffs on imports, use progressive taxation (meaning NOTHING on the middle class or lower), and provide infrastructure so that all Americans can be healthy, can communicate, learn, and travel as much as they need to. After the BASICS are take care of, then let all the entrepreneurs and executives fight for the most bucks. But the basics of Life, Liberty and the freedom to be Happy requires either money or infrastructure. In many places, you can't be FREE without a lot of money, today.
The number of smart people who want to move into America is getting smaller. Our regressive rights policies, our declining dollar, and our thuggish foreign policy are making America look ugly. We need a Jimmy Carter or and FDR. But first, we need American's to learn that Reagonomics and Conservatism in general, have been a massive scam on the middle class masquerading as a philosophy.
Kucinich legal counsel no matter who wins!! :)
WMK @ 122:
>> I don't think I could have said it better.
My mom is helping Obama's campaign. But I can't risk another 4 years on a "John Kerrey substitute" -- it's darn easy to SAY you like Democracy, but ONLY Kucinich and Edwards have ever fought for it. The media, has been positioning Hillary and Obama since 2006, because THEY are the easiest for a Republican to beat. Especially since they will just TELL the people that the REASONABLE choice is whomever is the most Corporate amongst the candidates.
I'll take Obama over Hillary ... but why risk it? Edwards has the most edge over ALL Republicans, and he has the benefit of having fought against corporations. With Kucinich as a VP, he would probably stay healthy, if you know what I mean.
That's assuming that electronic voting and fraud won't steal the elections again.
Symes @ 123:
Who are you to paint me as a Ron Paul troll or a 'repug'? Did I ever address any of his issues and agree with them, other than to say that A) they are different than the mainstream, B) he should be allowed and encouraged to express his unconventional opinion in order to encourage meaningful debate, and C) he's done a better job than the other candidates and media of bringing some sticky issues some attention.
Frankly I don't give a rip what act you think I'm putting on. The fact is you're downright hostile to any other opinion than your own. That's great in the kindergarten playground when little Jimmy takes your GI Joe, but not real effective elsewhere. Try listening and reacting like a grownup instead cutting and pasting more repug, Rove, Ron Paul, admin attacks.
Unbelievable that as simple a concept as variety in opinion is a good thing is so hard to understand.
I'm done with you, you're unwilling to exercise any reason or logic.
Marge @ 7:
You make some valid points, but your characterization of "real voters" is pretty offensive. We at least pretend in this country that every vote counts equally, regardless of the age of the voter or the method of transportation used to arrive at the polling spot.
Also, you complain that Obama says he's for change, but doesn't specify what that means, yet you do the same thing by calling him an opportunist with no supporting documentation. If this is true, we would all benefit from an examination of the evidence.
Right now, it seems more likely that he is just "not your guy" (which is certainly your right to decide) and that you are simply taking potshots.
The tone of conversation from a number of posters surprises me. I'm not trying to be combative here, but would just really appreciate some serious, thoughtful discussion about the historic events we're living through, rather than snark and divisiveness.
This election is going to be a watershed moment in deciding the future of this country and it seems to me that we owe it to ourselves and to our country not to get sucked into childish fights over personality cults but to really try to make an educated and thoughtful decision about who gets elected to the highest office in the land.
Let me second that question, Mr. D! It's not bad enough that the corporate media get to covertly torpedo the person(s) of their choice right out of the gate, (Edwards Who?) but the candidates must then endure an essentially skewed circus o' crap to see who survives to raise funds another day? (While I'm happy that Mr. Obama can pick up votes from Republicans and Independents, I'm not so blithe about those people selecting "our" Democratic candidate before I even get a voice in the matter.)
And we do this just because this so-called system "growed that way?"
We need something truly scientific instead of Iowa, like flipping coins or shooting dice. Or mebbe we put all the candidates on this desert island, see, with "tribes" for each party. Then....
Hmmm @ 127:
Try again troll.
This pretending to be something else then sliding right into the RP troll rhetoric is an perfect exampl of what I am talking about.
I am hostile to disingenuous little Repugs playing progressive on the adult boards. RP supporters fit the bill and your repeated chanting of his praises marks you as yet another one.
Combined with your admission that you are new here, just in time to sing in the RP choir no doubt, places you square into the troll camp.
So are you going to start apologizing for Shrub again or do you guys consider him a lost cause?
Manila Ryce @ 31:
Oh, SNAP! Couldn't have said it better myself.
However, might I add, there's a bit of self-fulfilling prophecy involved with Kucinich. I bet a lot of those Edwards/Obama voters wanted to, in their hearts, vote for Kucinich. But they know what the rest of the country would think when it came to the general election-he's a dork (even if his wife is smart and hot) and "I ain't gonna vote for no queer-lover who thinks smokin' weed shouldn't be a crime, and doesn't even come up to my chin."
So they vote for what they think is the next best thing. I don't include Hillary, because anyone dumb enough to support her has never considered Kucinich.
Did Obama get his win from the delegates Kucinich promised to release (or to have them all vote Obama 2nd choice)? Beating Hilary and coming in 2nd to Obama is a solid first day for Edwards.. I don't know why people keeping coun ting him out...he's in for the long hall.
The 10% that Ron Paul got proves how the Republican core is falterng... hopefully it'll move the debates in the right direct.
Why would anyone want to support Rudy after Tuesday..knwing that you will turn one red state blue and assure the second one into the blue column by his "blowing off" those states? Rudy is in DEP trouble...
Symes @ 130:
QED
And if he wins all three, the race is over.
Hardly. From Jesse Wendel at the GroupNews Blog:
After New Hampshire comes Michigan one week later on Jan 15. Obama and Edwards like absolute idiots sat out Michigan because Michigan jumped the DNC rules on when you can hold primaries, and ran to the front of the line. But the DNC's suspension of delegates won't hold up; Michigan's delegates will be allowed to vote in the Convention, so Hillary will get all of them, as Obama and Edwards didn't put their name in the hat. Again, idiots.
Here the rest of the post
Here's a link to the state by state breakdown in the upcoming primaries. As Jesse points out Florida which is on the same day as South Carolina is already a win for Hillary since Obama and Edwards did there what they did in Michigan.
2 major mistakes by both candidates automatically puts Hillary ahead in the game
Symes @ 112:
This is such a lie.
People who have supported Dr. Paul have been respectful.
You come across as an angry partisan, with a closed mind.
Johnny2Bad @ 62:
I believe you mean Howard Baker. Reagan always was an empty suit.
Abbybwood @ 85:
AND the horse you rode in on. You got TEN PERCENT. You lost to a guy who thinks the world is 6000 years old. You are incapable of taking the libertarian train of thought to it's inevitable conclusion. You believe in free market fairy dust. It's not a matter of what I say, you can vote for SATAN for all the fuck I care, but your guy ain't goin' nowhere. Nobody is buying your bullshit.
Hmmm @ 99:
Blow me Paulette. You can't even fucking read.
Hmmm @ 134:
Ahh, so I am to revert back to my newbie days and actually DEBATE a troll about the relative merits of his Repug here on a progressive blog.
You are way too late for that. If you want to discuss how a Repug might be a good thing for the country you are so in the wrong place. Been there done that and now I and most others here will just call you guys the names you USED to call us for so many years until you decided to pretend to be concerned citizens selling us another Repug as though that were a reasonable thing.
We do debate, and I am willing to debate any progressive policy or policy makers relative merits.
I am just going to call you names if you want to try to sell me another Repug.
Is this too much for you to comprehend?
Drop the concerned citizen crap and debate about progressives, Repugs are gong to get kicked outright.
Talcott @ 136:
So speaketh the Paulette.
Hmmm @ 120:
Fuck you and your diversity of opinion. Ron Paul has NO NEW IDEAS. They might be new to YOU but they aren't new. There has ALWAYS been a crank like Ron on the Horizon and they usually perform as well as Paul in a large election. Ron Paul is almost as intellectually honest as Tom Delay. Conservative thought, unlike what conservatives think, has NEVER not been represented in the media. Conservatives had to BUY all media outlets in order to be close enough to steal the 2000 election. So, fuck you, you fucking Ronbot.
Talcott @ 136:
BTW - I love how you chopped my quote to use it against me.
When are you going to drop the act and go back to being a Repug troll again? That was so much more entertaining than this lame act.
Americans love an underdog. This loss might be the best thing that could happen for Hil.
Again, Bill never went to Iowa, lost New Hampshire, didn't win a primary until Georgia in March and ultimately became the nominee. That was a year much like this year, none of the Democrats really stood out and seemed like an inevitable choice.
Symes @ 143:
Talcott @ 136:
Fuck off with your Dr. Paul bullshit. That asshole is such an idiot that he thinks life begins at conception and that fetuses have rights. Was the egg not "alive"? How about the sperm cell that got there first? Was it not "alive"? Stupid fucker. Just like his idiot supporters. Fuck republicans. Of course that means I am simply angry and can be dismissed, right? It couldn't have anything to do with the Republicans dismantling Democracy in the last 40 years. Nope. I'm just ANGRY for no reason.
Question Blog @ 2:
Doubtful. Richardson was born in Mexico, his mother is Mexican. He favors opening the border and letting everyone from Latin America come here. If the Democrats do that, democracy in America is over and it appears that the younger generation is totally in favor of it. They hate baby boomers because they think we're going to bankrupt the country with SS, but somehow they don't realize that if millions of uneducated, unskilled hispanics come here, there will be no opportunities for the traditional American middle class and the people who do pay taxes will have to pay more taxes to cover the cost of extending social services to low-paid hispanic workers who have no work-related benefits.
Or, the Democrats will put all of the hispanics on "a path to citizenship" in which case they will lose their low-paid jobs and be totally dependent on welfare. The corps will find a new crop of destitute people to work for nothing, but America will be over. I think this is what will happen. then, Canada will be constructing a wall to keep indigenous U. S. Americans out.
Talcott @ 145:
Marge @ 7:
Maybe the MSM has touted Obama so much because Republicans really are afraid of either Hillary of Edwards. I can imagine the corporations are scared of a trial lawyer who has successfully held them accountable for their many transgressions over a period of many years and I believe Hillary would be better than Obama. She has had experience and Obama just seems so arrogant and opportunistic.
bob @ 13:
Actually, while we're nitpicking, decimate does mean what both of you say.
dec·i·mate
(ds-mt)
tr.v. dec·i·mat·ed, dec·i·mat·ing, dec·i·mates
1. To destroy or kill a large part of (a group).
2. Usage Problem
a. To inflict great destruction or damage on: The fawns decimated my rose bushes.
b. To reduce markedly in amount: a profligate heir who decimated his trust fund.
3. To select by lot and kill one in every ten of.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/decimated
Login or Register to post comments.