U.S. Election '08: Race to the Conventions

[KukriKhan]

After consulting with several of the usual posters in the previous US election-threads, consensus was reached that we would keep US election-related information in a single thread - at least until the major party conventions in late summer.

So: here it is.

I'll now close the other threads.

Happy hunting. May the best candidate win!

[KukriKhan]

p.s. Moderators can add and remove polls, as requested. So let us know if you think one (poll) is appropriate.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Funny story, Clinton loaned her campaign $5 Million from her personal fortune yesterday, and Obama raised $6.5 Million through donations yesterday. The next 10 states favor him pretty heavily two. Most of them are either caucases or heavily black states.

[Lemur]

You can read up on Billary's sleazy contributors here. Good article.

[Vladimir]

Obama: The lesser of the two greater evils.

[Lemur]

Obama: The lesser of the two greater evils.

So sayeth the people who voted for George W. Bush twice.

Good video interview with Richard Brookheiser, Senior Editor of National Review.

-edit-

A couple of threads ago, Xiahou linked to National Journal's predictable press release that Obama and Hillary are teh most liberal Senators evar. He also linked to what they claimed was their methodology, which just happens to result in the Dem frontrunners being the most liberal people two presidential campaigns in a row. Doubtless they'll do the same thing in 2012, since it's working so well for them.

I linked to a liberal group, which also monitors Senate votes for the benefit of its granola-eating constituency, and which came to very different conclusions. Xiahou denounced this as "linking to a liberal blog," sniffed meningfully, re-donned his ascot and went back to his cognac.

To once again demonstrate how empty the National Journal's rankings are, I now present you with the American Conservative Union's ratings. Of particular interest: Their Senate Standouts. Note that their "Best of the Best" and "Worst of the Worst" don't include any of the candidates currently running for office. Interesting, is it not, that a group devoted to conservatism would arrive at such variant conclusions?

So we have the possibility that National Journal is just doing honest vote counts, and somehow wound up nominating the Democratic frontrunners as the most liberal Senators ever; or we have the possibility that National Journal (a well-respected magazine in a state of perpetual subscriber decline) got a nice bump when its ratings were used as national talking points four years ago, and is looking for the same thing this year.

[Vladimir]

Damn, I go to sleep and miss all this? I haven't heard the fat man Limbaugh insults in ages. When you have nothing else go after someone's (outdated) appearance I guess.

[Xiahou]

Damn, I go to sleep and miss all this? I haven't heard the fat man Limbaugh insults in ages. When you have nothing else go after someone's (outdated) appearance I guess.

To my knowledge, Lemur has never made mention of Limbaugh without some sort of fat reference. He's cool like that.
I do live how he gives the original author of the "magical negro" story a pass and attributes all of the racism connotations to the person who parodied it.

Translation for my California friends: No n-bombs of any kind allowed here.

Just for clarity, are we now saying "negro" is a prohibited word?

[Vladimir]

To my knowledge, Lemur has never made mention of Limbaugh without some sort of far reference. He's cool like that.
I do live how he gives the original author of the "magical negro" story a pass and attributes all of the racism connotations to the person who parodied it.

Just for clarity, are we now saying "negro" is a prohibited word?

Oh come now, do you really need excuses for cribbing from Rush Limbaugh? 'Cause let's face it, the L.A. Times didn't popularize the connection; the fat boy did.

Ye lord, how misinformation takes on a life of its own. Here's the timeline:

March of 2007, L.A. Times columnist David Ehrenstein writes a column about how he thinks Obama fits into the Magical Negro archetype. FWIW, Ehrenstein is a black man.

Never one to miss a chance to dance on the edge of a racial slur, fat boy Rush Limbaugh has a song recorded to the tune of Puff the Magic Dragon, in which an impersonator plays Al Sharpton bemoaning the rise of Obama, the "magic negro." Because a black dude said it first, he gets away with it.

And now people think Al Sharpton actually sang it. Ugh. A lie goes 'round the world while the truth is still getting its shoes on.

I assure you, rvg, that song came directly from Rush Limbaugh's show. And shocker of shockers, that isn't really Al Sharpton singing. Don't trust me, Google it for yourself.

Lemur on roid rage. This was originally a harmless, innocent little lemur too.

[Lemur]

Heaven forfend that I should speak disparagingly of an authoritarian demagogue who never appears in any setting except one he controls, who tolerates no guests who don't agree with him, and whose talking points are repeated endlessly by the faithful as gospel truth. As for pointing out his obesity, may I remind you that this is a man who advocates self-reliance and self-control, and yet he allows himself to be grossly fat. Let's not even start on the addiction to drugs, the lenient treatment for same, and the contradiction with his lock-em-all-up rhetoric.

Demagogues annoy me. Hypocritical authoritarian ideologues who call themselves "conservative" annoy me even more.

Now if either of you authoritarians would care to get back to talking about the Presidential race, we're all ears.

[Vladimir]

Heaven forfend that I should speak disparagingly of an authoritarian demagogue who never appears in any setting except one he controls, who tolerates no guests who don't agree with him, and whose talking points are repeated endlessly by the faithful as gospel truth. As for pointing out his obesity, may I remind you that this is a man who advocates self-reliance and self-control, and yet he allows himself to be grossly fat. Let's not even start on the addiction to drugs, the lenient treatment for same, and the contradiction with his lock-em-all-up rhetoric.

Demagogues annoy me. Hypocritical authoritarian ideologues who call themselves "conservative" annoy me even more.

Now if either of you authoritarians would care to get back to talking about the Presidential race, we're all ears.

Current year: 2008

Year on the Lemur callender: 1989.

When's the last time you heard the show much less saw a picture of the man. Should I take his rants more seriously than yours?

[Louis VI the Fat]

Do I vote for Hillary, to keep her campaign going and poison the Democrats in the national election (Virginia is going to go GOP anyway)?

Wait a second...so that was what Seamus was up to.

That sneaky bastard! He sold me his vote. He promised to vote Hillary in the primary in exchange for certain...services rendered. Now I understand why, Hillary doesn't stand a chance in Virginia.

I've been had!

[Lemur]

A video of one of those emotional, illogical Obama supporters. Very amusing, actually.

-edit-

And as long as I'm being contrarian, here's a good essay about McCain's conservatism.

Self-proclaimed conservative purists also attack McCain for his vote to block drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge. It was for this affront that Romney labeled McCain as being outside the conservative mainstream. Once again, it was McCain who was true to conservative principles and Romney who was off-base. Barry Goldwater, the founder of the modern conservative movement, devoted an entire lengthy chapter in his book “The Conscience of a Majority” to “Saving the Earth”. Russell Kirk, one of conservatism’s leading scholars, wrote: “the modern spectacle of vanished forests and eroded lands . . . is evidence of what an age without veneration does to itself and its successors.”

Over and over again, John McCain has found himself attacked by self-enthroned “conservative leaders” who have no clue as to what conservatism is really all about.

[Vladimir]

Obama the prophet.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

This kind of sale is hardly new. Organized religion has been offering a similar commodity — salvation — for millennia. Which is why the Obama campaign has the feel of a religious revival with, as writer James Wolcott observed, a “salvational fervor” and “idealistic zeal divorced from any particular policy or cause and chariot-driven by pure euphoria.”

[Xiahou]

Here's an IBD editorial on Obama that gave me a chuckle.

If this presidential thing doesn't work out, Obama might consider joining the NASCAR circuit. It's the only occupation we can think of where you win by turning faster to the left than anybody else.

The biggest upside to a McCain-Obama race that comes to mind is the schooling that McCain will give Obama on foreign policy debates. That should make for some good TV.

[Lemur]

What do you care, Xiahou? It's not as though you support McCain either. I'm kinda at a loss to see your interest in this contest, seeing as nobody meets the conservative purity test.

And I'm thrilled to see that you've gone from quoting the National Journal's MOST LIBRUL EVAR! article to quoting articles that quote the National Journal. This is probably the most publicity NJ gets per decade.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Lemur - you are going to see a big about face on opinions about mccain in the near future by conservatives.

Once a one on one campaign gets underway conservatives will support mccain. I knew this all along, but i wanted to put in a big fight before he won the nod. Huckabee is a tool, so McCain pretty much has it.

If a third party runs again (like a nader or bloomberg) we will have some serious advantages. If Clinton is the nominee, those third party runners will be almost inevitable AND the democratic party will be in shambles. It will be the most humiliating defeat that they have ever experienced in a general election.

Who would have thought that just 2 months of primaries could reveal holes in the hull just bebeath the surface. The mighty democratic ship of inevitabilty may just be a potemkin.

[KukriKhan]

Once a one on one campaign gets underway conservatives will support mccain. I knew this all along, but i wanted to put in a big fight before he won the nod.

I admit... you had me fooled. "He's just like my Dad; I love this guy!", are some of the words I remember, and 'tool' being hurled at McCain (and others).

When I heard the story on the radio that Romney had endorsed McCain, I immediately thought: "OMG, Tuffy's gonna be spittin' nails mad by the time I get home!".

Didn't happen.

So, actually, rather than an idealistic young conservative supporter of a staunch conservative, what you are is a hard-knuckle, realpolitik capital-R Republican.

Nothing wrong with that; and much to be admired. It's just that I'll take your expressed youthful, emotional exuberance for any candidate with an extra grain of salt, from now on.

So, thanks for the revelation.

[Xiahou]

What do you care, Xiahou? It's not as though you support McCain either. I'm kinda at a loss to see your interest in this contest, seeing as nobody meets the conservative purity test.

I don't support McCain, but vs Obama, I could see myself maybe voting for him. Against Hillary... I don't feel as pressing a need. She's tougher on foreign policy, and outside abortion, shares a fair number of his views (according to track record and not the red meat she throws at the primary voters). She would have the added bonus of letting us get a GOP do-over in 4yrs as opposed to 8yrs should McCain win.

And I'm thrilled to see that you've gone from quoting the National Journal's MOST LIBRUL EVAR! article to quoting articles that quote the National Journal. This is probably the most publicity NJ gets per decade.

And I'm glad to see you're still dismissing it out of hand despite it being conducted in a blind/impartial manner.

[Lemur]

Yeah, I can see how Hillary Clinton would be exactly your kind of politician. And by that same token, I can see how McCain and Obama would not be your cup of tea. Party before nation, eh?

As for the joy you take in National Journal's talking points, I'm not going to suggest that you budge from a sound byte that serves you so well, but you might want to do some other reading sometime.There are people who actually research what legislators do, and I'm not aware of any of them suggesting that Obama is TEH MOST LIBRUL EVAR. Although I suppose some of the "conservative" purveyors will change their tune if he gets the nomination, just as some left-wing sites are now slamming McCain.

I do follow legislation, at least on some issues, and I have been surprised by how often Senator Obama turns up, sponsoring or co-sponsoring really good legislation on some topic that isn't wildly sexy, but does matter. His bills tend to have the following features: they are good and thoughtful bills that try to solve real problems; they are in general not terribly flashy; and they tend to focus on achieving solutions acceptable to all concerned, not by compromising on principle, but by genuinely trying to craft a solution that everyone can get behind.

His legislation is often proposed with Republican co-sponsorship, which brings me to another point: he is bipartisan in a good way. According to me, bad bipartisanship is the kind practiced by Joe Lieberman. Bad bipartisans are so eager to establish credentials for moderation and reasonableness that they go out of their way to criticize their (supposed) ideological allies and praise their (supposed) opponents. They also compromise on principle, and when their opponents don't reciprocate, they compromise some more, until over time their positions become indistinguishable from those on the other side.

This isn't what Obama does. Obama tries to find people, both Democrats and Republicans, who actually care about a particular issue enough to try to get the policy right, and then he works with them. This does not involve compromising on principle. It does, however, involve preferring getting legislation passed to having a spectacular battle. (This is especially true when one is in the minority party, especially in this Senate: the chances that Obama's bills will actually become law increase dramatically when he has Republican co-sponsors.)

So my little data point is: while Obama has not proposed his Cosmic Plan for World Peace, he has proposed a lot of interesting legislation on important but undercovered topics. I can't remember another freshman Senator who so routinely pops up when I'm doing research on some non-sexy but important topic, and pops up because he has proposed something genuinely good. Since I think that American politics doesn't do nearly enough to reward people who take a patient, craftsmanlike attitude towards legislation, caring as much about fixing the parts that no one will notice until they go wrong as about the flashy parts, I wanted to say this. Specifics below the fold.

-edit-

By way of contrast, an examination of his Illinois record.

[Vladimir]

And one of them is running for president!

Hussein

Bloody hell! Can someone eliminate the apostrophe from the title?

[Xiahou]

And one of them is running for president!

Hussein

Bloody hell! Can someone eliminate the apostrophe from the title?

That guy, Obama's "spiritual mentor", is a huge liability for him.

Sen. Barack Obama's pastor says blacks should not sing "God Bless America" but "God damn America."

Unbelievable really. That meshes very nicely with Obama's hope and change rhetoric. The video of it is plays even better.

Another bit of dirt that I look forward to hearing more about is Obama's million dollar earmarks that he allegedly requested in 2006 for his wife's employer.

[Vladimir]

None of it matters though because that fool of an old man the Republicans offered up has vowed not run a negative campaign. This guy is so ripe for it, but I can see it backfiring.

[Xiahou]

None of it matters though because that fool of an old man the Republicans offered up has vowed not run a negative campaign. This guy is so ripe for it, but I can see it backfiring.

That's what 527s are for. McCain can publicly condemn them while they do his dirty work for him. I'm sure he knows all about it- he wrote our ridiculous campaign finance laws.

[Vladimir]

That's what 527s are for. McCain can publicly condemn them while they do his dirty work for him. I'm sure he knows all about it- he wrote our ridiculous campaign finance laws.

True. The plot thickens.

[CountArach]

None of it matters though because that fool of an old man the Republicans offered up has vowed not run a negative campaign. This guy is so ripe for it, but I can see it backfiring.

How is a negative campaign EVER good for an election?

[Vladimir]

How is a negative campaign EVER good for an election?

Because it gets you the win.

Just listening to the news. Apparently this Obama's mentor also blamed America's moral state for the 9/11 attacks. When Falwell used the God's wrath line and blamed homosexuals, leftists gnashed their teeth and tore at their clothes until he apologized.

I don't care about some European socialist who trash talks the country (you're supposed to rag on the other team, right?) but when someone who isn't proud of their country, in less they're trying to control it, or attends these kinds of services, or does a handful of other things to show contempt for this country, then it's personal.

Truly the most liberal senator.

[PanzerJaeger]

[Vladimir]

Not exactly Obama girl.

[Lemur]

A look at the money:

In the month of February, [John McCain] raised just under $11 million, compared to $34 million for Clinton and $55 million for Obama.The numbers get worse when you look at the whole election cycle: in total, McCain has raised just $64 million, less than half of Clinton's $170 million, and a third of Obama's $193 million.

But what's most striking is the debt. The Clinton campaign has amassed a staggering $8.7 million worth, double McCain's $4.3 million. Obama, on the other hand, owes only $625,000. By campaign standards, he's debt free.