U.S. Elections 2008: General Elections -- Analysis and Commentary

[Louis VI the Fat]

The formula for conservatives anywhere in America (correction, GOP/Republicans/neocon policy supporters, true conservatives are Dem at this point) is Groupthink + Projection. Anything they do, they imagine we do worse, and insist it loudly on airwaves and forums until it becomes de facto fact.

Why, I tend to agree.

In the mind of the conservatives, still the Democrats are the Big Government party. Yet America's Big Government party has been the Republicans for three decades now. Decrease taxes, increase expenditure, pass the bill on to the next generation and après moi, le déluge.
Conservatism in America is a big plasma television on credit, four SUV's for America's millionaires, and the calm assurance of outstanding moral quality by oppossing gays and abortion. Family values? That is Republican newspeak for mortgaging your children to the Chinese and Arabs.

[Don Corleone]

First, Koga... How about a link to Dick Cheney stealing ballot boxes across Ohio and Pennsylvania. If it's 1/10th as common as you claim, you should be able to find a story about it someplace besides the DailyKos.

But then again, if you're letting Tribesman lead you by the nose, by all means, follow his example. Cast dispersions on other people's sources until you're blue in the face, but never, ever, not once cite one of your own. Yep, that's true credibility.

Louis, you wound me to the core. Sadly you are correct. There are no fiscal conservatives in the race, and frankly, there were scant few in the primaries either. The one thing, other than gales of laughter, Ron Paul offered the race was talk about balanced budgets and debt repayment. Sadly, even this is gone now too.

I think I'm going to vote in the election and refuse to pick a presidential candidate.

[Koga No Goshi]

First, Koga... How about a link to Dick Cheney stealing ballot boxes across Ohio and Pennsylvania. If it's 1/10th as common as you claim, you should be able to find a story about it someplace besides the DailyKos.

But then again, if you're letting Tribesman lead you by the nose, by all means, follow his example. Cast dispersions on other people's sources until you're blue in the face, but never, ever, not once cite one of your own. Yep, that's true credibility.

Louis, you wound me to the core. Sadly you are correct. There are no fiscal conservatives in the race, and frankly, there were scant few in the primaries either. The one thing, other than gales of laughter, Ron Paul offered the race was talk about balanced budgets and debt repayment. Sadly, even this is gone now too.

I think I'm going to vote in the election and refuse to pick a presidential candidate.

Did I even mention Dick Cheney?

I'm not letting anyone lead me around by the nose, there are a zillion books on election fraud, many of them even written by ex-Republican operatives. Anyone who wasn't in a partisan coma throughout 2000 and 2004 knew it was happening.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/sto...n_stolen/print

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0411/S00142.htm

http://www.oilempire.us/exitpolls.html

http://www.eriposte.com/election04/2004_results_1.htm

http://robola.wordpress.com/2006/04/...lection-fraud/

There's a ton more out there.

[Don Corleone]

Did I even mention Dick Cheney?

I'm not letting anyone lead me around by the nose, there are a zillion books on election fraud, many of them even written by ex-Republican operatives. Anyone who wasn't in a partisan coma throughout 2000 and 2004 knew it was happening.

You said it was widespread and organized GOP ballot stealing and voter turnaway programs. Put your money where your mouth is. I injected Dick Cheney because isn't he Darth Vader in your universe?

Instead of just saying "a zillion books..." how about you actually offer some verifiable testimony to it?

[Koga No Goshi]

You said it was widespread and organized GOP ballot stealing and voter turnaway programs. Put your money where your mouth is. I injected Dick Cheney because isn't he Darth Vader in your universe?

Instead of just saying "a zillion books..." how about you actually offer some verifiable testimony to it?

Well my mom's whole family is from Ohio, and in their Democratic voting district they stood in line until past 11pm because of "broken machines and not enough paper ballots", besides the wealth of online research and books, what the heck are you asking for? In some districts more Bush votes were tabulated than there were even registered voters in the district. This is well known funny business.

http://wilsonhellie.typepad.com/for_...ava_kathe.html

yet another.

The fact that these all occurred in states with, at the time, Republican control of state government, were important swing states, and all the shifts went from Dem leads to Bush wins, should be highly suspicious to someone not just engaging in partisan damage control and denial.

http://www.amazon.com/What-Happened-...d_rhf_f_t_cs_3

One example:
Total number of votes received by Bush in Gahanna, Ohio, Ward 1B: 4,258
• Total number of ballots cast in Gahanna, Ohio, Ward 1B: 638

[Don Corleone]

Well my mom's whole family is from Ohio, and in their Democratic voting district they stood in line until past 11pm because of "broken machines and not enough paper ballots", besides the wealth of online research and books, what the heck are you asking for? In some districts more Bush votes were tabulated than there were even registered voters in the district. This is well known funny business.

http://wilsonhellie.typepad.com/for_...ava_kathe.html

yet another.

The fact that these all occurred in states with, at the time, Republican control of state government, were important swing states, and all the shifts went from Dem leads to Bush wins, should be highly suspicious to someone not just engaging in partisan damage control and denial.

http://www.amazon.com/What-Happened-...d_rhf_f_t_cs_3

One example:
Total number of votes received by Bush in Gahanna, Ohio, Ward 1B: 4,258
• Total number of ballots cast in Gahanna, Ohio, Ward 1B: 638

Your first source actually makes the DailyKos look balanced and well-reasoned by comparison. It will cite Al Jazeera as a news source, as well as Al Babawa, the World Socialist the Center for American Progress and The Nation (the self-described Flagship of the Left), yet cannot bring itself to cite award winning periodicals such as the Wall Street Journal.

Your second source is a book by a candidate from the Green Party (Fatrakis) and the head of Greenpeace (Wasserman). Nope, no bias there....

Just as I suspected, no objective, verifiable evidence at all.

Seriously, find something from the Atlantic or the Washington Post... lefty rags that I actually have some faith in.

Edit: I apologize, this is probably a little aggressive on my response for somebody with a fairly recent return. It's something of a Backroom expecation that when you levy a claim against a public figure, you'll supply some objective links to provide evidence. The sources you cite are pretty Leftist, but if it makes you feel any better, FoxNews typically isn't accepted either. Neither is National Review, and if I were to take issue, it would be with that. National Review does have a slant, all publications do, but it's a quality periodical, as is the Atlantic, which has a left slant, but is also a quality journal.

The website you cited, and the links it provides on its page, are nothing of the sort. Sorry.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Ah yes. So many elections have swung our way because of institutionalized voter fraud. Isn't that guy who used to run elections in Ohio in Federal prison now? Hmm. Wasn't he a Rep?

Strawman. Voter fraud in Washington state isn't institutionalized, it's a number of separate people gaming the system to help, mainly, democrats.

CR

[Don Corleone]

Koga,

Sorry, just noticed your new links in your earlier post. Did you just add them?

Sorry, Oilempire.us and Rolling Stone don't qualify as objective. You also cite a couple of foreign papers. I can't speak to their reputations, as I don't know them, but I would believe that a domestic paper would have better information on this story, no?

I'll make it easy on you. I'll allow the Chicago Sun, the NY Times and the L.A. Times. Can you show me where one of these left leaning (and more partisan) papers claims Bush and the GOP stole votes in Ohio? How about USA Today? All of these papers were backing Kerry heavily. Surely, if the GOP stole votes in 2004, they'd raise the issue...

[Crazed Rabbit]

Palin seems to be doing pretty good in the debate. Only been watching for 10-15 minutes.

CR

[Don Corleone]

I think she seems nervous, but coherent. She's focusing on energy a little too much, but a little rope-a-dope ain't a bad thing if that's all you've got.

Now where she is winning strongly is she's got Joe a little steamed. When she threw the phrase "redistribution of wealth" at him, I thought he was going to come unglued. He's calmed down, but it's always the first slip that let's the genie out of the bottle. My prediction, before the debate is over, Biden's going to tell her to "Shut up", or otherwise be dismissive and overly antagonistic.

[CrossLOPER]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Marshal Murat]

Watching the debate, it's pretty much a 2nd presidential debate, just by proxy. It's frustrating that I don't hear what THEY think, only what "John" or "Barack" thinks about something. I appreciate the concern you have, but what are you going to do as Vice-President to help these issues. I just can't stand it.

The beginning was rocky (soccer fields? Palin winks? Joey the gas station attendant?) but I think that the night will go well.

If it doesn't, McCain can call Ifill out on being a pseudo-commy Obama plant.

[Don Corleone]

I think Palin's showing she's not the dummy she came off in the Couric interviews, but she's not exactly Cato the Younger of statesman either. Joe is... well, he's being Joe. I think he may have played his hand a little... I think his repeated and vehement claim that John McCain cut funding to the troops to the tune of 1.5 billion is going to come back to bite him.

The Iran issue is never going to settle. Obama and Biden don't seem to mind letting Iran get nuclear arms, McCain and Palin want to start a 3rd front. Surely there's got to be a 3rd option.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Teehee Biden said Bush's a lot.

And he keeps referring to himself in the third person.

CR

[ICantSpellDawg]

I think Palin's showing she's not the dummy she came off in the Couric interviews, but she's not exactly Cato the Younger of statesman either. Joe is... well, he's being Joe. I think he may have played his hand a little... I think his repeated and vehement claim that John McCain cut funding to the troops to the tune of 1.5 billion is going to come back to bite him.

The Iran issue is never going to settle. Obama and Biden don't seem to mind letting Iran get nuclear arms, McCain and Palin want to start a 3rd front. Surely there's got to be a 3rd option.

I'm impressed and take back my concerns gained from the past two interviews.
I especially liked when Biden kept saying "George Bushes" in that weird squirrelly accents. I kept thinking of an army of tiny "Bushes".

Biden seems tired and kind of crazy tonight.

[Lemur]

Sorry, Oilempire.us and Rolling Stone don't qualify as objective.

What's with Rolling Stone suddenly being on the "dismiss with prejudice" list? They're a serious place for journalism, you unread idjits. Where did the reporting for Generation Kill originate? Oh, yeah, with a Rolling Stone embed. Where did P.J. O'Rourke do the majority of his publishing for the last twenty years? Oh, yeah, Rolling Stone.

They don't do a ton of political reporting, but when they do it's at high standards. Just because you don't like hippies doesn't give you the right to dismiss a place with a long history of serious journalism. And while we're at it, Playboy does some serious reporting as well. Enjoy these fine magazine while they're around. By the time I'm an old(er) man, it's all gonna be blogs and news agglomerators.

-edit-

Question: Is the veep debate worth watching? Gimme your verdict when it's done. I have it on Tivo, but I don't have a ton of time to waste.

[Proletariat]

Palin's doing fine. Everyone knew she would be a little subpar here, and the fact that she hasn't embarrassed herself after all the hype going into this Biden 'slaughtering' is prolly a net win.

One thing that's certainly evident, the Democrat's have the wrong guy as the vp. This should be Biden's ticket.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Question: Is the veep debate worth watching? Gimme your verdict when it's done. I have it on Tivo, but I don't have a ton of time to waste.

Hmm. No blowouts or important lines. Palin's doing fine, really, so none of the predicted slaughter. Heck, she's had a couple humorous lines.

I think the biggest impact will be Palin doing fine and undoing a lot of damage from interviews.

CR

[CountArach]

I think Biden has won (So far... I have to go to work soon), but Palin exceeded expectations and didn't make any serious gaffes. Biden also didn't come off as condescending.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I think it was a real tie. I have been profoundly impressed by Palin so far in this debate. After the past few weeks I was soo afraid.

Lemur it is absolutely worth watching. Better than the Obama/McCain debate.

[Don Corleone]

Is it just me, or did Palin strike a nerve with Biden when she talked about the role of VP as being quasi-legislative? He got upset and started talking about Dick Cheney being the most dangerous VP in history. I'm not arguing with him that Cheney's interpretation of the role of VP, from a Constitutional position is dead wrong. But Joe seemed to be talking about Vlad Dracul there for a moment... I was waiting for a nervous twitch to break out.

[seireikhaan]

Biden won the debate. Palin did about as I expected. I figured there was no way the McCain camp would let her not be prepared for the debate. I've been in debate: Biden brought up far more examples; Palin was far more rhetorical based.

[Koga No Goshi]

Your first source actually makes the DailyKos look balanced and well-reasoned by comparison. It will cite Al Jazeera as a news source, as well as Al Babawa, the World Socialist the Center for American Progress and The Nation (the self-described Flagship of the Left), yet cannot bring itself to cite award winning periodicals such as the Wall Street Journal.

Your second source is a book by a candidate from the Green Party (Fatrakis) and the head of Greenpeace (Wasserman). Nope, no bias there....

Just as I suspected, no objective, verifiable evidence at all.

Seriously, find something from the Atlantic or the Washington Post... lefty rags that I actually have some faith in.

Edit: I apologize, this is probably a little aggressive on my response for somebody with a fairly recent return. It's something of a Backroom expecation that when you levy a claim against a public figure, you'll supply some objective links to provide evidence. The sources you cite are pretty Leftist, but if it makes you feel any better, FoxNews typically isn't accepted either. Neither is National Review, and if I were to take issue, it would be with that. National Review does have a slant, all publications do, but it's a quality periodical, as is the Atlantic, which has a left slant, but is also a quality journal.

The website you cited, and the links it provides on its page, are nothing of the sort. Sorry.

Do you believe there are hard vote counts or not? You believe numbers are subjective too? I realize everything else is in a Republican worldview. But if there is some grand conspiracy by the left to simply make up numerical inconsistencies in the election and numbers of ballots thrown out, I'm yet to see any evidence of THAT assertion.

[Koga No Goshi]

Koga,

Sorry, just noticed your new links in your earlier post. Did you just add them?

Sorry, Oilempire.us and Rolling Stone don't qualify as objective. You also cite a couple of foreign papers. I can't speak to their reputations, as I don't know them, but I would believe that a domestic paper would have better information on this story, no?

I'll make it easy on you. I'll allow the Chicago Sun, the NY Times and the L.A. Times. Can you show me where one of these left leaning (and more partisan) papers claims Bush and the GOP stole votes in Ohio? How about USA Today? All of these papers were backing Kerry heavily. Surely, if the GOP stole votes in 2004, they'd raise the issue...

I'm not here to jump through hoops. The New York Times had many articles on exactly this topic but I figured you'd dismiss that also as a "left wing rag." Do your own research; it is clear to me that your mind is made up on the issue, on no basis except self-serving partisan skepticism over something that swung the elections in your party's favor in 2000 and 2004. So this seems to be a waste of time, me running around finding links.

[Don Corleone]

Do you believe there are hard vote counts or not? You believe numbers are subjective too? I realize everything else is in a Republican worldview. But if there is some grand conspiracy by the left to simply make up numerical inconsistencies in the election and numbers of ballots thrown out, I'm yet to see any evidence of THAT assertion.

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I haven't made any assertions one way or the other. You're the one that levelled the accusation that the GOP has been widely fixing elections for the past few years, in an organized fashion. I asked you for some proof of that assertion. You offered some sources, granted, but nothing even close to mainstream. Wouldn't the NY Times, that has had an axe to grind with Bush since before the 2000 election, publish any story, even of marginal credibility, if it could find one?

If Obama wins next month, and I think that's more than likely at this point, I'm not going to run around crying "vote-fixing".

[Koga No Goshi]

I'm not sure what you're getting at, but I haven't made any assertions one way or the other. You're the one that levelled the accusation that the GOP has been widely fixing elections for the past few years, in an organized fashion. I asked you for some proof of that assertion. You offered some sources, granted, but nothing even close to mainstream. Wouldn't the NY Times, that has had an axe to grind with Bush since before the 2000 election, publish any story, even of marginal credibility, if it could find one?

Sooner or later, you are going to have to accept that Bush won in 2000 and 2004 without all the hinjinx you want to chalk it up to.

No, I responded to the assertion that voting fraud benefits Democrats more than Republicans, of which there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever in our lifetimes that this has been true on a level which has measurably helped the Dems win elections they shouldn't have.

And, amazing. You say you have no stance, and then "Sooner or later, you are going to have to accept that Bush won in 2000 and 2004 without all the hinjinx you want to chalk it up to." Yeah, it doesn't sound like your mind was made up in advance of any evidence.

There is no point in discussion if you are dishonest about your stances and the irrelevance of evidence. Anyone can sit here and dismiss facts, figures and numbers. But if that's all you're here to do then there is no point in continuing discussion with anyone who doesn't agree with you.

[Don Corleone]

Like I said in another thread, Koga, I thought you could discuss things rationally with people you might disagree with. I guess I was wrong. I'll make it a note not to bother you in the future and not respond to your posts.

[Koga No Goshi]

Like I said in another thread, Koga, I thought you could discuss things rationally with people you might disagree with. I guess I was wrong. I'll make it a note not to bother you in the future and not respond to your posts.

Please do. You are an ideologue and you make the pretense of wanting to look at evidence, which you then just dismiss out of hand if it doesn't agree with what you already believe in advance. So yes, I quite agree, there is no further point.

[PanzerJaeger]

Sounds like a mini-meltdown in the McCain campaign:

Capitol Hill sources are telling me that senior McCain people are more than concerned about Palin.

The campaign has held a mock debate and a mock press conference; both are being described as disastrous." One senior McCain aide was quoted as saying, "What are we going to do?" The McCain people want to move this first debate to some later, undetermined date, possibly never. People on the inside are saying the Alaska Governor is "clueless."

Wishful thinking, Leemster?

Palin did great. CNN seems to think she won.

Oh and Biden apparently lied quite a bit... nothing new really...

[ICantSpellDawg]

Please do. You are an ideologue and you make the pretense of wanting to look at evidence, which you then just dismiss out of hand if it doesn't agree with what you already believe in advance. So yes, I quite agree, there is no further point.

Yea you are right - Don is a crazy ideologue who votes across the board with Bush, Cheney and the rest of the conservative masterminds.

Thank you, opinionated Berkley grad that is objective in all things, I can finally see now that you are the rational one and that Don is a mindless minion of the New American Century.

Cover it up all you'd like, Don (if that is your real name) We'll find evidence that you blew up the twin towers for the U.S. government and mossad. You days in the slimey conservative shadows are numbered.