« Mistakes Are Expensive | Main | Ready To Lead »

February 12, 2008


As OSCteve noted, Obama gat the majority of women in Virginia.

Yeah but 67% of self-described conservatives? That can't be right.

However, that is all women. White women did break for Clinton though I don't have the percentages, CNN only breaks it down by gender. White men, however, did break for Obama.

Of course, they are all sexist, except those that voted for Clinton.

I really shouldn't have made that last comment, but I have a feeling we will be hearing that case made by some Clinton supporters.

According to CNN's exit polls, Obama won Latinos in Virginia 55-45.

Interesting that with 34% counted, Obama has more than all 4 Republican candidates combined.

CNN exit polls here.

According to these exit polls, Clinton won 50% of whites; Obama won 49%. Obama won 55% of white men to Clinton's 43%; Clinton won 55% of white women to Obama's 45%.

"The big story of the night is shaping up to be Huckabee, but it's very early."

My understanding is that the returns are largely already in from the rural precincts which went strongly Huckabee, but not all in from more urban/populated precincts, which are going for McCain, so McCain is apt to narrowly pull it out ahead (further than he barely is now) for the narrow win in Virginia.

There are interesting points in the CNN exit poll, such as that educational level made no difference whatever in the vote.

It's unsurprising, but interesting that "No, Never Before" voters went 29% Clinton, 71% to Obama.

Slightly more unexpected is that 16% of the voters who thought Clinton is "Most Qualified to be Commander in Chief" voted for Obama anyway.

Just read a bunch of articles about HRCs organization internals. I think it's hard to walk away without concluding that she's just not all that good at managing her organization at all. You've got a number of telltale features:

(1) A small group of insiders who control access to the candidate and the information the candidate hears.
(2) Loyalists promoted way higher than their level of competence.
(3) An inability to adapt fast enough to changing circumstances.
(4) Competition and factionalization within the insiders which the candidate doesn't effectively resolve.
(5) People trying to cover for themselves by not passing on bad news, even though that comes at a great cost to the campaign as a whole.

Meanwhile, as a friend pointed out to me, the best thing to be said about the Obama camp is that we haven't heard anything about them at all. Other than a few talking heads they send out, we have no idea who they are.

Weather sucks here in DC tonight, same in MD, I assume, hilzoy/OCSteve, given that the polls are being kept open until 9:30.

I noticed something interesting on 60 Minutes Sunday nighht. During the interview Clinton was asked what she wantd to do as President or something like that and she got all mistyeyed and said (This a close paraphrae)"I want to lead on globalwarminng and I want to lead on this and that and I want to give the young people a vision of the future!"

Annd I thought jeez she's channelling Obama. Someone on her staff has advised her to do the vision thing.

Well today kathleen Townsend was on NPR to give thhe Hillary statement about Virginia. When thhe reporter asked her why shhe was a Hillary supporters she said a bunch of stuff abouut how Hillary has planns etc, then she shifted gears and all of a sudden the talkingpoints were how Hillary can reach across the aisle andhow Hillary met with a group of Rrepublicanns and was so nice to them that thhey all decided to vote Democrat.

She is trying to claim Obama's talking points for herself. Except her version is a sort of clumsy dumbeddown version.

I wondere what taylor MArcsh will think of that? I wonder how that will go over with all those ladies from my cxaucus who want her to go out and stomp thhe Republicans inot the dirt?

This is about the third time the Clinton team has reset her talking points and restructured her narative. Hillary the shapeshifter.

I don't think Obama's schtick works for her.

ugh: Here in Baltimore, it's cold air and freezing drizzle. The sidewalks, not to mention my steps, are coated with an invisible glaze of ice. It's not "bad weather" in the sense of a snow storm, it's "bad weather" in the sense of weather that is downright evil, and might have been designed to cause as many car crashes, fractured skulls and hips, etc., as possible.

It sucks.

I'm watching Clinton live at her Texas rally right now, and speaking of the lessons of Reagan, she's walking back and forth in front of a sea of teenage Latino young women, all in blue Hillary shirts, with lots of flags.

Oh, lord, it's all for the next generation.

Also, puppies.

Also, solutions, to meet our challenges, and solve our problems.

I swear, someday I want to vote for a politician who promises stagnation and failure, to do nothing for the children, to help the elderly die and get out of the way, and to let the young people sink into a pitiful sinkhole of despair, depression, and apathy. And to oppose all solutions, in favor of partying like mad for now, because either someone better will eventually come along, or not, so why not?

Just to relieve the monotony of Standard American Political Boilerplate.

"Solutions." Yeah, that's a controversial position to be for.

Oh, goody, she just came out for ethanol, to be grown in Texas.

The sidewalks, not to mention my steps, are coated with an invisible glaze of ice.

Yep, same here. I watched my neighbor get just enough traction to spin his wheels at ~45 mph all the way up his driveway while thinking "I hope he doesn't hit a dry patch cause if so, I'm going to pry him out of his garage."

Back OT - Looks like MD has been called for Obama.

My northern Virginia voting story:

I left the office in Alexandria today at 5:04. My car was covered in ice. After a thorough defrosting, I pulled out of the parking lot at 5:11 only to find that the beltway entrance was closed off--for BOTH directions. I tried Duke St. and sat in intersections through 13 changes of green without moving. I manuevered to King St. and made slight progress but then came to a similar standstill. I made a U to try a lesser known road, but quickly hit a patch of traffic (heading in the opposite direction of the traffic I'd just been in) where I sat in one place without moving for 18 minutes. Eventually cars started turning around to head in the other direction, which allowed me to move forward enough to make my turn. Accidents were everywhere, cops were everywhere, left turns were impossible because oncoming traffic clogged every intersection, long-angry-honks were blaring from all directions... I called my boyfriend and asked him to check Google traffic, and he said gravely, "The entire DC area is red."

With the help of a few shortcuts, I made it to my polling place in Annandale at 7:01. When I walked in the door and began to ask the officials standing inside if the polls were still open, they interrupted my first word and yelled "RUN!" while pointing down the hall. Laughing, I dashed into the polling room, where election officials sympathetically but firmly told me the polls were closed and the hours couldn't be extended without a court order, which they had already requested and had already been denied. I came home to find out that the MD elections chief extended MD polling hours to 9:30 due to the weather and subsequent traffic. Friggin' Virginia.

Anyway, just thought I'd pass along my story to highlight the importance of voting BEFORE work, and to mention that if you know someone who was travelling in the DC area during evening rush hour today, call them to make sure they're OK.

"bad weather" in the sense of weather that is downright evil

Check out what they got in Switzerland.

ObPrimaries: Yay Obama!

My story from Northern VA - I voted early this AM and the turn out for my little polling station was huge. Similar to what you'd get in the general. Obama stuff was around, HRC no where in sight.

I'm decided on Obama but work in a heavily GOP office. OCSteve - I'm not surprised at the 67% at all. Anecdotal it may be - but all the GOPers I know aren't voting HRC because she'd be easier to beat. They are voting Obama because if McCain loses and the country goes Dem, they think Obama is someone they can live with -- so it's anybody but HRC. She's got huge negatives here....

same in MD, I assume, hilzoy/OCSteve

Yeah it was fine until lunchtime when I went. Started raining after that. Very cold and wet, freezing rain, etc.

Obama is speaking like a front runner now. Nary a comment about Hillary. Full guns on the Bush Administration. Calm, relaxed, personable.

For the first time I really feel like Obama has won this thing.

Uh, DC Dems outvoted DC Republicans 25 to 1.

Uh. I know DC is Dem and all, but 25 to 1.

This isn't about the primary, but it does say "open thread," so, this seems like an example of overly-mechanical law.

BTW OCSteve, I see Gilchrist is winning with one precinct reporting.

Tidbits from Virginia:

# Sixty-one percent of voters said McCain was most qualified to be commander in chief, but 30 percent of that bloc still voted for Mike Huckabee anyway.
I guess that "in a time of war," the War On Some Terrorists isn't everything, after all.

Earlier in the piece:

[...] Half of the state’s voters were born-again Christians or evangelicals, and they favored Huckabee over McCain by 40 points.
But for general conservatives, surely in a time of war...
[...] Sixty-six percent of voters consider themselves conservatives (rather than moderates). Conservatives favored Huckabee over McCain by 23 points.
The State of Robert E. Lee and Virginia Military Institute has made the priorities of its conservatives clear.

It kinda undercuts any future argument that Republicans mustn't vote for Obama, because, you know, it's a time of war, and that's what's most important, doesn't it?

Clinton's deputy campaign manager resigned today, saying the new campaign manager should have the right to build her own team. Since this is the guy who managed her field campaigns one wonders.

With three weeks before the "have to win" primaries, it is going to be difficult to get a new staff on board and clicking as a team.

"Clinton's deputy campaign manager resigned today...."

Letter here.

Katherine Seelye has an interesting look at what happened in Maine.

Is Obama's speech from tonight on the web anywhere? I looked at cnn.com and msnbc.com but the most I could find was a 1-minute clip of the beginning of the speech.

Obama's (and Clinton's) speech at TPM: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/178286.php

There it is! At talkingpointsmemo.

(Cross-posted ith Matthew)

That's just clips of Obama's speech - I read that he went on the attack against McCain tonight, but the video posted doesn't have that.

But whatever, because the videos tell the story anyway: just compare Obama's speech with McCain and the Undead Posse. Oh. My.

UPDATE: I'm running out the door, but based on brief exit poll readings, tonight (and VA in particular) may be the beginning of the end of Clinton. Obama seems to be increasing his support from Latinos and women. All in all, some ominous clouds tonight for the Clinton campaign.

I actually think this is just a continuation of that trend, which I think already existed. We didn't have exits for Maine or Washington, so there's no way to know for sure, but SUSA, which nailed the caucus % pretty well, had Obama eating into her base w/ women, winning or tying with Hispanics and Asians, winning in the 35-50 category really comfortably and competitive in the 50-64 (I think stat tied)...outside of Seattle, Washington has a lot of working class whites, so you can't get those margins or win all 67 counties there w/o doing well with those demographics. We just didn't have the exits to "prove it". Maine, same story.

Is that a sign of momentum, or a sign that Obama has find a pitch for those demographics that's effective?

McCain's campaign is going to be like running Bob Dole on a theme of "Hope? Pshaw! I got wars! But don't worry, I don't know much about the economy."

Meanwhile, Juan McCain is not a conservative. Just ask quite a few conservatives.

Good luck with that.

back - wow, what a night.

and sara's making me "home"sick -- i used to live on oronoco and pitt in alexandria. fortunately, i lived there long enough to vote against george allen

In MD-04, Donna Edwards has 59% to Al Wynn's 37% with 51% reporting. I thought that with the high turnout (meaning lots of voters who didn't know about her) she had no chance against the incumbent. Glad to be wrong.

In MD-01, relatively good Republican Wayne Gilchrest is trailing the more conservative Andy Harris 35% to 41%.

In the MD-06 Democratic primary to see who challenges Roscoe Bartlett, netroots-supported 2006 challenger Andrew Duck is losing to Jennifer Dougherty, whom I know nothing about, 37% to 44%. Duck impressed me by using opposition to the Military Commissions Act as part of his campaign.

The Baltimore Sun has called the MD-04 Democratic primary for Donna Edwards and the MD-01 Republican primary for Andy Harris. Both challengers have won. Slimy corporate Democrat Al Wynn and not-as-horrible-as-most-Republicans Republican Wayne Gilchrest will be out of Congress at the end of the year. I only hope the Democrats can somehow beat Harris.

KCinDC: yeah, I just saw that about Harris and Gilchrest. That's bad.

Great about Edwards, though. We really need to dislodge lousy representatives, and this was an awesome start.

I do note that turnout in MD-01 was about equal in the D and R primaries. Hopefully, that might help in November.

COmpletely OT: every couple of weeks I check TTLB's blog ecosystem, and recently I have been amused to find that we are generally just a little bit behind Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen News. Darn, I think to myself: why can't we pull just a bit ahead of the Olsen Twins?

Guess what? I think we just did! Yay!

(It won't last, though: it's due to a Sullivan Traffic Spike.)

Annd I thought jeez she's channelling Obama.

Um, who in this campaign -- R or D -- hasn't been trying to do that since Iowa?

I wrote this comment around 10 this morning and then neglected to fill out the captcha, so I just discovered in a tab:

I'm off to volunteer at my polling place. My wildly optimistic hopes are that Obama reaches 70% in my half of the city and 85% in the other half, which would mean he gets 9 of the 10 district-level convention delegates. More realistically, I expect he'll get a majority here and 70% there, which would yield 7 of 10. Because of the way the at-large delegates are allocated, it seems virtually certain he'll get only 3 of 5.

If my calculations are correct, Obama's numbers are 70.068% for my half of the city and 81.840% for the other half, so my wildly optimistic hopes weren't as wild as I thought. It appears he'll get 8 of 10 district-level delegates and a total of 11 of the 15 pledged delegates for DC.

Obama wasn't even hitting on on cylinders in that speech (botched his hope-monger joke, e.g.) and he was still awesome. He's really unreal. He's also pivoted to the perfect position on the "blind optimism" criticism -- even in the way he inflects the "I know how hard it is" phrase. That's a new addition to the stump speech and he used it well.

I'm more amazed than anything at how sharp Obama is. Last night Clinton started pushing the "He talks nice, but he makes it sound too easy" version of the "false hope" criticism -- which was new -- and he's already stomped it and moved on. They're just not quick enough to keep up with him.

As a final bit of fanboyism -- you have to appreciate the sense of humor, too. The "I'm a Republican" bit actually made me chuckle a little, and it's not even a great joke, it was just well-delivered. The image he projects wouldn't be nearly as effective as it is if he didn't always seem like he was enjoying himself. He seems eager, and it shows in his campaign.

Speaking of which, the speech on the top at Obama's website right now involves McCain, and does have a pretty cute/funny bit at the beginning that's worth watching, too.

“There was excitement, there was hope, and there were specifics. Talk of new ways to use our old industrial centers, dead and forgotten by the establishment.”
-From an Obama speech linked in the previous thread

My theory is that the money people took control of this country in the 1960s, and that our politicians serve them. The Clintons just cleared $130 million on an ex-Soviet state uranium deal and $20 million cashing out a UAE trust fund to clean up her name before the elections.

Throughout American history, customs duties for imported goods averaged around 35% (click on ‘Bill’ below for the Commerce Department graph). Customs duties for imported goods in 2008 are less than 5%. This increases profit margins for importers and continues to drive good jobs overseas. Kicking a few hundred million to politicians is nothing in a $12 trillion dollar economy.

I’ll believe that Obama is not a card-carrying member of “the establishment” if he makes a policy position to return customs duties to historical averages. That would create “new ways to use our old industrial centers”.

Why don’t we have a national debate on increasing customs duties?

Clinton: "Well, I can't think of any better place to start our campaign for in Texas than right here in El Paso!"

Um, what? If you started driving from El Paso right now, you might make it here before March 4th, if you're lucky and you don't fall asleep on one of those stretches of highway that doesn't make the slightest turn for 30 miles (and yes, I've verified that personally).

Fun fact: El Paso is closer to San Diego, CA than it is to Beaumont, TX.

The only thing worse than watching Texas politicians pander to Texans is watching non-Texas politicians pander to Texans. Ugh. Still, coulda been worse. I don't know if it's the fact that he's in front of 50 people instead of 15,000, but wow -- did John McCain used to be a decent speaker?

Why don’t we have a national debate on increasing customs duties?

For the same reason we're not having a national debate on your Muslim-deportation policy or the unconscionable rutabaga crop shortage sweeping our across our breadbasket.

It's a travesty, I know. Surely the Reign of the Legumes is nearly upon us.

OK Adam;

You get back to me with one of them open-cycle cooled nuke plants. Maybe you can sell them to the Dubians. Perhaps for desalinization.

"(botched his hope-monger joke, e.g.)"

I thought he was just changing it up, since the last version has gone around so much, but I'm only guessing, of course.

You get back to me with one of them open-cycle cooled nuke plants. Maybe you can sell them to the Dubians. Perhaps for desalinization.

I don't know where "Dubia" is -- do they understand advanced nuclear physics concepts like friction?

he's already stomped it and moved on. They're just not quick enough to keep up with him.

Hmmm, sounds like HRC is on the outside of an OODA loop.

From Wikipedia's entry on John Boyd.

In addition, he stated that most effective organizations have a highly decentralized chain of command that utilizes objective-driven orders, or directive control, rather than method-driven orders in order to harness the mental capacity and creative abilities of individual commanders at each level. He argued that such a structure would create a flexible "organic whole" that would be quicker to adapt to rapidly changing situations. He noted, however, that any such highly decentralized organization would necessitate a high degree of mutual trust and a common outlook that came from prior shared experiences. Headquarters needs to know that the troops are perfectly capable of forming a good plan for taking a specific objective, and the troops need to know that Headquarters does not direct them to achieve certain objectives without good reason.

juxtapose that with this TNR piece from a different Marc Ambinder Atlantic piece than the one hilzoy linked to earlier (I think, I've got a lot of tabs open here), and you can see the extent of the problem.


You owe your existance to friction. And your electricity.

I ask again:

What are Obama's opinions on customs duties?

I propose we enact this. It was a great idea last time, so why not bring back a classic?

For the guy who asked for Obama's full speech, here it is in all its glory

Bill: as this is an open thread, in response to your non-sequitur and for the reading enjoyment of all of Obsidian Wings, I present you with tonight's chilling tale: ...

The True Story of the 2008 Republican Primary Debate

Ah, the Primary, yes. Sit, and I will tell you the story of the Republicans in 2008, oh so many years ago, before the Dawn of the Blood Moon. It was a time of turmoil. And there was said to be a Big Tent where all the old Houses would often meet and compromised even maybe do a little trading -- a little church here, a new apartment for my mistress here, a new plane sir, of course, yes. it's been great.

Then. Then came the 2008 Republican Primaries. We had thought that our sorry state under the last leader could be no worse. We sent out the cry, far and loud: Who amongst you can defend us in our time of greatest need? Without you, our children will be forced to attend a school with black children! We'll never get back at those Iraqis for what they did to us! The Fear that Reagan saw is here, personified! People, we need you!

And so the tribes sent their heroes, the men who best represented their unique contribution to the GOP coalition. By some choice of the Gods, the tribes sent us their greatest warrior, assuming that their greatest warrior could lead the Empire!

They sent one sleekly-dressed man from the corporate tribe of the party, a grizzled old chieftain from the crusty veteran hero tribe, one guy from the war fetishist tribe who kept muttering something about numerology, one guy from the religious nutjob tribe downstream, one guy who snuck in from the libertarian tribe, one guy who'd played a conservative on TV which seem like he deserved a shot given the competition... but then each pulled their stake out of the ground and into the big tent with them for some reason -- and of course it collapsed around them.

A moment of silence.

Then, first there was a scuffle, then screaming, of mortal pain and flesh being rent from bones, the Big Tent thrashing about like a rabid animal --punctuated by the occasional cell phone call --followed by the sound of... could it be... pleasure? horror? screams of masochistic revelry rose into a fever pitch, and in the cacophonies of their suffering was heard voices, speaking in the vile tongue of the Elder Races... and a black smoke crept from the ground before Elder Cheney, as he emerged from his lair and began to intone what i could only barely understand as some sort of euology for humanity, his deep voice punctuated by an intermittent "hohhhh-pur," his promises of everlasting power driving the creature to the madness of bloodlust, and a stench filled the room, worse than any I had ever smelled even in Rove's sanctum — when without warning a single claw, dripping with blood, viscera, mucus -- cut a single slit in the Big Tent of the Republican Party, which as the Tent melted back, there began to emerge a single being, walking in perfect lockstep as everyone listened, and everyone was listening still when It lumbered slobberingly into sight and gropingly squeezed Its gelatinous green immensity through the tent doorway into the tainted outside air... and in one last moment I see the Elder moving as to .. embrace the Elder? There is a inscrutable, somehow lecherous look about his face as the he draws himself to the alien, or the alien to him -- Something obscures my view, or the dream ends then, and every time I pray it will never return, but even on those nights when I remain inside my own mind, a message intones to me, again and again in that same alien tongue, and I know that it is he who is calling out to me!

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu Thr'ti'frth nMgah'Cthu'sehts wgah'nagl fhtagn."

...and I wake up to what sounds of a shotgun blast and a stabbing pain in my face, and as I slowly pull my hand away, it's revealed to be nothing but the sweat of nighttime terror. It is a warning. They know. They are here.

We have many members.

Sara's story reminds me of why I don't live in Fairfax, VA anymore.

Thankfully I left work at 2:30 in Tyson's to drive down F'burg for my MBA classes. My polling place in a little podunk spot on 95 was packed. The busiest I've seen it ever. And I didn't see a single person carrying the Republican card over to the machines.

Housemate works out of DC and generally slugs, but with the mixing bowl CLOSED, she had to metro down to Springfield, have her sister who lives in Lorton pick her up, and my wife picked her up from Lorton. Though they did manage to hit the polling place at 6:55.

All this for a little ice.

I, on the other hand, being northern bred and raised, grilled on the back deck once I got home from class.

Shame about Gilchrest. And not just that he’s a decent guy, but that Harris is such a sleeze. Who knows, with some long long coattails maybe the D will win here for once. Anyone but Harris…

KCinDC: not-as-horrible-as-most-Republicans

Come on. Guy is a RINO and for the last year or two one of the only Republicans to take the public stands that got him waxed last night.

Harris is such a sleeze.

And such and uplifting campaign too. Vote against Gilchrest because he wants us to lose in Iraq, he votes with those traitorous libruls, and his brother is not only gay but actually married to a dude. I’m so proud of my fellow rubes…

Who else got one of these, which I just received?

gary --

Thanks to you, Barack won all three of today's contests decisively.


Now is the time to step up and own a piece of this campaign.

If you make a donation of $25 now, your gift will be matched by another donor like you, doubling your impact.

Make a matching donation now:


It's going to take all of us to keep these victories going. But if anyone is up to the task, it's this movement.

Thanks for your support,


David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America

Wow, "[t]hanks to [me], Barack won all three of today's contests decisively"!

I'm reallly awesome!

Geez, mine said it was thanks to me. That two-timing so and so.

Psh, that's nothing. I was Time's person of the year a while back.

Now, boys - I'm sure Barack loves both of you equally, in your own special ways.

David Plouffe, you three-timing bastard !

you told me i was to thank for Obama's win!


"There are interesting points in the CNN exit poll, such as that educational level made no difference whatever in the vote."

I'm somewhat curious - does this take into account people who are currently in the process of being educated? Vast support among college students would presumably show up as support among people with only a high school degree, but those are very different demographics.

Mark Penn spinning like mad.

Mark Penn spinning like mad.

Shorter Mark Penn: Vote for Hillary, her negatives are already high!

Ugh: Yeah that’s a great argument. Vote for me because people already hate me more than the other guy.

Oh, Adam was right about Maryland being Clinton's best shot. She lost there by only 23 points, 60% to 37%. I guess having Gov. O'Malley and Sen. Mikulski on her side did help.

Though supporting Hillary makes a bit if sense in that (a) she might actually win the general election; (b) if she doesn't she's done as a presidential candidate; (c) if (b) happens, that leaves Obama as a lock for the 2012 nomination, against an aging and exposed as "not really a maverick or moderate" incumbent McCain. OTOH, if Obama wins the primary and loses the general, he's done as a presidential candidate and there's no obvious Dem successor as I don't think Hillary would make it in 2012. If Hillary does win, Obama is around for 2016 whether or not Hillary is re-elected in 2012.

Of course, I'm just making all that up. These are the internets, after-all.

In other news, these show-trials are going to be great.

Ugh, I don't think we can assume McCain would be running for reelection in 2012. Hasn't he at least suggested that he'll serve only one term? The question is who his VP successor would be.

And I don't think Obama was anywhere near the obvious Dem successor in Feb 2004, so it's quite possible that someone we haven't heard of will emerge.

Four years is way too long for meaningful political predictions. The pundits and everyone else are constantly being far off in their predictions for much shorter timescales.

Of course, Ugh did acknowledge the meaninglessness in the last paragraph.

The pundits and everyone else are constantly being far off in their predictions for much shorter timescales.

That's why they're pundits and not tax lawyers.

Are they consulting with Rove about the best schedule for the show trials?

Are they consulting with Rove about the best schedule for the show trials?

The trials are set up perfectly for all kinds of shenanigans. I expect all sorts of leaks about what KSM et. al. did/planned to do from anonymous administration officials, including things that the defendants are not allowed to have access to. Look for bunch around the democratic convention.

Isn't there something about Penn's piece that vibes of Bush-Cheney fearmongering? Only with the Republican attack machine replacing the terrorists who are gonna come git you.

Hillary Clinton has withstood the full brunt of that machine and actually emerged stronger.

Stronger than what? Stronger personally? I'm not sure that I care. Stronger politically that she would have been otherwise? How do we know? Stronger than she was as a candidate than when she comparatively unknown?

When it came to national security, "strong and wrong" won out over "right and weak" in the 2002 and 2004 elections.

Now that just begs the question. What about "strong and right"? Why can't I have that? Why is Hillary strong, but not Obama? If Democrats are going to start conceding that strength means a lot of bluster, then we are cooked.

With Hillary, the GOP has already tried just about every attack and has failed.

Funny, I see evidence for success.

Hillary has already built a powerful base, with overwhelming support among women, Latino voters, and other stalwarts of the Democratic Party.

Why, whom does he mean? HRCs support among women -- at least as demonstrated last night -- is far from overwhelming. And Obama won 9 in 10 African American voters. If anyone's coalition has been taking a beating these past few weeks, it's HRCs, which has been in steady decline.

Did Mark Penn even write this? The unintentional irony here is bad:

Hillary Clinton has repeatedly confounded pollsters and the chattering class

And this is just close to doublespeak:

Current Poll Numbers Don't Tell the Story of What Will Happen ... Hillary is the best candidate to take on Sen. McCain and defeat him

Pay no attention to the evidence before you. Instead believe the opposite of what is suggested by the evidence you do have, for no reason whatsoever.

This from a career pollster?

I guess that the GOP has decided that Obama is going to win. (h/t CQ)

(Yes I am fully aware of the irony of the GOP talking about how much Obama will cost.)

Did Mark Penn even write this?

Don’t forget that whoever wins the nomination, he personally stands to make millions. Just have to keep her in the game as long as he can.

Hmm, I think I was misinterpreting something in the delegate selection rules. It appears that since Obama got more than 75% of the overall Obama+Clinton vote in DC, he'll get both pledges PLEO delegates. That changes my calculation so that Obama gets 12 of the 15 pledged delegates from DC.

Wow, if the best the GOP has is that Obama is proposing spending one weeks' worth of war costs on the safety Iraqi refugees or $50 million for nuclear safety...

Or when they include his stimulus plan in their Spend-O-Meter...

Interesting "Spend-o-meter."

In one breath they criticize him for promising middle class tax cuts and in the next for proposing increased taxes on dividends, capital gains, and carried interests.

That not only makes little sense, it sounds like bad politics.

A commenter on Raising Kaine (unverified) said that Webb had said he'd cast his superdelegate vote for whoever won the primary. If that's true, good on him (though he's still dead to me forever because of his FISA votes). Other Virginia superdelegates aren't so democratic, particularly the DNC members.

NAACP chairman Julian Bond says voters will be reminded of the “sordid history of racially discriminatory primaries” if the Florida and Michigan delegates aren’t seated.

But – “…the NAACP had taken no position in the race between Clinton and Obama and would not endorse either candidate.”

Riiight. No position at all. And BTW it’s all Republican’s fault.

It struck me as making the voters, including minority voters in Florida particularly, victims of the Republican legislature in Florida.


“We’re going to make sure our voices are heard loud and clear on that convention floor,” she said, adding that the state’s entire Democratic Congressional delegation supported the decision to stick with Jan. 29.

So let me get this straight. The NAACP is pushing an action that would benefit Clinton and hurt Obama, even though they have “no position in the race”. Call me cynical. Call me even more cynical that the NAACP would support the Clinton machine over Obama.

Yes, the DNC members in DC include lots of Clinton supporters. They're much more of a problem than the superdelegates who are elected officials, because they (correctly) don't consider us their constituents and so are unlikely to respond to our input (in fact, contacting them probably does more harm than good because they get irritated). The DNC members in the DC delegation, for example, aren't really attached to DC. If one of them moves to Virginia, say, then they'd still be a superdelegate, and the DC delegation would go down by 1 while the Virginia delegation went up by 1.

The NAACP can't take a position on either candidate because that would jeopardize their non-profit status (you'll see that they don't officially endorse anyone in the general election as well).

That said, what an a$$.

Shorter GWB: Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

oh that GWB. he understands little, but he certainly knows that the most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.

It's also not a sign of a well-managed campaign when people like this are talking to the press, let alone saying these sorts of things.

If you make a donation of $25 now, your gift will be matched by another donor like you, doubling your impact.

Interesting. I got the same e-mail with a different ask.

Oh, Adam was right about Maryland being Clinton's best shot. She lost there by only 23 points, 60% to 37%. I guess having Gov. O'Malley and Sen. Mikulski on her side did help.

I appreciate the acknowledgement; I guess it was true, for some given definition of "shot" ...

It's also not a sign of a well-managed campaign when people like this are talking to the press, let alone saying these sorts of things.

It's the sound of people seeing their ambassadorships fade away.

It's also not a sign of a well-managed campaign when people like this are talking to the press, let alone saying these sorts of things.

At least when one of them has such a frightening picture with the article (John Catsimatidis)…

Good to know that the House Oversight committee has nothing more pressing to do than hold hearings on baseball and steroids.

Good to know that the House Oversight committee has nothing more pressing to do than hold hearings on baseball and steroids.

I like the way John Cole put it:

The day after rolling over and giving the administration precisely what they wanted, congressmen up with puffed out chests, red-faced, screaming at a pitcher about whether or not someone shot him in the a[$$] with steroids.

It is obscene and beyond absurdity. It has to be a sick f[n]cking joke, but there it is, on the television.

If you make a donation of $25 now, your gift will be matched by another donor like you, doubling your impact.

Interesting. I got the same e-mail with a different ask.

Although I can't remotely afford it, I chose to purchase a small number of Obama buttons and stickers from the Obama store at the official site. So that's how the campaign is getting what little money I can offer; my main contribution is volunteering to be precinct captain/commitee person, and being elected Alternate precinct delegate to both the County Convention and County Assembly.

But since I'm not down as a "donor," I assume they're lowballing me, and if I had made a direct donation, they'd ask for more. It's fundraising SOP.

(My first job in that field was in late 1978 - early 1979, during the several months I was living with a sweetie and a friend in the friend's Yale off-campus housing, a duplex -- my sweetie being a Yalie just a couple of credits short of graduating, and taking just two classes -- and I was working three jobs by both me and my sweetie being the night managers -- and the only two employees during our shifts -- for Book World, a longtime New Haven books store and the main magazine store in town -- for 3-4 nights a week, while during the day I did phone calls to Yale alumni asking for multi-thousand-dollar, or at least hundred-dollar, donations to the Campaign For Yale (a special drive of the endowment fund), and commuting into NYC once a week on the train to pick up manuscripts from Jim Frenkel at Bluejay Books to read and write reports on. Of course, that was ancient history, back when FISA was passed, eons ago, and thus few humans then alive still are.)

Well, this is going to be interesting, if it holds:

US lawmakers defied a warning from US President George W. Bush Wednesday to reach a quick decision and agreed to debate a controversial wiretapping law for three more weeks.

Good for the House.

"Good for the House."

It's still awful to remove judicial review, though.

I don't understand why the Democrats aren't proposing something like "here's a bill that allows for consideration of telecom amnesty after a full investigation of the details, etc.; after such an investigation, with subpoena power, is completed by the Select Committee on Intelligence (or whichever committee), a vote on telecom amnesty shall be considered."

Or something along those lines that does a bit of rightful judo on the "amnesty first" demand. (As I keep saying, if only the telecoms had Spanish names, demanding amnesty wouldn't sound like such a great idea to some of the same folks who now want to grant it.)

Are there aspects of this that are bad and non-obvious, or is this a small good thing?

Turns out that the guy behind the death of all those people at the dog show in Baghdad wasn’t:

1. Poor;
2. Uneducated; or
3. Unsuccessful.

He was the head of the hospital where the women with Down’s syndrome were housed. Dogs are haram.

Gary Farber: great link! I found this quote to be especially mystifying:

"An interesting sort of spin has been put on this that Senator Obama seems to do better in areas among more highly educated, more intellectual groups," Mr. Appel said. "And what is interesting about that is that it seems to be well known that Hillary has generated more large donors than Senator Obama has. I find it kind of strange that Hillary is the candidate of the less intellectual, yet she has the larger and more wealthy supporters."


The comments to this entry are closed.