By Rick Morris
Sports gamblers don't care about the ultimate outcome of games; they only care about who covered. Likewise, for politicians and the entire political chattering class, pointspreads are also the end-all, be-all. Except they're known in that realm as "expectations."
History will record that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama each went 1-1 on Tuesday night, with Obama pocketing North Carolina and Hil-Rod (ultimately, after a long wait) clinching Indiana. Frankly, the straightforward historical record is also meaningless, because the key difference in the outcomes came in the expectations: Obama "beat the spread" in North Carolina and also managed to "cover" in Indiana, coming tantalizingly close to an outright win that would have ended the process already via superdelegate stampede on Wednesday. On a completely different topic, anyone wondering why the Democratic machine in Gary, Indiana held back results until the wee hours of the morning would do well to read the epic book "Will" by G. Gordon Liddy for an explanation of how Lake County REALLY operates.
But back to the topic at hand: Obama, already the frontrunner, was able to consolidate his delegate lead by whipping Hillary all over Tobacco Road and by holding her to a near-tie among Hoosiers. The shock of Obama's turnaround Tuesday (especially in light of a tough few weeks in terms of primary results and headlines about his personal associations) was such that it triggered the primary season version of the election night "call" by networks. Tim Russert of NBC News set off a mass media stampede by proclaiming the race over and Barack Obama the winner. The conventional wisdom of the moment is that Obama's coronation in Denver at the convention is a done deal because of the way the numbers have materialized.
While media organizations, campaigns, and participants at every level of the process all have metrics that point in that direction, it's likely that none of them have anything quite as solid as what we're about to unveil here.
I've recently become acquainted with an excellent writer named Jacob Rosen, who writes about many different topics just like those of us here at The FDH Lounge. He's a busy, busy man and a man of many talents so I don't know when it will be feasible on his end, but it seems likely that we'll be able to feature him in some form through the FDH media family in the days ahead. When you read what we've got here, you'll understand why that thought causes us such enthusiasm.
Jacob sent us an email that he gave us permission to quote liberally here and we will. This is excerpted from his excellent email newsletter. He performed a statistical analysis on the Democratic race for president -- and found it quite uphill to say the least for Hillary at the moment. In short, he devised a metric he called the "glorious, magical number" that calculated her overall chances in the race.
"This number represents the break-even percentage point in which a) Hillary Clinton must win a difference over Obama for the overall super delegates, and b) the difference she must win in the remaining primaries.
Before the Pennsylvania primaries on April 22nd, the glorious, magical number stood at about 12.24% -- meaning that if Clinton were to win the remaining primaries by this number, and eventually increase her lead over Obama in terms of super delegates to this number, the overall delegate race would be tied in the end. Since Clinton did not win by 12.24%, but came awfully close to a 10% victory over the 158 pledged delegates, the glorious, magical number increased to 12.90% (which includes Guam results.)
In North Carolina and Indiana, Obama netted a total of 12 delegates (97 to 85) according to the most recent numbers available on RealClearPolitics.com. With these numbers, the glorious, magical number has increased to an astounding 16.40%. The number is now so large because North Carolina and Indiana represented just under half of the remaining pledged delegates remaining after Guam and Pennsylvania. This number may even seem quite irrelevant, because Clinton's super delegate lead is now only at 2.07% (down from 9.54% pre-OH/TX, 4.90% pre-PA and 2.65% pre-NC/IND.). So in order to catch her break-even point of pledged and super delegates, Clinton would have to exponentially increase her lead of super delegate supporters.
According to numbers on www.demconwatch.blogspot.com, the unofficial delegate totals from Michigan (with Obama as the uncommitted) and Florida for Obama and Clinton are 122 to 178. Including this into the total of overall pledged delegates, and the glorious, magical number at this point in time becomes 10.87%. Thus, if Clinton is to have any logical chance at winning this thing, or even making a point to seat these delegates in the first place, she must increase her overall super delegate lead to 10%. That should be the initial goal for the Clinton campaign, as the number of undecided super delegates out-weighs the number of remaining pledged delegates (264 to 217).
I have not seen very good polls just yet from upcoming primaries spots of West Virginia, Kentucky and Oregon. Once I do, however, I will be able to predict what the glorious, magical number will become like I did pre-NC/IND. According to poll averages RealClearPolitics.com from NC and IND (which I then formulated around 100% total), I had predicted the glorious, magical number to increase to 15.90%. The change of 0.5% is noted because of the impressive performance by Obama against the pre-primary polls (the first time since before OH/TX)."
Again, that's excellent work by Jacob right there in terms of breaking down the race with cold, hard numbers. Is there anybody out there not named Bill, Hillary or Chelsea who still thinks a win is possible? Actually, Chelsea seems pretty sharp to me; I wouldn't even necessarily count her with the believers at this point!
This race is done even if the Clintons don't realize it yet. As the Democratic party and their element in the left-wing blogosphere gets ever more angry about Obama still having to work for the nomination while John McCain gets a free ride, look for the recriminations directed at the Clintons to skyrocket. One wonders what Keith Olbermann's next misogynistic call for somebody to deal forcibly with Hillary will entail and whether this time he'll be getting waterboarded by the Secret Service. Then again, since the Secret Service doesn't look kindly on objects of their protection throwing lamps at people, they probably won't lift a finger and Olbermann, Kos and everyone else on that side will be able to keep spewing their impotent, murderous rage at Hillary.
Showing posts with label Hillary Clinton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hillary Clinton. Show all posts
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
North Carolina/Indiana primary predictions
By Rick Morris
The Real Clear Politics averages put Obama up 8 points in North Carolina and Clinton up 5 points in Indiana. With polls on the verge of closing shortly, here are my predictions.
Reports out of North Carolina today indicate that Obama will "beat the spread," perhaps decisively, as turnout among his key constituencies carries him to a big win. I see him covering, but not by much, mostly because he has not performed up to the levels of his late polling during much of the primary/caucus season. Call it Obama by 10.
In Indiana, I think the favorite also covers, as I believe Clinton will win by 8 points. I think that the state shapes up nicely for her in terms of the demographics she's carried in the past. Any hopes whatsoever for Obama to win are going to hinge on huge outpourings in Gary and Indianapolis -- which do account for a significant percentage of the state's Democratic voters. Frankly, with Gary being just a short commute for members of Obama's hometown machine, he's done a masterful job in terms of managing expectations in the state, as he should have been perceived as having a strong chance to win.
A split decision along the lines of what I forecast tonight changes nothing. There will be no stampede of superdelegates to Obama absent an upset win in Indiana, although they'll keep moving in his direction overall unless he inexplicably coughs up North Carolina.
The Real Clear Politics averages put Obama up 8 points in North Carolina and Clinton up 5 points in Indiana. With polls on the verge of closing shortly, here are my predictions.
Reports out of North Carolina today indicate that Obama will "beat the spread," perhaps decisively, as turnout among his key constituencies carries him to a big win. I see him covering, but not by much, mostly because he has not performed up to the levels of his late polling during much of the primary/caucus season. Call it Obama by 10.
In Indiana, I think the favorite also covers, as I believe Clinton will win by 8 points. I think that the state shapes up nicely for her in terms of the demographics she's carried in the past. Any hopes whatsoever for Obama to win are going to hinge on huge outpourings in Gary and Indianapolis -- which do account for a significant percentage of the state's Democratic voters. Frankly, with Gary being just a short commute for members of Obama's hometown machine, he's done a masterful job in terms of managing expectations in the state, as he should have been perceived as having a strong chance to win.
A split decision along the lines of what I forecast tonight changes nothing. There will be no stampede of superdelegates to Obama absent an upset win in Indiana, although they'll keep moving in his direction overall unless he inexplicably coughs up North Carolina.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Sore loser Gore hurts Democrats 8 years later
By Rick Morris
It's commonly accepted that the Democratic battle for president is the messiest since 1980, if not 1968 (and folks, we're headed for some Days of Rage out in Denver if Obama gets this nomination ripped from him). Everyone attributes two factors for this state of affairs:
1. The volatility of the usual Democratic obsession with identity politics being mixed with the certainty that either the first black or first woman candidate will be nominated.
2. The unparalleled ambition and ruthlessness of the Clintons.
But everyone's forgetting the vital third element in the equation, and this amnesia is surprising because it related directly to the rage Democrats have felt against George W. Bush since his first national campaign:
3. The legacy of the tactics deployed by Al Gore in the 2000 presidential election -- or rather, his refusal to accept the outcome of the 2000 election.
You remember the conduct of Sore-Loserman in the aftermath of the vote, don't you? The transformation of infantile drivel such as "the will of the people" becoming the official mantra of the Democrat party?
[Side note, Dick Nixon legitimately had the 1960 election stolen from him by crooks manipulating the "graveyard vote" in Illinois and Texas. Four decades later, Gore lost primarily because some of his core voters were illiterates who couldn't understand a simple butterfly ballot. Nixon refused to contest the election and conceded so our country wouldn't be divided at a time of peril in the Cold War. Regardless of what voters intended in their hearts, Gore lost the election by losing Florida and yet divided our country with relish at a vulnerable time when his president had spent eight years not facing up to the terrorist threat plaguing our nation. And yet it's Gore who gets made into a secular saint by the simpletons who comprise the ranks of "opinion leaders" in the U.S.A.]
Gore ran around the country trumpeting the fact that he won the popular vote, which is Constitutionally irrelevant under our system of government. Democrats demagogued the Electoral College, pronouncing it an anachronism when it suited their purposes. One of the chief phonies at the time was Hillary Clinton, who pronounced it undemocratic and who is now being blocked from the nomination by other phonies who pronounce her efforts undemocratic. Yes, there is a God and He has a sense of Karmic humor!
Gore picked a fight in a game of chicken he knew he could not possibly win, for it was certain that even if the U.S. Supreme Court backed the partisan hacks on the Florida Supreme Court and allowed the little old ladies with hatpins surreptitiously poking holes in the chads to steal the election that the House of Representatives would vote to recognize the legal Katherine Harris slate of electors. So he had no chance -- not immediately that is, as the clear endgame was to bloody up Bush for a rematch four years later and that scenario would have played out had Gore not chickened out when Bush was still in his post-9/11 popularity phase.
By posing as if they were the only ones concerned with "counting all the votes," Democrats ended up creating an extra standard in all elections. Now, even though the rules don't give Barack Obama any edge whatsoever because of it, he can claim a Divine Mandate because he's ahead in the popular vote and elected delegate count. Hillary has to augment her logical argument with "the rules say nothing about those factors" with more of her patented say-anything drivel like "caucuses are undemocratic."
By working so hard to delegitimize the winner of the 2000 presidential election (and I pronounce Bush the rightful winner of the election despite the fact that I did not vote for him, but rather, Patrick J. Buchanan), Democrats created a set of circumstances where tactics unexceptional by historical standards would call for the language of delegitimization to be invoked. The bitter fruit they are now choking on can best be called their just desserts.
It's commonly accepted that the Democratic battle for president is the messiest since 1980, if not 1968 (and folks, we're headed for some Days of Rage out in Denver if Obama gets this nomination ripped from him). Everyone attributes two factors for this state of affairs:
1. The volatility of the usual Democratic obsession with identity politics being mixed with the certainty that either the first black or first woman candidate will be nominated.
2. The unparalleled ambition and ruthlessness of the Clintons.
But everyone's forgetting the vital third element in the equation, and this amnesia is surprising because it related directly to the rage Democrats have felt against George W. Bush since his first national campaign:
3. The legacy of the tactics deployed by Al Gore in the 2000 presidential election -- or rather, his refusal to accept the outcome of the 2000 election.
You remember the conduct of Sore-Loserman in the aftermath of the vote, don't you? The transformation of infantile drivel such as "the will of the people" becoming the official mantra of the Democrat party?
[Side note, Dick Nixon legitimately had the 1960 election stolen from him by crooks manipulating the "graveyard vote" in Illinois and Texas. Four decades later, Gore lost primarily because some of his core voters were illiterates who couldn't understand a simple butterfly ballot. Nixon refused to contest the election and conceded so our country wouldn't be divided at a time of peril in the Cold War. Regardless of what voters intended in their hearts, Gore lost the election by losing Florida and yet divided our country with relish at a vulnerable time when his president had spent eight years not facing up to the terrorist threat plaguing our nation. And yet it's Gore who gets made into a secular saint by the simpletons who comprise the ranks of "opinion leaders" in the U.S.A.]
Gore ran around the country trumpeting the fact that he won the popular vote, which is Constitutionally irrelevant under our system of government. Democrats demagogued the Electoral College, pronouncing it an anachronism when it suited their purposes. One of the chief phonies at the time was Hillary Clinton, who pronounced it undemocratic and who is now being blocked from the nomination by other phonies who pronounce her efforts undemocratic. Yes, there is a God and He has a sense of Karmic humor!
Gore picked a fight in a game of chicken he knew he could not possibly win, for it was certain that even if the U.S. Supreme Court backed the partisan hacks on the Florida Supreme Court and allowed the little old ladies with hatpins surreptitiously poking holes in the chads to steal the election that the House of Representatives would vote to recognize the legal Katherine Harris slate of electors. So he had no chance -- not immediately that is, as the clear endgame was to bloody up Bush for a rematch four years later and that scenario would have played out had Gore not chickened out when Bush was still in his post-9/11 popularity phase.
By posing as if they were the only ones concerned with "counting all the votes," Democrats ended up creating an extra standard in all elections. Now, even though the rules don't give Barack Obama any edge whatsoever because of it, he can claim a Divine Mandate because he's ahead in the popular vote and elected delegate count. Hillary has to augment her logical argument with "the rules say nothing about those factors" with more of her patented say-anything drivel like "caucuses are undemocratic."
By working so hard to delegitimize the winner of the 2000 presidential election (and I pronounce Bush the rightful winner of the election despite the fact that I did not vote for him, but rather, Patrick J. Buchanan), Democrats created a set of circumstances where tactics unexceptional by historical standards would call for the language of delegitimization to be invoked. The bitter fruit they are now choking on can best be called their just desserts.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
Pa. Prez Debate – moderated by Michael Scott?
By Rick Morris
The following is a transcript of the Democratic presidential debate from the state of
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Good evening and welcome to this special edition of HARDBALL. We are taping a presidential debate here this afternoon from the
MICHAEL SCOTT: Thank you, Chris. Somehow, you seemed funnier and more entertaining on TV. I am honored to be here this afternoon so that my wonderful ability to MC can help illuminate the choice in this election for my fellow citizens. I regret that my two most trusted assistants in the office, Jim and Pam, could not join me today. They insisted about the supply closet being long overdue for reorganization. I’m not quite sure why Jim was making air quotes when he said that or why Pam smirked a little bit as he did or why Kevin ended up outside the door giggling after they went in. I guess we’ll never know the answer to those questions. But I will get the candidates to answer my questions here today, along with the two people I have here with me instead of Jim and Pam, the ones I really wanted. Dwight Schrute is the top salesman at our branch and Toby Flenderson is a brainless jerk in our HR department who is only here because the stupid people in our country apparently deserve a voice also.
TOBY FLENDERSON: Please, Michael …
MICHAEL: Shut it, Toby, nobody cares about you. OK, my first question is for Senator Osama. Now, Senator …
SENATOR OBAMA: Uh, that’s Obama, not Osama …
MICHAEL: Uh, excuse me, I’m speaking here.
OBAMA: But you got my name wrong!
MICHAEL: Details, details. Save it for your answer. Now, Senator, you have really turned your image around. I see all these young people clamoring for a chance to support you and you’re the hottest thing since my routine last time on open mic night. But really, Senator Osama, do you really think people’s memories are that short? I mean, it was a good move to lose the beard and the turban and the “
OBAMA: I am not Osama bin Laden! My name is Barack Obama. I had NOTHING! TO! DO! with 9/11!
MICHAEL: Uh huh, likely story. Just another politician dodging accountability. Senator Clinton, your response?
HILLARY CLINTON: Well, Michael, I can tell you that my campaign is not responsible for any implication that Senator Obama masterminded 9/11, those flyers in
OBAMA: That’s outrageous! Senator Clinton, I demand an immediate apology and a …
MICHAEL: Candidates, please! You’re not doing anything to elevate the level of discourse here! Let’s move along, I’ll take the next question. Now, Senator Hillary Rodman
MICHAEL: Exactly. Now, I look at you, the cool, collected professional woman in your tailored corporate pantsuits and I’ve gotta tell you, it’s very reminiscent of my girlfriend – eh, let’s call it like it is, my live-in lover Jan Levinson. Now, she rocks the whole powerful businesswoman look, but she is a tomcat in the bedroom. I mean, insatiable. Now Senator …
MICHAEL: You haven’t heard the question yet! Talk about prejudging! So much for open-mindedness. Senator, is the same true of you? Are you a hellion underneath your polished professional look, and if so, why’s Bill constantly roaming the country looking for some strange?
MICHAEL: Blah, blah, blah. I gotta tell ya, you’re not helping your ice queen image much with your uptight response. Here I lob you a softball, give you a chance to talk about using cherry-flavored massage oil or whatever you like to use to get freaky and you get all weird on me!
MICHAEL: OK, we see where you’re going with that. Osama, you got any response?
OBAMA: That’s Obama. I agree very much with Senator Clinton that any discussion of her frigid tendencies is completely inappropriate in this campaign …
MICHAEL: Please! Candidates, can we keep in on the issues here? OK, I’m going to reluctantly turn over the floor to Toby here and I hope that he won’t stink up the place too badly.
TOBY: Thank you, Michael. Senator Obama, can you discuss your approach to withdrawing our troops from
OBAMA: Thank you for that intelligent question, Toby. I believe that an expeditious and orderly withdrawal of our armed forces from the situation in
MICHAEL: That’s what she said!
OBAMA: Excuse me, what did Hillary say?
MICHAEL: Wait, no, Hillary didn’t …never mind, just please keep answering Toby’s stupid question.
OBAMA: All right. As I say, I want to increase our troop footprint in
MICHAEL: Buffer? I hardly know her!
TOBY: Michael …
MICHAEL: Shut it, Toby, you’re ruining the whole debate! OK, let’s move on from the way Toby just brought the debate down …
MICHAEL: Hold on, there, Hitlery …
OBAMA: She’s right, Michael, there’s really no comparison between her and the madman behind the Third Reich. Why, her and Bill offed a lot more folks than that back in
MICHAEL: C’mon, people! Don’t let this thing degenerate. The people deserve better than this. OK, next question comes from Dwight Schrute.
DWIGHT SCHRUTE: Senator Clinton. As the top salesman for Dunder-Mifflin Scranton, I know quite a bit about dominance. I live it every day. As you probably know, males in any species of mammal can mark their territory and establish dominance by peeing on the floor. You are in no position to be able to position yourself in such a way. I would like to ask if you have plans to modify your pantsuits in a manner to allow you to squat and …
OBAMA: Lemme jump in and answer that. I don’t think any man out there wants to see that. Can I get a “Hell Yeah?”
MATTHEWS: OK, we’ve heard enough. Good night from
MICHAEL: Hang on, I’m going to do an impression as we go off the air. Lemme just get my Oriental props together …
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Obama candidacy: high stakes for USA
By Rick Morris
Hillary Clinton's campaign is seizing on the prospect of Barack Obama raising hopes that can't possibly be fulfilled as a desperate grasp to keep him from the Democratic nomination. However, despite the fact that everything she says should be taken with an entire shaker full of salt, there is an underlying undeniable truth that is at least somewhat related to Hillary's point: the Obama candidacy has moved this country to a point where the stakes are very high in terms of any potential for national unity and maybe even viability down the road.
Although it's folly to draw too close a comparison with the Middle East, because our country on its worst day is 1,000 times more stable than the lands of feuding fanatics in the desert will ever be, it's worth thinking back to the launch of the Second Intifada in 2000. The first (and God willing, only) President Clinton brought together the key players in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to try to put together a nice 11th-hour gloss on his troubled legacy. Hopes were high as the parties agreed on almost all key points. And then -- it collapsed. Yasser Arafat walked away from the table at the end, unable or (probably) unwilling to compromise on the final sticking points. At that point, the bitterness of the raised expectations boiled over and the Palestinians took their militant operations to new heights, threatening the entire region.
Now, I don't think anything like that is possible in the literal sense here in America. I'm even dubious that we'd see a repeat of the urban riots of the late 1960s or those that followed the Rodney King verdicts of 1992. I could be wrong, but I don't think the strife that could arise between the races in this country will erupt in the streets.
However, it's not necessary to have a situation crest to that level for it to truly become a crisis. This country has traveled down a long road of redemption, first becoming the only country to go through a bloody war with itself to extinguish the crimes of slavery, then legislatively addressing the wrongs of Jim Crow. While the media has long harped on remaining points of contention between the races, such as how to administer affirmative action programs, we're at a point of overall peace between races in this country that our parents and grandparents probably could not have envisioned. Go talk to an elderly relative if you don't believe this assertion.
But with the country very much on the verge of electing its first black president, hopes have been raised to a point that could prove dangerous for all of us down the road. Let's examine some scenarios:
^ Hillary overtakes Obama for the nomination through "shenanigans." We've already addressed the point that Hillary has to pretty much leave a smoking crater where Obama used to be if she's to still get nominated. How's that going to go over in the minority community, with a longtime purported friend of theirs destroying their would-be pioneer?
^ John McCain comes back in the polls to win in November. With cynicism still high in the black community on issues of racial justice (for reasons I would partially agree with, given this nation's history), how's it going to look if McCain pulls out a win when all the polls indicate otherwise? Frankly, to many blacks it'll look like this country would never elect a black man under any circumstances.
^ The worst case of all: assassination. The internal strife this country endured in the 1960s over matters of race and war shook us all like nothing since the Civil War. I daresay that if the worst fears of many blacks are realized and Obama does not survive his campaign, the Sixties might look like a cakewalk in terms of ANY prospects for significant national unity. There's no way to ever undo the damage that such a tragedy would inflict on our country, no way to avoid the permanent bitterness if not outright hatred that a significant percentage of our fellow Americans would always carry with them. To a much, much lesser extent, the same would be true if Obama had an unsuccessful presidency and did not get reelected; the sense would be that America dumped him at the first available opportunity regardless of what any of the facts on the ground were.
Because assassination would rip this nation apart at the seams from now until the end of time, it's especially unforgivable that the Secret Service had such an egregious lapse (in Dallas of all places!) when they reportedly relaxed weapons screening at an Obama rally in the interest of speeding up the process. Because an Obama assassination would be more damaging to the country than any single killing that has happened in our history, his security detail should be significantly above and beyond that of any other candidate. The full weight of the disciplinary process needs to come down on any individuals responsible for this idiotic and amateurish decision.
Aside from keeping Obama's security air-tight, there's nothing that can be done to head off any damage from the possibility of high hopes being dashed. At the end of the day, he's a politician like anyone else, albeit a very talented one, and he's going to have to navigate the political process like anyone else. If he has a successful presidency, he'll move us much further along the path to racial reconciliation that we collectively began in the 1960s. Anything short of that is going to set us back in terms of truly being "One Nation Under God," and the only question is how far we get set back.
Hillary Clinton's campaign is seizing on the prospect of Barack Obama raising hopes that can't possibly be fulfilled as a desperate grasp to keep him from the Democratic nomination. However, despite the fact that everything she says should be taken with an entire shaker full of salt, there is an underlying undeniable truth that is at least somewhat related to Hillary's point: the Obama candidacy has moved this country to a point where the stakes are very high in terms of any potential for national unity and maybe even viability down the road.
Although it's folly to draw too close a comparison with the Middle East, because our country on its worst day is 1,000 times more stable than the lands of feuding fanatics in the desert will ever be, it's worth thinking back to the launch of the Second Intifada in 2000. The first (and God willing, only) President Clinton brought together the key players in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to try to put together a nice 11th-hour gloss on his troubled legacy. Hopes were high as the parties agreed on almost all key points. And then -- it collapsed. Yasser Arafat walked away from the table at the end, unable or (probably) unwilling to compromise on the final sticking points. At that point, the bitterness of the raised expectations boiled over and the Palestinians took their militant operations to new heights, threatening the entire region.
Now, I don't think anything like that is possible in the literal sense here in America. I'm even dubious that we'd see a repeat of the urban riots of the late 1960s or those that followed the Rodney King verdicts of 1992. I could be wrong, but I don't think the strife that could arise between the races in this country will erupt in the streets.
However, it's not necessary to have a situation crest to that level for it to truly become a crisis. This country has traveled down a long road of redemption, first becoming the only country to go through a bloody war with itself to extinguish the crimes of slavery, then legislatively addressing the wrongs of Jim Crow. While the media has long harped on remaining points of contention between the races, such as how to administer affirmative action programs, we're at a point of overall peace between races in this country that our parents and grandparents probably could not have envisioned. Go talk to an elderly relative if you don't believe this assertion.
But with the country very much on the verge of electing its first black president, hopes have been raised to a point that could prove dangerous for all of us down the road. Let's examine some scenarios:
^ Hillary overtakes Obama for the nomination through "shenanigans." We've already addressed the point that Hillary has to pretty much leave a smoking crater where Obama used to be if she's to still get nominated. How's that going to go over in the minority community, with a longtime purported friend of theirs destroying their would-be pioneer?
^ John McCain comes back in the polls to win in November. With cynicism still high in the black community on issues of racial justice (for reasons I would partially agree with, given this nation's history), how's it going to look if McCain pulls out a win when all the polls indicate otherwise? Frankly, to many blacks it'll look like this country would never elect a black man under any circumstances.
^ The worst case of all: assassination. The internal strife this country endured in the 1960s over matters of race and war shook us all like nothing since the Civil War. I daresay that if the worst fears of many blacks are realized and Obama does not survive his campaign, the Sixties might look like a cakewalk in terms of ANY prospects for significant national unity. There's no way to ever undo the damage that such a tragedy would inflict on our country, no way to avoid the permanent bitterness if not outright hatred that a significant percentage of our fellow Americans would always carry with them. To a much, much lesser extent, the same would be true if Obama had an unsuccessful presidency and did not get reelected; the sense would be that America dumped him at the first available opportunity regardless of what any of the facts on the ground were.
Because assassination would rip this nation apart at the seams from now until the end of time, it's especially unforgivable that the Secret Service had such an egregious lapse (in Dallas of all places!) when they reportedly relaxed weapons screening at an Obama rally in the interest of speeding up the process. Because an Obama assassination would be more damaging to the country than any single killing that has happened in our history, his security detail should be significantly above and beyond that of any other candidate. The full weight of the disciplinary process needs to come down on any individuals responsible for this idiotic and amateurish decision.
Aside from keeping Obama's security air-tight, there's nothing that can be done to head off any damage from the possibility of high hopes being dashed. At the end of the day, he's a politician like anyone else, albeit a very talented one, and he's going to have to navigate the political process like anyone else. If he has a successful presidency, he'll move us much further along the path to racial reconciliation that we collectively began in the 1960s. Anything short of that is going to set us back in terms of truly being "One Nation Under God," and the only question is how far we get set back.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Hillary has to disembowel Obama
By Rick Morris
With the final Democratic presidential debate before the big March 4 primaries looming next Tuesday, the dilemma facing Hillary Clinton is very stark indeed. Ever since she lost
It’s clear that Hillary and her inner circle realized the full extent of the crisis even during their only upswing of the election season. The insane momentum realized by Obama after the Hawkeye state win set in motion a dynamic that even Hillary’s shocking comeback win in
Hillary’s attempt to come off graceful at the end of the
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Worst Presidential Campaign Song EVER
By Tony Mazur
At the 1984 Republican Nation Convention, Lee Greenwood's "God Bless the USA" boomed from the speakers, and was used throughout Ronald Reagan's campaign for reelection, in which he won by a landslide.
Political songs aren't new. Some are decent. Some are bad. Some are horrible. But I heard one that was so awful, I almost tore the hair out of my scalp.
This is a pro-Hillary song, sung to the theme from Laverne & Shirley. This song is one of the many reasons why I will not vote for this broad.
At the 1984 Republican Nation Convention, Lee Greenwood's "God Bless the USA" boomed from the speakers, and was used throughout Ronald Reagan's campaign for reelection, in which he won by a landslide.
Political songs aren't new. Some are decent. Some are bad. Some are horrible. But I heard one that was so awful, I almost tore the hair out of my scalp.
This is a pro-Hillary song, sung to the theme from Laverne & Shirley. This song is one of the many reasons why I will not vote for this broad.
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Man-Hating for fun and profit
By Rick Morris
For those who like to follow the Lefter-Than-Mao antics of Ohio's First Couple of the Proletariat, U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown and his bride, perennially shrieking Cleveland Plain Dealer columnist Connie Schultz, this week was a doozy.
Her typically hysterical column this week featured the fact that some hotel gift shops are selling a "Hillary Clinton nutcracker" with metal spikes between her thighs. It was hilarious in usual Connie fashion, which is to say it was completely unintentional on her part. While I am a big critic of many Dubya policies, I must say that I await with baited breath Connie's denunciation of novelty items such as a "FUGWB" bumper sticker. Or maybe I shouldn't hold my breath after all, given the nature of the Brown-Schultz family, which seems to regard the blood of unborn babies as a sacrament, Fidel Castro as the foremost religious icon of our time and the razor as part of a ginormous patriarchal plot against wimmins everywhere.
For those who like to follow the Lefter-Than-Mao antics of Ohio's First Couple of the Proletariat, U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown and his bride, perennially shrieking Cleveland Plain Dealer columnist Connie Schultz, this week was a doozy.
Her typically hysterical column this week featured the fact that some hotel gift shops are selling a "Hillary Clinton nutcracker" with metal spikes between her thighs. It was hilarious in usual Connie fashion, which is to say it was completely unintentional on her part. While I am a big critic of many Dubya policies, I must say that I await with baited breath Connie's denunciation of novelty items such as a "FUGWB" bumper sticker. Or maybe I shouldn't hold my breath after all, given the nature of the Brown-Schultz family, which seems to regard the blood of unborn babies as a sacrament, Fidel Castro as the foremost religious icon of our time and the razor as part of a ginormous patriarchal plot against wimmins everywhere.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
1-2-3-4 Hillary wants a race war
By Rick Morris
Here's a swell example of "progressive" bring-us-together racial harmony. The Clintons are actively using the prospect of so-called "black vs. brown" conflict to use Hispanics as a firewall to help stop what would be the first American president of color.
Dare I believe that this is going to be enough to reverse the stupid narrative of "liberals revere black people, conservatives want to drag them by their genitals from the back of moving vehicles" that gets constantly perpetuated? Nah, it's pretty much just the way the world works. Look at how long "waving the bloody shirt" worked after the Civil War. A great deal of elected conservatives were on the wrong side of civil rights legislation in the 1960s, and even though 99% of them are now either deceased or feeding the pigeons in a Florida nursing home right now, the right wing is still going to be paying the price no matter what for a long time to come, fair or not (hint: it's not!). Like so much idiocy from the political and media classes in this country, all you can do is laugh about it if you want to stay sane.
Here's a swell example of "progressive" bring-us-together racial harmony. The Clintons are actively using the prospect of so-called "black vs. brown" conflict to use Hispanics as a firewall to help stop what would be the first American president of color.
Dare I believe that this is going to be enough to reverse the stupid narrative of "liberals revere black people, conservatives want to drag them by their genitals from the back of moving vehicles" that gets constantly perpetuated? Nah, it's pretty much just the way the world works. Look at how long "waving the bloody shirt" worked after the Civil War. A great deal of elected conservatives were on the wrong side of civil rights legislation in the 1960s, and even though 99% of them are now either deceased or feeding the pigeons in a Florida nursing home right now, the right wing is still going to be paying the price no matter what for a long time to come, fair or not (hint: it's not!). Like so much idiocy from the political and media classes in this country, all you can do is laugh about it if you want to stay sane.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Super Tuesday Liveblogging Part IV
By Rick Morris
This will be my final post of the evening and I will be revising my previous assessment, at least on the Republican side. While I still think the race will go on for at least another few weeks, McCain comes out of tonight extending his already strong lead having just won California and Missouri. Also, at the time of my last post, I confess that I had not seen some of the internal numbers in the polling down South -- Romney, who was being propped up by so many right-wing "opinion leaders," ran in third place across wide swaths of Dixie. His enablers will cry anti-Mormon racism, I'll retort that those voters just know a slick Northern Yankee phony when they see one, but regardless, a candidate trying so hard to be Goldwater 2K8 cannot afford to be repudiated so soundly by such a significant part of the base. So my prediction in the last liveblog installment was wrong; McCain comes out of today much stronger, Romney is weaker and Huckabee is in better shape but still a distant third and almost completely a regional candidate. And the Mitt-Bot meme about McCain only winning states dominated by Northeastern fru-fru elites (I never understood how South Carolina and Florida fit into that narrative?) -- well, McCain wins Illinois and Missouri among other states. How do you like them apples, Chowds?
The Democratic picture is still quite muddled. Obama's going to come out of the night with more states won, but Hillary just won the Big Casino, California. That Clinton win proved a bit disquieting for Claire McCaskill ... at least from the looks of her creepy, wrinkled Oompa Loompa visage.
Late note from MSNBC: Team Mittens is having "frank discussions about the future" on Wednesday. Turn out the lights, Dandy Don, the party's over.
This will be my final post of the evening and I will be revising my previous assessment, at least on the Republican side. While I still think the race will go on for at least another few weeks, McCain comes out of tonight extending his already strong lead having just won California and Missouri. Also, at the time of my last post, I confess that I had not seen some of the internal numbers in the polling down South -- Romney, who was being propped up by so many right-wing "opinion leaders," ran in third place across wide swaths of Dixie. His enablers will cry anti-Mormon racism, I'll retort that those voters just know a slick Northern Yankee phony when they see one, but regardless, a candidate trying so hard to be Goldwater 2K8 cannot afford to be repudiated so soundly by such a significant part of the base. So my prediction in the last liveblog installment was wrong; McCain comes out of today much stronger, Romney is weaker and Huckabee is in better shape but still a distant third and almost completely a regional candidate. And the Mitt-Bot meme about McCain only winning states dominated by Northeastern fru-fru elites (I never understood how South Carolina and Florida fit into that narrative?) -- well, McCain wins Illinois and Missouri among other states. How do you like them apples, Chowds?
The Democratic picture is still quite muddled. Obama's going to come out of the night with more states won, but Hillary just won the Big Casino, California. That Clinton win proved a bit disquieting for Claire McCaskill ... at least from the looks of her creepy, wrinkled Oompa Loompa visage.
Late note from MSNBC: Team Mittens is having "frank discussions about the future" on Wednesday. Turn out the lights, Dandy Don, the party's over.
Super Tuesday Liveblogging-Waiting on California
by Jason Jones
Almost 2 hours since the last post, the results have changed more closely toward my favor. I want to address the delegate issue. Clearly, I do not agree with the delegate aspect at all. The House of Representatives members are determined by population per state. The American way is to have balance, that balance is found in the Senate; 2 across the board. In my simplistic way of thinking, whoever wins the most states wins, period. This happens in some fantasy sports. If one person dominates, we alter the rules to make it fair. The analogy is this, if Barack Obama wins 46 states and Hillary Clinton gets 4, there should be no wayClinton California Texas New York Florida
Almost 2 hours since the last post, the results have changed more closely toward my favor. I want to address the delegate issue. Clearly, I do not agree with the delegate aspect at all. The House of Representatives members are determined by population per state. The American way is to have balance, that balance is found in the Senate; 2 across the board. In my simplistic way of thinking, whoever wins the most states wins, period. This happens in some fantasy sports. If one person dominates, we alter the rules to make it fair. The analogy is this, if Barack Obama wins 46 states and Hillary Clinton gets 4, there should be no way
I am still, like most of you, waiting for
John McCain-AZ, CT, DE, IL, NJ, NY, OK
Mittens
Mike
Barack Obama-AL, CO, CT, DE, GA, ID, IL, KS, MN, ND, UT
Hillary Clinton-AZ, AR, MA, NJ, NY, OK, TN
The math nerds at Fox News are reporting that even if McCain/Obama lose
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Super Tuesday Liveblogging-Early Impressions
by Jason Jones
I must preface the following by saying, I have never watched Super Tuesday or any other final 2 nominees' coverage as I am now. With the9pm est
I must preface the following by saying, I have never watched Super Tuesday or any other final 2 nominees' coverage as I am now. With the
Mittens Romney-Massachusetts (still in
Mike Huckabee-West Virginia (still in
Hillary Clinton-
Democratic states too close to call at the moment:
1. McCain MUST SEPARATE from Mittens Romney.
2. Obama MUST REMAIN RELAVENT versus Hillary Clinton.
Clinton and Romney are bad for
John McCain just won
Romney crushing McCain in
Super Tuesday Liveblogging Part I
By Rick Morris
First, let's get the initial predictions out of the way. Given the polling muddle in so many states, this assessment will be general on both sides as opposed to state-by-state.
For the Democrats, my sense is that Hillary Clinton comes in ahead of Barack Obama by a decent margin, but nothing overwhelming especially given the fact that delegates are awarded proportionally in so many places. I look for Hillary to win the majority of states tonight, however, which will provide a psychological boost to her campaign in the absence of a delegate landslide.
On the Republican side, I look for a solid John McCain win and an excellent tally of delegates given the winner-take-all victories he will earn tonight. I think McCain hangs on narrowly in California, but Mike Huckabee stays alive in the South and Mitt Romney takes a handful of states to stay alive.
Huck has already won the West Virginia caucuses with help from the McCain voters today, causing the Romney people to predictably cry. Obama won Georgia also.
First, let's get the initial predictions out of the way. Given the polling muddle in so many states, this assessment will be general on both sides as opposed to state-by-state.
For the Democrats, my sense is that Hillary Clinton comes in ahead of Barack Obama by a decent margin, but nothing overwhelming especially given the fact that delegates are awarded proportionally in so many places. I look for Hillary to win the majority of states tonight, however, which will provide a psychological boost to her campaign in the absence of a delegate landslide.
On the Republican side, I look for a solid John McCain win and an excellent tally of delegates given the winner-take-all victories he will earn tonight. I think McCain hangs on narrowly in California, but Mike Huckabee stays alive in the South and Mitt Romney takes a handful of states to stay alive.
Huck has already won the West Virginia caucuses with help from the McCain voters today, causing the Romney people to predictably cry. Obama won Georgia also.
James Dobson sells out
By Rick Morris
I am very disappointed by the recent decision of James Dobson to throw his support behind Objectively Unfit Mitt in the Republican presidential race, although I am not surprised. I criticized him previously for his ivory-tower babbling about wanting a real conservative choice in the race while he was choosing to publicly stab in the back the only viable candidate who fit that bill, Fred Thompson. His refusal to support the best man for the job because of what amounted to personal egotistical pique about Big Fred not puckering up and kissing Old Rosey exposes his decision as the complete and utter hypocrisy that it is.
For the millionth time, I get the fact that a lot of conservatives don’t like John McCain. I was strongly for Fred before and I’m only for McCain now in the sense that the other members of the “Final Four” of major presidential contenders on both sides are completely unacceptable to me. But haven’t these right-wing leaders, most of whom are moderately-to-significantly older than me, been around long enough to know that Option B isn’t always preferable just because Option A sucks? The world isn’t this simple. It is possible to acknowledge that John McCain leaves much to be desired as a candidate and still admit that Trust Fund Willard is the absolute pits. As I’ve said previously, you pretty much know what you’re getting with McCain and I’d rather be stabbed in the front than the back. Given some of the conservatives who have endorsed him and are rumored to be the leading contenders in terms of shaping policy in a McCain Administration, I’m also not in complete despair about what might come out of it, either.
As asinine as Ann Coulter’s diatribe about how she’d prefer President Hillary to President McCain was (and that pains me to say as I have several of Ann’s books and I respect the fact that she’s got more guts than almost any other commentator on the scene), at least it’s intellectually coherent. She feels that the country would be better off suffering the pain of a third Clinton Administration before taking a figurative laxative in 2012. At least that decision of hers makes more sense than her ill-considered endorsement of Romney just because he’s McCain’s only remaining major opponent on the GOP side. If anyone feels that the country would be better off with Hillary winning the White House or that there would be no difference whatsoever between her and McCain as president – well, I can disagree strongly with that and point to any number of facts to back up my view, but I wouldn’t disrespect it like I do the Know-Nothingism of the childish “We’re For Romney Just Because He’s Not McCain Brigade.”
James Dobson, like National Review, has a strong legacy of working to improve public policy in this country. Like National Review and so many other “conservative leaders,” he’s betraying that legacy with his hypocrisy and he should be ashamed of himself.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Florida primary predictions
By Rick Morris
For the donkeys, in a yawner, Hillary will top 50% in what would have to be called the dubiously-named beauty pageant. That designation comes from political pundits looking for some way to offer some context to a glorified straw poll, since the Democratic National Committee yanked all the delegates away from the Sunshine State for moving its primary up without authorization. This victory will not, and should not, be taken as any time of substantive refutation for the mighty hiney-whooping she took in South Carolina over the weekend, but the shameless Clintonian spin machine will try to push that garbage anyway.
On the Republican side, the toughest prediction of any of the contests to date looms. John McCain and Mittens are running neck-in-neck continuously in the polls. Based on the very little I can discern from the polls in recent days, I give the slightest of edges to McCain based on apparent momentum coming from the endorsement of Governor Charlie Crist and the fact that he is trending better on Intrade at the moment. "America's Mayor Rudy" will be a distant third, a prelude to his coming withdrawal from the race, and The Huck's slide will culminate in a fourth-place plummet.
For the donkeys, in a yawner, Hillary will top 50% in what would have to be called the dubiously-named beauty pageant. That designation comes from political pundits looking for some way to offer some context to a glorified straw poll, since the Democratic National Committee yanked all the delegates away from the Sunshine State for moving its primary up without authorization. This victory will not, and should not, be taken as any time of substantive refutation for the mighty hiney-whooping she took in South Carolina over the weekend, but the shameless Clintonian spin machine will try to push that garbage anyway.
On the Republican side, the toughest prediction of any of the contests to date looms. John McCain and Mittens are running neck-in-neck continuously in the polls. Based on the very little I can discern from the polls in recent days, I give the slightest of edges to McCain based on apparent momentum coming from the endorsement of Governor Charlie Crist and the fact that he is trending better on Intrade at the moment. "America's Mayor Rudy" will be a distant third, a prelude to his coming withdrawal from the race, and The Huck's slide will culminate in a fourth-place plummet.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
South Carolina Democratic primary preview
By Rick Morris
With this race being the first primary since the debacle with the polls in New Hampshire, it's exceptionally difficult to get a read on what the results will be tonight. It seems certain that Obama will win, but that was what everyone said in New Hampshire. As always, I am supremely unafraid to stick my neck out, so I'll go with the following predictions:
Obama 43%
Clinton 34%
Edwards 23%
With this race being the first primary since the debacle with the polls in New Hampshire, it's exceptionally difficult to get a read on what the results will be tonight. It seems certain that Obama will win, but that was what everyone said in New Hampshire. As always, I am supremely unafraid to stick my neck out, so I'll go with the following predictions:
Obama 43%
Clinton 34%
Edwards 23%
Monday, January 21, 2008
Bill Clinton trashes the presidency -- again
By Rick Morris
I am anything but a Barack Obama partisan. But I agree with one point that he and other leading Democrats are making loud and clear today: that Bill Clinton continues to trash the dignity of the presidency in ways utterly unprecedented in the long history of our republic.
Former presidents, in exchange for the immense respect granted to them by dint of the fact that they occupied our country's highest office, are supposed to conduct themselves in a manner that will not embarrass us. But Clinton has always reeked of the kind of person who'd go on QVC to hock autographed pairs of his used underwear if he thought it would work to his advantage. What's a little base attack dog politicking among friends?
Granted, Slick Willie is in some uncharted waters here, what with trying to get a former First Lady elected as President of These United States. But notwithstanding the effort to make Hillary the Lurleen Wallace of the new millennium, the trade-off in terms of regaining power versus retaining respect that Bill Clinton is trying to make is completely wrong. For it is not respect for him personally that he is squandering, it is the respect our nation has placed in him as a holder of our most revered office.
It is a tad funny to see many Obama supporters exercising outrage about Clinton's descent into anything-goes politics at their expense. I wonder how many of them were similarly chagrined when he debased the Oval Office with his sexcapades, or discussed his choice in underwear on national television or brought down the dignity of the office in a host of other unprecedented ways? Darn few, I bet; in politics it's always a matter of whose ox is being gored.
Here's hoping that the next time the Democratic Party succeeds in electing a president that it care ALL of the time about the character and dignity of the person as opposed to merely when it suits the need of the moment.
I am anything but a Barack Obama partisan. But I agree with one point that he and other leading Democrats are making loud and clear today: that Bill Clinton continues to trash the dignity of the presidency in ways utterly unprecedented in the long history of our republic.
Former presidents, in exchange for the immense respect granted to them by dint of the fact that they occupied our country's highest office, are supposed to conduct themselves in a manner that will not embarrass us. But Clinton has always reeked of the kind of person who'd go on QVC to hock autographed pairs of his used underwear if he thought it would work to his advantage. What's a little base attack dog politicking among friends?
Granted, Slick Willie is in some uncharted waters here, what with trying to get a former First Lady elected as President of These United States. But notwithstanding the effort to make Hillary the Lurleen Wallace of the new millennium, the trade-off in terms of regaining power versus retaining respect that Bill Clinton is trying to make is completely wrong. For it is not respect for him personally that he is squandering, it is the respect our nation has placed in him as a holder of our most revered office.
It is a tad funny to see many Obama supporters exercising outrage about Clinton's descent into anything-goes politics at their expense. I wonder how many of them were similarly chagrined when he debased the Oval Office with his sexcapades, or discussed his choice in underwear on national television or brought down the dignity of the office in a host of other unprecedented ways? Darn few, I bet; in politics it's always a matter of whose ox is being gored.
Here's hoping that the next time the Democratic Party succeeds in electing a president that it care ALL of the time about the character and dignity of the person as opposed to merely when it suits the need of the moment.
Saturday, January 19, 2008
South Carolina/Nevada results preview
By Rick Morris
In a result that barely merits mention, the Romney campaign will rack up a sizable win by default in
Over in
The Nevada Democrats appear poised to throw another curveball into what has already been a chaotic election process this year. Hillary is leading Obama in most of the major polls, and appears able to survive the endorsement momentum the
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Michigan primary predictions
By Rick Morris
Mitt Romney, having provided a nauseating microcosm of his larger campaign by pandering and telling Michigan voters exactly what they want to hear about how he will be able to restore their economic greatness by executive fiat, should be able to buy his first real win (no, we're not including you, Wyoming, nobody cares) with his inherited wealth (just what this country hasn't had enough of over the decades, huh, a president from the "Lucky Sperm Club") during this election cycle. I'll go out on a limb and predict he'll finish ahead of John McCain by as many as four points. Mike Huckabee will trail Romney by at least a dozen points.
Thus far, my predictions about the winners have been two for four. I was right about Obama, wrong about Romney (yay!) in Iowa, and right about McCain, wrong about Obama in New Hampshire (but so was the rest of the world, so give me a break on that!).
Keep one fact in mind if my prediction is right and Romney does eke this one out: when Hugh Hewitt and the rest of the "Mittens is Our Messiah" crew of sellouts in the Republican party and conservative movement crow about how McCain can't win even when independents can come in and vote for him and that Romney is the choice of true Republicans: the ONLY organized attempt to corral votes outside the Republican party for any candidate was organized on behalf of Willard Mitt Romney himself by the jerks over at Daily Kos. If I were a betting man, I'd wager heavily on Hughey leaving that tidbit out of his victory lap (speaking of which, how fast can you run when you're wearing kneepads, anyway?).
And for anyone needing one more recommendation on what a vile fraud the Romney candidacy really is, I'm happy to point you to this excellent roundup at Bizzyblog. Just the mere fact that I'm directing traffic to the Biz points out what strange bedfellows politics can make -- I don't like him, because he repeatedly slimed my good friend and our FDH Lounge Dignitary Nate Noy on behalf of Congresswoman Jean Schmidt, for whom the Biz is in the tank. But Nate is actually the person who has done the most to educate me on the dangers of Mittens and his band of Kool-Aid drinkers, so I'm sure he'd approve of me directing readers to the anti-Romney roundup on that site. I guess the FDH credo is that the enemy of our enemy is a slightly lesser enemy!
Mitt Romney, having provided a nauseating microcosm of his larger campaign by pandering and telling Michigan voters exactly what they want to hear about how he will be able to restore their economic greatness by executive fiat, should be able to buy his first real win (no, we're not including you, Wyoming, nobody cares) with his inherited wealth (just what this country hasn't had enough of over the decades, huh, a president from the "Lucky Sperm Club") during this election cycle. I'll go out on a limb and predict he'll finish ahead of John McCain by as many as four points. Mike Huckabee will trail Romney by at least a dozen points.
Thus far, my predictions about the winners have been two for four. I was right about Obama, wrong about Romney (yay!) in Iowa, and right about McCain, wrong about Obama in New Hampshire (but so was the rest of the world, so give me a break on that!).
Keep one fact in mind if my prediction is right and Romney does eke this one out: when Hugh Hewitt and the rest of the "Mittens is Our Messiah" crew of sellouts in the Republican party and conservative movement crow about how McCain can't win even when independents can come in and vote for him and that Romney is the choice of true Republicans: the ONLY organized attempt to corral votes outside the Republican party for any candidate was organized on behalf of Willard Mitt Romney himself by the jerks over at Daily Kos. If I were a betting man, I'd wager heavily on Hughey leaving that tidbit out of his victory lap (speaking of which, how fast can you run when you're wearing kneepads, anyway?).
And for anyone needing one more recommendation on what a vile fraud the Romney candidacy really is, I'm happy to point you to this excellent roundup at Bizzyblog. Just the mere fact that I'm directing traffic to the Biz points out what strange bedfellows politics can make -- I don't like him, because he repeatedly slimed my good friend and our FDH Lounge Dignitary Nate Noy on behalf of Congresswoman Jean Schmidt, for whom the Biz is in the tank. But Nate is actually the person who has done the most to educate me on the dangers of Mittens and his band of Kool-Aid drinkers, so I'm sure he'd approve of me directing readers to the anti-Romney roundup on that site. I guess the FDH credo is that the enemy of our enemy is a slightly lesser enemy!
Monday, January 14, 2008
Revisiting the Clintons and race
By Rick Morris
As I previously indicated here, I have been feeling some glee at seeing the Clintons suffer accusations of racism during the presidential campaign, since they have been poisoning the political discourse of our country for decades by lightly accusing political opponents of the same sin. But after discussing this matter on last night's FDH Lounge program, I found myself examining more angles still regarding this controversy.
One of The FDH Lounge Dignitaries, Chris Galloway, pointed out that there is a chance that the Clintons are asking to be thrown into the proverbial briar patch here -- that is, the Clintons know that the racial angle is a short-term loser with the South Carolina primary looming, but it will be a long-term winner in the events to follow. Ultimately, no matter how many black voters turn out, a black vs. white dynamic is a loser for a black candidate even in a Democratic primary. Interesting thought, and you certainly can't disbelieve it on the grounds that the Clintons aren't sufficiently cynical to perpetuate it.
Also, we got a call during the program from Andy from Toledo, one of the most faithful callers to our show during our first year. As a black man who supports Barack Obama and is significantly to the left of the Clintons, Andy had an interesting point to make. Since Bill Clinton was the greatest president ever in the morally dubious category of "Speaking In Words That Must Be Constantly Parsed," he knew exactly what he was saying when he branded Obama's campaign and life story a "fairy tale" -- moreover, black voters know this. With the coordinated points of attack emanating from the good old Clinton War Room (the "fairy tale," Obama and MLK being phony speech-givers, Bob Johnson's not-so-subtle about Obama's past weed and coke habits), black voters see the Clintons turning their "By All Means Necessary" mode of attack on one of their own -- and they don't like it.
There are signs now that the Clintons may be seeking a racial cease-fire with the Obama campaign, and while I would have previously thought it would have been because they were dealing from a position of weakness, I'm now rethinking that. Perhaps Chris is right and they want to move on because they've already accomplished their purpose: planting in the minds of white voters on Super Tuesday that angry black voters are out to take over the party and the country.
All that we can tell for certain right now is that events are going to get much more divisive and interesting before they settle down -- and as an emphatic non-Democrat, I am gleefully enjoying the show.
As I previously indicated here, I have been feeling some glee at seeing the Clintons suffer accusations of racism during the presidential campaign, since they have been poisoning the political discourse of our country for decades by lightly accusing political opponents of the same sin. But after discussing this matter on last night's FDH Lounge program, I found myself examining more angles still regarding this controversy.
One of The FDH Lounge Dignitaries, Chris Galloway, pointed out that there is a chance that the Clintons are asking to be thrown into the proverbial briar patch here -- that is, the Clintons know that the racial angle is a short-term loser with the South Carolina primary looming, but it will be a long-term winner in the events to follow. Ultimately, no matter how many black voters turn out, a black vs. white dynamic is a loser for a black candidate even in a Democratic primary. Interesting thought, and you certainly can't disbelieve it on the grounds that the Clintons aren't sufficiently cynical to perpetuate it.
Also, we got a call during the program from Andy from Toledo, one of the most faithful callers to our show during our first year. As a black man who supports Barack Obama and is significantly to the left of the Clintons, Andy had an interesting point to make. Since Bill Clinton was the greatest president ever in the morally dubious category of "Speaking In Words That Must Be Constantly Parsed," he knew exactly what he was saying when he branded Obama's campaign and life story a "fairy tale" -- moreover, black voters know this. With the coordinated points of attack emanating from the good old Clinton War Room (the "fairy tale," Obama and MLK being phony speech-givers, Bob Johnson's not-so-subtle about Obama's past weed and coke habits), black voters see the Clintons turning their "By All Means Necessary" mode of attack on one of their own -- and they don't like it.
There are signs now that the Clintons may be seeking a racial cease-fire with the Obama campaign, and while I would have previously thought it would have been because they were dealing from a position of weakness, I'm now rethinking that. Perhaps Chris is right and they want to move on because they've already accomplished their purpose: planting in the minds of white voters on Super Tuesday that angry black voters are out to take over the party and the country.
All that we can tell for certain right now is that events are going to get much more divisive and interesting before they settle down -- and as an emphatic non-Democrat, I am gleefully enjoying the show.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)