The
weather in the Cheesehead
state is in single digits today as Democrats and Republicans go
to the polls for the final primary of the month. Polls close at 8pm
local time, 9pm ET. The stakes: Pretty damn high.
The Democrats have just finished a week of the most brutal campaigning since South Carolina. Hillary Clinton has tested a series of negative attacks on Obama, from the piecemeal—Social Security, health care, his Illinois Senate record—to a dark, larger narrative. That narrative could be summed up as "Obama is a lightweight speech-maker for hire who won't debate the issues and doesn't even write his own stuff." The Deval Patrick scandal might be one of those cluster bombs that screws up everything we know about a presidential race; it might backfire on Clinton, since Obama's trading lines with a political ally is far, far different than Joe Biden stealing lines from a British Labour leader.
Those aren't the only factors that could screw up Obama's chances. Cold weather had an early impact on turnout in Madison, the liberal enclave where he needs to win big. Some talk radio jocks suggested that Republicans (it's an open primary, and they can vote in either race) vote for Hillary, since polls show her losing the state to McCain in November. But it would take one hell of a mind-meld to reverse the trend we saw in Virginia's open primary: Republicans and independents voting for Obama because they, uh, like him. In 2004 (when there was no GOP race), 38 percent of Democratic primary voters were non-Democrats. It'll be lower this time, but those voters will give Obama a cushion.
Here are the
exits from 2004: Here's a
map of how the state voted. If Dade
Dane (I had a map in front of me and still mistyped this) County
(Madison) turnout is light (125,363 voted in 2004), it's bad for
Obama. If Brown County (Green Bay) turnout is high (26,542 voted in
2004), it's good for Clinton.
The Republican race is harder to handicap simply because so many Republicans will pass on the race to stay home or to mess with the Democrats. But early exit polls suggest Huckabee is doing worse among groups he overperformed in back in Virginia, like talk radio voters.
We've got a Democratic caucus in Hawaii and a Republican primary
in Washington (supplementing the Feb. 9 caucus), and results won't
come in until 1 a.m. and 11 p.m. respectively, so thread
away.
Wisconsin
The Democrats (74 delegates) - I'm expecting Obama to win
by 7 or 8 points.
The Republicans (40 delegates) - McCain should win by
about 15 points.
Hawaii (20
delegates)
Obama's a native and the state's as wired for him as the rest of
the caucus states. It's also one of the wealthiest (median income
$49,820) and most liberal (Kucinich
got 31 percent in 2004 and carried Maui) states that's voted so
far. The only things that could put Hillary over the top would be
an Asian anti-Obama vote (as occured in California) or the old
Daniel Inouye machine turning out thousands of votes for her. I'd
be surprised if they could stop Obama. He wins by 15 points or
more.
Washington (19
delegates)
McCain will win.
UPDATE 6:45: Early Wisconsin exits (with more than two hours til polls close) look good for Obama. Twenty-seven percent of voters are independents, and Obama is winning them about 2-1. Clinton would need to win Democrats by about 10 points to overcome that advantage. One sort of promising result: 70 percent say free trade costs Americans jobs. Down from 74 percent last time!
UPDATE 6:53: Clinton will take the stage for her last speech of the day at... 8:30 p.m. ET. If she thought she could win Wisconsin, she'd wait. (Neither candidate is spending election night in Wisconsin.)
UPDATE 7:04: Nine percent of Democratic voters were Republicans, pushing the non-Democrat turnout in the Obama-Clinton race to 38 percent: Exactly what it was when a coalition of working class whites and blacks edged Kerry past Edwards in 2004. In the GOP race 20 percent of voters were independent and 9 percent were Democrats, which must be good for McCain.
UPDATE 8:13: CBS releases most of the early exits in a shameless bid for traffic. OK, I'll play. Obama is winning every region of the state except the conservative northwest, and carrying white voters by 7 points (losing white Democrats by 4).
UPDATE 8:58: Mickey Kaus is wrong. It was a backlash to overt sexism, a great ground operation (including the legendary Michael Whouley, who won Iowa for Kerry in 2004), Edwards spoiling the anti-Hillary vote, and a year of organization that won New Hampshire for Hillary. If she loses tonight, she... loses tonight.
UPDATE 9:00: The networks call for McCain. Final exit polls have Obama winning men by 26 points and women by 2 points. He wins going away tonight.
UPDATE 9:10: So, how did Plagiarismgate play? Obama... won voters who decided in the last week by 12 points. He lost voters who decided today by 2 points.
UPDATE 9:18: Exits have McCain winning by barely 15 points and Ron Paul dragging at around 4 percent.
UPDATE 10:02: In Obama's victory speech: "If you work in America, you should not be poor."
UPDATE 10:37: The exit polls are looking final, and the late-deciding vote broke this way: Voters who moved in the last week went for Obama by 34 points, voters who moved in the last three days went by 8 for Obama, and voters who decided today went for Clinton by 2. So, does that indicate a swing from the plagiarism scandal? Maybe not. In this last round of primaries election-day deciders have always broken for Clinton compared to last-week deciders. In Maryland Obama won last week voters by 34, last three days voters by 24... and Clinton won election day voters by 7 points. In other words they broke even more strongly in a state where the last day of news was good for Obama than they broke in Wisconsin, where Obama decisively lost the last news cycle. All three network broadcasts led with the plagiarism story last night.
UPDATE 11:06: As usual, Ron Paul is getting his best results in small, rural counties. Seven percent in Adams, Burnett, Calumet. Eight percent in Iron. Nine percent in Richland and Vernon. Twelve percent in Crawford. But in the exits he only breaks into double digits among voters dissatisfied with a McCain or Huck nomination.
UPDATE 11:33: The talking heads keep talking about Obama's "15 point" victory. It's going to be closer to 18 points. The outstanding counties are basically all Obama counties. More than 20 percent needs to be counted in both Dane and Milwaukee, both going huge for him. What makes this impressive? The single best pre-election poll for Obama showed him winning by 13.
UPDATE 12:16: In 2004, when there was no Republican race in Wisconsin, 828,364 people voted in the Democratic primary. Tonight more than a million people will have voted in the Democratic primary and less than 400,000 will have voted in the GOP primary. I'm increasingly thinking that Republicans handed McCain the nomination knowing that a Republican won't win this year. It's like a gold watch, except that it will explode after everyone else leaves the room.
Some talk radio jocks suggested that Republicans (it's an
open primary, and they can vote in either race) vote for Hillary,
since polls show her losing the state to McCain in
November.
WTF?!?!
Weigel where the hell were you when talk radio jocks were saying
this about Democrats voting in McCain v Romney?
Correct me if I am wrong, but if Obama gets the Democratic nod he will be the first person to get the nomination of a major political party who was born outside of the contiguous United States. I am right am I not?
Correct me if I am wrong, but if Obama gets the Democratic
nod he will be the first person to get the nomination of a major
political party who was born outside of the contiguous United
States. I am right am I not?
I guess that depends if the Republican Convention this year is
before or after the Democratic one.
2008: an election where two socialists oppose each other (McCain
and either Clinton or Obama). This kind of reminds me of the novel
Harangue by Garrett.
http://www.mises.org/store/Harangue-The-Trees-Said-to-the-Bramble-Come-Reign-Over-Us-P451C0.aspx
I forgot McCain was born in Panama! If Obama gets the nod (and assuming McCain gets his) we will have BOTH major contenders born outside the contiguous United States!
"One sort of promising result: 70 percent say free trade costs
Americans jobs. Down from 74 percent last time!"
We still havn't learned from Smoot-Hawley
http://www.mises.org/story/1008
Who is surprised by recent revelations that Hillary plans to
steal Obama's pledged delegates?! Come on, People!
By now we know the Clintons are capable of ANYTHING, whether legal
or ethical or not, to get power. There is NOTHING NEW here, is
there!?!
Enough of Washington politics as usual. The politics of personal
destruction, as perfected by the Clinton Dynasty over the years,
has gone far enough!
So, turn the focus where it should be: have Bill and Hill
immediately release their incriminating tax returns and have them
immediately release their secret White House papers (which they are
pretending they can't release now!) so that we all can judge for
ourselves whether Hillary really had any experience in the White
House besides parties with dignitaries and her miserably failed
Hillary-Care-Gate.
Some interesting analysis -- thanks. I'm about to post a link to
you, just FYI.
Thanks--
T.D. Scott
VichyDems
"Who is surprised by recent revelations that Hillary plans to
steal Obama's pledged delegates?! Come on, People!"
If she did that it would be the Republicans dream. A lot of
Democrats, especially [insert prefered term for Americans of
Sub-Saharan African descent] ones. McCain would win and they might
even recapture at least one of the houses of congress.
Madison is in Dane County; Miami is in (Miami-)Dade
County.
As a native cheesehead, I implore you to not confuse Wisconsin with
Florida.
Keith beat me to it.
BTW, I have always found it ironic that Green Bay is located in
Brown County.
Prediction =
Obama takes WI tonight handily (20+pts).
He also wins Ohio in 2 weeks, but loses texas fairly closely to
Hilary (by 10pts or so) and goes on to win the nom.
Clintons will not be particularly graceful about getting pwned, and
wont bow out until it becomes painfully clear she isnt getting
saved by dirty pool like reallocating FL or MI votes, or pulling
strings with the superdelegates.
Also, having mccain and obama as the candidates will be the most
engaged election in the last 50+ years. Highest turnout, most fluid
voters in play. I've heard from a number of republicans who want to
vote for Obama in the general, even. Many I know voted for 'bama in
the primaries in VA. It will actually be mostly a positive campaign
from both sides, although mccain will go after Obama's war-leader
cred mainly. Obama will poke at his age and his temper and his
'insider' thing, but overall be generous and respectful of his
credentials.
Obama will win in the end.
Then, we figure out what the fuck that really means.
Al Gore was born in the District of Columbia. Barry Goldwater was born in Arizona Territory three years before it became a state.
You mean the "plot to steal Obama's delegates" that doesn't
actually exist?
The only reason this Obama voter has even a shred of sympathy left
for that woman is the silly-ass conspiracy theories that the
wingers are always indulging in about her.
GILMORE,
MSNBC reported that 8% of Republicans in your fair commonwealth say
they would vote for Obama over McCain.
That is stunning. This is still the polarized nation of 2000 and
2004, and he has that kind of cross-party appeal?
The word on the street is that Ron Paul was lifting whole lines from Mein Kampf, but only for fund raising letters.
Joe, other than thier respective views on the war, what is the difference betwen McCain and Obama? Both are statists through and through. Notice McCain also has that "cross-party appeal" what neither has is apeal for people who support free-market economics.
PIRS,
You don't even know what the word "statist" means.
Hint: it does not mean "not a libertarian."
I might as well declare that Josef Stalin and Ronald Reagan are
both "a-liberals." So what's the difference, really?
The world is not defined in one-dimensional comparison to your
fringe politics.
"I might as well declare that Josef Stalin and Ronald Reagan are
both "a-liberals." "
They were both aliberal. There were at least a few minor
differences. For example, Reagan supported free market economics at
least some of the time. Stalin supported it none of the time. Also,
Reagan, unlike either McCain or Stalin supported free speech.
ONe major difference was that Stalin was unconstrained.
When the Constitution is not ignored it is a major inconvienience to would-be-tyrants.
other than thier respective views on the war, what is the
difference betwen McCain and Obama?
As the #1 issue, that's enough for me to make a decision.
To answer the question, the biggest difference is that John
McCain believes we would be a better, stronger, safer country if we
embarked on a Kipling-esque mission to bring the world under our
sway, and Barack Obama does not.
John McCain was trying to start up an Iraq
War/Occupation/Incorporation into our Sphere as far back as the
1990s. He believes our country is better off with a Great National
Project (see the Weekly Standard, 1998, "Towards a National
Greatness Conservatism"), and he believes the way to secure our
interests and values is to hold other countries down by force until
they concede to remake themselves in our image.
Barack Obama thinks we should fight terrorism by fighting
terrorists and winning the battle for public opinion across the
world. John McCain thinks we should fight terrorism by taking over
countries.
Barack Obama is a liberal internationalist. He might send a
battalion to some dusty hole to save half a million lives
threatened by drought or ethnic cleansing or some such horror, with
our allies at our side, but he would do everything he could NOT to
get our country into a large, serious war unless we were directly
threatened. He looks at war as something that is bad for our
country, while McCain and his neoconservative followers have an
almost pre-WW1 view of it as the natural course a state should
pursue, and one that improves the quality of the public by
instilling military virtues in them.
This has tremendous importance not just for our foreign policy, but
for our domestic policy. While Bush is way, way off the scale, all
presidents expand their power and the power of their office beyond
the checks and balances system during wartime.
It's really quite simple. Barack Obama will be more like a Belgian
Prime Minister, and John McCain will be more like a French Emperor.
Choose wisely.
Oops, you asked "other than the war."
I don't think that's a useful way to look at it. For one thing,
their positions on "the war" are the consequence of their positions
on war in general. Second, think of FDR during WW2. Think of Wilson
during WW1. Think of Nixon during Vietnam. Think of Truman trying
to nationalize the mines.
Now imagine if those wars were considered by the president and his
party to be the permanent state of our nation.
other than thier respective views on the war, what is the
difference betwen McCain and Obama?
Generational? Maybe it's because i'm 23, but i get so sick of
hearing about 'nam and woodstock and reagan and hanoi jane and blah
blah blah..
There's that, too, shane.
How about if there was a chance - just a chance - of having a
debate over drug policy that didn't degenerate into a grudge match
over who hated what kind of people when they went to college in the
60s.
joe | February 19, 2008, 7:43pm | #
GILMORE,
MSNBC reported that 8% of Republicans in your fair commonwealth say
they would vote for Obama over McCain.
That is stunning. This is still the polarized nation of 2000 and
2004, and he has that kind of cross-party appeal?
FWIW I live in NYC. My extended family and a number of ex-and
-current military people i know live in VA
I'm not particularly surprised. I WAS surprised my crazy super
conservative dad was more for Obama than mccain, but the way he put
it, neither of them fit traditional party lines, so they're both
just 'moderates' of different stripes to many people, which is why
i think the cross party appeal is a very real thing. For my pop,
the reason for Obama was that he was young and not yet a cynical
player. He felt the guy would grow to the responsibility, whereas
McCain is stuck with his history of positions which he couldnt move
from without alienating his support. To the same point, i think a
large number of 'Lieberman' style democrats will vote McCain
(although they wont make much of a difference - there arent enough
of them)
I think the 'polarization' thing has always been overblown. More
people want to bury the MoveOn.orgs AND Focus on the Family-types
than adhere to the rhetoric of either.
Maybe nows our chance :)
I said:
"Joe, other than thier respective views on the war, . . ."
It is true that foreign policy can impact domestic policy but this
was not my point. Obama would be like a Belgian Prime Minister and
McCain would be like a modern French president whose last name
rymes with Sarkozy.
joe- yeah that about completely turned me off during the '04
race, the tossing of the medals, the swift boat stuff it's like
these people(the boomers) just can't let go, between the aged
hippies and the born-agains there is no room for anything other
than the culture war crap.
god i hate boomers, wish they'd just die already. unfortunatley
they are planning on sticking it out for a while and demanding the
cushy tax payer supported "aged" friendly benefits they didn't
bother to extend to their own parents(sort of like how they
protested and dodged their war yet when i question this war...)
joe | February 19, 2008, 7:41pm | #
You mean the "plot to steal Obama's delegates" that doesn't
actually exist?
http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-wants-florida-and-michigan-delegates-seated-convention
Not stealing his, but this was the dirty pool i mentioned.
it's not a 'plot', but it exists, and it's pretty desperate
bullshit
GILMORE,
The Florida/Michigan thing is real.
The latest flap is about some comment some Clinton flack made
saying, "If no one has a majority at the convention, everyone is
going to be trying to poach everyone's delegates."
Which, with a little spin through the MIghty Wurlitzer, turned into
ZOMG!!1!! Teh Hildebeast is trying to steal the
election!!!11!!1eleven!!
"I don't think that's a useful way to look at it. For one thing,
their positions on "the war" are the consequence of their positions
on war in general. Second, think of FDR during WW2. Think of Wilson
during WW1. Think of Nixon during Vietnam. Think of Truman trying
to nationalize the mines.
Now imagine if those wars were considered by the president and his
party to be the permanent state of our nation."
Interestingly enough, in the 20th Century Democrats were more
likely to start wars than Republicans. Our current POTUS's father
was an exception to the rule. Now we have the W. This may be a
realignment of the parties.
Which, with a little spin through the MIghty Wurlitzer,
turned into ZOMG!!1!! Teh Hildebeast is trying to steal the
election!!!11!!1eleven!!
I havent paid much attention to the day to day dialogue on the
intertubes really. My bets have netted me about $500 bucks so far
amongst my professional "forecasting" friends. Im looking longer
term at this point. I think most of what will clinch the deal will
happen in 2 weeks, while the conventional wisdom still thinks
somehow it's coming down to the wire. I dont think thats the
case.
This promises to be one of the most interesting votes in recent years in the Aloha State. I just can't bring myself to register as a democrat to take part in it. Don't underestimate the power of the democrat machine here.
p.s.
Wulitzer?
Thats an awesome electric piano, which a guy I play with uses, but
I wouldnt think of it as working for a "munging/food processor"
type of analogy
PIRS,
The realignment you mention happened between 1968 and 1980.
Republicans have been the War Party and Democrats the Peace Party
for at least 20 years. But you are right, in between TR and FDR,
the Republicans were isolationists and the Democrats were more
activist with the military. From Truman through Johnson (the early
Cold War), they were equally likely.
GILMORE:
MSNBC reported that 8% of Republicans in your fair commonwealth say they would vote for Obama over McCain.
joe:
That is stunning. This is still the polarized nation of 2000 and 2004, and he has that kind of cross-party appeal?
It is impressive, joe, but maybe not that much. Virginia is going
Democratic anyway. Obama is maybe only getting it there a few
elections early. It's actually kind of interesting to live here and
watch it slowly happen.
(Though if a significant part of the MSNBC crossover figures are
due to the kind of military people for Obama of GILMORE's separate
anecdotal evidence, rather than just shifting populations, that
actually would be a much bigger deal. It would be an impressive
statement about Obama as a candidate. Of course, there's plenty of
those kind of statements around anyway.)
GILMORE,
The Mighty Wurlitzer is a slang term the kids are using for the
Republican Noise Machine. You know, like "tea shades" and "can I
rap witcha?"
It's big and expensive and makes a lot of noise. Get it?
Oh, Rodney, you play the piano divinely!
You ought to see my play my upright organ.
Ahh.
I hate the kids. They never know shit.
Wurly's are cheap, funky, and subtle. No one who doesnt play music
should be allowed to talk about them without kneeling and preying
for mercy.
(cue: BOM-BOM, BOM Bom BAM-BAM! "hey momma dont you treat me
wrong... come and love your daddy all night long, all right....
heyy heyyy,")
Joe, Reagan did not start a major war. OK, yea, he liberated Grenada but he also withdrew troops from Lebonon rather than go to war there. Reagan was also a peacenick in his own way, he signed a lot of treaties to reduce nuclear arms with the USSR. Many people forget that.
Republicans worldwide are praying that Obama win most popular vote delagates and that Hillary successfully steal the nomination.
oh. AND they're compact and portable.
The analogy would work if the example were "The Mellotron", but
thats pretty gay to actually say as well
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mellotron
GILMORE,
Was that a Wurlitzer in "Green Onions?"
Anyhoo, I think you got the big states backwards. Hillary wins
comfortably in Ohio, but it's close in Texas.
Does Weigel have a tipjar? Because, the coverage he offers is so exciting! It's almost like watching CNN, but without the BillSchneider closeups and the guy who was the reporter for that paper off in the background just sitting around waiting for something. Go Weigel! Go CNN!
For my pop, the reason for Obama was that he was young and
not yet a cynical player. He felt the guy would grow to the
responsibility, whereas McCain is stuck with his history of
positions which he couldn't move from without alienating
his support.
That's one of the more interesting points I've read in a while,
particularly the part in bold.
I guess I'm with Shane, too, being 27, that me and a whole bunch of
people my age are really sick and tired of baby boomer crap...it's
as if all the mistakes that could possibly be made in the last
thirty years they have gone out of their way to make, while what
they actually *did* in their youth disappeared down some gaping
memory hole.
PIRS,
Hey, I'm the last person in the world you need to tell about
Reagan's foresight in signing treaties with Gorbachev. The fact
that he reversed himself about the central defining plank of his
political philosophy for 30 years, embracing a charm offensive
because he saw that the Containment strategy he'd disdained had
worked, was one of the most extraordinary actions any American
president has ever taken. I think it gets far too little press,
because it doesn't fit into either party's preferred narrative.
That dipshit George Will wrote, the day after Rekyavik, "Today will
be remember as the day American lost the Cold War." Insane
supervillain Richard Perle had a few choice words for him
too.
I remember watching that signing ceremony - "Trust, but verify" -
live on CNN as a lad. Wow.
But nonetheless, Reagan was an absolutely ferocious saber-rattler,
and the fact that we didn't become involved in any big wars under
him was more a consequence of circumstance than his own
predilections.
BTW, FDR, Truman, and Wilson didn't "start" any major wars, either.
They reacted when other people started them.
joe | February 19, 2008, 9:01pm | #
GILMORE,
Was that a Wurlitzer in "Green Onions?"
No, thats a Hammond Organ
A huge, heavy, and expensive piece of kit that requires a powered
rotating speaker cabinet as well. See "whipping post" or anything
by Jimmy Smith or Jimmy McGriff or Lonny Smith, etc.
The main competitor/comparison to a wurly is a Rhodes keyboard. The
Wurly is the cheapest and smallest electric piano made, basically.
See the movie "Ray" for a co-starring role :)
Except George Will's spelling was correct.
joez Law of Teh Intertubez strikes again!
LoneWacko = please forward your home address. I have a number of used diapers that you can eat from to your heart's content
joe | February 19, 2008, 9:01pm | #
Anyhoo, I think you got the big states backwards. Hillary wins
comfortably in Ohio, but it's close in Texas.
$50?
I'll do $25 each if you're hedging.
I call Hawaii for Obama. First!
Ha, Obama wins Hawaii too but it will be closer than expected.
McCain's giving his speech. If you ever wanted to see what Teddy
Roosevelt would have been like with nukes, precision munitions, and
PTSD, by all means vote for McCain.
He sure ain't shy, he just said that we need to extend the "reach
and scope of our democracy". He could have explained it in six
letters.
For all I know, GILMORE, you're the anthrax guy.
Gentleman's wager, ok?
BTW, since you're an organ guy, check out a song called "Weirdo" by
the Charlatans UK. They're a Manchester Scene band from the 1990s,
but they worked in an ubercool organ riff into that song. It's a
neat sound, and totally unexpected, given the genre.
Looks like McCain took Chris Matthews' advice: give your speech
BEFORE Barack Obama. Not after.
My friends,...you don't want to follow that guy.
If you ever wanted to see what Teddy Roosevelt would have been like with nukes, precision munitions, and PTSD, by all means vote for McCain.
You get a big LOL and win the thread, "my friend".
Watching McCain's crowing. We must marshal ("to bring together and order in an appropriate or effective way") our economy against extremist Islam, apparently. Gosh, he's awful.
I was really hoping my candidate, Johan V. Unstructured, could pull it out on the Dem side.
Mickey Kaus is wrong.
You could make that a macro, you know. Set it so you just hit a
Function key.
Save your wrists, y'know?
"But nonetheless, Reagan was an absolutely ferocious
saber-rattler, and the fact that we didn't become involved in any
big wars under him was more a consequence of circumstance than his
own predilections."
Saber rattling is quite different from starting a war. When a
rattlesnake rattles its tail it does so as a warning. Reagan did so
as a warning.
"BTW, FDR, Truman, and Wilson didn't "start" any major wars,
either. They reacted when other people started them."
Willson's case was innexusable. He sided with Britain when they
were clearly in the wrong. A pleasurecraft had no business going
into a war zone. The U.S. had no interest in the "Great War." As
for Pearl Harbour, that was a reaction to our own trade policies.
Rosevelt had earlier placed an embargo on Japan. As for the
European War, that was largely the result of Wilson's insistance in
punishing Germany after WWI causing resentment among the German
people and at least one Austrian painter.
Woodrow Wilson is the most over-rated President of the 20th
Century.
The only reason hes rated so high is because liberal Democratic
Professors do sure love one of their own.
joe | February 19, 2008, 9:16pm | #
For all I know, GILMORE, you're the anthrax guy.
Gentleman's wager, ok?
if you mean, "no money involved", then save your breath. If you
mean, "hit me up afterward for transfer of funds" HEY! no sweat. My
opinions have a tradeable value and i'm not starting go GNU Licence
and shit at this point.
and the charlatans were also playing the hammond. You're mixing up
apples and kiwis, not even close. Electric pianos are very
distinct. great wurly tracks = "these eyes" by the Guess Who -
pretty much anything by Ray Charles. Hammond tracks are all over
the place. Try "sookie sookie" by Grant Green for a fun one.
PIRS,
Saber rattling is quite different from starting a war.
Tell it to the Austro-Hungarian and Russian Empires.
Reagan actually was an uber-hawk. He wasn't faking in all of those
speeches in the 50s and 60s and 70s. He blasted detente, he wanted
confrontation with the Soviet Union.
His pivot when Gorbachev came to power and started making changes
was a genuine conversion. That's what makes it so extraordinary; he
wasn't just playing before that. He would have been with the
generals during the Cuban Missile Crisis, urging Kennedy to launch
the air strikes. On top of that, he was not a brilliant strategic
thinker, he was not inclined to pursue arms control and peace
treaties, he spent decades urging that we rollback the Soviets
until we could devour them whole - and yet he saw the moment when
almost none of the people around him, certainly none of his "old
fighters," saw anything but weakness and surrender when he thawed
our relations.
It looks weird for Obama, giving his Wisconsin victory speech in
Texas. That's a big slap in the face of a big swing state that
turned out for him.
Maybe he thinks it's so safe he can diss it. Maybe he expects a
1984-scale victory over McCain, and is just winning the
primary.
It's a stump speech. He's telling people to go to the
caucuses.
Wisconsin? What Wisconsin?
I was very young when Reagan was POTUS but I do remember one of his remarks when someone asked him why he did not talk to a Soviety President (pre-Gorby). His respose was that he would expet they kept dying on him. This was a period when Soviet leaders did indeed die with frequency.
Shocking frequency.
A group of men in their 70s electing the senior among them. What
did they expect?
joe | February 19, 2008, 9:43pm | #
OK, "Whiter Shade of Pale."
Still a hammond dude.
Really, there is an "internet" you can check first if you're
curious.
I'm inclined to think Texas will be closer than Ohio. Obama's
only polling 4 points behind in Texas last I saw. Also, if there's
a trend in Obama vs. Clinton states, it's that Obama tends to win
in states with smaller Democratic populations (North Dakota,
Kansas, South Carolina) and Clinton where the Democrats are
entrenched (Florida, Massachusetts).
Also, just to play devil's advocate on the McCain war thing, to a
certain extent I think effectiveness may trump ideology. Whoever is
elected will be a wartime president dealing with (at least) two
overseas conflicts. McCain undeniably knows more about war than
Obama does, from his Senate experience as well as the whole
prisoner-of-war thing. Couldn't a person who agrees with Obama's
overall vision also worry that he'd mess up the details?
Reagan was a good President on balance, but George Bush Sr. is the most underrated President of the last 50 years.
So Shane, are you saying you'll vote for McCain? All three are
dirty boomer-panderers to some degree, but Hilldog and Barack are
both stinkin boomers themselves.
Politics would be a whole lot different if we took away voting
cards at the same time we handed out social security checks.
Bush 41 broke a promise to not raise taxes and entered a war which had as one consequence inflaming hatred in the United States in the heart of Osama Bin Ladin. Bush 41 is the Republican Party's answer to Woodrow Wilson.
and just to get all technical ... wurly's are technically
mechanical 'pianos' - with mechanical hammers that hit plinky
little metal 'reeds' that tune them and make nice plinky sounds
that can be mechanically modified. It's basically a percussive
instrument.
Organs on the other hand are in a different family, species wise =
they're 'sustained note' items, closer to bagpipes than pianos,
really. They have a totally different sound and note-envelope. They
have different range and modulation as well. but this is moot. My
point was, "kids dont know shit". And apparently most adults too,
when it comes to their ears.
alisa | February 19, 2008, 9:54pm | #
I'm inclined to think Texas will be closer than Ohio.
Joe? Money is still on the table. You're missing a real opportunity
here.
Bush 41 at leats got international consensus for his actions in Iraq. He traveled to Europe, he talked to allies to convince them. He didn't say "Fuck you you FRENCH if you're not with us!"
The situation with the Soviet leaders is worse than it seems. Andropov had kidney failure three months into his fifteen month term and spend the last six months hospitalized. Chernenko was already ill when he took power and spent most of his thirteen months. And when you add to that the last years of Brezhnev, the Soviet Union was pretty much paralyzed at the very top for most of Reagan's first term.
Transitioning out of the Cold War is no easy task, either. 41 sucked in domestic policy but he was pretty good in foreign.
Translating into English:
The situation with the Soviet leaders Was worse than it seems.
Andropov had kidney failure three months into his fifteen month
term and spent the last six months hospitalized. Chernenko was
already ill when he took power and spent most of his thirteen
months dying. And when you add to that the last years of Brezhnev,
the Soviet Union was pretty much paralyzed at the very top for most
of Reagan's first term.
Most overrated, Wilson.
Most underrated, Bush or Ford. Once upon a time, it was Harry T.,
but his reputation has grown steadily since he left office. Just
the opposite of Wilson.
Ceasar, so it is OK to get involved in a war that does not involve your country as long as a bunch of "diplomats" from other countries say so? So you would have been OK with his son doing the same if he had a UN resolution warning Iraq of "severe consequences" if they did not cooperate before invading?
Joe, I will agree with you on Ford. Not on Bush 41 though.
PIRS,
Bush 41 kicked the Iraqis out of the Kuwait, then left. And he did
with an international alliance against a state that Broke The Peace
- sent its army across another country's border to annex it.
You can certainly take exception to doing that - I disagree, but
can see the other fellow's point - but you must admit, it is hardly
the same thing as Bush's War On...uh...what's the war about this
week? Except not leaving, I mean.
Ideally, I would love to see a figurehead president (say, like
Germany's president). In that case Obama is the perfect
presidential candidate. It would suck to have a president who wants
to do stuff, lotsa stuff, and *also* have lots of power. Hence, I'd
say, vote for the candidate that will do the least as president.
The first choice would be Paul. He literally says that he will not
do anything as president unless there is a declaration of
war.
Now that Paul has 0 changes (yes, 0), I'd say vote for Obama! He's
the only one saying that all what he will do is bring about change
without saying what that really is, which I think means
"change=nothing". So, yes, vote for Obama, for he'll make a perfect
figurehead. He'd be good figurehead president. The others are all
deliberate statists and possibly fascists too.
PIRS
"A bunch of diplomats"
Memo to PIRS - we aren't the only country in the world. Stumbling
badly into a war on no evidence with no support from anyone else
(OK - Britain maybe) is not the way to "defend" ones interests.
Bush 41 was a pragmatic president who was able to set goals and
actually stick to em. His son can't manage an office pool.
Ceasar, so it is OK to get involved in a war that does not involve your country as long as a bunch of "diplomats" from other countries say so?
Not saying it was great, but its sure as hell better than what his
son did. I like that he actually talked to other
countries. Well, maybe I'm setting the bar too low, but thats easy
to do in the (20)00's.
My thesis advisor was a Romanian who had managed to escape
Ceaucescu. He was the most laid back, apolitical person I had ever
seen, except for one time when I went into his office shortly after
Andropov kicked the bucket and said "So, what do you think about
Andropov dying?" He looked up from his desk at me with a scowl and
said "They are bastards! I hope they all die!"
That was pretty much the end of the conversation.
joe | February 19, 2008, 10:16pm | #
What are the terms, GILMORE? I'm a sporting type.
I made the call Ohio (BO) and Texas (HC)
You say other way around.
We can go straight with that for $50 (i.e. if i get my pair, or you
get yours, one lumpen win) If Hil takes both or obama takes both,
we're both wrong and no winner.
OR - we can go $25 on each, and if they split them either way, we'd
end up breaking even regardless of who called it. I'd pick
Obama/Obama for both, assuming you'd split on one.
I ususally put money in iEscrow with intertubes people i make
'gentleman's bets' with. Or paypal if we're more trusting like.
Anyway, if you're in, let me know. We'll convene on the 4th to
figure out who gets what.
Memmo to Yoshi if you think I am defending Bush 43 I am not. I don't like EITHER of them. Jeb might not have been bad but he never became POTUS.
Agh - another Clinton speech, this time on how great Ohio
is:
"It gave us my friend and hero ... Senator John Glenn."
translated:
"Springfield, are you ready to rock?"
The CW on the Wisconsin primary was that McCain was headed for a
safe win, but the race was close on the Democratic side.
Barack Obama is winning a higher share of his party's votes than
John McCain, with 55+% of the vote counted.
Plant Imigration Rights Supporting | February 19, 2008, 10:19pm
| #
Syd, interesting paragraph, where is that from?
Just me. The first time it had some mistakes in it that I
corrected.
"UPDATE 10:02: In Obama's victory speech: "If you work in
America, you should not be poor." "
And if you don't work????? Also, what if you work and REALY suck at
your job? I mean if you suck like the WB Network in the 1990s.
joe, Charlatans UK were all about the organ. Inspiral Carpets are another '90s Brit band with an excellent organ sound, too. Check out "Saturn 5." Noel Gallagher was their guitar tech before he joined (read: took over) Oasis. Don't know if that's a positive or negative in your book, but interesting nonetheless.
Syd, good job, I asked because of your comment "translating from English" It made me wonder if it was from secret Soviet document.
Apologies, the "rock" in "Springfield, are you ready to rock?" should have been in all caps.
I'd feel icky betting on Hillary, which is what I'd have to do
in Ohio.
Which is unfortunate, because I think Ohio is a much safer bet than
Texas. I think Texas is going to be very close.
Tell you what: Over/under on HRC's margin of victory in Texas: 2.
I'll take the under. 2 points is a push. $50.
Oh, who are we kidding? The democratic nomination will be decided the old fashioned way, in a smoke-free back room.
"Oh, who are we kidding? The democratic nomination will be
decided the old fashioned way, in a smoke-free back room."
So, then you think Hillary WILL get the nomination?
joe | February 19, 2008, 10:51pm | #
I remember Inspiral Carpets. Commercial Rain
You're old. :)
I remember Michael Jackson's Thriller album. It was the first LP record I ever bought. He looked human then.
Billboard Top Hits 1966, I believe, or the Doors Greatest Hits. I don't really know what that says about me.
By the time I was really paying attention to music Michael Jackson had become a punch line.
joe | February 19, 2008, 10:49pm | #
I'd feel icky betting on Hillary, which is what I'd have to do in
Ohio.
Which is unfortunate, because I think Ohio is a much safer bet than
Texas. I think Texas is going to be very close.
Tell you what: Over/under on HRC's margin of victory in Texas: 2.
I'll take the under. 2 points is a push. $5
Thanks but i laid an offer down and you're changing the topic.
Either in or out. Yes, no. If not, cool. Go read about the
difference between electic pianos vs organs vs like, Moog
synthesizers. Fun stuff, really.
First CD I ever got was Kid A.
Before that I was getting Dave Brubeck vinyls from the used record
store.
I don't know what that says.
"sir", the croupier says pointing, politely, "this is a $25 minimum table. The slot machines are right over there. Thank you. Betters up?...Thank you/"
Dave Weigel says:
Lonewacko, an honest question: Which magazines or blogs do you
like?
I've considered getting a subscription to ATK, but then again
there's so much free stuff available it's not really
necessary.
Anywho, I'm thinking of starting a fund that would pay people to go
to campaign events and ask the questions the MSM is too corrupt to
ask. The only problem with that would be establishing the legal
structure and then promoting it, and doing that in time. Another
problem would be the fact that I'd like it to be a vehicle for my
questions, but others would have their own questions so I'd need to
come up with a non-gatekeeper way to deal with that.
I left a comment on a Veracifier video which they replied to
hinting that they were going to do something similar, but that was
a couple months ago and I haven't seen anything yet (besides their
"GroundHounds", who appear to just be partisan hacks).
Another thing I have to watch out is making sure to avoid the
process being corrupted by partisans or other hacks.
Anyway, thanks for listening as I formulated my plans out loud.
| February 19, 2008, 11:24pm | #
Dave Weigel says:
Lonewacko, an honest question: Which magazines or blogs do you
like?
I've considered getting a subscription to ATK, but then again
there's so much free stuff available it's not really
necessary.
Wow.
That was actually funny.
And not in the, "funny because you are a repulsive idiotic parody
of yourself" kind of way thats normall so endearing. But kudos!
that must be like Haley's Comet or something. Probably never see
that again as long as we live.
joe =
I forgive one of your comments
see - the extremely well known Wurlitzer piano
http://images.google.com/images?gbv=2&hl=en&q=wurlitzer+piano&revid=717439668&sa=X&oi=revisions_inline&resnum=0&ct=broad-revision&cd=1
see - the lesser known, never popular, Wurlitzer Organ
http://pipedreams.publicradio.org/gallery/pix/midwest/michigan/detroit_foxwurlitzer.jpg
which meets your conditions for blasphemous equipment of
uberpolyphonic obscenity
> I've considered getting a subscription to ATK
ATK = The Assistive Technology for Kansans web site?
I don't know when this became a music thread, but what the hey, here's a question. With the exception of Thriller, you guys being completely honest when you say The Joshua Tree or Kid A was the 1st album you bought? I mean, yeah those were popular, but they're far from popular fare, you know.
I'm being honest when I say Billboard Top Hits 1966...does that get me any street cred?
Now some thoughts on the actual music itself: Thriller
justly was and remains a classic, The Joshua Tree maybe
second to Achtung Baby but fine still, and Kid A
belongs in the concourse of Starbucks.
And Someone Who Doesn't Want to Lose His Job, yeah it gets you
street cred. With Dick Clark. Still hats off for sheer honesty.
The first album I bought with my own money was Tears for Fears
"Songs from the Big Chair." I was in junior high. But like Cesar
above, I wasn't that into music, so that is also the last (vinyl)
album I bought.
The first CD's I bought were Actung Baby and the Indigo Girls self
titled one (the one w/ closer to fine). Then like most college kids
in those days I signed up for BMG and got a shit ton of CD's, but
mostly classic rock, (e.g. Zepplin, Floyd, Eagles, etc)
Hawaii caucus's just closed. As expected, everyone is reporting record turnout. According to the advertiser, one place had 80 people where normally there had been about 20. 3200 people showed up at an elementary school in the same neighborhood where the University of Hawaii is located.
Actually, the advertiser has a story that because of the huge numbers, some of the caucus sites will still be voting as late as 10 p.m local (3 am eastern)
By the way, I don't think I have that on Billboard '66 on CD
these days but there's some good stuff on it if anyone's into that
oldies scene! Actually there are two versions, I had the
old one; the
new one seems different but still good.
Shortly after my Billboard days, I started a following of the holy
triumvirate of the Doors, Queen, and Led Zeppelin. I suppose,
though, that I was a Willie Nelson fan well before everything else,
but he's just barely edged out by the more goofy stuff in the first
cassette owned contest.
Kolohe, any news on whether it's gonna be called quickly or not? Another Obama blowout?
"3200 people showed up at an elementary school in the same
neighborhood where the University of Hawaii is located."
Then I'm glad I didn't go. I had a class until 6pm and the caucus
was supposed to be at 6:30. I kept thinking, "Maybe I should go,
'cos otherwise all the other Obama people will think like me and
not go," but apparently one vote really can't make a difference, so
sitting out was the right choice. Then again, nothing's more fun
walk 6 blocks so you can cram into Washington Elementary on King
Street.
Meh, I'll try harder to vote come November.
Kolohe,
Then like most college kids in those days I signed up for BMG
and got a shit ton of CD's...
Did you work full-time or something while you were at school? BMG
CDs ain't actually that cheap, especially when you factor in those
individually (and obscenely) calculated s/h costs.
And Someone Who Doesn't Want to Lose His Job,
Shortly after my Billboard days, I started a following of the
holy triumvirate of the Doors, Queen, and Led Zeppelin.
Of the "holy triumvirate" only Queen can bend my ears, and even
they sometimes make the Village People mildly campy by comparison.
Good call on Willie Nelson, though.
With 8% reporting CNN is showing an Obama blowout in HI:
77%.
To stay on-topic with the derail, my first real album that I
remember owning was Motley Crue's Theater of Pain; the first tape I
bought myself was Jane's Addiction's Ritual de lo Habitual; the
first CD I ever bought was the Violent Femmes' Why Do Birds
Sing.
Another great Wurlitzer track: Led Zep's "Misty Mountain Hop"
(the opening riff).
What's ATK?
On the Advertiser site 75 to 25 with about 30% in updated about
10:45
And no didn't work for BMG nor Columbia house or anything else.
Like most things (e.g. credit cards) you just got to work against
their business model. Frex, only get the specials. Now, when you
have *zero* cd's to begin with, they have enough of the loss leader
specials that you want. IIRC you could also return the auto one's
they gave you if you acted quickly enough, and didn't do it too
often. And you just got to get out after your commitment is up and
all that's left is the crap ones you don't want - and switch to the
other guys. I think the side effects was a bunch of extra junk
mail, and I wasn't perfect, I think I missed one or two of the
auto's I had to pay for. Still, IIRC I think I got about 50 CD's
for a total of about 30-40 dollars, which was pretty good for 1992
and not Hong Kong.
To bring this back full circle, thanks to Mr Jobs, a kid who's
first vote will be choosing Obama's successor after his second
term, will really never know what a mix tape is
I found this interesting site about the presidential election of 2008. By answering 36 questions you can discover your political position in comparison to the actual candidates. I was closest to Barack Obama. Here's the link: www.electoralcompass.com
NP -- yeah, I was being honest. I got it when I was eleven. But I didn't actually like the music; I had got the idea from some magazine that cool people from the future listened to Radiohead, so I played it dutifully for a while, hoping I'd get cool and futuristic enough to enjoy it.
CNN says Hawaii has a GOP contest on May 18th. For all 10 of
them?
There don't seem to be many Republicans in Hawaii...It confirms my
suspicions that, the attestations of folks like Jerry Falwell to
the contrary, Republicans are uncommon in paradise...
Kolohe - I guess the s/h prices weren't as high back then as now
(about $2-3 per CD), so I see how you were able to get more than
money's worth. And in case you don't know, BMG is the only music
club standing today so one can't play the switching game anymore,
but it's still possible to get a pretty good deal by buying only
clearance items and very low-priced box sets (which is what I used
to do).
alisa - IC. And something tells me we probably agree on
Radiohead.
lahigle,
That's a good find. It's really neat to be able to compare your
positions with the candidates' in various combinations by issue.
FWIF overall my views are pretty damn close to Paul's (in fact only
Giuliani comes close to my circle), but he was never warm on my
voting list. Heh.
There's a similar site you may be interested in:
www.politicalcompass.org. It's not as fancy as the site you found,
but it does boast more questions of a broader scope. Other items of
note are the "compasses" not only for the 2004 U.S. presidential
election and the ongoing primaries but also for elections in other
countries.
I don't remember the first CD I bought, but I remember
when.
I got Nevermind on tape, but In Utero on CD.
Broken on tape, but Downward Spiral on CD.
First CD I ever bought: Dire Straits Greatest Hits from a used
rack back. I was hooked from that point and went on a Columbia
House spree where I think I forgot to return the "I don't want it"
card for almost a year. I was 10. I'm much more responsible now,
but still uncivilized.
(joe, that was for you.)
joe - You got Broken and Nevermind on TAPE? I
hope you've moved on to DVD for your celluloid needs by now.
Nick - I used to have Brothers in Arms, which, come to
think of it, is Dire Straits' GH. :)
NP, what I had was the Money For Nothing compliation album that wasn't actually called "Greatest Hits" but for me it was. I still love that album.
MNG-
CNN says Hawaii has a GOP contest on May 18th. For all 10 of
them?
The contest on May 10th is the state convention. The precinct level
caucuses to elect delegates to this state convention have already
occurred - in late Jan I think. There may be another intermediate
contest as well, but I'm not sure if this has already occured. My
boss who's somewhat involved in republican politics went to it, and
it was a vastly smaller affair than yesterday's event
!!!A lead of 74...It's still wide open!!! Do NOT give up HILLARY fans!It's still too close to call and remember, we are talking Experience v Rhetoric. Obama talks of the CHANGE needed, but he has never said what they are! Hillary talks of changes too, in the form of SOLUTIONS and she backs this by telling you how!SO COME ON OHIO AND TEXAS!!! Don't wait for MARCH 4th VOTE for Hillary NOW! John McCain said of Obama;"Do not be fooled by an eloquent but empty call for change." Keep it up John, that's just what Hillraisers need to hear
If the person above me actually represents a real example of
Hilary's base of support, then I am doubling all my earlier
bets
Watch as the hilster goes all negative and loses another 10pts in
polls by late next week
The Wurlitzers that were once considered mighty were theatre
pipe organs, competitors with Kimball and the like. The phrase
[name of organist] at the Mighty Wurlitzer.. would have
been used on radio programs and in movie/vaudeville advertising
before the advent of TV and the phase-out of the great movie
palaces' practice of actually having orchestras in their orchestra
pits or organists in the loft.
All praise to the Hammond B3, much beloved of Booker T, but don't
let us forget the Vox or the Farfisa. ? and the Mysterians
used both, while Doug Sahm's Sir Douglas Quintent rocked
the Farfisa Beat* quite well.
Me, I never played anything more complicated than an Eminee.
Kevin
*Yes, that's a Squeeze reference.
vox and farfisas sounds are really, really annoying
A Jaguar, maybe I could handle. But those Doors keyboard riffs made
me want to tear my lungs out. Too, too plinky and dated. It comes
back from time to time in indie rock, but i'm not ooohing about
it.
The shit is really a rhodes with a little funky modding to it. They
growl like Wurlys on demand, or can be glassy. bob james could rock
that thing. when he wasnt cheesed out. Herbie. Fat Albert rotunda?
ouch. Too many great tunes that have that sounds. Paul simon -
Still Crazy after all these years? I wish i had one of those, and I
can't even play keys for beans.
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSS
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245