The Friday Political Thread: Extra-Stimulated Edition

The real action is tomorrow in South Carolina, but here's a quick wrapup:

Quote of the week

"Shame on you!" - Former President/respectable person Bill Clinton telling a CNN reporter to STFU about the race issue. It's unclear whether he said this before or after cutting a radio ad asking blacks to vote for his wife.

The week in brief

- The Democrats paid tribute to Martin Luther King by holding their ugliest-ever debate. We learned that Hillary Clinton started Wal-Mart, Barack Obama is a slumlord, and John Edwards is a wimp among wimps.

- The Republicans held a mostly colorless debate in Florida.

- Ron Paul scored the endorsements of Gary Johnson and Don Luskin and raked in $1.8 million in a MLK Day moneybomb.

- Dennis Kucinich teleported out of the presidential race.

- The FISA retroactive rolled on, and Chris Dodd pledged to filibuster retroactive immunity after the Senate defeated a measure that would have stripped it.

Fact-checking Rudy. Byron York does a hell of a service reporting what actually happened to the Rudy Giuliani campaign over this past month. Giuliani's campaign manager spins that the early primaries were not really winnable and York stands his ground:

Yes, Giuliani’s rivals were strong in those states. But Giuliani was, at times, strong, too. According to the RealClearPolitics average of polls, he was second in Iowa as late as the first of October. He was second in New Hampshire as late as the first of December. He was leading in Michigan as late as mid-December. And he was tied for the lead in South Carolina at the same time. All those competitive positions were gone by the end of December.

The Giuliani strategy was to come in second or third in the very early states, and ad spending in those states reflects it. How they've gotten away with arguing that Rudy wanted a Florida showdown all along, I don't quite know.

Paul's Resilience. After Fred Thompson left the race, Ron Paul's campaign site ran a triumphant image of the five remaining candidates: Paul, Mitt, Rudy, Mac, and Huck. The next day USA Today ran a cover story on the race showing... everyone except Paul. The candidate's 2nd place finish in Nevada has done nothing to break him into stories on the race, and it's virtually certain that, without Thompson and Hunter doing latrine duty, Florida will give Paul his first last-place finish.

The upside is that he still has millions of dollars—more than Huckabee—and his support in the Feb. 5 states isn't being influenced at all by the war at the top of the ballot. Rasmussen (which overestimated Paul's finish in New Hampshire) puts him at 12 percent in Georgia, a state where libertarians have usually fared well, thanks in part to the influence of radio icon Neal Boortz. Campaigners in smaller states like Montana and Alaska feel good about replicating the Nevada finish and racking up delegates. But the once-promising California primary, where delegates are awarded by congressional district, looks like less fertile ground. Polling in the Bay Area shows John McCain with a solid lead and Paul only in high single/low double digits.

Below the fold

- David Frum pokes at a wobby stool.

- Brad Warthen thinks Obama's young, grassroots organization will be the story out of South Carolina, if he wins.

- Phil Klein witnesses the birth of Mitt Romney, populist.

And in case we're starting to lose track of what's really important, I turn Politics and Prog over to Geddy Lee and company.

Comments

crimethink | January 25, 2008, 6:17pm | #

The candidate's 2nd place finish in Nevada has done nothing to break him into stories on the race, and it's virtually impossible that, without Thompson and Hunter doing latrine duty, Florida will give Paul his first last-place finish.

I think you mean "certain", not "impossible".

Shane Brady | January 25, 2008, 6:32pm | #

There was no story because was a distance second place, and hasn't been competitive anywhere else.

DenisL | January 25, 2008, 6:40pm | #

As Reason should know, it is all about patience and education in promoting freedom for the individual. Besides we have one more debate and the release of the 4th quarter fund raising where Ron Paul will do well. Maybe the Louisiana results will get straightened out as well, which should give Paul a boost. Additionally, Giuliani will likely be out of money and drop out. Huckabee is broke but he does not need much money to stay in. Paul has the bucks and the will to keep on trucking. He will stay in. Additionally, if there is a brokered convention, there is a back up strategy to pick up Paul delegates on the 2nd and third rounds of voting when the delegates legal commitments have expired. That is why Louisiana and other delegate selection states are important. That means all of them. Keep the faith. It ain't over until it is over. And there is always the education component. A lot of college students are hearing about libertarian principles for the first time. This all seems like a win win scenario for Ron Paul and his libertarian message.

Click 'n' Learn | January 25, 2008, 6:49pm | #

1. If Reason would like to encourage better debates and better MSM coverage, they have it within their power to do so. As I've pointed out a few times here in the past, it wouldn't cost more than $10k or so to put on one or two of these.

2. If Reason readers would like to encourage better debates and better MSM coverage, get out there and do it yourself by asking the candidates the questions the MSM is afraid to ask, then uploading the responses to video sharing sites.

3. In other news, if the MSM were doing their job, John McCain would be out of the race because of this: one of McCain's outreach directors is a former official of the MexicanGovernment. Needless to say, the tranzis at Reason would probably agree with McCain's choice.

4. Bubba and Arnie forgot to tell you something.

5. At least BarackHusseinObama won't try to grab your guns.

6. Here's a long article about the MSM's failures vis-a-vis coverage of my fave issue: tinyurl.com/25emdr (FrontPageMag)

7. The U.N.'s Institute International de l'Anti-Proggue a recommendu this antidote for all prog-related symptoms.

TrickyVic | January 25, 2008, 6:53pm | #

I didn't realize how much Romney was kicking ass. I'm suprised, he has as many delegates as everyone else combined. Well close, he's one shy from that claim. Paul has three times as many as Rudy.

Romney - 73
McCain - 38
Huckabee - 29
Paul - 6
Guiliani - 2
Total - 148
Source: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/#R

stephen the goldberger | January 25, 2008, 6:59pm | #

Yeah Romney is in front, has the money to stay in, and if he can pick up voters from the other candidates to overtake McCain will win the nomination. The race is also so wide open because of the number of winner take all states in the republican race, no one will have any idea who the nom will be until after super tuesday, or perhaps until the convention.

Eric Dondero | January 25, 2008, 7:03pm | #

"Second place Nevada finish for Paul"??

Gimmee a break. He finished barely ahead of McCain. They were essentially tied. And 3 times less votes than Romney received. How is that a "victory"?

Funny nobody in the Ron Paul campaign talks about Wyoming any more. That was the State they were "definitely going to win."

Not a single delegate from WY to Ron Paul.

And now headlines all over Paulist Blogs like NolanChart.com "Ron Paul wins Louisiana."

Actually, he placed 3rd behind "Pro-Life Uncommitted," and McCain. Hardly a "win" for Paul.

Where's Ron Paul's win gonna come from? Strong Paul States like Nevada, Wyoming and even neighboring Louisiana have all given him the thumbs down. Hell, he couldn't even break double digits in New Hampshire.

(No, Paul did not get 10% in NH as his supporters report, but rather 9.7%).

J. Cline | January 25, 2008, 7:03pm | #

"[Ron Paul's] 2nd place finish in Nevada has done nothing to break him into stories on the race."

Exactly! The media prefers to talk about "everyone but Paul" as if, through determined neglect, the $20 Million Dollar Man will simply cease to exist. Because, of course, if Big Media isn't covering you, you really aren't there, get it?

But at what point does plausibly-deniable neglect turn into detectably-deliberate obtuseness?

Ah, those troubling Paulites, who keep flashing their signage in the background of every other candidate's photo op! A curse on their seemingly limitless pockets, which they keep tapping to keep their man running.

Paul may be going nowhere... but, er, that is precisely the problem for the GOP machine bosses and the media who'd rather see him gone already. Paul just won't get the memo: Washington and their allied punditry don't want you, Dr. Ron.

But many Americans do. And we'll continue to make our presence felt, media blackout or no.

Eric Dondero | January 25, 2008, 7:05pm | #

The Louisiana results have been straightened out. They were straight 4 days ago.

Ron Paul lost and lost bigtime. He didn't even place 2nd, but rather a distant third.

Of course, the Ron Paul kool-aid drinkers keep drumming up conspiracies under every rock.

Eric Dondero | January 25, 2008, 7:08pm | #

Because Paul doesn't deserve nearly the amount of media he's already received. He has proven nothing at all in the first 5 to 6 contests.

His big state should have been Wyoming. He got body slammed there, not even gaining a single delegate.

Nevada should have been his territory next. Again, disastrous defeat for him, despite cries from his supporters for days before that he would "easily win Nevada."

Now he's polling 3% in Florida. But somehow his supporters will spin his 3% FL showing as a "victory." Or, they'll say "Florida was stolen from Paul."

Pro Libertate | January 25, 2008, 7:13pm | #

Eric,

But you can't very well cast stones--Giuliani is not exactly shaking the pillars of America, either. McCain's likely to win Florida, and, if he doesn't, Romney will. Giuliani's done if that happens.

By the way, Jack Kemp is apparently endorsing McCain. Kemp's got pretty good libertarian credentials (why isn't he running?), so that endorsement was quite a surprise.

J sub D | January 25, 2008, 7:13pm | #

Eric, how's Rudy doing?

joshua corning | January 25, 2008, 7:15pm | #

- Ron Paul scored the endorsements of Gary Johnson and Don Luskin and raked in $1.8 million in a MLK Day moneybomb.

Luskin is here:

http://www.poorandstupid.com/chronicle.asp

Hey Weigle, why doesn't Reason like Luskin?

Cesar | January 25, 2008, 7:16pm | #

Yeah, hows your favorite candidate doing Dondi?

Pro Libertate | January 25, 2008, 7:16pm | #

Really, J sub D, we must coordinate these postings better.

Pro Libertate | January 25, 2008, 7:20pm | #

Et tu, Cesar?

Sparky | January 25, 2008, 7:25pm | #

"Gimmee a break. He finished barely ahead of McCain. They were essentially tied."

"(No, Paul did not get 10% in NH as his supporters report, but rather 9.7%)."

So, to sum up, being precise about what happened in Nevada is somehow misrepresenting the situation there, but _not_ being precise about what happened in NH (rounding up 0.3% for fuck's sake) is somehow misrepresenting the situation there.

Care to explain that logic a little more, Eric? Or should I call you Hacky McHackington?

J sub D | January 25, 2008, 7:28pm | #

Eric, don't you see? Look at the times, it's a conspiracy. Go here to learn more.

brotherben | January 25, 2008, 7:47pm | #

That chick in the video has a HUGE beak. Ugly as sin ta boot.

->slinks away quietly in his red barchetta to worship in the temples of the syrinx

Brandybuck | January 25, 2008, 7:49pm | #

Why isn't Paul doing better in California? The answer is poor campaigning. I'll say more in a post-mortem after the primaries are over, but it essentially boils down to the official campaign providing no leadership, and the grassroots campaign being a bunch of lunkheads.

For a couple of months I was trying to get voter registration data for my county. The price for non-campaigns was over $500. I tried and tried to get the campaign to get it for me (it would have been free to them), but they were unresponsive and when they did reply, gave me instructions that were not applicable to my county. I finally got it, but no thanks to the campaign. Then a month later they sent out a California coordinator to teach us all how to do door-to-door campaigning. He came to our county on Thanksgiving Day morning, the worst possible time slot of the month. Overall the official campaign in California has been non-responsive, inept and scarce.

Then there are local grassroots lunkheads. With less than two weeks to the primary, we need to be going door-to-door and telephoning every registered Republican. But more people are showing up for silly sign waving than are going door-to-door or telephoning. Meetup assistant organizers are actually telling people to wave signs instead of canvassing! Meetups aren't discussions on how to win the campaign, but conspiracy rumor swapmeets.

I attended the local county Libertarian Party meeting last week, and they have more organization in their little finger than all the Ron Paul meetups do combined. Sigh.

Cesar | January 25, 2008, 7:56pm | #

Notice how Dondero always fails to respond to a challenging point.

Click 'n' Learn | January 25, 2008, 7:59pm | #

The real conspiracy here is that it only took him at most three seconds to switch guitars... if you believe the video. Unless... could the video be missing time? If so, what happened to it? Did they use the Randian Time Shifting Powers available only to 32nd Level Inducted Libertarians?

J sub D | January 25, 2008, 8:05pm | #

Notice how Dondero always fails to respond to a challenging point.

From my strange convoluted mind,
Eric Dondero--->ED--->Educationally Disabled.

SIV | January 25, 2008, 8:05pm | #

Paul is doing well in GA despite Neal Boortz.
Neal endorsed him back in '88 but he is all about the %30 + VAT tax now. He has hardly mentioned Paul except to diss him.

I'd argue that libertarian sentiment in GA has helped Neal's career as much or more than he has libertarianism.
I was in the geographic corner where AL, GA, and TN all meet this week and every intersection had a Ron Paul sign. Paul should do at least high single digits in most of the former "Confederate States"

brotherben | January 25, 2008, 8:08pm | #

behind Lifeson was a roadie with the strat. he holds the guitar with the strap raised and lifeson removes the one and steps into the other. seen it with other bands many times.

J sub D | January 25, 2008, 8:11pm | #

Ask John McCain about his Hispanic outreach director, Juan Hernandez (former Mexican government official)

Lonewacko, now that I have your attention, this is for you.

♬They're coming to take me away, HA HA
They're coming to take me away, HO HO HEE HEE HA HA
To the funny farm
Where life is beautiful all the time
And I'll be happy to see
Those nice, young men
In their clean, white coats
And they're coming to take me away, Ha-haaa!♬

♬To the happy home
With trees and flowers and chirping birds
And basket weavers who sit and smile
And twiddle their thumbs and toes
And they're coming to take me away, Ha-haaa!♬

Apologies to Napoleon the 14th

smokeyJoe | January 25, 2008, 8:11pm | #

The FISA retroactive rolled on, and Chris Dodd pledged to filibuster retroactive immunity after the Senate defeated a measure that would have stripped it

Is it to late to support Dodd for president?

Mr. Nice Guy | January 25, 2008, 8:14pm | #

The Klein article is good. Jesus, everyone knew that Romney has flip-flopped many major positions for this election, but heck now he's flipping during the campaign. He's a creep...But as I predicted long ago he's got the best chance for the nomination. He's got the money to play for every delegate and he is not consciously targetd by any of the stalwarts of the GOP coalition (NRA, anti-taxers, immigration, pro-lifers) the way Rudy (NRA, pro-lifers), McCain (immigration), and Huck (anti-taxers) are.

Hillary really came off as a selfish d*ck at the last debate. She could not get through a sentence without attacking Obama. It seemed a bit obssessed and maniacal to me. She's hurting whoever the eventual nominee will be...I hope she gets whupped...

Sparky | January 25, 2008, 8:19pm | #

"Notice how Dondero always fails to respond to a challenging point."

I think it might be because no one who's asked him a challenging question has used their real name, and he's boldly taken the principled position that he wouldn't respond to "anonymous" posters.

Also, he's the biggest hack who ever hacked in these here parts.

TrickyVic | January 25, 2008, 8:22pm | #

"""""Second place Nevada finish for Paul"??

Gimmee a break. He finished barely ahead of McCain. They were essentially tied. And 3 times less votes than Romney received. How is that a "victory"? """"

You can question the term victory but Ron Paul coming in second place in Nevada is beyond question. McCain came in third.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#NV

"""Not a single delegate from WY to Ron Paul. """

Neither did anyone else but Romney. So what's the point?
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/#R

Doonnnnddddddeeeerrrrrrrooooooooooooooooo

Cesar | January 25, 2008, 8:23pm | #

Hey DONDERRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOOO hows your boy Rudy doing again?

Kolohe | January 25, 2008, 8:35pm | #

Frum's piece started out OK, and has a decent overall premise, but really trailed off at the end.

Some wince inducing phrases at first reading:

Last, foreign-policy conservatives must recognize that crucial blocs of voters have wrongly but unmistakeably put 9/11 behind them (my emphasis)

Jesus, by this time we had 'put behind us' the Maine, the Lusitania/Zimmerman telegram, and Pearl Harbor. By the next inauguration, about enough time will have passed for us to put behind us both Gulf of Tonkin and Lexington/Concord.

What the Republican Party desperately needs is a domestic program that responds to the values and needs of the tens of millions of American families making around $70,000 a year.

Overall, you're earning more than 2/3 of the households in the country if your household income is $70,000. And based on this there are just about 15 million of your peers (+/- 10k of 70K) not 10's of millions.

And in the parts of country where Republicans dominate, $70,000 is considered rich.

Kolohe | January 25, 2008, 8:57pm | #

Oh, and count Fort Sumter and the Alamo as two more things it took less time to put behind us.

Kolohe | January 25, 2008, 8:59pm | #

I don't think I'll ever get over Macho Grande, though.

Franklin | January 25, 2008, 9:00pm | #

David, do you consider Boortz a libertarian (I noticed you only called him a radio icon)?

Also, on what are you basing your assertion that libertarians have fared well in Georgia "thanks in part to the influence of radio icon Neal Boortz"?

If you've read my past comments, I'm sure you know where this is going (SIV has already touched on it). Just curious.

Another topic... How come no mention of the Romney whisper?

Dondero, for someone supposedly so interested in politics, you know very little. The Louisiana GOP has a statement on their website that says the results are unofficial. It goes on to state that, in 5 of the 7 districts (1,2,4,5,6), after the eligible provisional ballots are added to totals, the outcome in each of those districts may change.

In Nevada, no state delegates were selected (that is why Nevada wasn't penalized for moving up their caucus). Only precinct delegates were selected and they were selected before the straw poll vote started. No one will know how many Nevada delegates each candidate receives until March. None of the campaigns have released any info on the leanings of the elected precinct delegates but it is very possible that Ron Paul garnered a larger proportion of delegates than suggested by the straw poll (and the MSM). The Paul supporters have been trying to get a count on their own. I'm not sure how accurate this information is but if you go through the entire thread and compare the precinct numbers with the popular vote, it's quite surprising. In some precincts where Romney got 60% of the vote, Paul got 50% of the delegates. In some Nye county precincts, 80% of the delegates are Paul supporters. Again, I don't know how accurate this info is (it's a public forum) but anyone who claims to know the final delegate counts for Nevada is either lying or psychic.

A precinct delegate's take.

Accurate info about how the Nevada Caucus works.

Someone Who Doesn't Want to Lose His Job | January 25, 2008, 9:14pm | #

Going back to the beginning of the campaign, I never expected Ron Paul to win. That having been said, and in fairness to anyone who thinks otherwise, I have been extremely surprised at how well he has done. I'm impressed at his vote totals; I had originally expected him to pretty much get below 3% in most every state (because I didn't think the Republicans would give any votes to an anti-war candidate), and he has far outperformed that expectation and continued to do so after neither winning any states nor getting much media attention. I realize that to his strong supporters, this must not be much comfort, but I think that even though there's little if any chance he could even be a factor in the nomination, his campaign has been surprisingly successful on most levels.

Similarly, I have been surprised at how poorly Giuliani has done. Though he is probably my least favorite candidate (yes, below Huckabee), I expected him to do well. He has instead done worse than Ron Paul in virtually every state. Unless I'm mistaken, the only time he beat the man I expected to do so poorly was in New Hampshire, where he was only barely ahead. I suppose that I expected that Giuliani's popularity after September 11th would make him a very tough contender. I guess I knew too little about his personality for my expectations to be correct.

passivatedObserver | January 25, 2008, 9:36pm | #

psst... Kolohe.. it is "Mucho Grande" (at least from the movie)

BakedPenguin | January 25, 2008, 9:53pm | #

...I didn't think the Republicans would give any votes to an anti-war candidate...

My father, aunt and uncle all independently decided to vote for Paul in the primaries (they're all long time R's) - mainly because of he's the only anti-war candidate.

Someone Who Doesn't Want to Lose His Job | January 25, 2008, 10:15pm | #

BP - that's good to hear. Watching the news and reading the news online I think can give you a skewed view of the overall opinions of Americans, right or left.

I don't vote, but when I checked out the candidates' positions, apparently I'm anti-war enough (both Iraq and drug) that the closest people to my position after Paul were Gravel and Kucinich. This is even though I disagree with both of them on almost everything economically (and with regards to gun rights).

economist | January 25, 2008, 10:29pm | #

Lots of us (nominal) Republicans are against the war in Iraq, and more than a few of us (myself and RP included) opposed it from the start. However, since the Dems seem dead set on a domestic policy of socialism and their foreign policy prescriptions aren't much better than our current situation, many of us hold our noses and vote for less than optimal Repubs (though if Huck or Rudy gets nominated, I won't bother voting. I'll just buy guns and ammo and drive out to the mountains to wait for either a revolution or the end of civilization).

Franklin | January 25, 2008, 10:30pm | #

About the Romney whisper, NBC says "As far as figuring out the mystery of who or where it came from, that is being worked on, and we hope to have an answer soon".

Maybe it was Dondero. Didn't he switch to Romney a couple threads back? Can anyone confirm that Dondero was not in Florida yesterday?

Someone Who Doesn't Want to Lose His Job | January 25, 2008, 10:45pm | #

economist -

I've always disagreed with the Democrats on economics, but I've never really bought into the idea that the Republicans were much closer to Libertarians than were the Democrats.

Of the three-legged stool of Reagan about which you hear so much these days, I only agree with really one of the legs. Social conservatism doesn't really fit with libertarianism (I'd say the only point at which it's even neutral toward it is on abortion) and neither does the security / law and order leg (every time I see an article by Radley Balko I remind myself of this). Of course the Democrats aren't really any better. On a the civil rights angle they may have an edge (again, as long as guns don't count) and on social liberalism is mostly in line with libertarianism, but there's so much that they are far off on as well.

Of course, I've long since given up imagining that any politician even exists that will agree with me on much of anything.

BakedPenguin | January 25, 2008, 10:50pm | #

Unemployaphobe: I think they're exceptions, but there are a few out there. Right after the debate, though, the local channel had an interview with a few local voters. Included among them was some matronly hag who said she had been for Giuliani, mainly because of 9/11, but after this debate, was going to vote for Romney because she thought he looked like JFK. No, I'm not joking.

I always get Kucinich & Gravel high up in my "preference" on those things, too, for the same reasons. One small positive about that - there are three major party candidates who are talking about ending the War on Drugs. Right now, they're the "kooks", but it's still an improvement over just having the one L candidate saying it.

Franklin - his phone number's on his website. Give him a call and ask.

Ali | January 25, 2008, 10:50pm | #

Ron Paul Nascar racing?

alisa | January 25, 2008, 10:53pm | #

"I have been extremely surprised at how well he has done."

Ron Paul has basically been a success story, in my opinion. Libertarians don't normally make national news. College kids don't normally get energized about the Federal Reserve. The ideas are out there now. And I know lots of people who won't go so far as to vote for Paul, but are vaguely sympathetic to the message.

B | January 25, 2008, 10:55pm | #

Why and the hell is this magazine still giving any positive press at all to Ron Paul? Perhaps you are priming him to win the 1st Annual David Duke Political Courage Award.


I guess if someone calls you on supporting a bigot, you can always just claim someone else wrote the article.

Ali | January 25, 2008, 10:58pm | #

Miss Teen USA South Carolina... No not the "US Americans" one, but the other one.

Someone Who Doesn't Want to Lose His Job | January 25, 2008, 11:05pm | #

BP: Yeah for me, I think it was that Libertarian cowboy dude who dropped out 80%, Ron Paul 77%, Kucinich and Gravel 58%, for precisely the same reasons.

I'm still holding out for "Hypothetical Dream Candidate" though. He panders to me in a way no other candidate does.

Ali | January 25, 2008, 11:15pm | #

Question: Why is Ron Paul's campaign trying to collect $5M more by Feb. 5? Wouldn't that be too late for Super Tuesday? I mean, what's the point? I thought he'd want the money way ahead of that date so that he can put more ads on TV. Are there important primaries after the 5th?

NP | January 25, 2008, 11:22pm | #

Newsflash: Sharapova just won her 1st Australian Open. Never been a big fan, but still congrats.

Someone Who Doesn't Want to Lose His Job | January 25, 2008, 11:28pm | #

Ali: I think there are some people involved in Ron Paul's campaign who probably don't really know what they're doing. (At least I hope that's the case - otherwise I'd be afraid some of his campaign staff might just be trying to line their pockets.)

Ali | January 25, 2008, 11:32pm | #

SWDWTLHJ- Yeah, weird.

Harpua | January 25, 2008, 11:38pm | #

"Now there's no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law.
And the trees are all kept equal
with hatchet, axe and saw"

Probably says more about politics than 1000 threads here.

It;s pretty obvious to me that it'll be Clinton vs Romney or McCain. The only good thing about the campaign now is watching the food fight between Bill and Barack. No matter what, freedom and liberty is on the run.

I'll still vote for Ron Paul on Super Tuesday. It's only because he most closely represents my political philosophy. In light of the TNR/Paul hoohaw, I'll have to hold my nose while doing it. I don't know how culpable Paul is in all of that, but at the very least he shows either no sense for detail or he's just plain lazy. At worst, he's a fellow traveler with bigots and doesn't deserve to hold high office. My worst fear is that libertarians will become tainted with the bigotry that's been exposed. Fortunately, Bill Clinton has come along to steal the racial angle. At any rate, Paul is a flawed candidate and the more I see him (and his followers), the less I like him.

The best we could have hoped is that exposure for Ron Paul could help spread the message of libertarianism. I think what has happened is that we've found out just how hard that will be. It's going to take someone a lot more attractive and articulate than Paul to do it.

The worst thing that happened this week was the twinbill of the Fed interest rate cut and the bloom of bipartisanship in the form of the stimulus package. Dust off your WIN buttons. You're gonna need up later this year.

Kolohe | January 26, 2008, 4:00am | #

passivatedObserver-

You sure?

Darla | January 26, 2008, 4:30am | #

Reason sucks

Kolohe | January 26, 2008, 4:37am | #

Franklin-
Well, I know you weren't talking to me, but I won't let that stop me from spouting off anyway.
I lived in Macon for two years right at the turn of the century. Boortz was the second most popular radio show of any type in the Atlanta market (limbaugh was first), so his influence is substantial. Also, Boortz has afaik always called himself a libertarian.

So, it's like how Ah-nold became a Republican;
many GA Paul voters will think
"I like what Boortz is saying, he says he's a libertarian, so therefore I must be a libertarian. And if someone else calls himself a libertarian I will vote for them."

Now, when I was there, Boortz's libertarianism was entirely self consistent because it was composed of attacks on Clinton and American liberals in general on economic matters coupled with antipathy of the Jesus wing of the Republican party and their cultural issues (forex, he was in favor of getting rid of the Confederate battle flag on the GA state flag.) And he has been quite straightforward at being against the drug war.

Looking at his website periodically since I left, he's taken a LouDobbsian turn over the last year or so. He's more emphatically populist than before: He's on the kick-em-out and seal-the-borders side on the immigration issue, and is somewhat Giulliani-esque wrt GWOT. I had left before the Iraq war run-up, so I'm not sure what he's said about that.

passivatedObserver | January 26, 2008, 7:47am | #

Kolohe - Hey, you're right!

I could swear it was "Mucho Grande", I thought that was the joke. I'll have to watch the movies again, be like the first time all over again.

Eric Dondero | January 26, 2008, 8:50am | #

Rudy has morphed into Mitt Romney. When we started this campaign, Romney was a Social Conservative. Now he's an Economic Conservative. You hardly hear about social issues any more.

I attribute this to Romney's campaign getting an influx of libertarian-minded supporters who've influenced him in that direction.

Certainly the William Weld endorsement of Romney a few months ago helped.

If Romney wins Florida, he'll have an excellent shot of gaining the nomination. And libertarian Republicans will be quite pleased.

Eric Dondero | January 26, 2008, 8:53am | #

"No switching" to Romney at all Franklin.

I've been a "Romney-Iani" supporter since July of last year. Check the archives over at Libertarian Republican Blog.

When Weld endorsed him, I followed.

Eric Dondero | January 26, 2008, 8:55am | #

Pro Liberate, McCain is not likely to win Florida. 4 out 5 of the last polls had Romney ahead, but 2 to 3 points.

A Romney win in Florida will be something to cheer for all libertarian Republicans and Fiscal Cons.

(Except those on the fringe with Mr. 3% - Ron Paul.)

gadzook | January 26, 2008, 9:31am | #

How can a political wrapup not include the liveliest story of the week, which involved the mayor of Detroit, perjury, and spicy text messages that included use of the word "LOL."

Shane | January 26, 2008, 9:44am | #

Klein compares Romney to Herbert Hoover.

Ouch.

Steve Horwitz | January 26, 2008, 9:59am | #

Just a Rush-related note: Lifeson is more clever these days. He created a stand for his acoustics to be anchored to so that he can actually play the acoustic while leaving the electric hanging around his neck. He may well have been using that on the ESL clip, but I don't think he was.

You can see it here at 1:15 in a nice performance of "Entre Nous" from opening night of last summer's tour: http://youtube.com/watch?v=1utF0J-tnw8

I'm somewhere the 9th row in front of him off to the side.

crimethink | January 26, 2008, 10:19am | #

OK, everybody line up for the free govt candy:

Retirees living off Social Security are frustrated that they won't get tax rebate checks through a bipartisan economic stimulus package before the House. Senate Democrats Friday began efforts to include them.

Mr. Nice Guy | January 26, 2008, 10:42am | #

Eric-forgive me if I am wrong, but it struck me that very recently you argued passionately that one of the major indicators of Rudy's acceptability was his pro-choice stance (and I agree with you, that in itself is a reliable indicator of how likely a candidate will tell the Pat Robertson's to go engage in relations with themselves). But now you say this:

"If Romney wins Florida, he'll have an excellent shot of gaining the nomination. And libertarian Republicans will be quite pleased."

Romney is one of the more anti-choice candidates running (well, at least NOW he is). How do you square this? I can't think of any GOP candidate who doesn't have at least a nominal stance of holding the line or lowering taxes and spending. But we do have some that have a better social record (Rudy and Paul) than others (Huckabee and Romney).

Mr. Nice Guy | January 26, 2008, 10:44am | #

Hell even McCain is more acceptable when it comes to social issues (if I remember he was not so strongly against stem cell research). And there is that whole "torture/detain/spy on American citizens" where Romney tends to suck butt...

Mr. Nice Guy | January 26, 2008, 10:46am | #

Oh, and don't forget gun control...
http://myclob.pbwiki.com/assault+weapons

Mike Laursen | January 26, 2008, 10:50am | #

Crazy as LoneWhacko is, I gotta agree that it would be very cool to see the Reason Presidential Debate.

BakedPenguin | January 26, 2008, 10:54am | #

MNG - Romney is a political tool who will do or say anything to get elected. DONDERRROOOOO!!! is a political tool who will do or say anything to seem relevant. He sees a like soul in Governor Morbot Goodhair, and his man-crush will not be stayed by the likes of policy.

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 10:55am | #

Rudy has morphed into Mitt Romney. When we started this campaign, Romney was a Social Conservative. Now he's an Economic Conservative. You hardly hear about social issues any more.

In other words, Romney switches to whatever position will win him votes. Wow how principled.

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 10:57am | #

MNG, he can't. He told me one couldn't be libertarian and be anti-second amendment. I pointed out Rudy is anti-gun, and he denied this despite the fact that all of New York City is a second-amendment free zone. Try getting a handgun permit there unless you're a retired cop. You can't.

P Brooks | January 26, 2008, 11:35am | #

Meanwhile, over at the Wall Street Journal:

The national catastrophe fund backed by Mr. Giuliani would allow private insurers and state pools to buy protection from the federal government, reducing the danger for any one state and limiting insurance companies' exposure to big disasters.

Hurricane relief is the latest local issue that has, at least temporarily, gained prominence in the presidential competition. In Iowa, nearly all the candidates embraced ethanol programs and support for corn subsidies. In Michigan, Gov. Romney used Sen. McCain's support for higher fuel standards as a wedge with auto-industry executives and employees. Nevada successfully used its status as an early caucus state to pressure candidates to denounce a plan to dump nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain.

One reason Florida pushed to move up its vote was to draw support for a national catastrophe fund, an idea strongly backed by Republican Gov. Charlie Crist and members of the state's congressional delegation. Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have both said they support a federal catastrophe-insurance program.

Many consumer groups balk, arguing it is wrong for taxpayers nationwide to subsidize beachfront homeowners. The Consumer Federation of America, which represents groups such as AARP, favors improving FEMA and the National Flood Insurance Program instead.

The Florida Democratic Party praised Mr. Giuliani for his support, while pillorying Mr. McCain's "inexplicable" opposition. "You wouldn't not support it," said Mark Bubriski, communications director of the Florida Democrats. "It's like saying you don't like oranges."

And McCain is the one who admits he doesn't have a particularly good grasp of economics.

P Brooks | January 26, 2008, 11:42am | #

Reason sucks

Shouldn't you be in church?

crimethink | January 26, 2008, 11:56am | #

In other words, Romney switches to whatever position will win him votes. Wow how principled.

I'm not worried about principled, I'm worried about trustworthy. But yeah, he ain't that either.

Though, given two candidates who claim to support awful policies, I'll take the one who can't be trusted to implement them over the one who can be trusted to do so...

Neu Mejican | January 26, 2008, 11:59am | #

Back to Rush again...try branching out a bit...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=kkTFo-AZysQ

Lost_In_Translation | January 26, 2008, 11:59am | #

As much as I dislike McCain, I've decided to vote for him just to piss Dondero off. Congratulations Dondero, your assholishness is really paying off.

J sub D | January 26, 2008, 12:02pm | #

How can a political wrapup not include the liveliest story of the week, which involved the mayor of Detroit, perjury, and spicy text messages that included use of the word "LOL."

gadzook,

Knowing that Detroit is always going to elect a democrat (Jeffery Dahmer, (D) would trounce Mother Theresa (R) here) I was actually warming up to Kwame Kirkpatrick. Some progress in the city has been made over the last 3-4 years.

It isn't be the first time somebody wasted their political capital on poontang. Expect our dysfunctional city council to take the lead in not running the city till a new mayor is elected. As I see it, the county prosecutor, Kym Worthy, has no choice but to bring charges against Kirkpatrick and his lover/chief of staff, Christine Beatty. I can't find a silver lining in all of this. I knew Kwame had flexible morals, but I had hoped he'd be smarter than this.

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 12:06pm | #

Ok, what exactly happened to the Mayor of Detroit? Did he pull a Mark Foley or something?

Neu Mejican | January 26, 2008, 12:09pm | #

They are still around that New Model Army...
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dqFZ55iHfDY

joe | January 26, 2008, 12:09pm | #

OK, everybody line up for the free govt candy:

Fly the helicopter this way! Over here, over here!

joe | January 26, 2008, 12:13pm | #

Subject: Will the disparity between black and white Democratic voters in South Carolina be reflected nationally, or is it a Southern thing?

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 12:18pm | #

Subject: Will the disparity between black and white Democratic voters in South Carolina be reflected nationally, or is it a Southern thing?

Its national. Hillary Clinton has successfully and very skillfully turned Obama into the "black candidate". She will clean up with whites and hispanics on super Tuesday.

J sub D | January 26, 2008, 12:26pm | #

Ok, what exactly happened to the Mayor of Detroit? Did he pull a Mark Foley or something?

He lied in a civil lawsuit brought by fired cops about his love affair with his chief of staff, Then the Detroit Free Press got ahold of some text messages between the two that unequivocally demonstrates the perjury. Here is a summary of what's going on.

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 12:30pm | #

Ah, I thought he went after a 14-year old girl or something.

Dirty scandal, but still nothing compared to having the chairman of your local public school board post nude pictures of himself on a gay sex site. Thats what happened down here about a year ago.

joe | January 26, 2008, 12:34pm | #

Maybe, Cesar. On the other hand, this is the first contest in a state with a non-trivial black population, and it's in the South, in the state where John Edwards grew up in a mill tahn.

What makes you conclude that there's something happening nationally? You saw polling results from Strom Thurmond's old state?

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 12:41pm | #

What makes you conclude that there's something happening nationally? You saw polling results from Strom Thurmond's old state?

Its basically what the MSM has been saying for a while now.

Obama has a big problem with hispanics also. Hispanics generally don't vote for the black guy--at this point in time its been shown they are even less likely than white people to do it. Nevada confirms this, which makes California and other Super Tuesday states with big hispanic populations look very bad for Obama.

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 12:44pm | #

BTW does anyone know when the polls close in SC?

J sub D | January 26, 2008, 12:55pm | #

...still nothing compared to having the chairman of your local public school board post nude pictures of himself on a gay sex site.

Wow. The local press must have creamed their jeans over that one.

joe | January 26, 2008, 12:59pm | #

Cesar,

Yeah, that's what MSMBC (heh) has been saying. But once again, they seem to be drawing a conclusion about the national race purely from what's happening in SC.

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 1:02pm | #

Wow. The local press must have creamed their jeans over that one.

They're used to it. Between he and Gwen Hedgepeth its par for the course in Richmond city politics.

Hedgepeth took $100,000 in bribes on camera from undercover FBI agents, then proceeded to say it was really a woman made to look like her by the Bush administration (!) because they don't like "powerful black women".

Brandybuck | January 26, 2008, 1:30pm | #

I attribute this to Romney's campaign getting an influx of libertarian-minded supporters who've influenced him in that direction.

Hah hah hah hah! That's the stupidest thing I've heard all week! If it's true, then we need to fear that covert Clintonistas might "join" his campaign and influence him in the direction of universal health care. Oh wait, that already happened!

I continue to be amazed at your Bizarro World claims that Rudy, Mitt, et al, are libertarians but Ron is not. It's hilarious that you've been in the libertarian movement for so long, can drop a dozen libertarian names per second, yet you don't have the first clue what a libertarian is! Hint: Neither Rudy nor Mitt are libertarians. They're conservatives. Duh!

Happy Jack | January 26, 2008, 1:35pm | #

I was actually warming up to Kwame Kirkpatrick.

Fess up. It's that "hip hop" mayor thing, isn't it?
Have they sold off the electric system yet? Some of my best memories are driving down dark streets where the traffic lights don't work.

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 1:52pm | #

Heres a subject--whats the most corrupt scandal thats ever taken place in the politics of your city? I just gave mine.

Sparky | January 26, 2008, 1:55pm | #

Cesar,

SC polls close at 7:00 Eastern.

J sub D | January 26, 2008, 2:02pm | #

Fess up. It's that "hip hop" mayor thing, isn't it?

Not really. But we have been getting some restoration of empty buildings, turning them into lofts and store. Particularly onlong Woodward.

Have they sold off the electric system yet? Some of my best memories are driving down dark streets where the traffic lights don't work.

Nope. It gets brought up annually, shot down annually. What a waste of money. OTOH, no more city funding for the DIA or the zoo. They stubbornley continue to provide art and exotic animals to the public for viewing. If an economically rocked city like Detroit can support the cultural amenities w/o city help, your metropolitan area can do so as well.

We still elect the city council at large vice using a ward system. The incumbents naturally like it that way. So much to do here, I'd welcome Democratic activists because the status quo sucks. Kwame it least wasn't status quo. This perjury stuff is gonna bring him down.

Kolohe | January 26, 2008, 2:03pm | #

P Brooks:
I know all the Democrats have come out specifically against Yucca mountain. I did not think the Republicans had, though. (and afaik only Romney and Paul actively campaigned in Nev, right?)

J sub D | January 26, 2008, 2:06pm | #

By the way, the Detroit Institute of Arts and the Detroit Zoo are both world class operations. The DIA just finished a huge expansion/renovation, without city funding.

Amazed | January 26, 2008, 2:13pm | #

Wow! Ron Paul raised $1,8 million on a day set aside to honor the man he called a pedophile in his newsletters.

http://www.tnr.com/downloads/december1990.pdf

After all, according to Ron Paul's newsletters, King "seduced underage girls and boys," was a "comsymp," and should NEVER have had a federal holiday named after him:

"What an infamy Ronald Reagan approved it!" "We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day."

Will wonders never cease?

SIV | January 26, 2008, 2:19pm | #

Subject: Will the disparity between black and white Democratic voters in South Carolina be reflected nationally, or is it a Southern thing?

joe, it is a Democrat thing and it is National.

White Democrat voters in South Carolina are largely Yankee transplants.

joe | January 26, 2008, 2:34pm | #

It would have to be a Democrat thing, SIV.

There aren't any black Republicans.

Eric Dumdero | January 26, 2008, 2:38pm | #

J.C. WATTS!!

crimethink | January 26, 2008, 2:41pm | #

I thought Hillary was married to the First Black President. Though in my experience black chicks aren't fond of white women involved with black men.

joe | January 26, 2008, 2:46pm | #

While white Democrats in South Carolina give Obama a level of support in the low twenties, a national ABC News/Washington Post survey released January 14 found that among white Democratic voters across the country; Obama does much better than among white southern Democrats.

The ABC/Post poll showed 33 percent of white Democrats backing Obama nationally, with 41 percent supporting Clinton and 14 percent in Edwards' corner. Nationally, there was only an 8 point spread between Clinton and Obama. Obama did less well among white voters nationally in a CBS poll released January 13, winning 24 percent to Clinton's 42 percent and Edwards' 13 percent. But he still beat Edwards by a solid 11 points.

Kolohe | January 26, 2008, 2:49pm | #

Some dude on Foxnews from Baron's just said Ron Paul is the best candidate to answer voter concerns on the shaky economy. He drew parallels to Perot in '92, but he strained it a bit by trying to equate the political effect of the current Iraq war with v 1.0

joe | January 26, 2008, 2:59pm | #

So, contra the wishful thinking of some, that Obama has higher support among white Democrats nationally than among white Democrats in the South.

The question is, there has been a trend in South Carolina, at least, that shows his relative share of the white vote dropping and his relative share of the black vote rising; is this a national trend or a southern trend?

Most of the national polls show the race tightening, with Clinton's lead down to the single digits. It's unlikely that could be the result of only black voters switching to him. It is a certainty that it could not be the result of black voters switching to him while white voters move away from him.

joe | January 26, 2008, 3:01pm | #

Whoa, gotta preview. That first sentence should be,

"Contra the wishful thinking of some NON-DEMOCRATS, WE KNOW that Obama has more support among white Democrats nationally than in South Carolina."

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 3:03pm | #

Joe, all that says is the Clintons haven't worked their political strategy on other states yet.

Shes not really trying to drive a wedge between white and black voters as much as between hispanic and black voters anyway. Its the Clintons "hispanic strategy". I bet we'll see some racial push-polling directed at hispanics in California and New York in the next week magically pop up.

Kolohe | January 26, 2008, 3:09pm | #

don't know about the trend in the white vote.

But, i recall that early polls (circa sept/oct 2007) had Clinton with decisive leads in all demographics, including to the surprise of some african americans (by something like 65-35). This was attributed correctly to Clinton's better name recognition and that Bill Clinton is held in the highest regard of just about any living politician by many (most?) african americans.

This turnaround among African Americans from 65-35 for Clinton, to 75-25 for Obama (i'm not sure of the exact #) is striking. My guess it's due to more exposure to Obama, many voters found they could in fact identify with him better than H Clinton. And, Iowa was a tipping point that proved Obama was electable by the body politic at large, which made Obama not a protest vote, but actually a positive one.

BakedPenguin | January 26, 2008, 3:11pm | #

...is this a national trend or a southern trend?

With Obama & Clinton going after each other, it had to happen that the glow would fade from Obama. His "fairy tale" campaign was bound to be ended by the Clintons, one way or another.

He gets attacked, and fights back - so there is going to be a segment of (mainly white / hispanic) voters who no longer see him as the shiny, happy candidate, which is a lot of what he has going for him. The AA vote might shore up around him, as a conscious or unconscious "closing ranks" mentality comes about.

WE KNOW that Obama has more support among white Democrats nationally than in South Carolina."

Some of the low support for Obama is due to Edwards being perceived by white southern Dems as a homeboy. However, that doesn't explain the relative difference in support between Clinton & Obama.

joe | January 26, 2008, 3:13pm | #

Wait a second, Cesar, has Clinton not yet tried to work this on the national level, or has she been working to divide black and Hispanic voters nationally?

And of course she's been working her campaign on a national level. She's spent a great deal of the last two weeks outside of South Carolina in order to campaign in Super Tuesday states, leaving Bill in SC in her stead.

Not to mention, all of the free media about the Democrats for the past two weeks has been about South Carolina, so for the most part, the campaigns they've been running there ARE their national campaigns.

Kolohe | January 26, 2008, 3:17pm | #

What really beats the heck out of me is the divide between the hispanic vote and the african american vote wrt relative support for Clinton and Obama.

Serious question what do mean by "the Hispanic strategy."?

I'm thinking of the Chris Rock routine that starts "ima 'merican, yeah!" and ends with the punchline "this is where I start paying attention, because next it's the n****** and the jews." In other words, a hispanic strategy to try to drive a wedge between (Democratic) hispanics and blacks I would think would backfire.

joe | January 26, 2008, 3:17pm | #

Kolohe,

When discussing that turnaround among black voters, remember the "white people will never let a black man win" issue. Obama's big victory in pasty-white Iowa seems to have gone a long way towards knocking that down.

Baked Penguin,

But Obama's numbers have been RISING nationally, including over the past two weeks.

But it is an interesting question whether Edwards' impressive level of support among white Southern voters extends outside of his home state.

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 3:19pm | #

I'm thinking of the Chris Rock routine that starts "ima 'merican, yeah!" and ends with the punchline "this is where I start paying attention, because next it's the n****** and the jews." In other words, a hispanic strategy to try to drive a wedge between (Democratic) hispanics and blacks I would think would backfire.

Local politicians play that game all the time in California and other states from what I understand. And they do it successfully. Its dirty and shameful, but remember we're talking about Hillary Clinton here.

Joe-, shes already started yes and it was very successful in Nevada. After a second place finish in SC that she will spin masterfully as "A very close second place finish!" shes going to that plan into over-drive nationally.

joe | January 26, 2008, 3:21pm | #

Kolohe,

It is entirely possible that the "cuz I know the...are next" effect only works one way.

Black voters have shown that they don't like it when good ole boy minority-bashing is unleashed on groups other than themselves - immigrant-bashing and gay-bashing come to mind - but I don't know if Hispanics would rebel against the appearance of anti-black politics, or if it would have no effect, or if it would actually work for them.

I can't think of any previous examples of races where this dynamic happened.

joe | January 26, 2008, 3:24pm | #

Joe-, shes already started yes and it was very successful in Nevada.

OK. Based on Obama's rising national numbers, it would appear that, if indeed she is doing that, it is either not working, or it is alienating more people than it is winning over.

Here's an interesting scenario: Hillary manages to do serious damage to Obama among HIspanics as Cesar theorizes, Obama wins the nomination anyway, and faces John McCain, sponsor of the comprehensive immigration reform bill.

Kolohe | January 26, 2008, 3:27pm | #

joe

Re: your 3:17 Yes that what I was trying to say with my last sentence of my 3:09; thanks for saying it better.

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 3:27pm | #

Here's an interesting scenario: Hillary manages to do serious damage to Obama among HIspanics as Cesar theorizes, Obama wins the nomination anyway, and faces John McCain, sponsor of the comprehensive immigration reform bill.

Joe-, if they Republicans had any brains they'd try to appeal to hispanics by driving a racial wedge between them and blacks. But they'd rather rant about the MexicanGovernment instead.

Even if McCain is the nominee, the down-ticket people will alienate too many hispanics. The Republican party is stupid, stupid stupid with their nativist strategy the last few years.

Kolohe | January 26, 2008, 3:31pm | #

Obama's rising national numbers: I am under the impression that the rate of change has slowed (2nd derivative magnitude decrease) Clinton stills has pretty sizable leads in a bunch of big states. Obama will get a bounce from a win today, but I don't think it will be enough to close the gap prior to Feb 5.

But, I thought Dallas would still be playing football, so who knows?

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 3:32pm | #

Ask Rudy! about national polls and how much they mean.

Kolohe | January 26, 2008, 3:33pm | #

That should be second derivative is negative

joe | January 26, 2008, 3:36pm | #

Cesar,

It might be a difficult November for racist Latinos.

I'm not sure if down-ticket candidates actually hurt presidential candidates, though.

joe | January 26, 2008, 3:38pm | #

Kolohe,

It's the same dynamic in every Democratic contest this year; Obama starts out almost 20 points behind a few months out, closes the gap to a single-digit lead with less than two weeks, and then he either closes the deal or he doesn't.

Mr. Nice Guy | January 26, 2008, 3:38pm | #

Cesar
I think I have told you that my parents live down South in Richmond, and they remind me of one Mayor Rev. Leonidas Young who they say was taking money from parishioners to pay for a penis implant...Does that scandal win?

joe | January 26, 2008, 3:39pm | #

Ask Rudy! about national polls and how much they mean

You mean the guy whose national numbers have been steadily trending downward, which has caused him to lose his lead in the one state he's been campaigning in?

I'm not sure how that's relevant, unless you're comparing him to Hillary.

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 3:42pm | #

Joe, I think the way in which the Republican Party has ranted and raved against latinos has screwed them out of any support from that demographic for a decade at least. Meanwhile, in compensation, they'll recieve the much sought after old conservative white guy vote. Which they had to begin with.

I think I have told you that my parents live down South in Richmond, and they remind me of one Mayor Rev. Leonidas Young who they say was taking money from parishioners to pay for a penis implant...Does that scandal win?

Oh God, not that idiot. Yeah, it probably wins.

joe | January 26, 2008, 3:42pm | #

We once had a City Councilor who refused to resign from his job as a headmaster in the High School after being elected, despite being directed to by the state ethics commission.

Ummmmmm, the Council gave out towing contracts to bidders who appear to have colluded.

I think the problem is that the people who get elected in my city are too old to have sex.

Mr. Nice Guy | January 26, 2008, 3:42pm | #

joe-
I don't put much stock in national polls as opposed to state specific ones. The national ones seem shaped by performances in the specific contests...

I'm disappointed to see the dynamic in SC, but there you have it. It could be that the whites down there feel compelled towards some 'racial solidarity/awareness' due to the black vote so monolithically going Obama (as I called a couple of weeks ago).

SIV-do you have any proof of what % of SC's population is recently transplanted from the North are you talking out of your ass?

Mr. Nice Guy | January 26, 2008, 3:46pm | #

Subject:
Black democrats are to the Democratic Party what the Religious Right is to the Republican Party. (monolithic support, charlatan leaders who can command them to turn out in goofily high numbers, both often counted on and then taken advantage of but returning to the flock, and both making demands on the party that ultimately harm the party and thereby get the opposite party in power [which then is of course much worse for their interests]).

It's unuanced and I feel slimy just saying it, but there you have it imo...

joe | January 26, 2008, 3:47pm | #

MNG,

National polling can be useful for some things, such as assessing whether dynamics are playing out on a national level.

But if you're talking about predicting who's going to win the next state-level contest, you're absolutely right.

This year, as both party's contests seem to be shaping up to a race for delegates to bring to the convention, rather than as a race to see who can get a majority of them a few months before the convention, the national numbers are even less important.

Cesar | January 26, 2008, 3:49pm | #